Resistance to Change in Public Organization - EJOBSAT

Volume 4 Issue 1ISSN 2336-6494www.ejobsat.com

RESISTANCE TO CHANGEIN PUBLIC ORGANIZATION:REASONS AND HOW TO OVERCOME ITAyesha Amjad1, Muqqadas Rehman11The Superior University, Lahore, Pakistan

AMJAD, Ayesha, and REHMAN, Muqqadas. 2018. Resistance to Change in Public Organization: Reasons andHow to Overcome It. European Journal of Business Science and Technology, 4 (1): 56–68. ISSN 2336-6494,DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.11118/ejobsat.v4i1.129.

ABSTRACT

The objective behind this paper is to explore the main sources of resistance to change and how thatresistance effects the whole organization. Employees’ duty and overseeing resistance effectively arebasic essentials for forceful change management. This paper implements qualitative approach toobserve the employees’ resistance to change in one of the government organization working underMinistry of Industries of Pakistan. This is a qualitative study in which sample of 10 interviews havebeen conducted from the managers, deputy managers and executives working in this governmentorganization. As indicated by Kurt Lewin’s force field analysis this study shows, a manager lookingfor to “push” the procedure of organizational change must put all push to decrease the impact ofpreventing forces while expanding the impact of main driving forces and along these lines workwith resistance of employees towards change.

KEY WORDS

resistance, organizational change, qualitative, employees

JEL CODES

L16

1 INTRODUCTION

The modern age of development of mankindduring an era when changes in all circlesof life are quickened, the requirement forfast adjustment and most extreme expectationof future changes emerges. Forms happen soquickly that even the extreme advancements aresuch for a brief timeframe. While actualizing

focused methodologies, organizations are con-tinually compelled to screen the progressionsoccurring available and must watch activitiesof rivals all together not to linger behind inthe transient and be in front of everybodyin the long haul. Steady changes have turnedinto a target need for everybody, although

Resistance to Change in Public Organization: Reasons and How to Overcome It 57

for the individuals who would prefer not tochange.

In this way, Pakistani organizations mustutilize the world experience of progress man-agement in their practices and in everydayoperations. Residential organizations need toreexamine their financial, organizational, socialand mental parts of management and business.

Organizations basically work as open frame-works and are liable to outer impact, so theyhave to change and adjust to the economic sit-uations. The pre-requisites to change originatefrom inside the organization as necessities anddesires of employees and from outside as ex-panded rivalry, mechanical advancements, newenactment and the weight of social components.

It is also possible that the organizationneglects to roll out the fundamental improve-ments, terms of vital changes. For instance, inthe most recent decade of the 20th century fromthe rundown of the main twenty organizationsin Europe inside five years fifteen organizationsvanished (got to be out of business sector).This was the outcome that the organization didnot foresee and did not wish to notice changesin the outer environment. Notwithstanding,there are likewise different numbers expressingthat 50 to 70% of all hierarchical changesstarted in 1980–1990 neglected to accomplishits objectives. As indicated by appraisals ofM. Hammer, American master on rebuildingorganizations, out of 32 billion dollars spentby organizations on these procedures, 20 billionhave been squandered (Shermet, 2010). At theend of the day, not each change prompts apositive result. All things considered, there is nooption for change. Regardless of the high risk ofdisappointment, organizations need to continu-ally search for, execute and oversee change.

There may be many reasons of showingresistance like due to fear of insecurity, lack offreedom or being afraid of unknown or havingless knowledge. The management should under-stand the possible reasons of such resistancewhile implementing change processes in theorganization (Asgarkhani and Patterson, 2012).Such type of resistance can be reduced by devel-oping proper communication channels amongthe organization (Yılmaz and Kılıçoğlu, 2013).

Employees’ perspective and their connectionto organizational changes assume a character-izing part and significance in the changingoccurring in the organization. It is known, thata critical test to the usage of organizationalchanges or projects of progress is resistance tochange. It is the restriction to any progressionsand changes in organizations showed by workersin this or other structure. It is imperative tosay that individuals oppose not just awful ordestructive, in their perspective, changes addi-tionally to those that clearly appear to be sureand not harming. Along these lines, workersmay have numerous reasons and intentions notacknowledge changes and oppose them.Resistance from change has many faces for

example absent from duty, failure to completeassignments on time because employee don’twant to do, or damaging new machines deliber-ately so that new things will not work properly(Carr and Brower, 2000).In this way, it is intelligent to consider orga-

nizational changes through the model (Lewin,1951; Yılmaz and Kılıçoğlu, 2013). Its base isin the position that the comprehension of theprogressions includes the mindfulness and theidea of security. In his model, Lewin offeredconversation starters like what forces lead tothe foundation and support of a parity or whatsort of components in the organization that“pushes” to changes.Thusly, Levin called developments towards

change as “driving forces” and blocking devel-opments towards accomplishment of an objec-tive as “hindering forces” (Lewin, 1951). If thereshould arise an occurrence of fairness of theseforces – the organization can hold a steadyposition.In this manner, usage of changes at an

organization includes either an expansion inthe estimation of main thrusts, or a decline inconstraining upsetting strengths or some mix ofcollaborations that prompt the infringement oftheir equalization.According to Lewin (1951) managers are

looking to “push” the procedure of organiza-tional change must put all endeavors to lessenthe impact of hindering forces while expand-ing the impact of driving forces and along

58 Ayesha Amjad and Muqqadas Rehman

these lines work with resistance of employeestowards change. He expressed that resistanceto change was the norm of the organization,subsequently working with faculty, clarifyingthem the change methods and new standardswas essential (Wanberg and Banas, 2000).

It is important to say that Kurt Lewin’sfield theory was the beginning stage in theutilization of the term resistance to change in

the 1950s and 1960s (Lewin, 1951). From thatpoint forward resistance to change was consid-ered as a component of progress procedure inorganizations and was analyzed by hierarchicaladvancement and management researchers. Re-sistance is characterized as limiting strengthsthat restrict any adjustments in organizations(Lewin, 1951).

2 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study is to examine why em-ployees shows resistance towards change, whattype of changes were seen in employees behaviorwhile implementing change in the organization,what are the main causes of such behaviorand what steps should organization take to

reduce the effect of such resistance. This studyenquires about the employee’s behavior duringimplementation and even planning the anythingnew or changes in the organization which effectsthe whole organization and causes resistance inimplementing change in the organization.

3 LITERATURE REVIEW

Resistance is something that influences thechange process by deferring or backing off itsstarting, impeding or preventing its execution,and expanding its costs (Ansoff, 1991). What’smore, it can be any behavior that tries tokeep the present state of affairs (Maurer, 1996).Resistance is not negative ideas all in all, sincechange is not naturally helpful for organizations(Waddell and Sohal, 1998).

Organizations face resistance in many formssuch as employees strikes, arrogant behavioror by harming new technologies or machiner-ies (Fleming and Spicer, 2003). Resistanceof employees is sometimes created becauseof inefficient management or because of fewmanagers. If management did not use appro-priate behavior with their employees, it maycreate resistance to change (Fleming and Spicer,2003). Sometimes organizational factors alsobecome a cause of resistance and ultimatefailure of new techniques and organization too(Mlay et al., 2013).

Organizations developments in an organi-zation are focused and requesting as muchorganization alongside the difficulties and resis-

tance they confronted in the prologue to ad-vancement. A few researchers further remarkedthat bleeding edge employees known as inter-functional in executing advancement in themanagement industry (Wilson et al., 2012).Seemingly it is unpredictable on the groundsthat management development reasons, out-standing effect on employee’s parts requiringchanges in behavior which suits the consumer’stendencies.

Resistance affects the investment at whichan improvement is acquired. It influences theemotions and conclusions of workers in anyrespect phases of the reception technique. Itsways effectiveness, charming, and organiza-tions. Impenetrability to change can heighten ifindividuals sense that they have been ensured inan advancement of adjustments that have hadinadequate support to pick up the predictedresults. In ultra-cutting edge turbulent timesconsidering headway is a forceful need in lightof reality that this wonder contributes enor-mous impact on organization and organizations.Thusly, to make the improvement unmistak-able, the management needs to set a stage to


fit the changes inside the earth all together thatthe management can hold next to each other onadvancement and the resistance with a higherhand.

Advancement and new pursuit improvementmay begin as an arranged choice of the mostastounding administration or it might includepretty much mid-level individuals as they needto take the activity to take care of an issue innew courses or to build up a proposition forchange. Very fruitful organizations permit both,and even authority top administration choicesto embrace an improvement exertion advantagefrom the unconstrained innovativeness of thoseunderneath (Schuler and Jackson, 1987).

Kurt Lewin’s force field analysis model, amanager seeking to “push” the process oforganizational change must put all effort toreduce the effect of hindering forces whileincreasing the effect of driving forces and thisway work with resistance of employees towardschange (Kunanbayeva and Kenzhegaranova,2013). Dean and Linda Anderson resent twodiverse methodologies towards change in whichone differences the other. Both methodologieshave at last extensive effects and pioneers andtheir own particular achievements (Andersonand Anderson, 2002).

Change procedure can be sorted from mul-tiple points of view that incorporate formativechanges, transitional changes and transforma-tional changes. Formative changes are eitherarranged or developing. It upgrades or redressesthe current perspectives concentrating on thechange of an expertise or procedure. Transi-tional changes are done to get the fanciedstate which might be not quite the same asthe current one. Such changes are arranged ormight be radical. Transformational changes areradical in nature. It requires a movement inpresumptions and results as far as structure,procedures, society and technique in an orga-nization (Anderson and Anderson, 2010).

The organization cannot achieve their strate-gic goals unless their employees are convinced(Schraeder, 2009). The organization shouldhave all information about all the consequencesand causes of resistance while implementingchange (Asgarkhani and Patterson, 2012). Pre-

vious studies also show that resistance tochange is also dependent upon the emotionsand irrational ideas of the employees are pos-itively dependent upon the behavior towardschange implementation. It also determinesthe intervention strategy for the managementto reduce the employee’s resistances towardschange (Bovey and Hede, 2001). Individualsdo opposes to change as they feel that it willmake them lose their worth or force. Peopleresist not only to bad or harmful but it alsoresist to those changes that seem positive andnot damaging as employees may have manyreasons and motives not to accept changesand resist them. Therefore implementation ofchange management practices involves eitheran increase in the value of driving forces,or a decrease in limiting hindering forces orsome combination of interactions that lead tothe violation of balance in any organization.Resistance to transform from the workers ofan organization can turn into an obstruction toflourishing (Toosy, 2006).

For that the change management processmust be comprehended and afterward the ex-planations behind resistance to change shouldbe figured it out. Once the reasons are knownthen we can take out the main driver of theresistance.

Much of the literature focuses on the processof change management. Particularly in privatesector of developing countries like in Pakistanare largely under researched area. In paststudies, performance of individual organizationsis observed by researchers which do not coverall population. This study will be helpful forefficient allocation of the change managementpractices in the organizations to get betteroutcomes from implementation of changes atan organization level that would involves eitheran increase in the value of driving forces, or adecrease in limiting hindering forces or somecombination of interactions that lead to theviolation of balance. In spite of the plenitudeof studies on resistance to change, there arevery few studies focused on the managementpractices of government organizations espe-cially when it comes to resistance to change(Hornstein, 2010).


Fig. 1: Themes

The main focus of this study is to ex-plore why employees shows resistance wheneversomething new is going to be happened in thegovernment organizations and how the organi-zation can reduces such resistance; by under-standing employees’ expectations and how theseexpectations can help organization to improveefficiency of the man power. Based on reviewof literature relationships were developed inthis study showing factors that were importantfor the employees which would increase theirloyalty towards organization.

Following propositions where developed onthe basis of the previous literature:

1. Level of awareness regarding change islinked with the resistance of employeestowards change.

2. Nature of change which is going is associ-ated with resistance of employees towardschange.

3. Employees’ participation in change planningprocess is associated with the resistance ofemployees towards change.

4. Personality traits of the employees is linkedwith the resistance of employees towardschange.

4 RESEARCH DESIGN

4.1 Philosophy of Research

As this paper was on the subjective matterof the topic, research paradigm selected wasconstructivist as constructivism accepts thatthe importance of encounters and occasionsare built by people, and along these linesindividuals build the substances in which theytake part (Charmaz, 2006). This study is alsobased on inductive reasoning approach as thisstudy was concerned with the observation ofthe employees’ behavior when something newis implemented in the government organization(Creswell, 2012).

4.2 Population and Sample Size

Target population for this paper was theemployees in government organization. Theperfect sample size was under 10 individuals.According to experts of qualitative research, itwas suggested that the number of participants

may vary from 5 to 50 in qualitative studies(Dworkin, 2012). For this situation, the aggre-gate participants who report are twelve and tenare considered to be included in this paper.

4.3 Sampling Technique

We have used convenience sampling technique(Bryman, 2004) in this study as the cost andtime required completing this sampling was less.It allows you to complete the sample size in alesser time and gather vital information relatingto the participant views. This procedure mayyield data poor cases since cases are pickedbasically in light of the fact that they areanything but difficult to get to, instead ofon a particular methodology/basis. Examiningcolleagues, relatives or neighbors just in lightof the fact that they are “there” is a case ofcomfort inspecting (Creswell, 1998).


4.4 Data Collection Tool

Creswell (2012) states that the essential strat-egy for data collection is one-to-one interviewdeveloped in the basis of previous observations.

Permission was taken from the participants torecord their interviews that take approximately45 to 60 minutes. Notes were also taken torecord their gestures during interview.

Semi-structured interviews will be perform-ing among employees of Government orga-nization at all the hierarchical levels. Thequestionnaire was adopted from Kunanbayeva

and Kenzhegaranova (2013). Observation wouldbe used as an additional tool to get a betterunderstanding of the answers. Independencebetween the participants and the researcherwill scrupulously respect. An interview guideprovided a reliable, comparable qualitativedatabase for the research. The informationsought in this study had the potential to be in-tricate and multi-factorial; therefore, the semi-structured interview allowed the participantsto supply some direction with open questionsand also allowed for the measurement of specificdimensions through indicators.

5 DATA ANALYSIS

All the ten interviews were transcribed after allthe data collection to get accurate and exactviews of all the participants. Oliver et al. (2005)stated that “transcription is a technique ofdata presentation, and this representation canaffect how data are conceptualized”. All thetranscriptions were then thematically analyzed

through latest version of the NVivo softwarethat is QSR NVivo 11-plus.

“The searching tools in NVivo allow theresearcher to interrogate her or his data at aparticular level. This can, in turn, improve therigor of the analysis process by validating (ornot) some of the researcher’s own impressionsof the data.” (Welsh, 2002)

6 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Being a researcher it is very important to giverespect to all the participants and keep themaware about all the pros and cons of the studyand their participation (Guba and Lincoln,1994). Here in this section key ethical issue ofstudy discussed below.

6.1 Confidentiality and Anonymity

Primary consideration was given to all theparticipant’s confidentiality and anonymity. Itwas assured to all the managers and executivesthat all personal information would not bedisclosing to anyone and will only be seen bythe researcher and the supervisor of this study.

6.2 Ownership and Interpretation

Ownership and interpretation were consideredto be very important while dealing with ethicalissues on the qualitative study (Creswell, 2012).Because ownerships means who owns data andinterpretation means who owns the interpre-tations. Being a researcher it is the primaryresponsibility of the researcher to be honestwith the data and with the participants and willnot share with any other person.

6.3 Withdrawal from participatingin the study

All the participants were given full right towithdraw from the interview whenever he/shewants and in case of withdrawal of any individ-ual, after his/her withdrawal, all the data willbe destroyed.


7 QUALITATIVE DATA ANALYSIS

Five themes have been identified after the the-matic analysis through NVivo software. Thesethemes were named as Employees’ response;Level of awareness; Participation of employeesin planning and implementing change; Per-sonality towards; and Planned and purposefulchange. These themes has been reported in theTab. 1.

Tab. 1 clearly show all the themes emergedafter the thematic analysis and their frequen-cies. According to this, the theme with thehighest frequency is the last one which isPlanned and Purposeful change with frequencyof 48, which shows that participants shows moreresistance when there were not a purposefulchange. Because if they see that organizationis implementing something new which did nothave a clear purpose or it was not a plannedchange, employees show more resistance.

The second theme with the highest frequencyis Employees response after the thematic anal-ysis which is 43 shows that all the happenings

will ultimately affect the employees’ response.If anything new is going to implement inthe organization it will create resistance byemployees. Employees’ response includes theirbehavior towards change at every step ofchange formulation and implementation in theorganization.

The third highest frequency is of two themeswhich are of participation of employees inplanning of change and personality traits ifemployees. The frequency of these two themesis 22, which indicates that participation of em-ployees in planning and implementing changeand personality traits of employees are equallyimportant and can help to reduce the resistanceby employees towards change.

The theme with the lowest frequency is oflevel of awareness that is Level of awarenesshave frequency of 18, which indicates that levelof awareness of change among employees is moreor less important to create resistance to change.

8 INTERPRETATION OF THEMES

8.1 Planned & Purposeful Change

The most highlighted theme among all theinterviews is planned and purposeful change. Itshows that if management is going to do anychange in the organization, it should be pur-poseful and planned too; otherwise spontaneouschanges may create ambiguity and fear amongemployees. And in this case they will definitelyshow resistance to this change, a mentioned byone of the participant:

• “Some things should be changed after some-time. But these changes should be for thebetterment of company and for the welfareof employees otherwise employees will notsupport any such change.” (Participant 5)

• “If I feel new things can create risk for myjob security, I will not support such change.”(Participant 9)

• “… Favorable changes are accepted openhandedly.” (Participant 2)

• “… but it should be positive change whichincrease productivity of organization.” (Par-ticipant 8)If any of the employees perceived that new

things can harm them, they will not supportthe change and if employees perceived that newthings will teach them something new they willsupport it.

8.2 Employees Response

The second most reported theme is employeeresponse, and it indicates that anything happenin the organization will affect the employees’response in a positive or negative way de-pending upon the nature of the change andwhat are the perceptions of this change inthe minds of the employees. It is noteworthy


Tab. 1: Qualitative Data Analysis

ParticipantsA:

Employees’Responses

B:Level of

Awareness

C:Participationof Employees

D:Personality Traitstowards Change

E:Planned and

Purposeful ChangeParticipant 1 7 3 2 4 6Participant 2 5 2 1 3 7Participant 3 3 2 3 1 6Participant 4 5 1 2 3 7Participant 5 3 1 4 3 6Participant 6 3 1 2 2 3Participant 7 3 2 1 1 4Participant 8 3 2 2 2 4Participant 9 4 3 4 1 3Participant 10 7 1 1 2 2Total 43 18 22 22 48

that it is also important that how managementcommunicate about change with the employees;if the management communicates properly itwill definitely give positive feedback from theemployees.

As referred by participants:

• “Before implementing any change, managermust ensure that all employees are readyfor change. It can be done their involve-ment … then they train their departmentsubordinates and take feedback about thatchange … if feedback is positive then it canbe assumed that nobody is disagree withchange.” (Participant 8)

• “Sometimes new policies are just made andimposed on us, without any prior commu-nication will create a feeling of irritatingmeans we are the one who will work on allthese new thing and we remain ignorant howwe can support or be a part of that change.”(Participant 10)

• “If my supervisor intimate me about newthings it will make me easy to understandand cope with that change otherwise itwill become very difficult for me to handlethings … sometimes make very weird situa-tion … very complex … obviously then I resistto it.” (Participant 6)

Employees felt satisfied and show positiveresponse to change when they are previouslyinformed about that change and their views andfeedback were also considered while implement-ing that change.

8.3 Personality Traits of theEmployees

The third highest frequency theme is Person-ality traits of the employees, which indicatesthat if someone is naturally very active andadventurous, that one individual will supportnew things and if someone is very reluctant,he/she will hesitate to try anything new.

As referred by participants:• “And be optimistic even though I might not

be currently happy. I will learn new skillsand also look for ways to help others copewith change.” (Participant 6)

• “Yes because I m very much optimisticperson I want change in anything which isassociated with myself.” (Employee 2)

• “Yes I support to change because withoutchange businesses would likely lose theircompetitive edge and fail to meet the needsof customers … and as a employee new andbetter change help in completing projectsproperly.” (Employee 8)


The above statements clearly shows responsetowards change is also dependent upon thepersonality traits of the employees. If someoneis enthusiastic, he will support change, andtake new things as a challenge. If someone isvery pessimist, he will show resistance towardschange and may create hurdle while implement-ing change in the organization.

8.4 Participation of Employees inPlanning and ImplementingStages of Change

This theme is also important as if the manage-ment involve employees in the decision makingprocess in the organization, employees feelconfident and it will also increase loyalty andhonesty of employees with the organization andwith management as well.

As referred by participants:

• “Only selective employees took part indecision making process which sometimemakes other employees felt inferior.” (Par-ticipant 5)

• “Management show biasness in this re-gard…they take advises of just their of ownedclosed relative employees which make otheremployees ignorant.” (Participant 6)

• “There always remain conflict of ideasamong employees and management, as man-agement just think about their self interestnot what is better for the employees.”(Participant 8)

It is obvious if someone will not be askedabout their opinion he/she will feel inferior andwill not support anything in the organization.It is the responsibility of the management oforganization to make all employees participatein all the decision making process. It will allowall the employees to show their creativity andbe confident and make loyal to the organization.

8.5 Level of Awareness

The lowest frequency theme is Level of aware-ness, means all employees have well awarenessabout the change going to implement in theorganization. Mostly participants indicates thatit will become easier for them if they are wellaware about the new things, otherwise moreor less it will become the reason for resistanceagainst change.

As referred by participants:• “No, mostly changes are not properly aware

to all employees.” (Participant 1)• “Only top management is aware about the

new things, whether changes are minor ormajor, lower or middle layer managers arenot are of these things … which may some-times create resistance as employees feelignorant by the management.” (Participant3)If employees are not aware of things happen-

ing in the organization it will ultimately createfeeling of ignorant or can also affect the selfesteem of the employees.Fig. 2 shows the themes emerged after the

thematic analysis through NVivo software. Itshows that Employees response towards changetheme is associated with four other themeswhich are Level of awareness, Planned and pur-poseful change, personality traits of the employ-ees and Participation of employees in planningand implementing change. Level of awarenesstheme is linked with employees’ response theme.Planned and purposeful change theme is linkedwith employees’ response theme, participationof employees in planning and implementingchange them and Personality traits of theemployees theme. Participation of employeesin planning and implementing change is linkedwith employees’ response theme, Personalitytraits of the employees theme and level ofawareness theme. Personality traits of the em-ployee theme is linked with employees’ responsetheme, Participation of employees in planningand implementing change and Planned andpurposeful change theme.


Fig. 2: Concept Map

9 DISCUSSION

The research shows that the spontaneouschanges make employees afraid of new thingsand risks. The management should take neces-sary steps to make new things purposeful fortheir employees (Fleming and Spicer, 2003).Otherwise the management of the organizationhave to face resistance from their employees(Asgarkhani and Patterson, 2012). If new thingsand technologies that will lead to change theorganization should be properly communicatedamong all the employees in the organization

(Yılmaz and Kılıçoğlu, 2013). By communi-cating about new changes with employees themanagement can get positive response alongwith the some positive feedbacks from theiremployees. If the organization will not do sotheir employees will felt harmed and negativelywill be spread all over the institution (Mlay etal., 2013). Employees response towards changeis also effected by their personality traits ofindividuals.

10 CONCLUSION

This study highlights the main reason of em-ployees’ resistance to change in governmentorganizations. The finding of this study re-veals that management plays a vital role inreducing the resistance by proper communica-tion. If employees have enough confident onthe management of the organization they willdefinitely support management at every step of

change formulation and implementation processin government organizations. Another reasonof the employees’ resistance is the personalitytraits but again if management convinces everyemployee that every change is betterment ofthe employees, they will support managementat every step.


11 LIMITATION AND FUTURE RECOMMENDATIONS

In this study there is issue of generaliabilityarises due to small sample size, as the datawas collected from ten employees only. In futureincreasing the sample size may be affected the

results of the study. Furthermore quantitativestudy done in this issue may positively supportthe results obtained in this research which isqualitative research.

12 IMPLICATIONS OF THE STUDY

Particularly in private sector of developingcountries like in Pakistan are largely underresearched area. In past studies, performanceof individual organizations is observed by re-searchers which do not cover all population.This study will help to explore impact ofimplementing new processes in the Governmentsetup of the Pakistan and also helpful forefficient allocation for the change managementpractices in the organizations. This study willfacilitate the management of the public sectororganizations to overcome the issue of imple-menting change processes. This study will behelpful for efficient allocation of the changemanagement practices in the organizations toget better outcomes from implementation of

changes at an organization level that wouldinvolves either an increase in the value ofdriving forces, or a decrease in limiting hinder-ing forces or some combination of interactionsthat lead to the violation of balance. Thefindings of this research helps in implementingthe balanced approach regarding factors causesresistance for change management practices andby developing a strong organizational culturethat must be creative and does not contain anypolitical constrains. It tells how organizationalmanagement can manage the change that willlead to prosperous outcomes not just for thecompany but also for the employees and otherstakeholders too.

13 REFERENCES

Anderson, D. and Anderson, L. A. 2002. BeyondChange Management: Advanced Strategies forToday’s Transformational Leaders.

Anderson, D. and Anderson, L. A. 2010.Beyond Change Management: How to AchieveBreakthrough Results Through Conscious ChangeLeadership. John Wiley & Sons.

Ansoff, H. I. 1991. Critique of Henry Mintzberg’s ‘TheDesign School: Reconsidering the Basic Premisesof Strategic Management’. Strategic ManagementJournal, 12 (6), 449–461.

Asgarkhani, M. and Patterson, B. 2012. Informationand Business Process Re-engineering throughApplication of Information and CommunicationTechnologies (ICTs). International Conferenceon Recent Trends in Computer and InformationEngineering.

Bovey, W. H. and Hede, A. 2001. Resistance toOrganizational Change: the Role of Cognitive andAffective Processes. Leadership & OrganizationDevelopment Journal, 22 (8), 372–382.

Bryman, A. 2004. Social Research Methods. OxfordUniversity Press.

Carr, J. B. and Brower, R. S. 2000. PrincipledOpportunism. Public Affairs Quarterly Spring,24 (1), 109–138.

Charmaz, K. 2006. Constructing Grounded Theory:A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis.SAGE Publications.

Creswell, J. W. 1998. Qualitative Inquiry andResearch Design: Choosing Among Five Designs.SAGE Publications.

Creswell, J. W. 2012. Qualitative Inquiry andResearch Design: Choosing Among FiveApproaches. SAGE Publications.


Dworkin, S. L. 2012. Sample Size Policy for QualitativeStudies Using In-Depth Interviews. Archives ofSexual Behavior, 41 (6), 1319–1320.

Fleming, P. and Spicer, A. 2003. Working at a CynicalDistance: Implications for Power, Subjectivity andResistance. Organization, 10 (1), 157–179.

Guba, E. G. and Lincoln, Y. S. 1994. CompetingParadigms in Qualitative Research. In Denzin,N. K. and Lincon, Y. S. (eds.) Handbook ofQualitative Research, Chapter 6, pp. 105–117.

Hornstein, H. 2010. Successes and Potential Obstaclesto Change Management in the Public Service. IveyBusiness Journal, 74 (6), 1–25.

Kunanbayeva, D. and Kenzhegaranova, M. 2013.Resistance to Change in Organizations of theRepublic of Kazakhstan: Country-Specific Reasonsand Ways to Overcome it. World Applied SciencesJournal, 28 (2), 223–232.

Lewin, K. 1951. Field Theory in Social Science.Maurer, R. 1996. Using Resistance to Build Support

for Change. The Journal for Quality andParticipation, 19 (3), 56–64.

Mlay, S. V., Zlotnikova, I. and Watundu, S. 2013.A Quantitative Analysis of Business ProcessReengineering and Organizational Resistance:The Case of Uganda. The African Journal ofInformation Systems, 5 (1), 1–26.

Oliver, D. G., Serovich, J. M. and Mason, T. L.2005. Constraints and Opportunities with InterviewTranscription: Towards Reflection in QualitativeResearch. Social Forces, 84 (2), 1273–1289.

Schraeder, M. 2009. Leveraging Potential Benefits ofAugmentation in Employees Training. Industrialand Commercial Training, 41 (3), 133–138.

Schuler, R. S. and Jackson, S. E. 1987. LinkingCompetitive Strategies with Human ResourceManagement Practices. The Academy ofManagement Executive, 1 (3), 207–219.

Shermet, M. A. 2010. Change Management. Delo.Toosy, M. A. 2006. Role of Leadership in Reducing

Resistance to Change.Waddell, D. and Sohal, A. S. 1998. Resistance:

A Constructive Tool for Change Management.Management Decision, 36 (8), 543–548.

Wanberg, C. R. and Banas, J. T. 2000. Predictorsand Outcomes of Openness to Changes in aReorganizing Workplace. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 85 (1), 132.

Welsh, E. 2002. Dealing with Data: Using NVivo inthe Qualitative Data Analysis Process. QualitativeSocial Research, 3 (2).

Wilson, A., Zeithaml, V. A., Bitner, M. J. andGremler, D. D. 2012. Services Marketing:Integrating Customer Focus Across the Firm.McGraw Hill.

Yılmaz, D. and Kılıçoğlu, G. 2013. Resistance toChange and Ways of Reducing Resistance inEducational Organizations. European Journal ofResearch on Education, 1 (1), 14–21.

14 ANNEX

14.1 Interview Protocol

The interview protocol for the in-depth in-terviews with the government employees wasdeveloped from a review of the relevant liter-ature and was available. The researcher usedthe protocol for the interviews to guide theparticipants. The Interview Protocol used toconduct the face-to-face in-depth interviewswith the government employees was approvedby the Superior University. The interviewerfollowed a topic guide to make the discussionand interview flow in a systematic and naturalway, and to facilitate appropriate probing.

14.2 Initial Interview Protocol forGovernment Employees

1. Introduction

The interviewer introduces her role, aim andthe format of the interview. After thankingthe participant, the interview process will beintroduced. The participant will be advised ofwhat is expected of him/her. The ground rulesof the interview will be established e.g.:• All information and discussion will be

treated confidentially.• Participant will be informed about the

purpose of the interview.• Participant’s opinion is valuable.• The duration of the interview.


• Participant will be informed about the bestway to get in touch with the interviewer,later if he/she wants to.

• The recording arrangement etc.The participant will be asked to introduce

him/herself and express any questions or con-cerns before the interview process starts. Afteranswering all the questions and concerns, thetape recorder will be switched on and theinterview will start.

2. Discussion Questions

The participant will be asked to answer thefollowing questions:• Are you satisfied with the level of your

awareness about the changes taking place inyour company?

• How do you cope with changes?• Do you think that changes taking place

in your organization are purposeful andnecessary

• Do you observe resistance to changes?• Who should take part in planning and

implementing changes in the organization?

• Are there any workers in your company whodisagree with the ongoing changes in yourcompany

• What do these changes mean for you per-sonally?

• Why do you work for this company?• Do you support changes taking place in the

company?• What kinds of changes are planned in your

organization?

3. Closing

Explain the next step of the research and howthe participant’s feedback will be used. Thankthe participant again for his/her contributionand ask if he/she has any other questions.If there are no other questions, mark theending time and turn off the tape recorder. Theinterview will be dismissed.

Source:Kunanbayeva, D. and Kenzhegaranova, M.2013. Resistance to Change in Organizations of theRepublic of Kazakhstan: Country-Specific Reasonsand Ways to Overcome it. World Applied SciencesJournal, 28 (2), 223–232.

AUTHOR’S ADDRESSAyesha Amjad, The Superior University, Lahore, Pakistan, e-mail: [email protected]

Muqqadas Rehman, The Superior University, Lahore, Pakistan, e-mail:[email protected]

Resistance to Change in Public Organization - EJOBSAT

Documents

Transcript of Resistance to Change in Public Organization - EJOBSAT