Dealing with resistance to pressure for change in the company

You almost can't hear it anymore and yet, the pressure for change on companies is dramatic. Digitalization, climate change and the Corona pandemic raise decided fields of action in which companies need to evolve.

But where and how do you start?

I like to describe this situation as a change dilemma. As a managing director, as an executive and as a co-designer in the company, it is necessary on the one hand to maintain functioning business models or to secure the core business, and at the same time to open up or develop new innovative business models.

In my experience, decision-makers often know what needs to be done and have a much harder time with the implementation, i.e. the question of how to navigate through such transformation processes and the associated handling of change risks.

Companies strive for a suitable and stable system that adapts incrementally over time from learning experiences. So now one finds that the known system is no longer sustainable and needs a new system that will work in the future with the economic, environmental and social realities.

Disruptive change is needed, which organizations often only engage in when doing nothing carries higher risks than engaging in a serious transformation process.

So the path is from a stable system, through an unstable transformation process, to a sustainable system that is also seeking stability. To decide early and proactively, and not out of compulsion, for a change of course requires foresight as well as courage.

In transformation processes, there is often the concern that everything will suddenly have to be done differently and that employees will be overburdened. So how do you bring the "old" and "new, desired world" together? The following example provides an insight into how this can be done.

So how does one act in a transformation process between two systems?

The example of Bosch's "ambidexterity" serves to approach transformation processes decisively, yet cautiously, where the task of leadership between two operating systems, efficient business execution and rapid business adaptation is described.

 

In companies, we have learned to perfect efficient business execution and have developed organizational forms based on the principle of line organization. As a result, systems with rigid hierarchical levels and a clear division of labor have prevailed, which tend to favor work by the book rather than employees taking responsibility for their own actions.

Tasks with which organizations have to deal with change issues are becoming increasingly complex and interwoven. Systemic intelligence, i.e. using the knowledge of one's own organization in a networked way, is one of the major tasks of being adaptable as an organization.

Agility describes the ability to adapt to changes proactively and not just reactively. The agile, adaptive understanding of management requires a rethinking of structures and processes as well as a rethinking of collaboration as such and is discussed extensively in the context of New Work.

So what does it mean to approach transformation decisively but carefully?

The trend-setting decision lies in the new strategic orientation of the organization. Which vision and goals are pursued and whether these successfully address the topic of the desired changes shows whether the project is approached with the necessary will.

The challenge lies in finding a balance between efficient business execution and interactive business adaptation. This requires a clear overview of the requirements for the different areas of the organization and how the requirements have changed and will change in the future. If there is a clear picture of the current situation with regard to the adjusting screws in the different organizational areas, then a common understanding of leadership with regard to the handling, between efficient and adaptive processes, for the development of a sustainable organization can emerge.

How do I achieve a corporate culture that deals positively with change?

The way we deal with and the attitude toward change is crucial to whether or not we can innovate and develop as a company. We have to accept that we live in a time where rapid change will always accompany us and our approach to change must become part of the corporate strategy and culture. A new orientation of a company therefore always needs a corresponding corporate culture, the employees must believe in the goals of the company and must want to and be allowed to actively participate in the achievement of the goals.

A helpful starting point can be an evaluation of the corporate culture and the agile maturity level in the various corporate divisions. It makes it possible to make relevant fields of action visible and to formulate precisely fitting goals and measures in discussions with managers from the various divisions. Statements such as "everyone must now work in an agile and customer-centric manner" sound good at first, but they do not make sense in all areas of the company or require a different gradation in the concrete implementation.

Established beliefs and routines sometimes have to be relearned, and this is difficult for employees at all hierarchical levels and sometimes generates resistance. Dealing with resistance in the right way is therefore of central importance for the success of the transformation process.

5 starting points for successfully dealing with resistance

Let's say again in advance that the way of dealing with resistances transformation process will be crucial for a successful culture change.

Often, the focus is set incorrectly. Loud employees who reject change and stand out with misconduct get too much attention. This costs energy and is often out of proportion to the many employees who actively help shape the company.

Desired behavior should therefore be valued and reinforced, and misconduct should be given as little space and attention as possible.

The following measures will direct the focus to positive developments and keep motivation high during a long transformation process.

1. Clear communication
   • Avoid rumors at all costs by communicating the goals and measures of the transformation process transparently.
2. Involving employees and supporting managers
   • Stress and rejection arise especially when control is lost. To avoid resistance, employees must be able to help shape the process. The goals and measures should therefore be defined and implemented in close cooperation with the respective managers. During implementation, employees at all levels of the hierarchy must be empowered and supported.
3. Give time
   • Change requires convinced employees, and many organizations fail to win employees over to the project at an early stage because possible conflict talks are avoided. The time that has to be spent in convincing employees exceeds the effort of a transparent and participative approach from the beginning.

• • The implementation of measures should follow a long-term and targeted development perspective. It is therefore important to avoid operational hecticness and measures without a clear development perspective, so that employees do not interpret the actions as arbitrary and are unsettled.

4. Avoid internal competition
   • A successful transformation process is driven jointly. Mutual support is fostered through experience and learning exchanges (between all organizational units) at regular intervals. Internal competition will nip cooperative and networked collaboration in the bud and make the transformation process much more difficult.
5. Demonstrate advantages and make them tangible
   • The benefits resulting from networked collaboration and improved customer centricity, for example, should be demonstrated and made tangible. The transition phase is initially associated with uncertainty and additional work. That is why sharing a sense of achievement and best practices during this phase is extremely important for motivating employees.