Al Haddad2015 PDF
Content
Journal Jou rnal of o f Organizatio Organizational nal Change Mana Management gement Integrating the organizational change literature: a model for successful change Serina Al-Haddad Timothy Kotnour
Ar ti c le inf i nf or orm m ati on: on : To cite this document: Serina Al-Haddad Timothy Kotnour , (2015),"Integrating the organizational change literature: a model for successful change", Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 28 Iss 2 pp. 234 - 262 Permanent link to this document: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-11-2013-0215
) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
Downloaded on: 14 June 2015, At: 03:42 (PT) References: this document contains references to 153 other documents. To copy this document: [email protected] The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 1103 times since 2015*
Users Use rs w who ho down loaded loaded this article a also lso d ownloaded: Gabriele Jacobs, Arjen van Witteloostuijn, Jochen Christe-Zeyse, (2013),"A theoretical framework of organizational change", Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 26 Iss 5 pp. 772-792 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-09-2012-0137 Carolin Abrell-Vogel, Abrell-Vogel, Jens Rowold, (2014),"Leaders’ commitment to change and their effectiveness in change – a multilevel investigation", Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 27 Iss 6 pp. 900-921 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-07-2012-0111 Steven H. Appelbaum, Sally Habashy, Jean-Luc Malo, Hisham Shafiq, (2012),"Back to the future: revisiting Kotter's 1996 change model", Journal of Management Development, Vol. 31 Iss 8 pp. 764-782 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02621711211253231
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emeraldsrm:198285 []
For Aut hors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www www.emeraldinsight.com/authors .emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
Ab ou t Em Emeral erald d ww w w w.emer w.emerald ald in s ig ht .co m Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society society.. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services. Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time ti me of download.
) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at: www.emeraldinsight.com/ / 0953-4814.htm www.emeraldinsight.com 0953-4814.htm
JOCM 28,2
Integrating the organizational change literature: a model for successful change
234
Serina Al-Haddad and Timothy Kotnour Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Systems, University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida, USA Abstract Purpose – The The purpose of this paper is to contribu contribute te a roadmap roadmap to the change management management literature, and provide definitions for describing change types, change enablers and change methods. This paper also proposes aligning the change type with the change method to find the effect on the change outcomes. New researchers can use this paper to get an overview of the change management discipline along with the main concepts that help in underst understanding anding the different dimensions of and relationships between the change types and methods in the literature. Managers can use this paper to describe and classify their organizational change situation and select an implementation method for systematic change and for change management.
) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
Design/methodology/approach – This This framewo framework rk is desi designe gned d bas based ed on lite literat rature ure revi review ew and experts judgment. Findings – The The results of the research propose a hypothes hypothesis is that describes describes the relation relationships ships between the change types and methods and how this relationship can affect the change outcomes. Originality/value – The The main contribution of this research paper is to connect three main knowledge areas of change types, change methods and change outcomes. These three areas are standalone subjects in several publications in the literature. Some researchers connected the change types and change cha nge met methods hods,, whi while le other other res researc earchers hers connecte connected d the change change met methods hods and cha change nge outc outcome omes. s. But connecting the change types, change methods and change outcomes remains a new research territory to explore. Keywords Alignment, Change management, management, Organiz Organizational ational change, System Systematic atic change Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction Introduction
Journal of Organizational Change Management Vol. 28 No. 2, 2015 pp. 234-262 © EmeraldGroupPublishi EmeraldGroupPublishing ng Limited Limited 0953-4814 DOI 10.1108/JOCM-11-2013-0215 10.1108/JOCM-11-2013-0215
We are living todaythe in norm a constantly global business environment, where change chan ge has become for organizati organgrowing izations ons to sustain sustain their success succe ss and existence. existen ce. Indust Ind ustria riall and governm government ental al organi organizat zation ionss are consta constantl ntly y strivi striving ng to ali align gn their their operations with a changing environment (Ackoff, 2006; Burnes, 2004a; By, 2005; Hailey and Balogu Balogun, n, 2002; 2002; Kotter Kotter,, 1996; 1996; Mintzb Mintzberg, erg, 1979; 1979; Moran Moran and Bright Brightman man,, 2001). 2001). Organizations and their leaders are also changing as a natural response to the shift in strate strategic gic import importanc ance, e, from from effect effective ively ly managi managing ng mass mass market marketss and tangib tangible le properties to innovation, knowledge management and human resources (Dess and Pick Pi cken en,, 20 2000 00). ). Many Many appr approa oach ches es and and meth method odss have have be been en su sugg gges este ted d to mana manage ge change, chan ge, yet organizati organizations ons undergoin undergoing g change change vary significan significantly tly in their their structure, structure, systems, strategies and human resources. Organizations need an integrated approach to drive systematic, constructive change and and mi mini nimi mize ze th thee de dest stru ruct ctiv ivee barr barrie iers rs to ch chan ange ge,, as well well as ad addr dres essi sing ng th thee consequence conse quencess of making making the change. change. In implement implementing ing change, change, different different definitions definitions and method met hodssfailure have have rate been beenofpropos pro posed ed to manage man age change cha nge;literature ; howeve however, r, organi organizat zation ionsscases sti still ll report a high their change initiatives. The provides many
) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
on organizational change; yet, the success rate of change initiatives is o 30 percent (Balogun and Hope Hailey, Hailey, 2004; Beer and Nohria, 2000; Grover, 1999 1999).). And more recent articles note the fact that this this rate is not getting any bett better er ( Jacobs et al., 2013; Jansson, 2013; Michel et al., 2013; Rouse, 2011). Those failure rates indicate a sustained need for invest investiga igatin ting g and findin finding g what what factors factors increa increase se the probab probabili ility ty of succes successfu sfull orga or gani niza zati tion onal al ch chan ange ge and and de deba bata tabl bly y im impl ply y a lack lack of a va vali lid d fram framew ewor ork k for for organizational change (By, 2005; Rafferty et al., 2013). Reasons behind organizational change failure have attracted only limited attention (Buchanan et al., 2005). Dunphy and Stace (1993) argued that “managers and consultants need a method of change that is essentially a “situational” or “contingency” method, one that indicated how to vary var y change change strate strategie giess to achiev achievee “opti optimum mum fit” with the changing changing environme environment nt” (p. 905). When reviewing relevance and validity in the available methods, the literature show showss a cons consid ider erab able le disa disagr greem eemen entt re rega gard rdin ing g th thee most most ap appr prop opri riat atee me meth thod od to changi cha nging ng organi organizat zation ionss (Bamf (Bamford ord and Forres Forrester, ter, 2003). 2003). With With the high high variat variation ion between organizations undergoing change, a directive change approach or method would not be suitable for all situations as change methods should depend on the organizati organ izational onal context context (Michel (Michel et al 2013; 3; Nyströ Nyström m et al. 2013). One-si One-sizeze-fit fitss all al.., 201 al., 2013). methods frequently result in failing change (Kotter and Schlesinger, 2008). Burnes Bur nes and Jackso Jackson n (2011) (2011) argue argue that that even even writer writers, s, who have have address addressed ed why change initiatives fail, recognize that reasons go beyond poor planning or lack of commitmen comm itmentt to change: change: “Th Thee unde underly rlyin ing g caus causee is a cl clas ash h of va valu lues es betw betwee een n th thee organization and the approach to and type of change it has adopted ” (p. 135). Conner (1998) (19 98) believ believes es that that org organi anizat zation ionss have have to realize realize th that at the driver driverss of cha change nge are all connected and affect each other; any change action has a chain reaction that impacts the whole organization. Today, successful change management is a major topic for all organizations, and how to successfully achieve organizational change during economic crises is being as aske ked d by many many orga organi niza zati tions ons (A (Ash shur urst st an and d Hodg Hodges es,, 20 2010 10). ). Many Many writ writers ers ha have ve suggested methods to implement change; nevertheless, in recent years, it has become more recognized that one or even two methods to change cannot cover the vastly differ dif ferent ent change change sit situat uation ionss (Burne (Burness and Jackso Jackson, n, 2011). 2011). The growth growth in theori theories es and methods dealing with change requires having a framework that integrates and catego cat egorize rizess the variou variouss method methodss (Goes (Goes et al., 20 2000 00). ). Chan Change ge meth method odss need need to be continuously to the align with theHow environmental factors.align their change type This paperevolving addresses question: can organizations with the most appropriate change method? This paper is divided into six sections. The first section introduces the need for change and the gaps this paper is addressing. The second section section reviews reviews and integrates integrates the change literature literature history history and the main authors that addressed change. The third section proposes and discusses a taxonomy to the change literature and discusses the different change types, enablers, methods and outcomes and explains how the alignment concept between the change types and methods. The fourth section discusses opportunities for future research. And the fifth section summarizes the paper with an overall conclusion. The main contribution of this research to the scholarly literature is to connect the three main knowledge areas of change types, change methods and change outcomes. These three areas are stand-alone subjects in several publications in the literature. Some researchers connected the change types and change methods (Burnes, 2004a; By, 2005; Goes et al., 2000; Meyer et al., 1990), 1990), while while other other resear researcher cherss connec connected ted th thee chan change ge meth method odss an and d chan change ge ou outc tcom omes es (Bee (Beerr an and d Nohr Nohria ia,, 20 2000 00;; Burn Burnes es,, 20 2004 04a; a;
Integrating the organizational change literature
235
JOCM 28,2
236
) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
Miller, 1982; Miller, 1982; Mintzberg, Mintzberg, 1979). But connectin connecting g the change types, types, change change methods methods and change outcomes remained a new research territory to explore. 2. A review of the change change literatu literature re history history This section provides a review of history of change as a discipline and reviews the primary authors that have addressed the different contributing disciplines of change such suc h as: sociol sociology ogy and psycho psycholog logy; y; manage managemen mentt and leader leadershi ship; p; and engine engineeri ering ng management (EM) and industrial engineering (IE). Figure 1 shows the change literature timeline along with the authors in each area. As shown in Figure 1, research in change in the areas of psychology and sociology started with the Lewin studies in 1946 in organizational development (OD). Kurt Lewin was a humanitarian who thought that human conditions could only be enhanced by resolving social conflicts (Burnes, 2004b). Lewin is considered the intellectual father of the philos philosoph ophies ies of OD, applie applied d behavi behaviora orall scienc science, e, action action researc research h and planne planned d change. Working during Second World War, Lewin focussed on how to change human be beha havi vior or,, sp spur urri ring ng an enti entire re ge gene nera rati tion on of rese resear arch ch ad addr dres essi sing ng ch chan ange ge an and d implementing it as a process (Schein, 1988). Lewin ’s theories inspired studies in the ro role le of huma human n beha behavi vior or in orga organi niza zati tion onal al dyna dynami mics cs.. In Indi divi vidu dual alss’ and and groups groups’ perspectives revealed how people react to organizational change. Figure 2 shows the different perspectives in OD. As shown in Figure 2, each of the individual theories assumed it was able to transl tra nslate ate the human human action actionss correc correctly tly (Lovel (Lovell, l, 1980; 1980; Pavlov Pavlov,, 1960; 1960; Skinne Skinner, r, 1974). 1974). Looking at group dynamics as part of OD is probably the oldest perspective (Schein, 1969). Group dynamics were identified and defined by Kurt Lewin in 1948; he believed thatt since tha since organi organizat zation ional al struct structure ure was becomi becoming ng more more team-b team-base ased, d, indivi individu duals als’ behavior must be a function of the group environment and can only be seen and modified in terms of groups. Supporters of the group dynamics perspective claim that change has to occur on a team level and should concentrate on changing and influencing the norms, roles and values of its members (Cummings and Huse, 1989; French and Bell, 1984). As a result of both perspectives, of individuals and groups, the open systems explanation of OD emerged; the open systems school looks at the organization from a broader perspective. As the name implies, this school views organizations as being open externally to the surrounding environment, and internally where argues variousthat subunits interact with each other (Buckley, 1968; Scott, 1987). Lalonde (2011) the open systems require ongoing change to adapt to the revolutionary environment and this creates a strategy of continuous continuous learning that becomes becomes integrated integrated within the organizati organizational onal culture. OD affe affect ctss th thee or orga gani niza zati tion on by chan changi ging ng th thee in indi divi vidu dual alss an and d al alte terin ring g th thee over overal alll performance; consequently, change is a natural conceptualization of OD (Kezar, 2001). Weis We isbo bord rd and and Ja Jano noff ff (201 (2010) 0) prom promot otee th thee id idea ea of part partic icip ipat atio ion n when when di disc scus ussi sing ng organization development and change by introducing “future research.” They note that when issues involving people are explored, more creative energy is released, leading to projects that everyone identifies as significant and no one could accomplish alone. In the social studies area, the change management literature has been associated with OD studies. Moreover, it has been argued that change management is a proper replacement for OD as it includes both business and human needs (Worren et al., 1999). First introduced in the early twentieth century, the discipline of management was introduced by Fayol as a part of general administration and has since emerged as a major maj or focus focus of resear research. ch. Fayol Fayol is also also known known for developi developing ng th thee 14 princi principle pless of
Integrating the organizational change literature ) 0 " 0 2 ( O " a & i r " h E o " N y d r n o e a h r T e e B
) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
s r o h t u A y r a m i r P
n l e o 3 ) e i ) l t d 0 d a 9 s o o ) 9 0 m 1 n 6 M ) M r 0 5 d o ( o i 9 e 2 f t 9 t o ( n 9 g s t z c o 9 h l i n n n 1 n t 1 ( e a e a c u ( r r h m e . M T o r l o F e C r t t a t a n t i K n o g H u t a s e h ) n e e h n K i c d y 9 l d r I n m h W d k g 8 e r a a e e T a ) M o 9 d o e g i n y g l e 6 Q h b n S B & s a o 1 L 8 T ) s a s e i c n ) h ( o i 9 f 4 h r r a c e y 8 y e M R h t 1 e C i 8 ) 8 s s h W e i t ( o M 9 u r f s s 9 P u r 2 e c 1 u g l g o a e 1 t 8 i r ( ) l H ( a a t n W u b o 9 t i e u l r M i 9 a p 1 p d e n n & e v 7 t e ( m t e i R s F e i m e s a o e & c m A 9 S e i s e 4 c y i n g h 1 n m n y ) h t R i T D 1 e ( e n 7 t e & a n a g e o c i a n n n t t a m o k e K h z v 6 i B i C s g e S n i s n o t r m i r C s g c 9 y e o e r t a m u e a n C s g v e c u 1 F c d ( b i e g m n g C m t a b H i a z I n c h h r u A y e o e u n a S t r r t e a b h O C c S h C T M n s t P i h h s i t . i o R g C T C n M r h l i r h g d l a c n C i m t r n O o R g r d n r e i a a t t m A e i e s n r u e e o s o m f t f e D g e F c l l f p o n C e i i o h e P i m e e n k s d e o t y c ) e M c o R i D r l l 6 h e i s r z T e m c n i v i a t k t 4 a c e A i o l e h e u a c a 9 s D t e a g T r v u a 1 Q a r l n t r r t ( e a d P l n e r I o n e i t n s D e a n R n a a e p & i c a a n o h M n i e h i m O w i z o t o T g w t i o s e i e t a C e t g n m l z L c i d a h a e a h r t o S t t A n n S S s o s a a C a r n c f g i o r f o F u o o c i i n M t p t l t r O r s c a n e a e t r s o n e c & n h i n a u t u C n c o e J i a l F M a F r S m t o t c t s o f e y n l n i e o s y r g a e u a e a F e h F m T n R T h e s t a g s & a M o a r F n C a e h M T
s e i r e g n o n i a o l h d p c i e l p e i c s t o d t o e g n p n s a i t a w h h c t r o h t y o / o p y h h n m o i W W d •
y e y g g n o o i l l l o o i p h i c c c o s y S i s D P &
s e e i n g l p p n i a c l n e h c i r g p h s i n n e i h c i a t i s t r c l p e a r c p m s l w d o a o n c c o H a a g •
& t i p n h e s m r e e d g a a e n L a M
g d n n e i z a g i n n l a a e h p g c r o t o , p e f c e g f n g i a n i n t s n c e a e l r c r p i d u w d o o n s e H a r •
f o s d o h t e m d e e g l i a n t a e h D c •
s y n b e s p m p a d t s e h n y e a s g s d n a e e h s t c s a e r c g h c e i o h r t n w P i •
0 1 0 2
237
0 0 0 2
0 8 9 1
0 e 6 9 i m 1 T
0 4 9 1
0 2 9 1
0 0 9 1
d e d e e n s l l i k s d e n g a n s a e h u c l a r o V f •
E I & M E
Figure 1. Change management timeline
JOCM 28,2
Behaviorist Theory: assumes that change is initiated only when the external consequences consequence s and effects on the individuals are modified
Individuals Gestalt-Field Theory: assumes change is initiated by aiding individuals understand themselves and circumstances they are in, and this is what leads to a successful change of their behavior
Organizational
238
Development Perspectives
has to be on a team level and should concentrate on changing Group Dynamics: Change and influencing the norms, roles and values of i ts members Organizational Goals and Values Subsystem
Figure 2. Organizational development perspectives
Open Systems: Organizations are open externally to the surrounding environment, and internally where various subunits interacts with each other
Technical Subsystem Psychological Subsystem Managerial Subsystem
) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
management. In 1949, Fayol wrote a book titled General and Industrial Management in whic which h he disc discus usse sess what what he cons conside idered red th thee most most im impo port rtan antt 14 prin princi cipl ples es of manage man agemen mentt and explai explains ns how manage managers rs should should organi organize ze and intera interact ct with with staff staff (Fayol, 1950). Carter (1986) argues that most management textbooks recognize Fayol as the father of the first theory of administration. Fayol also divided the functions of administration or controlling management into fiveand elements: organizing, commanding, coordinating and (Babcock Morse, planning, 2002). In 1974, Drucker defined management as a process of accomplishing tasks with the help of other people and resources (Drucker, 1974). Drucker argues that business has to be managed by balancing the different organizational goals and objectives that became a popular term in management called “management by objectives” (Drucker, 1986). McFarland (1979) argues “management was originally a noun used to indicate the process of managing, training, or directing” (p. 5). Mcfarland also defines management as an administrative process and can be seen as a science or an art. Weihrich and Koontz (1993) define five main functions of management: (1) planning, planning, which which includes includes setting setting a mission and vision vision and prepare prepare for future future actions; (2) organizing organizing,, which involve involvess creating a formal formal structure structure of people people’s roles in the organization; (3 (3)) st staf affi fing ng,, whic which h mean meanss empl employ oyin ing g pe peop ople le to fi fill ll in th thee po posi siti tion onss on th thee organizational structure; (4) leading, leading, which means means having having the authori authority ty to influence influence and and direct direct employees employees to willingly accomplish certain objectives or achieve common goals; and (5) (5) contro controll lling ing,, which which invo involv lves es fo foll llowi owing ng up and and correc correcti ting ng emplo employe yees es’ performance to ensure they conform to the goals and objectives set. Nicholas Nichol as and Steyn Steyn (2008) (2008) define define manag manageme ement nt as the executio execution n of all of what what is important to accomplish a task or a system of tasks, or completing a project on time and with the allocated resources. Ackoff and Emery (1972) discusses the importance of systematic thinking in managing human behavior. Ackoff (2006) also stresses on the importance of plans and procedures in providing guidance when managing change. Aut Author horss in manage man mentt also als(1979) o have haveand propos proMiller posed ed(1982) method methods s forincremental manag managing ing change cha nge at an incremental rate.agemen Mintzberg define change as an
) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
approach approa ch in which which organi organizat zation ionss progre progressi ssivel vely y alter alter a few elemen elements ts or form form new strategies. Miller (1982) argues that sometimes the most economical and cost effective change cha nge strate strategy gy is to adopt adopt the semi-i semi-incr ncreme ementa ntall app approa roach ch with with stable stable interv intervals als punctuated occasionally by revolutionary periods of change. Managing change and its associ associate ated d uncerta uncertaint inties ies can be is stress stressful ful and poses poses a llot ot of physica physical, l, emotio emotional nal and psychological tolls (McCaskey, 1982). Leadership can be defined as a process whereby a person influences and directs others to accomplish a certain objective or achieve a common goal (Northouse, 2007). Kouzes and Posner (1995) suggest that the five main leadership practices, or what they call the “exemplary leadership,” are: “modeling the way, inspiring a shared vision, challenging the process, enabling others to act, and encouraging the heart ” (p. 13). Soderholm (1989) argues that leadership is about the innovation of new ideas and new concepts that brings new desirable outcomes. The entrepreneurship, creativity and innova inn ovatio tion n embedd embedded ed in leaders leadership hip are very import important ant to succes successfu sfully lly managi managing ng change. In addition, Hamel (2007) believes that mobilizing talent, allocating resources, and formulating strategies are necessary for the organization’s profitability and for maintaining the competitive advantage. A leader is the person who makes sure that the organization is heading in the right direct dir ection ion (Winst (Winston, on, 2004). 2004). The contin continual ually ly changi changing ng busine business ss environ environmen mentt needs needs quick responses that only a leader can provide. And it is the leaders who have to make the right decisi decisions ons at the right right time time to align align the organiza organizatio tion n with with the changi changing ng enviro env ironme nment, nt, and who motiva motivate te the people people to work work and implem implement ent the change changess (Goleman, 2000; Haidar, 2006). In complex and ambiguous situations, managers have to deal with major uncertainties that arise; those who can successfully deal with this uncertainty distinguish themselves and become key people within the organization and gain great impact and authority (Thompson, 1967). As defined by Griffith-Cooper and King (2007), change leadership refers to “a set of principles princ iples,, techniques, techniques, or activities activities applied to the human aspects aspects of executing executing change to influence intrinsic acceptance while reducing resistance” (p. 14). Change leaders are people with creative visions, who are able to foresee a new reality and how to get to it. Change leaders have to understand how their employees perceive change and ensure they accept the change and are ready for it. They have to motivate employee to take responsibility and be an active part of the change (Gioia et al., 2013; van et al., 2013). Kanter Kan ter (1984) (19 84) the descri desclassic cribes bes skills them them for as change the the archit architect ectss or ultimate ate maste masters. rs. Kanter Kanter (20 (2000) 00) suggests that leaders are:ultim (1)
Tuning in to the environment.
“
(2) Challengin Challenging g the prevaili prevailing ng organizati organizational onal wisdom. wisdom. (3) Communic Communicating ating a compelli compelling ng aspirat aspiration. ion. (4) Buildi Building ng coalit coalition ions. s. (5) Transferrin Transferring g ownership ownership to a working working team. team. (6) Learni Learning ng to preser preserve. ve. (7) Making Making everyo everyone ne a hero hero” (p. 34). Beer and Nohria (2000) identify two two basic change theories for leading chan change: ge: Theory E th that atabilit islity. base ba d on econ omic ic valu va lue, e,the an and d Th Theo eory ry Ooach th that at to is chan base baange sed d orfo gani niza tion onal ale capabi cap y. sed Theory The oryec Eonom represe rep resents nts approa ch ch ge;;onit itssorga focu cus szati is th the “hard” appr
Integrating the organizational change literature
239
JOCM 28,2
240
) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
sharehold shareh older er value value and usuall usually y involv involves es using using econom economic ic incent incentive ives, s, layoff layoffss and down downsi sizi zing ng.. On th thee ot othe herr hand hand,, Theor Theory y O repr repres esent entss th thee “soft” approac approach; h; its focu focuss is deve develo lopi ping ng th thee orga organi niza zati tion onal al cu cult ltur uree an and d pe peop ople le’s ca capa pabi bili liti ties es an and d usually welcomes people’s involvement, feedback and reflections. Acts of leadership enable the organization to respond to the changing environment by creating a vision and making prompt decisions in terms of resources and technologies (Ekvall and Arvonen, Arvo nen, 1991; Masood et al., 2006). Therefore, leaders have to be aware how to deal with the different perceptions and cultures when implementing change (Bayerl et al., 2013). Leaders can be seen as change makers who guide the organizations into the desired des ired future future state state or perfor performan mance. ce. Mahmoo Mahmood d et al. al. (2012) (2012) argue, argue, “Management an and d le lead ader ersh ship ip are are two two over overla lapp ppin ing g te term rmss whic which h conf confus usee many many pe peop ople le.. Leadership and management are complementary for each other and they go hand in hand” (p. 513). Research on change in the fields of EM and IE began in 1911 with the early work of Frederick Taylor, the “father of management sciences.” Taylor introduced the “Piece Ratee Sy Rat Syste stem m” that that was was conc concern erned ed wi with th im impr prov ovin ing g th thee ef effi fici cien ency cy of shop shop-f -flo loor or operations (Babcock and Morse, 2002). When implementing change, the values of EM and IE can be critical for change efforts to succeed. EM is ab abou outt ap appl plyi ying ng engi engine neer erin ing g valu values es an and d sk skill illss in coac coachi hing ng peop people le an and d managing projects (Lannes, 2001). As per the US Department of Education Institute of Education Education Sciences: Classifica Classification tion of Instructio Instructional nal Programs, Programs, EM and industria industriall managements (IE) provide proper experience in financial management, industrial and human hum an resour resources ces manage managemen ment, t, indust industria riall psycho psycholog logy, y, manage managemen mentt inform informati ation on systems, quality control and operations research. IE, as defined by the Institute of Industrial Engineering, involves the design, improvement and installation of integrated system sys temss of people people,, materi materials als,, inform informati ation, on, equipm equipment ent and energy energy.. IE draws draws upon upon specialized knowledge and skills in the mathematical, physical, and social sciences togeth tog ether er with with th thee princi principle pless and method methodss of engine engineeri ering ng analys analysis is and design design,, to specif spe cify, y, predic predict, t, and evalua evaluate te the results results to be obtain obtained ed from from such such system systems. s. EM and IE are both important in order to manage change, and the inclusion of the human factor within them gives EM and IE a unique distinction among other engineering disciplines (Baker, 2009). In IE, five authors provide insight into change methods: Shewhart, Deming, Juran, Crosby and Sink. the first to improve the traditional and introduced theShewhart scientificwas method to describe the process of massproduction production.process Three steps were involved: specification, production and inspection (Shewhart and Deming, 1945). Shewart later revised this idea into a cyclical concept, developing what is now known as the Shewhart cycle. In the 1950s, Deming revived and modified Shewhart ’s cycle, cyc le, incorp incorporat orating ing additi additiona onall proble problem-s m-solv olving ing approac approaches; hes; ultima ultimatel tely y Deming Deming developed the plan-do-study-act (PDSA) cycle. The PDSA cycle is one of the most popula pop ularr proble problem m solvin solving g method methodss and contin continues ues to be applie applied d today today (Moen (Moen and Norman, 2010). Juran is considered one of the great authors in quality and management; he is well recogn rec ognize ized d for introd introduci ucing ng the hu human man elemen elementt into into qualit quality y (Baile (Bailey, y, 2007). 2007). Juran Juran founde fou nded d an instit institute ute in 1979 1979 that that offers offers benchm benchmark arking ing,, consul consultin ting, g, and traini training ng services to implement programs that aim to improve business results. In 1986, Juran published the The Quality Trilogy that later was renamed The Juran Trilogy. The defines three management management processes processes required required by organizati organizations ons to Quality Trilo Quality Trilogy gy defines improve: quality planning, planning, quality control and quality im improvement provement ( Juran et al., 1962).
) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
Juran promoted change and believed it eventually reduces the costs of waste within an organization (Juran, 1986). Crosby has also been part of the quality management revolution. He popularized the idea that doing things right the first time in an organization, through simple preventive action, adds no cost to an organization and improves overall outcomes. Therefore, Cr Cros osby by beli believ eved ed that that qual qualit ity y is fr free ee (Cro (Crosb sby, y, 19 1979 79). ). In addi additi tion on,, Cr Cros osby by (1 (198 984) 4) emph em phas asiz ized ed the the im impo port rtan ance ce of mana manage geme ment nt in impr improv ovin ing g th thee qual qualit ity y in an orga organi niza zati tion on.. He ar argu gued ed th that at it is poss possib ible le to have have ze zero ro defe defect ctss in al alll ty type pess of organizations through serious and active involvement of management in problems solving and initiating solutions (Crosby, 1984). Sink (1985) focussed his efforts on productivity basics and productivity management. He introduced evaluation strategies and techniques that can be used for developing measu me asure ress in or orga gani niza zati tion ons. s. Sink Sink and and Tutt Tuttle le (198 (1989) 9) in intr trod oduc uced ed th thee “performance improvement improv ement planning planning process” and offered offered a roadmap roadmap for transformin transforming g an organization organization into what they called “the organization of the future” where organizational performance is improved using effective measurement systems. In addition, they recognized seven change cha nge perform performanc ancee measur measures: es: eff effect ective ivenes ness, s, eff effici icienc ency, y, qualit quality, y, produc productiv tivity ity,, innova innovatio tion, n, qu qual alit ity y of work work li life fe and and profi profita tabi bili lity ty and and “budgetability.” Next, Next, Sink Sink et al. al. (1995) presented methods and techniques to best implement change theories, including the principles of quality guru Deming. They provided a solid ground for organizations to master the implementation of improvement initiatives. Since organizations undergoing change vary greatly in their structure, systems, strategies and workforce, this chapter proposes that the interconnection between the fields of: sociology/psychology, leadership/management and EM/IE. This intersection is necessary to understand and apply the various types of organizational change and change methods, and consequently for change to succeed. In summary, sociology/ psychology explains why and how people respond to change. Leadership/management provides principles and practices practices that help in planning, planning, organizing and directing pe people ople and resources accomplishing change. And EM/IE provides detailed methods of change, processes and integrated systems by which change happens and values and skills that are needed for change. This understanding is necessary to better comprehend and manage change as well as the people and resources involved in the change process, ultimately leading to desired change outcomes. 3. Taxonomy Taxonomy of change change literature literature Reviewing the available change literature, this section proposes a taxonomy to classify the change literature. This taxonomy views the literature as covering four main areas: change type, change enablers, change methods and change outcomes. The proposed taxonomy of change is shown in Figure 3. The first element of the taxonomy is the change type that can be defined as the characteristics that describe the form of change and are group grouped ed under under two categorie categories: s: scale scale of change change and durati duration on of cha change nge.. Section 3.1 explains change types in further detail. The second element is the change enablers that can be defined as the factors that increase the probability of change success. Section 3.2 explains change enablers in further details. The third element is the change methods that can be defined as the actions taken to deal with change and are grouped into two categories: systematic change methods and change management methods. Section 3.3 explains change methods in further detail. And the fourth element consists of the change outcomes, defined as the results or consequences of change on the organization. Section 3.4 explains the change outcomes in further detail.
Integrating the organizational change literature
241
JOCM 28,2
Small 3.1.1 Scale 3.1 Change Types 3.1.2 Duration
Big Short Long Planning
Knowledge and Skills 3.2 Change Enablers
242
“What” & “How” Participatory Action Research
Resources Commitment
Integrative Six Step Wheel Lean ERA
3.3.1 Systematic Change
Change Literature ) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
Total Quality Managem Management ent Six Sigma
3.3 Change Methods
Process Reengineering Lewin’s Judson 3.3.2 Change Management
Figure 3. Taxonomy to the change literature literature
3.4 Change Outcomes
Jick, Kanter, and Stein Leading Change Luecke’s Insurrection
Achievement of project objectives Customer satisfaction about the outcomes:
3.1 Chang Changee type typess Change Chan ge type can be defined as the essential essential characteris characteristics tics that describe the kind and form of change and the qualities that make change what it is. This study proposes that when whe n the change change type type is clearl clearly y identi identifie fied, d, then then a manag manager er can choose choose the most appropriate method to promote change. Moore (2011) notes that “understanding where your organization sits today and whatt pro wha proces cesses ses it needs needs to improv improve, e, chang changee or transf transform orm is th thee first first step step toward toward introducing business process change discipline” (p. 4). Meyer et al. (1990) classifies change types based on two dimensions. The first dimension is the level at which chang cha ngee is occurr occurring ing:: the organi organizat zation ion’s le leve vell vs th thee in indu dust stry ry le leve vel. l. The The se seco cond nd dimension is the type of change taking place: continuous change vs discontinuous change. Goes et al. (2000) classify change based on three dimensions. The first and the second dimensions, as in Meyer et al. method, are the level and type of change. The third thi rd ident identifi ified ed dimens dimension ion is the mode mode of change change:: determ determini inisti sticc and prescr prescribe ibed d vs generative and voluntary in type. Such classifications and other organizational aspects havee been hav been consid considere ered d when when develo developin ping g the change change types types in the taxono taxonomy my shown shown of this paper. Change types are grouped under two categories: scale of change and duration of change. 3.1.1 3.1 .1 Ch Chang angee sca scale: le: small vs lar large ge. Change scale can be defined as the degree of change required to reach the desired outcome. Large scale change can be defined as a “holistic alteration in processes and behaviors across a system that leads to a step chang cha ngee in the output outputss from from that that system system” (p. (p. 265) 265) (Oldha (Oldham, m, 2009). 2009). It engage engagess all stakeh sta kehold olders ers in the change change proces processs and requir requires es having having strong strong collab collabora oratio tion n and visionary leadership in order to succeed (Boga and Ensari, 2009; Boyd, 2009; Brigham, 1996; Margolis et al., 2010; Oldham, 2009). Boyd discussed the effect of large scope
) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
change on the organization. He believed that for such changes efforts to take place, it need needss to be cust custom omiz ized ed to alig align n wi with th spec specif ific ic depa departm rtmen enta tall an and d unit unitss cu cult ltur uree (Stock (St ock,, 1993). 1993). Even Even with with the numerou numerouss studie studiess and theori theories es tackli tackling ng large large scope scope change, there are contradicting results about its advantages. Furthermo Furt hermore, re, Kotnour Kotnour et al al.. discus discussed sed the import importanc ancee of strate strategy, gy, clear clear roles roles and aligni aligning ng proces processes ses,, resour resources ces and workfo workforce rce to accom accompli plish sh big change change in th thee organi org anizat zation ion.. Bennet Bennettt and Segerb Segerberg erg (2012) (2012) also also believ believed ed that that lar largege-sca scale le change change requires high levels of organizational resources. Small scale change can be defined as minor in less significant change taking place at the organization. Small scale change is easier to initiate and manage, and does not require the level of leadership needed in big scale change (Boga and Ensari, 2009; Stock, 1993). Berwick and Berwick and Nolan argued that a steady and small scale change and improvement in healthcare can be a better approach when compared to large scale change to help pilot, evaluate, modify and implement quality improvement projects (Berwick, 1998; Berwick and Nolan, 1998). 3.1.2 3.1 .2 Dur Durati ation: on: short vs lon long g ter term m. Change duration can be defined as the time period over which change takes place. Long-term change can be challenging to an orga organi nizat zatio ion n an and d requi require ress st stro rong ng lead leaders ership hip th that at activ actively ely in invo volv lves es empl employ oyee eess throughout the change process (Harrison, 2011; Rachele, 2012; Schalk et al., 2011). Human behavior needs to be taken into consideration when dealing with long-term change. Harrison argued that long-term change rarely, if ever, is achieved without powerful leaders (Harrison, 2011). Rachele believes that a method like participative ac acti tion on re resea searc rch h can can be an ef effe fect ctiv ivee comp compon onen entt of succ succes essfu sfull lo long ng-t -term erm chan change ge ini initia tiativ tives es as it all allows ows people people to be involv involved ed in the the change change.. People People’s involvem involvement ent positi pos itivel vely y affect affectss their their attitu attitude de toward toward change change as it values values their their past past experi experience encess which influences change success (Shields, 1999). Short-term change has been recognized in the literature as being more successful when compared to long-term change (Shields, 1999; Ulrich, 1998). Organizations that predict small changes in conditions, and respond promptly to these changes, gain a competitive edge. Ulrich (1998) argues that the pace of response is what determines success in dealing with change; “winners will be able to adapt, learn and act quickly, losers will spend time trying to control and master change” (Chrusciel and Field, 2006, p. 130). Berwick (1998) suggests that short-term changes that take place in relatively smal sm all, l, on ongo goin ing g proc proces esses ses can can be rich rich op oppo port rtun unit itie iess to im impl plem emen entt chan change ge an and d improvement initiatives, especially in complex systems.
3.2 Chan Change ge enabl enablers ers Organizational change takes place over time; to increase the probability of success, it is important to plan for change, setting a clear timeframe and addressing the critical factor fac torss that that affect affect change change succes successs (Chrusc (Chrusciel iel and Field, Field, 2006; 2006; Kenny, Kenny, 2006; 2006; Miller Miller and Friesen, 1982). Studies in the literature offer a broad range of definitions and examples of change enablers enab lers including: including: a stat stated ed vision and goals for the change change direction direction,, defined defined roles of employees involved in change, leadership guidance or commitment in involvement, traini tra ining ng employ employees ees and having having strong strong human human resour resources ces to measur measuree and evalua evaluate te performance (Ackerman et al., 2001; Bridges and NetLibrary, 2003; Griffith-Cooper an and d King King,, 20 2007 07;; Kenn Kenny, y, 20 2006 06;; LaMa LaMars rsh, h, 1995 1995). ). Prop Proper er pl plan anni ning ng an and d an anal alys ysis is help identify the gap between where the organization is now and where it wants to be.
Integrating the organizational change literature
243
JOCM 28,2
244
) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
The organi organizat zation ion needs needs to identi identify fy the the enviro environme nmenta ntall condit condition ionss requir required ed for the change plan to succeed (Hotek and White, 1999; Kotter, 1996). Weber and Weber (2001) argue that people’s perception of organizational readiness for change can also affect chan change ge succ succes ess. s. Orga Organi niza zati tion onal al re read adin iness ess fo forr ch chan ange ge ha hass been been defi define ned d as th thee organizat nizationa ionall members members’ chang changee commit commitmen mentt and self-e self-effi fficac cacy y to implem implement ent “orga organizati organ izational onal change change” (Wei (Weine ner, r, 20 2009 09,, p. 68 68). ). The The posi positi tive ve atti attittude ude an and d st stro rong ng co comm mmit itme ment nt to ch chan ange ge ar aree main main outc outcom omes es of th thee read readin ines esss to ch chan ange ge (Raf (Raffe fert rty y et al., 2013 2013). ). Anderson and Ackerman Anderson (2001) suggest that the main three aspects of a comprehens comp rehensive ive change change strategy strategy are content, content, people people and process. Content refers to the strategy, systems, technologies and work practices. Technology is key to drive change and plays a strategic role in facilitating change and making it part of the organizational culture (Bayerl et al., 2013). People refer to humans involved in the change, and their behavior when implementing change. This aspect has also been named as the personal dimension of change. The deeper the organizational change, the more important for people to alter their own values and perspectives to align to the overall organizational perspective (Moran and Brightman, 2001). van et al. (2013) argue that in order to increase the probability of change success, more attention needs to be given to the peop people. le. The The th thir ird d as aspe pect ct of chan change ge is proce process ss whic which h repr repres esen ents ts th thee ac acti tion onss an and d procedures carried out to implement change. Communication and regular meetings with employees facilitates implementing change (van et al., 2013). Therefore, the proper alignment between content, people and process is what leads to successful change. Smit Sm ith h (200 (2002) 2) co cond nduc ucte ted d a st stud udy y to de dete term rmin inee th thee majo majorr reas reason onss be behi hind nd organi org anizat zation ional al change change failur failuree and change change succes success. s. A qu quest estion ionnai naire re was used used to collect data, and the respondents were 210 managers from different industries and job-functions across North America. The questionnaire results identified the main factors affecting successful change as: “visible and sustained sponsorship, addressing the needs needs of employ employees, ees, and having having strong strong resour resources ces dedica dedicated ted for th thee change change” (Smith, 2002, p. 81). Smith (2002) also found that change initiatives should “align with business strategies, and all executive and departmental levels should be aligned in support of the change ” (p. 82). From Fro m review reviewing ing previo previous us studie studiess in the lit litera eratur ture, e, Kotnou Kotnourr (2011) (2011) found found that that a strategic, systematic orientation to change led to organization’s retaining the necessary skills to successfully complete their work processes. However, without a systematic approach, appr oach,knowledge, results were nega Typicalthe negative nega tiveresulting results results were losing instituti inst onal memory, andnegative. skilltive. to perform work in a decrease in itutional quality, improvement/innovation improvement/innov ation lacking and an iincrease ncrease in employee burnout. Sink et al. (1995) offerr nine integrated offe integrated “fronts” for succes successfu sfull change change to ensure ensure positi positive ve result resultss are achieved. These fronts have been grouped with other research findings to define what the organization needs to have in order to enable successful change and enhanced organizational performance. The three enablers are: knowledge and skills, resources and commitment, as shown in Figure 4.
3.3 Chang Changee metho methods ds Change methods can be defined as the actions carried out by managers to deal with change and are grouped under two categories: first, systematic change methods and second, change management methods. 3.3.1 Syst Systematic ematic chan change ge methods. Systematic change methods involve a certain set of processes and tools to help the management team make a series of start, stop and continue decisions (Zook, 2007). Several systematic change methods have been
Knowledge & Skills
Resources
Integrating the organizational change literature
245 Commitment
) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
proposed in the last 20 years; these methods share many processes such as: scouting and diagnosing the current situation, planning and communicating change and finally implem imp lement enting ing and instil instillin ling g the new change changes. s. Chang Changee theori theories es tradit tradition ionall ally y have have promoted incremental process adjustment and infrequent small transitions that are mainly planned and steered by management (Thompson, 1967). More recent change meth methods have become more systematic syste matic,, cyclical cycli calBedeian, and integrativ integ rative, e, involving involving higher scalesods of organizational change (Armenakis and 1999; Bullock and Batten, 1985; Galpin, 1996; Kolb and Frohman, 1970; Lippitt, 1958; Singh and Shoura, 2006). Many Ma ny auth authors ors ha have ve deve develo lope ped d diff differe erent nt syst system emat atic ic ch chan ange ge meth method ods; s; el elev even en methods have been identified and subsequently divided under three main theories as shown in Figure 5. Thee plan Th planni ning ng meth method od.. Lipp Lippet et,, Wals Walson on an and d Wesl Wesley ey pr prop opos osed ed th thee pl plan anni ning ng method in 1958. This method involves a cyclical process that requires continuously im impr prov ovin ing g the the chan change ge proc proces esss by expl explori oring ng th thee orga organi niza zati tion onal al si situ tuat atio ion n af afte terr stabilizing the change (Kolb and Frohman, 1970; Lippitt, 1958). This method consists of seven consequential steps and involves exploring and diagnosing the organizational situation, planning for the change actions that need to be taken, applying the change and lastly stabilizing and evaluating the change. “What” and “how” method. The “what” and “how” method was proposed by Conner (1998) in his book Leading at The Edge of Chaos. Conner argues that change has to be dealt with as a compound system consisting of multiple processes that can involve chaos. His method emphasizes the importance of strong leadership to direct the change by pr prov ovid idin ing g the the over overal alll visi vision on and and st stra rate tegy gy and and de deci cidi ding ng on in indi divi vidu dual alss’ tasks. Conner’s method assumes that the future of business will be filled with chaos. Therefore, this method stresses the role of leadership in having conscious competence to successfully implement change (Conner, 1998). Partic Par ticipa ipator tory y action action resear research ch (PAR). (PAR). PAR gained gained popula popularit rity y in the 1960s 1960s and in invo volv lves es exam examin ining ing an issue issue syst systema ematic ticall ally y fr from om th thee persp perspect ective ivess and and lived lived experiences of the people involved and affected by the resulting actions of change (French, 1969; Helmich and Brown, 1972; Schein, 1969; Tichy, 1974). Planned action research can be a very successful method for change as it gathers input from the people undergoing change, making them feel more involved. And when employees feel that change belongs tonature them, this holdsresearch them more responsible to ensure change2006, succeeds. The participative of action was also addressed by Ackoff, who
Figure 4. Change enablers
JOCM 28,2
246
) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
g n i s r s e e e n c i o r g P n e e R
t r o p n e v a D
r d o n f a t s n g y c e i f i s e s t l s e n e e e s c d e d r I o r . 1 p
a m g i S x i S
a l o r o t o M
e n i f e D . 1
e r u s a e M . 2
e z y l a n A . 3
M Q T
) 6 8 9 n 1 a r ( u g n J i m e D
n a l P . 1
o D . 2
/ k c y e d h t u C S . 3
d o h t e M A R E g n i k n i h T n a e L l e e h W
p e t S x i S
) 6 0 0 2 (
n e h C
d n a s k c e a n m J o o W
e d h e r t i r y s e e f m i e h t t c d o b y e e p u u s S l . a c 1 v
r t a o h e f h t t e t m u l y a c u a f i e d v t t n r o s p d s r e e d d I h u . c a 2 l a v a e
) 6 9 9 1 ( n i p l a G
e e h t g n h a s h i l c b o a t t s d E e . e 1 n
n o d & i s e p i e o v n n g l a l e v a n a e d p h a c D a . e r f o 2 p s
y s e l t i s n o g i n o n a J g a . i h c 1 d
a n o p i s o i l v e v d e e r D a . 2 h s
) 0 9 9 1 ( . l
a t e
r e e B
e v i t a r g e t n I
s n i r r e a t t : a H s B ) d ) e r & e s e o h t n 7 l d 5 n a a 8 p c n 8 r e e 9 x a a 9 r r a 1 d r 1 E e c k ( a ( . S c h w 1 o a l l k c u e B B
R A P
) ) ) 9 9 4 6 6 7 9 9 n 9 1 ( 1 ( w 1 ( h n o r y c i e B h n h c e c i r F S T
g n i n n a l P
Figure 5. Systematic Systema tic change methods
.
l a t e
) 8 5 t t i 9 p 1 p ( i L
y s f i t m n l e e b d I o r . p 1
t n y s e r a k e c t o z i i f s c i n n t c a g i a f o g c s p s s e a m e R n i c . e t f i c 1 h h u s s w
t u o c S . 1
d t w n n l o e r a e f t u s r s t r r ’ s c e u s u r d c e t n e c s U t . h o r & 4 p
e s h s t e n c g o i r s p e w D e . n 5
t & n s d e s t e s m e i m e c a e l c t o p r o s s y m p s I e a s . h 7 t
e p s y w s t o e t n e c o o r e r h p P t . 6
s t l y l p i u e t v x i p t e s n t c e l a c l e a u d h m t a e o r n e t m r n e w o I r t s . t e f p 4 b u s n o e i t t a r a e d n n e e G m . m 4 o c e r
s n o e i t h t a l i d n a e t e D m . m 5 o c e r
e h t t n s e s e m n o t i t t m o o a l i c d P e . r 6
r o r f s e e u t s s g n o n a F e h . s c 3 n o c
l a r i t i s e i n s h & i t a m o a t n r g a o G d a . f r i 3 e d p
n s i e e y r n g r o i a t c m n a s r s a e h e f t c c h e t e c D a n a . e 3 h w e r a
h c n t i h i n w e r f o e m y a d t f i s e s t r n t e j u e o n d c a d a I . f 2
r e t n E . 2
t o n t e e m v k c e i a g G b . a 4 d e n e a f m
e s o n g a i D . 3
e v o r p m I . 4
l o r t n o C . 5
s y e l s m t n o l i e o n b J g o a r . i 5 d p
n g e i a n n h t g i h i o c t n a a i g s e c e e s e r f r i B e c l t . r n p 5 o p u
s e n o h i t t t a u e o r d l l a n p e o r e r r m o f P m . o 7 c e r
n t o n d i e a t l l m e a r z a t l r p i o a a t S t . i v p e 4 e r d
s : , n n e n o a i g k i l s s a i P e c . e 2 D m d
n a t l l a t r u n r e s e n t p x o x e C e . 2
t e p n g n e d e a t l i h s m u t i c h c B m . d r a e 9 m a o w t c o a t
a n a g , p y n o g & i l n n i e t a a r v e l e a t p t r t D s n c : i o u t c e g t c d n A n o a a c . h 3 c
y e w l h l o s t f u t o e k c u t n a d u i M n . o r o 3 p c
& e e t s h t n o o e n i t n z e r r a g l y u u a a t i i c n s D . a 3
e t s t t a l r c u o i f n s e f u r e m g e n h i m o o t f o C g . n 8 o
t c A . 4
e n & t g t a i s n u e e r l a d m e u v e t e - m g l e t e a u c n R s a . y 2 s m
e e c t a l n u a a l t m a r v o o E t f r . 1 e p
. l a t e
d o ) & h t 8 9 ” 1 t e 9 a M ( r e h ” n n w o W “ o C H “
e d n o h s n i t s a i e s e y v n n g s i f i s e e e s u t a c D b r o . t r 3 s p
r s o s y f f i t s e c n g n r o r i e e p s d l b e I d . a w 2 n e e n
a n o g i m n r t c i o a f r t n n e n l a P i p . o 6 j
e g , n e a r & , h u e c s r c a o e e f h n t M i e . n r i 9 e f e r
e s z n i e i l c o i a i l t n o o a i z p t i l u h t a g i t t s i v u o n e I r . r t 5 h
& s r e o t s i t g i u e n j t o d a a r M t . s 6
: e & t a r e w z e i g l e i t b n e n r a I t . 4 S
& e : t n t t c e a u A m l . l a v 3 e p e m I
r r e e n f o h t t a a i a t c G t . a a 8 d
t c A . 7
h e o t z t i s i l w e a n d g o i m n r s e e a o i c c h F e o . d r c 4 p
n a l P . 4
e h n t t e s u m n o o i t l l m a o o c d R e . r 8
t c A . 5
l o l e t u t u s f t c e e n v e e x g e t n i n i E a . h h c 5 c a
e e z t i a l i l b u a a t v S E . 6 &
e t a . n 7 i m r e T
) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
stressed stress ed how it can take take in and invo involve lve pe peopl oplee in organi organizat zation ionss underg undergoin oing g change change.. The involvement of people in processes, products and in problem solving eventually leads to cultural change. The integr integrati ative ve method method.. In the the 1980s, 1980s, the integr integrati ative ve method method interes interested ted many many schola sch olars rs of change change resear research. ch. As the name name implie implies, s, th this is method method integr integrate atess variou variouss meth me thod odss and and ap appr proac oache hess in th thee lite litera ratu ture re into into one one comp compreh rehen ensi sive ve meth method od to systematically deal with change (Bullock and Batten, 1985). Bullock and Batten (1985) and Beckha Beckhard rd and Reuben Reuben (1987) (1987) sugges suggestt that that the the integr integrati ative ve method method of change change includes exploring the organization and creating awareness, planning for the change, implementing and evaluating the actions taken and lastly integrating and stabilizing the applied change. Six step. The six-step method was introduced by Beer, Eisenhardt and Spector in 1990. This method promotes the concept of “task alignment,” which can be defined as reorga rganiz nizing ing employ employee ee roles, roles, respon responsib sibili ilitie ties, s, and rel relati ations onship hipss to solve solve specif specific ic “reo business problems” (Beer et al., 1990). According to these authors, the six-step method is best implemented in small departments and units where tasks are easily determined and can be modified to affect affect the overall corporate corporate performance. performance. As the name implies, implies, the method consists of six steps and includes building commitment for change through actively involving people in identifying the problems, developing shared goals for the change thellactual change. and argue thiss method thi metand hodimplementing encour encourage agess small sma change changes s that that Beer, allow allow Eisenstat for indivi individua duallSpector learni learning ng and that can reduce the resistance to change. Wheel method. The wheel method was proposed by Galpin (1996) in his book The Human Side of Change. He proposed a method that consists of nine steps that form a wheel to effectively involve people in the technical change process. Galpin argues that most organizational change methods fail when people are not taken into consideration. The wheel method starts with establishing the need for change, carefully planning for the change change process process,, implem implement enting ing it and dealin dealing g with with behavi behaviora orall change change at th thee organization (Galpin, 1996). Galpin acknowledges the importance of taking account of the organizati organization on’s cult cultur ure, e, poli polici cies es,, cust custom oms, s, norm normss an and d rewa reward rd sy syst stem em when when implementing change (Armenakis and Bedeian, 1999). Lean thinking. Lean thinking became popular in the 1990s after being adopted by Toyota (Holweg, 2007). Lean production focusses on producing what is needed, when it is needed, with the minimum amount of materials, equipment, labor and space. Lean thinking originated with driving out waste so that all work adds value and serves the customer’s needs. Womack and Jones (2003) suggest that the lean change method revolves around three fundamental areas: purpose, process and people. The history of lean change has evolved over more than a 100-year period of time, beginning with Frank Gilbreth who based his work on “speed work” in the early 1900s. Gilbreth used to analyz analyzee each task task perfor performed med at his constr construct uction ion fir firm m to eli elimin minate ate unnece unnecessa ssary ry motions and he soon became one of the best-known contactors in the world (Babcock and Morse, 2002). Eval Ev alua uati tion on,, re re-e -eva valu luat ation ion,, an and d ac acti tion on (ERA (ERA)) meth method od.. The The ERA ERA meth method od was was proposed by Chen, Yu, and Chang in 2006. This method is customer-oriented and consists of the three main phases noted in its name. The authors argue that when compared with other change models, “the ERA model provides a more detailed picture ”
of how the micro-processes of change work in an organization (Chen et al., 2006, p. 1301). The first two phases involve analyzing the current organizational situation,
Integrating the organizational change literature
247
JOCM 28,2
248
) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
values an values and d syste systems, ms, ident identify ifying ing the custom customers ers’ needs needs,, th then en rean reanal alyz yzin ing g th thee organizational situation, values and systems. The third phase represents the actual im impl plem emen enta tati tion on of chan change ge th that at invo involv lves es deve develo lopi ping ng a ch chan ange ge st stra rateg tegy y an and d a comprehensive action plan (Chen et al., 2006). Total quality management (TQM). TQM gained popularity in the 1950s and later became what is known today as the PDCA cycle (acronym of Plan, Do, Check and Act). Juran was the first quality guru to identify the three main aspects of quality: planning, improvement and control cycle; in 1962, he provided methods and tools to achieve organizational excellence (Juran et al., 1962). Deming, another famous quality guru, also provided a simple yet highly effective technique that serves as a practical tool for proble pro blem m solvin solving g and carryi carrying ng out contin continuou uouss improv improveme ement nt in th thee workpl workplace ace (Moen (Moen and Norman, 2010). The American Society for Quality calls this technique the Deming Cycle (PDCA cycle). Six Sigma. Six Sigma was first implemented at Motorola in 1987; this method has positively affected their return on investment ever since (Gill, 1990; Mader, 2008). Schroeder et al. (2008) (2008) argue argue that, that, althou although gh Six Sigma Sigma has been been enthus enthusias iastic ticall ally y adopted in the industry, little research can be found about this in the literature. Six Sigma employs highly structured cyclical steps to improve organizational performance and eventuall eventually y achieve achieve a maximum maximum process process incapabili incapability ty rate of 3.4 incidents incidents per million million opportunities (ReVelle, Thisanalyze, methodimprove uses an approach called thecycle DMAIC cyclea that stands for: define, 2004). measure, and control. This follows methodology inspired by Deming’s PDCA cycle (Linderman et al., 2006). Process reengineering. Process reengineering can be defined as a redesign tool that aims to achieve radical improvements and innovations in organizational processes using certain performance measures such as cost, quality, service and speed (Hammer and Champy, 1993). Reengineering is a “term coined by Michael Hammer in 1990 to describe the process of change that certain organizations were undertaking in order to achieve achi eve dramatic dramatic process process improveme improvements nts” (Brown (Brownee and O ’Sulli Sullivan, van, 1995). 1995). Business Business process pro cesses es involv involvee activi activitie tiess that that aim to add value value to ser servic vices es or produ products cts.. These These processes include the traditional processes such as sales and production and other internal inte rnal processes that aim to improve improve and sustain other organizati organizational onal functions functions (Pereira and Aspinwall, 1997). 3.3.2 Change management methods. Change management methods are broader and more conceptual when compared to systematic change methods. Change management methods tackle change on a large scale and include a range of intervention strategies (Worren et al., 1999). These methods help management align the change initiative with the overall mission and the organizational strategy by proper planning and creating a vision that involves people in change (Grover, 1999). Change management processes assist in making making change change part of the organizati organizational onal culture. culture. Worre Worren n et al. (1999) note that the underlying theory and framework of change management include “principles and tools from sociology, information technology, and strategic change theories ” (p. 180). Many authors have developed different change management methods; six of these are identified in Figure 6. Lewin’s method method.. In 1948, 1948, Lewin Lewin sugges suggested ted that the change change proces processs start start with with unfreezing the current state of the organization by creating incentives, implementing the desired changes by selecting the right leadership style and ends with refreezing the state when the organizational desired change has been reached. Lewin stressed the need to include dialogue in solving problems, and believed that successful problem
) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
Lewin’s Method
Judson Method
(1946)
Judson (1991)
Jick & Kanter
1. Unfreeze
1. Analyze & plan change
2. Communicate the change
3. Gain acceptance of new behaviors
Jick & Kanter Leading Method Change Method
Luecke’s Method
Insurrection Method
Kotter (1996)
Luecke (2003)
Hamel (2000)
1. Analyze the organization & its need for change
1. Establish a sense of urgency
1. Mobilize energy & commitment by jointly identifying problems & solutions
1. Build a point of View
2. Create a vision and a common direction
2. Form a powerful guiding coalition
2. Develop a shared vision of how to organize & manage for competitiveness
2. Write a manifesto
3. Separate from the past
3. Create a vision
3. Identify the leadership
3. Create a coalition
4. Create a sense of urgency
4. Communicate the vision
4. Focus on results, not on activities
4. Pick your targets and pick your moments
5. Empower others to act on the vision
5. Start change at peripheries & let it spread without pushing from top
6. Plan for and create short term wins
6. Instill success through policies, procedures & systems
Integrating the organizational change literature
249
5. Support a strong leader role
5. Co-opt and neutralize
6. Line up political sponsorship
2. Act & move
4. Change from status quo to a desired state
7. Craft an implementation plan
8. Develop enabling structures
9. Communicate,
3. Refreeze
5. Consolidate & institutionalize the new state
6. Find a translator
7. Win small, win early, win often 7. Consolidate
involve people & be honest
improvements & produce more change
10. Reinforce & institutionalize change
8. Institutionalize more changes
7. Review & adjust strategies in response to arising problems
8. Isolate, infiltrate, integrate
solving requires active participation of change agents in understanding the problem, finding a solution and implementing it. A little more than 50 years later, Burnes (2004b) notes that change methods stemming from Lewin’s method from the 1940s are more focussed on revolving groups’ conflicts and developing individuals. Judson method. Judson (1991) proposed a method for implementing change that consists of five phases starting with analyzing the organization, planning for change, communicating it to people and finally reinforcing and institutionalizing it. Judson
Figure 6. Change management methods
JOCM 28,2
250
) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
identifies the expected barriers that might occur in each phase and what actions can be taken to minimize such barriers. He considers the resistance to change as the biggest barrier, which occurs not only to the employees who are directly affected by the chan change ge,, but but also also to lowe lowerr leve levell mana manage gers rs who who usua usuall lly y pl play ay an esse essent ntia iall part part in implementing change. Kanter, Jick and Stein method. Kanter et al. (1992) (1992) developed developed a comprehens comprehensive ive method met hod to implem implement ent change change consis consistin ting g of ten phases phases.. Their Their method method starts starts with with analyz ana lyzing ing the organi organizat zation ional al situat situation ion,, creati creating ng a plan plan and vision vision,, implem implement enting ing ch chan ange ge with with the the su supp ppor ortt of st stro rong ng le lead ader er and and fi fina nall lly y co comm mmun unic icat atin ing g and and instit ins tituti utiona onaliz lizing ing change change.. Jic Jick, k, Kanter Kanter and St Stein ein take take into into consid considera eratio tion n many many intern int ernal al and extern external al forces forces that that might might affect affect change change as well well as major major pro proces cesses ses involve, and they stress the importance of having “change agents”; people who are responsible for the formulation and implementation of the change (Ford et al., 2008). Leading change. Kotter proposed the leading change method in 1996. He designed a change method consisting of eight steps. Kotter (1996) promoted his method as holistic, noting not ing that that organi organizat zation ionss could could use his method method to avoid avoid failur failures es in implem implement enting ing chang cha ngee and increa increase se their their chance chancess of succes success. s. Kotter Kotter ide identi ntifie fied d the most most common common pitfalls that managers make in attempting to implement change and offered his change meth me thod od to over overco come me th thes esee pitf pitfal alls ls.. Hi Hiss meth method od st star arts ts wi with th es esta tabl blis ishi hing ng a sense of urgency by relating the for change to real potential crises, building a team trusted to support change, having a vision and strategy, communicating the vision, implementing the change and planning short term win, consolidation gains and constantly institutionalizing change. Luecke method. In 1990, Luecke proposed a change method that carries his name. Luecke (2003) stressed the importance of accepting the need and urgency for change. He believed that seeing change as an opportunity and not as a threat allows it to succeed and sink deeply within the organizational culture. Luecke ’s method stresses the importance of strong leadership in supporting change and motivating employees to accept change. The method also addresses the different reactions of employees to chan change ge,, which which allo allows ws mana manage gers rs to help help th thei eirr empl employ oyees ees ac acce cept pt chan change ge an and d it itss consequences. Luecke’s method starts with joint identification of existing problems and their solutions, developing a shared vision, identifying leadership, implementing chan change ge an and d fina finall lly y moni monito tori ring ng an and d adju adjust stin ing g st stra rate tegi gies es fo forr any any prob proble lem m in th thee change process. Insurrection model. Hamel proposed the insurrection model in 2000. Hamel argues that radical, nonlinear changes and innovations in an organization, that are different than tha n the chang changes es compet competito itors rs are doing, doing, are necess necessary ary to mainta maintain in succes successs and competitive edge and create new wealth opportunities. Hamel (2000) developed eight steps for successful change that starts with having a strong plan, writing policies, creati cre ating ng a suppor supportt team, team, implem implement enting ing change change and finall finally y integr integrati ating ng th thee change change and institutionalizing it in the organization. Hamel stresses that change has to be a continual cycle of “imagining, designing, experimenting, assessing, scaling innovative ideas” (Hamel, 2000).
3.4 Chang Changee outcom outcomes es Change outcomes can be defined as the consequences of change on the organization. Measuring outcomes can contribute to OD and success if the measurement systems are properly developed and employed (Sink and Tuttle, 1989). Sink and Tuttle (1989) claim
) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
that the best measurement systems are “a blend of the objective with the subjective, quantitative with quantitative, intuitive with explicit, hard with soft, and judgment with decision rules or even artificial intelligence ” (p. 1). Measures provide management with new insights into why the system performs the way it does, where it can be improved and where the system is in control or out of control. Defining and setting the goals of performance measures are one of the most important decisions facing organizations as they are a function of the organizational strategy, and can only be achieved when the strategic objectives are clearly defined; performance measures help organizations evaluate the execution of objectives and management of operations by providing the needed information for making decisions (Gunasekaran and Kobu, 2007; Ittner and Larcker, 1998; Wouters and Sportel, 2005). Therefore, for measuring change, on must be clear on the change objectives. This paper defines the change project outcomes as the ending result of the change pr proj ojec ect. t. A ch chan ange ge proj projec ectt is de deem emed ed su succ cces essf sful ul if it is co comp mple lete ted d wi with thin in th thee predetermined objectives (i.e. completed within budget, within schedule, conforming to customer custo mer requiremen requirements ts and satisfies satisfies the main stakeholders) stakeholders) (Project (Project Management Management Institute Inc., 2004; Kendra and Taplin, 2004; Nicholas and Steyn, 2008). The outcomes are classified under two main categories: (1) (1) Achi Achiev evem emen entt of proj projec ectt ob obje ject ctiv ives es:: th thee ab abil ilit ity y of th thee chan change ge pr proj ojec ectt to be completed within the allocated cost: the expenditures in terms of resources vs the set budget for the change project, schedule: the duration or time required to achieve the change project deliverables vs the target duration, and technical performance: the ability to meet scope and requirements and achieve the end result. (2) Customer satisfaction satisfaction about the outcomes: outcomes: the ability ability of the project project outcomes outcomes to meet me et or excee exceed d custo custome mers rs’ expecta expectatio tions ns (custom (customers ers refers refers to change change team, team, organizational employees and change project sponsors).
3.5 Align Alignment ment Since change affects all organizational aspects, including strategy, internal structure, processes, people’s jobs and attitudes and overall culture, organizations need to realize that change can be neither quick or straightforward, but has to be more flexible and very well aligning planned the (Kanter To properly for change, this research et type al., 1992). proposes change and change methodplan to achieve the desired change outcomes. Miller (1992) and Sabherwal et al. (2001) recognize the importance of alignment in effective effec tively ly measuring measuring outcomes outcomes and enhancing enhancing organizati organizational onal performanc performance. e. Bayerl Bayerl et al. (2013) suggest that organizational organizational change is created by aligning the organization’s existing structure with the new change processes and patterns. Alignment is defined as the extent extent to which which two or more more organi organizat zation ional al dimens dimension ionss meet meet th thee predef predefine ined d theoretical standard with mutual agreement (Hatvany et al., 1982; Jarvenpaa and Ives, 1993; Sabherwal Sabherwal et al al.., 2001 2001). ). On the the ot othe herr ha hand nd,, Kotn Kotnou ourr et al. al. (1998) (1998) define define organizational alignment as “organizations doing the right thing, the right way with the right people at the right time ” (p. 19). Kotnour et al. also suggest two classifications of organizational alignment: external and internal. External alignment can be defined as matching the organization’s products and services to the market and customer needs. External alignment shapes the internal alignment by defining the goals and core values and processes.
Integrating the organizational change literature
251
JOCM 28,2
252
) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
Venkatraman (1989) identifies different perspectives of organizational alignment or fit and notes the key characteristics of each, including underlying conceptualization, number of variables, measure of the fit or alignment and the analytical schemes to measure the alignment. In order to align two independent dimensions or variables with a high high degree degree of specif specifici icity ty,, Venkat Venkatram raman an sugges suggested ted two ali align gnmen mentt perspe perspecti ctives ves:: matching and moderation: (1) Matching : alignment in matching can be defined as finding a connection or link between two independent variables. Venkatraman (1989) notes that the effects of matching on dependent variable(s) are tested to highlight the connection and matchi mat ching ng levels levels betwee between n the indepe independ ndent ent variab variables les.. Venkat Venkatram raman an (1989) (1989) concludes that the fit or interaction between two variables is developed without any interaction between them. The matching perspective can be investigated using deviation score analysis or analysis of variance. (2) Moderation: alignment in moderation can be defined as finding a connection or link between two variables (dependent and independent variable) when a third predicting factor is involved. Venkatraman (1989) notes that, in the moderation perspective, the effect that an independent variable has on a dependent variable is re reli lian antt on th thee leve levell of a th thir ird d vari variab able le,, te term rmed ed here here as th thee mode modera rato tor. r. Venkatraman (1989) concludes that the fit or interaction between the predictor (i (ind ndep epen ende dent nt)) an and d th thee mode modera rato torr is what what af affe fect ctss th thee crit criter erio ion n vari variab able le (dependent). The moderation perspective can be investigated using multiple regression analysis. This re This rese sear arch ch pape paperr alig aligns ns two two inde indepe pend nden entt vari variab able les, s, chan change ge ty type pe an and d th thee change method to find the effect on a third variable, the change outcome. Therefore, this this re rese sear arch ch uses uses th thee “matching ” persp perspec ecti tive ve to an anal alyz yzee th thee al alig ignm nmen entt (Venkatraman, 1989). This research paper proposes aligning the change types with the most appropriate change method to achieve the desired change outcomes as shown in Figure 7. Dunphy (1988) developed a situational model that aligns two dimensions: the scale of change and the style of leadership required to implement change. However, other change classifications need to be taken into consideration. Besides, while leadership is critical to implementing change, not following an appropriate method to implement change chan ge will mean mean the desired desired outcomes outcomes will will not be achieved. achieved. Change Change enablers enablers discussed discussed in Section 3.2 are used to align change types with change methods. Each change type
Change Types
Alignment
Figure 7. The proposed proposed alignment alignme nt model
Change Methods
Change Outcomes
) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
needs certain factors to succeed and these factors are mapped against the systematic change and change management methods to select the methods most likely to generate the desired outcome. The alignment matrix showing the relationship between change types and method is shown in Figure 8. The values of the change type (X1) and the change method (X2) are specified as the positive axes of two dimensional coordinates, where X1 is the horizontal axis and X2 is the vertical axis. For the change type (X1) construct, the increased values indicate the increased level, where 1 means the lowest level (small gap and short duration) and 5 means the highest level possible (big gap and long duration). For the change method (X2), the increasing values indicate a better application of the change methods during the change project, where 1 means that the method was poorly applied and 5 means thatt the method tha method was well well applie applied. d. The alignm alignment ent is determ determine ined d by the distance distance between the line passing through the origin (0, 0) with the slope of 45 degrees at the pointt with the coordinates poin coordinates of the change type (X1) and change method (X2) meet. The diagonal line passing through the origin represents the highest alignment possible wher wh eree the the valu valuee of the the ch chan ange ge type type equa equals ls the the va valu luee of th thee ch chan ange ge meth method od.. The graphi graphical cal repres represent entati ation on of the alignm alignment ent as match matching ing is given given in Figure Figure 8. The alignm alignment ent is co conse nseque quent ntly ly calcul calculat ated ed using using th thee formu formula: la: Align Alignmen mentt 5 – ( |change type – change method| ). ). This research paper suggests that the higher the value of the alignment, the higher the likelihood that change will succeed and result in satisfactory outcomes.
Integrating the organizational change literature
253
¼
4. Future Future research research This research paper focussed on reviewing the change types and methods discussed in the literature. It is proposed in this paper that each change type requires a different method to be followed to reach the desired outcomes. Measuring change outcomes can
5
4 d o h t e M 3 e g n a h 2 C
1
0
1 2 3 4 5 4 = = = = = t t t t t e n e n e n e n e n m m m m m n n n n n i g i g i g i g i g 4 4 A l A l A l A l A l = t e n m n l i g A = 3 t = e n n m i g l 2 A = t e n m n i g 1 A l = t n e m n i g A l
1
2
3
4
5 Big Gap Short Duration
Small Gap Long Duration Change Type
Figure 8. The graphica graphicall representation represen tation of the alignme alignment nt between betwee n change type and method
JOCM 28,2
254
) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
contribute to the OD and success if the measurement systems are properly developed and employ employed ed (Si (Sink nk and Tuttle Tuttle,, 1989). 1989). Measur Measures es provid providee manag manageme ement nt with with new insights into why the system performs the way it does, where it can be improved and when the system is in control or out of control. Future research should extend the current suggested alignment between the change types and change methods and should investigate the relationships outlined in the propos pro posed ed concep conceptua tuall model. model. Hypoth Hypothese esess can be propos proposed ed to test test the rel relati ations onship hipss between the change types, enablers, methods and outcomes. Different data collection methods (such as surveys or case studies) can be used to quantify and assess the alignment between the level of the change type, enablers and methods and how this alignment affects the change outcomes. Statistical processes such as exploratory factor analysis (EFA) can be applied to verify the variables of the conceptual model and explore the underlying factors in the model and make it more understandable. EFA is specifically useful when there are no previous explorations of the measure and no clear subscales explanation (Smith et al., 2013). Standard multiple linear regressions can also be employed to test the hypotheses and investigate the strength of the relationships between betwe en the variables. variables. Supplemen Supplementary tary statistica statisticall analysis analysis (e.g. confirmatory confirmatory factor factor analysis and structural equation modeling) can be conducted in the future to establish cause and effect relationships and achieve a deeper understanding of the relationships between the model variables. Large randomized samples can be used to test the developed conceptual model an and d as assu sump mpti tion onss wher wheree diff differ eren entt chan change ge ty type pess are are in incl clud uded ed to in inve vest stiga igate te th thee relationships in more detail and hence be able to generalize the context and conclusions of this this resear research. ch. Futur Futuree resear research ch can invest investiga igate te furthe furtherr th thee outcom outcomes es of change change and may requir requiree focussi focussing ng on the change change projec projectt effect effectss on the organi organizat zation ion and on the performance of the change project itself by involving experts in measuring the outcomes. Understanding the human side of change can also be studied and incorporated in future fut ure models models analyz analyzing ing change change succes success. s. Other Other factor factorss affect affecting ing change change can be investigated including the organizational readiness for the change and the availability of required resources including the organization ’s technological systems. 5. Conclu Conclusion sion This chapter revie wed. Organi the anizat change chan ge literature liter ature inte grated thetinuou available avai lable methods for manag ma naging ing reviewed change change. Org zation ions s and their theand ir leader leaintegrated ders s are contin con uously sly changi cha nging ng as a response to the growing global business environment; however, the success rate of change initiatives is o 30 percent. This chapter critically reviewed the concept of having one change approach as the “silver-bullet.” The numerous studies and opinions identified in the scholarly literature can be overwhelming and applying a method that is contingent and incorporates proven successful approaches is a step in the right direction. However, the probability of success varies from one organization to another as organizations undergoing change vary vastly in their structure, systems, strategies and human resources. Organizational change takes place over a period of time, and to increase increa se the probabilit probability y of success, it is important important to plan for change, change, and address address the critical factors that lead to successful. Moreover, it is important to adopt a structured methodological process to achieve the desired outcome. The methods reviewed in this chapter addressed several systematic change and change management methods, and regardless of the change method managers choose to adopt, the method has to be well aligned with the organizational change type.
References Ackerm Ack erman, an, A., Linda, S. and Anderson Anderson,, D. (2001), (2001), The Change Change Lead Leader er ’’ s Roadmap: How to Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer eiffer,, San Francisco, Francisco, CA. Navigate Your Organization’ s Transformation, Jossey-Bass/Pf Ackoff, R.L. (2006), Idealized Design : How to Dissolve Tomorrow’ s Crisis … Today, Wharton School Publishing, Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA. Ackoff, R.L. and Emery, F.E. (1972), On Purposeful Systems, Aldine-Ather Aldine-Atherton, ton, Chicago, IL. Anderson, D. and Ackerman Anderson, L.S. (2001), Beyond Change Management (Electronic Resource): Advanced Strategies for Today’ s Transformational Leaders, Jos Jossey sey-Bas -Bass/ s/ Pfeiffer, San Francisco, CA. Armena Arm enakis kis,, A.A. A.A. and Bedeian Bedeian,, A.G A.G.. (1999), (1999), “Org Organiz anizati ational onal change change:: a review review of theory theory and research in the 1990s”, Journal of Management , Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 293-315.
) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
Ashu Ashurs rst, t, C. and and Ho Hodg dges, es, J. (2010) (2010),, “Exp Explori loring ng bus busine iness ss tra transf nsform ormatio ation: n: the challen challenges ges of developing a benefits realization capability”, Journal of Change Management , Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 217-237. Babcock, D.L. and Morse, L.C. (2002), Managing Engineering and Technology: An Introduction to Management for Engineers, 3rd ed., Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Bailey, J. (2007), “Profil Profile: e: Joseph Juran”, Engineering Management , Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 46-47. Baker, Bak er, M. (2009), (2009), “My inv involve olvemen mentt in engine engineerin ering g man managem agement ent during during its pioneer pioneer years years”,
Engineering Management Journal , Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 9-12. Balogun, J. and Hope Hailey, V. (2004), Exploring Strategic Change, 2nd ed., Prentice Hall, London. Bamford, D.R. and Forrester, P.L. (2003), “Managing planned and emergent change within an operations management environment”, International Journal of Operations & Production Management , Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 546-564. Bayerl, P.S., Jacobs, G., Denef, S., van den Berg, R.J., van, Kaptein, N., Birdi, K. and Stojanovski, T. (2013), “The role of macro context for the link between technological and organizational change”, Journal of Organizational Change Management , Vol. 26 No. 5, pp. 793-810. Beckhard, R. and Reuben, H. (1987), in Harris, R.T. (Ed.), Organizational Transitions: Managing Complex Change, 2nd ed., Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Reading, MA. Beer, M. and Nohria, N. (2000), “Cracking the code of change”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 78 No. 3, pp. 133-141. Beer, M., Eisenstat, R.A. and Spector, B. (1990), “Why change programs don’t produce change”,
Harvard Business Review, Vol. 68 No. 6, pp. 158-166. Benn Bennet ett, t, W. W.L. L. and and Sege Segerb rber erg, g, A. (20 (2012 12), ), “Th Thee logic logic of con conne nect ctiv ivee ac acti tion on”, Information, Communication & Society, Vol. 15 No. 5, pp. 739-768. Berwick, D.M. (1998), “Developing and testing changes in delivery of care ”, Annals of Internal Medicine, Vol. 128 No. 8, pp. 651-656. Berw Berwick ick,, D. D.M. M. and and No Nolan lan,, T. T.W. W. (1 (1998 998), ), “Phy Physici sicians ans as lead leaders ers in improv improving ing hea health lth care: care: a new series in annals of internal medicine ”, Annals of Internal Medicine, Vol. 128 No. 4, pp. 289-292. Boga, I. and Ensari, N. (2009), “The role of transformat transformational ional leadership leadership and organizational organizational change on perceived organizational success”, Psychologist-Manager Journal , Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 235-251. Boyd, N. (2009), “Impleme Implementing nting large-scale large-scale organization organization development development and change in the states”, Public Administration Quarterly, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 233-269. Bridges Brid ges,, W. and NetLib NetLibrar rary, y, I. (2003), (2003), Managing Transitions: Making the Most of Change , 2nd 2nd ed. ed.,, updated and expanded ed., Da Capo, Cambridge, MA.
Integrating the organizational change literature
255
JOCM 28,2
Brigham, S.E. (1996), “Large-scale events”, Change, Vol. 28 No. 6, p. 28. Br Brow owne ne,, J. an and d O’Sulli Sulliva van, n, D. (1995 (1995), ), Re-Engin Re-Engineering eering the Enterp Enterprise rise, Chap Chapma man n & Hal all, l, Boundary Bound ary Row, London. London. Buchanan, D., Fitzgerald, L. and Ketley, D., Gollop, R., Jones, J.L., Lamont, S.S. and Whitby, E. (2005), “No going back: a review of the literature on sustaining organizational change ”, International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 189-205.
256
Buckley, W.F. (1968), Modern Systems Research for the Behavioral Scientist; A Sourcebook, Aldi Aldine ne Publishing Co., Chicago, IL. Bullock, R.J. and Batten, D. (1985), “It’s just a phase we’re going through: a review and synthesis Bullock, of OD phase analysis”, Group & Organization Studies, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 383-412. Burnes, B. (2004a), Managing Change :A Strategic Approach to Organizational Dynamics, 4th ed., Burnes, Prentice Prent ice Hall, Harlow.
) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
Burnes, B. (2004b), “Kurt Lewin and the planned approach to change: a re-appraisal ”, Journal of Burnes, Management Studies, Vol. 41 No. 6, pp. 977-1002. Burnes, B. and Jackson, P. (2011), “Success and failure in organizational change: an exploration of the role of values”, Journal of Change Management , Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 133-162. By, R.T. R.T. (2005), (2005), “Organ Organisation isational al change change management: management: a critical critical review”, Journal Journal of Change Change Management , Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 369-380. “
”
Carter,Vol. N.M. General and industrial management , Academy of Management Review , 11 (1986), No. 2, pp. 454-456. Chen, C.-K., Yu, C.-H. and Chang, Chang, H.-C. (2006), “ERA model: a customer-orientated organizational change model for the public service ”, Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, Vol. 17 No. 10, pp. 1301-1322. Chrusciel, D. and Field, D.W. (2006), “Success factors in dealing with significant change in an organization”, Business Process Management Journal , Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 503-516. Conner, D. (1998), Leading at the Edge of Chaos: How to Create the Nimble Organization , John Wiley, New York, NY. Crosby Cro sby,, P.B. P.B. (1979), (1979), Qual Qualit ityy is Free Free:: The The Ar Artt of Maki Making ng Qu Qual alit ityy Cert Certai ain n, McGr McGraw-H aw-Hill, ill, New York, NY. Crosby, P.B. (1984), Quality Without Tears: The Art of Hassle-Free Management , McGrawMcGraw-Hill, Hill, New York, NY. Cummings, T.G. and Huse, E.F. (1989), Organization Development and Change , 4th ed., West Publishing Co., St Paul. Dess, G.G. G.G. and Picken, J.C. (2000), “Chang Changing ing roles: leadership leadership in the 21st century century”, Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 18-34. Deming, W.E. (1986), “Out of the crisis”, Massachusetts Inst. of Technology, Center for Advanced Eng. Study. Drucker, P.F. (1974), Management Drucker, Management:: Tasks, Tasks, Responsib Responsibiliti ilities, es, Practi Practices ces, 1st ed., Harper & Row, New York, NY. Drucker, Druck er, P.F. (1986), The Practice of Management , 1st ed., Perennial Library, New York, NY. Dunphy Dun phy,, D.C. D.C. (198 (1988), 8), “Transf Transformatio ormational nal and coercive coercive strategies strategies for planned planned organizationa organizationall change: beyond the O.D. model”, Organization Studies, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 317-334. Dunphy, D. and Stace, D. (1993), “The strategic management of corporate change”, Human Relations, Vol. 46 No. 8, pp. 905-920. Ekva Ekvall, ll, G. and and Arvo Arvone nen, n, J. (19 (1991) 91),, “Cha Change nge-ce -cente ntered red leaders leadership hip:: an extens extension ion of the twotwodimensional model”, Scandinavian Journal of Management , Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 17-26.
Fayol, H. (1950), General and Industrial Management , Pitman, London. Ford, J.D., Ford, L.W. and D’amelio, A. (2008), “Resistance to change: the rest of the story”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 362-377. Fr Fren ench ch,, W. (1969) (1969),, “Org Organiz anizati ation on develop developmen ment, t, object objective ives, s, assump assumptio tions ns and str strate ategie giess”, California Management Review, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 23-34. French, W.L. and Bell, C. (1984), Organization Development: Behavioral Science Organization Improvement , 3rd ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Interventions for Galpin, T.J. (1996), The Human Side of Change: A Practical Guide to Organization Redesign , 1st ed., Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco, CA. Gill, M.S. (1990), “Stalking Six Sigma”, Business Month, Vol. 135, pp. 42-46. Gioia, D.A., Patvardhan, S.D., Hamilton, A.L. and Corley, K.G. (2013), “Organizational identity formation format ion and change”, Academy of Management Annals, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 123-193. ) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
Go Goes es,, J., J., Fried Friedman man,, L., L., Seif Seifer ert, t, N. and and Buff Buffa, a, J. (2000 (2000), ), “The Theory ory,, resear research, ch, and practi practice ce on organizational change in health care”, Advances in Health Care Management , Vol. 1, p. 143. Goleman, D. (2000), “Leadership that gets results”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 78 No. 2, pp. 78-90. Griffi Gri ffithth-Coop Cooper, er, B. and King, King, K. (200 (2007), 7), “The partnership partnership between project manage management ment and organi org anizat zation ional al ch chang ange: e: int integ egrat rating ing cha chang ngee manage managemen mentt with with ch chang angee leader leadershi ship p”,
Performance Improvement , Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 14-20. Grover Gro ver,, V. (1999), (1999), “Fro From m bus busine iness ss reengi reenginee neerin ring g to bus busine iness ss proces processs change change manage managemen ment: t: a longitudinal study of trends”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management , Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 36. Gunasekaran, A. and Kobu, B. (2007), “ Performance measures and metrics in logistics and supply chain management: a review of recent literature (1995-2004) for research and applications”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 45 No. 12, pp. 2819-2840. Haidar, E. (2006), “Leadership and management of change”, Journal Journal of Community Community Nursing Nursing , Vol. 20 No. 4, p. 13. Hailey, Hail ey, V.H. V.H. and Balogun, Balogun, J. (2002), (2002), “Dev Devisin ising g con contex textt sensit sensitive ive approa approache chess to change change:: the exampl exa mplee of Glaxo Glaxo wellcome wellcome”, Long Range Planning: Planning: International International Journa Journall of Strategic Strategic Management , Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 153-178. Hamel, G. (2000), Leading the Revolution, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. Hamel, G. (2007), Future of Management , Hardcover, p. 1. Hammer, M. and Champy, J. (1993), Reengineering the Corporation: A Manifesto for Business Revolution, 1st ed., HarperBusiness, New York, NY. Harrison, L.M. (2011), “Transformational leadership, integrity, and power”, New Directions for Student Services, No. 135, pp. 45-52. Hatvany, N.G., Hatvany, N.G., Tushm Tushman, an, M. and Nadler, Nadler, D. (1982), Managing Organizations: Readings and Cases, Little,, Brown, Boston. Little Helmich Hel mich,, D.L. D.L. and Brown, Brown, W.B. W.B. (1972), (1972), “Suc Succes cessor sor type type and organiz organizati ational onal change change in the corporate enterprise”, Administrative Science Quarterly , Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 371-381. Holweg, M. (2007), “The genealogy of lean production”, Journal Journal of Operat Operations ions Management , Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 420-437. Hotek, Hot ek, D.R. and White, M.R. (199 (1999), 9), “An ove overvi rview ew of perfor performan mance ce techno technology logy”, Journal Journal of Technology Studies, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 43-50. Ittner, C.D. and Larcker, D.F. (1998), “Innova Innovations tions in performance performance measurement: measurement: trends trends and research implications”, Journal of Management Accounting Research , Vol. 10, pp. 205-238.
Integrating the organizational change literature
257
JOCM 28,2
Jacobs, G., van Witteloostuijn, A. and Christe-Zeyse, J. (2013), “A the theore oretica ticall framewo framework rk of organizational organizational change”, Journal of Organizational Change Management , Vol. 26 No. 5, pp. 772-792. Jansson, N. (2013), “Or Orga gani niza zati tion onal al ch chan ange ge as pr prac acti tice ce:: a cr crit itica icall analy analysi siss”, Journ Journal al of Organizational Change Management , Vol. 26 No. 6, pp. 1003-1019.
258
Jarvenpaa, S.L. and Ives, B. (1993), “Organizing for global competition: the fit of information technology”, Decision Sciences, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 547-580. Judson, A.S. (1991), Changing Behavior in Organizations: Minimizing Resistance to Change B , Blackwell. Juran, J.M. (1986), The Quality Trilogy: A Universal Approach to Managing for Quality, Quality Progress. Juran, J.M., Gryna, F.M., Juran, J.M. and Seder, L.A. (Eds) (1962), Quality Control Handbook, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
Kanter, R.M. (1984), “The change masters”, Training and Development Journal , Vol. 38 No. 4, pp. 39-43. Kanter, R.M. (2000), “Leaders with passion, conviction and confidence can use several techniques to take charge of change rather than react to it ”, Ivey Business Journal , Vol. 64 No. 5, p. 32. Ka Kant nter er,, R.M., R.M., Stei Stein, n, B. and and Jick Jick,, T. (1992 (1992), ), The Challen Challenge ge of Organi Organizat zation ional al Change Change:: How Companies Experience it and Leaders Guide it , Free Press/Maxwell Macmillan Canada/ Maxwell Macmillan International, Maxwell International, New York, NY/Toronto/New NY/Toronto/New York, NY. Kendra, K. and Taplin, L.J. (2004), “Project success: a cultural cultural framework framework”, Project Management Journal , Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 30-45. Kenny, J. (2006), “Strategy and the learning organization: a maturity model for the formation of strategy”, Learning Organization, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 353-368. Kezar, A.J. (2001), “Understanding and facilitating organizational change in the 21st century: recent research and conceptualizations”, ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report , Vol. 28 No. 4, p. 1. Kolb, D.A. and Frohman, A.L. (1970), “An organization development approach to consulting ”, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 51-65. Kotnour, T. (2011), “An emerging theory of enterprise transformations”, Journal of Enterprise Transformation, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 48-70. Ko Kotn tnou our, r, T. T.,, Barto Barton, n, S., S., Jenn Jennin ings gs,, J. and and Brid Bridge ges, s, R. (1998) (1998),, “Under Understand standing ing and leading ”
lar large-s ge-scale cale change change at the Ken Kenned nedy y Space Space Center Center , Engineering Engineering Management Management Journal Journal , Vol. 10 No. 2, p. 17. Kotter, J.P. (1996), Leading Change, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. Kotter, J.P. and Schlesinger, L.A. (2008), “Choosing strategies for change ”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 86 No. 7, pp. 130-139. Ko Kouz uzes es,, J.M. J.M. and and Po Posn sner er,, B.Z B.Z.. (1995) (1995),, The Lead Leaders ershi hip p Chal Challe leng nge: e: How How to Ke Keep ep Ge Gett ttin ing g Extraordinary Things Done in Organizations, 2nd ed., Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. La Lalon londe de,, C. (2011) (2011),, “Mana Managing ging crises crises thr throug ough h organis organisatio ational nal developm development ent:: a concept conceptual ual framework”, Disasters, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 443-464. LaMarsh, J. (1995), Changing the Way We Change: Gaining Control of Major Operational Change , Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. Lannes, W.J. (2001), “What is engineering management?”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management , Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 107. Lewin, K. (1946), “Action research and minority minority problems problems”, Journal of Social Issues , Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 34-46.
Lewin, K. (1948), “Resolvi Resolving ng social conflicts, conflicts, selected papers on group dynamics [1935-1946]”, in Lewin, G.W. (Ed.), Foreword by Gordon W. Allport , Harper, New York, NY. Lind Linder erma man, n, K. K.,, Schr Schroed oeder er,, R.G. R.G. and and Ch Choo, oo, A.S. A.S. (2006) (2006),, “Six Six sigma sigma:: th thee ro role le of goal goalss in im impr prov ovem emen entt teams”, Journal of Operations Management , Vol. 24 No. 6, pp. 779-790. Lippitt, R. (1958), The Dynamics of Planned Change; a Comparative Study of Principles and Techniques, Harcourt, Brace, New York, NY. Lovell, R.B. (1980), Adult Learning , Croom Helm/Halsted Press, London/New York, NY. Luecke Lue cke,, R. (2003), (2003), Harvard Harvar vard d Harvard Business Business Essentials. Essentials. Managing Change and Transition Transition, Har Business School Press, Boston, MA. McCaskey, M.B. (1982), The Executive Challenge: Managing Change and Ambiguity , Pitman, Marshfield, MA. ) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
McFarl McF arland and,, D. D.E. E. (1979) (1979),, Managem 5th h ed ed.,., Macm Macmil illa lan, n, Management: ent: Foundati Foundations ons and Practices Practices, 5t New York, NY. Mader, D.P. (2008), Lean Six Sigma ’ s Evolution, Quality Progress. Mahmood, Z., Basharat, M. and Bashir, Z. (2012), “Review of classical management theories ”, International Journal of Social Sciences & Education, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 512-522. Margolis, P.A., DeWalt, D.A., Simon, J.E., Horowitz, S., Scoville, R., Kahn, N. and Miles, P. (2010), “Design Designing ing a large-scale large-scale multil multilevel evel improvement initiative: the improving improving performance performance in practice program”, Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 187-196. Masood, S., Dani, S., Burns, N. and Backhouse, C. (2006), “Trans Transformat formational ional leadership leadership and organizational culture: the situational strength perspective”, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers – Part Part B – Engineering Engineering Manufacture, Vol. 220 No. 6, pp. 941-949. Meyer, A.D., Brooks, G.R. and Goes, J.B. (1990), “Enviro Environment nmental al jolts and industry industry revolutions: revolutions: organizational responses to discontinuous change”, Strategic Management Journal , Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 93-110. Michel, A., By, R.T. and Burnes, B. (2013), “The limitations of dispositional dispositional resistance resistance in relation relation to organizational change”, Management Decision, Vol. 51 No. 4, pp. 761-780. Mille Mil ler, r, D. (1982 (1982), ), “Evolu Evoluti tion on and and revo revolu luti tion on:: a quan quantu tum m vi view ew of st stru ruct ctur ural al ch chan ange ge in organizations”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 131-151. Miller, D. (1992), “Enviro Environment nmental al fit versus internal internal fit”, Organization Organization Science, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 159-178. Miller Mil ler,, D. and and Fr Fries iesen en,, P.H. P.H. (1982) (1982),, “Str Struct uctura urall cha change nge and perfor performanc mance: e: quantu quantum m versus versus piecemeal-incr piecem eal-incrementa ementall approaches approaches”, Academy Academy of Manage Managemen mentt Journa Journal l , Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 867-892. Miller, E.J. and Rice, A.K. (1967), Systems of Organization: The Control of Task and Sentient Boundaries, Tavistock Publications, New York, NY, Barnes & Noble, etc. Mintzberg, H. (1979), “Patterns in strategy formation”, International Studies of Management & Organization, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 67-86. Moen, R.D. and Norman, C.L. (2010), Circling Back, Quality Progress. Moore, C. (2011), “ The path to business process transformation ”, KM World , Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 6-7. Moran Mor an,, J.W. J.W. and and Brig Bright htman man,, B.K. B.K. (2001 (2001), ), “Lea Leadin ding g organiz organizati ational onal change change”, The Caree Career r Development International , Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 111-118. Ni Nich chola olas, s, J.M. J.M. and and Stey Steyn, n, H. (2008 (2008), ), Project Project Manage Managemen mentt for Bus Busine iness, ss, Eng Engine ineeri ering, ng, and Technology: Principles and Practice, Elsevier Butterworth Butterworth Heinemann, Burlington, Burlington, MA.
Integrating the organizational change literature
259
JOCM 28,2
260
Northouse, P.G. (2007), Leadership Theory and Practice, 4th ed., Sage Publications Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA. Nyström, M.E., Höög, E., Garvare, R., Weinehall, L. and Ivarsson, A. (2013), “ Change and learning strategies in large scale change programs. Describing the variation of strategies used in a health promotion program”, Journal of Organizational Change Management , Vol. 26 No. 6, pp. 1020-1044. 1020-1044. Oldham Old ham,, J. (2009), (2009), “Ach Achiev ieving ing large large system system cha change nge in health health care”, JAMA: JAMA: Journa Journall of the American Medical Association, Vol. 301 No. 9, pp. 965-966. Pavlov, I.P. (1960), Conditioned Reflexes: An Investigation of the Physiological Activity of the Cerebral Cortex (trans by G.V. Anrep), Dover Publications, New York, NY. Pereir Per eira, a, Z.L. Z.L. and Aspinw Aspinwall, all, E. (1997), (1997), “Total quality management versus business business process process re-engineering”, Total Quality Management , Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 33-39.
) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
Project Management Institute Inc. (2004), A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide), 3rd ed., Project Management Institute Inc., Newtown Square, PA. Rachele, Rach ele, J. (2012), (2012), “The divers diversity ity qua quality lity cycle: cycle: dri drivin ving g culture culture change change throug through h innovat innovative ive governance”, AI & Society, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 399-416. Rafferty, A.E., Jimmieson, N.L. and Armenakis, A.A. (2013), “Chang Changee readiness: readiness: a multilevel multilevel review”, Journal of Management Management , Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 110-135. ReVelle, J.B. (2004), “Six Sigma”, Professional Safety, Vol. 49 No. 10, pp. 38-46. Rouse, Rou se, W.B. W.B. (2011), (2011), “Nec Necess essary ary compet competenc encies ies for transf transformi orming ng an enterp enterpris risee”, Journa Journall of Enterprise Transformation, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 71-92. Sabherwal, R., Hirschheim, R. and Goles, T. (2001), “The dynamics of alignment: insights from a punctuated equilibrium model”, Organization Science, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 179-197. Schalk, R., van, d.H., de Lange, A. and van Veldhoven, M. (2011), “Long-t Long-term erm development developmentss in individual work behaviour: patterns of stability and change”, Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, Vol. 84 No. 2, pp. 215-227. Schein, E.H. (1969), Process Consultation, Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., Reading, MA. Schein, E.H. (1988), Organizational Psychology, 3rd ed., Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Schr Schroe oede der, r, R. R.G. G.,, Lind Linder erma man, n, K. K.,, Lied Liedtk tke, e, C. and and Ch Choo oo,, A.S. A.S. (2 (200 008) 8),, “Six Sigma: Sigma: definition defin ition and underlying underlying theory”, Journal Journal of Operations Operations Management Management , Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 536-554. Scott, W.R. (1987), Organizations: Rational, Natural, and Open Systems , 2nd ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Englew ood Cliffs, Cliffs, NJ. Shewhart, Shewh art, W.A. and Deming, Deming, W.E. (Eds) (1945), Statistical Method from the Viewpoint of Quality Control , The Graduate School, The Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC. Shields, J.L. (1999), “Transforming organizations”, Information Knowledge Systems Management , Vol. 1 No. 2, p. 105. Si Sing ngh, h, A. and and Shou Shoura ra,, M.M M.M.. (2006) (2006),, “A life life cy cycl clee ev evalu aluat ation ion of ch chan ange ge in an en engi gine neer erin ing g organization: a case study”, International Journal of Project Management , Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 337-348. Sink, D.S. (1985), Productivity Management: Planning, Measurement and Evaluation, Control and Improvement , Wiley, New York, NY. Sink, D.S. and Tuttle, T.C. (1989), Planning and Measurement in Your Organization of the Future , Industrial Indu strial Engineering Engineering and Management Management Press, Norcross, Norcross, GA. Sink, D.S., Johnston, C.S. and Morris, W.T. (1995), By What Method? Are You, Developing the
Knowledge and Skills to Lead Large-Scale Quality, Industrial Engineering and Management Press, Institute Institute of Indus Industrial trial Engineers, Norcross, GA.
Skinner, B.F. (1974), About Behaviorism (Book Club ed.), Knopf, New York, NY. Smith, M.E. (2002), “Implem Implementing enting organizational organizational change: correlates correlates of success success and failure”, Performance Improvement Quarterly, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 67-83. Smith, P.N., Wolford-Clevenger, C., Mandracchia, J.T. and Jahn, D.R. (2013), “An exploratory factor fac tor analys analysis is of the acquired acquired capabil capability ity for suicid suicidee scale scale in male prison inmates inmates”, Psychological Services, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 97-105. Soderh Sod erholm, olm, L.G. L.G. (1989), (1989), “Needed Needed:: engineering engineering leadership leadership”, Design Design New Newss, Vol ol.. 45 No. 13, pp. 13-13. Stock, Sto ck, B.A. B.A. (1993), (1993), “Leadin Leading g small-scale small-scale chang changee”, Training Training & Development Development , Vol. 47 No. 2, p. 45. Thompson, J.D. (1967), Organizations in Action; Social Science Bases of Administrative Theory , McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. ) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
Tichy, N.M. (1974), “Agents of planned social change: congruence of values, cognitions and actions”, Administrative Science Quarterly , Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 164-182. Ulrich, D. (1998), “A new mandate for human resources ”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 76 No. 1, Ulrich, pp. 124-134. van, d.H., Demerouti, Demerouti, E. E. and and Bakker, Bakker, A. (2013), “How psychological psychological resources resources facilitate facilitate adaptation adaptation to organizationa organizationall change”, European European Journal Journal of Work and Organi Organizatio zational nal Psychology Psychology, Vol. 26 No. 6 pp. 1-13. Venkatraman, N. (1989), “The concept of fit in strategy research: toward verbal and statistical correspondence”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 423-444. Weber, P.S. and Weber, J.E. (2001), “Changes in employee perceptions during organizational change ”, Leader Leadershi shipp & Organi Organizat zatio ion n De Devel velop opmen mentt Jou Journa rnal l , V ol . 22 No . 6 , pp. 291-300. Weiner, B.J. (2009), A Theory of Organizational Readiness for Change, Implementing Science. Weihrich, H. and Koontz, H. (1993), Management: A Global Perspective , McGraw McGraw-Hill, -Hill, New Delhi. Weisb We isbord ord,, M.R. M.R. and and Jano Janoff ff,, S. (20 (2010 10), ), Future Search [electronic resource]: re source]: Getting the Whole System in the Room for Vision, Commitment, Commit ment, and Action , Berr Berrett ett-Koe -Koehler hler Publish Publishers, ers, San Francisco, CA. Winston, A.W. (2004), “Engineering management – a Winston, a personal perspective”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management , Vol. 51 No. 4, pp. 412-413. Womack, J.P. and Jones, D.T. (2003), Lean Thinking: Banish Waste and Create Wealth in your Corporation, Free Press, New York, NY. Worren, N.A.M., Ruddle, K. and Moore, K. (1999), “From organizational organizational development development to change change management: the emergence of a new profession”, Journal of Applied Behavioral Science , Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 273-286. Wout Wo uter ers, s, M. and and Spor Sporte tel, l, M. (2005) (2005),, “Th Thee ro role le of ex exis isti ting ng measu measure ress in deve develop lopin ing g and and implementing performance measurement systems”, Internaional Journal of Operation & Production Management , Vol. 25 No. 11, pp. 1062-1082. Zook, C. (2007), “Finding your next CORE business”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 85 No. 4, pp. 66-75.
Further reading Vansina, L. (1999), “Leadership in strategic business unit management ”, European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 87-108.
Integrating the organizational change literature
261
) T P ( 5 1 0 2 e n u J 4 1 2 4 : 3 0 t A y t i s r e v i n U k r o Y w e N y b d e d a o l n w o D
JOCM 28,2
About the authors Dr Serina Al-Haddad, PhD, is an Industrial Engineering PhD recent graduate from the University of Central Florida (UCF). She got her MSc in Industrial Engineering from UCF and her BSc in Industrial Engineering from the University of Jordan. Her PhD research was in the Change Manage Man agemen mentt and Organi Organizati zationa onall Develop Developmen mentt fie fields lds.. She is a Member Member of the Institut Institutee of Industrial Engineering (IIE). She has served in an Executive Officer role in the IIE Student
262
Chapter at herInundergraduate university, chapter for Student which she was a Founding Member and the President. addition, she served as theaChair of the Educational Track Committee at the 2012 IIE Annual Conference & Expo that was held in Orlando. She has many years of experience in the quality, customer relationship management and business process reengineering fields. She partnered to start a consultancy and training company and worked as a freelance consultant for few organizations in Jordan including State University of New York (SUNY) and Business Busine ss Development Development Center (USAID (USAID program). program). Dr Serina Serina Al-Haddad Al-Haddad is the corresponding corresponding author and can be contacted at: [email protected] Dr Timothy Kotnour, PhD, is a Professor in the Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Systems at the University of Central Florida. Dr Kotnour partners with senior mana ma nage geme ment nt team teamss to deve develop lop sol solut ution ionss for for su sust stai aine ned d perf perfor orman mance ce ex exce celle llenc ncee fo forr th their eir organi org anizat zation. ion. He comp complete leted d his Doctor Doctorate ate in Indust Industrial rial and System Systemss Enginee Engineerin ring g with with an emphasis emphas is in Management Systems Systems Engineering Engineering from Virginia Tech. He is the Directo Directorr of the UCF Engineering Leadership and Innovation Institute. He is the Program Director of the Professional Engineering Management Program. He is a Fellow of the American Society for Engineering Management. He is author of the book Transforming Organizations: Strategies and Methods . He was the Editor of the Engineering Management Journal .
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website: www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm Or contact us for further details: [email protected] [email protected]
