Many of you are asked to take a leadership role within your department: managing a research team, joining your administration, or spearheading a clinical effort. It is easy to feel unprepared for these roles, and there are many pitfalls waiting to sabotage your team’s productivity. The ALiEM Faculty Incubator has created a series of 10 case-based teaming problems to provide you with evidence-based advice and solutions for tackling some of the more common problems encountered in our professional team experiences.
What strategies can you use to bring everyone on board with a new CCC format?
Change is never easy
Implementing change in the assessment tools utilized by your Clinical Competency Committee (CCC) is no small task. Many people may be resistant to embark on such a trek if the current system is seen to be “working fine.” However the assumption that the current model of assessment is the best model simply because it has always worked or always been that way is a recipe for complacency and mediocrity.
In professional contexts, it is easy to become frustrated with the apparent immovability of the committee. Opposition to one’s ideas can lead to a sense of futility and, over the long-term, citizenship burnout.1 There is a large body of literature within business and psychology literature around some of the techniques to promote change in resistant environments.
“Culture eats strategy for breakfast”
Schermerhorn and colleagues2 extrapolated this statement by generating a convenient list of reasons people are change-averse:
- Fear (of the unknown, loss of security, or loss of power)
- Lack of good information
- Lack of resources
- No reason to change
- Bad timing
These reasons may apply to the group as a whole or a handful of individuals around the table.
Evaluating the team dynamics of the CCC allows for identification of additional factors complicating group progress. Despite assembling highly qualified and competent individuals, a team may remain dysfunctional. Lencioni offers a framework through which to view team dysfunction and provides guidance on addressing its root cause.3
Using Lencioni’s framework, the dysfunction of any team can be explored, including your own CCC. In addition to acknowledging the intrinsic issues of the team, a strategy is necessary to promote individual behavioral change, as well as cultural change. In 1996, Kotter offered the following eight steps to achieving culture change, which remain relevant and applicable in today’s complex professional environment.4
Using these steps, you can help create the change necessary to move your CCC towards evidence-based practice. In addition to Kotter’s 8 steps, Kotter and Schlesinger have explicitly detailed various methods for dealing with resistance to change in professional environments. The table below is adapted from this reference and details the methods, as well as the advantages and drawbacks of each approach.5
Methods for dealing with resistance to change
|Approach||Commonly used in situations||Advantages||Drawbacks|
|Education & communications||Where there is a lack of information or inaccurate information & analysis.||Once persuaded, people will often help with the implementation of the change.||Can be very time consuming if lots of people are involved.|
|Participation & involvement||Where the initiators do not have all the information they need to design the change, & others have considerable power to resist.||People who participate will be committed to implementing change, & any relevant information they have will be integrated into the change plan.||Can be very time consuming if participants design an inappropriate change.|
|Facilitation & support||Where people are resisting because of adjustment problems.||No other approach works as well with adjustment problems.||Can be time consuming, expensive, & still fail.|
|Negotiation & agreement||Where someone or some group will clearly lose out in a change, & the group has considerable power to resist.||Sometimes it is a relatively easy way to avoid major resistance.||Can be too expensive in many cases if it alerts others to negotiate for compliance.|
|Manipulation & co-optation||Where other tactics will not work or are too expensive.||It can be a relatively quick & inexpensive solution to resistance.||Can lead to future problems if people feel manipulated.|
|Explicit & implicit coercion||Where speed is essential, & the change initiators possess considerable power.||It is speedy & can overcome any kind of resistance.||Can be risky if it leaves people mad at the initiators.|