Firm leaders experience frustration when their partners and managers resist strategic initiatives. However, by understanding what resistance really means, leaders will be able to work through it.

When leaders of accounting firms learn that my background is in human behavior and motivation, they often smile and acknowledge how much of their work requires an understanding of psychology. Our discussions frequently drift to the human dynamics they have to navigate with clients, colleagues and staff.

One recurring issue that surfaces is the difficulty leaders have in aligning their partner-teams with strategic initiatives. Despite thorough preparation, discussions and research, certain partners sometimes struggle to take action. How can a group of highly intelligent and capable professionals fail to recognize the importance of a significant initiative and act on it? 

Attempts to negotiate or persuade individuals to shift their perspectives often prove ineffective. While some leaders may assume the authority to mandate compliance, more effective approaches exist to foster alignment. Understanding the psychological foundation of resistance can help leaders navigate these challenges more effectively.

The psychology of resistance

When asked, most people will acknowledge that they aren’t averse to change. Some will admit that they embrace change and enjoy the challenges that are presented. But these same individuals are often found pushing against a new initiative that takes them out of their comfort zone. So which is it—do they like change or not?

This answer isn’t so simple. First, change has two faces. The first is initiated change. When we are involved in a change effort from the beginning, we have had a chance to think about it, discuss it, maybe even try it out. We feel more comfortable because we have a sense of control. And we become frustrated when others can’t see the wisdom of the idea we are proposing.

On the other hand, imposed change is something that someone else wants us to accept. Often, it isn’t so much the initiative itself, but more so, that we feel out of control in terms of the severity, pace or scope of what is expected. When we don’t have control, our threat sensor goes into overload, screaming that we must resist. 

Our resistance is protective. We gravitate toward whatever feels safe and certain. While the definition of safety and certainty varies from person to person, the underlying principle is universal. We remember experiences of success when we adhere to what we believe to be true and failure when we disregard our better judgment. We have learned what works and what doesn’t, which informs us about how to respond in unfamiliar situations. These beliefs direct our actions and reactions, protecting us from bad results.

Understanding beliefs

Consider a scenario in which a partner-team is discussing a strategic initiative to position the firm in a new market. During the conversation, team members may think: “While this initiative seems valuable, it goes against what feels right to me, and I am reluctant to accept it. My concerns may seem trivial to others, but it feels unsafe and uncertain.” People seldom choose voluntary discomfort easily.

Rather than be overtly obstinate, their resistance may be framed in a logical way. A person’s beliefs will appear rational and well-intentioned, making them difficult to recognize as barriers. 

Below are some common examples of how partners’ beliefs can obstruct progress:

While I’m having a hard time accepting this initiative, I’ll support it as long as…

1. “…we will continue doing what has worked before. If not, I’m not in favor.”

   • Belief: The status quo is the best path forward.
   • Reasoning: Established practices are familiar, shared and have led to past success. Why change now?

2. “…we don’t have to endure discomfort or inconvenience. If not, I vote no.”

   • Belief: Actions should remain within “reasonable” limits of time, money and effort.
   • Reasoning: My work is already challenging; adding further strain seems unnecessary.

3. “…we will proceed only when every detail is planned and accounted for. If not, we aren’t on the same page.”

   • Belief: Initiatives must be meticulously mapped out before beginning anything.
   • Reasoning: Past experiences of premature action have resulted in wasted resources, delays and setbacks.

4. “…we must have unanimous agreement before moving forward. If not, it won’t work for me.”

   • Belief: Full consensus is required for success.
   • Reasoning: If everyone isn’t onboard, it won’t work. 

5. “…we avoid making high-stakes decisions without guarantees. If not, I can’t go along with it.”

   • Belief: Uncertainty poses a risk to safety and stability.
   • Reasoning: Waiting for validation elsewhere will minimize potential failure.

6. “…we have a fallback plan in case this initiative fails. If not, you can count me out.”

   • Belief: Strategies should allow for easy reversal.
   • Reasoning: Committing fully without certainty is too risky.

7. “…authority and control structures must remain intact. If not, it’s a deal breaker.”

   • Belief: Existing power dynamics should be preserved.
   • Reasoning: Restructuring could disrupt established leadership effectiveness.

Addressing resistance

These interfering beliefs, sometimes unspoken, significantly impact an individual’s ability to embrace change efforts. Leaders should not be discouraged by resistance; instead, they should recognize that overcoming these beliefs is part of the alignment process.

There are some ways to break through resistant beliefs. One essential strategy is priming resistors by openly discussing with the team the pain points that exist under the current circumstances — ineffective, inefficient, unwieldy, counter-productive, costly, etc. When people feel heard about their concerns, people are more willing to entertain a different way. Until then, they will resist change and will continue to make the current circumstances tolerable.

Another approach is to face a particular belief directly. For example, if there is evidence that the “risk without guarantees” belief is present (No. 5 above), questions could be asked: “What would be the risks of delaying action? Is the risk of staying where we are greater than the risk of adopting this initiative? If this change is inevitable, how does delaying action reduce risk later on? What is the risk of continuing with [pain points] and does it put our people, clients and the firm at risk?” 

A third approach is to engage a particular partner who is struggling with their sense of safety.  Begin by establishing a clear understanding of the belief by affirming the concern. Engage in an empathetic discussion about their uneasy feeling about the proposed initiative. Putting the discomfort into words is a way of making their apprehensions less spooky and feel more in control. Remember that resistance is a protective reaction to what feels unsafe.

“John, I agree that this initiative is a bold effort that is unknown to us. And we agree that the risks you identified are real. It seems to be particularly unsettling to you. Can you elaborate more, not on the logic you already presented, but on what worries you the most?”

Allow John to express his position, keeping him focused on his apprehensions and away from the risks of “what if’s” and “what could’s.” When he feels sufficiently heard by you (by restating his objection), ask the penetrating question, “If there was something that would reduce your discomfort, what would it be?” 

Clearly, this is where the situation becomes very fluid and could go in a number of directions, but it is a good beginning to penetrate the angst that is influencing the belief. Only be careful of pushing people too hard on their beliefs because it will only reinforce their anxiety and they will dig in, actively or passively.

The next time your partner-team discusses a change initiative, listen to the language they use. Pay attention to seemingly supportive statements that have underlying reservations. By identifying and addressing these hidden beliefs, leaders can accelerate meaningful alignment and drive strategic success.

The Chartered Institute of Management Accountants named John Graham its next president, succeeding Simon Bittlestone, effective today.

Graham will also serve as president, as well as co-chair, of the Association of International CPAs, for a one-year term.

Graham has spent much of his career in the National Health Service in the U.K., working for a range of organizations, including the Department of Health, and has held the roles of chief finance officer and director of finance for the last 16 years. He is currently the CFO of the Stockport NHS Foundation Trust, making him the first sitting CIMA president to concurrently hold a full-time executive position within the NHS during his term.

“The world is more unpredictable and challenging than ever before. Yet, the finance and accounting profession continues to show remarkable resilience,” Graham said in a statement. “There are great opportunities arising, driven by digital transformation and the increasing demand for finance professionals who bring not just technical expertise, but critical thinking, agility and strategic insights. We must look ahead to create the future of the profession — anticipating the skills, knowledge and opportunities that will define the next generation.” 

Over the next year as president, Graham will work with AICPA chair Lexy Kessler and AICPA CEO Mark Koziel on the “Finance and Accounting 2040: Rise to the Future Together” project. 

He will also be engaging with members and candidates in Africa, Asia, Europe and North America to highlight the growing career opportunities in finance driven by new technologies such as artificial intelligence and fast-growing areas such as business sustainability. 

“It is an honor to serve as 92nd president of CIMA and 10th co-chair of the Association of International Certified Professional Accountants, leading a global organization that fosters trust, enables opportunity and advances prosperity for people, businesses, communities, and economies worldwide,” Graham stated. “I am humbled to be elected as the president of the Chartered Institute of Management Accountants. I am stepping into this year with purpose and optimism and look forward to listening, connecting and shaping our future together.” 

Graham has held numerous positions within the AICPA. He previously served as a member and chair of the CIMA Life Long Learning and Professional Standards Committees. He currently serves on the Membership Committee, the Exam Board and the Appointments Committees. He also chaired the CIMA Northwest England and North Wales Area Board. 

I was inspired to write this open letter to you, the technology vendors that serve our accounting profession, after attending AICPA Engage and seeing the sheer number and quality of ambitious, well-funded technology ventures that are now coming into our space.

Our profession truly seems to have gone from famine to feast in an accelerated timeframe, driven in part by the influx of private equity and venture capital into the accounting tech space. VCs are now eyeing services businesses – yes, services! – as the next big growth frontier. (I never thought I’d say ‘services is sexy in Silicon Valley’… but here we are.) I am so thrilled to have you accelerate innovation, but this new abundance also requires a very different game plan to win.

When my cofounders and I started Aiwyn +5 years ago, the landscape was very different back then. I segment startups into “Pre-PE” vs. “Post-PE” because most of you, the “Post-PE” startups, have never experienced what it was like (I’ll resist the urge to tell the classic ‘back in my day’ tale about trudging uphill both ways in the snow to go to school – but just know, the landscape truly was very different back then.).

So how do you win in today’s landscape?

I use the TV show Survivor as a construct for you to strategize and execute upon a winning plan. (I contemplated using Hunger Games as an example but that seems a little too close to home in the potential figurative deaths of startups).

If you’ve ever watched the show Survivor, you know that winning isn’t just about brute strength—it’s about adaptability, strategy, and knowing when to play nice. The same goes for the accounting tech space. In a landscape full of rapid disruption, here’s how to avoid getting voted off the island.

1. Be Excellent at Your Craft

Just like winning immunity challenges on Survivor, great products and execution matter. That means:

• Building best-in-class solutions that solve real-world firm problems, not just buzzword-laden demos
• Creating a go-to-market (GTM) machine that understands the complexities of the CPA firm buyer persona and avoids treating the profession like a generic B2B vertical
• Delivering a world-class customer experience, from thoughtful and seamless implementation to responsive customer support and meaningful iteration on feedback

Excellence today means more than just functionality—it means speed-to-value, seamless experiences, and products tailored for the needs of accountants. It is no joke to earn the trust of CPA firms (my team at Aiwyn learned this through the School of Hard Knocks) – your core offering should work so well and your team so trusted that you become indispensable.

2. Form Strategic “Alliances”, or Integrations

In our “Let a Thousand Flowers Mode” era, the market for accounting technology is fragmented. Even the “#1 tool” in a category isn’t good enough on its own anymore. So stop playing a zero-sum game. Instead:

• Keep your friends close and your frenemies closer. Recognize that your arch-nemesis today might be your acquirer, partner, or co-selling ally tomorrow.
• Prioritize deep integrations with vendors who align on customer impact, not just press release value.
• Focus on startups with strong founder DNA, shared long-term vision, and a similar ideal client profile (ICP). These are the allies that will scale with you and thrive to leave the others behind.

In this game, the right integrated, bundled offering wins – point solutions lose. Don’t be a lone wolf.

3. Play the Long Game: Navigate AI Disruption and Market Dynamics with Conviction AND Fluidity

The biggest winners in accounting tech aren’t going to just shipping features. They’re shaping how firms evolve—and they do so with a strategy that is both dexterous and opinionated enough to survive this dynamic market.

We’re still in the early innings of private equity and venture capital entering the profession, alongside the AI disruption that is reshaping every business model. The implications are massive. You need to know where the puck is going, but be humble enough to admit when your hypothesis is wrong and the puck is skating elsewhere. This entails:

• Understanding firm business model shifts, from compliance to tech-enabled advisory, from billable hours to outcome-based pricing.
• Anticipating regulatory implications and the impact of AI agent deployment on talent, engagement metrics, and revenue models.
• Becoming a strategic thought partner. That means publishing, advising, and educating – not just selling. CPA firms remember who helped them see the future, not just who gave them a demo.

Final Words of Advice

Firms are evolving quickly, with rising expectations around technology partnerships, user experience, and long-term strategy. Vendors that succeed will not only deliver technical excellence—they’ll inspire trust, evolve alongside the profession, and lead with clarity even when the path shifts so that the tribe wants to follow you all the way to the final.

Build with conviction, adapt with humility, and remember: in a landscape defined by alliances and disruption, the right strategy makes all the difference.

Best of luck to you in: Outwit. Outplay. Outlast.