4

Rainer Hampp Verlag
Leading and Managing Organizational Change Initiatives

Author(s): Claudia Peus, Dieter Frey, Marit Gerkhardt, Peter Fischer and Eva Traut-Mattausch
Source: Management Revue, Vol. 20, No. 2, Special Issue: Management of Change (2009), pp. 158175
Published by: Rainer Hampp Verlag
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41783612
Accessed: 27-01-2016 07:50 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Rainer Hampp Verlag is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Management Revue.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 196.13.242.253 on Wed, 27 Jan 2016 07:50:21 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Claudia Peus, Dieter Frey, Marit Gerkhardt, Peter Fischer,

Eva Traut-Mattausch*
Leading
and Managing
Organizational
Change
Initiatives**
Althoughindispensablefor long-termeconomic growth,organizationalchanges are

usuallymetwithresistance.This articledrawson psychologicaltheoriesand empirical
evidenceto highlight
why and underwhat conditionschangeslead to resistanceand
the articlediscussesthevariwhatlikelyconsequencesof resistanceare. Furthermore,
ables thathave been identifiedas success factorsfororganizationalchangeinitiatives.
of the
These include individualdifferencevariables and objective characteristics
and
such
as
fairness
the
of
in
trust,
implementation,
changes,but particularaspects
Finally,conclusions
leadership,and participation.
adequate communicationstrategies,
the most importantaspects thatare beneficialto considerin managing
summarizing
are presented.
changeinitiatives
organizational
Key words: change management, resistance, success factors
andPeopleManagement,
ClaudiaPeus,LMU CenterforLeadership
Ludwig-MaximiliansGeschwister-Scholl-Platz
1,D - 80539Munich,Germany.
Munich,
University
E-mail:Peus@psy.lmu.de.
of Psychology,
DieterFrey,Department
Munich,LeoLudwig-Maximilians-University
E-mail:
D
80802
Munich,
13,
Dieter.Frey@psy.lmu.de.
Germany.
poldstr.
Stormstr.
MaritGerkhardt,
28,D - 30177Hannover,
Germany.
E-mail:info@savia-consulting.de.
of Psychology,
of Graz,Department
PeterFischer,University
2/III,
Universitaetsplatz
E-mail:peter.fischer@uni-graz.at.
A - 8010Graz,Austria.
Muof Psychology,
Eva Traut-Mattausch,
Ludwig-Maximilians-University
Department
D
80802
Munich,
13,
nich,Leopoldstr.
Germany.
E-mail:traut-mattausch@psy.lmu.de.
** Article
November25,2008
received:
doubleblindreview:
Revisedversionacceptedafter
July1,2009.
86l-9908_mrev_2009_02_Peus
DOI 10.1688/1
revue,
20(2):158-175
management
1861-9908 Rainer
ISSN(internet)
ISSN(print)
www.Hampp-Verlag.de
HamppVerlag,
0935-9915,
volume20,issue2,2009
revue,
management
1.
DOI1 0.1688/1861
159
-9908_mrev_2009_02_Peus
Introduction
Today's organizationsface a numberof challengesresultingfromthe developmentof

new technologies,changingemployee demographics,global economic competition
and economic shocks relatedto the instability
of both domesticand global financial
markets.The abilityto quicklyand adequatelyadapt to theseenvironmental
challenges
has become a crucialfactorforthe success of an organization.As a result,an organization'scompetitiveadvantageno longerprimarily
dependson its productionfacilities
or financialstrengthbut ratheron its capacityto embrace change and innovate
(Burnes2004; Dess/Picken 2000; Tushman/O 'Reilly1997). In concordancewiththis
view,Tushman and Anderson (1986) providedevidencethatcompanies thatinitiate
technologicalchange tend to grow more rapidly.Moreover,expertssuggestthatorganizationswith successfulchange managementstrategiesare more likelyto survive
and thusmorelikelyto providesustainableemploymentfortheirworkers(Picot et al.
1999).
more aware of the need forchange,manysigAlthoughpeople are increasingly
nificantorganizationalchange initiativesfail to meet expectations (Burke 2002;
Probst/Raisch2005). In factit is estimatedthatsomewherebetween40% and 70% of
of
change initiativesfail (Burnes 2000). Activitiespertainingto the implementation
in
should
focus
on
changes organizations
changingthe behaviorsof organizational
memberssince these are crucial for the improvementof organizationaloutcomes
of 52 evaluationsof plannedchangein(Robertsonet al. 1993). As theirmeta-analysis
terventions
shows thereis a positiverelationshipbetweenindividualbehaviorchange
and changesin organizationaloutcomes.In orderto aid to the developmentof a better understanding
of the antecedentsand facilitators
of individualbehaviorchange,
this articlepresentspsychologicaltheoriesas well as empiricalevidence highlighting
barriersto and success factorsfororganizationalchangeinitiatives.
and managementof iniChange managementcan be definedas the introduction
tiativesdesignedat "renewingan organization'sdirection,structure,
and capabilitiesto
servethe ever-changing
needs of externaland internalcustomers"(Moran/Brightman
2001: 111). Due to the factthat employeesare ultimately
responsiblefor executing
and
or
succeeds
fails
on
changeinitiatives, change
depending employeebehavior(Armenakis/Bedeian1999), leadingemployeesto supportthe changesis critically
importantforthe success of any organizationalchangeinitiative.
However,since the introduction of organizational changes is usually met with employee resistance
(Scheck/Kinicki2000), thisarticlefirstexploreswhyand underwhichconditionsemployees are likelyto reactwithresistancebeforediscusssingthe antecedentsof supportfororganizationalchanges.Both theoreticalexplanations,mosdyfromsocial psychology,and empiricalevidence specificto organizationalchange managementare
provided.
2.
Employee resistance to organizational change

Previousresearchpoints to the factthatnegativeemployeereactionsare most common in the contextof organizationalchange (Scheck/Kinicki2000). Negative emfororganizationssince theyare commonlyassociployeereactionscan be detrimental
160
Traut-Mattausch:
Fischer,
Peus,Frey,Gerkhardt,
ChangeInitiatives
Organizational
sen
ated with harmfuloutcomes,such as employeewithdrawal(e.g., Armstrong-Stas
al.
al.
as
Ford
et
et
and
reduced
However,
(2008)
2004).
1994)
performance(Weeks
pointout it is importantto expandthediscussionof resistanceto changeto includeits
to effectivechangemanagement.Concordandy,
sourcesand its potentialcontribution
thenextsectiondescribesnot onlythenegativeoutcomesof employeeresistance,but
also theconditionsunderwhichresistancedoes (and does not) occur,as well as itspotentialbenefits.
2. 1 Explanations foremployee resistance
In examiningthe negativerelationship
generallyfoundbetweenorganizationalchange
and employee attitudes,researchhas used concepts such as uncertainty(Ashford
1988) and the relatedloss of control(Ashfordet al. 1989) as well as fearof failure
2000) as explanati(Nadler 1982) and disruptionsin sense making(McKinley/Scherer
et
al.
ons foremployeeresistance(Herold
2007).
is
Uncertainty
likelyexperiencedby employeesin relationto a numberof organizaand the expected outtional issues such as the process of change implementation
comes of the change (Jacksonet al. 1987; Buono/Bowditch1989). Potentiallyeven
more importandy,employeesmay experienceuncertainty
regardingthe securityof
theirposition as well as theirfutureroles and responsibilities(Bordia et al. 2004).
Studiesbased on controltheory(Frey/Jonas2002) show thatit is not onlythe extent
influenceshis/heremoto whicha personcan in factinfluencean eventthatstrongly
but also thedegreeto whichimminenteventsare predictableand
tionsand well-being,
et al. 2006). Conseexplainableforthatperson (cf. Fischeret al. 2007; Greitemeyer
over eventsin orand
some
seek
to
gain
prediction understanding
quently,employees
and feelingsof loss of control(Sutton/Kahn1986).
der to minimizetheiruncertainty
An importanttool for minimizingemployees' uncertaintyand therebyfacilitating
positiveemployeeattitudestowardsthe changesis communicationby managers(see
by Allen et al. (2007) showed,employeeswho
pp. 8 ff).As the empiricalinvestigation
communication(termed"qualitychange
and
useful
accurate
reportedreceivingtimely,
and a higherlevel of openness
of
levels
revealed
lower
uncertainty
communication")
to change than employeeswho did not. The correlationbetween qualitychange
uncerwas r - -.37 forjob-relatedas well as strategic
communicationand uncertainty
it
while
the
one
on
for
r
-.50
and
hand,
uncertainty
implementation-related
tainty
are statistically
was r- .33 foropennessto change.(All correlations
significant).
Fearoffailure
is anotherreactionemployeesare likelyto show in thefaceof organizationalchange (Nadler 1982). For example,theymaybe scaredof not beingable to
new workprocesses.Fear of failure
deal withnew technologiesor not understanding
it
because
can be particularly
likelyimpedesa rationalanalysisof the
disadvantageous
imminentchangesand the potentialopportunitiestheymaybringabout and can lead
have to cause fearand stress?Accordingto reto stress.But do changesautomatically
searchconductedby Lazarus thatis not necessarilythe case. He has shown thathuman beingsonlyreactwithfearand stresswhenevertheysuspectan imminentevent
theycan not cope with(Lazarus/Folkman1987). In linewiththispredictioninvestigations of the antecedentsof openness to change (Wanberg/Banas2000) and change
commitment
efficacy(individuals'confichange-related
(Herold et al. 2007) identified
revue,
management
DOI 10.1688/1861-9908_mrev_2009_02_Peus
161
dence in theirabilityto handlethechanges)as an importantpredictor.Thus, empirical

evidence points to the fact that employeesare less likelyto react to organizational
changeswith resistanceif theybelieve theycan handle the changes.This belief,in
turn,can likelybe influencedby communication(Eden/Aviram1993) and organizationalinterventions
aimed at buildingemployees'change self-efficacy
(Herold et al.
should facilitate
and supportsmallerchangesin a way that
2007). These interventions
rewards
theyyieldsuccessfuloutcomesand providepositivefeedbackand potentially
in orderto strengthen
employees'beliefsin theirabilityto handlechanges(cf. Freyet
al. 2002).
The thirdconcept drawnupon in the explanationof employeeresistanceto orinsensemaking(McKinley/Scherer
ganizationalchangeis disruptions
2000). As research
shows (e.g. Weick 1995) it is crucialforemployeesto be able to make sense of organizationalstructures
and proceduresand particularly
the changestheyare facedwithin
orderto develop commitment.
communication
Again,
playsa crucialrole in facilitatthis
outcome
and
resistance.
As Frahm and Brown (2005)
ing
preventingemployee
individual
sense
esposit,changeprocessesrequire
making- whichcan be facilitated
communication
who
describe
peciallyby monologicchange
(e.g. by top management
This
whythechangesare necessary).In addition,collectivesense makingis important.
can be supportedby dialogiccommunication(e.g.withdirectsupervisors,
who explain
the impacton the particulardepartment,
answerquestions,and stimulatediscussions
amongcolleagues).
2.2 Contextual variables influencingemployee resistance
In his comprehensiveinvestigation
of resistanceto organizationalchangeOreg (2006)
resistance
as a multifaceted
construct.Specifically,
he distinconceptualizedemployee
guishedbetweenthreetypesof resistance:affective(positiveand negativefeelingstowardsthe specificchange),cognitive(evaluationof theworthand potentialbenefitof
the change),and behavioral(intentionsto act againstchange). In the predictionof
thesethreetypesof resistancehe drewon fourcontextualvariables:1. expectedoutcomes (job security,
intrinsicrewards,power and prestige),2. trustin management,3.
and
4.
influence
of colleagues.Expected outcomes(job security,
intrinsic
information,
and
were
related
to
affective
and
rewards,power
prestige)
significantly
cognitiveresisbut
not
to
behavioral
resistance.
That
of
tance,
is, expectations losingpowerand presand
one's
tige
potentially
job led to strongnegativefeelingstowardsthe changesand
negativeevaluationsof theirbenefitswhile the expectationof positiveoutcomes such as gainingpower - were relatedto positivefeelingstowardsand evaluationsof
the changes.Trustin managementwas significantly
relatedto all threetypesof resistance,i.e. the lack of faithin leadershipwas stronglyrelatedto increasedreportsof
and anxietywithrespectto the change (affectiveresistance;r - anger,frustration,
to
increased
actions
.33),
againstit (behavioralresistance;r - -.30),and in particularto
evaluations
of
the
need for,and value of theorganizationalchange(cognitive
negative
resistancer - -.52). The examinationof informationshowed thatmore information
was associatedwithworse evaluationof and higherwillingnessto act againstchange.
This findinghighlightsthat the mere provisionof informationis not sufficient
in
for
but
ratherit is the perceivedqualityof the
promotingemployeesupport
changes,
162
Traut-Mattausch:
Fischer,
ChangeInitiatives
Organizational
information
(Allen et al. 2007). With regardto the fourthcontextualvariableexamined, influenceof colleagues,a significant
positiveassociationwith behavioralresistance was revealed(r = .26). That is employeeswho were surroundedby colleagues
who opposed the change tendedto expressmore negativeemotionsand behavioral
intentions.
2.3 Organizational consequences of employee resistance
Empiricalevidencepointsto the factthatemployeeresistanceis an importantpredicvariablesthatimpaireffectiveorganizationalfunctor of a numberof work-related
tioning(Wanberg/Banas2000). Among the outcomesmost frequendycitedare lower
as well as strongerwithdrawalintentions
levels of job satisfactionand commitment,
of affective,
and increasesin sick time.In his investigation
cognitive,and behavioral
resistanceOreg (2006) examinedto what degreethe different
typesof resistancepreto leave the organiintention
and
dictedjob satisfaction,
organizationalcommitment,
zation. He foundthe predictedrelationsin a sense thataffectiveresistancewas parrerelatedto job satisfaction(r = -.15), cognitiveresistancewas particularly
ticularly
lated to organizationalcommitment(r = -.12), and behavioralresistancewas particu=
larlyrelatedto intentionsto quit (r .15). In short,thisstudyshows thatsome conrelatedto a decreasein job satisfaction(e.g. expected
textualvariablesare particularly
while othervariablesare
commitment
or
(e.g. information),
outcomes) organizational
the
leave
to
to
intentions
related
organization(e.g. influenceof colclosely
particularly
the
leagues).Overall,the studyalso highlights importanceof trustin managementfor
and intentionsto leave the organization
organizationalcommitment,
job satisfaction,
duringchangeprocesses.
While the investigation
by Oreg (2006) focused on the impactof resistanceon
the studyby Fugateet al. (2008) centredon
behavioral
intentions,
employeeaffectand
objectivemeasuresof employeebehavior,i.e. sick timeused and voluntaryturnover.
Fugateet al. (2008) measuredemployees'appraisalsof organizationalchanges(specificallythreatand harmcaused by the changes),employees'positiveand negativeemotionsrelatedto thechanges,employeecoping (proactive,i.e. controlcopingvs. avoidance, i.e. escape coping),and intentionsto quit one monthafterthe initialmanagementchanges.Twelve monthslater,the authorsgathereddata on sick timeused and
voluntaryturnoverfromcompanyrecords.Their resultsshowed thatnegativeemotionspredictedsick timeused and intentionsto quit,whichthenpredictedvoluntary
thatmanagingemployeeappraisalsand
turnover.The findingsof thisstudyhighlight
is
emotions
and
paramountto reduce employeewithsubsequentcoping strategies
drawalduringorganizational
change.
to organizationalchange can have seriousimplicareactions
Negativeemployee
and organizationalcompetitiveness(Spreitzer/Mishra
tions for change effectiveness
and engagementis likelyto erode the
2002). Notably,a lack of employeecommitment
the changes,especiallyin knowlmotivated
that
presumably
competitiveadvantages
of key personnelnot only
turnover
voluntary
edge-basedindustries.Furthermore,
and
costs an employerorganizationalknowledge,skills,
abilities,but theircompetitive
threatenedif such employeesthen join competitors(Fugate et al.
positionis further
2008).
revue,
management
DOI 10.1688/1861-9908_mrev_2009_02_Peus
163
Despite the numerousnegativeoutcomes associated with employeeresistance,

Ford et al. (2008) pointout thatthe discussionof resistancein the contextof change
managementhas been one-sided.They stressthatit has been ignoredthatresistance
to changecan be a potentialcontributor
to or resourceforeffectivechange,although
authenticdissenthas been shown to be functionalin other areas of management
(Nemeth et al. 2001a; Nemeth et al. 2001b; Schulz-Hardtet al. 2002). In particular,
Ford et al. (2008) stressthatresistancemay actuallycontributeto the successfulimto the build-upof momentum
plementationof change,if it is viewed as contributing
the
are
talked
and
source
of
information
about unnecessary,
imabout)
(e.g.
changes
or
in
elements
the
or
conduct
of
the
practical, counterproductive
design
changeprocess.
Overall,this sectionhas discussed a numberof psychologicalmechanismsthat
underlieemployeeresistanceto organizationalchangeand has highlighted
thatprocedural aspects are paramountforinfluencingemployees'behavioralresponses (Crino
1994; Robbinset al. 2000; Skarlicki/Folger,
1997). Consequendy,thenextsectiononly
individual
difference
variables
and objective characteristics
of the
brieflypresents
found
to
influenceemployeereactions.More emphasisis placed on the prochanges
ceduralaspects thatinfluencethe success of organizationalchangeinitiatives,
whereforetheyare discussedat greaterlength.
3.
Success factors for organizational changes

3.1 Individual differencevariables
A numberof concepts have been examinedas positivereactionsto organizational

variables,includinga positiveview of
changesin the contextof individualdifference
change (e.g. Miller et al. 1994), openness to change (e.g. Wanberg/Banas2000),
- a lack of
change commitment(e.g. Herold et al. 2007), and - somewhatindirectly
resistance(Oreg 2006). Overall, thereis evidence for the factthatindividualdifferences have an impacton these reactionsto change.For example,Milleret al. (1994)
foundthatpersonswithhighlevelsof need
had a more favorableview of
forachievement
than
with
low
levels
of
this
trait.This is likelyexplained
organizationalchanges
people
the
fact
that
with
levels
of
need
for
achievement
by
people
high
maysee the changes
as opportunities
to prove theircompetenciesand potentially
advance in the organization. Similarly,
,a
openness to change was positivelyassociatedwithpersonalresilience
compositeof self-esteem,
optimism,and perceivedcontrol(Wanberg/Banas2000). In
this studyopenness to change was also relatedto change-related
, i.e. confiself-efficacy
dence in the abilityto be able to handle change.Furtherevidenceforthe importance
of change-related
is providedby Herold et al. (2007) who reportit to be
self-efficacy
an importantpredictorof individuals'changecommitment(r = .37), especiallyin settingswhere changes are frequent.Finally,the studyconducted by Oreg (2006) revealed an associationbetween dispositional
resistance
to change(a personalityconstruct)
and the affectiveas well as behavioraldimensionsof resistance.In summary,these
studiespointto the factthatsome employeesare morelikelyto embracechangethan
the imothers,regardlessof the particularnatureof the change.In orderto facilitate
of organizationalchangesit maythusbe advisableto considerindividual
plementation
164
Traut-Mattausch:
Fischer,
Organizational
ChangeInitiatives
differences
by placingindividualswithhighlevels of need forachievement,personal
and changeself-efficacy
in core positions(cf.Herold et al. 2007).
resilience,
3.2 Objective characteristicsof the changes
One characteristic
of organizationalchangesthatis likelyto influenceemployeereactions is the changes' magnitude.
In line with this assumptionGreenberg(2005) probetweentwo kindsof change:first-order
poses thedifferentiation
changeand secondorderchange. First-order
incremental
includes
(or
change
change)
changethatis continuousin natureand thatinvolvesno majorshifts(e.g.,Toyota: continuously
improving the efficiencyof the productionprocess). Second-orderchange (or quantum
levelsof the orchange)includesradicalchangesthatinvolvemajor shiftsat different
the
and
with
different
of
business
ganization
aspects
(e.g., change of culture,new
their
for
new structure).
necessity organizationalsuccess,secondtechnology,
Despite
orderchangesare usuallymetwithresistancesince employeesare forcedto abandon
familiarassumptions,approaches, and environments.They have to quit routines
theiractionsand abandonwhathas been provento be comfortwhichhave facilitated
in the past. Concordandy,recentresearch(Fedor et al. 2006)
able, usefulor efficient
has foundthe magnitudeof change to be an importantcorrelateof change commitment.That is, individuals'commitment
to a changeis partlydependenton the degree
to which the change impactsor disruptstheirwork routines.The more the change
disruptstheirroutines,the more likelyemployeesare to reactwithresistance.This is
trueeven forchangesthatone maybe positivelypredisposedtowardor forwhichthe
outcomesare ultimately
expectedto be positive(Herold et al. 2008). It may thusbe
wise fororganizationsto implementa seriesof small changesratherthanone quantum change in order to minimizeemployeeresistanceand facilitatesuccess of the
changeinitiative.
In additionto the changes'magnitude,thefrequency
withwhichtheyoccurwithin
one organizationhas been foundto impactemployees'change commitment.
Specifiof freal.
revealed
that
an
environment
the
Herold
et
(2007)
cally,
by
investigation
commitment
has
a
on
especiallyif
negativeimpact employees'change
quentchanges
for
on
the
individual
have
low
even
when
self-efficacy
controlling impact
people
and his/herworkgroupand perceivedfairnessof theimplementation.
variablesand objective
the factthatindividualdifference
This sectionhighlighted
characteristics
of the changesimpactemployeereactionsto them.However,various
authors(e.g. Crino 1994; Robbins et al. 2000; Skarlicki/Folger
1997) point out that
most importantfor influencingemployees'behavioralresponses are proceduralaspects,i.e. thewaychangesare managed.We willturnto thisarea next.
3.3 Implementation of organizational changes
of the anteceAs Oreg (2006) points out based on his comprehensiveinvestigation
was the
inmanagement
dentsof resistanceto change,of all the variablesexaminedtrust
associated with affective,cognitive,
most importantone. In factit was significantly
associatedwith
and behavioralresistanceto changewhich,in turn,were significantly
as well as intentionsto quit the organiand commitment
decreasesin job satisfaction
evidencepoints to the factthatfailingto repairdamaged relazation. Concordantly,
revue,
management
DOI 10.1688/1861-9908_mrev_2009_02_Peus
165
tionshipsand restoretrustwhichmayhave been damagedin the process of introducing changesleads to different

typesof resistancesuch as cynicism,a tendencyto enin
and
critical
behaviorstowardboth changeand changeagents,and
gage disparaging
lowerworkmotivationand commitment(Andersson1996; Dean et al. 1998; Reichers
et al. 1997). A loss of trustin managementas well as lowerlevelsof obligationtoward
and satisfaction
withthe employerare likelyto be caused by experienceof injusticeor
betrayal(Robinson1996; Robinson/Morrison1995; Robinson/Rousseau1994).
The experienceof havingbeen treatedunfairly
can lead to resentment
and a desire for retribution(Folger/Skarlicki1999), which can resultin such negativeoutcomes as lower productivity,
lower work quality,and less cooperation (Shapiro/
Kirkman1999). In extremecases, people may seek revengeor retaliationand engage
in sabotage,theft,or otheraggressiveor violentbehaviors(Benisom 1994; Robinson/
Bennett1997; Tripp/Bies 1997). Accordingto recenttheory-building
and research
et
al.
consists
of
four
2001) organisational
(Colquitt
justice
components:distributive,
procedural,interpersonaland informational
justice.Distributivejusticerefersto the
distribution
of outcomes,i.e. people expectthe outputto be distributed
in accordance
withtheirinput.However,thisexpectationcan oftennot be metwhen changesare introduced.It is therefore
even moreimportantto observeproceduraljusticein managing organizationalchanges.Proceduraljusticeis concernedwiththe way in whichresults were achieved and the criteriathat were applied. Meta-analysesof numerous
studiesshow close connectionsbetweenproceduraljusticeand job satisfaction,
performance,organizationalcommitmentand trust (Colquitt et al. 2001; CohenCharash/Spector2001). Accordingly,
proceduraljusticehas a major influenceon the
of
For
the
othertwo typesof justice(interpersonal
and
acceptance changeprocesses.
communication
is
central.
While
is
informational)
interpersonal
justice concernedwith
thedegreeto whichbehaviorsshown towardsemployeesare appropriateand respectful,informational
justicerefersto the way decisions,procedures,and outcomes are
communicatedand adequate explanationsare provided.Informationaljusticein the
contextof organizationalchange also means thatactual or potentialbad news connectedto the changesare providedand discussedopenlywiththe affectedemployees.
This helps to minimizethe impactof those negativeaspects,as predictedby inoculationtheory(McGuire 1961). Overall,researchon organizationaljusticein the context
of changes has shown that when people see themselvesas being or having been
treatedfairly,
theydevelop attitudesand behaviorsassociatedwith successfulchange
above, a crucialaspect forthe perceptionof having
(Cobb et al. 1995). As illustrated
been treatedfairly
is communication.
is importantduringorganizaDespite the generalacceptance that communication
tional changes strategiesimplementedby managementoftenfail to fulfilltheirpurHarris2002). This may at least partlybe due to the
pose (Smeltzer1991; Armenakis/
factthatcommunicationstrategies
are designedbased on common-senseassumptions,
whichare not alwaysin concordancewithempiricalevidence.For example,the scholhas focusedmore on the qualityof information
thandid the discussion
arlyliterature
in the popular press (Allen et al. 2007; Bordia et al. 2004). As the investigation
of a
governmentdepartmentundergoingmajor changes by Allen et al. (2007) revealed,
employeeswho indicatedhavingreceivedqualitychange communication(character-
166
Traut-Mattausch:
Fischer,
Organizational
ChangeInitiatives
ized by perceivedtimeliness,accuracy,and usefulness)demonstrateda more positive
attitudetowardsthechange.Specifically,
was positively
qualitychangecommunication
associatedwithemployees'openness to changeto the extentthatthe communication
addressedemployees'uncertainty
regardingstrategicand job-relatedissues. Furtherrated
the
of
more,employees
theyreceivedfromtheirsupervisors
quality information
as higherthan the information
disseminatedby seniormanagement.They explained
thatthiswas truesincecommunication
withsupervisorswas usuallytwo-wayand thus
severalmanagers
allowedthemto ask questionsand make suggestions.Concordantly,
describedtheirrole as a filterof informationmakingsure that theiremployeesreceivedinformation
imminentchangesin such a way thatit was relevantand
regarding
On the side of the employeesthisled to the factthatemployeesindiunderstandable.
in
theirdirectsupervisorsas a source of change-related
cated preferring
information,
immost
able
to
address
which
were
because
were
they
job-specificaspects
particular
portantto them.Thus, it maybe advisablefororganizationsto focuson communicating job-specificinformationthroughsupervisorsin advanced stages of the change
information
has been providedby seniormanagementinitially.
process,afterstrategic
Allenet al. (2007) recommendusinga cascadingapproach
Based on theirfindings
This would entailseniormanagewhen developingchangecommunicationstrategies.
on strategicissues,whiledirectsupervisorsconveymore
mentto provideinformation
to theiremployees.The communicationof practical,job-related
practicalinformation
informationshould be done in a mannerthat allows for specificquestions.Along
the factthatthreecommunicathoselinesFrahmand Brown (2005) have highlighted
tionmodelsexistin thearea of changecommunication.
They comprisemonologicand
talk
of change.Whilemonologic
and
the
background
dialogicchangecommunication,
communicationis ideallyused to convey strategicinformation(particularly
by top
management),dialogiccommunicationcan serveto providemore specificjob-related
information
(whichis best done by directsupervisors).Finally,backgroundtalkrefers
to mainlyinformalconversationsbetweenpeers.This is the contextin whichconversationsabout cynicismor resistanceare most likelyto take place (Ford et al. 2002).
However,backgroundtalkcan also be a promoterof organizationalchange,since the
of a personhas an importantimpacton his/herattitudestowards
social environment
thechange(Brown/Quarter1994). Hence, it maybe advisableforsupervisorsto identifyemployeeswho have a positiveview of the changesand who may serveas multitheirpositiveviewsto theirpeers.It is crucialthattheseperpliersby communicating
sons do not onlypossess influence,but are also highlyregardedand trustedby their
colleaguesand byotheremployeesin theorganization.
in the
Anotheraspect of communicationthat may have been misrepresented
As
emin
communication.
information
role
of
is
the
change
negative
popularpress
to
the
not
be
should
information
evidence
shows
withheld,
contrary,
negative
pirical
about changecan help alleviateanxietyand reduce some neganegativeinformation,
the empiricalinvestigativereactionsto change (Miller/Monge1985). Concordantly,
that
a
realistic
tionby Schweigerand DeNisi (1991) revealed
mergerpreview- a complete and authenticexplanationof both the positive and negativeoutcomes of a
change recipientshad about the imminentchange
merger- reducedthe uncertainty
and increasedtheirabilityto cope withit. In line withthisfindinginoculationtheory
revue,
management
167
DOI 10.1688/1861
-9908_mrev_2009_02_Peus
can
(McGuire 1961) predictsthatthe focusedcommunicationof negativeinformation
It has been used successbe used to immunizereceiversto the negativeinformation.
fullyin a numberof areas, e.g. preventingthe erosion of public attitudestowardan
organizationfollowinga crisis(Wan/Pfau2004) or increasingthe resistanceof supportersof politicalcandidatesto attackmessages fromopposing candidates(Pfau/
Burgoon1988).
The communicationof negativeinformationmay also be importantwhen it
comes to explainingthe rationalebehindthe changes.As Gebert (2004, 2007) points
out the perceptionof deficitsis an inevitableconditionforpeople's willingnessto accept innovationand change.For example,the EURO was acceptedmore readilyonce
people had realizedthatit would be introducedinevitably(Jonaset al. 2002). However,it is recommendedto addressnecessarychangesproactivelyby pointingout the
need to changein the presentin orderto secure standardsforthe future(e.g., social
the environment,
and naturalresources).Nevertheless,since people are still
security,
to
and anxietyeven thoughtheyare aware of the need
likely experienceuncertainty
forchange,dialogiccommunicationwiththe directsupervisorand the observanceof
principlesof organizationaljusticeare crucialin winningemployees'supportforthe
changeinitiative.
One variablethathas been discussedas an importantsuccess factorfororganizationalchangeinitiatives
is the communicationof a vision(e.g. Kotter1996). Fairhurst
literature
(1993) reviewedthe scientific
concerningimportantfunctionsof visioncreation and communicationduringchange.She arguedthatvision servesas a means to
createand managesharedreality,
and createnew social
inspireaction,focusattention,
in organizations.She further
structures
contendedthata vision thatis clearlyunderstood and perceivedby employeesis more likelyto engendera favorablereaction.
Empiricalsupportforthesepostulatesis providedby findingsfromthe area of transformational
whichhas been foundto be a crucialpredictorof employees'
leadership,1
for
support organizationalchanges(see below). One of thecore componentsof transformational
vision.
leadershipis the developmentand communicationof an attractive
transformational
leaders communicatehigh performanceexpectations
Furthermore,
but at the same timeprovideemployeeswithsupportin orderto reachthesechallenging goals. In orderto inspireemployeesto committhemselvesto the changeprocess
and make extraeffortsthegoals to be achievedhave to be connectedto theoverarching vision,theyhave to be presentedas a challenge,but at the same timemustbe regarded as attainableand specific (Locke/Latham1990). In short,it is importantto
presentan inspiring,positivevision as part of strategicchange communication,but
point out thatin orderto reach thisvision in the futuresacrificesin the presentare
necessaryand some negativeaspectswillhave to be facedat thepracticallevel.
As Herold et al. (2008) point out, althoughchangeprocesseshave been conceptualizedin a varietyof waysthe leadership
changeagentsshow has receivedthegreatest
amountof attentionand has been shown to be a powerfuldeterminant
of individuals'
1
Transformational
is characterized
inleadership
byleaderbehaviorsthatare exemplary,
to reachchallenging
spiretheirfollowers
goalsand providehighlevelsof individualized
consideration
andsupport(seeBass 1985;1998).
168
Traut-Mattausch:
Fischer,
Organizational
ChangeInitiatives
reactionsto organizationalchanges (Beer 1980; Brockneret al. 1994; Lind/Tyler
1988). Most of the recommendationson how to lead change processes in organizathe plan forthe change,buildinga guidingcoalition,develtions,e.g. communicating
rationale
forthe change,and providingsupport(Kotter1996) can
a
oping compelling
be linkedto one or more dimensionsof transformational
leadership(Herold et al.
the
transformational
2008). Accordingly,
concept thatdominatesrecent
leadership
has
been examinedwithregard
and
research
(Judge/Piccolo2004)
theory-building
to a numberof outcomes in the contextof organizationalchange. These include
to the change(Herold et al. 2008), cynicismabout organizationalchange
commitment
of change managementteams (Pearce/Sims
(Bommeret al. 2005), and effectiveness
have
these
studies
Overall,
2002).
providedconsistentevidenceforthe utilityand apof
transformational
organizationalchanges.
leadershipin implementing
propriateness
Herold
et
al.
(2008) found transformational
leadership to be more
Specifically,
= .35) than change-specific
stronglyrelatedto employees' change commitment(r
=
true
the changehad significant
when
This
was
especially
leadershippractices(r .19).
personalimpact for the employee.Overall, 17 percentof the variancein affective
behaviorsalone.
were explainedby the leaders'transformational
changecommitment
The findingsprovidedby Herold et al. (2008) thus highlighttwo facts:First,more
leaders seem to get theirfollowersto embracethe changes,regardtransformational
the changes.Second, parless of theirspecificbehaviorsin planningor implementing
overallperceptionof
their
for
of
under
conditions
highinsecurity employees
ticularly
theirmanagersis crucialfortheirreactionsto the change and a trustingrelationship
cannotbe substituted
by mereprofessionalmanagementof the changes.Furthersupleadershipin organizationalchangeinitiaportfortheimportanceof transformational
tivescomes fromthe longitudinal
by Bommeret al. (2005). As theyhad
investigation
behaviors
were associatedwithlower levels of
leader
transformational
hypothesized,
the directionof cauabout
organizationalchange.Furthermore,
employees'cynicism
reducedembehaviors
leader
that
transformational
in
consistent
was
suggesting
sality
for
the
evidence
about
utilityof
organizationalchange. Finally,
ployees' cynicism
is
in
of
the
context
transformational
organizationalchange provided by
leadership
of change management
Pearce and Sims (2002) who investigatedthe effectiveness
the
researcherscompared
In
their
firm.
in
automotive
teams an
study
manufacturing
and in
effectiveness
on
team
and directiveleadership
the impactof transformational
leadershared
betweenthese two leadershipstylesenactedas
doing so differentiated
ship (i.e. among teammembersas a whole) and as verticalleadership(i.e. by the team
leadershipwas positivelyrelated
leader).Resultsindicatethatverticaltransformational
and shared
of
team effectiveness,
to manager( - .45) and team self-ratings
.63)
(
as
team
effectiveness
to
related
to
be
found
was
transformational
positively
leadership
ratedby its manager( - .42), the team ( = .38), and itsinternalcustomers(- .32).
sharedleadershipemergedas a more usefulpredictorof teameffectiveFurthermore,
leaderness overallthanverticalleadership.However,since verticaltransformational
both
of
a
combination
team
of
also
a
was
effectiveness,
predictor
significant
ship
in
the
context
most
seems
transformational
sharedand vertical
promising
leadership
of organizational
change.
revue,
management
169
DOI 10.1688/1861-9908_mrev_2009_02_Peus
In additionto the particularleadershipstyleenacted,having consensus

the
within
teamis importantforthe success of organizationalchangeinitiatives.
leadership
Having
a leadershipteamthatis unitedin its supportforand approachto the changeprocess
it is not only the adequate executionof the
is indispensable.As researchhighlights,
that
but
more
how theleadershipteamembodies
matters,
changeprocess
importandy
and
vision,values, strategy,
motivation,
inspiration(Roger 2003). A competentand
of
executives
is
the
ideal
of
drivingforcebehind the implementation
stronggroup
a
all
Since
serves
as
role
model
for
stakeholders,
change.
management
disagreements
and resistanceon lowerlevels of
betweenits membersare likelyto lead to insecurity
If employeesperceivean attitudeof avoidance or doubt
the organizationalhierarchy.
among theirexecutives,theyare most likelydiscouragedfromsupportingthe changes
themselves.
In line with findingsfromthe area of transformational
leadershipresearchhas
to be associatedwith successfuloutcomes fromthe
supportedemployeeparticipation
perspectivesof employeesas well as organizationaldecision makers (Bordia et al.
2004; Coyle-Shapiro1999; Edmondson et al. 2001; Nutt 1987; Sagie et al. 2001; Sagie/
to
Koslowsky1994). Specificto changemanagementresearchhas shownparticipation
be an importantpredictorof openness to change(Wanberg/Banas2000) as well as of
theimpactof participost changetrustin management(Lines et al. 2005). Underlying
on
to
reactions
pation positiveemployee
organizationalchangesis likelyto be thebasic humanneed forcontrolor at least perceivedcontrol.Controldescribesthe degree
to which an event is explainable,predictable,and subject to influence(Frey/Jonas
2002). Appliedto changeprocesses,controltheoryimpliesthatit is veryimportantto
includeorganizational
membersin theprocess froman earlystageon, in orderto raise
identification
and thewillingnessto participate.
Actionor projectplans are suitableto
create
their
own
for
content
and timingand, further,
to enable
help employees
script
of
is
in
what
now
and
the
future.
That
understanding
happening
way expectationsare
defined
which
some
sort
of
and a feelingof
clearly
givesemployees
planningreliability
controlover the situation.Concordantly,researchbased on the Theory of Planned
Behavior (Fishbein/Ajzen1975) also showed that employees' attitude,subjective
norm,and perceivedbehavioralcontrolpredictedtheirintentionsto supportorganizationalchange (Jimmieson
et al. 2008). Accordingto the model by Fishbeinand Ajzen
the followingfactorsare relevantforbehaviorchange:Persons musthave a positive
attitudetowardsthe behavior.The expected new behaviormust be evaluatedpositively(i.e. as havingsome utilityor advantagescomparedto previousbehaviors).In
addition,theremustbe a subjectiveor social normthatit is good to change.If either
theenvironment
is opposed to thechange
(social norm)or thepersonhimself/herself
a
in
behavior
is
to
occur.
(personalnorm), change
unlikely
Finally,it is importantthat
the personpossess self-efficacy
withregardto the desirednew behaviors.If all of the
conditionsabove apply,an intentionto changewillbe formed,and subsequentlythere
is an increasedprobabilitythatpeople willindeed show behavioralchange (Herold et
al. 2007; Oreg 2006).
Traut-Mattausch:
Fischer,
Organizational
ChangeInitiatives
170
4.
Conclusion
the factthattheway
Overall,thisarticlehas presentedempiricalevidencehighlighting
are managedand led is hugelyimportantfortheir
theorganizationalchangeinitiatives
success. First,a numberof studiespoint of factthatthe degreeto which employees
embrace organizationalchanges is largelydependenton theirtrustin management.
This variable,in turn,is closelyassociatedwithorganizationaljustice.Especiallysince
addistributive
justicecan oftennot be achievedin organizationalchangeinitiatives,
and interpersonal
herenceto procedural,informational,
justiceis crucialforemploythe
ees' reactions.Specifically,
employeeshave to perceivethe processes underlying
adeand
been
treated
that
have
been
as
fair
and
feel
given
appropriately
they
changes
quate informationabout the changes and the reasons for them. Concordandy,researchhas pointedto the enormousimportanceof communicationin change processes. In particular,empiricalevidence has revealedthe qualityof information(i.e.
timeliness,accuracy,perceivedusefulness)to be an importantdeterminantof embased on empiricalevidencea cascadingapproach to
ployee reactions.Furthermore,
is conveyed
in which strategicinformation
is
recommended
changes
communicating
communiwhereas
communication
dialogic
(e.g. by top management),
by monologic
cation (e.g. withdirectsupervisors)is used to clarifytheimpactof the changeson init is advisdividualemployees'work and allow themto ask questions.Furthermore,
able to include negativeinformationin the communicationof changes in order to
immunizeemployeesto it. Nonetheless,an inspiringvision (whichjustifiessacrifices
on the way to achievingit) is regardedas an importantfactorin facilitating
positive
employeereactionsto organizationalchanges. Consistentwith this finding,a transformational
leadershipstylewhichincludesthe communicationof an overarchingvision and challenging
goals as well as theprovisionof individualizedconsiderationand
found
to be most effectivein leading organizationalchanges. In
has
been
support
verticalleadershipwith shared (i.e. teamof
transformational
a
combination
sum,
can be regardedas a particularly
and
promisbased) leadership
employeeparticipation
of
the
to
implementation organizationalchanges.Since individualdifferingapproach
have been foundto intraitsand change-related
ences such as personality
self-efficacy
for
core
fluenceemployeereactionsto changes,employees
positionsshouldbe chosen
and underconsiderationof thesevariables.In addition,organizationalinitiacarefully
a
tivesto supportemployees'change-related
efficacy(e.g. by means of implementing
seriesof small changesand celebratingthe victories)seem useful.These would also
pay considerationto the factthatchangesof highmagnitudeare morelikelyto be met
withemployeeresistance.In consideringthe factorsmentionedabove organizationsas
well as individualchangeagentscan increasethe success rateof organizationalchange
initiatives.
References
ManB.E.(2007):Uncertainty
P./Irmer,
change:
N.L./Bordia,
organizational
Allen,
during
J./Jimmieson,
187-210.
of
In:
communication.
7(2):
Management,
Change
Journal
through
aging
perceptions
In:
framework.
violation
Anexamination
L.M.(1996):Employee
Andersson,
usinga contract
cynicism:
49:1395-1417.
Human
Relations,
revue,
management
DOI 10.1688/1861-9908_mrev_2009_02_Peus
171
A review
Armenakis
A.G.(1999):Organizational
oftheory
in the
andresearch
A.A./Bedeian,
change:
1990's.In:Journal
ofManagement,
25:293-315.
forchange.
K.W.(1993):Creating
readiness
In:Human
RelaArmenakis,
A.A./Harris,
S.G./Mossholder,
46:681-703.
tions,
a change
S.G.(2002):Crafting
tocreate
transformational
readiness.
In:
Armenakis,
A.A./Harris,
message
ofOrganizational
15(2):1
69-183.
Journal
Management,
Change
A study
M. (1994):Coping
withtransition:
oflayoff
survivors.
In:Journal
ofOrganArmstrong-Stassen,
izational
14:597-621.
Behavior,
forcopingwithstress
transitions.
In:
Ashford,
S.J.(1988):Individual
strategies
during
organizational
ofApplied
Behavioral
24:19-36.
Science,
Journal
P. (1989):Content,
andconsequences
ofjobinsecurity:
A theoryAshford,
/Lee,C./Bobko,
causes,
S.J.
basedmeasure
andsubstantive
In:Academy
test.
ofManagement
32:803-829.
Journal,
andperformance
NewYork,
NY:FreePress.
Bass,B.M.(1985):Leadership
beyond
expectations.
B.M.
Transformational
and
educational
Bass,
Individual,
Mahwah,
(1998):
leadership:
military
impact.
NJ:
Erlbaum.
anddevelopment.
SantaMonica,
CA:Goodyear.
Beer,M.(1980):Organizational
change
H.F.(1994):Crisis
anddisaster
in
Violence
the
In:Training
andDeBenisom,
management:
workplace.
48(1):27-32.
velopment,
R.S.(2005):Changing
attitudes
aboutchange:
effects
of
Bommer,
W.H./Rich,
G.A./Rubin,
longitudinal
transformational
leader
behavior
onemployee
aboutorganizational
In:Journal
of
cynicism
change.
26:733-753.
Behavior,
Organizational
N. (2004):Uncertainty
Bordia,
P./Hunt,
E./Paulsen,
N./Tourish,
D./DiFonzo,
during
organizational
Is itallaboutcontrol?
In:European
ofWork& Organizational
change:
Journal
13(3):
Psychology,
345-361.
efBrockner,
R./Martin,
C./Bies,
J./Konovsky,
M./Cooper-Schneider,
R./Folger,
R.J.(1994):Interactive
fects
ofprocedural
andoutcome
onvictims
andsurvivors
ofjobloss.In:Academy
justice
negativity
ofManagement
37:397-409.
Journal,
Resistance
tochange:
Theinfluence
ofsocialnetworks
ontheconversion
of
Brown,
/Quarter,
J.
J.(1994):
a privately-owned
unionized
business
to a worker
In: Economic
andIndustrial
Decooperative.
15(2):259-282.
mocracy,
sideofmergers
andacquisitions.
SanFrancisco:
Buono,
J./Bowditch,
J.(1989):Thehuman
Jossey-Bass
Publishers.
W.(2002):Organization
andpractice.
Thousand
Burke,
Oaks,CA:Sage.
change:
Theory
B. (2004):Managing
A strategic
to
4thedn.Harlow:
Burnes,
change:
approach organizational
dynamics,
Prentice
Hall.
B. (2000):Managing
A strategic
toorganizational
3rdedn.Harlow:
Burnes,
change:
approach
dynamics,
FT/Prentice-Hall.
A critical
review.
In:Journal
ofChange
By,R.T.(2005):Organizational
change
management:
Management,
5(4):369-380.
R. (1995):Justice
in themaking:
Towardunderstanding
thetheory
Cobb,A.T./Wooten,
K.C./Folger,
andpractice
ofjustice
in organizational
anddevelopment.
In: Research
in Organizational
change
andDevelopment,
8:243-295.
Change
P.E. (2001):Theroleofjustice
inorganizations:
a meta-analysis.
In:OrganCohen-Charash,
Y./Spector,
izational
Behavior
andHuman
Decision
86:278-321.
Processes,
at themillennium:
A
D.E./Wesson,
/Porter,
Colquitt,
J.A./Conlon,
M.J.
C.O./Ng,K.Y. (2001):Justice
of25 years
review
oforganizational
research.
In:Journal
ofApplied
meta-analytic
justice
Psychology,86:425-445.
andassessment
ofanorganizational
interCoyle-Shapiro,
J.A.M.
(1999):Employee
participation
change
A three-way
vention:
ofTotalQuality
In:
ofApplied
Behavioral
Scistudy
Management.Journal
ence,35(4):439-456.
172
Traut-Mattausch:
Fischer,
Organizational
ChangeInitiatives
M.D.(1994):Employee
A random
orpreventable
In:Journal
ofManageCrino,
phenomenon?
sabotage:
rialIssues,
311-330.
6(3):
inimplementing
evaluaP.D. (1994):Theroleoffairness
Daly,J.P./Geyer,
large-scale
change:
Employee
andoutcome
insevenfacility
relocations.
In:Journal
ofOrganizational
tionsofprocess
Behavior,
15:623-638.
In:Academy
ofManagement
R. (1998):Organizational
Dean,J.W./Brandes,
P./Dharwadkar,
cynicism.
23:341-352.
Review,
inthe21stcentury.
roles:Leadership
Dess,G.G./Picken,
DynamJ.C.(2000):Changing
Organizational
ics,29:18-33.
andspeedof reemployment:
A. (1993):Self-efficacy
Eden,D./Aviram,
Helping
peoplehelp
training
78:352-360.
themselves.
In:Journal
ofApplied
Psychology,
andnewtechG.P.(2001):Disrupted
routines:
Teamlearning
Edmondson,
A.C./Bohmer,
R.M./Pisano,
inhospitals.
In:Administrative
Science
46:685-716.
Quarterly,
nology
implementation
In:
talkstotalquality.
G.T. (1993):Echoesofthevision- Whentherestoftheorganization
Fairhurst,
6: 331-371.
Communication
Management
Quarterly,
of organizational
on employee
D. M. (2006):The effects
S./Herold,
Fedor,D. B./Caldwell,
changes
1-29.
In:
Personnel
59:
A multi-level
commitment:
Psychology,
investigation.
ofhigh,
andgroupstatus:
Theimpact
D. (2007).Mergers
S.I. /Frey,
Fischer,
P./Greitemeyer,
T./Omay,
witha company
onidentification
andsatisfaction
lowandequalgroupstatus
merger,
experienced
andApplied
Social
In:Journal
ofCommunity
andgroupcohesion.
controllability,
groupidentity
17:203-217.
Psychology,
Anintroduction
totheory
andreandbehavior:
I. (1975):Belief,
attitude,
intention,
Fishbein,
M./Ajzen,
Mass.:Addison-Wesley.
search.
Reading,
In:
as mistreatment.
to change:
D.P. (1999):Unfairness
andresistance
R./Skarlicki,
Hardship
Folger,
ofOrganizational
12(1):35-50.
Management,
Journal
Change
of
In:Academy
tochange:
Therestofthestory.
A. (2008):Resistance
L.W./D'Amelio,
Ford,
J.D./Ford,
Review,
33(2):362-377.
Management
ofchange.
conversations
andthebackground
R.T.(2002):Resistance
L.W./McNamara,
Ford,
J.D./Ford,
105-121.
In:Journal
ofOrganizational
15(2):
Change
Management,
In:Academy
communication
anorganizational
K.A.(2005):Building
Frahm,
theory.
change
J.A./Brown,
BestConference
ofManagement
PaperOCIS:CI.
In:
ofcognitive
Kontrolle
derkognizierten
E. (2002):Die Theorie
D./Jonas,
control].
[Thetheory
Frey,
- BandIII: Motivations-,
undInSelbstM. (Hrsg.):
Theorien
derSozialpsychologie
D./Irle,
Frey,
Bern:Huber:13-50.
(2.Auflage).
formationsverarbeitungstheorien
of human
Intervention
as a majortoolof a psychology
T.
(2002).
E./Greitemeyer,
Frey,
D./Jonas,
In: Aspinwall,
fromorganizational
L.G./Staudinger,
changeandinnovation.
strength:
Examples
DC:
field.
onanemerging
ofhuman
U.M.(Eds.):A psychology
Washington,
Perspectives
strength:
149-164.
Association:
American
Psychological
Anexamiwithorganizational
G.E. (2008):Employee
M./Kinicki,
change:
coping
A.J./Prussia,
Fugate,
61:
1-36.
In:
Personnel
and
models.
theoretical
nation
ofalternative
Psychology,
perspectives
LehrIn:Schuler,
H. (Hrsg.):
D. (2004):Organisationsentwicklung
Gebert,
developement].
[Organization
601-616.
Bern:Huber:
buchOrganisationspsychologie.
ofinnovation
derInnovationsgenerierung
D. (2007):Psychologie
Gebert,
generation]..
[Thepsychology
Band
der
L. v. (Hrsg.):
In:Frey,
D./Rosenstiel,
Wirtschaftspsychologie,
Enzyklopdie Psychologie.
783-855.
6.Gttingen:
Hogrefe:
International.
Education
Pearson
inorganizations.
NewJersey:
behavior
J.(2005):Managing
Greenberg,
D. (2006).Psychologische
T./Fischer,
Erfolgsfaktoren
C./Frey,
D./Stahlberg
Greitemeyer,
P./Nrnberg,
Identifikation
vonaktueller
DerZusammenhang
beiUnternehmensfusionen:
bernahmeposition,
In:
derMitarbeiter/innen.
undsubjektivem
Wohlbefinden
Kontrolle
erlebter
mitderOrganisation,
50:9-16.
frArbeitsundOrganisationspsychologie,
Zeitschrift
revue,
management
DOI 10.1688/1861-9908_mrev_2009_02_Peus
173
A multilevel
D.B./Caldwell,
S.D. (2007):Beyond
Herold
D.M./Fedor,
change
management:
investigation
onemployees'
tochange.
In:Journal
ofApplied
influences
commitment
ofcontextual
andpersonal
92(4):942-951.
Psychology,
Y. (2008):Theeffects
oftransformational
andchange
leadD.B./Caldwell,
D.M./Fedor
S./Liu,
Herold,
toa change:
a multilevel
In:Journal
ofApplied
onemployees'
commitment
study.
Psycholership
ogy,2: 346-357.
to organizational
of a threeHerscovitch,
L./Meyer,
J.P.(2002):Commitment
change:Extension
In:Journal
ofApplied
87:474-487.
model.
component
Psychology,
inturbulent
In:A. Riley/S.
stress
times.
S.E./Schuler,
Jackson,
R.S./Vredenburg,
D.J.(1987):Managing
andorganizational
Zaccaro(Eds.):Occupational
stress
effectiveness.
NewYork:Praeger:
141-166.
K.M.
the
of
behavior
to
inform
N.L./Peach,
M./White,
(2008):
theory
Jimmieson,
Utilizing
planned
aninvestigation
ofemployee
tosupport
In:
intentions
change
management:
organizational
change.
2:
of
Behavioral
237-262.
Science,
JournalApplied
D. /Schulz-Hardt,
S. (2002):Psychological
effects
oftheEuro- exJonas,
E./Greitemeyer,
T./Frey,
ontheperception
ofsalaries
In:European
ofSoresearch
andpriceestimations.
Journal
perimental
cialPsychology,
32:147-169.
A meta-analytic
R.F.(2004):Transformational
andtransactional
testof
T.A./Piccolo,
leadership:
Judge,
In:Journal
their
relative
ofApplied
89:755-768.
validity.
Psychology,
T.M.(1999):Managerial
T.A./Thoresen,
V./Welbourne,
Judge,
C.J./Pucik,
copingwithorganizational
In:Journal
ofApplied
84:107-122.
change.
Psychology,
Harvard
Boston:
Business
SchoolPress.
Kotter,
J.P.(1996):Leading
change.
T. (1998):Howtodeliver
a change
In:Training
& Development,
52(4):44.
Kramlinger,
message.
S. (1987):Transactional
onemotions
In:Euroandresearch
andcoping.
Lazarus,
R.S./Folkman,
theory
ofPersonality,
1: 141-170.
peanJournal
L./Seibold,
D. (1998):Reconceptualizing
as a communicaLewis,
organizational
change
implementation
tionproblem:
a review
ofliterature
andresearch
In: Roloff,
M.E. (Ed.):Communication
agenda.
21.Thousand
Oaks,CA:Sage:93-151.
yearbook
in organizations.
T.
Procedural
In: Cohen,C.L. (Ed.):ThesocialpsyLind,E.A./Tyler,(1988):
justice
of
New
York:
Plenum
Press:
173-202.
justice.
chology procedural
S.T. (2005):Theproduction
oftrust
Lines,R./Selart,
B./Johansen,
M./Espedal,
during
organizational
In:Journal
ofChange
5 (2):221-245.
change.
Management,
G.P.(1990):A theory
ofgoalsetting
andtaskperformance.
N.
Locke,E.A./Latham,
Cliffs,
Englewood
Hall.
J.:Prentice
ofsupportive
andrefutational
defenses
inimmunizing
defenses.
McGuire,
W.J.(1961):Theeffectiveness
In:Sociometry,
24:184-197.
A.G. (2000):Someunanticipated
oforganizational
W./Scherer,
McKinley,
consequences
restructuring.
In:Academy
ofManagement
25:735-752.
Review,
intheworkplace:
andapplication.
Thouresearch,
Meyer,
J.P./Allen,
N.J.(1997):Commitment
Theory,
sandOaks,CA:Sage.
L. (2001):Commitment
intheworkplace:
Toward
a general
model.
In:Human
Meyer,
J.P./Herscovitch,
Resource
11: 299-326.
Review,
Management
L. (2007):Employee
commitment
andsupport
foran
/Srinivas,
E.S./Lal,
Meyer,
J.P.
J.B./Topolnytsky,
Testofthethree-component
modelintwocultures.
In:Journal
ofOccupaorganizational
change:
tional
andOrganizational
80:185-211.
Psychology,
V.D./Johnson,
towillingness
ina planned
toparticipate
Miller,
J.R./Grau,
J.(1994):Antecedents
organizational
In:Journal
ofApplied
Communication
Research,
change.
22(1):59-80.
P. (1985):Socialinformation
andemployee
aboutorganizational
In:
Miller,
K./Monge,
anxiety
change.
Human
Communication
Research,
11(3):365-386.
G.M.(1998):Explaining
howsurvivors
to downsizing:
The rolesof
Mishra,
A.K./Spreitzer,
respond
andworkredesign.
In:Academy
ofManagement
23:567-588.
trust,
Review,
empowerment,
justice,
174
Traut-Mattausch:
Fischer,
Organizational
ChangeInitiatives
In: Career
InternaB.K. (2001):Leading
Moran,
organizational
change.
Development
J.W./Brightman,
tional,
6(2):111-118.
In:Organizational
11:37transitions
touncertain
future
states.
D.A.(1982):Managing
Nadler,
Dynamics,
45.
versusauthentic
dissent:
/Brown,
Nemeth,
J.D.(2001):Devil'sadvocate
Stimulating
C.J.
K.S./Rogers,
In:European
ofSocialPsychology,
31:707-720.
andquality.
Journal
quantity
K.S. (2001):Improving
decision
Nemeth,
bymeansof
J.D./Brown,
making
C.J./Connell,
J.B.
/Rogers,
31:48-58.
In:Journal
ofApplied
SocialPsychology,
dissent.
In: Strategic
install
andappraising
howmanagers
Nutt,P.C. (1987):Identifying
strategy.
Management
8: 1-14.
Journal,
of
to organizational
In: European
andresistance
context,
Journal
change.
Oreg,S. (2006):Personality,
15(1):73-101.
andOrganizational
Work
Psychology,
oftheeffectiveness
of
as predictors
H.P.(2002):Vertical
versus
shared
C.L./Sims
Pearce,
leadership
Jr.,
An
of
teams:
examination
transactional,
transformational,
aversive,
directive,
change
management
andPractice,
In:GroupDynamics:
behaviors.
andempowering
leader
Research,
6(2):172Theory,
197.
In:HumanCommuniinpolitical
communication.
M. (1988):Inoculation
Pfau,M./Burgoon,
campaign
cation
15:91-111.
Research,
ofrevonReorganisationen
W. (1999):Management
H./Ganer,
Picot,A./Freudenberg,
[Management
Gabler.
. Wiesbaden:
organization]
ReIn:Academy
ofManagement
crisis:
Thelogicoffailure.
S. (2005):Organizational
Probst,
G./Raisch,
19:90-105.
view,
aboutorganizational
andmanaging
Reichers,
A./Wanous,
cynicism
J./Austin,
J.(1997):Understanding
ofManagement
In:Academy
Executive,
11(1):48-59.
change.
thediandinter-justice
T.L./Summers,
T.P./Miller,
Robbins,
relationships:
Assessing
J.L.(2000):Intrarection.
In:Human
Relations,
53(10):1329-1355.
ofplanned
D.R./Porras,
Robertson,
/Roberts,
Assessing
change:
organizational
J.I(1993):Dynamics
P.J.
ofManagement
model.
In:Academy
fora theoretical
36(3):619-634.
Journal,
empirical
support
Science
In:Administrative
contract.
ofthepsychological
S.L.(1996):Trustandbreach
QuarRobinson,
41(4):574-599.
terly,
anditscauses.In:Reitsnature
Itsdefinition,
deviance:
Robinson,
S.L./Bennett,
R.J.(1997):Workplace
inOrganizations,
6:3-27.
onNegotiation
search
A psychological
behavior:
S.L./Morrison,
E.W.(1995):Organizational
Robinson,
perspective.
citizenship
16:289-298.
ofOrganizational
In:Journal
Behavior,
butthe
contract:
Nottheexception
thepsychological
D.M. (1994):Violating
S.L./Rousseau,
Robinson,
15:245-259.
ofOrganizational
norm.
In:Journal
Behavior,
- orchange
3:
ofChange
In:Journal
G. (2003):Change
Management,
leadership?
management
Roger,
307-318.
on
decisions
instrategic
andtactical
ofparticipation
M. (2001):Effect
D./Koslowsky,
Sagie,A./Elizur,
ofSocialPsychology,
In:Journal
ofplanned
130(4):459-465.
change.
acceptance
in
ofparticipation
as a function
andbehaviors
attitudes
M. (1994):Organizational
A./Koslowsky,
Sagie,
ofOrganizaIn:Journal
ofpath-goal
Anapplication
decisions:
andtactical
theory.
change
strategic
15:37-47.
tional
Behavior,
A
withanorganizational
ofcoping
antecedents
Scheck
C.L./Kinicki,
acquisition:
A.J.(2000):Identifying
21:627-648.
In:Journal
ofOrganizational
assessment.
structural
Behavior,
Genuine
ingroupdecision
conflict
D. (2002):Productive
Schulz-Hardt,
making:
M./Frey,
S./Jochims,
BeIn:Organizational
biasedinformation
tocounteract
as strategies
andcontrived
dissent
seeking.
88:563-586.
havior
andHuman
Performance,
A longitudia merger:
withemployees
A.S.(1991):Communications
D.M./DeNisi,
following
Schweiger,
34:110-135.
ofManagement
In:Academy
nalfield
Journal,
experiment.
revue,
management
DOI 10.1688/1861-9908_mrev_2009_02_Peus
175
reaction
tothechange
toworkteams:
Theinfluence
of
B.L.(1999):Employees'
D.L./Kirkman,
Shapiro,
In:
of
51-66.
12(1):
Journal
"anticipatory"
injustice.
Organizational
Change
Management,
R. (1997):Retaliation
intheworkplace:
Therolesofdistributive,
and
Skarlicki,
D.P./Folger,
procedural,
In:Journal
ofApplied
interactional
82(3):434-443.
justice.
Psychology,
L.R.(1991):Ananalysis
ofstrategies
forannouncing
In: Group&
Smeltzer,
change.
organization-wide
Studies,
16(1):5-24.
Organization
anorganizaA.K.(2002):To stayortogo:Voluntary
survivor
turnover
G.M./Mishra,
Spreitzer
following
tional
In:Journal
ofOrganizational
23:707-729.
Behavior,
downsizing.
R.L.(Eds.)(1986):Prediction,
andcontrol
as antidotes
to organizaR.I./Kahn,
Sutton,
understanding,
CA:Prentice
Hall.
tional
stress.
Cliffs,
Englewood
In: Research
Theavenger's
on
T.M./Bies,
R.J.(1997):What's
goodaboutrevenge?
perspective.
Tripp,
in
6:
145-160.
NegotiationOrganizations,
M.L./Anderson,
P. (1986):Technological
In:
discontinuities
andorganizational
environments.
Tushman,
Administrative
Science
31:439-465.
Quarterly,
M.L./O'Reilly,
C.A.(1997):Winning
innovation.
MA:Harvard
Business
Tushman,
through
Cambridge,
SchoolPress.
M. (2004):The relative
effectiveness
of inoculation,
andcombined
Wan,H.H./Pfau,
bolstering,
apincrisis
In:Journal
communication.
ofPublicRelations
Research,
16(3):310-328.
proaches
andoutcome
of openness
in a reorganizing
to changes
C.R./Banas,
Wanberg,
J.T.(2000):Predictors
In:Journal
ofApplied
85(1):132-142.
workplace.
Psychology,
L.B./Jones
E. (2004):Individual
forchange,
fearof
readiness
individual
W.A/Roberts
Weeks,
J./Chonko
andsalesmanager
Anempirical
In:Journal
ofPersonal
change,
performance:
investigation.
Selling
andSalesManagement,
24:7-17.
K.E. (1995):Sense-making
inorganizations.
Thousand
Oaks:SagePublications.
Weick,

4

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

4

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rainer Hampp Verlag

Leading and Managing Organizational Change Initiatives

Claudia Peus, Dieter Frey, Marit Gerkhardt, Peter Fischer,

Althoughindispensablefor long-termeconomic growth,organizationalchanges are

Today's organizationsface a numberof challengesresultingfromthe developmentof

Employee resistance to organizational change

dence in theirabilityto handlethechanges)as an importantpredictor.Thus, empirical

Despite the numerousnegativeoutcomes associated with employeeresistance,

Success factors for organizational changes

A numberof concepts have been examinedas positivereactionsto organizational

tionshipsand restoretrustwhichmayhave been damagedin the process of introducing changesleads to different

In additionto the particularleadershipstyleenacted,having consensus

You might also like