Resistance To Change Analysis

43-45). Top-down change process provides prescription that has only been developed by top managers and given to lower cadre employees down the ranks to consume without their input. According to Bovey & Hede (2001, p. 540) resistance occurs at the individual level, where employees are motivated by psychological factors to change that include resentment, frustration, low motivation and morale, fear, and feelings of failure. At the same time, earlier publication by Yilmaz & Kilicoglu (2013, pp. 17-18) identified four factors that motivate employees to resist changes in the organisation: employees focusing on self- interests as opposed to those of the organisation, having inadequate understanding of

The point that I’m trying to make is that men will adapt to our ever changing environments if they sense that those changes are crucial, urgent, and does not threaten their current position (which they feel are safe and secure). People don’t resist changes because they dislike those changes. People resist changes because they’ve encountered previous experiences of change that are unpleasant or have negative effects on their interests. People resist changes, because they are unsure of the outcome that those changes will bring. People resist changes because they are comfortable with the current organizational culture and feel that the new changes would jeopardize their job security. Now that we know why people resist changes—we need to find a way to diagnose certain signs and how we can manage these resistance. Every Organization will have different groups that will react differently to change. By learning proper ways to diagnose we can handle the situation with care and ease. Essentially, when we talk about resisting changes, we need to start from the very beginning, when those changes first started to have a clearer diagnose.

For ethical culture in the organization, they should provide effective procedure and resolutions when there is any issue.

Resistance to change is an expected reaction of human nature. We are not accustomed to change, as it is possible to lead to failure; however, there are also ways to manage the resistance within the company.

Changes are very critical to enhance organizational effectiveness. An organization needs to implement changes to stay productive, competitive as well as avoiding calamity in the case of aviation sector. Changes are the process of instilling new attitudes, values, norms and behaviors within an organization to support the way of doing work. However, the implementation of changes is a task that requires adequate planning and design since changes are not always welcome and could lead to individual's resistance to change. (Agboola,& Salawu,2011). The identification

The resistance from employees and managers is normal and can be addressed. Persistent resistance, however, can threaten a project. The change management team needs to identify understand and help their leaders manage resistance throughout the organization. Resistance manage is the process and tools used by managers and executives with the support of the change

In today’s society companies are finding that it is more demanding that they make changes in certain departments or in the entire company. May managers are faced with the question, “How do I make successful changes?” Another issue company’s face is the resistance to changes by employees. How can a company reduce the resistance from employees? What role do human

As we all know, change is inevitable and we cannot control the world changing around us, but what we can control is how we can deal with how the employees deal with change. Knowing and understanding the common cause why people is resistant to change gives you the chance to plan your strategy to address these factors.

The strategy to handle this resistance is to prepare employees for the changes forthcoming; managers should have an expectation of resistance to change. Engagement of the best-qualified change management team is vital to successfully address concerns. Knowing the primary concerns, change management teams have the tools to present a compelling case why change is needed (Prosci, n.d).

Personal impact and fear of change are not the only causes of resistance by individuals during a change to business practices. The lack of respect and negative attitudes can also lead to employees resisting business change. If an employee lacks respect or has a negative attitude towards a person or department leading the change, then there are more likely to oppose the new ideas being implemented. Poor communication greatly impacts individuals’ accepted to new practices in a company. Typically if an employee is given new behaviors to adopt, but is given no reason, then that employee may reject the change. Upper management must effectively relate the value, need and benefit of the change to help get employees on board with new changes. The lack of individual input can also lead to resistance. Some individuals feel the need to be included in new ideas. When employees are not asked to be involved in changes, they may lack the vision of importance or will to change. A heavier workload can also cause opposition among employees. Employees may not embrace more systems and requirements needed

(Levine, 1997; Huston, 1992; Steier, 1989; Arendt et al., 1995; Tessler, 1989; New and Singer, 1983). As Nord and Jermier (1994) express it, resistance is resisted rather than being purposively managed. Therefore, in order to successfully lead an organization through major change it is important for management to balance both human and organization needs (Spiker and Lesser, 1995; Ackerman, 1986). Organizational change is driven by personal change (Band, 1995; Steinburg, 1992; Dunphy and Dick, 1989). Individual change is needed in order for organizational change to succeed (Evans, 1994). This paper reports on a study that aimed to identify, measure and evaluate how human elements including cognitive and affective processes are associated with an individual 's level of resistance to organizational change.

In these instances, change is seen as evil and not "healthy". Change is not looked on as a positive opportunity and thus is rejected by the individuals in a company, which may result in incohesiveness within the organization and eventual collapse. Personal instances of resistance like those stated above often hold companies back because of their conservative views as they often result from lack of individual confidence in oneself to be creative. Stemming from personal instances of resistances is the occurrence of group resistance to change. Sources of group resistance to change include: Conformity to Norms (Inertia), Vested Interests, Sacrosanct, Rejection of Outsiders, Overdetermination, and threatened power. Vested Interests is probably the most interesting source of resistance because how can interest in being the best be a resistance? Vested Interests can be a resistance because it often promotes conformity to norms, as workers are less likely to contribute their ideas to the advancement of innovation and as a result the company suffers as past new ideas become old, and new ideas are needed to survive in the ubercompetitive business world today. Rejection of Outsiders can be looked on as positive or negative, but more negatively, thus placing it as a resistance to change. Rejection of Outsiders might cause more cohesion within a group to rely on each

To identify the key elements of the resistanceto change described in this situation, one may make use of the six Change Approaches of Kotter and Schlesinger.[1]The model prevents, minimizes or descreases resistance to change in organizations. According to Kotter and Schlesinger (1979), there are four reasons that why people resist change, three of which are applicable to this case:

Managerial actions to reduce resistance to change are listed by Robbins (2009 p.392). They include “Education and Communication, Participation, Facilitation and Support, Negotiation, Manipulation and Co-Optation, Selecting employees who accept change and Coercion.” Kurt Lewin’s force-field analysis method is a prodigious tool for analysing change techniques. According to Robbins (2009 p.391) “This method proposes that two sets of forces operate in any system – forces that operate for change (the driving forces) and forces that operate against change (the resisting forces). If the two sets of forces are equal in strength then the system is in equilibrium.” By approaching and using these techniques systematically and creating explicit links between employees’ commitment and the company’s necessary change outcome, managers dramatically improve the probability of attaining organisation change.

Every organization also has a profession responsibility to conduct business honestly and ethically. Our readings reported, “Experts estimated that U.S. companies lose about $600 billion a year from unethical and criminal behavior” Kinicki and Kreitner (2009). The organization could avoid having ethical issues by meeting the