As the old cliché says, "the only constant in life is change.

" Why, then, are human

beings so naturally fearful of and resistant to change? Given the fast-paced,
technology-based world in which we operate, one would think that employees would
be accustomed to accepting and adjusting to changes. More common than not, the
opposite is true. For many people, their job is a significant source of structure in
their life. Any thoughts or activities that stray from the comfort of this structure can
be threatening and provoke insecurity.

There are many different factors that contribute to staff resistance when it comes to
organisational change. One or more of these factors can be present in the
consciousness or attitude of each individual employee. Being familiar with these
factors can help organisational leaders manage and overcome opposition to
necessary change.

1. Lack of Awareness

Staff members at various levels may not necessarily be aware of the underlying
business need for change. Whether attempts have been made at communicating this
to staff or not, it must be considered and dealt with. Another variation on this theme
is that even staff members that do understand the underlying need for change may
not necessarily be in agreement or be in line with the overall goals of the
organisation.

2. Fear of the Unknown

Humans are prone to fear of the unknown. As mentioned above, many people view
their job as an important source of stability in their life. At the very least, employees
depend on their regular paycheque to take care of basic financial needs. Not knowing
what situations can arise from organisational change can be scary. Employees can be
afraid of what may happen, especially in cases of change where layoffs or reduction
in workforce may be necessary.

3. Personal Predisposition

This is a highly personal factor and can only be analyzed on an individual basis. A
person's predisposition to change is based on several factors having to do with the
life experiences that have helped to shape him or her. For example, the way change
and uncertainty were handled when that person was a child can have a small or huge
effect on how the same person perceives and reacts to impending change as an
adult. People with a strong predisposition to resisting and fighting change can have
an impact on the next main reason that staff rejects doing things differently.

4. Peer Pressure

Some employees are known pushovers that often take on the plights of one another
even if they are not directly affected. In some cases, these types of employees will
buy into others' apprehension toward change without even necessarily understanding
it.

5. History
Long-standing staff members have long-standing memories. They can exhibit
negative feelings and attitudes based on simple misunderstandings,
miscommunications, and conflict. The worst thing about this reason for staff denial of
change within organisations is that some of the deep-seated history involved may
have happened long before the current leadership took the reins.

6. Comfort Zones

Employees may be creatures of habit, knowing very well how to do what they do.
Introducing change can raise questions about whether the employee's existing skills
and experiences will be adequate to support and thrive in the new environment. This
insecurity of whether one's skills will be enough to ensure success during and after
change can contribute to resistance. In addition to the skills factor, individuals may
be comfortable with the current state of things. The status quo may be providing a
sense of accomplishment and fulfillment that staff members are just not ready to
relinquish.

7. More May Be Less

Depending on what the organisational change entails, some employees are likely to
suspect that they will be required to do more with less, or to perform more work for
a smaller amount of pay. While this is not likely to be the case, it is important to
evaluate this factor honestly and to address it in communications about change.

8. Trust Issues

This contributing factor of staff resistance to change is related to the corporate

culture at the organisation. Managers who do not trust their employees are creating
a climate of mistrust that is bound to be reciprocated. If employees do not trust the
leadership at the organisation, they are likely to be skeptical of any proposed
changes.

9. Loss of Control

Even great employees may resist organisational change. Competent staff members
who are good at what they do and feel they have a handle on everything related to
their job may feel threatened by the perceived loss of control that change can bring
about. Employees can feel confused and powerless by being asked to change the
way they think or operate.

10. Fear of Failure

If staff members are happy with what they do and with the results they currently
achieve, it may make the status quo too attractive to give up. Fear that they will not
be able to attain the same level of success under new circumstances is another
reason employees are skeptical of change.

These are only a few of the reasons why staff members in your organisation may
resist change. It is evident that a common underlying theme among these reasons is
fear. Fear can originate from a myriad of motivations and take on just as many
variations. Realising that open communication and understanding will lay the
foundation for overcoming fear is the first step in doing so. The type of
communication that will help you understand why your staff specifically is giving
change the cold shoulder is listening. Making your employees feel comfortable to
voice honest opinions and doubts will give you insights into their motivations (or lack
thereof). This is the best way of finding out which reasons are standing in your
organisation's path to widely supported change.

How to Deal with Change in the Workplace

Benefits received from this training:

At the conclusion of this training, you will be able to . . .

• Identify the effects of change in the workplace.

• Understand the effects of change on people and organizations.
• Know the types of change that cause resistance.
• Know the barriers that stimulate resistance.
• Know the trends that will produce change in most organizations.
• Identify the characteristics of dysfunctional behavior.
• Discover your own ability to deal with change.
• Know how to become a resilient person.
• Identify the characteristics of resilient people.
• Avoid the eight mistakes that are often made during change.

Other guidelines Loeffler offers for coping with change are:

• Develop support relationships at work and home. People
with friends on whom they can rely during stressful times
experience fewer negative effects of the stress change can
bring. They also remain healthier, are more successful, and live
longer.

• Take care of yourself. Eat a balanced diet, exercise, and get

enough rest. Take time to relax with friends and family. Enjoy
your hobbies. Listen to your body. If you don't think these
suggestions are important, look around at others who aren't
using them. You'll soon discover just how important these basic
wellness tips are.

• Build self-esteem. There is only one you. You have special

talents and interests. List what you like about yourself and note
your special talents. Also, list what you appreciate about family
and friends. Tell them and make them feel good, too.
 • Be open and flexible. Knowing that change can happen at any
time helps you accept and adjust when it occurs. Most people
are eager to settle into comfortable routines. Realize that your
present routine may only be temporary.

• Keep your "sunny side" up. The old song went something
like, "Accent the positive and eliminate the negative. Keep on
the sunny side of life." A positive attitude helps you feel good
about yourself, goes a long way toward improving your health,
and helps you deal with changes that come along.

• Take control of your life. What can you do now that will help
you cope with the changes in your life? Make a list of options.
What are the positive and negative outcomes of each choice?
Practice finding the good in each of life's changes. It's not what
happens to you that causes you to be happy or unhappy; it's
how you react to what happens. Your reaction governs the
outcome. Take charge of your thoughts and actions.

Managing change; motivating people

Motivating people is a myth. People cannot be motivated by others.
They are motivated from within. Leaders can however, set up an
environment in which people are able to motivate themselves.

To set up an environment that enables employees to be motivated,

leaders need to understand what the motivational needs of
individuals and groups are. Determining the “what's in it for me” for
individual employees and workgroups that is consistent with goals
and strategies of the organisation is the key to improving motivation
for individuals and groups of employees.

A base for understanding what motivates human beings is found in

the theories by Maslow and Herzberg.
Maslow's theory is that people are motivated by a hierarchy of needs:
that hierarchy being physiological needs, safety needs, belonging
needs, esteem needs and self actualization needs.

Physiological needs are the very basic needs such as air, water,
food, sleep, shelter, etc. Safety needs have to do with personal safety
and security including job security. Belongingness is the desire to
belong to groups: clubs, work groups, religious groups, family, gangs,
etc. There are two types of esteem needs. First is self-esteem which
results from competence or mastery of a task. Second, there's the
attention and recognition that comes from others. The need for self-
actualization is "the desire to become everything that one is capable
of becoming."

Maslow's theory postulates that humans are motivated by the needs

above the minimum set of needs which are fulfilled. People who have
fulfilled a particular set of needs are not likely to be motivated by an
environment which fulfils needs at lower levels. Conversely, people
are also unlikely to be motivated by an environment which fulfils
needs at a much higher level when their lower level needs have not
been fulfilled.

For example, people who are struggling to cope with the basic
physiological needs of sufficient water, food and shelter are unlikely
to be motivated by self actualisation, characterised by seeking
knowledge and “inner peace”. Similarly, people who have a safe
home, a secure family and a healthy ego fuelled by the accumulation
of material goods are not going to be motivated by the provision of
financial rewards.

Herzberg's theory is about the hygiene factors needed to stop

employees from being demotivated and the factors which, if the
hygiene factors are taken care of, will provide an environment to
motivate people.
The hygiene factors included in the job environment encompass the
company, its policies and its administration, the kind of supervision
which people receive while on the job, working conditions
interpersonal relations, salary, status and security. These factors do
not lead to higher levels of motivation but without them there is
dissatisfaction.

Herzberg's motivation theory involves what people actually do on the

job. The motivators are achievement, recognition, growth or
advancement and interest in the job.

When applying these theories, leaders must understand some of the

personal circumstances of the individuals and groups to develop the
environment that allows individuals and groups to motivate
themselves and provide an overall approach that reinforces the
desired motivation.

Understanding what employees consider to be the basic physiological

needs is a starting point. Do employees consider the basic needs to
be a roof over their head and food for their family or a house they
own and a car? Is it different from one workgroup to another? Be
careful, the definition of these needs will change over time for
individuals and groups and they will not necessarily match your own
definition.

In my own experience, the removal of a bonus for not hitting targets

de-motivated staff well beyond that which might be expected. In
20:20 hindsight the bonus had, over the years, become a means by
which the employees provided their basic needs of a home. It had
become part of their mortgage payments.

For employees whose basic needs are fulfilled, it may be necessary

to understand whether delegation of responsibility and authority will
cater to their self esteem needs. For example, giving them projects
for which they are accountable and have the resources and
competence to complete.

Care has to be taken with processes and policies. Processes and

policies which are in contradiction of people's motivators will depress
motivation. A study of Herzberg dis-satisfiers reveals that
administration and policy has the highest impact on motivation being
a dis-satisfier on 36% of occasions. However, processes and policies
which motivate individuals may not be aligned to an organisation's
strategy and objectives.

Further, a robust performance management system that recognises

and rewards people in a way that fits their motivators is necessary for
developing an environment that allows individuals and groups to
motivate themselves.

Developing an environment that improves employee's motivation is

hard work. There is no one size fits all solution, as motivation is
driven by “what's in it for me”.

Making change happen

Seventy percent of all change management projects are considered
to be failures.

The critical factors for change management success or failure are

fairly simple.

The first factor is to have a group of people at leadership level believe

that change is required. More than that, they must believe that
“change management” is required. If these factors are not evident
then failure is assured.
Understanding that major change is required is not enough.
Developing a project plan which includes changes to processes,
policies and infrastructure that does not include a plan to manage the
change at a people level is not enough.

The second requirement is that the people undergoing change must

have a reason to believe the change is necessary. They need the big
picture painted for them to understand what benefits the organisation
will gain from what many people will consider as the shared pain of
change.

The big picture must be compelling, giving as many people in the

organisation the desire to embrace the change even if it is difficult.
Organisational change for organisational change's sake is likely to fail
to deliver change.

The third requirement is that individuals must know how the change
will affect them as individuals. Never forget the greatest motivational
tool is to be able to respond to the question, “What's in it for ME?”

For most individuals in most organisations, motivation is about

achievement, recognition, the work itself, responsibility, advancement
and personal growth. So be sure that the change message addresses
as best it can the motivational opportunities for people.

The fourth requirement is to “tell them early, tell them often”. Do not
be surprised how many times the message needs to be repeated to
the same people. Human beings filter information based on their
emotional state, their previous experiences and their thinking styles.
In a time of significant change people are often in emotional turmoil
and will filter severely whatever they are told.

Tell people the compelling reason for the change, the plan for
change, the progress of the plan for change including any early wins
and their role in change, again and again as the project is
implemented.

The fifth requirement is to be honest about the change. Sugar coating

change is seen as being untrustworthy and will adversely impact the
ability to communicate with the very people who have to embrace and
implement the change.

If there is any bad news say so. If jobs are going to be lost, say so. If
there are going to be challenges with the change, say so. If people
have to re-skill, say so. If the targets are going to become much
tougher, say so. Do not dress mutton as lamb. If an insignificant
advantage will accrue to people, do not make it seem more significant
than it is.

If you are honest about change and you don't know about some of
the implications, you may have a significant number of people
actually believe you. When you ask for help in making the change
work, you may get a positive response. Be dishonest and even your
best workers will smell a rat and treat you like one.

The sixth requirement is to utilise project management processes and

skills. For those involved in change management who do not use
project management processes and skills the simple advice is, “If I
were you, I would not have started there”.

Project management processes and outputs play a big part in both

planning and communicating the changes anticipated. They assist in
risk management, contingency planning, change control, resource
management, prioritisation and post implementation review of the
change.

Far too many organisations embark on change in manner best

described in the vernacular language, as flying by the seat of their
pants. They do not plan change. They do not estimate the resources
required by change. They do not plan the precursors to events
required to make the change happen. They do not understand the
risks and plan the contingencies. They usually reap the rewards with
a failed change project.

Managing change is not easy. However, it is not as difficult as a

seventy percent failure rate would make it seem. It needs to be taken
as seriously as managing the finances of an organisation or the
safety of an organisation.

Managing change requires a leadership team with project

management, communication and analytical skills with a high degree
of results orientation. The latter is important as when a journey of
change is embarked upon, the environment in which the change is
being implemented immediately changes. A changing environment
often calls for changed tactics to achieve the same result.

More than that it requires the leadership team to have a vision for
what the change can bring to the organisation and to individuals and
a passion to make that change happen.

Leading change, it's 24x7

Change has been occurring since before the beginning of man, so it
is a fair bet that it will not stop soon. Whether organisations like it or
not, they will change.

External influences change the constraints an organisation has, the

expectations their stakeholders place upon them and change the
values and capabilities of their people. What separates organisations
from one another is how they deal with change.

Some react to change along a conservative line, waiting until the last
moment to adapt to change. They resist change at every turn,
believing in the intrinsic value of "tradition". They tend to be backward
looking, remembering the "good old days" and ignoring the here and
now.

They do gain some advantage in being able to learn from others

mistakes and successes. Unfortunately for them, if they face
competition change may come too late to survive.

If they have a monopoly then it is time to pity their poor customers for
having to suffer products and services befitting the era of their
parents or grandparents. If they are a government entity then pity the
poor country as it loses competitiveness in an ever freer global
trading environment.

Some go along with the flow, not resisting change but not embracing
it. They take a somewhat conservative line, sensing their operating
environment so as not to fall too far behind the change and
organizing them to ensure that the change has a low impact on their
organization.

Others though, embrace change, sensing that the time is right to

make bold changes and chase audacious goals. With a combination
of internal drive, common goals and inspirational leadership these
organisations add to the pressure other organisations feel to make
change happen also.

The role of leaders in an organization that embraces change is

paramount. The stresses and strains placed on a leader are immense
and usually underestimated.

The impact of this underestimation is that many times leaders fail.

They do not have the focus, the sense of, and ability to create order,
the tolerance for uncertainty, the human touch and the sheer stamina
required to see the change through.
Leading change requires focus on the end game. It's like staring in a
candle when all that can be seen is the bright burning flame of the
end result. The end result must be able to be communicated simply
and readily understood. If it cannot be expressed in a single sentence
then it is unlikely to be understood.

The road to the end result must be clear. It does not have to be
expressed in a level of detail that requires a two thousand line
Microsoft Project plan. What must be clear are the next steps and the
means by which the following steps will be determined.

The end game and the next steps for sixty to ninety days must
be clear. Each individual in the organization can then contribute
to either the next sixty to ninety days of action or further
planning to get closer to the end game.

The role of a leader is not only to arrange the resources to plan

and execute the next steps but to provide comfort to others who
are unable to cope with the ambiguity of a change project.

Ambiguity always arises in a change project as change is as

much about people's behavior as it is about process and policy.
The very starting of a change project will create a change in
behavior from fear or anxiousness or eagerness. The behavioral
impact of changes made will always therefore be ambiguous and
changes will inevitably be made to well thought through plans
which did not work.

Most people cannot cope with ambiguity. The leader needs to

refocus the team and provide the emotional surety that solutions
can be found.

Leaders of change need to be able to demonstrate a wide range

of styles during a change programme. Autocratic and
democratic styles will work during different phases of change as
will being a facilitator or a coach, but at all times a leader must
show a human touch.

Leaders must be able to show that even in making tough

decisions they understand the impact on people. That is, not to
shy away from the decision, but to show empathy. Leaders have
to show this human touch and not expect words to be enough.

Leaders of change are on show all the time. They must remain
focused, positive and encouraging. Even the slightest lapse can
put a project back months or in some cases be terminal. It takes
great stamina to lead significant change.

Leading change is tough and lonely but also rewarding as true

leaders of change will witness the development of other leaders
following in their footsteps. When that happens, it is worth being
on show 24x7.

Coaching refers to the activity of a coach in developing the abilities

of a coachee. Coaching tends to focus on an existing problem (from
which to move away) or a specific outcome that the individual wishes
to achieve (move towards). In both cases, the coach aims to
stimulate the coachee to uncover innate knowledge so they can
achieve a sustainable result. Coaches will normally check that the
specific learning can be successfully re-applied by the coachee, to
deal with other problems in the future. The structure and
methodologies of coaching are very numerous with one unifying
feature, coaching approaches are predominantly facilitating in style,
see facilitation; that is to say that the coach is mainly asking
questions and challenging the coachee to learn from their own
resources. The coaching process is underpinned by established trust
in the coachee. Coaching is differentiated from therapeutic and
counselling disciplines in that the problems and outcomes have
contexts which are important in the present and with aims for the
future - these do not have emotional aetiology, or baggage, from the
past - in other words, the coachee has the resources they need to
make reasoned progress at the time that they seek coaching.