Theory of Constraints Handbook - James Cox Iii [394]
The Layers of Resistance to Change
The Layers of Resistance to change originate from the TOC basic questions of change (Goldratt, 1984).
1. What to Change? (What is the problem we are attempting to address?)
2. What to Change to? (What is our solution to this problem?)
3. How to Cause the Change? (How to implement the solution?)
Taken together, these three questions represent the buy-in effort in a nutshell. Yet each one of these three is a separate issue that must be addressed before we even attempt to get the other party to buy-in to our change initiative. The second and third questions (agreeing on the solution and the implementation steps) may seem self-explanatory, but it is also vital to make sure that everyone understands and agrees on the problem. What sometimes happens is that in our haste to talk about the change (i.e., the solution), we neglect to verify that we agree on the problem—and if both parties have different problems in mind, the odds are rather slim that our solution addresses their problem. It is no wonder, then, that they fail to see the merit in our solution, and object to it. The three questions of change thus highlight not only what should be covered in a buy-in effort, but also, and just as importantly, the inherent order in which this effort should be executed. There is no sense in talking about the solution before we agree on the problem, and no sense talking about the implementation steps before we agree on the solution. Hence, the three questions of change act as the basic Layers of Resistance to change that must be overcome or “peeled away,” one after the other, in order to get a buy-in. We use the terms “layers” and “peeled away” since it’s easy to picture the various challenges that must be overcome as peeling away layers of an onion until we get to the heart of the matter: the buy-in (see Fig. 20-1).
Awareness of the three basic Layers of Resistance is sufficient to improve many discussions about change. It was clear that those guys at the airport were all over the place. The guy who objected kept bouncing from the reasons why it was impossible to implement the change (disagreement on the implementation), to questioning whether they should focus on that particular change (disagreement on the solution), to suggesting that they should solve another problem first (disagreement on the problem). The initiator was doing his best to address each objection, but without any sense of progress; it was no wonder that those two were growing increasingly frustrated with each other and the entire discussion. The first thing they should have done was to pause and make sure that they agreed on what the problem was. Then, once they were on the same page, they could have moved forward to discuss the solution. If at that point they failed to reach an agreement, they would at least know where they stood and could restart from that point. In order to avoid wasting time and trying our own and our partner’s patience, we need to resist the urge to hop all over the place—we should identify as soon as possible the earliest “Layer” on which we disagree, and suggest to the other party that we concentrate on that issue before we move on to the next.
Being aware of where we are in the discussion—identifying the Layer with which we have to deal—may also give us a better idea as to whether we are making progress or we are stuck. In tough situations where the changes may appear “radical” or the other party is exceedingly resistant, the buy-in process may still take some time. Instead of experiencing the uncomfortable feeling that we are going nowhere, the Layers may serve as a road map, indicating where we are, when it is appropriate