Based on our interview with the MIS Manager of SAMULCO, the two most frequently experienced causes of frustration of IS professionals and users while working on an IS plan are Resitance to Change and Budget and Financial Constraints.
Resistance To Change
Definition
Resistance to change is the action taken by individuals and groups when they perceive that a change that is occurring as a threat to them.
Key words here are 'perceive' and 'threat'. The threat need not be real or large for resistance to occur.
In its usual description it refers to change within organizations, although it also is found elsewhere in other forms. Resistance is the equivalent of objections in sales and disagreement in general discussions.
Resistance may take many forms, including active or passive, overt or covert, individual or organized, aggressive or timid.
Rationale for resistance
The rationale for resistance is often quite straightforward as people justify their actions to themselves. If you want to overcome resistance to change, you must be able to answer the following points.
Person wants to stay where he is because…
Even if you offer me a bowl of cherries, he may not be very concerned to take what you proffer if he is happy where he is now. People who have been in the same place for a long time are usually in this state. They do not need to change and will view any suggestion of change with distaste.
…His needs are already met here
Needs are basic drivers of action. If needs are not perceived as being particularly threatened and the current situation is relatively comfortable (particularly in comparison with the proposed change) then he will be happier to stay where he am. If people already have their needs met, then you will need to shake the carpet and provide some sort of threat to those needs so they are no longer sufficiently met for the person to want to stay where they are.
…I have invested heavily here
When I have invested a lot of time and energy in building up my position, both socially and organizationally, then any change may mean bad news. Social investment creates a person's sense of identity. Organizational investment gives them control. Sliding down the ladder that I have so painstakingly climbed over the year is a long way from my shopping list. Where people have invested heavily, you will either have to show them how to get to a similar position in the new organization or otherwise reduce the value of their investment (for example by moving the people over whom they have social influence).
...I am in the middle of something important
When I have committed to achieving a goal, either personal or emotional, then a part of my integrity and hence identity may be bound up in achieving the goal. When I have partly completed something, I am also affected by the need for completion, such that I will feel uncomfortable with stopping now. When people are busy, find ways for them to complete the work in the shorter term, perhaps by nudging their goals so they have less to do to complete. If possible, turn their work towards something that will be useful for the new organization.
I do not want to change because…
Even if I am not that happy where I am, I still may not be particularly interested in moving forward with the change.
…the destination looks worse than where I am now
Although I want to move, the final resting place of the change looks significantly worse for me than the current position. I feel it is like jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire. If you want people to voluntarily move, then it must be to somewhere better than they are now. You can create this in two ways: first by making the present position worse (though be careful with this!) and secondly by building a rosy vision to which people can then attach their dreams.
…there is nothing to attract me forwards
If the change is nothing to do with me, if the benefits are all for other people or the general organization, if I just do not buy the 'vision' as sold, then I will feel no pull and I will not buy into the change.You may offer forth a brilliant vision, but do the people buy it? Make sure your communications are clear and couched in terms that people can understand and buy into. Make your visions inclusive, such that people really can and will buy the change.
…I do not know which way to move
If I buy the vision, I may still may not know which way to jump. Some change projects sound wonderful, but people are left wondering what to do (even the managers).Grand plans need to be turned into tactical detail in which people can see and easily take the step forward.
…the journey there looks painful
The final destination may be great, but the journey from here to there looks very uncomfortable. The anticipated pain of the transition is more immediate than the distant and hazy future, and I respond more to this than to any inspiring vision. Make sure the transitional period between now and the final change does not appear so uncomfortable that people refuse to join you. In practice, it may not be that bad -- what counts, though, is the perception of the people, so design the transition well and then communicate it well.
...the destination or journey is somehow bad or wrong
If the transition or the final destination somehow transgresses my values, then I will judge it to be bad or wrong and will be very loathe to join the party.Be careful with the change in working around established organizational and general social values. If you must break an unwritten rule (such as getting rid of people) then do so with appropriate consideration and care.
…I do not trust those who are asking me to change
If my experience of you is that you have been untrustworthy in the past, then I am not likely to buy your vision of the future. If you are going on what I perceive as a perilous journey, then I will not trust you and will not join you. The integrity of leaders is a very important attribute. If you want people to follow you, then you must give them good reason to trust you.
I am not going to change because…
Even if people do not want to change, they may still have to do so, albeit truculently. Some people, how ever, have the wherewithal to refuse.
…I am able to ignore the change
One of the questions I will ask is 'What happens if I do not go along with the change?' If the negative implications for my non-compliance are negligible, then I can happily not join in. This sort of situation occurs when the person in question is so valued by the organization that the idea of them leaving is unthinkable. This is often where difficult choices around change take place. What do you do with the laggards? If this problem is not addressed, then the people around them may take their lead and before long you have a silent revolution on your hands.
…I have the power to obstruct the change
Another reason why a person can happily ignore the change is because they can stop it. People in senior positions often treat change as being a good thing -- as long as it is for someone else. When faced with change themselves, they may do whatever it takes to scupper the change, for example by refusing to give needed access or other support. This is a good test of the senior sponsor of change -- which may need to be the most senior officer in the organization. Those who actively oppose the change must be dealt with -- preferably kindly and in in an understanding way, but ultimately in a firm and final way.
The nature of opposition
When considering stakeholders who are opposing the change, do a deep analysis of their personality to give you better ability to manage their opposition and convert them to the cause of the change. This analysis should help you to decide whether and how you might convert the person to the change cause or, if they are implacable opponents, how you might control or contain their opposition.
Drivers
Beliefs
Beliefs are basic drivers of thought and behavior. If you can understand their beliefs, you can begin to change them.
• What are their beliefs about people? Their rights? Their capabilities?
• What beliefs do they have about themselves?
• How strongly do they hold these beliefs?
• What are the beliefs that they have that led them to oppose the change?
• What beliefs do they have that could be used to help convert them?
Values
Values are guides and shapers of behavior that tell what is right and wrong, good and bad, important and unimportant. Understanding a person's values tells you what they will not do as much as what they will do.
• Are any of their values being transgressed by change actions?
• What are their stress values? Are these being triggered?
• What values can you appeal to, to persuade them to change?
Goals
Goals are the deliberate objectives that we set ourselves to satisfy values and needs. By identifying these and how they are affected by change, you can
• What are their career goals?
• What are their social goals?
• What other goals do they have?
• How are any of these affected by the change?
Perceptions
The perceptions that people have of the change is based on their internal systems and the inferences they make. Perception is reality for the person, even it if is not really true. It therefore makes sense to understand how they perceive the change.
• What are their perceptions of the change? What do they think will happen?
• What are their perceptions of other stakeholders in the change? Do they think others will help them? Do they think others will gain unfair advantage?
• What are their perceptions of those implementing the change? Do they think the change agents will be fair? Do they think they are competent?
Potential
A critical question about opponents of change is what they can and are likely do to oppose the change.
• What power do they have?
• What is the source of that power? (position, expertise, social, etc.)
• How might they use that power? (blocking, persuading others, etc.)
• What would the impact of that action be? (local, widespread, etc.)
• How might their power change?
Triggers
And when you understand the power that a person who is opposing or may oppose the change, the final step is to understand their triggers, those events that would tip them into action.
• What would lead them to use that power? (events, actions, etc.)
• What would defuse them beforehand? (involvement, listening, etc.)
• What would bring them down after they had started resisting? (listening, threats, etc.)
• Who do they listen to? (friends, social leaders, senior people, etc.)
• What could other people do to contain or convert them? (words, action, etc.)
When resistance to change occurs, then it is very helpful to be able to spot it coming and hence respond appropriately to it (rather than be surprised when the change mysteriously fails).
Signs of resistance
Early signs of resistance
If you can catch resistance early, then you can respond to it before it takes hold, effectively nipping it in the bud.
Gossip
When the change is announced, the tom-toms will start beating loudly and grapevine will bear fruit of much and varied opinion. Keep your ear to the ground on what is being said around the coffee points. Listen particularly for declaration of intent and attempts to organize resistance. Grumbling and complaint are natural ways of airing discomfort, so you should not try to squash it (you would fail, anyway). The biggest danger of it is when it is allowed to ferment in an information vacuum.
Respond to gossip by opening it up, showing you are listening to concerns and taking them seriously, and providing lots of valid information that will fill the vacuum.
Testing
Just as a high school class will test a teacher's ability to maintain discipline, so also will some brave soul test out what happens when they resist change. They may, for example, not turn up to a meeting or openly challenge a decision. How you deal with such early resistance will have a significant effect on what happens next. For example you can jump on the person and squash both them and their words, or you can take an adult position, describing what they have done and assertively questioning their motives.
Collectivism of resistance
Resistance can happen both on an individual case-by-case basis or people may band together.
Individual action
Individually, people may resist, although this is generally limited to the extent of their personal power. For those with lower power, this may include passive refusals and covert action. For those with more power, it can include open challenge and criticism.
Handle individual action individually, starting with those with greater power. As necessary, you may need to make an example, and disciplining a senior executive can send a strong signal to other resistors.
Collective action
When people find a common voice in organized resistance, then their words and actions can create a significant threat to the change, even though they are individually less powerful. Trade Unions are a classic example of this.
Organized resistance is usually a sign of a deep divide. People will not go to the bother of organizing unless they have serious issues with the change. Manage collectives by negotiating with their leaders (which can be much easier than dealing with a myriad of smaller fires). You may well need to make concessions, but you at least should be able to rescue some key elements of the change. You can also 'divide and conquer' by striking deals with individual key players, although this must be done very carefully as it can cause a serious backlash.
Visibility of resistance
Sometimes resistance is out in the open, but more often it starts out in a more underhand, covert way.
Covert resistance
Covert resistance is deliberate resistance to change, but done in a manner that allows the perpetrators to appear as if they are not resisting. This may occur, for example, through sabotage of various kinds. Handle covert resistance by showing that you know what is happening and setting in place investigations designed to identify the people responsible.
Overt resistance
Overt resistance does not try to hide, and is a result either of someone comfortable with their power, someone for whom covert acts are against their values, or someone who is desperate. This may take forms such as open argument, refusal or attack.
Deal with overt resistance by first seeking to respond openly and authentically. If the resistance is blind, then you will have no alternative but to defend, for example by isolating and disciplining attackers.
Activity of resistance
Overt resistance does not need to take positive action -- sometimes it can be passive.
Passive resistance
Passive resistance occurs where people do not take specific actions. At meetings, they will sit quietly and may appear to agree with the change. Their main tool is to refuse to collaborate with the change. In passive aggression, for example, they may agree and then do nothing to fulfill their commitments. This can be very difficult to address, as resisters have not particularly done anything wrong. One way to address this is to get public commitment to an action (and you can start small on this), then follow up -- publicly if necessary -- to ensure they complete the action. Then keep repeating this until they are either bought in or give in.
Active resistance
Active resistance occurs where people are taking specific and deliberate action to resist the change. It may be overt, with such as public statements and acts of resistance, and it may be covert, such as mobilizing others to create an underground resistance movement.
Overt active resistance, although potentially damaging, is at least visible and you have the option of using formal disciplinary actions (although more positive methods should normally be used first). When it is covert, you may also need to use to covert methods to identify the source and hence take appropriate action.
Dealing with resistance
Here is a small raft of things you can do to handle resistance, starting with kind and moral approaches and ending with the harsher end of gaining compliance. This whole site has fleets other things you can do, of course.
Facilitation
The best approach to creating change is to work with them, helping them achieve goals that somehow also reach to the goals of the change project. When you work with people, they will be happier to work with you.
This is a good practice when people want to collaborate but are struggling to adjust to the situation and achieve the goals of change.
Education
When people are not really bought into the rationale for the change, they may well come around once they realize why the change is needed and what is needed of them. In particular, if new skills are required, you can provide these via a focused course of education.
Involvement
When people are not involved physically or intellectually, they are unlikely to be involved emotionally either. One of the best methods of getting people bought in is to get them involved. When their hands are dirty, they realize that dirt is not so bad, after all. They also need to justify their involvement to themselves and so persuade themselves that is the right thing to do.
Negotiation
When the other person cannot easily be persuaded, then you may need to give in order to get. Sit them down and ask what they are seeking. Find out what they want and what they will never accept. Work out a mutually agreeable solution that works just for them and just for you.
Manipulation
Manipulation means controlling a person's environment such that they are shaped by what is around them. It can be a tempting solution, but is morally questionable and, if they sense what you are doing, will lead to a very dangerous backlash. Only consider this when change is necessary in the short term and all other avenues have been explored.
Coercion
Even more extreme than subtle manipulation is overt coercion. This is where you sit them down and make overt threats, for example that if they do not comply that they will lose their jobs, perhaps in a humiliating and public sacking. This should only be used when speed is of the essence or when the other person themselves has taken to public and damaging actions.
How to cause resistance
Here are just a few of the ways you can cause people to resist the change:
• Resist the resistance, fighting back.
• Do not use your sponsors.
• Try to do everything yourself.
• Allow sponsors to be non-committal about the change.
• Use threats and aggressive language.
• Avoid talking to individual people.
• Avoid listening to people.
• Do not visit the various teams affected.
• Spend more time with your allies (and avoiding the troublemakers).
• Ignore those who resist. Keep your fingers crossed they will give up.
• Tell people about your plans and then ignore the plans.
• Give lots of rational reasons why people should do as you say.
• Dive into the details before they have bought the big picture.
• Do not test that people have understood what you have said.
• Lose faith yourself in the change.
• Be vague about what the change will be.
• Avoid being the messenger of bad news.
• Collude with the other person.
• Produce non-specific plans.
• Expect people to instantly understand what took you three weeks to figure out.
• Publicly and aggressively punish those who object.
• Shout down anyone who disagrees.
• Do not change reward systems to align with the change.
• Make 'an exception' for talented people who resist.
Responding to unexpected resistance
What happens when you are in the middle of a conversation or meeting and someone speaks out against the change?
Pause
The natural tendency of many people is to respond immediately, perhaps butting in or cutting the other person short. The voice may be authoritarian and tinged with anger. But think how this appears to other people? The message being sent is 'public disagreement is not allowed'. A likely effect is that the person resisting now has the sympathy of others (and may recruit the others to their cause). It is also very likely that the resistance will just go underground. So the very first thing is to bite your lip, hold your tongue and count to three. Take a moment to pause and assess the situation. What are others doing? Is the person speaking cautious or bold? What does the body language tell you?
Listen
The next step is to listen carefully not only to what they are saying but also to how they are saying it. Listen for the deeper messages between the lines. Listen to their fears, hopes and ambitions. Hear the tensions and emotions. Notice how they are coping. You can also draw out further information, tipping the bucket to ensure you have the whole story. Use appropriate questioning techniques to learn more.
Empathize
Make your initial response one that empathizes with their position. Show first that you understand (even though you may not agree) and respect their right to voice an honest opinion. This and other previous action will have won you many friends -- perhaps even the person in question who may have been expecting you to resist their resistance (which is just what it would be) and is preparing for a fight. When people expect a fight and find only concern, the surprise is likely to change their opinion.
Think
Before you open your mouth, think hard about what you are going to say and how you are going to say it. Done wrong, a response will show your empathy to be false and may cause a bitter backlash.
Respond
Respond in a way that offers the other person a dignified way out. Seek win-win. Use their language. Reframe their position to show a bigger picture.
The income statement is a simple and straightforward report on the proposed business's cash-generating ability. It is a score card on the financial performance of your business that reflects when sales are made and when expenses are incurred. It draws information from the various financial models developed earlier such as revenue, expenses, capital (in the form of depreciation), and cost of goods. By combining these elements, the income statement illustrates just how much your company makes or loses during the year by subtracting cost of goods and expenses from revenue to arrive at a net result -- which is either a profit or a loss.
Budget and Financial Constraints
Financial Constraints and Differential Investment Responses
Since differences in investment opportunities arising from product market exposures do not appear to explain differences in the effects of depreciations on affiliates and local firms, we now consider an alternate explanation: a differential ability to overcome financial constraints.
Local Firms and Leverage Differences
If financial constraints contribute to the relative underperformance of local firms, then the relative performance amongst local firms should be dictated by the level and composition of leverage prior to the depreciation. While data on the duration of debt is not available for multinational affiliates, data on the level and duration of debt is available for local firms. For each local firm, we compute averages of the ratio of total debt to assets and the ratio of short term debt to total debt over the three years prior to a crisis. We then use the sample median level of these averages to classify if local firms have above or below medians levels of leverage and short term debt. Dummies are included in interaction terms in the basic specifications to analyze if highly levered local firms, particularly those with short term debt, experienced the sharpest reductions in investment subsequent to depreciations. Local firms that rely heavily on short term debt are likely to face significant liquidity constraints, especially since interest rates often increase following depreciations. The specifications are presented employ the log of capital expenditures as a dependent variable and the interaction terms of interest are those that discriminate amongst local firms on the basis of the level and duration of their leverage prior to the depreciation. In these three specifications, the coefficients on the post-depreciation dummy indicate how local firms with high leverage, high amounts of short term debt or firms with both characteristics respond to the depreciations. In turn, the interaction terms indicate how the remaining local firms and how affiliates respond relative to these baseline coefficients.Resistance To Change
Definition
Resistance to change is the action taken by individuals and groups when they perceive that a change that is occurring as a threat to them.
Key words here are 'perceive' and 'threat'. The threat need not be real or large for resistance to occur.
In its usual description it refers to change within organizations, although it also is found elsewhere in other forms. Resistance is the equivalent of objections in sales and disagreement in general discussions.
Resistance may take many forms, including active or passive, overt or covert, individual or organized, aggressive or timid.
Rationale for resistance
The rationale for resistance is often quite straightforward as people justify their actions to themselves. If you want to overcome resistance to change, you must be able to answer the following points.
Person wants to stay where he is because…
Even if you offer me a bowl of cherries, he may not be very concerned to take what you proffer if he is happy where he is now. People who have been in the same place for a long time are usually in this state. They do not need to change and will view any suggestion of change with distaste.
…His needs are already met here
Needs are basic drivers of action. If needs are not perceived as being particularly threatened and the current situation is relatively comfortable (particularly in comparison with the proposed change) then he will be happier to stay where he am. If people already have their needs met, then you will need to shake the carpet and provide some sort of threat to those needs so they are no longer sufficiently met for the person to want to stay where they are.
…I have invested heavily here
When I have invested a lot of time and energy in building up my position, both socially and organizationally, then any change may mean bad news. Social investment creates a person's sense of identity. Organizational investment gives them control. Sliding down the ladder that I have so painstakingly climbed over the year is a long way from my shopping list. Where people have invested heavily, you will either have to show them how to get to a similar position in the new organization or otherwise reduce the value of their investment (for example by moving the people over whom they have social influence).
...I am in the middle of something important
When I have committed to achieving a goal, either personal or emotional, then a part of my integrity and hence identity may be bound up in achieving the goal. When I have partly completed something, I am also affected by the need for completion, such that I will feel uncomfortable with stopping now. When people are busy, find ways for them to complete the work in the shorter term, perhaps by nudging their goals so they have less to do to complete. If possible, turn their work towards something that will be useful for the new organization.
I do not want to change because…
Even if I am not that happy where I am, I still may not be particularly interested in moving forward with the change.
…the destination looks worse than where I am now
Although I want to move, the final resting place of the change looks significantly worse for me than the current position. I feel it is like jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire. If you want people to voluntarily move, then it must be to somewhere better than they are now. You can create this in two ways: first by making the present position worse (though be careful with this!) and secondly by building a rosy vision to which people can then attach their dreams.
…there is nothing to attract me forwards
If the change is nothing to do with me, if the benefits are all for other people or the general organization, if I just do not buy the 'vision' as sold, then I will feel no pull and I will not buy into the change.You may offer forth a brilliant vision, but do the people buy it? Make sure your communications are clear and couched in terms that people can understand and buy into. Make your visions inclusive, such that people really can and will buy the change.
…I do not know which way to move
If I buy the vision, I may still may not know which way to jump. Some change projects sound wonderful, but people are left wondering what to do (even the managers).Grand plans need to be turned into tactical detail in which people can see and easily take the step forward.
…the journey there looks painful
The final destination may be great, but the journey from here to there looks very uncomfortable. The anticipated pain of the transition is more immediate than the distant and hazy future, and I respond more to this than to any inspiring vision. Make sure the transitional period between now and the final change does not appear so uncomfortable that people refuse to join you. In practice, it may not be that bad -- what counts, though, is the perception of the people, so design the transition well and then communicate it well.
...the destination or journey is somehow bad or wrong
If the transition or the final destination somehow transgresses my values, then I will judge it to be bad or wrong and will be very loathe to join the party.Be careful with the change in working around established organizational and general social values. If you must break an unwritten rule (such as getting rid of people) then do so with appropriate consideration and care.
…I do not trust those who are asking me to change
If my experience of you is that you have been untrustworthy in the past, then I am not likely to buy your vision of the future. If you are going on what I perceive as a perilous journey, then I will not trust you and will not join you. The integrity of leaders is a very important attribute. If you want people to follow you, then you must give them good reason to trust you.
I am not going to change because…
Even if people do not want to change, they may still have to do so, albeit truculently. Some people, how ever, have the wherewithal to refuse.
…I am able to ignore the change
One of the questions I will ask is 'What happens if I do not go along with the change?' If the negative implications for my non-compliance are negligible, then I can happily not join in. This sort of situation occurs when the person in question is so valued by the organization that the idea of them leaving is unthinkable. This is often where difficult choices around change take place. What do you do with the laggards? If this problem is not addressed, then the people around them may take their lead and before long you have a silent revolution on your hands.
…I have the power to obstruct the change
Another reason why a person can happily ignore the change is because they can stop it. People in senior positions often treat change as being a good thing -- as long as it is for someone else. When faced with change themselves, they may do whatever it takes to scupper the change, for example by refusing to give needed access or other support. This is a good test of the senior sponsor of change -- which may need to be the most senior officer in the organization. Those who actively oppose the change must be dealt with -- preferably kindly and in in an understanding way, but ultimately in a firm and final way.
The nature of opposition
When considering stakeholders who are opposing the change, do a deep analysis of their personality to give you better ability to manage their opposition and convert them to the cause of the change. This analysis should help you to decide whether and how you might convert the person to the change cause or, if they are implacable opponents, how you might control or contain their opposition.
Drivers
Beliefs
Beliefs are basic drivers of thought and behavior. If you can understand their beliefs, you can begin to change them.
• What are their beliefs about people? Their rights? Their capabilities?
• What beliefs do they have about themselves?
• How strongly do they hold these beliefs?
• What are the beliefs that they have that led them to oppose the change?
• What beliefs do they have that could be used to help convert them?
Values
Values are guides and shapers of behavior that tell what is right and wrong, good and bad, important and unimportant. Understanding a person's values tells you what they will not do as much as what they will do.
• Are any of their values being transgressed by change actions?
• What are their stress values? Are these being triggered?
• What values can you appeal to, to persuade them to change?
Goals
Goals are the deliberate objectives that we set ourselves to satisfy values and needs. By identifying these and how they are affected by change, you can
• What are their career goals?
• What are their social goals?
• What other goals do they have?
• How are any of these affected by the change?
Perceptions
The perceptions that people have of the change is based on their internal systems and the inferences they make. Perception is reality for the person, even it if is not really true. It therefore makes sense to understand how they perceive the change.
• What are their perceptions of the change? What do they think will happen?
• What are their perceptions of other stakeholders in the change? Do they think others will help them? Do they think others will gain unfair advantage?
• What are their perceptions of those implementing the change? Do they think the change agents will be fair? Do they think they are competent?
Potential
A critical question about opponents of change is what they can and are likely do to oppose the change.
• What power do they have?
• What is the source of that power? (position, expertise, social, etc.)
• How might they use that power? (blocking, persuading others, etc.)
• What would the impact of that action be? (local, widespread, etc.)
• How might their power change?
Triggers
And when you understand the power that a person who is opposing or may oppose the change, the final step is to understand their triggers, those events that would tip them into action.
• What would lead them to use that power? (events, actions, etc.)
• What would defuse them beforehand? (involvement, listening, etc.)
• What would bring them down after they had started resisting? (listening, threats, etc.)
• Who do they listen to? (friends, social leaders, senior people, etc.)
• What could other people do to contain or convert them? (words, action, etc.)
When resistance to change occurs, then it is very helpful to be able to spot it coming and hence respond appropriately to it (rather than be surprised when the change mysteriously fails).
Signs of resistance
Early signs of resistance
If you can catch resistance early, then you can respond to it before it takes hold, effectively nipping it in the bud.
Gossip
When the change is announced, the tom-toms will start beating loudly and grapevine will bear fruit of much and varied opinion. Keep your ear to the ground on what is being said around the coffee points. Listen particularly for declaration of intent and attempts to organize resistance. Grumbling and complaint are natural ways of airing discomfort, so you should not try to squash it (you would fail, anyway). The biggest danger of it is when it is allowed to ferment in an information vacuum.
Respond to gossip by opening it up, showing you are listening to concerns and taking them seriously, and providing lots of valid information that will fill the vacuum.
Testing
Just as a high school class will test a teacher's ability to maintain discipline, so also will some brave soul test out what happens when they resist change. They may, for example, not turn up to a meeting or openly challenge a decision. How you deal with such early resistance will have a significant effect on what happens next. For example you can jump on the person and squash both them and their words, or you can take an adult position, describing what they have done and assertively questioning their motives.
Collectivism of resistance
Resistance can happen both on an individual case-by-case basis or people may band together.
Individual action
Individually, people may resist, although this is generally limited to the extent of their personal power. For those with lower power, this may include passive refusals and covert action. For those with more power, it can include open challenge and criticism.
Handle individual action individually, starting with those with greater power. As necessary, you may need to make an example, and disciplining a senior executive can send a strong signal to other resistors.
Collective action
When people find a common voice in organized resistance, then their words and actions can create a significant threat to the change, even though they are individually less powerful. Trade Unions are a classic example of this.
Organized resistance is usually a sign of a deep divide. People will not go to the bother of organizing unless they have serious issues with the change. Manage collectives by negotiating with their leaders (which can be much easier than dealing with a myriad of smaller fires). You may well need to make concessions, but you at least should be able to rescue some key elements of the change. You can also 'divide and conquer' by striking deals with individual key players, although this must be done very carefully as it can cause a serious backlash.
Visibility of resistance
Sometimes resistance is out in the open, but more often it starts out in a more underhand, covert way.
Covert resistance
Covert resistance is deliberate resistance to change, but done in a manner that allows the perpetrators to appear as if they are not resisting. This may occur, for example, through sabotage of various kinds. Handle covert resistance by showing that you know what is happening and setting in place investigations designed to identify the people responsible.
Overt resistance
Overt resistance does not try to hide, and is a result either of someone comfortable with their power, someone for whom covert acts are against their values, or someone who is desperate. This may take forms such as open argument, refusal or attack.
Deal with overt resistance by first seeking to respond openly and authentically. If the resistance is blind, then you will have no alternative but to defend, for example by isolating and disciplining attackers.
Activity of resistance
Overt resistance does not need to take positive action -- sometimes it can be passive.
Passive resistance
Passive resistance occurs where people do not take specific actions. At meetings, they will sit quietly and may appear to agree with the change. Their main tool is to refuse to collaborate with the change. In passive aggression, for example, they may agree and then do nothing to fulfill their commitments. This can be very difficult to address, as resisters have not particularly done anything wrong. One way to address this is to get public commitment to an action (and you can start small on this), then follow up -- publicly if necessary -- to ensure they complete the action. Then keep repeating this until they are either bought in or give in.
Active resistance
Active resistance occurs where people are taking specific and deliberate action to resist the change. It may be overt, with such as public statements and acts of resistance, and it may be covert, such as mobilizing others to create an underground resistance movement.
Overt active resistance, although potentially damaging, is at least visible and you have the option of using formal disciplinary actions (although more positive methods should normally be used first). When it is covert, you may also need to use to covert methods to identify the source and hence take appropriate action.
Dealing with resistance
Here is a small raft of things you can do to handle resistance, starting with kind and moral approaches and ending with the harsher end of gaining compliance. This whole site has fleets other things you can do, of course.
Facilitation
The best approach to creating change is to work with them, helping them achieve goals that somehow also reach to the goals of the change project. When you work with people, they will be happier to work with you.
This is a good practice when people want to collaborate but are struggling to adjust to the situation and achieve the goals of change.
Education
When people are not really bought into the rationale for the change, they may well come around once they realize why the change is needed and what is needed of them. In particular, if new skills are required, you can provide these via a focused course of education.
Involvement
When people are not involved physically or intellectually, they are unlikely to be involved emotionally either. One of the best methods of getting people bought in is to get them involved. When their hands are dirty, they realize that dirt is not so bad, after all. They also need to justify their involvement to themselves and so persuade themselves that is the right thing to do.
Negotiation
When the other person cannot easily be persuaded, then you may need to give in order to get. Sit them down and ask what they are seeking. Find out what they want and what they will never accept. Work out a mutually agreeable solution that works just for them and just for you.
Manipulation
Manipulation means controlling a person's environment such that they are shaped by what is around them. It can be a tempting solution, but is morally questionable and, if they sense what you are doing, will lead to a very dangerous backlash. Only consider this when change is necessary in the short term and all other avenues have been explored.
Coercion
Even more extreme than subtle manipulation is overt coercion. This is where you sit them down and make overt threats, for example that if they do not comply that they will lose their jobs, perhaps in a humiliating and public sacking. This should only be used when speed is of the essence or when the other person themselves has taken to public and damaging actions.
How to cause resistance
Here are just a few of the ways you can cause people to resist the change:
• Resist the resistance, fighting back.
• Do not use your sponsors.
• Try to do everything yourself.
• Allow sponsors to be non-committal about the change.
• Use threats and aggressive language.
• Avoid talking to individual people.
• Avoid listening to people.
• Do not visit the various teams affected.
• Spend more time with your allies (and avoiding the troublemakers).
• Ignore those who resist. Keep your fingers crossed they will give up.
• Tell people about your plans and then ignore the plans.
• Give lots of rational reasons why people should do as you say.
• Dive into the details before they have bought the big picture.
• Do not test that people have understood what you have said.
• Lose faith yourself in the change.
• Be vague about what the change will be.
• Avoid being the messenger of bad news.
• Collude with the other person.
• Produce non-specific plans.
• Expect people to instantly understand what took you three weeks to figure out.
• Publicly and aggressively punish those who object.
• Shout down anyone who disagrees.
• Do not change reward systems to align with the change.
• Make 'an exception' for talented people who resist.
Responding to unexpected resistance
What happens when you are in the middle of a conversation or meeting and someone speaks out against the change?
Pause
The natural tendency of many people is to respond immediately, perhaps butting in or cutting the other person short. The voice may be authoritarian and tinged with anger. But think how this appears to other people? The message being sent is 'public disagreement is not allowed'. A likely effect is that the person resisting now has the sympathy of others (and may recruit the others to their cause). It is also very likely that the resistance will just go underground. So the very first thing is to bite your lip, hold your tongue and count to three. Take a moment to pause and assess the situation. What are others doing? Is the person speaking cautious or bold? What does the body language tell you?
Listen
The next step is to listen carefully not only to what they are saying but also to how they are saying it. Listen for the deeper messages between the lines. Listen to their fears, hopes and ambitions. Hear the tensions and emotions. Notice how they are coping. You can also draw out further information, tipping the bucket to ensure you have the whole story. Use appropriate questioning techniques to learn more.
Empathize
Make your initial response one that empathizes with their position. Show first that you understand (even though you may not agree) and respect their right to voice an honest opinion. This and other previous action will have won you many friends -- perhaps even the person in question who may have been expecting you to resist their resistance (which is just what it would be) and is preparing for a fight. When people expect a fight and find only concern, the surprise is likely to change their opinion.
Think
Before you open your mouth, think hard about what you are going to say and how you are going to say it. Done wrong, a response will show your empathy to be false and may cause a bitter backlash.
Respond
Respond in a way that offers the other person a dignified way out. Seek win-win. Use their language. Reframe their position to show a bigger picture.
The income statement is a simple and straightforward report on the proposed business's cash-generating ability. It is a score card on the financial performance of your business that reflects when sales are made and when expenses are incurred. It draws information from the various financial models developed earlier such as revenue, expenses, capital (in the form of depreciation), and cost of goods. By combining these elements, the income statement illustrates just how much your company makes or loses during the year by subtracting cost of goods and expenses from revenue to arrive at a net result -- which is either a profit or a loss.
Budget and Financial Constraints
Financial Constraints and Differential Investment Responses
Since differences in investment opportunities arising from product market exposures do not appear to explain differences in the effects of depreciations on affiliates and local firms, we now consider an alternate explanation: a differential ability to overcome financial constraints.
Local Firms and Leverage Differences
The Financing of Multinational Affiliates During Sharp Depreciations
Alternative Explanations
Reference:
WIKIPEDIA.org
No comments:
Post a Comment