Recently, I was involved in a project dedicated to the construction and development of a new shopping center. The owner gathered multiple departments into one coherent mechanism, including the brunch responsible for social media promotion and marketing – which I was part of. There was a team of fifteen people with a manager assigned. Prior to launching the project, we created a plan for our work and delegated the roles accordingly. However, on the very first day, the owners provided their requirements of how we should act and what we should do, which implied some considerable changes. In other words, they came up with another plan for our activities. It should be admitted that this new plan had a number of significant and appropriate suggestions, taking into account the fact that the owners were better acquainted with the overall project’s structure and timeline. Nevertheless, it was inconvenient for us to re-establish our expected routine, which we had been preparing for a considerable period. Given the depicted situation, we faced a number of issues related to resistance to change.
It seems reasonable to state that there were a number of reasons that contributed to our resistance to change, which correlates with the related pillars from the theoretical dimension. Firstly, it was self-interest – we would prefer to stick to the plan that we developed ourselves; this would apparently require a lesser extent of effort from our side. Secondly, it was a lack of trust – we doubted the competence of the owners within the scope of marketing and promotional affairs in which we specialized. Thirdly, we had different evaluations of the project in general – and it should be recognized that the owners were likely to understand its peculiarities better.
It seems that the owners of the project implemented several strategies to address our team’s resistance to change. Their main idea was to participate in the development of the plan; that is, they attempted not simply to provide the requirements but to advance the future performance in conjunction with us. They appealed to our experience and expertise so that the outcomes could be significant. Then, the owners did not neglect the opportunity to support us at every stage of the new plan’s creation. They allocated the necessary resources – including time available for us to prepare for the project – and established constant communication channels.
Furthermore, they promised to compensate us for the extra time we would spend due to the realization of the updated plan. The owners provided us with a number of incentives that – to a great degree – improved our motivation and willingness to get into the project. People who believe their lives will be badly impacted by a change are more likely to resist it. The owners seemed to assume that it could be our case. Indeed, this may be due to a belief that our wages or professional prospects would suffer or because we believed the work necessary to reap the benefits was not worthwhile (Coleman & Thomas, 2017). Then, it should be emphasized that they set achievable and engaging targets for the team. Such an approach worked significantly, given that we fully understood what was needed from us and what actions we were to take (Campbell, 2014). The owners also did not hesitate to show passion for the project, which encouraged us to overcome resistance to change as well.
The decisions of the owners contributed to the resolution of the problem notably. Our team admitted that the proposed plan was more than acceptable and could lead the project to success. We established and developed communication channels and changed many aspects of our action plan jointly and properly. This resulted in an outstanding promotional campaign and marketing strategy for the project – all the goals were achieved.
I found out that resistance to change can be overcome using a particular set of tools that the related theory offers. There are many pieces of evidence that can be applied in various cases, which can serve as a foundation for dealing with the mentioned resistance. Among particular insights, the strategies of participation, support, and incentives can be mentioned. These instruments seem to be a good option while approaching a change. The depicted case tends to prove its effectiveness, which corresponds with the academic literature from the field.
In the framework of what I have learned that I can use to enhance my ability to lead change, there are two tactics that can be noted. Firstly, it is setting measurable, achievable, and engaging goals that guide a person in terms of undertaking specific actions. Secondly, it is the expression of passion for the change that is desired to be implemented (Iverson, 2010). The explored set of tools is a valuable asset that a manager can use in various situations. Finally, it should be noted that in the future, I will definitely approach the change process differently. This is due to the enrichment of my knowledge about resistance to change and gaining experience within the scope of application of the mentioned strategies and tactics.
References
Campbell, H. (2014). Culture to change. Managing organizational change: a practical toolkit for leaders. Trident Online Library.
Coleman, S., & Thomas, B. (2017). Working with Resistance to Change. Organizational change explained: case studies on transformational change in organizations. Trident Online Library.
Iverson, L. (2010). Resistance to Change. The science of change management: the 7 phases of change & breaking through resistance to change. Trident Online Library.