Managing Resistance in Change During Restructuring

How I Learned to Decode Transformation Resistance: "Everyone seems supportive of our digital transformation." Famous last words from a CEO whose initiative failed spectacularly. The signs were all there: - Meetings full of polite agreement - Questions focused on logistics, not vision - Energy levels dropping after announcements - Key people suddenly "too busy" for planning sessions We weren't reading the emotional subtext. Here's the EQ framework that turned things around: The SERA Method for Emotional Intelligence: SENSE the Emotional Climate - Notice energy shifts during meetings - Observe who stops participating - Track changes in informal conversations - Pay attention to body language patterns Actionable: Start every transformation meeting with an energy check. "On a scale of 1-10, how are you feeling about this change today?" INTERPRET the Underlying Emotions - "Need more details" often means "I'm scared" - "Seems rushed" often means "I feel overwhelmed" - "What about customers?" often means "What about me?" RESPOND to Emotions First, Facts Second Before: "The timeline is non-negotiable." After: "I understand this feels fast. Let me explain the support we're putting in place..." Actionable: Lead every response with emotional acknowledgment. "I hear that you're concerned about..." then provide information. ADAPT Your Communication Style - High anxiety = Slower pace, more details - Low engagement = More involvement opportunities - Strong resistance = More one-on-one time Actionable: Match your communication style to the emotional state you're observing. The transformation turned around when we stopped managing change And started managing the emotions around change. ♻️ Repost this to help other navigate transformations successfully. 🔔 Follow Sara Junio for more insights on Transformations and Leadership Communication.

Most change initiatives don't fail because of the change that's happening, they fail because of how the change is communicated. I've watched brilliant restructurings collapse and transformative acquisitions unravel… Not because the plan was flawed, but because leaders were more focused on explaining the "what" and "why" than on how they were addressing the fears and concerns of the people on their team. People don't resist change because they don't understand it. They resist because they haven't been given a compelling story about their role in it. This is where the Venture Scape framework becomes invaluable. The framework maps your team's journey through five distinct stages of change: The Dream - When you envision something better and need to spark belief The Leap - When you commit to action and need to build confidence The Fight - When you face resistance and need to inspire bravery The Climb - When progress feels slow and you need to fuel endurance The Arrival - When you achieve success and need to honor the journey The key is knowing exactly where your team is in this journey and tailoring your communication accordingly. If you're announcing a merger during the Leap stage, don't deliver a message about endurance. Your team needs a moment of commitment–stories and symbols that anchor them in the decision and clarify the values that remain unchanged. You can’t know where your team is on this spectrum without talking to them. Don’t just guess. Have real conversations. Listen to their specific concerns. Then craft messages that speak directly to those fears while calling on their courage. Your job isn't just to announce change, but to walk beside your team and help your team understand what role they play in the story at each stage. #LeadershipCommunication #Illuminate

Most companies think stakeholder management is about getting buy-in. It's actually about changing predictions.   Years ago, I was helping a technology company with their organizational transformation. They had grown from a startup to several thousand people but were still operating like a startup. No real processes. No decision-making structures. Just running from one urgent need to another.   When I recommended new forms of governance, the resistance was immediate. And here's what made it complicated: each senior leader was resisting against a different, negative outcome as a result of the change.   For example, some believed that structure would slow them down and make them less nimble versus competitors. Others thought it would kill innovation. Some thought it would create bureaucracy by adding layers and layers of approvals to workflows. Many thought it meant they would lose the autonomy to run their business unit.   Here's what was really happening. Each person's brain was making different predictions based on their unique experience. These leaders could only predict problems because unstructured processes and systems were all they'd ever known. Their brains couldn't envision the benefits because they had no (or at least limited) experience with good structure.   Traditional stakeholder management would have grouped them as "senior leaders" and design one strategy for them all. But their concerns were entirely individual.   Changing predictions requires three things. First, understanding that each person's concerns are unique. No two brains make the same predictions. Second, getting people to try new approaches without perfect information. This takes direct, one-on-one conversations. Third, recognizing that predictions don't change overnight. It takes experience and repetition.   If the stakeholders in your company are resisting change understand that their brains are doing what brains do. They're predicting outcomes based on what they know.   The next time you build your stakeholder management approach remember it's not about treating everyone with the same title the same.   It's about engaging everyone, individually, where they are. Michael J Lopez Consulting #change #stakeholdermanagement

"If you have to force change, you've already failed." This became painfully clear when I learned why the majority of organizational transformations collapse… Last week, in a workshop with Tamsen Webster, MA, MBA, I learned a term that fundamentally altered how I view organizational psychology: Reactance. I now call it "The Corporate Immune System" - and it's quietly destroying your change initiatives. Here's the counterintuitive truth most leaders miss: The harder you push for change, the stronger the organizational antibodies become against it. Consider this paradox: When you mandate transformation, you simultaneously create its greatest obstacle. When you force evolution, you guarantee devolution. When you demand innovation, you breed stagnation. HARD TRUTH: Your brain has a freedom detector. And when it senses a threat, it doesn't just resist - it architects elaborate systems of opposition. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗦𝗰𝗶𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗦𝘂𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗳𝘂𝗹 𝗖𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲: 1. The Autonomy Principle "Don't push the boulder. Build the slope." * Every forced change creates an equal and opposite resistance * The energy you spend overcoming resistance could have been spent creating momentum * Psychological safety isn't a buzzword - it's the foundation of transformation 𝟮. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗣𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗽𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗣𝗮𝗿𝗮𝗱𝗼𝘅 "𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗹𝗼𝘄𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝘄𝗮𝘆 𝘁𝗼 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲 𝗶𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗰𝗲 𝗶𝘁" * Speed of implementation ≠ Speed of integration * Involvement beats compliance by a factor of 4 * The time you "waste" in collaboration is recovered tenfold in execution 𝟯. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗟𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗽 𝗟𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗣𝗼𝗶𝗻𝘁 "𝗖𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲 𝗵𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗲𝗻𝘀 𝗮𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗲𝗱 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗿𝘂𝘀𝘁, 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗲𝗱 𝗼𝗳 𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗰𝗲" * Trust is the hidden multiplier in all transformation equations * Authority can mandate behavior but never belief * The best change strategies make resistance harder than adoption Here's what the research shows: * 70% of change programs fail to meet their objectives (McKinsey) * Projects with excellent change management are 6x more likely to succeed (Prosci) * Organizations with effective change management practices report 143% higher ROI compared to those with minimal change management (Prosci) Intellectual humility moment: I had to unlearn a decade of "best practices" to understand this fundamental truth - the most effective change feels chosen, not imposed. What conventional wisdom about change leadership do you need to unlearn? #OrganizationalPsychology #ChangeManagement #LeadershipScience Tamsen Webster - Your reactance framework revolutionized my approach to change.

How do you take a resistant team and guide them through a successful transformation? I led a team that went from evaluating programs to developing them—a complete transformation. At first, there was a lot of pushback, but by understanding their concerns and using a thoughtful approach, we made the transition work.   ---Here’s what I learned--- 🔸Resistance isn’t about the change—it’s about fear of loss. Through candid one-on-one conversations, I discovered the team feared losing their expertise. 🔸Facts don’t inspire change. Stories do. Rather than overwhelm them with reasons for the shift, I shared stories. Emotional buy-in through storytelling sparked curiosity. 🔸Small behavioral nudges lead to lasting change. We didn’t push the team into full-scale program development right away. Instead, we used small steps that eased them into the transition. This made the change feel natural, not overwhelming. 🔸Your biggest resister can become your strongest advocate. I focused on the team’s informal leader—the person everyone trusted. Once he embraced the change, the rest followed. 🔸Embrace failure as a stepping stone to success. We reframed setbacks as learning opportunities. By openly discussing challenges and solutions, we created a culture where innovation thrived and fear of failure diminished. 🏡 Think of change like remodeling a house. Exciting, but full of unexpected snags. In business, it’s the same—something always comes up. Plan for it. Expect it. 💡 Key Lesson: Resistance isn’t a roadblock—it’s part of the process. Expect pushback and guide your team with strategic nudges. What unexpected challenges have you faced when leading change?