The relationship between vision of
opportunity and employee affective
commitment to change
How vision content affects employee affective commitment to change and the role
of concrete goal setting and participation in decision-making during the change
process.
THESIS SUPERVISOR: DHR. DR. M. VENUS AUTHOR: S.I.G. BASELMANS
STUDENT NUMBER: 10165479 DATE OF SUBMISSION: 22-06-2018 VERSION: MASTER THESIS, FINAL
1
Statement of originality
This document is written by Sophie Ida Ger Baselmans who declares to take full responsibility for the contents of this document.
I declare that the text and the work presented in this document are original and that no sources other than those mentioned in the text and its references have been used in creating it.
The Faculty of Economics and Business is responsible solely for the supervision of completion of the work, not for the contents.
2
Abstract
Organizational change is a very current topic in management literature, and implementation is often problematic. Therefore, many researches have been conducted on change recipients’ attitudes and the effect of change agent behaviors. Affective commitment to change is a widely researched topic and a main factor clarifying employees’ attitudes toward
organizational changes. One factor determining employee affective commitment to change is the vision of change presented by the leader. This research focuses on one specific type of visions of change, namely a vision of opportunity, which emphasizes a better future full of opportunities. Current study is a first aim to provide further insights in the effectiveness of this type of a vision of change as a self-contained concept. The relationship between vision of opportunity and employee affective commitment to change was studied, also considering the expected positive moderating effects on this relationship of employee participation during change processes and concrete goal setting. Research was conducted amongst employees (N = 130) of eight different high schools that are currently occupied with organizational change. Analyzation of research results shows a positive relationship between vision of opportunity and affective commitment to change. However, the expected moderation effects were not present. Exploratory research did show a positive direct relationship between employee participation during change processes and affective commitment to change.
3
Table of contents
1. Introduction ... 4
2. Literature review ... 8
2.1 Organizational change ... 8
2.2 Employee affective commitment to change ... 9
2.3 Leadership during change processes ... 12
2.4 Visions of opportunity ... 15
2.5 The influence of concrete goal setting during change processes ... 17
2.6 The influence of employee participation in change decision-making processes ... 19
3. Method ... 22 3.1 Procedure ... 22 3.2 Sample ... 23 3.3 Measures ... 23 4. Results ... 26 4.1 Descriptive statistics ... 26 4.2 Hypotheses testing ... 27 4.3 Exploratory research ... 30 5. Discussion ... 32 5.1 Theoretical implications ... 33 5.2 Limitations ... 35
5.3 Suggestions for future research ... 37
5.4 Practical implications ... 40
5.5 Conclusion ... 40
References ... 42
4
1. Introduction
This research is about the relationship between a presented vision of opportunity, which emphasizes the future opportunities accompanied with organizational change, and employee affective commitment to that change. Moreover, the effect of concrete goal setting and the level of employee participation during processes of organizational change on this relationship is taken into account. This research was conducted among employees at secondary schools in the Netherlands.
Changes in the organization of public sector institutions are triggered by the emergence of more neo-liberal governments since the 1980s in the Netherlands, with
associated developments such as privatization, deregulation, and cutbacks (Geijsel, Sleegers, Leithwood & Jantzi, 2003; De Boer, Enders & Leisyte, 2007).
The education sector is one of the sectors that is experiencing significant reforms because of developments like increased autonomy, privatization, quality control and freedom of choice. This asked for reforms in management systems and administrative processes like more economically oriented management styles and increasing administrative tasks for employees (Karsten, 1999).
For organizations, the implementation of these changes is often problematic. Many educational reforms fail (Fullan & Miles, 1992). Organizations in other sectors also experience problems with the implementation of organizational changes. According to McKinsey and Company, 70% of all change programs in companies fail to meet expectations (McKinsey & Company, 2015).
Numerous studies have been conducted on the behavior and attitudes of change recipients and change agents, to analyze why so many organizational change initiatives fail. There are several reasons why the behavior and attitudes of these two central actors in change processes are of great importance. First, positive change recipients’ attitudes towards change
5 initiatives were found to be of crucial importance for organizational changes to succeed (Vakola & Nikolaou, 2005; Eby, Adams, Russell & Gaby, 2000; Kotter, 1995a). More specifically, the number one reason why so many change initiatives fail is because of employee resistance to change (Vakola & Nikolaou, 2005). Therefore, employees’ behavior and responses to change are a widely researched topic in change literature (e.g., Oreg, Vakola & Armenakis, 2011; Ford, Ford & D’Amelio, 2008; Choi, 2011; Self, Armenakis &
Schraeder, 2007).
The construct reflecting employees’ attitudes toward change initiatives that received most attention from researchers in recent change literature is commitment to change: one’s desire to support a change initiative based on the conviction of its inherent beliefs
(Herscovitch & Meyer, 2002; Choi, 2011). Commitment to change was found to be a main factor determining employees’ responses to change initiatives (Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch & Topolnytsky, 2002). For example, during educational reforms, teachers’ commitment to change was found to fulfill a crucial role in the success or failure of the reform as it
determines the extent to which teachers implement the changes in their day-to-day work (Van Veen, Sleegers & Van de Ven, 2005; Day, Elliott & Kington, 2005).
Leadership plays a crucial role in determining employees’ attitudes toward changes (Yukl, 2010). Therefore, the change agent, the leader, is the second actor in the change process that has been subject of much research. Research has been conducted on the effect of different leadership styles and behaviors during change processes (Gill, 2002; Todnem By, 2005; Conger & Kanungo, 1987; Stam, van Knippenberg & Wisse, 2010). Several scholars agreed upon the fact that transformational leadership might be the best suitable leadership style during organizational change processes, as it positively affects employee commitment to change (Herold, Fedor, Caldewell & Liu, 2008; Bommer, Rich & Rubin, 2005; Eisenbach, Watson & Pillai, 1999).
6 One critical aspect of transformational leadership, the communication of a compelling vision, was found to be of crucial importance in determining employees’ motivation to support organizational changes (Yukl, 2010). However, literature on what this vision of change should entail is limited. Some research differentiates between visions of change in terms of content and distinguish between visions that emphasize a break with the status quo and visions that emphasize continuity (Venus, Stam & Van Knippenberg, 2018, in press; Bommer et al., 2005; Stam et al., 2010; Stam, Lord, Van Knippenberg & Wisse, 2014; Conger & Kanungo, 1998; Shamir & Howell, 1999).
However, it does not yet become clear which type of vision is most favorable in enhancing positive employee attitudes toward the change (Venus et al., 2018, in press; Fiol, Harris & House, 1999; Yukl, 2010). Hence, more research on what type of vision of change motivates employees to be committed to a change is needed. Current research will further investigate this relation.
To do so, present study examines the relationship between a presented vision of opportunities and employee commitment to change. A vision of opportunities entails a vision of change that illustrates a brighter picture of the future and highlights future opportunities for amongst others the team or employees (Venus et al., 2018, in press; Conger & Kanungo, 1998). A presented vision of opportunity is expected to be positively related to employee commitment toward that change since employees might be more likely to support a change when it promotes a better future with exciting opportunities (e.g., Gill, 2002; Bommer et al., 2005).
To further investigate the relationship between vision of opportunity and affective commitment to change, this study will also yield first insights in the moderating effects of two motivational tactics in organizational change situations, namely concrete goal setting and employee participation in change processes.
7 Concrete goal setting refers to the extent to which leaders provide their employees with clear and specific goals to attain in their work (Locke & Latham, 2002). During a change process, concrete goal setting might make employees aware of which steps they have to take to actual reach the illustrated future opportunities. Therefore, setting specific goals is expected to strengthen the positive relationship between vision of opportunities and commitment to change.
Furthermore, employee participation during the change process is expected to strengthen the relationship between vision of opportunities and employee commitment to change, as employees might get the feeling that they helped to create the future full of opportunities (Gill, 2002). Employee participation during change processes involves the degree to which employees are involved in change decision-making processes (Glew, O’Leary-Kelly, Griffin & Van Fleet, 1995; Lines, 2004).
This research contributes to the existing change management literature by investigating vision as a separate concept. In previous research on vision during change processes, vision was treated as a dimension of transformational leadership. This study will explore whether vision of opportunity on itself affects the employees’ level of commitment for an organizational change, and therefore provides further insight in what an effective, compelling vision of change should encompass. Furthermore, this research sheds a first light on the moderating effect of two motivational concepts, namely goal setting and employee participation in change processes that in combination with vision of opportunities might enhance employees’ affective commitment.
8
2. Literature review
2.1 Organizational change
Organizational change is a very current topic in research because there are many changes currently taking place in organizations. One important reason for these many changes is the continuously evolving environment. This gives rise to internal and external forces that ask for organizational changes in private and public-sector organizations to succeed (Armenakis, Harris & Mossholder, 1993; Iverson, 1996; Todnem By, 2005; Self et al., 2007). These forces might comprise amongst others globalization, technological or process innovations, a
significant growth of the organization, newly introduced rules or deregulation, and political, social and demographic trends (Pfeffer, 1994; Todnem By, 2005). Organizations continuously have to adapt their direction, culture, goals, process, structure, tasks, and strategy to remain a fit with the environment (Armenakis et al., 1993; Iverson, 1996; Todnem By, 2005).
One critical element that is essential in determining the success of a change initiative are the employees (Armenakis et al. 1993). They need to internalize the organizational changes in their on-the-job behaviors to implement them (Iverson, 1996; Choi, 2011; Jones, Jimmieson & Griffiths, 2005). The importance of employees during change processes was also established by Elias (2009) who concluded that psychological processes of individual employees should be considered in the development of change strategies.
The high failure rate of organizational changes might be a result of a lack of support for change initiatives by employees. There is growing consensus that the support and acceptance of organizational members are of critical importance for planned organizational changes to succeed (Herold, Fedor & Caldwell, 2007; Armenakis et al., 1993). This is
supported by Porras and Robertson (1992) and Tetenbaum (1998) who stated that members of the organization are at the middle of change processes. Furthermore, organizational member’s attitudes toward changes were established to be essential for better understanding of change
9 processes (Caldwell, Herold & Fedor, 2004; Rafferty & Griffin, 2006; Oreg et al., 2011). Lastly, not taking into account employees’ psychological processes was established to be an essential reason for the failure of organizational change initiatives (Elias, 2009).
2.2 Employee affective commitment to change
Employees’ attitudes toward organizational changes reflect the extent to which they support and accept changes. It can be defined as their general positive or negative judgment of a change initiative and are an indicator of on-the-job behaviors of either support or resistance (Armenakis et al., 1993; Lines, 2004; Choi, 2011). Employees’ attitudes toward changes were found to be an essential element in determining the success or failure of change initiatives (Elias, 2009; Vakola & Nikolaou, 2005; Oreg et al., 2011; Choi, 2011).
Although there are several constructs that are used to represent employees’ attitudes toward organizational change, this research will focus on commitment to change. This concept received the most attention from researchers in recent literature (Choi, 2011). Furthermore, commitment to change was examined to be a main factor in clarifying employees’ job outcomes and employees’ behavior in organizational change situations (Meyer et al., 2002). Herscovitch and Meyer (2002) define commitment to change as “a force (mindset) that binds an individual to a course of action deemed necessary for the successful implementation of a change initiative” (p. 475). Commitment to change encompasses a positive attitude toward a change as well as a psychological alignment with the particular change. Moreover, it entails proactive behavioral intents to support the change and the intention to work toward the success accompanied with the implementation of the change initiative (Choi, 2011; Fedor, Caldwell & Herold, 2006; Herscovitch & Meyer, 2002; Herold et al., 2007; Meyer, Srinivas, Lal & Topolnytsky, 2007; Herold et al., 2008).
10 According to research of Herscovitch and Meyer (2002), there are three types of commitment to change that can be distinguished: affective, normative, and continuance commitment. Affective commitment to change reflects a desire to support a change initiative based on the conviction of its inherent benefits. Normative commitment to change entails some sense of obligation to support the change. Continuance commitment to change reflects employees supporting the change because of the awareness of the costs accompanied with possible failure (Herscovitch & Meyer, 2002; Choi, 2011; Cunningham, 2006; Meyer et al., 2007). This multidimensional and distinguishable conceptualization of commitment to change by Herscovitch and Meyer (2002) is incorporated by several scholars (e.g., Cunningham, 2006; Meyer et al., 2007; Conway & Monks, 2008; Neves & Caetano, 2009; Foster, 2010; Meyer et al., 2007).
This research will focus on the concept of affective commitment to change because this type of commitment was found to be most strongly positively related to behavioral support for the change which entails amongst others cooperation and championing
(Herscovitch & Meyer, 2002; Meyer et al., 2007). The importance of affective commitment to change is supported by Parish, Cadwallader, and Busch, (2008) who stated that this is the most crucial element from Herscovitch and Meyer’s (2002) three types of commitment to change that is essential to achieve desired change outcomes. Furthermore, Meyer and Herscovitch (2001) argued that affective commitment is needed for employees ‘to go the extra mile’ to help a change initiative to succeed.
According to Self et al. (2007), affective commitment to change might be stimulated by several antecedents of the organizational change process. These antecedents include aspects associated with the nature or content of a change initiative, aspects of the change process, aspects of the change context and individual employee aspects (Choi, 2011). The
11 distinction between these types of antecedents that might affect commitment to change was recognized by several scholars (Herold et al., 2007; Oreg et al., 2011; Self et al., 2007).
Factors from the change content or nature antecedents represent the first type of antecedents that might stimulate affective commitment to change. These comprise the ‘what’ of the change initiative (Self et al., 2007). Change content antecedents involve amongst others the benefits of the intended change for the work unit and the individual (Fedor et al., 2006), the impact of the change on work unit and individual level (Herold et al., 2007; Self et al., 2007), distributive change justice (Bernerth, Armenakis, Feild & Walker, 2007) developments in the work environment (Devos, Vanderheyden & Van den Broeck, 2002), and the fit
between the change initiative and the organization’s original vision (Parish et al., 2008; Neves, 2009).
Aspects of the change process represent the second type of antecedents that influence affective commitment to change. These entail the ‘how’ of the change initiative, (Self et al., 2007). Process factors that act as antecedents of commitment to change are participation and training during the change process (Devos et al., 2002; Shum, Bove & Auh, 2008),
interactional and procedural justice (Bernerth et al., 2007; Foster, 2010), and information sharing about the progress, the vision and the consequences (Shum et al., 2008). These antecedents were established to be positively related to commitment to change (Choi, 2011).
Aspects from the organizational change context represent the third type of antecedents that affect affective commitment to change. This involves the internal and external
circumstances that affect the organization (Self et al., 2007). Change context antecedents comprise suitable infrastructure and technology to support the change (Shum et al., 2008), laws and regulations in the industry (Self et al., 2007), good experiences with earlier organizational changes (Devos et al., 2002), followers’ satisfaction with HR practices (Conway & Monks, 2008), effective transformational leadership and change management
12 practices (Herold et al., 2008), role autonomy (Parish et al., 2008), and functional
relationships between employee and manager (Parish et al., 2008). This type of antecedents was found to enhance high levels of commitment to change (Choi, 2011).
Antecedents from the individual employee perspective are the last type of antecedents that influence affective commitment to change. These antecedents include job satisfaction (Devos et al., 2002), job motivation (Parish et al., 2008), locus of control (Chen & Wang, 2007), and change self-efficacy (Herold et al., 2007). These individual aspects were all established to enhance commitment to change (Choi, 2011).
This research will focus on the effect of several process and context antecedents and the combination of these antecedents on employee affective commitment to change.
2.3 Leadership during change processes
Leadership is of essential importance for change initiatives to succeed. Leaders are necessary to institutionalize new approaches accompanied with organizational change (Kotter, 1995a; Eisenbach et al., 1999). Change processes must be well managed by the change agent as they must be control, organize, direct and plan the change. However, adequate and suitable
leadership can make the difference, as it is estimated that 50% of the change initiatives fail due to poor change leadership (Gill, 2002; Quinn, 2004).
During the implementation of changes, leaders have to deal with an inevitable element in organizations, namely the employees and their attitudes toward change initiatives.
Numerous scholars have reasoned that many change initiatives fail because of leaders underestimating essential human variables and their effect on change recipients attitudes (Armenakis et al., 1993; George & Jones, 2001; Choi, 2011; Self et al., 2007).
Scholars concluded that certain aspects of leadership affect change recipients’
13 were found to significantly affect change recipients’ reactions toward the change (Armenakis et al., 1993; Self et al., 2007). Moreover, the quality of the relationship between leader and follower, employees’ satisfaction with this relationship, effective leadership practices, and employees’ trust in the leader act as essential antecedents from the organizational context affecting employee commitment to change (Parish et al., 2008; Qian & Daniels, 2008; Herold et al., 2008; Rafferty & Simons, 2006; Choi, 2011; Pfeffer, 1994).
Transformational leadership is a leadership style that is often associated with change is (Bommer et al., 2005). This was found to be the most effective leadership style during times of change. The concept is defined around the process of transformation and organizational change. Transformational leaders can transform their followers, and they help change
recipients understand the need for change, both intellectually and emotionally (Bommer et al., 2005; Gill, 2002; Herold et al., 2008; Bass & Riggio, 2006). Podsakoff, MacKenzie,
Moorman, and Fetter (1990, p. 108) concluded that various explanations of transformational leadership “share the common perspective that effective leaders transform or change the basic values, beliefs, and attitudes of followers.”
Successful change leaders need to provide vision and strategy and need to support the emergence of a culture of sustainable shared values that support the implementation of the change. Moreover, change leaders should motivate, empower and inspire change recipients that are affected or involved by the change (Gill, 2002).
Research has shown that transformational leadership behavior gives rise to employee behavior that is strongly positively related to successful change implementation (Bommer et al., 2005). Transformational leaders allegedly have the required capabilities to enact change successfully; they are able to recognize the need for change, create a new vision, and to institutionalize the change (Eisenbach et al., 1999). Furthermore, Michaelis, Stegmaier, and Sonntag (2009) established a positive relationship between charismatic leadership, a typical
14 dimension of transformational leadership, and affective commitment to change. This is
supported by findings of Herold et al. (2008) who examined an overall positive relationship between transformational leadership and employee commitment to change.
Research on transformational leadership during change processes shows the
importance of the vision dimension of this leadership style (Eisenbach et al., 1999; Herold et al., 2008; Bommer et al., 2005). A vision entails some desired future state, which forms the foundation for the direction of a change initiative. During change processes, the
organization’s vision ‘shows the way’ on a journey from an organization’s current state to a future state (Gill, 2002; Kotter, 1997).
A vision of change is defined as “the communication of a future image of the collective with the intention to persuade others to contribute to the realization of change” (Venus et al., 2018, in press). A vision of change encourages followers to contribute to the fulfillment of this future state, and it makes sure that all actions during the change process are aligned (Kotter, 1995b; Gill, 2002; Kotter, 1997; Herold et al., 2008; Ford & Ford, 1994; Yukl, 2010). Change leaders are concerned with the creation, formulation, articulation, and communication of this shared vision of change (Sashkin, 2004; Herold et al., 2008). During change processes, leaders establish where the organization is currently placed and where it should be in the future. If a discrepancy is recognized, leaders develop and communicate a shared vision of change to reach the desired future state (Hooper & Potter, 2000; Heifetz & Laurie, 1997; Herold et al., 2008; Armenakis et al., 1993).
The presence of a vision of change increases employee commitment and is therefore said to be one of the critical factors in the successful implementation of organizational changes (Gill, 2002; Kotter, 1997; Yukl, 2010). However, until now the relationship between the content of a presented vision of change and employees’ reactions toward this change has only been explored in the broader context of transformational leadership. Moreover, research
15 on the content of an effective vision of change is limited. Some researchers describe the content of a vision of change (Venus et al., 2018, in press; Bommer et al., 2005; Stam et al., 2010; Conger & Kanungo, 1998; Shamir & Howell, 1999). For example, Bommer et al. (2005) describe the content of a vision of change as an exclusive picture of a better future. Furthermore, Stam et al. (2010) distinguish between promotion-appeal visions and
prevention-appeal visions. Promotion-appeal visions present a positive future to strive for, whereas prevention-appeal visions present a negative vision to avoid. Conger and Kanungo (1998) describe the content of a vision of change as “a set of idealized future goals” (p. 156). Additionally, Shamir and Howell (1999) defined the content of visions of change as inspiring and exciting and presenting new ideas and solutions.
However, from previous research, it does not become clear what type of a vision of change is most effective in enhancing positive employee attitudes toward changes (Venus et al., 2018, in press; Fiol et al., 1999; Yukl, 2010). This research will provide further insight in the effectiveness of one specific type of visions of change in enhancing employee
commitment to change.
2.4 Visions of opportunity
According to literature a distinction can be made between two types of visions of change, namely visions of continuity and visions of opportunities. Leaders presenting a vision of continuity intend to get change recipients on board by emphasizing the continuity of the organization in their vision of change (Venus et al., 2018, in press). Therefore, leaders choose to emphasize the continuousness of the organization’s culture, practices, structure, and
identity after a change (Venus et al., 2018, in press).
Other leaders might choose to present a vision of opportunity. These visions of change highlight a new, better, ideal future and are based on creating dissatisfaction with the status
16 quo and illustrate how this will be resolved by the better future state the organization will reach after the change (Kotter, 1995a; Gill, 2002; Conger & Kanungo, 1987). These types of visions of change emphasize the existence of new, promising, and attractive future
opportunities for the organization and its members (Bommer et al., 2005; Shamir, House & Arthur, 1993; Shamir & Howell, 1999; Gill, 2002; House & Shamir, 1993). In this study, the overarching term vision of opportunity will be used for visions of change with the previous mentioned characteristics.
Leadership scholars suggested visions of change that contain characteristics of visions of opportunities to be effective visions of change, as they create a need for change by
providing an idealized alternative for the current situation (Kotter, 1995a). The emphasis on the need for change might enhance positive attitudes toward changes, as the perception of the urgency of a change is proposed to be of crucial importance in enhancing support for change (Kotter, 1995a; Conger & Kanungo, 1987; Bommer et al., 2005).
Visions of opportunities provide an inspiring, exciting, and positive picture of a future full of opportunities and successes (Bommer et al., 2005; Shamir & Howell, 1999; Berson, Shamir, Avolio & Popper, 2001). This positive, inspiring aspect of visions of opportunity is a first factor that might motivate change recipients to be committed to a change. Moreover, employees’ commitment to change might be enhanced by leaders setting ambitious future goals in their vision of change, which is said to provide change recipients some sense of personal challenge (Conger & Kanungo, 1987, 1998). This sense of challenge might serve as a motivational force to support a change initiative (Conger & Kanungo, 1987). Furthermore, one might reason that when change recipients are provided with an optimistic vision of change full of opportunities from which they might benefit personally, they might be more likely to choose to commit to a change as there are future benefits accompanied with the change.
17 In previous research on visions of change, the content of visions of change was
described using several characteristics that are in this research incorporated in the
overarching, self-contained concept vision of opportunity. Furthermore, in previous research, the effectiveness of visions of change was only studied as a part of the broader concept transformational leadership. This research treats vision of opportunity as a self-contained concept to further explore its effectiveness. Based on the investigation of previous literature on visions of change, the following hypothesis has been formulated:
Hypothesis 1: There is a positive relationship between vision of opportunities and affective
commitment to change.
2.5 The influence of concrete goal setting during change processes
Since change implementation processes can be complex, there might be present
organizational context factors that affect the relationship between visions of opportunities and commitment to change. This research will shed a first light on the effect of two often
occurring motivational concepts during change processes, namely concrete goal setting and employee participation during change processes, on the relationship between vision of opportunities and affective commitment to change.
Goal setting is a motivational tactic that is based on the principle that in organizations, setting conscious, concrete performance goals for employees affects action (Locke & Latham, 2002; Ryan, 1970). Concrete goal setting enhances clarity and reduces ambiguity for employees about the organization’s objectives (Locke, Chah, Harrison & Lustgarten, 1989; Locke & Latham 2002). There is an essential task for organizational leaders in providing concrete goals. When they provide their employees with concrete goals and tasks, employees will
18 experience that what they are doing is meaningful to reach the higher purpose of the
organization. Therefore, goal-setting is an effective motivational tactic for leaders (Perry & Porter, 1982; Latham & Locke, 1991). Moreover, Tziner and Latham (1989) established that through concrete goal setting, employees might get a broader picture of how their personal goals relate and contribute to the overall organizational goals.
During organizational change processes, the concrete goals set by leaders are supposed to be related to the achievement of the future state formulated in the vision of opportunity. Taylor (1994) established the importance of visions of change providing
employees with guiding values and a sense of purpose to achieve the formulated goals in the vision. One might suggest that when a presented vision of opportunity is accompanied with concrete goal setting, this guides employees’ behavior in realizing the better future state. Moreover, employees’ awareness of how they can contribute to the realization of the future opportunities might strengthen their sense of purpose. Therefore, concrete goal setting might make visions of opportunity more effective.
Zimbardo and Leippe (1991) stated that exciting future opportunities should be communicated in a clear, feasible way that makes clear how employees can benefit from the change. When a leader presents a vision of opportunities, and this leader provides employees with concrete steps on how they can achieve those future opportunities, employees might be more aware of the personal benefits accompanied with the change. Employees then might know precisely what to do in order to make the brighter picture of the future that is presented in vision of opportunity become a reality.
Visions of opportunity that are presented without providing employees with concrete goals might be less effective in enhancing employees’ affective commitment to change. Employees might get the feeling that the opportunities presented in the vision of change are abstract and unattainable if they don’t know which steps to take in order to achieve the
19 realization of the opportunities in the better future. This might not be favorable for enhancing affective commitment to change.
Setting concrete goals for employees might strengthen the relationship between vision of opportunities and employee commitment to change. Based on an investigation of previous literature on concrete goal setting and change, the following hypothesis is supposed:
Hypothesis 2: The positive relationship between vision of opportunities and affective
commitment to change is moderated by concrete goal setting, so that this relationship is stronger for higher values of concrete goal setting.
2.6 The influence of employee participation in change decision-making processes Another contextual factor that might affect the relationship between vision of opportunities and affective commitment to change is the level of employee participation in change decision-making. Participation in change decision-making involves a conscious and intended effort by leaders of an organization to provide visible extra opportunities for groups or individuals at the lower level of the organization to have a greater say in the change strategy in various levels of the organization (Glew et al., 1995; Lines, 2004).
The application of employee participation in change decision-making was found to be of great importance for change implementations to be effective (Gill, 2002). Moreover, employees’ involvement in change decision-making creates a sense of agency and control over the change. As a result this sense of agency and control, actively involved employees were found to feel less stressed about change initiatives (Armenakis & Bedeian, 1999; Coyle-Shaipro, 2002; Oreg et al., 2011; Gagné, Koestner & Zuckerman, 2000).
Participation in change decision-making was found to be positively related to a better understanding of the urgency of the change (Bartunek, Rousseau, Rudolph & DePalma, 2006;
20 Bartunek, Greenberg & Davidson, 1999). If employees have a better understanding of the urgency of a break with the status quo like presented in a vision of opportunity, this might make this type of a vision of change more effective.
Moreover, Oreg et al. (2011) established that participation in decision-making was positively related to a better understanding of the possible personal benefits accompanied with the change. When employees get the opportunity to give their input, they might be better able to shape their future personal benefits.
When leaders present an optimistic vision of change with a future full of opportunities, and when employees get the chance to participate in how the organization is going to achieve these future opportunities, employees might be more likely to get the feeling that they helped to create this better future than when they are not involved (Gill, 2002). This might make employees more inherently committed to a change initiative.
Participation in change decision-making might have a reinforcing effect on the relationship between vision of opportunity and employee affective commitment to change. Therefore, the following hypothesis has been formulated:
Hypothesis 3a: The positive relationship between vision of opportunities and employee
commitment to change is moderated by employee participation in change process, so that this relationship is stronger for higher values of employee involvement in change process.
However, if employees do not get the opportunity to participate in the change decision-making process, they might start showing resistance toward the change. When a leader presents a vision of opportunities, but employees have no say at all in how the organization is going to achieve this beautiful future state, employees might start showing behavior of resistance. A vision of opportunities that is developed by leaders without any input from
21 employees might create a distance between leaders and employees. Employees might feel that their interests are not taken into account and that the future is only full of opportunities for the leaders of the organization. Therefore, the following hypothesis is has been formulated:
Hypothesis 3b: The positive relationship between vision of opportunities and employee
commitment to change is moderated by employee participation in change processes, so that this relationship is negative when there is no employee participation in change processes.
22
3. Method
3.1 Procedure
In this research, a cross-sectional survey was used to collect data in order to test the stated hypotheses about the relationship between vision of opportunities and employee commitment to change, and the moderating effect of concrete goal setting and employee participation in the change process on this relationship. Employees from eight different high schools in the Netherlands that are currently occupied with processes of organizational reforms were asked to fill out the survey. These reforms, for example, include the implementation of a new management structure, mergers, new team structures, or setting up a new education
department. The data was collected from the end of April 2018 until the end of May 2018. A combination of two non-probability sampling techniques was used, namely convenience sampling and snowball sampling. The primary sampling technique used was convenience sampling, because of the easier first access to high schools in the network from the author. This sampling technique was followed by snowball sampling. This was used to a limited extent by employees who already filled out the survey distributing the questionnaire to some of their colleagues. The questionnaires were distributed by personally visiting the high schools and asking employees to fill out the survey right away on a tablet. After that, some employees forwarded the questionnaire to more of their colleagues by e-mail. Due to the personal approach in collecting respondents, the response rate and response time were high. However, it is not possible to calculate an exact response rate since the number of responses during personal visits, and the snowball sampling were not monitored.
Because all participating high schools were located in the Netherlands, the survey questions were formulated in Dutch. Furthermore, respondents were informed that their responses remained confidential and were only meant for research purposes. The
23 constructs from literature measuring vision of opportunities, employee commitment to
change, concrete goal setting and participation in the change process. The questionnaire ended with several questions regarding demographics, such as gender and age and some questions about the number of working hours per week, amount of years working with the current supervisor and amount of contact with the direct supervisor. Participants who completed the survey were obliged to fill out all the questions. For the complete questionnaire, see Appendix 1.
3.2 Sample
In total, 130 respondents completed the questionnaire. 43.1% of these respondents were female, 56.9% of these respondents were male. Respondents range in age from 18-24 years to 65-74 years. All respondents were Dutch. They have been working for their current employer for on average 11.52 years and are working with their current supervisor for on average 4.52 years. Furthermore, they work on average 31.98 hours per week, and they have direct contact with their supervisor on 2.15 days a week on average.
3.3 Measures
The questionnaire consisted of items measuring vision of opportunity (5 items), affective commitment to change (3 items), participation in change processes (4 items), goal setting (3 items) and leader-member exchange (7 items). These items were all measured using a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”. The survey ended with some demographics, containing questions about gender, age, number of years working for the current organization, number of working hours per week, number of years working for the current supervisor and number of days per week having direct contact with their supervisor.
24
Vision of opportunity was measured using a 5-item scale. Some sample items were
“My direct supervisor often communicates his/her ideals for the team in his/her vision” and “My direct supervisor often communicates about the opportunities for the team in his/her vision”. These items were adapted from Stam et al. (2014). Cronbach’s Alpha of this scale is .927.
Participation in change processes was measured using a 4-item scale developed by
Lines (2004). Some sample items were “Steps were taken to involve affected persons at an early stage of the change process” and “Affected persons became actively involved in the development of the change content”. Cronbach’s Alpha of this scale is .886.
Goal setting was measured using a 3-item scale. These items were derived from the
Lee, Bobke, Christopher Early, and Locke (1991) scales for Goal rationale and Goal clarity. Their Goal rationale scale initially consists of 4 items. One item of this scale was used in this survey, namely “My boss clearly explains to me what my goals are”. The Goal clarity scale originally consists of 4 items, of which two items were used in this questionnaire. These items were “I understand exactly what I am supposed to do on my job” and “I have specific, clear goals to aim for on my job”. Cronbach’s Alpha of this scale is .652.
Affective commitment to change was measured using a 3-item scale. These items were
derived from the Herscovitch and Meyer (2002) affective commitment to change scale which initially consists of 6 items. This research used the three positively laden items, which include amongst others “I believe in the value of this change” and “This change is a good strategy for this organization”. Cronbach’s Alpha of this scale is .932.
Leader-member exchange (LMX) is part of this research as control variable and is
therefore also measured in the questionnaire. Leader-member exchange examines the quality of the dyadic mature relationship between a leader and a member and is expected to affect several individual, group and organizational outcomes (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995; Gerstner &
25 Day, 1997). The quality of the relationship between leader and employee might affect the extent to which employees inherently support the communicated vision of change by their leader. Moreover, when an employee has a good relationship with their leader, they might be less likely to be skeptical about the communicated opportunities in the leader’s vision of change. LMX was measured using a 7-item scale developed by Graen and Uhl-Bien (1995). The original scale consists of items like “How well does your leader recognize your
potential?” and “How would you characterize your working relationship with your leader?”. These items were transformed to items that could be answered using a 5-point Likert scale, so these items were translated to: “My supervisor recognizes my talents” and “I have an affective relationship with my supervisor”. Cronbach’s Alpha of this scale is .935.
Moreover, number of years working for the current organization was considered as control variable. It might be the case that employees who are working in the same
organization for long-time experience difficulties in accepting and supporting organizational changes. They might be used to the way things are done in the organization and might dislike visions of change that break with the status quo. Therefore, the number of years working for the current organization might affect affective commitment to change.
26
4. Results
4.1 Descriptive statistics
In table 1, the means, standard deviations, correlations and internal consistency for all variables are shown. The correlation coefficients were computed using a Pearson correlation test. From table 1 it can be concluded that the inter-correlations between vision of
opportunity, affective commitment to change, participation in decision-making, goal setting and LMX are all significant with a significance value of p < 0.01.
Table 1: means, standard deviations, correlations, and internal consistency
Variables M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 1. Vision of opportunity 3.22 1.03 (0.927) 2. Affective commitment to change 3.84 0.91 0.41** (0.932) 3. Participation in change processes 3.37 0.98 0.39** 0.58** (0.886) 4. Goal setting 3.96 0.69 0.55** 0.30** 0.37* (0.652) 5. LMX 3.82 0.92 0.72** 0.33** 0.30** 0.62** (0.935)
6. Years working for current
organization
11.52 10.37 -0.01 -0.01 0.05 0.09 0.1 -
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)
The correlation table provides some striking results. Vision of opportunity and affective commitment to change are positively correlated (r = 0.41). Moreover, there is a relatively strong positive correlation (r = 0.58) between participation in change processes and affective commitment to change. The results also show a relatively strong correlational effect of r = 0.55 between goal setting and vision of opportunity.
Furthermore, the control variables show some outstanding correlations. Although it is not the aim of this research, the strongest correlational effects are found between LMX and
27 vision of opportunity (r = 0.72) and LMX and goal setting (r = 0.62). This correlation might imply a relationship between the quality of the relationship between leader and employee and the extent of goal setting and presented visions of opportunity.
4.2 Hypotheses testing
A hierarchical regression analysis was conducted to test the first hypothesis about the direct relationship between vision of opportunity and affective commitment to change. In this analysis, the ability of vision of opportunity to predict levels of affective commitment to change was investigated, after controlling for LMX and number of years working for the current organization.
Table 2: hierarchical regression model of Affective commitment
Variables R R² Δ R² B Std. Error
β t p
Step 1 0.34 0.11
LMX 0.33 0.08 0.34 4.02 0.00**
Years working for current organization
-0.00 0.01 -0.04 -0.47 0.64
Step 2 0.41 0.17 0.06
LMX 0.09 0.12 0.09 0.74 0.46
Years working for current organization -0.00 0.01 -0.01 -0.12 0.91 Vision of opportunity 0.30 0.10 0.34 2.90 0.00* * p < 0.01 ** p < 0.001
Table 2 contains the results of testing hypothesis 1, reporting the R, R², amount of change in
R², unstandardized coefficient B, the standard error, the standardized coefficient β, the t-value
and the significance level. In the first step of this hierarchical multiple regression analysis, the two predictors were entered, namely, LMX and number of years working for the current organization. This model was statistically significant F (2, 127) = 8.07; p < 0.001 and explained 11.3% of variance in affective commitment to change. After entry of vision of
28 opportunity at Step 2, the total variance explained by the model as a whole was 16.8% F (3, 126) = 8.48; p < 0.001. The introduction of vision of opportunity explained additional 6% variance in affective commitment to change, after controlling for LMX and number of years working in the current organization (R² change = 0.06; F (1, 126) = 8.36; p < 0.005).
Checking the standardized coefficients in the final model, one out of three predictor variables was statistically significant. Vision of opportunity records a Beta value of β = 0.34 (p < 0.01),
which means that if vision of opportunity increases for one, employees’ affective commitment to change increases for 0.34. This leads to a confirmation of hypothesis 1.
To test the three hypotheses suggesting moderating effects of concrete goal setting and participation in change processes on the positive relationship between vision of opportunity and affective commitment to change, an analysis using the SPSS process macro tool
developed by Hayes (2012) was conducted.
Table 3: moderation analysis of goal setting
Variables Coefficient SE t p
Intercept i1 3.71 0.49 7.57 0.00*
Vision of opportunity (X) c1 0.28 0.11 2.61 0.01
Goal setting (M) c2 0.13 0.14 0.91 0.37
Vision of opportunity * goal setting (XM)
c3 -0,05 0.09
-0.51
0.61
LMX (Cov) 0.04 0.13 0.34 0.30
Years working in current organization (Cov) -0.00 0.01 -0.17 0.86 R² = 0.18, p < 0.001 F (5, 124) = 5.29 * p < 0.001
Table 3 provides an overview of the moderation analysis in order to test hypothesis 2 about the moderating effect of goal setting on the relationship between vision of opportunity and affective commitment to change. This moderation model is significant at the p < 0.001 level
29 and accounts for 18% variance in affective commitment to change. The interactional effect between vision of opportunity and goal setting with a coefficient of -0.05 is not significant (p = 0.61). Therefore, the relationship between vision of opportunity on affective commitment to change is not affected by the level of goal setting. This means that there is no moderating effect of goal setting on the relationship between vision of opportunity and affective
commitment to change, which means that hypothesis 2 is rejected. Moreover, in this model, the effects of the control variables investigated as covariates are not significant (p = 0.30, p = 0.86).
Table 4: moderation analysis of participation in change processes
Variables Coefficient SE t p
Intercept i1 3.61 0.39 9.24 0.00
Vision of opportunity (X) c1 0.15 0.10 1.56 0.12 Participation in change processes
(M)
c2 0.47 0.07 6.56 0.00*
Vision of opportunity *
participation in change processes (XM)
c3 0.04 0.06 0.70 0.49
LMX (Cov) 0.07 0.10 0.65 0.52
Years working in current organization (Cov)
-0.00 0.00 -0.56 0.57
R² = 0.38, p < 0.001 F (5, 124) = 15.37
* p < 0.001
Table 4 provides an overview of the moderation analysis of the moderator participation in decision-making. This model is significant at the p < 0.001 level and accounts for 38% variance in affective commitment to change. In this model, the interactional effect between vision of opportunity and participation in change processes with a coefficient of 0.04 is not significant (p = 0.49). Therefore, the relationship between vision of opportunity and affective commitment to change is not affected by the extent of goal setting. This means that there is no moderating effect of goal setting on the relationship between vision of opportunity and
30 affective commitment to change. As a result, hypotheses 3a and 3b are rejected. Moreover, in this model, the effects of the control variables investigated as covariates are not significant (p = 0.52, p = 0.57).
4.3 Exploratory research
Concrete goal setting and participation in change processes did not show a significant interaction effect with vision of opportunity. Therefore, these two variables do not have a moderating effect on the relationship between vision of opportunity and affective
commitment to change.
However, to further explore possible relationships between concrete goal setting, participation in change processes and affective commitment to change, a linear regression analysis was conducted. In this linear regression analysis, the ability of vision of opportunity, concrete goal setting and participation in change processes to predict levels of affective commitment to change was tested.
Table 5: linear regression model of Affective commitment
Variables R R² B Std. Error β t p 0.61 0.38 Vision of opportunity 0.18 0.08 0.21 2.39 0.02 Concrete goal setting 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.03 0.98 Participation in change processes 0.46 0.07 0.50 6.42 0.00* * p < 0.001
Table 5 shows the results of this exploratory analysis, reporting the R, R², amount of change in R², unstandardized coefficient B, the standard error, the standardized coefficient β, the
t-31
value and the significance level. This model is statistically significant F (3, 126) = 25.40; p < 0.001 and explains 38% of variance in affective commitment to change.
Checking the standardized coefficients in this model, two of the three predictor variables are statistically significant. Vision of opportunity is, after adding concrete goal setting and participation in change processes as predictors in this exploratory model, significant (p < 0.05) and records a Beta value of β = 0.21. This means that if vision of opportunity increases for one in this model, employees’ affective commitment to change increases for 0.21.
Moreover, participation in change processes shows to be a statistically significant predictor (p < 0.001) of affective commitment to change. Participation in change processes records a Beta value of β = 0.50, which means that if participation in change processes increases for one, employees’ affective commitment to change increases for 0.50.
32
5. Discussion
The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between a leader’s presented vision of opportunity and the extent of employee affective commitment to change. To get a more thorough understanding of this relationship change processes, the moderating effect of two often used motivational tactics, namely employee participation in change processes and concrete goal setting, on the relation between vision of opportunity and employee affective commitment to change were investigated.
Until now, it remained unclear what an effective vision of change should entail
regarding its content. Some researchers advocate that a vision of change should emphasize the continuity of the organization after the change (Venus et al., 2018, in press), while others suggest that an effective vision of change should highlight a new, better, ideal future that is full of opportunities and breaks with the status quo (e.g., Bommer et al., 2005; Stam et al., 2010, House & Shamir, 1993; Shamir et al., 1993). This research incorporated the
characteristics of this last type of visions of change in the concept vision of opportunity. This research aims to get more clarity about the effectiveness of a communicated vision of opportunity by a leader during organizational changes. Furthermore, so far, the concept of vision of opportunity was only examined in the broader context of
transformational leadership. This research attempts to gain a better understanding of the isolated concept vision of opportunity, and of affective commitment to change. Moreover, this study shedded a first light on the moderating effects of goal setting and employee
participation during change processes on the relationship between vision of opportunity and affective commitment to change.
A positive relationship between vision of opportunity and affective commitment to change was proposed. This was confirmed by the research results. This means that leaders who present a vision of change that is full of opportunities can increase their employees’
33 affective commitment to that change. It was expected that this relationship would be stronger for higher values of concrete goal setting and employee participation in change processes. Moreover, it was expected that there would be a negative relationship between vision of opportunity and affective commitment to change if there is no employee participation during the change process at all. However, these moderating effects were not confirmed in this study. An explanation for these moderating effects not being present
5.1 Theoretical implications
The expected positive relationship between vision of opportunity and employee affective commitment to change was confirmed by this research. The regression analysis showed a positive significant effect of vision of opportunity on affective commitment to change. This confirms the effectiveness of visions of opportunity as visions of change. In previous
research, visions described with the characteristics of a vision of opportunity were supposed to be effective visions of change (Bommer et al., 2005; Kotter, 1995a). However, this is the first research proving the effectiveness of visions of change with the content of a vision of opportunity in enhancing employees’ affective commitment to change. Moreover, in previous research, the effectiveness of visions of change described with characteristics of visions of opportunities was only studied as a part of the broader concept transformational leadership (Shamir & Howell, 1999; Conger & Kanungo, 1987; Shamir et al., 1993). This is the first research studying visions of opportunity as a self-contained concept. Therefore, it contributes to a better understanding of the concept and its effectiveness. However, the findings of this research are not in line with the study of Venus et al. (2018, in press) who suggested another type of visions of change, namely visions of continuity, to be effective vision of change. Current research proves the effectiveness of visions of opportunity.
34 During this research, the expected reinforcing effect of goal setting on the relationship between vision of opportunity and affective commitment to change has not been found, as the results did not show a significant interaction effect between these two variables. This means that in this study, the level of goal setting does not affect the relationship between vision of opportunity and affective commitment to change. An explanation for the absence of this expected interaction effect might be due to the low Cronbach’s alpha of the scale measuring goal setting, which was 0.65. One item could be deleted to increase the Cronbach’s alpha to 0.71. However, the scale would then only consist of two items. The absence of the interaction effect could be explained by the fact that employees might not be aware of how their concrete tasks contribute to the realization of the change initiative communicated in the vision of opportunity. Employees might find it difficult to see how their own concrete goals relate to the realization of the future opportunities communicated in the vision of change.
Furthermore, the expected reinforcing effect of employee participation in change processes on the relationship between vision of opportunity and affective commitment to change was not present. Moderation analysis did not show a significant interaction effect between vision of opportunity and employee participation in change processes. This means that the level of employee participation in change processes does not affect the relationship between vision of opportunity and affective commitment to change. However, exploratory research did establish a significant direct effect of employee participation in change processes on affective commitment to change. This established direct positive effect of employee participation in change processes on employee affective commitment to change is consistent with previous research of Alutto and Belasco (1972) who stated that organizations encourage the process of employee acceptance of organizational changes when they let employees participate in change decision-making. Furthermore, it was established that employees’
35 involvement in change decision-making processes enhances the development of positive attitudes toward that change (Holt, Armenakis, Feild & Harris, 2007).
Additionally, the absence of an interaction effect between vision of opportunity and employee participation in change processes implies that the expected negative moderating effect is not present. This implies that when a strong vision of opportunity is presented, it might not be necessary for leaders to involve their employees in change decision-making processes to get them on board and to enhance their affective commitment to the change. Exploratory research indeed shows that vision of opportunity has a positive effect on employee affective commitment to change above and beyond participation in change
processes. This finding might suggest that presenting a strong vision of opportunity might be enough to get employees’ commitment to a change initiative and that employee participation in change processes is not essential to get employees’ affective commitment to change.
5.2 Limitations
When interpreting the results of this research, several limitations of this study should be considered. First, the sample of this study consisted of Dutch employees who all work in the educational sector. Therefore, research results regarding the established relationship between vision of opportunity and affective commitment to change need to be interpreted carefully. The fact that all respondents work in the same sector might hinder the generalizability of the results. People working in the educational sector might possess specific personality
characteristics or might have certain previous experiences with organizational changes within their sector which might cause biases in answering questions about organizational change. Therefore, future studies on this research’ topic could focus on a larger and more diverse sample, which entails respondents working in non-profit and profit organizations in different sectors. This could have positive effects on the external validity.
36 A second limitation of this research is that data were collected using a convenience sampling technique. This might obstruct the generalizability and representativeness and might lead to biased outcomes (Acharya, Prakash, Saxena & Nigam, 2013). Most of the respondents were working at an educational institution that is connected to the researcher. Possibly, this might have caused respondents to give socially desirable answers to the survey questions. A suggestion for further research is to apply a probability sampling technique in order to provide more representative research results.
A third limitation of this research is that this study is based on a cross-sectional nature, which might hinder the establishment of causal relations and might have led to a relatively low internal validity of the research results. In future research on the current topic, a
longitudinal study on the effect of vision of opportunity on affective commitment to change could be conducted.
A fourth limitation of this research is that in this study, the phase of the organizational change was not considered. This could have affected the results of this research. In very early phases of the change, employee participation and concrete goal setting might not have taken place yet. The vision of change might already have been communicated to employees, or employees might have caught signal of an upcoming change, but the organization could still be in very early phases of change in which the focus is, for example, on developing the framework for the change strategy. This might give employees the feeling that they are not involved or are not provided with concrete goals, while the organization intends to do involve them and provide them with concrete goals in later phases of the change. This might have obstructed employees’ answers to the survey questions.
37 5.3 Suggestions for future research
During the collection of the data, signals were caught that employees had developed somewhat negative attitudes toward changes, because they had experiences with
disappointing change initiatives in their organization. A first suggestion for future research is that employees’ previous experiences with organizational changes could be studied as a moderating variable on the relationship between with vision of opportunity and employee affective commitment to change. The positive effect of a presented vision of opportunity on employee affective commitment to change could be negatively moderated by employees having bad experiences with organizational changes. If employees have bad experiences with previous organizational changes, and the vision of change highlights a beautiful, better, inspiring future full of opportunities, they might be more likely to develop feelings of cynicism instead of commitment. The importance of past change experiences in enhancing levels of cynicism was also proposed by Bernerth et al. (2007), who suggested that change agents should shape their change message more consciously.
A second suggestion for future research is that employee personality traits could be considered as moderating variable in order to get more insight in the relationship between of visions of opportunity in enhancing employee affective commitment to change. According to Oreg et al. (2011), several change recipient personality traits act as antecedents of employees’ specific reactions to change. These personality traits involve self-efficacy and openness to experience. These personality traits could be studied as moderating variables on the
relationship between vision of opportunity and affective commitment to change. A vision of opportunity that is presented to employees who are self-confident about their capacities, resulting in high levels of self-efficacy, might result in higher levels of employee affective commitment to change. These employees might be more likely to believe that they can realize the suggested future opportunities, which could result in a strengthening effect on the positive
38 relationship between vision of opportunity and employee affective commitment to change. Moreover, openness to experience might also have a reinforcing effect on the relationship between vision of opportunity and affective commitment to change. Employees being open to new experiences might be more likely to see visions of opportunity as a challenge rather than a threat. Therefore, openness to experience might strengthen the positive relationship between vision of opportunity and employee affective commitment to change.
A third suggestion for future research is that the effectiveness of vision of opportunity as a self-contained could be further explored by studying the interaction effect with certain leadership behaviors. In previous research, the effectiveness of a presented vision of
opportunity was only suggested in the broader context of several transformational leadership behaviors (Bommer et al., 2005; Shamir & Howell, 1999; Shamir et al., 1993). This research has shown that presenting a vision of opportunity is an effective self-contained concept in enhancing employees’ affective commitment to change. It could be interesting to study the effect of a presented vision of opportunity on employees’ affective commitment to change accompanied by a leadership style that has not been studied before, for example, transactional leadership. This could provide more insights in the strength of the effectiveness of a vision of opportunity in enhancing employees’ affective commitment to change. In future research, the moderating effect of transactional leadership behaviors on the relationship between visions of opportunities and employee affective commitment to change could be studied. If there is an interaction effect between vision of opportunity and transactional leadership behaviors, this would imply that visions of opportunity are not effective above and beyond the applied leadership style.
A fourth suggestion for future research is that the moderating effect of concrete goal setting on the relationship between vision of continuity and employee affective commitment to change could be studied. The results of this research did not show a significant interaction
39 effect of concrete goal setting and vision of opportunity. However, another type of vision of change could show an interaction effect. Venus et al. (2018, in press) describe visions of continuity as visions of change that emphasize the continuousness of the organization’s culture, practices, structure, and identity after a change. Visions of continuity that are accompanied by concrete goals for employees on how they can contribute to the
continuousness of the organization might enhance employees’ affective commitment to change. Employees might be better able to relate how their concrete tasks relate to ensuring the current organizational identity than to a realization of an entirely new future. Therefore, in contrast to visions of opportunity, concrete goal setting might show a positive interaction effect with visions of continuity.
A final suggestion for future research is to conduct a research in which LMX is considered as moderating variable in the relationship between vision of opportunity and employee affective commitment to change. This research showed an outstanding strong correlational effect between vision of opportunity and leader-member exchange when analyzing this control variable. One could argue that when a leader presents a vision of change in which a future full of opportunities is highlighted, and employees have a good relationship with this leader, employees might be more likely to be committed to the change that is presented by this leader. Therefore, the relationship between a presented vision of opportunity and affective commitment to change might be even stronger for higher levels of LMX. On the other hand, when an employee has a troubled relationship with his/her leader, and this leader presents a vision of change in which a better future is highlighted, an
employee might be less likely to be committed to this change. Therefore, the relationship between vision of opportunity and affective commitment to change might be weaker for lower levels of LMX.
