The talk explores the history of organisational change and its relevance to challenges organisations face today This is the first of a series of talks with the to crowd-source a body of knowledge from people who have experience in Organisational Change. To build this body of knowledge I aim to cover the following topics over the coming months: History of Organisational Change - this seems like a logical place to start to assess the current body of knowledge and tease out areas that need to be worked on Adopting a Scientific Mindset - we need a systematic way of building knowledge and challenging our beliefs Complex Systems - maybe the most difficult part. Organisations and change are complex systems. Do complex systems offer us some axioms or principles on which we can build our practice? Myths of Organisational Change - this will be an exploration into current Organisational Change beliefs and whether they fit with the way we want to build our knowledge base. Neuroscience of Organisational Change - This will take us back to the basics of how our brains potentially deal with uncertainty and change. Change capabilities - this is the body of evidence - a set of capabilities that organisations need to develop to be able to change. The fun bit would be working together to constantly test the effectiveness of these capabilities constantly enhancing our body of knowledge.

1. Future Events

2. Jan 28, 2021
HISTORY OF
ORGANISATIONAL CHANGE
2

3. 1
WHY
3
WHAT
2
HOW
4 THE HISTORY!
3
CONTENT
Is the history of Organisational Change
important?
are the underlying assumptions that we
take for granted that bias our
interpretation of history?
does our view of reality (ontology) and
knowledge is formed (epistemology) affect
our historical interpretation?

4. WHY…?
2
4
Is the history of Organisational Change
important

5. 5
A story about failure
2011
2021
2016
2022
Mark Hughes questioned the
assertion emanating from HBR
that 70% of all organizational
change initiatives fail
Referenced as claiming that
organizational change tends to
fail. Refused a correction
called a Taliban Scholar
Questioned the notion that
transformation efforts fail, but
with the addition of
#leadingchange, they succeed
Inaccurate
misrepresentation
corrected but
organizational change
failure tendencies still
erroneously endure.
1993
Hammer and Champy
“Our unscientific estimate is
that as many as 50 percent to
70 percent of the organizations
that undertake a reengineering
effort do not achieve the
dramatic results they intended”

6. HOW…?
2
6
does our view of reality (ontology) and knowledge is formed (epistemology)
affect our historical interpretation?

7. Deterministic
Subjective
Sensemaking Facts
Rhetoric Power
Interpretations of history are objectively reconstructed
largely absent of human agency through imprinting,
structural inertia & escalation of commitment limiting
organisational change capability.
Creating credible and coherent narrative by rhetorically
reconfiguring the past through memorialising, forgetting,
periodisation creates an ‘invented tradition’
Pressures for and against change form counterbalancing
collations of different interests creating equilibrium or
change resistance until one collation overcomes another
through revolutionary change.
Socially constructed retrospective interpretations of the
past have a deterministic effect on group values
through enactment, collective frames of reference &
role of past interpretation on future behavior
Objective
Malleable Different Interpretations of History
“variations in how we
conceptualize change are
underpinned by different
assumptions about history
and its relationship to our
capacity for change”
“evaluation is a form of
knowing informed by the
evaluator’s epistemology
and ontology”. Butler et al
(2003)
Suddaby, R., & Foster, W. M. (2017). History and
organizational change. Journal of
management, 43(1), 19-38.

8. What to watch out for as we travel through time
COHERENCE
Definition + Scope + Relationship = Coherence Autonomy, Relatedness & Competency = Motivation =
“aggregate construct”
RELATIONSHIP
No construct is an island we are building a body of knowledge. Making logical connections to other
theories – Kotter & ADKAR have no references.
SCOPE
Space = Kubler Ross from grief to change, Time = period of validity, and values judgements = “brains
hate change” or “sense of urgency”
DEFINITION
Precise distinctions from other concepts. Change management = “people side of change”
Suddaby, R. 2010. Construct clarity in theories of management and organization. Academy of Management Review, 35: 346-357.
Construct = an abstract categorisation of observations - exist in our brain only ;) e.g. depression

9. 9
Organisational Change
‘defining and adopting
corporate strategies,
structures, procedures
and technologies to
handle changes in
external conditions and
the business
environment.’
SHRM
“ ‘the application of a
structured process and
set of tools for leading the
people side of change to
achieve a desired
outcome’ PROSCI
‘Organizational change
refers to the actions in
which a company or
business alters a major
component of its
organization, such as its
culture, the underlying
technologies or
infrastructure it uses to
operate, or its internal
processes
HBR 2020
Change management is a
collective term for all
approaches to prepare,
support, and help
individuals, teams, and
organizations in making
organizational change
WIKI
Change
Management
DEFINITION
Do we know what we are talking about?

10. WHAT…?
3
10
are the underlying assumptions that we take for granted that bias
our interpretation of history?

11. 11
Can you name these change models?
1 2
3 4

12. 12
What are your underlying assumptions about organisational
change?

13. THE HISTORY
4
13

14. 14
1950s 1960s 1980s
1970s 1990s 2000s 2010s 2020s
1940s
From Kurt Lewin (1943) to Paul Lawrence
(1958) change and organisational
development is conceived as a set of
causal relationships within a ‘social
system’ built on scientific constructs.
Allport (1937) ‘functional autonomy’ &
Maslow’s (1943) ‘general dynamic theory’
integrate psychological & physiological
approaches to human motivation. White
1959 uses the words ‘competence &
efficacy’ to describe the human need to
‘‘learn to interact effectively with his
environment’
Lewin (1947) mentions “unfreezing,
change of level, and freezing on the new
level” (UCF) ‘theory’. Lewin believes
that force is needed to “break the habit”
(unfreeze), change, Freeze change
management (UCF) & restraining forces
although he views people not being
either entirely fluid or rigid.
Coch & French (1948) – use the phrase
‘overcoming resistance to change’
Lewin’s UCF is extrapolated by Lippit et
al (1958) to 7 stages who cites Lewin’s
‘three phase model’ & creates the term
‘change agents’
Schien (1961) uses Lewins ‘3-phase’ model in
his model for culture change but doesn’t
mention Lippit until Schein & Bennis 1965 who
popularize T-Groups..
Kübler-Ross publishes her stages of grief
theory (1969) based on collection of case
studies taken from conversations with dying
patients
1962 Maslow founds the Humanistic
Psychology movement which soon becomes
‘pop’ movement
1979 Robbins’ Organizational Behavior
published with no mention of Lewin’s UCF
Forrester (1961) - publishes Industrial
Dynamics which views organisations as
complex systems.
Burns & Stalker (1961) – find that less
structured organisations can better adapt to
dynamic environments
1965 Emery & Trist view organisations as
‘open systems’ responding to ‘environmental
textures’
Katz & Kahn (1966) develop an ‘open-
system theory’ of organisations.
Current robust OD constructs emerge such
as Dansereau’s (1973) – Leader Member
Exchange, Bandura 1977 – Self- Efficacy &
Gouldner, 1960 (Reciprocity) Social
Exchange Theory
‘Pop’ psychology’ n-stage organisational change
‘arms race’ as 11 models in 11 years
extrapolated from ‘Lewin’s’ UCR model Conner
& Kotter embed ‘Sense of Urgency &
Resistance Myths’. Methods fail to reference
research & based mainly on personal
experiences & case studies.
Peters & Waterman (1982) publish In Search of
Excellence
Brief history of organisational change & development
Birth of organisational change Birth of organisational change Explosion of management fads
Meta Analysis & Myth Busting
Scientific Approach to OD Systems Approach to OD Explosion of OD constructs
Myth Development & Embedding
OD constructs consolidated into more general
theories such as Ryan & Deci (1985) Self
Determination Theory, Theory of Planned
Behaviour Lock & Latham (1988) Goal Setting
while new theories emerge such as Kahn
(1990) Psychological Safety & Employee
Engagement, Weick’s (1995) Organisational
Sensemaking help to build the foundations of
modern OD thinking.
Meta analysis techniques help to create robust
OD constructs such as Self-Efficacy (Stajkovic &
Luthans-1998), Organisational Justice (Colquitt
et al 2013) Trust in Leadership (Dirks & Ferrin -
2002), Psychological Safety (Frazier et al
2017)
Academics start to question the foundations of
traditional organisational change models e.g.,
Hughes (2015) critiques Kotter & Cummings et
al (2015) questions the Lewin’s UCF theory.
BCG stress
importance of
evidence
CIPD embrace
evidence-
based
management
(EBM) &
produce
‘evidence
reviews’
2008 SCARF model loosely based on
neuroscience leads to ‘brains hate change’ &
other ‘neuro’ myths
Lueke 2003 further embeds Kubler Ross myth
& other ‘n-stage methods.
Mcgregor’s (1957) X-Y theory
‘operationalises’ Maslow’s theory
DiClemente and Prochaska (1982) – integrative
model of behavioural change
Birk & Letwin (1992) integrate OD theories into
their causal model of organisational performance &
change
Hiatt (2006) ADKAR 5 step model
uses outdated theory and case
studies
Stouten et al integrate organisational
change methods with academic OD
theories
CMI Handbook (2015) integrates CM methods
but also embeds myths such as MBTI, Learning
Styles, Kubler-Ross, Amygdala Hijack,
Maslow’s Hierarchy etc.

15. 15
Lippit et al 1st n-step
model of change
Weick’s notion of
sensemaking
organisations
1950s 1960s 1980s
1970s 1990s 2000s 2010s 2020s
1940s
Lewin 1940’s
Schein quotes
Lewin’s 3 phases of
change
Paul Lawrence
conceives
organisations as
social systems
McKinsey &
Company 1983
publish 4 stage
model with only 2
references & starts
with creating a
‘sense of concern’
Daryl Conner
coined the term
'burning platform’ &
suggests
“orchestrating pain”
Beer & Huse -
systems
approach to OD
Evidence based ‘system’ approach – nonlinear, psychological constructs
Pop psychology approach to Organisational Change – linear, incremental, top down, n-step myth based
(natural resistance to change etc)
Gouldner sets
foundation for
Social
Exchange
Theory
Forrester
Systems
Thinking
Tajfel – Social
Identity Theory
Csikszentmihalyi,
‘Flow’
Ryan & Deci 1985 Self
Determination Theory
Ajzen– Theory of
Planned Behaviour
Bandura 1977 – Self-
Theory
1979
1972
1977
1982
1985
1983
1995
Kotter publishes
‘Choosing
Strategies’ focusing
on resistance to
change and
diagnosing need
for change not
included in his 8-
step model
1984
Lock & Latham– Goal
Setting Theory
1990
Kahn -
Psychological
Safety & Employee
Engagement
1987
Greenburg– Organizational
Justice
Hackman & Oldham
Job Characteristics
Theory 1980
1993
1996
Kotter starts his 8-
step model with
‘Creating a sense
of urgency’
1991
Judson
1992
Kantar’s 10
Commandmen
ts
2003
Hiatt ADKAR 5 step
model uses
expectancy theory
and case studies
Mark Hughes
critiques Kotter’s
approach to
change
2015
2000
Beer & Nitin start
the 70% of all
change initiatives
fail myth
Luecke builds on
Kotter, Beer,
Deming but no
reference to
academic studies
1990
Beer’s 7 step
model starts with a
clear definition of
the problem
2018
Stouten et al identify ten
evidence-based steps in
managing planned
organizational change
2019
BCG stress the
importance of
grounding change
programs in
evidence
1987
AI
1993
Antonovsky
sense of
coherence
1988
Watson – Positive Affect
1973
Dansereau– Leader
Member Exchange
2002
Organisational
Justice Meta
Analysis
2001
Trust in leadership
Meta Analysis
Luthan - construct
of Psychological
Capital – resilience,
Efficacy, Hope &
optimism
Peter Senge
(1990
1980
Peters & Waterman,
1982 – In Search of
Excellence
1982
1940 1958 1961
Hull, Drive
Reduction
Theory, 1943
1943
Maslow Drive
Reduction
Theory, 1943
1957
Mcgregor X-Y
Theory.
1968
Hertzberg hygiene
v 1968
1959
2017
Psychological
Safety meta-
analysis
1985
Autonomy Meta
Analysis
Ajzen– Theory of
Planned Behaviour
1998
Self Efficacy – Meta Analysis
2021
CIPD Evidence
Reviews on
Employee
Engagement &
Resilience
2017
CMI Body of
Knowledge
kinson developing his expectancy value theory (Atkinson, 1964)
1964
Carregie (Gorden
& Howell) Ford
Foundation
Pierson 1959

16. 01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
Emergence of Constructs
Extraordinary Extrapolations
Context & Complexity
Core Constructs
Scientific Mindset
Pop Psychology
N-Step Arms Race
09
Myth busting
10
Confidence in Causal Claims
Dilemma of structure (belonging & relatedness) v agency
(efficacy, competence, autonomy)
Viewing organisations as adaptive social
systems and interest in complexity
Organisational Development discipline cannot grow if it
doesn’t adopt a scientific mindset
Core constructs that underpin Organisational Change are
being developed
Meta-analysis used to distill key findings
from large data sets
Clear ontology and solid epistemology helps to create
robust body of knowledge
Intuitive claims taken from unrelated
disciplines or contexts used as foundations
Authority and clever marketing help to promote
poorly evidenced theories that sell
Lots of models use the same foundations to create
models that are similar but just in different orders
Attempts to disentangle what is likely to work from what
is less likely to work.
Synthesis of Concepts
FROM 1940-2020.
Organisational
Change
Themes

17. Emergence of Psychological Constructs
Challenges the view that human personality is driven by childhood experiences, sexual
motives, archetypes, stimulus responses etc. but by dynamic “traits, attitudes, interests, and
sentiments” – the conscious cognitive processes are the initiator of actions.
Gordon Allport - 1937 - Functional Autonomy
Challenges the physiological approach to motivation and proposes that humans are driven
by the need to ‘learn to interact effectively with his environment’. He chooses the words
‘competence’ and ‘efficacy’ to describe this behaviour.
Robert White – 1959 – Competency & Efficacy
Challenges the ‘functional’ view of behavioural psychology that feeding was the most
important factor in the mother-child relationship rather than love that could be provided by
the mother or father – a revolutionary idea for its time!
Harry Harlow – 1950 – Belonging & Relatedness

18. THE DRIVE TO FIT
IN
Rigidity
Integration
Interdependence
Framework
Belonging
WIIFUS
Planned
Inclusion
Hierarchical
Mechanistic
THE DRIVE TO
STAND OUT
Fluidity
Differentiation
Self – Interest
Freedom
Uniqueness
WIIFM
Emergent
Diversity
Self-organizing
Organic
Paradox 1 – Autonomy v Structure

19. Building an Inclusive Culture
Differentiation
Exclusion Assimilation
Individual is not treated as an
organisational insider in the work group,
but their unique characteristics are seen
as valuable and required for
group/organisational success
Individual is not treated as an
organisational insider with unique value
in the work group but there are other
employees or groups who are insiders
Individual is treated as an insider in the
work group when the conform to the
organisational/dominant culture norms
and downplay uniqueness
UNIQENESS
–
Drive
to
stand
out
BELONGING - Drive to fit in (Cohesion)
Shore, Lynn & Randel, Amy & Chung, Beth & Dean, Michelle & Ehrhart, Karen & Singh, Gangaram. (2011). Inclusion and Diversity in Work Groups: A Review and Model for Future Research. Journal of
Management.
Inclusive cultures are those where
uniqueness and belonging come
together
When an individual’s unique
characteristics are accepted into a
group it improves performance
while creating a sense of
belonging
These feelings of psychological
safety where people feel safe
taking interpersonal risks are
critical to building inclusive
cultures
(Separation)
Inclusion
Individual is treated as an insider and
allowed/encouraged to retain uniqueness
within the work group .

20. 20
Adapting to external environment
Study of a supermarket chain that wanted to decentralise to be more
competitive and create a better working environment. Cconceived
organisations as ‘social system’. & environment determines behaviour
Paul Lawrence - 1958
01
02
03
Questioned the efficiency of hierarchical bureaucratic organisations and
whether they can adapt to their contexts
Blau (1955) & Merton (1949)
“suggests that organisations who cannot adapt & align their internal structure
& strategy with their external environment will underperform. They proposed
"organic" forms of structure in situations of high environmental complexity and
uncertainty
Lawrence & Lorsch (1969) & Burns & Stalker (1961)

21. Organisations As Complex Systems
“Traditional organisational theories have tended to view the human
organisation as a closed system. This tendency has led to the disregard of
differing organisational environments and the nature of organisational
dependency on its environment”
Katz & Kahn - 1966
01
02
03
“A main problem in the study of organisational change is that the
environmental contexts in which organisations exist are themselves changing,
at an increasing rate, and towards increasing complexity”
Emery & Trist – 1965
“Organisations can be viewed as consisting of goal, task, technological,
human-social, structural & external interface subsystems existing in a state of
dynamic interdependence” p.82
French & Bell- 1972

22. Organisational
Development
Force Field Analysis Tensions in the ‘field’ create
change
Action Research - planning, action, and fact-finding
Group dynamics - groups and individuals act and
react to changing circumstances
Change
Management

23. Extraordinary Extrapolations
01
02
1. The Develop Of A Need For Change (“unfreezing”), 2. Establishment of
Change 3. Relationship, Working Toward Change (“moving”), 4.
Generalisation & Stabilisation of Change (“freezing”) & 5. Achieving A
Terminal Relationship
Lippit’s 5-steps – 1958 (Schein 1961)
1. Creating A Sense of Concern, 2. Developing A Specific Commitment to
Change, 3. Pushing For Major Change, 4. Reinforcing & Consolidating
New Course
Phillip’s 4 Steps – McKinsey & Co - 1983
1. Create Urgency 2. Form a Powerful Coalition 3. Create a Vision for
Change. 4. Communicate the Vision. 5. Remove Obstacles. 6. Create Short-
Term Wins. 7. Build on the Change. 8. Anchor the Changes in Corporate
Culture.
Kotter’s 7 Steps – 1995

24. Adopting a Scientific Mindset
“though science is slow and fumbling, it represents the best road we know to truth, even in so
delicately intricate an area as that of human relationships.”
Carl Rogers – 1942 - Counseling and Psychotherapy
“Psychologists who think in field theoretical terms and those who think in stimulus response terms
agree that psychological explanations have to use "constructs" and that psychological theory has to
be mathematical in nature ”
Kurt Lewin – 1943 – Definition of Field Theory
“The art develops through empirical experience but in time ceases to grow because of the
disorganised state of its knowledge” “But as long as there is no orderly underlying scientific base the
experiences remain as special cases. The lesson’s are poorly transferable either in time or space”
.
Jay Forrester – 1961 – Industrial Dynamics
01
02
03

25. ORGANISATIONAL
CHANGE
‘defining and adopting
corporate strategies, structures,
procedures and technologies to
handle changes in external
conditions and the business
environment.’
SHRM
“ ‘the application of a structured
process and set of tools for
leading the people side of
change to achieve a desired
outcome’ PROSCI
CHANGE
MANAGEMENT
ORGANISATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
‘a planned and systematic
approach to enabling sustained
organisational performance
through the involvement of its
people’
CIPD 2020
The practice of continually adapting human capability to meet an organisation’s
internal & external ambitions
STRATEGIC HR
MANAGEMENT
The choice, alignment, and
integration of an organisation’s
HRM system so that its human
capital resources most effectively
contribute to strategic business
objectives.’ Kaufman (2015: 404)
IES 2019
Spot the difference?

26. 26
What caused the split between OD and CM?
WHAT is knowledge v HOW to knowledge
Quick Fixes
Lack of robust constructs in OD
Effective Marketing
?

27. Key Concepts in Organisational Development?
People who consciously decide their goals and are monitored against those goals are more likely to attain
their goals that those who do not. Goals create ‘energy’ to ‘do work’ One of the most research areas in
organisational psychology. Goals can be used to increase commitment to change
Goal Setting Theory – Lock & Latham 1988
People are more likely to perceive decisions as being fair if there is a clear process, outcomes of the
decision are distributed equitably and the process and outcomes are communicated. It is a strong
predictor of commitment, trust, support, relationships, performance and discretionary behaviour.
Organisational Justice – Greenburg 1987
People in a group who feel confident they can take ‘interpersonal risks’. A large number of empirical
studies have demonstrated that a high level of psychological safety motivates employees to actively seek
and share information and knowledge, ask critical questions, speak up with suggestions for organisational
improvements, and take initiative to develop new products and services” CIPD 2021
Psychological Safety – Kahn - 1990
Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., Rodell, J. B., Long, D. M., Zapata, C. P., Conlon, D. E., & Wesson, M. J. (2013). Justice at the millennium, a decade later: a meta-
analytic test of social exchange and affect-based perspectives. Journal of applied psychology, 98(2), 199.
Frazier, M. L., Fainshmidt, S., Klinger, R. L., Pezeshkan, A., & Vracheva, V. (2017). Psychological safety: A meta‐analytic review and extension. Personnel
Psychology, 70(1), 113-165.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. American psychologist, 57(9),
705.

28. Employee Engagement – Aggregate Construct
A Work Motivation
C Employee’s sense of
belonging to the
organisation
Organisational
Identification B
Organisational
Commitment
Wietrak, E., Rousseau, D. and Barends, E. (2021) Work motivation, Organisational Identification & Organisational
Commitment : an evidence review. Scientific summary. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.
Goal Setting
Feedback
Person-
Organisational Fit
Organisational
Prestige
A+B+C
Employee
Engagement
Recognition
Rewards
Meaning
Empowerment
Social Support
Psychological Safety
Task & Skill Variety
Energy levels within
the organisation.
Employee emotional
attachment to the
organisation
Employee energy to do
work & attain a goal
Role Clarity
Leadership : Trust &
Positive Relationships
Organisational Justice

29. 04
05
06
Cutting edge consultants
extrapolate findings to wide
applications
Managers become the evangelists
resulting in self-fulfilling prophecies
Review of original findings sows
scepticism. Concept now makes
consultants look outdated.
Everyone smartly moves on.
Academic
Discovery 01
02
03
A modest cautious complicated contextual
discovery showing a causal link between
two factors.
High powered simplified presentation
embellishing the ‘discovery’ creates a
‘buzz’ & repetition makes it stronger
One idea becomes a book
released by a ‘guru’ with a catchy
title
Doubt
&
Defection
Cult-like Following
Consultancy Hype
Popularisation
Study Description
Pop psychology
The Fad & Fashion Funnel
“Thinking scientifically is a
skill. Scepticism is healthy;
cynicism is not. In order to be
a discriminating “purchaser” of
management ideas we need
to evaluate the evidence for
them.“
Fads and Fashions in Management - July 20,
2015 - Adrian Furnham Professor of
Psychology University College London –
European Business Review

30. 30
N-Step Arms Race

31. Individual Level
- Individual Change Readiness
- Motivating Change
- Organisational Fairness Perceptions
- Organisational Identification
Group Level
- High Quality Connections
- Emergent Local Changes
- Supervisory Support
- Shared Goals & Beliefs
Organisation Level
- Leadership Competency
- Trust In Leaders
- Nature of the Change
- Organisational Change Readiness
BEST AVAILABLE
EVIDENCE
1. Understand Get The Facts On The Nature of the
Problem
2. Understand Assess & Address Readiness for Change
3. Develop & Communicate a Compelling Vision
4. Develop Effective Change Leadership
5. Implement : Evidence-Based Change Interventions
6. Support : Work with Social Networks and Tap Their
Influence
7. Support : Use Enabling Practices to Support
Implementation
8. Realise : Promote Micro-Processes and
Experimentation
9. Realise : Change Progress and Outcomes over Time
10. Institutionalize the Change to Sustain Its
Effectiveness
INTEGRATED EVIDENCE BASED
ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE
PRINCIPLES
Stouten, J., Rousseau, D. M., & De Cremer, D. (2018). Successful organizational change: Integrating the management
practice and scholarly literatures. Academy of Management Annals, 12(2), 752-788.
ten Have, S., ten Have, W., Huijsmans, A. B., & Otto, M. (2016). Reconsidering change management: Applying
evidence-based insights in change management practice. Routledge.
Integrated Organisational Change Model
31
2 Kanter, Stein, and Jick’s Ten Commandments
POPULAR
ORGANISATIONAL
CHANGE MODELS 1
1 Except for Kotter’s 8 Steps none of these models have been empirically tested
3 Appreciative Inquiry

32. 32
Myth busting & Alternative views

33. 33
CMI Body of Knowledge ?

34. 34
Meta Analysis – Confidence in our Causal Claims
TRUST =
Consideration
(benevolence + ability)
+
Structure
(predictability & integrity)
Psychological
Contract Breach
Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for
research and practice. Journal of applied psychology, 87(4), 611.
Trust In
Leadership.pptx

35. 35
BCG & CIPD evidence reviews

36. 1
2
3
4
5
Context & Complexity
Change & Performance
Time & History
Pacing & Receptivity
Scholars & Practitioners
Pacing & Readiness
Scholars & Practitioners
What patterns from past changes can we use to help
understand current change?
How can we get better at linking change to
organisational performance? How do we know what
worked in which context?
How do the internal & external conditions, content of
the change and timescales affect change success?
Does the order affect the outcome? Where does
change start & what is the organisation’s readiness?
Is sustaining different from starting? Is change
episodic or continuous?
How should they work together to form a body of
knowledge? How do we critically examine our
practice?
What we still need to get better at…?
Pettigrew, A. M., Woodman, R. W., & Cameron, K. S. (2001). Studying organizational change and development: Challenges for future research. Academy of management journal, 44(4), 697-713.
Improved
Understanding
of
Organisational
Change

37. Future Events

38. AND ...
Thank you!
from
Alex Boulting
Ow ner at EbbnFlow
Em ail: alex@
ebbnflow .co.uk
Mobile: +44(0) 7562 570000
w w w .ebbnflow .co.uk