Managing Resistance to Change - Coursework Example

Managing Organizational Resistance Name Instructor Course Managing Organizational Resistance Introduction Organizational changes usually occur when a particular company decides to make a transition from the current state that it is into a different and desired state (Oreg, 2006). When organizations undergo these significant changes, the managers play a critical role in its management so that they ensure that there are very minimal cases of employee resistance as well as reduce the costs that the organization will incur during this transition. Given that the business environment is increasingly becoming competitive, it is typical for many organizations to undergo these changes to remain competitive as well (Oreg, 2006). However, it is typical for the changes to be resisted primarily by the employees and the other stakeholders, and if this resistance is not managed effectively, then it will be difficult to achieve the goals that the transition intended to achieve (Oreg, 2006). The paper will, therefore, seek to evaluate the ways in which managers could actively and positively manage resistance to change and what they are required to understand when undertaking these changes and facing this resistance. Managing Resistance to Change It is documented that when the management of an organization decides to implement any change, regardless of how small the change is, they need always to expect to face some resistance in the organization (Kirkman and Shapiro, 2001). Therefore, this means that resistance to change is a normal thing because typically, individuals usually tend to cling to the status quo and their usual habits. Following this, as studies have documented, the actions of a manager in an organization can either arouse or minimize resistance (Kirkman and Shapiro, 2001). The individuals in the organization need to be motivated so that they can manage to shake off their usual habits and be warm to the changes that the organization undergoes. Organization changes tend to introduce some levels of anxiety about what will take place in the future. Following this, if after the changes the future will be perceived to be positive, then there will be fewer resistance levels and vice versa (Kirkman and Shapiro, 2001). There are various theories and models that have been developed and used in the process of managing change. Prosci’s 3-Phase Process is one of the major theories used in managing change. The Prosci’s 3-Phase Process documents the three distinct phases of managing change and in so doing minimizing resistance significantly (Tudor, 2014). The first step of the process is preparing for the change. The management of an organization is the one which is responsible for managing change. During the first stages of designing the change, the managers are also required to develop a change management plan as well as the strategy of managing resistance because it is inevitable when trying to implement change (Tudor, 2014). In doing this, the management needs to document the expected resistance points as well as the particular tactics that will be needed to manage this resistance by the readiness assessments (Tudor, 2014). The second phase of the process is managing the change (Tudor, 2014). The plan on resistance management is among the change management plans which are usually developed in this particular phase. The importance of the managers to develop a plan on resistance management is because it will assist them in helping the employees to proceed through the change process while addressing the potential barriers which will hinder making the transition successful (Tudor, 2014). When the managers develop the plan on resistance management, they will be developing or coming up with the unique and specific action steps which will assist them in understanding as well as address the issue of resistance. Being proactive in the ways of addressing change is a positive way of managing resistance in when experiencing organizational change (Tudor, 2014). The third phase of the process is reinforcing the change (Tudor, 2014). In this phase, the managers collect the employee feedback regarding the compliance and adoption of the change and the new workflows. When the managers strive to evaluate this feedback, they are usually in a position where they could effectively identify the gaps that exist in the change and most importantly be in a position to manage the resistance which they may still be experiencing (Tudor, 2014). Additionally, this particular phase also entails the steps that are involved in tackling the resistance of the employees to change. This then becomes a very powerful tool for the managers in the organization as they strive to manage the resistance (Tudor, 2014). When the managers address resistance formally, they ensure that the aspect is understood clearly and is dealt with efficiently throughout the change’s lifecycle (Tudor, 2014). It tends to move the practice of managing resistance from being merely a reactive mechanism to being a proactive approach and consequently an efficient tool for addressing objections, and mobilizing support. Kotter’s Steps to Change is another major theories used in managing change. John P. Kotter developed eight steps of managing organizational change with the most minimum levels of resistance. The first phase of the model is to increase the urgency through inspiring the employees to make objectives which are relevant and achievable (Kotter and Cohen, 2002). The second step is to build a guiding team through acquiring the right people who have the good mix of levels and skills as well as the right level of emotional commitment (Kotter and Cohen, 2002). Thirdly is to get the right vision and ensure that it is right. This can be done through developing an effective team which has a simple strategy and vision and with the necessary drive for efficient and service delivery (Kotter and Cohen, 2002). The other steps include proper communication about the intended action, empowering action towards the change, creating some short-term wins, never giving up and making this change stick (Kotter and Cohen, 2002). Following the Kotter’s model, the management may oversee that there are effective communication and adequate education which are considered to be critical ingredients when it comes to minimizing resistance to changes (Kotter and Cohen, 2002). The staff members could be made aware of the nature of the particular change that the organization wishes to undertake and be informed of the logic which is behind these changes even before the actual changes occur (Kotter and Cohen, 2002). This information could be conveyed to them through individual discussions, group presentations, memos, or reports. Another essential component of the model is to build teams and involve them in every step of the change process (Kotter and Cohen, 2002). Following this, another critical practice that the managers could take in minimizing the resistance to organizational change is overseeing their involvement and participation both in the planning and the implementation phases of the effort to oversee the change (Kotter and Cohen, 2002). In doing this, the managers could probably ensure that there are some organized forms of support and facilitation which can be deployed among the employees. They could also undertake to make sure that the employees possess the required resources which are necessary for implementing the change and make it successful (Kotter and Cohen, 2002). They can also ensure that they are always available so that they could provide the employees with the necessary explanations in the change process as well as minimize the stress levels which may come about in different stages of implementing the change (Kotter and Cohen, 2002). Another theory for managing resistance to change is Nudge Theory. This theory is utilized to explain the shift in the way people often think when subjected to different situations (Kosters and Van der Heijden, 2015). Heuristic thinking, when put in the context of the nudge theory, describes the nature of the human intelligence where they tend to think quickly and make instinctive decisions. This theory is relevant when explaining the effects of imposed or enforced change which more often than not leads to failure or even makes the change worse (Kosters and Van der Heijden, 2015). This is because if people are forced to undertake changes that are in place, or they feel like they have been coerced to implement these changes, it is possible for them to make the quick decision of resisting the change rather than just cooperating and executing the particular change (Kosters and Van der Heijden, 2015). Realizing that the employees may develop heuristic thinking in the context of the nudge theory, managers can avoid the effects of resistance through rewards and negotiations with them (Kosters and Van der Heijden, 2015). They may decide to reward the employees with some concrete incentives so that they can be motivated and cooperate in the change process rather than resisting. In doing this, some companies have resolved to be manipulative or make use of some subtle tactics to minimize the resistance (Kosters and Van der Heijden, 2015). For example, the management of a particular company may decide to offer a resistant leader a desirable position in the efforts of the change so that they could minimize their having hysterical thinking. Another common mistake that managers may make when managing organizational changes is ignoring the resistance of change by the employees (Kirkman and Shapiro, 2001). The managers do not need to pretend that that is nothing that is taking place in the company as far as resistance is concerned and decide to walk away from it simply. This is because this resistance will only grow bigger and in the end, the change will not be as effective as it was intended to be (Kirkman and Shapiro, 2001). Another thing that the managers need not do is to victimize the person who has come out in the open to speak about ideas which are contrary to theirs as far as the change is concerned. Again, it is important to note that although it is only one person who has come out to speak about their disagreement with the particular change, it does not simply mean that they are the only ones disagreeing (Kirkman and Shapiro, 2001). There could be a possibility that there are numerous others who are silently agreeing with that one person. Following this, it is crucial for the managers to take the voice of one person to be representing that of many others and act on those concerns as soon as possible (Kirkman and Shapiro, 2001). What Managers Need to Understand One of the major things that the managers need to know when managing organizational changes is that it is their responsibility to manage these changes effectively (Kotter and Cohen, 2002). It is not the employees’ responsibility to manage organizational changes, but their responsibility is to implement these changes. The responsibility of the managers together with the other executives is to handle the change in an efficient manner such that the employees could easily cope with it and be ready to implement it as well (Kotter and Cohen, 2002). They also need to understand that they are responsible for facilitating and enabling this change and everything else which is implied within the organizational change statement. The managers are required to understand the change statement, what it means, and the current situation of the organization from a more objective perspective (Kotter and Cohen, 2002). They should then assist the individuals in the organization to understand the aims, reasons, and the manner in which they can respond to the changes in an efficient way according to the capabilities and situations of the employees. Increasingly, the managers are required to understand that it is their role to communicate, interpret, and enable (Kotter and Cohen, 2002). Another crucial thing that the managers need to understand is that it is a must for the organizational change to incorporate people and it does not need to be imposed on individuals (Oreg, 2006). It is evident that whenever new things are imposed on people in a given company, there will always be some difficulties. Following this, early, full, and open communication, as well as involvement and participation, are critical factors when undertaking organizational changes. It is imperative for the managers to understand that they cannot impose change (Oreg, 2006). Rather, the teams and the employees, in general, will need to be empowered so that they could find their own responses and solutions with the support and facilitation of the managers as well as compassion and tolerance from their executives and leaders (Oreg, 2006). Conclusion Many organizations usually undergo changes primarily so that they can become competitive in the business world. In implementing these changes, however, the managers often experience some levels of resistance, and it is, therefore, imperative for the managers to manage this resistance positively and actively. There are various ways in which managers can manage this resistance some of which include proper communication of the changes, involvement, and participation, support and facilitation, negotiation, and rewards or manipulation, among others. Some of the theories and models that have been used to explain the management of resistance to the managers in an organization include the nudge theory, Kotter’s Steps to Change, and the Prosci’s 3-Phase Process. References Kirkman, B.L and Shapiro, D.L 2001, The impact of cultural values on job satisfaction and organizational commitment in self-managing work teams: The mediating role of employee resistance. Academy of Management journal, vol. 44, no. 3, pp.557-569. Kosters, M. and Van der Heijden, J 2015, From mechanism to virtue: Evaluating Nudge theory. Evaluation, vol. 21, no. 3, pp.276-291. Kotter, J.P and Cohen, D.S 2002, The heart of change: Real-life stories of how people change their organizations. Harvard Business Press. Oreg, S 2006, Personality, context, and resistance to organizational change. European journal of work and organizational psychology, vol. 15, no. 1, pp.73-101. Tudor, L 6th Nov. 2014, Change management–challenge and opportunity for sustainable development of Romanian companies. In Proceedings of the 8th International Management Conference, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, pp. 466-476. Read More