Here are the files

6/4/23, 2:43 AM Six Images of Change Management

https://prod.reader-ui.prod.mheducation.com/epub/sn_3fab/data-uuid-30100d95786d400393f383a017becdae 1/15

Page 37

1. Change Manager as Director (Controlling Intended Outcomes) The director image views management as controlling, and change outcomes as being achievable as planned. The change manager’s role here, as the title indicates, is to steer the organization toward the desired outcomes. This assumes that change involves a strategic management choice upon which the well-being and survival of the organization depends. Let us assume that an organization is “out of alignment” with its external environment, say with regard to the information demands of a changing regulatory system and the more effective responses of competitors. The change management response could involve a new corporate information technology (IT) system to apply data analytics to more efficiently capture “big data” (George et al., 2014). The director image assumes that this can be mandated, that the new system can be implemented following that command, and that it will work well, leading to a high-performing organization that is more closely aligned to its external environment.

What theoretical support does this image have? As chapter 10 will explain, there are a number of “n-step” models, guidelines, or “recipes” for change implementation that are based on the

6/4/23, 2:43 AM Six Images of Change Management

https://prod.reader-ui.prod.mheducation.com/epub/sn_3fab/data-uuid-30100d95786d400393f383a017becdae 2/15

image of the change manager as director. The change manager is advised to follow the steps indicated (the number of steps varies from model to model), more or less in the correct sequence and regardless of the nature of the change, to ensure successful outcomes. These models are united by the optimistic view that the intended outcomes of change can be achieved, as long as change managers follow the model, as discussed earlier. Kotter (2007; 2012b) developed one of the best known n-step models. He advocates working systematically through the eight steps in his approach, more or less in sequence, and not missing or rushing any of them. Even Kotter acknowledges that change is usually a messy, iterative process. Nevertheless, he remains confident that, if followed correctly, his “recipe” will increase the probability of a successful outcome.

As chapter 10 also explains, contingency theories argue that there is no “one best model” for change managers to follow. These perspectives argue that the most appropriate approach is contingent; that is, it depends on the context and on the circumstances (Stace and Dunphy, 2001; Balogun et al., 2016). Contingency theorists thus part company with n-step “best practice” guides, suggesting that a range of factors such as the scale and urgency of the change, and the receptivity of those who will be affected, need to be considered when framing an implementation strategy. In other words, the “best way” will depend on a combination of factors—but as long as the change manager takes those factors into account and follows the contingent model, then the intended outcomes should be delivered.

6/4/23, 2:43 AM Six Images of Change Management

https://prod.reader-ui.prod.mheducation.com/epub/sn_3fab/data-uuid-30100d95786d400393f383a017becdae 3/15

Page 38

2. Change Manager as Navigator (Controlling Some Intended Outcomes) In the navigator image, control is still at the heart of change management action, although external factors mean that, although change managers may achieve some intended change outcomes, they may have little control over other results. Outcomes are at least partly emergent rather than completely planned and result from a variety of influences, competing interests, and processes. For example, a change manager may wish to restructure the business using “agile” autonomous teams to streamline new product design and development (Brosseau et al., 2019). Although a change manager may be able to set up agile teams (an intentional outcome), getting them to work effectively may be challenging if there is a history of distrust, information hoarding, and boundary protection by the business units. In this situation, functional managers may appoint to the agile teams people who they know will keep the interests of their department uppermost and block any decisions that might decrease their organizational power—an unintended outcome of setting up the teams in the first place.

Exploring why change initiatives stall, Eric Beaudan (2006, p. 6) notes that “No amount of advance thinking, planning and communication guarantees success. That’s because change is by nature unpredictable and unwieldy. The military have a great way to put this: ‘no plan survives contact with the enemy’.” He also argues that “leaders need to recognize that the initial change platform they create is only valid for a short time. They need to conserve their energy to confront the problematic issues that will stem from passive resistance and from the unpredictable side effects that change itself creates” (Beaudan, 2006, p. 6). Change may be only partially controllable, with change managers navigating the process toward a set of outcomes, not all of which may have been intended.

What theoretical support does this image have? Processual theories (see chapter 10) argue that organizational changes unfold over time in a messy and iterative manner and thus rely on the image of change manager as navigator (Langley et al., 2013; Dawson and Andriopoulos, 2017). In this perspective, the outcomes of change are shaped by a combination of factors, including:

6/4/23, 2:43 AM Six Images of Change Management

https://prod.reader-ui.prod.mheducation.com/epub/sn_3fab/data-uuid-30100d95786d400393f383a017becdae 4/15

The role of the change manager is not to direct, but to identify options, accumulate resources, monitor progress, and navigate a way through this uncertainty, ambiguity, and complexity.

Change managers must accept that there will be unanticipated disruptions and that options and resources need to be reviewed. Change navigators are also advised to encourage staff involvement. For senior management, rather than directing and controlling the process, the priority is to ensure receptivity to change (Rafferty et al., 2013) and that those involved have the skills and motivation to contribute. However, given the untidy, nonlinear nature of change, navigators—consistent with the metaphor—have room to maneuver; the course of change may need to be plotted and replotted in response to new information and developments. There is no guarantee that the final destination will be as initially intended. In some instances, change may be ongoing, with no clear end point.

the past, present, and future context in which the organization functions, including external and internal factors the substance of the change, which could be new technology, process redesign, a new payment system, or changes to organizational structure and culture the implementation process—tasks, decisions, timing political behavior, inside and outside the organization interactions between these factors.

6/4/23, 2:43 AM Six Images of Change Management

https://prod.reader-ui.prod.mheducation.com/epub/sn_3fab/data-uuid-30100d95786d400393f383a017becdae 5/15

3. Change Manager as Caretaker (Controlling Unintended Outcomes) In the caretaker image, the (ideal) management role is still one of control, although the ability to exercise that control is severely constrained by a range of internal and external forces that propel change relatively independent of management intentions. For example, despite the change manager’s desire to encourage entrepreneurial and innovative behavior, this may become a failing exercise as the organization grows; becomes more bureaucratic; and enacts strategic planning cycles, rules, regulations, and centralized practices. In this situation, the issues linked to inexorable growth are outside the control of an individual change manager. In this rather pessimistic image, at best managers are caretakers, shepherding their organizations along to the best of their ability.

Theoretical support for the caretaker image can be drawn from three organizational theories: life-cycle, population ecology, and institutional theory.

Life-cycle theory views organizations passing through well-defined stages from birth to growth, maturity, and then decline or death. These stages are part of a natural, developmental cycle. There is an underlying logic or trajectory, and the stages are sequential (Van de Ven and Poole, 1995; Van de Ven and Sun, 2011). There is little that managers can do to prevent this natural development; at best they are caretakers of the organization as it passes through the various stages. Harrison and Shirom (1999) identify the caretaker activities associated with the main stages in the organizational life cycle, and these are summarized in table 2.2. Change managers thus have a limited role, smoothing the various transitions rather than controlling whether or not they occur.

6/4/23, 2:43 AM Six Images of Change Management

https://prod.reader-ui.prod.mheducation.com/epub/sn_3fab/data-uuid-30100d95786d400393f383a017becdae 6/15

TABLE 2.2 Life-Cycle Stages and Caretaker Activities Developmental Stage Caretaker Activities Entrepreneurial Stage

Founder initiates an idea

Collectivity Stage

Coordination through informal means as group identity develops

Formalization Stage

Formalization of operations emphasizing rules and procedures, efficiency, and stability

Elaboration Stage

Change and renewal as structure becomes more complex and environment changes

Make sure that resour available

Establish market nich

Design processes to a and creativity

Ensure founder gener commitment to vision

Coordinate communic decision making

Build cohesion and m and culture

Develop skills through reward systems

Facilitate shift to profe management

Monitor internal opera external environment

Focus procedures on e quality

Strike balance betwee coordination, and con

Adapt current product new ones

Ensure structure facili coordination

Plan for turnaround, c

6/4/23, 2:43 AM Six Images of Change Management

https://prod.reader-ui.prod.mheducation.com/epub/sn_3fab/data-uuid-30100d95786d400393f383a017becdae 7/15

Page 39

Page 40

Population ecology theory focuses on how the environment selects organizations for survival or extinction, drawing on biology and neo- Darwinism (White et al., 1997). Whole populations of organizations can thus change as a result of ongoing cycles of variation, selection, and retention:

Some population ecology theorists suggest that there are limited actions that change managers can take to influence these forces, such as:

In general, however, this perspective implies that managers have little influence over change where whole populations of organizations are affected by external forces. For example, managers of many financial institutions struggled to deal with the widespread global crisis triggered by the collapse of Lehman Brothers, an investment bank, in September 2008. That event affected adversely the global population of finance organizations (and the governments that had to recapitalize them).

Institutional theory argues that change managers take broadly similar decisions and actions across whole populations of organizations. The central concern of this perspective is not to explain change, but to understand “the startling homogeneity of organizational forms and practices” (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983, p. 148; Oertel et al., 2016). These similarities can be explained by the pressures associated with the interconnectedness of organizations that operate in the same sector or environment. DiMaggio and Powell (1983) distinguish three pressures, which in practice interact:

Source: Adapted from Harrison and Shirom (1999), pp. 307–14.

renewal

Organizational variation occurs as the result of random chance. Organizational selection occurs when an environment selects those that best fit the conditions. Organizational retention involves forces (e.g., inertia and persistence) that sustain organizational forms, thus counteracting variation and selection.

interacting with other organizations to lessen the impact of environmental factors repositioning the organization in a new market or other environment

6/4/23, 2:43 AM Six Images of Change Management

https://prod.reader-ui.prod.mheducation.com/epub/sn_3fab/data-uuid-30100d95786d400393f383a017becdae 8/15

Not all organizations succumb to these pressures; there are what DiMaggio and Powell call “deviant peers.” However, the assumption is that these external forces are inexorable and individual managers have only limited ability to implement change outcomes that are not consistent with these forces. At best, change managers are caretakers with little influence over the long-term direction of change.

coercive, including social and cultural expectations, and government- mandated changes mimetic, as organizations imitate or model themselves on the structures and practices of other organizations in their field, often those which they consider to be more successful normative, through the professionalization of work such that managers in different organizations adopt similar values and working methods that are similar to each other

6/4/23, 2:43 AM Six Images of Change Management

https://prod.reader-ui.prod.mheducation.com/epub/sn_3fab/data-uuid-30100d95786d400393f383a017becdae 9/15

4. Change Manager as Coach (Shaping Intended Outcomes) In the coach image, the assumption is that change managers (or change consultants) can intentionally shape the organization’s capabilities in particular ways. Like a sports coach, the change manager shapes the organization’s or team’s capabilities to ensure that, in a competitive situation, it will be more likely to succeed. Rather than dictating the state of each play as the director might do, the coach relies on establishing the right values, skills, and “drills” so that the organization’s members can achieve the desired outcomes.

What theoretical support does this image have? Organization development (OD) theory reinforces the “shaping” image of the change manager as coach, by stressing the importance of values such as humanism, democracy, and individual development (see chapter 9). OD “interventions” are designed to develop skills, reduce interpersonal and inter-divisional conflict, and structure activities in ways that help the organization’s members to better understand, define, and solve their own problems (Ibarra and Scoular, 2019). As the OD movement evolved, the emphasis shifted from team-based and other small-scale interventions to organization-wide programs, designed to “get the whole system in the room” (Burnes and Cook, 2012; Cheung-Judge and Holbeche, 2015). As a movement underpinned by values, OD advocates can be evangelical about helping organization members to develop their own problem-solving skills to achieve intended outcomes, claiming that the approach works and that it produces results with less resistance, greater speed, and higher commitment.

6/4/23, 2:43 AM Six Images of Change Management

https://prod.reader-ui.prod.mheducation.com/epub/sn_3fab/data-uuid-30100d95786d400393f383a017becdae 10/15

Page 41

5. Change Manager as Interpreter (Shaping Some Intended Outcomes) The change manager as interpreter has the task of creating meaning for others, helping them to make sense of events and developments, which, in themselves, constitute a changed organization. It is up to change managers to represent to others just what these changes mean. However, there are often competing interpretations of the same issues, especially where there are different groups who do not necessarily share common interests and perceptions (Buchanan and Dawson, 2007). This suggests that only some meanings—and therefore some change intentions—are likely to be realized.

What theoretical support does this image have? Architect of the influential processual perspective on organizational change, Pettigrew (1985, p. 442) sees the “management of meaning” as central. He argues, “The management of meaning refers to a process of symbol construction and value use designed to create legitimacy for one’s own ideas, actions, and demands, and to delegitimize the demands of one’s opponents.” The change manager seeking to introduce significant, strategic change may thus be faced with the prospect of trying to create a story that will dislodge a well-established ideology, culture, and system of meaning. Change managers, of course, do not have a monopoly on storytelling skills; sometimes the stories of others are better, and they “win.”

The interpreter image is central to Weick’s (1995; 2000) sensemaking theory of organizational change. Sensemaking, Weick explains, is what we do when we face a problem—a surprise or a crisis, for example—and have to work out how we are going to respond. For sensemaking to work in these situations, however, four factors have to be present. First, it has to be possible to take some action to address the problem; almost any action will do, as long as experiment and exploration are allowed. Second, that action must be directed toward a purpose or goal. Third, the context must allow people to be attentive to what is happening and to update their understanding accordingly. Fourth, people need to be allowed to share their views openly, in a climate of mutual trust and respect. Weick calls these four components of sensemaking animation, direction, attention, and respectful interaction.

Weick (2000, p. 225) also observes that emergent, continuous, cumulative change is the norm in most organizations. The textbook focus

6/4/23, 2:43 AM Six Images of Change Management

https://prod.reader-ui.prod.mheducation.com/epub/sn_3fab/data-uuid-30100d95786d400393f383a017becdae 11/15

Page 42

on planned, transformational, revolutionary, disruptive change is partial and misleading. Emergent change involves the development of new ways of working that were not previously planned:

The recurring story is one of autonomous initiatives that bubble up internally; continuous emergent change; steady learning from both failure and success; strategy implementation that is replaced by strategy making; the appearance of innovations that are unplanned, unforeseen, and unexpected; and small actions that have surprisingly large consequences.

Emergent changes are thus driven by continuous sensemaking, often by frontline staff, and not by senior management. Indeed, top-team intervention may inhibit change. Weick (2000, p. 234) argues that, while the four sensemaking activities of animation, direction, attention, and respectful interaction are necessary for learning, adaptation, and change, “they are also the four activities most likely to be curbed severely in a hierarchical command-and-control system.” For successful change, Weick concludes, management must become interpreters, recognizing that “organizational change is emergent change laid down by choices made on the front line. The job of management is to author interpretations and labels that capture the patterns in those adaptive choices. . . . management doesn’t create change. It certifies change” (Weick, 2000, p. 238; emphasis added).

The interpreter image of change management may be particularly significant during an economic downturn and recession, when commitment and loyalty to employers are likely to deteriorate. In this context, there may be problems getting staff to support major change programs, triggering passive resistance and turnover. To build that support, management needs to try and change the mindset and associated behaviors by offering a positive interpretation of events (Basford and Schaninger, 2016).

6/4/23, 2:43 AM Six Images of Change Management

https://prod.reader-ui.prod.mheducation.com/epub/sn_3fab/data-uuid-30100d95786d400393f383a017becdae 12/15

Interpreters at Work: Four Conditions for Changing Mindsets

Emily Lawson and Colin Price (2003) argue that the success of change relies on persuading individuals to change their “mindsets”—to think differently about their jobs and the way in which they work. They identify three levels of organizational change. First, desired outcomes (increase revenue) can often be achieved without changing working practices (selling noncore assets, for example). Second, employees can be asked to change working practices in line with current thinking (finding ways to reduce waste, for example). The third level involves fundamental changes in organizational culture, in collective thinking and behavior—from reactive to proactive, hierarchical to collegial, inward looking to externally focused. There are four conditions for changing mindsets at level three:

6/4/23, 2:43 AM Six Images of Change Management

https://prod.reader-ui.prod.mheducation.com/epub/sn_3fab/data-uuid-30100d95786d400393f383a017becdae 13/15

Employees will alter their mindsets only if they see the point of the change and agree with it—at least enough to give it a try. The surrounding structures (reward and recognition systems, for example) must be in tune with the new behaviour. Employees must have the skills to do what it requires. Finally, they must see people they respect modelling it actively. Each of these conditions is realized independently; together they add up to a way of changing the behaviour of people in organizations by changing attitudes about what can and should happen at work. (Lawson and Price, 2003, p. 32)

In a contested climate, managers as interpreters “need to be able to provide legitimate arguments and reasons for why their actions fit within the situation and should be viewed as legitimate” (Barge and Oliver, 2003, p. 138). Downsizing, for example, is one situation where competing interpretations are inevitable. Change managers may portray this action as a way of strengthening the organization in the face of environmental pressures, thus protecting the jobs of those who remain. Others, however, may tell different stories, of management incompetence and of underhand ways of “outplacing” politically troublesome individuals or even whole departments, under the cover of “efficiency.” Good stories can be more inspiring and motivational than a detailed business case. Balogun et al. (2016) regard stories as devices to make the content of new strategies easier to understand, enhancing individuals’ ability to translate change into meaningful actions for themselves. Vaara et al. (2016) explore how senior management narratives concerning strategy and vision contribute to organizational stability and change by making sense of circumstances and events. In other words, when it comes to interpreting the meaning of change for others, the effective interpreter tells better stories than the competition.

6/4/23, 2:43 AM Six Images of Change Management

https://prod.reader-ui.prod.mheducation.com/epub/sn_3fab/data-uuid-30100d95786d400393f383a017becdae 14/15

Page 43

6. Change Manager as Nurturer (Shaping Unintended Outcomes) The image of change manager as nurturer assumes that small changes can have a major impact on the organizations and that managers may be unable to control fully the outcomes of these changes. However, they can nurture the organization and its staff, developing qualities that enable positive self-organizing. Future directions and outcomes can be nurtured or shaped, but the ability to produce specific intended outcomes is limited by wider, and sometimes chaotic, forces and influences. Checinski et al. (2019) claim that the failure rate of public-sector transformations, at 80 percent, is higher than in the private sector. In determining the outcomes of change, they emphasize the decisive impact of people practices, one of which is nurturing the capabilities that are required to succeed with major transformation programs and that are often lacking in the public sector.

Perspectives supporting the nurturer image include chaos theory and Confucian/Taoist theory.

Chaos theory argues that organizational change is nonlinear, is fundamental rather than incremental, and does not necessarily entail growth (table 2.3). Chaos theorists, drawing also on complexity theory, explore how organizations “continuously regenerate themselves through adaptive learning and interactive structural change. These efforts periodically result in the spontaneous emergence of a whole new dynamic order, through a process called self-organization” (Lichtenstein, 2000, p. 131). The phenomenon of self-organization is driven by the chaotic nature of organizations, which in turn is a consequence of having to grapple simultaneously with both change and stability. In this context, the change manager has to nurture the capacity for self-organization, with limited ability to influence the direction and nature of the spontaneous new orders that may emerge. This may sound abstract and puzzling, but this describes the emergent strategy—and nurturing capabilities—that the successful Brazilian entrepreneur Ricardo Semler (2000; 2019) adopted in his iconic manufacturing company Semco (Kuiken, 2010). This explains how Semco successfully diversified into electronics (see the box “Semco: A Chaotic Business?”).

6/4/23, 2:43 AM Six Images of Change Management

https://prod.reader-ui.prod.mheducation.com/epub/sn_3fab/data-uuid-30100d95786d400393f383a017becdae 15/15