11 Replies Latest reply on Mar 30, 2012 7:54 AM by Leona

    Change management best practices

      I'm working on drafting a change plan for our cJive launch (internal community).  Our soft launch will target avid social users, communities of practices and people who have joined our advocate group.  About 2 months after our soft launch (pilot) we will ramp-up and offer Jive to mainsteam users across the company.  We recently completed a stakeholder analysis and identified several "resistor groups," who we anticipate will struggle with social adoption.  I need to create some "resistor management" strategies that we can start implementing during our soft launch to prepare the organization for wider adoption.  I'm looking for best practices in managing resistors- including what tactics worked to bring resisters along the change adoption curve.  What things have worked and how have you leveraged your advocate community to help resistors overcomes their "fear" or "skepticism" of social?  Thanks!

        • Re: Change management best practices

          Hi Heather, you might get more eyes on this if you move it to Jive Internal Communities. Just click "Move" under Actions on the right.

          • Re: Change management best practices

            I assume you might have already come across this, but in case you haven't or others stumble on this thread...


            The tried and tested battle against resistors was well defined and understood by Kotter and Schlesinger in their observations from 1979. While this was originally focused on organizational change -- it stands strong for IT and now Social Business resistors.




            The Six (6) Change Approaches of Kotter and Schlesinger is a model to prevent, decrease or minimize resistance to change in organizations.


            Reasons for resistance to change  According to Kotter and Schlesinger (1979), there are four reasons that certain people are resisting change:


            1. Parochial self-interest. Some people are more concerned with the implication of the change for themselves and how it may affect their own interests, rather than considering the effects for the success of the business.
            2. Misunderstanding. Communication problems; inadequate information.
            3. Low tolerance of change. Certain people are very keen on feeling secure and having stability in their work.
            4. Different assessments of the situation. Some employees may disagree with the reasons for the change and with the advantages and disadvantages of the change process.

            Six approaches to deal with resistance to change: Kotter and Schlesinger have set out the following six (6) change approaches to deal with change resistance:


            1. Education and Communication. Where there is a lack of information or inaccurate information and analysis. One of the best ways to overcome resistance to change is: to inform and educate people about the change effort beforehand. Preceding communication and education helps employees see the logic in the change effort. This reduces unfounded and incorrect rumors concerning the effects of change in the organization.
            2. Participation and Involvement. Where the initiators do not have all the necessary information to design the change, and where others have considerable power to resist. When employees are involved in the change effort they are more likely to want change rather than resist it. This approach is likely to decrease resistance of those, who merely acquiesce in the change.
            3. Facilitation and Support. Where people are resisting change, because of adjustment problems. By being supportive of employees during difficult times, managers can prevent potential resistance. Managerial support helps employees to deal with their fear and anxiety during a transition period. The basis of resistance to change is likely to be: the perception that there will be some form of detrimental effect occasioned by the change in the organization. Typical for this approach are special training and counseling, outside normal office premises.
            4. Negotiation and Agreement. Where someone or some group may lose out because of a change, and where that individual or group has considerable power to resist. Managers can combat resistance by offering incentives to employees not to resist change. This can be done by allowing people who are resisting the change to veto certain elements of change that are threatening. Or the people who are resisting the change can be offered incentives to leave the company through early buyouts or through retirements. In order to avoid the experience of the change effort. This approach will be appropriate where those resisting change are in a position of power.
            5. Manipulation and Co-option. Where other tactics will not work or are too expensive. Kotter and Schlesinger suggest that an effective manipulation technique is: to co-opt with people who are resisting the change. Co-option involves bringing a person into a change management planning group for the sake of appearances rather than their substantive contribution. This often involves selecting leaders of the people who are resisting the change, to participate in the change effort. These leaders can be given a symbolic role in decision-making, without threatening the change effort. Note this: if these leaders feel that they are being tricked, they are likely to push resistance even further than if they were never included in the change effort leadership.
            6. Explicit and Implicit Coercion. Where speed is essential. And to be used only as last resort. Managers can explicitly or implicitly force employees into accepting change, by making clear that resistance to change can lead to: jobs losses, dismissals, employee transfers, or not promoting employees.
            • Re: Change management best practices

              Hi Heather,

              We're going through the same process right now, and in a change workshop earlier this week we focused some our time on resistance management. One activity we'll continue to work on is tied to the stakeholder analysis - in particular at the role level, but also the individual level - to understand what is driving resistance. Using similar resistance analysis to what Jonathan noted above, we highlighted some of the usual suspects (I don't believe/understand the value, I am not tech savvy, etc), but also had a few key insights that came out such as that a tool of this nature potentially makes some middle management feel vulnerable because of a capability gap/lost power - ie: I am the one person who knows this, my team / people need to come to me for answers & support etc...the resulting resistance managemnet tactics will focus on how to appeal to the perceived issue that is driving the resistance and re-positioning it as a benefit (flipping it) - My SME now gets showcased on a broader stage etc.


              I'd be interested to hear more about what you've found as part of your analysis.