Resisters Thwart Change
Organizations are always engaged in efforts to bring about change within and outside of their operational realms. Despite the positive change anticipated by organizational leaders, they get bound to face some forces against change within their organizations. Those who resist change employ tactics, which they hope would help them retain the status quo. Whereas there are those within an organization that seeks change, there are those opposed to it. In this essay, the discussion is on the particular plans that resisters can utilize to thwart change, how they impact business, and what business leaders can do to mitigate them.
Tactics resisters applied to thwart change.
Resisters of change often employ practical, as tactical approaches make them supported their followers to discredit change. The first strategy resisters use is to invoke the surrounding fear change to gain support against it. For example, when technology gets introduced in the workplace, resisters will point out the possible consequences of change, such as likely job positions or roles to be lost so that supporters can see sense in resisting change. Now that change is insidious, and resisters recognize the need to put their best forward to provide an alternative to change. Secondly, resisters invoke unmet expectations to rest change. They understand that a given change comes with certain expectations that all members of the organizations have when expectations are unmet resisters point them out to seek support for their point of view. The third strategy resisters use is to deflect responsibility. Deflecting responsibility means passing it over to someone else. They create an excuse for their resistance behavior on someone else.
How tactics to resist change impacts business
Change is necessary for an organizational setup. If corporate leaders yield resistance to change, they risk losing out on the benefits of organizational change. The impact of resistance to change can be dire to the organization. Resistance to change has implications such as inefficient business processes and the adoption of new technology. In the contemporary business environment, for instance, change is necessary, and organizations ought to manage change so that they use efficient processes and new technology. Also, resistance to change causes waning industry influence on the part of an organization due to the failure to carry out the meaningful process and organizational changes
Mitigating resistance to change
Now that change is necessary for organizational development, and leaders must mitigate resistance to change. Leaders can minimize change using several strategies. First, leaders can reduce resistance to change by participation. Participation, in this case, should be focused on engagement and not broad participation. It mostly allows for all stakeholders to be involved in the change so that they can develop ownership of the proposed change. Secondly, communication mitigates resistance to change. Communication ensures that the reasons for change are evident. According to (Akan, Ülker, &Ünsar, 2016, p.53), avers that staff understands the degree of urgency, and all stakeholders understand the meaning of the change. In the corporate context, training can mitigate resistance to change. Training usually gets based on the understanding that some types of change come with new requirements of skills, knowledge, and abilities that can motivate resistance.
In conclusion, resistance to change is a normal organizational phenomenon because any change often has some effects on individuals or groups. The choice to resist or accept change depends on the stakes it has on a specific stakeholder such as an employee. Leaders should thus recognize the need to mitigate resisting change to decrease the harmful impacts of change resistance on organizations.
References
Akan, B., Ülker, F. E., & Ünsar, A. S. (2016). The effect of organizational communication towards resistance to change: A case study in banking sector. Economic Review: Journal of Economics and Business, 14(1), 53-67.