What the research says

Why do middle managers resist change?

The short answer

In the studies we mapped, what gets called resistance usually has a reason behind it. Middle managers push back when they stop seeing their leaders as legitimate, and a change that stirs up group identities and emotions can turn them for or against it. Leaders who leave them out can run into trouble, and one study argues that resistance can be a check on over-optimistic plans. One study reads cynicism as a way of making sense of contradictions, and others see pushback as managers keeping room to act or defending their sense of themselves.

Based on 8 studies from the Atlas of the Middle: 2 rated high strength, 1 medium, 5 low. Designs: qualitative case (6), qualitative interviews (1), survey (1).

It follows how leaders treat the middle

The two highest-rated studies on this question are long case studies by Quy Huy and colleagues. In one, managers moved toward resistance as they reassessed whether their leaders were legitimate. In the other, emotions tied to their own groups led managers to back or quietly brush off an initiative.

Huy et al. (2014) · qualitative case · HighFrom Support to Mutiny: Shifting Legitimacy Judgments and Emotional Reactions Impacting the Implementation of Radical ChangeOver three years of a radical change, middle managers went from supporting their top leaders to mutiny as they reassessed whether those leaders were legitimate, and their emotional reactions fed rising resistance.Huy (2011) · qualitative case · HighHow middle managers' group‐focus emotions and social identities influence strategy implementationIn a three-year case at a large tech firm, executives treating strategy as a purely task-focused job unintentionally stirred middle managers' group identities around tenure and language; the resulting emotions saw managers, even ones executives promoted, back or quietly brush off an initiative.

Pushback can be a way of making sense

Some researchers argue that what looks like resistance is managers working through contradictions, or keeping room to act.

Bergström et al. (2014) · qualitative interviews · LowParadoxifying Organizational Change: Cynicism and Resistance in the Swedish Armed ForcesSwedish Armed Forces unit managers met years of reforms with cynicism, which the authors read as a way of making sense of contradictions, not just resistance.Laine & Vaara (2007) · qualitative case · MediumStruggling over subjectivity: A discursive analysis of strategic development in an engineering groupWhen corporate management used strategy talk to tighten control at an engineering group, middle managers answered with a strategy language of their own to keep room to act.Bardon et al. (2017) · qualitative case · LowIdentity regulation, identity work and phronesisAt Disneyland, middle managers pushed back on a company script that put effectiveness ahead of ethics, recasting themselves as seekers of practical wisdom.

Leaving the middle out can backfire

In one telecom takeover, senior leaders who left out middle managers' voices ran into trouble implementing change, and the authors argue resistance can be a check on over-optimistic plans. Another study shows middle managers building resistance to management decisions in places they made their own.

Fronda & Moriceau (2008) · qualitative case · LowI am not your hero: change management and culture shocks in a public sector corporationIn a telecom takeover, senior leaders who left out middle managers' voices ran into trouble implementing change; the authors argue resistance can be a check on over-optimistic plans.Courpasson et al. (2017) · qualitative case · LowPolitics of place: The meaningfulness of resisting placesIn two cases, middle managers took over and reshaped particular physical places, and the meaning they gave those places helped them build resistance to management policies and decisions.

Trust and support narrow the gap

One survey looked at what sits between resistance and readiness for change.

Thakur & Srivastava (2018) · survey · LowFrom resistance to readiness: the role of mediating variablesIn a survey of 276 Indian middle managers, trust, felt organizational support and emotional attachment to the organization helped explain the link between resistance and readiness to change, narrowing the gap between the two.

What I take from it

If middle managers are pushing back, I would ask what they know that the plan doesn't, and how they see the people leading it, before treating it as a people problem to manage.

This is my reading, Gabriel Lopez's, not a finding of the studies above.

Common questions

Is middle-manager resistance always bad for a change?

Not necessarily. One study of a telecom takeover argues resistance can be a check on over-optimistic plans, and another reads cynicism as a way of making sense of contradictions.

What makes middle managers turn against a change?

In a three-year case of radical change, middle managers moved from supporting their leaders to mutiny as they reassessed whether those leaders were legitimate, and their emotional reactions fed rising resistance.

Every summary on this page was written by Unfrozen from the study's abstract or full text and checked twice by independent reviewers. Loop coding is exploratory and AI-assisted, pending human verification. Spot an error? Email info@unfreeze.us and it gets fixed.