NOVEMBER 2008

Kirkpatrick's Column
Why people resist or welcome change

It used to be accepted fact that everyone resists change. We now know that this one is not true. There are many reasons why a person resents and/or resists a particular change. Likewise, there are many reasons why a person accepts and/or welcomes a particular change.

Why people resent or resist change

There are many reasons why employees may react negatively to change. One of these might be personal loss. People are afraid they will lose something. They might be right or they might be wrong in their fear. Some of the things they might lose may include:

“People with a negative attitude toward the organization, the job and/or the boss are very apt to resent or resist change no matter what it is. This is one of the reasons why high morale is so important.”

• Security. They might lose their jobs through a reduction in work force. Automation and a decline in sales often bring about this feeling.
• Money. They might lose money through a reduction in salary, pay, benefits, or overtime. Expenses, such as travel, may also be increased because of a move to another location that is farther from home.
• Pride and satisfaction. They might end up with jobs that no longer require their abilities and skills (that is, that of a “button pusher” instead of a “skilled craftsman”). Automation, such as computer-aided design (CAD) in engineering departments, often results in this type of loss.
• Friends and important contacts. They might be moved to another location where they will no longer have contact with friends and important people. This loss of visibility and daily contact is very serious for people who are ambitious, as well as those with a strong need for love and acceptance. In Puerto Rico, for example, families who have lived in slum conditions may not want to move because this change would separate them from their long-time friends and traditions.
• Freedom. They might be put on job under a boss who no longer gives them the freedom to do it “their way.” Closer supervision that provides less opportunity for decision making is a dramatic loss to some people.
• Responsibility. Their jobs might be reduced to menial tasks over or through changes in methods or equipment.
• Authority. They might lose their position of power and authority over people. This frequently happens when reorganization takes place or when a new boss decides to usurp some of the authority that an individual has.
• Good working conditions. They might be moved from a large private office to a small one or to a desk in a work area with only a partition between people.
• Status. Their job title, responsibility, or authority might be reduced from an important one to a lesser one with a loss of status and recognition from others. This also happens when another layer of management is inserted between a subordinate and manager.

Another reason why employees may react negatively to change is that they may feel that there is no need for the change. The typical reaction is, “What’s the matter with the way things are now?” or “I don’t see any reason why we should change.”

Employees may feel that the change will bring more harm than good. This is even stronger that the attitude of “no need.” People really feel that it is a mistake—that it will cause more problems than it’s worth. And sometimes this reaction is justified. It is particularly common when people at the “bottom” of an organization feel that top management makes changes without knowing what’s going on “down on the line.”

When people have a lack of respect and/or negative attitude toward the person responsible for making the change, there is a strong tendency to resent and even resist it. Their feelings don’t allow them to look at the change objectively. This would apply to attitudes toward a particular person as well as toward the department the person represents. For example, production foremen may not respect the industrial engineering department or anyone who represents it.

Sometimes change is ordered in such an objectionable manner that the people resent and/or resist it because they don’t like being told what to do. An emphatic command and/or a derogatory tone can create emotions that would not have resulted if the persons had been asked to do it in a nice way. This feeling can also occur if people are told what to do but not told why.

People with a negative attitude toward the organization, the job and/or the boss are very apt to resent or resist change no matter what it is. This is one of the reasons why high morale is so important.

No input is one of the most significant reasons—people who felt they should have been asked were not asked for their ideas concerning the change.

Whether or not the change is actually criticizing the things that were previously done, or the way in which they were done, people may look upon the change as a personal criticism. For example, a person who has developed a certain system or procedure will very likely take it personally if someone wants to change it.

Some changes create burdens or add more work and with it confusion, mistakes, and other negative results. The computer, for example, has been forced on many departments, and burdens and additional problems result. People therefore, will naturally resent and even resist such a change.

The change will obviously require more effort—and much of the effort accomplishes very little, if anything. Whenever changes require more time and effort, people are apt to resent and even resist them, particularly if no rewards accompany the extra effort.

The timing of a change is very important to its acceptance. If it comes at a bad time when people are already having problems, the change is usually resented and probably resisted by those who are supposed to implement it. If, for example, a subordinate is in the process of making a schedule change that had been ordered by the boss, the subordinate would resent and probably resist another schedule change that the boss might request or order.

Some people are testing their power and influence by simply refusing to do it. This challenge to authority is usually done to see whether or not the subordinate can get way with it. Some people are very sensitive about the way they learned of the change. If they found out about it from a secondhand source, they might resist it until they hear it “from the horse’s mouth.”

One of the common reasons why employees will resist or resent change is because of peer pressure. If peers feel they will be hurt by the change, they can be very effective in convincing or even forcing others to resist it. If they don’t, they may be ostracized, ignored, and maybe even worse.

If a natural leader decides to resent and/or resist a change, others are tempted to follow. By definition, a natural leader is one who has no authority but has a great deal of influence on other employees. They like to follow a natural leader.

Donald L. Kirkpatrick
From Chapter 3 of Managing Change Effectively,
published in 2001 by Butterworth-Heinemann