Pub Date : 2020-05-04DOI: 10.1080/14697017.2020.1758748
Carol Flinchbaugh, Ghadir Ishqaidef, Clint Chadwick
ABSTRACT The study employs a mixed-method approach utilizing interview and survey data to discern what influences the effectiveness of an inter-organizational initiative wherein two distinct organizations share a human resource executive (HRE). Initial efficiencies of the initiative resulted in both agencies. Over time, however, the data emerged to reveal differing outcomes, such that the agency who shared the HRE reported a decreased HR service climate, while HR service gains and increased job engagement appeared at the other agency. Rather than one agency benefitting at the other’s expense, relational and structural organizational boundary conditions emerged to explain the divergent views of the collaborative’s (in)effectiveness. The analysis extends flexible leadership theory to depict how an HRE’s relational role, trust, and organizational architectures are boundary conditions for effectiveness in an HR collaboration. The findings provide practical implications for organizations considering collaborative initiatives and identify conditions that may contribute to success following the change.
{"title":"A Shared Human Resources Change Initiative: What Influences (in)Effectiveness?","authors":"Carol Flinchbaugh, Ghadir Ishqaidef, Clint Chadwick","doi":"10.1080/14697017.2020.1758748","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2020.1758748","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The study employs a mixed-method approach utilizing interview and survey data to discern what influences the effectiveness of an inter-organizational initiative wherein two distinct organizations share a human resource executive (HRE). Initial efficiencies of the initiative resulted in both agencies. Over time, however, the data emerged to reveal differing outcomes, such that the agency who shared the HRE reported a decreased HR service climate, while HR service gains and increased job engagement appeared at the other agency. Rather than one agency benefitting at the other’s expense, relational and structural organizational boundary conditions emerged to explain the divergent views of the collaborative’s (in)effectiveness. The analysis extends flexible leadership theory to depict how an HRE’s relational role, trust, and organizational architectures are boundary conditions for effectiveness in an HR collaboration. The findings provide practical implications for organizations considering collaborative initiatives and identify conditions that may contribute to success following the change.","PeriodicalId":47003,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT","volume":"20 1","pages":"369 - 386"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2020-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14697017.2020.1758748","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41721110","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 : 2020-04-30DOI: 10.1080/14697017.2020.1755342
Michael Pedersen, Stephen Dunne
ABSTRACT The narrow view of habits predominant within behavioural approaches to change management conceptualizes them as passive transition points between stimuli and responses. John Dewey’s broad view of habit, by contrast, conceptualizes habits as the very basis for how individuals interact with their environments, one another, and themselves. We highlight the renewed relevance of Dewey’s conceptualization of habit by clarifying it as (1) a function between individuals and environments; (2) a custom produced within social settings; (3) a process intertwined with inquiries and impulses. We illustrate each of these characteristics through the example of a French factory, within which we claim that the narrow view prevails, and a Danish IT company, within which we claim the presence of a broader view. We proceed to discuss consequences of the broad view to change management research. MAD statement This paper Make a Difference (MAD) by pointing to the relevance of looking at habit in understanding the microdynamics of change. Rather than understanding habit in a narrow sense as automatic behaviour triggers by environmental clues, the paper presents a broad conceptions of habit that understands habit as a social and materially disposition that both make change recipients resist and receptive towards change. This conception of habit is based on the work of the pragmatist philosophy and psychology of John Dewey, applied to two empirical cases and discussed in light of change management literature
{"title":"Dewey’s Broad Account of Habit and its Relevance for Change Management: A Conceptual Clarification with Pragmatic Illustrations","authors":"Michael Pedersen, Stephen Dunne","doi":"10.1080/14697017.2020.1755342","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2020.1755342","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The narrow view of habits predominant within behavioural approaches to change management conceptualizes them as passive transition points between stimuli and responses. John Dewey’s broad view of habit, by contrast, conceptualizes habits as the very basis for how individuals interact with their environments, one another, and themselves. We highlight the renewed relevance of Dewey’s conceptualization of habit by clarifying it as (1) a function between individuals and environments; (2) a custom produced within social settings; (3) a process intertwined with inquiries and impulses. We illustrate each of these characteristics through the example of a French factory, within which we claim that the narrow view prevails, and a Danish IT company, within which we claim the presence of a broader view. We proceed to discuss consequences of the broad view to change management research. MAD statement This paper Make a Difference (MAD) by pointing to the relevance of looking at habit in understanding the microdynamics of change. Rather than understanding habit in a narrow sense as automatic behaviour triggers by environmental clues, the paper presents a broad conceptions of habit that understands habit as a social and materially disposition that both make change recipients resist and receptive towards change. This conception of habit is based on the work of the pragmatist philosophy and psychology of John Dewey, applied to two empirical cases and discussed in light of change management literature","PeriodicalId":47003,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT","volume":"20 1","pages":"247 - 263"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2020-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14697017.2020.1755342","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45379030","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 : 2020-04-23DOI: 10.1080/14697017.2020.1755341
Kasper Edwards, Thim Prætorius, A. Nielsen
ABSTRACT Understanding how and why organizational changes succeed is of paramount importance because many organizational changes do not deliver the expected results. This paper presents a case study of successful change at a world leading cardiology department and proposes a model of cascading change that requires change managers to go beyond the simplistic dichotomies of planned versus emergent change. Successful change requires the reconciliation and integration of top-down and bottom-up approaches. Top management must set the direction and should then step back and allow the diagnosis and solution-development processes to take place in a bottom-up manner. This allows employees to identify and solve the problems that matter to them and that reflect their organizational reality. The implementation of the changes toward the end of the change process should take place in a top-down manner. The model of cascadingchange is based on three key drivers: a cascading change process with formal handovers engaging more and more employees, Lewinian change processes of unfreeze, move, and refreeze, and, finally, orchestrated employee participation. The cascading change process is found to build participation, transparency, trust, and commitment to the change among employees and managers. In turn, this ensures that implementation occurs without problems.
{"title":"A Model of Cascading Change: Orchestrating Planned and Emergent Change to Ensure Employee Participation","authors":"Kasper Edwards, Thim Prætorius, A. Nielsen","doi":"10.1080/14697017.2020.1755341","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2020.1755341","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Understanding how and why organizational changes succeed is of paramount importance because many organizational changes do not deliver the expected results. This paper presents a case study of successful change at a world leading cardiology department and proposes a model of cascading change that requires change managers to go beyond the simplistic dichotomies of planned versus emergent change. Successful change requires the reconciliation and integration of top-down and bottom-up approaches. Top management must set the direction and should then step back and allow the diagnosis and solution-development processes to take place in a bottom-up manner. This allows employees to identify and solve the problems that matter to them and that reflect their organizational reality. The implementation of the changes toward the end of the change process should take place in a top-down manner. The model of cascadingchange is based on three key drivers: a cascading change process with formal handovers engaging more and more employees, Lewinian change processes of unfreeze, move, and refreeze, and, finally, orchestrated employee participation. The cascading change process is found to build participation, transparency, trust, and commitment to the change among employees and managers. In turn, this ensures that implementation occurs without problems.","PeriodicalId":47003,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT","volume":"20 1","pages":"342 - 368"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2020-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14697017.2020.1755341","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48989329","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 : 2020-04-21DOI: 10.1080/14697017.2020.1744884
Otto Scharmer
ABSTRACT In his critique of Theory U, Kühl suggests that this approach resembles a management fashion based on four specific characteristics and claims, namely: (1) The simultaneous transformation of nearly everything, (2) The suspension of the differences between science, economics, politics, and religion, (3) Resolving conflicts of interest according to a community ideology, and (4) Reliance on purposive-rational thinking. The first part of this response to Kühl's critique argues that these four claims are unfounded or misguided and outlines why that is the case. The second part explores the questions not raised by Kühl. Finally, the third part of this response explores the blind spots of the framework that underlies Kühl's critique (Luhmann-inspired autopoietic social systems theory) and ways in which Theory U actually addresses these. Reflecting on the origins of Luhmann's approach in the early work of Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela [1987. The tree of knowledge: The biological roots of human understanding. Shambhala Publications, Inc.], the question is asked what an alternative approach to social systems theory might look like if it were instead grounded in the more evolved and later work of both Maturana and Varela – which in fact turns out to be the case for Theory U.
{"title":"Social Systems as If People Mattered Response to the Kühl Critique of Theory U","authors":"Otto Scharmer","doi":"10.1080/14697017.2020.1744884","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2020.1744884","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In his critique of Theory U, Kühl suggests that this approach resembles a management fashion based on four specific characteristics and claims, namely: (1) The simultaneous transformation of nearly everything, (2) The suspension of the differences between science, economics, politics, and religion, (3) Resolving conflicts of interest according to a community ideology, and (4) Reliance on purposive-rational thinking. The first part of this response to Kühl's critique argues that these four claims are unfounded or misguided and outlines why that is the case. The second part explores the questions not raised by Kühl. Finally, the third part of this response explores the blind spots of the framework that underlies Kühl's critique (Luhmann-inspired autopoietic social systems theory) and ways in which Theory U actually addresses these. Reflecting on the origins of Luhmann's approach in the early work of Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela [1987. The tree of knowledge: The biological roots of human understanding. Shambhala Publications, Inc.], the question is asked what an alternative approach to social systems theory might look like if it were instead grounded in the more evolved and later work of both Maturana and Varela – which in fact turns out to be the case for Theory U.","PeriodicalId":47003,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT","volume":"20 1","pages":"322 - 332"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2020-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14697017.2020.1744884","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41780012","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 : 2020-04-02DOI: 10.1080/14697017.2019.1703025
Florian Hemme, Matthew T. Bowers, J. Todd
ABSTRACT Drawing from critical realism, institutional logics, and sensemaking, we examine how changing field level logics are encoded and enacted in organizational practice. In this paper, we make evident the problems inherent in attempting to characterize logics solely based on their observable macro-level structures and highlight in particular the challenges associated with appropriately distinguishing between final logic instantiations and the fluid processes underpinning their formulation. Consequently, we offer a meso-level explanation of how or why logics can be combined in practice. In the present case, the two prevailing logics coexisted because their respective actors encoded them in different ways and because distinctions between peripheral and central logic expectations were borne out of the process through which they were interpreted. Finally, we offer a contextualized interpretation of these enactment processes under consideration of the idiosyncratic features found in public service organizations. MAD statement This article sets out to Make a Difference (MAD) for change agents tasked with implementing complex organizational transformation initiatives. Documenting how the practical implementation of novel expectations depends on employees’ personal backgrounds and histories, we challenge the applicability of one-size-fits-all approaches. We highlight instead the need to attend to the differences in change perception and interpretation that are bound to arise when diverse groups of people work in separate branches or locations of the same organization and do not share sensemaking models or meaning giving frameworks.
{"title":"Enacting Logics in Practice: A Critical Realist Perspective","authors":"Florian Hemme, Matthew T. Bowers, J. Todd","doi":"10.1080/14697017.2019.1703025","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2019.1703025","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Drawing from critical realism, institutional logics, and sensemaking, we examine how changing field level logics are encoded and enacted in organizational practice. In this paper, we make evident the problems inherent in attempting to characterize logics solely based on their observable macro-level structures and highlight in particular the challenges associated with appropriately distinguishing between final logic instantiations and the fluid processes underpinning their formulation. Consequently, we offer a meso-level explanation of how or why logics can be combined in practice. In the present case, the two prevailing logics coexisted because their respective actors encoded them in different ways and because distinctions between peripheral and central logic expectations were borne out of the process through which they were interpreted. Finally, we offer a contextualized interpretation of these enactment processes under consideration of the idiosyncratic features found in public service organizations. MAD statement This article sets out to Make a Difference (MAD) for change agents tasked with implementing complex organizational transformation initiatives. Documenting how the practical implementation of novel expectations depends on employees’ personal backgrounds and histories, we challenge the applicability of one-size-fits-all approaches. We highlight instead the need to attend to the differences in change perception and interpretation that are bound to arise when diverse groups of people work in separate branches or locations of the same organization and do not share sensemaking models or meaning giving frameworks.","PeriodicalId":47003,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT","volume":"20 1","pages":"122 - 99"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2020-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14697017.2019.1703025","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43926581","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 : 2020-03-30DOI: 10.1080/14697017.2020.1744885
James M. Vardaman
Theory U, the change management philosophy discussed in Otto Scharmer’s (2009) book of the same title, continues to have broad relevance today. With recent reports of bias in Google’s search algori...
{"title":"Point-Counterpoint: Theory U – A Debate on Community","authors":"James M. Vardaman","doi":"10.1080/14697017.2020.1744885","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2020.1744885","url":null,"abstract":"Theory U, the change management philosophy discussed in Otto Scharmer’s (2009) book of the same title, continues to have broad relevance today. With recent reports of bias in Google’s search algori...","PeriodicalId":47003,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT","volume":"20 1","pages":"312 - 313"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14697017.2020.1744885","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44052526","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 : 2020-03-26DOI: 10.1080/14697017.2020.1746684
Andrew Baughen, C. Oswick, Rosie Oswick
ABSTRACT We contend that the dominant focus within the OD discourse is on organizations and their success (i.e. a preoccupation with ‘organizational effectiveness’) at the expense of wider responsibilities and obligations, and that the framing of ‘organizational health’ is overly narrow and partial (i.e. what is healthy for the organization rather than what is ‘healthy’ at an individual or societal level). We offer some support for our assertion that OD initiatives focus too much on organizational effectiveness and organizational health and we discuss the scope for embracing a wider set of change imperatives. This involves distinguishing between ‘self-ish’ and ‘self-less’ behaviour and drawing a distinction between distributive and generative forms of change activity Finally, we conclude by briefly sketching out how this could take shape in terms of what we have chosen to call ‘soulful interventions’.
{"title":"Rethinking ‘Organizational Effectiveness’ as a Core Premise of Organization Development: Beyond Narrow Organizational Interests and Towards Wider Soulful Interventions","authors":"Andrew Baughen, C. Oswick, Rosie Oswick","doi":"10.1080/14697017.2020.1746684","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2020.1746684","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT We contend that the dominant focus within the OD discourse is on organizations and their success (i.e. a preoccupation with ‘organizational effectiveness’) at the expense of wider responsibilities and obligations, and that the framing of ‘organizational health’ is overly narrow and partial (i.e. what is healthy for the organization rather than what is ‘healthy’ at an individual or societal level). We offer some support for our assertion that OD initiatives focus too much on organizational effectiveness and organizational health and we discuss the scope for embracing a wider set of change imperatives. This involves distinguishing between ‘self-ish’ and ‘self-less’ behaviour and drawing a distinction between distributive and generative forms of change activity Finally, we conclude by briefly sketching out how this could take shape in terms of what we have chosen to call ‘soulful interventions’.","PeriodicalId":47003,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT","volume":"20 1","pages":"333 - 341"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14697017.2020.1746684","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48737636","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 : 2020-03-24DOI: 10.1080/14697017.2020.1744883
S. Kühl
ABSTRACT Following a long period where the concept of a learning organization was the most popular way to implement change projects, consultants have now begun to apply a programme known as Theory U. A description of Theory U from a sociological perspective reveals that it has the typical structure of a management fashion. Theory U resembles a management fashion in as much as it holds out the promise that an organization – all of society, or even simply one individual – will be better off than beforehand after it has run through the various phases of the change process.
{"title":"The Blind Spots in Theory U: The Reconstruction of a (Change-) Management Fashion","authors":"S. Kühl","doi":"10.1080/14697017.2020.1744883","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2020.1744883","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Following a long period where the concept of a learning organization was the most popular way to implement change projects, consultants have now begun to apply a programme known as Theory U. A description of Theory U from a sociological perspective reveals that it has the typical structure of a management fashion. Theory U resembles a management fashion in as much as it holds out the promise that an organization – all of society, or even simply one individual – will be better off than beforehand after it has run through the various phases of the change process.","PeriodicalId":47003,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT","volume":"20 1","pages":"314 - 321"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14697017.2020.1744883","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47888344","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 : 2020-03-09DOI: 10.1080/14697017.2020.1737180
Erika van Gilst, R. Schalk, Tom Kluijtmans, R. Poell
ABSTRACT This study examined whether remediation (providing another inducement to compensate for an undelivered obligation in the psychological contract) was perceived as a useful way to deal with the consequences of a psychological contract breach in the context of organizational change. Data was collected by means of semi-structured face-to-face focus-group sessions and individual interviews in a restructuring organization in the Dutch banking sector. Fourteen focus groups and eight individual interviews were conducted with 30 non-managerial employees and 48 supervisors/professionals. The results bring the potential of offering compensating inducements to remedy psychological contract breach to the fore and highlight the role of other factors such as communication and the availability of job alternatives. Suggestions are provided for improving employee relations in situations of organizational change by taking the psychological contract into account. MAD statement This article sets out to Make A Difference (MAD) through describing views of employees of different hierarchical levels of a Dutch Bank on how to cope with expected organizational changes and less beneficial employment benefits in the future. The question of ‘how to change the deal while keeping the people’ by remediating breach of the psychological contract is addressed from different perspectives. When organizations are forced to implement changes, taking the mutual obligations in the psychological contract into account can avoid reactive, and unsuccessful management of change. A psychological contract breach can be remediated by providing other inducements for the mutual benefit of organization and employee. Since there are differences between employees in the meaning attached to obligations, an individual approach is necessary.
{"title":"The Role of Remediation in Mitigating the Negative Consequences of Psychological Contract Breach: A Qualitative Study in the Banking Sector","authors":"Erika van Gilst, R. Schalk, Tom Kluijtmans, R. Poell","doi":"10.1080/14697017.2020.1737180","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2020.1737180","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study examined whether remediation (providing another inducement to compensate for an undelivered obligation in the psychological contract) was perceived as a useful way to deal with the consequences of a psychological contract breach in the context of organizational change. Data was collected by means of semi-structured face-to-face focus-group sessions and individual interviews in a restructuring organization in the Dutch banking sector. Fourteen focus groups and eight individual interviews were conducted with 30 non-managerial employees and 48 supervisors/professionals. The results bring the potential of offering compensating inducements to remedy psychological contract breach to the fore and highlight the role of other factors such as communication and the availability of job alternatives. Suggestions are provided for improving employee relations in situations of organizational change by taking the psychological contract into account. MAD statement This article sets out to Make A Difference (MAD) through describing views of employees of different hierarchical levels of a Dutch Bank on how to cope with expected organizational changes and less beneficial employment benefits in the future. The question of ‘how to change the deal while keeping the people’ by remediating breach of the psychological contract is addressed from different perspectives. When organizations are forced to implement changes, taking the mutual obligations in the psychological contract into account can avoid reactive, and unsuccessful management of change. A psychological contract breach can be remediated by providing other inducements for the mutual benefit of organization and employee. Since there are differences between employees in the meaning attached to obligations, an individual approach is necessary.","PeriodicalId":47003,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT","volume":"20 1","pages":"264 - 282"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14697017.2020.1737180","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46538750","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 : 2020-03-05DOI: 10.1080/14697017.2020.1737179
S. Waddock
ABSTRACT The dire condition of planetary systems, growing inequality, and other grand challenges seem to make system transformation, either purposeful or not, inevitable. This paper argues transformation agents using approaches that involve seeing the system and its patterns, sensemaking that constructs new narratives and stories about the system built on resonant memes, and connecting across a range of boundaries are necessary for purposeful transformation towards human and planetary wellbeing. The paper further argues that it is such purposeful transformation towards global goals around wellbeing for all (including non-humans) that is needed. MAD statement The world is in significant trouble in its future capacity to support human civilization as we know it. There is growing recognition that major and purposeful systemic transformation of human systems, e.g. economic, social, and human-nature interact, is needed. Transformation change agents can purposefully work toward system transformations using approaches of seeing and making sense of the current system to figure out where leverage points for change are, creating new stories and memes that resonate broadly through sensemaking processes, and connect actors already working toward similar ends.
{"title":"Thinking Transformational System Change","authors":"S. Waddock","doi":"10.1080/14697017.2020.1737179","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2020.1737179","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The dire condition of planetary systems, growing inequality, and other grand challenges seem to make system transformation, either purposeful or not, inevitable. This paper argues transformation agents using approaches that involve seeing the system and its patterns, sensemaking that constructs new narratives and stories about the system built on resonant memes, and connecting across a range of boundaries are necessary for purposeful transformation towards human and planetary wellbeing. The paper further argues that it is such purposeful transformation towards global goals around wellbeing for all (including non-humans) that is needed. MAD statement The world is in significant trouble in its future capacity to support human civilization as we know it. There is growing recognition that major and purposeful systemic transformation of human systems, e.g. economic, social, and human-nature interact, is needed. Transformation change agents can purposefully work toward system transformations using approaches of seeing and making sense of the current system to figure out where leverage points for change are, creating new stories and memes that resonate broadly through sensemaking processes, and connect actors already working toward similar ends.","PeriodicalId":47003,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT","volume":"20 1","pages":"189 - 201"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14697017.2020.1737179","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44290426","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：