Negative reaction to new initiative I led on

[lurchersforever]

How do you deal with this?

I am in a leadership role and this is the first big thing I've led on, despite being in the role for a few years. This is the first thing that is going to shake up people's working practices and affect their day to day working life. It needs to happen and obviously I was tasked to do this by my boss, who is everyone's boss. I am well-qualified to lead on it and have done a huge amount of research.

The backlash has been quite strong and I'm feeling a bit under-attack. I feel people are resistant to change and, frankly, in some cases, just don't want to put the work in, but ultimately I have failed to win them over, which must be on me. Boss is supportive but I think feels I haven't communicated this properly so also a bit disappointed. We have made some concessions now which, while not the end of the world (or the project) do have the potential to dilute it somewhat.

Some people who I thought had a level of respect for me and a positive working relationship have pushed back, which has been hurtful, while a couple of others are 'usual suspects'. Other than learning from it how else can I deal with this?

What is the initiative?

I think be seen to be listening and acknowledging feedback is important. Is any of the resistance justified?

What is the initiative and were the employees whose working practices are being 'shaken up' involved at all? I think people are much more receptive to change when they are consulted and given the opportunity to have their opinions, ideas and concerns heard. Did this happen or do the staff feel that the change is being imposed on them with no discussion?

Tbh I'm surprised you've been in a leadership role for several years and are just going through this for the first time, this experience is pretty standard in leadership and you've not been done any favours by not having been given a big leadership project earlier.

I think you're approaching it in the wrong way. If the decision has already been made at senior level that this is the way things are going to be done, then you need to stick to your guns and not back down. It's not your job to be popular and win everyone over, you won't. Unless there is the risk of a legal challenge, the worst that can happen is people ultimately vote with their feet, but that happens with organisational change and you need to be the one who responds if and when that happens (restructure? Recruitment? Attempts to retain the staff you really want to keep?).

Where I think mistakes may have been made here is in the earlier decision making process. If you are leading then I would have expected you to be heavily involved in designing the changes, even being the driving force behind them. Is this a decision that was simply handed to you to implement? That's not really leadership imo. If you were involved in the strategic planning, then you have either a) failed to back yourself, or b) failed to fully consider the ramifications of your plans, which is where you need to think about improvements for next time.

I don't really want to explain it fully in case outing, but it is to do with the way in which we all perform a key element of our duties. I have been given a brief, which I had suggested anyway, and then I had ownership over the direction to take. I did discuss it with middle leaders, but I don't think I explained, or they understood, the extent of the plans and the level to which compliance would be expected, as this is new for our organisation. Full consultation wasn't an option due to timescales and also it was felt that it would open up too many options and ideas that would never have been taken up, which might well have caused even more hostility.

There is an element of me trying to bring our place up to date with current practices, which ultimately, is what people are resistant to.

How have the changes been briefed out? With space for questions concerns? Or just a this is what is happening.

i think this is really difficult to comment on without knowing the impact on staff. What is the general impact and why is there resistance?

Is your boss called Keir?!

If you didn't have a consultation then it's no wonder people are resistant. This isn't the way to implement large scale change.

Ride it out.

Do you really think it’s for the best for the company?

Yeah as someone who works in change communication, you really need to find ways to take people with you and have a sense of ownership. Did you seek support from your Comms team?

Edited to add - although it is also the case the people don't like change, and you will never please everyone however well you do it!!

There has been time for questions and concerns, but probably closer to 'this is what is happening.' I do feel like consultation would have just resulted in people being resentful when things they raised weren't acted on - though it wasn't my decision not to have a consultation. If I know this is the right direction and kind of wonder what the point is in asking people what they think if we pretty much know what they think and will largely need to ignore it as the old way of doing things has caused a lot of problems for us as an organisation.

I definitely think it's the right thing to be doing.

Was there any focus on the issues that the previous way of working was causing? How aware are/ were staff of the issues, how are / they impacted eg re-doing things, people doing things twice, disgruntled customers, regulatory fines?
Surely the focus has to be on getting them to figure out what the benefits of the required changes will be, eg smoother processes, less time needed, happier / repeat customers, no costly fines or whatever.

What is the driver for it happening? Is it efficiency, money saving, reducing stress on employees etc? or is it a legal requirement you have to implement?

Do you have unions in place? If so then they needed consulted even if their views would have limited impact.

I'm a Health & Safety Manager so many of my changes aren't popular and I find it useful to differentiate between changes that benefit the company, those that benefit employees and those that just have to be because that is what the HSE say we have to do.

I would recommend consultation in the future. The backlash is probably due to the lack of engagement with staff.

There will be one or two individuals who will be driving the rest of them against what you are trying to bring about. And those one or two will be highly unlikely to change their position.
Whatever it is that you are trying to implement, delay it so that it gives those couple of individuals time to leave. You cannot win them all over, but you have to implement what the business needs. Give them rope and that can also send a signal that you will not push it through, so they keep pushing. It needs to be definitive, it will happen but we will delay it until X.
Your boss also should support you.

The driver is better outcomes for our service users and I do believe staff will benefit directly too in the medium to long term, though in the short term they need to adapt to new ways of working, which will add to workload initially. We are public sector. Unions have fed back to us and we have made some concessions, but, having worked in the sector for 20 odd years, it is not standard for them to have been consulted on this kind of change beforehand.

I think even when the decision has been made, you need to move at a slower pace than leaders usually want. So spend time explaining the case for change, listening to and addressing concerns, then setting out what is going to happen, when and how, listening to and addressing concerns again, etc.

I know that it always feels so urgent to get on with stuff, but I always say to clients in a years time, the fact you spent an extra month or two delivering this won't matter in the grand scheme of things but it might win more support and make the journey easier.

Are there any opportunities to hear and respond to people's concerns?

It feels a little like the gun was loaded and you were tasked with firing it and it was essentially a done deal, so to speak.

Yes, we are talking and listening. I have come away from the meeting this evening feeling it was a bit of a pile on. A couple of the people who are probably ringleading will never leave. Ever. But I don't kid myself they're the only ones resistant.

Have you read up on the change curve? It was probably always going to be shit for a time, but people will get used to it.

Agree with this, you should try and "bring people on the journey"
But also, if the decision has been made people will just need to suck it up, and all the managers need to be part of that, as leaders themselves. Your boss needs to back you.
So the messaging really needs to be, this is happening whether you like it or not. People are always resistant to change especially if it means they need to work more/harder, do something differently, be more accountable etc.
You can still be nice about it, listen to feedback and where appropriate make changes.
But quite honestly if this is being done, everyone needs to just get on with it!

You are approaching this logically, but it sounds like people are reacting emotionally. Lots of people don’t like change, especially if it creates more work as you’ve said it will for a while. If you’re public sector though, and it will be good for the public, hopefully colleagues will come round as that’s the whole ethos of doing anything. At the moment it sounds like they’re reacting to having stuff ‘done to’ them rather than having been involved and been able to have any input - even if it was then impossible to implement any of their suggestions. However, because you didn’t consult, you are assuming they wouldn’t have come up with anything useful. It’ll blow over, but I’d be wary of taking the same approach in future as they’ve shown you how they react to it.

I was just about to say that you need to look at the change curve to understand that you’re way ahead in that curve than your colleagues due to your familiarity with the change. They’re just learning what you know. Their feelings need to be respected and treated with empathy.

Also for the future actively involving people in a change is far more likely create a more positive reaction to that change.

Take a look at any basic change management materials and you’ll get a better understanding of the value of decent communication and stakeholder management so you see less of this in future. It is a failure not to understand that the best changes will absolutely fail if there’s no engagement from the teams that need to action the change.

I work in the public sector and change never ever goes down well. Having worked in the private sector too, IME people are much more willing to voice their frustrations and not comply with directives in the public sector.

All I’d say is don’t take it personally. They don’t like this change because it adds to their workload. They’re allowed to be cross and whinge about that. In the public sector there isn’t really a “my way or the highway” attitude with management as unions often play a big part, this invites a lot of discussion.