Overview
In my book, "What They Don't Teach You at Change Management School," I discuss a concept called core-periphery resistance. As an undergraduate, I studied core-periphery issues in relation to geo-politics and urban development. For instance, Ireland, being on the edge of the European peninsula, has both suffered and benefited from this position.
Core periphery structures are a type of social network analysis. They involve a dense, cohesive core and a sparse, unconnected periphery, based on geographical location (such as a central headquarters and remote subsidiaries) or cultural connectedness and influence (influential and less influential people).
In the context of adoption and change management, the core-periphery model explains how change activities concentrate around pivotal points, causing inequalities. The "core" refers to people and/or regions that are advanced in their adoption of new things, while the "periphery" serves as backstages or even degrade. Change has a negative correlation with distance from the core, causing connected core growth poles to form, while disconnected periphery poles remain.
To manage resistance to change in large, dispersed organizations, one tool I use core-periphery theory.
Using the Core-Periphery Model
Geographic Core-Periphery Issues
I've witnessed this scenario many times. A global headquarters, situated in an extravagant location, initiates a change. Within the headquarters, everything is going well. There's engagement, swag, lunch and learns, and leaders are seen and heard both formally and informally.
Meanwhile, there is a geographically remote subsidiary with its own internal management structure. They're doing pretty well, but they have their own culture and implicit rules of engagement. A top-down change suddenly appears from headquarters, with little effective consultation or coalition building. This leads to resistance from employees, who feel that it won't work locally, and that headquarters should be left to get on with it while they continue to do their own thing.
I see several issues with this situation:
Perceived lack of relevance to local operations or cultural differences that make change initiatives irrelevant or impractical.
Resistance to changes that are perceived as top-down or imposed without local input or consultation.
Fear of losing autonomy or independence in decision-making.
Skepticism about the potential benefits of change for local operations or for the subsidiary's performance.
Perception that the subsidiary's unique strengths or competencies are not being recognized or leveraged in the change process.
Resentment or distrust of headquarters or other central units perceived as lacking knowledge of or respect for local conditions.
Concerns about additional costs or resource constraints that may be imposed because of the change.
Perceived risks to the subsidiary's local reputation or relationships with customers, suppliers, or other stakeholders.
Resistance from local managers or employees who are more connected to the local community and feel more accountable to local stakeholders.
Resistance due to cultural or language barriers that may impede communication or understanding between global and local units.
People Core-Periphery Issues
During change, it is important to recognize that people within the organization may also be viewed, or view themselves as core or peripheral. The core-periphery model can be used as a lens to understand how different employees or groups may be impacted by the change and to develop targeted mitigation strategies to address potential resistance.
The model highlights that people or groups that are considered or consider themselves as "core" may be more advanced and comfortable with change, while those people who are considered, or consider themselves as "peripheral" may resist the change. By identifying which employees or groups fall into each category, we can anticipate potential sources of resistance and develop targeted communication and engagement strategies to involve all employees in the change process.
I see several issues with this situation:
Lack of understanding or knowledge about the change and its purpose.
Fear of losing job security or status within the organization.
Uncertainty about how the change will affect their day-to-day responsibilities.
Resistance to changing established work processes or habits.
Perception that the change will negatively impact their ability to perform their job effectively.
Lack of trust in the individuals leading the change initiative.
Feeling excluded or undervalued in the decision-making process.
Belief that the change will create more work or added stress without any added benefits.
Skepticism about the potential success of the change.
Resistance to change due to personal beliefs or values that conflict with the proposed change.
Mitigating Core-Periphery Issues
I recommend the following mitigations to overcome core-periphery issues and drive adoption and change:
Conduct a thorough analysis of the geographically remote subsidiaries and take into account their unique culture and implicit rules of engagement. Use this analysis to identify potential sources of resistance and develop targeted communication and engagement strategies to involve all employees in the change process.
Foster a sense of inclusion by involving local managers and employees in the decision-making process. This can be achieved by conducting effective consultation and coalition building prior to implementing any changes.
Develop targeted communication and engagement strategies that highlight the potential benefits of change for local operations and for the subsidiary's performance. This can be achieved by showcasing how the change can leverage the subsidiary's unique strengths and competencies.
Mitigate resistance to changes perceived as top-down or imposed without local input or consultation by ensuring that there is effective consultation and coalition building prior to implementing any changes.
Foster a sense of autonomy and independence in decision-making by providing opportunities for local managers and employees to provide input and feedback throughout the change process.
Address concerns about additional costs or resource constraints by communicating clearly and transparently about the resources required for the change initiative.
Address people core-periphery issues by identifying which employees or groups may be impacted by the change and developing targeted mitigation strategies to address potential resistance. This can be achieved by ensuring that all employees are provided with adequate training and support to adjust to the change.
Develop targeted communication and engagement strategies that address potential sources of resistance, such as lack of understanding or knowledge about the change, fear of losing job security or status within the organization, and uncertainty about how the change will affect their day-to-day responsibilities.
Foster a sense of trust in the individuals leading the change initiative by ensuring that they are transparent and communicative throughout the change process.
Provide ongoing support and training to employees to ensure that they are equipped with the necessary skills and knowledge to adjust to the change. This can be achieved by providing adequate training and support throughout the change process.
Action Checklist
Wrap Up
Managing change in large organizations is complex. The core-periphery model helps understand how change activities concentrate around pivotal points, causing inequalities. Resistance can arise from geographic and people core-periphery issues. Targeted communication and engagement strategies can involve all employees in the change process.
To mitigate core-periphery issues, analyze unique cultures and engage in effective consultation and coalition building. Foster inclusion, autonomy, and trust in change leaders. Provide ongoing support and training to equip employees with necessary skills and knowledge.
Overcoming resistance leads to successful change. Use tools and frameworks available to create positive change for employees, organizations, and communities. As leaders and change agents, we have a responsibility to achieve desired outcomes.
© Al Lee-Bourke – al@554north.scot
Коментарі