Managing Change: Comparing Views and Implementing Strategies

This essay delves into the critical topic of managing change within organizations. It begins by defining resistance to change and its impact, then explores three distinct perspectives: mechanistic, social, and conversational views, comparing and contrasting their approaches. The essay highlights the importance of understanding these views to effectively address resistance. It then identifies key strategies for managers to positively influence the change process, including empathy, communication, employee participation, and the application of models like Martin Luther King's four-step approach. The essay emphasizes the need for proactive planning and the involvement of employees in the decision-making process to ensure successful organizational transformation. The conclusion reiterates the significance of managing change and mitigating resistance through the implementation of effective strategies, ultimately aiming to foster a more adaptable and responsive organizational environment.

Student Name
INSTITUTIONAL AFFILIATION(S)
MANAGING CHANGE 02

P a g e | 1
Introduction
Resistance to change can be defined as an inevitable response made towards any
major change taking place in an organization. The response can be attributed to the notion
that individuals will rush to defend their traditional status quo if they find that their status or
security is threatened (Sorre, 2016). Organizational change may develop scepticism among
employees which makes them resistant towards change, sometimes making the change
process impossible or complicated to integrate organizational improvement moves. In this
sense, it can be said that resistance to change tends to be viewed negatively and makes it
difficult for organizational managers to manage change. This essay will herewith compare
and contrast three different views on managing change along with identifying how managers
can manage change positively.
Discussions
The current understanding on resistance to change suggests that new scopes of
investigations are possible and therefore, Ford and Ford break the current notion on resistance
to change in three views of resistance including mechanistic, social and conversational views.
Under the mechanistic view, resistance to change is neutral and takes place due to some kind
of resistance. Accordingly, more resistance means change is bigger. From an organizational
perspective, common signs reflecting resistance to change include being late to meetings,
complaining, damaging equipment's, etc which might delay objectives behind the change
(Waddell, Creed, Cummings, & Worley, 2017, p. 105). Similarly, Daniel (2019) argues that
employee resists changing mostly when they feel change is unnecessary or are unaware of the
reasons behind the change. A lack of knowledge concerning how the change will affect their
work further makes employees resist to change. Specifically, employees with superior posts

P a g e | 2
and personalities find change more difficult as their processes and work-life reliability is also
affected.
Alternatively, the social view of resistance to change suggests that resistance to
change differs from organization to organization and different facts of them such as
perception towards culture and its effects on organizational performance. Unlike the
mechanistic view, social view posits that resistance can either be exceptional or detrimental
or remains omnipresent in the employees due to some of the existing factors. Under the social
view, resistance to change can be a response to those factors also which are not a part of the
change at all. It can be noted that under some situation’s individuals can show resistance not
because of change but because of their complaining attitude or for showing a response
towards it (Waddell, Creed, Cummings, & Worley, 2017). Change process in every
organization is unique in its way because of differences in business and organizational nature,
value and culture, leadership and management style and finally, employee’s behaviour and
attitude. Mansor, Mat, Abu, & Johari (2013) indicated that a person's attitude reflects the way
he/she think or perform negatively or positively. Complex attitude can comprise three
tendencies such as affective, cognitive and behavioural where any kind of attitude may
induce person support or resist organizational change management. However, the
conversational view states that change perspectives shared with an organizational group can
act as a catalyst or perpetrator to resistance to change.
Conversational view of resistance to change recognises conversation and change
effects on an organization which can be based upon factors like sequential, simultaneous and
recursive conversations adopted by different networks in the workplace. This makes difficult
for a change agent or a manager to establish a common communication network besides the
creation of unwanted misinterpretations of key messages. The conversational view can be
compared to a mechanistic view to some extent as both the views recognises individual

P a g e | 3
boundaries. Every individual behaves differently and can hold different meaning regarding
resistance to change. Moreover, comparing oneself with other individuals can also become a
reason behind resistance which brings in declarations and assertion about resistance
(Waddell, Creed, Cummings, & Worley, 2017). During the change process, many tough
decisions are taken by change agents or managers which need to be communicated to the
employees. New opportunities and possibilities though may prove intimidating to the
employees as they have to live with change effects (Jain, Asrani, & Jain, 2018). From the
mechanistic and conversational viewpoint, a single decision made regarding change can bring
forth insecurity, apprehension and fear, making the entire change process viewed negatively.
Resistance to change is one of the complicated issues facing organizations in ever-
evolving business trends today. Since the change process is ubiquitous and resistance to
change has been identified from several viewpoints as discussed above, it is critically
significant that managers make a well-conceived effort and planning before initiating change
in an organization. To manage resistance to change, managers must look at the negative
effects from employees perspective along with examining individual behaviour to ensure that
every employee alters according to the new status quo (Sorre, 2016). Therefore, Waddell,
Creed, Cummings, & Worley (2017) recommends undertaking at least three important
measure which includes empathy and support, communication and employee participation
and involvement.
Empathy and support can be the first step that can help in overcoming resistance to
change by understanding employee’s perspective towards change. The communication
process is one of the most critical part in entire change process where managers are required
to ensure that every data and fact is shared and accessed by different departments and any
informal rumours are avoided to impact the change process negatively. Hasanaj & Manxhari
(2017) argues that one of the most effective ways to manage change positively and actively is

P a g e | 4
by informing people about the change in advance. Employees must be made aware of the
change that will take place and how it might get implemented, who need to anticipate it and
how their jobs will be affected. Besides communicating change requirements, managers must
also motivate employees and assure that their work environment will not be compromised.
Another possible method that can be adopted is to substitute change information to normal
operating systems deliberately. By embedding the need for change within organizational
policies and processes, a key message will be communicated regarding employee’s active
participation significance for change (Waddell, Creed, Cummings, & Worley, 2017).
Participation and involvement are regarded as one of the most powerful strategies
which help managers in overcoming resistance to change by involving organizational
members in planning and change implementation. This will make employees participate in
the decision-making process, share idea and facts to contribute to implementing innovative
change ideas. Martin Luther King's four-step model can also help managers in understanding
and solving issues related to resistance to change. His four steps include a collection of facts
so that existing injustice can be determined, negotiation to analyse existing paradigms, self-
purification for analysing people’ motive behind resistance to change and direct action to
respond to change issues patiently and understandingly (Waddell, Creed, Cummings, &
Worley, 2017). Even Zafara, Butt, & Afzal (2014) claims that with thoughtful application of
employee involvement techniques, organizations can overcome change resistance issues and
turn them into positive action.
Conclusion
Resistance to change is a phenomenon which slows down or delays the change
process, hinders or obstruct change implementation and increases overall change
management costs. The above essay identified that resistance to change can be viewed from

P a g e | 5
three perspectives: mechanist, social and conversationalist views. While mechanistic and
conversationalist views share similar view by referring more to individual behaviour and
reasons behind the change, social view differs from them as it analyses group performance
that acts as a catalyst in resistance to change phenomenon. The above essay recommends
managers to adopt three crucial measures that can mitigate resistance to change: empathy and
support, communication and participation and involvement. This will make employees feel
that their perception and feelings are being noticed and taken care of and they will help
managers in establishing a problem-solving way rather than showing resistance towards
change.

P a g e | 6
References
Daniel, C. O. (2019). Effects of Change Management on the Performance of Firms in
Nigeria. International Journal of Advances in Scientific Research and Engineering,
5(1), 59-64.
Hasanaj, R., & Manxhari, M. (2017). Importance of Communication During Change: A Case
of the Municipality of Vlora. European Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies, 4(1), 15-
19.
Jain, P., Asrani, C., & Jain, T. (2018). Resistance to Change in an Organization. Journal of
Business and Management, 20(5), 37-43.
Mansor, M. F., Mat, N., Abu, N. H., & Johari, A. N. (2013). Factors influencing intention
resistance to change: A study of a service organization in Malaysia. Journal of
Applied Sciences Research, 9(4), 2620-2630.
Sorre, B. M. (2016). Resistance to Organizational Change. International Journal of Recent
Trends in Engineering & Research, 2(11), 22-28.
Waddell, D. M., Creed, A., Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (2017). Organizational
Change: Development and Transformation (6 ed.). Sydney: Cengage Learning
Australia Pty Limited.
Zafara, F., Butt, A., & Afzal, B. (2014). Strategic Management: Managing Change by
Employee Involvement. International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied
Research, 13(1), 205-217.

P a g e | 7