Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Decoding
Resistance
to Change
Strong leaders can hear and learn
from their critics.
It’s true that resistance can be irratio- IDEA IN BRIEF handouts for them to take back to their
nal and self-serving. But like it or not, it groups. Given that effort on her part,
■ When change initiatives
is an important form of feedback. Dis- she’d assumed that the executives would
founder, leaders often blame
missing it robs you of a powerful tool as resistance. They assume that explain to rank-and-file employees how
you implement change. It takes a strong if only people would stop the move would benefit not just the
leader to step up and engage when a complaining and get on board, company’s bottom line but also the pa-
change effort meets with pushback. If all would be well. tients the company served, by ensuring
you can gain perspective by paying at- ■ Resistance is, in fact, a form they received the right treatments and
tention to, understanding, and learning of feedback, often provided were not wrongly billed. As it turned out,
by people who know more
from behaviors you perceive as threat- the executives had been reluctant to de-
about day-to-day operations
ening, you will ultimately deliver better than you do. It can be turned liver what they feared would be seen as
results. into a vibrant conversation bad news, and leaders from functions
that gives your change effort such as finance and clinical services
Resistance Is a Resource a higher profile. didn’t feel equipped to answer ques-
In our research and consulting work, ■ Dismissing the feedback tions about the new technology. They’d
we’ve had the opportunity to study deprives you of potentially hoped that Alison would take charge of
valuable information, costs
change initiatives at scores of large and the kickoff, so their people had heard
you goodwill, and jeopardizes
small companies, and we’ve found that important relationships. only rumors – and no explanation of the
to understand resistance to a program, rationale for the change. Consequently,
■ If you learn to embrace resis-
you need to start by adjusting your own tance, you can use it as a her launch meetings were contentious.
mind-set. Ask yourself two questions: resource and find your way The insurance team, which feared that
“Why am I seeing this behavior as resis- to a better solution. historical files would become inacces-
tance?” and “If I viewed the resistance sible, was particularly annoyed.
as feedback, what could I learn about Alison had to postpone the rollout
how to refine the change effort?” Once or a highly charged discussion – may be and arrange a series of meetings to ex-
you’ve honestly answered those ques- the one thing that keeps a conversation plain the changes, with IT team mem-
tions, you can begin to see resistance as about change alive. bers at the ready to describe their impli-
a resource – as energy to be channeled 2. Return to purpose. Awareness is cations. Though she was disappointed
on behalf of the organization. (See the about what; purpose is about why. Peo- that the members of the management
sidebar “Defining Resistance.”) Even dif- ple who aren’t involved in the planning team hadn’t communicated with their
ficult people can provide valuable input need to understand not only what is own people, she acknowledged a key les-
when you treat their communications about to change but also why their jobs son: The pushback from frontline em-
with respect and are willing to recon- are being upended. ployees made her appreciate the need
sider some aspects of the change you’re We worked with Alison, an IT execu- to educate the entire hospital staff about
initiating. Here are five ways you can tive who was preparing for a change the purpose of the systemic change.
use resistance to effect change more in her hospital’s computer systems for 3. Change the change. Frustrating
productively. registration and insurance reimburse- though it is, resistance can lead to bet-
1. Boost awareness. By the time ment. With those two functions at the ter results. People who are outspoken
you’re ready to implement a change opposite ends of the business cycle, the about their objections to a change are
program, you’ve probably had ample new systems would touch almost every often those who genuinely care about
opportunity to process what it will employee, including clinical and labora- getting things right and who are close
mean for you as an individual. It’s easy tory personnel, in some way. The initia- enough to the inner workings of an or-
to forget that the change hasn’t been tive was a crucial one because delays in ganization to recognize a plan’s pitfalls.
similarly internalized by those who reimbursement are costly to hospitals, Consider Harold, the COO of a large
will be most affected by it – in ways you and the most common reason for reject- manufacturing organization we worked
can’t imagine. Drop two levels down ing claims is incomplete or inaccurate with. He had drawn up a plan to con-
in the hierarchy, and the tasks people information. When a bill bounces back, solidate two groups: the product design
are doing are probably invisible to you. it can take a long time to track down engineers, who worked at the main of-
Their jobs will change in ways that you the error; some irregularities are never fice, and the capital-planning engineers,
don’t understand, and if you suppress resolved. who worked in the plants. His objective
dialogue, you’ll miss opportunities to Throughout the design process, Ali- was to improve collaboration, communi-
gain their buy-in. In the early stages, son had communicated regularly with cation, and efficiency. But when Harold
any talk – even a litany of complaints the rest of the executive team, preparing announced his plan, Eric, the manager
with the cross-training but don’t move ridiculous that she hadn’t even taken it collocated – and she held events to forge
the billers into the call center. to the executive team. Employees were stronger relationships among them. In
Sharon took the worry and idea lists so enthusiastic about that idea that the process, Sharon bonded with her
to the rest of the executive team and, the group came up with a way to inte- employees and fostered good coopera-
with their input, created a third “execu- grate it into the plan. Sharon said that, tion as they underwent training and
tive action list.” She then brought the regardless of her own opinion, it was then collaborated in their new location.
three lists into follow-up meetings with worth the effort to let them “get some- 5. Complete the past. As employees
staff. Employees bypassed suggestions thing they felt was at least partly their listen to new proposals, they remember
to reject cross-training and relocation; own.” She willingly embraced the core previous experiences. Given the dismal
they knew those were basically nonne- concerns of her people – which were re- rate of success in change efforts, it’s not
gotiable. But, to Sharon’s surprise, they ally about whether they’d get along and surprising that people expect history to
jumped at the prospect of training one whether different groups would remain repeat itself – and resist going through
another – a proposal she’d considered so socially separate even after they were it all over again. If you don’t know the
history, an explanation for the resistance
can remain elusive.
George, the head of a vehicle service
organization we studied, planned to
Defining Resistance upgrade his maintenance team’s tech-
nology by giving the group GPS and
Managers have many terms to describe We didn’t attend these meetings, computer communications systems. He
resistance: pushback, not buying in, criti- but disparate attitudes toward resis- had met with the fleet and service su-
cism, foot-dragging, and so on. And they tance are nonetheless evident in the pervisors one-on-one, and he knew they
may perceive as resistance a broad spec- managers’ responses. Two opposite wanted these systems. But when he
trum of behaviors they don’t like – from behaviors – asking questions and not spoke to them as a group about the in-
an innocent question to a roll of the eyes asking questions – were perceived as stallation and training schedules, the su-
to overt sabotage. resistance, depending on the manager. pervisors surprised him by saying, “This
Moreover, whether something Asking questions was itself seen in isn’t going to be fair for the backroom
constitutes resistance is a subjective different ways, either as resistance or machine guys,” “You’re going around us
matter, on both sides. Consider the as engagement. Meanwhile, so-called again,” and “This won’t work any better
experiences of David, Elaine, and Allen, resisters probably didn’t view their own than last time.”
managers at an insurance company who behavior as inconsistent with the orga- When George probed into their skep-
held meetings in their respective units nization’s objectives. (When managers ticism, one supervisor finally mentioned
to inform people about the launch of a themselves exhibit “resistant” behavior, an incident from a training program
new performance-management system. they often rightly don’t see it as such. two years earlier. George’s predeces-
These meetings were the first opportu- Indeed, it’s usually a manifestation of a sor had promised promotions and pay
nity for frontline employees to learn the rational, reasonable desire to be heard.) raises to the purchasing and inventory
particulars. Quite possibly, Elaine unconsciously staffers if they could switch to a new sys-
The three compared notes after- discouraged questions; alternatively, the tem within eight weeks. The four men
ward. David said he’d gotten consid- members of her group might legitimately involved buckled down and learned the
erable “pushback” in the form of “a have had nothing to ask – they’d heard new system, transferred inventory data,
ton of questions.” He’d felt as if he enough. She simply chose to see stone- and updated their records in time – but
were being “interrogated”; employees walling in their silence. David didn’t con- they never received their promotions
were “irritated” when he didn’t know sider the possibility that either his lack of or pay hikes. Embarrassed, the manager
the answers. Elaine didn’t get a single answers or his failure to promise to get at the time found a poor substitute for
question and characterized the shallow them might have contributed to people’s three of them – some overtime opportu-
comments and silence as “stonewalling.” irritation. His folks might even have nities – and promised the fourth a pro-
Allen described his people as “very re- been surprised to hear him label their motion when he reached his two-year
ceptive.” They’d asked many questions, questions as “pushback,” given that the anniversary. But that never came to pass
and although some employees were meeting was seemingly an opportunity because the manager left the company
disappointed when he didn’t have an an- to get answers. Allen, in contrast, ap- before the anniversary.
swer, he promised to get back to them. peared to enjoy the dialogue, questions The men believed that the manager
Overall, he reported a “very engaging and all – a receptiveness that exemplifies had never intended to obtain raises and
and energizing” meeting. a productive reaction to resistance. promotions. They’d also convinced them-
“I didn’t mean to hurt his feelings. He’s just not the incentive I had in mind.”