Ford et al. (2008) Resistance to change: the rest of the story

Question 1

Key message:

Answer 1

Views of resistance to change tell a one-sided story that favours change agents by proposing that resistance is an irrational and dysfunctional reaction located “over there” in change recipients

Question 2

Resistance in three ways:

Answer 2

1) Resistance is a label to make sense of recipient’s reactions to change, rather than a description of objective reality
2) Implies that resistance is neither a sudden nor a direct response to a particular instance of change but to the relationship between agent and recipient
3) It assumes resistance is bad but misses the potential contributions it may have
a. Can increase likelihood of success through discussion
b. Help build awareness and momentum
c. Eliminate unnecessary, impractical, or counterproductive elements

Question 3

Perspective on change agents and recipients

Answer 3

Engaging in sensemaking:
If change agents go into a change expecting resistance, they are likely to find it. Sensemaking occurs in conversations that involve giving accounts or self-justifying explanations of events and activities. Account is a linguistic device employed when action is subject to evaluation, particularly when there is a gap between action and expectation or between promise and performance. Resistance occurs when change agents breach their agreements or promises, as the change recipients feel unjustified.