"“In a fight between you and the world, bet on the world." — Franz Kafka
Some people
cling desperately to the past. They hang on to what’s familiar, snuggling ever
deeper into their comfortable routines to avoid the chilling thought that they
might have to change. Someone said, “the organization is so screwed up that
somebody doesn’t like it as it is.: Change always means giving up something,
and the greater the personal sacrifice the more you feel like dragging your
feet.
Another
reason why people defend the old way of doing things is to maintain personal
stability or feel more in control. They battle against change out of fear of
the future, not because of love for the past. If uncertainty and ambiguity eat
on your nerves, you can’t get very pumped up about “progress.” The more you
dislike unpredictability, the more you’re likely to protect the status quo.
A third group
of people resists change as a way of getting even. They play “punish the
organization” in retaliation for changes they don’t like. We’re talking here
about plain old revenge. And the fascinating thing is to watch how people are
willing to damage themselves just to get back at the organization.
Finally, some
change resisters are well-intentioned people who think they see their outfit
about to make a mistake, and have the courage to try and stop it. They fight
change because they (1) have the organization’s best interests at heart and (2)
have enough nerve to take a stand. But frankly, these people with good
intentions often happen to be wrong. In trying to save the organization they
shoot it in the foot.
When an
organization initiates changes – does it on purpose – you can bet there are
compelling reasons. Almost always you can find a strong financial argument for
what’s going on. Study the situation –
Are outside events forcing the
changes?
Must the organization swallow some
bitter medicine to stay alive?
Will a tough exercise like this
develop needed organizational muscle?
When the
winds of change hit your organization, here’s the bottom line: Resisting does
more harm than good. To begin with, you could get nailed for being oppositional
– someone may accuse you of causing trouble, getting in the way of progress.
That easily damages your career.
Second,
resisting change takes effort, and you can find more productive ways to spend
your energy.
Besides,
you’re probably going to lose the battle anyway. Even if you do win a skirmish
now and then, you’re going to lose the war.
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteHello Tim, on the issue of change and the resistance to change I find that people as a group do not reflexively resist change...although there are a few. Afterall people get married and have kids quite willingly and I can not think of too many things that cause personal change any more than those two. No, people resist "being changed"....especially "by others". I find that, in industry a full 90% of the resistance comes about because of poor change management. So much of what is called resistance to change would largely disappear if managers practiced good change management. As is often the case, the rank and file workers catch the brunt of the criticism for "resisting" when the real culprit is poor change execution by the management team.
Lonnie Wilson
law@qc-ep.com
May 5, 2017 at 9:21 AM