Managing change to reduce resistance
Essays from the Harvard Business School Press ease the process
The famous quip of Will Rogers, "even if you're right on track, you'll get run over if you just sit there," represents a fundamental truth for all organizations to live by. Surely, there is no phenomenon that challenges organizations and its stakeholders more than the issue of change. In fact, the very word often sends shudders up and down the spines of those who have spent years seeking—and acquiring—a comfort level with their job responsibilities.
Harvard Business School's invaluable series, The Results Driven Manager, has produced a vitally important volume of essays from the Harvard Business Review on the subject of change, Managing Change to Reduce Resistance (Boston, 2005). Most of the essays are very high quality and include interviews with some of the premier thinkers on the subject of change management—John Kotter, Richard Koppel and Howard Gardner. But the most substantial essays are those authored by individuals who are less inclined to be household names.
One of those articles, "Is Your Company a Prisoner of its Own Success?" by Loren Gary, explores the intriguing topic of "active inertia." As Gary explains:
Why do successful companies falter? Typically, it's not because their managers are paralyzed by some drastic shift in the environment…In fact, they [often] tend to respond quickly. Nevertheless, the steps they take are ineffective because they exhibit active inertia, the tendency to respond to even the most disruptive shifts in the environment by accelerating actions that worked in the past.
Observations such as this highlight the difficulty that many—indeed most—people have with organizational change. How can an organization that is desperate for change best achieve a shift in direction while minimizing opposition? Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton in "Organizational Capital" talk at length about the importance of changing culture, that is behaviors and mindsets. Before even suggesting a strategic change, Kaplan and Norton recommend adjusting an organization's culture first. Otherwise, change will invariably be an uphill battle, even for the most persuasive of executive teams. Specifically, they suggest re-examining an organization's vision and values and including all employees and stakeholders in that crucial process. Then, they recommend building a new corporate culture (or mindset) by encouraging employees to rally around the new strategy and mentality. Only then should any substantive changes be suggested.
However, this bottom-up, grass roots approach is only one possible approach to managing change. Lauren Keller Johnson, in "Debriefing Eric Abrahamson: the Road to Better Recombination," suggests a combination of two approaches: 1) "creative destruction" an essentially top-down approach in which new methodologies are promulgated from on high and draconian changes swiftly made and 2) "creative recombination" in which other existing structures are subtly shifted, thus effecting change without incurring the wrath or suspicions of employees. By combining the two methods, stakeholders receive the message that change will happen but that it will be subtle and sensitive to the needs of those who must ensure its implementation.
Other informative essays include "Communicating Change: A Dozen Tips from the Experts" by Rebecca M. Saunders, "You're Ready for Top-Line Growth—Are Your Employees?" by Angelina Herrin, and "Communication as a Change Tool," a particularly fine article by Steven Robbins.
So what can we deduce from this web of interpenetrating—and occasionally conflicting—viewpoints? Several observations come to mind. First, change is a constant. Its occurrence is inevitable and cannot be avoided. No organization can afford to stand pat—especially in an age of such rapid and cataclysmic change as ours. Second, resistance to change is normal. It may provide a source of consternation to executives. But resistance should be expected and should be fully anticipated. Third, there are various options for an executive team to take. The terminology may vary according to the scholar—bottom-up, top-down, "creative destruction," or "creative recombination." But these are essentially the notes that organizational leaders, as the corporation's de facto jazz musicians, has at their disposal. They must be played in the proper sequence, in the right keys and in the right combination—all depending on the needs and culture of the organization. Careful improvisation is the key to the success of any change initiative. The execution is the ultimate test of the visionary and persuasive skills of the executive team in place.