All organisations, whatever their size, are faced with change in one way or another. At a time when change is multiplying, the willingness of teams to support change within their company has fallen from 74% in 2016 to 43% in 2022 (Gartner). Why and what can be done about this erosion in employee motivation?
Contents
What is the main resistance to change?
We don't tolerate not knowing. Ever since school, answering "I don't know" has been frowned upon. Our relationship with uncertainty is formatted to be complicated and tense.
The difficulty of motivating a team to change
Businesses are constantly undergoing change: restructuring, changes in working methods, replacement of software, etc. According to a Gartner study published in 2022, the average company is facing 10 planned changes, compared with 2 in 2016. At the same time, the willingness of teams to support change will plummet to 43% in 2022, compared with 74% in 2016. The gap between the change effort required and the teams' willingness to change is called "transformation deficit. The wider the gap, the more likely it is that any attempt at change will be doomed to failure, limiting the ambitions of companies, draining the motivation of teams, and ultimately leading to an increase in departures.
Forms of team resistance to change
Not to mention the natural fear of losing our habits and the sense of security that our comfort zone gives us, What are the different types of resistance to change? ?
- Teams that don't understand lreasons for change, particularly when they consider the current system to be effective. Without the right information, it reinforces their fear of the unknown.
- Teams who fear they lack the skills required for change, and do not feel able to acquire new skills easily/quickly.
- Teams who do not feel sufficiently involved at the change project stage, even though they will be directly affected by the changes, and who feel presented with a fait accompli. Guaranteed drop in motivation...
- Teams who don't see what they stand to gain from change, or who even anticipate that achieving their objectives will lead to a deterioration in their situation, a source of resentment.
- Resigned or blasé teams faced with constant waves of change, who pretend to accept them but have no incentive to implement them. This is the discouragement effect.
These cases can, of course, overlap within the same team. They often result in a lack of confidence in the company's ability to successfully implement change. It's all very well for directors and managers to set an example and demonstrate shared values, but if the legitimacy of the company project is not perceived, it won't be enough to convince anyone. teams to embrace the proposed change.
How can you motivate your team during a difficult change?
How can we ensure that teams feel sufficiently secure in the midst of change? How can we ensure that employees are both committed to the company's projects and renew internal methods that no longer serve their purpose? Here are 5 ideas.
1. Feel before you do
Before trying to convince your teams of the merits of the change, start by asking yourself how this change makes you feel, by listening to your own reactions and emotions. Are you frustrated or disappointed at the idea of having to abandon a project or a working method that had previously worked well for you? If so, your sense of stability and comfort is itself being affected and threatened. And this will have an effect on your ability to process information related to this change without bias, to make decisions and to convince teams of their validity.
Taking stock of your own feelings, beyond the general atmosphere, will help you to avoid reacting impulsively, and will help you to find your individual motivation and different options for action.
2. Don't minimise the emotional cost of change
Every major change has a cost, and it's easier to overestimate the benefits and minimise the losses in order to better 'sell' it internally. We don't often hear about the feeling of vulnerability or the loss of precious links in a team that is exposed to change. Identifying and working on these two components helps to create support for a project, rather than a false loyalty to the achievement of the objectives just set out.
3. Clarify what should not change, and why
If a team is unable to come up with a new organisational structure that would meet the change project, it may not be out of ill will. If the team is united and working effectively, it is normal for it to try to protect itself by opposing a painful dislocation. Over and above what could be seen as resistance to change, or an inability to change, it is important to identify what the teams value in the way they operate, and which corresponds to the corporate culture. This will help you to clarify with greater discernment which loyalties are worth preserving, and which can be shaken up in the achievement of objectives.
These discussions with the teams are not easy. Giving them the ability to name what connects them and the shared values that bind them as a team will also give them the opportunity to orientate themselves differently and be a source of motivation. The team will be better able to focus on what is worth preserving and what can evolve.
4. Take account of team fatigue in the face of change
Fatigue management is an important change management lever to be developed. Planning rest periods helps to keep teams energised by change and skills development, as it increases their effectiveness. These are rest "tools" that meet the individual needs of team members, for example days without meetings or planned breaks / downtime as part of a project. Integrating these rest periods into the work flow, in conjunction with Human Resources, helps to prevent burnout.
A study by Gartner in 2022 showed that these "rest" times contribute to a 26 % increase in team performance and a tenfold reduction in the number of people suffering from "fatigue". burnout.
5. Motivate teams by listening to what they have to say
In this context, actively involving people in the planning and implementation of change is a useful team management approach. It's not a question of asking teams to vote on every change decision, but of integrating the opinions of the people concerned into the planning, and involving them in the decision-making process so that their ideas are included. These forms of recognition of their expertise have a positive effect on collective motivation.
It also changes the logic: it is no longer a question of concentrating on how to "sell" the change to employees. By giving them the opportunity to share their questions and opinions, this participative management will create the conditions to encourage their understanding and commitment to these changes, and renew their sources of motivation.
In conclusion the irony of corporate change Many of the objectives of change, such as redefining the way teams are structured, automating tedious tasks and redefining the corporate culture, are designed to combat work-related fatigue and increase team efficiency. But the shortcoming of many managers is that they approach change with short-term solutions, and try to create a transformation dynamic by moving too quickly. It therefore seems important for managers to take better account of the degree of motivation of teams and their experience when considering the speed of change initiatives, by prioritising them more clearly so that everyone is clear about where to invest their energy.
