Resistance To Change And Its Implications In An Organization

Resistance to change

Discuss about the Resistance to Change and Its Implications in an Organization.

The occurrence of the change, especially in an organization, could be brought out by various factors either external or internal. A natural response to change is resistance especially in organizations (Burke, 2009) Resistance to change is sometimes unavoidable especially in situations where the proposed change does not fit well with the employees.

Resistance to change is quite frequent in organizations. Employees can resist the proposed change due to various factors. For instance, change brings about anxiety and uncertainty. In most cases, the change affects every employee in the organization and it is for this reason that they may offer resistance so as to maintain their status quo rather than embracing the unknown brought about by the change. Oreg (2008) believes that factors such as an employee’s short-thinking of the immediate discomfort rather than long-term benefit, the cognitive rigidity of an employee as well as the desire to have a stable routine can facilitate their resistance to change. However, not all employees provide resistance to change. Among those who may resist change are; those who are likely to receive an increase in their workload, those who advocate for a different kind of change, those who are successful and received awards in their current way of working and employees who have invested highly in the current way of working as well as those who developed the current way of working (Bratton, 2010)

Managers often view resistance to change as a drug to the development of the organization that has to be managed. For instance, managers in an editorial firm can decide to introduce new editorial tools that editors have to use in addition to the existing ones when editing. This move, in the long run, will improve the efficiency and reliability of the firms’ work. However, the editor is likely to resist to this change as this means more work for him. The manager is more likely to see this as a problem as their goal of providing high-quality work will not be attained easily. Thus there is need to manage this resistance.

There is a link between power and resistance to change when it comes to organizational change (Erkama, 2013) to understand the resistance to change, it is important for one to understand the notion of power as the two are intertwined. There are four faces of power in an organization that influences resistant in organizations (Fleming, 2010). These include coercion, manipulation, subjection, and domination. Resistance is viewed as a source of power that the employees use to avert change. In coercion, a person in a position of power can coerce the employees to accept or follow orders. The employees can use resistance to refuse what they are coerced to do. Manipulation is the control that one imposes on another to get something done. As it is mainly through non-participation, then resistance, in this case, can be used to gain access to gain a voice through either trade unions or social movements. Domination is the power that shapes the preferences and general outlook of the employees. To avert this, one can use resistance as a means of escape to disengage from this domination. The fourth power, subjectification, is one where the organization molds the employees into a certain way. Resistance, in this case, can be as a result of the employees creating something that contradicts what the management intended.

Reasons why employees resist change

Thomas and Hardy (2011) provide that there are those who shape the decisions while there are those whores are resistant to the decisions. Resistance is conceptualized in various ways including as pathology, psychological and sociological. As a pathology, managers have the best and crucial knowledge to develop a rational approach towards change. This can be through using empirical data that will lead to a predictable change. As employees resist the change, employers and managers view this as a problem that has to be dealt with thus causing them to use secrecy, coercion, sanctions and other forms of power to overcome this resistance. Additionally, resistance can be conceptualized as the outcome of one’s psychological state including emotions and attitudes. A person’s feelings such as selfishness, cognition, and powerlessness can make them resist change. This necessitates for the managers to first fix the individual through communication so as to inform and enlighten them on the new ideas and what it means to the organization as well as encourage them to accept the proposed changes. Additionally, managers and change agents can incorporate some of the employees’ ideas as well as encouraging their participation so as to ensure they attain effective change management. However, the interests, power, and assumptions of the agents and managers are to remain the most dominant. Resistant to change can be viewed on the sociological aspect (Johns, 2013). Resistance is itself a form of resistance as a response to power which is employed by employees.

Change is a vital decision that managers and change agents formulate for better service delivery. However, as the change is likely to face resistance, managers tend to demonize the action stating that the resistance affects service delivery (Burke, 2009). For one, resistance to change lowers the work morale of employees especially in cases where they lack detailed information on the implemented change. Additionally, resistance to change can result to the negative conceptualization of the organization as employees are likely to have a negative attitude of the change as well as the proposed change. To manage the resistance, managers and change agents in, most cases use their power to influence the employees to accept and adopt the change. On the other hand, the employees tend to use resistance to avert or express resistance. An implication of this, move by the employees can be poor service delivery or satisfaction and low job turnover. For instance, a delivery firm can change the modes of delivery from a pickup point to offering door-to-door delivery services. The managers might impose this change with an aim of improving their customer relations. However, employees view this move as an addition to their workload thus resists the move. This will affect the service delivery and can tarnish the company’s name. It is in this light that the managers demonize resistance and derive ways to manage the resistance (Jabri, 2017)

The link between power and resistance to change

Ethics refers to the decent guidelines that drive a person’s behavior when piloting or articulating an activity. When dealing with issues that require ethical considerations, it is important for one to develop an ethical framework that is to be followed to arriving at a solution (Dolan, 2012). An appropriate ethical framework relevant to the organizational management of change is the use of the basic right approach. According to this approach, the managers have a duty in consulting the employees on matters affecting them at work as well as giving employees a right to see and understand how decisions involving employment are taken. This framework is associated with the clear and open relationship between the managers and the employees meaning that the decisions undertaken by any of the parties have to be informed to the other party first.

Power and resistance to change raise a number of issues. For instance, when managers coerce their employees to partake or do something that they are unwilling to do, they violate the person’s freedom of choice. Coercion can be in form of threats or use of force. A manager in can make a decision requiring all employees to report to work on Saturday which is against their jurisdiction and to respond to this change, the employees can boycott work. In the same way, a manager can provide laws that require employees to pay for certain services that were previously attained with no costs, with an excuse of raising extra funds for a certain project. This can be through manipulation or even subjection. Once employees realize that they have been manipulated and subjected to paying for these services, they are more likely to resist the change by failing to pay or even through sanctions. The use of power to implement changes that one wants causes raised various ethical issues that affect the organization at large. On the other hand, the move to resist a change has its ethical issues. In addition to resistance to organizational change, other factors likely to cause dissent include performance evaluation, tactics for decision making and how employees’ are treated (Thompson, 2009)Dissent can be presented in various ways. Articulate dissent involves presenting the disagreement directly to the superiors. This method provides that the employees are concerned with the issue at hand for the benefit of the whole organization rather than for personal gain. Latent dissent is where one presents the opposition to the coworkers especially in situations which they are unable to have a clear audience with the supervisors or managers. This is a method that is useful in situations where one feels the superiors are not receptive. Displaced dissent involves expressing disagreement to the external audiences such as friends and family. This dissent, however, limits the employee’s feedback on the organization thus presenting the picture that the proposed organizational change has been accepted by all employees.

Managing resistance to change

The use of ethical frameworks to respond to these ethical issues raised by resistance and power is a key consideration for any organization. The framework is to provide a possible solution or method in which a proposed change can be articulated and accepted by all without the use of powers or resistance.  Even as change is inevitable, change agents and managers should always consider the ethical issues likely to arise and use the ethical frameworks as a guide to implementing a particular organizational change. The basic right framework provides a ground in which the managers have to consult or inform the employees of a change likely to happen so as to receive their feedback as they are the ones likely to be affected by the implementation of the particular change. Other additional frameworks that are useful or relevant to issues arising from organizational change according to Woodhall, Winstanley, and Heery (1996) include; the universalism approach which deals with the principle of ‘Do as you would be done by,’ and respect for the individual; the community of purpose approach which holds a stakeholder view that accept that change can affect different groups differently and therefore there should not be extreme disparities of benefits in these groups and the organizational justice approach which advocates for fair treatment of the employees through provision of equal opportunities as well as in decisions on  performance and rewarding (Bratton, 2010).To achieve an effective change management, it is advisable for the change agents to clearly outline the details of the change and what it involves. The employees should also provide their thoughts on the proposed change to the managers including what they propose to be done. This will reduce the collision that arises as a result of the use of power and resistance mechanisms.

Conclusion                                                  

Resistance to change is a natural response that is provided by employees in an organization in situations where the change is likely to affect their work. Factors such as ambiguity in the details of the change, the feeling of powerlessness and anxiety as well as cognition of the proposed change are among those that make them resist the change. However, managers and change agents may feel the need to manage this action as it affects the job satisfaction as well as service delivery. Additionally, resistant to change and power are interlinked as managers can use powers to advocate for change while employees use resistance power as a response to the same. Ethical considerations are important especially when managers are implementing a particular organizational change.

References

Bratton, J. S. (2010). Work and Organizational Behaviour 2nd Ed. UK: Palgrave Macmillan,

Burke, W. W. (2009). Organizational change: A comprehensive reader. San Francisco: .: Jossey-Bass.

Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (2009). Organizational development & change (9th ed.). Mason: South-Western Cengage Learning.  

Dolan, S. L. (2012). Sharing the culture: Embedding storytelling and ethics in the culture change management process.”. Journal of Management and Change, 29 Pp. 10-23.

Douglas, F. (2011). Between a rock and a hard place: Resistance and the formation of professional identity. International Journal of Education and Vocational Guidance. 11 (3) pp. 163-173

Erkama, N. (2013). Power and resistance in a multinational organization. Scandinavian Journal of Management., 26. Pp. 151-165.

Fleming, P. a. (2010). The Faces of Power in Organizations. In Contesting the Corporation: Struggle, Power, and Resistance in Organizations. Cambridge University Press.

Jabri, M. (2017). Managing Organizational Change: Process, Social Construction and Dialogue. 2nd Ed. . london: Palgrave Macmillan.

Johns, E. A. (2013). The Sociology of Organizational Change. Pergamon Publications.

Oreg, S. (2008). Resistance to Change: Developing an individual differences measure. Journal of Applied Psychology

Thomas, R. & Hardy, C. (2011). Reframing resistance to organizational change. Scandinavian Journal of Management. 27 pp. 322-333.

Thompson, P. &. (2009). Work Organization: A Critical Approach. , London. : Palgrave Macmillan.