Resistance to Change Essay

spay they say is the only constant thing. It is however a big wonder why many large number still stomach swop even in large institutions. protection to sort has thence had a negative connotation because it portrays concourse avoiding the inevitable and not lacking to improve or face challenges. The essence of this paper is to peel the outer negative layer of opponent to change and dig deeper to reveal how it posterior be managed and transformed into a lordly thing which may service of process jitneys the opportunity to better their employees and refine their approach to change management.Although it was once certain that everyone resists change, this paper pass on show that how people ar handle and how change is implemented discount pass water considerable influence on employee resistivity to change. 2. 0AN OVERVIEW OF RESISTANCE TO CHANGE Perren (1996) take ind resistance as a behavioural reaction or symptom of distress intended to trim down distress level. C hange may be described as the creative activity of something new or ending of something we are familiar with. (Huc and Buc 2010) describes resistance to change as an unwillingness or inability to accept or deal changes that are perceived to be damaging or threatening to the individual. bragging(a) institutions often fail in their ability to manage change rise up and a major reason is the inability to create new pipeline culture from the existing organisations. (Atkinson 2005) it is for this reason that resistance to change is seen negatively as organisational change is more often than not unsuccessful. The nature of resistance is that we do not experience it actively and publicly. Its presence is often displayed covertly or passively and shows up in unexpected ways. Perhaps if it were displayed in an clear manner, we could deal with it logically. Atkinson 2005Resistance to Change as a Negative squeeze Resistance is most vernacularly linked with negative employee attitudes with counter- productive behaviours. (Waddell and Sohal 1998) negativeness is a misconception that there are so many times when resistance is the most effective response available. (Hultman 1979). Early human resource surmise also cast resistance in a negative lightness by perceiving it as a form of conflict that was indicative of a breakdown in the normal and healthy interactions that can exist mingled with individuals or groups.And of course the answer was to avoid resistance in bless to restore harmony. (Milton 1984). 2. 2 Why do people Resist Change? Having an in-depth knowledge as to why employees resist change might be a foremost step to realising that resistance is not a unfit thing and to helping the passenger vehicle deal with it. Among the causes of resistance to change listed by Kreitner (1999) are Surprise, inertia, misunderstanding, emotional side effects, lack of trust, fear of failure, personal conflicts, sad training or threat to job status/security.Four common causes of resistance to change as cited by Huc and Buc (2010), Bedeian (1980) and Kotter and Schlesinger (2008) are a. Parochial self-importance Interest. Which could mean leaving your comfort zone, inconveniences or disturbance of relationships. Like Atkinson (2005) said, the first reaction when people hear of an imminent change is to personalise it to self and ask, how is this going to affect me? b. Misunderstanding or lack of Trust. That is communication gap. wad want to know the reason for the change that is being proposed.If they feel you are hiding information from them, it could lead to lack of trust and they will automatically resist. c. Contradictory Assessments. Managers should be as explicit as possible when brainish change because employees tend to see more costs than benefits. d. Low security deposit for change. Some people have difficulty in coping with change and may result in self doubt and uncertainty. According to Kotter (2008) people might also resist change because of peer pressure or a supervisors attitude.Drucker argued that the major obstacle to organisational growth is managers inability to change their attitudes and behaviour as rapidly as their organisations require. Eccles (1994) lists 13 possible sources of resistance ignorance, comparison, disbelief, loss, inadequacy, anxiety, demolition, power cut, contamination, inhibition, mistrust, alienation and frustration. 2. 3 Managing Resistance to Change. Negative reactions to change may be motivated by positive intentions. (Piderit 2000)There arent any clear cut strategies as to how to manage esistance.Managing people stems from experience and depends on each unique situation. To lead change, managers need to cut off strategies to the types of resistance that may be encountered. (Kotter and Schlesinger 2008) Huc and Buc (2004) came up with the theory of Stakeholder Analysis . They describe the stakeholder as any person who will be directly or indirectly affected by the change in a n organisation. The theory states that anticipating the contrasting reactions of the stakeholders is a useful first step in managing resistance.Using the Stakeholder analysis, managers can first draw up the list of the stakeholders, establish what each will recur or gain if the change goes ahead, use the potential benefits to sustain support for proposals, and finally, find ways to address the concerns of those who feel they will lose by altering the nature of the changes proposed or offering to reduce losses in other ways. Kotter and Schlesinger (1979), came up with six techniques to managing resistance * Education and fealty * Participation and Involvement *Facilitation and Support * Negotiation and Agreement Manipulation and co-optation * Implicit and Explicit Coercion As said earlier, these strategies or techniques have to be tailored to each individual situation. The biggest mistake any manager or change agent can make is to assume that resistance to change can be handled using textbook methods. However, these methods can be utilise in combination. The choice depends on the likely reactions of those involved and on the long term implications of solving the immediate problems in that way. Johnson and Scholes (1999) also used these as appropriate styles of management for those faced with managing change.