Resistance to Changes in Organisations - Term Paper Example

 Running Header: Resistance to Changes in Organisations Introduction In a rapidly evolving world, the only thing that is constant is change; hence, the timeless adage that changes are inevitable and avoidable. Nevertheless, human beings tend to perpetually view changes with trepidation whether in industry, organizations, and countries or even within individual households. Within organizations there are those who look forward to fresh changes and the conservative groups who resist or resent changes as it represents the loss of the familiar hence evokes a sense of fear. The resistance to changes in organizations is mostly prevalent at the lower ranks of the ladder due to employees distrusting the reasoning by management behind the decisions or the lack of respect of the acumen of their leaders. This altitude often permeates in the entire organization, however, there are those in the organization who always look forward to changes believing it will herald better opportunities for them and improve the working conditions for them. Former US president John F. Kennedy argued that, ‘change is the law of life and those who look only to the past or the present are certain to miss the future’ (Warren, Benne and Chin 1969, Pg. 24). In this discussion paper, an analysis of the change management in organisations and the resultant resistant to the change is examined. Change management in organizations refers to the process of instigating changes in a planned and controlled or orderly manner. This involves invoking innovative techniques and schemes in the organization controlled by the management and sometimes prompted by events outside the company. Most changes in organisations often fail due to internal resistance from company staff, studies on British production firms revealed that more than half of the failures were due to poor implementation of the projected changes (Maurer, 1996). There several reason attributed to resistance to changes in organisation mostly emanating from the organisation’s failure to properly prepare the employees on the impending transformations including lack of proficiency and guidance among the staff as well as minimal communication from the leaders [see Figure:1]. Figure 1 According to Goman (2000), ‘organizations don't change, people do’ (Pg.506); thus she asserts a firm’s management ignorance of the significance of their employees is the utmost error made in affecting change which leads to 60-75 percent failures in change management . Another mistake made by management is considering changes as incidental, rather than a psychological, substantial and poignant process while underestimating the human potential (Goman, 2000). In order to effectively overcome resistance the management must supervise an orderly transition to the desired state or technology through appropriate communication, training and tolerance. Change is thus a modification of the external position while transition is the mental reorientation in reaction to changes (Horton & Shetty, 2006). Resistance induces unexpected delays, expenses and instabilities into the course of a tactical change as those opposed to transformation erect barriers to maintain the status quo. Many employees often resist changes when they feel threatened or fearful of their job securities perceiving changes as meant to get rid of them. Resistance to changes is most profound when the company’s systems are being overhauled hence the most significant foundation for change should be the early elimination of resistance as it tends to escalate eventually. The management should therefore win acceptance of the line staff through proper communication mechanisms; expand the skills of the staff to be able handle the new systems; make certain a homogeneous perception of the scheme so that the staff get to ‘own the project’. The resultant changes must be accessible rapidly to demonstrate the effectiveness of the new methods/systems; lastly, the management team must ensure lasting change by creating fresh mindset among the employees hence positively changing their attitude (SAP, 2009). Analysts have thus identified resistance to changes by employees as one of the teething problems in transformations organizations. Opposition to change is often an inborn feeling and patience or tolerance is encouraged to engage the support of staff in implementing changes. Nichols (2008) suggests the use of several management techniques to overcome resistance. These include the Power-Coercive strategy whereby people are generally assumed compliant and will normally adhere to instructions; hence exercising firm authority can prevail over the initial hostility. Another approach is the Environmental-Adaptive stratagem, which alleges that staff will adapt to changes ultimately after preliminary opposition. Similarly another scheme propagate that human beings are rational and will generally be motivated by self-interest once they discern tangible opportunities in the fresh scheme. The management therefore is obliged to communicate positive aspects and incentives to the staff. In the Normative-Reductive stratagem, people are held as social beings that stick to their cultural norms and values hence new changes require redefining these beliefs to conform to the required changes (Nichols, 2008). Resistance to changes is often exacerbated by the management’s cavalier attitude towards their fellow workers when they inadvertently or carelessly force down changes without due consideration and consultation. This type of management approach which also requires higher performance with the new changes is always doomed to fail. The conventional altitude that people are a variable cost has now changed as strategic human resource management (HRM) ascertain that to gain a competitive advantage in modern industry, a well educated and skilled, inspired and dedicated workforce is needed at every point of the organisation. McNamara (2008) has designed progressive charts that illustrate how employees who may either be primarily opposed to the changes or amenable eventually come to terms with the organisational changes planned. The individuals either perceive the intended changes as ‘bad news’ or ‘good news’ depending on their emotional state which alternate between indolence and high passion. Both sets of employees at some point show resistance to the projected changes with the ‘bad idea’ group opposing from the start but later giving up resistance while ‘the good idea’ group or the conformists accepting the changes but later becoming lukewarm due to technical or teething problems though ultimately again accept the changes. [See illustration Figure: 2] Figure 2 Chapman (2005) however argues that the responsibility of change management lies with the organization’s leaders tasked with ensuring employees cope with the changes. The management role is deducing and decoding rather than imposing the intended changes. Nevertheless, Waddell and Sohal (1998, Pg.543) asserts that mismanagement of resistance is a major pitfall for many organisations while implementing changes. The authors have ascribed resistance to changes on four major factors: rational, non-rational, and political and management elements. In rational factors, resistance is attributed to the employees’ rational assessment of the changes envisioned by the management being at variance to their own, perceiving them as unnecessary. In non-rational factors the employee’s inclination to change is illogical, possibly because they are unadventurous or are opposed to moving office or maybe fearful of the outcome of the changes hence erect artificial barriers to changes. In political factors, the employee may be playing office politics by projecting defiance to the management if they perceive the changes will not favour their present status within the organisation. Finally, management factors are when the administration badly implement the changes hence employees resist the unruly disruption especially when the intended changes are not properly communicated to them (Waddell and Sohal, 1998). According to Newell and Simon (1972, Pg. 47), changes must transform, reduce, and apply perceived problems from one state or stage to the other. The best change management system must therefore include proper communication to all the stakeholders ensuring that the information reaches the lower ranks of the organization or clients. There should be urgency on the required changes imparted to the employees to implement the scheme. This means that obstacles to the envisioned changes are cleared for smoother and effective execution. Any impediment should be communicated to the leaders. The project should however be led by a guiding team composed of the correct blend of talent and all levels of the organization rather than relying on the top echelons to drive the change only. There should be possibilities of short-term projections or structured progress that serve as stepping ladders to the ultimate goal. The project implementation team has to be an unwavering in their endeavour even as other employees offer support especially from the company’s management. The most important aspect is to ensure the changes are fully implemented and no reverting to the old system even in times of teething problems at the initial stages (Rowley and Roevens 2007, 53). Although effective change management requires the participation of all stakeholders in the organization including the customers, suppliers and employees from all levels, it imperative to the person(s) driving the change to have a fervent zeal and belief in the success of the scheme as this permeates to all the other participants who then get captivated by the idea to prevent resistance. Failure for the change to have a leader or a team of enthusiastic change-drivers will mean a lukewarm reception by other employees who will in turn be rather lethargic in implementing the requisite changes. Those not involved in devise the intended changes must be convinced on the viability, expected improvement, and justification of the planned changes for them to appreciate the need for the transformation. Other problems experienced during the execution stages that lead to resistance are: poor direction from top management, erroneous data or methods used, incorporating unnecessary redundant processes in the new scheme, having overrated or unrealistic expectations, insufficient preparation and instruction on the new methods, the natural predisposition to resisting changes, selecting the wrong system, tendency to perceive the new system as just another IT project, and serious technical hitches (Warren et al 1999, 284). People often oppose changes opting to remain within the comforts of their habits though change is as old as evolution. Nevertheless poor implementation of new changes by the organisations management often leads to undue resistance. According to Worley and Vick (2005), ‘implementing change poorly is often worse than not implementing change at all. Poor implementation poisons people’s attitude toward change and creates problems in the future’ (nd). According to Horton and Shetty (2006) to minimise resistance to changes in organisations, the management must lead the transition from the current status by creating a shared need with line employees, having a vision that is discernable to all the employees, mobilising all the staff towards a commitment to the desired changes, ensuring everlasting changes, monitoring the progress during the transition and finally making sure the support systems and infrastructures are in place for smother transition [ see illustration Figure: 2]. Figure 3 By applying the force field analysis, a firm can diagnose the forces against change (resistance) to the intended transformation and similarly identifies the forces for change (drivers). Although the drivers for change may be more than the forces against, the latter (resistance) may override the positive forces during the implementation stages hence leading to the failure of the project (Accel-team.com, 2010). [See illustration Figure: 3 below] Figure 4 O'Dea (2008) has categorised resistance into passive and active resistance whereby the former mainly involves employees being anxious and grumbling while in the latter the workers may organise others to resist the changes. Although both are detrimental, he argues that active resistance is more treacherous and must be confronted immediately in efforts to win over the naysayers. Nevertheless, in affecting changes, it is recommended to use change agents or those employees who are positively receptive of the ideas and can be able to influence those against the changes due to their unique strategic location and status in the organisation. Conclusion To successfully implement changes within the organization, a company requires an imbedded creative culture that encourages new technologies, ideas, and creativity. Change management should be more than just training and seminars. The company must identify change leaders and a team is formed to facilitate the transformation. The envisioned changes must be durable and should outlive the initiators hence require solid policies that are not self-serving but aimed at the good of the organization. Resistance to changes must be confronted with appropriate measures that assuage the employees hence changing their attitude. References Accel-team.com. (2010). Force Field Analysis. Retrieved February 27, 2010, from Accel-team.com: http://www.accel-team.com/techniques/force_field_analysis.html Arnold, G., 2002. Corporate Financial Management. 2nd ed. London: Financial Times Pitman Publishing. Chapman, Alan. "Change Management." Businessballs.com. 2005. Retrieved February 27, 2010 from Businessballs.com Goman, C. K. (2000). The Biggest Mistakes in Managing Change. Innovative Leader, Volume 9, Number 12. Horton, L. L. (2006). Managing Change in Organizations. McNamara, C. (2008). Basic Context for Organizational Change. Retrieved February 27, 2010, from Managementhelp.org: http://www.managementhelp.org/org_chng/org_chng.htm Nickols, F (2008) Change Management 101: A Primer Nickols.net. Retrieved 27 February 2010 O'Dea, T. (2008). Strategies for Managing Change-Resistance. Retrieved February 27, 2010, from Articlesbase.com: http://www.articlesbase.com/leadership-articles/ Outlaw, W. D. (2005) Motivating and Training Your Employees. Retrieved February 27, 2010, from Precisetech.com: Maurer, R. (1996), Using resistance to build support for change, Journal for Quality & Participation, Pg. 56-63. SAP. (2009). Professional Management of Resistance to Change. Retrieved February 27, 2010, from SAP Online: http://en.sap.info/professional-management-of-resistance-to-change-part-2/4291 Singh, Pratap Vikram (2008) Tackling Change Management. Express India Journal: Pg.1-8. Sohal, D. W. (1998). Resistance: a Constructive Tool for Change Management. MCB University Press , Volume 36 Number 8; Pg. 543–548. Sorensen, J. (2002). The strength of corporate culture and the reliability of firm performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47, Pg. 70–92. Storey, John (1991). Introduction: From Personnel Management to Human Resource Management Routledge, London, U.K. Pg. 55-66 Vick, C. G. (2005). Leading and Managing Change. Graziadio Business Report, Pepperdine University , Volume 8, Issue 2. Workman, D 2008. International Job Assignments: Multinational Screening, Selection Criteria and Adjustment Tools Suite101.com Retrieved February 27, 2010, from Read More