Viewing Resistance as Ambivalence: Integrative Strategies for Working With Resistant Ambivalence

Abstract

Resistance to change is a problem that has long evaded easy solutions. In this article, the authors suggest the value of understanding and working with some forms of resistance as ambivalence. They describe resistant ambivalence in the context of an integrative and multivoiced understanding. A person who is ambivalent possesses a voice that moves toward change and a voice that struggles against change. The authors sought therapy methods that were consistent with the multivoiced integrative understanding of ambivalence and that could be useful in its resolution. Motivational interviewing and the two-chair method are described in this article, along with illustrative case

Motivation and Autonomy in Counseling, Psychotherapy, and Behavior Change: A Look at Theory and Practice 1ψ7

“…Reflection presumably helps clients clarify both reasons for change and the barriers in the way. Presumably, when clients experience low motivation, this itself would become an object of active interest and reflection, with a resulting movement on the part of the client in a direction of health (Engle & Arkowitz, 2008).…”

Maintenance and Transformation of Problematic Self-Narratives: A Semiotic-Dialogical Approach

“…Indeed, mutual in-feeding needs to be understood in the interpersonal context in which it occurs-the intersubjective field created in all interactions between the therapist and the client (Engle and Arkowitz 2008). According to Engle and Arkowitz (2008), "therapists can facilitate the resolution of resistant ambivalence by creating in-session exercises that increase awareness and integration of disowned aspects of the self" (p.393), in the context of a safe and accepting relationship.…”

Living on Both Sides of the Fence: A Phenomenological Study of Human Resource Development Professionals as Downsizing Survivors and Strategic Human Resource Development Facilitators

“…Downsizing can disrupt stable routines contributing to reliable performance (Neves & Caetano, 2006) and leave surviving employees feeling vulnerable and unsafe (Stuart, 1996). Change requires employees to move out of their comfort zones (Armenakis, Bernerth, Pitts, & Walker, 2007;Engle & Arkowitz, 2008). This can create a sense of uncertainty (Diamond, 2008;Folger & Skarlicki, 1999;Self & Schraeder, 2009;Stuart, 2006), unpredictability, and uncontrollability (Engle & Arkowitz, 2008) resulting in decreased morale, risk-taking, sense of direction, commitment, and selfesteem along with increased anxiety, disorientation, stress, and insecurity (Stuart, 2006).…”

“…Personal, organizational, and change-specific factors can contribute to employee resistance (Self & Schraeder, 2009) Some have suggested that the term ambivalence be used in place of resistance (Engle & Arkowitz, 2008;Piderit, 2000). Unlike resistance, which involves opposing the change, employees who display ambivalence wrestle with intrapersonal and interpersonal factors that move them simultaneously towards and away from the change (Engle & Arkowitz, 2008;Piderit, 2000).…”

“…Unlike resistance, which involves opposing the change, employees who display ambivalence wrestle with intrapersonal and interpersonal factors that move them simultaneously towards and away from the change (Engle & Arkowitz, 2008;Piderit, 2000). For example, downsizing survivors might be relieved to have jobs, curious about the new organizational structure, hopeful that taking on new responsibilities will increase their value to the organization, and determined to help the organization succeed.…”