weLEAD Online Magazine
leadingtoday.org
Copyright
2005 ã weLEAD, Inc.
Organizational Change: Managing
Transition – Part 2
By Evan Bahe
One of the toughest
management challenges all managers face during the change process is overcoming
resistance to change. When an
organizational change is announced, employees typically experience four
emotions, and they are (in the order they are experienced):
·
disbelief and denial—many people believe the change won’t
actually happen and things will remain as they always have;
·
anger and blame—this is the stage where employees actively
resist the change;
·
reluctant acceptance—employees begin to accept the change
and try to define what their role will be during the change process; and
·
the final stage—personnel commit to the
change during this stage and attempt to focus on the future, rather than the
past (Riches, n.d.).
Anne
Riches (n.d.) explains that there are several actions
a manager can take to counteract these four emotional stages in an attempt to
prevent change from becoming a major shock to the organization’s
personnel. First, proper planning will
help reduce the amount of denial employees face. Also, keeping everyone informed about what
changes to expect, how the changes will affect them and what the timeline will
look like for each phase of the change, will help prepare employees for any
upcoming changes.
Second,
listening to what your people have to say can reduce the amount of overall
resistance they choose to exert. A key
word during any change process is empathize. Most
people don’t want to be told how they should react; they just want an
acknowledgement that their responses and reactions are valid.
Next,
personnel will more readily accept change if they know they will have the full
encouragement and support of management through the change process. A training plan will help get employees up to
speed on the new processes and will help them understand how they will have to
perform any new tasks. Once personnel
understand the benefits of the change, they will normally respond in a positive
manner.
Riches, (n.d.) explains that during the fourth and final stage,
personnel will become fully committed to the change if they are recognized
during each phase of the change and rewarded when short-term goals are
reached). Recognition should be provided
not only at the individual level, but also the group level. This will keep the work groups motivated and
committed to the long-term goals (Prosci, 2003). Communication is the most important factor
during this, and any other, stage of the change process. Once the employees
understand they are being kept up-to-date on every aspect of the process, they
will become increasingly committed to the change.
Something
to keep in mind is the fact that people move through these emotional stages at
different rates and suffer through some stages longer than others. The sooner managers
help their personnel move through these stages and get them committed to the change,
the sooner the change can be successfully initiated and completed (Riches, n.d.).
There are
numerous reasons that employees resist change.
Some are simply afraid of the unknown.
Others may think that things are fine just the way they are and that any
changes will conflict with current operations.
They may also envision all kinds of negative impacts on production,
resource procurement, company goals, or organizational culture (McNamara,
1999). It is a manager’s job to identify
these resistance factors and address them during the planning stage to
eliminate them as soon as possible.
Resistance
can normally be seen in a few different ways.
First, it can be immediate, in the form of voiced complaints,
work slow downs, and threats to go on strike.
These types of resistance are the easiest for managers to deal with
because disgruntled employees openly display them. Resistance to change can also be deferred and
will not be easily discernable to management.
Forms of this type of resistance are more subtle and include: loss of
loyalty, loss of motivation, increased mistakes, and increased absenteeism
(Robbins, 2003, p. 559).
Sources of
resistance can be at the individual level or the organizational level. Robbins (2003) identifies five reasons why
individuals may resist change. The first
reason is habit; we like to maintain our normal routines during the workday and
anything that affects these routines can cause new stresses to our lives (p.
559).
Security is the
second reason employees may resist a change.
Workers like to feel safe in their surroundings and a change may cause
downsizing or restructuring. Having to
change jobs or work under a new supervisor can also lead to a stressful
situation (p. 560).
Third,
changes often affect an individual’s economic situation, especially if the
changes establish new production tasks and pay is tied to productivity. Almost everyone would resist a change that
could, in the long-term, reduce his or her annual income (p. 560).
Fourth, as
mentioned earlier, fear of the unknown typically causes some kind of resistance
from the employees. Not knowing how the
change will affect job security or their economic well being normally causes
immediate resistance until they receive adequate information (p. 560).
Robbins’
(2003) fifth, and final, reason individuals may resist change is that they have
a tendency to hear only what they want to hear; they hear that changes are
going to be made, but don’t listen to all the reasons for the change or how the
organization will benefit from it. This
causes unnecessary resistance during the change process and slows down all
efforts to improve the work situation and production processes (p. 560).
Organizations resist change for entirely different reasons. There are six sources of organizational
resistance to change according to Robbins (2003). The first source he identifies is structural inertia. This phenomenon is the organization’s overall
activities and mechanisms that keep the business moving forward and
stable. All of the company’s strategies,
training plans, production processes, and job descriptions are based on this
inertia, so anytime a change is initiated, it affects
almost every area of the organization and creates resistance (p. 561).
This leads
to the next source, called limited focus of change. This happens when all areas affected by a
change don’t actually make the required changes and it ends up not being fully
accepted by everyone in the organization (p. 561).
The third
source of organizational resistance is group inertia. In this situation, individuals may accept the
change, but a group, such as a union, may resist the change because of the
overall affect it may have on the organization (p. 561).
Fourth,
there may be a perceived threat to expertise.
Certain departments or specialized groups of personnel may feel
threatened by changes that will lesson their importance to the company or make
their job obsolete (pp. 561-562).
The next
source of resistance at the organizational level is threat to established power
relationships. In this instance,
personnel who have gained a position of power may feel that changes will cause
the organization to modify its structure, reducing perceived levels of
power. Examples of changes that could
reduce power relationships include participative decision making and
self-managed work teams (p. 562).
Robbins’
(2003) final source of organizational resistance is the threat to established
resource allocations. Resistance is
often met when departments in the organization perceive that they may not get
their fair share of resources necessary to accomplish their production
processes. Reductions in resources may
affect future budgets for the department and may even lead to staff cuts (p.
562). Resistance that starts at the
organizational level often causes individual resistance. Employees often identify with any source of
organizational resistance and realize that changes to the organization will
ultimately affect them on a personal level.
Once the
source of resistance is identified, choosing the right tool for overcoming it
is the next step. Robbins (2003)
identified six tactics for overcoming resistance to change. The first tactic suggests that resistance can
be reduced through education and communication.
Many times, employees resist change because they haven’t been given
enough information about what the effects of the change will be or they might
have been given incorrect information.
Once employees are given a full explanation about what the change
strategy is, resistance should subside (p. 562).
Having the
employees participate in the planning process for organizational changes is the
second tactic that managers can use to overcome resistance to change. This will allow personnel that oppose the
change to voice their opinions and make suggestions. Everyone who will be affected by the change
should also have the opportunity to make recommendations based on their expertise
and experience. This tactic normally
increases the commitment employees have to the change (p. 562).
Facilitation and support can also be used to reduce resistance to
change. This tactic suggests that
managers consider employee counseling, training, or a paid leave of absence for
employees who get completely stressed out about an upcoming change (p. 562).
Managers may
have to use a tactic called negotiation to deal with potential resistance to
change. Offering some sort of reward package
that interests a particular employee may be required if the person is in a
position of power in the group. This
tactic could prove to be quite costly if others in positions of power attempt
to negotiate for the same or a higher reward package (p. 562).
The fifth
tactic, manipulation and cooptation, are basically underhanded ways for
managers to reduce resistance to a change.
Examples of manipulation include: distorting the facts, providing only desirable
information, and spreading information that is untrue. Making threats about layoffs and pay cuts
that they do not really intend to initiate are also ways to manipulate
employees. Cooptation is a combination
of manipulation and participation. It
can be described as bribing resisting personnel in positions of power by
offering them a desired position in the change process (p. 563).
The sixth
and final tactic Robbins (2003) identified for overcoming resistance to change
is coercion. He defines this as “the
application of direct threats or force on the resisters”. In this case, if management threatens
resisters with layoffs and pay cuts and really do intend to follow through with
them, this would be considered coercion (p. 563).
According to
Gary Dessler (2004), there are several advantages to
each of these tactics, to include increased participation in the change,
reduced employee adjustment problems, and quick solutions to resistance
problems. Disadvantages of these methods
are that they can be time-consuming, can be expensive, may lead to future
problems, and may leave people angry (p. 204).
One way
managers can reduce the overall resistance to change is to manage the
transition process in a professional manner.
Managers must first understand that there is a difference between the
change and transition process, which will enable them to help their personnel
through any emotional change situation.
William Bridges and Susan Mitchell (2000) explain that:
Transition
is the state that change puts people in.
The change is external (the different policy, practice, or structure
that the leader is trying to bring about), while transition is internal (a psychological reorientation that people have to go through
before the change can work) (n.p.).
Managers typically focus the majority of their time on
accomplishing the change and neglect helping their personnel through the
transition process.
According to
Robbins (2003), a well-known approach to managing change, that requires people
to go through three separate processes, is called Lewin’s
Three-Step Change Model. The three steps
are unfreezing, movement, and refreezing (p. 564). The first transition step, unfreezing,
requires personnel to say goodbye to the way things used to be. Managers must realize that employees are
being asked to give up tasks and processes that have made them successful in
the past and all the emotional and resistance factors will kick in if enough
time is not allotted for this step. The
second step, movement, is when everyone shifts into neutral. Employees may have given up their old ways of
accomplishing tasks, but they may not quite be ready to start using the new
process. During this step, employees may
seem a little uncomfortable and there is often confusion. Managers must manage this step carefully or
employees may try to revert back to the old process. The final step, refreezing, is when everyone
moves forward and starts accomplishing tasks in the new manner. Again, great care must be taken when managing
this step to identify resistance and prevent personnel from going back to the
original process (Bridges & Mitchell, 2000).
Lori Silverman (2001) points out that there are several
questions a manager should answer prior to initiating a change and starting the
transition process. Examples of some of
these questions are:
·
What work, if any, has already been accomplished in the
change process?
·
What work processes will be affected by the change?
·
How will the change impact the structure of the organization?
·
How will the change impact the organizational assets (e.g.
knowledge, technology, equipment, physical assets)?
·
What additional resources will be required to make the
change?
·
What constraints will need to be addressed before, during,
and after the change?
All of these issues will have to be researched,
addressed, and made part of the implementation plan or the change is sure to
fail. These are the types of issues that
the employees should be involved in from the very beginning to show them that
actions are being taken to ensure a smooth transition into the new process
(Silverman, 2001).
In an effort
to manage changes and transition processes in the most professional and cost
effective method possible, Jones, Aguirre, and Calderone
(2004) explain that managers will have to apply numerous principles of change
management. One principle suggests that
managers address the human side of a change situation to handle any people
issues that may develop. This means
that, on a case-by-case basis, personnel will have to be retrained, moved to a
new position, or let go. Each
stakeholder must be individually addressed to identify where he or she is in
the transition process and is dealt with accordingly.
Another
principle managers must consider is to ensure that all change decisions have
support from the top. Personnel will
look to their leaders during the change process to see what kind of support and
direction the organization is getting from top management. If the leadership fails to embrace the
change, there is a good chance the change will not be supported by the rest of
the organization.
Jones,
Aguirre, and Calderone’s (2004) third principle
recommends that managers involve every layer in the organizational change
process. A change often affects the
entire organization, requiring managers to identify a leader, at each layer, to
be trained and made responsible for implementing any new processes. These leaders must understand the
organization’s vision and be prepared to execute the change and motivate other
personnel.
During any
transition process, organizational leaders should ensure they involve the
employees in the identification of problems and the creation of solutions. Their fourth principle of change management
suggests that managers try to create ownership of the change by getting the
employees to accept responsibility for a successful outcome. Incentives and rewards are a good way to
motivate personnel during the change process.
Communication is one of the most important principles of change
management. The flow of communication
must go in all directions to successfully provide employees with the
information they need to make a change.
Personnel need the right information at the right time to be able to
make decisions and solve problems. It is
often necessary to set up redundant channels of communication to ensure
everyone has up-to-date details about the implementation plan, timelines,
processes, and goals. Lack of
information is normally the biggest cause of resistance when an organizational
change is announced.
Jones,
Aguirre, and Calderone (2004) explain that the next
very important principle to follow when initiating a change is to ensure the
organization’s culture is addressed in the same manner as the other change
principles. The company’s culture is a
mixture of its history, values, beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors and any
planned changes that will affect it should be communicated to the employees
during the planning stage. Changes such
as mergers and acquisitions will often change or combine cultures, creating a
whole new set of values, beliefs, and attitudes. Managers should attempt to establish a
baseline or vision of what the new culture will be and help employees
understand it before any major changes take place.
As everyone
knows, no change process ever goes exactly according to the plan. The next principle recommends that managers
plan for the unexpected. For example,
employees may react to a change differently or there may be more or less
resistance than was expected. There may
also be external factors that are beyond the organization’s control, such as
resource procurement problems, cost increases, equipment malfunctions, or
negative impacts from Mother Nature.
Managers should always be prepared for the unexpected and be ready to
make adjustments, as required, to meet the desired results.
The final
principle of organizational change management involves the individual. Everyone reacts differently to change based
on how they perceive it will affect them.
Each person will exhibit different levels of emotion, resistance,
motivation, and finally acceptance during a change process and a good manager
will handle the situation accordingly.
Every employee needs to be spoken to individually to ensure they
understand what part they will play in the change and how it will affect
them. Motivational rewards, such as
promotions, recognition, and bonuses need to be communicated to each individual
prior to any change to ensure they know that their hard work will be recognized
in some manner. They also need to
understand that if they hinder the process in any way they will be dealt with
accordingly (Jones, Aguirre, and Calderone, 2004).
One way to
reduce the stresses caused by change is to initiate a program called Continuous
Process Improvement (CPI). According to
Dr. Tyrone Holmes (2004), CPI is:
A systematic approach for improving
performance and customer satisfaction through the enhancement of an
organization’s core processes. It is
specifically designed to help process owners and key employees document
processes, assess their current status and functioning, and utilize a variety
of tools to increase process efficiency and effectiveness (n.p.).
If an organization makes CPI a part of its corporate
strategy and culture, employees will get used to the fact that changes are
frequently necessary to remain profitable and maintain a competitive advantage.
Donald Clark
(2000) explains that CPI is not just a way to fight fires, but a way to put
fires out; a way to solve problems by identifying the root causes. He describes a system called the ADDIE model
that breaks CPI down into five phases.
ADDIE is actually an acronym for the phases, which are Analysis, Design,
Development, Implement, and Evaluate.
The analysis
phase is the phase where problems are first identified. Once processes are defined, tasks need to be
regularly reviewed to ensure they are accomplished in the best manner possible for
a successful project completion. Since
many actions in an organization affect other departments, managers must
routinely look for barriers between different work groups in an effort to
remove obstacles as soon as possible.
The second
phase in the ADDIE model is the design phase.
After a problem is identified by the analysis phase, managers need to
design a plan that will make the changes necessary to eliminate the
problem. The main objective during this
phase is to design a plan that will “get rid of a problem and keep it from
reoccurring” (
The next
phase is the development phase. During
this phase of CPI, the design plan moves to the next step of the process and
more detailed decisions are made.
Step-by-step procedures are developed, personnel are assigned tasks, and
timelines are created during this part of the change process.
Phase number
four is the implementation phase. This
is the point in the improvement process that the plan is put into action. Since this is the actual implementation of
the change, any resistance from the employees will begin to surface at this
point. Resistance will normally be
minimal, though, because everyone who could be affected by the change should
have been involved in the first three phases of the ADDIE model.
The final
phase is the evaluation phase, which is accomplished to determine if the plan
succeeded and the change was implement properly. Each phase of the CPI ADDIE model has to be
evaluated prior to moving on to the next phase, but the overall improvement
must be evaluated using some sort of measuring tool or technique. Some of the indicators managers can measure
to evaluate the success of the change include: dollars saved, time saved,
production increases, or employee/customer feedback (
Organizations can definitely benefit from having a Continuous Process
Improvement Program. Providing an avenue
for employees to make suggestions on how to improve the organization’s
processes enhances communication.
Involving employees in this manner allows them to contribute directly to
any improvements that are made and increases their commitment and loyalty to
the company. Open communication also
creates an atmosphere that enables employees to identify performance roadblocks
early, preventing them from growing out of control. Finally, a CPI Program establishes an
organizational culture where employees willingly identify problems, provide
ideas, and create solutions, in an effort to continuously improve the organization’s
processes (Lewis, 2002).
As you can see,
there are many factors businesses must take into consideration before, during,
and after an organizational change. If
an organization’s leaders expect their company to maintain a competitive
advantage over others in the industry, they must ensure their managers possess
the skills required to make successful organizational changes. In this thesis, I described the knowledge
managers must learn to make required changes and how to reduce employee stress
during organization-wide changes. I also
defined organizational change and explained why it is important for managers to
learn the forces for change, how to manage change, and how to overcome
resistance to change. I have also
provided information on managing the transition and the benefits of an
established Continuous Process
Improvement Program.
References:
Allen, G. (2002). Teambuilding.
Supervision.
Retrieved
http://ollie.dcccd.edu/mgmt1374/book_contents/4directing/teambldg/teambldg.htm.
Bridges, W. & Mitchell, S. (2000). Leading
transition: a new model for change. Retrieved
Caldwell, R. L. (2004). Driving
forces: Instructor’s viewpoint. Retrieved
http://ag.arizona.edu/futures/rlc/mydrivingforces.html.
Clark, D. (2000, January 30). Big dog's continuous process improvement page. Retrieved
July
Dator,
J. (1993). American state courts, five tsunamis, & four
alternative futures. Retrieved
Dessler, G. (2004).
Principles and practices for tomorrow’s leaders. Management. (3rd ed.).
DeWitt, R. (2004, April 30). Managing change
is managing people. Retrieved
from http://www.cioupdate.com/insights/article.php/11049_3348041_2.
Egan, A. H. and Orser, B. (n.d.). Managing the tidal wave
of change. Retrieved
from http://www.strengthinpartners.org/tidal_wave_of_change.htm#top.
Gorin, B. (2002,
September 1). Are you a switch hitter? Retrieved
http://www.internetworld.com/magazine.php?inc=090102/09.01.02change.html.
Holmes, T. A. (2004). Process
improvement. Retrieved
http://www.doctorholmes.net/continuous_process_improvement.htm.
Jones, J., Aguirre, D., and Calderone, M. (2004). 10 principles of
change management.
Retrieved
Kanter, R. M. (1999). The enduring skills of change leaders. Retrieved
from http://www.pfdf.org/leaderbooks/l2l/summer99/kanter.html.
Knowledge Context. (2004). How does
technology change? Retrieved
http://www.knowledgecontext.com/organization/marketing/book/How%20does%20Technology%20Change.htm.
Lewis, E. A. Consulting. (2002)
Benefits of CIP. Retrieved
http://www.ealewisconsulting.com/CIP.htm.
Marken, G. A. (2000). Collaboration ... Personal power, not
position power. Retrieved July
29, 2004, from http://www.managerwise.com/cgi-bin/frames.cgi?page=kbank//
McNamara, C. (1999). Basic context
for organizational change. Retrieved
from http://www.mapnp.org/library/mgmnt/orgchnge.htm#anchor493930.
Morello, D. T. (2002,
March 1). Ten converging forces will change your workforce. Retrieved
forces030102/tenforces030102.html.
Prosci. (2004). An overview of change management. The BPR Online Learning
Center. Retrieved
Riches, A. (n.d.). The four emotional
stages of change. Retrieved
http://www.anneriches.com.au/article-ct3.html.
Robbins, S. P. (2003). Organizational behavior (10th ed.).
Hall.
Shiplett, M. H. (2003,
November). The power of diversity and inclusion.
Retrieved July 25,
2004, from http://www.diversityatwork.com/Monster-Nov2003.pdf.
Silverman, L. L. (2001). Key
considerations in organizational change. Retrieved January 16,
2004, from http://www.partnersforprogress.com/Articles/KeyConsiderationsOrg.pdf.
Trent, W. T. (n.d.). The changing nature of work and its implications. Retrieved
July 24,
2004, from http://www.igpa.uiuc.edu/publications/critIssues/work.pdf.
labor force. Retrieved
WebFinance, Inc. (2004). Globalization. Retrieved
words.com /2182/globalization.html.
Yahooligans!
Reference: World Factbook. (2000).
from http://yahooligans.yahoo.com/reference/factbook/ch/popula.html.
Comments
to: editor@leadingtoday.org
BACK TO weLEAD HOME PAGE
About
the author:
Evan Bahe (evbahe40@msn.com) is a retired USAF Senior
Master Sergeant who currently works for a government contractor. Bahe is an
equipment evaluator for the Air Force’s Basic Expeditionary Airfield Resources
(BEAR) community and his main responsibility is to verify bare base assets meet
all required specifications prior to procurement. He also helps during the transition process
of eliminating obsolete equipment and gaining acceptance of the new modernized
assets.