Do people resist change?
Steve Simpson writes in his Blog Inspiring Cultures:
Why do people resist change?
I think the answer to this is really simple... People resist change because of a combination of up to three reasons:
- They don’t like their boss(es) - if people don't like those who are asking them to change, then despite the logical value of the change, people will resist out of retribution. This is all about the relationships
- They don’t like the change itself. This can relate to two separate, but important aspects - the process by which the change was introduced or implemented (ie, the way in which it was done) and/or the content of what is proposed (ie, the what). For example, people will resist change if they feel they weren't consulted. They'll also resist if they feel the proposed change doesn't result in sufficiently important benefits (either to them or the organisation)
- They don’t like the impact it will have on them. For example, change may mean extra work in a context where people are already very busy, or it might expose people's weaknesses within the 'new' environment. This is all about the ‘me’
I don't agree. I don't believe people resist change at all. I do believe that systems resist change - this is a typical pattern of complex systems, as a result of their auto-poietic behavior.
People have concerns, purposes and circumstances. If we acknowledge them, they will cooperate. If we neglect them, they will not cooperate.
But most people are not against change. Make a simple experiment with any group of people in an organization: Draw a matrix on the floor. One axis is about change in personal life (from "I seek for change in my life constantly" to "I love stability"), and the other axis is about change at work (from "I adapt easily when I am asked to be changed" to "I don't like to be changed"). Ask people to find their space on the grid. You will find that most people will be in the quadrant that says "I seek for change and I adapt easily", while they would say that their staff and bosses are in other quadrants. Isn't that a paradox?
6 comments:
What I learned as a psychologist is that 'resistance' doesn't exist. It is the therapist/leader/facilitator who doesn't know how to relate with where the person really is, how the other really feels...
I don't know that there would be more people selecting the change quadrant. I've encountered people who were very comfortable with their routines because they had developed what they saw as the most efficient and effective way of dealing with a situation. It would take a great deal of persuasion to get them to do something differently.. and some very good reasons... not just change for the sake of change. Perhaps you would need to demonstrate to them that the situation they built their routines for has changed and these routine are therefore no longer the best way to do things.
Well, people in organizations are rarely people at all ... they're people embedded in groups, departments, project teams and a multitude of other formal and informal affiliations. Systems they all are (a human itself is another complex system on another scale).
When asking what prevents change we can find a whole lotta reasons, some deeply rooted in one person's belief systems, others may be more situated in the group's experiences and learned patterns.
Yes, it's more complicated than we all normally conceive, and keeping track of all factors isn't "really simple" as Steve Simpson writes in Inspiring Cultures. This is indeed one of the most difficult questions we [must] tackle and ponder when we look at [change in] organizations.
(Hoilger, I've written this on posterous, but it doesn't trackback, so in the spirit of interactivity I do redundant things ;)
http://frogpond.posterous.com/do-people-resist-change-0
We are living in the ordering paradigm. From individuals to entire organizations the aim is to order everything. This anxiety to order everything is the exact opposite of change. At the same time understanding this anxiety of ordering everything is the key to embrace change.
if embraced,change can create new opportunities for individuals and help them lead a more successful ,happier and productive lives
Experience shows, and literature confirms, that more often than not results from initiatives to improve the business are disappointing. Some are outright disasters. Creating change is really hard.
Significantly overestimating the readiness of the organization to change may be a key factor when results are disappointing.
Why does this happen? Here are some hypotheses:
(1)We are too enamored with our solution. After all, our project team has toiled for months crafting it, we are deeply entrenched in the issues and detailed analyses, we may have bought in external experts to confirm our vision etc. We have convinced ourselves that our solution is right, and we expect that others in the organization will now easily grasp the brilliance of our recommendation as well.
As a result, we are under-managing (and likely under-funding) the change process. We overlook that it took us months to get to this point, often with controversial discussions, until we finally converged on the recommendation. Can we really count on others making the leap in a few days, after seeing a couple of presentations?
(2) We dismiss “resistance” as irrational behavior: these people “just don’t get it”, they are “nostalgic, stuck in their old ways”, “afraid of change” etc. This is problematic for two reasons. It makes us blind to understanding the thought processes that frequently are well founded and rational – they may just be based on different perceptions and assumptions. Only if we understand can we develop effective ways to make our case by addressing these different perceptions and assumptions head-on.
Secondly, people are perceptive. They will recognize our attitude as what it really is, that we are in fact looking down on them. Envision this scenario: “We believe that you are irrational and resisting, so we will ‘change mange’ you to comply”. Of course, this is never expressed openly, may probably even be a subconscious emotional response. But it is frequently implied by actions or remarks etc. of the leadership team. Would you feel attacked and manipulated? How likely is it that you will lock up and even reinforce your position? Engaging in an open and productive dialog that might change your mind is then very difficult.
Post a Comment