Comfort zone

One of the most challenging tasks in the workplace is getting people to move away from their comfort zones. In my over two decades of workplace experience, I have observed all sorts of resistance to change processes. This simmering and dogged resistance occurs both at senior and junior levels and its measure or degree depends largely on quality of communication, fear of losing out and ‘this is how we’ve been doing it’ syndrome.

Whatever the reasons for introducing change either in processes, technology or even persons, change should always be managed properly so as to render resistance ineffective and achieve target objectives.

There are common mistakes that are made while introducing change in work places. One, is to presume that since this change is for the good of the company, that all and sundry will buy into it once a memo is sent out. I call this the Memo approach to change. More often than not, change is not perceived as such. Many, even for the reason of old habits and the need to continue in their comfort zones of privileges try to ‘stop’ the change by raising many objections and spreading thoughts on how such change will not work.

Rather than adopt a singular magic wand memo style to introducing change, it’s usually better to push change through educative campaigns during which thoughts are sampled and possible grey areas are detected. In doing this, people are made to see themselves as part initiators of change, thus breaking walls of resistance.

The second error is to think that once change has been set in motion by sending out circulars and memos that staff will automatically accept and implement totally. This is self delusion. Those who resist changes in the workplace do so more clandestinely. They neither show their aversion nor discuss it, but on their own work against the change. This is the reason management should, while introducing any major change, create a monitoring team, possibly without disclosure of the team or its members. The team’s task is to nose around to perceive any roadblocks to the change process and address such accordingly.

The third error is not to think through of the change being proposed. Are there examples of where such change has yielded good results and why? Is the change timely or is it something that can be done later? Is there capacity to push through this change or will it be trapped for lack of capacity? These are issues that should be well considered by management before pushing change through. When management pushes through change that is inappropriate it exposes itself to caricature, and may incur huge expenses pushing through something that is counterproductive.

In all, change is a common feature in work places and society in general. But change shouldn’t be for change sake, it must improve existing situations, yield better results and be cost effective. People should not meet change first with resistance, but always seek to understand the motives and end of change, in order to engage with change in a better constructive and conciliatory manner.