Maybe, the most important point in changing is how we deal with fear. Every change process implies in fear on both sides: those who are being changed want to avoid the pain of (maybe) loose something; those who are promoting change have the fear that their idea are wrong or won’t be accepted. When both these sides get in contact surges an impasse. Resistance is not the main force that takes a change to failure. Reaction to resistance is the problem.
You will hardly get 100% approval of a new idea. This is welcome. Every law that doesn’t let opened the possibility of its execution, precisely because of its disobedience, is an arbitrary law. Second the Sanhedrin Treaty, is case of judgment of capital punishment – when it was necessary 23 judges -, if there was an unanimity in the sentence to the defendant, the judgment was disqualified and the defendant liberated. The sense of this kind of law is the distrust that a process can be conducted so well, that there is no doubt about it and can’t exist any different interpretation about this situation. (Nilton Bonder – The Immoral Soul)
It is difficult to listen to people when we don’t agree with some point of view. We usually get fixed on our point of view. Another approach would be encourage the other to talk more about his point. Just listening to him could help you both to understand each other.
Ask for the help of the resistants. Make sure they know you are listening to them. Truly listen and try to learn with them. Try to make them undestand that accepting the new idea does not mean throw away their own ideas. Don’t assume that a skeptic posture lasts forever. Someone who initialy seems against can turn into your favor.
This pattern allows you to use the resistance to your own benefit, instead of using it against you. People who watch you dealing well with skeptics will respect and admire you for this.