MGT540: Management of Change - Resistance, Power, and Ethics

This essay, prepared by Zeeshan Aziz Khan for MGT540, delves into the complexities of change management within organizations. It begins by exploring the reasons behind resistance to change, drawing upon the research of Anderson, Hardy, and Thomas, and highlighting factors such as loss of status, reward systems, fear of the unknown, organizational politics, and timing. The essay then examines key theoretical concepts of resistance, contrasting scientific objectivism with social constructionism ontologies, and analyzing their implications for change management. Furthermore, it critically examines the relationship between power and resistance, as well as the ethical issues arising from managerial and resistant positions. Finally, the essay discusses the implications of power and resistance for the role of the change agent in ethically managing change, considering both dialogical and problem-centric approaches. The assignment provides a comprehensive overview of the challenges and considerations involved in managing change effectively and ethically within organizational settings.

MGT540 Management of Change
Name : Zeeshan Aziz Khan
Student Id : 11623762
Assessment : Additional assignment
Word count : 2319

Question One
Reasons why change is resisted (Anderson, Hardy and Thomas)
As highlighted earlier in the introduction part of this study, many change attempts have
been reported to have failed. The reasons for this are because the change was or resisted in many
organizations. From the research works of Anderson, Hardy, and Thomas, we find that change in
an organization entails or involves establishing new understandings, practices, and relationships
which may not be welcomed or supported if the change does not to support the interest of the
majority. Therefore they highlight some of the common reasons why people resist change in
organizations or in other aspects of life are due to; loss of status or job security in the
organization (Thomas et al., 2011). For instance, employees, peers or even managers will resist
administrative and technological change which may render their status or their job roles insecure.
Another reason for resisting organizational change is the non-reinforcing rewards systems in
organizations and therefore organizations should strive to ensure that their reward systems
support the change that they want to implement in the organization.
Change is also resisted in organizations due to surprise or the fear of the unknown.
According to (Anderson, 2011) Anderson (2011) when change agents bring about changes
whether administrative or technological for instance in an organization, the change recipients
usually have great fears of the unknown and therefore this calls for managers or changes agents
to get their organizations prepared for change through establishing effective communication
mechanisms for communicating change before it is implemented. Organizational politics also
bring about resistance to change as a result of the creation of organizational groupings supporting
Name: Zeeshan Aziz khan Student ID: 11623762 Page Number : 2

certain ideologies and resisting others (Ng Choi & Rashad, 2015). Lastly, organizational change
is resisted due to poor timing to implement the change initiative in the organization. As discussed
above organizations through their managers should ensure that their organizations, as well as
their stakeholders, are prepared enough to embrace change. Poor timing has greatly contributed
to increased resistance to change as research provides that most changes implemented without
proper timing have always failed and therefore causing a lot of resistance which is not properly
timed.
Managers of different organizations, therefore, are of the view that change is naturally resisted
by people and that change in its course is not the problem but the resistance to change. They,
therefore, feel that resistance to change can be avoided in organizations with effective change
management initiatives (Thomas & Hardy, 2011). This can, therefore, be achieved through
promoting a culture of trust, transparency in communication, a culture of employee engagement
and creating positive interpersonal relationships which will reduce resistance to change. The
first question is well answered.
Question Two
Key Theoretical Concepts of Resistance
Different theoretical ontologies have been used to evaluate resistance to change in
organizations and their effectiveness in enhancing change management. However, the most
common concepts that we focus on is the scientific objectivism ontology to resistance as well as
the subjectivism or social constructionism ontology to change management. Social construction
ontology suggests and supports the idea that people can indeed be change agents (Burr, 1995)
which promotes the fact that change is brought about by human activity. However, this concept
Name: Zeeshan Aziz khan Student ID: 11623762 Page Number : 3

of social constructionism also accepts that there is always an objective reality behind any change
engagement which brings about the concept of objectivism as another important ontology in
understanding change management (Burr, 2003).
Scientific Objectivism approach
This approach is also referred to as positivism approach and portrays an organizational position
that social entities exist , external to social actors and concerned with existence. This means that
the approach argues that social phenomena have an existence that is independent of social actors
(Jabri, 2012). The approach is based on the findings from organizational data collected and
analyzed. The results from such data is termed as scientifically true however in most case the
symptoms that lead to such results have different interpretations. Therefore, In when
implementing change in an organization, the managers usually use an established scientific
approach that is aimed at attaining certain outcome irrespective of the social factors from the
employees in the organization. This approach or method can be used to assess staff competence
and capability without taking into considerations the organizational efforts to empower
employees with relevant skills. Results from this assessment are then used to make comparisons
with the organization future requirements or even to plan for employee’s development programs
without involving the inputs of employees on various social factors. This ontology does not
support effective change management in an organization as it does not support a lasting
relationship between change agents and the change recipients.
Name: Zeeshan Aziz khan Student ID: 11623762 Page Number : 4

Subjectivism or Social Constructionism
This ontology or approach portrays a concept of social phenomena such as organizational
change as created from perceptions and consequent actions of those social actors. It therefore
takes into considerations the causal effects and all other social factors influencing change in an
organization. Social constructionism lies under the premises of dialogue and appreciative inquiry
and therefore during change implementation in an organization this approach takes into
consideration the views of all stakeholders (Jabri, 2012). It argues that the reality of a social
phenomenon is understood differently according to our social experience. It therefore provides
an effective way of change management in an organization.
This approach lays more emphasis on discovering and valuing the things which give
organization vitality and identifying the future. The managers then design a dialogue through
creating proposals for change, discussing them with stakeholders and enhancing readiness to
adapt to the changes through capacity building (Jabri, 2012). Social constructionism therefore
supports the idea that people can be change agents within an organization through human agency
and this provides an effective mechanism of implementing change in an organization (Shore &
Kupferberg, 2014). This ontology therefore contributes to both positivism in achieving
organizational goals as well as taking into consideration the social actors contributing or
influencing change. It therefore helps to minimize change resistance. Ontology can be applied in
change process to minimize resistance and overcoming situations that might arise. Managers
might apply ontology directly to gain results in cases of change or reducing negative impacts that
might arise.
Name: Zeeshan Aziz khan Student ID: 11623762 Page Number : 5

this last statement is important and you can connect the previous arguments more directly to
resistance throughout to build the connections.
Question Three
. Critically examine the relationship between power and resistance, and the ethical issues that these
raise in relation to the managerial and resistant positions.
These scholars have also examined the relationship of power and resistance and it is evident in
the modern society or in modern organizations resistance to change has ignored the theoretical
concept of power and therefore in most case, the privileges of change agents have been taken for
granted. Power has been used severally in organizations to mobilize certain outcomes or to bring
about change. However, it has been equally used to resist change in any organization. Therefore
power and resistance may seem to operate together in most case; there are no relations of power
in an organization without resistance (Fleming, 2007). Yes well done
The two approaches to resistance to change as well the relations of power and resistance raises
a number of ethical issues and challenges in relation to managerial and resistant positions. Both
approaches have been found to maintain a clear distinction between the change agent and change
recipient in understanding change resistance but have been found to privilege the change agent
(Erkama, 2010). There are two approaches one is scientific objectivism and other is subjectivism
to change management procedure. In every organisation, process of change is always resisted by
Name: Zeeshan Aziz khan Student ID: 11623762 Page Number : 6

its employees. Managers are known to exert power while controlling and coordinating between
various organisational objectives. Managers have power, can be change agents from social
constructivism. It allows them to extend their capabilities in order that employees can provide
productivity. While change becomes an inevitable process across all organisations and can due to
need of resource allocation, business processes, budget and other factors. In order to bring about
change, varying perspective of the nature of change within organisational environment has to be
brought about (D’Cruz, 2007). With change agents being either internal or external in nature,
there needs to be use of power. Power will always play a part. Power is the authority or
influence on others, as in this case employees. Manager or change agent within the organisation
might exert legitimate power, from their position within organisational hierarchy. Greater the
power a manager holds greater will be the resistance to change. In case a manager has great deal
of power and is in direct communication with the organisational heads he might be able to dictate
terms his own way and employees might will resist (Holland, 2010).
According to concept of scientific objectivism, staffs are expected to coordinate with managers
in change processes. In such a case, resistance to change is bound to be less as employees will
have access to manager who is exerting power. Employees are generally resistant to change in
every form, therefore at lower hierarchy levels ethical behaviours can easily be promoted
(Antonsen, 2009). Ethical behaviours can be prompted in such cases in managers whereby they
can motivate personnel towards change management processes. In case of ethical change
processes, there is a gradual transformation that is adopted. Employees are made aware regarding
expectations that they might have from the change processes. Impacts the change process will
have on their jobs and pay-bands can also be explained. Therefore, there is a gradual
transformation through a series of process as has been suggested by a number of scholars and
Name: Zeeshan Aziz khan Student ID: 11623762 Page Number : 7

researchers in the domain. Ethical change process is able to impact the organisation in a positive
manner by creating a positive impact on employees. In case of community approaches, manager
have to consider the responsibility of organization towards the stakeholders rather than purely a
stakeholder’s view that should be tolerable and respectable (Winstanley,1996). Likewise, at the
time of taking strategies manager should not be extreme disparities of benefit with these group as
these group have great impact on organization. No problems here
4. Critically discuss the implications of power and resistance for the role of the change agent in
ethically managing change, in both the dialogical and problem-centric approaches to change
management
Power and resistance have been discussed to work together or to exist in the same web of
relationships (Bushe & Marshak, 2014). Works of Jabri (2012) is able to contextualize problem-
centric and logical positivism. While logical positivism incorporates open system model that
gather data for replicating science. Outcomes of diagnostic models can be multifarious in nature.
While problem centric approach is focused on consciously identifying causes and symptoms by
systematically collecting data. In such social construct or organisational open system, change
agent or manager communicates regarding all aspects of change. On the other hand, diagnostic
methods aims at designing and implementation intervention for arriving at solutions of problems.
Efficiency and effectiveness can be enhanced by this mechanism.
Implications of power and resistance for role of change agent is critical and essential for the
management of change. Implications of change are immense especially on employees. While
Name: Zeeshan Aziz khan Student ID: 11623762 Page Number : 8

there remains several implications that needs to be evaluated, resistance to change remains one
of the most critical factors. A change agent’s role focuses on overcoming these resistance to
change by use of power in an appropriate manner (Young, 2009). While various organisations
promote use of unethical means in adopting change, it is essential that ethical change
management be promoted. In order to ethically manage the process of change, change agents
needs to promote dialogical talks between employees, management and himself such as to
provide smooth transition. No amounts of change management can be smooth, hence its best to
approach it in a problem-centric manner. Focusing on the problem will ensure that root of the
problem is analysed and solution is arrived at. Ethical change or transformation processes
includes proper hand-holding of employees through the entire process of change or
transformation.
With proper communication by the change agent to the employees regarding all aspects of
change, they are taken through the process (Fleming, 2008). Employees are trained, counseling is
given, any other problems faced by the employee is diagnosed and then analysed to arrive at a
recommendation that can be implemented. A problem resolving technique to the process of
change is adopted and then change management processes are implemented. A sudden change
management process without the implication of processes can lead to failure of the change agent.
In every case dialogue should be encouraged to ensure that there are no miscommunications
regarding the change and it is handled in an appropriate manner. Dialogue instills a spirit of
confidence amongst employees. They feel motivated being a part of the change management
process. Hence, they are easily able to accommodate themselves to the entire process of change
management. These are the various implications to change management processes that provides
success to the entire organisation.
Name: Zeeshan Aziz khan Student ID: 11623762 Page Number : 9

In this question you need to be more specific about what the two different approaches of Problem
centric and Dialogic is and also be more specific about the different roles of the Change agent in
both. Have a look at the two chapters in Jabri and also the chapter on Change agent.
Correct sources used
Reference Lists
Anderson, A. (2011). Engaging resistance: How ordinary people successfully champion change.
Stanford University Press.
Antonsen, S. (2009). Safety culture and the issue of power. Safety Science, 183-191.
Burr, V. (2003). Social Constructionism (2nd Ed). London: Routledge
Bushe, G. R. (2014). The dialogic mindset in organization development. In Research in
organizational change and development. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 55-97.
D’Cruz, H. G. (2007). Reflexivity, its meanings and relevance for social work: A critical review
of the literature. The British Journal of Social Work, 73-90.
Name: Zeeshan Aziz khan Student ID: 11623762 Page Number : 10

Erkama, N. (2010). Power and resistance in a multinational organization: Discursive struggles
over organizational restructuring. . Scandinavian Journal of Management, 151-165.
Fleming, P. &. (2008). Beyond power and resistance: New approaches to organizational politics.
Management Communication Quarterly, 301-309.
Fleming, P. (2007). Sexuality, power and resistance in the workplace. Organization Studies, 239-
256.
Holland, S. R. (2010). Power, agency and participatory agendas: A critical exploration of young
people’s engagement in participative qualitative research. Childhood, 360-375.
Jabri, (2012). Social construction and scientific objectivism. Management of change, p-149 .
Klonek, F. E.-W. (2014). Dynamics of resistance to change: a sequential analysis of change
agents in action. Journal of Change Management, 334-360.
Kummamuru, S. &. (2014). Human Resource Management: Towards a Human-Centric
Approach. IUP Journal of Soft Skills, 36.
Shore, D. A. (2014). Preparing people and organizations for the challenge of change. Journal of
health communication, 275-281.
Winstanley, D. and Woodall, J. (2000b). (eds). Ethical issues in contemporary human resource
management. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Thomas, R. &. (2011). Reframing resistance to organizational change. Scandinavian Journal of
Management, 322-331.
Thomas, R. S. (2011). Managing organizational change: Negotiating meaning and power-
resistance relations. Organization Science, 22-41.
Van der Voet, J. K. (2016). Implementing Change in Public Organizations: The relationship
between leadership and affective commitment to change in a public sector context. Public
Management Review, 842-865.
Name: Zeeshan Aziz khan Student ID: 11623762 Page Number : 11

Young, M. (2009). A meta model of change. Journal of Organizational Change Management,
524-548.
Name: Zeeshan Aziz khan Student ID: 11623762 Page Number : 12