Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024].

See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Applying the Model in Practice 267

Working across the three activity tracks we can think of goal

setting and monitoring as involving at least two if not all three tracks.
Sensemaking and sensegiving about goals is a key tool for managing
meaning. To win support for a goal or set of goals, it is important
for audiences to understand what those goals are and what rationale
is offered to support them. Managing meaning about competing goals
– either ones already embraced by the organization or ones offered
as alternatives to the change goals proposed – is also necessary in
order to be able to create a sense of shared and collective goals or
to effectively deprioritize competing goals. Additionally, strategic
participants in a change will need to manage the network in terms of
understanding how different groups of stakeholders view the goals
of the change; their own goals; and the competing and complementary
stakes and goals of other groups of stakeholders. It is also possible
that part of the management of practice will involve setting up or adjust-
ing existing mechanisms for monitoring goal accomplishment. We can
turn to the Virtual Problems case to illustrate practice tools related to
goals.
As the HR Director charged with implementing this change, Evelyn
should first examine the organization’s core goals for implementing the
change. She needs to garner the support of senior leaders for specific,
measurable goals that can be shared among important stakeholders of
the change. These leaders need to take part in building the belief in
stakeholders that there is principal support (Chapter 7) for the change.
Building a case for the change also will involve demonstrating that the
change represents a necessary and appropriate change for the organiza-
tion that can be successfully accomplished. These beliefs relate to dis-
crepancy, efficacy, and appropriateness that we discussed in Chapters
5 and 7. In order to make that case effectively, it is important that senior
management know what they hope to accomplish. From the case
description it is not apparent how instituting telework would serve any
of Designcorp’s fundamental organizational goals. In fact, on first blush,
it seems that teleworking might run counter to the work norms of “last
minute meetings,” time pressures, and team work. Not that these things
couldn’t be managed virtually, but that it may not be immediately
obvious to stakeholders in the organization why telework is important,
necessary, and potentially positive to accomplish the organization’s
goals. However, it is likely that stakeholders are immediately able to
identify individuals’ goals that would be served by the change (e.g.,
teleworkers gain more autonomy and flexibility). It is also likely that
stakeholders would easily be able to imagine some downsides of the
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
268 Applying the Model in Practice

change for those who are not able to telework (e.g., limited access to
teleworking employees, difficulty in calling meetings).
For Evelyn, it is important to think through the goals of the change
initiative and the ways in which the change might line up with the
current values and stakes of key stakeholders. This stakeholder analysis
is an important tool in getting clarity on the goals and stakes others have
in the change and determining how values fit (Chapter 7) with those
goals/stakes. Table 9.1 shows how Evelyn might start such an analysis
by identifying important groups of stakeholders who have a stake in
this change; then identifying the most relevant values that are held by
those stakeholders that seem to be impacted by the change; and finally

Table 9.1 Stakeholder analysis

Key Stakeholder Key Values Relevant to Change Initial Values Fit
with Change from
Their Perspective
Employees who Job flexibility, job autonomy, Good
may be allowed to high client commitment
Telework (e.g.,
Susan)
Employees who will Fairness, smooth work Poor
never be allowed process, high client
to Telework (e.g., commitment
Nathan)
Supervisors of the Competency in supervisory Poor to Neutral
teleworkers duties, high commitment to
(Rodney and clients, high commitment to
Claire) employees
Clients of Quality and timely service Unknown
teleworkers
Senior Managers Organization survival, cost Mixed
savings on overhead, high
employee morale, retention of
talent, growth of organization’s
client base, high quality client
relationships, development of
national reputation
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Applying the Model in Practice 269

estimating the degree to which the value-fit is initially poor, neutral, or

good from the perspective of those stakeholders. This analysis gives
Evelyn her first read on how stakeholders might react to the idea of the
change and what goals might be represented in their reactions.
As Evelyn moves through her stakeholder analysis and encourages a
conversation among senior leaders about the organization’s goals, she
is managing both meaning and the network in this change effort. She is
attending to the meaning of what “we are doing” and developing an
understanding of how it might be interpreted by others in the organiza-
tion. She is also contributing to mapping out where potential allies and
rivals might lie in the organization both for and against the change
effort. Some of the stakeholder clashes and potential complementary
stakes she identifies among stakeholder groups may be unknown to
those groups at this early point. Further, by encouraging senior manag-
ers to thoroughly examine their core values and the ways that this
change initiative is supportive or counter to those goals, she may
provoke an opportunity for them to “gut check” whether this change is
a good idea or not. They may end up asking themselves why they are
implementing the change. Perhaps they are following a trend in the
industry but without good reason. Perhaps they are responding to a
single employee’s request, without further analysis of the implications
of the program for other employees. Perhaps there is little in the way
they’ve envisioned the implementation of the program that is tied to any
major core value or focus for the company. This is an excellent exercise
for senior management to undergo before further pursuing implement-
ing the change.
Other stakeholders need to monitor and articulate goals as well. Goals
for non-implementers are more likely to be informal. For example,
supervisors of the new teleworkers might discuss among themselves
what goals they have for this new pilot program. In the process, they
will likely discover the depth of their differences on the idea of trying
telework. It might be most strategic for those opposed to the telework
to gain agreement from the other supervisors on the criteria by which
the pilot program will be evaluated. That is, what would it have to
accomplish in order to be deemed successful and what would indicate
a failure that should suggest discontinuation? Examples of success
indicators might include maintaining current levels of productivity,
timely processing of client accounts, number of client complaints.
Examples of indicators of failure might be noticeable increase in
animosity among employees, delays in resolving client issues, commu-
nication breakdowns between teleworkers and office staff. Nailing
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
270 Applying the Model in Practice

down these indicators for what success looks like would be a strategic
way to force senior managers to articulate the goals for the program
and to provide measurable benchmarks that the change must meet.
It might also be strategic to include individual goals that the supervi-
sors have wanted in the past. For example, Rodney might use this
opportunity to ask for other benchmarks to be met or other complaints
to be addressed as the pilot goes forward. Rodney could ask that he be
alleviated from some supervisory tasks or have some tasks restructured
to make the transition to telework supervision smoother. In this sort of
negotiation, the supervisors would be working across activity tracks of
managing the network (e.g., potentially forming a coalition with some
agreements about the evaluation of the change and the direct benefits
all supervisors would win from the pilot should it prove “successful”)
as well as managing meaning of the change in forcing more commitment
to terms of engagement – what is this change exactly? What is it meant
to accomplish? How or when will that be assessed? – and gaining clarity
on how the program adds value to those who bear the burden of the
transition.

Developing Strategic Messages and Strategic

Communication Plan
Another set of tools in managing across the activity tracks concern the
strategic messages that implementers and stakeholders create and the
general strategy framework within which those messages are created.
As we discussed in Chapter 2, there are several dimensions along which
message and communication plans may be based including dissemination/
soliciting input; sidedness; gain vs. loss framing; blanket vs. targeting;
and discrepancy vs. efficacy.
One of Evelyn’s challenges in creating messages about the change –
even if she can get senior leaders to gain clarity about the goals of the
initiative – is to overcome the disparities that this sort of change creates
between the “haves” and the “have nots.” For example, if she adopts a
“gain” frame (Chapter 5) for this change, it is easy for some in the
organization to question what is gained for them personally. Some of
the stakeholders who are not going to be allowed to telework may see
the gains as extra perks for some individual workers. If Evelyn is going
to use a gain frame, she must emphasize gains for the entire organiza-
tion’s wellbeing or find a way to creatively identify gains even for those
who are seemingly disadvantaged by this change (i.e., those who will
never be able to telework themselves). Discrepancy messages will also
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Applying the Model in Practice 271

need to be crisp and clear to the most negative of the stakeholders. If

there is no message explaining the need for the change or the opportu-
nity that the change represents (e.g., to motivate talented people who
are threatening to leave to stay with the organization), it is easy for the
naysayers to point out that the pain of adjustment to the new work style
isn’t worth the minimal organizational gains earned.
Further, a major role for Evelyn, as the implementer, is to disseminate
information (Chapters 2 and 5) about what the change entails, how it
will work, what processes are in place, and other core official informa-
tion. She should monitor the stakeholders’ understandings of the change
and the questions they raise so she can both identify weaknesses in the
implementation plans and correct any misunderstanding about how the
change is envisioned to unfold in the organization.
Stakeholders most opposed to the change should consider strategic
messages to both implementers and to powerful and well-positioned
opinion leaders (Chapter 3). Targeted messages (Chapter 5) should be
designed to appeal to influential decision-makers who have the power
to stop the change but who may not have yet considered all the down-
sides to the change. So Rodney and Nathan would be wise to target
undecided supervisors. These supervisors may not immediately see any
problem with the change initiative and so are not opposing it initially.
These participants and others like them might supply evidence (e.g.,
disseminate information from other organizations who have had diffi-
culty with telecommuting) and raise issues that call attention to poten-
tial problems. Raising insurmountable problems or ones that would
require a good deal of analysis and problem-solving on the part of super-
visors may make the change seem less desirable. In essence Rodney and
Nathan would be raising counters to “efficacy” messages – saying, “we
can’t do this.”
For Susan, who is in favor of the change, strategic messages might
take the form of a gain frame – what the organization stands to gain by
investing in this change. She could make the case that by increasing the
flexibility of work arrangements for even some staff, the commitment
of those employees to the organization might be increased. She could
highlight savings in physical space and other resources, as well as reduc-
tion in noise and parking lot overcrowding, as gains for the entire
organization should the change succeed.
Susan and Evelyn might also apply two-sided messages (Chapter 5)
that acknowledge the downsides to the change by countering with
ideas for repairs for overcoming them (e.g., an inoculation message).
If Susan and other supportive stakeholders worked together to target
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
272 Applying the Model in Practice

the more neutral supervisors and lobby them for support of the change
they could win support from a powerful coalition. However, it might
also be strategic to use the same approach with the less enthusiastic
peers. Nathan might be swayed to a more supportive position if some
of his concerns about the change could be alleviated. In this instance it
would be useful for both Susan and Evelyn to practice soliciting feed-
back from stakeholders like Nathan to hear concerns, problem-solve
together, and determine if problems that are being raised are insur-
mountable or not.
In each of these examples – Evelyn, Rodney, Nathan, and Susan – the
strategic messages are geared for different audiences that these
stakeholders believe will have important influence on decision-making
or decision-makers. No supervisor wants to deal with a “revolt” by
his/her subordinates, so even for those low-level subordinates with
little power in this decision context, their support of the change might
be an important contribution to the overall organization’s conversation
about telework. Understanding that and working to manage their
sensemaking about the change involves managing meaning and manag-
ing the network.
Also, as the pilot program for the teleworking begins, those who are
either opposed to or in support of the change will want to continue to
manage the meanings that are constructed about how well the change
initiative is working out. They will want to influence how important and
influential stakeholders are constructing the reality of the change as it
is practiced. For example, checking in with clients of the teleworkers
to monitor for praise or complaints will be important. Further, they will
want to manage the practice of the telework in terms of messages that
are publicly posted and recorded about the change. Another way to
manage practice is to influence who become spokespersons for the
change for external or important internal audiences and how the change
is represented. For example, Rodney will probably want to underscore
at every opportunity that telework is a pilot program and not a finalized
change. He should keep alive the discourse of tentativeness and adapta-
tion of the program as it goes through this testing phase. He would want
to correct any document or presentation that implied that the change
was permanent. Symbolic markers of permanence would also need to
be cautioned against – such as revising formal documents with “tele-
workers” as a category of staff. For those very supportive of the change,
such as Susan, moving towards encouraging normalizing practice of the
telework model would be to her advantage. That might involve strategic
messages that use a “future” tense. For example, she might invoke
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Applying the Model in Practice 273

teleworkers in long-term planning documents; encourage “telework” to

be advertised to new hires as a possible incentive; and encourage other
non-teleworkers to make requests to be considered for a future tele-
work slot when the pilot period concludes.

Analysis of Input
A key strategic tool in participating in a change initiative – whether the
goal is to forestall the change; alter it; or support it – is to solicit and
use input (Chapter 2). The implementers of a change will often con-
sciously or unconsciously select a style of participation (see Table 2.1
in Chapter 2). Those styles will emphasize either more symbolic or
sincere (resource-based) gathering of input during change. They will
target very select stakeholders or wide representation of diverse stake-
holders. In order to maximize the use of input as a resource, I recom-
mend that participants adopt USER:

Use input as a resource in the decision-making and adjustments

Systematically collect input
Evaluate the process by which input is collected to ensure it is working
Rigorously drill down and examine the input that is collected

This acronym reminds the participant to use the input as a resource

not merely as a symbol (Chapters 2 and 6). To know if you are using the
input as a resource, Evelyn could ask herself if anything she might hear
in collecting input could actually alter a decision that has already been
made? Could input influence important decisions going forward? Could
the input influence the ways resources or responsibilities are allocated?
If the answers to these and other similar questions are “no” it may be
that input is merely being used to “look like” the organization is
listening. Or, it might be that input is only being solicited to gauge the
correctness of understanding about the change – and although that is
important to do, it is very limited.
Similarly, stakeholders who hold other opinions about the change or
who are not sure about their opinions during the change process should
collect and use input as a resource that informs their opinions and their
actions. For example, Claire should actively engage stakeholders she
knows are opposed to and in favor of the change – as well as others
who are uncertain – to discover what information they hold in common;
what they do not share; and what concerns each has about the possible
outcomes of the change initiative. Neutral participants like Claire can
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
274 Applying the Model in Practice

sometimes best manage the network by serving as important “connec-

tors” (Chapter 3) who might broker creative solutions to identified
problems or concerns.
The second piece of USER reminds us to be systematic in soliciting
input. It is easy for us to go to those who we know will agree with us;
those whose information and ideas we use repeatedly; and those who
have common experiences. However, we are less likely to find new
information from such people. All strategic participants in change
should be wide-reaching and systematic in a search for a variety of
information sources, types of knowing, and bases of experience. Part
of being systematic is being active in the pursuit of input rather than
passively waiting for “the usual” sources to offer up input. The noisiest,
most combative or assertive stakeholders are more likely to initiate
providing input. Others who are quieter, more reserved, more concerned
about their self-presentation may not be eager to share perspectives,
concerns, and information – especially during controversy. A systematic
approach to soliciting input will attempt to overcome reluctance on the
part of such stakeholders and make it easier and more comfortable for
them to offer what they know and what they think. An especially strong
system of soliciting input will pursue the perspectives of the skeptics
and those with strong concerns (Chapter 6). Such voices are more likely
to surface potential problems that might blindside the company later if
not considered early in the pilot phase.
Evelyn could create input soliciting channels that would encourage
widespread participation in evaluating and monitoring the pilot program.
That might include time set aside during team meetings to share con-
cerns and perspectives on how the telework is going; creating a confi-
dential channel especially set up to discuss concerns about the
teleworker relationships with peers and/or clients; a survey that asks
clients to report their level of satisfaction with client services during the
pilot program.
New teleworkers might create channels to monitor reactions and
concerns about their new telework style. Susan could actively seek the
honest feedback of her peers, routinely checking in with them over
coffee or stopping by the office to ask how things are going or if adjust-
ments need to be made in new communication procedures. Susan and
other teleworkers could also encourage openness with clients about the
telework program, asking for any suggestions or concerns to be sur-
faced so they can be addressed. Actively creating channels and
opportunities for peers and clients to voice their input not only surfaces
concerns, it adds perspective and information to the process of testing
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Applying the Model in Practice 275

the new program. It also builds trust among stakeholders who may
perceive their stakes to be at odds.
USER also reminds us to evaluate the system we are using for solicit-
ing input to ensure that it is working to obtain the widest sample of
useful input possible. We need to think through how to evaluate the
system. One indicator of a poor system for soliciting input is that we
are only hearing what we want to hear. If all we get is confirming input,
we probably aren’t doing a very good job being systematic. There should
be a variety of types of input representing as many points of view as are
present among our stakeholders. Also, use of input systems should
encourage people to provide input repeatedly (that is, they are not
soured in their early experiences of doing so). They should build a sense
of trust and openness.
Finally, USER calls us to be rigorous in analysis of the input we
receive. It is not enough to simply categorize or tally up those “for” and
“against.” It is important to ask many questions of those with various
perspectives; to learn where their point of view and concerns come
from; to interrogate the information (not the people) for its weaknesses
and strengths before relying on it in decision-making. Rigorous analysis
of any sort of data in organizations (financial, marketing, production)
necessitates spending some time and using unbiased procedures. It is
not that hard to “see” what one wishes to see in data. One can read the
data in support of many different stories (Chapter 8). Comparing differ-
ent reads on the same data and sorting through the interpretations in
an honest search for a collective sense of things is challenging.
Participants who invest in this level of rigor will be better able to lever-
age an argument though. They will be better prepared to formulate or
reformulate their own position on the change. They will be better
equipped to confront the change (even an undesirable one) if they have
that level of data analysis behind them.
Part of being rigorous involves understanding that stories and reali-
ties are enacted not “found” (Chapter 8). As discussed in earlier chap-
ters, the frames that are put around data can dramatically alter what
they “say” to us and to others. Different stakeholders will attempt to
frame data and input in ways favorable to their own interpretations of
or enactment of reality. A strategic participant in change will monitor
the ways in which input is being framed. For example, Evelyn could
frame all the complaints of employees like Nathan as “jealousy” and
dismiss it. Rodney could frame the positive or neutral responses of the
non-teleworker employees as “uniformed” responses or as from people
who were just reluctant to complain since this decision to do the pilot
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
276 Applying the Model in Practice

has already been made. It is important to be aware of the ways in which

others are framing experiences and events so that effective counter-
framing can be made if necessary.
We should also be aware that as input is solicited and interpretations
form about what the data/input means, networks often are reshaped
(Chapter 8). Understanding how networks can be reshaped, relation-
ships made stronger or weaker as sensemaking activity unfolds during
change, is part of managing networks. Those who come to share per-
spectives and stories may bond around those enacted realities. They
may further search together for more stories that prove their case. Thus,
as the pilot project progresses, those opposed to it may search for
stories that illustrate its challenges and failures. Those in favor are likely
to circulate stories about its successes. The sharing of these self-
reinforcing stories may help bond the groups of stakeholders who share
them. This involves managing networks as well as managing meaning.

Influencing Implementation Climate

As discussed in Chapter 2, communication is not everything in change.
An important part of a change process concerns the ways in which
physical, material, financial, and other resources are allocated and
managed. Some authors have argued that in order to provide for a strong
implementation “climate” (Klein and Sorra, 1996) participants need to
know that desired behaviors are rewarded, supported, and expected.
That is, infrastructure needs to be in place to create appropriate incen-
tives (for compliance) and disincentives (for noncompliance); material
and physical resources such as training, staffing, equipment, and the like
needs to be in place to overcome hindrances to a smooth change
process; and leaders need to demonstrate that they have expectations
that stakeholders – especially employees/staff – will be supportive of
the change. They need to show that they expect that the change will
endure and not die out from neglect or their own lack of enthusiasm.
Many stakeholders can enhance the implementation climate through
active participation, follow-through, sharing necessary resources, and
the like. However, implementers are chiefly responsible for allocating
necessary resources and making rewards and expectations clear to
participants. Evelyn needs to think about more than “selling” the idea
of teleworking to her employees and to clients. She needs to provide
for infrastructure that plays a role in ensuring that telework can be suc-
cessful at Designcorp. That could include purchasing and installing
technologies that assist in smooth communication and resource-sharing
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Applying the Model in Practice 277

between teleworkers and non-teleworkers as well as between telework-

ers and clients; investing in training for all employees so they have a
firm understanding of how virtual team work can be accomplished and
have a chance to learn new skills; and building evaluation criteria and
incentives into employees appraisal process that relate to successful
management of telework relationships.
Senior leaders play a critical role in making it clear to employees that
promotion of the success of the telework pilot is expected. As this is a
pilot program, part of that expectation will be to report any problems
so that they can be addressed. If employees feel compelled by senior
managers to work with the change effort to rigorously develop the idea
and “debug” processes involved with it, they are more likely to engage
the change in productive ways rather than merely grumble about it.
Building a strong implementation climate has to do with managing
practice more than anything, but it also has elements of managing
meaning since these actions bring with them a message that the organi-
zation is serious about trying out this idea.
For other stakeholders, especially those who are not in support of the
change, it is wise to make clear to targeted audiences that support of
their advocated position will in some ways be rewarded, supported, and
at times (if negotiated agreements have been reached) expected. So, if
Claire cuts a deal with Rodney that she will support him in opposing
the change if certain benchmarks are not met during the pilot, Rodney
would want to communicate that follow-through on that commitment
is expected. Similarly, if Nathan promises to swap shifts with Susan if
she drops her support for telework, Nathan would need to reward her
for compliance with that request. In terms of managing practice, Rodney
could create a disincentive for the telework pilot to succeed if he threat-
ens to quit. If he could gain the cooperation of other supervisors in
taking a similar stance (i.e., managing networks and managing practice)
he might have a powerful tool to get his interests met.
In sum, Designcorp’s implementer and stakeholders should manage
the change process across the three activity tracks – managing meaning,
managing network, and managing practice – by employing four general
tools: monitoring and articulating goals; developing strategic messages;
analyzing input; and influencing implementation climate (see Figure
9.1). As strategic and invested stakeholders (including implementers)
focus on the use of these tools to manage these activity tracks they will
inevitably be interacting to make sense of what is going on; be reaching
for a clear understanding of multiple perspectives on the change; be
working to frame the change in ways consistent with their own and
 Tools of Practice
Activity Tracks Monitor and Articulate Develop Strategic Analyze Input: USER Influence Implementation
Goals Communication Plan and Climate
Messages
• Determine goals • Create messages that • Encourage the • Influence stakeholders’
• Gain leader commitment build necessary beliefs widespread understanding understandings that
to goals about change / counter- that sharing participation in change is
• Share goals with others argue against them perspectives/concerns/ rewarded, supported, and
Managing Meaning • Manage conflicts with • Create messages that ideas is useful for all expected
others’ goals frame the change; cope concerned
• Stakeholders discuss with downsides; inoculate • Build perceptions of trust
goals audiences through open channels of
• Frame results from • Design information and communication
monitoring goals participation strategy • Actively frame and
• Monitor reactions to monitor the frames others
messages of self/others put on input and data
• Map stakeholders’ value fit • Target audiences (blanket • Actively engage a variety • Broker deals and
with change or specific) to influence of stakeholders with partnerships with other
• Highlight shared goals process and decision- varied perspectives stakeholders who have
with other groups of making • Broker relationships unique rewards or support
stakeholders • Raise strengths and among stakeholders to aid to offer or withhold from
Managing Network
• Map out how different weaknesses that speak in developing overlapping the change effort
stakeholders goals the stakes of important stakes • Monitor the key resources
conflict/overlap stakeholders • Facilitate sharing of that various stakeholders
• Look to frame common knowledge/data are able/willing to bring to
stakes among allies • Monitor the way the the change effort
network is reshaped
around interpretations

• Make goals official • Shape official or unofficial • Actively create and use • Create supportive
• Determine metrics to documents about the channels for soliciting infrastructure to ensure
assess goals change input that your goals can be
Managing Practice • Set up means to monitor • Attend to the symbols, • Evaluate use and met
goals language, and opinions about system for • Put in place incentives
• Participate in monitoring spokespersons used to input and disincentives for
goals stand for the change • Rigorously analyze input cooperation
and enlist help to create
shared sense of data

Figure 9.1 Managing activity tracks with tools of practice

Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Applying the Model in Practice 279

shared stakes; connect with and make bridges between groups of stake-
holders in coalitions; and manage the physical and material resources
of the change climate in ways that support their goals in the change
effort.
These recommendations, if followed, do not guarantee that Designcorp
will have success with teleworking or that the implementers will have
an easy pathway to convincing the more reluctant stakeholders to
embrace the change. However, this prescription does encourage energy
being directed at the change initiative. Managing these activity tracks
with these tools, stakeholders will be able to thoroughly vet this change
initiative. By the end of the pilot period all the various stakeholders will
have had voice; had opportunities to help make sense of the change;
and listened thoroughly to other stakeholders. The likelihood is that all
cards are on the table through this process. Those empowered to make
final decisions about moving forward with telework should have a clear
picture of the viability and potential challenges of the change. Those
who have little or no power in the decision-making will have had oppor-
tunities to be heard and potentially have influenced outcomes.

Myths About Implementing Planned Change

In the process of writing this book, it has occurred to me that several

myths about the change process exist in our popular understanding and
to some extent surface in our research and theoretical traditions regard-
ing change implementation. This tour of the research and theory about
implementation of change has, hopefully, debunked these myths or at
least called into question whether they are always the case.
First, the myth that planned change is inevitable. Too often popular
press books and even academic articles and books start out assuming
that the stewards of organizations must change them. They assume,
perhaps even to the point of not being aware of it, that lengthy periods
of stable practice with little variation of processes, product, policy,
style, and so on is really fantasy. Although I started this book by arguing
that there are multiple triggers for change in organizations and that
forces of regulation, marketplace, internal innovation, and environmen-
tal turbulence frequently lead to planned change as a response, that is
different from an argument of inevitability of planned change. This is a
dangerous assumption since accepting that change is inevitable sets up
the practitioner to be less vigilant in considering the soundness of argu-
ments and pressure to bring about any specific change. If we believe
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
280 Applying the Model in Practice

that we just have to change, then we resign ourselves to each new trend,
fashion, and innovation as one more change we need to implement. If
we take the concept of healthy stability off the table, and give into the
cultural dogma that the only good organization is one that is constantly
reinventing itself, we can become much less discerning about judging
when change might be beneficial and when it is problematic or not
worth the effort.
Further, changing organizations is an affirmative act (or more accu-
rately a set of actions) not something that simply happens. So, in fact,
change is only inevitable if we choose to change. And constant change
is only inevitable if we constantly choose to change. Although certainly
we don’t choose the change that occurs in our organizations’ environ-
ments or choose the life-cycle changes that come with the age and
history of an organization, we do choose to implement planned change
in response to those circumstances. Our choices to change should be
vigilantly considered not merely assumed to be inevitable.
A second myth that crops up a lot in popular press discourses about
change implementation asserts that it is human nature or the nature of
certain personalities to fear change. This myth also suggests that such
personality tendencies are at the root of resistance, and resistance is
bad. As we discussed thoroughly in Chapter 6, “resistance” is probably
a term that has outlived its usefulness. It is a term that groups together
a varied range of behavior, attitudes, and cognition under one pejorative
term. Being less than completely satisfied with, enthusiastic about, and
cooperative in a change effort cannot be assumed to be a bad outcome
for all cases, for all stakeholders, no matter what.
It is incumbent on the implementer to sort through hesitation, concern,
push-back, negativity, refusal among other “resistant” responses to
change and determine root causes and appropriate ways to manage
each. For some it will be appropriate to educate and correct misinter-
pretations of information or intent. For others, it is more appropriate to
alter the change effort to address problems and concerns that are raised.
In some cases negotiation among stakeholders with competing stakes
will be necessary. In others, the complete withdrawal of the change may
be the wisest choice. What has been called “resistance” should be
reframed in our literature and our practice as “energy” that needs to be
effectively channeled in order to improve the change process and the
change itself.
A third myth focuses our attention on the informational and persua-
sive campaigns of implementers. This myth suggests that if we offer
up change in an appealing manner, we will ultimately convince most
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Applying the Model in Practice 281

stakeholders to accept and like it. Much of this myth stems from the
issue I raised in the Introduction that too many consultants and research-
ers assume that the change – any change – is a good idea. If that is true,
then it easily follows that negative reactions must be due to misunder-
standing the change. If only everyone understood the change, of course
they’d be on board. So, that casts the implementer in the role of infor-
mational campaign manager. However, we know from our discussion in
Chapter 2 that more information does not always resolve uncertainty
nor lead to shared “knowledge” or shared meaning. We also know that
there are many competing sources of knowing and information within
organizations and implementers cannot just speak one-to-one to
stakeholders without the influence of those competing sources. Thus,
managing communication during change involves soliciting of input;
managing across all three of the activity tracks discussed in this chapter;
and especially understanding that meaning is managed throughout an
organization and beyond – not merely by the formal messages an imple-
menter puts in her campaign to sell the change.

Conclusion

Through this book the reader has taken a journey that has illuminated
the complex social dynamics that occur when organizations attempt to
implement change. While the book is somewhat ambitious in its attempt
to integrate research and theory across disciplines and sub-disciplines,
I hope that I have managed to intrigue the researcher and scholar of
organizational change in ways that might impact the direction of future
research. I also hope that this book has been able to make useful obser-
vations and provide advice for practitioners who will encounter change
in their work and lives. The central argument of this book and the main
take-away I hope any reader will get from it is that change implementa-
tion is essentially a social and communicative process. Further, that the
negotiation of stakes, and sensemaking through interaction that occurs
among stakeholders, accounts for the largest share of explanation in
outcomes of change.

Reference
Klein, K. J. and Sorra, J. S. (1996) The challenge of innovation implementation.
Academy of Management Review, 21 (4), 1055–1080.
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Glossary

absorption person adjusts self to fit role demands.

activity tracks areas that account for our attention and energy during
change.
adaptive approaches approach to change implementation wherein
the change/innovation is fit to the organization.
adoption the term we use to describe the formal selection of the idea
for incorporation into an organization.
appropriateness reflects the belief that the specific change under
consideration/implementation is the correct one to address the
need expressed in discrepancy.
attribution error occurs when an observer attributes the cause of
an observation incorrectly.
authenticity concerns the sincerity of stakeholders’ compliance with
implementers’ expectations for their behavior.
autonomous approaches implementation strategies that are flexible
and open to redefinition/reinvention even at the lowest levels of the
organization.
avoidance-avoidance goal conflicts “arise when the message
options available to respond to a question have multiple negative

Organizational Change: Creating Change Through Strategic Communication,

First Edition. Laurie K. Lewis.
© 2011 Laurie K. Lewis. Published 2011 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Glossary 283

outcomes in relation to one’s aims, yet a reply must be made”

(Kline, Simunich, and Weber, 2009, p. 44).
bankrupt participation describes the case where even symbolic
involvement is available for only a few representative
stakeholders.
boundary-spanners individuals who connect an organization with
external environments.
change acceptance zone that space wherein the motivation to
change is high enough to create some stress, but the perception
of potential success is also high enough to provide impetus
to try.
change burnout the exhaustion of an individual’s capacity or willing-
ness to continue to participate in change programs.
channel “the means by which messages get from one individual to
another” (Rogers, 1995, p. 18).
coercive forces direct communicators away from certain practices
that that would be frowned upon by authorities.
cognitive frames representations of reality that are stored in an indi-
vidual’s memory.
communication processes involve interaction, discourse, and inter-
pretation. Processes are sometimes created through formal planned
processes determined by decision makers in organizations. At other
times processes are created in emergent interaction that may
become normative (usual) practice over time.
concertive control concertively controlled organizations rely on the
strong loyalty and identification of stakeholders (usually employ-
ees) to foster a frame of decision-making that puts the organiza-
tion’s interests first, above any individual interests.
connectors are those who help bridge gaps between different types
of stakeholders.
corporate social responsibility scholars are concerned with
describing how organizations attend to stakes of stakeholders
who have claims on the organization that are not related to the
bottom line.
counselors those in the organization who provide social support to
other stakeholders during change.
decaf resistance looking like we are resisting while still accepting
the power structure.
definitive stakeholder in Mitchell, Agle, and Wood’s (1997) scheme,
those stakeholders perceived to hold all three of the attributes of
power, urgency, and legitimacy.
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
284 Glossary

descriptive stakeholder theory branch of Stakeholder Theory that

depicts existing relationships with stakeholders.
determination person adjusts the role to suit self.
diffusion the process involved in sharing new ideas with others to the
point that they “catch on”.
discontinuance the gradual ending of a practice.
discourse “a system of thought with its own linguistic tool bag, or
collection of terms and metaphors for key concepts and ideas;
categories for understanding; themes for stories; and familiar argu-
ments for us to draw upon to describe, explain or justify” (Fairhurst,
2011, p. 32).
discrepancy the belief that the change is necessary.
discrepancy messages messages focused on suggesting the urgency
to initiate change.
discursive change often involves re-labeling of practices as some-
thing new in order to give the appearance of changed practice
without really doing things differently.
dispositional resistance “an individual’s tendency to resist or avoid
making changes, to devalue change generally, and to find change
aversive across diverse contexts and types of change” (Oreg, 2003,
p. 680).
effectiveness the accomplishment of desired results.
efficacy the belief that the change is something we can successfully
accomplish.
efficacy messages messages promoting the sense that the change
goals can and will be accomplished.
efficiency accomplishment of effectiveness with the fewest possible
expended resources.
emotional support providing a channel for venting emotions.
enactment in this process stakeholders “enact” or “construct” their
environment through a process of social interaction and
sensemaking.
equal dissemination blanket style of communication where all
stakeholders are given information with same message and style.
equal participation blanket style of communication where all stake-
holders are given equal opportunities to provide input.
equifinality the principle that there are multiple paths to the same
end.
equivocal communication strategic use of language to give an
appearance of responsiveness that if truly delivered in a clear,
direct manner would create negative repercussions.
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Glossary 285

equivocality ambiguous meanings and too many available interpreta-

tions of events/objects.
espoused theories those we claim as the premises of our choices of
action.
expertise power relying on perceptions of one’s competence, capa-
bility, and effectiveness to influence organizational or individual
behavior.
exploration there is simultaneous adjustment of role and person.
fidelity the degree of departure from the intended design of the
change.
first-order change small, incremental predictable interruptions in
normal practice.
formal communication involves use of official channels; declara-
tions and policy set down by organizational leaders.
frames a means to bracket experience and elements of a story in
order to impact interpretation of details.
gain frame emphasizes the advantages of compliance with the per-
suader’s message.
group values vary among the groups in an organization and reflect
the shared experiences, roles, interactions, and perspectives of
those in the groups.
high intensity organizational values “encapsulate strong, fervent
views and sharp strictures regarding desirable and undesirable
actions on the part of the organization and its members” (Klein and
Sorra, 1996, p. 1063).
identity gap the difference between the actual organizational schema
and the ideal organizational schema.
implementation “the translation of any tool or technique, process, or
method of doing, from knowledge to practice” (Tornatzky and
Johnson, 1982, p. 193).
implementers are those people in organizations who take on a formal
role in bringing about the change effort and translating the idea of
change into practice.
informal communication includes the spontaneous interactions
of stakeholders with each other, with implementers, and with
non-stakeholders.
information dissemination involves the spreading of facts, clarifica-
tions, notices, details, rationale and the like for the purpose of
increasing the knowledge about a change initiative.
informational support providing answers to questions that are
source of stress.
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
286 Glossary

innovation a creative process of generating ideas for practice.

input solicitation as resource empowering stakeholders to have
impact on the manner, rate, timing and possibly even the wisdom
of implementing a change at all.
input solicitation as symbol merely creating an appearance of
participation.
institutional theory argues that components of an organization’s
formal structure and institutionalized contexts (e.g., industries,
professions) become widely accepted, deemed to be necessary or
appropriate, and then their presence or absence is used as a signal
of legitimacy.
instrumental stakeholder theory branch of Stakeholder Theory
wherein scholars test claims about how organizational actions
shape stakeholder relationships (e.g., certain strategies with stake-
holders are associated with certain outcomes).
instrumental support taking on some task for another person.
interactional frames dynamic process of enacting and shaping
meaning in ongoing interaction.
interpersonal channel channels that primarily involve face-to-face
communication.
isomorphism a constraining process that gives rise to similarity in
organizational form and practice.
journalists serve the function of investigators and reporters during
change by gathering and sharing information from inside and
outside the organization.
knowing a verb: an active and ongoing accomplishment of
problem-solving.
knowledge a noun: stable facts, objects and dispositions.
latent power available power that can be used as a threat of the
exercise of power.
lateral dissent an individual would express dissent to someone other
than the leader in hopes it would get relayed to the leader.
loss frame emphasizes the disadvantages of noncompliance.
low intensity organizational values organizational values are of
lesser importance to its members.
management of meaning symbols are constructed to define reality
for others. That new reality then implies certain actions and under-
standing over others.
managing meaning participating in enacting realities of “what is
going on” in the change process.
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Glossary 287

managing networks both monitoring and participating in shaping

relationships among those who are impacted by and/or witness to
the change.
managing practice monitoring, planning and acting on the physical
and material considerations for bringing about change.
marketing communication model where stakeholders are approached
in an explicitly tailored way.
material change alters operations, practices, relationships, decision-
making and the like.
material conditions sorts of results that change the day-to-day
reality for stakeholders (e.g., pay , levels of noise, efficiency of
service).
mediated channel channels that make use of some form of mass
media or technology.
mimetic forces direct implementers to conform to established and
well-known routines for implementing change and compel other
stakeholders to mimic what they see as successful and common
examples.
mindlessness instead of processing new information, people behave
without thinking about their actions.
multi-dimensional change one or more changes have subsequent
parts.
multifaceted change occurs when more than one change occurs
within the same temporal time frame.
multiple change two or more independent changes occurring at the
same time.
mum effect when individuals have a distaste for delivering bad news
or even previewing a message that contains bad news.
need for consensus building the degree to which it is important to
achieve consensus among stakeholders for change to be a success.
need to know communication model where stakeholders who request
information about a change are provided it.
non-refutational message merely stating the opposing arguments
without making a case against them.
normative concerns relate to challenges to existing group norms and
values that may trigger concerns for protection and survival of a
group.
normative forces expectations for appropriate and standard operat-
ing procedures are established through professional socialization,
training, and industry standards.
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
288 Glossary

normative stakeholder theory branch of Stakeholder Theory

wherein scholars focus on moral and ethical obligations of manag-
ers to various stakeholders.
observable system concerns what is possible to notice through par-
ticipation and observation.
one-sided message presenting arguments only in favor of the advo-
cated position.
openness support for the change, positive affect about the change.
opinion leaders individuals or groups of stakeholders whose opin-
ions tend to lead rather than follow other stakeholders.
organizational values “Implicit or explicit views, shared to a consid-
erable extent by organizational members, about both the external
adaptation of the organization and the internal integration of the
organization” (Klein and Sorra, 1996, p. 1063).
peer-focused resistanced resistance efforts directed at co-workers,
family, and other stakeholders in informal and sometimes anony-
mous settings such as underground publications including web-
sites, cartoons, newsletters, and zines.
performance concerns relate to both issues of assessment and
judgments of competence as well as personal feelings of task
mastery.
personal development in which the person alters his or her frame
of reference, values, or other attributes.
planned change those brought about through the purposeful efforts
of organizational stakeholders who are accountable for the
organization’s operation.
position power relying on formal power invested in one’s organiza-
tional role to influence organizational or individual behavior.
power one’s ability to influence a target or capacity to effect organi-
zational outcomes.
principal support belief that high-level decision-makers share a
commitment to the change initiative such that it will not become a
mere passing fad or discarded change after an initial flurry of
activity.
principled dissent expression of dissatisfaction for reasons of
justice, honesty, or organizational benefit.
privileged empowerment implementer style wherein select stake-
holders are approached for input in a resource-based way.
programmatic approaches approach to change implementation
wherein the organization and the organization are altered to accom-
modate the change.
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Glossary 289

psychological contracts the “good-faith” relationships between

stakeholders and organizations that stipulate an understanding of
what is expected of each party.
puzzlements propositional forms of storytelling where the listeners
are asked to engage in problem-solving.
quid pro quo communication model where stakeholders who provide
the most resources get the most communication about the
change.
readiness a compilation of stakeholders’ beliefs about the necessity
and appropriateness of change combined with beliefs that the
change can be accomplished and will be beneficial.
reciprocal interdependence concerns the situation where one
stakeholder’s inputs are another stakeholder’s outputs and vice
versa.
refutational message not simply referring to opposing arguments,
but making the case against them.
replication minimal adjustment to personal or role systems – repeat
what you did before.
resources ways of doing, organizational beliefs, and important pos-
sessions in an organization that can be invoked in order to move
along a new idea or to make a case for staying the course on an
action.
results concern whether the implementation effort achieves intended/
unintended or desired/undesired consequences.
ripple effects the impacts that organizational actions and presence
bring to stakeholders within and surrounding the organization.
ritualistic participation describes the case of diverse stakeholder
symbolic involvement where many different types of stakeholders
may be asked to provide input, but it is routinely ignored in most
or all cases.
role development in which the person tries to change the role
requirements so that they better match his or her needs, abilities,
and identity.
role schema individuals beliefs about what such a role typically
requires.
routinization when the innovation/change has become incorporated
into the regular activities of an organization and is no longer con-
sidered a separate new idea.
rule-bound approaches implementation strategies that are centrally
controlled and designed.
rules simple, but powerful ideas that guide process and action.
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
290 Glossary

schema a cognitive structure that represents what is known about

some object including its attributes.
second-order change large transformational or radical changes that
depart significantly from previous practice in ways that are some-
what frame-breaking.
self-concept how the individual views him/herself.
sensegiving giving the sense made to others.
sensemaking assorting observations and stories into a coherent
understanding of what is going on.
sequential interdependence a special type of interdependence
wherein stakeholders affect each other in sequence.
socialization concerns how organizations shape the understandings
its members have to the values, priorities, procedures, job tasks,
culture, and formal and informal expectations.
solicitation of input asking for opinions, feedback, reactions about
change and change process.
stakeholders those who have a stake in an organization’s process and
or outputs.
story a means to capture and share experience, to create sense out
of the world, to influence others’ sensemaking.
story-building collective activity of sensemaking wherein two or
more individuals work together to order disparate facts, events,
and experiences and create shared understanding of what is going
on.
structured implementation activities a set of actions purposefully
designed and carried out to introduce users to the innovation and
to encourage intended usage.
structures rules and resources that create organizational practices.
system requirements organizational expectations.
tamara the stitching together of a sensemaking path through an
organization.
targets of identification groups and subgroups with which individu-
als may identify with within or relative to an organization.
terse-telling a truncated form of storytelling that involves reference
to an elaborated story shared by the group.
theories-in-use those theories we actually act out in real life.
third-order change involve the preparation for continuous change.
two-sided message presenting arguments supporting arguments as
well as discussing opposing arguments.
uncertainty a lack of information or as confusion related to many
available possible interpretations of events /objects.
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Glossary 291

uncertainty concerns relate to problems occurring when stakehold-

ers do not know what to expect or what likely outcomes will be.
uncertainty reduction lessening of the sense that information is
lacking.
uniformity the range of use of the change across adopting unit(s) or
stakeholder groups.
unintended consequences unforeseen and /or unpredicted results
of change.
unplanned change those brought into the organization due to envi-
ronmental or uncontrollable forces.
valence belief that change is beneficial to the individual
stakeholder.
values fit key stakeholder groups will initially consider the change a
good fit with their high intensity values and other key stakeholder
groups will consider it a poor fit.
widespread empowerment exists where solicitation of input is done
in a manner consistent with a resource approach and is
widespread.
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Index

absorption, 76 attitudes, 106, 133, 228, 280

activity tracks, 261–7, 270, 277–81 altering, 154–5
adaptive approach, 64, 146, 149, 151, and opinion leadership, 101–2
170 and participation, 54, 71
adoption, 12, 22, 26–8, 32, 34–6, 42, declining/negative, 59, 131, 135, 136
69, 127, 139, 266 faking, 131
Agle, B., 88 of willingness/liking, 131, 187
Albrecht, T., 235 resistance, 4
Allen, M. 98, 154, 167 attribution error, 123, 137, 139
alliances, 87, 92, 102, 234, 249, Austin, J., 137
257 authenticity, 87, 130
appropriateness, 87, 160, 162, 220, authority, 43, 45, 53, 68, 181, 236
222, 224–5, 248, 267 autonomous, 5, 97, 145–6
Argyris, C., 188–9 avoidance-avoidance goal conflicts,
Armenakis, A., 101, 167, 222–3, 228 160
Ashford, S., 75, 103
assessment, Babrow, A., 57–8
of goals, 221, 266 Badham, R., 46
of outcomes/results, 41, 117–20, bankrupt participation, 72, 149
125, 132, 139 Barley, S., 44
of stakeholders, 87–9, 201, 214–15, Bartunek, J., 38, 43, 161, 243
220, 222 Batchelor, J., 158

Organizational Change: Creating Change Through Strategic Communication,

First Edition. Laurie K. Lewis.
© 2011 Laurie K. Lewis. Published 2011 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Index 293

Bernerth, J., 101, 167, 219 Coca-Cola, 199

Bird, S., 237, 249–50 coercive forces, 211–12, 229
Blanchard, K., 193 cognitive frames, 240
blanket messages, 87, 165 commitment, 25, 59–60, 68, 94, 133,
Blazejewski, S., 46 201, 225, 228
Bohmer, R., 70 communication processes, 13, 14, 41,
Boje, D., 239, 249, 354 52–3, 55–6, 88
Boonstra, J., 45, 179–80, 182–4 communication strategies, 14, 105,
Bordia, P., 56–7, 67 107–9, 139, 144–5, 165–9, 171,
boundary spanners, 94–5, 102 210–11, 214, 217, 229
BP, 2, 9 Compton, J., 155–6
Broemer, P., 161 concertive control, 185–7
Brown, A., 234 connectors, 100, 102, 105, 253, 274
Browning, L, 234–5 consensus building, 217
Brummans, B., 57, 241–2 Contractor, N., 64, 66
Bryant, M., 250 Contu, A., 195
Buchanan, D., 45–6, 234 Cooney, R., 66, 183–5, 252
burnout, 130, 133–4 corporate social responsibility, 88, 90,
92
Caldwell, S., 75 counselors, 100, 103, 105
Callan, V., 56 Covin, T., 135
Callouet, R., 98, 167 Cox, J., 250
Castles, J., 192 CTOSH, 17–18, 91, 122
change acceptance zone, 168 cueing behavior, 138, 188
change history, 87, 219, 222 cynicism, 131, 133–4, 157, 190, 195,
channel, 13, 145, 150, 209, 212, 218, 201
229 Czarniawska, B., 235
and dissent, 197
definition, 169 D’Amelio, A., 191
effectiveness, 170 D’Urso, S., 79, 91, 182, 226
for dissemination, 13, 61–3, 170 Damanpour, E., 09
for emotional support, 103 Davis, J., 14, 79, 182, 226
for soliciting input, 69, 73, 75, 151, Dawson, P., 234
170, 197, 204, 274, 278 DePalma, J., 161
formal, 13, 53, 63, 278 decaf resistance, 195–6
informal, 13, 53, 63, 151, 278 Decelles, K., 100, 119
interpersonal channels, 169 decision-making, 38, 55, 184, 247, 252,
mediated channels, 64, 169 272
perceptions of, 170 and concertive control, 185
use of, 170 and institutionalized contexts, 211
Cheney, G., 21–5, 38, 69, 138, 185 and rationality, 117, 125, 200
Cherim, S., 243 and resistance, 45
Chesmore, M., 253 of implementers, 13
Christensen, L., 21–5, 38 sharing power, 44, 67–9, 80, 145,
Claydon, T., 132, 45, 67 150, 152, 262, 273, 275, 279
coalitions, 5, 46, 198, 263, 279 vigilance, 5
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
294 Index

Deetz, S., 68, 70, 92, 100, 178 expertise, 3, 43, 55, 58, 66, 96, 147,
definitive stakeholders, 88–9 151, 198, 217
degree of involvement, 72 expertise power, 181–3
Delta Airlines, 62 exploration, 76
Demarie, S., 168
Dent, E.,137, 190, 192 Facebook, 104, 202–3
descriptive stakeholder theory, 86 faddishness, 22
determination, 76 failure, 2, 9, 13, 18, 106, 132, 263, 269
Dewulf, A., 240–1 and adoption/continuance, 36
diffusion, 26–8, 32–6, 101, 127, 191 and persuasion, 161, 168–9
discontinuance, 27, 32, 34–6 and resistance, 187, 190, 199, 201
discourse, 56, 100, 186–7, 197, 235, attributions of, 124
239, 245, 251, 272 causes, 46, 135–9, 203
discrepancy, 87, 148, 167–8, 222–5, consequences of, 25, 161, 163
248, 267, 270 frequency of, 24
discrepancy messages, 167–8, 224, of organizations, 118–19, 123
270 perspectives on, 25, 72, 102, 154
discursive change, 38, 41 Fairhurst, G., 101, 135, 187, 243–4
dispositional resistance, 200–1 Fedor, D., 75
dissent, 101, 190, 191–2, 196–9, feedback, 64, 67–8, 73, 147, 151–2,
201–4 170, 188, 197, 199, 215, 272, 274
Doughterty, D., 59 feelings, 25, 67, 103, 130, 188, 191–3,
Doyle, M., 45, 67, 132–3 211, 227, 245–6
drive-thru, 26–7, 30–5, 109 Feldman, M., 125
Drory, A., 45 fidelity, 87, 127–30, 139, 146, 221–2,
Drucker, P., 52, 204 266
Duck, J., 61 Fidler, I., 170
Finkl, J., 77
effectiveness, 1, 17, 118, 130, Fireman, B., 95
136, 154, 161–2, 169–70, 181, first-order change, 38
191–92 Fiss, P., 239–40
efficacy messages, 87, 148, 167–9, Flanagin, A., 28
222–5, 248, 267, 270–1 formal communication, 53
efficiency, 1, 11, 33, 71, 87, 118, 133, Foucault, M., 183, 186
213, 217–18, 266 framing, 4–5, 14, 24–5, 33, 47, 87, 110,
emotional support, 103, 198, 227 162, 233–4, 239–45, 248–9, 251,
enactment, 23–4, 129, 210, 219, 275 254–6, 270, 276
environment, 12, 17, 23, 26–8, 33–6, Freeman, R., 6, 37, 86
57, 93, 108–9, 262 Frost, P., 103
person-environment fit, 75–6
equal dissemination, 165 gain frame, 87, 161–3, 270–1
equal participation, 165 Gallivan, M., 96, 102
equifinality, 120 Gallois, C., 56
equivocal communication, 160 Gamson, W., 94
equivocality, 58–9 Gap Inc., 149
espoused theories, 188 Garner, J., 198–9, 201
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Index 295

General Electric, 90 ideal speech situation, 68, 72

Gephart, R., 184 identification, 5, 93, 96–8, 100, 107,
Girl Scouts of America, 121 109–10, 185
Gladwell, M., 101–2 identity gap, 168
goals, 5, 9, 18, 22, 119, 127, 131, 179, informal communication, 45, 53, 63,
180, 185, 208, 227, 243–4, 247–8, 65
263, 268, 270 information
alignment of, 102 analysis, 117
and alliances, 249, 252, 264, 267 and expertise, 44, 151
and CSR, 90, 92 and framing, 239, 243, 245–6
and division, 253, 267 and knowledge, 64–6
and interdependence, 42, 263 and networks, 93–4, 102, 167
and politics, 45, 120 and rumor, 74, 197
and results, 132, 266 and uncertainty, 56–60, 104, 107,
communication/persuasion, 281
167, 183, 209–10, 212, 266–7, as resource, 43–4, 152, 183, 275
269–70 as symbol, 125
for change effort, 60, 62, 65, 108, channels, 169–71, 218, 274
146, 213, 221–2, 266 dissemination, 1, 13, 53, 56–66, 100,
measurement, 121, 122, 139, 266, 107, 136, 139, 145, 147, 149, 154,
277–8 156, 166, 169–70, 198, 210, 212,
of dissent, 198 241, 271
organizational goals, 117–18, 121, in context of participation, 68, 70,
132, 266–7, 269 72
perspectives on, 97, 160, 268–9 misunderstanding, 147, 280
shifting, 129–30, 266 negative, 158, 161
Goldberg, S., 137, 190, 192 primary sources, 75, 101, 103, 104
Gossett, L., 104, 196–7 processing, 209
Gravenhorst, K., 45, 180, 182–4 seeking, 104, 198, 211, 227, 273
Gray, B., 145 sharing norms, 44, 53, 66, 190, 218,
Griffin, M., 77, 131 225, 274
Griffith, T., 158 support, 103, 227
Griffiths, A., 131, 227 technology, 24
group values, 214–15 withholding, 55, 133, 160
Grunberg, L., 133 innovation, 2, 23, 26–8, 31–5, 96, 101,
Gustafson, L., 168 116, 127–8, 144–5, 187, 199, 209,
222, 225, 228, 245, 253, 280
Hamel, S., 55, 67, 71, 165, 217–18 Institutional Theory, 211
Harris, L., 130, 133, 199 instrumental support, 103
Harris, S., 167, 222–4, 228 interactional fairness, 77
Heide, M., 242 interactional frames, 240
Heold, S., 75 interdependence, 42–3, 179, 222
Hershey, 8–10 interpersonal channel, 169–71
high intensity values, 214 ISO 9000, 28
Hiner, G., 61 isomorphism, 211–12, 229
Hobman, E., 56, 67 issue framing, 241
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
296 Index

Jackson, M., 59, 64 Lin, W., 155

JAR, 186, 192 Lines, R., 72, 183
Jian, G., 133–4 loss frame, 87, 148, 161–3
job satisfaction, 59–60 low intensity values, 214
Johansson, K., 242
Johnson and Johnson, 90 Malcolm Baldridge Award, 28
Johnson, E., 30 management of meaning, 183–4, 187,
Johnson, J. D., 170 243–4, 262–4, 267, 270, 272,
Johnson, S., 194 276–8
Jones, E., 56 managing the network, 262, 264, 270,
journalists, 100, 105, 119, 253 272, 277–8
managing practice, 262–4, 277–8
Kassing, J., 198 March of Dimes, 125–6
Kickul, J., 77 Marglin, S., 66
Kilker, J., 104, 196–7 marketing, 148, 166
Kilmann, R., 135 Markus, M., 137
King, A., 138 material change, 38, 41
Klein, K., 213–15, 225, 276 material conditions, 87, 132–3, 139
Kline, S., 160 Maurer, R., 191, 201
Knodel, T., 24 McDonalds, 27
knowledge, 5, 30, 35, 43–4, 52, 57, 60, McGlone, M., 158, 160
64, 66–8, 70, 75–6, 96, 102, 118, McGraw-Hill, 76
124, 147, 151, 184, 240, 274, 281 McWilliams, A., 90
Kotter, J., 61 media, 16, 64, 100, 153, 167, 169–70,
Kramer, M., 59, 75 209
Krantz, J., 137 mediated channel, 169–70
Kuhn, T., 59, 64, 68, 70, 72, 92, 98 merger, 14–15, 36, 39–41, 60–3, 98,
102–3, 134–5, 163–4, 220–1, 236,
Larkin, S., 170 238–9, 244–5
Larkin, T., 170 message design, 5
Larson, G., 187, 192 Meyer, C., 102, 211
Laster, N., 14, 36, 40, 63, 133–4, 164, middle-level managers, 102
221, 236 Miller, K., 71
latent power, 180–1 mimetic forces, 87, 211, 229
lateral dissent, 199 mindlessness, 209
Lego, 151–2 Mintzberg, H., 178, 181
Leonard-Barton, D., 71, 100, 127, 138, mission, 17, 19, 120–3, 125–6, 148,
166 185
Leonardi,, P., 254–6 Mitchell, R., 88–90, 92, 152
Lester, S., 77 modification, 25, 127
Lewin, K., 127 Monge, P., 64, 66, 71, 103
Lewis, L., 3, 14, 38, 47, 52, 54–5, 61, multi-dimensional change, 40
63, 65, 67, 71–2, 74, 79, 91, 101, multifaceted change, 40
105, 127, 129, 130–2, 135, 137, multiple change, 36, 40, 109, 133,
145, 153, 166, 170, 181–2, 211, 218
216–19, 226, 245–9 multiplex relationships, 253
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Index 297

mum effect, 158 Pfau, M., 155–6

Mumby, D., 178, 195 Piderit, S., 137, 190, 192–3
Pierce, T., 59
Napier, N., 103 Pisano, G., 75
Neale, M., 77 position power, 181
need for consensus building, 87, 213, Pitts, J., 101, 167, 219
217 politics, 42, 45–6, 130, 135, 155, 250
need to know, 166, 276 principal support, 222, 225–6, 267
networks, 5, 26, 44–5, 66, 93–4, 101, principled dissent, 201–2, 204
151, 156, 183, 197, 239, 245, 250, privileged empowerment, 72, 151
256, 262–3, 276–7 procedural fairness, 77
Neumann, J., 68 programmatic approaches, 64, 145,
Nicholson, N., 76–7 149, 170
Nivea, 46 psychological contracts, 76–7
nonrefutational messages, 154 puzzlements, 250
nonprofit, 2, 28–30, 52, 71, 79, 89,
120–2, 135, 157, 165–6, 217–18 quid pro quo, 166, 218
normative concerns, 87, 109, 246–9
normative forces, 55, 56, 87, 211–13, Radio Shack, 196–7
229 readiness, 87, 108, 135–6, 167, 219,
normative stakeholder theory, 86, 90 223, 228
Northcraft, G., 54, 158 reciprocal interdependence, 42
Nutt, P., 55, 145 Red Cross, 95
Rees, A., 77
O’Keefe, D., 161, 168 reframing, 168, 184, 240, 252
observable system, 87, 105–6, 109, refreezing, 32, 127
127–30, 132 refutational messages, 154–6, 158
Ogbonna, E., 131, 133, 199 Reger, R., 168
one-sided message, 87, 148, 156–7 Reichers, A., 133
openness, 136, 212, 219, 274, 275 reinvention, 32–4, 36, 127, 145–6
opinion leaders, 100–1, 104–5, 253, replication, 76
271 Richardson, B., 55, 61, 67, 71, 165,
Oreg, S., 200–1 217–18
organizational values, 213–14 Ridolfi, E., 76
Orlikowski, W., 96 ripple effects, 8–9, 40, 42, 45, 70, 247,
Owens-Corning, 61 249
ritualistic participation, 72, 145
P-E fit, 75 rivalries, 5, 87, 234, 249, 251, 257
partial adoption, 127 Roberts-Gray, C., 145
Paulsen, N., 57 Robinson, O., 131, 227
peer-focused dissent/resistance, 192, Rogers, E., 27, 32–3, 127, 169
196–7 role development, 76
performance concerns, 245–6 role schema, 77
personal development, 76 role transition, 76
persuasion, 5, 145, 154–6, 158, 215 Romm, C., 45
Pfarrer, M., 100, 119 Rousseau, D., 76, 161, 243
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
298 Index

routinization, 32–4, 127 socialization, 5, 13, 53, 56, 75–8, 80,

Rowley, T., 92–3, 95 96, 212, 241
Ruben, B., 14, 16, 47, 54, 153, 180, soliciting input, 13, 53, 56, 66–75, 80,
181, 216, 220, 224, 247, 249 149, 170, 202, 270, 274–5, 278
Rudolph, J., 161, 243 Sorra, J., 213–15, 225, 276
rules, 43–4, 128, 131, 179, 181, 196, Southwest Airlines, 69
227, 254 Stakeholder Theory, 6–7, 11–13, 86,
rule-bound approaches, 145–6, 88, 90, 92, 105, 109
149 Starbucks, 11, 90–91
rumors, 62, 64, 69, 104, 134, 147, 197, Stevenson, W., 45
212, 221 story, 183, 194–5, 202, 235–40, 248–9,
Russ, T., 14, 54, 153, 247 253–4
story-building, 237, 239
sabotage, 46, 137, 190–2, 196, 197, storying, 14, 233, 239
199, 201 Stratton, K., 103
Sandmeyer, L., 14, 47, 54, 153, 181, stress, 4, 25, 40, 59, 103, 130, 133–6,
216, 247 161, 168, 177, 213, 227, 241,
Sarr, R., 244 245–6
Sawhill, J., 123 structural holes, 45, 94
schema, 77–9, 168 structured implementation activities,
schisms, 5, 87, 249, 252 144
Scott, C., 14, 79, 91, 96, 182, 226 structures, 25, 42–4, 48, 136, 171, 183,
Scott, W., 179 211
second-order change, 38, 39 subversion, 178
self-concept, 77–8 success, 18, 26, 34, 106, 128, 147, 154,
Seibold, D., 3, 38, 55, 101, 127–9, 131, 161, 163, 170, 211, 217–18, 222,
135, 145, 209, 245–6 227, 267, 269–70, 276
sensegiving, 4, 6, 107, 234, 244, and activity tracks, 264
267 and efficacy message, 167–9, 223
sensemaking, 4, 5–6, 14, 23–5, 35, and equifinality, 120
39, 47–8, 59, 74, 87, 106–8, 110, and participation, 70, 170, 183
151, 171, 198, 203, 223, 245, and routinization, 33
248–9, 251–7, 263, 267, 272, causes of, 135–9, 160
276, 281 measuring, 123–5, 130,
and framing, 239, 241, 244 perceptions of, 3, 5, 28, 132, 183,
and storymaking, 234–9 220
sequential interdependence, 42 statistics of, 24–5
Sewell, G., 66, 183–5, 252 survival, 22, 25, 98, 120, 133, 162, 191,
Siegel, D., 90 193, 246, 268
Simmons, G., 103 symbol, 46, 68, 72, 125, 237
Smeltzer, L., 53, 167
Smith, K., 100, 119 Tamara, 239, 254
Smulowitz, S., 14, 54, 153, 247 Target, 90
social influence process, 101, targeted messages, 87, 148, 271
203 targets of identification, 96, 98,
social networks, 26, 156 110
 Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ by Texas A&M University- Commerce, Wiley Online Library on [18/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Index 299

Taylor, M., 75, 100, 119 valence, 222, 227, 248

techne, 66 values-fit, 87, 213–15, 217, 222, 268
technology, 3, 8, 12, 24, 27, 30, 32, 36, venting, 67, 103, 156, 261
38, 44, 46, 58, 70, 78, 79, 96, 106, voice, 67, 71, 94, 150, 190, 194, 196,
146, 158, 169, 183, 226–7, 237, 217, 238, 274, 279
241, 244–7, 252, 254–6, 262–3,
266 Walker, J., 101, 167, 219
Telenor, 237 Walmart, 9
Tenkasi, R., 253 Walt Disney, 90
terse telling, 249 Wargo, M., 198–9, 201
theories-in-use, 188, 199 Weick, K., 23–4, 58–9, 106
third-order change, 39 West, M., 77
threats, 108, 159, 181, 184, 193, 210, Whittle, A., 234, 242–3, 245, 251
212 Whole Foods, 90, 92
Timmerman, E., 64, 101, 169, 209 widespread empowerment, 72, 149,
Tompkins, P., 186–7, 192 151–3
Tornatzky, L., 30, 127 Willamson, D., 123
triggers for change, 24, 279 Wood, D., 88

uncertainty concerns, 245 Yi-Wyn, 158

uniformity, 87, 127–30, 139, 146, Young, M., 170
221–2, 266
unintended consequences, 87, 106, Zajac, E., 239–40
132–5, 139, 248 Zener, M., 167
UPS, 90 Zoller, H., 101, 244
urgency, 88, 89–90, 148, 167, 209, 218, Zorn, T., 21–2, 25, 38, 69, 103, 138,
243 143, 185–6, 227
675031
research-article2016
JOMXXX10.1177/0149206316675031Journal of ManagementSuddaby, Foster / History and Organizational Change

Journal of Management
The Journal of Management invites commentaries on Vol. 43 No. 1, January 2017 19­–38
this Guest Editorial. For consideration, please submit DOI: 10.1177/0149206316675031
to http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/jom as Original © The Author(s) 2016
Research, including “Response to Suddaby and Reprints and permissions:
Foster” in the title. Commentaries will be treated as sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
editorials, but will also be peer reviewed.

Guest Editorial

History and Organizational Change

Roy Suddaby
University of Victoria
Newcastle University

William M. Foster
University of Alberta

This research commentary introduces historical consciousness to studying organizational change.

Most theories of organizational change contain within them implicit assumptions about history.
Made explicit, these assumptions tend to cluster into different models of change that vary by the
assumed objectivity of the past and the associated malleability of the future. We explore and elabo-
rate the implicit assumptions of history. We identify four implicit models of history in the change
literature: History-as-Fact, History-as-Power, History-as-Sensemaking, and History-as-Rhetoric.
We discuss the implications of theorizing organizational change from each of these views of history
and outline future directions for studying change with a heightened understanding of history.

Keywords: change; history; power; rhetoric; sensemaking

Organizational change is a central and enduring subject in management. The massive

growth in literature on change presents an ongoing challenge for management scholars who
often must rely on typologies to impose some form of discipline on what is increasingly an
unruly subject. While typologies offer excellent reviews of the extant literature, they fail to
adequately define what is meant by the concept of change. In much of the literature, change
lacks “construct clarity” (Suddaby, 2010). The underlying assumptions are not articulated,
the contextual conditions under which it applies are not clear, and, often, the concept of
change is not defined. Critics suggest that the greatest weakness of change management

Corresponding author: Roy Suddaby, Peter B. Gustavson School of Business, University of Victoria, 3800 Finnerty
Road, Victoria, BC V8P 5C2, Canada.

E-mail: [email protected]

19
20   Journal of Management / January 2017

scholarship is that change is a universal but undefined construct (Pettigrew, Woodman, &
Cameron, 2001), and its epistemological status is “left unexamined” (Quattrone & Hopper,
2001: 404).
As a result, we often fail to address basic questions about change. How do we know when
change has successfully occurred? How can we distinguish change from stability? Where, in
complex organizations, do we look for change? And, perhaps most importantly, what do we
mean when we say an organization has changed?
We address these fundamental questions in this essay. Our central argument is that varia-
tions in how we conceptualize change are underpinned by different assumptions about his-
tory and its relationship to our capacity for change. We adopt a historical lens because, at
their core, the study of change and history both involve the retrospective interpretation of
past events. There are, however, important differences in how we theorize history.
The degree to which we see the past as objective or subjective clearly influences how we
understand change. There is an important but unarticulated relationship between how con-
crete we believe the past to be and the degree of agency that we introduce into our models of
change. Those who see the past as an objective reality might reasonably be expected to also
see the future as highly influenced if not fatalistically determined by history. Conversely,
those who see the past as highly subjective might equally be expected to see the future as
much more malleable and open to alternatives based on creative interpretations of the past.
Our explicit theories of change and our ability to change, thus, vary by our implicit models
of history.
In this paper, we present four distinct conceptualizations of change, each of which rests on
a continuum between an objective and a subjective view of history. We term these categories
History-as-Fact, History-as-Power, History-as-Sensemaking, and History-as-Rhetoric. Each
category is representative of distinct assumptions about the nature of the past and how our
understanding of the past influences how we perceive when change has occurred. We argue
that each of these categories of implicit assumptions about history incorporate related
assumptions about our ability to effect change (agency), how we define change (focal unit of
analysis), and how difficult we assume change to be.

History-as-Fact
Key Assumptions
A distinct theme in organizational research contains an implicit assumption that a firm’s
history makes change extremely difficult. The constraining influence of history is understood
to occur as the result of three key influences. First, the founding conditions of an organization
are theorized to exert a powerful influence over the initial structure of the organization and
exert a restrictive pressure on subsequent change. This influence is perhaps best captured by
Stinchcombe’s (1965) construct of imprinting.
Second, much of the change literature assumes that as time passes, an organization ossi-
fies. Like humans, the assumption is that as organizations age, they are seen to acquire expe-
riences, traditions, and practices, which create powerful forces of internal inertia. The
construct that best illustrates this concept is Hannan and Freeman’s (1989) notion of struc-
tural inertia, but it is also reflected in related organizational constructs like institutionaliza-
tion (Selznick, 1949) or cognitive sunk costs (Oliver, 1997).
 Suddaby, Foster / History and Organizational Change   21

Third, many models of change assume that decisions in the past restrict human agency and
strategic choice. Past decisions influence present decisions, and, with the accumulation of
time, opportunities for change inexorably narrow into a deterministic form of path depen-
dence. This assumption is best illustrated by the construct termed escalation of commitment
(Staw, 1976) but is also evident in related constructs like path dependence (Schreyögg &
Sydow, 2011) or historical lock-in (Arthur, 1989, 1994).
These models of change share some common, and perhaps erroneous, assumptions about
history. First, time is understood to be a continuous, measurable, and linear flow that occurs,
for the most part, independently of human experience. Second, the cumulative passage of
time—that is, the past—creates a sedimentary accumulation of past events and experiences
that collectively become expressed as “traditionalizing” (Stinchcombe, 1965) or “inertial”
(Hannan & Freeman, 1989) forces that limit an organization. Finally, the process of reflect-
ing on the past, and interpreting it—that is, history—is seen to be an act of objective recon-
struction that is largely absent of human agency. The analysis of organizational history, which
is understood to be the faithful accumulation of “brute facts” (Searle, 1995), serves to con-
strain human agency rather than to generate opportunities and alternatives for change.
The notion that organizational history is objective and oppressive to change is, perhaps,
the dominant view in management research. These assumptions suggest that because time
and history reduce agency, change is very difficult to accomplish because any change effort
must face the herculean task of overcoming the past. Change, in this view, typically requires
an exogenous shock or some form of profound intervention that forcefully disrupts the con-
straining influence of history.

Key Constructs: Imprinting, Structural Inertia, and Escalation of Commitment

Imprinting. Stinchcombe (1965) observed that the founding conditions of an organiza-
tion play a long-lasting role in its future development. Drawing from developmental psy-
chology, Stinchcombe observed that, at founding, organizations are particularly sensitive
to adopting influences and characteristics from their external environment. Once adopted,
these characteristics tend to persist. In support of this assertion, Stinchcombe points to the
high degree of similarity in the structure of organizations founded during a similar histori-
cal period.
The construct of imprinting has been very influential in theories of organizational change
(Marquis & Tilcsik, 2013). Most work has focused on demonstrating that founding charac-
teristics persist throughout the life of an organization (Boeker, 1989). Research, thus, has
demonstrated the role of imprinting in the persistence of organizational structure (Barron,
Hannan, & Burton, 1999), network structures (Marquis, 2003), and a host of related organi-
zational outcomes (Kimberly, 1979; Romanelli & Tushman, 1986). More current research
has turned attention to understanding why some environmental characteristics are adopted
and others are not and the processes by which those characteristics are made to persist
(Johnson, 2007).
A clear implication of imprinting research is that the historical conditions at founding
severely limit an organization’s ability to change. History constitutes an objective reality that
episodically fixes organizational conditions and constrains the agency of managers who seek
to change the organization. Change, in imprinting research, is largely the result of an exog-
enous shock that threatens the viability of the organization (Lippman & Aldrich, 2013).
22   Journal of Management / January 2017

Structural inertia. A similar understanding of the restrictive influence of history and

time is offered by Hannan and Freeman’s (1977) concept of structural inertia. Organizations,
they observe, suffer from “strong inertial pressures on structure arising from both internal
arrangements (for example, internal politics) and from the environment (for example, public
legitimation of organizational activity)” (Hannan & Freeman, 1977: 957). Internal factors
that contribute to inertia in organizations include sunk costs (actual and cognitive), politi-
cal coalitions, and the growth of bureaucracy. External inertial forces are commonly known
in strategic management and include access to resources, barriers to entry, and competi-
tive pressures. Collectively, these factors make organizational change extremely difficult to
accomplish.
Similar to imprinting, the construct of structural inertia adopts a highly deterministic view
of time and history. The concept is based on the assumption that organizational success is
dependent upon an organization’s ability to consistently reproduce routines and structures
that initially made the organization successful. As a result, young organizations are assumed
to be extremely vulnerable to competition and are likely to fail. Old organizations, which
have successfully stabilized the reproduction of routines and structures, risk becoming ossi-
fied and unable to adapt to environmental change.
The cumulative weight of an organization’s history is often cited as a reason why firms are
unable to strategically adapt to internal and external challenges. Oliver (1997) argues that
history and tradition are linked to specific ways that firms process information and conduct
their operations. These “cognitive sunk costs” restrict managers from thinking about strate-
gic challenges differently, which hampers and often prevents change. History is an objective
and immutable fact that managers have to cope with.

Escalation of commitment. The term escalation of commitment refers to a well-estab-

lished phenomenon in which actors (e.g., individuals, groups, organizations) continue with
a course of action despite accumulating negative outcomes. Staw (1976) used a simulated
investment decision to demonstrate that individuals who felt responsible for a losing course
of action were more likely to increase their investment than individuals who did not.
The term is broadly applied to contexts where a history of decision making produces large
“sunk costs” that irrationally constrain human agency so that managers continue to commit
resources to a clearly failed strategy. The resilience of the phenomenon has been aptly dem-
onstrated by studies in such diverse fields as game theory (Zardkoohi, 2004), psychology
(Moon, 2001), and political science (Fearon, 1994).
A core assumption of the escalation of commitment concept is that past events and behav-
iors create serious constraints for future action. Staw (1981) explains this with the observa-
tion that broad social norms of appropriate behavior dictate that leaders and managers should
be consistent over time. As a result, managers tend to stick with decisions once made because
that is what leaders are assumed to do.

Implications for Change

Collectively, these three constructs—imprinting, structural inertia, and escalation of com-
mitment—demonstrate how our implicit assumptions of history inform our explicit models
of change. An objective, positivist view of history contains within it a series of related but
unarticulated assumptions that define the difficulty of change, the key to successful change,
 Suddaby, Foster / History and Organizational Change   23

the focal unit of change, and how we know when change has occurred. We examine each of
these implications in turn.

Difficulty of change. Change theorists who hold a positivist and objective view of history
tend to see change as a difficult process that can be successful only through extreme levels
of episodic intervention. In this perspective, because history is understood as an inexorable
accumulation of events that constrain choice, over time, organizations are assumed to acquire
inertial properties (Kelly & Amburgey, 1991). Events that occur early in the life history of the
organization persist and are felt powerfully as the organization ages. Organizations, in this
view, age like humans and grow increasingly rigid over time. Resisting change is seen as the
default state of most organizations, and change, typically, occurs only when organizations are
faced with few alternatives.
Similarly, an objective view of history as unfettered facts tends to limit assumptions of
human agency. That is, an implicit assumption of history as “brute fact” carries with it an
associated assumption of deterministic fatalism. Researchers in this tradition, thus, structure
models of change in which early events both determine later events and delimit alterna-
tives—a process described as “path dependence” (e.g., Schreyögg & Sydow, 2011; Sydow,
Schreyögg, & Koch, 2009). Human agency to effect change is limited not only because of the
powerful determination of the past but also because of the implicit inability of human partici-
pants to alter their interpretation of the past.

Success of change. The impetus for change is typically “exogenous” and takes the form of
an “environmental jolt” (Meyer, 1982; Sine & David, 2003) or a forced intervention that arises
independent of the organization. Models of successful endogenous change must overcome
the powerful calcifying effects assumed to accumulate over time. Internally induced change,
thus, must simulate the profound disruptive effect of an exogenous shock. The enormous effort
required to accomplish this simulated jolt is perhaps best illustrated by Lewin’s (1947) classic
description of facilitating change by first “unfreezing” the organization—that is, dislodging the
inertial “rust” that has accumulated over time, executing the change, and then “refreezing” the
organization.

Unit of change. The focal unit of change in this perspective is the entity (i.e., the organi-
zation or, more specifically, the organizational structure). Researchers know that change has
occurred when the entity passes from one state to another. This linear and objectivist view
of change, as Quattrone and Hopper (2001: 408) observe, is predicated on epistemological
assumptions that time is linear and history is objective. Organizations “change” when they
adopt new structures or operations. Change is defined in terms of naive positivism—a mate-
rial change in states of being that occur in a segmented and linear temporal domain.
It is important to recognize, however, that not all change theorists accept these underlying
assumptions of time and history or this particular definition of change. This view tends to
overemphasize the importance of structural or design changes in organizations and tends to
underemphasize the role of changes in culture or meaning systems (Meyerson & Martin,
1987). Clearly, thus, there are alternative assumptions about the nature of history and its effect
on models of change. As we demonstrate in the next section, there are other models of change
that are based on implicit assumptions about history in which the past is much less concrete
and the ability to interpret it offers emancipatory opportunities for creativity and change.
24   Journal of Management / January 2017

History-as-Power
Key Assumptions
A somewhat different view of organizational change emerges if the assumption of history
as objective fact is retained but the focal point of change is not the design or structure of the
organization but, rather, the power structure of the various coalitions or entities within the
organization. This perspective of organizational change draws directly from Marx’s view of
history and is based on three key assumptions.
First, this perspective of organizational change carries an implicit assumption of historical
materialism. All social structures, including societies, communities, and organizations, are
“historically constituted” into relations of production that define both social position or class
and the division of labor (Clegg, 1981: 545). Change typically serves to consolidate the
power of owners or managers. For the working class, historical change is manifest in the
increasing specialization of work—that is, breaking it into discrete units of repetitive activ-
ity—which enables increased intensification of the frequency of production.
A second assumption is that the inexorable effect of history is to solidify not the design
and operational structure of organizations as is suggested by the History-as-Fact view but,
rather, differences in power of various coalitions within the organization. The increased dis-
aggregation of work, often termed “Fordism” or “Taylorism” (Kanigel, 2005), tends to crys-
tallize differences in power in organizations by granting increasing control to owners and
their surrogates while disempowering and alienating workers.
A third assumption is that change occurs dialectically. As historically constituted power
structures, organizations exist in relatively long periods of stasis during which the pressures
for entropy and change exist in relative equilibrium, effectively counterbalancing the various
power coalitions within the firm. Small incremental efforts to change are relatively ineffec-
tive because the power differences in the social structure of organizations encourage workers
to resist change. Midlevel managers also encourage stasis as they seek to maintain carefully
constructed “webs of interdependent relationships with buyers, suppliers, and financial back-
ers” (Tushman & Romanelli, 1985: 177) to preserve existing patterns of culture, norms, and
ideology.
Collectively, historical materialism, power, and dialectical change present a view of his-
tory that constrains change because of intricately counterbalanced pressures for change and
stability. History is still understood to be objective, and time is linear, unidirectional, and
largely independent of human experience. The cumulative passage of time (i.e., history) is
seen to promote stasis and inertia.
However, the History-as-Power perspective acknowledges greater capacity for human
agency to effect change because it acknowledges the ability of individuals to reflect upon the
history of power relations and to act upon them. As we describe below, this view of history
tends to produce models of change characterized by long periods of stability but punctuated
by distinct bursts of revolutionary change.

Key Constructs: Contradiction, Praxis, and Punctuated Equilibrium

Contradiction. A central concept in the History-as-Power view is the Hegelian under-
standing that all social systems are complex collections of coalitions of different interests
 Suddaby, Foster / History and Organizational Change   25

(Benson, 1977; Clegg, 1981). Over the history of an organization, ongoing interaction tends
to exacerbate existing contradictions and produce new ones (Ford & Ford, 1994). Typically,
these oppositional contradictions counterbalance each other and result in long periods of
stasis or resistance to change. Periodically, however, the contradictions between opposing
forces become unbalanced and change occurs (Van de Ven & Poole, 1995).
The construct of contradiction is pervasive in the change literature and has been used to
theorize processes of change at the individual (Jermier, 1985), organizational (Ford & Ford,
1995), and institutional (Seo & Creed, 2002) levels of analysis. Organizational contradic-
tions often initiate moments of organizational change that compromise the performance of an
organization. So, for example, firms sometimes initiate change in an effort to appear legiti-
mate to internal or external audiences, knowing fully that the change will reduce profit or
efficiency (Lamertz & Baum, 1998; Westphal & Zajac, 1993).
Some firms, because of historically accumulated dominant internal coalitions, become resis-
tant to change and engage in acts of conformity or competency traps (Levitt & March, 1988)
that undermine future success. Miller (1990) describes these firms as suffering from the “Icarus
paradox,” noting that the source of a firm’s internal success often creates an irrational internal
commitment to actively resisting change even when doing so threatens the firm’s existence.

Praxis. Over long periods of stability, much of organizational life, including roles,
status orders, and acts of resistance to change, tend to become reified or attributed to an
autonomous authority that exists outside the organization. Only through ongoing reflection
about the history of an organization can organizational participants come to realize that they
themselves are the creators of this organizational power structure that appears to constrain
their own agency (Morgan, 1997). The key to successful organizational change, then, is
the ability to overcome the power of the past by unlearning it (Kolb, 1996), by reinterpret-
ing it (Bartunek, 1993), or by critically analyzing one’s organizational history (Barrett &
Srivistava, 1991).
The process of reflecting on and overcoming one’s collective history is called organiza-
tional praxis (Bradbury & Mainemelis, 2001). Perhaps the best empirical application of the
use of praxis (Heydebrand, 1983) is offered by Bartunek’s (1984) case study in a Roman
Catholic religious order. The changes, which came to be known as “Vatican II,” encouraged
the Church to reintegrate with world society. This represented a fundamental challenge to the
order, which had, for centuries, adopted the philosophy of the need to remain separate from
the secular world. The proposed change, thus, represented a cosmological change for the
order, requiring what amounted to a denial of much of the organization’s prior history.
Bartunek (1984) observed a successful and incremental process of change. She explains
this somewhat surprising outcome as the result of successful dialectical change in which the
original worldview (or thesis) was challenged by a contradictory worldview (or antithesis)
and was, gradually, resolved by collectively and critically reflecting upon and integrating the
old and the new worldviews into a creative new worldview (i.e., synthesis).

Punctuated equilibrium. While the concept of praxis describes how opportunities for
change are first identified in the History-as-Power approach, the process through which
change occurs is captured by the construct of punctuated equilibrium. Borrowed from evolu-
tionary biology, punctuated equilibrium refers to processes of change characterized by long
26   Journal of Management / January 2017

periods of relative stability interrupted by short, sharp episodes of revolutionary change. This
model of change is quite influential and has been used to explain change at multiple levels
of analysis, including individuals (Levinson, 1978), the small group (Gersick, 1988), orga-
nizations (Tushman & Romanelli, 1985), and social or organizational fields (Meyer, Gaba,
& Colwell, 2005).
Tushman and Romanelli’s (1985) study of change in the microcomputer industry offers an
early field level empirical demonstration of punctuated equilibrium. They observed that
changes in the firms were clustered, as would be predicted by a punctuated equilibrium
model of change, rather than randomly dispersed, as might be expected under a gradual,
more evolutionary model of change. Significantly, they also demonstrate that models of
punctuated equilibrium are described by distinct shifts in the power distribution within orga-
nizations over time. Long periods of power consolidation are associated with organizational
stability, but shifts in the power distribution in the organization are typically associated with
spasms of revolutionary change.
Punctuated equilibrium also operates at group level processes of change. Gersick (1988)
observed that project teams evolve through two main phases separated by a transition phase.
During the initial inertial phase group, members apply traditional thinking strategies and work
routines to their project and devote time to developing roles and political coalitions designed
to resolve conflicts. In the transition phase, which occurs at roughly the midpoint of the allot-
ted time, the inertia is disrupted and members initiate major changes in their work strategy.
During the second phase, group members return to a phase of relative stability. Gersick (1988:
28) describes the process of change as a “dialectical” model of punctuated equilibrium.
A clear implication of this approach to change is that history tends to crystallize power
structures in an organization. As a result, change is dialectical and characterized by long
phases of relative inertia maintained by countervailing political pressures within the organi-
zation. At certain points of time, however, the equilibrium is disrupted and change occurs,
typically in a revolutionary burst of activity.

Implications for Change

In combination, the constructs of contradiction, praxis, and punctuated equilibrium
describe a distinct and well-established model of change that is predicated upon an implicit
model of history in which history is still objective and deterministic but holds the key to
emancipatory change. Adopting an assumption that history is power offers a different defini-
tion of the construct of change—with distinct implications about how difficult change is,
how to successfully implement change in organizations, and how we know when change has
actually occurred. We summarize these observations in the balance of this section.

Difficulty of change. Conceptualizing change through the lens of History-as-Power

allows a somewhat more dominant role for human agency in processes of change. Agency
is enacted through reflexivity and praxis—that is, through the ability of individuals or
collectives to overcome the constraints of their history through retrospection, critical
reflection, and creative visioning (Foster & Wiebe, 2010; Jermier, 1985; Suddaby, Viale,
& Gendron, in press). Change, as a result, is not only possible to achieve; it is somewhat
inevitable.
 Suddaby, Foster / History and Organizational Change   27

Success of change. In this view, the possibility of change can be identified through orga-
nizational praxis, or deep reflection on the historical conditions that created present orga-
nizational arrangements and the associated insight that the existing power structure can be
changed. Change occurs in periods of punctuated equilibrium or revolutionary change during
which the existing power structures are dissolved and replaced by new ones. Greiner (1972)
describes such dialectical change as a series of small adaptations that accumulate over time
to produce a profoundly new organization. As a company progresses through developmental
phases, he notes, each evolutionary period creates its own revolution.

Unit of change. In dialectical models of change, the primary unit of analysis is the bal-
ance of power between opposing forces in an organization (Van de Ven & Poole, 1995). Such
forces can become manifest in various forms, but most research has focused on political
coalitions and their struggle for dominance in organizations. A range of terms are used to
describe these political groups, including dominant coalitions (Cyert & March, 1963), upper
echelons (Carpenter, Geletkanycz, & Sanders, 2004), incumbents and challengers (Fligstein,
2001), and top management teams (Wiersema & Bantel, 1992).
From this dialectical perspective, organizations are understood to be historical accretions
of power. While history is still understood to be objective, the key mechanisms of change—
contradiction, praxis, punctuated equilibrium—are largely ideohistorical. That is, they are
each based on different ways of cognitively integrating the past, present, and future. As we
argue in the next section, when we relax our assumptions about the objectivity of history, the
restrictions on human agency are similarly relaxed and the opportunities for change increase.

History-as-Sensemaking
Key Assumptions
A third view adopts a phenomenological view of history. Phenomenology is based on the
premise that reality consists of experiences, objects, and events as experienced in human
consciousness, rather than in the objects, events, and experiences themselves. In manage-
ment theory, phenomenology is best reflected in Weick’s (1995) notion of sensemaking in
which organizational reality is based on how participants interpret their collective experi-
ence. Sensemaking thus privileges human interpretation of events over the “brute facts” of
reality and “is less about discovery than invention” (Weick, 1995: 13).
Three key assumptions define the construct. First, sensemaking rejects the essentialist
assumption that change occurs as a discrete event outside human consciousness. Instead,
change occurs in human cognition when some events are selected out of the ongoing flow of
organizational experience and are identified and labeled as “change” (Weick, 1979). Second,
these interpretive processes can occur collectively, at the level of groups (Gephart, 1984),
organizations (Daft & Weick, 1984), or even larger social groups (Friedland & Alford, 1991).
Shared assumptions of social reality hold a determinative effect of group values. Third,
shared schema about how to interpret past events has a powerful influence on future behav-
ior. That is, the cognitive frames that we use to experience the reality of the present are based
on retrospective and collective interpretations of past events. In turn, past events delimit the
array of choices available for future action.
28   Journal of Management / January 2017

These assumptions—which in the sensemaking literature are termed enactment, collec-

tive frames of reference, and the role of past interpretation on future behavior—present a
view of history as a phenomenological subject of human interpretation rather than an objec-
tive set of immutable facts. Not only is history a matter of interpretive construction, time is
viewed not as a linear and unidirectional flow, but as a process of understanding achieved
in an iterative pluperfect form—that is, moving back and forth between the past and
present.

Key Constructs: Retrospective Enactment, Selection, and Identity

Three key constructs help to illustrate how the implicit assumptions of history, described
above, influence explicit models of change in sensemaking theory: retrospective enactment,
selection, and identity. We elaborate each below.

Retrospective enactment. Enactment refers to the process in symbolic interaction the-

ory through which shared meaning systems are brought into reality through action. So, for
example, a young doctor encountering a patient for the first time enacts the script of profes-
sionalism by acting as if she always has been a physician. By reaching back to preexisting
cultural templates—scripts, roles, traditions—the physician can effectively use the past to
make sense of the future. Retrospective enactment, thus, uses creative historical reasoning to
produce outcomes based on retrospective assessments of events that have not yet occurred.
A key element of sensemaking is the ability to engage in “future-perfect-thinking” by using
past tense to impose order on a chaotic and unknowable future (Weick, 1979).
Schultz and Hernes’s (2013) account of the resurgence of the Danish toy manufacturer
LEGO aptly illustrates the use of retrospective enactment. The authors describe two distinct
historical strategies used by the company in its change efforts. The first strategy encouraged
team members to analyze “lessons of the past” and focused on short-term time horizons. That
is, they studied failed attempts at organizational identity change from a few decades in the
past and encouraged team members to use those findings to develop identity claims in the
near future (i.e., 9 months ahead).
The second strategy involved much longer time horizons in which team members
reached back 75 years to the early founding of the firm to identify the essence of the firm,
a time period that extended well beyond the invention of the core product of the firm (the
building block). The team, ultimately, identified the promotion of child development and
creativity as its enduring essence and helped stimulate a renaissance of new products for
the firm.
LEGO, thus, used sensemaking techniques to motivate strategic change by retrospectively
reconstructing a degree of coherence and continuity between the organization’s past history
and a, largely predefined, future direction. Historicizing the present and the future through
retrospective sensemaking, according to Weick, provides “the feeling of order, clarity and
rationality” (1995: 29).

Selection. Selection refers to the process by which actors select plausible interpretations
of data on the basis of how well these interpretations are thought to fit with past understand-
ings. Acts of selection depend on assumptions of bracketing in which actors make sense of
 Suddaby, Foster / History and Organizational Change   29

the raw flow of experience by creating temporal continuity between some events and tempo-
ral discontinuity between others. The process of selecting some events as continuous or dis-
continuous with others is a way of imposing meaning on experience by making it consistent
or inconsistent with cognitive templates drawn from the past.
Ravasi and Phillips (2011), for example, demonstrate how the venerable Danish design firm
Bang & Olufsen employed processes of selective bracketing to realign their strategy to better
fit with changes in the external, competitive environment. The company periodically revised
the history of the organization to mask profound changes in the strategic direction of the com-
pany as being consistent with the past. Executives used legitimation techniques to ensure that
organizational participants did not select or bracket change efforts as unique events.
A similar example of using selection to create disjuncture with the past is offered by
Suddaby and Greenwood’s (2005) analysis of arguments used by accountants to challenge
the legitimacy of a new organizational form—multidisciplinary partnerships—that threat-
ened to allow large accounting firms to assume ownership of law firms. Opponents of the
new form used a variety of verbal techniques to emphasize how threatening the new form
was by characterizing the profession as “being at a crossroad,” “crossing the Rubicon,” and
“failing to honor their past.” Persuasive language can be used to skillfully characterize an
event as discontinuous with the past and therefore dangerous. Rhetoric, thus, is used to
bracket and select an event as illegitimate.

Identity. Change succeeds when it is seen to be consistent with past behavior. Gioia, Cor-
ley, and Fabbri (2002) observe that a reconstituted history assists change in organizations by
creating a coherent identity. Identity, they argue, can be articulated only through retrospec-
tive interpretation. As conditions change, however, so too do our interpretations of the past.
As a result, “all history is likely to become revisionist history” (Gioia et al., 2002: 623).
For example, Howard-Grenville, Metzger, and Meyer (2013) demonstrate how revisionist
history is employed to create identity. In their analysis of the resurrection of the community
identity of Eugene, Oregon, they show how actors used “orchestrated experiences” based on
recreating elements of the city’s historical “golden age” as “Track Town” to reconnect stake-
holders with the city’s storied past. These activities involved strategically drawing from
“Eugene’s history, saluting athletes, rhapsodizing about heroic performances and celebrating
Hayward Field itself” (Howard-Grenville et al., 2013: 128). History, thus, offers a critical but
somewhat invisible or intangible resource that was effectively mobilized by select rhetorical
strategies designed to resurrect a communal identity sedimented by years of neglect.
Sensemaking, thus, is a process by which organizational participants cognitively recon-
struct events as either change or continuity through processes of collective interpretation and
reinterpretation of identity. History, in this view, is not objective, and the process of recon-
structing the past is not bound by the brute facts of the past. Rather, the act of interpreting the
past is motivated by an interest in constructing an identity of the organization as either con-
tinuous or discontinuous with an imagined future.

Implications for Change

Collectively, the concepts of retrospective enactment, selection, and identity introduce a
model of change that is defined not by a linear transition through phases of unfreezing,
30   Journal of Management / January 2017

changing state, and refreezing, as defined by Lewin (1947), but, rather, is characterized by
human cognition and interpretation. This model of change builds on a well-established
stream of phenomenological research (Daft & Weick, 1984; Gephart, 1984; Quinn &
Kimberly, 1984) in which the pace, direction, and success of change is managed by the inter-
pretations of events by dominant collectives in the organization.
Sensemaking theory dominates this approach to change but is supported by related theo-
retical traditions, including events-based construction (Isabella, 1990), cultural change
(Pettigrew, 1987; Schein, 1985), and symbolic interactionist approaches to change (Barley,
1986; Pondy, Frost, Morgan, & Dandridge, 1983). A clear differentiator of this model of
change is its overt acknowledgement of the importance of the past and the critical role of
selective memory in reconstructing salient elements of the past to create a credible history.

Difficulty of change. This approach ascribes a high degree of human agency to managing
processes of change that is in contrast to the more essentialist approaches embedded in both
the History-as-Fact and the History-as-Power approaches. The key challenge in managing
change is not in controlling what events happen, as Lewin (1947) suggests, but, rather, in
creating shared interpretations of what happened. That is, change requires an interpretive
shift in the cognitive frames that define the dominant reality of the organization.

Success of change. Viewing change through the lens of History-as-Sensemaking sub-

stantially changes organizational assessments of successful change. In this model, change
often occurs iteratively and retrospectively. Because interpretation occurs after events have
occurred, successful change is apparent only a posteriori and once a collective assessment of
the change effort has emerged.

Unit of change. In contrast to the prior models of change, where the primary unit of
analysis was the organizational entity (either its organizational structure or its power struc-
ture), in the History-as-Sensemaking approach, the clear unit of analysis is the marked shift
in meaning or cognition that occurs within a social group. Weick (1995) uses the term cosmo-
logical episode to capture the disruptions in meaning systems that occur when organizations
adopt a new interpretive scheme. Cosmology episodes are characterized by a sudden and
profound loss of rationality or meaning in one’s lived experience where prior perceptions of
change, which once made sense, no longer cohere and participants are forced to reconstruct
a new interpretive framework within which to organize experience.

History-as-Rhetoric
Key Assumptions
A fourth implicit model of history extends the view that conceptualization of the past is
interpretive with the added assumption that the process of interpreting the past is highly
agentic and can be deliberately manipulated for strategic purposes. The term rhetorical his-
tory is used to describe the “strategic use of the past as a persuasive strategy to manage key
stakeholders of the firm” (Suddaby, Foster, & Quinn-Trank, 2010: 157). Participants in pro-
cesses of organizational change are assumed to have high degrees of agency in creating nar-
ratives of the past designed to facilitate strategic change in organizations.
 Suddaby, Foster / History and Organizational Change   31

In this view, history is essentially a narrative of the past and is therefore highly subjective.
This critical view of historiography rejects the notion of a single unifying historical account
or “grand narrative” and suggests that the depth and richness of available “brute facts” of the
past offer skilled rhetoricians a potentially infinite number of equally valid histories.
As a result, history is assumed to be more biased by the present and future than previous
views of history have allowed, and the construction of any particular history is deliberate and
strategic. Hobsbawm (1983: 1) thus demonstrated how many “ancient” traditions are, in real-
ity, of fairly recent origin. He coined the term invented tradition to identify a range of con-
temporary social institutions that deliberately claim certain rituals, routines, and practices to
be much older than they actually are in order to make claims of authenticity, continuity, and
legitimacy.

Key Constructs: Periodization/Continuation, Memorialization, and Strategic

Forgetting
The notion that history is highly malleable and open to revision helps define a model of
change that uses narratives of history to facilitate strategic change. We elaborate three con-
structs upon which the concept of rhetorical history is based—periodization/continuation,
memorialization, and strategic forgetting.

Periodization/continuation. One of the simplest ways for organizations to rhetorically

reconstruct history is to impose artificial categories on the continuous flow of time and
experience. Periodization is the process of retrospectively cultivating “the idea of a radi-
cal transformation in terms of ‘before’ and ‘after’” (Ybema, 2014: 499). Periodization is
largely accomplished through rhetoric that serves to bracket temporal experience. Periodiza-
tion bears some similarity to Weick’s (1979) notion of “bracketing” but differs in the degree
of deliberation and agency. That is, in contrast to bracketing, which is largely a preconscious
form of cognition, periodization is intentional and strategic.
Perhaps the best empirical illustration of the use of periodization as a rhetorical strategy for
change is offered by Biggart’s (1977) analysis of the change effort in the U.S. Postal Service.
Biggart attributes the success of the effort, in part, to the ability of the change agents to artifi-
cially create a sense of division between the past and the future. They achieved this by demon-
izing and discrediting long-held values and the removal of many of the symbols of the “old”
organization—that is, retiring the 200-year-old name of the organization, designing a new logo
with modern typeface, repainting thousands of postal trucks and mailboxes—in what was
described as a corporate “makeover.” Biggart emphasizes the critical role played by internal
and external corporate communication in articulating the core message that the old organization
“was no more” in a deliberate effort to rhetorically destroy the old history of the organization.
Disengaging with the past through a formal declaration of a division in time is essential to
creating a new organizational reality (Jick, 1993) and has the effect of retroactively changing
both the past and the future. Imposing periods on the continuous flow of time is a form of
“mnemonic cutting and pasting” (Zerubavel, 2012) that uses language to impose meaning
and significance onto discrete chunks of time (Czarniawska, 1997). Periodization, thus, is an
effective way of facilitating change by rhetorically reconfiguring the past and reimagining
the future through the lens of the present.
32   Journal of Management / January 2017

Memorializing. A related rhetorical strategy of changing the past is the act of memorial-
izing periods of the past in an effort to signal either continuity or a breach with the past. Con-
siderable research has documented the empirical fact of corporate memorialization, which
tends to use celebrations to reify a disjuncture or signal closure with the past (Deal & Key,
1998) or rituals, which are used to signal continuity with the past (Dacin, Munir, & Tracey,
2010). So, for example, research has emphasized the importance of mourning the passage of
a celebrated CEO, such as Steve Jobs, in order to mark transition to a new form of leadership
(Bell & Taylor, 2016) or canonizing the iconic image of a founder (Foster, Suddaby, Minkus,
& Wiebe, 2011). Often, memorializing involves a high degree of revisionist history and a
deep reliance on nostalgia—or appeals to an invented past that never actually was (Gabriel,
1993; Strangleman, 1999).
Memorializing the transition to a new period in corporate history aids change by giving
organizational members an opportunity to honor the past (Wilkins & Bristow, 1987) and
achieve symbolic closure that makes real the passage from one moment of reality to another
(Jick, 1993). Such closure is essential to successful change and requires some form of insti-
tutional recognition or acknowledgement by the organization. The central objective of
memorialization is to reify the periodization of past events. It is also to reinforce and empha-
size those values from the past that are still valued while providing organizational members
with a path to a new and altered organization.

Strategic forgetting. A growing body of research demonstrates that organizations often

engage in acts of intentionally erasing elements of their collective memory in order to facili-
tate change. Strategic forgetting “can be a critical first step in organizational renewal when
an organization needs to change” (de Holan & Phillips, 2004a: 425). In a study of Canadian
hotels adapting to local conditions in Cuba, de Holan and Phillips (2004b) document how
successful hotels strategically discarded well-established routines and schemas that had been
successful in the past in order to make room for new knowledge, innovative routines, and
fresh schemas. Forgetting “is an important managerial concern and must be managed or the
organization will pay the price for failing to do so” (de Holan & Phillips, 2004b: 1612).
A related study of change in a French aeronautics company documented repeated and stra-
tegic omissions of historical fact in the firm’s corporate bulletin (Anteby & Molnár, 2012).
The researchers identify two basic types of strategic forgetting: structural omissions, in which
historical facts that contradict managerial identity claims for the company are intentionally
omitted, and preemptive neutralizations, where management deliberately reframes contradic-
tory historical facts with a view to mute problematic identity cues in an organization’s past.

Implications for Change

When history is understood to be a rhetorical resource that can be reconstructed to suit
strategic purposes, the models of change are characterized by high degrees of agency in man-
aging the past for future interests. This approach draws on a long history of research on the
important role of narrative in processes of organizational change (Boje, 1991; Brown &
Humphreys, 2003; Humphreys & Brown, 2002) but focuses specifically on narratives that
strategically reinterpret the past for present or future purposes.

Difficulty of change. In contrast to prior implicit models of objective history, where the
past is viewed as an essentialist constraint on action, this model of history grants tremendous
 Suddaby, Foster / History and Organizational Change   33

creative license to change agents interested in revising a firm’s narrative of its past. There
are clear constraints to the degree to which the past can be revised, as the German corpo-
rations Bertelsmann and Volkswagen discovered in their attempts to revise their historical
narratives in order to deny affiliations with the Nazi regime (C. Booth, Clark, Delahaye,
Procter, & Rowlinson, 2007). However, the change literature, particularly techniques that use
scenario planning, reinforce the powerful role played by selective reconstruction of the past
as a means of facilitating change in the present. Scenario planning, like rhetorical history,
is premised on the assumption that corporations, like human beings, are capable of revising
their past in order to achieve a desired future. The key to successful scenario planning is to
creatively avoid the assumed objectivity of the past by questioning taken-for-grantedness
assumptions about prior interpretations of the past (Schwartz, 1991).

Unit of change. The primary unit of analysis in change processes that are based on implicit
models of History-as-Rhetoric is the historical narrative itself (McGaughey, 2013). Research
in organizational storytelling has demonstrated that effective stories are far more persuasive
or effective in changing attitudes than the use of statistics or other quantitative data (Martin
& Powers, 1983). The test of whether change has occurred, thus, is when the organizational
narrative and associated practices (traditions, rituals, descriptions of heroes and villains, and
claims of uniqueness based on history) have been changed.

Success of change. In order to be successful, narratives must adopt all of the elements
of successful rhetoric (W. Booth, 1983; Burke, 1969). The narrative must be coherent and
credible. The strategic intent of the story must be disguised (Barry & Elmes, 1997), and it is
advantageous, but not necessary, that the narrative is based on a kernel of objective fact. As
Gardner observes, a visionary leader must offer a story “that builds on the most credible of
past syntheses, revisits them in the light of present concerns, leaves open a space for future
events, and allows individual contributions by the persons in the group” (1995: 56). Cred-
ibility in rhetorical history, thus, is based on the same criterion as most storytelling but neces-
sitates storytelling structures that capture convincing and believable accounts of the past.

Discussion and Conclusion

Our central objective has been to demonstrate how implicit models of history have influ-
enced explicit models of organizational change in management studies. Drawing a contin-
uum in which history is seen to be largely objective and deterministic, on one hand, and
largely subjective and malleable on the other, we describe four implicit models of history that
define different explicit models of organizational change. We elaborate the implications that
each of these implicit models of history hold for what change is, how it unfolds, and where,
in an organization, we should look in order to successfully manage change. We summarize
these implications in Table 1.
One of the critical insights of our analysis is the demonstrative lack of construct clarity in
the concept of change. Depending upon their implicit models of history, theorists often mean
different things when they use the word change. What must change and what must stay the
same when organizations change? Our analysis indicates that our answer to this question
depends, largely, on which implicit model of history we subscribe to and how we understand
the reciprocal relationship between change and stability.
34   Journal of Management / January 2017

Table 1
Varieties of History and Theories of Change
History-as-
History-as-Fact History-as-Power Sensemaking History-as-Rhetoric

History is . . . Objective Objective Subjective Subjective

Epistemology Positivist Critical Interpretive Constructivist
Unit of Change Structure Power Relations Meaning Narratives
Representative Imprinting Contradiction Enactment Periodization
Constructs Structural Inertia Punctuated Selection Memorialization
Escalation of Equilibrium Identity Forgetting
Commitment Praxis
Change Occurs . . . Incrementally Episodically Retrospectively Instrumentally
Likelihood of Low Low/Moderate Moderate High
Change
Assumption About Low Low/Moderate Moderate High
Agency
Triggers of Change Shocks Conflict Reflexivity Plurality

Can we say that change has occurred if the structure of the entity remains the same but the
political value structure changes? Advocates of History-as-Fact would say no, but those who
see History-as-Power might disagree. Similarly, can we say that change has occurred when a
radical new technology, such as the electric light bulb or the automobile, has been intro-
duced? Perhaps, at least according to the standard of change set by the History-as-Fact view.
But the empirical evidence suggests that, in order for the innovation to be successful, consid-
erable rhetoric will be required to suggest that the innovation is either continuous with the
past (Hargadon & Douglas, 2001) or a significant breach of the past (Rao, 1994)—a defini-
tion of change offered by the History-as-Rhetoric view.
What is less well understood is how these implicit models of history influence the
capacity to manage change. While we have demonstrated a causal link between how we
theorize the past and the possibility of change in the future, we have little understanding of
how that causal linkage can be manipulated to encourage innovation or to identify innova-
tors. So, for example, do successful entrepreneurs differ from the rest of the population in
how they conceive of the past and its link to future opportunities? Are entrepreneurs more
apt to revise their view of history to facilitate an envisioned future? Similarly, can we
encourage innovation by teaching populations to see the past as less concrete and therefore
less fatalistically path dependent?
Another key insight of our analysis is that the construct of organizational identity is inti-
mately associated with our assumptions of the degree of objectivity in the past. Those who
see the past as largely fixed and immutable appear to be more likely to see organizational
identity as similarly fixed and immutable. By contrast, interpretive assumptions about the
past make organizational identity a much more fluid and adaptive construct. This observation
has important implications for revisiting long-standing issues in organizational commitment.
Do organizations that demonstrate high levels of commitment amongst their members rely
on narratives of the past that are more objective and unchangeable than organizations with
low commitment? Are there individual differences in assumptions of the past that make some
organizational members more apt to exhibit high citizenship behavior than others?
 Suddaby, Foster / History and Organizational Change   35

Traditionally, theories of change have focused on identifying categories of change and

matching them to different organizational or environmental conditions in order to manage
the change process. The assumption is that change occurs in the present with a view to over-
coming the past. In this paper, we reverse that assumption by suggesting that many of the
impediments to successful change are the product of inherent assumptions about the nature
of history and the lack of agency that we have in revising the past.
Our intent in this essay has been to demonstrate a “historical consciousness” in how we
theorize change in organizations (Suddaby, 2016). By historical consciousness we mean a
degree of reflexivity or heightened appreciation of how our collective assumptions about
history can influence our understanding of the present and how we envision the future
(Seixas, 2004). Rather than adopting an essentialist view of history as a set of immutable
facts that must be overcome by constructing an artificial breach or rupture with the past, our
core insight is that successful change can occur by reframing our attitudes and preconceived
notions about the past. History actually offers a valuable but underexploited organizational
resource that can be used to motivate and successfully manage change.

References
Anteby, M., & Molnár, V. 2012. Collective identity meets organizational memory: Remembering to forget in a
firm’s rhetorical history. Academy of Management Journal, 55: 515-540.
Arthur, W. B. 1989. Competing technologies, increasing returns and lock-in by historical events. The Economic
Journal, 99: 116-131.
Arthur, W. B. 1994. Increasing returns and path dependence in the economy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Barley, S. R. 1986. Technology as an occasion for structuring: Evidence from observations of CT scanners and the
social order of radiology departments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31: 78-108.
Barrett, F., & Srivastva, S. 1991. History as a mode of inquiry in organizational life: A role for human cosmogony.
Human Relations, 44: 231-254.
Barron, J. N., Hannan, M. T., & Burton, D. M. 1999. Building the iron cage: Determinants of managerial intensity
in the early years of an organization. American Sociological Review, 8: 527-547.
Barry, D., & Elmes, M. 1997. Strategy retold: Toward a narrative view of strategic discourse. Academy of
Management Review, 22: 429-452.
Bartunek, J. 1984. Changing interpretive schemes and organizational restructuring: The example of a religious
order. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29: 355-372.
Bartunek, J. 1993. The multiple cognitions and conflicts associated with second order organizational change. In J. K.
Murnighan (Ed.), Social psychology in organizations: Advances in theory and research: 322-349. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bell, E., & Taylor, S. 2016. Vernacular mourning and corporate memorialization in framing the death of Steve Jobs.
Organization, 23: 114-132.
Benson, K. 1977. Organizations: A dialectical view. Administrative Science Quarterly, 22: 1-21.
Biggart, N. 1977. The creative-destruction process of organizational change: The case of the post office.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 22: 410-426.
Boeker, W. 1989. Strategic change: The effects of founding and history. Academy of Management Journal, 32:
489-515.
Boje, D. M. 1991. The storytelling organization: A study of story performance in an office-supply firm. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 36: 106-126.
Booth, C., Clark, P., Delahaye, A., Procter, C., & Rowlinson, M. 2007. Accounting for the dark side of corporate
history: Organizational culture perspectives and the Bertelsmann case. Critical Perspectives on Accounting,
18: 625-644.
Booth, W. 1983. The rhetoric of fiction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Bradbury, H., & Mainemelis, C. 2001. Learning history and organizational praxis. Journal of Management Inquiry,
10: 340-357.
36   Journal of Management / January 2017

Brown, A. D., & Humphreys, M. 2003. Epic and tragic tales: Making sense of change. Journal of Applied Behavioral
Science, 39: 121-144.
Burke, K. 1969. A rhetoric of motives. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Carpenter, M. A., Geletkanycz, M. A., & Sanders, W. G. 2004. Upper echelons research revisited: Antecedents, ele-
ments and consequences of top management team composition. Journal of Management, 30: 749-778.
Clegg, S. 1981. Organization and control. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26: 545-562.
Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. 1963. A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Czarniawska, B. 1997. Narrating the organization: Dramas of institutional identity. London: Sage.
Dacin, M. T., Munir, K., & Tracey, P. 2010. Formal dining at Cambridge colleges: Linking ritual performance and
institutional maintenance. Academy of Management Journal, 53: 1393-1418.
Daft, R. L., & Weick, K. E. 1984. Toward a model of organizations as interpretation systems. Academy of
Management Review, 9: 284-295.
Deal, T. E., & Key, M. K. 1998. Corporate celebration: Play, purpose and profit at work. New York: Berrett-
Koehler.
de Holan, P. M., & Phillips, N. 2004a. Organizational forgetting as strategy. Strategic Organization, 2: 423-433.
de Holan, P. M., & Phillips, N. 2004b. Remembrance of things past? The dynamics of organizational forgetting.
Management Science, 50: 1603-1613.
Fearon, J. D. 1994. Domestic political audiences and the escalation of international disputes. American Political
Science Review, 88: 577-592.
Fligstein, N. 2001. Social skill and the theory of fields. Sociological Theory, 19: 105-125.
Ford, J. D., & Ford, L. W. 1994. Logics of identity, contradiction and attraction in change. Academy of Management
Review, 19: 756-785.
Ford, J. D., & Ford, L. W. 1995. The role of conversations in producing intentional change in organizations.
Academy of Management Review, 20: 541-570.
Foster, W. M., Suddaby, R., Minkus, A., & Wiebe, E. 2011. History as social memory assets: The example of Tim
Hortons. Management and Organizational History, 6: 101-120.
Foster, W. M., & Wiebe, E. 2010. Praxis makes perfect: Recovering the ethical promise of critical management
studies. Journal of Business Ethics, 94: 271-283.
Friedland, R., & Alford, R. R. 1991. Bringing society back in. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new
institutionalism in organizational analysis: 232-263. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Gabriel, Y. 1993. Organizational nostalgia: Reflections on the golden age. In S. Fineman (Ed.), Emotion in organi-
zations: 118-141. London: Sage.
Gardner, H. 1995. Leading minds: An anatomy of leadership. New York: Basic Books.
Gephart, R. 1984. Making sense of organizationally based environmental disasters. Journal of Management, 10:
205-225.
Gersick, C. 1988. Time and transition in work teams: Toward a new model of group development. Academy of
Management Journal, 31: 9-41.
Gioia, D. A., Corley, K. G., & Fabbri, T. 2002. Revising the past (while thinking in the future perfect tense). Journal
of Organizational Change Management, 15: 622-634.
Greiner, L. 1972. Evolution and revolution as organizations grow. Harvard Business Review, 50(4): 37-46.
Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. 1977. The population ecology of organizations. American Journal of Sociology, 82:
929-964.
Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. 1989. Organizational ecology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Hargadon, A., & Douglas, Y. 2001. When innovations meet institutions: Edison and the design of the electric light.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 46: 476-501.
Heydebrand, W. V. 1983. Organization and praxis. In G. Morgan (Ed.), Beyond method: 306-320. Beverly Hills:
Sage.
Hobsbawm, E. 1983. Introduction. In E. Hobsbawm & T. Ranger (Eds.), The invention of tradition: 1-14. Cambridge,
England: Cambridge University Press.
Howard-Grenville, J., Metzger, M. L., & Meyer, A. D. 2013. Rekindling the old flame: Processes of identity resur-
rection. Academy of Management Journal, 56: 113-136.
Humphreys, M., & Brown, A. D. 2002. Narratives of organizational identity and identification. Organization
Studies, 23: 421-447.
Isabella, L. A. 1990. Evolving interpretations as a change unfolds: How managers construe key organizational
events. Academy of Management Journal, 33: 7-41.
 Suddaby, Foster / History and Organizational Change   37

Jermier, J. 1985. When the sleeper awakes: A short story extending themes in radical organization theory. Journal
of Management, 11: 67-80.
Jick, T. 1993. Implementing change. In T. Jick (Ed.), Managing change: 192-201. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin.
Johnson, V. 2007. What is organizational imprinting? Cultural entrepreneurship in the founding of the Paris Opera.
American Journal of Sociology, 113: 97-127.
Kanigel, R. 2005. The one best way: Frederick Winslow Taylor and the enigma of efficiency. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Kelly, P., & Amburgey, T. 1991. Organizational inertia and momentum: A dynamic model of strategic change.
Academy of Management Journal, 34: 591-612.
Kimberly, J. R. 1979. Issues in the creation of organizations: Initiation, innovation, and institutionalization. Academy
of Management Journal, 22: 437-457.
Kolb, D. A. 1996. Management and the learning process. In K. Starkey (Ed.), How organizations learn: 270-287.
London: Thompson.
Lamertz, K., & Baum, J. 1998. The legitimacy of organizational downsizing in Canada. Canadian Journal of
Administrative Sciences, 15: 93-107.
Levinson, D. J. 1978. The seasons of a man’s life. New York: Knopf.
Levitt, B., & March, J. G. 1988. Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 14: 319-340.
Lewin, K. 1947. Frontiers in group dynamics. Human Relations, 1: 5-41.
Lippman, S., & Aldrich, H. E. 2013. History and evolutionary theory. In D. Wadhwani & M. Bucheli (Eds.),
Organizations in time: 124-146. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Marquis, C. 2003. The pressure of the past: Network imprinting in intercorporate communities. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 48: 655-689.
Marquis, C., & Tilcsik, A. 2013. Imprinting: Toward a multi-level theory. The Academy of Management Annals,
7: 195-245.
Martin, J., & Powers, M. 1983. Truth or corporate propaganda: The value of a good war story. In L. Pondy, P. Frost,
G. Morgan, & T. C. Dandridge (Eds.), Organizational symbolism: 93-107. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
McGaughey, S. L. 2013. Institutional entrepreneurship in North American lightning protection standards: Rhetorical
history and unintended consequences of failure. Business History, 55: 73-97.
Meyer, A. 1982. Adapting to environmental jolts. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27: 515-537.
Meyer, A. D., Gaba, V., & Colwell, K. A. 2005. Organizing far from equilibrium: Nonlinear change in organiza-
tional fields. Organization Science, 16: 456-473.
Meyerson, D., & Martin, J. 1987. Cultural change: An integration of three different views. Journal of Management
Studies, 24: 623-647.
Miller, D. 1990. The Icarus paradox: How excellent organizations can bring about their own downfall. New York:
Harper.
Moon, H. 2001. The two faces of conscientiousness: Duty and achievement striving in escalation of commitment
dilemmas. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86: 533-540.
Morgan, G. 1997. Images of organization. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Oliver, C. 1997. Sustainable competitive advantage: Combining institutional and resource based views. Strategic
Management Journal, 18: 697-713.
Pettigrew, A. 1987. Context and action in the transformation of the firm. Journal of Management Studies, 24:
649-670.
Pettigrew, A., Woodman, R. W., & Cameron, K. S. 2001. Studying organizational change and development:
Challenges for future research. Academy of Management Journal, 44: 697-713.
Pondy, L. R., Frost, P. J., Morgan, G., & Dandridge, T. C. 1983. Organizational symbolism. Greenwich, CT: JAI
Press.
Quattrone, P., & Hopper, T. 2001. What does organizational change mean? Speculations on a taken for granted
category. Management Accounting Research, 12: 403-435.
Quinn, R. E., & Kimberly, J. R. 1984. Managing organizational transitions. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin.
Rao, H. 1994. The social construction of reputation: Certification contests, legitimation, and the survival of orga-
nizations in the American automobile industry: 1895-1912. Strategic Management Journal, 15(S1): 29-44.
Ravasi, D., & Phillips, N. 2011. Strategies of alignment: Organizational identity management and strategic change
at Bang & Olufsen. Strategic Organization, 9: 103-135.
Romanelli, E., & Tushman, M. L. 1986. Inertia, environments, and strategic choice: A quasi-experimental design
for comparative longitudinal research. Management Science, 32: 608-621.
38   Journal of Management / January 2017

Schein, E. H. 1985. Organizational culture and leadership: A dynamic view. San Francisco: Josey-Bass.
Schreyögg, G., & Sydow, J. 2011. Organizational path dependence: A process view. Organization Studies, 32:
321-335.
Schultz, M., & Hernes, T. 2013. A temporal perspective on organizational identity. Organization Science, 24: 1-21.
Schwartz, P. 1991. The art of the long view: Paths to strategic insight for you and your company. New York:
Doubleday.
Searle, J. 1995. The construction of social reality. New York: Free Press.
Seixas, P. C. 2004. Theorizing historical consciousness. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Selznick, P. 1949. TVA and the grass roots. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Seo, M.-G., & Creed, W. E. D. 2002. Institutional contradictions, praxis, and institutional transformation: A dialecti-
cal perspective. Academy of Management Review, 27: 222-247.
Sine, W. D., & David, R. J. 2003. Environmental jolts, institutional change and the creation of entrepreneurial
opportunity. Research Policy, 32: 185-207.
Staw, B. M. 1976. Knee-deep in the big muddy: A study of escalating commitment to a chosen course of action.
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16: 27-44.
Staw, B. M. 1981. The escalation of commitment to a course of action. Academy of Management Review, 6:
577-587.
Stinchcombe, A. L. 1965. Social structure and organizations. In J. G. March (Ed.), Handbook of organizations:
142-193. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Strangleman, T. 1999. The nostalgia of organizations and the organizations of nostalgia: Past and present in the
contemporary railway industry. Sociology, 33: 725-746.
Suddaby, R. 2010. Construct clarity in theories of management and organization. Academy of Management Review,
35: 346-357.
Suddaby, R. 2016. Toward a historical consciousness: Following the historic turn in management thought.
M@n@gement, 19(1): 46-60.
Suddaby, R., Foster, W. M., & Quinn-Trank, C. 2010. Rhetorical history as a source of competitive advantage.
Advances in Strategic Management, 27: 147-173.
Suddaby, R., & Greenwood, R. 2005. Rhetorical strategies of legitimacy. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50:
35-57.
Suddaby, R., Viale, T., & Gendron, Y. in press. Reflexivity: The role of embedded social position and social
skill in processes of field level change. Research in Organizational Behavior. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
riob.2016.02.001
Sydow, J., Schreyögg, G., & Koch, J. 2009. Organizational path dependence: Opening the black box. Academy of
Management Review, 34: 689-709.
Tushman, M. L., & Romanelli, E. 1985. Organizational evolution: A metamorphosis model of convergence and
reorientation. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, vol. 7: 171-222.
Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Van de Ven, A. H., & Poole, M. S. 1995. Explaining development and change in organizations. Academy of
Management Review, 20: 510-540.
Weick, K. E. 1979. The social psychology of organizing. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Weick, K. E. 1995. Organizational sensemaking. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Westphal, J. D., & Zajac, E. J. 1993. Substance and symbolism in CEOs long term incentive plans. Administrative
Sciences Quarterly, 39: 367-390.
Wiersema, M., & Bantel, K. 1992. Top management team demography and corporate strategic change. Academy of
Management Journal, 35: 91-121.
Wilkins, A. L., & Bristow, N. J. 1987. For successful organizational culture, honor your past. Academy of
Management Perspectives, 1: 221-228.
Ybema, S. 2014. The invention of transitions: History as a symbolic site for discursive struggles over organizational
change. Organization, 21: 495-513.
Zardkoohi, A. 2004. Do real options lead to escalation of commitment? Academy of Management Review, 29:
111-119.
Zerubavel, E. 2012. Time maps. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Consider a change initiative you have observed or participated in
within a past or current organization. Reflect on the initiative and
describe how it fit into one of the models discussed in the article(s).
Be sure to describe each step of the process related to the change
initiative you experienced to show alignment to the change model
you selected.

Kurt Lewin’s Unfreeze, Change and refreeze model

3 step change management model.

Change must occur when there is a strong motivation for the change.

• Unfreeze: Melt the block of ice

• Change: Pour the water into spherical mould
• Refreeze: Refreeze the water into required shape

Unfreeze

Preparing the organization for the change that’s about to take place.

Communicating about reasons for change

Key aspects is preparation and communication

Steps to ensure success

➢ Understand why change is needed

➢ Get senior management buy-in
➢ Create vision for the change and outline key aspects
➢ Create the vision
➢ Encourage feedback

Change

Phase where the actual change takes place/implemented

People will take time to support change completely

Steps to ensure success

➢ Communicate regularly about benefits

➢ Explain how the change will affect the org. once implemented
➢ Be open to questions
➢ Be prepared to deal with operational hurdles
➢ Get more people involved in the process

Refreeze

People need to be adviced and supported to continue working with the new way.

Steps to ensure success

Provide training and support to people to manage changes

Identify barriers to sustaining change

Encourage people to provide feedback

Infuse positivity and highlight any benefits that have been realised.

John Kotter’s 8-step change model

First described in 1995 Harvard business model

It divided change model into 3 phases:

Create a climate for change- create a shared understanding of the change you want to make and why

Engage and enable the organization- Engaging the team so that they’re empowered and enthusiastic
to effect change within the org

Implement and sustain-Pressing ahead after initial success to build momentum and fully sustain the
change

1. Create urgency
Create an urgency to convince others of the need to act immediately
Build a compelling case for change so that people understand why its necessary (75% buyin
of the management)
2. Build a coalition
Need to form a powerful coalition with powerful and influential people for the change
steering group.
3. Create a vision
Clear vision of the future org and why it is necessary to change
Vision needs to be easily understood by members
Create initiatives to realize the vision (Link initiatives to the vision so everyone understands
how they contribute to the vision)
4. Communicate the vision
Communicating the vision aims to win hearts and minds of the members
It helps to align all people to pull in the same direction
Clear and laser-focused communication is key in this stage
Make use of all communication channels available
5. Empower others
Change coalition needs to remove any blockers or barriers so tat the team can implement
vision.
Removing barriers, the change coalition empowers the team to succeed
6. Create quick wins
Structure your initiative to deliver quick wins early
Break the initiative down into phases with 1+ tangible benefits delivered at the end of each
phase.
Nothing breeds success like success
7. Build on the change
Real change takes a long time
There is a high risk of people reverting to old ways of doing things
 Repeat steps 4 through 6 to sustain change
8. Embed the change
Make the change stick to become a fundamental part of the organizational processes

Pros

Focuses on buy-in from key employees to ensure success

Fits nicely on top of traditional org structures

Provides clear steps through the change process

Cons

It’s a top-down model

Can lead to resistance from employees

Model is better for initiating change than sustaining change

You are more likely to succeed when:

You create the right climate

Build momentum through powerful vision, removing barriers and achieving regular quick wins

ADKAR change management model

Change is hard

This model gives better success chances

It Is different from other models because it focuses on the individual

Driving individual change will in turn, drive organizational change

A-Awareness of the need to change

Outcome: Everyone understands why the change is necessary

Key role for management is to ensure everyone understands the need

D-Desire to support and take part in the change

Outcome: Feel dissatisfied with the current state

Understand the negative consequences of not changing

Want to participate in the change

K-Knowledge of how to change

Outcome: Havin the knowledge on how to change

Knowing what they need to do during the transition (How to change)

Knowing the future skills/behaviour they need when the change is complete

A-Ability to implement change

 Outcome: Individual can demonstrate new skills, behaviours to make the change happen.

Training is necessary for employee to build their ability

R-Reinforce to sustain the change

Outcome: The change/behaviour is reinforced within each individual

Tries to avoid employees from reverting to old ways of doing things

Methods of doing this include: Seeking feedbacks, taking corrective actions quickly, positive
reinforcement, celebrating good behaviours.

Pros

Focus on outcomes rather than tasks

Model can be used to measure change progress

Recognizes the importance of people

Provides a clear checklist of what needs to be done

Cons

Better suited for small change initiatives

It ignores the complexity of change. (It ignores the need to have a vision and long-term step
by step plan to realise the vision over time)

The McKinsey 7S Framework

Strategic objectives are objectives set at the highest level
There exist 7 essential internal elements that organizations need to align with one
another for the achievement of strategic objectives
A change to one area should drive change in all other areas
Essential internal elements;
Strategy-The plan developed by a firm to achieve a sustained competitive advantage
in the market place
Structure-The structure is the way the business is organised
Systems-This delves into the processes and procedures followed by members of staff
in the organisation
Shared values-Guides employee behaviour and how the organisation should react in
different circumstances
Skills-The actual capabilities and competencies of the employees in the organization
Staff-The number of employees the org needs, procedures on how they would be
recruited, trained, motivated and rewarded
Style-The management and leadership in the organisation
 CHAPTER 1

Why Change Management

Matters to Human Resource
Professionals
Be the change that you wish to see in the world.
—Mahatma Gandhi

The skills and competencies needed to succeed as a Human Resource

(HR) professional are complex and involve a dynamic interaction of
many differing and diverse capabilities. As the HR profession has grown
and evolved, so too have the required qualities and abilities of HR prac-
titioners. No longer seen as a dumping ground for employees with per-
formance issues that cannot be corrected, or a holding spot for someone
filling time until retirement, the HR department is now valued as a criti-
cal resource in helping organizations achieve their strategic outcomes.1 As
such, a key reason that change management matters to HR professionals
is due to the changes and evolution of the profession itself.2 In order to
stay abreast of the demands and rigor within the profession, HR profes-
sionals must be capable of adapting and responding to change, thereby
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

altering their own competencies and knowledge. Further, when exam-

ining the qualifications within various HR designations (e.g., CPHR,
CHRP, CHRL, SHRM-CP),3 the ability to effectively deal with and
facilitate organizational change is highlighted. The expectation that HR
professionals are well versed in the complexities of change management,
and how to help organizations effectively utilize, benefit from, and sustain
change, is clearly detailed within these designations.
As well, it is readily acknowledged that a company will only succeed
if it has the correct people, in the correct places, doing the correct things
at the correct times.4 As such, HR professionals are tasked with playing

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 2 THE HUMAN RESOURCE PROFESSIONAL’S GUIDE TO CHANGE MANAGEMENT

a key part in ensuring that this strategic alignment and configuration

occurs. So what does this really mean? How do HR professionals ensure
that a company succeeds and achieves desired strategic outcomes? Are HR
professionals really people-people, and is liking and understanding others
enough to bring about key organizational results? The balance between
focusing on operational requirements and attending to peoples’ needs and
wants is an issue that HR professionals should readily acknowledge and
must not shy away from. As such, it is imperative that HR professionals
be ever aware of the changes that organizations experience, and how to
assist with these amendments through the dynamic interplay of meeting
both the organization’s (operational) and peoples’ (emotive) needs. This
again highlights the need for change management competencies.

Is It Human Resources or Humane Resources?

When I first meet people they usually ask me about my work. When I
explain that I am an HR professional, the next part of the conversation is
inevitably predictable. I cringe when people tell me that since I’m in HR
I must like people and respond by saying “Oh, indeed I like people. I like
to fire people, I like to tell people they did not get the job, I like to tell
them that they are not meeting performance expectations….” This typi-
cally puts a quick end to the dialogue, but the serious and truthful nature
of my reply should not be easily dismissed. The practice of HR often
involves tough decisions and actions—from terminations to disciplinary
meetings to assisting employees during times of grief and illness. This
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

type of work certainly speaks to having a skill set that encompasses much
more than just liking people, thus clearly demonstrating a change from
previous labels of personnel, or the people who must enjoy dealing with
employees.
HR professionals are tasked with ensuring that organizations achieve
their objectives with and through the most valuable assets—their people.5
This is not easy or simple work and means having to, at times, engage in
difficult conversations and issues. It can, at times, also involve celebrating
and recognizing good work and accomplishments. Through a strategic
lens, HR professionals are viewed as those who understand how to plan
for and implement policies and procedures that enable employees and

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 Why Change Management Matters 3

organizations to succeed. In summary, being an HR professional means

having to deal with an organization’s human assets in good times and bad,
from the start of someone’s employment to the end of their tenure with
a company, and through the myriad of situations that arise in between.
The altering and varying circumstances that HR professionals become
involved in further speak to the importance of change management, as
this role is not static with a limited set of requirements. As such, HR
professionals who understand and appropriately use change management
tools and techniques are better able to do their jobs, as the nature of the
work requires someone who is able to quickly adjust and meet new or
altering demands.

The Heart of the Matter

Dealing with people issues means dealing with people. At first glance this
appears rather simplistic or repetitive, but it is important to remember
that human beings are the central component to the HR profession. The
ability to deal with people in a strategic, competent, and yet compas-
sionate manner is critical to the enactment of an HR professional’s role.
As such, it is not unreasonable to expect HR people to be able to com-
municate with, engage with, and work with others, with a goal of achiev-
ing strategic outcomes.6 Therefore, HR professionals are often seen as the
heart of an organization.
For this analogy to hold true it is important to remember that the
heart is only one critical, yet admittedly very important, component of
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

how the whole body works. The heart helps keep other processes and
functions within the body (the organization) aligned and working well
to ensure the desired overall result, which is a healthy and high-function-
ing entity. When the heart stops or does not work as it should, no other
functions within the body will fare well. As such, concrete (often difficult)
and strategic decisions and actions pertaining to diet, exercise, and life-
style choices have to be made to ensure that the heart functions properly,
thereby ensuring an effective and top performing body. This is similar
to the tactical decisions that HR must develop and implement so that
an organization operates effectively and produces top results. While very
practical in its operation, the human heart is also known for having the

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 4 THE HUMAN RESOURCE PROFESSIONAL’S GUIDE TO CHANGE MANAGEMENT

capacity for emotion and dealing with issues in more than just a rational
manner. So, defining HR as the heart of an organization is again rather
appropriate. An organization’s operational functions must be attended to
and adhered to, often resulting in strategic conversations, decisions, and
actions.7 However, emotive components must be nurtured and honored
as well. As such, the practice of HR is not a choice between two areas of
focus, but rather a way of finding pathways to ensure effective operations
and functionality while honoring and upholding the emotive elements
within an organization. While simple and basic, at the heart of the mat-
ter (pun intended), the truth is that accomplishing great results through
both function and form (operational and emotional effectiveness) is not
a simple task. Engaging and motivating people, while representing the
interests of both employers and employees, is a delicate, multifaceted jug-
gling act, and ever evolving challenge. As such, HR professionals must be
adept at managing change as the interests of employers and employees
are dynamic and require an ability to keep up with the changing, often
conflicting requirements, as they present themselves. This leads to a fur-
ther complexity for an HR professional and presents a potential challenge
within this role, as both employers and employees are viewed as clients.

Who’s the Boss?

A difficult question that HR professionals must resolve is who they
actually work for and represent. Is it the employers or is it the employ-
ees? I argue that this is not an either or query, but that through careful,
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

well-thought-out, and skillful plans and actions, both groups’ needs are
addressed. In fact, it is only through meeting the needs of both groups
that organizations will truly succeed. However, this is not an easy outcome
to achieve. Often the needs and requirements of employers are seen to be
in conflict with those of employees.8 This is not just the case in union-
ized environments, although these more regimented workplaces often
seem to amplify these divergent interests. In unionized and nonunionized
work settings alike, employers’ desired outcomes, and the pathways to
achieving them, often do not align with employees’ needs and interests.
For example, an organization may want to serve clients across a diverse
geographic area, but employees may dislike travel and time away from

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 Why Change Management Matters 5

home. Such requirements could be seen as distracting from employees

achieving a work–life balance. As another example, a company may want
employees to put in extra hours in order produce a certain amount of
products and employees may have health and safety concerns around this
due to resulting fatigue. Situations abound where employers’ and employ-
ees’ needs, motivators, and desired outcomes do not align. As such, it
is imperative that an HR practitioner be able to find the common and
overlapping requirements for management and employees and in doing so
change employers’ and employees’ perspectives and understanding in order
to create synergies within and across the company. This, in turn, reduces
barriers and perceived distances between people while providing opportu-
nities to achieve sought-after results. This need to find commonality and
overlap exists across many of the practices and processes most commonly
dealt with under the HR umbrella such as the following: Recruitment
and Selection, Orientation, Work Design, Compensation, Learning and
Development, and Performance Management. For example, how can the
need for new employees to be socialized and welcomed to an organization
be balanced with an employer’s desire to get people working as soon as
possible? Or, how can an employee’s need for a fair and sufficient salary be
met while still ensuring that a company remains profitable? So while dis-
cussions continue about how HR professionals can find a seat at the deci-
sion-making table and how HR professionals can truly be viewed as strategic
partners, the reality is quite simple—find ways to change employers’ and
employees’ limited and self-serving views and find ways to develop and
implement strategic processes, practices, and policies that meet the needs
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

of both parties in meaningful and practical ways, thereby ensuring focused

efforts on achieving desired company objectives. In order to accomplish
this, HR professionals must have a solid understanding of change man-
agement principles as organizations continue to evolve and grow. In other
words, HR professionals must develop, implement, and monitor pro-
cesses, practices, and policies that meet the needs of both employers and
employees within an environment that is ever fluctuating. In doing so,
HR professionals must also be seen as those who can guide and facilitate
others on how to effectively use and follow new processes, practices, and
policies. These expected competencies clearly necessitate that HR profes-
sionals are well versed in change management tools and techniques.

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 6 THE HUMAN RESOURCE PROFESSIONAL’S GUIDE TO CHANGE MANAGEMENT

Summary
Evolving requirements within the profession itself necessitate that HR
professionals be able to skillfully change and enhance their own capabili-
ties in order to remain current and relevant in the field. HR professionals
who cannot manage change will not be able to evolve and develop them-
selves in response to the advancing requirements within this specialized
discipline. Further, HR professionals balance operational and emotive
needs within an organization and the facets within these requirements
are ever shifting. Therefore skillful change management assists HR pro-
fessionals to meet the fluctuating needs of both employers and employees,
thereby ensuring desired organizational outcomes can be achieved.
It is clear that HR professionals need to possess change management
capabilities. However, knowing what needs to change (i.e., processes,
practices, and policies) is not enough. In addition to this, it is critical that
HR professionals have a deep and rich understanding of the complexities
around why change should occur and how to enact effective and lasting
change. While HR professionals are typically the people whom others
turn to for guidance and advice on what responses are required to deal
with change, HR professionals are also expected to provide advice and
guidance on how to effectively manage change. This point is critical and
bears repeating: Knowing what needs to change is not sufficient, as HR
professionals must also be skilled in recognizing why change is necessary
and how to manage change. The remainder of this book will help you do
all of this. Chapter 2 reviews the driving forces for change and explores
why change may be required at various times in an organization’s evo-
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

lution. Chapter 3 then reviews the different categories of change orga-

nizations typically face and why it is important to differentiate among
varying types of modifications. Chapter 4 addresses a formula for manag-
ing change, while Chapter 5 focuses on resistance, which is one specific
element within the formula. Chapters 6 and 7 then review specific tools
and techniques to launch and sustain organizational change. This is fol-
lowed in Chapter 8 by an exploration of important communication tools
and techniques to use during times of change and Chapter 9 brings all
ideas presented throughout the book together, highlighting the role that

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 Why Change Management Matters 7

HR professionals should play within change management, including the

importance of self-exploration and self-development.
As such, your journey through this text will leave you with a deeper
understanding of how to, in your role as an HR professional, help orga-
nizations enact meaningful and lasting change.

End of Chapter Questions

• Based on your own experiences, what advice would you give
to someone having to deal with conflicting interests and needs
from employers and employees?
• What has been the biggest change you have noted in the HR
profession over the past five years and how has this impacted
and influenced you as an HR practitioner?
• What do you anticipate will be the one or two biggest changes
that will occur within the HR profession within the next five
years? How are you preparing yourself for this?
• What are three key points of learning that you want to take
away from reading this text?
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 CHAPTER 2

Forces for Change

No matter what people tell you, words and ideas can change the world.
—Robin Williams

A key part of managing change is understanding why change is required,

or in other words being clear about the driving force behind a change.
Many elements that drive organizational change will impact and influence
processes, practices, and policies that an HR professional is responsible for
developing or implementing, and therefore ultimately changing. When
an HR professional has a deep and rich understanding of why change is
needed (i.e., what is driving a change) appropriate actions can be imple-
mented. In other words, knowing why change is required allows for the
appropriate decision of what to change as a consequence of this driving
force. Further, knowing why change is necessary may allow for a change
to occur in advance as an anticipatory measure. This is of critical impor-
tance. An HR professional who is aware of forces for change is often able
to be proactive and make amendments before difficulties arise.1 Enacting
changes that avoid legal, operational, and strategic difficulties is a key way
in which HR professionals are able to provide value within their roles.
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

Preemptive responses to forces for change are not always possible and
as such, appropriate reactions are also something that an HR professional
must be capable of. Being able to quickly and effectively adjust organiza-
tional processes, practices, and policies in response to changing require-
ments is also an expectation of HR professionals and therefore a clear
picture of the change driver is once again required.
In order to understand why a change is required, and then appropri-
ately deal with this either proactively or as a responsive action, HR pro-
fessionals must continuously monitor and stay abreast of key elements or
factors that impact their work. These factors, which are common drivers
of change, can be explored as the HR professional’s landscape.2

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 10 THE HUMAN RESOURCE PROFESSIONAL’S GUIDE TO CHANGE MANAGEMENT

The HR Professional’s Landscape

Developing and implementing significant and pragmatic organizational
processes, practices, and policies that meet employer and employee
requirements with the end goal of achieving an organization’s strategic
goals necessitates that HR professionals understand:

• Legislative requirements
• Industry trends
• Labor market conditions
• Competitors
• Customer demands
• Organizational strategies

While this list is not exhaustive, it certainly points to and addresses

key factors that HR professionals must continuously review and address.3
Further, these areas that HR professionals must be aware of are not static
and changes within each of these elements are what typically initiate or
necessitate changes within an organization. Legislative, industry, and
labor market considerations are typically grouped together as environ-
mental drivers of change. Competitors and customer demands capture
market forces for change and organizational strategies align with inter-
nally driven initiatives that serve as an impetus for change.4 As Figure 2.1
illustrates, all forces for change interact and influence one other with fur-
ther complexities arising as each of the previously noted elements contin-
uously evolves and shifts.
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

An HR professional must be able to stay abreast of new requirements

and developments within each of these key areas and the changes that are

Environmental Internal
forces forces

Market forces

Figure 2.1 Forces for change

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 Forces for Change 11

necessitated by these amendments. As well, HR professionals must also

continue to be aware of how and if multiple drivers of change are in play
and how they are impacting each other. As such, exploration of each area
within an HR professional’s landscape, and how it is a driving force for
change (i.e., why change is needed) along with examples of preemptive or
reactionary responses (i.e., what needs to change) is warranted.

Legislative Requirements
At all times, legislative compliance must be at the front of mind for HR
professionals.5 Employment standards, occupational health and safety
standards, and human rights are some examples of areas covered under
specific legal requirements.6 As the world and its value and belief systems
change, so too does the law. An example of this falls under the duty to
accommodate employees due to protected grounds. For example, as per
current legislation in Canada, family status is now viewed as something
that employers must consider and provide reasonable accommodation for
when requested to do so.7 This has led to changes in the way in which shift
work is scheduled and the amount of notice that needs to be provided
when employees are required on site. Another example of value systems
influencing legal issues can be seen through the removal of mandatory
retirement (exceptions apply due to safety-sensitive roles) as this is seen
as age discrimination.8 As such, an organization’s policies and processes
had to be changed at one point to ensure that employees were not being
forced out, and that incorrect assumptions regarding future staffing levels
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

or predictions for recruitment were not being made based upon forced
employee departures, which would be deemed illegal. Therefore, the abil-
ity to monitor amendments to legal requirements and ensure ongoing
compliance by an organization through alteration of key processes and
guidelines, both proactively and reactively, is certainly a key change com-
petency that an HR professional must possess.

Industry Trends
HR professionals must have a thorough understanding of the indus-
try that an organization operates in and the critical indicators of trends

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 12 THE HUMAN RESOURCE PROFESSIONAL’S GUIDE TO CHANGE MANAGEMENT

within this context.9 Industry trends alert an HR professional to upcom-

ing organizational changes that are required in order for a company to
remain competitive. Illustrations of this are prevalent in heavily resource-
based industries such as oil and gas. As an example, decreasing commod-
ity prices signal that cost-cutting measures will need to be addressed and
these most often impact HR-related areas such as recruitment, staffing
levels, and training and development budgets. HR professionals must
keep abreast of key indicators (e.g., trending and anticipated fluctuations
to commodity prices) that signal upcoming changes within an industry.
By doing so, changes can be anticipated in advance. These leading indica-
tors result in well planned and thought-out strategies that negate drastic
reactions to unforeseen circumstances. For example, knowing that the
industry will be facing a decreased demand for workers, staffing levels can
be addressed through normal attrition or a hiring freeze, thereby mini-
mizing the number of employees who have to be terminated when com-
modity prices, and resulting profits, decrease.
As another example, the grocery industry has changed to allow for
online ordering and product collection from the parking lot.10 As this
type of shopping option becomes a standard procedure, and more of a
normalized option within this industry, organizations will have to ensure
that they have changed what skills they seek in employees (employees
will need computer literacy to read and understand orders), will have to
alter training programs to ensure that employees know how to perform
these new functions and may likely have to alter methods of evaluating
customer service skills, due to the different ways in which employees and
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

customers will interact. In summary, the HR professional who is knowl-

edgeable about industry changes is able to anticipate, plan for, and/or
implement organizational consequences of these industry alterations and
thereby demonstrate change management competencies.

Labor Market Conditions

Just as focus on industry is important, so too is understanding labor mar-
ket trends. Availability of workers, especially those with unique or special-
ized skills, is critical to the ongoing success of an organization.11 Therefore,
an HR professional must always be aware of alterations to the supply of

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 Forces for Change 13

workers resulting from issues such as demographic changes, mobility of

the workforce and shifting educational levels. As an example, workers
who have retired from their full-time positions but still seek employment
have resulted in a different pool of potential employees whom organi-
zations can attract to fill part-time roles. This, in turn, requires an alter-
ation to recruitment and selection strategies in order to better align with
this different target group of candidates. As another example, awareness
that people with key education and skills live in certain geographic areas
allows for planning and implementation of recruitment initiatives aimed
at these key resources. Once again, knowledge regarding the characteris-
tics of potential workers in the labor market allows an HR professional
to amend recruitment and selection practices, thereby altering processes
to attract key human resources and filling positions in a strategic manner
that responds to the composition of the workforce. The ability to alter
recruitment and selection practices and procedures, in anticipation of or
in response to this environmental driver of change, is just one example
of how an HR professional utilizes change management capabilities to
enhance strategic outcomes.

Competitors
It is critical for HR professionals to know which organizations should be
considered as competitors. A simple way to determine competitive forces
involves listing organizations, either currently in operation or potentially
starting operations, that offer products or services that would replace or
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

substitute those offered by a company.12 Once known, activities of the

competition must consistently be monitored and appropriate responses
often necessitate a change in an organization’s policies and processes to
meet, or exceed, offerings from competitive entities. As an example, when
a competitor begins to publicize a program where employees are given
time off to volunteer in the community, a company may choose to respond
in kind. Implementation of their own employee volunteer program may
be carried out in order to maintain a strong presence of social responsi-
bility in the community, thereby keeping customers who value this, as
well as to continue attracting new employees and retaining the current
workforce who believe in this type of program and employee benefit. This

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 14 THE HUMAN RESOURCE PROFESSIONAL’S GUIDE TO CHANGE MANAGEMENT

would then necessitate the development and implementation of key HR

policies and procedures around an employee volunteer program, thereby
producing change in the benefits offered to the workforce.
As another example, a competitor may alter/increase their hours of
operation and in order to keep current clients by matching services, an
organization may have to follow suit thereby revising employees’ working
hours and shifts. Again, this would involve changes to key HR policies
and procedures such as scheduling and compensation. The preceding
examples highlight how competitors can influence actions that organiza-
tions have to take and as such, how actions from opponents are a force for
change. Therefore, an HR professional will be expected to provide advice
and guidance on how to change critical processes, practices, and policies
in order to keep an organization viable against the actions of competitor
organizations, once again highlighting the importance of change manage-
ment competencies in this role.

Customer Demands
Being agile and responsive to shifting customer requirements is critical
to ensure an organization’s ongoing success. As such, an HR professional
must be able to amend key policies and practices in order to ensure that
these demands are met. As an example, when consumers demand health-
ier menu choices, employees need to receive training on how to pre-
pare, promote, and serve these new food selections. Or, when a shifting
customer base requires that a company’s services be offered in different
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

languages, employees must be trained to acquire this new skill or new

employees, who meet this requirement, will need to be hired. The preced-
ing examples are merely two descriptions of how an HR professional will
have to adapt and revise current processes, practices, and policies in order
to effectively respond to shifting customer needs, thereby ensuring the
retention of clients. Numerous other examples of customer-driven needs
are continuously evolving and presenting requirements for change within
organizations, which in turn necessitate alterations to company policies,
processes, and procedures. As such, the ability to effectively develop and
implement changes, again proactively or in response to changes, is once
again seen as critical within the HR professional’s landscape.

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 Forces for Change 15

Organizational Strategies
There are numerous strategic decisions that a company may make per-
taining to its internal operations.13 For example, a company may decide
on using a team-based approach to completing work, or may determine
that it wants employees to display a more creative and less risk adverse
approach to their work. Each of these potential scenarios would neces-
sitate that an HR professional implement changes to complement these
company directives. For example, when a team-based approach to work is
implemented, the way employees receive feedback and coaching will need
to be altered, thereby necessitating that a new performance management
system be developed and implemented. Processes focused on individual
behaviors and outcomes would no longer align with the organizational
desire for team focus and a change in monitoring and evaluating perfor-
mance would need to ensue. Further, compensation policies and processes
would also have to be amended to complement and reinforce a focus
on team outcomes in lieu of individual achievements. Changes to com-
pensation would also have to be implemented should an organizational
directive to encourage creativity and risk-taking be implemented. In this
particular example, an HR professional needs to have a strong under-
standing of what changes are necessary in order to align financial rewards
with desired employee behavior, or people will not move away from safe,
tried, and true actions that they know will result in receipt of mone-
tary rewards. As the preceding examples highlight, as a driving force for
change, organizational strategies demand that an HR professional possess
strong change management abilities in order to amend other key organi-
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

zational processes to align with and support the new company directives.

Summary
An organization is typically required to change in anticipation of, or in
response to, key elements which are known as forces for change. These
considerations typically impact organizational processes, practices, and
policies that an HR professional is responsible for and therefore attention
to these elements and the ability to be aware of why change is needed and
what needs to be amended to allow for this change is critical. Given the

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 16 THE HUMAN RESOURCE PROFESSIONAL’S GUIDE TO CHANGE MANAGEMENT

elements within an HR professional’s landscape are ever evolving, it is

critical that an HR professional keep on top of these factors and amend-
ments within them, thereby ensuring implementation of organizational
change(s) to accommodate for, and capitalize on, these shifting environ-
mental, market, and internally driven forces.
With a solid understanding of why change is needed and what needs
to change, an HR professional must then be able to determine how best
to implement and sustain required changes. The starting point for this is
a clear understanding of what type of change is being addressed and this
will be dealt with in Chapter 3.

End of Chapter Questions

• What is the primary force for change in your organization?
What elements within this driving force have you had to
respond to and what processes, practices, and policies have
you changed in response to these?
• Given the elements with an HR professional’s landscape, what
do you anticipate as upcoming driving forces for change in
your organization and how will you plan to respond?
• What element within an HR professional’s landscape is often
forgotten or given the least attention? Why do you think this
occurs?
• What is a recent situation where a company failed to attend
to a key element within an HR professional’s landscape that
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

changed and then subsequently faced poor outcomes or

results? What is your key learning from this?
• In lieu of being labeled as a specific driving force for change,
technology can be seen as embedded within various types
of change, or as a catalyst for various forces for change. The
online grocery shopping example provided in this chapter
addresses altering use of technology as part of industry trends
that are driving change. As another example, requirements
for online apps and online access to company information
could be viewed as a technological catalyst within customer
demands as a force for change. Within which force for change

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 Forces for Change 17

do you anticipate technology will have the most impact in

your organization? What changes in policies, processes, and
practices will you have to enact to help your organization
prepare for, or react to, this?
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 CHAPTER 3

Categories of
Organizational Change
If we don’t change, we don’t grow. If we don’t grow, we aren’t
really ­living.
—Gail Sheehy

Change is here to stay. Change is ongoing. Change is required in order to

survive and those who do not embrace and effectively deal with it are des-
tined for failure. The clichés and quotes pertaining to change are familiar
and the messaging continues to reinforce that change is not something
that can be ignored or undervalued. Yet, there is lack of understanding
about what change truly encompasses and involves or what change truly
means.1 A key part of this problem is that one singular word, change,
is used to describe many diverse, complex, and multipurpose situations.
People tend to singularly speak about change when they are actually
describing vastly distinct scenarios that involve differing levels of resource
commitment.2 Just think about it. “I am going to change my socks” versus
“I am going to change the world.” Regardless of how fantastic a person’s
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

socks are, I am certain you will agree that the type of change envisioned
in each of the previous statements is drastically different. Knowing how to
effectively manage change therefore necessitates a solid understanding of
the parameters of the change being addressed, or in other words what type
of change is being dealt with. Without a thorough consideration of the
type of change being addressed the sought-after results and benefits from
the change may only be partially realized or may not be accomplished
at all.
As well, knowing the type of change that is being addressed pro-
vides HR professionals with knowledge about the typical pitfalls that are

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 20 THE HUMAN RESOURCE PROFESSIONAL’S GUIDE TO CHANGE MANAGEMENT

encountered during these kinds of modifications. This, in turn, enables

HR professionals to be better equipped to enact strategic change man-
agement competencies by anticipating, and therefore dealing with, things
that can usually take a specific type of change initiative off track.
There are three categories of organizational changes that can occur:
Tangential, Transitional and Transformational.3

Tangential Change
Many of the changes that people encounter in their everyday lives, both
personally and professionally, are incremental or tangential. These are
changes that happen very slowly and as such, often go unnoticed or unap-
preciated. As Figure 3.1 shows, tangential changes occur a little bit at a
time over a lengthy period. As such, it is often difficult to recognize these
individual gradual changes that ultimately, when taken into account as
a sum of numerous small changes, can lead to vastly different circum-
stances. When my children were young and my family would see friends
after some time apart, I would inevitably hear about how much the kids
had grown. This made sense to me, as logically I knew they were chang-
ing, but because I saw them every day it was not until someone made note
of these changes and overtly mentioned this to me that I was reminded of,
and thus explicitly aware of, the changes that were occurring. It is rather
like not seeing the forest for the trees or in this scenario, not seeing how

Future
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

Present

Figure 3.1 Tangential change

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 Categories of Organizational Change 21

the trees have developed until someone with a fresh perspective visits the
forest after some time away from it. Gradual, or tangential change, is not
readily obvious to those who live with or within it.
Organizations continuously go through these tangential changes and
as such, one of the key change management competencies of an HR
professional is to be aware of, acknowledge, and support these types of
amendments.4 Owing to the small and gradual nature of the changes,
employees typically find their own unique, preferred, and simple ways
to incorporate changes into their work and this leads to a lack of consis-
tency in the way tasks are accomplished and work is completed. Or worse,
employees may find ways to avoid the changes and forget about them alto-
gether. This is one of the key issues with tangential changes—they can be
ignored. HR professionals with strong change management competencies
are therefore skilled at recognizing tangential changes and finding ways
to ensure that they are effectively incorporated into employees’ work and
ultimately used to enhance an organization’s strategic outcomes. Chapter
4 will address ways that HR professionals can ensure that this occurs, but
before any action can be taken, the first step is to recognize that this type
of tangential modification is occurring. As such, it is worthwhile to review
examples of this category of change.

Examples of Tangential Change

As previously noted, tangential changes are the most common type of

modifications that organizations experience. Another way to explain this
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

is that employees have to tweak their work processes in order to accom-

modate a new requirement(s). Think about the following list and whether
your company has encountered these or similar scenarios:

• A new product or service is introduced to add to (or slightly

alter) current offerings.
• A new application is used to enhance current software.
• A new step is added to a production process.
• A step is taken out of a production process.
• A new form must be completed as part of a required reporting
process.

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 22 THE HUMAN RESOURCE PROFESSIONAL’S GUIDE TO CHANGE MANAGEMENT

Regardless of the specific tangential change, it is important to

remember that when all of the little changes are taken into account
in their entirety throughout the whole organization, these amendments
actually have the potential for lasting and substantial consequences
regarding the achievement of corporate outcomes. Tangential changes
typically require an employee to change a process or work habit without
altering mindset (i.e., focus on what is being done without elaborate or
deep thinking about why the work needs to be done in this manner),
but are nonetheless an important and critical part of the change land-
scape within organizations. Ignoring or avoiding these minor amend-
ments diminishes organizational opportunities, outcomes, and potential
for success.

Transitional Change
Transitional change is more complex than tangential change, as it involves
replacing what is with something completely different. In lieu of slight
amendments, transitional change involves creating an entirely new process
or system. These types of amendments require employees to change their
behaviors in order to complete new work and therefore necessitate new
understanding of processes and requirements. In other words, as entire
components of their work change, or in some cases entire roles need to
change, employees must alter both behavior and mindset. A quick fix or
quick amendment will not suffice, as in tangential change, and therefore
more thought is required in order to enact the required modification.
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

Transitional change is often thought of as a way to enhance processes,

policies, or practices; how to replace an old way of doing things with the
goal to create a new way of operating that is more efficient and effective.5
As Figure 3.2 illustrates, transitional change involves moving from an old
state to a new state over a set period of time using planned and deliberate
actions to guide this process.
Given the intentional and iterative nature of transitional change, it is
usually implemented through a project management process.6 Since the
old state and desired new state are both clearly known, budget, timelines,
people, and other key resources can be earmarked to participate in the
change. Both the starting point and desired future outcome are known,

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 Categories of Organizational Change 23

TRANSITION Future
Present

Figure 3.2 Transitional change

so transitional change can be dealt with in an orderly, structured manner.

While unexpected outcomes may occur at various points during the tran-
sition, a calculated and thorough approach minimizes such occurrences
and any accompanying problems can be dealt with through the use of
contingencies as accounted for within a solid plan. As such, HR pro-
fessionals can display strong change management competencies and add
strategic value by working with organizational leaders to ensure that the
plans to move (or transition) to the new state are clearly documented and
followed. Gantt charts can aid in this process and be used as a key tool for
tracking progress.7
While planned and detailed, transitional change is not without its
pitfalls and potential limitations. This type of modification is somewhat
similar to using a dimmer switch to increase the lighting in a room.
As the movement from darkness is transcended to brightness over a
period of time with planned incremental steps (i.e., the switch is slowly
turned), the light in the room eventually becomes substantially differ-
ent with an entirely new environment being created. A danger of this
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

is that people can become frustrated as the change takes time to occur
and the desired outcome may not be reached as quickly and efficiently
as desired. A further danger is that due to the slow and steady nature of
the change, people can become confused and lack an understanding of
what is actually happening or what is actually being modified. Given the
need to entirely change something, a new state will eventually be created
and as such, employees cannot ignore the changes or easily revert back
to previous patterns of behavior, as is possible with tangential change.
However, employees may not completely utilize the required changes,
thereby not allowing for full benefits to be realized within the new state.
Therefore, HR professionals need to be keenly aware of, and attentive to,

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 24 THE HUMAN RESOURCE PROFESSIONAL’S GUIDE TO CHANGE MANAGEMENT

this type of change and the resulting disinterest, frustration, and confu-
sion that may ensue. Bored, disenchanted, and ill-informed employees,
while not ignoring the change, will not fully understand or appreciate
the change. As such, these employees will not utilize the change to its
full potential, thereby minimizing the positive ramifications. The ability
to keep people interested in, fully knowledgeable about, and engaged
with, transitional change is a necessary change management competency
that HR professionals should possess. Again, Chapter 4 will address ways
that HR professionals can ensure that this occurs, but it is first crucial that
HR professionals recognize that transitional change is occurring in order
to ensure it is successful. As such, it is worthwhile to review examples of
this category of change.

Examples of Transitional Change

Movement from an old state to a new state, in a deliberate and planned

manner, occurs in organizations in many different ways. Think about
the following list and whether your company has encountered these or
­similar scenarios:

• Completely new products or services are implemented to

replace old ones.
• A new policy or procedure must be followed, with previous
requirements being eliminated.
• Corporate restructuring or reorganizing reporting
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

relationships.
• Replacement of a computer program or application with
completely new software or a new provider.

A simple way to recognize transitional change in your organization

is to think of the “out with the old, in with the new” mantra. As previ-
ously addressed, it is critical that HR professionals acknowledge and be
involved in these types of amendments as they require that employees not
only alter their work processes, but due to the changes to role require-
ments within an entirely new state, must also reconfigure their under-
standing of what their work involves and how to do this work. In other

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 Categories of Organizational Change 25

words, transitional change alters both an employee’s actions and mind

and HR professionals must ensure that people do not become confused
or frustrated with, and ultimately disengaged with, the change process as
evolution to the new state of being transpires over time.

Transformational Change
Transformational change is the most complex type of organizational
change as it involves a radical shift in a company’s mission, vision, and
value systems, ultimately leading to a complete overhaul of the organi-
zation’s operations.8 This can be thought of as a complete re-engineer-
ing or reinvention of a company. An organization is altering its raison
d’être and therefore employees need to be able to enact and embrace these
amendments that strike at the very core of a company. As such, the orga-
nizational culture will need to be altered as well, involving not only how
employees enact and think about their work, but also how they work
with, and relate to, each other and those external to the organization.
Owing to the way that an organization has to completely reconstruct
itself, transformational change often alters relationships and interactions
that employees have with one another as well as with customers, suppli-
ers, competitors, and government agencies. This is a drastic modification
that impacts not only what employees do, but also how they feel about
what they do. In other words, transformational changes impact employ-
ees’ hands, heads, and hearts. This type of amendment requires an organi-
zation to reinvent itself and the desired end state is often unknown or not
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

fully clear as the change commences. As such, transformational change

is often described with adjectives such as murky, confusing, messy, and
chaotic. As Figure 3.3 indicates, in lieu of having clear and detailed plans,
the move from the current state is filled with unexpected twists, turns,
and course corrections as the envisioned, but not fully clear future state,
is pursued. A vision for the new state exists, but this desired outcome
will often evolve and alter as the change progresses with amendments to
action plans and goals along the way.9 Further, the force(s) of change is
often altering and shifting, further causing the organization to alter its
trajectory during this type of transformation. This is a lengthy process,
often occurring over many months or even years.

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 26 THE HUMAN RESOURCE PROFESSIONAL’S GUIDE TO CHANGE MANAGEMENT

RE
/FUTU
VISION

Tran
sf
proc ormation
ess al

PRESENT

Figure 3.3 Transformational change

Transformational change can be further understood with a compar-

ison, or analogy, to sailing. When setting out in the boat a destination
is in mind, but as the winds and waters change (i.e., as the drivers of
change alter), and even the desires and aspirations of the occupants alter,
the sails must be adjusted in often less than ideal conditions. As well,
the actual shoreline is often not within the line of sight, so faith that an
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

actual landing spot or destination is out there and achievable is required.

When all is said and done, the destination may not end up being exactly
what was first thought (i.e., the shoreline will be reached, but it could
be vastly different than the originally charted location), with numer-
ous course corrections being made along the journey. During times of
transformational change, decisions must be made, and actions taken,
without full information or understanding of consequences. As such,
employees are often fearful and can become paralyzed, thereby halting
progress. Therefore, one critical way that HR professionals can display
strong change management competencies and provide strategic value
during this type of turbulent change is to ensure that progress continues

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 Categories of Organizational Change 27

and that people do not get bogged down by uncertainty and worn out by
the ongoing amendments to plans and actions that are required. Given
the complexity of transformational change, HR professionals must be
acutely aware of, and engaged in, people’s logical and emotive reac-
tions to the shift that is occurring. The impactful nature of this type of
change means that employees cannot ignore it or find simple and quick
ways to incorporate it into their usual work patterns, as is common for
tangential change. Nor can employees implement something new by
merely changing their actions, skills, and understanding of their work,
as needed for transitional change. Therefore, HR professionals must deal
with complex, often difficult, human reactions, and not ignore or avoid
these often difficult interactions in times of organizational transforma-
tion. HR professionals need to ensure that employees do not become
fatigued and lose faith in the process, outcome, and the organization’s
leadership during this type of initiative. As previously noted, Chapter 4
will address ways that HR professionals can ensure successful transfor-
mational change, but in order to do so, HR professionals must first be
aware that this is occurring.

Examples of Transformational Change

The nature of transformational change necessitates that people use,

understand, and feel the repercussions of the fluctuation, as this journey
involves working toward an uncertain, but better vision of the future.
Think about the following list and whether your company has encoun-
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

tered these or similar scenarios:

• A move from focusing on accounting services to providing

strategic consulting services.
• A move from offering basic banking services to supplying
customer-centered investment and financial planning advice.
• A move from operating a small coffee shop to providing
an Internet café where people can buy various beverages,
unwind, or meet and connect with others.
• A move from supplying data encryption services to offering
online payment functions.

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 28 THE HUMAN RESOURCE PROFESSIONAL’S GUIDE TO CHANGE MANAGEMENT

Each of these noted examples highlights that transformational change

necessitates a shift in people’s understanding of the nature of the business
and requires employees to have/develop new or different skills and abil-
ities in order to work within a drastically different environment or work
culture. As well, the very way employees will need to interact and relate to
each other, as well as other stakeholders, and view and be inspired by the
nature of their work must be altered as well. It is much more than simply
understanding what has changed and involves a necessity to believe in and
support the change through a readjustment to changed organizational
operations, values, and beliefs. In sum, transformational change has the
power to drastically modify an organization and its strategic outcomes,
but HR professionals must never lose sight of the fact that this, in turn,
requires that people are able to have faith to advance toward an uncer-
tain future, thereby working and progressing during times of uncertainty
while aligning with, supporting, and believing in a completely revised
organization that wants to accomplish drastically different outcomes.10

The Interplay among Categories of Change

Tangential, transitional, and transformational organizational changes are
not necessarily independent of one another. Often an amendment will
involve more than one, or even all three categories of change, on some
level. This is rather like the nesting Russian dolls, with tangential change
being a subset of transitional change, which could also be embedded
within a transformational change. Therefore, when thinking about the
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

category of change an organization is experiencing, it is important that

HR professionals are not limited or narrow in their analysis of the situa-
tion. An overly simplistic view (i.e., it is this type of change or that type
of change) would not adequately highlight what is occurring and would
therefore diminish HR professionals’ understanding of how to enact
change management competencies.

Summary
HR professionals must take the time to think deeply about, and under-
stand, what category of change(s) an organizational initiative encompasses.

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 Categories of Organizational Change 29

Time taken to fully understand and define what is occurring leads to

enhanced capacity to understand the complexity of the change as well
as the required time and resources. As well, key pitfalls that are typically
encountered within this category of change are illuminated. As such, a
thorough and deeper understanding of the type of organizational change
being enacted enables HR professionals to provide proactive and strategic
responses meant to guard against, or eliminate, the typical issues that derail
the various categories of change. How HR professionals should respond
to peoples’ inconsistent application or avoidance of small changes during
tangential change would be different than how HR professionals should
respond to employees becoming bored and losing interest in the creation
of an entirely new state during transitional change, and different yet again
when stakeholders are asked to reconfigure their entire understanding of
the organization’s mission and the entire way of being/operating during
times of transformational change. Chapter 4 therefore provides an explo-
ration of specific change management tools and techniques, through the
use of a formula for change, that HR professionals can utilize in order to
best respond to the specific category of change being encountered and
ensure the success of these initiatives.

End of Chapter Questions

• Think about a tangential change that your organization has
experienced. Would you describe this as a successful change
management initiative? Why or why not? What were your key
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

learnings from this experience?

• Think about a transitional change that your organization has
experienced. Would you describe this as a successful change
management initiative? Why or why not? What were your key
learnings from this experience?
• Think about a transformational change that your organiza-
tion has experienced. Would you describe this as a successful
change management initiative? Why or why not? What were
your key learnings from this experience?
• How would you explain to a manager in your organization
(in your own words) the different categories of change?

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 30 THE HUMAN RESOURCE PROFESSIONAL’S GUIDE TO CHANGE MANAGEMENT

How would you help the manager understand (again in your

own words) the value received from taking the time to fully
understand the category of change (or changes) that is (are)
occurring.
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 CHAPTER 4

A Formula for Managing

Change
Things do not change; we change.
—Henry David Thoreau

The ability to successfully implement change means having to deal with

people, while recognizing, anticipating, responding to, and valuing their
reactions to the modification. Simply put, nothing will ultimately be
altered if the people involved in, or affected by, the modification do not
change.1 While this may seem basic, it is often forgotten and a key rea-
son why many changes fail or do not accomplish their full impact. Far
too many change initiatives focus on what has to change (i.e., focus on
the content of the change) while failing to acknowledge and attend to
who has to change.2 In all categories of change (tangential, transitional,
and transformational) there are critical actions that must be taken, or
issues that must be addressed, if an initiative is to be successful. While
each person brings individual needs and complexities to a situation, HR
professionals can still use a scientific approach to change management
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

by attending to a critical formula that promotes successful change and

achievement of lasting consequence. Given the focus on people, it may
appear counterintuitive to approach change in a scientific or contrived
manner, but failure to do so is what often detracts from, or completely
dismantles, change initiatives.
The change management formula, which addresses change in a sci-
entific or more prescribed manner, focuses on four key areas: Dissatis-
faction with the status quo, Vision, Steps and Resistance.3 As indicated
in Figure 4.1, the first three elements influence each other and when
accounted for in summation, must outweigh or be greater than encoun-
tered resistance.4

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 32 THE HUMAN RESOURCE PROFESSIONAL’S GUIDE TO CHANGE MANAGEMENT

D × V × S > R = Change

Figure 4.1 A formula for managing change

Each element within the formula, and its specific applications during
various categories of change, enable HR professionals to effectively guide
and facilitate organizational change initiatives, thereby providing strategic
value within, and to, an organization. As such, exploration of the ele-
ments within the change formula and how HR professionals can utilize
them during different categories of change is warranted.

Increasing Dissatisfaction with the Status Quo

Increasing dissatisfaction may, at first glance, appear to be a counterintu-
itive approach to dealing with change. Why would an HR professional
want to stir up and invoke negative thoughts and feelings? The simple
answer is that people are creatures of habit and tend to want and support
change only when they realize that the continuation of the current situa-
tion, or the status quo, no longer meets their needs or desires and/or is in
some manner detrimental to them. People need to realize that the same
old processes and procedures will no longer suffice and without change
poor outcomes will ensue. Many people subscribe to the belief that “if
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

it ain’t broke don’t fix it.” As an example, a person will not take his car
to a mechanic to have specialized work performed (this is not referring
to regular or expected ongoing maintenance such as an oil change) if it
is functioning properly. Taking action to alter the vehicle and have parts
replaced and repaired, when everything appears to be working properly, is
seen as a waste of time, energy, and money.
By illuminating why the status quo is no longer tenable or desirable,
HR professionals are, in essence, showing that the current circumstances
are in fact broken and are no longer acceptable or viable. Further, as part
of understanding that the status quo is no longer acceptable, people need
to realize why and how this impacts them. This is also known as a WIFM,

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 A Formula for Managing Change 33

or what’s in it for me? In order for change to occur people need to feel
personal, and negative consequence, if a situation remains stagnant. Con-
tinuing with the previous example, this is rather like the check engine light
appearing, signaling that the current situation is no longer working and
that something within the vehicle needs to change.
So, how can the HR professionals illuminate the check engine light,
per se, within organizations? A key part of increasing dissatisfaction with
the status quo is doing so in a manner that does not use threats or fear
mongering. This is not a simple task and not only what is said to increase
dissatisfaction, but also how the information or messaging is conveyed is
of vital importance. When asked to get others to see that a situation is no
longer acceptable, it is common to use intimidation or anxiety to invoke
change. Comments such as “if you do not change you will lose your job”
or “if things do not improve we will be bankrupt” only serve to incite
panic or despair, with the typical response of people shutting off and
ultimately resisting change. This is rather akin to shouting at someone
whose engine light is on and telling them that their car will explode and
they will face certain death if something is not fixed and changed. Or, this
is rather like an alarm sounding as the light continues to blink off and
on. This only serves to annoy someone, who will ultimately find a way to
ignore these cues or will find a way to shut them off in order to avoid the
warnings. This type of dramatic, exaggerated, and fear-inducing request
to attend to change is typically met with a belief that the person request-
ing the change really does not know what is going on, is paranoid, or is
exaggerating the urgency of the situation and that there really is no need
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

to change. Again, threats and fear do not promote change. Instead, they
typically incite people to ignore, avoid, dismiss, or shut down altogether.5
Therefore, dissatisfaction with the status quo must be created in a
calm and well thought-out manner and by helping people realize that
the current situation is no longer working and is causing them problems
and/or that changes will ultimately result in a better circumstance for
them. This should be done with the use of facts or evidence in a logical
and nonintimidating fashion. Examples of how to do this include sharing
statistics and metrics, providing proof of changed requirements through
legislation or altered industry standards, sharing of consumer feedback/
requests, and demonstration of how changes have brought about success

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 34 THE HUMAN RESOURCE PROFESSIONAL’S GUIDE TO CHANGE MANAGEMENT

for other organizations, also known as benchmarking. Thinking about

the specific driver of change often points to or leads to ways to increase
dissatisfaction with the status quo, as evidence of the required alteration
is pronounced within the force behind the modification. For example, if
legislative requirements are driving a change, then the details and com-
munication around this should be shared with employees. Or, if customer
requirements are the driving force, then evidence of changing customer
needs, through feedback obtained, should be shared.
Using the example of the engine light, it would be best to increase
someone’s dissatisfaction with the status quo by showing them research
demonstrating that lack of attention to a malfunctioning engine only
serves to create other costly mechanical problems or providing evidence
showing the consequence of poor gas mileage when a car is not operating
correctly. Helping people realize that the current situation is not provid-
ing them with the best possible circumstances and that other negative
consequences could ensue as well, without using alarming or terrifying
tactics, is fundamental to increasing dissatisfaction with the status quo
and triggering a key element within the change formula. Simply put,
increasing dissatisfaction with the status quo addresses why this change is
really needed.
Understanding the need to increase dissatisfaction with the status quo
allows for implementation of actions within each type of change that help
negate the prevalent pitfalls (as addressed in Chapter 3) that occur within
each category. Again, it must be stressed that these tactics to increase dis-
satisfaction with the status quo must rely on facts, evidence, and logic and
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

not be seen as threats or based upon creating fear. HR professionals can

therefore utilize this competency within each category of change.

Dissatisfaction and Tangential Change

Discontent with the status quo must show people that even minor or
apparently inconsequential processes, rules, actions, products, and/or ser-
vices are taking away from success in their roles. It must be displayed that
even small changes will have impact and therefore allow people’s work to
be easier or more gratifying. By showing people that their current situa-
tion is taking away from their enjoyment and accomplishments, and that

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 A Formula for Managing Change 35

this could be rectified by minor alterations, an increase in dissatisfaction

with the status quo will be created and enticement to embrace, consis-
tently use, and maintain tangential changes will be created.

Dissatisfaction and Transitional Change

Discontent with the status quo must show that the current state of opera-
tions is no longer meeting needs (i.e., customer desires, legislative require-
ments, and ability to meet or beat competitors) and that without change,
the organization will not succeed and may eventually be unable to operate
at all. It must be clearly shown that the current situation is no longer ten-
able and that processes and/or services and/or products need to entirely
change in order to ensure the ongoing success of the organization. This
type of understanding of why things cannot remain as they are helps to
prevent boredom and frustration during the progress to the new state.

Dissatisfaction and Transformational Change

Discontent with the status quo during times of transformational change is

very similar to the strategy used for transitional change, except the scope
is larger. It must be shown that the current state of the company and its
operational goals (i.e., not just specific processes, services or products)
needs to completely change. Through the use of evidence, facts and logic,
a deeper understanding of why things cannot remain the same is created
and therefore the emotive and often difficult human reactions, such as
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

lack of belief and faith in the value of the amendment, to transforma-

tional change are better addressed and dealt with.
While increasing dissatisfaction with the status quo must be enacted
across all categories of change, so too must increasing the vision, and this is
addressed as the second element within the formula for managing change.

Increasing the Vision

In addition to increasing unhappiness with the current state of affairs, it
is also critical to create an enhanced vision of what the change will create.
Dissatisfaction with the status quo addresses the now and increasing vision

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.
 36 THE HUMAN RESOURCE PROFESSIONAL’S GUIDE TO CHANGE MANAGEMENT

addresses the future. Knowing the end state, or what the consequence of
the change will be, helps provide a beacon and guide to people. Pictur-
ing what could be, in lieu of what currently is, will provide possibilities
and promises of better outcomes, which is required in order for success-
ful change to occur.6 This is rather like using the picture on a puzzle box
to complete the task. Having an understanding of the desired result helps
to drive people forward, provides inspiration, enhances motivation and
helps stimulate ongoing engagement with the change process along the
way. Again, using the check engine light analogy, this would involve tell-
ing someone how enjoyable the driving experience could be by creating a
picture, through deep and vivid descriptions, of what it would be like to
operate a fully functioning car that is not encountering mechanical issues.
The idea of a smooth ride, free of worries and distractions, must reside in
the automobile owner in order to know why bothering with the change is
worthwhile. A compelling vision not only provides a visual impetus, but
allows someone to feel what it would be like to be in the new environment,
thereby appealing to both logical and emotive influences. Chapter 8 will
address communication during times of change and how best to enact these
types of responses from key stakeholders. Simply put, increasing the vision
addresses what the purpose of this change is by providing a deeply desirable
goal and end state and should be addressed within each category of change.

Vision and Tangential Change

Through increasing the vision, people are motivated to use and sustain
even small changes, as the desired results are seen to be worthwhile. As
Copyright © 2017. Business Expert Press. All rights reserved.

such, the likelihood of inconsistent application, avoidance, and/or return

to previous patterns or ways of doing things is less likely. An understand-
ing of how incremental changes can ultimately provide a desirable out-
come is critical within tangential change. The vision must clearly depict
how incremental amendments, even though appearing to be inconse-
quential, actually lead to important alterations and beneficial results.

Vision and Transitional Change

As the move from the current state to a new state transpires, people who
are captivated by a vibrant and motivating picture of the new reality are

Peacock, M. J. (2017). The human resource professional's guide to change management : Practical tools and techniques to
enact meaningful and lasting organizational change. Business Expert Press.
Created from tamu on 2024-05-21 13:08:09.