Overcoming Resistances To Change.

 

Eight tactics can help change agent deal with resistance to change. Let us review them briefly.

 

Education and Communication

Communicating the logic of a change can reduce employee resistance on two levels. First, it fights the effects of misinformation and poor communication: If employees receive the full facts and clear up misunderstandings, resistance should subside. Second, communication can help “sell” the need for a change by packaging it properly. 

 

Participation

It is difficult to resist a change decision in which we have participated. Assuming participants have the expertise to make a meaningful contribution, their involvement can reduce resistance, obtain commitment and increase the quality of the change decision. However, against these advantages are the negative: potential for a poor solution and great consumption of time.

 

Building Support and Commitment

When employees’ fear and anxiety are high, counseling and therapy, new-skills training or a short paid leave of absence may facilitate adjustment. When managers or employees have low emotional commitment to change, they favor the status quo and resist it. Thus, firing up employees can also help them emotionally commit to the change rather than embrace the status quo.

 

Develop Positive Relationships

People are more willing to accept changes if they trust the managers implementing them. According to studies, those who have a more positive relationship with their supervisors and who felt that the work environment supported the development, were much more positive about the change process.

 

Implement Changes Fairly

One way organizations can minimize negative impact is to make sure change is implemented fairly. As we saw in Chapter 6, procedural fairness is especially important when employees perceive an outcome as negative, so it is crucial that employees see the reason for the change and perceive its implementation as consistent and fair.

 

Manipulation and Cooptation

Manipulation refers to covert influence attempts. Twisting facts to make them more attractive, withholding information and creating false rumors to get employees to accept change are all examples of manipulation.

Cooptation, on the other and, combines manipulation and participation. It seeks to “buy off” the leaders of a resistance group by giving them a key role, seeking their advice not to find a better solution but to get their endorsement. Both manipulation and cooptation are relatively inexpensive ways to gain the support of adversaries but they can backfire if the targets become aware they are being tricked or used. Once that is discovered, the change agent’s credibility may drop to zero.

 

Selecting People Who Will Accept Change

Research suggests the ability to easily accept and adapt to change is related to personality, some people simply have more positive attitudes about change than others. Such individuals are open to experience, take a positive attitude toward change, are willing to take risks and are flexible in their behavior. An impressive body of evidence shows organizations can facilitate change by by selecting people predisposed to accept it.

 

Coercion

Last on the list of tactics is coercion, the application of direct threats or force on the resisters.If management really is determined to close a manufacturing plant whose employees do not acquiesce to a pay cut, the company is using coercion. Other examples are threats of transfer, loss of promotions, negative performance evaluations and a poor letter of recommendation. The advantage and drawbacks of coercion are approximately the same as for manipulation and cooptation.