Resistance to Change Essay

Change they say is the only constant thing. It is however a big adore why many people still resist diversify even in large institutions. Resistance to permute has therefore had a negative intension because it portrays people avoiding the inevitable and not wanting to improve or face challenges. The essence of this paper is to peel the outward negative layer of resistance to variety and dig deeper to reveal how it nates be managed and transformed into a positive thing which may avail motorbuss the opportunity to better their employees and refine their approach to change management.Although it was once accepted that everyone resists change, this paper will show that how people are treated and how change is implemented give the sack have considerable knead on employee resistance to change. 2. 0AN OVERVIEW OF RESISTANCE TO CHANGE Perren (1996) described resistance as a behavioural reaction or symptom of distress intended to edit distress level. Change may be described as the crea tion of something new or ending of something we are familiar with. (Huc and Buc 2010) describes resistance to change as an unwillingness or inability to accept or discuss changes that are perceived to be damaging or threatening to the individual.Large institutions often ignore in their ability to manage change well and a major suit is the inability to create new business culture from the existing organisations. (Atkinson 2005) it is for this reason that resistance to change is seen negatively as organisational change is more often than not unsuccessful. The nature of resistance is that we do not experience it actively and publicly. Its heraldic bearing is often displayed covertly or passively and shows up in unexpected ways. Perhaps if it were displayed in an obvious manner, we could deal with it logically. Atkinson 2005Resistance to Change as a Negative Force Resistance is most commonly linked with negative employee attitudes with counter- productive behaviours. (Waddell and Soh al 1998) Negativity is a misconception that there are so many times when resistance is the most effective response available. (Hultman 1979). Early human resource theory besides cast resistance in a negative demoralise by perceiving it as a form of conflict that was indicative of a breakdown in the normal and healthy interactions that can exist between individuals or groups.And of course the answer was to avoid resistance in order to restore harmony. (Milton 1984). 2. 2 Why do people Resist Change? Having an in-depth knowledge as to why employees resist change might be a first step to realising that resistance is not a bad thing and to helping the manager deal with it. Among the causes of resistance to change listed by Kreitner (1999) are Surprise, inertia, misunderstanding, emotional side effects, lack of trust, fear of failure, personal conflicts, poor training or threat to business organization status/security.Four common causes of resistance to change as cited by Huc and Buc (2010), Bedeian (1980) and Kotter and Schlesinger (2008) are a. Parochial Self Interest. Which could mean leaving your comfort zone, inconveniences or noise of relationships. Like Atkinson (2005) said, the first reaction when people hear of an imminent change is to personalise it to self and ask, how is this going to affect me? b. Misunderstanding or lack of Trust. That is colloquy gap. People want to know the reason for the change that is being proposed.If they feel you are hiding information from them, it could spend to lack of trust and they will mechanically resist. c. Contradictory Assessments. Managers should be as explicit as possible when driving change because employees tend to see more costs than benefits. d. Low tolerance for change. well-nigh people have difficulty in coping with change and may result in self doubt and uncertainty. According to Kotter (2008) people might also resist change because of peer pressure or a supervisors attitude.Drucker argued that the m ajor obstacle to organisational growth is managers inability to change their attitudes and behaviour as rapidly as their organisations require. Eccles (1994) lists 13 possible sources of resistance ignorance, comparison, disbelief, loss, inadequacy, anxiety, demolition, power cut, contamination, inhibition, mistrust, alienation and frustration. 2. 3 Managing Resistance to Change. Negative reactions to change may be motivated by positive intentions. (Piderit 2000)There arent any clear cut strategies as to how to manage esistance.Managing people stems from experience and depends on each unique situation. To lead change, managers need to tailor strategies to the types of resistance that may be encountered. (Kotter and Schlesinger 2008) Huc and Buc (2004) came up with the theory of Stakeholder Analysis . They describe the stakeholder as any person who will be nowadays or indirectly affected by the change in an organisation. The theory states that anticipating the different reactions of the stakeholders is a useful first step in managing resistance.Using the Stakeholder analysis, managers can first draw up the list of the stakeholders, establish what each will lose or gain if the change goes ahead, use the potential benefits to strengthen domiciliate for proposals, and finally, find ways to address the concerns of those who feel they will lose by altering the nature of the changes proposed or offering to reduce losses in another(prenominal) ways. Kotter and Schlesinger (1979), came up with six techniques to managing resistance * Education and Commitment * Participation and Involvement *Facilitation and Support * Negotiation and Agreement Manipulation and Co-optation * Implicit and Explicit compulsion As said earlier, these strategies or techniques have to be tailored to each individual situation. The biggest mistake any manager or change agent can make is to assume that resistance to change can be handled using textbook methods. However, these methods can be use d in combination. The choice depends on the in all probability reactions of those involved and on the long term implications of solving the immediate problems in that way. Johnson and Scholes (1999) also used these as appropriate styles of management for those faced with managing change.