Changing Mental Models

Innovation There are a number of issues at play in this scenario. The two employees are raising some interesting, practical concerns. However, management may have already dealt with these concerns. Thus, there is a point where management needs to act on its strategies, knowing that it has already considered the issues that Vernon and Bud are raising. The key now is that management needs to change the way that these two are thinking and get them on board with the change. Resistance to change occurs for several reasons.

Some people's mental models are essentially non-flexible, and as a result they are unable or unwilling to conceive of change. This makes them resistant to change. The first question the company has to ask is whether these two are resisting change because they have thought this issue through and have legitimate concerns about the company's strategy, or because they are simply resistant to change. The mindset approach to change begins by creating motivation.

Vernon and Bud both need to understand what is at stake for them if they do not get on board with this change. They may be resisting because they feel that they in some way can influence strategy, but that is not the case. Thus, they need to reframe how they think about the issue, but that begins by breaking down their existing mental models to create openness (Stauffer, 2011). Often, resistance to change is not rooted in technical issues.

This makes sense -- in this case neither Vernon nor Bud is presenting a technical issue that cannot be overcome. The change is therefore rooted in social change (Lawrence, 1969). Bud, for example, is concerned about how this change will affect the social dynamics of the industry. He is not prepared to abandon the congenial competition that has essentially kept this company small.

What is important to communicate to both of these men is that the change is going to happen, and it will result in changing dynamics of the company, but the new ownership is intent on changing the dynamics of the company as a means of breaking out of the status quo and pursuing growth. Both men need to hear this -- their resistance reflects a desire for things not to change, so they need to come to terms with the reality of change sooner rather than later.

Vernon's resistance is rather vague, which indicates that perhaps he lacks trust in new management or in their strategy (Tanner, 2014). Bud, on the other hand, has expressed rather directly his fears that this strategy will backfire, raising the ire of competitors in a way that will ultimately come to hurt the company. Both of these men have a long tenure with the company and are likely speaking from a sense of fear and mistrust -- for them there is significant downside to change and relatively little upside.

In this instance, it does not make much sense to talk to either of these men from the perspective of the business decision -- this is about them and their security. The company therefore needs to provide not only a sense that this change is inevitable, but that it is strategically necessary -- that the new owners are not confident in the business model's viability going forward and therefore such changes are necessary to secure the future for all of the stakeholders within the company.

The appeal to their persona circumstances is probably going to be useful here, because personal security is probably the reason for the resistance to this particular change effort. This approach is based on the four steps to changing mental models. It is clear that the models are.