Some say that only people who

instigate change enjoy it; others

have to suffer it. You may feel

that in this fast-moving, com-

petitive environment, everyone should

accept the changes that take place without

resistance, that people should show

resilience by embracing the new and look-

ing to the future.

Fundamentally, two key factors instigate a

change program. These are inspiration

and desperation. One of the greatest lead-

ership skills we need to nurture is that of

predictive skill. We need to be one step

ahead of the game. I will always remem-

ber the puzzled look on a seasoned man-

ager’s face when he was confronted with

this idea. His comment was, “If I stop to

wonder about what might happen next,

I’ll never have enough time to manage

what I need to do now!”

Things we do now are maintenance tasks;

to make space for creative thoughts can

move the business forward into the future

by innovative and progressive activities.

To pursue one without the other has been

the downfall of many organizations.

I am proud to be one of the inspirational

change instigators. However, I had to

learn that I may believe my ideas or con-

cepts are brilliant, but that doesn’t mean

that others will embrace the change

process with such enthusiasm. Just being

right isn’t enough; you have to win the

hearts and minds of the people who will

make the change happen.

Organizational culture can still be a major

influence on the approach and the man-

agement style adopted during any change

program. In this context, the word “cul-

ture” includes the following:

• beliefs and values

• decisionmaking authority

• processes

• habits

• characteristics that have evolved

• unwritten rules

In the United Kingdom, I often have to

remember that we have a tradition of a

directive management style, where we tell

people what is required of them. The word

“empowerment” is still management

speak rather than reality when it comes to

establishing decisionmaking parameters.

Performance Improvement • Volume 40 • Number 3 29

Masters SeriesMASTER SERIESMasters Series

Degrees of Change—Resistance or Resilienceby Christine Marsh

30 Performance Improvement • MARCH 2001

Figure 1 shows management styles and when each might bemost appropriate. For instance, in the direct style, 80% of man-aging is telling and 20% is allowing staff to do, with a minimalopportunity to ask questions or challenge. The persuasive stylesuggests that 60% of managing is telling and 40% is encourag-ing input and spending time listening to and understandingthe concerns being raised. The aim is still to persuade andmotivate people to support management’s decision.

The advising style says 40% of management is setting theparameters, while 60% is individual involvement. This pro-vides greater freedom to people who have to act on the deci-sions. The fourth style, support, has 20% input by manage-ment in a supportive role and 80% empowerment of indi-viduals to come up with solutions to improve and imple-ment new working practices.

There is a tremendous difference in how people react if theyfeel that change has been imposed on them or if they havebeen involved. A persuasive presentation of the issues canchange opinions without using force. If people are involvedand can influence their working practices and instigate theirown ideas, then we are more likely to achieve lasting change.

Over the years, I have found that an up-front investmentinvolving the people who are going to be affected by thechange process pays high dividends.

This approach identifies core issues at an early stage, andyou then have the opportunity to minimize counterproduc-tive resistance. Many new initiatives are refined in isolationby a select few with little practical knowledge of the actualtasks involved. These are then launched, with trumpetsblowing, to be implemented by people who actually have todo the job. If they then raise questions and concerns, theycan be seen as disruptive—it is now too late to assess orinclude these concerns.

Moving Out of the Comfort Zone

Figure 2, Evaluation of Performance illustrates how weoperate in an environment where our performance is mea-sured and our competencies evaluated. If we take pride indoing a good job and are confident in our existing skill sets,then any major change can leave us feeling vulnerable.

Major demotivators people experience when moving out oftheir comfort zones into new territory are the feeling of los-ing control of their work and their environment and the fearof failure.

Planning and Implementing a New IT System

I would like to share with you a case study, where I workedwith my clients to apply the principles of performanceimprovement. The program addressed the changes that wereto take place to existing working processes and the impactthose changes would have on the people who had to imple-ment and sustain them.

Figure 1. Adopting an Appropriate Management Style.

Figure 2. Evaluation of Performance.

Figure 3. Aspects of Change.

The aim of a new integrated information technology (IT)software system (see Figure 3) was to streamline processesand develop improved information and customer service.As the new system was going to replace key existing sys-tems—such as production, distribution, financial, sales andmarketing, and personnel and payroll—it was obvious thata reorganization of existing roles and responsibilities wasinevitable. An investment of £3 million meant that the suc-cess of this implementation program was vital to the busi-ness. The accuracy of data input was going to be crucial and,with such reliance on other links in the chain, effectiveteam working was essential.

There were two key players who had opposing views onhow this project should be approached. An enlightenedhuman resources (HR) manager wanted to ensure that dueconsideration was given to the people issues. He had beeninvolved in the introduction of a total quality managementprogram, but the lack of commitment on the part of somefirst-line managers meant that all the initial enthusiasm justmelted away. He was adamant that the motivational and softskills factors were not going to be overlooked this time.Figure 4 shows that the challenge is to understand reactionto the change and to provide support, encouragement, andskills development, as appropriate.

The resilience factor is crucial and is more likely to happenwhen open communication takes place. The transitionperiod will vary, depending on individual characteristics,but at least if people are aware of the impending changes,they can assimilate what the future holds.

I conducted a change management program for the projectimplementation team, which consisted of 16 employees.There were consultants from the IT software companyinvolved, and I suggested that representatives be includedin our workshops.

Starting Point—Research

One of my first assignments was to conduct one-on-oneinterviews for research purposes; I planned to start with the

project manager. His attitude can be summed up by his out-burst when I was first introduced to him. He had deliber-ately failed to turn up for our appointment and, whenlocated, he was heading in the opposite direction! He hadhoped that by ignoring me I would go away. His immediatereaction was to go into attack mode. He announced, “Thereis one word that does not exist in my dictionary, and thatword is resistance. This implementation is not an option!”He displayed such resistance himself even though the pro-gram was not an option in the eyes of the HR manager.

Initial Workshop

The project manager’s attitude had been infectious, and histeam members arrived at the start of the first workshopbelieving that it was going to be a waste of their precioustime. They had had a meeting on the previous evening anddrawn up a list of 24 objectives they wanted to meet. I wasable to match all of these objectives by using the principlesof performance improvement.

The project team members had been assigned work on vari-ous modular areas of the software package. The very natureof an integrated IT system means that everyone needs to beaware of ensuing effects of their input.

I told them of a case study to help them think of the waythey were approaching their own project. Another companydecided to standardize its accounting processes to conformto the new IT software. Check payment dates for suppliershad varied between departments, so it was logical to makeone date on which to process all checks. Unfortunately,nobody consulted the various departments or thoughtthrough the implications for their suppliers.

Performance Improvement • Volume 40 • Number 3 31

What defines yourmastery?

I spent the first seven years of my life in India withoutexposure to any formal education. As a free spirit, Ihave always been prepared to challenge acceptedparameters as my varied career path demonstrates.

I act as a catalyst to help move people out of stale-mate zones. This may be caused by the restraint ofthe system that they function within or conflictbetween people they work with. There is a vastreserve of untapped and blocked potential within anyorganization. With a combination of empathy andopportunity, once the positive energy flows again,the return on that investment can be truly amazing interms of improved performance.

➩Figure 4. Implications of Change for People Management.

32 Performance Improvement • MARCH 2001

We started the workshop with an exercise that allowed the

team to view the project in its entirety and have a mutual

understanding of the key impact zones in terms of changes

to three elements: • the system• roles and responsibilities• working relationships

Project Team Exercise. Analysis of the Impact Zones.An overview of our current business process:

Method used:Stage 1—Produce a flow chart of the business and place flipchart paper around the room for process mapping and rela-tionship mapping.

Stage 2—Use Post-It™ notes to define the various tasks. Use color codes to identify the degree of change (see Figure 5). Continue (Tick sign) GreenStop (X Cross off) Red Do differently (Question Mark) YellowStart (Exclamation sign) Orange

Stage 3—The project team members, assigned to the variousmodules of the new IT software package, explained theirimpact zones using this model to identify key issues, plottheir progress to date, and identify the issues surroundingthe forthcoming changes. They took notes on the questionsthey were asked during their summary. This allowed a bet-ter understanding of all views and concerns and formed thebasis for future communication with the end users vianewsletters and during training programs.

Stage 4—Review of the impact zones and preparation of apresentation to the operation director. This immediate feed-back ensured that approval for their constructive ideascould progress quickly.

Outcome of the Change Management Program

It became very clear to the team members, as they workedthrough the program, that they had not fully appreciated thevarious degrees of change within the key impact areas. Thereaction of the staff who had the greatest adjustments tomake to the way they worked had to be taken into account.Not everyone could adjust to the change in managementstyle, and the project manager was replaced.

The project team made major adjustments to its implemen-tation plans. A new rollout program was designed. Itincluded the following:1. Regular progress reports and feedback sessions within

the project team 2. Trial-and-comment periods on early system prototypes

by different groups of people3. Trainers to receive knowledge to share it with their

colleagues4. Reschedule training priorities to allow more time for

people with the greatest learning requirement5. Communications packages developed prior to the

launch. Everyone was informed of the forthcomingchanges via newsletters and presentation; everyone hadthe opportunity to ask questions before the programactually began.

Conclusion

It is vitally important to have clear communication and toidentify and address areas of concern before implementa-tion starts. It is not that people cannot cope with changes totheir working environment—it is the way in which thesechanges are communicated that causes resistance.

The odds are stacked against most change programs, so let usdo everything that we can to ensure we take the people alongwith us. No system survives for very long without them.

Figure 5. Degrees of Change: Performance and/or Conduct.

Figure 6. Resistance to Change (Source: Roger D’Aprix research, 1996).

Related Readings

Langdon, D.G. (1995). The new language of work. Washington,DC: HRD Press.

Kaufman, R., Thiagrajan, S., & MacGillis, P. (1996). Theguidebook for performance improvement. San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.

Panza, C.M. (1989). Picture this, your function, your company.Morristown, NJ: CMP Associates.

Christine Marsh is the Principal of PrimeObjectives, Training & Business DevelopmentConsultancy based in Cheltenham, England,working with British and international companies.She has recently conducted a seminar inNovosibirsk, Siberia, as part of an internationalcooperation tour, looking at the challenges facedwith turning dreams for social and economicregeneration into reality.

Christine gained her commercial experience and expertise in supply chainmanagement with a national food retail chain. Changing career tracks, sheentered the world of human resources, provoked by a feeling of frustration thatthe traditional approach did not match the reality of the demands of the work-ing environment. As staff development manager responsible for the careerdevelopment of 4,000 staff, she instigated a modular approach for staff train-ing. Christine was subsequently promoted to personnel manager, jointlyresponsible for 10,000 people.

As the principal of Prime Objectives, she has extensive experience in theresearch, design, and delivery of performance improvement projects across abroad spectrum of service, sales, retail, IT, engineering, and production com-panies involving all levels of management and staff. Christine can be reachedat cmarsh@primeobjectives.com

Performance Improvement • Volume 40 • Number 3 33

SAVE TIME! • SAVE MONEY! • HIRE EXACTLY WHO YOU WANT!

ISPI Annual Job FairY O U R C A R E E R C O N N E C T I O N

At the 2001 Annual Conference, April 8-12, 2001, San Francisco, CA

Looking to hire the best and brightest in Performance Improvement, Training, Instructional Design, Organizational Development, and related fields?

Looking for a new job?Don’t miss the ISPI Job Fair!

Get qualified responses to open positions. Search an exclusive list of positions suited to you.Computers will be set-up at the Conference so that on-line employment searches can be done instantly!

International Society for Performance ImprovementDedicated to improving individual and organizational performance for nearly four decades.

301.587.8570 • www.ispi.org

ATTRACT HIGHER QUALITY CANDIDATES • REDUCE RECRUITING COSTS • EXPEDITE THE RECRUITING PROCESS