Week One Written Assignment: Resistance to Change

An Assessment of the Actions of Steve Jackson

Niki Hamilton
3/15/2015
MBA 530
Benedictine University

An Assessment of the Actions of Steve Jackson

Steve Jackson Faces Resistance to Change is a case study describing the
organizational culture and personnel challenges faced by Steve Jackson, supervisor of
software implementation for the Project Evaluation Group (PEG), after he recommends
his employer move forward with plans to implement a new project evaluation software
(Inkpen & Pearson, 2011). Jackson struggles the supervisor of a different department,
Mike Barnett, through the change process. Barnett is adamantly opposed to the change in
software Jackson recommended. The case study does not close with resolutions, but with
Jackson facing a demand from his boss to convince Barnett of the softwares merits. The
reader is left to evaluate the actions taken by Jackson in as far as the study relates and
recommend a path forward that ensures Barnetts support of implementing the new BSO
project evaluation software.
Appropriate Change Implementations
Computer software increases productivity by automating the process of
converting an individuals thoughts and task data into information usable by multiple
people. Efficient use of software requires the user be familiar with the commands and
expected responses of the software. Transitioning users from one software to another
within an organization is a difficult process wrought with failure (Joshi, 1991). Jackson
takes a number of appropriate actions to facilitate a smooth transition.
Involving the people a change affects is an important step to successful change
management (Gotsill & Natchez, 2007). After Jacksons boss, Luke Williams, gives his
approval of the software, Jackson organizes a series of demo sessions for the users to
evaluate the BSO software. The demo sessions are smart elements of the change process

for two reasons. First of all, face-to-face is the most effective way to support a
comprehensive exchange of knowledge (Sarka, 2014). The demo sessions permit the
users to engage with the software and receive immediate resolution to obstacles. The
second positive component of the demo sessions is that the holding of demo sessions
addresses the human element of the change process by making the users of the software
part of the change evaluation process and providing an avenue for their commentary.
Jackson and Barnett talk about BSO and the demo sessions on more than one
occasion. Barnetts response to the training sessions indicates early on that he is not
receptive to new software. He verbally expresses dissatisfaction with the proposed
change and does not attend the first demo session. Jackson responds by sending a
personal e-mail invitation to upcoming sessions and engages in further face-to-face
discussions with Barnett. Jacksons choice to continue dialog with Barnett is another
proper approach to resolving Barnetts resistance to BSO.
Even though Barnett continues to resist BSO, the project is approved and
scheduled for implementation. Upon receiving the roll-out date, Barnett appeals to a
higher level of management in an attempt to stop the adoption of BSO and recommends
Jackson be removed from his position. Jackson is subsequently instructed to convince
Barnett that BSO is the right choice. Jackson responds appropriately by requesting
leadership and support from his immediate supervisor, Luke Williams. Williams neglects
to offer any useful support, but further stresses the importance of Barnetts acceptance of
the new software.

Areas for Improvement of Change Implementations

Jackson began the change process unaware of the human tendency to resist
change. Barnetts negative reaction and resistance to the proposed change are commonly
observed by researchers and change management professionals (Balestracci, 2003;
Gotsill & Natchez, 2007; Joshi, 1991). Prior to initiating the process of initiating a
change in software, Jackson should have familiarized himself with change management.
If he had been more aware of what to expect, he could have been prepared to handle the
inevitable opposition.
Jackson has the right idea in providing demo sessions as a setting in which people
use the proposed software and express their insights. However, Jacksons responses
while handling of Barnetts continual rebuffs Jacksons invitations to attend the sessions
miss the opportunity to ask Barnett the reasons behind his opinion of the software. One
of the main reasons people are difficult is a perceived loss of control; listening to and
engaging a person gives the person an opportunity to participate in control (Hannon,
2005). Barnett is a long-term employee with a history of experience and knowledge. His
reasoning for opposing the change is worth seeking. Jackson fails to identify and meet a
basic need of Barnett and all people: the need to be acknowledged (Balestracci, 2003).
Two things Jackson can do to improve his focus on people during change
implementation: ask more questions; listen more and open his mind to other
perspectives; talk less.
The case study indicates Jackson fails to realize implementing change is a
political process (Joshi, 1991). He spends time and energy seeking the approval of his
immediate supervisor and neglects building relationships across the software user and

peripheral management groups. Relationships are the conduits of information

(Balestracci, 2003). Jacksons apparent disregard for relationships among his peers and
across departments leaves him without a broad base of support for his initiative. In this
case, a network of relationships might have provided an avenue for Barnett to be
convinced BSO is the right software by someone other than Jackson. In the future,
Jackson can improve his change management by recognizing the political aspect of
change acceptance in an organization.
Causes for Resistance to Change
The reasons for resisting change may seem as varied as the people resisting.
However, change management professionals see only a few root causes for resistance:
power, lack of understanding, disagreement, and anxiety (Gotsill & Natchez, 2007; Joshi,
1991). Barnett is likely resisting the new software for all of these reasons and because he
is a difficult person by nature. Barnett attempts to assert his power within the
organization by repeatedly calling for Jackson to be removed from his position. Barnett
appeals to numerous managers and uses his personal relationships to advance his case.
The case study does not clarify Barnetts level of familiarity with BSO, however, one can
safely conclude his understanding is limited because he does not articulate his grievances
with the software but makes vague denunciations. Disagreement with the choice of
software is an unlikely reason for Barnetts resistance. His product knowledge is not
presented as thorough enough to rationally disagree with the product. Anxiety, on the
other hand, is also a likely reason for Barnetts rejection of the software change. He is
likely comfortable with and adept at using the companys current software package. He
may be worried about the time it will take to reach the same skill level with a new

product. He may be concerned his authority and control will be undermined as he leads a
workgroup, but takes longer to learn the new software. Finally, based on the case study
and characters descriptions of the man, difficult appears to be one of Barnetts
personality traits.
Addressing Change Resistance
The closing paragraph of the case study paints a picture of Jackson heading to his
office wondering about his boss lack of support, worrying about his future with the firm,
and struggling for a means to garner Barnetts support. The most pressing of these
concerns is Barnetts support. The first thing Jackson should do is request an
appointment with Barnett and find out why Barnett opposes the software. Jackson knows
why a software change is planned. Share the reasons for the proposed change with
Barnett and ask Barnett how he would handle the situation. Jackson needs to have an
authentic conversation with Barnett about the project. Presumably, both men have the
best interest of the company in mind. A series of conversations might provide the
information exchange needed to agree upon a solution to the problem that precipitated the
software change.
******I stink at conclusionsany help is appreciated*******

References
Balestracci, D. (2003). Handling the Human Side of Change. Quality Progress, 36(11),
38-45.
Gotsill, G., & Natchez, M. (2007). From Resistance to Acceptance: How to Implement
Change Management. T+D, 61(11), 24-27.
Hannon, K. (2005, July 7). You can take down that bully, gently. USA Today. Harvard
Business Review.
Inkpen, A., & Pearson, C. (2011). Steve Jackson faces resistance to change. Thunderbird
School of Global Management. Harvard Business Review.
Joshi, K. (1991). A Model of Users' Perspective on Change: The Case of Information
Systems Technology Implementation. MIS Quarterly, 15(2), 229-242.
Kerry, H. (n.d). You can take that bully down, gently. USA Today.
McShane, S.L., & Von Glinow, M.A., (2013). Organizational Behavior: emerging
knowledge, global reality (6th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.