Change Management - Meaning and Important Concepts

The business landscape of the 21st century is characterized by rapid change brought about due to technological,
economic, political and social changes. It is no longer the case that the managers and employees of firms in this
decade can look forward to more of the same every year. In fact, the pace of change is so rapid and the degree of
obsolescence if organizations resist change is so brutal that the only way out for many firms is to change or perish.
In this context, it becomes critical that organizations develop the capabilities to adapt and steer change in their
advantage.

The role of senior managers becomes crucial in driving through change and ensuring that firms are well placed with
respect to their competitors. However, it is the case that in many organizations, senior managers actively resist
change and in fact thwart change initiatives due to a variety of reasons which would be explored in subsequent
sections. This essay examines the barriers to change by senior managers and discusses approaches to mitigate such
resistance. The essay begins with a discussion n the role of senior managers as barriers to change and then outlines
some approaches on how to get the senior managers on board for change.

It goes without saying that “he who rejects change is the architect of decay and the only human institution that
rejects progress is the cemetery.” With this axiom in mind, it is critical to understand that unless change is actively
embraced, organizations in the 21st century risk obsolescence.

To resist change is as basic as human nature and hence the change managers must adopt an inclusive approach that
considers the personality clashes and the ego tussles. It is often the case that in large organizations, there tend to be
power centres and fiefdoms and hence the issue of organizational change must address the group dynamics as well
as the individual behavioural characteristics.

Only by an understanding of the means by which managers can be brought on board can there be a foundation for
suitable approaches. The approaches include a combination of pressure tactics and coordination instead of
competition and cooption as well as cooperation. Change agents must realize that wherever possible, they must deal
with consensual decision making and if that is not possible, they must walk the talk and be firm in their approach.
Managers at all levels have a tendency to resist change and in the high stakes game of change management, it is the
ones that can articulate and communicate the change in a clear and coherent manner who succeed.

In conclusion, change is the only constant in business and the landscape of the 21st century is littered with
companies that have not adapted to the changing times. Hence, organizations must and should embrace change and
the approaches discussed in this paper are part of the solution.

The Need for Change Management

In the contemporary business environment, organizations fight the battle of competition by building their adaptive
capabilities and preparedness for coping against the pressures of change. In the present scenario, top management
give a lot of importance to change management process and the need for being flexible as well as adaptable for
tackling the growing environmental uncertainties or competitive threats.

Change management is a complex process and requires serious attention as well as involvement from the
management and people from all levels, in order to achieve a meaningful or a progressive transformation
across various levels. For being ahead in the competitive race and gaining a winning edge, organizations have been
focusing on expansion of business worldwide, achieving excellence in processes and operations, implementing
innovations in technology and identifying/developing the right talent. The fast changes which have taken place and
the way in which this has affected the strategies, people, policies and processes in an organization, it has become all
the more imperative that organizations clearly establish a well-defined change management framework for realizing
the strategic objectives. Change is inevitable and it can only be managed, failing which the organizations may cease
to exist.
In the era of globalization, organizations function across the cultural boundaries with large investments in human
capital as well as physical resources, give utmost importance to technological change and innovative practices for a
leadership advantage. Business alliances like mergers, acquisitions, diversifications, takeovers and various other
collaborative ventures have become the most preferred strategic best practices for the organizations to survive the
fierce forces of competition, through transfer of people, technology, processes and leadership. For successfully
handling this transition and converting the threats of change into opportunities, organizations must be flexible and
open for Change Management.

By improving the readiness for change, organizations can strengthen their adaptability mechanisms and build their
internal competencies for facing future uncertainties or many such multiple change auguring situations. An
organization’s readiness for change management influences organizational strategies and policy related
decisions, as it involves a comprehensive, well planned approach and implementation of systemic interventions
which would have an overall influence on the system, processes, people as well as the organizational structure as a
whole.

Innovations in technology and research advancements, have created opportunities for working virtually across any
part of the globe; changes in the organizational structure and hierarchy; changes in the human resource policies and
regulations, has resulted in organizational reengineering and change in the style of working of employees.

For meeting the growing demands of ever changing business operations, more dynamic and flexible organizations
have endorsed new methods of working like flexi work hours, work from home, freelancing opportunities, virtual
method of working, business operation outsourcing and project driven operations, etc. which provide ample
opportunities to the workmen to work as per their convenience and flexibility.

Organizations change for responding to the fluctuations or volatility in the business environment. Any change in
order to have successful outcomes must involve comprehensive planning, focused approach and involvement of the
key stakeholders in the entire process.

For any organization, people play a very vital role in driving business excellence as they are the most valuable
assets. Hence, a change in the method of handling a job role, implementation of facilitating interventions and
training people about the new practices or techniques, can result in impressive results in terms of the return on
investment (ROI). How organizations manage change or respond to the business transitions largely depend upon the
adaptability of people or readiness of the people in understanding the changes in the process and method of handling
a job. Change management process may directly affect the human resource strategies of an organization depending
upon the goals or strategies of an organization.

A well-defined change management process can help in mitigating risks related with the people side. If this aspect is
ignored, it might result in increase in the overall costs, decline in productivity as well as employee motivation and
increase in the absenteeism level and employee attrition. Hence, it improves the overall preparedness of the
management and the decision making authorities in understanding the need for managing change, the key processes
involved in it and in understanding the operational technicalities connected with it.

Planned change if effectively implemented can be beneficial in terms of controlling costs, minimizing risks,
reducing the stress and anxiety by controlling uncertainties. It helps in setting up new milestones, establishing
objectives, defining priorities and identifying the limitations for driving excellence in new initiatives.

Effective Change management process help organizations in understanding the changing customer needs,
meeting their demands and expectations much better since the requirements are well defined. If implemented
with proper planning, change management does not affect the day to day functioning of an organization, rather it
functions concurrently. Instead it creates a scope for establishing best practices, defining the operational framework
and regulations for the people, processes and system. It engages people in the entire process and motivates them to
work towards realization of a common goal or objective and deliver excellence in performance through collaborative
efforts and involvement in the process as a whole. Research in this direction proves the fact that organizations which
have an established change management process are more likely to excel in meeting the business goals or achieve
excellence in their project outcomes.
Effective change management is the key to realization of operational effectiveness, plays a key role in creating an
optimism in the organizational environment as it has holistic outcomes and enables achievement of outcomes by
defining superior benchmarks and working towards it for realization of the set benchmarks.

Organizational change affect the leadership thinking style and may optimize the benefits by establishing the
systems and processes in place, establishing an integrated framework for achieving the developmental goals with the
complete involvement of people in the end to end stages of change management cycle.

Hence, to conclude it may be appropriate to mention that change management is a planned and an integrated
approach involving the support of the key stakeholders in terms of the willingness as well as the preparedness to
move from the existing state of affairs to a reformed state by accepting the transition and wholeheartedly
participating in the entire process.

The success of change management process largely depends upon effective planning, establishing of objectives,
communication of objectives to the people involved in it and establishing of the required framework to deliver the
expected goals or outcomes.

Kinds of Change and the Barriers to Change

There are different kinds of change that an organization might undertake or be forced to undertake because of
internal and external factors.

The internal factors for change include reorganization and restructuring to meet the challenges of the future and also
to act proactively to initiate change as a means of staying ahead of the competition.

The external factors include change that is forced upon the organization because of falling revenues, changing
market conditions and the need to adapt to the ever changing business landscape.

Change can be organic which means that it evolves slowly and is like meandering up the gentle slope of a
mountain. In this case, the organization and the management have enough time to prepare for change and reorient
themselves accordingly. This is the kind of change that is adaptive meaning that firms have the opportunity to adapt
themselves to the change.

Change can be radical which is rapid, sudden and uncertain. This is the kind of change that is disruptive and
often forces organizations to reorient themselves without adequate notice and warning. It is better for organizations
to anticipate change rather than be forced into accepting change that is rapid and sudden.

We have seen how managers at different levels resist change and how this resistance manifests itself. Apart from the
ideological and personality issues, there is the very real possibility of change being resisted because the “visibility”
of what comes next is not clear. For instance, many managers tend to resist change because the change initiators
have not clearly spelt out the outcomes of the changes and the possible impacts that such changes have on the
organization. This is the realm of the “known unknowns” and the “unknown unknowns” which arise because of
ambiguity, complexity and uncertainty. Hence, the resistance to change can come about due to the lack of coherence
in the vision and mission and because the change is not clearly communicated as well.

Finally, the rapidity with which change is introduced can upset the organization structures that are usually rigid and
bureaucratic with bean counters at all levels resisting and actively thwarting change. Hence, it needs to be
remembered that change initiators take into account all these factors when introducing changes. The possible
approaches in dealing with these resistances would be discussed in the next section.

Pre-Requisites for Successful Change Management

Change Management in an organization aims at realizing the strategic goals and improving an organization’s
preparedness for meeting both internal as well as external challenges, which may influence business growth and
profitability. To remain on top, today companies have to undergo through progressive transformation and evolve as
per the changing business environment.

Effective Change Management involves a comprehensive and an integrated effort from all the levels of the
management. Successful change management involves consideration of several factors, which have been described
below:

Effective Planning: This is critical for ensuring successful change to happen. This stage essentially involves
definition and documentation of objectives to be attained from change management and also the strategies for
realizing those objectives. It aims at addressing the vital questions of who, what, why, when, where and how
involved in the implementation of any change management programme. It takes into context the current situation
and equally assesses the impact of change initiatives on the futuristic strategies of the organization, the people
involved in it as well as the stakeholders connected with it.

Effective Planning should consider the below factors:

 Clear definition of objectives of change management and alignment of objectives with the
organizational vision/mission/strategies. If the vision is not defined properly or shared, seeking the
involvement of all the stakeholders in the process of change may be difficult. Lack of vision and direction,
may result in misaligned approach, incompatible outcomes and may dissolve the long term benefits of
change initiatives.
 Documentation of the objectives, defining the road map or the development of the change plan for
implementing change management successfully. Documentation of the change management objectives,
provides a strategic direction and justifies the rationale of a change initiatives along with the resources
required for it to happen. It provides a bigger picture regarding the magnitude and complexities involved in
the entire process of change management.

Documentation should justify the following points:

i. Why a change initiative is required and the factors/drivers establishing a need for change
management.
ii. What could be the possible outcomes of the change initiatives, and
iii. How a change management effort may affect the key stakeholders, people, processes and the
organization as a whole.

Change Plan must cover the following areas:

iv. The change plan should elaborate the key objectives which are aimed at.
v. Highlight the strategic alternatives, direction, organizational restructuring, changes in the existing
processes & people management practices to ensure successful change.
vi. Plans for implementing the change, provide a description on how the change would be
communicated to the people or the stakeholders who are connected with it.
vii. Highlight the resources involved or the timelines within which the results are supposed to be
achieved.
viii. The changes in the HR policies and principles which may be applied particularly in relation with
the staffing issues for realizing the objectives of change management.
ix. Clear definition of the key performance indicators for reviewing the outcomes of change
management and its success in meeting the objectives.

Definition of the Governance Structure/Framework for effective Change Management: In the absence of a
well-defined governance framework, the success of change management efforts may fizzle away. For a successful
change to happen, the organizational structure, roles & responsibilities should be established and defined clearly to
monitor the progress of change periodically and implement corrective actions for seamless transformation. The
following change governance structure model can be used:

 Steering Committee: It is the apex body responsible for ensuring the success of change management. The
members of the steering committee are responsible for planning and implementing strategies, providing
direction and leadership for change management and ensure that the objectives of change management
remain in alignment with the organizational vision/goals.
 Change Sponsor: The change sponsor is the key person responsible who is directly responsible and
accountable for the change. This may be a senior level representative who may have the responsibility of
managing the resources involved in the change management process and may exercise control over the
expenditure incurred in the entire process. The Change sponsor is involved in the end to end process, is
directly accountable for gathering the support and commitment of the business leaders in particular,
minimizes the resistance or barriers to change management and addresses the risks associated by taking
radicle measures. A change sponsor is usually someone who enjoys greater authority, is empowered and
experienced in implementing vital decisions for handling the complexities in change management.
 Change Agent: A change agent is responsible for coordinating the day to day activities and provides the
needed support as well as expertise for ensuring the success of a change initiative. Change teams are the
facilitators involved in extensive coordination between the various functionalities, establishes the
operational framework and ensures adherence with the regulations involved in the entire process.
 Work Streams/Groups: This involves the task forces/groups directly responsible for the realization of the
specific objectives of change management. The task forces or specialized groups within the organizations
work upon the specific projects and are directly accountable for completion of the assigned responsibilities
within the predefined timelines and resources.

Commitment of the Leadership: Leaders build the conducive organizational culture and climate for the realization
of the objectives of change management. Their commitment and involvement is critical for the success of change
efforts. Leaders who are transformational, visionaries and lead by example can foster an environment of cooperation
and collaboration across all the levels of the organization.

Stakeholders Awareness and Involvement: Stakeholders involvement and participation in the entire process is
critical for the success of change management. The organizations should engage the stakeholders by facilitating an
environment of collaboration and communicate the objectives as well as its outcomes.

Workforce Alignment: This should essentially involve an assessment of the impact of change management process
on the people and establishing plans for obtaining the support of the people in the entire process by building
collaborative synergies and highlighting the beneficial outcomes.

Change Management: Success Stories as well as Failures (Organizational Case

Studies)
1. Success Stories (Pearson): In 2012, John Fallon the new CEO of the organization announced a new game
plan “Global Education Strategy” for realizing the bigger objectives of business. Apart from this, he
championed organizational restructuring leading to the formation of 6 different units of workforce. The
company went big by not only changing the strategies but also by implementing organizational
restructuring to support the entire plan. The communication was established in a top down manner-Intranet
was considered as the medium for communicating the objectives of change and also the expectations
involved in it. For realizing the strategic intent of change management, the new CEO relied heavily on new
technology (intranet) for aggressive internal marketing of change initiatives and the benefits associated
with it.
2. Failure Stories (Walmart): The giant retail player followed the strategy of Low Pricing few years ago and
enjoyed a prominence in the market due to its low pricing strategy for across various categories of
products. Few years later, they introduced a change in the strategy for attracting niche customer segments
who could afford higher priced products and up-scaled their items. Due to a change in the strategy,
 Walmart lost its business profitability since it could neither attract the higher end customers through its
products and the regular customers started looking for better bargains from the competitors.

Overcoming Barriers to Change

Research has shown that the best way to get the senior managers at all levels interested in the change initiatives is by
engaging them and seeking their buy-in for the change management process. Studies have proved that the managers
in the upper echelons buy into the change from a strategic perspective where the accent is on performance and hence
radical or disruptive change is seen as part and parcel of an organizations development.

Managers at the middle level can be made to see the value inherent in change and hence they can be brought
on board. The frontline managers’ views and inputs can be sought and thereby their cooperation and participation in
the change obtained. These are the broad outlines and the following detailed sets of approaches can be pursued as
well.

Make Them the Hero

By making the managers the change drivers and change initiators is often the best way of securing their buy-in. The
point here is that by getting the managers to be the ones who are implementing change and by giving them centre
stage, it is possible to secure their participation.

By definition, senior managers are highly capable, motivated and ambitious. By making them the stars of the change
process, their innate abilities can be harnessed to the benefit of the organization. It is often better to have a close
association with the senior managers to achieve the desired results.

Show them the potential of Change

By selling change and the value of such change to the organizations and themselves the senior managers can be
persuaded to accept change. The point to note is that senior managers must be told what their role in the post change
scenario would be and by making them see themselves in the future vision, they can be made to play a key part in
the change management.

As has been mentioned earlier, if the benefits of the change are explained and by persuading that the change does
not involve downsizing or other reduction in roles and responsibilities, the senior managers can be expected to be
partners rather than resisters in the change management process.

Painting the Alternatives

This is the stick part of the carrot and stick approach wherein senior managers are told of the urgent need for change
and by indicating to them what the consequences for themselves and the organization would be if the change does
not succeed. By painting harsh alternative scenarios like declining market share and repercussions of layoffs and
downsizing if the change does not succeed would make the senior managers realize the flip side of resistance. In this
way, they can be persuaded to accept the business realities behind the change process.

Involving Them in the Change

By adopting a “hands on” approach that would involve “all hands” and including all the stakeholders, senior
managers can be brought on board. The point is that by adopting an inclusive approach and giving a sense of
ownership to the senior managers and taking their inputs and feedback would ensure that the key aspect of
“engagement” is achieved.

The key to senior manager participation in the change initiatives is through engagement and only by communicating
clearly the benefits of change and by positing the alternatives would it be possible to engage with senior managers.
A suitable narrative of the changes and the impact that they have on the senior managers must be communicated to
all levels and there must be a process in place to bring on board as many managers as possible.

Personality clashes and power politics can be addressed by consensual approaches to decision making and by
adopting a carrot and stick approach as described above.

Reasons for Resistance to Change

Change is an important and an indispensable part of the organizational life. It is all pervasive and hence comes the
question of paying attention to the importance of building the coping and adaptive mechanisms of an organization
for being current and competitive in the contemporary scenario. The phrase “Resistance to Change” is discussed
hand to hand along with the concept of Change Management. Resistance to Change may be organizational or
individual in nature. According to Agócs, 1997, organizational resistance involves all the organizational behavioural
patterns which impede or undermines change.

A mild degree of resistance to change is considered to be positive as it provides a great extent of behavioural
stability as well as predictability. It is believed to have a favourable influence on the decision making, evaluation
of the available alternative critically and leads to a healthy brainstorming on the viability of various ideas and
strategic alternatives. But, on the other hand, resistance to change hinders the progress of the work due to
unnecessary chaos and creates adaptability issues.

Resistance to change can manifest in different ways. Resistance towards a change can be expressed in an overt
manner, covertly, implicitly, can be immediate or may be deferred. Individual Resistance to Change can be
classified into the following categories as below:

Rational vs. Irrational Resistance

According to de Jager, 2001, Rational or Irrational Resistance to Change can be defined as merely a perceptual
process. Irrational resistance to change does not find too much of a mention in the change literature. Hence the
irrational resistance does not have a clearly defined definition. Irrational resistance can only be felt or usually
expressed in various behavioural forms.

On the other hand, Rational Resistance to Change is backed by logical argument, justification or a reward which can
bring about the change.

Justified vs. Unjustified Resistance

Rational Resistance to Change can be classified into Justified and Unjustified Resistance to Change.
Unjustified Rational Change is usually psychological in nature and may involve conflicting commitments in a
hidden form (Kegan & Lahey, 2002), might manifest as personal insecurities or fears (Powell & Posner, 1978; Yukl,
2006) or may be simply as a belief that a change may come against one's very own ideals or culture (Lawson &
Price, 2003; Recardo, 1995; Schein & NetLibrary, 2004; Yukl, 2006). Unjustified rational resistance may take the
following forms with fear or threat being the major drivers:

 Fear towards the unknown

 Fear regarding the Personal Failure
 Fear of Being Labelled as Incompetent
  Fear of Loss of Control over the situation
 Threat to personal values, principles or philosophy
 Threat of a possible change in the status

According to Recardo (1995), an employee who is faced with the fear of unknown may require special efforts in
communication from the change agent for managing that fear. For dealing with the fear of failure or being
considered as incompetent, the organization may temporarily introduce changes in the workflow or change the
employee evaluation procedure so that the employees are reassured that they will not be penalized during the entire
change process. Atkinson (2005), a change specialist is of the view that various change programs fail to meet the
intended objectives due to the lack of efforts devoted to effective internal public relations. Though some fears and
threats can be easily addressed with devoted efforts from the change management involving effective
communication with the key stakeholders and the people who are directly affected by the change. However,
unhealthy threats and fears cannot be easily addressed and are beyond the purview of the change agent or the
management and may take a longer time for adaptation process.

Justified Resistance takes place when the real threat or fear exists and the change is manifested in a negative form.
Several consultants explain that the Justified Resistance is believed to have a positive effect on the organization (de
Jager, 2001; Atkinson, 2005). According to Dent and Goldberg (as cited in Oreg, 2006 p. 73), the members of
the organization resist adverse outcomes of the change and not the change itself. The negative outcomes of the
change may take the following forms:

 Change may increase the workload

 Change may affect the job security
 Change may adversely affect the social networking of the employee
 The resource availability for implementing the change are insufficient. Hence the change is resisted
 The need for change is not so urgent or important

Research studies have proven that a negative consequence of change will lead to resistance from the employees
which is obvious and cannot be avoided. For example, organizational downsizing or a reduction in the pay of
employees will undoubtedly lead to a resistance from the employees, but this resistance may not essentially affect
the possible effects or the outcomes of the change.

Covert vs. Overt Resistance

Resistance to change can be expressed in an overt or covert manner (de Jager, 2001). According to Atkinson
(2005), identification of overt resistance is relatively easier, and the appropriate strategies can be used for mitigating
its effects. Overt resistance may manifest in various forms but is usually expressed in the form of either opposing
vocally or in the form of strong agitation. On the other hand, it is very difficult to detect covert resistance to change.
According to Recardo (1995), covert resistance to change may be expressed in the following ways:

 Reduction in the output

 Withholding the information
 Lingering the matter by asking for unnecessary details or information for further studies or investigation
 Unnecessarily appointing committees or various task forces

Resistance to change is still a controversial area of research or study as still there is an absence of a proper
consensus between different authors regarding the change outcomes, which is due to the lack of substantial
empirical pieces of evidence or facts on the change literature. Resistance to change is still a potential area of
investigation or further research, and a lot of newer insights on this subject can be unveiled through effective
research and investigation.
Individual and Organizational Sources of
Resistance to Change
Individual sources of resistance towards a change exist in the basic human tenets or characteristics and are
influenced by the differences in perception, personal background, needs or personality-related differences. It is
important to understand those triggering factors or issues which refrain individuals from endorsing change or
extending their support and cooperation towards any change initiatives at an organizational level.

Criticizing the individuals or the teams for not being supportive in the stages of transition or compelling them cannot
be an effective solution for implementing change smoothly or in a hassle free manner.

The resistance towards change at an individual level can be due to various reasons:

 How satisfied they are with the existing state of affairs

 Whether they appreciate the overall end product of change and it’s outcome on them
 How much practical or realistic the change is
 What will be the possible cost change on the individual in terms of potential risks involved, pressure to
develop new competencies and disruptions

The following factors explain why individuals may pose resistance towards change:

 Habits: We individuals are influenced by our habits in our ways of working and accept or reject a change
depending upon the effect which a change may have on the existing habits of the individuals. For example,
change in the office location might be subjected to resistance from the individuals as this might compel
them to change their existing life routine and create a lot of difficulties in adjustment or coping with the
schedule. The individuals might have to drive a longer way for reaching their office, or start early from
home for reaching their office in time, etc.
 Lack of Acceptability or Tolerance for the Change: Some individuals endorse change and welcome a
change initiative happily while few individuals fear the impact of change. Over a period of time change
fatigue also builds up.
 Fear of a Negative Impact Economically or on the Income: During the process of organizational
restructuring or introduction of organization-wide change as a strategic move on the part of the
management, several inhibitions, and fear rule the thought process of the individuals. Fear of possible loss
of a job as a result of change or a change in their income structure or may be a change in their work hours
could be one amongst the possible reasons.
 Fear of the Unseen and Unknown Future: Individuals develop inertia towards the change due to the fear
of unknown or uncertainties in the future. This can be tackled through effective communication with the
participants of change and making people aware of the positives of change and the course of action which
individuals are expected to follow to cope with the changing requirements successfully.
 Fear of Losing Something Really Valuable: Any form of threat to personal security or financial security
or threat to the health of the individuals may lead to fear of losing something precious as a result of the
implementation of change.
 Selective Processing of Information: It can be considered as a filtering process in which the individuals
perceive or make judgments by gathering selective information which is greatly influenced by their
personal background, attitude, personal biases or prejudices, etc. If an individual maintains a negative
attitude towards any kind of change, then they are having a usual tendency of looking at the negativities
associated with the change and involve all the positive aspects of it.
  A Rigid Belief that change cannot bring about any facilitating change in the organization and it only
involves the pain and threats to the individuals.

Now, we will look into the organizational factors which result in resistance to change.

 Resistance Due to the Structural Rigidities or Limitations: Structural resistance is a characteristic

feature of bureaucracies, which focus more on stability, control, set methodologies or routine.
 Ignoring all the interconnected factors which require change or lack of clarity in understanding the ground
realities.
 Inertia from the Groups: Groups may resist change because just like individuals, groups equally follow
set behavioural patterns, norms or culture and as a result of change the groups might have to change their
existing ways of conduct or behaviour.
 Possible threats to Power, Resources or Expertise can also result in resistance towards an organization level
change. Any kind of devolution of power or transfer of resources from some agency or group to some other
agency or a group will definitely lead to a feeling of fear or inertia towards a change initiative.

In the end, it can be concluded that any kind of change will surely involve heavy resistance at the individual as well
as organizational level. But through effective communication during all stages and consulting, desirable outcomes
can be ensured by breaking all the possible barriers or resistances towards a change. What is more important is
identifying the main source of resistance and accordingly developing action plans for dealing with it.

Successful change in an organization will require strong commitment and involvement on the part of the top
management, focused and an integrated approach, strong and a stable leadership, effective and open communication
from the internal change agent for making people sensitive and more aware of the realities and the ultimate need for
change.

For minimizing the resistance towards the change employee participation and involvement in the overall process
plays a crucial role in building acceptability and seeking the cooperation of the employees towards the change.
Hence proper planning, coordinated approach and complete involvement of all the stakeholders, play a decisive role
in implementing strategic decisions and determining the success of change.

Techniques for Overcoming Resistance to

Change and Selection of Appropriate
Technique
According to Kotter and Schlesinger (1979) proposed six crucial techniques for overcoming the resistance to
change. These are given below:

1. Widespread Education and Improving Communication

2. Facilitating Participation and involvement
3. Support and Facilitation
4. Agreement & Negotiation
5. Co-optation & Manipulation
6. Coercion-Both Explicit and Implicit
1. Education and Effective Communication: This is one of the commonest techniques for minimizing
resistance to change by educating people and promoting awareness through effective communication
regarding the benefits of a planned change. By explaining the need for change and the objectives of change,
the management can gain the much-needed support from the team members and facilitate its smoother
implementation.

With the help of two-way communication, the employee’s queries and oppositions related to various
aspects of change can be quickly addressed and thereby, minimize the objections or hassles which may
come across in the path of implementation of change.

Given below are the important principles which are related to the communication of change and require a
lot of attention while implementation a planned change:

 A large-scale planned change can be effective and yield successful outcomes only if it involves
two-way communication efforts. Only top down communication or one-way communication will
fail to attract the desired commitment from the staff members.
 The staff members do have a preference for being communicated about the change on face to face
basis from their immediate supervisors.
 According to Beckhard & Pritchard 1992; Robbins et al. 1998; Ivancevich & Matteson 1996,
employees prefer a consultation and involvement in the change.

Few important things which should be essentially followed while implementing an organization-wide
change are:

 Avoid sending emails or memo for informing the employees regarding a change initiative and
expect that the employees will be able to understand and accept it readily.
 Invite the suggestions and feedback from the staff members, involve them in the process and
encourage their participation for effective results.
 Communicate with people regularly by engaging in face to face interactions with them both
individually and in groups and provide them opportunities for discussion.
2. Facilitating Participation and Involvement: This technique gives a lot of importance to involving the
resistors in the change process by setting up a collaborative environment and implementing the change in
consultation with the staff. It is a constructive strategy and can be beneficial in minimizing the resistance to
change by involving the employees and seeking their participation in the entire process.
3. Support and Facilitation: Employees fear or resist change due to a number of reasons as a result of which
they pose a resistance or oppose any kind of transformation in the existing ways of work or methods. The
employees look for complete emotional support and facilitation for being able to cope up with the
challenges resulting from the change and should be allowed to express their fear, resentment or anger in
connection with the change and the challenges of change.
4. Agreement & Negotiation: This technique involves negotiating or bargaining with the resistors on various
aspects related to the change and making tradeoffs so that the concerns of the resistors and the management
are both being given due consideration and importance.
5. Co-optation & Manipulation: This technique involves getting the support, persuading or influencing the
employees in favor of the change. Manipulation involves covert attempts from the managers by
withholding painful information, twisting or distortion of the information for making it more appealing for
the staff members or spreading false rumors across the organization in order to compel the employees to
accept the change manipulatively.

Alternately, the managers can depend on staff polling strategy and make an attempt towards persuading the
resistors to join the rest of the group. The management may even co-opt an individual and assign certain
important responsibilities in connection with the implementation of change.
 6. Coercion: Implicit and Explicit: Coercion involves exercising force or threat for making the change
accepted and followed by the employees. This strategy emphasizes more on the use of fear by way of direct
or indirect threats and involves harassment, bullying or compels the employees to act in accordance with
the expected ways or else resign. This strategy is illegal, ineffective and in the long-run, will result in mass
resentment, dissatisfaction, high rate of absenteeism, low productivity and ultimately high employee
turnover.

Selecting the Right Technique and the Relative Benefits of Each Technique
1. Education and Effective Communication: This technique is useful when there is an absence of
availability of ample information with the employees, or they have inaccurate or partial information on
various aspects of change. Once the employees are convinced about the change, then they will help in the
successful implementation of change as change partners.
2. Facilitating Participation and Involvement: This technique can be useful when the initiators lack
substantial information for designing and implementing the change, or the employees have tremendous
power to resist the change. The involvement of the employees can increase their commitment level and
motivation for supporting the change initiatives, reduce resistance and improve the quality of the decision
in connection with the change.
3. Support and Facilitation: This technique is useful when there is resistance towards change from the
people due to certain adjustment or adaptability issues. This is the best technique as it involves employee
facilitation, training & various supportive efforts for reducing the resistance. However, this technique is
very time consuming, expensive and does not necessarily assure a successful outcome.
4. Agreement & Negotiation: This technique is effective when it involves exchanging something valuable
for reducing the resistance towards the change. This is one of the most convenient techniques for avoiding
any kind of major resistance.
5. Co-optation & Manipulation: This technique can be adopted only when the other techniques fail to
provide the desired results or are too expensive. This technique can be relatively inexpensive and quick in
terms of results.
6. Coercion (Explicit & Implicit): This technique should be avoided till the end and can be used only as the
last possible resort.

Organizational Change and Managing

Resistance to Change
Why is Change Resisted ?
Any change anywhere, be it among nations, organizations, societies, or even families is hard to actualize given the
human tendency to not step out of the “comfort zone” and hence, resist new ways of doing things and instead, cling
on to the status quo.

The change is harder in those cases where the intended audience or the target population is diverse and is
comprised of multiple interest groups and power centers. Indeed, in large organizations with diverse workforces
and multiple power centers with their own agendas, organizational change is indeed hard to implement and actualize
in practice.
Change Agents and Resistance to Change
Having said that, this does not mean that “Change Agents” or those seeking to actualize change should give up or
desist from introducing changes into organizations.

On the contrary, challenges should be taken as an inspiration to move forward, and problems should be seen as
opportunities that can be converted into solutions and a win-win approach should be the norm.

Indeed, organizational change agents such as the legendary founder of Microsoft, Bill Gates, the late technological
revolutionary, Steve Jobs, and N R Narayana Murthy of Infosys, in the Indian context, have always found
workarounds and solutions to problems and have also weathered resistance to change from within and without.

Of course, it helps that these individuals are charismatic and have a “halo” around them that helps them to actualize
change since the power of their words and their ability to “walk the talk” often emboldens and energizes their
followers to follow their path.

However, this does not mean that those change agents who do not have such qualities cannot actualize change as
more often than not, the real changes in organizations are brought about by “armies of faceless and nameless” rank
and file employees who take Millions of “small steps” to ensure that macro level and Big Picture change happens.

Change is Hard to Implement

Even for the legends of business and the Titans of Industry, implementing and actualizing organizational change has
been fraught with challenges and problems as can be seen in the way in which the Late Steve Jobs found himself out
of Apple, the company he cofounded only to return much later with a bang. Indeed, even in the case of organizations
such as Infosys that thrive and pride themselves on their unique work culture and approach to business, on the
ground change and real change has sometimes been hard to come by due to conflicting agendas and multiple power
centers stymieing change.

For instance, Microsoft is known as a bureaucratic organization and at the same time, a chaotic and unorganized
place where processes and approaches depend on individuals rather than on a systemic approach to change.

Indeed, Bill Gates has often remarked how ideas should go hand in hand with actual implementation to make real
change happen. For that matter, even in the much hyped and much celebrated Silicon Valley Startups and Unicorns
(those startups valued at more than a Billion Dollars), the work culture is often dominated by individual agendas
rather than a systemic procedural and process oriented approach.

The More Diverse the Organization, the Harder it is to Change it

Further, what complicates the efforts of change agents to actualize change in large and diverse organizations is that
due to multiple levels of thought processes and differences in working styles and attitudes, more often than not, the
leaders and the change agents are not on the “same page” as the rank and file managers and employees.

This often results in the Vision and Mission statements as well as important policies being merely platitudes and
high-sounding statements without and relevance to the situation on the ground.

What compounds matters is when organizations are geographically dispersed meaning that whenever organizations
operate in multiple locations worldwide, there is every possibility that the culture of the employees in specific
countries often proves to be the resistance to change. For instance, take the case of the Mutual Funds and Wealth
Management firm, Fidelity.

This firm which operates worldwide has often found that corporate governance in the United States is much
different from say, in India or China, leading to acute problems in the way corporate governance is actualized in
practice.
It also cuts both ways, as sometimes, what is actually happening in the India or China offices is often much closer to
what the leaders want rather than in their own backyard where change is hard to implement.

Incentives and Securing Buy-In

This brings us to the point as to how change agents must win over the resistors and ensure that they have a “buy in”
from all.

In this context, it needs to be remembered that management and leadership are all about managing situations and
balancing competing agendas and interests as well as ensuring that there are incentives for everyone to participate.
For instance, in most case of organizational change, rank and file employees often ask, “What is in this for me?”.
Hence, change agents must ensure that everyone is motivated and sufficiently incentivized to participate in the
change process.

Change is the Only Constant in Life

Lastly, organizational change must be actualized or implemented only after due diligence has been made about the
relative success factors meaning that change agents must not rush headlong into introducing changes without
studying and assessing the impacts as well as quarters from which resistance can occur.

This calls for a careful approach where the pros and cons are weighed, and the likely chances of the change
succeeding are then assessed.

In addition, change agents must evaluate the readiness of the system to embrace change, and while disruption is
sometimes good, often, it brings its own set of problems.

In conclusion, change agents, as well as every professional, must remember that “change is the only constant in life”
and hence, one must not shy away from embracing it.