Tag Archives: change

Myths

“Resistance is useful”: a new assumption?

3 Comments

If we want to see change happen, and for it to occur in a meaningful, timely and impactful manner, we need to see any resistance that we encounter in a different light. Rather than considering resistance an unhelpful roadblock to change, we should perhaps see it (at risk of supplying any more old clichés) as both an opportunity and an indicator of progress. The opportunity is that resistance opens a door to new dialogue with others. As an indicator, resistance shows us that people are noticing what we are doing.

As Herrero (2006) points out, the assertion that “People are resistant to change” is untrue. The reality is that people are resistant to change if nothing in terms of what managers expect from them changes. Extending that notion, Seddon (2005) suggests that the reason people are resistant to change is that they often don’t see its relevance to their work, because the rest of the system – how they are managed, doesn’t change. With the right encouragement these people can identify and discuss the other areas where change might be required – and themselves, with the right support,  start to influence that wider change.

It is too easy to assume that “there will always be casualties – people not accepting change – and you need to identify and deal with them.”   Hererro does not accept this and also suggests that we need to reject the position that “skeptical people and enemies of change need to be sidelined.”

Instead when we manage change, Herrero suggests that greater care is required;

  • don’t assume that people have excluded themselves.
  • expect resistant behaviours to disappear when alternatives are reinforced.
  • give sceptics a bit of slack (they may well have something to contribute).
  • suspend judgement, be willing to be surprised, and don’t write people off too quickly.
Changes in your behaviour will influence others

We should also recognise that discord provides opportunity for debate and the development of new ideas. We always need to examine what these ‘outsiders’ are saying and learn from them what the issues or problems really are. Neither should we expect  “People used to not complying with norms will be even worse at accepting change.”  With viral change, Herrero encourages different routes to establishing new norms and for these approaches, ‘non-normative’ people often make good champions.

This means that anyone involved in change, at whatever level, needs to take on responsibility for getting on with the change, to be seen to do the things we want to see done. We need to be open minded and able to discuss and debate effectively, not quash dissent, but seek opportunities for engaging new ideas.

Rather than challenging the nay-sayers with a dogma that ‘resistance is useless’ perhaps we should have a new perspective that will engage their input: resistance is useful!

Read more…

Herrero, L. (2006) Viral Change, meetingminds, UK.

Seddon, J. (2005) Freedom from Command and Control, Vanguard Press, Buckingham, UK.

Myths

Highlighting misplaced assumptions: the myth of leadership-driven change

2 Comments

In the past 15-20 years there has been an increasing trend towards viewing leaders as the change agents and transformers of organisations; this view even has its own brand name ‘Transformational Leadership’. Although many of the suggested ‘transformational’ leadership behaviours are well researched, the inevitable catalogues of ‘best practice’ have resulted in the embedding of incorrect assumptions about managing change. Leandro Herrero (2006) is one author who challenges three such misconceptions.

A vision for change need not come solely from leaders

First, Hererro challenges the misconception that:

“Only change at the top can ensure change within the organisation”.  Not true

Change at the top is desirable, but it is not always necessary in the first instance. Leaders can be influenced by others and people across the organisation need to realise that their own ideas can make a difference.

A second incorrect assumption is:

“Vision for change needs to come from the top and cascade down”.

Not necessarily and cascades of information and ideas can be slow and ineffective.

Vision may or may not come from the top. More importantly, if people want to implement change, then working through the hierarchy may also NOT be the best method and may even impede progress. There are better ways to devise, test and implement change in a way that will stick and this possibility challenges the final misconception:

“Big change requires big actions”.

Big changes in complex organisations can make things worse rather than better.

A big, organisation-wide programme is not necessarily the best method to engage people and make things different.

If we always expect leaders to be the source of change it will put the brakes on progress. Leaders do however have the key role of encouraging people, looking for opportunities and providing an environment where people are not threatened by change, but are encouraged to make a difference. Small sets of behavioural changes, taken on and shared by informal groups of people can generate improvements in a non-linear way, as Hererro terms it, a ‘viral’ spread. If we engage in new ways of thinking and acting we can influence the people around us and engage in the development of the university in a new way.

Read more about these ideas:

Herrero, L. (2006) Viral Change, meetingminds, UK.

Myths

Kick out the old assumptions about change

4 Comments

‘Change’ is a hot topic, sometimes exciting and engaging, but all too often an issue which leads to disappointment, frustration, uncertainty; even suspicion, fear and resentment.  Concerns may be raised from the direct impact that changes have on people’s work life, but are also often caused by the way change is implemented or the expectations placed on people during the change.

It is rather easy to copy the received wisdom about change and how it should be ‘done’. However it is sensible to challenge many of our assumptions which, whilst perhaps being well-established and apparently plausible, are actually incorrect (Herrero, 2006). We need to take care; if we follow the wrong assumptions, we are likely to make mistakes.

John MacDonald, a leading management practitioner and writer, who sadly died earlier this month, frequently challenged what he saw as ‘Mindless Change’ – where each new fad leaves “another layer of barnacles that in time encrust the organisation and impede progress”. His observations remain relevant in the current climate of change in Higher Education – how do we avoid the crush of ‘initiative overload’?. MacDonald tells us that organisations need to get back to managing the ‘business,’ organically incorporating only those changes and practices that can actually improve their operations.  For us, this means improving value for students.

We shouldn’t view the university as a management machine that is impervious to anything other than a major overhaul. Instead we should see things as a human system: people, the work that we do, the interactions we have with each other, the physical environment that we create and use. These are the routes to change.

Stephen Covey’s famous ‘7 habits of highly effective people’ calls us to think about how we, as individuals, can influence wider change through our own behaviour and choices.

When we consider change, we need to keep in mind the question:

“why are we doing it like this – is there a better way?”

 

Some helpful sources of reading relating to this blog include:

Covey, S. (1989) 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, Simon & Shuster, New York, NY.

Herrero, L. (2006) Viral Change, meetingminds, UK.

MacDonald, J. (1998) Calling a Halt to Mindless Change, Amacom, UK