MANAGING RATIONAL REACTIONS

MANAGING RATIONAL REACTIONS & OBSTACLE TO CHANGE:

Overcoming Obstacles to Change MANAGING RATIONAL REACTIONS & OBSTACLE TO CHANGE

Top Ten Reasons People Resist Change:

Top Ten Reasons People Resist Change The risk of change is seen as greater than the risk of standing still People feel connected to other people who are identified with the old way People have no role models for the new activity People fear they lack the competence to change People feel overloaded and overwhelmed People have a healthy skepticism and want to be sure new ideas are sound People fear hidden agendas among would-be reformers People feel the proposed change threatens their notions of themselves People anticipate a loss of status or quality of life People genuinely believe that the proposed change is a bad idea

The following are some tips on facing barriers and challenges in the change process:

The following are some tips on facing barriers and challenges in the change process Expect resistance. Explain the rationale for change. Choose your opening moves carefully. Provide a clear vision. Seek opportunities to involve people. Promise "problems". Over-communicate. Wear your commitment on your sleeve. Get resistance out in the open. Make sure people have the know-how. Track behavior and measure results. Outrun the resisters.

Five Fears that Block the Ability to Change:

Five Fears that Block the Ability to Change Fear of the Unknown— The unspoken message from society says that when change occurs, you will lose control. Fear of Failure— If I commit myself to goals for change, there is a chance for failure. Fear of Commitment— Commitment forces an answer to tough questions. "What do I really want?" Commitment to one option is not always fun because it eliminates other options. Fear of Disapproval— If I change, I risk having people say they like me better the way I was. Your own change also forces others to change in relationship to you. Fear of Success— If I change, what other demands will be make of me? Can I sustain this success?

Types of resistance to change:

Types of resistance to change Positive Resister: agrees with new ideas and programs, but never moves to implement any changes Unique resister: believes each change is find for other areas but not for his or her "unique" situation Let-me-be-last resister: hopes new ideas and programs will die before his or her department must act on them We-need-more-time-to study resister: discovers that others find it hard to object to this form of resistance State-rights resister: wants not part of programs initiated elsewhere (which may even mean rejection of whatever comes from outside his or her department or outside the school system; also known as the not-invented-here syndrome) Cost-justifier: want everything cost-justified before any change Incremental change resister: wants the new program, system, or machine as long as it just adds on to everything the old one had.

Six Change Approaches to deal with this Resistance to Change :

Six Change Approaches to deal with this Resistance to Change Education and communication – where there is lack of information or inaccurate information and analysis. One of the best ways to overcome resistance to change is to educate people about the change effort beforehand. Up-front communication and education helps see the logic in the change effort. This reduces unfounded and incorrect rumors concerning the effect of change in the organization. Participation and involvement – where the initiators do not have all the information they need to design the change and where others have considerable power to resist. When employees are involved in the change effort they are more likely to buy change rather than resist it. This approach is likely to lower resistance and those who merely acquiesce to change. Negotiation and agreement – where someone or some group may lose out in a change and where that individual or group has considerable power to resist. Offering Incentives and reward can combat resistance. Manipulation and co-option – where other tactics will not work or are too expensive than an effective manipulation technique is to co-opt with resisters. Explicit and implicit coercion – where speed is essential and to be used only as last resort than explicitly or implicitly force people into accepting change by making clear that resisting change can lead to something not good.

FIN. Thank You!:

FIN. Thank You! Prepared by: Laura L. Donato III, RSW

1. THE RISK OF CHANGE IS SEEN AS GREATER THAN THE RISK OF STANDING STILL:

1. THE RISK OF CHANGE IS SEEN AS GREATER THAN THE RISK OF STANDING STILL Making a change requires a kind of leap of faith:  you decide to move in the direction of the unknown on the promise that something will be better for you.  But you have no proof.  Taking that leap of faith is risky, and people will only take active steps toward the unknown if they genuinely believe – and perhaps more importantly, feel – that the risks of standing still are greater than those of moving forward in a new direction.  Making a change is all about managing risk.  If you are making the case for change, be sure to set out in stark, truthful terms why you believe the risk situation favors change.  Use numbers whenever you can, because we in the West pay attention to numbers.  At the very least, they get our attention, and then when the rational mind is engaged, the emotional mind (which is typically most decisive) can begin to grapple with the prospect of change.  But if you only sell your idea of change based on idealistic, unseen promises of reward, you won’t be nearly as effective in moving people to action.  The power of the human fight-or-flight response can be activated to fight for change, but that begins with the perception of risk.

2. PEOPLE FEEL CONNECTED TO OTHER PEOPLE WHO ARE IDENTIFIED WITH THE OLD WAY:

2. PEOPLE FEEL CONNECTED TO OTHER PEOPLE WHO ARE IDENTIFIED WITH THE OLD WAY We are a social species.  We become and like to remains connected to those we know, those who have taught us, those with whom we are familiar – even at times to our own detriment.  Loyalty certainly helped our ancestors hunt antelope and defend against the aggressions of hostile tribes, and so we are hard wired, I believe, to form emotional bonds of loyalty, generally speaking.  If you ask people in an organization to do things in a new way, as rational as that new way may seem to you, you will be setting yourself up against all that hard wiring, all those emotional connections to those who taught your audience the old way - and that’s not trivial.  At the very least, as you craft your change message, you should make statements that honor the work and contributions of those who brought such success to the organization in the past, because on a very human but seldom articulated level, your audience will feel asked to betray their former mentors (whether those people remain in the organization or not). A little good diplomacy at the outset can stave off a lot of resistance.

3. PEOPLE HAVE NO ROLE MODELS FOR THE NEW ACTIVITY:

3. PEOPLE HAVE NO ROLE MODELS FOR THE NEW ACTIVITY Never underestimate the power of observational learning.  If you see yourself as a change agent, you probably are something of a dreamer, someone who uses the imagination to create new possibilities that do not currently exist.  Well, most people don’t operate that way.  It’s great to be a visionary, but communicating a vision is not enough. Get some people on board with your idea, so that you or they can demonstrate how the new way can work. Operationally, this can mean setting up effective pilot programs that model a change and work out the kinks before taking your innovation “on the road.”  For most people, seeing is believing.  Less rhetoric and more demonstration can go a long way toward overcoming resistance, changing people’s objections from the “It can’t be done!” variety to the “How can we get it done?” category.

4. PEOPLE FEAR THEY LACK THE COMPETENCE TO CHANGE:

4. PEOPLE FEAR THEY LACK THE COMPETENCE TO CHANGE This is a fear people will seldom admit.  But sometimes, change in organizations necessitates changes in skills, and some people will feel that they won’t be able to make the transition very well.  They don’t think they, as individuals, can do it.  The hard part is that some of them may be right.  But in many cases, their fears will be unfounded, and that’s why part of moving people toward change requires you to be an effective motivator.  Even more, a successful change campaign includes effective new training programs, typically staged from the broad to the specific.  By this I mean that initial events should be town-hall type information events, presenting the rationale and plan for change, specifying the next steps, outlining future communications channels for questions, etc., and specifying how people will learn the specifics of what will be required of them, from whom, and when.  Then, training programs must be implemented and evaluated over time.  In this way, you can minimize the initial fear of a lack of personal competence for change by showing how people will be brought to competence throughout the change process.  Then you have to deliver.

5. PEOPLE FEEL OVERLOADED AND OVERWHELMED :

5. PEOPLE FEEL OVERLOADED AND OVERWHELMED Fatigue can really kill a change effort, for an individual or for an organization.  If, for example, you believe you should quit smoking, but you’ve got ten projects going and four kids to keep up with, it can be easy to put off your personal health improvement project (until your first heart attack or cancer scare, when suddenly the risks of standing still seem greater than the risks of change!).  When you’re introducing a change effort, be aware of fatigue as a factor in keeping people from moving forward, even if they are telling you they believe in the wisdom of your idea.  If an organization has been through a lot of upheaval, people may resist change just because they are tired and overwhelmed, perhaps at precisely the time when more radical change is most needed!  That’s when you need to do two things:  re-emphasize the risk scenario that forms the rationale for change (as in my cancer scare example), and also be very generous and continuously attentive with praise, and with understanding for people’s complaints, throughout the change process.  When you reemphasize the risk scenario, you’re activating people’s fears, the basic fight-or-flight response we all possess.  But that’s not enough, and fear can produce its own fatigue. You’ve got to motivate and praise accomplishments as well, and be patient enough to let people vent (without getting too caught up in attending to unproductive negativity).

6. PEOPLE HAVE A HEALTHY SKEPTICISM AND WANT TO BE SURE NEW IDEAS ARE SOUND:

6. PEOPLE HAVE A HEALTHY SKEPTICISM AND WANT TO BE SURE NEW IDEAS ARE SOUND It’s important to remember that few worthwhile changes are conceived in their final, best form at the outset.  Healthy skeptics perform an important social function:  to vet the change idea or process so that it can be improved upon along the road to becoming reality.  So listen to your skeptics, and pay attention, because some percentage of what they have to say will prompt genuine improvements to your change idea (even if some of the criticism you will hear will be based more on fear and anger than substance).

7. PEOPLE FEAR HIDDEN AGENDAS AMONG WOULD-BE REFORMERS:

7. PEOPLE FEAR HIDDEN AGENDAS AMONG WOULD-BE REFORMERS Reformers can be a motley lot.  Not all are to be trusted.  Perhaps even more frightening, some of the worst atrocities modern history has known were begun by earnest people who really believed they knew what was best for everyone else.  Reformers, as a group, share a blemished past . . . And so, you can hardly blame those you might seek to move toward change for mistrusting your motives, or for thinking you have another agenda to follow shortly.  If you seek to promote change in an organization, not only can you expect to encounter resentment for upsetting the established order and for thinking you know better than everyone else, but you may also be suspected of wanted to increase your own power, or even eliminate potential opposition through later stages of change

8. PEOPLE FEEL THE PROPOSED CHANGE THREATENS THEIR NOTIONS OF THEMSELVES:

8. PEOPLE FEEL THE PROPOSED CHANGE THREATENS THEIR NOTIONS OF THEMSELVES Sometimes change on the job gets right to a person’s sense of identity. When a factory worker begins to do less with her hands and more with the monitoring of automated instruments, she may lose her sense of herself as a craftsperson, and may genuinely feel that the very things that attracted her to the work in the first place have been lost. I saw this among many medical people and psychologists during my graduate training, as the structures of medical reimbursement in this country changed in favor of the insurance companies, HMO’s and managed care organizations.  Medical professionals felt they had less say in the treatment of their patients, and felt answerable to less well trained people in the insurance companies to approve treatments the doctors felt were necessary.  And so, the doctors felt they had lost control of their profession, and lost the ability to do what they thought best for patients.

9. PEOPLE ANTICIPATE A LOSS OF STATUS OR QUALITY OF LIFE:

9. PEOPLE ANTICIPATE A LOSS OF STATUS OR QUALITY OF LIFE Real change reshuffles the deck a bit.  Reshuffling the deck can bring winners . . . and losers.  Some people, most likely, will gain in status, job security, quality of life, etc. with the proposed change, and some will likely lose a bit.  Change does not have to be a zero sum game, and change can (and should) bring more advantage to more people than disadvantage.  But we all live in the real world, and let’s face it – if there were no obstacles (read: people and their interests) aligned against change, then special efforts to promote change would be unnecessary. Some people will, in part, be aligned against change because they will clearly, and in some cases correctly, view the change as being contrary to their interests.  There are various strategies for minimizing this, and for dealing with steadfast obstacles to change in the form of people and their interests, but the short answer for dealing with this problem is to do what you can to present the inevitability of the change given the risk landscape, and offer to help people to adjust. Having said that, I’ve never seen a real organizational change effort that did not result in some people choosing to leave the organization, and sometimes that’s best for all concerned. When the organization changes, it won’t be to everyone’s liking, and in that case, it’s best for everyone to be adult about it and move on.

10.  PEOPLE GENUINELY BELIEVE THAT THE PROPOSED CHANGE IS A BAD IDEA:

10.  PEOPLE GENUINELY BELIEVE THAT THE PROPOSED CHANGE IS A BAD IDEA I’ll never forget what a supervisor of mine said to be, during the year after I had graduated from college, secure as I was in the knowledge of my well earned, pedigreed wisdom at age twenty-two.  We were in a meeting, and I made the comment, in response to some piece of information, “Oh, I didn’t know that!”  Ricky, my boss, looked at me sideways, and commented dryly, “Things you don’t know . . . fill libraries.”  The truth is, sometimes someone’s (even – gasp! – my) idea of change is just not a good idea.  Sometimes people are not being recalcitrant, or afraid, or muddle-headed, or nasty, or foolish when they resist.  They just see that we’re wrong. And even if we’re not all wrong, but only half wrong, or even if we’re right, it’s important not to ignore when people have genuine, rational reservations or objections. Not all resistance is about emotion, in spite of this list I’ve assembled here.  To win people’s commitment for  change, you must engage them on both a rational level and an emotional level. I’ve emphasized the emotional side of the equation for this list because I find, in my experience, that this is the area would-be change agents understand least well.  But I’m also mindful that a failure to listen to and respond to people’s rational objections and beliefs is ultimately disrespectful to them, and to assume arrogantly that we innovative, change agent types really do know best.  A word to the wise:  we’re just as fallible as anyone.