- Original Paper
- Published: 09 September 2022
Change Management: From Theory to Practice
- Jeffrey Phillips ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0708-6460 1 &
- James D. Klein 2
TechTrends volume 67 , pages 189–197 ( 2023 ) Cite this article
This article presents a set of change management strategies found across several models and frameworks and identifies how frequently change management practitioners implement these strategies in practice. We searched the literature to identify 15 common strategies found in 16 different change management models and frameworks. We also created a questionnaire based on the literature and distributed it to change management practitioners. Findings suggest that strategies related to communication, stakeholder involvement, encouragement, organizational culture, vision, and mission should be used when implementing organizational change.
Working on a manuscript?
Organizations must change to survive. There are many approaches to influence change; these differences require change managers to consider various strategies that increase acceptance and reduce barriers. A change manager is responsible for planning, developing, leading, evaluating, assessing, supporting, and sustaining a change implementation. Change management consists of models and strategies to help employees accept new organizational developments.
Change management practitioners and academic researchers view organizational change differently (Hughes, 2007 ; Pollack & Pollack, 2015 ). Saka ( 2003 ) states, “there is a gap between what the rational-linear change management approach prescribes and what change agents do” (p. 483). This disconnect may make it difficult to determine the suitability and appropriateness of using different techniques to promote change (Pollack & Pollack, 2015 ). Hughes ( 2007 ) thinks that practitioners and academics may have trouble communicating because they use different terms. Whereas academics use the terms, models, theories, and concepts, practitioners use tools and techniques. A tool is a stand-alone application, and a technique is an integrated approach (Dale & McQuater, 1998 ). Hughes ( 2007 ) expresses that classifying change management tools and techniques can help academics identify what practitioners do in the field and evaluate the effectiveness of practitioners’ implementations.
There is little empirical evidence that supports a preferred change management model (Hallencreutz & Turner, 2011 ). However, there are many similar strategies found across change management models (Raineri, 2011 ). Bamford and Forrester’s ( 2003 ) case study showed that “[change] managers in a company generally ignored the popular change literature” (p. 560). The authors followed Pettigrew’s ( 1987 ) suggestions that change managers should not use abstract theories; instead, they should relate change theories to the context of the change. Neves’ ( 2009 ) exploratory factor analysis of employees experiencing the implementation of a new performance appraisal system at a public university suggested that (a) change appropriateness (if the employee felt the change was beneficial to the organization) was positively related with affective commitment (how much the employee liked their job), and (b) affective commitment mediated the relationship between change appropriateness and individual change (how much the employee shifted to the new system). It is unlikely that there is a universal change management approach that works in all settings (Saka, 2003 ). Because change is chaotic, one specific model or framework may not be useful in multiple contexts (Buchanan & Boddy, 1992 ; Pettigrew & Whipp, 1991 ). This requires change managers to consider various approaches for different implementations (Pettigrew, 1987 ). Change managers may face uncertainties that cannot be addressed by a planned sequence of steps (Carnall, 2007 ; Pettigrew & Whipp, 1991 ). Different stakeholders within an organization may complete steps at different times (Pollack & Pollack, 2015 ). Although there may not be one perspective change management approach, many models and frameworks consist of similar change management strategies.
Anderson and Ackerman Anderson ( 2001 ) discuss the differences between change frameworks and change process models. They state that a change framework identifies topics that are relevant to the change and explains the procedures that organizations should acknowledge during the change. However, the framework does not provide details about how to accomplish the steps of the change or the sequence in which the change manager should perform the steps. Additionally, Anderson and Ackerman Anderson ( 2001 ) explain that change process models describe what actions are necessary to accomplish the change and the order in which to facilitate the actions. Whereas frameworks may identify variables or theories required to promote change, models focus on the specific processes that lead to change. Based on the literature, we define a change strategy as a process or action from a model or framework. Multiple models and frameworks contain similar strategies. Change managers use models and frameworks contextually; some change management strategies may be used across numerous models and frameworks.
The purpose of this article is to present a common set of change management strategies found across numerous models and frameworks and identify how frequently change management practitioners implement these common strategies in practice. We also compare current practice with models and frameworks from the literature. Some change management models and frameworks have been around for decades and others are more recent. This comparison may assist practitioners and theorists to consider different strategies that fall outside a specific model.
Common Strategies in the Change Management Literature
We examined highly-cited publications ( n > 1000 citations) from the last 20 years, business websites, and university websites to select organizational change management models and frameworks. First, we searched two indexes—Google Scholar and Web of Science’s Social Science Citation Index. We used the following keywords in both indexes: “change management” OR “organizational change” OR “organizational development” AND (models or frameworks). Additionally, we used the same search terms in a Google search to identify models mentioned on university and business websites. This helped us identify change management models that had less presence in popular research. We only included models and frameworks from our search results that were mentioned on multiple websites. We reached saturation when multiple publications stopped identifying new models and frameworks.
After we identified the models and frameworks, we analyzed the original publications by the authors to identify observable strategies included in the models and frameworks. We coded the strategies by comparing new strategies with our previously coded strategies, and we combined similar strategies or created a new strategy. Our list of strategies was not exhaustive, but we included the most common strategies found in the publications. Finally, we omitted publications that did not provide details about the change management strategies. Although many of these publications were highly cited and identified change implementation processes or phases, the authors did not identify a specific strategy.
Table 1 shows the 16 models and frameworks that we analyzed and the 15 common strategies that we identified from this analysis. Ackerman-Anderson and Anderson ( 2001 ) believe that it is important for process models to consider organizational imperatives as well as human dynamics and needs. Therefore, the list of strategies considers organizational imperatives such as create a vision for the change that aligns with the organization’s mission and strategies regarding human dynamics and needs such as listen to employees’ concerns about the change. We have presented the strategies in order of how frequently the strategies appear in the models and frameworks. Table 1 only includes strategies found in at least six of the models or frameworks.
Strategies Used by Change Managers
We developed an online questionnaire to determine how frequently change managers used the strategies identified in our review of the literature. The Qualtrics-hosted survey consisted of 28 questions including sliding-scale, multiple-choice, and Likert-type items. Demographic questions focused on (a) how long the participant had been involved in the practice of change management, (b) how many change projects the participant had led, (c) the types of industries in which the participant led change implementations, (d) what percentage of job responsibilities involved working as a change manager and a project manager, and (e) where the participant learned to conduct change management. Twenty-one Likert-type items asked how often the participant used the strategies identified by our review of common change management models and frameworks. Participants could select never, sometimes, most of the time, and always. The Cronbach’s Alpha of the Likert-scale questions was 0.86.
The procedures for the questionnaire followed the steps suggested by Gall et al. ( 2003 ). The first steps were to define the research objectives, select the sample, and design the questionnaire format. The fourth step was to pretest the questionnaire. We conducted cognitive laboratory interviews by sending the questionnaire and interview questions to one person who was in the field of change management, one person who was in the field of performance improvement, and one person who was in the field of survey development (Fowler, 2014 ). We met with the reviewers through Zoom to evaluate the questionnaire by asking them to read the directions and each item for clarity. Then, reviewers were directed to point out mistakes or areas of confusion. Having multiple people review the survey instruments improved the reliability of the responses (Fowler, 2014 ).
We used purposeful sampling to distribute the online questionnaire throughout the following organizations: the Association for Talent Development (ATD), Change Management Institute (CMI), and the International Society for Performance Improvement (ISPI). We also launched a call for participation to department chairs of United States universities who had Instructional Systems Design graduate programs with a focus on Performance Improvement. We used snowball sampling to gain participants by requesting that the department chairs forward the questionnaire to practitioners who had led at least one organizational change.
Table 2 provides a summary of the characteristics of the 49 participants who completed the questionnaire. Most had over ten years of experience practicing change management ( n = 37) and had completed over ten change projects ( n = 32). The participants learned how to conduct change management on-the-job ( n = 47), through books ( n = 31), through academic journal articles ( n = 22), and from college or university courses ( n = 20). The participants had worked in 13 different industries.
Table 3 shows how frequently participants indicated that they used the change management strategies included on the questionnaire. Forty or more participants said they used the following strategies most often or always: (1) Asked members of senior leadership to support the change; (2) Listened to managers’ concerns about the change; (3) Aligned an intended change with an organization’s mission; (4) Listened to employees’ concerns about the change; (5) Aligned an intended change with an organization’s vision; (6) Created measurable short-term goals; (7) Asked managers for feedback to improve the change, and (8) Focused on organizational culture.
Table 4 identifies how frequently the strategies appeared in the models and frameworks and the rate at which practitioners indicated they used the strategies most often or always. The strategies found in the top 25% of both ( n > 36 for practitioner use and n > 11 in models and frameworks) focused on communication, including senior leadership and the employees in change decisions, aligning the change with the vision and mission of the organization, and focusing on organizational culture. Practitioners used several strategies more commonly than the literature suggested, especially concerning the topic of middle management. Practitioners focused on listening to middle managers’ concerns about the change, asking managers for feedback to improve the change, and ensuring that managers were trained to promote the change. Meanwhile, practitioners did not engage in the following strategies as often as the models and frameworks suggested that they should: provide all members of the organization with clear communication about the change, distinguish the differences between leadership and management, reward new behavior, and include employees in change decisions.
Common Strategies Used by Practitioners and Found in the Literature
The purpose of this article was to present a common set of change management strategies found across numerous models and frameworks and to identify how frequently change management practitioners implement these common strategies in practice. The five common change management strategies were the following: communicate about the change, involve stakeholders at all levels of the organization, focus on organizational culture, consider the organization’s mission and vision, and provide encouragement and incentives to change. Below we discuss our findings with an eye toward presenting a few key recommendations for change management.
Communicate About the Change
Communication is an umbrella term that can include messaging, networking, and negotiating (Buchanan & Boddy, 1992 ). Our findings revealed that communication is essential for change management. All the models and frameworks we examined suggested that change managers should provide members of the organization with clear communication about the change. It is interesting that approximately 33% of questionnaire respondents indicated that they sometimes, rather than always or most of the time, notified all members of the organization about the change. This may be the result of change managers communicating through organizational leaders. Instead of communicating directly with everyone in the organization, some participants may have used senior leadership, middle management, or subgroups to communicate the change. Messages sent to employees from leaders can effectively promote change. Regardless of who is responsible for communication, someone in the organization should explain why the change is happening (Connor et al., 2003 ; Doyle & Brady, 2018 ; Hiatt, 2006 ; Kotter, 2012 ) and provide clear communication throughout the entire change implementation (McKinsey & Company, 2008 ; Mento et al., 2002 ).
Involve Stakeholders at All Levels of the Organization
Our results indicate that change managers should involve senior leaders, managers, as well as employees during a change initiative. The items on the questionnaire were based on a review of common change management models and frameworks and many related to some form of stakeholder involvement. Of these strategies, over half were used often by 50% or more respondents. They focused on actions like gaining support from leaders, listening to and getting feedback from managers and employees, and adjusting strategies based on stakeholder input.
Whereas the models and frameworks often identified strategies regarding senior leadership and employees, it is interesting that questionnaire respondents indicated that they often implemented strategies involving middle management in a change implementation. This aligns with Bamford and Forrester’s ( 2003 ) research describing how middle managers are important communicators of change and provide an organization with the direction for the change. However, the participants did not develop managers into leaders as often as the literature proposed. Burnes and By ( 2012 ) expressed that leadership is essential to promote change and mention how the change management field has failed to focus on leadership as much as it should.
Focus on Organizational Culture
All but one of the models and frameworks we analyzed indicated that change managers should focus on changing the culture of an organization and more than 75% of questionnaire respondents revealed that they implemented this strategy always or most of the time. Organizational culture affects the acceptance of change. Changing the organizational culture can prevent employees from returning to the previous status quo (Bullock & Batten, 1985 ; Kotter, 2012 ; Mento et al., 2002 ). Some authors have different views on how to change an organization’s culture. For example, Burnes ( 2000 ) thinks that change managers should focus on employees who were resistant to the change while Hiatt ( 2006 ) suggests that change managers should replicate what strategies they used in the past to change the culture. Change managers require open support and commitment from managers to lead a culture change (Phillips, 2021 ).
In addition, Pless and Maak ( 2004 ) describe the importance of creating a culture of inclusion where diverse viewpoints help an organization reach its organizational objectives. Yet less than half of the participants indicated that they often focused on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). Change managers should consider diverse viewpoints when implementing change, especially for organizations whose vision promotes a diverse and inclusive workforce.
Consider the Organization’s Mission and Vision
Several of the models and frameworks we examined mentioned that change managers should consider the mission and vision of the organization (Cummings & Worley, 1993 ; Hiatt, 2006 ; Kotter, 2012 ; Polk, 2011 ). Furthermore, aligning the change with the organization’s mission and vision were among the strategies most often implemented by participants. This was the second most common strategy both used by participants and found in the models and frameworks. A mission of an organization may include its beliefs, values, priorities, strengths, and desired public image (Cummings & Worley, 1993 ). Leaders are expected to adhere to a company’s values and mission (Strebel, 1996 ).
Provide Encouragement and Incentives to Change
Most of the change management models and frameworks suggested that organizations should reward new behavior, yet most respondents said they did not provide incentives to change. About 75% of participants did indicate that they frequently gave encouragement to employees about the change. The questionnaire may have confused participants by suggesting that they provide incentives before the change occurs. Additionally, respondents may have associated incentives with monetary compensation. Employee training can be considered an incentive, and many participants confirmed that they provided employees and managers with training. More information is needed to determine why the participants did not provide incentives and what the participants defined as rewards.
Future Conversations Between Practitioners and Researchers
Table 4 identified five strategies that practitioners used more often than the models and frameworks suggested and four strategies that were suggested more often by the models and frameworks than used by practitioners. One strategy that showed the largest difference was provided employees with incentives to implement the change. Although 81% of the selected models and frameworks suggested that practitioners should provide employees with incentives, only 25% of the practitioners identified that they provided incentives always and most of the time. Conversations between theorists and practitioners could determine if these differences occur because each group uses different terms (Hughes, 2007 ) or if practitioners just implement change differently than theorists suggest (Saka, 2003 ).
Additionally, conversations between theorists and practitioners may help promote improvements in the field of change management. For example, practitioners were split on how often they promoted DEI, and the selected models and frameworks did not focus on DEI in change implementations. Conversations between the two groups would help theorists understand what practitioners are doing to advance the field of change management. These conversations may encourage theorists to modify their models and frameworks to include modern approaches to change.
The models and frameworks included in this systematic review were found through academic research and websites on the topic of change management. We did not include strategies contained on websites from change management organizations. Therefore, the identified strategies could skew towards approaches favored by theorists instead of practitioners. Additionally, we used specific publications to identify the strategies found in the models and frameworks. Any amendments to the cited models or frameworks found in future publications could not be included in this research.
We distributed this questionnaire in August 2020. Several participants mentioned that they were not currently conducting change management implementations because of global lockdowns due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Because it can take years to complete a change management implementation (Phillips, 2021 ), this research does not describe how COVID-19 altered the strategies used by the participants. Furthermore, participants were not provided with definitions of the strategies. Their interpretations of the strategies may differ from the definitions found in the academic literature.
Future research should expand upon what strategies the practitioners use to determine (a) how the practitioners use the strategies, and (b) the reasons why practitioners use certain strategies. Participants identified several strategies that they did not use as often as the literature suggested (e.g., provide employees with incentives and adjust the change implementation because of reactions from employees). Future research should investigate why practitioners are not implementing these strategies often.
Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic may have changed how practitioners implemented change management strategies. Future research should investigate if practitioners have added new strategies or changed the frequency in which they identified using the strategies found in this research.
Our aim was to identify a common set of change management strategies found across several models and frameworks and to identify how frequently change management practitioners implement these strategies in practice. While our findings relate to specific models, frameworks, and strategies, we caution readers to consider the environment and situation where the change will occur. Therefore, strategies should not be selected for implementation based on their inclusion in highly cited models and frameworks. Our study identified strategies found in the literature and used by change managers, but it does not predict that specific strategies are more likely to promote a successful organizational change. Although we have presented several strategies, we do not suggest combining these strategies to create a new framework. Instead, these strategies should be used to promote conversation between practitioners and theorists. Additionally, we do not suggest that one model or framework is superior to others because it contains more strategies currently used by practitioners. Evaluating the effectiveness of a model or framework by how many common strategies it contains gives an advantage to models and frameworks that contain the most strategies. Instead, this research identifies what practitioners are doing in the field to steer change management literature towards the strategies that are most used to promote change.
Ackerman-Anderson, L. S., & Anderson, D. (2001). The change leader’s roadmap: How to navigate your organization’s transformation . Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.
Anderson, D., & Ackerman Anderson, L. S. (2001). Beyond change management: Advanced strategies for today’s transformational leaders . Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.
Bakari, H., Hunjra, A. I., & Niazi, G. S. K. (2017). How does authentic leadership influence planned organizational change? The role of employees’ perceptions: Integration of theory of planned behavior and Lewin’s three step model. Journal of Change Management, 17 (2), 155–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2017.1299370
Article Google Scholar
Bamford, D. R., & Forrester, P. L. (2003). Managing planned and emergent change within an operations management environment. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 23 (5), 546–564. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570310471857
Beckhard, R., & Harris, R. T. (1987). Organizational transitions: Managing complex change (2 nd ed.). Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
Bridges, W. (1991). Managing transitions: Making the most of change . Perseus Books.
Buchanan, D. A., & Boddy, D. (1992). The expertise of the change agent . Prentice Hall.
Bullock, R. J., & Batten, D. (1985). It's just a phase we're going through: A review and synthesis of OD phase analysis. Group & Organization Studies, 10 (4), 383–412.
Burnes, B. (2000). Managing change: A strategic approach to organisational dynamics (3 rd ed.). Prentice Hall.
Burnes, B., & By, R. T. (2012). Leadership and change: The case for greater ethical clarity. Journal of Business Ethics, 108 (2), 239–252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-1088-2
Carnall, C. A. (2007). Managing change in organizations (5th ed.). Prentice Hall.
Connor, P. E., Lake, L. K., & Stackman, R. W. (2003). Managing organizational change (3 rd ed.). Praeger Publishers.
Cox, A. M., Pinfield, S., & Rutter, S. (2019). Extending McKinsey’s 7S model to understand strategic alignment in academic libraries. Library Management, 40 (5), 313–326. https://doi.org/10.1108/LM-06-2018-0052
Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (1993). Organizational development and change (5 th ed.). West Publishing Company.
Dale, B. & McQuater, R. (1998) Managing business improvement and quality: Implementing key tools and techniques . Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
Doyle, T., & Brady, M. (2018). Reframing the university as an emergent organisation: Implications for strategic management and leadership in higher education. Journal of Higher Education Policy & Management, 40 (4), 305–320. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2018.1478608
Fowler, F. J., Jr. (2014). Survey research methods: Applied social research methods (5 th ed.). Sage Publications Inc.
French, W. L., & Bell, C. H. Jr. (1999). Organizational development: Behavioral science interventions for organizational improvement (6 th ed.). Prentice-Hall Inc.
Gall, M., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2003). Educational research: An introduction (7 th ed.). Allyn & Bacon.
Hallencreutz, J., & Turner, D.-M. (2011). Exploring organizational change best practice: Are there any clear-cut models and definitions? International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences , 3 (1), 60–68. https://doi.org/10.1108/17566691111115081
Hiatt, J. M. (2006). ADKAR: A model for change in business, government, and our community . Prosci Learning Publications.
Hughes, M. (2007). The tools and techniques of change management. Journal of Change Management, 7 (1), 37–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/14697010701309435
Kanter, R. M., Stein, B. A., & Jick, T. D. (1992). The challenge of organizational change . The Free Press.
Kotter, J. P. (2012). Leading change . Harvard Business Review Press.
Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical papers . Harper & Brothers Publishers.
Luecke, R. (2003). Managing change and transition . Harvard Business School Press.
McKinsey & Company. (2008). Creating organizational transformations: McKinsey global survey results . McKinsey Quarterly. Retrieved August 5, 2020, from http://gsme.sharif.edu/~change/McKinsey%20Global%20Survey%20Results.pdf
Mento, A. J., Jones, R. M., & Dirndorfer, W. (2002). A change management process: Grounded in both theory and practice. Journal of Change Management, 3 (1), 45–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/714042520
Nadler, D. A., & Tushman, M. L. (1997). Competing by design: The power of organizational architecture . Oxford University Press.
Neri, R. A., Mason, C. E., & Demko, L. A. (2008). Application of Six Sigma/CAP methodology: Controlling blood-product utilization and costs. Journal of Healthcare Management, 53 (3), 183–196.
Neves, P. (2009). Readiness for change: Contributions for employee’s level of individual change and turnover intentions. Journal of Change Management, 9 (2), 215–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/14697010902879178
Pettigrew, A. M. (1987). Theoretical, methodological, and empirical issues in studying change: A response to Starkey. Journal of Management Studies, 24 , 420–426.
Pettigrew, A., & Whipp, R. (1991). Managing change for competitive success . Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
Phillips, J. B. (2021). Change happens: Practitioner use of change management strategies (Publication No. 28769879) [Doctoral dissertation, Florida State University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
Pless, N., & Maak, T. (2004). Building an inclusive diversity culture: Principles, processes and practice. Journal of Business Ethics, 54 (2), 129–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-004-9465-8
Polk, J. D. (2011). Lean Six Sigma, innovation, and the Change Acceleration Process can work together. Physician Executive, 37 (1), 38̫–42.
Pollack, J., & Pollack, R. (2015). Using Kotter’s eight stage process to manage an organizational change program: Presentation and practice. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 28 , 51–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-014-9317-0
Raineri, A. B. (2011). Change management practices: Impact on perceived change results. Journal of Business Research, 64 (3), 266–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.11.011
Saka, A. (2003). Internal change agents’ view of the management of change problem. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 16 (5), 480–496. https://doi.org/10.1108/09534810310494892
Strebel, P. (1996). Why do employees resist change? Harvard Business Review, 74 (3), 86–92.
Waterman, R. H., Jr, Peters, T. J., & Phillips, J. R. (1980). Structure is not organization. Business Horizons, 23 (3), 14–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/0007-6813(80)90027-0
Authors and affiliations.
University Libraries, Florida State University, 116 Honors Way, Tallahassee, FL, 32306, USA
Department of Educational Psychology & Learning Systems, College of Education, Florida State University, Stone Building-3205F, Tallahassee, FL, 32306-4453, USA
James D. Klein
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Correspondence to Jeffrey Phillips .
Conflict of interests.
This research does not represent conflicting interests or competing interests. The research was not funded by an outside agency and does not represent the interests of an outside party.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Reprints and Permissions
About this article
Cite this article.
Phillips, J., Klein, J.D. Change Management: From Theory to Practice. TechTrends 67 , 189–197 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00775-0
Accepted : 02 September 2022
Published : 09 September 2022
Issue Date : January 2023
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00775-0
Share this article
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
- Change management
- Organizational development
- Performance improvement
- Find a journal
- Publish with us
Journal of Organizational Change Management
Issue(s) available: 209 – From Volume: 1 Issue: 1 , to Volume: 36 Issue: 8
- Issue 8 2023 Open Access Issue in Progress
- Issue 6 2023
- Issue 5 2023
- Issue 4 2023
- Issue 3 2023
- Issue 2 2023
- Issue 1 2023 Why Some Firms Outperform Others
- Issue 8 2022 Open Access Issue
- Issue 7 2022 Sustainable creativity, innovation, and entrepreneurship: Concerning failures and resilience in hard times, difficult conditions, and special communities
- Issue 6 2022
- Issue 4/5 2022
- Issue 3 2022
- Issue 2 2022 Knowledge Management in Tourism: paradigms, approaches and methods
- Issue 1 2022
- Issue 7 2021
- Issue 6 2021
- Issue 5 2021
- Issue 4 2021 Theories are Methods. Or are they? Methodological options for organization and management research
- Issue 3 2021
- Issue 2 2021
- Issue 1 2021
- Issue 7 2020
- Issue 6 2020
- Issue 5 2020
- Issue 4 2020 Managing Meanings, Coaching Virtues and Mediating Rhetoric
- Issue 3 2020 LGBTQ research in management and institutions: broadening the lens
- Issue 2 2020
- Issue 1 2020
- Issue 7 2019
- Issue 6 2019
- Issue 5 2019 Organizational Change in Open Innovation
- Issue 4 2019
- Issue 3 2019 Building leadership capacity for change as the norm
- Issue 2 2019
- Issue 1 2019
- Issue 7 2018
- Issue 6 2018
- Issue 5 2018
- Issue 4 2018
- Issue 3 2018
- Issue 2 2018
- Issue 1 2018 Managing organizational change in emerging markets
- Issue 7 2017
- Issue 6 2017
- Issue 5 2017
- Issue 4 2017
- Issue 3 2017 The rhetoric and narratives in management research
- Issue 2 2017
- Issue 1 2017
- Issue 7 2016
- Issue 6 2016
- Issue 5 2016
- Issue 4 2016
- Issue 3 2016
- Issue 2 2016
- Issue 1 2016 Slawomir Magala, Generalist with a cause
- Issue 6 2015
- Issue 5 2015
- Issue 4 2015 Advancing Knowledge on Organizational Change and Public Sector Work
- Issue 3 2015
- Issue 2 2015
- Issue 1 2015
- Issue 6 2014
- Issue 5 2014 The Rhetoric and Narratives in Management Research
- Issue 4 2014 AGE-ility Challenges, and Management Agendas for the Organisation
- Issue 3 2014
- Issue 2 2014
- Issue 1 2014
- Issue 6 2013
- Issue 5 2013
- Issue 4 2013 Dreams and the organisation
- Issue 3 2013
- Issue 2 2013
- Issue 1 2013
- Issue 6 2012 Resistance to change as a positive influencer an introduction
- Issue 5 2012 Change management in the Entrepreneurial LatinAmerican organizations an overview
- Issue 4 2012 Sustainability and the need for change organisational change and transformational vision
- Issue 3 2012
- Issue 2 2012 The rhetoric and narratives in management research
- Issue 1 2012
- Issue 6 2011 Vagrants, voyagers, travellers and exiles a journey into the structures of organization
- Issue 5 2011
- Issue 4 2011
- Issue 3 2011
- Issue 2 2011 Changing Practice Through Reflection
- Issue 1 2011
- Issue 6 2010 The Failure of Transition Identities, Ideologies and Imaginary Institutions in Times of Global Capitalist Crisis
- Issue 5 2010 Perspectives on organizational change in Asia
- Issue 4 2010 Employeeorganization relationship in collective entrepreneurship
- Issue 3 2010
- Issue 2 2010 3rd International Conference on Rhetoric and Narratives in Management Research
- Issue 1 2010 Work and Play
- Issue 6 2009
- Issue 5 2009
- Issue 4 2009 The novel and organization
- Issue 3 2009
- Issue 2 2009 Corporate Robespierres ideologies of management and change
- Issue 1 2009 Historical approaches in organizational research
- Issue 6 2008
- Issue 5 2008 Storytelling
- Issue 4 2008 Worker Identity, Social Isolation and Absence of Community Challenges for the future
- Issue 3 2008
- Issue 2 2008
- Issue 1 2008
- Issue 6 2007
- Issue 5 2007
- Issue 4 2007 Change and continuity in writing about change and continuity
- Issue 3 2007 Organizational Change OverPsychologized and UnderSocialized
- Issue 2 2007 Women and Leadership
- Issue 1 2007
- Issue 6 2006 Romania Untapped Intellectual and Spiritual Capital
- Issue 5 2006 Space and Time and Organisation Change
- Issue 4 2006 Paradoxes in Management
- Issue 3 2006
- Issue 2 2006
- Issue 1 2006 Organizations in the age of postbureaucracy
- Issue 6 2005 Change in the feminine Women in change
- Issue 5 2005
- Issue 4 2005
- Issue 3 2005 Integrally informed approaches to organizational transformation
- Issue 2 2005
- Issue 1 2005
- Issue 6 2004
- Issue 5 2004
- Issue 4 2004
- Issue 3 2004
- Issue 2 2004
- Issue 1 2004
- Issue 6 2003
- Issue 5 2003
- Issue 4 2003
- Issue 3 2003
- Issue 2 2003
- Issue 1 2003
- Issue 6 2002
- Issue 5 2002
- Issue 4 2002
- Issue 3 2002
- Issue 2 2002
- Issue 1 2002
- Issue 6 2001
- Issue 5 2001
- Issue 4 2001
- Issue 3 2001
- Issue 2 2001
- Issue 1 2001
- Issue 6 2000
- Issue 5 2000
- Issue 4 2000
- Issue 3 2000
- Issue 2 2000
- Issue 1 2000
- Issue 6 1999
- Issue 5 1999
- Issue 4 1999
- Issue 3 1999
- Issue 2 1999
- Issue 1 1999
- Issue 6 1998
- Issue 5 1998
- Issue 4 1998
- Issue 3 1998
- Issue 2 1998
- Issue 1 1998
- Issue 6 1997
- Issue 5 1997
- Issue 4 1997
- Issue 3 1997
- Issue 2 1997
- Issue 1 1997
- Issue 6 1996
- Issue 5 1996
- Issue 4 1996
- Issue 3 1996
- Issue 2 1996
- Issue 1 1996
- Issue 6 1995
- Issue 5 1995
- Issue 4 1995
- Issue 3 1995
- Issue 2 1995
- Issue 1 1995
- Issue 6 1994
- Issue 5 1994
- Issue 4 1994
- Issue 3 1994
- Issue 2 1994
- Issue 1 1994
- Issue 5 1993
- Issue 4 1993
- Issue 3 1993
- Issue 2 1993
- Issue 1 1993
- Issue 4 1992
- Issue 3 1992
- Issue 2 1992
- Issue 1 1992
- Issue 4 1991
- Issue 3 1991
- Issue 2 1991
- Issue 1 1991
- Issue 3 1990
- Issue 2 1990
- Issue 1 1990
- Issue 3 1989
- Issue 2 1989
- Issue 1 1989
- Issue 2 1988
- Issue 1 1988
The dark side of AI-enabled HRM on employees based on AI algorithmic features
AI is an emerging tool in HRM practices that has drawn increasing attention from HRM researchers and HRM practitioners. While there is little doubt that AI-enabled HRM exerts…
A mediation moderation model between work–family conflict and turnover intention among public and private kindergarten school teachers in China
The present study aimed to examining the association between work–family conflict and turnover intention by exploring the mediating effect of job satisfaction and the moderating…
Professionalizing all-volunteer nonprofit organizations: an intervention study based on the competing values framework and self-determination theory
Professionalization is an important issue in many all-volunteer nonprofit organizations (e.g. recreational sports clubs). Therefore, this study relied on the competing values…
Mercy does not hold the army: a study on the dark side effect of benevolent leadership
The purpose of this study is to examine the mechanism of benevolent leadership on employee cheating behavior through two paths – employee uncertainty and perceived acceptability…
The impact of robots and robotic systems on businesses in the workplace: systematic review
This study aims to identify articles examining human-robot interaction and the effects of robotic systems on employment.
Impact of workplace fun in a co-working space on office workers' creativity
Fun at workplace is considered an important initiative to build co-working communities, and this study aims to study its role in promoting the innovative behaviour of co-workers…
Digital transformation in HRM of the modern business service sector in Finland and Poland
The purpose of this article is to analyze the digital innovations which are being introduced in the HRM field in organizations in the modern business services sector in Finland…
Paradox in the making: toward a theory of utility maximization in human-commercial robot interactions
This article aims to develop a new theory that can better explain and predict how and when humans interact with commercial robots. To this end, utility maximization theory (UMT…
Managing workuniverses with workers and robots: the implications of digital-driven spatiotemporal dynamics for HRM
The increasing presence of traditional or new forms of robots at work demonstrates how the copresence of workers and robots might reframe work and workplaces and consequently…
The perceived credibility of human-like social robots: virtual influencers in a luxury and multicultural context
Social robots are invading our daily lives. Recently, thanks to artificial intelligence, humanoid social robots have been developed and influence individuals on social media. This…
A review of workplace spirituality scales
This paper reviews 18 workplace spirituality scales developed over a period of 23 years from year 2000 to early 2023. The objective is to provide inputs which can guide future…
Intelligent human resources for the adoption of artificial intelligence: a systematic literature review
This study is dedicated to critically analysing research addressing human resource management (HRM) and the adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) with the purpose of driving…
Online date, start – end:
Copyright holder:, open access:.
- Prof Slawomir Magala
- About the journal (opens new window)
- Purchase information (opens new window)
- Editorial team (opens new window)
- Write for this journal (opens new window)
We’re listening — tell us what you think
Something didn’t work….
Report bugs here
All feedback is valuable
Please share your general feedback
Join us on our journey
Platform update page.
Visit emeraldpublishing.com/platformupdate to discover the latest news and updates
Questions & More Information
Answers to the most commonly asked questions here
Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser .
Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.
- We're Hiring!
- Help Center
Journal of Organizational Change Management A theoretical framework of organizational change
by Leotta Hannele
Free Related PDFs
2002, Strategic Change
2018, Revista de Științe Politice/ Revue des Sciences Politiques
The study of change is a major concern at present in all fields of science. Traditionally, in philosophy and socio-human sciences, the concept of change was approached as opposed to that of stability, with intense debates about the desirability and importance of order and stability vs. the unpredictability of change. While in classical approaches to organizational change the conceptions that favoured order, stability, and routine prevailed, modern approaches recognize the decisive role of accepting change for the development and progress of organizations. In the field of organization development and organizational becoming nowadays strategies are sought and devised in order to align the organizations not only with their rapid inner changing, but also with the external multiple, complex, and dynamic environments. Starting from an outline of the factors of change and of the term of change as it has been conceptualized in sociology, the present paper aims to delineate a general framework for addressing organizational change. In this regard, after discussing the relationship between organizational change and the social and economic environment and delineating the main areas and agents of change in an organization, the various types of change in the organization and the models of their approach are addressed. Furthermore, since the resistance to change is a common and omnipresent human and social phenomenon, including at the level of groups and organizations, the paper approaches also the causes and manifestations of change resistance, as well as the possible measures for combating this phenomenon, in situations where the change is beneficial and necessary.
This paper presents a literature review on change management. Change management has been defined as ‘the process of continually renewing an organisation’s direction, structure, and capabilities to serve the ever-changing needs of external and internal customers (Moran & Brightman 2000). Kanter (1992) contends that we live in a constantly changing world, and change has an impact on the individuals and the organisation as a whole. In this context, organisations have to look into the future to find new advantages. New technologies, new products, new competitors, new regulations, and new people with new values and experience is the order of the modern organisation. Nevertheless, theories and approaches to change management are often conflicting, lacking in empirical evidence and based on unchallenged assumptions about the nature of modern organisational change management. This paper looks at some of the main theories and approaches to organisational change management as an important fir...
As organisations have been attempting to deal with the practical difficulties that change brings, the debates and discussions seemed to have played to a number of themes and assumptions. Although the former has benefited from extensive research the latter has been neglected over the past seven decades. Whilst researchers have focused on planned and emergent change and the discourse and practice approaches, others have proposed dualism/paradox, change agency, behavioural and positioning theory as these are assumed will help management resolve challenges and achieve successful change. However, a study is yet to be carried out on what the taken-for-granted assumptions that these debates play to really are and what they could offer to an area that has been claimed to be under-theorised over decades. This lies at the crux of the paper’s aims and objectives. Through content analysis and the interpretation of the qualitative, empirical data, it has been found that employees’ preferences ha...
2009, Journal of Change …
Prof.dr. Adnan Çelİk
International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences
Elizabeth Goodfellow , Jason Mazanov
In this paper we build on Burnes' 2005 review and critique of organisational change approaches and explore more recent developments. Through systematic review of mainstream change and management literature it is demonstrated that the content of individual approaches and the number and scope of change approaches has increased since 2005. The contribution of this paper is to outline the spectrum of change approaches and paradigms that emerged, and to describe a revised research agenda needed to accelerate progress in understanding organisational change.
Cliff Oswick , David Grant
2005, Journal of Organizational Change Management
FREE RELATED PAPERS
Oğuz N . Babüroğlu
There is little argument that organizational change is increasingly important. Turbulent organizational environments, hypercompetition, and related organizational activities demand that organizations manage change effectively (e.g., Ilinitch, D'Aveni, and Lewin, 1996). Organizations must perceive and respond to changes in their environments, independently create new environments, and learn from their experiences. This volume of the JAI series, Research in Organizational Change and Development, takes on these issues in a variety of ways.
2017, International Journal of Educational Leadership and Management
This paper reviews the different ways that academics and practitioners write about and discuss change management, to develop an understanding of whether there is a divide between the theory and practice of change management. This research used scientometric research techniques to compare three corpora: one based on the most cited research in the general management literature on change management; one based on the most cited research in specialist change management journals; and one based on interviews with practising change managers. It was found that the general management literature emphasised an abstract understanding of knowledge management and the learning organisation, while the change management literature focused more on issues associated with value, culture and social identity. The practitioners emphasised issues at the individual, project and team levels, the need for the effective use of targeted communication to achieve organisational change objectives, and the value of rapidly identifying key drivers in a new context. This research found significant differences between these three corpora, which lends support to other researchers' claims of a divide between theory and practice in change management.
Craig E Carroll
Michael N Bazigos, PhD
1996, Journal of Organizational Change Management
TRAMES, 2007, 11 (61/56), 2, 91-105 CHANGES AROUND AND WITHIN ORGANISATIONS: MANIFESTATIONS AND CONSEQUENCES Preface to the special issue of TRAMES Maaja Vadi, Rebekka Vedina University of Tartu 1. Introduction By definition, ...
2003, Appl Psychol Int Rev
Marshall Scott Poole
Abstract Scholars hold different views about whether organizations consist of things or processes and about variance or process methods for conducting research. By combining these two dimensions, we develop a typology of four approaches for studying organizational change. Although the four approaches may be viewed as opposing or competing views, we see them as being complementary. Each approach focuses on different questions and provides a different—but partial—understanding of organizational change.
Effecting major organizational change and innovation is a complex process and many organizations do not obtain the outcomes they desire. The purpose of this paper is investigate which factors contribute to or hinder far-reaching change. These factors are sought in characteristics of organizations, and in the design and management of change processes. Thus, we distinguish fifteen aspects to be evaluated when assessing the change capacity of organizations. In addition, we explore possible underlying patterns in the change capacity of organizations. Our first results suggested that none of the fifteen aspects we distinguished were really problematic. This may lead to the conclusion that in general organizations and change processes run rather satisfying. This is counterintuitive. Thus, we needed to perform additional and more sophisticated analyses. A cluster analysis was performed in order to explore possible underlying configurations in the barriers to change. We found nine configura...
1997, British Journal of Management
Encyclopedia of Strategic Leadership and Management
Organizational change is a critical process for the survival of any organization in the 21st century. Resistance to change, oftentimes presented by stakeholders within an organization, is a major impediment to the process and can lead to chaos. While being a driver of change, chaos complicates and often impedes transformation. Thus, while chaos necessitates highly dynamic change, resistance stands in the way of mobility. The goal of thriving through chaos and change poses challenges to leaders, managers, and an organization's many stakeholders, while also providing opportunities for learning and growth within the organization. Hence, a sophisticated approach aimed at eliminating, weakening, adapting or transforming different aspects of resistance serves the organization and its stakeholders with the benefits of acceptance, learning and growth. This chapter discusses factors that spark resistance to organizational change and presents opportunities to generate collective acceptanc...
The aim of this paper is to discuss three main obstacles to change in organisations. To do so, at the outset it starts defining organisations from different perspectives. In the following sections the external and internal triggers of change are presented. In an attempt to explain how does change happen, there is an overview of different types and stages of change, which is complemented with the change equation. At the core section, this article argues that obstacles to change in organisations exist at three levels: i) at the macro level, the negative context or action environment, which is related to the wider background such as the economic, social and political conditions existing in a given country; ii) at the intermediate level, the organisational structure and culture, namely the ethos or the covert aspect of organisational life; and iii) at the micro level, the human blockage, which may come from the managerial level or from the employee’s attitudes (resistance to change). It is worth mentioning that in this paper those elements are described from the negative perspective, because at the same time, these elements (from an optimistic perspective) can be the driving forces for positive organisational change.
2001, ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report
African Journal of Business Management
Dr. Ross Wirth
With change an ever-present factor of life, one would expect great agreement on what the essential elements are for a successful change effort or a response to a changed situation. However, that is not the case and it is generally recognized that most change programs fail for a number of reasons that are only identified in hindsight. Many of these failures can be traced to attempts at replicating prior change efforts that were successful. This is based upon the assumption that a best practice for change can be identified through the processes that were used in the earlier attempt. However, this fails to recognize the myriad of factors that might be different, any one of which might invalidate a critical component of success in the earlier success. The attempt here is to focus on the core components of change with the realization that there is no simple answer that can be applied in all cases.
Karyn S Krawford
Introduction This case study focuses on a fast growing online business services startup platform in Australia. It operates as its own functioning business unit under the umbrella of News Ltd, who own a cluster of individual digital companies also known as Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, one of the world’s largest global media companies. This case study examines a change that occurred when almost the entire senior management staff level was replaced including the CEO two years ago. Organisational change is something that occurs throughout an organisation’s life cycle and effects the entire organisation rather than one part of it. Employing a new person is one example. Change is increasing due to a number of forces including globalisation led by rapidly advancing technologies, cultural diversity, environmental resources and the economy; therefore the ability to recognise the need for change as well as implement change strategies effectively, in a proactive response to internal and external pressures is essential to organisational performance. Internal changes can include organisational structure, process and HR requirements and external changes involve government legislation, competitor movements and customer demand (Wood et al, 2010). Change does not need to be a painful process, as it may seem when observing the amount of failed change management initiatives with reports as low as 10% of researched success rates (Oakland & Tanner, 2007), when successful change management strategies are utilised and planned, including effective communication strategies, operational alignment, readiness to change and implementation, which all lower and overcome resistance (Wood et al, 2010). There is a great amount of literature on the negative aspects and difficult management with employees resisting change, however Wood et al (2010) challenge this notion by questioning the change management process as people do not resist change itself but aspects of the change that affects them personally such as fear of the unknown, status, remuneration and comfort. Resistance to these changes is a healthy reaction and can be managed effectively in the beginning by ensuring communication and using one of the change initiatives described here .
2000, British Journal of Management
Rune Todnem By
It can be argued that the successful management of change is crucial to any organisation in order to survive and succeed in the present highly competitive and continuously evolving business environment. However, theories and approaches to change management currently available to academics and practitioners are often contradictory, mostly lacking empirical evidence and supported by unchallenged hypotheses concerning the nature of contemporary organisational change management. The purpose of this article is, therefore, to provide a critical review of some of the main theories and approaches to organisational change management as an important first step towards constructing a new framework for managing change. The article concludes with recommendations for further research.
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Rashad Yazdanifard
2001, Management Accounting Research
Van Geert Hootegem , Guido Maes
The literature on change is characterized by an opposite, dichotomist view on the subject. Many authors describe only one or some of these characteristics and attribute a normative value to it. When discussing one of these attributes they will make a deviating classification in the way in which change arises. Although types and attributes of change are largely studied in the change literature, there is no general agreement on the attributes that can best describe the different types of change. The purpose of this chapter is to try to consolidate the vast literature on the types and attributes of change in order to find a more homogeneous set of attributes. From an extensive literature research on change articles and books from 1970 onward, eight dimensions of change attributes were found that are able to describe the characteristics of a change in a dynamic way. In order to overcome the dichotomist view, organizational change is approached not as a process changing a system but as a system by itself. Although the borders between the change system and the system to be changed are not always easy to perceive, this view seems to create a richer picture on change. A systems approach allows to define the attributes of change in a holistic way that captures the always paradoxical state change is in. INTRODUCTION The literature on organizational change is characterized by a dichotomist view, always separating the subject into two classifications. This dichotomic approach has resulted in a cluttered jumble of change models that do not tend to promote the general understanding of this subject matter. A systems approach can provide a way to describe change based on all the attributes of the change system. If organizational change is considered a system in itself, that system will show dynamic fluctuations during the change process that can be described based on the attributes of that system. From an extensive literature research of change articles and books from 1970 onward, eight attributes of change were found. Using these attributes an organizational change system can be defined in all its aspects. This approach is also much better able to view change as a process of becoming than the static definitions resulting from the dichotomic approach. In the first section of this chapter we investigate the way that changes are being described in the literature on change as well as the resulting conclusions that can be drawn. Next, the characteristics of changes will be grouped in a dynamic entity, which will allow describing all attributes of a change. Finally, we study an alternative way that systems theory can be applied to change management.
DR SAHEED A D E M O L A LATEEF
2015, Corporate Board: role, duties and composition
Any organisation operating in today’s uncertain economic climate needs to know how to manage change in order to survive. For businesses to withstand today’s competitive environment, organisations must frequently examine its processes and performance strategies to better understand what changes need to be made. The pace of change has considerably increased. Change nowadays is a reality for businesses and organisations, those which resist change, risk losing their competitive edge. Change is one of the most significant aspects that affect organisations. The ability therefore to manage change effectively has become vital. It is crucial that organisations understand the implications that change may have on the employees’ culture, history, goals, aims, objectives and so on? Change is essential for business survival and growth. In today’s complex and competitive global business environment, organisations must adjust to changing environmental conditions by constantly introducing changes in...
Company change stories are often constructed around a linear series of ‘successful’ events which serve to show the company in a positive light to any interested external party. These stories of company success sanitise this process and offer data for change experts to formulate neat linear prescriptions on how to best manage change. This position is criticised in this paper which draws on processual case study data to argue that change is a far more complex muddied political process consisting of competing histories and ongoing multiple change narratives which may vie for dominance in seeking to be the change story. A central aim is to demonstrate the analytical importance of identifying and unpacking frameworks of interpretation which are utilized in organizational struggles over change outcomes. Understanding how change stories are managed also highlights political process and draws attention to the ways in which power is exercised. As such, the paper calls for the more widespread use of the concept of ‘competing histories’ and ‘multiple change narratives’ in theories which seek to explain processes of organizational change.
Why is leading change important? The most basic reason is that entities, whether they be individuals, managers, teams, or organizations, that do not adapt to change in timely ways are unlikely to survive. The resistance of the change characterizing the bureaucracy in public sector’s organizations. In US, Fortune Magazine first published its list of America’s top 500 companies in 1956. Sadly, only twenty nine companies from the top 100 on the original list remain today. Survival, for any type of organization cannot be taken from granted. The most successful companies know that, to survive, they must adapt to accelerating and increasingly complex environmental dynamics. Today’s norm of pervasive change brings problems, challenges and opportunities. Those individuals, managers and organizations that recognize the inevitability of change, learn to adapt to it, and attempt to mange it, will be the most successful.
Dana M. Al-Mulla
2011, Journal of Change Management
2006, Public Administration Review
- We're Hiring!
- Help Center
- Find new research papers in:
- Health Sciences
- Earth Sciences
- Cognitive Science
- Computer Science
- Academia ©2023