Article: Resisting Change in Technology
by Asif Nawaz. Published on November 20, 2009.
As I sip my morning coffee and look out the cafe window on a typical, rainy morning in London and type away, I am actually debating whether or not to write this article. As a technology savvy person (I know what some think, but I like to think I am), it is almost taboo for me to say that a good 60%+ of the times when employees resist a change in technology in any company, it may actually be good for companies.
Now before all of you CIOs and CTOs get all wound-up, hear me out. How many of your counterparts in other companies are actually aware of which of the latest technologies out there is the best for your business? Not that you are ever guilty of this cardinal sin, but have you ever advised the board or the owner of your business (as the technical expert) to go out and buy a software or piece of technology just because the competition bought it? Maybe you haven't, but I personally know many technology executives and advisors who do just that and then blame the employees for resisting the change in technology when it all goes sour.
I hate to say this, but today I'm here to support the 'employee', not because he/she is right by resisting change in its very essence, but is actually right to do so because of the standard behavior (or misbheaviour) of technology specialists in companies. Technology decisions are not thought through and are made on political or personal grounds, the result of which is that business in general suffers and employees are laid off anyway.
If some of our friends in the technology arena actually made investments and decisions that they thought through, I'd say that employee resistance to a change is counter-productice, because not adapting to such a change would harm the business in the long run. It is, therefore, harmful for the employees too. However, I have, whether in the past as an employee, or today as an advisor to a variety of companies, seen more often than not executives who do not understand the ramifications of their decisions, take them boldly and lead their companies and employees to total doom.
Unfortunately, such decision-making is quite popular in the UK and I am, therefore, forced to say that resisting change in technology is perhaps good for many of the businesses based here. Think of your own company or the company that you work for. How many times have you met a technology and vendor and said 'I want what he's got'. He is usually your competitor, but do you ever stop to think that maybe 'he' runs his business differently from yours, and maybe what he got out of what he invested wasn't all that he should have?
If these are the kind of decisions being made in your company, your colleagues and the 'real' stakeholders of the business will actually thank you for resisting change in your company's technology today. There's a little thing called research and analysis, which many business leaders today forget to indulge in. The result is that a planned investment in technology just ends up being another expense on the P&L and a liability on the balance sheet. In such a scenario, resistance is a blessing.
If you work for a company that is bent upon shooting itself in its feet, contact us immediately. We've got years of experience in helping companies sway away from suicidal technology decisions (especially in matters of software and plaform architecture). We'll try to save your business and employment.
If you're a technology executive or decision maker, do the right thing and think the decision through. That doesn't mean you deploy Windows 7 in 2011, but it doesn't mean that you start deploying the beta version across the entire company.
