The results from the Positive Strategies for Managing Change project suggest that a significant percentage of administrators and practitioners within the Tri-County Literacy Network are, or have been, experiencing stress due, in varying degrees, to the program reform changes. Having had the pleasure of working with many people in the literacy field in Ontario, I have heard many champion and defend the need for changes. I have heard many others argue that there isn't a need to make changes or that these changes are merely re-inventing the wheel but painting it a different colour. I have heard yet others report that it is more the rate at which the changes are being introduced that is stressful.

As an independent consultant working with numerous organizations in the process of change, a fundamental question for me has always been, "Why do different people respond differently to change?"

In an effort to answer that question, I have developed these thoughts (so far):

Humans are emotional beings

At the individual level, a significant change will elicit an emotional response that will yield the fight, flight or fright reactions. What appears to happen at this stage for many (myself included) is one of two things:

1. The level of examination of the impact of the change at both the personal and organizational levels stops here, and the decision about whether the change is a good one and how it should be managed is based on an emotional response.

2. A second possibility is that we mask our emotional reactions — and the decisions that ensue — in a pseudo-critical thinking shroud. As an example, a number of years ago, I was teaching business communications at a community college. The curriculum for the communications program was set to be overhauled. My initial reaction to the proposed changes was negative, and I now realize that it was negative for three reasons:

   1. Part of my reaction was emotional — I didn't like the proposed curriculum.
   2. Part of it was defensive - I suspected that it would negatively affect my position.
   3. Part of it was because some of my colleagues did not like it either.

   As instructors, we were asked to comment on what we thought of the changes. I, like others, detailed why I didn't think it was a good idea, even going so far as to collect information that would support my argument. However, what I did not do was closely examine the proposal, including the rationale, the implementation strategy, etc. Therefore, I used available information to support my negative reaction and bolster my resistance, but I didn't critically examine the issue from the other side.

As the research indicates, when we are overwhelmed with other stressors, critically examining the potential impact of any change becomes more difficult. Additionally, some people will be more comfortable with a change for a variety of personal reasons, including: