Managing Resistance and Complications During Organisational Change
Abstract
Today’s World is defined as a turbulent set-up. The implication for businesses and organizations is that they have to embrace change as a standard practice to stay competitive enough. Organizational change can be brought about by programs or projects. As much as these changes could be relevant to their environments, they can have a diversity of relationships and result in resistance. This paper shall investigate through a case study of change in educational systems, how organizations can manage such challenges and oppositions by providing a methodology of data collection, the data analysis and findings and lastly offer recommendations on how to deal with the problem at hand.
Resistance is expected to yield either positive or negative impacts and is, therefore, from the management perspective, it is considered a risk. Either Internal or external environments exert resistance on several occasions. The author will, thus, extract correspondences to the risk and incoherent management and propose a model that used to manage forms of resistance within a program. The main objective of this article is to understand and explore how resistance and other challenges that come alongside change, can be prevented and handled as they occur.
Introduction
Organizations experience a lot of change with time as a result of both external and internal pressures exerted by the ever-volatile economy. Schools require sustained stability to cater for effective education. Continuous positive modifications are, therefore, crucial alongside the changing circumstances. Organizations need to be flexible so that they are open to such changes. Global developments push organizations to advance their content and structures. The pressures on organizations, including schools to change exist and hence, the members respond in either a positive or negative way. The crucial issues facing organizations are the driving forces of change, the causes of opposition and how to manage them. This study aims to explore the concepts concerning objection to change in educational establishments and how to manage the challenges that come with it.
Literature review
As a result of the rapid technologies and multiple events within organizations’ environments and the World as a whole, establishments subject themselves to pressures for change. The external and internal environments of the organizations are the contributing elements to these occurrences. These types of changes include; social, financial, structural, and technological (Laframboise, et.al., 2002). Advancements in the field of information and communication technology, globalization, demographic shifts, economic predicaments are factors driving humans to change. Some primary external triggers include; market globalization, the government’s laws, and regulations, political and social pressures, and demographic characteristics. Internal forces are those that emanate from inside the organization, and they include but not limited to; human resources, technology, hierarchies of management, company’s primary task, and reward systems. Direction, speed, and the consequences of the change in an organization are the factors related to both external and internal forces.
Methodology
After concluding the most suitable research strategy for this article, it was necessary to decide how to collect the empirical data. Evidence can usually be gotten from six sources: physical artifacts, interviews, documents, direct observation, and archival records. To arrive at a holistic picture of the subject in the study, it is necessary to collect diversified kinds of information. The author used multiple sources in this research study to acquire both primary and secondary data. The primary sources included: surveys, documentation, and interviews and secondary data obtained from articles and books. The data was compiled as a source of reference and to demonstrate views of different authors, for example, causes of resistance, symptoms, and proposed techniques of preventing and handling them. It was also essential to have in mind the advantages and disadvantages of each type of source of data.
The author collected the information by applying face-to-face interviews with significant employees of the company. They included the employees that partake decisions, those in charge of the change process, and those affected by it and surveys used for the other company employees. The participants grouped themselves to represent various roles within the organization. All the represented groups are stakeholders because they are affected by the process, either in terms of their relationships or jobs. The potential impacts are the reasons people resist change. The sampled groups included board members, students, ICT services, teachers and principals.
Findings and Analysis
The data obtained were organized into their theoretical classes, and their properties identified. They were then carefully examined, and various comparisons are drawn.
From the data analysis, it was evident that there were a significant number of employees afraid of change and displayed intolerant behaviours towards it. An observation was made that the fear of the unknown drove some participants from the educational systems. They found it discomforting, and this is what is referred to as blind resistance.
Political resistance occurred in those stuff members that they were subject to lose a valuable part of them once the implementation of the change occurs; for example, their managerial positions, budget size, and even personal compensation. Teachers and principals thought they were likely to lose their jobs, power, or significant roles within the school. Several scholars of management argue that change comes typically with it both short-term and long-term losses.
Ideological resistance was observed amongst the intellectuals of the schools. They disagreed with organizational change because they believed that the move came at the wrong time and that it was not bound to work and that it could result in more destructions than positive outcomes (Laframboise, et.al., 2002). Teachers felt that the proposed changes were violating their deeply held values. They tried to provide logical reasons to validate their stand of resistance.
Causes of resistance
It is quite challenging to determine the sole reasons for resistance to change; it is evident that many forces are to blame (Van de Ven, et.al, 2011). These forces include not putting into consideration the expectations and needs of the members within the organization and providing inadequate enlightenment about the nature of the change. People will naturally develop an awareness of fears of job security, job loss, new wage rates, employment levels, and changes in working conditions. Even though change always comes for positive impacts, members tend to perceive it negatively and therefore resist. From the study, it was evident that the main reasons for resistance include loss of freedom, economic implications, fear of the unknown, organizational structure, threats to influence or power, and limited resources (Levay, 2010).
Loss of freedom or inconvenience as change assumes place is bothersome as control increases and, in the process, members tend to resist the implementations coming with the amendment. Changes that prevent organization members from social and economic fulfilment are bound to encounter challenges. People tend to acquire resistance to changes that reduce their income, social relationships and job status. Selective perception is the other factor contributing to resistance. Organization members process the given information selectively as per their point of view. It is natural for people to disregard any information that threatens their beliefs. This results in biased perceptions, and the result is resistance to the change.
Habit is also a cause of resistance. Members react to new customs that aim to alter their usual living habits or behaviours. Patterns are a means of comfort and security, and when threatened, people develop resistance. Economic implications include possible pay reduction and other rewards which would incite resistance since people embrace the concept of maintaining the status quo. The fear of the unknown also contributes to resistance to change more so when adequate information is not provided regarding the nature of the change. They become anxious and fearful about any implications coming alongside the move since it is normal for people to love stability and disregard uncertainties and doubts.
Changes that affect technology and the administration threaten power bases and may result in opposition. This includes aspects like the reallocation of decision-making roles. Members of an organization also tend to resist change when their skills and knowledge are obsolete (Yılmaz, & Kılıçoğlu, 2013). Organizations that also have limited resources will opt to maintain their status quo because of a lack of capital and human resource that is well-equipped with suitable skills and time. The desired changes, as a result, are likely to be abandoned.
Recommendations
Organizations that underestimate the extent of the impact of change are bound to fail in attaining change initiatives. As much as change has a direct effect on hierarchy, technology and organization structures, people receive a tremendous impact. It is, therefore, crucial that the employees’ psychological assessments are put into consideration. Employees need to be guided through their mental transition. Effective management is one that understands human behaviour.
In educational organizations, school members may exhibit fear, frustrations and uncertainty regarding change initiatives. To attain the successful execution of change, organization management should embrace affirmative action (Yılmaz, & Kılıçoğlu, 2013). Six strategies according to Kotter and Schlesinger have been proposed to be used in managing challenges and resistance to change: support and facilitation, education and communication, involvement and participation, agreement and negotiation, implicit and explicit coercion and, co-optation and manipulation.
Facilitation and support have the main goal to handle resistance by giving it an emotional and help approach (Hussey, 2000). Administrators should actively listen to the members that portray hardships with coping with changes in terms of their complaints, problems and even ideas. In this case, school principals should make the working environment pleasant and conducive to the change process.
Education and communication call for the organization’s management to educate its members of the change’s nature and its need before implementing it. This strategy works best in the case of resistance stemming from inaccurate information. Involvement and participation also allow members to be present during the different stages of the change process from planning, designing and implementation so that they can propose their ideas and give advice.
The aspect of agreement and negotiation is applied when some members of the organization lose a valuable factor and are propelled to resist. This is done by arranging trade-offs for exclusive benefits with the resistors. Co-optation and manipulation are applied when the previous measures do not work. Other members within the establishment are influenced by availing the necessary information, and the needed events for change are structured.
Implicit and explicit coercion usually has adverse effects like fear, frustration, alienation and revenge (Hussey, 2000). This is because the authority employs force on the resistors by threatening them with unpleasant circumstances if they do not comply with the changes. This method is applicable when speed is crucial, or example, when the organization is facing a crisis and agents of change, have considerable power.
Conclusion
The ever-changing characteristic of economy and technology is what propels organizations to change. External and internal pressures are responsible for this desire for change. In schools, it is clear that external forces have the most impact, especially the government’s influence. Changes result in various responses, including resistance. People tend to respond unconsciously to aspects threatening their stability and comfort. The main factors resulting in resistance are selective perception, interference with need fulfilment, inconvenience, habit and loss of freedom amongst others. It is the organization’s role to manage the conflicts and challenges accompanying the change process. The authority has the mandate to comprehend human behaviours while paying close attention to their psychological perceptions.
References
Hussey, D. E. (2000). How to manage organizational change (Vol. 28). Kogan Page Publishers.
Laframboise, D., Nelson, R. L., & Schmaltz, J. (2002). Managing resistance to change in workplace accommodation projects. Journal of Facilities Management, 1(4), 306-321.
Levay, C. (2010). Charismatic leadership in resistance to change. The leadership quarterly, 21(1), 127-143.
Thomas, R., Sargent, L. D., & Hardy, C. (2011). Managing organizational change: Negotiating meaning and power-resistance relations. Organization Science, 22(1), 22-41.
Van de Ven, A. H., & Sun, K. (2011). Breakdowns in implementing models of organizational change. Academy of Management Perspectives, 25(3), 58-74.
Yılmaz, D., & Kılıçoğlu, G. (2013). Resistance to change and ways of reducing resistance in educational organizations. European journal of research on education, 1(1), 14-21.