By Anna Bryan

The Good Idea

At the beginning of September last year, I wrote an encouragement for school leaders seeking tangible action steps for maximizing commitment toward change during one of the most critical seasons of our school year. At this point, most of us are about a month into the school year and our change initiatives are in full swing. We spent the summer analyzing data and stakeholder feedback, setting purpose-driven goals related to student outcomes, and following through on the actions that invite commitment from our teams. The change initiatives presented to the staff are morally compelling, innovative, and supported by feedback and data collected over time. These ideas appear to be great, and the methods of bringing your team into the work have been fail-proof – or so you think.

The Headache

Then, from somewhere in the organization, a low vibration begins to rumble. We all know and recognize it. It comes in various forms – the tone of a team member questioning the ideas during a staff meeting, a panicked email regarding how the changes are impacting “my way of doing things,” a team member sent as a spokesperson on behalf of others to express concern, the use of strong language to describe the perception the impact of the change efforts, etc. Our good idea has become a headache for others. 

Our temptation at this point may be to default quickly toward one of the following responses:

1. Question – “Did I interpret the data and feedback correctly? Was my ‘good’ idea really a bad one?” 
2. Ignore – “Maybe these concerns will subside. After all, the ideas are ‘good’ and people will see after a while that their concerns are invalid.” 
3. Defend – “My reasons were obviously not clear enough. The team just needs to hear the reasons that support this change, again.”
4. Abandon – “This might just be too much. Sticking with our old way of doing things is ‘better’.”

Before deciding to question your judgment and data, abandon your ideas, and just stick with the status quo it is important to slow down and ask some questions.

Understanding the Key Players

In any organization, factions will emerge when change occurs. Often these factions fall into two primary categories: Allies and Resistors. 

1. Who is resisting and why?
2. Who are our allies and why?  

The Allies: To identify the allies, observe for who is engaged in the work required with the change initiative. To do so, listen for those in the organization who have adopted the language and ideas, and are putting them to practice. 

The Resistors: Identifying the resistors is typically not hard because they often sound louder than the allies, even if outnumbered by the allies. Resistors can fall into a few subcategories:

• The Opposition: Those actively impeding progress. 
• The Troublemakers: Those consistently sounding the alarm. 

Threats and Losses

While it may seem that our attention needs to rest fully on the allies to lead the organization through the change, we will miss an important opportunity to refine and implement the change if we ignore the resistors. It is easy to interpret the actions and words of resistors as obstinance, cowardice, or a lack of innovative capacity. However, it will be more helpful, empathic, and productive for the overall growth of the organization if we approach our interpretations through the lenses of threats and losses. 

Let’s look at a clear and helpful example to understand this concept in action. A school leader implements a new master schedule that is unlike anything her faculty and staff have experienced in the last decade. As teachers begin to complain, the school leader finds herself jumping to assumptions, “They’re just stuck in their old ways. This team isn’t working well and lacks creativity. This isn’t that hard – they’re struggling with laziness.” 

The lenses of threats and losses slows us down to consider the underlying motivations of work-avoidance and resistance. The Opposition is anticipating and experiencing painful loss due to the new change. These resistors fear that what they are losing isn’t worth the purpose being served. In our example above it’s very possible that the teachers in the Opposition are fearful over the loss of the past structure for collaborative and instructional times. Similarly, the Troublemakers are constantly perceiving the potential threats to what they value most and voicing all the ways in which this new idea will not work as a result. In the case above, Troublemakers may perceive that the new schedule threatens their value for consistency for their students. 

The reframing of our initial interpretations helps us see that change-avoidance is more of a natural response to the anticipation or experience of loss. In The Practice of Adaptive Leadership by Heifetz, Glashow, and Linsky state that, “Avoidance is not shameful; it’s just human.” Additionally, it highlights that the resistance to change is less about the quality or worthiness of the change ideas, and more about the perception of loss that the idea generates. 

It is prudent of us then, to lean into the productive potential the resistors offer us as we aim to lead the organization, alongside the allies, to keep the work and benefits at the center of our attention. 

Maximizing Allies and Shepherding Resistors

Implementing change requires that the majority of the organization be involved in the efforts. To that end, I offer the following as action steps that will maximize the commitment from the primary factions and lead to greater productivity:

1. Promote the Allies:  As often as possible, elevate the stories and voices of those positively impacted by the change. This honors their work and risk taking, keeps the vision set on what is ahead, and lifts attention away from the fear of losing what we once knew to work.
   1. Some questions to ask allies:
      1. In what ways have you experienced success or seen a positive impact of this change on students? Your practice? Our school?
      2. What are your primary goals and how can I best support you in achieving those?
   2. Some steps to take with the allies:
      1. Create space for allies to collaborate with and learn from one another. 
      2. Host brainstorming parties that allow for greater depth of exploration of new ideas. 
      3. Schedule check-ins to discuss what is working well and what tweaks can be made to improve results. 

2. Spend time with the Resistors: Consider these resistors as potential “canaries in the coal mine” who are willing to raise tough questions that may end up serving as an early warning system. Remember, the Opposition will move at a different pace than the allies as they process loss. Build in ways to support the Troublemakers, and help protect their voice while offering boundaries that protect the organization.
   1. Some questions to ask yourself ahead of time:
      1. What assumptions am I making that have led me to see the resistors this way? What is accurate and not accurate about those assumptions? How might I test those assumptions?
      2. What losses are at stake if this change initiative succeeds? 
   2. Some steps to take with the resistors:
      1. Ask for input on the change initiative.
      2. Listen closely to their perspective (which represents their perceived reality).
      3. Let them know you value their insights.
      4. Think about how to come alongside and help so they are not in the work alone. 
      5. Honor and celebrate the ideas that move the work forward. 

The Compelling Why

As we aim toward improvement, we do well to set our eyes on the ultimate model for how to navigate resistance that leads to fruitful change – Jesus Christ. The Gospels outline multiple accounts of the Pharisees serving as some of the greatest resistors to the change Jesus came to bring, often accosting him with extreme accusations while testing him to see just how far he would go. Jesus consistently looked beneath surface assumptions and exposed their motives, aimed for peace, exercised silence when listening was more appropriate, and applied scripture to hold course with God’s plan for redemption. As a result of his humble approach (Philippians 2:5-8), we have an advocate who sympathizes with us, and made a way for transformative, life-giving change to occur.   

---

5 In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus: 6 Who, being in very nature[a] God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; 7 rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature[b] of a servant, being made in human likeness. 8 And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to death—even death on a cross! -Philippians 2:5-8

---

About the Author
Anna H. Bryan is a Fellow with the Baylor Center for School Leadership and director of lower schools for a private Christian school in Norfolk, Virginia. Prior to her recent positions, Anna served as a middle school math and science teacher in both public and charter schools, as well as a Math Specialist and later Assistant Principal and Coordinator for Professional Learning for Virginia Beach City Public Schools. She has developed a background in Collective Leadership, Design Thinking, and Improvement Science. Using that expertise, Anna supports work with 24 Improvement Community schools while helping us and them design improved change processes.