Reasons Why Managers Demonize Resistance to Change

Why is resistance to change frequently demonised by managers, as a problem that must be managed? What are the ethical implications of this and how else can resistance be understood?

Management of change is an effective way of dealing the changes in an organization for capitalizing on the change opportunities (Axelrod & Axelrod, 2017). This study will examine reasons for which managers frequently demonize resistance to change as a problem, which needs to be managed. Apart from that, the study will also assess the relationship between the power and resistance in respect to organizational change. On the other hand, the study will examine the ethical issue associated with power and resistance and assess the implication of managerial and resistant position towards effective organizational change management. The example of Woolworths Limited will be used as example of organizational change.

Resistance to change is the actions initiated by the employees, when they perceive that change occurring in the organization is actually a threat to them.  Resistance to change in organizations can be occurred for several reasons. In case of Woolworth, most of the employees prefer to have predictability and stability in their professional life. In such situation, initiating ERP system would be a huge change for the organization as well as the employees.

According to (Hornstein, 2015), the employees mostly want to be stick to their current status quo. Hence, the new change in Woolworths can change the current status quo of the employees, which can encourage them to resist the change. On the other hand, (Voet & Der, 2014) opined that the employees can resist to organizational change for the fear of unknown. The new ERP system is completely new to the employees of Woolworth. In such situation, the employees have fear for the unknown factors, which can encourage them to resist the change. The employees always suffer from the fear of job security, which changes occur in their organizations. The installation ERP system may cause loss of job for some employees, as the automated process of ERP system may reduce the human efforts. Hence, the employees may resist to the change with the fear of job loss.

Resistance to organizational change occurs, when the employees imposes adequate resistance for preventing the changes to be occurred. (By, Oswick, & Burnes, 2014) stated that resistance to change can come up in the form of natural biological response against the change, as the brain mostly wants to hold on the known matter. Biologically, the employees are hardwired to the needs of certainty and security. Certainty is the tendency of the employees to be stick onto the same place or same status. Hence, the tendency of the employees to stick on the current status quo can lead them to raise resistance to organizational change. In comparison with the fact, (Zhao, Seibert, Taylor, Lee, & Lam, 2016) opined that at biological level, the reptilian brain is responsible for human flight and fight. Reptilian brain always functions purely for the interest of the survival of people. Hence, anything that is perceived to be as threat to the employees’ survival, they will naturally raise resistance against that organizational change. Hence, the employees of Woolworths naturally impose resistance against the changes with ERP installation.

Relationship Between Power and Resistance in Organizational Change

In case of Woolworths, the employees may need new set of skills and knowledge for handling and managing the new ERP system. (Der & Vermeeren, 2017) stated that lack of competency in the new changes often make the people resistant to organizational change. However, the employees of the organization have lack competencies in the areas of ERP system, which has led the employee to resist change. On the contrary, (Lockett, Currie, Finn, Martin, & Waring, 2014) opined that the employees, who resist to the organizational changes, do deep analysis on their personality that gives them better ability to manage their resistance. It often converts them to the cause of changes. Poor communication with the employees makes them feel uncertain about the organizational change. Hence, they impose opposition to the organizational change. In case of Woolworths, poor communication can lead the employees to be resistant about the organizational change.

Change is inevitable in every area of an organization towards its getting high level of success. It can be opportunity, threat, problem and neutral for the employee depending on their different viewpoints. Resistance to change is obviously a problem, which hampers the successful change management process of the organization hindering its long term business success. Given that organizational change is constant, the organizational leaders have to manage as best for achieving the required changes with minimal disruption of the stakeholders. There can be more resistance than necessary, when the change is handled ineffectively.

The employees may feel less optimistic and hopeful about their professional future, when they resist to any organizational change. (Al-Haddad & Kotnour, 2015) opined that lowered morale can be spread throughout the entire staffs, which can be a great issue for the employee recruitment and retention. Hence, the managers consider resistance as a big problem, which can be managed immediately. (Kova?, 2017) pointed out that motivating people to change direction, establishing new strategy, transforming new business model and adopting new ways of collaboration for implementing organizational change is quite challenging. Resistance to change often spread negativity among the staff members of the organization, which ultimately causes disruptive work environment. Hence, the managers demonize resistance as huge problem, which needs to be handled instantly.

Organizational power has very close relationship with the resistance to change in Woolworths. Power refers to the possession of authority associated with an individual or group of individuals to influence others. The effectiveness of authority on influencing employee resistance to change has conceptualized the power in organizational change management. The managers of Woolworths can use personal power to manage the resistance level of the employees. According to (Petrou, Demerouti, & Xanthopoulou, 2017), in personal power, one person has more power over others and get the other persons to do something that they otherwise would not do. In case of change management, power is viewed as potential ability of the change agent to influence the employees in organizational change context. (Axelrod & Axelrod, 2017) opined that the managers of Woolworths often uses expert power to influence the resistance of the employees against the change. In expert power, the managers obtain respect from the employees for their skills and knowledge. Hence, they can use such power to convince the resistant employees for accepting the organizational change. On the contrary, (Wetzel & Gorp, 2014) stated that there is great relation between the legitimate power and resistance of the employees in organizational change. The managers of Woolworths can use formal positional power on the employees to convince the resistant employees towards organizational change. Apart from that, the managers can also use referent power, reward power and association power to influence the resistance level of the employees.

Ethical Issues Associated with Power and Resistance

As per (Holten & Brenner, 2015), structural power potentially belongs to any collectivity in a particular structure regardless of the personal traits of the individuals. The relational network of the interdependent groups is collaborated through collaboration and competition. The managers of Woolworths can use control of scare resources, where they can allocate scarce organizational resources among the group of competing interest for influencing resistance. Apart from that, (Celik & Ozsoy, 2016) opined that centrality power can be highly effective for influencing the resistance of change. While comparing personal power and structural power, it can be said that both the power has huge influence on employee resistance. However, in contrast with personal power, structural power has more stable effect on the resistance of change.

While considering the theoretical perspective of organizational change, the mainstream approach of Kotter can be highlighted. According to (Sharif & Scandura, 2014), in mainstream approach, the resistance to change is seen as pathology. In this approach, the managers and change agents use manipulation, sanction, coercion and other forms of power for overcoming the employee resistance to change. On the contrary, (Lord, Dinh, & Hoffman, 2015) opined that in sociological approach, power is seemed to a coercion, which is the ability of managers to get the employees to do something that they would not do otherwise. However, resistance is itself a form of power, where the employees of the organization can exert some form of power.  However, both the approach equally influential on the demonization of the resistance level of the employees.

Ethics is the moral principle, which governs the behavior and activities of an individual. According to (Xu, Payne, Horner, & Alexander, 2016), organizational ethics help an organization towards differentiating between right and wrong behavior and activities. It actually directs the organizational members towards right direction. On the other hand, (Celik & Ozsoy, 2016) opined that organizational ethics help the organizational members towards taking moral decisions towards the overall benefits of all members. While considering the Utilitarianism ethical framework, it can be said that ethical and best action always maximizes utility. Moreover, best action always enhances the pleasure and wellbeing of the people and minimizes the suffering of the people. However, In case of power and resistance of Woolworths, the powerful managers often impose the changes on the less powerful people and force them to accept the changes. The managers often ignore the suffering level of the resistant position or employees leading the unethical behavior.

Example of Organizational Change: Woolworths Limited

Utilitarianism ethical framework equates good with pleasure and evil with suffering or pain. (Hornstein, 2015) pointed out that the standard of Utilitarianism ethical framework is only measured through right and wrong. The relationship of power with the organizational change leads to purposefully misinterpreted statements regarding the organizational change. Oftentimes, the managers of Woolworths have stated that organization change is actually intended for purposefully increasing employee engagement. However, in real scenario, the true rationale behind the organizational change results in performance based metrics, which can suffocate and scrutinize the activities of the resistant position. In this way, the relationship between power and organizational change may lead to unethical behavior.

The managers of the organization should create the way of communicating with the employees about the new changes and initiatives. According to (Celik & Ozsoy, 2016), the employees or resistance position will be willing to accept the change, when they will understand the urgency of the changes in the organization. In case of Woolworths, the mangers always update the employees about the urgency of the changes for effective implementation of change management. On the other hand, (Al-Haddad & Kotnour, 2015) opined that the managers should provide effective training programs to the employees for understanding the unknown areas of organizational change. Such effective training programs will bring a confidence among the resistant position, which will help them to accept the changes towards implementing organizational changes. While considering the mainstream approach of organizational change, it can be said that organizational manages should have best knowledge about the organizational change. Hence, they can use their expert power for convincing the resistant position for effective organizational change.

As per (Lord, Dinh, & Hoffman, 2015), the managers should also implement a support structure for supporting the resistant position in accepting the organizational change. The change agents or managers should be highly supportive to the employees, who resists for organizational change. Proper support from the managers obviously reduces the complexity level of the change, which can encourage the resistant position towards accepting the organizational change. For example, the managers of Woolworths are always supportive to their employees in reducing their complexities in organizational change. While considering the sociological approach of organizational change, it can be said that the managers can use the power to get the resistant positions towards accepting the change

Conclusion

While concluding the study, it can be said that the fear for unknown can make the employee resistant about the new organizational change. The fear for job loss also resists the employees towards accepting the organizational change. Resistance to change can create disruptive work environment in the organization. Hence, the managers often demonize organizational change as a problem for organization. Power and resistance has great relationship for implementing organizational change. The managers can use both personal power and structural power for implementing successful organizational change. However, imposing change and forcing the resistant positions to accept the change can lead to ethical issue. Moreover, the managers should be highly communicative and supportive to the resistant position towards implementing successful organizational change.

Al-Haddad, & Kotnour. (2015). Integrating the organizational change literature: a model for successful change. Journal of organizational change management, 234-262.

Axelrod, & Axelrod. (2017). The scholar-practitioner mindset: How texts and experience influence organizational change practice. Academy of Management Review, 561-571.

By, Oswick, & Burnes. (2014). Looking back and looking forward: Some reflections on journal developments and trends in organizational change discourse. Journal of Change Management, 1-7.

Celik, & Ozsoy. (2016). Organizational Change: Where Have We Come From and Where Are We Going? International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, 134-141.

Der, V. V., & Vermeeren. (2017). Change management in hard times: can change management mitigate the negative relationship between cutbacks and the organizational commitment and work engagement of public sector employees? The American Review of Public Administration, 230-252.

Holten, & Brenner. (2015). Leadership style and the process of organizational change. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 2-16.

Hornstein. ( 2015). The integration of project management and organizational change management is now a necessity. International Journal of Project Management, 291-298.

Kova?. (2017). Dimensions of organizational change. Management journal of contemporary management issues, 73-81.

Lockett, Currie, Finn, Martin, & Waring. (2014). The influence of social position on sensemaking about organizational change. Academy of Management Journal, 1102-1129.

Lord, Dinh, & Hoffman. (2015). A quantum approach to time and organizational change. Academy of Management Review, 263-290.

Petrou, Demerouti, & Xanthopoulou. (2017). Regular versus cutback-related change: The role of employee job crafting in organizational change contexts of different nature. International Journal of Stress Management, 62.

Sharif, & Scandura. (2014). Do perceptions of ethical conduct matter during organizational change? Ethical leadership and employee involvement. Journal of Business Ethics, 185-196.

Voet, V. d. (2014). The effectiveness and specificity of change management in a public organization: Transformational leadership and a bureaucratic organizational structure. European Management Journal, 373-382.

Wetzel, & Gorp, V. (2014). Eighteen shades of grey? An explorative literature review into the theoretical flavours of organizational change research. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 115-146.

Xu, Payne, Horner, & Alexander. (2016). Individual difference predictors of perceived organizational change fairness. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 420-433.

Zhao, Seibert, Taylor, Lee, & Lam. (2016). Not even the past: The joint influence of former leader and new leader during leader succession in the midst of organizational change. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1730