Why resist change

Attachment to familiar habits, practices, places and people may have to be given up. Image Courtesy : morethanasundayfaith. Change scares people. Individuals tend to find security in traditional approaches to life and situations.

One of the major reasons for resistance to change is uncertainty about the impact of change, especially the impact on job security. The fear of the unknown always has a major impact on the decisions of the individuals. New technology, new procedures, new systems can all create uncertainty and hence resistance to change. Not knowing exactly what the change would bring about makes the employees anxious and apprehensive about the change. Many people, indeed, have lost their jobs when a plant became automated or an office became computerized.

If the need for the change is not communicated to the workers in time and in an acceptable manner, then it can lead to resistance. A sense of participation in the change process by the employees reduces the extent of this resistance. If the changes are minor and involve routine operations, then the resistance, if any, would be minimal. However, if the changes are major such as reshuffling of staff, then the resistance will be highly visible.

Similarly, slow changes in the process result in lower resistance than sudden or rapid changes. Sometimes, individuals -resist change because the group to which they belong resists it. They should reward and recognize participants — and their families, too, who often make unseen sacrifices. Ripple effects. Like tossing a pebble into a pond, change creates ripples, reaching distant spots in ever-widening circles.

The ripples disrupt other departments, important customers, people well outside the venture or neighborhood, and they start to push back, rebelling against changes they had nothing to do with that interfere with their own activities.

Leaders should enlarge the circle of stakeholders. They must consider all affected parties, however distant, and work with them to minimize disruption. Past resentments. The ghosts of the past are always lying in wait to haunt us. As long as everything is steady state, they remain out of sight.

But the minute you need cooperation for something new or different, the ghosts spring into action. Old wounds reopen, historic resentments are remembered — sometimes going back many generations.

Leaders should consider gestures to heal the past before sailing into the future. Sometimes the threat is real. Now we get to true pain and politics. Change is resisted because it can hurt. When new technologies displace old ones, jobs can be lost; prices can be cut; investments can be wiped out. There is one more source of resistance, though maybe something on this list is meant to cover it. The loss or threat of loss of something important. Sometimes the uncertainty of what will be lost generates the fear and resistance.

Sometimes what is being lost, is very clear, e. When change takes something away that is important, some kind of resistance may arise. Excellent article! Change is hard for many people and requires repeated reassurance, very clear communication for both management and staff as well as a great deal of patience in order to achieve long-lasting results. The gross presumption of the writer and management attendees of the article is not surprising considering the degree of dysfunctionality of the worldview presented.

If the cause for change comes from management itself, that management itself operates from fallacious principles, then resistance is necessary. If a workforce is subject to abrasive, belligerent, and threatening management then common morality and ethics mandates resistance. The hypocracy of modern American business is that while persons in management conduct their own lives under common conventions of social contract and morality, they demand to be excused from the same conventions in the business place — they insist on treating subordinates in any manner they please for the good of profits, stockholders, or the mere ego of the CEO.

Moreover, the perspective of the writer assumes that might is right, that authority bears no responsibility in its actions…as long as the flow of authority is maintained. Without ethics and morality in business, the pursuit of profit becomes a workplace nightmare.

With millions upon millions of Americans unemployed by no fault of their own, the premise of this article is beyond preposterous. Great list, Rick. Communicating effectively with people, building trust, selling the benefits, and making the change as easy as possible for them, are so important.

I agree whole heartily with Duncan Brodie, I have implemented changed from the heart, but first It all starts in there minds.

Gaining trust and giving them confidence. Experience is also a reason. When people have experienced that change causes problems and offers no improvement on their situation but is done for the sake of change and the managers bonus it is common sense to resist change.

Ethics, culture and integrity breed acceptance. The reason why people resist change in organization.

I really enjoyed this tips and it has really exposed me to some things like the self — esteem the denial, anger, confusion, depression, Crisis, new confidence, and acceptance.

I have read this blog a number of times and every time I do I become more convinced that its not resistance to change is the problem but a failure to gain the buy-in or commitment of the people impacted by the change.

Taking the view that they are not the problem its ua who need to change the way we manage change can establish a very different dynamic. How often do we see engagement in the form of more one way communications, more spin and more trashing of the past. One organisation that carries its pride in the past and moves on is the military with medals, banners etc. Bridges Transition Model offers a very useful approach of acknowledging the past before moving on.

Is failure to do that reason 13….. It began to be used as a human phenomenon in two contexts. One was the idea of collaborative if not coordinated collective opposition to something, usually suggesting illicit basis, e. It has passed into pop cliche e.

JFK was among its original subjects. The sample was small because the study was begun prior to WWII so they stopped adding new subjects by More specifically adaptations include fantasy, sublimation, projection, sublimation etc. They determine how people respond to personal crises, and may vary over time. None is necessarily dysfunctional unless maintained neurotically. For example, fantasy is a common and healthy defense mechanism for children who really experience senses of threat from angry or critical parents, teachers, etc.

If it is a key adaptation for people over 30 it perpetuates avoiding dealing with issues problems internal and external in a way that is less healthy. Hence my questioning the over simplification of the graph of reaction to change. Worse in OD and CM is that resistance is used to connote a group reaction. If the only psychological manifestation is -by definition — an ego defense, a problem arises. Groups have no egos, certainly not aggregately subjected to complex dynamic of ego in the same way at the same time.

Wherever possible, keep some things the same. Stay focused on the important reasons change is being sought. And avoid a follow-the-leader-because-I-say-so attitude. Fatigue can be a killjoy for change.

If an organization has been through a lot of upheaval, people may resist change simply because they're tired. And when people are tired, they tend to be cranky, angry, and irritable. It has been my experience that when the environment is tense or inundated with projects, the people in that environment will be the same way.

When this is the case, leaders have to be understanding of people's complaints and attentive to their needs throughout the change process. Keep the reasoning for change front and center, and make the environment more conducive for future change. By definition, implementing change is a departure from "the way it's always been done. Transformation, especially when it's from the top down, can make people feel uncomfortable.