While many companies in the Middle East are undergoing rapid changes in the way they are managed, resistance to change is a common hurdle in the way of progress.

Resistance to change comes from company stakeholders who are afraid to change or commit to change due to their worry about the negative effects the change might have on them or their position. 

Resistance to change can be seen as an intentional and conscious effort to block change from occurring. While this is true of one type of change called “active resistance,” however there is a more dangerous type of resistance termed “passive resistance” that might not be an intentional effort. The latter type is more illusive and a far more dangerous form of resistance to improvements. 

Passive resistance means unconsciously or indirectly resisting change. The tough part about this type of resistance is that it is sometimes undertaken, unknowingly, by the very same people who are pioneering the change in the organisation.

The pressure and burden of change pushes them unconsciously to put barriers in the face of change to slow it a bit, or prevent it from causing them insecurity or instability.

Since passive resistance is hard to detect, it is important to listen carefully to statements and observe behaviours that indicate the existence of this type of resistance in the workplace, especially during change initiatives.

Since change resistance must be dealt with proactively, it is important to watch carefully for these signs of passive resistance to ensure they are dealt with swiftly before they hurt the successful completion of the improvement initiative.

There are clear lines passive resisters use that can be easily caught during conversations. Some of these lines show scepticism that the change can work in a certain culture or organisation. While cultural considerations are key, they are sometimes blamed for much more than their share  when it comes to organisational problems.

For example, when talking about the importance of using structured management techniques to manage projects and operations, two common lines of passive resistance are used.  One of them is “this will not work in our culture.” The second is “this is too theoretical,” and finally there is the infamous line of “while this might work somewhere else, it will not work here, because we are different and unique.”

Other lines of passive resistance are used to protect management from feeling guilty about not doing the right thing in the past. So, for example, when suggesting development of key performance indicators to assess employees’ performance, passive resistance lines that get thrown out there include, “I tried this before already and it did not work.” The other one is, “Management would not let us do this in our company.” 

A third type of passive resistance lines puts question marks on the abilities of the team members to be responsible or competent enough to improve. An example of such lines is, “the kind of people we have would eat us alive if we show them too much respect.”

Another popular one is, “our people are not ready to work in this manner,” or “this would work with a competent team, not the kind of people I got on my team.”

Some managers request changes but are not willing to commit to these changes themselves. They use lines like, “my project is an exception due to its special circumstances,” or they use the line, “let us start right after my project is complete.”

Finally, a common way of passive resistance is to let the changes pass, without helping nor resisting, hoping the change will pass and weather away.  Such passive resistance can be identified by looking for statements like, “fine, do whatever you want,” or, “Go ahead and try it and let us see how it goes.”

These lines are used by mangers to distance themselves from the change so they do not have to participate or put themselves into an insecure position. 

Remember that people passively resisting might not even be  aware of the fact that they are resisting. So, it is necessary not to deal with them with anonymity. Someone facing passive resistance, as a consultant, manager, or a team member, must remember that these passive resisters are not the enemy. They are not fighting the change because they have something personal against it or against anyone. Instead, they are doing so out of fear of change and longing for stability in their careers and their positions.

This is different from active resisters who might be waging an all out war on purpose against the change.

So, it is important to have compassion for passive resisters and their reasons for resistance. This does not mean accepting the resistance or not dealing with it, but it means not to take the resistance against the people personally, and help them deal with their passive resistance. They need help, support, and hand-holding to turn that passive resistance into support for the change. 

To deal with these lines of resistance, it is important not to fall into the trap of accepting the judgment resisters are making at face value. Instead, probe further into why they are making such statements. Ask them, “what makes you say that?”

Sometimes, it is important to confront passive resistance head on. This is possible when dealing with mature and responsible passive resisters who can take the heat from being confronted with their passive resistance. If they can, it might be necessary to help them see what they are doing as passive resistance.

The key here is to help them see it, rather than accuse them of it. So, saying calmly and even with a smile, “Is this passive resistance  I am sensing from you?”  might do the trick.  It is a better confrontation than saying, “You are passively resisting this initiative.” 

Passive resistance requires dealing with reasons behind the passive resistance. This can be done by explaining how the change will yield improvements and how these passive resisters will benefit from the improvements.

Everyone benefits from improvements, even people who might be fired due to that improvement. They might lose their job short term, but long term they are being given an opportunity to find something else where they can be of more value to another organisation, and to tap into their real potential. 

Monday, February 19, 2007