In thischapter, I consider the relationship between change processes and con­flict.

If we define conflict as incompatibility—of ideas, beliefs, behaviors, roles, needs, desires, values, and so on—then resolving such incompatibility leads, in some way, to change: in attitude, perception, belief, norms, behavior, roles, relationship, and so forth.

I make the assumption that the process of change is, at its core, a process of conflict resolution. Therefore, one can think of change as an outcome of a con­structive or destructive conflict resolution process, and the process of change as a series of conflict resolution activities that lead to some new (changed) end state. Thus, engaging in planned change gives rise to conflict; conversely, conflicts and how they are resolved exert a strong influence on the success of planned change. A second assumption I make is that there is a conceptual similarity in the process of change for individuals, groups, and organizations.

In this chapter, I look at common theoretical notions regarding the process of change and focus on three critical psychological components involved in any change effort: motivation, resistance, and commitment to change. I start by clar­ifying the types of change to which I am referring. What do I mean by change? I rely on a dictionary definition: “To cause to be different; to give a completely different form or appearance to; transform.” For my purposes, this discussion centers on change affecting individuals and groups within a social context. By social change, I refer to changes in the social systems of which we are part: a dyad (a marital relationship), small groups we belong to (the fundraising committee of the PTA), and larger groups (the organization in which we work). My interest is in looking at change as it occurs in such social systems, as distinct from changes in weather patterns and other types occurring outside of our indi­vidual or social realm.