Abstract

Steve Jackson’s role at Western is software implementation and making sure that all evaluation professionals have the tools necessary to do their job efficiently. Implementing the new software, he has discovered, would allow evaluation professionals in his company to have more information readily available to make faster decisions. This software, BSO, is also used by their competition and would give them a competitive advantage when dealing with their clients as well. After two successful demonstrations, all evaluation professionals were on board except for one, Mike Barnett. He is head of another department but is opposing the move to the new software. He has taken drastic measures to try and stop the implementation of the new software after the final decision was made to proceed.
The questions in the case pertain to the resistance Jackson is facing from Barnett. I will take a look at what Jackson did right in presenting the software, what he did wrong in handling the resistance from Barnett and what he should do next. I will also discuss why Barnett might be opposing the new software.

INTRODUCTION
Steve Jackson is a supervisor of software implementation and training at Western Construction Company. Jackson’s primary responsibility is to make sure that the project evaluation professionals have the right tools and training to be efficient at their job. Therefore, Jackson has met with a software company, BSO, who have a software program that is specific to their industry. Their competition is currently utilizing the software and after meeting with BSO, Jackson decided to inform his manager about the benefits the software could offer their company. Luke Williams, who is Jackson’s manager, was very impressed with the software and suggested setting up a demo so that all the project professionals at Western could try the BSO software themselves (Inkpen, 2011).
Jackson sent out invitations to all the evaluation professionals including, Abu Dija, who is Luke Williams boss. All key evaluation professionals attended the demo except for Mike Barnett, who is the lead international bidding and contracting department. When invited to the demo, Barnett stated he didn’t understand why the software is being considered by the company and he would have to check his schedule before making a commitment to attend the demo. This baffled Jackson because he had reminded Barnett that the new software would have better capabilities than the one they were currently using and that the demo would be an excellent opportunity to try out the software (Inkpen, 2011).
Jackson was encouraged by both Williams and Dija to set up another demo since the first one was very successful. Since Barnett was the only evaluation professional that did not attend the first one he decided to send an e-invite and a personal email to request his attendance. This email was met with hostility from Barnett. He responded that he was clearly against the software and that it would only increase problems. He did not feel like anything was wrong with the current software they were using (Inkpen, 2011).
Despite Barnett’s objections, Jackson proceeded with the second demo. It was a success and after several meetings with both companies, Dija voted to proceed with the implementation of the new software. This sent Barnett on a downward spiraling rampage. He sent out emails to both Williams and Dija voicing his opinion about the software and also made a statement about the integrity of Jackson (Inkpen, 2011).
Jackson is in a difficult position because he is lead of his department and as mentioned before; his primary responsibility is to ensure that the project evaluation professionals have the right tools and training to do their job. He has the backing of both Williams and Dija and both had stated that they were very impressed with the software and both had been able to demonstrate the software and liked what they saw. By implementing the software they will be able to provide more detailed information that will aid in making decisions more quickly. Barnett did not attend the software demonstration but mentioned that Jackson had his facts wrong about the software and that it would cost more time and money (Inkpen, 2011).
I will now look at some questions pertaining to this case and see how this could have been handled differently.

Questions pertaining to the case – Steve Jackson Faces Resistance to Change

Question 1: What has Jackson done right in introducing BSO at Western? In the book it states that the most valuable information a company can have, to be competitive, is knowledge (McShane & Von Glinow, 2013). The software that Jackson is trying to implement is specific to their industry, is used by their competition and will provide the decision makers with more details/knowledge to make decisions more quickly. A key factor to successfully implement a change is to include everyone in the process so that they will have an understanding of what is going on (Lawrence, 1969). Jackson is being a change agent for his company by actively seeking out software that can improve the quality of detail that will be available to the decisions makers and speed up the process of the decision making. Jackson did several things right when he introduced the BSO software to Western. First, after his initial meeting with BSO, he presented the information to his boss, Luke Williams. They discussed all the pros and cons associated with the software. His boss was also impressed that their competition was using the software and recommended that they do a software demo in order to see how it could benefit the company. He then set up the software demonstration and invited all the project professionals to come and test the software themselves. After the first demo, Jackson’s boss and his boss, Abu Dija, both congratulated him on the success of the demo and recommended he set up another one. Barnett was the only evaluation professional that did not show up. When Jackson set up the second demo, he sent an e-invite to Barnett and also a personal email to invite him. Jackson made sure he included Barnett both times by personally inviting him to the demo sessions.

Question 2: What could Jackson have done better introducing BSO at Western?
I think Jackson should have handled Mike Barnett’s objections immediately. It appears to me that he heard the objections, but never stopped to ask Barnett why he felt the way he did. It would have benefited him in the long run to have uncovered Barnett’s underlying motives immediately and try to understand where his thoughts were coming from.
I was reading an article about how to effectively deal with resistance to change and two of the ways mentioned were to let people participate in the change and to understand the nature of their resistance (Lawrence, 1969). Jackson did give all evaluation professionals an opportunity to demo the software twice but he did not address the resistance coming from Barnett as I mentioned before. If Jackson had addressed some of these issues up front and had a meeting with all three supervisors initially, I think that the objections from Barnett would have not gone as far as they did. I think that he could have also made the second demo mandatory. He had already heard that Barnett was upset about the software and he should have gotten Dija and Williams to back him up on the second demon by making it mandatory.

Question 3: Why is Barnett resisting the introduction of BSO?
I think emotions and personality are two big factors as to why Barnett is resisting the new software. He was given multiple opportunities to demo the software and voice his opinion. By not participating, he removed himself from the decision making process. One observation I made is that both Williams and Dija alluded to personality traits that needed to be dealt with. Williams stated that Barnett is cynical and Dija stated that he needed to be dealt with because he was fuming and could derail the whole project. Williams also alluded to the fact that he might be temperamental when he stated that he did not broach the subject with Barnett when he had the opportunity, because he was already upset about another project and didn’t want to make it worse. I also found it interesting that Dija and Barnett are friendly outside of work and have had a very long working relationship; but, Dija would not intercede and help Jackson get Barnett onboard with the software.
In the MARS model of individual behavior and results, it states an individual’s motivation, ability, role perception and situation are predictors of an individual’s behavior and performance (McShane & Von Glinow, 2013). In this case, Jackson, supervisor of software implementation, has a distinct role to ensure the evaluation professionals had the tools they needed for their job. He also is motivated to find solutions for the company that will save them time and money and increase their competitive advantage. Barnett is a lead supervisor of a different department. His role in this project was not necessary; but was invited to both demonstrations in order to be able to make his own assessment of the software. His motive to not attend was never uncovered in the case, but based on the information provided, I feel that he did not want to learn something new. Maybe he did not feel he would have the ability to learn the new software. In the case, it stated that roles are often blurred because of the nature of their business. I did not see why he felt it was his responsibility to block this project based on his role in the company. He mentioned that Jackson did not have his facts straight about the software but did not back that up with concrete evidence. He also said that it would cost time and money to the company, but everyone else in the company seemed to think the opposite, especially after having had the opportunity to try the software. He also mentioned that they would lose some valuable employees over the new software implementation but did not state where his information was coming from. Maybe he did not have confidence in the staff; whereas, Jackson clearly felt the staff was smart and would be able to adapt quickly to the new changes.
So in this case, I think his motivation might be based on the lack of confidence in his ability to learn the new software which might be affecting the situation at hand and causing him to step outside of his role.

Question 4: What should Jackson do next regarding Barnett?
In chapter 2, we read about personality dimensions in the five-factor personality model. It states in the book that personality traits reflect the behavioral tendencies of the individual. Barnett has clearly demonstrated some personality traits in the past that should not have been a surprise to Jackson. I think that based on the descriptions in the model, Barnett is displaying low agreeableness and high neuroticism. He is not trusting Jackson’s research and decision to implement the new software and he is responding in a manner that is very temperamental and almost insecure. He became very aggressive when he was told that the software was going to be implemented and turned his attentions away from the software to personal attacks on Jackson.
In order to overcome this resistance, Jackson needs to understand the reasoning behind Barnett’s behavior. He gave Barnett an opportunity to participate in the demonstrations and voice his opinion. What motivated him to not show up to the demo and give his opinions? The objections Barnett made were clearly more emotional and not based on facts about the software. This is why I have a feeling it is more of a resistance to change and he doesn’t want to have to learn a new process. He is comfortable with the current software and it is meeting his needs and this is why Jackson needs to show Barnett the value of the software to the other departments in the company. He needs show how they will benefit from the software and that it will give them a competitive advantage to have more information readily available and speed up the decision making process.
Jackson also needs to have both Dija and Williams support him more than they have, especially since Barnett’s actions have moved from passive to aggressive. Barnett has made it personal by attacking Jackson’s integrity at work. He needs to discuss this behavior coming from Barnett and remind him that this is a professional place of business and that he needs to keep his emotions in check and look at this from a different point of view. It is for the benefit of the company, not a personal gain on Jackson’s part. He honestly wants to offer a program to the company that will benefit all parties involved.

References
Inkpen, A. & Pearson, C. (2011). Steve Jackson Faces Resistance to Change. Thunderbird School of Global Management.
Lawrence, Paul. (1969). How to Deal with Resistance to Change. Retrieved on July 1, 2015 from: https://hbr.org/1969/01/how-to-deal-with-resistance-to-change
McShane, S., & Von Glinow, M. (2013). Organizational Behavior (6th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Higher.