The Psychology of why employees resist change

A Gartner survey revealed that employees’ willingness to support enterprise change has collapsed to just 43%.

While speaking at Ted Talk on what leaders need to know about change, the speaker asked the audience to raise their hands if their leaders lead change well.

Only two people in a jam-packed auditorium raise their hands!

And did you know a Gartner survey revealed that employees’ willingness to support enterprise change collapsed to just 43% in 2022, compared to 74% in 2016?

Why are leaders unable to do a successful job in leading change? What is that point they are missing to understand the employees who resist change?

A lack of awareness about the reasons employees resist change is the main cause of stunted growth.

So, let’s review what are the ten reasons employees resist change.

10 Reasons Employees Resist Change

#1 Muscle Memory vs Unfamiliarity

Did you know Apple recently announced a change to iOS 17, and it caused outrage among iPhone users?

What’s interesting is that it wasn’t even a dramatic change. They just moved the end call button from the center to the right corner of the screen.

It’s quite similar to Jakob’s Law of UX designing. Basically, the principle states that we must use familiar patterns in design in order to facilitate a positive user experience.

The reason is that user because users prefer it when a site works in the same way as all the other sites they already know.

We shouldn’t mess with people’s “muscle memory.”

The same principle applies to the employees faced with a new change.

Uncertainty and unfamiliarity about their own future an organization’s lead employees to grow insecure about their ability to perform well with new paths.

#2 No Clue About the Reason for Change

A 2022 Gartner survey discovered that 75% of organizations adopt a top-down approach to change, meaning leaders decide the change strategy and the new roadmap that everyone must follow.

They expect employees at all levels to buy into the new path and for managers to be a perfect role model.

Employees get no voice in the change process and no decision-making power, making them feel left out and detached from the proposed “growth” plan.

And because they lack awareness about the purpose and reason for the change, they end up struggling with the following questions:

• Who am I actually serving in the end? The leader? End Customer?
• What is this new change going to do for me?

The truth is that employees crave to be a part of the bigger picture. To know the company challenges, participate in innovation challenges, and work as an insider in the change plan.

However, organizations exclude them from change-related decisions.

As a result, employees resist change.

Commonly, front-line employees feel unheard as as well threatened, betrayed, blind-sided, or targeted by the change.

Employees want to be a part of the process of preparing, equipping, and supporting people, as well as contributing to the change sequencing.

#3 Feeling Insecure with the New

Even Tesla, one of the most innovative companies in the world, renowned for its revolutionary nature faces employees’ resistance to change quite blatantly.

The reason being the feeling of insecurity among employees. Job insecurity. Safety insecurity. Skill insecurity. Cultural insecurity.

This is why, in 2017, Tesla faced high criticism from employees about its increased automation efforts.

Reports indicated that Tesla had laid off several hundred employees in October 2017 as part of restructuring efforts, fueling fears about the impact of automation on jobs.

And, employees resist change because these instances fuel feelings of insecurity in them.

That’s now it.

These insecurities also include workload increases, job description changes, and new behavioral requirements.

When role changes are required, employees often lack the desire to learn a new system or technology. Others are concerned about the time they have to adopt changes, a lack of incentives, and decreased autonomy and control.

Tesla’s move towards automation required employees to acquire new skills to operate and maintain automated systems. Many workers, particularly those with experience in traditional manufacturing methods, faced challenges adapting to these new technologies. Tesla needed to invest in training programs to bridge these skill gaps effectively.

So, overall it’s a huge change that causes emotional, cognitive, behavioral, and mental stress.

#4 Change Fatigue

Change fatigue refers to the exhaustion and decreased resilience that employees experience when they are subjected to frequent or prolonged periods of organizational change.

According to a survey by Gartner, 69% of employees report being tired of constant change at work.

A company that undergoes frequent restructurings, with changes in reporting lines and job roles every few months, ends up being toxic.

Employees feel overwhelmed and anxious about the uncertainty surrounding their positions and responsibilities, leading to increased resistance to further changes.

Addressing change fatigue requires organizations to prioritize clear communication, employee involvement, and providing adequate support and resources to manage the psychological impact of change. It’s essential to recognize the toll that frequent or poorly managed changes can take on employees’ well-being and productivity.

You can start by listening to their ideas, thoughts, and perspectives, with quick responses. Not just for the sake of it.

#5 Choosing Certainty over Uncertainty

I have an interesting phenomenon to share with you, known as uncertainty-induced stress or ambiguity aversion.

Research suggests that people often experience more stress when faced with uncertainty, even if the uncertain outcome might be less severe than a certain outcome.

A study about decision-making under risk and uncertainty with two group of participants reveals:

1. 50% Chance of Electric Shock: When participants are told there is a 50% chance of receiving an electric shock, they experience uncertainty about whether or not they will receive the shock. This uncertainty can lead to increased stress and anxiety because they are unsure of what to expect.
2. 100% Chance of Electric Shock: On the other hand, when participants are told there is a 100% chance of receiving an electric shock, there is certainty about the outcome. While the outcome itself may be more severe, participants may experience less stress because they know what to expect and can mentally prepare for it.

This phenomenon highlights the psychological discomfort associated with uncertainty and the desire for predictability and control in stressful situations.

It’s similar to how employees may feel more stressed when faced with organizational changes that are uncertain or poorly communicated, compared to changes that are clearly communicated and understood, even if they may have negative consequences.

Understanding ambiguity aversion can help organizations better manage change by providing clear communication, transparency, and support to help employees navigate uncertain situations with less stress and anxiety.

#6 Reflex Rationalization

Resistance to change is a common psychological response that can manifest in various forms, often stemming from individuals’ natural inclination towards the familiar and the comfort of routine.

Anyway, it’s hard to swim against cultural norms.

When faced with change, individuals may come up with rationalizations or justifications for their resistance. These rationalizations serve as a way to explain their discomfort with the change and maintain their sense of control and stability.

For example, an employee might rationalize their resistance to a new project management system by citing concerns about its complexity or potential disruptions to workflow, even if the real reason is discomfort with learning something new.

#7 Past Negative Experiences

Individuals often draw on their past experiences to inform their attitudes and behaviors in current situations. If they have had negative experiences with change in the past, they may be more likely to resist similar changes in the future.

For example, if an employee previously experienced job loss or felt unsupported during a previous organizational change, they may be hesitant to trust management and may resist future changes.

Or, if a team’s previous attempt to implement a new software system resulted in inefficiencies and frustration, team members may resist a similar change out of fear that it will lead to similar problems.

Past negative experiences can breed skepticism about the potential benefits of change. Employees may doubt whether new initiatives will truly improve their situation or if they will lead to more problems.

Addressing these concerns requires proactive efforts from leadership to rebuild trust, communicate effectively, and demonstrate the potential benefits of change.

#8 Comfort with the Status Quo

Here’s a fact for you: Employees with longer tenures fear change more than newer employees because of the depth of their comfort with the old ways of doing things.

Maybe this is the reason managers are more averse to change in their organization than frontline workers.

It makes sense, doesn’t it?

The longer you’ve been with a company, the more accustomed you are to how things have always been done.

So, when someone comes along and says, “Hey, let’s change things up!” it’s natural to feel a bit resistant, right?

And managers are often the ones who’ve been around the longest.

So, it makes sense that they might be even more hesitant about change than frontline workers.

They’ve likely invested a lot of time and effort into establishing the existing processes and systems. Plus, there might be a fear of the unknown — what if the changes don’t work out as planned? That could reflect poorly on them.

Ultimately, it’s about finding the right balance between respecting the comfort employees have with the status quo and embracing the need for progress and innovation.

#9 Social Influence

Employees may resist change due to social dynamics within the workplace, such as peer pressure or loyalty to colleagues who are opposed to the change.

You know, workplace relationships can be pretty powerful.

We spend a lot of time with our colleagues, and their opinions and attitudes can really influence how we feel about things, including change.

Imagine you’re working on a team where everyone’s pretty tight-knit. You’ve been through a lot together, and there’s a strong sense of camaraderie.

Now, let’s say the boss comes in with this new initiative that’s going to change how things are done. Some people might be on board right away, but if there’s a vocal minority who’s not feeling it, that can create a ripple effect.

It’s like when one person starts expressing doubts or concerns about the change, others might start to second-guess it too. After all, they trust their colleagues’ opinions and don’t want to go against the grain.

Plus, there’s often a fear of rocking the boat or causing conflict within the team.

Peer pressure can be a powerful thing. There’s also loyalty to consider. If you’re really close to certain colleagues who are opposed to the change, you might feel torn between supporting them and embracing the change. After all, nobody wants to feel like they’re abandoning their friends or colleagues.

Leaders can harness the influence of key influencers within the organization to help rally support for the change. By getting buy-in from respected colleagues and involving them in the change process, you can turn social dynamics into a force for positive change rather than resistance.

#10 Lack of Trust

Picture this: You’re working in a company where trust between employees and management is pretty shaky.

Maybe there have been past instances of broken promises, poor communication, or decisions that didn’t seem to have employees’ best interests at heart.

Now, the higher-ups come along with this shiny new change initiative, but you can’t help feeling skeptical.

When there’s a lack of trust, it’s like there’s this underlying sense of suspicion about the motives behind the change.

Employees might be thinking, “Is this really going to benefit us, or is it just another way for management to shake things up?”

And you know what’s interesting? Lack of trust can manifest in all sorts of ways when it comes to change.

Maybe employees start spreading rumors or gossiping about the change behind management’s back. Or perhaps they become passive-aggressive, nodding along in meetings but dragging their feet when it comes to actually implementing the change.

At the end of the day, if employees don’t trust that the change is in their best interest or that management has their back, they’re going to resist it. They’ll cling to the status quo because it feels safer than taking a leap of faith into the unknown.

So, what can organizations do to overcome this lack of trust? It’s all about building transparency, fostering open communication, and demonstrating a genuine commitment to employees’ well-being. When employees feel heard, valued, and respected, they’re much more likely to trust that the changes being proposed are for the right reasons.

In conclusion, the psychology of employee resistance to change is complex and multifaceted, influenced by factors such as fear of the unknown, loss of control, and past negative experiences.

Comfort with the status quo, social dynamics, and lack of trust in leadership also play significant roles. Recognizing these psychological factors is crucial for organizations seeking to implement successful change initiatives.

By addressing employees’ concerns, building trust, and fostering open communication, organizations can mitigate resistance and create a supportive environment where employees are more willing to embrace change and adapt to new ways of working, ultimately driving positive outcomes for both individuals and the organization as a whole.

Stay tuned to learn how to handle employees who resist change or let’s put it in a more constructive: How to address concerns of employees resisting change.

Happy Reading!