As we lead our organizations through the Industrial Transformation (IX) process, it is easy to get caught up in the excitement of the promises of Industry 4.0. Production boosts, quality improvements, and reduction of equipment downtime are enticing changes in the right direction, and in our current economic landscape these improvements are needed more than ever before. The allure of improving our processes has never been stronger
But with what sometimes seems like endlessly changing processes comes a new challenge to manage. Our team members (at all levels) not only inherit the benefits of our visions of transformation, but also bear the brunt of making those transitions happen. They inherit new processes, and frequently have to perform both new and old processes simultaneously during what can sometimes be a long transition period. Even though the result of the transformation leads to tangible benefits for everyone, the change process can lead to incredible stresses on our teams as they navigate their way though a constant cycle of learning and relearning.
Combine these workplace stresses with other human factors and it is easy to see that there is an opportunity (and necessity) to focus on our people when building our IX strategy.
Resistance to Change – Why does it happen, and how does it appear?
For many, change is exciting. It allows us, as leaders, to see our vision become reality and to witness the positive impacts we make on our KPIs. Our processes achieve higher capabilities, our deliverables are achieved more reliably, and our businesses thrive… and it’s our IX leadership that makes it happen.
But when implementing change of this magnitude it is important to focus significant attention on the people in our workforce. Not every team member has the ability or willingness to make changes as rapidly as we can envision them. This isn’t to say we should slow down, because the business environment does not reward a slow pace. Rather, we need to understand the roadblocks our people face so that we can remove those roadblocks and enable our teams’ success.
Some of these obstacles are internal to the candidates, and some are external. Every individual is different and there is no comprehensive list, but many of the obstacles to change can be attributed to the categories below (Kantor, 2018).
Culture
One definition of culture is “the customs, arts, social institutions, and achievements of a particular nation, people, or other social group”. It is no surprise that an organization’s culture has a huge impact on a team’s inclination to embrace change. Specifically, the implication that prior achievements have been deemed inadequate can create feelings of defensiveness from those who have historically embraced “the way we’ve always done things”. Feelings of uncertainty and a perceived loss of control can easily impact teams and their willingness to support IX.
Personality
Attributing challenges to culture can be correlated to “painting with a broad brush”. Although culture makes it easier to understand behaviors in aggregate, it is important to recognize that our team members are all individuals who have their own feelings about (and ability or willingness to accept) change. Even within the same culture, some people enjoy a constantly changing workplace, while others will see even the smallest change as a reason to panic due to concerns about their own competence.
Experience
Often, when our people have a negative response to change, they have good reason. Implementation of new processes are often accompanied by a need to perform parallel processes during the transition (more work), and there may be past resentments from previous change initiatives. Previous change experiences may have revealed to team members that their education level or ability to learn new skills was inadequate to integrate into the new system; this type of experience would leave long-lasting negative feelings towards any change initiative (no matter how beneficial to the overall organization).
Most important is the impact of this resistance to change. No matter how well-designed a transformation is, if it does not include a robust change management component to address individuals’ concerns and needs then it will face a difficult path to success. In a recent study (Rehman et al, 2021), the data reveals that most employees fear that change will be bad not only for themselves, but for the company as well. This can lead even the most committed employees to taking actions that avoid or even sabotage change efforts.
One example of this is in the implementation of new Information Security practices (which should be a focal area when incorporating IoT into your processes). Specifically, when introducing a “Zero Trust” model, there will be a loss of freedom for some of your users. Free access to all resources on the network will be replaced with authentications and verifications at every access request, which will be unsettling for many. Some of these users will actively seek ways to circumvent the new security practices in an effort to perform their tasks more efficiently while missing the “bigger picture” of how they are sabotaging the organization’s security efforts.
Managing Change and Conflict on the IX Journey
Even if you are just beginning your organization’s transformation journey, your team has likely experienced the culture-shock caused by change. This may be from a previously implemented continuous improvement initiative, or maybe from a myriad of changes designed to squeeze any little opportunity that remains from your organization’s current design. In any case, there is opportunity to engage your workforce in the transformation process before it is too late.
We’ve identified that there is a problem. Our next step is to understand the root cause. Luckily, this is not uncharted territory: Ours aren’t the first organizations to face this issue. But the challenge is that every organization is different, so the best recipe to solve your specific problems is going to take some work to decipher. Interestingly, many change management methodologies include components of what is described below. To increase the likelihood of successful change, however, it is important to thoughtfully select not only the areas of focus but also to avoid a “one size fits all” approach.
Culture
We can start again with the “broad brush” of culture to capture big-picture issues to address, and we then gradually narrow our focus as we move forward to address smaller groups and individuals within those groups.
A classic tool that can be used is Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions (Hofstede, 2011). This study focused on differences in work-related values across different nations and can be applied to better understand how approaches to change need to be individualized to each situation. Stated simply, Hofstede identifies six traits:
- Power Distance: The extent to which the less powerful accept and expect that power is distributed unequally
- Individualism: Extent to which people feel independent (vs interdependent as part of a larger whole)
- Masculinity: Extent to which the use of force is endorsed socially
- Uncertainty Avoidance: Tolerance for uncertainty and ambiguity
- Long Term Orientation: An acceptance of constant change (vs adherence to the past as a moral compass)
- Indulgence: Freedom to follow impulses (vs being restrained)
As an example of cultural differences resulting in the need to approach change differently, look below at the comparison of Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions between Japan and the United States, and apply this to the context of a Lean initiative’s rollout. Lean’s (through its synthetization into the Toyota Production System) systems and techniques were created (and proved incredibly successful) in Japan and while Lean thinking and practice has proven both popular and successful in the United States, it has been shown to be more difficult to implement there (Martins, 2015). The primary reasons identified for this difference in success are a combination of:
- Wildly different work cultures (as shown in the Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions comparison below, as well as in other measures of cultural dimensions including the GLOBE Project, Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner, and D’Iribarne), and
- Failures to account for these differences when implementing Lean practices.
(Hofestede Insights, 2021)
Individual Personality and Experience
Within these broad cultural norms everyone is different. However, engaging our people as individuals can help them actively accept (and even embrace) the transformations necessary for the success of our organizations. Individual needs can be met through use of continuous user participation throughout the transformation process through multiple toolsets; many of those are incorporated into Lean methodology. It is important when using these techniques to involve people at all levels of the organization in any transformation process as this democratizes the changes by giving team members at all levels a voice in how their processes are changing.
It is also important to remember that a transformation is an ongoing process requiring continual support. Outside of the use of Lean methodologies previously mentioned, the use of communication support tools in user interfaces can help employees maintain engagement in change initiatives well beyond the initial rollout (Yetim, n. d.). The reasons for this include:
- Acknowledgement of the value of workplace democracy as a motivating factor
- Leveraging the value of knowledge and expertise
- Involving employees in a way that recognizes their commitment and acceptance of the change
All stakeholders in the transformation should be included in some way, and the communication support tools should be incorporated where all employees have comfortable access to them. The communication support tools should be available continuously and should allow all employees to communicate in a manner that helps alleviate their challenges in embracing the transformation.
By providing robust communication support, our team members can be enabled to feel more sense of control over the transition, which should in turn improve acceptance. However, every organization is different, and this is just one way to support your people during the most challenging parts of the IX process. It is incumbent upon all leaders to determine the best ways to ensure that each person is enabled to successfully make the transition to I4.0.
Finally, response to employee concerns must be appropriately addressed. Continued training and other means of supporting your teams during what may be a significant change to task performance will help organizations retain talent and propel many to increased success in their new or redefined roles.
Conclusion
Your organization is ready for industrial transformation, and that means a lot of changes for your team at all levels. Change is challenging for everyone involved and not everyone on your team has the same engagement in the change process. However, by involving your people in decision-making processes throughout all phases of the transformation, you are enabling them to stay involved as positive change agents while also enabling the overall success of your organization’s transformation.
Bibliography
Compare countries. Hofstede Insights. (2021, June 22). Retrieved September 2, 2022, from https://www.hofstede-insights.com/fi/product/compare-countries/
Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. (n.d.). Retrieved September 2, 2022, from https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1014&context=orpc
Kantor, R. M. (2018, September 26). Ten reasons people resist change. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved September 2, 2022, from https://hbr.org/2012/09/ten-reasons-people-resist-chang
Martins, A. F., Affonso, R. C., Tamayo, S., Lamouri, S., & Ngayo, C. B. (2015). Relationships between National Culture and Lean Management: A literature review. IEEE Xplore. Retrieved September 2, 2022, from https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7380183
Rehman, N., Mahmood, A., Ibtasam, M., Murtaza, S. A., Iqbal, N., & Molnár, E. (1AD, January 1). The psychology of resistance to change: The antidotal effect of organizational justice, support and leader-member exchange. Frontiers. Retrieved September 2, 2022, from https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.678952/full
Yetim, F., Draxler, S., Stevens, G., & Wulf, V. (n.d.). Fostering continuous user participation by embedding a communication support tool in user interfaces. AIS Electronic Library (AISeL). Retrieved September 2, 2022, from https://aisel.aisnet.org/thci/vol4/iss2/7/