Stepping Forward Together: Creating Trust and Commitment in the Workplace. Mac Ph.D. McIntire

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ

      “Sure,” I agreed. “I think there are a small number of individuals who may fold their arms the old way out of obstinacy. I’ve seen employees who figuratively stand on the sidelines stubbornly folding their arms and planting their feet in defiance. But I think the number of truly defiant employees is few. I think most ‘rebellious’ people have reasons for their defiance. When managers uncover what those reasons are, and address them in a positive way, they usually can get most resisters to climb the Ladder to COMMITMENT.”

      I explained that sometimes people look and sound like they are resisting change when, in fact, they are just waiting for someone to convince them of the value of the new way. Some people resolutely fold their arms the old way until given a good reason to fold their arms the new way. If the change doesn’t make sense to employees – if they don’t know why it’s necessary or important – they may keep doing things the old way until someone gives a reasonable explanation for why they need to do things differently.

      “What really irritates people is when someone changes things for no apparent reason,” I suggested. “Employees get really frustrated when someone changes a form they’ve been using, and the employees discover the new form asks for the exact same information, only in a different format. Employees tend to get irritated and remain on the CLOSED rung on the Ladder when changes that have no apparent purpose. If the change doesn’t make sense, is not logical, or has no perceived value, you can be sure people will be CLOSED to the idea.”

      As an example, I suggested a lot of new managers come in and implement changes to current formats or long established processes because they prefer the format or process they used at their previous employer. A manager who changes things just because the manager wants to maintain a routine he or she is comfortable with will infuriate the employees. Why should the employees have to change to the new manager’s processes when the manager could just as easily, or perhaps even easier, adjust to the way things have always been done at the present company?

      “People do resist change,” I agreed, “but there is usually a logical reason for it. For example, I once had a guy in a management training session I was conducting tell me, after I did the folding arms exercise, that when I instructed the group to reverse the fold, he didn’t do it. When I asked why, he said, ‘I knew with 25 people in the room you wouldn’t notice how I folded my arms the first time, so I never changed.’”

      “What a jerk!” Paul declared.

      “No, he’s not a jerk,” I countered. “He’s just acting normally. Some people may appear to be resisting change when, in fact, they actually are acting rationally and reasonably, according to their own sense of what is rational or reasonable.”

      “That guy’s response isn’t rational. It’s defiance!” Paul insisted.

      “I disagree. I think he’s just being a normal, rational human being,” I offered. “Employees sometimes don’t go along with a change because they think no one will notice whether they changed or not. Employees on the graveyard shift, for example, often get away with doing things their own way because they seldom see the boss late at night. People in remote offices may believe they can ignore corporate dictates because of the distance between them and their corporate overseers. A lot of managers are notorious for attending management training sessions with little intention of making any alteration to their managerial style. They know their bosses will not follow-up to see if what was learned was actually implemented. Lack of follow-through or management involvement, not resistance, is a major contributor to the lack of employee commitment to many change initiatives. People respond CLOSED to any change where they feel their own manager is not committed to the change, as evidenced by the manager’s own inaction. The major question I get from employees as a consultant when I’m involved in an organizational improvement initiative is: ‘Does my manager agree with the change and is she committed to it?”

      There were a few more points I wanted to make about why people resist change, so I returned to the arm folding example.

      “So, do you think folding your arms the new way will ever become comfortable to you?” I asked.

      “Probably. After I’ve done it for awhile.”

      “That’s right. That’s another important point about commitment. Whenever a change is implemented it needs to be left in place long enough for people to get comfortable with it and competent at doing it. Companies that implement frequent changes make it difficult for employees to reach the COMMITMENT level. Just when their getting comfortable again, and have become competent in the new routine, another change comes along and throws them out of whack again. Where there is constant change, people tend to stay CLOSED.

      “Paul, I realize your tool company, like most companies, has to be adaptive and fluid in order to compete in today’s tough markets. But changing procedures or processes too frequently can greatly diminish employee commitment to the change.”

      I told Paul I frequently hear complaints from employees about executives who seem to chase every new management fad. Whenever their CEO reads another management book the company charges off in a new direction based on what the CEO is reading at the time. Then, when the CEO reads another book with a different approach, she gets excited about these additional concepts and she takes the company in a whole new direction. Repeatedly the company swings from one management principle to another as the CEO tries to implement each management technique she reads about in a book. No wonder employees respond unenthusiastically to new fads. They don’t get excited about the latest trend because they know it won’t be long before they will be asked to head off in a new direction.

      I could see the wheels turning in Paul’s head.

      “You can always tell when you’ve chased too many new programs,” I said, offering, him a way to discern whether he may be trying to change too frequently. “Next time you roll out a new program, listen in the wings to what the employees say about it. If you hear comments such as, ‘Here we go again,’ it might be time to ease up on implementing new programs.”

      “That’s me,” he admitted. “I keep reading books and implementing new things, trying to find something that will get my people to be more focused and more productive.”

      “And does it work?” I asked.

      “No.”

      “Then why don’t you stop doing it?” I advised.

      I told Paul when I find an executive who seems to be influenced by every new management philosophy or organizational whim, I tell him to stop reading management books for a while. It’s best to find one good management approach, figure out how to make it work, and then leave it in place long enough for people to become proficient at it.

      Paul sat reflectively for a moment. “You’re hitting the nail on the head with this one. I know I’m guilty of this. I want to be a good manager. That’s why I read so many management books. I get excited about the things I’m reading and want the other managers at my company to be excited about them, too. I buy copies of the books and pass them out to the managers in my staff meetings. But I doubt they read them. Maybe I’m giving them so many different things to read they don’t know what is important and what isn’t.”

      “And they’re probably thinking, ‘here we go again.’” I said softly, reinforcing the point.

      “No wonder nothing ever changes. I keep giving managers these books and I expect them to change their management style based on what the books say. I assume they’ll figure out what I want just by reading the book. But I never tell them I want them to change. I never tell them why I gave them the book in the first СКАЧАТЬ