Pub Date : 2022-02-21DOI: 10.1080/14697017.2022.2040571
Dag Naslund, A. Norrman
ABSTRACT This paper develops a conceptual framework for understanding how organizations create an accepted purpose for organizational change initiatives related to business processes. The framework is based on a longitudinal study related to an Action Research project and the ‘higher level learning’ from using a performance measurement system for change initiatives. Over more than four years, we followed and measured the developments and progress in two separate, major change initiatives related to different business processes in one case organization. The framework has a specific focus on the need for a clear and accepted change purpose. It tries to explicate the nature of change purpose and proposes different interrelated attributes related to the clear content of a change purpose (relevant, justified, urgent, clear destination, clear scope and explicit goals) but also attributes of how the change purpose then should be communicated to be jointly accepted. This operationalization of the nature of change purpose could also inform the current general discussion on purpose related to leadership. MAD statement The intention of this article is to Make A Difference (MAD) by addressing problems with change readiness by focusing specifically on change purpose. We explicate the nature of change purpose and operationalize it, proposing a conceptual framework grounded in a longitudinal study of two major change initiatives. The framework could help organizations create an accepted purpose for organizational change initiatives related to business processes. We discuss attributes related to the clear content of a change purpose (relevant, justified, urgent, clear destination, clear scope and explicit goals) and how the change purpose should be communicated to be jointly accepted.
{"title":"A Conceptual Framework for Understanding the Purpose of Change Initiatives","authors":"Dag Naslund, A. Norrman","doi":"10.1080/14697017.2022.2040571","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2022.2040571","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper develops a conceptual framework for understanding how organizations create an accepted purpose for organizational change initiatives related to business processes. The framework is based on a longitudinal study related to an Action Research project and the ‘higher level learning’ from using a performance measurement system for change initiatives. Over more than four years, we followed and measured the developments and progress in two separate, major change initiatives related to different business processes in one case organization. The framework has a specific focus on the need for a clear and accepted change purpose. It tries to explicate the nature of change purpose and proposes different interrelated attributes related to the clear content of a change purpose (relevant, justified, urgent, clear destination, clear scope and explicit goals) but also attributes of how the change purpose then should be communicated to be jointly accepted. This operationalization of the nature of change purpose could also inform the current general discussion on purpose related to leadership. MAD statement The intention of this article is to Make A Difference (MAD) by addressing problems with change readiness by focusing specifically on change purpose. We explicate the nature of change purpose and operationalize it, proposing a conceptual framework grounded in a longitudinal study of two major change initiatives. The framework could help organizations create an accepted purpose for organizational change initiatives related to business processes. We discuss attributes related to the clear content of a change purpose (relevant, justified, urgent, clear destination, clear scope and explicit goals) and how the change purpose should be communicated to be jointly accepted.","PeriodicalId":47003,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49466768","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-17DOI: 10.1080/14697017.2022.2040572
Kirstin van Niekerk, M. Jansen van Rensburg
ABSTRACT Strategic organizational changes in the higher education sector are costly and resource intensive but considered crucial for the longevity and feasibility of organizations in this sector. Faced with major reforms of government-imposed funding, pressures from internationalization, digitalization and globalization, many Higher Educational Institutions had to reconsider governance, organizational structures and the roles and responsibilities of actors. The purpose of the empirical qualitative research study was to investigate the professional middle managers’ strategising practices to effect strategic change. The study context was a South African higher education institution undergoing substantial organizational change due to an institutional restructuring. An interpretative phenomenological analysis was used to describe participants’ cognitive, emotional, and physical nature which confirmed six holistic and comprehensive strategising practices namely adapting, effecting change, collaborating, mobilizing, peacekeeping and overseeing. The findings confirmed that strategising practices were not the result of actions only but were also influenced by cognitive, rational, and emotional experiences. MAD statement Change is difficult for everyone, but even more so for middle managers who are not only strategy implementors but also recipients of change. Findings provide insight to how middle managers handle change contexts in which changes are multiple and overlapping.
{"title":"Middle Managers’ Strategising Practices to Effect Strategic Change","authors":"Kirstin van Niekerk, M. Jansen van Rensburg","doi":"10.1080/14697017.2022.2040572","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2022.2040572","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Strategic organizational changes in the higher education sector are costly and resource intensive but considered crucial for the longevity and feasibility of organizations in this sector. Faced with major reforms of government-imposed funding, pressures from internationalization, digitalization and globalization, many Higher Educational Institutions had to reconsider governance, organizational structures and the roles and responsibilities of actors. The purpose of the empirical qualitative research study was to investigate the professional middle managers’ strategising practices to effect strategic change. The study context was a South African higher education institution undergoing substantial organizational change due to an institutional restructuring. An interpretative phenomenological analysis was used to describe participants’ cognitive, emotional, and physical nature which confirmed six holistic and comprehensive strategising practices namely adapting, effecting change, collaborating, mobilizing, peacekeeping and overseeing. The findings confirmed that strategising practices were not the result of actions only but were also influenced by cognitive, rational, and emotional experiences. MAD statement Change is difficult for everyone, but even more so for middle managers who are not only strategy implementors but also recipients of change. Findings provide insight to how middle managers handle change contexts in which changes are multiple and overlapping.","PeriodicalId":47003,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41545525","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-17DOI: 10.1080/14697017.2022.2040570
D. Blackman, F. Buick, M. O’Donnell, N. Ilahee
ABSTRACT Public sector effectiveness necessitates planned change; however, many initiatives fail. For planned change to be successful, employees’ mental models need to be amended to support new behaviours. One mechanism to achieve this is employee performance conversations, which can elicit behavioural change through introducing new ideas to an individual’s reality. However, many conversations fail to create shared understandings of the need for change. Ford and Ford's [The role of conversations in producing intentional change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 541–570] typology identifies different conversational forms to create the shared understandings required to enact change. This paper reflects on the learnings from a management development intervention based upon Ford and Ford’s typology where managers applied the conversational forms to initiate mental model amendment, thereby enabling planned change. Analysis of qualitative data collected during the intervention suggests that using different types of conversations in a structured manner enabled shared understandings regarding why change was required and what success looked like. Managers recognized that slowing down the conversational process led to more effective mental model amendment, facilitating behavioural change. The paper demonstrates how different conversational forms enable leaders to discuss a planned change from an individual and organizational perspective and elicit mental model amendment to realize change. MAD statement This paper explores a new approach to undertaking employee performance management to enable organizational change. The paper applies Ford and Ford’s (1995) conversational typology as a practice model for developing the conversational competencies of managers and leaders. The paper highlights the importance of taking account of employees’ and managers’ different mental models in order to enable planned change. It argues that it is not more conversations that is needed, but instead the capacity to recognize and utilize different conversational forms to realize mental model amendment to elicit behavioural change and thus achieve change. The paper outlines an intervention that applies this new approach to employee performance management training.
{"title":"Changing the Conversation to Create Organizational Change","authors":"D. Blackman, F. Buick, M. O’Donnell, N. Ilahee","doi":"10.1080/14697017.2022.2040570","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2022.2040570","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Public sector effectiveness necessitates planned change; however, many initiatives fail. For planned change to be successful, employees’ mental models need to be amended to support new behaviours. One mechanism to achieve this is employee performance conversations, which can elicit behavioural change through introducing new ideas to an individual’s reality. However, many conversations fail to create shared understandings of the need for change. Ford and Ford's [The role of conversations in producing intentional change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 541–570] typology identifies different conversational forms to create the shared understandings required to enact change. This paper reflects on the learnings from a management development intervention based upon Ford and Ford’s typology where managers applied the conversational forms to initiate mental model amendment, thereby enabling planned change. Analysis of qualitative data collected during the intervention suggests that using different types of conversations in a structured manner enabled shared understandings regarding why change was required and what success looked like. Managers recognized that slowing down the conversational process led to more effective mental model amendment, facilitating behavioural change. The paper demonstrates how different conversational forms enable leaders to discuss a planned change from an individual and organizational perspective and elicit mental model amendment to realize change. MAD statement This paper explores a new approach to undertaking employee performance management to enable organizational change. The paper applies Ford and Ford’s (1995) conversational typology as a practice model for developing the conversational competencies of managers and leaders. The paper highlights the importance of taking account of employees’ and managers’ different mental models in order to enable planned change. It argues that it is not more conversations that is needed, but instead the capacity to recognize and utilize different conversational forms to realize mental model amendment to elicit behavioural change and thus achieve change. The paper outlines an intervention that applies this new approach to employee performance management training.","PeriodicalId":47003,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45466244","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-06DOI: 10.1080/14697017.2021.2018722
Saara Karasvirta, S. Teerikangas
ABSTRACT Despite a plethora of frameworks and processes, in planned organizational change models (POCMs), the role of change organizations, i.e. organizations dedicated to change, remains rarely explored. In this paper, we delve into this subject via a multiple case-based research design studying eleven large Finnish companies via 33 interviews. We find that although all studied case companies bear some component(s) of change organizations, these vary substantially. To this end, our findings bear three contributions. First, we propose a typology on change organizations as consisting of change networks, change teams and individual change roles, incorporating varying dimensions each. We further found three interrelations between these dimensions. Second, we demonstrate that change organizations exist in company practice more than they appear in the POCM literature. Third, we develop a framework for the evaluation of the maturity of a company’s change organization. Going forward, our findings are a call for further research on change organizations and their role in planned organizational change. MAD statement This article aims to Make a Difference (MAD) by offering a coherent lens that can be used both in the research and in the development of change organizations, in theory and in practice. Change organizations (networks, teams and roles dedicated to change) are a somewhat underrepresented dimension in classic planned organizational change models. However, in practice, companies’ change organizations play various active roles in planned change. Building on evidence from a multiple case study of eleven Finnish large companies, we suggest a multi-dimensional typology on change organizations. Through identified interrelations, we suggest that certain types of change organizations may be preferred over others in particular circumstances. In addition, we offer a change organization maturity framework for developing and evaluating companies’ change organizations.
{"title":"Change Organizations in Planned Change – A Closer Look","authors":"Saara Karasvirta, S. Teerikangas","doi":"10.1080/14697017.2021.2018722","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2021.2018722","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Despite a plethora of frameworks and processes, in planned organizational change models (POCMs), the role of change organizations, i.e. organizations dedicated to change, remains rarely explored. In this paper, we delve into this subject via a multiple case-based research design studying eleven large Finnish companies via 33 interviews. We find that although all studied case companies bear some component(s) of change organizations, these vary substantially. To this end, our findings bear three contributions. First, we propose a typology on change organizations as consisting of change networks, change teams and individual change roles, incorporating varying dimensions each. We further found three interrelations between these dimensions. Second, we demonstrate that change organizations exist in company practice more than they appear in the POCM literature. Third, we develop a framework for the evaluation of the maturity of a company’s change organization. Going forward, our findings are a call for further research on change organizations and their role in planned organizational change. MAD statement This article aims to Make a Difference (MAD) by offering a coherent lens that can be used both in the research and in the development of change organizations, in theory and in practice. Change organizations (networks, teams and roles dedicated to change) are a somewhat underrepresented dimension in classic planned organizational change models. However, in practice, companies’ change organizations play various active roles in planned change. Building on evidence from a multiple case study of eleven Finnish large companies, we suggest a multi-dimensional typology on change organizations. Through identified interrelations, we suggest that certain types of change organizations may be preferred over others in particular circumstances. In addition, we offer a change organization maturity framework for developing and evaluating companies’ change organizations.","PeriodicalId":47003,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45367888","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-02DOI: 10.1080/14697017.2022.2030980
Mark Hughes
ABSTRACT The assumption that organizational change tends to fail continues to stand unchallenged. This is an unsatisfactory situation that impedes not only the evaluation of such change but also studying its management and leadership. The enduring prevalence of this flawed assumption illustrates a failure of scholarship rather than practice. Although failure claims appeared plausible implying objective research and critical scholarship at work, the supporting evidence always eluded the proponents. This paper turns its focus to explain how and why change and transformation have been and continue to be depicted as failing. Seven hopes for future organizational change studies are identified and discussed. These include undertaking further historiographies and moving away from change either tending to succeed or to fail dualisms, towards embracing dualities. As well as, greater acknowledgement of the contextual, processual and dynamic nature of evaluating organizational change. Organizational change lost its way in not appreciating that it was managing change which was depicted as failing. Constructing the authority of change leaders; initially, required the authority of change managers to be corroded. The attribution of failure to managers and success to leaders is currently missing from change agency and change evaluation debates.
{"title":"Reflections: How Studying Organizational Change Lost Its Way","authors":"Mark Hughes","doi":"10.1080/14697017.2022.2030980","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2022.2030980","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The assumption that organizational change tends to fail continues to stand unchallenged. This is an unsatisfactory situation that impedes not only the evaluation of such change but also studying its management and leadership. The enduring prevalence of this flawed assumption illustrates a failure of scholarship rather than practice. Although failure claims appeared plausible implying objective research and critical scholarship at work, the supporting evidence always eluded the proponents. This paper turns its focus to explain how and why change and transformation have been and continue to be depicted as failing. Seven hopes for future organizational change studies are identified and discussed. These include undertaking further historiographies and moving away from change either tending to succeed or to fail dualisms, towards embracing dualities. As well as, greater acknowledgement of the contextual, processual and dynamic nature of evaluating organizational change. Organizational change lost its way in not appreciating that it was managing change which was depicted as failing. Constructing the authority of change leaders; initially, required the authority of change managers to be corroded. The attribution of failure to managers and success to leaders is currently missing from change agency and change evaluation debates.","PeriodicalId":47003,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44235655","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-02DOI: 10.1080/14697017.2022.2037184
Edward Freeman, R. By
MAD statement The intention of this leading article is to help reframe our take on capitalism and leadership. Rather than presenting a linear, one-solution approach, it promotes an often messy, uncertain approach based on purpose, co-creation, creativity, courage and action delivering on a multitude of stakeholders’ needs and interests.
{"title":"Stakeholder Capitalism and Implications for How We Think About Leadership","authors":"Edward Freeman, R. By","doi":"10.1080/14697017.2022.2037184","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2022.2037184","url":null,"abstract":"MAD statement The intention of this leading article is to help reframe our take on capitalism and leadership. Rather than presenting a linear, one-solution approach, it promotes an often messy, uncertain approach based on purpose, co-creation, creativity, courage and action delivering on a multitude of stakeholders’ needs and interests.","PeriodicalId":47003,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43222011","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-27DOI: 10.1080/14697017.2021.2018721
Bradley J. Hastings, G. Schwarz
ABSTRACT Diagnostic and dialogic organization development present two contrasting change practices that are frequently discussed in tandem. Yet, an increasing body of evidence shows they are co-applied in practice. For those involved in leadership of these practices, co-application means switching their engagement, such as commencing with a diagnostic analysis to determine the goals of change, then switching to dialogic processes to foster the emergence of new ways of working. However, theoretical descriptions of these two practices remain bifurcated and, as such, overlook leadership development approaches that help leaders switch between engagement styles. Addressing this problem, this paper explores a leadership development approach that focusses on mindsets. We propose six mindsets from psychology settings that are relevant for leadership of diagnostic and dialogic practices. A key contribution of this work is a new perspective on leadership development. Extending psychology-derived knowledge on how to activate mindsets provides leaders of change practices with a means to increase awareness of, and take control of, their mindset, helping them to adjust their engagement as change contexts dictate. MAD statement This paper seeks to Make a Difference (MAD) by offering a practical means to develop change leaders. Far too often, change practice literature has studied successful leaders with the aim to identify what they do, while at the same time overlooking the mechanics that develop these same actions and behaviours. The paper addresses this oversight with a focus on mindsets. It puts forward a means for leaders to increase awareness of, and take control of, their activated mindset and, in doing so, align what they do to change leadership contexts.
{"title":"Mindsets for Change Leaders: Exploring Priming Approaches for Leadership Development","authors":"Bradley J. Hastings, G. Schwarz","doi":"10.1080/14697017.2021.2018721","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2021.2018721","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Diagnostic and dialogic organization development present two contrasting change practices that are frequently discussed in tandem. Yet, an increasing body of evidence shows they are co-applied in practice. For those involved in leadership of these practices, co-application means switching their engagement, such as commencing with a diagnostic analysis to determine the goals of change, then switching to dialogic processes to foster the emergence of new ways of working. However, theoretical descriptions of these two practices remain bifurcated and, as such, overlook leadership development approaches that help leaders switch between engagement styles. Addressing this problem, this paper explores a leadership development approach that focusses on mindsets. We propose six mindsets from psychology settings that are relevant for leadership of diagnostic and dialogic practices. A key contribution of this work is a new perspective on leadership development. Extending psychology-derived knowledge on how to activate mindsets provides leaders of change practices with a means to increase awareness of, and take control of, their mindset, helping them to adjust their engagement as change contexts dictate. MAD statement This paper seeks to Make a Difference (MAD) by offering a practical means to develop change leaders. Far too often, change practice literature has studied successful leaders with the aim to identify what they do, while at the same time overlooking the mechanics that develop these same actions and behaviours. The paper addresses this oversight with a focus on mindsets. It puts forward a means for leaders to increase awareness of, and take control of, their activated mindset and, in doing so, align what they do to change leadership contexts.","PeriodicalId":47003,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49034207","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-16DOI: 10.1080/14697017.2021.2013298
I. Winkler, M. Kristensen
ABSTRACT This conceptual paper draws upon Victor Turner’s understanding of social change as social drama. It develops an interpretive framework for episodic organizational change as a period of liminal transition that is triggered and driven by conflict. Emphasizing the liminal quality inherent in change processes, the social drama is used to generate a conceptual frame to investigate the opportunities and threats in liminal transitions, the various ways to re-establish social order in organizations and the associated role of leaders in liminal times. Promoting conflict’s productive nature for organizational change, the social drama is further used to provide a frame to investigate how social reality in organizations is challenged, developed, crafted, transformed and finally re-constituted through conflict. The article argues that the social drama perspective has the capacity to further reflexive thinking about change processes in organizations.
{"title":"Episodic Organizational Change and Social Drama – Liminality and Conflict in the Change Process","authors":"I. Winkler, M. Kristensen","doi":"10.1080/14697017.2021.2013298","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2021.2013298","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT\u0000 This conceptual paper draws upon Victor Turner’s understanding of social change as social drama. It develops an interpretive framework for episodic organizational change as a period of liminal transition that is triggered and driven by conflict. Emphasizing the liminal quality inherent in change processes, the social drama is used to generate a conceptual frame to investigate the opportunities and threats in liminal transitions, the various ways to re-establish social order in organizations and the associated role of leaders in liminal times. Promoting conflict’s productive nature for organizational change, the social drama is further used to provide a frame to investigate how social reality in organizations is challenged, developed, crafted, transformed and finally re-constituted through conflict. The article argues that the social drama perspective has the capacity to further reflexive thinking about change processes in organizations.","PeriodicalId":47003,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46367436","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-16DOI: 10.1080/14697017.2021.2013297
Benjamin P. Dean
ABSTRACT To meet the adaptive challenges of rapidly changing environments, leaders of organizational teams and team-based entities can leverage the powerful dynamic capabilities of ambidexterity to achieve sustainable innovation and longterm adaptation. This conceptual inquiry focuses on the special characteristics of teams and teamwork, and how those can afford dynamic potential for achieving ambidexterity. Teams intrinsically function dynamically as integrative adaptive systems. Teams hold unique advantages for sensing and seizing new opportunities, and for reallocating taskwork and reconfiguring resources. Such advantages enable teams to more effectively align and balance exploration and exploitation for sustained innovation and successful adaptation. This inquiry draws from existing studies of dynamic capabilities and ambidexterity, and integrates that research with the well-established literature on teams and teamwork. This study examines the key processes and dynamics of team ambidexterity. The study synthesizes, and proposes a systems model that indicates team-centric mechanisms and dynamic linkages by which ambidexterity can operate as dynamic capabilities within teams. The analysis and model add to the development of organizational change theory and orients future studies of ambidexterity at meso level. This inquiry also benefits organizational leaders by providing valuable insights and practical tools for developing, leading, and supporting teams that can perform effectively under turbulent conditions.
{"title":"Developing and Leading Ambidextrous Teams: A Team-Centric Framework of Ambidexterity in Volatile Environments","authors":"Benjamin P. Dean","doi":"10.1080/14697017.2021.2013297","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2021.2013297","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT To meet the adaptive challenges of rapidly changing environments, leaders of organizational teams and team-based entities can leverage the powerful dynamic capabilities of ambidexterity to achieve sustainable innovation and longterm adaptation. This conceptual inquiry focuses on the special characteristics of teams and teamwork, and how those can afford dynamic potential for achieving ambidexterity. Teams intrinsically function dynamically as integrative adaptive systems. Teams hold unique advantages for sensing and seizing new opportunities, and for reallocating taskwork and reconfiguring resources. Such advantages enable teams to more effectively align and balance exploration and exploitation for sustained innovation and successful adaptation. This inquiry draws from existing studies of dynamic capabilities and ambidexterity, and integrates that research with the well-established literature on teams and teamwork. This study examines the key processes and dynamics of team ambidexterity. The study synthesizes, and proposes a systems model that indicates team-centric mechanisms and dynamic linkages by which ambidexterity can operate as dynamic capabilities within teams. The analysis and model add to the development of organizational change theory and orients future studies of ambidexterity at meso level. This inquiry also benefits organizational leaders by providing valuable insights and practical tools for developing, leading, and supporting teams that can perform effectively under turbulent conditions.","PeriodicalId":47003,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46085229","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-22DOI: 10.1080/14697017.2021.2005294
E. Mastio, S. Clegg, Miguel Pina e Cunha, Ken Dovey
{"title":"Leadership Ignoring Paradox to Maintain Inertial Order","authors":"E. Mastio, S. Clegg, Miguel Pina e Cunha, Ken Dovey","doi":"10.1080/14697017.2021.2005294","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2021.2005294","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47003,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44685354","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：