Professional Documents
Culture Documents
TABLE OF CONTENTS..............................................................................................................1
Restraining forces....................................................................................................2
Equilibrium..............................................................................................................3
2. Other factors....................................................................................................... 6
Unfreezing...............................................................................................................7
Changing................................................................................................................. 7
Refreezing...............................................................................................................7
1. Motivation ...........................................................................................................8
ADOPTION OF CHANGE.........................................................................................................10
REFERENCE...............................................................................................................................11
Introduction
Wells, s. (2006) defined restraining forces as the forces that make change more difficult.
Restraining forces are those factors that resist change to occur; few examples are lack of skill and
knowledge, antagonism between the employees and the manager, poor job description. This
paper will elaborate on these factors that do not permit change to occur, how to deal with the
restraining forces, examine the relationship between the restraining forces and the driving forces
for change to maintain the change equilibrium. Before looking at the solution to the restraining
forces to change, lets’ consider the Lewin’s Force field analysis.
Lewin assumes that in any situation, there are both driving and restraining forces that influence
any change that may occur.
Driving forces
Driving forces are those forces affecting a situation that are pushing in a particular direction;
they tend to initiate a change and keep it going. In terms of improving productivity in a work
group, pressure from a supervisor, incentive earnings, and competition may be examples of
driving forces.
Restraining forces
Restraining forces are forces acting to restrain or decrease the driving forces. Apathy, hostility,
and poor maintenance of equipment may be examples of restraining forces against increased
production. Equilibrium is reached when the sum of the driving forces equals the sum of the
restraining forces. In our example, equilibrium represents the present level of productivity, as
shown below.
Equilibrium
This equilibrium, or present level of productivity, can be raised or lowered by changes in the
relationship between the driving and the restraining forces.
For illustration, consider the dilemma of the new manager who takes over a work group in which
productivity is high but whose predecessor drained the human resources.
The former manager had upset the equilibrium by increasing the driving forces (that is, being
autocratic and keeping continual pressure on subordinates) and thus achieving increases in output
in the short run.
By doing this, however, new restraining forces developed, such as increased hostility and
antagonism, and at the time of the former manager's departure the restraining forces were
beginning to increase and the results manifested themselves in turnover, absenteeism, and other
restraining forces, which lowered productivity shortly after the new manager arrived. Now a new
equilibrium at a significantly lower productivity is faced by the new manager.
Now just assume that our new manager decides not to increase the driving forces but to reduce
the restraining forces. The manager may do this by taking time away from the usual production
operation and engaging in problem solving and training and development.
In the short run, output will tend to be lowered still further. However, if commitment to
objectives and technical know-how of the group are increased in the long run, they may become
new driving forces, and that, along with the elimination of the hostility and the apathy that were
restraining forces, will now tend to move the balance to a higher level of output.
Managers are often in a position in which they must consider not only output but also intervening
variables and not only short-term but also long-term goals. It can be seen that force field analysis
provides framework that is useful in diagnosing these interrelationships.
One major reason why people resist change is the potential for loss on a personal level. Note that
objectively there may be little threat, but people may act as if there is one
Some of the things people feel are at risk during change processes are:
Security
Friends and contact
Money
Freedom
Pride and satisfaction
Responsibility
Authority
Good working conditions
Status
The general principle here is that whenever a change is perceived as creating some threat to the
employee having his/her needs met the more likely resistance will be overcome. These mostly
occur;
When the reason for the change is unclear. Ambiguity--whether it is about costs,
equipment, jobs--can trigger negative reactions among users.
When the proposed users have not been consulted about the change, and it is offered to
them as an accomplished fact. People like to know what's going on, especially if their
jobs may be affected. Informed workers tend to have higher levels of job satisfaction
than uninformed workers.
When the change threatens to modify established patterns of working relationships
between people.
When communication about the change--timetables, personnel, monies, etc.--has not
been sufficient.
When the benefits and rewards for making the change are not seen as adequate for the
trouble involved or when the change threatens jobs, power or status-quo in an
organization occurs.
Change not needed - status quo is working fine proposed change does more harm than good
lack of respect for person responsible for the change objectionable way of implementing the
change negative attitude towards the organization before the change no opportunity to have input
into change perceived as implying personal criticism change simply adds more work and
confusion. Change requires more effort than to keep status quo bad timing of the change
a desire to challenge authority hearing about the change secondhand the uncertainty principle
The uncertainty principle “states that when people are faced with ambiguous or uncertain
situations, where they feel they do not know what to expect, they will resist moving into those
situations”. In other words, if people don't know what is to come, they get antsy, and resistive.
1. Personal gain
People will be more likely to accept change when they see the possibility that they will gain in
some of the following areas:
• Increased security
• Salary increase
• More authority status/prestige
• Better working conditions
• Self-satisfaction
• Better personal contacts
• Less time and effort
2. Other factors
In general, most people will have mixed reactions towards proposed change, so the change
agent can be helpful in highlighting the positive aspects in a realistic manner.
Unfreezing
This is the shake up phase perhaps triggered by declining sales or profits. The result is an
acceptance that the existing structures and ways are not working to get people ready for change it
is necessary to develop an awareness of the:
• Necessity of change
• Nature of change needed
• Methods planned to achieve the change
• Needs of those affected
• Ways that progress will be planned and monitored
Changing
Refreezing
Roger N. (2006) stated that refreezing is complete when the new patterns are accepted and
followed willingly to:
Establish a sense of urgency by creating a compelling reason (vision & understanding)
for why change is needed.
Create a new vision to direct the change and strategies for achieving the vision.
Plan for, create, and reward short-term “wins” that move the organization toward the new
vision.
Consolidate improvements, reassess changes, and make necessary adjustments in the new
programs.
Reinforce the changes by demonstrating the relationship between new behaviors and
organizational success.
In summary, management of restraining forces for change could be a straining task, but
following these procedures can eliminate them
1. Motivation
Before your employees are really motivated to work at change, they must be convinced of the
personal and professional benefits to themselves, as well as to their organization. In addition,
management must realize that work will slow during the transitional process. Often temporary
help must be brought in or overtime authorized to help get the more mundane tasks
accomplished. Learning is often awkward, requiring a great deal of practice before new habits
are automated. Practice, of course, means making mistakes and taking time to correct them.
Because of these factors, commitment is mandatory at the highest levels of the organization.
Upper management in particular must create a clear, realistic vision. All too often, organizations
develop vision statements that are too vague or idealistic. The vision must be something people
can buy into. It must be "symbolized" with a theme, and it must have its champions at the highest
level of the organization.
Once realistic themes have been developed, upper management must create a mission, goals and
objectives specific to individual departments. Then management must sell these missions, goals
and objectives to members of the various departments.
Persuasion needs a user-friendly approach. User-friendly in this context means giving employees
an opportunity to vent, to express their own ideas and to make mistakes. It means that managers
involved in the process must remain positive and approachable, and have an encouraging
demeanor.
At this point managers should coach and encourage rather than criticize or punish. Self-
righteous, critical or condescending behavior will only frighten people back into their old tried-
and-true behaviors. In helping employees adapt to new conditions, managers must not assume an
“I'm right you're wrong” stance. Workers immediately will become defensive. Moreover, they
will tune the managers out, become argumentative or passively resist the changes they're being
asked to make
Keep in mind that people respond better to workshop exercises that have "face validity" -- that is,
whose content is related to the work people actually perform. The workshop should combine process
and content. Participants must be encouraged to learn more about one another personally, and to build
a level of trust. They should be given content-specific tasks to perform together. This will enable them
not only to improve their actual working conditions and move toward the desired process or cultural
changes, but also to work more effectively with each other in the future.
5. Launching of the change management program
While smaller companies and organizations might be able to just dig in and start the process, in
larger organizations it may be necessary to create some drama. Thus the firm might want to
develop a large-scale kickoff program involving as many people as possible
This all-day affair should be exciting and motivational, and encourage the participation and ideas
of all attendees, who should be provided with a means of ensuring their ongoing involvement in
the process.
Adoption of change
Donald, K (1985), elaborates that adoption of new ideas and techniques does not occur naturally
but results from hard work, trial and error. It is important to recognize this fact and to make an
effort to develop information that is concise, readable and to the point and to make sure the
information reaches people who can use it. A broad spectrum of skills is needed to lead to
effective management of innovation and change. There is no magic formula for success--no
such formulas exist.
Change agents can bring innovation for the user by examining their preconceived notions about
the way things should be done. Personnel have to be receptive to change themselves, they have
to be able to evaluate new ideas objectively and see their users --not as they have been --but as
they might be.
Recommendation
Reference
Roger N. (2006). Plan for Implementing Change. CSE & Enterprise Systems Center.
Lehigh University.