The Positive Side of Resistance to Change (Essay Sample)

The Positive Side of Resistance to Change Name: Institution: Date: The Positive Side of Resistance to Change Contributions of Change Agents to Resistance in Change Resistance to change can be a resource for controlling the type of change introduced in a work environment. A vital tool that ensures only change leading to positive results takes place. There are several ways in which change agents can contribute to resistance (Ford, Ford & D’Amelio, 2008). One is when change agents do not maintain agreements made before the actual change. Organizational change affects patterns of activity and distribution of resources. Change recipients understandably worry about how the change will affect them and when agreements made are broken in the change process, they respond by less cooperation and producing low quality work. In an organization where change agents introduce change that requires employees to increase the hours they work and promised raises do not take effect, the employees will respond by producing low quality work. Unless broken trust is restored, staff of lower authority will revenge the unfair treatment through rebellion and in some cases by stealing from the organization. Change agents also contribute to resistance when they openly ignore proposals from the change recipient concerning implementation of change. In an organization that introduces technology that reduces the number of staff required. Failure to include the employees in the change discussions will result to the staff body opposing this technology. Change recipients analyze change elements and change agents have the responsibility of communicating the reasons for the change, justifying their approach by providing information that demonstrates how the change will be beneficial to the organization and the individuals. Change agents sometimes present weak justifications providing poor support of its benefits sparking resistance from the doubtful change recipients. An organization that wants to introduce change in the production process of raw materials should communicate strong justifications to the management bodies and the subordinate staff. Failure to present clear benefits will be met by resistance from the staff, who will not see why they should learn the new procedures. Poor communication channels in the form of misrepresentation of change are another way in which change agents contribute to resistance in change. If change agents anticipate resistance and use unethical methods such as intentional misrepresentation of the change details in an effort to attract recipient’s acceptance to the change, the will hurt their credibility. The misrepresentation of change in an organization, whether intentional or not will lead to future resistance to the change. An organization can introduce change in its marketing strategies and misrepresent the change listing false justifications such as a wider market base while in reality the company is just cutting costs. If the sales do not present the expected results future changes proposed by the change agents will be met by resistance due to the ruined credibility. Once the change recipients understand the change principles change agents need to emphasize on performance putting the policies into action. Failure to do so may lead to unsuccessful implementation of change that will easily be assumed as a result of resistance to change. Change agents in an organization have to guide the employees in carrying out the change. Resistance to Change as a Change Agent Resistance to change can be a resource for enacting successful change in an organization. The resistance can shape change improving its strength and effectiveness. Resistance to change keeps the change relevant in the work environment. Employees can have difficulty adopting new conversations and patterns of activity therefore change can easily be diluted by old routines. Resistance to change will spark debates in the workplace keeping the topic of change in existence. Regardless of the type of attitude the staff displays, debates concerning the change will give change agents the opportunity to clarify any details about the change and improve its implementation. Resistance to change is a sign of engagement from the change recipients since scrutiny of change elements incorporates thoughtful considerations. The change recipients display a sense of attachment to the work environment. Aspects of the work environment that are of value to the change recipients may be affected by the change raising the need for heavy scrutiny. Since change recipients are justified in their resistance to change, counter argument measures introduced by the change agents may alter the attitudes of the change recipients. Once the change recipients display a new attitude in favor of the change, they will be highly motivated to work for what they believe in. Resistance to change is a tool that if addressed well will lead to the employees associating the company’s victories as their own. Resistance to change can be described as a conflict of interest between change agents and change recipients. The change agents can address resistance to change as an opportunity to strengthen the change process through implementing conflict resolution procedures. An example is by thoughtful discussions carried out by the two sides. Only change that is beneficial to both the change recipients and the company will be implemented. This will in turn strengthen commitment levels of the change recipients. Mistakes Made by Managers Management that is divided concerning the importance of change is likely to have a negative effect in the change process. The management body will not emphasize the urgency of the change and the employees will not reflect attitudes supporting the change. Failure to incorporate transformational leadership in the management body will create a sense of comfort in the old methods of conducting business since transformational leadership addresses emerging concerns that are likely to affect the organization in the future. The change process will therefore have several setbacks if urgency for the change is not emphasized by managers because of concerns such as risks imposed on short-term business profits. Another mistake that mangers make is not teaming up with members with significant levels of authority in an effort to strengthen the campaign for change. Unless leaders with different levels of expertise strengthen their influence by ganging up to push forward the change, forces against the change will eventually return the corporation to old working environments. Management that fails to develop a clear vision for the organization risk confusing the staff. Even when goals and deadlines are clearly expressed, the management body that does not inspire its employee with a clear vision, which shows where the change efforts will lead, ends up disorienting the employees limiting their productivity. In organizations that have a well-developed vision for transformational change, poor communication from the managers will damage any progress made on change. Some managers simply communicate the vision verbally in speeches or newsletters but that is not enough to instill the vision in employees. Effective communication of the organization’s vision in form of words and actions throughout the change process is required from the managers. Management bodies that do not remove obstacles to the vision risk halting the change process. Obstacles in the form of people and attitudes should be addressed accordingly. Employees lose trust in the new patterns of activity if some organizational heads are allowed carry on with old methods. Managers miss opportunities for promoting support for the transformational process when they fail to structure shot term goals. Since the change process may take a long period of time the number of members against the change may grow if no results or evidence of improvement is witnessed. Managers also mistake improvements as victories and celebrate early before the change is completely rooted into the company. When this happens, the changes realized slowly disappear and the organization returns to its old practices. Organizational culture takes years to be fully incorporated in corporation’s behavioral practices. When managers stop emphasizing the new values and them...