lecture 6: organizational resistance Flashcards
Resistance
a complicated concept.
- Can be positive or negative.
- And differ between: background ressitance and ressistance related to a specific project.
- Can also be used in different ways:
a. A bad excuse for failing a project
b. Exist only in the head of change agent
Change agent behavior might increase “resistance”
Where do ressitance come from?
Three theories why ressistance is caused
1. Factors internal to person or groups / “people resist all changes”
2. Factors internal to systems
3. Interactions between the mentioned above (the alignment between person/groups and systems)
a. Centralization vs. Decentralization: IF controle over data are resisted IN organizations with decentralized authority structure
b. Loss vs. Gain power: systems that alter power is resisted by those who lose power and accepted by those who gain
Systems vs. Social context: resistance arise from the interaction of technical design features of systems with the social context in which the systems are used
Depending on the theory you believe in the implementation process will differ and therefor will you respond to ressistance differently.
socio-technical explanations
focuses on the distribution of responsibility for organizational tasks across various roles and on the work-related communication and coordination around this division of labor
Socio-technical design focus on achieving excellence in technical performance and quality in people’s work lives through joint optimization.
Political explanations!!
Resistance is explained as a product of the interaction of system design features with the intra-organizational distribution of power.
person-determined theory
An implementor holding the person-determined theory use the following tactics:
- Selecting users
- Educating users
- Increase commitment: getting users to participate in the design process
- Management support: gaining support of the users’ bosses
New incentives: changing organizational structures or reward systems
system-determined theory
An implementor holding the system-determined theory use the following tactics:
- Modify the system: modifying packages to conform to the ways people think, work, or do business
- Training system designers: to improve technical efficiency etc.
User participation: involving users in the design process so
interaction theory
An implementor holding the interaction theory use the following tactics:
- OBS!! No tactic can be used in every situation “no onesize fit”, it all depend on the given situation
The MOST important here is to analyze the situation before chosing the tactic
- The integrated approach: integrate and align organizational changes
- Consider and design the relationship between users and designers –> no designer is completely neutral concerning interest, payoff, power bases etc.
- Dont overcome resistance - avoid it
- perceive resistance as a clue: what went wrong and how can we prevent it?
Focus on the benefits
resistance as a way to explain failure: violation of trust
when people see themselves as being treated fairly, develop attitudes and behaviors is associated with successful change BUT When people experience an injustice or betrayal, they report resentment, a sense of being done to, and a desire for retribution, which can result in negative behaviors.
resistance as a way to explain failure: communication breakdown
○ Justify the change!!: communicate and justify the rationality of change, create readiness, acceptance and participation of change
○ Explain the benefits of changes!!
Take objections toward change serious and use them to improve!!
resistance as a way to explain failure: misrepresentation
Change agents may engage in intentional misrepresentation to induce recipients’ participation, to look good, or to avoid losing face and looking bad. JUST DONT DO IT!!
Deception and misrepresentation are bargaining tactics that may be used during negotiations and are more likely to occur in competitive situations where the stakes are high and there are incentives for unethical behavior.
resistance as a way to explain failure: bias toward optimism
○ Not all misrepresentations of change are intentional. Decision makers have a bias toward optimism.
As a result of their optimism, agents may oversell the positive and undersell the negative.
resistance as a way to explain failure: no call for action
○ When change agents mistakenly assume that understanding is sufficient to produce action, they are likely to emphasize conversations for understanding over conversations for performance and are therefor likely to see little or no action.
You have to tell people what to do!!!
resistance as a way to explain failure: resisting resistance
○ Change agents may be resistant to the ideas, proposals, and counteroffers submitted by change recipients.
resistance as a ressource
Resistance helps keep conversations in existence. Talking in a negative way has been labeled as resistance. It can nevertheless be functional because it keeps the topic “in play“.
A. Engagement: can give higher commiment and better acceptance, the people who disagree with changes might go in an engage in the changes by expressing their concerns, people might just resist because they care and want the best solution
Strenghtening: ressistance = conflict –> conflict can strengthen both the quality of decisions AND the commitment to the implementation of the decision (as long as functional conflicts not turn in to dysfunctional conflicts)
compliance
the user interact with the system in the prescribed manner.
:assumes that the user interacts with the system in the prescribed manner, although it has been argued that total compliance is unlikely and that a low level of resistance is inevitable.
