UPI Study › Courses › Principles of Management › Free lessons › Lesson 6.3 Free with a free account
Leading Through Uncertainty: The Manager's Role During Change
Principles of Management · Chapter 6: Leading Organizational ChangeSection 6.3 · lesson 27 of 11713 min · free with a free account
Free preview
Create a free account to keep watching
It takes a minute and costs nothing. Your free account unlocks all of Chapter 1 and 3 more lessons of Principles of Management.
Lesson complete
Earn the 3 college credits for Principles of Management
Enrolling adds a quiz after each lesson, the graded work and the official transcript. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
Next lesson: Turning Intention into Action: The Planned Change Process →← Mapping Internal Change: Structure, Strategy, People, and ProcessNext lesson: Turning Intention into Action: The Planned Change Process →
In this lesson
The manager's role during change.
- Describe a manager's 4 responsibilities during change
- Distinguish the change event from the transition
- Explain resistance and what it usually indicates
- Match an approach to the source of resistance
Transcript
Everything said in the video, section by section (1,755 words). Read along, or search it.
Leading Organizational Change
Leading Through Uncertainty
Every change effort eventually lands on a manager who has to make it work, with real people. This section is about that manager's role while the ground is moving. We look at the awkward position she occupies, and the four responsibilities that define doing it well. We separate the change itself from the transition people go through, which is a different thing entirely. Then we reframe resistance, not as an obstacle, but as information. We cover five sources of resistance, five ways to respond, and why the match between them matters. And we close with the hardest case. What a manager does when she disagrees with the change herself.
The Position
A Structurally Difficult Place to Stand
A manager leading a team through change usually occupies a genuinely difficult position. She's often implementing a decision she may not have made herself. It was handed down from above, through the authority chain introduced in Subchapter two point three. And she's implementing it with people she must keep managing, after the change is complete. That's not simply an emotional difficulty. It's a structural one. She cannot credibly distance herself from a decision she is responsible for executing. And she cannot afford to alienate a team she'll depend on, long after the change itself has concluded. Both constraints are real, and both apply at the same time. Much of this section follows from managing them together, rather than resolving one at the other's expense.
4 Responsibilities
What Competent Management Looks Like
Four responsibilities define competent management during a change effort. First, explain the reasoning, not only the decision. Give the team the why, not just the what. People who understand the reasoning can extend it to situations the decision didn't explicitly cover. People who only know the decision can't. Second, be honest about what isn't known yet. Resist the temptation to project false certainty. A team that later finds out a manager overstated her certainty loses trust in everything she says next. That includes the things that were accurate. Third, absorb uncertainty without passing all of it downward. A good manager filters genuine ambiguity into something the team can actually act on. Relaying every unresolved question unchanged would leave the team as paralyzed as she is. Fourth, represent the unit's concerns upward. Carry legitimate objections, risks, and on-the-ground realities back to whoever made the decision. This connects to the informational roles of Subchapter one point three, especially the spokesperson role, here operating upward.
Communication
Frequency, Consistency, and the Cost of Silence
Communication during change follows its own discipline, different from routine communication. Frequency matters. A long gap between updates does not read as neutral. It reads as evidence that something is being withheld. Consistency matters too. A message that shifts unpredictably from one update to the next teaches people to discount whatever comes next. They can't tell which version will hold. And behind both sits one governing fact. Silence is interpreted as bad news. In the absence of information, people don't default to assuming the best. They fill the gap with the worst plausible explanation. That is frequently more damaging to morale and cooperation than an honest, less flattering update would have been.
Figure 6.3.1
The Transition Is Not the Change
Here is a distinction worth holding carefully. The change is not the same as the transition. The change is an event in the organization. A new structure takes effect, a system goes live, a policy starts applying. It can be dated precisely. The transition is the psychological and practical process each individual goes through, in adjusting to that event. On the timeline, the change event is a single point, here a reorganization being announced. The transition begins at that same point, but it extends well beyond it. It has no fixed end date, it's uneven, and it often takes considerably longer than the change itself. And it's where the actual work of change happens. So a manager who tracks only whether the event has happened is measuring the wrong thing. The event can be fully implemented on paper, while the transition underneath it remains largely unresolved.
Resistance
Resistance Is Information
Resistance to change is any behavior that opposes, delays, or undermines a change effort. The conventional instinct is to treat it as an obstacle, to be overcome as efficiently as possible. This section argues for a different starting point. Resistance is information about what the change costs someone. Treat it purely as obstruction, and you guarantee its information is lost before anyone examines it. A person resisting a change is very often telling you something true and specific. It might be a real cost, a risk, or a flaw in the change. And it may be information the person designing or implementing the change has no other access to. Be careful with the reframing. It doesn't mean every objection is correct, or must be accommodated. It means every objection is worth examining for what it contains, before you decide how to respond.
Sources of Resistance
5 Places Resistance Comes From
Resistance traces to five distinct sources. Identifying the right one is the precondition for responding well. Loss of something valued is rooted in a genuine loss the change imposes. Status, autonomy, a valued working relationship, or income. And that's true even if the change is otherwise sound. Misunderstanding and lack of trust is rooted in incomplete or inaccurate information about what the change involves. It's often compounded by an existing low-trust relationship with whoever is leading the change. Different assessment of the situation is a genuine, good-faith disagreement about facts. The person has looked at the same situation and reached a different conclusion, from a real difference in judgment or information. Low tolerance for change is a general discomfort with disruption, largely independent of this particular change. And the fifth is usually omitted from lists like this one. A rational judgment that the change is bad. That's a genuinely correct assessment that the change, as designed, won't work, or will make things worse. A manager should take it at least as seriously as the other four. Dismissing it throws away exactly the information the reframing was meant to preserve.
Approaches
5 Approaches, From Least to Most Coercive
Five approaches exist for addressing resistance, and they run from least to most coercive. Education and communication addresses misunderstanding, with accurate information and a clear explanation of the reasoning. Participation and involvement addresses a different assessment, or a loss of valued autonomy. It gives the resisting party a genuine role in designing the change, not just receiving it. Facilitation and support addresses low tolerance for change, or genuine loss. It offers concrete help, like training, transition time, and emotional support, that reduces the real difficulty of adjusting. Negotiation and agreement addresses the loss of something valued, through a specific exchange that offsets it. And at the far end, named honestly along with its costs, manipulation and coercion. That means withholding information selectively, distorting the picture, or applying pressure and threat instead of persuasion. It can secure short-term compliance, but at a substantial and durable cost to trust. And it reliably produces compliance without commitment.
Table 6.3.1
Source, Fit, and the Wrong Fit
Table six point three point one pairs each source with what it indicates, the approach that fits, and the one that backfires. Loss of something valued indicates a genuine, specific cost. Negotiation fits, or facilitation and support. Education alone makes it worse, because it doesn't address the actual loss. Misunderstanding and low trust indicate missing or inaccurate information. Education and communication fit. Negotiation makes it worse, because it concedes something when the real gap is information. Different assessment indicates good-faith disagreement. Participation and involvement fit. Coercion makes it worse, because it discards potentially correct information rather than examining it. Low tolerance for change indicates general discomfort with disruption. Facilitation and support fit. Manipulation makes it worse, because it does nothing to build the confidence that's actually missing. And a rational judgment that the change is bad indicates a real design flaw. Participation fits, taken seriously as a design input. Anything that ignores the substance of the objection makes it worse.
Matching
The Wrong Approach Makes It Worse
The pattern in that table is worth stating directly. The wrong approach doesn't just fail. It makes things worse. Offer more education to someone facing a genuine, specific loss, and you've done nothing about the loss. Worse, it can read as dismissing a real concern. Negotiate a concession with someone whose resistance is purely a misunderstanding, and you've wasted it. Better information would have resolved the problem for free. And it can teach everyone else that raising an objection, however unfounded, gets rewarded. So matching approach to source is not about choosing the gentlest option by default. It's about diagnosing the source first. That's the same diagnostic spirit Subchapter six point two applied to identifying the right change target.
When She Disagrees
The Manager's Own Disagreement
Now the sharpest form of the manager's dilemma. She's asked to implement a change she personally disagrees with. Her escalation options are limited, but they're real. She can raise her objection clearly and specifically, before implementation begins. That's her upward-representing responsibility at work. She can try to shape the change's design, once the decision to proceed has been made, even if she couldn't prevent it. Or, having raised the objection and had it heard without being adopted, she can implement with genuine effort. That keeps her credible with leadership above her, and with the team below her. The cost is personally executing something she wouldn't have chosen. What she generally cannot do is quietly undermine a decision she is nominally implementing. Not without a serious and lasting cost to her credibility, on both sides.
Case Vignette
Marcus Discovers His Team Was Right
Here is a composite case, constructed for instruction. Marcus led a logistics team through the rollout of a new routing system, mandated from above his level. Two of his most experienced dispatchers objected early, and repeatedly. Their concern was specific. The system's assumptions about loading times didn't match how loading actually worked on the floor. Under pressure to hit the deadline, Marcus treated the objections as ordinary resistance, and pushed the rollout through on schedule. Within a month, delivery delays had risen noticeably. They traced directly to the exact loading-time assumption the dispatchers had flagged. Looking back, Marcus saw what had happened. He'd correctly identified the behavior, two employees objecting to a mandated change. But he'd assumed its source without checking, defaulting to low tolerance for change, or misunderstanding. The source was the fifth and most serious one. A rational judgment that the change, as designed, had a real flaw. His dispatchers' information had been correct and specific from the start. He just never opened it up. Try a reverse problem. A change went in quickly, with no visible resistance, but six months later almost nobody followed it. Which approach most likely secured that first compliance, and why would it produce exactly this outcome?
About Principles of Management at UPI Study
Principles of Management (Business 101) is a self-paced online course of 117 video lessons in 17 chapters, from the classical schools and the four management functions to leadership, motivation, change, human resources, strategy and ethics. It carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits.
Every lesson transcript is free on pages like this one, and the videos are free with a free UPI Study account. Enrolling adds a practice quiz after each lesson, the graded work and final exam that earn the credit, lifetime access, and an official transcript on completion. UPI Study has helped over 130,000 students with college credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Enroll now → Course details Download the syllabus Every course with PRO →
Why take it here
Why students take Principles of Management with UPI Study
Where the credit goes
Universities that work with NCCRS
Principles of Management carries a NCCRS credit recommendation. These universities work with NCCRS; some are UPI Study's signed partners. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Thomas Edison State UniversitySigned partner
University of the PeopleSigned partner
Charter Oak State CollegeSigned partner
Strayer UniversitySigned partner
Columbia Southern UniversitySigned partner
Indiana TechSigned partner
Penn StateWorks with NCCRS
Southern New Hampshire UniversityWorks with NCCRS
SUNYWorks with NCCRS
+many more cooperating universitiesFind my college →Find my college → Not listed? Ask Athena in the corner of this page, or book a 15-minute call.
FAQ
Questions students ask us
About Leading Through Uncertainty: The Manager's Role During Change
What is the role of a manager during organizational change?
What is the difference between change and transition?
What are the main causes of resistance to change?
How should managers deal with resistance to change?
About the Principles of Management course
How many college credits is Principles of Management?
How much does Principles of Management cost and what is included?
Which universities accept UPI Study credits?
How long does Principles of Management take?
How are the exams done?
How do my credits reach my college?
Ready for the full course? Earn 3 credits in Principles of Management.
117 video lessons, a quiz after each one, and the graded work that earns the credit. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
3 credits · NCCRSEnroll →