5 Barriers and stimulants to Development/Change including Goals and value dilemma

Dr. Shikha Kapur

    1. Objectives

2. Introduction

3. Change and Resistance Forces

I. Initial Forces toward Change

II. Emergent Forces toward Change
III. Interdependence of Subparts of a System as a Source of Change and Resistance Forces

IV. Resistance forces
V. Interference

4. Goal and Value Dilemmas in the Planning of Change

5. Conclusion

Introduction

Change is inevitable. Every social thinker to which ever school of thought he/she may belong to, concurs to this thought. This means that humans in order to maintain a creative and healthy relationship with the world around should continuously engage in the process of change directed towards material, social and spiritual environment. Change ensuing in the dynamic systems may stem either from the ‘natural law’ or the ‘invisible hand’ that is usually an unanticipated, ‘sudden surprise’ as witnessed in unplanned change. Otherwise when change is well thought of ‘deliberate design and implementation of a structural innovation, which may be a new policy or a goal, or a change in the work ethics and philosophy, even changes in work climate and style’ it is a planned change. This kind of change occurs as a result of strategic, systematic planning, reorganization and implementation of change. The change agents in the process of planned change steer the client system towards adapting and adopting changes ushered in by innovation.

Every process of change is subjected to two forces which may increase or decrease the readiness of the client system to face change. They are the ‘change forces’ and the ‘resistance forces’. The ‘change forces’ also called the driving forces increase the willingness of the client to change and promote change. The ‘resistance forces’ on the other hand oppose change and reduce the willingness of the system to make change (Lewin, 1947; Dhama and Bhatnagar, 1997).

The following module will examine the stimulants and barriers in the process of Development/Change.

Objectives:

1. The students will be acquainted with the Barriers in Development/Change.
2. The students will understand the stimulants in the process of Development/Change.
3. The students will become familiar with value dilemma in the process of Development/Change.

Introduction

In the process of change, the first and foremost question that is often asked is what makes an individual or a group or any other social system decide that change is desirable? Is the decision to change or not to change ever clear to the client system? What are the various arguments that can change project or continuing one that has already begun? These are the questions which interest change agents and goad them to examine the change forces and resistance forces in the change process.

A ‘change force’ has its origin in any aspect of the situation and it increases the willingness of the client system to make a proposed change. A ‘resistance force’ has its origin in any aspect of the situation and reduces the willingness of the system to make a change. These forces may be rational or irrational, recognized or unrecognized, general or specific. They may originate in the client system, in the environment, or with the change agent. It may be a ‘driving force’ pushing the system into action or a ‘restraining force’ which block action.

‘Change forces’ and ‘resistance forces’ operate in tandem with each other in almost every situation. For example in a group or community, some people will want a change; while still others will want to maintain the status quo. Many people will have conflicting desires. They would like to see the benefits change might bring, but they are afraid to give up the security and satisfaction that enjoy by following old set ways of doing things. In the case of a disturbed individual the ambivalence may be extremely intense. He definitely wants relief from his painful symptoms, but he finds it almost impossible to give up the habits that generate these symptoms.

Whether the conflict between change forces and resistance forces leads to individual ambivalence or arguments between individuals, or formal conflict between subgroups, its resolutions is an important part of change process. A careful evaluation of change and resistance forces or extensive opposition to the change project is important so that the change agent knows whether or not to proceed further. Change agent may decide to give up the idea of introducing change, or may even postpone it till conditions become favorable.

Once change project is initiated, the objective of the change agent as well as the client system is to turn the balance of forces as far as possible in favor of change. This may mean strengthening the ‘change forces’, weakening the ‘resistance forces’, or even both. Maintaining a favorable balance of forces is a continuous job for change agent and client system, beginning with the initial decision to undertake a change project or helping relationship and continuing until the project has been completed. Lippitt et al (1958) have elaborated forces and factors stimulating and resisting the process of change. They are:

1. Initial Forces toward Change
2. Emergent Forces toward Change
3. Interdependence of Subparts of a System as a Source of Change and Resistance Forces
4. Resistance forces
5. Interference

Next all these forces will be elaborated one by one:

1. Initial Forces toward Change

At the beginning of the change processes the change force is likely to be rather general in character comprising of unfavorable judgments of the existing situation or favorable judgments of a potential future situation. Four types of motivation may be distinguished.

1. The client system may feel dissatisfaction or pain associated with the present situation. Then the change force is a desire for relief e.g. a sick individual wants to be cured of his symptoms and the unproductive group or organization wants to find a way to do things more efficiently.
2. Sometimes the dissatisfaction arises from a perceived discrepancy between what is and what might be. For example, community members may not feel any real dissatisfaction with their local government, but when they see the improvements which have been introduced in other communities they may begin to want some of the same things for themselves. Another example is that the officials of a school system may want to be democratic, yet may be unable to free themselves from autocratic practices. If this discrepancy were brought into focus together with suggestions about what to do, they might very well respond with a desire for change.
3. Sometimes external pressures on the client system make it change its behavior. An example of it is an environmental “requiredness” and societal expectation that an individual change his behavior, becomes mature as he grows older
4. Finally, there is the possibility that some internal requirements will lead to pressures towards change. For instance, a person may remove his psychological blocks which have prevented him from deriving happiness and satisfaction. Once done, this will automatically lead to a more satisfactory state of affairs.

II. Emergent Forces toward Change

As the change proceeds, additional constellation of change forces is required to continue with process of change till final change objective has been achieved. These additional change forces also known as ‘emergent forces’ as they steer the dynamic system towards change. There are of several kinds of ‘emergent forces’.

1. First there is the need to complete a task which has been begun. For example, if community undertakes a self- survey, the people involved feel some obligations to act upon the results which it produces. Similarly, people or organization that sponsors a workshop will look for ways to show that it has some positive effects.
2. According to Kurt Lewin at the beginning of change process individual or group may show strong resistance to starting on a sequence of activities. But once this point has been passed and system has invested in the process, there is a dramatic reversal and forces preventing change come to its support. Energies are directed toward completing the change process and obtaining the final reward.
3. Expectations regarding the results of the change process is another emergent change force that arises in the change process between the client system and change agent. As they work together they develop expectations regarding the results of change process. The client system learns that the change agent expects certain results from the change process and these expectations constitute a force for change. Thus, if the change process reaches the stage where client system is unable to take decisions, the change agent may insist and give a small shove to get the client system over the hump.
4. Sometimes the qualitative changes in a part of the client system due to change process become emergent force for further adaptive changes throughout the system e.g. as therapy proceeds there is an increase in ego strength of the individual. So, he becomes increasingly able to handle psychological problems which have been giving him difficulty. Similarly, parallel change forces work in multi person client system like in individuals. Once the system works on small and immediate problems first, it gradually develops capacity for dealing with the larger problems and solves them. Hence change is initiated.

III. Interdependence of Subparts of a System as a Source of Change and Resistance Forces

The interdependence among the subparts of a system can generate an emergent force toward change and it can also serve as a source of resistance too. Similarly, if a change sequence has no effect on the system, consequently it may fail to have any effect on any of the parts of the system. What is important here is size of the unit should be appropriate for change. If the subpart selected for change is too small it will be unable to change because of resistance originating outside the subpart. Similarly, if the unit is too large but includes autonomous subsystems/subparts which are not directly involved in the change process, then too it may be unable to change because of the resistance originating from these subsystems.

On the other hand, if the size of the unit selected as a client system is appropriate for the particular change objective and if several subparts of this system become committed to achieve the same objective, the motivation and energy available to the system for working on change will be intensified by the interdependence and interaction among the subparts and the system will undergo change.

Next certain mechanisms that operate to produce either change forces or resistance forces in the system are being discussed:

a. Expectations

In systems consisting of more than one individual, the expectations held by one person or group about the behavior of other persons or groups serve as an important deter/motivator of behavior. People do what others expect them to do. This tends to be true even when people know how to behave differently, in ways which would be more satisfactory but do not behave since they know the changed behavior would run contrary to expectations. As an example of how behavioral expectations can prevent change from occurring can be illustrated by a hypothetical case of a human relations training program in industry. Suppose that foremen are taken off their duties and given training in new ways of behaving towards their men. They are then returned to their original positions and responsibilities. The men working under the foremen in the meantime have not received any training and have retained their old behavior patterns and their old expectations about how the foreman will behave with them. Under these conditions, foremen are likely to resume their old patterns of supervision almost immediately. Some foremen who try the new techniques but do not get the desired as these are interpreted by the men in the light of old and inappropriate expectations. Then these foremen, too, return to the old patterns of supervision. In short, it is quite likely that the workers would be so sure about what to expect from their foremen that they would be unable to perceive, understand, or accept any significant changes in supervisory behavior.

However, if both the foremen and his workers are given separate training, then they all will be able to initiate and maintain the new and more satisfactory behavior patterns.

b. Simultaneous Satisfaction of Different Needs

Each system is made of several subparts. When in a process of change, each subpart has its own needs, impulses and purpose. But unitary nature of the system makes separate and independent satisfaction/action by these subparts impossible. So, in the final outcome of change process, the system acts in a way that there is a general satisfaction derived to all of its subparts but not exclusively or fully satisfaction to any one subpart. At individual level it is called as substitute gratification e.g. an individual who enjoys oral stimulation may take up cigarette smoking.

The interdependence of subparts in a system can contribute to the promotion or obstruction of change. If the needs of the subparts are ignored they would oppose the change and insist on preservation of the status quo. While on the other hand if the change proposed meets some of the needs of the subparts and give satisfaction to subparts, forces toward change would be generated in the system.

c. Vulnerability to threat

When one system or subsystem is dependent on another it wants to see the other maintain both its good health and its good will. This interdependence also makes the subparts vulnerable to threat. If the failure of any subpart of a system can cause failure for the system as a whole; then anything which threatens a part, threatens the whole. It is not pleasant to feel threatened and that pain can become a force towards change. Thus, pain originating in one part of a system may become sufficiently important for the whole system to undertake the necessary corrective action-in this case change, even if this is difficult. Some examples are- an industrial organisation offering employee benefits over and beyond those demanded by the union; or an individual entering psychotherapy knows that it is the only way of to get rid of his severe headaches; or the businessman who spends long hours commuting so that wife may live in a neighbourhood she likes.

d. Promise of benefits to one subpart of the client system at the expense of other partsis another reason of resistance towards change process by subparts. If one part tries to change then the other parts may immediately conclude that this part or group must be trying to gain some special advantage. The defensive reaction naturally is to oppose the change, without even considering its actual advantage or disadvantages. Change agents working with large organisation are well acquainted with these phenomena and hence use “multiple entry” procedure which ensures that the chain proposal is associated not exclusively with one part of the system but with all the subparts. Whatever the terminology, the point is that interdependence among the parts of a system is often associated with a fear that the improvement of one part can be gained only at the expense of another, and there is has a tendency to feel threatened by any proposal for change except one’s own.

IV.         Resistance forces

It is not only the subparts of the system that face ‘resistance forces’, but it is the system as a whole that faces many ‘resistance forces’. We will discuss these ‘resistance forces’ here.

Resistance to change process may emerge either at the beginning of the change process, or during the process and even later on. Some types of resistance typically occur early in the process and others which are more likely to occur later. Some ‘resistance forces’ can crop at any time that it is not possible to group them into separate section.

‘Resistance forces’ are most active and increase in intensity for a while at the beginning of change project. At this stage the conflict between ‘change forces’ and ‘resistance forces’ stalls the process of change till conflict resolution between ‘change forces’ and ‘resistance forces’ is not done. The deadlock may be broken either by “working through” and weakening a ‘resistance force’ strengthening ‘change forces’.

The most common resistance at the beginning of the change process is a ‘general opposition to any kind of change’. This often grows out of combination with fear and ignorance of the client system that it will be unable to change successfully. Or the fear that once accomplished, the change will require things of people which they are unable to deliver. Hence maintaining status quo is the best and safest rather facing threat of failure.

Sometimes these feelings of inadequacy are quite justified as they emanate from client system’s lack of skill, experience, or capacity for action that is necessary to carry them through a change. This actual inability results in opposition to all proposals for change and would lead to failure if change were undertaken.

Sometimes resistance is not against change process but against a particular proposed change objective. It may be judged as undesirable, irrelevant or altogether impossible.

Sometimes the change objective appears to be of doubtful value, and the question is whether or not it is safe to experiment.

Another reason for resistance to change is clinging to existing satisfaction at the unchanged state. The sub parts along with the vested interest groups are happy not to change because they know the benefit from the status quo and want to keep it that way. For example, we carry on with our traditions and customs and old ways of social life over generations, since we are reluctant to give up the pleasure, satisfaction and security these ways give us since they have always been followed that way.

At the beginning of the change process resistance is sometimes observed in the relationship between the client system and the change agent. In the beginning of change process there maybe mistrust due to unfamiliarity with the change agent-the change agent may appear too alien or too friendly. Moreover, unfamiliarity with the help extended by the change agent is unfamiliar and may raise suspicion in the client system. Sometimes the change agent may not be acceptable to the client system and if this incompatibility persists it may be the reason for ending change agent client relationship.

Later on, in the change process dissatisfaction with the change agent may occur due to disappointment with what change agent has to offer in the change process.

Emergent forces may even resist change that were unnoticed and unimportant at the beginning of the change process and subsequently turn into major obstacles in change process. For example, the client system may be related to systems in its environment which are opposed to change. At the beginning of the change process, these oppositions may not have been observed or may have been ignored but they cause serious obstacles.

Even the cost of the change project in terms of time, money, or energy may turn out to be more than the client system can handle and eventually the client system becomes unwilling to continue further with the change process.

The impeding end of the relationship with the change agent may lead to either change or resistance forces. With the imminent loss of help and support from the change agent, the client system may decide either that it must hurry up and get something done or that, since there is no time to finish anything anyway, it would be better not to start anything.

Many resistance forces can be converted into change forces. If the client insists on maintaining the status quo as needs can be met satisfactorily, the change agent may be able to show that the same needs would be met even more satisfactorily in a changed set of conditions. Some change agent, welcome resistance because it gives information about the important motivation and difficulties of the client system. Thus, change process and therapy is sometimes said to consist of working through a series of resistance.

V. Interference

Interference is described as a type of force which is not specifically opposed to the change objective, but which nevertheless diverts the energies of the client system away from the change objective for example, a proposal to build a new city hall might be defeated not because of opposition to such a building, but because it seemed that a new school building was even more urgent. Interference may arise when other project competes with the change project for the time, energy and money of the client system; when there is a lack of ideas or too many ideas, lack of skill and even lack of information or presence of conflicting information about how to execute the change project; or when the environment is simply intractable.

Goal and Value Dilemmas in the Planning of Change

Planning is sought to convert change that leads to “improvement”. But which changes are “improvements”? While seeking answer to this question, man has to agree upon some normative standards and value criteria, by which changes can be judged as ‘good’ or ‘bad’ ‘desirable’ or ‘undesirable’. There are no readymade agreements or norms to tell whether the “changes” are “improvements”. Hence the processes of “engineering” can provide valid and acceptable agreement on what “changes” are “improvements” and they must become more self-conscious and self-critical than in the past.

Since societies are no longer homogeneous and uniform, but an amalgamation of many cultures, many religions, different social classes hence those who plan change should look for valid direction or change in the presence of discrepant & conflicting goal orientations.

Further more fundamentally, by what methods can men already in conflict about values judge the validity of values in such conflicts. Mannheim in Roots of the Crisis in Evaluation delves into the social roots of the deep cutting disruption of the consensus in the value orientations of contemporary men. It becomes essential that while examining values in the process of change, they must be analysed from both descriptive and normative point of view. Since ‘science’ is an integral part in planning of change, hence “methods of science” must be carefully analysed & assessed if any clarity concerning direction of “good” change is to be attained.

In the west there is a wide review of tenability of liberal-democratic heritage. Under this heritage values related to “rationality” are the most basic to man’s ability to plan for future. The scientific achievement is to support man’s growing ability to select from alternatives. However, the new orthodox theologians today seek to lure liberal man back to reliance upon some favoured “Faith”; political realists’ conservative or radical, seeking to short circuit the inefficiency & slowness of democratic rationality in accomplishing the ends through some alleged ‘unnecessary absolutism’.

Another cluster of values in the liberal-democratic heritage which are said to be doomed by planned change are of “freedom” & “individuality”. There is empirical justification in the recent history that shows “Fascist” & “Nazi” planning explicitly sought to constrict and destroy these values. The “Soviet” planning radically subordinates them to other values, given planning efforts in United States have not always placed “freedom” & “individuality” as compared to “productivity” “health”, “orderliness” or “efficiency” high in hierarchy of values to enhanced through planning.

Hence there is genuine problem between “planning” and “freedom” and it becomes difficult to maintain value of “freedom” high in the hierarchy of values of those responsible for planning.

Conclusions

Change is inevitable. Every social thinker to which ever school of thought he/she may belong to, concurs to this thought. Every process of change is subjected to two forces which may increase or decrease the readiness of the client system to face change. They are the ‘change forces’ and the ‘resistance forces’.

The ‘change forces’ also called the driving forces increase the willingness of the client to change and promote change. The ‘resistance forces’ on the other hand oppose change and reduce the willingness of the system to make change. This module delved into all the change forces which might motivate a client system to make a change, resistance forces which might motivate it not to make a change, and interference which might obstruct a change without being directly related to it. While planning for change the goal and value dilemmas in the planning of change are very important. And the change agents have to decide on the value orientations while planning change.