LEADING CHANGE IN SCHOOLS AND REGIONS

CHANGE THEORY 2

Alfred J. Sant Fournier

Lubricants of change

 proper selfishness

 a way of reframing

 negative capability
Handy (1990) The Age of Unreason p 50

The Iceberg Theory

Only the heads stick out nodding and talking politely and distanced tones.

Below the water line[…] icebergs collide […] sometimes with serious
consequences.

For many of the staff […] the real business of relationships is below the
surface.
Overcoming resistance to change!!!

Attack the proposition … find as much fault with it as possible …

• We’ve tried that once before & it didn’t work!
• We don’t have the time
• Let’s get back to reality
• We don’t have the resources
• You can’t teach an old dog new tricks
• Not that again!
• We’ve managed so far without it
• Let’s form a working party
• It won’t work here
• Let’s wait until things settle down
Newton & Tarrant (1992) p. 62

Reasons for organisational resistance to change – Plant (1987)

• Fear of the unknown

• Lack of information
• Misinformation
• Historical factors
• Threat to core skills and competence
• Threat to status
• Threat to power base
• No perceived benefits
• Low trust organisational culture
• Poor relationships
• Fear of failure
• Fear of looking stupid
• Reluctance to experiment
• Custom bound
• Reluctance to let go
• Strong peer group norms

The less I know about the plans to change, the more I assume, the more
suspicious I become, and the more I direct my energy into counter-productive
‘resister games’. Once I feel manipulated, or uninvolved, I will inevitably tend
to veer towards a negative view of the change and its effect on me.
 Plant (1987)

Resistance to Change:

 Systemic resistance – lack of knowledge, information, skill and

managerial capacity
 Behavioural resistance – emotionally centred … derives from the
reactions, perceptions and assumptions of individuals and groups in the
organisation.

“Change is a process, not an event…”

Fullan (2001)p. 52

No one can resolve the crisis of reintegration on behalf of another. Every

attempt to preempt conflict, argument, protect by rational planning, can only
be abortive: however reasonable the proposed changes, the process of
implementing them must still allow the impulse of rejection to play itself out.
… If they deny others the chance to do the same, they treat them as puppets
dangling by the threads of their own conceptions.

Marris (1975)

Why default strategies don’t work

 These often escalate and strengthen opposition to your goals

 They increase resistance
 The win might not be worth the cost
 They fail to create synergy
 They create fear and suspicion
 They separate us from others
(Maurer 1996)

Making matters worse

“When we face resistance to our ideas, most of us react with an assortment of

ineffective approaches. These are our default positions.”

 Use power
 Manipulate those who oppose
 Apply force of reason
 Play off relationships
 Make deals
 Kill the messenger
 Give in too soon

Maurer, R. (1996) Beyond the wall of resistance

Getting beyond the wall

Five fundamental Touchstones

 Maintain clear focus
 Keep both long and short view
 Persevere
 Embrace resistance
 Counterintuitive response
 Understand the voice of resistance
 Respect those who resist
 Listen with interest
 Tell the truth
 Relax
 Stay calm and stay engaged
 Know their intention
 Join with the resistance
 Begin together
 Change the game
 Find themes and possibilities

Consider strategies that incorporate most (or all) of the touchstones

(Maurer 1996)

Some guidance:

 Initiators of change must be aware that those involved will want to

protect what they see themselves to be
 People seek to satisfy work needs and expectations with minimum of
uncertainty and anxiety. Pressure to change is a threat
 Suggestions to change arouses the defense of the familiar and
established
 Heads & SMT see this defensive tendency as opposition to new ideas
and see their task as one of overcoming the perceived resistance. The battle
of wills is counter-productive to the change process and to relationships!

Keep in mind

 When people resist change they are not usually working against it
as such but demonstrating that a threat to their personal and
professional security has been experienced.
  Senior managers need to accept this response as natural and
inevitable.
 A key task is to listen to the experience of those involved and
seek to understand what is felt to be threatened.
 Managers need to be deeply caring and concerned about what it is
that staff feel they are having to give up and are to be seen as an
ally in this process, not an opponent.
 Managers also need to help colleagues to protect what they
perceive to be under threat while moving them towards new
methods and strategies.
 In the process of change it is vital to try and avoid undermining
the individual’s sense of competence and professional well-being
by appearing to reject or devalue their established practices.

Stress is part of our life.

When we’re stressed …

We complicate
Implementation Dip

Regardless of the thought, planning and hard work involved, it seems that
every change eventually faces an Implementation Dip.
If it doesn’t it probably means that no change is being effected!
The key to success is to keep going by involving others in the process and
continuously adding new elements and fresh ideas.
Real change, then, whether desired or not represents a serious personal and
collective experience characterized by ambivalence and uncertainty; and if the
change works out it can result in a sense of mastery, accomplishment, and
personal growth. The anxieties of uncertainty and the joys of mastery are
central to the subjective meaning of educational change, and to the success
or failure hereof – facts that have not been recognized or appreciated in most
attempts of reform.

Fullan (2001)