Enduring change resistance. This might be a pathway to failure. But these are the things that most managers typically do when dealing with change resistance. Typical solutions first ignore. high performers will generally leave the poor performers will stay if you ignore the problems that you're trying to rectify with the change. Secondly, they'll double up on training and coaching.

We've talked about this already. These are the typical approaches that are used along with communication. Tell them tell them tell them again, well necessary. It's not sufficient alone. The rewards and penalties these are the carrot or the stick approach, you can generally get short term compliance, but difficult for long term commitment. And it's an easy crutch for poor management.

There's also potential for a loss of trust. This can come from really breaking the psychological contract that people may have with the organization. And in turn, it will lead to increased resentment and really anger itself fallback solutions if the resistance continues. These are the typical approaches that managers will use has a fallback to dealing with resistance, they'll use force. This can be done through the systems and processes that are in place or the infrastructure of how the organization is designed and hierarchy the reporting the information flows. There's also manipulation that can be used, though sometimes disguised.

And we will get into this in another video later. If you continue to have problems, obviously reorganization to move the resistors this is a way to get rid of your problem. If you could get somebody else to accept it, without them knowing you're giving them a problem. There's also the potential of firing and replacing a blocker. Not always beneficial, as we discussed in the you're fired PDF. And you can also revert back and accept the status quo a giving up, fallback solution.

If you can't overcome the resistance, you just give up. The difficulty here though, is that it reinforces a wait and see attitude toward change, because you've given up once you may give up again on the next change initiative, let's now shift over into systematic approaches to resistance, starting with the least desirable and moving up to the most beneficial approach to dealing with resistance. Number seven, declare success in lieu of failure. Obviously, this is not where you want to be. But I actually saw this take place, the change failure was going so poorly, so much money was being invested, that everybody in the organization knew that it was a failure, and we had to give it up. However, as a face saving effort, and to put a positive spin on it.

The change leadership team actually declared success and said that we are now ready to move into the next change initiative, based upon how successful we've been. It allowed them to be Basically kill one change initiative move into the next, saving their face of not having to admit defeat, though obviously everybody knew that defeat was at hand when they sent out that medal. Number six, manipulation and corrosion. If all else fails use force. It's obviously quick and inexpensive on the surface, but maybe not. Because to the extent that you are coercing the organization to do something by force, you're creating other problems and other areas of resistance that can really expand into mega types of problems, though it is obviously a better solution than declaring success in lieu of failure.

Number five, manage the problem. This is typically where most managers reside. They will use force as necessary, and they will also micromanage a situation and get compliance while hoping that that compliance will eventually go into commitment. The difficulty here though, is that you're only taking care of the problem short term. If you stop managing, and keeping close direction over the situation, the organization will revert back to the previous state, and you will have lost any gains in the process. But again, this is where most change management resides.

Number four, you can negotiate the non essential elements. The key is understanding what is critical for success. And what are 10 gentle, negotiable issues. A lot of times if there's a power structure, or even a change in someone's address The entity and how they think about their role within the organization. The leadership team could easily make minor adjustments to the change process, as in negotiation to make it basically agreeable to those that were initially resisting. This may involve bargaining, bribing, begging people.

But again, it may be cost and time effective, because what you're bargaining away may not be that significant to the organization success for the change. You can also prioritize around the edge of less make a deal. If you do this here. I will do this for you over here. It's a trade off that can take place. But again, you're giving them the power to resist and to the extent that you're negotiating, you may set up that type of expectation.

Down the road also. So while it is beneficial to negotiate the small things, you need to be careful of not letting that creep into the more significant areas that really are critical for the success of the change. Third, address the problems ad hoc, you could ignore some with risk associated with it. But as issues come up, deal with them as they come up and resolve them as a reaction to the problem. This obviously could be done negotiated, or it could involve changing the change objective or the methodology with which you're managing the change project. It's basically making minor changes on the fly.

And to some extent, this is a reaction and you're hoping that the problems will go away with minor adjustments. These are the four things that are most typical used. In the next video we will shift our attention into two that actually have a better outcome and more lasting effect on dealing with change resistance. Are you just enduring the pain? Or are you dealing with the pain of resistance?