RESISTANCE TO CHANGE

Resistance to Change

Resistance to Change

Introduction

Resistance to change is one of those institutional arrangements and approaches that disrupts, undermine and impede change initiatives. Organizational change strategies can resist in different ways, ranging from a collective failure, wildcat strikes and return to the more sophisticated options, as foot-dragging, the ambivalence and cynicism. Although much of the literature focuses on the lower level of resistance to change of personnel management programs, the upper echelon positions May resist change too. The reasons why some employees oppose instruction to change the diverse and consistently linked with the political context in which this process occurs (Ackroyd, 1999).

Motivators noted in the literature include the fear of redundancy, the fear of the unknown, rooted habits, lack of training, perceptions of injustice, poor communication, the perception of incompetence, and general culture of mistrust. Most of the major governance scholarship is usually defined as resistance to change irrational response from the staff that should be prevented or reduced. Management prerogative taken for granted, and class differences of managerial capitalism are undeniable (Ackroyd, 1999).

Conceptual Overview

Resistance is a response to the power of this practice, challenges and negotiations that would undermine the government. Depending on the definition of power, different types of activities as a resistance (Amoore, 2005).

Resistance to diverse and constantly invented yet. It includes the unions, adoption, shelter, and denials, which sometimes produce a comprehensive agreement on the forms of democracy, while at other times, exclusion, violence and polarization. When power becomes (a) dominance of resistance is likely. If power is understood as the creation of subordination through discourses that the structure of the label and the title of identity, creating borders, reduce complexity, and then contribute to the power load images identities will be invested in the resistance can be custom identities, images and discourse in order to change stereotypes and hierarchy (Amoore, 2005).

A tremendous amount of research currently exists on the issue of resistance to organizational change. Much of this interest in connection with the incredible popularity of changing management practices, especially those related to culture, management, reengineering business processes and technological skills. Indeed, the accounting and management consultants writers often maintain a cliché that the change is the only constant (Amoore, 2005). It is therefore not surprising that the resistance is mainly interpreted as a negative terms, which indicates the irrationality, stubbornness and insubordination.

A classic study of organizational change is keenly aware that individuals and / or groups may resist. The influential social psychologist Kurt Levin has developed what he called the force-field analysis of organizational change. Links physics metaphor of the primary actions and reactions, Lewin proposed a change agent for the calculation of forces that favor or against the changes. While the forces of resistance may be related to factors such as uncertainty or high risk behavior and attitude of employees in particular stand out as a persistent obstacle. In order to unfreeze, change, and to freeze the organization, managers should strengthen the drivers of change and reduce or eliminate the forces opposing it ...