In the world, we see many
natural dualities: dark versus light, low versus high, hot versus cold, life versus death, and so on. Traditional wedding vows describe life
experiences as a twofold experience: good times and bad, sickness
and health, sorrow and joy, etc. Even
computers work in a binary fashion, interpreting bits of data as 0’s or 1’s.
Leaders, change practitioners and researchers often view organizational change through a dual lens: people either support or resist the change. This limited view of change management assures failure during the initial planning process.
Leaders, change practitioners and researchers often view organizational change through a dual lens: people either support or resist the change. This limited view of change management assures failure during the initial planning process.
The truth is individuals do sometimes support organizational change, and they often resist organizational change. Researchers are beginning to catch up with what some practitioners have known for years. For the past decade, organizational change researchers have argued that individual responses are more complicated than a binary response (Piderit, 2000; Rafferty, Jimmieson, & Armenakis, 2012).
Barry Johnson, author of
Polarity Management, makes a pretty convincing argument that choosing between
polar opposites is as futile as choosing between breathing in or breathing
out. Choosing one over the other is not
appropriate, let alone possible. The
following adaptation illustrates the point: change management is not a dichotomy.
Follow the numbers to make
sense of this theory:
- An organization experiences stagnation and apathy, so leaders decide to change (moving from the lower right quadrant to the upper left quadrant).
- At first, the idea of change seems great with new energy and some progress. However, the change begins to lose momentum. People are frustrated. Managers dislike inconsistency.
- Because of these change problems, leaders decide to stabilize. The stability is reassuring for workers and managers at first.
- Once stability outlives its expiration date, stagnation and apathy reappear.
And the cycle
continues …
This post is another lesson in change management failure: If you do not change the way you think about change management, success will elude you.
While many people crave simplicity and certainty, use polarity management as a concept to break the pattern of the way your organization changes. If you would like more details on the application of polarity management to organizational change, check out Robert Jacob’s recent presentation in South Africa.
While many people crave simplicity and certainty, use polarity management as a concept to break the pattern of the way your organization changes. If you would like more details on the application of polarity management to organizational change, check out Robert Jacob’s recent presentation in South Africa.
Related Posts:
What is Change Management? (Mount Rushmore version)
Why the CM 70% Failure Rate is SUCCESS for some
References:
What is Change Management? (Mount Rushmore version)
Why the CM 70% Failure Rate is SUCCESS for some
References:
Johnson, B. (1992). Polarity management: Identifying and managing unsolvable problems. Amherst, MA: HRD Press.
Piderit, S. K. (2000).
Rethinking resistance and recognizing ambivalence:
A multidimensional view of
attitude toward an organizational change.
Academy of Management Review, 25, 783–794.
Rafferty, A. E.,
Jimmieson, N. L., & Armenakis, A. A. (2012). Change readiness: A multilevel
review. Journal of Management,
[On-line], doi: 10.1177/0149206312457417
If we add Reward and Threat to Dr. Johnson's model, the Johari window enables us to better understand and those manage, the dynamics of change.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comment.
DeleteThe $100,000 question is where to add reward and threat into the model? The leaders invested in the status quo will threaten change within their domain. Those
leaders supporting the change will reward the change and threaten the status quo as being futile. This is where Bob Marshak and his views on hidden dynamics come in handy.
I've always thought of the Joe-Harry window as a great add-on model that could enhance any type of management thinking. I was once given a great debrief as I was approaching the birth of my daughter 10 years ago. My cousin asked me how much did I think my life would change. I said something to the effect of "a little."
His response was one for the ages: "you think you know, but you just don't know."
The would be the message to get the leaders to soften up or open up to the Joe-Harry piece. It can be great when people are not in full politics mode.