Managing Resistance to Change at FedEx: A Strategic Plan

Resistance to Change

There are any number of reasons for resistance to change in an organization, among them poor communication, self-interest, exclusion, lack of trust, and lack of skills (Brookins, 2017). Sometimes change is resisted specifically because the organization does not communicate the need for change effectively — people see the disruptive aspects of change but do not understand the motivation behind it or its objectives. In such situations they may resist, but with better communication surrounding the change they might not have.

However, not all change is positive from the perspective of every person involved. What business executives and managers see as positive may be negative for others, and in such cases resistance can be entirely legitimate. If people are losing their jobs, or if their roles shift to the point where they feel they no longer have the right skill set for the work being asked of them, they are likely to resist. This is often tied to self-interest, because the change is negative for that particular individual or group. In a company like FedEx, which is generally stable, roles tend not to change much — so there is a real risk that change can provoke these types of negative responses.

Three Potential Causes of Resistance at FedEx

The change plan under consideration focuses on making FedEx more proactive and positioning the organization for the future. This is likely to meet resistance on several fronts. First, the organization has been fairly hierarchical in its power structure, owing in part to founder Fred Smith's background in the Marines. Shifting away from that hierarchy will reduce the power of certain individuals whose authority was largely based on tenure. The goal is to create opportunities for talent to rise on the basis of merit rather than time served. Resistance will come from those who stand to lose power under the new plan — and this is especially critical at the managerial level, since those are the people who must implement the changes.

A second cause of resistance is that the change plan demands a higher level of personal responsibility. Many employees within the organization may currently be underperforming, since performance measures are largely based on historical precedent — meaning people only need to perform at the level of their past performance. Such an approach does not drive excellence. By implementing more proactive performance measures, the organization will be better equipped to meet future challenges. However, part of the plan specifically involves identifying underperformers and either raising their performance level or encouraging them to move on. This will upset many people, particularly those who have grown accustomed to poor habits or whose skill sets are ill-suited to the performance level now being required.

A third cause of resistance stems from the fact that the change may be seen as lacking clear motivation. This is where communication becomes essential. The envisioned change is proactive in nature, but most people only recognize the need for change when there is a crisis or when something is visibly not working. The intent is to shift the organization's mindset so that proactive change becomes the norm. FedEx has historically been somewhat reactive — responding to economic shifts with restructuring, for example — but the objective now is to make FedEx more proactive in its strategy and to reposition the organization around that mindset.

Strategies for Minimizing Resistance

Several steps can be taken to minimize resistance to change. The first is to communicate the change effectively. Communication should be as personal as possible — for example, the CEO could deliver a presentation or video address to the company. Most communication to the workforce flows through regional or station managers, so a direct message from corporate headquarters would convey the importance of the change quite clearly, since such direct communication from the top is rare at FedEx.

There are strong reasons for the change, but not everyone will understand those reasons intuitively. The entire rationale should therefore be laid out in simple terms so that everyone understands why the change is happening. This helps the organization become accustomed to the idea that change is coming. Importantly, however, the communication plan must extend across the entire course of the change — not just the initial announcement. Sustained communication reinforces the original message, allows people to see how ground-level changes connect to overall strategic goals, and lets people recognize small victories along the way.

A third way to reduce resistance is to ensure that communication flows in both directions. Employees need to be engaged in the change process — perhaps not at the highest conceptual levels, but they are well-positioned to offer insight into how ground-level changes can be implemented more effectively, or at least less painfully. When those at the top of the organization design ground-level changes without input from below, those changes are likely to be less effective and to leave the rest of the organization feeling disengaged (Heathfield, 2016). Change should be carried out by the organization, not imposed upon it — and that is why two-way communication is critical. In a company like FedEx, many ground-level jobs will not actually change much, but it remains important for employees to feel engaged not only with where the company has been, but with where it is going.