Content area
Full text
Contents
- Abstract
- Study 1: Building the Resistance to Change Scale
- Method
- Analyses and Results
- Discussion
- Studies 2, 3, and 4: Confirming the Factor Structure of the Resistance to Change Scale and Establishing its Convergent and Discriminant Validities
- Study 2: Validating the Resistance to Change Scale's Structure
- Method
- Results and Discussion
- Study 3: Personality Correlates of the Resistance to Change Scale and a Reconfirmation of its Structure
- Method
- Participants and procedure
- Measures
- Results
- Structure validation
- Convergent and discriminant validities
- Discussion
- Study 4: Resistance to Change and Cognitive Ability
- Method
- Results and Discussion
- Studies 5, 6, and 7: Establishing the Scale's Concurrent and Predictive Validities
- Study 5: Predicting Voluntary Change
- Method
- Participants and procedure
- Measures
- Results and Discussion
- Study 6: Predicting Resistance to Innovation
- Method
- Results and Discussion
- Study 7: Predicting Reactions to Imposed Change
- Method
- Procedure
- Measures
- Participants
- Results
- Discussion
- General Discussion
- Appendix A
Figures and Tables
Abstract
The Resistance to Change Scale was designed to measure an individual's dispositional inclination to resist changes. In Study 1, exploratory analyses indicated 4 reliable factors: Routine Seeking, Emotional Reaction to Imposed Change, Cognitive Rigidity, and Short-Term Focus. Studies 2, 3, and 4 confirmed this structure and demonstrated the scale's convergent and discriminant validities. Studies 5, 6, and 7 demonstrated the concurrent and predictive validities of the scale in 3 distinct contexts. The scale can be used to account for the individual-difference component of resistance to change and to predict reactions to specific change.
Most modern industrial societies value the person who is willing and able to initiate and respond positively to change, and yet, organizations that attempt to initiate such changes are often stymied by individuals or groups within the organization who resist the changes. Often the reasons for the resistance are not far to seek: The benefits to the organization are not necessarily consonant with—and are often antithetical to—the interests of the individuals being asked to make the change (e.g., Coch & French, 1948; Tichy, 1983; Zaltman & Duncan, 1977; Zander, 1950). Nevertheless, some individuals seem to resist even changes that are consonant with their interests. Who are these people?...





