Re: Resistance to Change LO1254

Jim Michmerhuizen (
Tue, 16 May 1995 23:05:54 +0059 (EDT)

Replying to LO1222 --

On Mon, 15 May 1995, John R. Snyder wrote:

> Replying to LO1192 --
[ snip snip snip... ]
> ...uncritically they adopted the language of "overcoming employee
> resistance." Here's the mental model, as best I can reconstruct it:
> -> Change must start at the top of the org chart
> -> Managers act / Employees react
> -> Managers push / "Targeted employees" resist
> -> Managers should give convincing arguments in support of adopting
> an innovation. They should listen to employees' objections
> so that they (the mgrs) can give more effective arguments
> in favor of their position (not so they could learn how
> to improve the innovation).
> Friends, we can do better than this.

Oh yes indeedy. And we _have_ to, don't we. It strikes me that one of
the nastiest components of that scenario you gave is the "debate-team"
adversarial model. Back in high school I took one semester of debate
club. Naively, I thought it was going to be an extended sort of Platonic
dialogue. The reality was ... well, nauseating.

If I had to pin down (and mercifully, up to just this moment I haven't
had to :-) how LO conduct differs from the scenario you gave above, I'd
have to say it's exactly the difference between adversarial debate and
mutual struggle towards truth.

Jim Michmerhuizen
--------------------------------------------------- ---------------------
. . . . . There are more different kinds of people in the world . . . . .
. . ^ . . than there are people... . . . . .