FREE online courses on Strategies for Managing Change - Using Weak Signals to Manage Change - Coercive Change Management

 

The preceding discussion has shown that, when strategic management is introduced into a firm, support and influence by top management is typically used to overcome resistance to planning.  Further, implementation of the new strategy is the first and initial concern, followed by a step-by-step recognition of the systemic deficiencies.  Discovery of the need to change culture and power (if it comes at all) comes last.

 

We shall refer to such a method of introducing discontinuous change, which follows a resistance introducing sequence and uses power to overcome resistance, as a coercive change process.

 

Experience shows that coercive change is expensive and socially disruptive, but it offers the advantage of a rapid strategic response.  Thus, the coercive approach must be used when urgency is high and rapid response is essential.

 

But given an understanding of the nature of resistance, it need not be the brute force approach typically used in the past.  Even under pressures of time, resistance can be managed and costs minimized.  The typical pitfalls in the brute force approach are:

 

1.                  Failure, prior to the change, to muster be amount of power necessary to assure its completion.  The result is frustration of the change, which peters out before the new strategy is in place.

2.                  Failure to anticipate the sources and strength of behavioral resistance.  The results are unanticipated confusion, costs and delays.

3.                  Failure to attack its root causes, when resistance surfaces.  The result is paralysis by analysis.

4.                  Premature removal of the political support behind the change.  The result is regression of the change.

5.                  Failure to follow up implementation instructions issued to resisting units/individuals.  The result is sabotage of the change.

6.                  Failure to recognize the need for new competence, and capacity.  The results are suppression of change in favor of operating concerns, low quality of strategic decisions, and ineffective implementation.

 

The pitfalls can be avoided, and the coercive change made more effective, through the following measures:

 

1.                  Before launching the change, perform a behavioral diagnosis, to identify the potential sources of cultural and political resistance/support.

2.                  Build the necessary political platform for the change, that is, muster enough power behind it to assure successful completion.

3.                  During the change, monitor the process for incipient signs of resistance and deal with them before the resistance erupts.

4.                  After the strategy change is made, turn attention to capability/ capacity, and continue to apply power until the new strategy and capability match, and the change is institutionalized within the firm.

 

If a firm using the coercive approach lacks a strategic management capability, it can save time by using external consultants for strategy formulation.  It should be kept in mind, however, that if the consultants recommend changes which impact on the culture and the power structure, they will be unpopular.  Top management will need to apply continuous pressure and follow up to assure implementation of the consultants' advice.