Link:

http://go.galegroup.com.ezproxy.apollolibrary.com/ps/retrieve.do?sgHitCountType=None&sort=RELEV ANCE&inPS=true&prodId=GPS&userGroupName=uphoenix&tabID=T003&searchId=R3&resultListType=R ESULT_LIST&contentSegment=&searchType=BasicSearchForm&currentPosition=3&contentSet=GALE|A 137362818&&docId=GALE|A137362818&docType=GALE&role=ITOF

Change, change, and more change; it seems that is all we have talked about in the last 10 years. Change has become the standard in our everyday life. In many organizations, the banner cry has been to promote change and expect increased performance concurrently. As rapid change continues to be the constant in our lives, leaders need to learn more effective methods to assist their organizations and employees in developing improved strategies for dealing with change. If leaders do not understand their own communication styles in both positive and negative terms, then their change initiatives may be significantly compromised with a substantial number of personnel. Keeping employees involved during transitions and managing their resistance is essential to using change effectively. Learning to expect resistance to change can be a major hurdle; leaders frequently ignore resistance or view it as a negative event. Many leaders do not see resistance as a natural part of change, and they attempt to deal with resistance by trying to control it. People need time to deal with change, and resistance is how the time delay is expressed. The simple fact is resistance exists and will not be negated by giving people more data, showing them more pie charts, or providing a more detailed plan. Misguided attempts to talk employees out of resistance by giving them facts and information are doomed to failure. Information is meaningless to a person who is trying emotionally to cope with change. Employees need assistance on an emotional level. You cannot control others' resistance. You can only make it safe for others to explore their thoughts and feelings about change. The art of managing change is a dynamic process of designing and refining the age-old problem of people/structure/technology and performance. In the current environment, organizations seem to have little choice: change or become extinct. Although change appears to be a given, choices exist as to how the changes will occur and be implemented. This may leave a gap between the people involved in decision making and those asked to implement the decisions. It is trouble-some to be charged with implementation of changes when you have not been included in the decision making process. Many managers and employees know that changes are coming; yet, they generally have not been involved in the decisions. Typically, they have had little input, have not been able to explore their options, and have little information on the proposed changes--or imposed changes. For the followers, changes, even when foretold, seem sudden and abrupt. Change to employees may seem to be dramatic, create problems and disrupt established routines. The leader may view the changes as gradual and part of a bigger plan. Although leaders may experience change as exciting and full of new opportunities to succeed, followers are likely to experience the same change as an opportunity to fail. Warning Signs When the followers' reactions to change are ignored or downplayed, the price is usually demonstrated in the areas of loyalty, expertise, consistency, credibility and motivation. When imposed changes enter the workplace, loyalty questions arise: To whom should I be loyal? Will loyalty be rewarded in the future? Will my past performance mean anything in the future? If loyalty is changing, change itself can increase the disconnects between the employees and the transitions necessary for future performance. How can a leader succeed with people exhibiting varying degrees of loyalty during change? All employees require some level of consistency or predictability. Whether it is expectations about performance or the simple routines of business processes, consistency in the workplace is essential. Without it, questions arise: What are the new expectations? What are the new rewards? Can I change my behavior to fit it? What is dependable around here? What really counts? All of these questions have an emotional and intellectual component and the questions require two different kinds of answers. As it is natural for individuals to respond both emotionally and intellectually, satisfying responses require that both the intellectual (data and information) and the emotional components be addressed. Many individuals facing change need data and information but they also benefit tremendously by having the opportunity to express their concerns about how the change is affecting them. This two-sided dialogue is the key for leaders to effectively help followers through their change process. [ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] Change can have a pronounced impact on expertise. Existing employees who may have mastered skills in the old processes have to acquire new skills or roles, often without training or time to accumulate needed experience. Questions come to the surface: Where are the new experts? Who are they? Can I still become an expert in this new way? Do the leaders really know what they are doing?

Collectively these dynamics can produce an environment where the questioning of leadership's expertise may lead to questions of leadership's credibility. Is anyone making good judgments? Are the leaders only concerned about themselves and their careers, the bottom line or the customer, the organizations needs or employee needs? What are the leaders' real motives? Can I truly trust the organization in the future?

Organizations depend on the employees' motivation to do the work and to excel at their jobs. Change has tremendous impact on motivation. As the change efforts accelerate, so do the pointed questions: What is considered good work now? Is anyone going to stay? Can we attract people to work in the new systems? Will I ever feel like I'm doing a good job again? Interpreting the Reactions Leaders may wish to interpret the employees' reactions as illogical or unreasonable, yet the employees' reactions are as legitimate as the need for change. The lesson to learn is reactions are predictable, can be planned for, and handled in ways that minimize the impact on employees' lives and the organization's ability to change proactively. One of the largest adjustments shared by employees and managers is the change to their roles in the organization. Each one of us engages in multiple roles every day, ranging from parent, child, student, employee, neighbor and friend. The roles in the workplace are not always so clear and many times these roles have power or prestige attached to them, which individuals may not wish to give up. Many of us may have worked diligently for years to master a process and be seen as "the expert" and now a proposed change takes away our "expertness." When change jeopardizes an employee's established image, social or political standing, and comfort level, the resistance cycle begins.

A great deal of change management is geared toward assisting others in learning how to accommodate changes in their roles. A tremendous amount of unnecessary resistance can be derailed if the leader helps individuals understand and find new roles. Roles are difficult to manage in a group setting, but if an effort is not made to address the issues of changing

roles, the change effort may use up vast amounts of resources for no real purpose. A highly productive person in the old ways can become the saboteur in the new system if he cannot find his new role or niche. [ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] Like any place in life, people in organizations have differences in how they deal with change. Though we predict certain reactions to imposed change, each person's reactions will be unique. While one person finds change stimulating and exciting, another will feel overwhelmed and depressed. Everyone knows that people are different; yet, organizations often make and implement plans as though all employees are the same. This often generates more resistance than the change itself. And then suddenly and predictably, leadership becomes frustrated when everyone does not share the excitement. Different personalities require varying types of information and emotional processing to complete the change cycle and not become problematic. [ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] Two Key Strategies for Success Leaders, when dealing with change, need to develop strategies to support the vast majority of employees by creating more diverse information and communication approaches. Leaders, too, need to develop flexible styles for dealing with change. A simple rule: Give the employee information they can use and present it in a way they can safely process it. If you do this, you can create an environment where change happens rapidly, without passive and overt resistance.

The first, and perhaps the most important, leadership strategy is to recognize the followers' high need for safety. Establish an environment of safety for employees so they may explore their thoughts and feelings in private or in public without judgment or ramifications. Some individuals need more time, some need to blow off steam, others need to go home to their "cave" and think. Many a leader has interpreted a follower blowing off steam about a proposed change as disloyal, when in fact they are just individuals who need to express themselves in front of others. The damage was not the public reaction, but the interpretation by other observers regarding the leader's view of this reaction as being disloyal. Leaders get few chances to motivate employees but millions of opportunities to discourage. During times of change the leader is on the public viewing stand more than ever. How the leader controls his or her own reaction to others' behaviors is under immense scrutiny by the followers. The critical message may get lost or upstaged by how the leader reacts to the followers' reactions. The second strategy, and perhaps the most difficult to implement, is the creation of an open information flow regarding the process. In most organizations, information becomes power. Higher positions within the hierarchy typically are entitled to greater access to pertinent information. This exclusionary process is at the heart of a great deal of change resistance. Research has shown that within organizations it is the leader's information preferences that dictate what and how information is communicated with the organization's line staff. If the leader loves graphics, then the information flow is full of graphics. This information will be well received by the visual learner who also loves pictures, but the same documents mean nothing to employees who want to discuss an issue.

When the leader gets a negative response to his or her communication style, the customary response is to end the flow of information. This further complicates matters as staff feels cut off from information. Many employees will then begin to suspect hidden agendas or other negative scenarios. The strategy here is plain and simple but difficult to implement because it takes energy on the part of the leader. Effective leaders must have the capacity to suspend how they wish to communicate and learn instead to dialogue in the style of the follower. Every person has unique ways of processing the giving and receiving of information. In an interview with a CEO, he expressed his disappointment with having to state and restate his vision of the proposed changes for the organization. He was angry about the staff's inability to capture his ideas and was exhausted by the sheer number of times he had to talk about the changes. "I know they're not dumb, but how many times do I have to say it?" was his classic statement. The CEO did not understand that he was sending messages the way he likes to receive information. His preference was for information in printed form, with details and visuals, and time to analyze the information. What he failed to understand is that some employees need information presented orally and others need to question and discuss the issues. To some individuals, the data and numbers mean nothing; they want to deal with the information on an emotional level. [ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] In the world of leadership we have begun to call this phase of change "beating the drum." The leader's role is to beat the drum of change by having a wide variety of information presentation skills. Beating the drum is combination of visual presentations, personal contact, and group discussions. These can take the form of executive letters, briefings, newsletters, walk-arounds, creative metaphoric stories and brown bag meetings. The effective leader must move beyond his or her comfort zone and step into the preferred communication style of the followers. Learn this simple lesson in leadership: You can communicate all day long in your modality and nothing may happen, but talk five minutes in the followers' language and the world becomes ripe for transformation. RELATED ARTICLE: Behavior Outcomes to Address Ten outcomes typically experienced by employees should be expected. Management must address these issues for the change initiative to be successful. * When employees experience uncertainty about proposed changes, they may generalize this anxiety into the future. * They begin to doubt the organization's credibility as the original contract has changed. * Skepticism increases. * They see hidden agendas in policies. * Employees may begin to feel overwhelmed with new job requirements. * Caution, a slower work pace, and deliberateness become the work ethos. * Negative emotions erupt--anger and frustration--and morale declines. * Employees may become cynical and withdrawn in the workplace. * Employees become information addicts. "I'm not moving until I get the new policy" becomes the mantra, indicating the need for direction before activity. * Employees experience personal losses--colleagues, customers, vendors and social routines--and reminisce about the good old days. RELATED ARTICLE: How CPR Can Save the Change Process To assist others in accepting and adopting organizational changes, leaders must "make it safe." Leaders must learn to scan for signs of silence or violence. When people avoid or attack the change, it is a cue that it is no longer safe to freely discuss the change itself. The proven technique of CPR can be the saving grace in these situations. CPR is used to change dialogue from content (logic) to the core issues of how the relationship or conversation is progressing. CPR helps identify what conversations the individuals need to be engaged in. With CPR, leaders learn to step out of content (C) and move to pattern (P) or relationship (R). Pattern is the focus on how we work together or how we process information. Pattern talks about the methods we use or the repetitive rituals we use in our work culture. Relationship represents how each member of a conversation impacts the collective relationship--positively or negatively. For example, a leader who always dismisses another's opinions outright creates an environment of information withholding--sometimes at great cost to the organization or to the leader. Only when the conversation is no longer about logic, but speaks to how the change disrupts the patterns and relationships, is true progress made. Leaders need to lead by engaging in the correct conversation using pattern or relationship. The majority of dialogue failures begin with staying in content when content is not the issue. It is better to capture the hearts of the followers before winning their heads.

Source Citation
McMurray, Paul, and Scott Rosenke. "Leadership in a changing environment." Rural Telecommunications Sept.-Oct. 2005: 31+. General OneFile. Web. 17 Oct. 2011.