Content area
Full text
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Complex implementations and change initiatives in organizations generally experience a high failure rate. This is because significant change always creates some level of uncertainty, uncertainty can lead to fear, and fear can generate significant resistance to the proposed change. Overcoming this opposition requires understanding the various layers of resistance that occur and how to promote ownership of the change initiative.
How many times have you had a good idea to improve some aspect of your organization? And when you begin to discuss it with a colleague or boss, the response is less than encouraging. "Well, I'm not sure that will work because..." or "Let me think about it and get back to you" - and they never do.
The problem is that all improvement initiatives require change. And significant change in organizations is difficult. In fact, research from McKinsey & Co. reveals that roughly 70 percent of all significant change initiatives in organizations fail. And despite the proliferation of studies, theories and change management programs, the success rate has not improved. Executives know that the cost of failure is not just the wasted time, money and lost opportunity. Failed change initiatives breed cynicism, kill motivation and trigger withdrawal from involvement in future efforts.
The real underlying issue is that significant change always involves uncertainty about how it will affect people. This uncertainty can lead to fear as people imagine real or perceived threats to their job status or security. And such fear often leads to resistance, sometimes fierce resistance, to the proposed change.
The nature of resistance
Experience indicates that resistance to change comes in waves or layers, each of which must be overcome sequentially. These layers of resistance fall into three broad categories that can be derived from the three basic questions of change embedded in the theory of constraints (TOC) first described by Eli Goldratt:
1. What to change (What is the problem that must be addressed?)
2. What to change to (What is the agreed upon solution to the problem?)
3. How to cause the change (How should the solution be implemented?)
The TOC approach suggests that addressing each question sequentially helps overcome resistance to change and achieves buy-in from all of the key players. There is no sense...