The potential outcomes to resistance that Charles Fleetham described in
LO643 are just what I have seen happen in many change consultations too:
Many people will resist; Some will adapt and adopt the change; Some will
always resist. Of the perennial resistors, some will choose to opt out of
the system and some will be ejected by the system.
In The Learning Community I lead, we have encountered problems with people
"losing their dialogical perspective" so to speak--that is, being
argumentative and resistant. In the Learning Community meetings, we always
have someone who plays the resistor or antagonist role. It's usually the
same one or two people--if they are absent, someone else will take on the
role. We see it as a role to be played in a group, and are now trying to
learn not to personalize our responses to the resistor (that is, to hush
up or eject the person). Along the way to this understanding, however, we
have had some people opt out (after long tenures as the antagonist), and
some who continue to come and provoke us to listen in spite of the
attitude and learn to deal with conflict. And, a few of these people are
also learning new ways to express themselves with a better balance of
advocacy and inquiry. Developing this kind of understanding in the group
has been wonderful to experience.
(Some of you familiar with socio-technical systems theory and Tavistock
conferences may recognize this description of roles in groups from these
sources.)
End of Message LO737!
Diane Weston DMWeston@AOL.COM