Introduction
Organizational change is an aspect implemented by every company that aims to innovate and keep up with changes in consumer preferences and competition. Nonetheless, despite being the goal, addressing and employing efficiently and seamlessly is challenging. Multiple factors facilitate the formation of a rather stagnant environment in which employees are less likely to be open to change and internal alterations.
Leaders are major factors in these settings, as a lack of leadership flexibility correlates with an immobile team. Simultaneously, several techniques can be implemented to create an environment in which resilience is well-perceived and employed by every workforce member.
This paper will exemplify resistance to change based on the tech resistance case study concerning stakeholders, factors maximizing it, and potential resolutions through leadership and motivation. Based on observations, leaders can significantly impact the workforce and their readiness to be flexible through communication and training.
Case Study
An example in which change failed to be addressed was the case study highlighting Ms. Figueroa’s failed attempt to generate a more innovative approach. Namely, the background of the event correlates with the setting of the American School for the Deaf, to which Ms. Figueroa was invited as a math teacher. One of the duties highlighted in the ad for the job was the need to integrate new learning technologies to maximize opportunities for the students, which was what Ms. Figueroa intended to do with TI-Nspire calculators and computer programs. As a result, she accepted the job with the willingness to generate organizational change and create a more efficient learning system for the children.
The teacher had advanced training and supplies that could be integrated on a larger scale in most classes and for most teachers to use. The additions to the education setting advancements correlate with the efficiency teachers would experience during their courses due to using calculators and software. TI-Nspire would help students store and utilize information that would benefit their decision-making and problem-solving skills through collaboration, data storage, and sharing. Nonetheless, despite the possibilities linked with the advancement, other teachers resisted change and refused to integrate e TI-Nspire in their classes. Not only was the technology not properly implemented into the school system by every teacher.
At the same time, Ms. Figueroa was discouraged from using it by other workforce members. As the supervisor stated, it was certain that the teacher’s class focuses on the calculator more than math (Nelsen & Valadez, 2012). The initiative failed, and it is certain that the lack of success was not generated by students refusing to use the technology but rather by other teachers being less resilient and flexible to new additions.
Stakeholders
Several stakeholders and stakeholder groups can be identified about the case study. On the one hand, the students of the American School for the Deaf appeared to have the least barriers when it came to technological integration. Namely, the fact that the TI-Nspire calculators allow for a maximization of visual representation rather than auditive one and the focus on collaboration generated a sense of motivation for hearing-impaired students. Thus, it is certain that resistance to change in this case is minimal.
On the other hand, among teachers, Figueroa was the only one who accepted the new technology. The rest of them were resistant and rather stagnant when learning how to operate the newly obtained calculators and software (Nelsen & Valadez, 2012). Thus, resistance to change is high among these particular stakeholders. The school administration is another group of stakeholders that can be mentioned as resistant to change. No policies were implemented to train staff members to use TI-Nspire, and Figueroa herself was discouraged from using the technology in her class.
The different perspectives of each of the major stakeholders, in this case, did, indeed, come together to further increase the overall resistance to change the ASD. For example, the leaders highlighted reluctance to maximize staff involvement in the initiative. No training was organized to highlight the potential of the technology, and leaders were more focused on remaining highly reliant on sign language rather than optimizing the existing system. Teachers, on the other hand, were reluctant to change partly because they were not motivated to do so by the school administration. Instead, in efforts to maintain the system that had been implemented long ago within the school, they sabotaged Figueroa’s motivation to change the ways of the school.
The dependency between the school administration and teachers on resilience level has been well-documented in the literature. Namely, leaders highlight that one of the most challenging barriers to overcome is generating an environment in which change is welcomed by managers and, as a result, by employees (Campbell, 2014). In the case study, the entire institution and the system on which it was based did not imply effort toward learning new things and incorporating them in classes.
Factors Minimizing Resilience
Introducing new technology into a setting that is not reliant on innovation is, indeed, a major change that may generate resistance on the part of major stakeholders. Nonetheless, it is vital to consider the additional barriers that facilitate the outcome. For example, researchers highlight hesitance and feeling overwhelmed as one of the challenges correlating with stagnancy (Iverson, 2010). In this case, the teachers perceived the new addition as, perhaps, more than they could learn and apply in day-to-day classes. Feeling hesitant results from a lack of confidence in personal skills and knowledge. In this case, training and clear explanations of the benefits of the change may help the stakeholder feel inclined to try it before dismissing it.
Another factor that may have influenced the results is mistrust. Specifically, the new teacher who was willing to implement the change was a newly hired workplace member. Moreover, she was the only one who did not know American Sign Language (Nelsen & Valadez, 2012). As a result, she was somewhat differentiated and isolated from the rest of the group, which consisted of teachers with more experience working in that particular school and being more familiar with ASL. Thus, they may have had mistrust toward
Figueroa and how she could become an integrated member of their social group. It was intensified as the leaders, instead of supporting the initiative, were similarly uninterested in it. Thus, a workforce that sees the involvement of the school administration when it comes to the strategy implemented by a new teacher is unsure whether to join or resist the change. Poor communication is one of the elements that are not only linked to the development of mistrust but also generates fear (Coleman & Thomas, 2017).
For example, in this case, the teachers have not explained the purpose of the initiative and its benefits, which is why they viewed it as redundant and dismissed the technological addition. The effort is to be focused on improving confidence and addressing barriers such as fear. In this case, having discussions and maintaining transparency, as well as ensuring each stakeholder has access to education on the subject, is key. Leaders could have organized an event in which teachers learn how to work on the calculators, and they would have comprehended that resilience will ultimately make their jobs easier and more enjoyable.
Conclusion
Ms. Figueroa has experienced an environment in which change was not welcomed, and resilience was not an organizational value that leadership would address. The situation in which the calculators would have been added to the school process could have improved if the leaders had been involved. Namely, the school administration could have inspired flexibility, which would motivate stakeholders to participate in the change. Leaders could have communicated with the stakeholders and introduced training and courses to minimize feelings of inadequacy and a lack of skills to keep up with the technology.
Resistance to change is possible to overcome, and the aforementioned strategies would have made a significant difference in inspiring teachers to comply with the new techniques. If the focus is on minimizing fear, discomfort, a lack of knowledge, and gaps in skills through effective leadership as well as transparent and efficient communication, the workplace is dynamic and prone to resilience.
References
Campbell, H. (2014). Managing organizational change: A practical toolkit for leaders. Kogan Page.
Coleman, S. (2017). Working with resistance. In B. Thomas (Ed.), Organizational change explained: Case studies on transformational change in organizations (pp. 124–135). Trident Online Library.
Iverson, L. (2010). The science of change management: The 7 phases of change & breaking through resistance to change. Made for Success.
Nelsen, B. J., & Valadez, M. S. (2012). Resistance to technological change: The case of the unused calculators. Journal of Case Studies, 30(2), 14–20.