Why resistance to change represents unresolved fear

“We’ve got resistance.” “People are resisting.” “We need to manage the resistance.” If you have ever stepped foot within a board room, project meeting or steering group where change management is being discussed, then you have probably heard plenty of variations on these phrases. And the likelihood of the word resistance appearing on any slide deck about change? Pretty close to 100%. In fact, it’s been used as a corporate buzzword so many times that it has almost stopped meaning anything. We don’t even question it anymore or delve into whether it’s even a correct assertion, let alone investigating the potential underlying reasons.

But we should be, because people aren’t ‘resisting’ because they have some deep objection to change. It’s because they’re scared.

And if we started being honest about that, then we’d probably all make a lot more progress with this business of change.

People aren’t obstacles

The word itself creates an immediate problem, because it paints people as obstacles that need to be overcome, when the reality is usually very different. Getting to work one day to be told that your role is changing, you’ve got to learn how to use completely new technology, or that your company is being bought out – all of these things can create worry. It’s only natural to be concerned about succeeding in the new environment, taking on new responsibilities, or the risk of redundancy, and it’s equally as natural to ask questions in a bid to alleviate those worries.

If we take those questions at face value, answer them honestly and as fully as possible, and take note of the underlying emotions sparking them – then we can often reduce that worry, and ultimately support people through change. But if we frame it as the questioner being difficult or (let’s use the word again) resisting change, then what has been created is an ‘us v them’ situation and we’re suddenly on opposing teams rather than working cohesively together to achieve successful change.

Interpreting emotion

Conversely, an air of disengagement during a major organisational change isn’t necessarily a rejection of the future. Especially for those who have already been through multiple projects that promised everything and delivered very little.

Whether it’s exhaustion, despondency, concern or otherwise – it is completely normal to have an emotional reaction to uncertainty. In fact, our enhanced knowledge of neuroscience means we now have a far better understanding about exactly what triggers the complex electrical wiring system we call the human brain.

By scanning the environment looking for certainty, patterns and signals, brains can make predictions about what is going to happen. Because this takes an extraordinary amount of energy to do all of this, the brain prefers familiarity wherever possible: familiar routines, work schedules and people around us all help it operate efficiently, and change completely disrupts that lovely pattern of being able to make easy, accurate predictions.

The uncertainty involved with change can be interpreted by the brain as a potential threat, activating the same neural pathways as a physical threat does, meaning your biological reaction to a company merger can actually mirror the type of reaction you’d have if you were in mortal danger.

Biology not choice

Yet despite all these remarkable scientists unlocking the secrets of the brain and laying the facts out there for all of us – organisations still continue to talk about resistance as if people are simply being awkward if they have questions or worries. It’s as bizarre as describing someone standing on the edge of a cliff as ‘resistant to gravity’ – gravity exists whether they like it or not, just as a brain cannot be rewired at will.

Fear exists because we are human. Everyone experiences it (yes, even including the leaders in charge of change, and the consultants supporting them).

So, we must reframe the conversation. It’s not about tackling or avoiding an obstacle akin to a race to the finish line in a Gladiators-style game show – it’s about creating environments where people feel safe enough to discuss the fear they feel.

Because if we allow individuals the time, space and psychological safety to talk about what’s worrying them, then we have a far greater chance of addressing their concerns. That gives leaders the chance to either provide more information by way of reassurance, or perhaps even to reconsider a course of action to take into account different perspectives.

Don’t dictate, communicate

Communicating with employees through change is positive – we know this. But mistaking dictating for communicating is a fundamental error. By telling people what’s happening and then disappearing back into a boardroom to continue forging ahead with the change project, leaders allow all those doubts and fears to linger without ever addressing them.

Instead, having a two-way conversation that explores how people are feeling as well as the practicalities of the changes ahead addresses the very real need for people to talk about their emotions in order to process them. It’s about empathy: one of the most underrated leadership qualities.

Empathy won’t make these difficult conversations any easier, but it does allow leaders to recognise the fear which often underpins the questions, concerns and frustrations they are hearing. Empathy reduces the tendency to label someone as ‘resistant’, because we’re looking at them as a person not a potential obstacle. And empathy enables us to

focus on building confidence, creating trust, reducing uncertainty, supporting people, listening, and eventually move away from fear and towards belief.

Reassurance not resistance

There are few people who walk into work each morning set on undermining a change project, like a villain hell-bent on destroying the superhero’s carefully laid-out plans. But there are many, many people who just want to know that they will be alright. That there’s some certainty in their future. That their voice matters and someone is listening.

So, let’s stop talking about change resistance and start concentrating on reassuring the very real humans affected by organisational transformation. These people are worried, uncertain, and trying to make sense of a future that’s setting off alarm bells in their brains. If we really want people to embrace change, the answer isn’t managing resistance, it’s understanding the fear that created it in the first place.