Resistance to Change and Change as a Process

Change produces normal resistance, and it unfolds as a process rather than as an event. These two ideas underpin the practical models of change management.

The chef and the cook

No two changes are exactly alike, and no two organisations are alike. The application of change management should not become automatic. Learning “how” without understanding “why” leaves a manager helpless when the recipe meets a new situation. The right approach is specific to the situation.

Work like a chef, not a cook. A cook follows the recipe by rote and may be surprised when the result is poor. Changes in temperature and other variables affect the outcome significantly. A chef understands the chemistry of what is occurring and knows the “why” behind each element. When variables change, a chef adjusts to produce the result.

A change management cook follows the eight steps of Kotter’s model by rote. She does the steps but does not understand why each one matters. When the change runs into trouble, she has no way to adjust.

A change management chef understands the principles behind each step. She uses the steps as guidance but adapts them to her specific situation. When trouble arises, she diagnoses and adjusts.

A school head should aim to be a chef. The model gives the recipe; the deeper understanding is what makes the recipe work.

Resistance is normal

Many change-managers assume that by building awareness of the need for change, they have also created for workers a desire to engage in that change. The assumption is that desire automatically follows awareness. It is a mistake.

This is a common error. The school head sees the need for change, sees it clearly, and assumes that once she explains it, the staff will see it too and want to change.

The reality: awareness does not automatically produce desire. A teacher can understand perfectly that the school needs to change and still not want to change herself.

Why resistance is normal

The normal reaction to change is resistance. The current state has great holding power. The possibility of losing what people have grown used to creates worry, anxiety, and fear. The future state is often unknown or ill-defined, and uncertainty creates more fear.

Three factors make resistance normal.

1. The current state has holding power. Habits, routines, established relationships. All exist; all serve some purpose; all would have to be rebuilt.
2. Loss aversion. People feel losses more strongly than equivalent gains. Even a change that produces net benefit involves some loss; the loss looms larger than the gain.
3. Uncertainty. The future state is unknown. Uncertainty itself produces fear, regardless of whether the future will actually be better or worse.

A school head who treats resistance as personal failure (these staff are difficult; they should just see the value) is misreading the situation. The same staff facing the same change in a different school would resist the same way. Resistance is normal human response to change.

The key message

Because resistance to change is normal, resistance should be expected. Planning activities should be designed to soften that resistance. Manage it early and at its source.

Three implications.

Expect resistance

Plan for resistance. Build it into the change plan. Do not be surprised when it appears.

Manage early

Resistance is easier to manage early than late. A teacher who has six months of unaddressed concerns about a change becomes harder to engage than one whose concerns were addressed in the first month.

Manage at the source

Address what is actually producing the resistance, not just the surface complaints. The teacher complaining about “the new schedule” may really be anxious about whether she can manage the new schedule’s demands. Addressing the schedule technically does not address the anxiety.

Shift the framing

For effective change management, shift from preventing and managing resistance to engaging employees and building enthusiasm around the change.

The most powerful move is to engage staff in the change rather than just managing their resistance. A staff that owns the change is in a different state from a staff that has been brought along despite resistance.

This is harder. It requires the change to be one staff can engage with, the principal to be one staff want to follow, and the change to be designed in ways that staff have a voice in.

When it works, the change is genuinely the staff’s. When it does not work, change management is still possible but more effortful.

Three more practical points

Three additional practical points: accept resistance, enable managers, and do not overlook culture.

1. Accept resistance. Do not treat resistance as failure. It is information.
2. Enable managers. Middle managers (heads of department, coordinators) are critical for change. Equip them.
3. Do not overlook culture. The school’s culture either supports or resists change. Pay attention to it.

Change is a process

Change unfolds over time. Change occurs as a process, not as an event. Change in an organisation does not happen instantly because there was a notice, an announcement, or an order. Individuals do not change just because they received an email or attended a training programme.

Many change initiatives treat change as an event. The announcement is made; the new policy takes effect; the change is done. This is the wrong framing. The announcement is a step in a longer process.

When people experience change, they move from what they have known and done, through a period of transition, to a new way of behaving and doing the job. Treating change as a process is central to successful change management. Breaking the change into distinct phases allows the approach to be tailored so employees can adopt it.

The three states

Whatever the change (technological, business process, or a new reporting structure), there is always a Current State (how things are done today), a Future State (how things will be done), and a Transition State (how the move from A to B happens).

Current State

The current state is the collection of processes, behaviours, tools, technologies, structures, and job roles that make up how work is being done. It may not be working well, but it is familiar and comfortable because people know what to expect.

The starting point. Even when the current state is poor, it is known. People have built their work around it. Leaving it means leaving familiarity.

Transition State

The transition state is messy, constantly changing, unpredictable, and often emotionally charged. Productivity declines. People are asked to accept new perspectives and learn new ways while still keeping day-to-day work running.

The middle. This is where the real difficulty lives. The old ways are being abandoned but the new ways are not yet mastered. Productivity drops temporarily. Emotions run high.

Many changes fail in the transition state. The drop in productivity is interpreted as failure of the change. Leadership loses nerve. The change is abandoned and the school returns to the current state, having spent resources and lost trust.

A school head who understands the transition state expects the difficulty. She holds the course through it. She supports staff through the discomfort. She does not interpret the temporary decline as final failure.

Future State

The future state is where the change is trying to get to. It is often not fully defined and can shift during the effort. It can be worrisome: it may not match personal and professional goals, and there is a chance the effort may not succeed.

The destination. Often less clearly defined than the current state. Worrisome precisely because it is unknown. The future state may not turn out to be what was promised. It may not suit every staff member.

A school head should be honest about the future state. Overpromising it produces disappointment when reality is more complicated. Under-defining it produces anxiety about an unknown destination. The skill is honest, concrete description of what the future will be, with acknowledgement of what is uncertain.

Flashcard

What are the three states of any change, and why does the transition state often cause changes to fail?

Tap to reveal

Answer

Current State, Transition State, Future State.

1. Current State. How things are now. Familiar, comfortable, even if not working well.

2. Transition State. Messy, unpredictable, emotionally charged. Productivity declines. Old ways being abandoned; new ways not yet mastered.

3. Future State. Where we are trying to get. Often less defined than current state. Uncertain.

The transition state often causes changes to fail because:

1. The drop in productivity is interpreted as failure.
2. Leadership loses nerve.
3. Staff resistance intensifies.
4. The change is abandoned and the school returns to the current state.

A school head who understands the transition state expects the difficulty, supports staff through it, and does not abandon the change prematurely. The transition is supposed to be hard; that is not a sign of failure.