One section of the book that I found very helpful looked at the difference between those individuals who are skeptics and those that he termed “NoNos”. According to Kotter, there is some really big differences between these two. A skeptic is someone who questions the need for change. They have an attitude that if change is needed, you need to “show-me”. However, if enough evidence for why a change is necessary is presented, they can become one of the biggest supporters and advocates of the proposed change.
NoNos, on the other hand, approach change with the attitude that under no circumstances is it going to happen. They may act as if they want evidence presented that can change their minds, but in reality they are only looking for selective pieces of evidence that they can use to shoot down the effort. These individuals are highly disruptive and while they can work openly to stop the effort, they usually do their best work behind the scenes. They like to build support for their cause and use a variety of tactics to stop those advocating a new approach or direction.
Like me, I bet all of you have had to deal with a NoNo or two in your life and working career. How can we deal with these folks and keep our activities moving forward. According to Kotter most of us typically try two different approaches. Unfortunately, as I can definitely attest, these approaches don’t work.
One approach is to include the NoNo as part of the change effort. Most individuals believe that if they include the NoNo in the process, they will be magically transformed into an advocate. However, this is the worst place to have them. Now they have direct access to those involved in the activity. With this access they can now easily spread doubt and dissension. If given an activity to complete or oversee, they can stall just long enough to impact the success of the project.
A second approach that many follow is to ignore NoNos. Those following this strategy believe that by leaving the NoNo out of the activity they will be able to push the effort to success. Unfortunately when a NoNo is left alone, this is when they can cause the most mischief. Since NoNos like to work behind the scenes, they are masters at building support for their cause, while keeping these activities secret. If left alone, they can single-handedly sabotage a project, while at the same time pledging their support of the effort with a smile.
Since these two approaches are not the answer, what is? According to Kotter there are three additional approaches that have proven to work. These include pushing the individual out the door. Unfortunately, this strategy might not be available to use because one either does not have the authority to do this or the NoNo has very influential friends that can make life miserable for all involved.
A second approach is to immobilize the NoNo with social pressures. This involves finding ways to call them out in public, and letting social pressure handle the culprit. Once again, this may not always be an option, because others might be frightened of this individual and how they might retaliate.
The third approach is one that I employ on a regular basis. That is to distract them. You can do this by either giving the NoNo a special assignment that requires them to be out of the office a significant amount of time, pair them with a person who understands that their job is to keep the NoNo from creating problems, or give the NoNos so much work that they can’t create mischief. The key to success for this strategy is to find real issues that need to be addressed and that fit this individual’s talents and skills. Don’t make up an issue, the NoNo will see through it and work twice as hard to disrupt your project.
The secret to working with NoNos is to realize that they are not rational people. They are usually very insecure and want to remain in control. As Kotter stated, “Change means risk means anxiety.” Through obstruction of the process NoNos believe they can maintain the status quo forever.