THE DYNAMICS OF READINESS FOR CHANGE “The

(1)

THE DYNAMICS OF READINESS FOR CHANGE

“The development of readiness for change

based on a multidimensional level”

Master thesis, MscBA, specialization Change Management University of Groningen, faculty of Management and Organization

November 12 , 2012 VERA RUSTEMA Student number: 2022400 Willem Mantelstraat 35 7742 LG Coevorden Tel: 06-40876254 e-mail: v.rustema@student.rug.nl Supervisor/ university

1st supervisor: Mrs. drs. H.P. van Peet 2nd supervisor: Mr. dr. C. Reezigt

(2)

2 Acknowledgement

(3)

3 Abstract

This research is focused on the dynamics of readiness for change based on the tri dimensional construct (Piderit, 2000), cognitive-, emotional-, and intentional readiness for change and the influence of communication. Qualitative and quantitative research was done. Quantitative research was done with help of a telephone survey amongst 61 participants to analyze the development of readiness for change based on the three components. The questionnaire made use of the OCQ-C, P,R questionnaire of Bouckenooghe (2009). Qualitative research was done with help of 19 in depth interviews to identify the influence of communication on the readiness for change.

The results of the quantitative analysis demonstrated readiness for change was dynamic en developed over time, based on the fact readiness for change existed at the first measurement of two components (intentional and emotional+cognitive) and the second time of three separate components. A possible reason for this is that the communication made the change more clear. Furthermore there was a causal relationship between readiness for change (emotional and cognitive) scores prior to the communication and readiness for change scores (cognitive, emotional and intentional) post to the communication. Intentional readiness for change prior to the communication only had a causal relationship with intentional readiness for change post to the communication. The qualitative analysis showed communication was not the main factor influencing readiness for change, other factors were of influence too (leadership style and future prospects).

Keywords: Readiness for change, communication, intervention, emotional

readiness for change, cognitive readiness for change, intentional readiness for change

ResearchTheme: Change Management

(4)

4

Introduction

People and their opinions towards organizational change are important during a change process. Research indicates the importance of involving employees when changing an organization and employees being in the centre of organizational change (Choi, 2011). Choi (2011) showed a growing number of research, explaining a large amount of change efforts fail due to the underestimation of change leaders of the role of individuals in the change process. Furthermore research of Judge, Thoresen, Pucik and Welbourne (1999) claimed organizations change and act through their members. A large amount of research has been focused on attitudes and reactions of these people towards change (Bouckenooghe, 2010; Oreg, Vakola & Armenakis, 2011). Research of Bouckenooghe (2010) and Oreg et al (2010) has indicated different kinds of attitudes towards change. Common attitudes are: readiness for change, commitment to change, openness to change and cynicism about organizational change (Choi, 2011). This research focuses on the attitude: “Readiness for Change”.

Readiness for Change

(7)

7 Research context

In order to investigate the readiness for change based on the multidimensional construct, data of an organization dealing with organizational change are needed. The Province of Overijssel is the organization in which this research takes place.

Organization

The Province of Overijssel is a local government agency in the Netherlands and is the central layer between the central government and municipalities. The organization consists of an administrative layer: management team and eight departments and a political layer: provincial council, provincial executive, royal commissioner and sessional services. The administrative organization is divided in eight departments, working about 900 people (Provincie Overijssel, Organisatie. 7 maart 2012, http://intranet.ovr.prv/organisatie/). The province is in the process of a planned organizational change. There are three main causes of why the province needs to change: a political assignment; request of stakeholders and because of the province itself wants to change. To gain more insight in what needs to be changed, the province hired a consultancy agency who gave insight in how the province could improve itself. (Meer toegevoegde waarde: verschil maken het veranderverhaal, 2011).

Change Process

The change process of the province can be split up in three phases. The first phase was focused on implementing a new main organizational structure. The organization consisted of ten departments, which is brought back to eight departments. Furthermore, new department managers and adjunct department managers were assigned. Although the main organizational structure was already changed per January 2012, the existing teams within departments remained the same during this phase. From January 2012 till December 2015 the remainder of the organizational change will be executed, called phase two and three. This research takes place during phase two (Appendix A). The following section will elaborate phase two in more detail.

(8)

8

 department (organization, composition, financial position);  vision (external developments and actions);

 goals (what does the department wants);

 assignments (which assignments is the department going to realize in the future);  approach (how is the department going to work in the future);

 organization (how does the new department look like, function plan);

 transition (how does the path of the department to the new organization look like). (Bedrijfsplan provincie Overijssel 2012)

The department manager together with his or her deputy was responsible for the business plan. Most of the departments consulted a team of employees to help the development of the plan, also called “change teams”. However, differences per department concerning this way of working can be found. One department had no change team, one department gave all responsibility about the development of the business plan to the employees without interference of a manager and one department changed the group of employees in the change team depending on the subject matter. Concluding can be said employees had the function of “consultant” during the change process. The business plan was completed at the end of April 2012 and communicated to the employees of the departments in an organization wide meeting led by the director of the Province of Overijssel. The goal of this organization wide meeting was to inform about employees about the consequences for the entire organization and why the change was needed.

The organization wide meeting was followed by a department wide meeting. The department wide meetings were given to make the information of the organization wide meeting more concrete and to explain the consequences for the department. No conclusions about the individual were given during this meeting. An hr-advisor also gave an explanation of the personnel consequences. This was also the case during team meetings. Employees who wanted to know more about the social plan, planning and process, could participate in information sessions.

(9)

9

replacement candidate. If the function is unchanged and there is enough formative place, the employee is a function follower. If the function will be remained, but the formative place will decrease, the employee is a placement candidate. This was also the moment the (re)placement process starts. During this phase, people can indicate their interest for functions. In the last week of June the placement conversations were started. At the end of October 2012/ beginning of November 2012, the placements are definite.

Change Goals

Before getting further into detail about the research, the change goals of what the province wants to achieve during the change will be described shortly to give more insight in the process of change.

1) Strengthen focus on core tasks

Based on the coalition agreement 2011-2015, the following core tasks are defined for the province:

 sustainable spatial development and management;  environment and energy;

 establishment of rural area;

 regional accessibility and regional public transit;  regional economy;

 cultural infrastructure and conservation of monuments;  quality of public administration services.

Strengthen focus on core tasks means all activities of the province should be limited to tasks and or areas the province identifies as its domain. Current functions may be superfluous and unwanted in the future organization. This development can have serious impact on the employees performing these functions. For instance youth care, this responsibility will be transferred to the municipalities.

2) Improving the result oriented way of working

(10)

10

can be improved. In order to improve, the organizational structure needs to facilitate this way of working. Besides a facilitating organizational structure, there needs to be a clear definition of principal and contractor. Behavior of employees within the organization should be focused on the fulfillment of agreements and an integrated way of working (collaboration).

3) Promoting collective administrative leadership

The analysis done by the consultants indicated the collectivity of the administrative official leadership1 can be improved (Provincie Overijssel: Vergroten van toegevoegde waarde, 2011). This means the different layers in the organization need to be aware of their interdependencies. This requires a new way of working.

4) Improving content focused, strategic guidance by department managers

Previously, managers and in particular department managers, were focused on operations and less focused on the strategic aspects. Future leadership needs to be focused on the strategic side and less focused on the operational side. In order to achieve this, roles and tasks for department managers are developed.

5) Downsizing of the organization

Due to the political assignment, downsizing of the organization is needed. The organization needs to be reduced from 831 FTE to 765 FTE. Along with the reduction of the organization, the quality of the workforce needs to be improved (see change goal 6). Besides downsizing as a political assignment, the organization itself wants to become a more compact organization by focusing on core tasks. Facilitating tasks, and tasks no longer belonging to the core of the organization and facilitating tasks will be reduced to a minimum or outsourced.

6) Improving ‘match’ assignments and personnel

In order to increase its added value, the province needs more seniors and specialists. The province wants to create: “A better match between its personnel and its assignments” (Provincie Overijssel: Vergroten van toegevoegde waarde, 2011). In order to achieve this, the province needs to take this in consideration while reducing its workforce. These considerations will be made on department and team level.

(11)

11 7) Promoting desired behavior of employees

The province can be characterized as risk avoiding and avoiding knowledge focused on content. This is indicated by the external environment of the province (Provincie Overijssel: Vergroten van toegevoegde waarde, 2011). This has resulted in a “non-intervention” culture. Employees were mainly working within team boundaries and therefore not collaborating with other teams. Future behavior of employees is supposed to be more focused on collaboration outside “regular” teams and on work during department exceeding projects. Employees have to work in a more focused, integrated and responsible way.

8) Optimize operations

Based on the coalition agreement, the province has to work in a more efficient way. Furthermore, the province will be more involved in realizing her assignments, projects and programs, will focus more on its core tasks and will work more intensively with its partners. Because of these developments, new demands for risk management and contract management have arisen. In order to keep up with these demands, optimization of operations is needed. This means the planning and control cycle needs to be simplified and more collaboration with municipalities and other provinces.

Management question

Besides the interest of the researcher about investigating the readiness for change based on a multidimensional level, the province itself also has a management question. As mentioned in the first section of this chapter, analysis has been done about the content of the organizational change but less analysis has been done about the process of change and people’s attitudes towards the change (Provincie Overijssel: Meer toegevoegde waarde: Verschil maken het veranderverhaal, 2011). In addition to knowing the content side of changing, the province wants to know what people think about the change, what their attitudes are towards the change and which factors are of influence. Therefore, the province has the following management question:

(12)

12

When the province has more notion of people’s thoughts and attitudes and possible factors of influence, it can come up with actions to improve or stimulate attitudes and factors of influence. These actions can be used during this change process due to the province still being in the middle of the process. Furthermore, when knowing more about the attitudes, this information can be used in other future organizational changes.

Research

Summarized can be said the Province of Overijssel is in the middle of its change process. The first phase has already been executed in 2011 and the second phase is currently being executed. During these phases the future situation will become more clear. This future situation will be communicated per department in the business plan (see change process). At the beginning of May 2012 the business plan will be communicated organization wide, followed by department and team wide meetings, concluding with the individual situation by letter. The communication of the business plan and communication of the starting position of the individual by letter can be seen as an important intervention in the change process. Cummings and Worley (2008) describe an intervention as: “A set of sequenced planned actions or events intended to help an organization increase its effectiveness”. An intervention purposely disrupts the status quo to change an organization towards a different more effective state. The communication of the future situation takes place during the change process and may have an effect on the attitudes. Employees of the province know where they stand and what will change personally for them. Besides, knowing more about the motives why to change will help reducing uncertainty and improve the readiness for change (DiFonzo and Bordia, 1998).

(13)

13

Looking back at the introduction of this chapter, one could say a lot of research has been done about readiness for change, though a research gap can be found concerning measuring readiness for change on a multidimensional level.

Most research is focused on readiness for change as a “static” concept, not focusing on readiness for change as a dynamic concept consisting of three dimensions: cognitive-; emotional- and intentional readiness for change. This research investigates the dynamics of readiness for change based on the three dimensions of readiness for change. Considering the fact the province is interested in the attitudes about the change and the province is in the middle of a planned change process in which a major intervention will take place, gives the opportunity of measuring the readiness for change twice based on a multidimensional level of attitudes, to look at the influence of communication on three dimensions, cognitive, emotional and intentional. Therefore the following research question can be formulated.

(14)

14

Theory

This research is focused on the development of readiness for change during a change process and the influence of an intervention on readiness for change on a multidimensional level. In this chapter, the conceptual model of this research with belonging research question and hypotheses will be explained followed by an explanation of the concept readiness for change. A series of change models will be described to get more insight in how people’s attitudes change over time and to provide different angles of how readiness for change develops. Furthermore readiness for change can be influenced by several antecedents. These antecedents will be appointed with special attention to communication, the intervention of this research.

Conceptual model

This research focuses on the development of readiness for change over time and the effect of an intervention, communication, on this development. In order to analyze the influence of the intervention and how the readiness for change develops during the change process, the readiness for change will be measured twice, prior to and post to the communication.

The following research question for this research can be set up:

“How does the cognitive, emotional and intentional readiness for change develop over time, and what is the influence of communication on the readiness for change”

Figure 1 Conceptual Model

(15)

15

And the following hypotheses and sub hypotheses are set up:

H1: Readiness for change is dynamic and therefore develops over time H1.1 The cognitive readiness for change develops over time

H1.2 The emotional readiness for change develops over time H1.3 The intentional readiness for change develops over time

H2: Communication during the change process influences the readiness for change H2.1: Communication has a positive influence on the cognitive readiness for change H2.2: Communication has a positive influence on the emotional readiness for change H2.3: Communication has a positive influence on the intentional readiness for change

The following sections will explain amongst other things, the readiness for change concept based on a multidimensional level and the influence of communication on the readiness for change.

Readiness for change

(16)

16

Others define readiness for change as a multidimensional construct, incorporating next to the cognitive element, the emotional and intentional element (Piderit 2000, Bouckenooghe 2009), also known as the tri-partite view (Ajzen, 1984). Piderit explains the benefit of using a multidimensional concept as: “By describing employee’s attitudes towards proposed change is that conceptualizing each dimension as a separate continuum allows for the possibility of different reactions along different dimensions”. Another researcher using the multi dimensional concept the same way Piderit does is Metselaar (1997). Metselaar talks about readiness to change and sources of readiness for change: “A positive behavioural intention towards the implementation of modifications in an organization’s structure, or work and administrative processes, resulting in efforts from the organizations member’s side to support or enhance the change process” (Metselaar 1997).

Bouckenooghe (2010) in his review about change recipient’s attitudes brought this concept back to Elizur and Guttman (1976) who also conceived attitudes as a tri-dimensional concept, referring to a set of feelings about change: “Attitudes towards change is a multi- facetted concept comprised of a set of feelings about change, cognitions about change and intentions towards change”. This research will be based on the multi level definition of readiness for change. The different components will be explained in the following paragraphs.

Cognitive readiness for change

The cognitive part of readiness for change can be defined as: “Beliefs expressing positive or negative evaluation of greater or lesser extremity, and occasionally are exactly neutral in their evaluative content” (Eagly and Chaiken, 1998). This might range from positive beliefs, to negative beliefs (Piderit, 2000). Oreg et al (2011) in their review about reactions to change found the following cognitive elements in different research: decision satisfaction, change commitment, support for business strategy, openness to change and perceived fairness.

Emotional readiness for change

(17)

17

emotions. Furthermore they concluded that besides research focused on the negative aspect, positive aspects being measured could also be found, for example: pleasantness and commitment.

Intentional readiness for change

Research has not a common agreement about the intentional part of readiness for change. In the traditional view intentional readiness is about one’s past behaviour and future intentions to act. Some studies put more emphasis on a persons’ past behaviour and some are more focused on intentions to act, future behaviour (Piderit, 2000; Eagly and Chaiken, 1993).

Bouckenooghe (2009) developed an instrument: “Organizational Change Questionnaire-Climate of Change, Processes, and Readiness (OCQ-C, P, R)” measuring cognitive-, emotional- and intentional readiness for change. Bouckenooghe seems to be one of the few who developed a scale measuring readiness for change, splitting up the attitude in three components. For instance Holt, Armenakis, Field and Harris (2007) developed an instrument measuring the individual readiness, making no distinction between cognitive, emotional and intentional readiness. Bouckenooghe (2009) distinguishes between the three components but seems to be neglecting the fact readiness for change could be dynamic during time, not being clear about when the measurement was done in the change process. Also a large amount of research and instruments about readiness for change measure readiness for change before the change is taking place (Holt et al, 2007), regarding it as something that needs to be measured before changing.

(18)

18

sources concerning readiness for change indicated the emotional component has a higher influence on the readiness for change, than the cognitive component. This means emotions are more determinative than cognitions. Though stating emotions are of higher influence than cognitions. This does not mean these two components can be seen as completely separate.

Concluding; most research about readiness for change seems to be neglecting the fact readiness for change can be dynamic. It is interesting to explore the dynamics of readiness for change based on the three components. Therefore the first hypothesis of this research is

The following section describes a series of change models to get more insight in how attitudes change over time from an organizational and a psychological perspective regarding readiness for change as a phase people go through.

Change Phases

The previous paragraph concludes a large amount of research about readiness for change considers readiness for change as static, which needs to be measured prior to the change. When looking at readiness for change from a more psychological angle, readiness for change is more considered as a phase people go through. These psychological models seem to assume readiness for change is not something which needs to be measured prior to the change. However one could still say readiness for change is not considered to be dynamic according to these models because these models are also considering people are “ready to change” during one single phase, not considering possible changes in the readiness for change over time. Notwithstanding these models are also not focused on the dynamics of readiness for change, it is interesting to look at it from a psychological perspective starting with one of the earliest change models

H1: Readiness for change is dynamic and therefore develops over time H1.1 The cognitive readiness for change develops over time

(19)

19

One of the earliest change models, is the three step model of Lewin (1947) (Elrod and Tippett, 2002). Lewin describes the change process as three basic steps:

1. unfreezing; 2. moving; 3. freezing.

Lewin (1947) argues: “Human behaviour is based on a quasi-stationary equilibrium”. This equilibrium needed to be unfrozen to adapt new behaviour to change. Lewin believed before change was possible to happen, the equilibrium of an organization needs to be unfrozen. Lewin recognized change is not easy and the applicability of an approach is not similar to all situations. The “unfreezing” stage is about: “Disconfirmation of the status quo, induction of guilt or survival anxiety and creating psychological safety” (Schein, 1996). During the second phase, people move from one equilibrium to another. Factors of influence are taken into account, identified and evaluated, which makes people able to move. Finally people will “freeze” again and new behaviours are being institutionalized. Lewin saw change as a group process. In order to change an individual’s behaviour, group behaviour too needed to be changed, otherwise individual change would not sustain. Concluding; Lewin also saw readiness for change as something that needed to be created before people start changing.

During the 70’s and 80’s times were changing and organizations needed to change more rapidly in order to survive. This was also the time criticism towards Lewin’s approach emerged. Lewin’s model has been criticized for many reasons. The three main critiques according to Burnes (2004) are:

 too simplistic and mechanistic where organizational change is a continuous open-ended process;

 only relevant to incremental and isolated change projects, unsuitable for radical transformational change;

 ignores role of power and politics in organizations;

 ignores bottom up change, advocates a top down approach.

(20)

20

with Lewin, stating readiness for change needs to be there first. When an organization changes but employees are not ready, resistance will emerge.

As stated in the introduction of this chapter, psychological models are considering readiness for change as a phase/ stage. Kubler-Ross (1969) identified five stages people go through when they are being faced with trauma and illness. She identified the following phases:

1. denial; 2. anger; 3. bargaining; 4. depression; 5. acceptance.

The model of Kubler-Ross is seen as the foundation for many other models based on bereavement theory and grief (Elrod and Tippett, 2002). When looking at the five stages, one could make the conclusion people are negative about change at first, acceptance evolves in a later stage.

Elrod and Tippet (2002) give in their study an overview of current theory concerning human response to change and transition. They also mention another model based on the model of Kubler-Ross, the model of Fink (1967). He identified the following phases: shock, defensive retreat, acknowledgement and adaptation and change. Another model they mention based on the individual was developed by Menninger (1975) named the “Change curve”, containing the phases of:

1. arrival (anxiety, high motivation, apprehension, enthusiasm); 2. engagement (depression, realization losses, frustration);

3. acceptance (anger/ criticism, activism, speaking out, reassessment); 4. re-entry (anxiety, depression, future, satisfaction at completion.

The model of Kubler-Ross is focused on the individual when dealing with change. Also models focused on a broader perspective, the organization, can be found. Elrod and Tippett (2002) name for example Grensing (1991). Grensing stated the stages of the model of Kubler-Ross are also applicable to people dealing with change in general. An example is the Tuckman model, also identifying four stages:

(21)

21

2. Storming; intergroup conflict takes place, emotional responses expressed. 3. Norming; cohesion, roles and norms are being developed.

4. Performing; the group will be able to function together.

“Besides these four phases, organizations also experience some kind of loss, which often remains unacknowledged by the organization. This expresses itself in the behaviours of employees becoming obstructionist” (Henderson-Loney, 1996).

The model of Perlman and Takacs (1990) is one of the most extensive models of change (Elrod and Tippett, 2002). This model describes readiness for change as one of the last phases people go through. They describe ten phases:

1. equilibrium; 2. denial; 3. anger; 4. bargaining; 5. chaos; 6. depression; 7. resignation; 8. openness; 9. readiness; 10. re-emergence.

Elrod and Tippett (2002) in their research concluded most models about human response to change, start from a certain stage, than face a disruption and end in a redefined stage. “People do not anticipate change, and thus tend to resist when it comes” (Elrod and Tippett, 2002). Furthermore most models are showing a loss of capabilities during intermediate phases. They conclude their research with the importance of leaders (change agents) to: “Understand the path, communicate expectations, establish handholds and encourage travellers” (Elrod and Tippett, 2002). Readiness for change can be influenced by different factors. The next paragraph shortly describes these factors.

Antecedents

(22)

22

cognitive). Pre change antecedents are focused on change recipients characteristics (traits, needs, coping styles and demographics) and internal context (supportive environment and trust, commitment, culture and job characteristics). Change antecedents can be distinguished as change process (participation, communication, interactional and procedural justice and management competence), perceived benefit/ harm (anticipated outcomes, job insecurity and distributive justice), and change content (compensation, job design, office layout and shift schedule).

Bouckenooghe (2009), distinguishes between process (quality of change, communication, support by supervisors, attitude of top management, participation) and context (trust in leadership, politicking, cohesion). As previously appointed, Metselaar (1997) talks about sources of readiness for change. These sources have a direct influence on the readiness for change. He defines the following eight sources: consequences for work, emotions, added value, behaviour of colleagues, change experience, time and manpower, lead of the process, complexity of the change.

The intervention of this research is, according to Oreg et al (2011), part of the “change antecedent category” and can be identified as a change process antecedent. Because the change process antecedent is the subject of this research, this antecedent will be explained in further detail. Holt et al (2007) also made a distinction between the several antecedents. They identify context, content, process and individual factors. According to these authors quality of communication and participation from employees are part of the process antecedent, which is in line with Oreg et al. (2011). This antecedent will be elaborated in more detail in the following section.

Communication

(23)

23 Communication and Organizational Change

Communication and organizational change are related to each other (Lewis, 1999). Communication is of great importance for the succeeding of an organizational change (DiFonzo and Bordia, 1998; Lewis and Sebold, 1998; Schweiger and Denisi, 1991). Poor communication may cause resistance to change and rumours (DiFonzo, Bordia, and Rosnow, 1994; Smelzer and Zener, 1992). Schweiger and Densi (1991) are claiming that communication during organizational change reduces people’s insecurity. This is also based on the uncertainty reduction theory: “Individuals will look for information when they experience uncertainty”. An increase of the amount of communication reduces this uncertainty and will increase positive feelings towards the organization (Kramer, Dougherty and Pierce, 2004). Besides, employees who are being informed on time with informative and useful information are more positive about the change and more willing to change (Wanberg and Banas, 2000). A consequence of poor communication is the increase of rumours which may increase peoples’ resistance to change. “Routine notice about what is happening, is an absolute must” (Soumyaja, Kamalanabhan and Bhattacharyya 2011).

Communication and Readiness for Change

(24)

24 Communication Goals

Different goals of communication during organizational change can be identified. The communication of messages can be seen as the primary goal of communication (De Ridder, 2005). Furthermore communication is about relationships, more focused on satisfaction about communication processes (De Ridder, 2004). Elving (2005) claims: “Communication aims for the creation of mutual understandings and trusting relationships” (Elving, 2005). Van Vuuren and Elving (2008) continue this statement by stating that the creation of relationships are equally important as information about organizational goals. Claiming: “From this point of view change efforts are often too narrowly focused at information, for example explaining the rationale goal for change” (Van Vuuren and Elving, 2008).

Change Message

What will change, why the change is needed, when the change will take place and the consequences of the change are important questions needing to be answered for employees during the whole change process (Elving et al 2005). Soumyaja, Kamalanabhan and Bhattacharyya (2011) claim communication of why the change is needed needs to be done by the management self. Knowing more about the motives for change reduces uncertainties people have, for instance job security (DiFonzo and Bordia, 1998). Furthermore, research of Robertson, Roberts and Porras (1993) showed when organizational change is about individual tasks of employees, communication about the change and informing the employees who are involved is of high importance.

Armenakis and Harris (2002) claim: “Negative responses to organizational changes are caused by leader’s oversight of the importance of communicating a consistent change message”. Armenakis et al (1999) developed a framework including five different aspects a change message must address. A consistent change message according to Armenakis et includes the following:

1. discrepancy (whether the change is needed);

(25)

25

When a change message incorporates these five aspects, organizational readiness will be achieved. Armenakis et al (1993) identified three strategies: “Three message conveying strategies are persuasive communication (direct communication efforts); active participation (involving people in activities designed to have them learned directly) and managing internal and external information (making views of others available)”.

Examples of persuasive communication are speeches, newsletters, memos and annual reports. Examples of active participation are: enactive mastery (develop skills through involvement and practice); vicarious learning (observing and learning from others) and participation in decision making. Fishbein and Ajzen (1975) describe active participation as “Perhaps the most effective in transmitting the message components because it capitalizes on self-discovery” and “The more possibilities to participate and think about the change, the more likely the change will succeed”. (Elving, 2005). The communication of the business plan and communication by letter can be seen as persuasive communication. Therefore this research is focused on persuasive communication.

Concluding can be said communication is of importance during organizational change. Furthermore a direct relationship between communication and readiness for change can be found. However no literature can be found at the influence of persuasive communication on cognitive-, emotional- and intentional readiness for change and the development of readiness for change. Therefore the second hypothesis of this research is:

H2: Communication during the change process influences the readiness for change H2.1: Persuasive communication has a positive influence on the cognitive

readiness for change

H2.2: Persuasive communication has a positive influence on the emotional readiness for change

(26)

26

Methods

This research is about the influence of communication on people’s readiness for change based on three dimensions and the dynamics of readiness for change. Therefore, the readiness for change of people needed to be measured twice (Appendix A). In this research, readiness for change was measured before the intervention (the publication of future business plans and personal letters) and measured shortly after the intervention. Besides looking at the development of someone’s readiness for change, this research also tries to explain what the underlying mechanisms are, for which a third measurement was needed (Appendix A). This chapter gives an overview of how this research was done.

Research Design

Based on the literature research, readiness for change is considered to be a tri-dimensional construct, consisting of a cognitive component, emotional and intentional component (Piderit, 2000). Furthermore readiness for change is likely to be dynamic and communication will influence the readiness for change. In order to investigate if this was the case, quantitative and qualitative research methods were used. Quantitative research was done in order to investigate the readiness for change scores at two different times and to find out if there is a significant difference between these two moments and if development took place. Qualitative methods were used to see what caused possible changes in the readiness for change scores.

Data Collection

This paragraph describes how data was gathered. A distinction is made between the survey; quantitative data and interviews; qualitative data.

Survey

(27)

27

developed, the same participants contacted for measurement one, needed to be contacted for measurement two.

There was chosen to do a telephone survey instead of a written survey because of the high amount of written surveys already done in the past at the organization. Besides, the telephone survey was combined with the usual telephone survey: “Belrondje”. Furthermore: “When compared to either personal interviews or mail surveys, the use of telephones brings a faster completion of a study” (Blumberg, Cooper and Schindler, 2005). Also collecting these sorts of data with help of a survey is efficient and economical. Blumberg, Cooper and Schindler (2005) conclude: “We seldom learn more about opinions and attitudes except by surveying”. Also by using a survey suggested correlations and relationships can be examined (Verschuren and Doorewaard, 1999).

The survey was set up making use of a validated questionnaire, the “Organizational Change Questionnaire- Climate of Change, Processes and Readiness” (OCQ-C, P, R) of Bouckenooghe (2009). Since this research is only interested in the readiness for change, only this part of the questionnaire was used. The questionnaire was used because of it’s clear distinction between emotional readiness for change, cognitive readiness for change and intentional readiness for change (Bouckenooghe, 2009). The OCQ-R questionnaire was tested by Bouckenooghe amongst a high amount of participants (over 3000) having different organizational backgrounds and facing different sorts of organizational change. Also the questionnaire was used due to its brevity and limited pressure on respondents, which was important due to the limitations of the duration of the phone call conversations2. The items of the questionnaire could also be used separately. Which was of importance because the researcher was only interested in the readiness for change of the employees and not in for instance the climate and process of the change which were also part of the questionnaire (Bouckenooghe, 2009).

The original questionnaire developed by Bouckenooghe (2009) consisted of 13 items. The final/ validated questionnaire consisted of 9 items. The researcher chose to also include the

2

(28)

28

statements Bouckenooghe did not include in this final questionnaire to look for possible other interesting findings. The questionnaire consisted of the following items:

The 13 readiness statements were translated in Dutch, since the participants and organization were Dutch. The translation of the statements was done by the researcher. In order to see if the statements were translated correctly, the translation was discussed with another person to see if the translation was correctly done. The survey was tested amongst five employees of different departments, having different functions. This way, the researcher had an impression if participants would understand the survey and which questions needed to be revised.

Emotional readiness for change:

1. I have a good feeling about the change project.* 2. I experience the change as a positive process.* 3. I find the change refreshing.*

4. The change will improve my work. 5. The change will simplify my work.

Cognitive readiness for change

6. I am somewhat resistant to change.

7. I am quite reluctant to accommodate and incorporate changes into my work. 8. I think most changes will have a negative effect on the clients we serve.* 9. Plans for future improvement will not come too much.*

10. Most change projects that are supposed to solve problems around here will not do much good.*

Intentional readiness for change

11. I want to devote myself to the process of change.*

12. I am willing to make a significant contribution to the change.* 13. I am willing to put energy into the process of change.*

(29)

29

Furthermore testing the survey also gave an estimation of the time needed to do the survey and if the amount of time was suitable to do the survey by phone.

Appendix C gives an overview of the original and revised questions and Appendix B their translation in Dutch. An example of a question concerning the cognitive readiness for change was: “I am somewhat resistant towards the upcoming changes”. An example of a question measuring the emotional readiness was: “I have a good feeling towards the upcoming changes”. An example based on intentional readiness was: “I am willing to make a significant contribution towards the upcoming change”. Because the readiness for change was measured twice, before and after the communication, the statements needed to be revised for a second time. For example some statements contained the first time the phrase: “The upcoming change” and the second time: “The change”.

Per statement participants could indicate on a five point Likert scale their level of agreement. Ranging from 1: strongly disagree till 5: highly agree. “The Likert scale is the most common used psychometric scale among psychological measurements that require self –reporting” (Wakita, Ueshima and Noguchi, 2012). Research has no agreement on the amount of categories used when using a Likert scale (Wakita, Ueshima and Noguchi, 2012). Preston and Colman (2000) concluded in their research that five to ten categories were easy to rate and five categories were short enough to select an answer quickly. They conclude by stating five categories being enough for most scales. Because this research was done with help of short telephone calls, a five point scale was appropriate.

(30)

30

The total population consisted of approximately 720 employees (table 1: Sample Measurement 1&2). For measurement one, 10 percent of the population (72 in total) was approached to participate. Because of the different departments, about 10 percent per department was called to participate. The employees were randomly selected with help of a guide containing all employees with belonging phone number, function and department. The researcher randomly picked numbers from this guide3. For measurement two, the same group was contacted again. Due to absence and other personal reasons 61 participants were reached the second time. The participants who were not able to participate during measurement two were excluded from this research. Furthermore the survey was conducted under employees directly influenced by the change. Department managers and direction were not included because they were the main designers of the organizational change.

Male and Female were equally divided (male: 57,4%, female: 43,6%) Furthermore all age categories were covered in the research. Most participants in the categories 31-40 years (32,8%), 41-50 years (31,1) and 51-60 years (26,2). The categories 21-30 years and >61 years old both scored lowest (4,9%). Concluding can be said these numbers are representative when looking at the total workforce. All tenure categories were covered, most participants are working more than 16 years for the organization (32,8%), and the smallest group is working 6-10 years (18%) for the organization, which is also representative. Most participants were not part of a change team (90,2 %), Table 1.

Because the readiness for change was measured twice, before and after an intervention, it was of importance that the data of both measurements was collected in the shortest period possible. Therefore the telephone survey for both measurements was done within one week. As mentioned before, a telephone survey is very suitable to collect data in a short amount of time. This way all participants had the same information about the change, which makes the data more comparable.

3_{During the time of research another research took place. Employees participating in the other research, were}

(31)

31

Table 1: Sample Measurement 1&2

Population 720 employees 100% Sample 61 8,5% Sex Male 57,4% Female 43,6%

Age category 21-30 years 4,9% 31-40 years 32,8% 41-50 years 31,1% 51-60 years 26,2% > 61 years 4,9% Tenure 1-5 years 27,8% 6-10 years 18% 11-15 years 21,3% > 16 years 32,8% Part of a Change Team Yes 9,8%

No 90,2%

Qualitative Data

When having measured the readiness for change, qualitative research was used to identify which mechanisms caused a certain change or perhaps no change. Therefore in depth semi structured interviews were used (Appendix H). An advantage of personal interviewing is the depth of information and detail that can be gathered. Furthermore conditions can be noticed and additional questions can be asked. Which is not the case when using a telephone or mail survey (Blumberg, Cooper and Schindler 2005).

Blumberg et al (2005) are mentioning three broad conditions that have to be met in order to have a successful interview:

1. the participant must possess the information being targeted by the investigative questions;

2. the participant must understand his or her role in the interview as the provider of accurate information;

3. the participant must perceive adequate motivation to cooperate.

(32)

32

not miss any information and analysis of the data was possible (Lucassen en Olde-hartman, 2007).

The goal of the interviews was explaining what caused a certain change, or perhaps no change concerning the readiness for change based on the cognitive, emotional and intentional level. Furthermore the interviews were used in order to see if the intervention, the communication of the business plan and personal situation, had an influence on the readiness for change or not and if there were other possible factors that were of influence. Therefore four different parts of the interview can be identified: situation; readiness for change; intervention and other factors of influence.

The questions concerning the situation part were asked to analyze what happened between measurement one and measurement two, personal changes and the reaction of the participant concerning the change. The readiness for change part was focused on how people would describe their readiness for change in words and on a 1-5 Likert scale to see if the readiness for change was changed or not and why. The intervention part was about the communication of the business plan and personal situation by letter in order to see how the process went, how it was experienced and if this was of influence on the emotional, cognitive and intentional readiness for change and to determine the amount of involvement in the process. Finally the interview ended with the question: “Which factors were (also) of influence on your readiness for change?”, to identify if there were possible other factors of influence.

The questions (Appendix H) were based on the questionnaire of Bouckenooghe (2009) and theory about the influence of communication on the readiness for change. Because readiness for change in this research is considered to be a tri dimensional concept statements of participants were of importance. This way the research could identify changes in cognitive, emotional or intentional readiness for change.

(33)

33

employees of different departments. No major adjustments to the interview questions were made. The duration of the interview was 30-45 minutes.

Nineteen people were interviewed, about 1/3 of the total research group (Table 2). One planned interview was cancelled. The participants of the interviews were also randomly selected from the research group. All age categories, the categories 31-40, 41-50 and 51-60 years scored highest, and tenure categories were covered. Furthermore, the participants knew due to the letter what their start position concerning the reorganisation was. The percentages are representative looking at the total amount of replacement and placement candidates and function followers.

Besides the interviews, the researcher attended to several meetings about the organizational change, was part of the project team leading the change and worked at an open workstation. This way the researcher got more insight in the change itself, and in the different responses of employees towards the change. The data gathered from the interviews was used to explain what may have caused a certain shift or no shift in the readiness for change. Furthermore the data gathered from meetings etc. was also used to interpret changes. However, since the interviews were only done with 1/ 3 of the total research group only interpretations can be made.

Data Analysis

The questionnaire used during measurement one and two contained also negative statements. These negative statements were re-coded, so all statements were positive and could be further analyzed.

(34)

34

Table 2: Sample Measurement 3

Population 720 employees 100%

Sample measurement 1&2 61 8,5%

Sample measurement 3 19 31,1%

Sex Male 57,9%

Female 42,1%

Age category 21-30 years 10,5%

31-40 years 36,8% 41-50 years 31,6% 51-60 years 15,8% > 61 years 5,3% Tenure 1-5 years 42,1% 6-10 years 15,8% 11-15 years 15,8% > 16 years 26,3%

Part of a Change Team Yes 10,5%

No 89,5% Starting position reorganization Function follower 57,9% Placement candidate 26,3% Replacement candidate 15,8%

The loadings of a factor analysis need to meet certain criteria. Hulland (1999) states the loadings of a proper factor analysis should have loadings of at least 0.7. Howitt and Cramer (2007) conclude the following : “A factor loading of 1.0 indicates a perfect correlation of an item with the concerning factor. A factor loading of 0.8 indicates a good correlation with the factor. A factor loading of 0.5 indicates a moderate correlation, though these correlations can be of importance. A loading of 0.2 is very low and a loading of 0.0 indicates there is no correlation with the factor”. This research accepts loadings of at least 0.4.

In order to measure the reliability of the scale, a reliability analysis was done. The Cronbach alpha. In order to have acceptable reliability the Cronbach Alpha needs to be ≥ .70 (Nunnally, 1978).

(35)

35

communication (α < .125). the Q-Q plots gave the same conclusion. Due to only one item being normal distributed the data was considered to be non-normal distributed.

In order to analyze if there is correlation between measurement one and two and if a development took place, a Wilcoxon signed rank sum test was done. The Wilcoxon signed rank sum test is used under the following circumstances (Keller, 2008):

 the problem objective is to compare two populations;

 the data (matched pairs differences) are interval or ordinal, but not normally distributed;

 the samples are matched pairs.

Besides looking at the correlation, development of readiness for change can also be analyzed by using a simple regression analysis. “Regression analysis is used to test to predict the value of one variable on the basis of other variables” (Keller, 2008). The regression analysis was used to test if there was a causal relationship between emotional-, cognitive- and intentional readiness for change prior to the communication (predictors) and emotional-, cognitive- and intentional readiness for change post to communication (dependent variables).

(36)

36

Results

This chapter represents the results of this research. First the results of the quantitative data will be given. This part will show if the readiness for change consists of three dimensions and if readiness for change is dynamic. Secondly the qualitative data will be presented to identify if communication was of influence and possible other factors of influence.

Factor Analyses prior to and post to communication

To identify if readiness for change indeed consists of three separate components a factor analysis was done. Several factor analyses were done of the measurement which was done prior to the communication (Appendix D). First a factor analysis containing all items4 of the OCQ-R questionnaire of Bouckenooghe (2009) was done (Table 3). This factor analysis identified three components. The scores of this factor analysis were not sufficient enough5. The cognitive items (component one and two) seem to be interwoven with the emotional items (component one and two). The intentional items are scoring highest on the third component except item three of intentional readiness for change. The highest scores are displayed bold.

Table 3: Factor Analysis prior to communication: All items

Factor Analysis prior to communication Component

Item Question 1 2 3

1. Emotional Readiness for Change

I have a good feeling about the upcoming changes

,614 ,472 ,126 2. Emotional Readiness for

Change

I experience the change as a positive process

,728 ,175 ,190 3. Emotional Readiness for

Change

I find the upcoming change refreshing ,147 ,637 ,119 4. Emotional Readiness for

Change

The upcoming change will improve my work

,232 ,801 ,179 5. Emotional Readiness for

Change

The upcoming change will simplify my work

,354 ,574 ,035 1. Cognitive Readiness for

Change

I am somewhat resistant towards the upcoming changes

,691 ,340 -,059 2. Cognitive Readiness for

Change

I am quite reluctant to accommodate and incorporate upcoming changes into my work

,661 -,047 ,196

3. Cognitive Readiness for Change

I think that most changes will have a negative effect on our in- and external

,688 ,232 ,051

(37)

37 clients/ relations 4. Cognitive Readiness for

Change

Plans for future improvement will not come too much

,293 ,576 ,440 5. Cognitive Readiness for

Change

Most change activities will not contribute too much to the change goals of the change

,406 ,443 ,182

1. Intentional Readiness for Change

I want to devote myself to the process of change

,273 ,142 ,856 2. Intentional Readiness for

Change

I am willing to make a significant contribution to the upcoming change

,086 ,234 ,892 3. Intentional Readiness for

Change

I am willing to put energy in the process of change

-,117 ,575 ,452

Due to the insufficient scores of the first factor analysis, a factor analysis only containing the items Bouckenooghe (2009) included in his final questionnaire was done (Table 4) to search for more “sufficient” scores (Appendix D). The factor analysis identified two components. The intentional items are all scoring on the same component (component one). The emotional and cognitive components are scoring on component one and two. Most items score on component two. The items of this factor analysis are also not scoring sufficient enough. However this factor analysis contained the most “sufficient” scores. Therefore the researcher chose to continue with the items included in this factor analysis. The Cronbach Alpha of these items was acceptable (α .826) (Appendix E).

Table 4: Factor Analysis prior to communication: Final items

Factor Analysis prior to communication Component

Item Question 1 2

,271 ,717 2. Emotional Readiness for

Change

,161 ,787 3. Emotional Readiness for

Change

I find the upcoming change refreshing ,423 ,347 1. Cognitive Readiness for

Change

I think that most changes will have a negative effect on our in- and external clients/ relations

,029 ,792

2. Cognitive Readiness for Change

Plans for future improvement will not come too much

,617 ,455 3. Cognitive Readiness for

Change

Most change activities will not contribute too much to the change goals of the change

,270 ,642

,795 ,195 2. Intentional Readiness for

Change

,894 ,088 3. Intentional Readiness for

Change

(38)

38

Table 5 represents the factor analysis of the readiness for change post to the communication. The factor analysis divided readiness for change in three components. All items scored sufficient. Emotional readiness for change component two, cognitive readiness for change component three and intentional readiness for change component one. The Cronbach’s Alpha for the second measurement was acceptable (α .813).

Table 5: Factor Analysis post to the communication: Final items

Factor Analysis post communication Component

Item Question 1 2 3

Change

I find the upcoming change refreshing ,147 ,798 ,000 1. Cognitive Readiness for Change I think that most changes will have a

negative effect on our in- and external clients/ relations

,155 ,146 ,680

2. Cognitive Readiness for Change Plans for future improvement will not come too much

,145 ,010 ,887 3. Cognitive Readiness for Change Most change activities will not

contribute too much to the change goals of the change

,180 ,234 ,693

,785 ,218 ,117 2. Intentional Readiness for

Change

,905 ,090 ,155 3. Intentional Readiness for

Change

,865 ,137 ,275

(39)

39

Descriptive statistics prior to and post to the communication

Table 1: Mean and Standard Deviation prior to and post to the communication, represents the descriptive outcomes of the two measurements. The data from the questionnaire is based on a five point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. The table shows the mean of the emotional and cognitive readiness for change has slightly increased. The mean of the intentional readiness for change slightly decreased compared to measurement one.

Table 6 Mean and Standard Deviation prior and post to the communication

Correlation Analysis

To analyze the correlation between the measurement prior to and post to the communication based on the three dimensions, a Wilcoxon signed rank sum test was used (Appendix F) to test the following hypothesis:

H1: Readiness for change is dynamic and therefore develops over time H1.1 The cognitive readiness develops over time

H1.2 The emotional readiness develops over time H1.3 The intentional readiness develops over time

A Wilcoxon signed rank sum test was carried out between emotional readiness for change prior to the communication and post to the communication on mean emotional readiness for change score. The ranks table (Table 7) of the Wilcoxon signed rank sum test shows, concerning the emotional readiness for change scores: 26 participants had a lower score post to communication compared to prior to the communication; 21 participants had a higher score the second time and 14 participants had the same score. The cognitive scores: 25 participants scored lower the second time, 26 participants higher and 10 participants had the same cognitive readiness for change score prior to and post to the communication. Concerning the intentional readiness for change scores: 21 participants had a lower score the second time; 17 had the same score and 23 a higher score.

Readiness for change prior to communication

Readiness for change post to communication Component Mean Standard

(40)

40

The test statistics of the Wilcoxon signed rank sum test is presented in Table 8. The test showed there was no significant difference between emotional readiness for change prior to and post to the communication, Z=-.376, p > .05 (computed P=.707). Furthermore the test showed there was no significant difference between cognitive readiness for change prior to and post to the communication, Z=-.114, p > .05 (computed P=.909). There was also not a significant difference concerning the intentional readiness for change, Z=-.517, p > .05 (computed P=.605).

Table 7: Wilcoxon Signed Rank Sum Test: Ranks Ranks N EMRE6 post to communication- EMRE prior to communication Negative Ranks 26 Positive Ranks 21 Ties 14 Total 61 COGRE7 post to communication – COGRE prior to Communication Negative Ranks 25 Positive Ranks 26 Ties 10 Total 61 INRE8 post to communication – INRE prior to communication Negative Ranks 21 Positive Ranks 23 Ties 17 Total 61

Table 8: Wilcoxon Signed Rank Sum Test Emotional Readiness for

Change post to

communication –

Emotional Readiness for Change prior to

communication

Cognitive Readiness for Change post to

Cognitive Readiness for Change prior to

communication

Intentional Readiness for Change post to

Intentional Readiness for Change prior to

communication

Z -376 -,114 -,517

Regression Analysis

The regression analysis was also done to test hypothesis one (Appendix: G). A single linear regression analysis was conducted to test if there was a causal relationship between emotional readiness for change prior to communication and emotional-, cognitive-, and intentional readiness for change post to communication (Table 9). The results of the regression analysis

6

EMRE= Emotional Readiness for Change

THE DYNAMICS OF READINESS FOR CHANGE “The