Enabling the Emergence of Proactive Task
Fulfillment of Organization Members
Thesis Master Change Management
Final version
Student
Teddy Monninkhof
S3395111
t.m.monninkhof@student.rug.nl
University of Groningen
Faculty of Economics & Business
Msc Business Administration: Change Management
Course: Thesis Master Change Management
Abstract
To cope with the increasing pace of change, behaviors in which organization members proactively fulfill their task become more essential every day. As proactive task fulfillment has been considered as an emergent form of behavior, instead of behavior that is standardized and directed or imposed by others, this research explores, by using the evolution theory as a framework, the role of the manager in enabling the emergence of proactive task fulfillment. After a data analysis of seventeen semi-structured interviews, this research concluded that the manager can enable the emergence of proactive task fulfillment by developing six conditions, namely interactions, empowering leadership, organizational commitment, management support, role model and belongingness. An important additional result showed that a facilitating style of leadership should be used as an addition, or as a complement, to the condition ‘empowering leadership’ to stimulate the emergence of proactive task fulfillment. Balanced by the pressure to take over control, managers should act on these conditions, generate outcomes in some context and the emergence of proactive task fulfillment follows over time. Instead of planning and controlling the way to go, the developing nature of proactive task fulfillment still unfolds, but the role of the manager might be more important than the literature indicates.
TABLE OF CONTENT
ABSTRACT………...2
1. INTRODUCTION………..4
Emergent change: evolution theory………..4
The role of the manager in emergent change………...5
The role of the manager in variation………6
The role of the manager in selection/retention……… 8
The research questions..………. 9
2. METHODOLOGY………....12
The change situation………12
Data collection……….12
Data analysis………....13
Reliability and viability………15
3. RESULTS………....16
The role of the manager in variation………....16
The role of the manager in selection/retention……….20
4. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION………..………..23
The role of the manager in variation: sub-question 1, 2 and 3………..………..22
The role of the manager in selection/retention: sub-question 4 and 5…………..………...24
The role of the manager in the emergence of proactive task fulfillment: main question……...26
Theoretical implications………...27
Practical implications………...28
Limitations and future research………28
5. BIBLIOGRAPHY………...29
1 Introduction – the emergence of proactive task fulfillment
“It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is the most adaptable to change.” – Charles Darwin (1859)
It is not a secret that today’s environment is unpredictable and changes faster than at any time in history. The clichés about the increasing pace of change seem to be true and in the face of organizational change, not all forms of work behavior seem equally effective or desirable. To cope with the complexity and uncertainty of the environment, behaviors in which organization members proactively fulfill their task to anticipate to new situations become more essential every day (Griffin, Parker & Mason, 2009). In this study, the term proactive task fulfillment refers to ‘taking initiative in improving current circumstances; it involves challenging the status quo rather than passively adapting present conditions’ (Crant, 2000, p.436). Proactive task fulfillment entails organization members to anticipate opportunities and initiate actions as part of their in-role behavior to operate effectively in today’s environment. Due to difficulties in standardizing and predicting terms of actions, changing proactive task fulfillment is a challenge. Instead of a relative straightforward process that moves through a series of pre-planned steps, directed or imposed by others, proactive task fulfillment has been considered as an emergent form of behavior (Griffin, Parker & Mason, 2009). Rather than a linear process or a one-off isolated event, the emergence of proactive task fulfillment seems to be a continuous, open-ended, cumulative process of aligning and realigning to the environment (Falconer, 2002) and can only arise from unpredictable, iterative and unintentional events (Weick & Quinn, 1999). This creates a tension: is it possible to manage proactive task fulfillment, when it has such an unpredictable nature? As regards the management of change, a pressing question remains how managers can enable the emergence of proactive task fulfillment. The main question of this study that must be answered is, therefore, ‘What is the role of the manager in enabling the emergence of manifestations of proactive task fulfillment of organization members?’
1.1
Emergent change: evolution theory
To understand emergent change, Sammut-Bonninci and Wensley (2002) argue that the evolution theory of Darwin (1859), may provide greater insights. According to the evolution theory, evolution occurs when variation and selection/retention are present in a system. Variation is referred to as the generation of ideas to let the emergence of change occur. Greater opportunities for change result from a higher frequency of ideas. Sources of variations may be intentional or blind. Intentional variations arise when organization members generate ideas and try to solve problems. It is a conscious response to difficult situations. Within formal programs of experimentation and imitations, intentional variation may occur as well. Innovation becomes a part of an organization members’ job description, financially compensating organization members whose ideas are selected and creating competition between workgroups. In contrast to intentional variations, blind variations do not result from adaption pressure, but occur independently of environmental or selection pressures. Blind variations rather result from trial and error learning, imitation, mistakes, passion, misunderstandings, surprises, forgetting standard routines and gossip about better practices. When organization members become discouraged or bored, work under pressure and improvise to solve unforeseen circumstances, blind variation may occur as well (Aldrich, 1999).
The variations are then subject to internal selection pressures, because some variations are more helpful for enabling the effectiveness of existing routines or for producing new routines, than other variations. Selection/retention is referred to as the way organization members enact on the generated ideas to let the emergence of change occur. Selection pressures arise in relation to new ideas, prior experiences, power structures and legitimization processes. Enactment on the selected ideas requires diffusing newly minted knowledge to the place and time where it is needed. It involves persistence to perpetuate and maintain selected variations. Decisions about which of the selected variations will be continued and which will be discontinued entail not only replication, but also contributes new information that can provide diversity to start variation again. As the variation and selection/retention description above show, organization members compete to be considered for ideas (variation), join ideas (selection) and stay with the ideas (retention) an organization has to offer (Lovas & Ghoshal, 2000). Because selection and retention are used often as a combination, selection and retention are aggregated in this study. The next paragraph discusses the role of the manager in the emergence of change.
1.2
The role of the manager in emergent change
become a barrier for managers who want to enable the emergence of change (Plowman et al., 2007). By looking at change from an evolution perspective, change becomes an everyday accomplishment, in the sense that all organization members are living with change continuously. Changes are rather governed by having a few simple guiding conditions than by planning, constructing, instructing and controlling the right direction to go. Every action contains an element of emergence and requires us to think about how change can be managed (Higgs & Rowland, 2005). Therefore, a reconceptualization of the role of the manager within emergent change is needed. In the next paragraph the role of the manager is related to variation and selection/retention, in order to further investigate the role of the manager in enabling the emergence of change. In this study, a manager is defined as the person who is in charge of organization members in the context of day to day tasks.
1.3 The role of the manager in variation
The generation of ideas depends, to a great extent, on the creativity and innovation that comes from organization members. Managers should enable conditions to unleash the energy and ideas latent in the organization and stimulate organization members to act. To encourage organization members to generate ideas, two conditions need to be present, namely interaction and empowering leadership. Despite the fact that there are several other conditions mentioned in the emergent change literature, the conditions interaction and empowering leadership, or referred to as something similar, occurred regularly in different studies and are, therefore, chosen to be presented in the following paragraph (Bushe & Marshak, 2016; Lichtenstein & Plowman, 2009; Uhl-Bien, Marion, & Mckelvey, 2007).
Condition ‘Interaction’
By creating conditions in which organization members can interact, new ideas can be developed. Interactions that are conducive for creativity have the following characteristics: they entail diversely skilled organization members or skilled external relations, different perspectives, openness to new ideas and communication wherein organization members challenge each other’s ideas. Managers can promote interaction through open architecture workplaces, self-selected electronic workgroups, informal meetings, café breaks and corridor discussions. Social networks should be enriched, so organization members and external relations with similar motivations and beliefs can find and support each other. These interactions can and indeed should involve discomfort, conflict constraints and tensions. It is such conflict that pushes controversy. Conditions in which perceptions occur are altered and new ideas originate. It represents a process of looking beyond original perceptions (Uhl-Bien, Marion, & Mckelvey, 2007; Parajen, 2012). To stimulate the generation of ideas, managers should promote interactions by creating space for interactions to occur. Through interactions, organization members create new points of view which spark the generative potential of variation (Rhoerig, Schwendenwein, & Bushe, 2015).
Condition ‘Empowering leadership’
Another condition to enhance the generation of ideas is displaying empowering leadership. Empowering leadership refers to the extent to which managers express confidence in organization members abilities, involve organization members in decision making and remove bureaucratic constraints on their organization members to enhance creativity, which is critical for the generation of ideas (Zhang & Zhou, 2014). Zhang and Bartol (2010) state that because empowered organization members are more likely to spend extra time on solving problems, exert greater efforts and find their task more meaningful and impactful, they are more likely to produce novel and useful ideas compared to less-empowered organization members. Under supportive circumstances, ideas that are truly useful and novel to the organization might result.
displaying empowering leadership, serves as a powerful force for the generation of ideas. The role of the manager in the generation of ideas is, therefore, focused on establishing a work context in which organization members are empowered to enhance the generative potential of variation.
1.4 The role of the manager in selection/retention
Managers should not only manage the organizational conditions in which ideas can occur. Ideas should also be moved upward through the formal hierarchical system and flow into the administrative structures. One important condition found will be explained, namely management support. Despite the fact that there are several other conditions mentioned in the emergent change literature, the condition management support, or referred to as something similar, occurred regularly in different studies and is, therefore, chosen to be presented in the following paragraph (Bushe & Marshak, 2016; Lichtenstein & Plowman, 2009; Uhl-Bien, Marion, & Mckelvey, 2007).
Condition ‘Management support’
Organizational structures, functioning power and social networks often present obstacles for ideas to become enacted. Organization members often wait for direction and encouragement. To stimulate the enactment of ideas, a manager should support the generated ideas of organization members. Management support refers to the willingness of a manager to promote ideas, promote the championing of ideas and provide the resources organization members require to enact on ideas (Rhoerig, Schewdenwein & Bushe, 2015). As with the previous paragraph, the term ‘management’ refers to the managers who are in charge of organization members in the context of day to day tasks.
focus on, among others, clarifying roles and responsibilities and managing time and resources. Relationship-oriented behaviors focus on showing consideration for organization members’ feelings, being concerned and personally support them. When organization members perceive the management to value their ideas, they have a basis on which to judge how they are doing (Amabile et al., 2004). For ideas to become enacted, managerial behavior entails being committed, promoting ideas through the social networks and willingly risk their position and reputation to ensure success. Managers need to adjust activities to accomplish organizational outcomes with the generated ideas. Without management support, the selection/retention of ideas would be seriously compromised (Uhl-Bien, Marion, & Mckelvey, 2007).
1.5 The research questions
As described, in paragraph 1.1 to 1.4, the manager can play an important role in managing emergent change in general, by creating the right conditions, rather than defining goals and actions plans. As regards to the management of emergent change in general, the role of the manager is to enable three conditions, namely promoting interactions, displaying empowering leadership and realizing management support. As proactive task fulfillment has been considered as an emergent form of behavior, it is interesting to research if a manager can stimulate the emergence of proactive task fulfillment of organizations members, by creating these three conditions, as well. That is, by encouraging and facilitating interactions between those organization members in their endeavors to live up to proactivity expectations, by empowering them in such a way that they really feel free to take initiatives proactively and to make sure that those initiatives are welcomed and supported by involved managers as much as possible. Table 1 provides an overview of the conditions related to enabling the emergence of proactive task fulfillment, that was presented in the previous paragraphs.
Condition Definition
Interaction Organization members merge with other organization members and external stakeholders with different beliefs and perspectives to live up to proactivity expectations.
Empowering leadership
The manager serves as a leader who expresses confidence in organization members abilities, involves organization members in decision making and remove
bureaucratic constraints to let organization members feel free to take initiatives proactively.
Management support
The manager promotes ideas, promotes the championing of ideas and provides the resources organization members require to make sure that proactive initiatives are welcomed and supported by involved managers as much as possible.
An appropriate main question that needs to be answered by this study is:
- What is the role of the manager in enabling the emergence of manifestations of proactive task fulfillment of organization members?
To answer the main question the emergence of proactive task fulfillment will be linked to the elements of the evolution theory in terms of variation and selection/retention. Therefore, this study defines variation as the generation of ideas to let the necessary manifestations of proactive task fulfillment originate.
Two fitting sub-questions are:
- To what degree is promoting interactions conducive to the generation of ideas by organization members for manifestations of proactive task fulfillment?
- To what degree is displaying empowering leadership conducive to the generation of ideas by organization members for manifestations of proactive task fulfillment?
In order to explore whether other conditions than the ones specified here may play a role the following additional sub-question is included:
- To what degree are other conditions conducive for the generation of ideas by organization members for manifestations of proactive task fulfillment?
Furthermore, selection/retention is defined as the way organization members enact on the generated ideas to let manifestations of proactive task fulfillment occur. An appropriate sub-question is:
- To what degree is realizing management support conducive for the enactment of generated ideas of organization members for manifestations of proactive task fulfillment?
In order to explore whether other conditions, than management support, may play a role the following additional sub-question is included:
- To what degree are other conditions conducive for the enactment of generated ideas of organization members for manifestations of proactive task fulfillment?
Variation
Selection/retention
Figure 1. Research model enabling the emergence of proactive task fulfillment
2 Methodology
This section presents the change situation at the Gemeente Groningen. Afterward, the data collection approach and the data analysis process that is conducted to answer the research question is explained.
2.1 Change situation
The organization that is used to collect data is the local government of the city Groningen. The study was conducted at the divisions ‘Ruimtelijk Beleid en Ontwerp’ (RB&O) and ‘Ruimtelijk Ontwerp en Uitvoering’ (RO&U) of the department ‘Stadsontwikkeling’. Developments in the environment of Groningen will remain in full force the incoming years. To be able to adapt to the continuous changing environment, the departments' mission is to become a viable department that is flexible enough to adapt to the changing circumstances. To accomplish this mission, the organization conducted a structural change in 2014. The structural change was supposed to stimulate the proactive task fulfillment of organization members. In 2018 an evaluation was conducted. The evaluation stated that the expected change in behavior, proactive task fulfillment, was not fully incorporated by organization members (Van de Watering, 2018). For some reasons, the behavioral change was hard to address by a structural change.
2.2 Data collection
trends in experiences, success factors and points of improvement in managerial approaches were found that could enable the emergence of proactive task fulfillment. The answers were evaluated on relevance, validity and completeness to make sure that the presence or absence of the proactive task fulfillment was identified correctly. Please see Appendix 1 for the Dutch interview protocol that is used.
The interviews were conducted at several day-visits at the Gemeente Groningen during the collection period of two weeks in April 2019. Respondents are chosen based on the characteristics of the population and the availability of respondents. Another characteristic was that respondents had to be present during the structural change. Furthermore, organization members needed to have a manager who directs them in the context of the day-to-day tasks and vice versa. The respondents can be found in Table 2.
Nr. Function respondent Abbreviation
1 Programmanager 1 PM1 2 Programmanager 2 PM2 3 Projectleader 1 PL1 4 Projectleader 2 PL2 5 Projectleader 3 PL3 6 Projectleader 4 PL4 7 Projectleader 5 PL5 8 Projectleader 6 PL6 9 Teamleader 1 TL1 10 Teamleader 2 TL2
11 Organization member 1 OM1
12 Organization member 2 OM2
13 Organization member 3 OM3
14 Organization member 4 OM4
15 Organization member 5 OM5
16 Organization member 6 OM6
17 Organization member 7 OM7
Table 2. Respondents
2.3 Data analysis
fulfillment of organization members. Using both deductive and inductive coding complemented this study by allowing tenets of multiple premises of the literature study presented in chapter 1, while allowing themes to emerge directly from the interviews as well (Fereday & Muir-Cochrane, 2006). A definition of the deductive codes was already presented in paragraph 1.5 and a definition of the inductive codes can be found in chapter 3, the results.
Variation Selection/Retention
Role of the manager Interaction Management support
Empowering leadership
Table 3. Deductive codes
Variation Selection/Retention
Role of the manager Organizational commitment Role model
Belongingness
Table 4. Inductive codes
Both the deductive and inductive codes are presented in Table 5. The codes are provided with a description that relates every code to the impact of the role of the manager on enabling the emergence of proactive task fulfillment. Albeit the results in chapter 3 already provide quotes of experiences of organization members, Table 5 provides quotes as well to give the reader the best possible overview.
Code and description Example Quote
Information regarding the impact of the manager in facilitating interactions to enhance the generation of ideas of
organization members to let manifestations of proactive task fulfillment occur.
PL2: ‘By talking to each other about content, about projects or about tasks we can get people to think differently compared to our own rules.’
Information regarding the impact of the manager in displaying empowering leadership to enhance the generation of ideas of organization members to let manifestations of proactive task fulfillment occur.
PL2: ‘You can always stay and sit by someone’s side, but at a certain point you just have to dare to step away from it and give people the
responsibility. Often, they can handle much more than when you stay and sit by their side.’
Information regarding the impact of the manager in stimulating organizational commitment to enhance the generation of ideas of organization members to let manifestations of proactive task fulfillment occur.
Information regarding the impact of realizing management support to enhance the enactment of ideas of organization members to let manifestations of proactive task fulfillment institutionalize.
TL1: ‘Support is seen by organization members and is appreciated. It also acts as a compliment, you know. Compliments are always a good reason to keep doing it.’
Information regarding the impact of a manager acting as a role model to enhance the enactment of ideas by organization members to let manifestations of proactive task fulfillment institutionalize.
TL1: ‘One time in a meeting the director said: ‘Everybody put your iPads away!’ This was the best thing that could happen in this session because he is the one that is always doing things on his phone. Only because he was the one that enounced the issue it had a great effect. Now we treat each other differently. It looks like a small thing but it is actually bigger than you would think. It made a big impression.’’
Information regarding the impact of the manager in stimulating belongingness to enhance the enactment of ideas of
organization members to let manifestations of proactive task fulfillment institutionalize.
PL2: ‘We try to make things visible by putting different parties at the table. That organization members see what people do and why it is important to know this from each other. This brings things to life in the projects.’
Table 5.Codebook with inductive and deductive codes
2.4 Reliability and viability
3 Results
In this chapter, the results obtained from the seventeen conducted interviews are presented. The first paragraph shows the conditions relating to variation. The next paragraph illustrates the conditions that relate to selection/retention. Within each paragraph a description of every condition is provided.
3.1 Role of the manager in variation
The following paragraph presents the impact of the role of the manager on the generation of ideas by organization members to let manifestations of proactive task fulfillment occur through three conditions, namely interaction, empowering leadership and organizational commitment. Every condition shows one key result. Additional information that is useful as a context for the key results, is presented as well.
Condition ‘Interaction’
As illustrated in paragraph 1.5, the condition interaction is defined as the extent to which organization members merge with other organization members and external stakeholders with different beliefs and perspectives to live up to proactivity expectations.
A key result indicates that the manager has an impact on the emergence of proactive task fulfillment through promoting interactions. It was remarkable that when managers forced organization members into interactions, there was room for new ideas. This stimulated organization members to take proactive initiatives. An organization member (OM4) shares an example: ‘I like to brainstorm with the people from the other company. I get new perspectives from the program leader but also from his company. This inspires me to act differently.’
Besides the key result presented above, two additional results were found. The first additional result indicates that two managers specifically mentioned that they expect from organization members to organize interactions themselves. A project leader (PL2) explains: ‘We expect from organization members in this profession that they will interact with each other to share knowledge. But in our culture, this seems difficult.’ Once managers had organized the interactions, both managers and organization members were determined to reinforce these interactions. Although managers can have a high impact on the emergence of proactive task fulfillment through the promotion of interactions, one respondent indicates that interactions have not sufficiently been organized by managers.
sufficiently promoted enough. A projectleader (PL2) shares the following quote: ‘The organization has become a pile of loose sand.’ An organization member (OM7) adds to this: ‘Back in the days, I walked downstairs through the corridors. It only cost me five minutes to find each other because we saw each other every day. I do not know anyone anymore.’
Condition ‘Empowering leadership’
As paragraph 1.5 explained, empowering leadership refers to the extent to which managers serve as a leader who expresses confidence in organization members abilities, involve organization members in decision making and remove bureaucratic constraints to let organization members feel free to take initiatives proactively.
A key result indicates that displaying empowering leadership did not always have the desired result on the emergence of proactive task fulfillment. Eight respondents state that displaying empowering leadership did often not enhance organization members to take initiatives proactively. Organization members were expected to figure things out by themselves, which created confusion. Expectations and responsibilities were not clear and organization members felt lost. As a consequence, a projectleader (PL3) indicates that: ‘Organization members become more careful.’ A programmanager (PM2) adds to this: ’People do not come up with ideas by themselves anymore, I miss that sometimes.’ This finding gives the impression that empowering leadership sometimes negatively influenced the ideas of organization members to live up to proactivity expectations.
Besides the key result presented above, three additional results were found. The first additional result indicates that managers display empowering leadership accordingly. Managers are not ventured to provide space for unforeseen situations, meaning that organization members were allowed to move around freely. Giving space showed a sense of trust and it allowed, some, organization members to come up with new ideas that managers expect them to take to act proactively. A projectleader (PL3) explains how he does this: ’I give them leeway by not moving to fast to conclusions. To leave room for exploration and to shop around for the best solution.’
projectleader (PL3) referred to this as: ‘If you want them to act more proactively you give them space to figure things out by themselves, yes, but what do they receive in return?’ A projectleader (PL3) adds to this: ‘I can imagine that the organization wants proactive organization members that take more initiative. But the structural change is used as a means to an end. It did not lead to the intended goal.’ If organization members have any questions or like to exchange thoughts and ideas, managers sometimes provided the opportunity to meet informally with organization members. However, organization members had to initiate this themselves. This often occurred in the corridor at the coffee machine and in the corridor chat, as a quick break during work.
Subsequent to the results presented above, a final additional result points out that although managers are not ventured to display empowering leadership, nine respondents indicate that proactive initiatives emerged when managers combined empowering leadership with a facilitating style of leadership. In this study, a facilitating style of leadership refers to a manager who creates the necessary conditions to let proactive task fulfillment occur, which includes the coaching of organization members, talking to organization members about purposes and objectives, helping organization members to get insights into the situation and built intense participation with organization members. It entails creating an atmosphere of respect, listening to one another, patience without judging and being open to unexpected situations and new ideas. It allows revealing underlying interests and deeper problems, which can result in potential creative solutions. As a projectleader (PL3) indicates: ‘My role shifts towards providing a sense of purpose. Pointing into a direction. Take action when necessary.’ A programmanager (PM2) illustrates how he does this by sharing the following example: ‘When something goes wrong I am not going to say that an organization member did it. It is my responsibility. I am never interested in culpability. Only what we can learn from it. Failure should be a treasure.’ As a projectleader (PL2) points out: ‘When organization members are not sure, I say: ‘Give it a try and when you will not be able to succeed we can do it together next time.’’
Condition ‘Organizational commitment’
The role of the manager to stimulate organizational commitment emerged during the interviews as a new condition that could impact the emergence of proactive task fulfillment. Organizational commitment is defined as the extent to which organization members sense a positive emotional bond with the organization which makes them go beyond their designated role to proactively fulfill their task.
Exploring how I can use this in my job. Finding out how it can change the way we work.’ A projectleader (PL1) shared an example of an organization member in her team that is fully committed to the job: ‘He goes to Brazil visiting buildings on his own expense. It is his pride and joy.’ Later in the interview she adds to this: ‘Feeling committed to the organization has an effect on organization members. With each other you represent something. An advantage of this is that you make progress.’ Another projectleader (PL3) illustrates how organizational commitment impacts the emergence of proactive task fulfillment by the following quote: ‘It is related to personal qualities. When somebody is proficient in his job no doubt they will manage. It has to do with a love for content. Maybe also with self-awareness and a strong orientation for adventure. The organization gets the behavior that they reward.’
Besides the key result shown above, two additional results were found. The first additional result shows that four respondents indicate that organizational commitment is not present everywhere. They state that organization members do not take a broad perspective when carrying out their task, do not think about the impact on others and operate on their own within their own professional field. A teamleader (TL2) referred to this as: ‘They all act like they have their own private company.’ Own subjects and projects are the most important. A projectleader (PL6) claims: ‘It is not about getting your own things done. It is about doing things that are not suboptimal for your own projects. Make it somebody else his win.’ As stated by a programmanager (PM1): ’People wait-and-see. They show little initiative in coming up with new assignments and activities. I think that we are far too concerned about the questions that come up now and too little with the questions that can come up tomorrow.’
3.2 Role of the manager in selection/retention
The following paragraph presents the impact of the role of the manager on the enactment of generated ideas by organization members to let manifestations of proactive task fulfillment occur through three conditions, namely management support, role model and belongingness. Every condition shows one key result. Additional information, that is useful as a context for the key results, is presented as well.
Condition ‘Management support’
As paragraph 1.5 presented, management support refers to the extent to which managers promote ideas, promote the championing of ideas and provide the resources organization members require to make sure that proactive initiatives are welcomed and supported by involved managers as much as possible.
A key result points out that management support can have an impact on the emergence of proactive task fulfillment. Eight respondents indicate that the ideas, initiatives or suggestions that circulate in the organization become enacted when managers support and welcome proactive initiatives. An organization member (OM2) shares an illustration: ‘I had a great idea and went to the director and the manager. I asked if there was money for it and the next week we were having a beach in the city. It is not that difficult.’ A teamleader (TL1) points out: ‘Support is seen by organization members and is appreciated. It also acts as a compliment, you know. Compliments are always a good reason to keep doing it.’
In addition to the key result presented above, three other results were found. The first additional result indicates that managers express management support by providing priority and a budget. An organization member (OM1) shares the following quote: ‘The management can make an important contribution to the enactment of ideas by providing internal priority.’
The second additional result indicates that management support contains providing a secure environment. The role of the manager is to represent a more open and transparent environment. By doing so, organization members become more open, leave their comfort zone and expose themselves despite there being doubts and insecurities. A projectleader (PL3) points out: ‘When they sense a secure environment, they can just try something. Perhaps it goes wrong, but it is fantastic if they succeed. When they feel unsafe they might not dare because it feels like the good deed will be punished.’
‘Fundamental values are respect and trust. If the management does not represent this than we do not get it back from organization members either. The management is responsible for a good atmosphere. It makes organization members more receptive.’ Another projectleader (PL3) points out: ‘You did your best coming up with an idea. It is taken up, but then a manager says: ‘What kind of shit is this?’ Then organization members retreat to the fortress of solitude. That will not get you very far.’’
Condition ‘Role model’
A manager acting as a role model emerged during the interviews as a new condition to enhance the emergence of proactive task fulfillment. A role model refers to the extent to which a manager serves as an example of someone who displays and/or champions proactive behavior.
A key result points out that acting as a role model can have an impact on the emergence of proactive task fulfillment. One important illustration emerged during the interview that is used to formulate this statement. A teamleader (TL1) shared an example: ’One time in a meeting the director said: ‘Everybody put your iPads away!’ This was the best thing that could happen in this session because he is the one that is always doing things on his phone. Only because he was the one that enounced the issue it had a great effect. Now we treat each other differently. It looks like a small thing, but it is actually bigger than you would think. It made a big impression.’’ This illustration gives the impression that when managers serve as a role model, organization members are inspired to act differently which might positively influence the enactment of proactive initiatives.
Besides the key result shown above, two additional results were found. The first additional result indicates that confronting each other is part of being a role model. Four respondents point out that managers should set the right example. A projectleader (PL4) shares the following example (PL4): ‘I can not confront my team with undesirable behavior when I slack off myself, like being too late. It starts with me. We need to set an example ourselves.’
The second additional result shows that two respondents indicate that being a role model is not that common for managers within the organization. An organization member (OM5) indicates: ‘We do not have a culture where we call each other to account when something goes wrong. People become careless. Our behavior and role in the organization is not questioned.’ A projectleader (PL4) states: ‘We have a culture in which we do not directly confront each other. Even though we have a hierarchical organization we are not used discussing it when someone does not carry out his duties.’
Condition ‘Belongingness’
the organization members experience they are accepted members of a group in order to see value in enacting on proactive initiatives.
A key result points out that stimulating belongingness can have an impact on the emergence of proactive task fulfillment. An important illustration, shared by a projectleader (PL2), appeared: ‘Without team spirit, nobody would consider asking him about his idea with the consequence that he does not share his ideas. Not because he does not want to, but because they do not ask.’ Belongingness seems an important driver for organization members to see value in proactively enacting on initiatives, which might positively influence the emergence of proactive task fulfillment.
From conducting the interview with the same projectleader (PL2) two additional results were found, subsequent to the key finding presented above. The first additional result indicates that belongingness is stimulated by making hidden ideas visible. It shows what everyone is doing in the group. The projectleader (PL2) points out: ’We try to make things visible by putting different parties at the table. That organization members see what people do and why it is important to know this from each other. This brings things to life in the projects.’
The second additional result points out that belongingness, ever since the structural change, has been compromised which may have influenced the emergence of proactive task fulfillment. The projectleader (PL2) states: ‘When organization members do not know where to find each other anymore, then it logically follows that they do not proactively contact each other.’ Besides, the organization used to have an excursion where organization members visited a different city every year. This excursion increased involvement and created a greater sense of belonging to a group.
To answer the main question and the sub-questions, a conclusion of the six conditions above will be presented in chapter 4, the discussion.
4 Discussion and conclusion
As was mentioned in chapter 1, the main question to be answered was: ‘What is the role of the manager in the emergence of manifestations of proactive task fulfillment?’ Six guiding conditions are found relevant to enable the emergence of proactive task fulfillment. The next paragraphs will discuss these conditions in more detail.
4.1 Role of the manager in the variation process: sub-question 1, 2 and 3
As mentioned in chapter 1, three sub-questions were formulated that referred to the role of the manager in variation:
- Sub-question 1: To what degree is promoting interactions conducive to the generation of ideas by organization members for manifestations of proactive task fulfillment?
- Sub-question 2: To what degree is displaying empowering leadership conducive to the
generation of ideas by organization members for manifestations of proactive task fulfillment? - Sub-question 3: To what degree are other conditions conducive for the generation of ideas by
organization members for manifestations of proactive task fulfillment?
Many interesting stories were found that indicated that the manager has played an important role in stimulating the generation of ideas for manifestations of proactive task fulfillment. The two predefined conditions, related to sub-question 1 and 2, are discussed first, namely interactions and empowering leadership. Followed by discussing one other condition that is found during the interviews, related to sub-question 3, namely organizational commitment. The conditions are presented in figure 1 and will be further explained in this section.
Figure 2. Role of the manager in the generation of ideas
To answer the first sub-question, results confirm what was already indicated by the literature study, namely that the manager could impact the emergence of proactive task fulfillment through promoting interactions. When managers promote interactions, new ideas emerged which stimulated organization
Deductive conditions: Interaction
Empowering leadership Generation of ideas by
organization members for manifestations of proactive
task fulfillment Inductive condition:
members to proactively take new initiatives. Additional results indicated that proactive initiatives did not solely arise from individual actions. It required the involvement of different organization members or even contributions of external stakeholders. However, it appeared that interactions have not been sufficiently organized by managers. Results show that managers expect organization members to organize interactions themselves.
To answer the second sub-question, results indicate that displaying empowering leadership did not always have the desired result on the emergence of proactive task fulfillment. Empowering leadership made organization members often careful and therefore did not always stimulate organization members to proactively take initiatives. Albeit additional results indicate that managers display empowering leadership accordingly, respondents indicate that for most organization members solely being empowered was not enough to live up to proactivity expectations. An interesting additional result demonstrated that when managers combined empowering leadership with a more facilitating style of leadership, ideas originated that positively influenced the emergence of proactive task fulfillment. As the comments illustrated, the role of the manager shifted towards the role of providing a sense of purpose, pointing into a direction, helping out when necessary and creating a safe environment where respect, listening to one another, and patience are core values.
To answer the final sub-question, the role of the manager to stimulate organizational commitment emerged during the interviews as a new condition to enhance the emergence of proactive task fulfillment. When organization members felt committed to the organization, they went beyond their designated role and developed ideas to proactively fulfill their task. Therefore, stimulating organizational commitment is, besides promoting interactions and displaying empowering leadership, an important finding and must be listed to the conditions presented in figure 1.
4.2 Role of the manager in the selection/retention process: sub-question 4 and 5
As mentioned in chapter 1, sub-question three and four were formulated as followed:
- Sub-question 4: To what degree is realizing management support conducive for the enactment of generated ideas of organization members for manifestations of proactive task fulfillment? - Sub-question 5: To what degree are other conditions conducive for the enactment of generated
ideas of organization members for manifestations of proactive task fulfillment?
during the interviews, namely role model and belongingness. The conditions are presented in figure 2 and will be further explained in the following paragraph.
Figure 3. Role of the manager in the enactment of ideas of organization members
To answer the first sub-question, the results confirm, what was already indicated by literature, that management support can impact the emergence of proactive task fulfillment. When management support was present, organization members felt like their ideas were welcomed and supported which consequently positively stimulated the enactment of proactive initiatives. Additional results indicate that the role of the manager entails realizing supportive actions and provide guidance to the organization members they are on the right track. Supportive actions like for example providing internal priority, ensure that there is a budget available and the giving of compliments to one another. The additional results discuss management support into more detail than chapter 1 did, mainly by adding that a secure environment is a necessary characteristic of management support. That is by facilitating organization members in such a way that they dare to leave their comfort zone to enact on proactive initiatives.
To answer the second sub-question, serving as a role model emerged during the interviews as an important other condition to enhance the emergence of proactive task fulfillment. When a manager serves as an example of someone who displays proactive behavior, organization members felt inspired to enact on their ideas and to act differently. Therefore, the role of the manager to serve as a role model is, besides management support, an important finding and must be listed to the conditions presented in figure 2. Additional results indicate that confronting each other is part of acting like a role model, but is not a common practice for managers within the organization. This results into the consequence that organization members become careless and are not questioned on proactive behavior and their role in the organization.
During the interviews, it appeared that the manager could influence the emergence of proactive task fulfillment through another condition as well, namely belongingness. The manager has an essential role in motivating organization members to do their utmost for the social group they belong to and identify
Deductive condition: Management support
Enactment of ideas by organization members for manifestations of proactive
task fulfillment Inductive conditions:
with. While feeling part of a group, organization members see the value of enacting on proactive initiatives. Therefore, belongingness, is besides management support and being a role model, an important finding and must be listed to the conditions presented in figure 2. Additional results indicate that belongingness, ever since the structural change, has been compromised. This may be the reason why organization members do not bother to proactively enact on ideas anymore.
4.3 Role of the manager in the emergence of proactive task fulfillment: main question
Variation
Selection/retention
Figure 3. Model role of the manager in enabling the emergence of proactive task fulfillment 4.4 Theoretical implications
This study made a key contribution to the theory about the role of the manager in enabling the emergence of proactive task fulfillment. Although chapter 1 argued for three conditions that might be important for the emergence of proactive task fulfillment, results in chapter 3 showed that three other conditions were also of considerable importance. By relating the emergence of proactive task fulfillment to the evolution theory, a model with six conditions could be developed, namely interaction, empowering leadership, organizational commitment, management support, role model and belongingness. An important additional result showed that a facilitating style of leadership emerged as an important aspect that should be used as an addition, or as a complement, to empowering leadership. By developing a new model for the emergence of proactive task fulfillment this research offered new ingredients for the emergent
change theory in general as well. It may even indicate that there are no universal rules with regard to the management of emergent change, but that the role of the manager in managing emergent change is more important than the literature indicates (Bamford & Forrester, 2003).
4.5 Practical implications
A key practical implication is that managers are expected to think differently about the management of proactive task fulfillment. Instead of planning and directing the way to go, the developing nature of proactive task fulfillment still unfolds, but is accomplished by achieving the conditions presented in figure 3. Balanced by the pressure to take over control, managers begin to act on the conditions, generate outcomes in some context and change follows over time. Despite managers being expected to empower organization members rather than being controllers, they also have the responsibility for developing a direction, a common purpose, follow the effects of that direction and coach organization members towards it. Whatever the management does, in what direction they push, organization members will follow, which dictates where the organization eventually goes (Wilms & Hardcastle, 1994). Thereby trying to adapt and to control, to a certain extent, the emergence of proactive task fulfillment. It would appear, therefore, in a way instigated, suggested, directed, implemented and followed by managers (Bamford & Forrester, 2003).
4.6 Limitations and future research
5 Bibliography
Aldrich, H. E. (1999). Organizations evolving. London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Amabile, T. M., Schatzel, E. A., Moneta, G. B., & Kramer, S. J. (2004). Leader behaviors and the work environment for creativity: Perceived leader support. The Leadership Quarterly, 15(1), 5–32.
Bamford, D. R., & Forrester, P. L. (2003). Managing planned and emergent change within an operations management environment. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 23(5), 546–564.
Björk, J., & Magnusson, M. (2009). Where Do Good Innovation Ideas Come From? Exploring the Influence of Network Connectivity on Innovation Idea Quality. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 26(6), 662–670.
Bushe, G. R., & Marshak, R. J. (2014). The Dialogic Mindset in Organization Development. In Shani, A.B., Noumair, D.A. (Eds.), Research in Organizational Change and Development, 55–97.
Crant, M. (2000). Proactive behavior in Organizations. Journal of Management, 26(3), 435-462.
Darwin, C. R. 1859. On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. London: John Murray.
Falconer, J. (2002). Emergence happens! Misguided paradigms regarding organizational change and the role of complexity and patterns in the change landscape. Emergence, 4(1/2), 117-130.
Fereday, J., & Muir-Cochrane, E. (2006). Demonstrating Rigor Using Thematic Analysis: A Hybrid Approach of Inductive and Deductive Coding and Theme Development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(1), 80–92.
Griffin, M. A., Parker, S. K., & Mason, C. M. (2010). Leader vision and the development of adaptive and proactive performance: A longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(1), 174–182.
Higgs, M., & Rowland, D. (2005). All changes great and small: Exploring approaches to change and its leadership. Journal of Change Management, 5(2), 121–151.
Lichtenstein, B. B., & Plowman, D. A. (2009). The leadership of emergence: A complex systems leadership theory of emergence at successive organizational levels. Leadership Quarterly, 20(4), 617– 630.
Morse, J. M., Barrett, M., Mayan, M., Olson, K., & Spiers, J. (2002). Verification Strategies for Establishing Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(2), 13-22.
Parjanen, S. (2012). Experiencing Creativity in the Organization: From Individual Creativity to Collective Creativity. Interdisciplinary Journal of Information, Knowledge & Management, 7, 109– 128.
Plowman, D. A., Solansky, S., Beck, T. E., Baker, L., Kulkarni, M., & Travis, D. V. (2007). The role of leadership in emergent, self-organization. Leadership Quarterly, 18(4), 341–356
Roehrig, M., Schwendenwein, J., & Bushe, G.R. (2015). Amplifying change: A three phase approach to model, nurture and embed ideas for change. In Bushe, G.R., & Marshak, R.J. (2015). Dialogic Organization Development: The Theory and Practice of Transformational Change. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Sammut-Bonnici, R. & Wensley, R. (2002). Darwinism, probability and complexity: market-based organisational transformation and change explained through the theories of evolution. International Journal of Management Reviews, 4(3), 291–315.
Thompson, M., & Eynikel, J. (2011). Leading with Wisdom. Antwerp: Garant Publishers.
Uhl-Bien, M., Marion, R., & McKelvey, B. (2007). Complexity Leadership Theory: Shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era. Leadership Quarterly, 18(4), 298–318.
Van de Watering, K. (2018). Concept Evaluatie reorganisatie Stadsontwikkeling. Gemeente Groningen.
Weick, K., & Quinn, R. E. (1999). ‘Organisational change & development’. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 361-386.
Zhang, X., & Zhou, J. (2014). Empowering leadership, uncertainty avoidance, trust, and employee creativity: Interaction effects and a mediating mechanism. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 124(2), 150–164.
Appendix 1 – Interview protocol organization members and managers
(Dutch only)
Interview protocol medewerkers Gemeente Groningen Inleiding
Allereerst bedankt dat u wilt deelnemen aan het onderzoek. Mijn naam is Teddy, 24 jaar oud en ik studeer een master aan de faculteit bedrijfskunde. Naast mijn master ben ik ook twee dagen per week werkzaam op het organisatieveranderingsproject van Stadsontwikkeling. Met het onderzoek dat ik ga uitvoeren hoop ik antwoorden te vinden op de volgende vragen:
• Wat zijn de veranderingen in het gedrag van medewerkers sinds de structuurverandering? • Wat heeft het management voor rol gespeeld in deze gedragsverandering?
Om dit zo goed mogelijk in kaart te brengen ben ik straks erg benieuwd naar uw ervaringen. Het gesprek duurt ongeveer een uur en zoals vanzelfsprekend wordt alle informatie vertrouwelijk behandeld. Als u het goed vindt zou ik graag ons gesprek opnemen, zodat ik en mijn scriptiebegeleider inzage hebben in het interview. Aan het einde van het onderzoek zal ik ook een terugkoppeling verschaffen van de resultaten. In welke vorm dat gaat plaatsvinden wordt nog bepaald in een later stadium. Dit wou ik u graag voorafgaand aan het gesprek vertellen. Heeft u voor nu eerst nog vragen of is er nog iets niet duidelijk? Dan lijkt het mij een goed idee om nu over te gaan tot de eerste vragen.
*Informatie voor de interviewer zelf: tijdens het gehele gesprek wordt er doorgevraagd op concreetheid, volledigheid en de onderzoeker gaat op zoek naar positieve en negatieve effecten om zo concreet mogelijk de gedragsverandering of het uitblijven van gedragsverandering in kaart te brengen.
Introductie vragen (5 minuten)
1. Kunt u iets vertellen over uw positie en taken binnen Stadsontwikkeling? Deel 1 (15 minuten)
De bedoeling van de structuurverandering was, zoals ik van Karin van de Watering heb begrepen, dat er een nieuwe manier van werken, nieuwe gedragswijzen ontstond.
2. Zijn er, sinds de structuurverandering, veranderingen ontstaan in hoe u dingen aanpakt? Optie geen verandering als gevolg van structuurwijziging:
• Hoe komt het dat er niks is veranderd?
• Waarom heeft de structuurverandering geen invloed gehad op het veranderen van gedrag? • Heeft de manager actie ondernomen om het gedrag te veranderen?
Deel 2 (40 minuten)
Er zijn allerlei ontwikkelingen in de maatschappij. Ik kan me voorstellen dat dit ook voor gemeentes ontwikkelingen met zich mee brengt. Denk aan bijvoorbeeld meer contact met burgers.
3. Heb jij ook bepaalde ontwikkelingen doorgemaakt de afgelopen jaren?
5. Heeft uw leidinggevende een rol gespeeld in de totstandkoming van ontwikkeling voorbeeld 1? 6. Hebben uw collega’s een rol gespeeld in de totstandkoming van de ontwikkeling voorbeeld 1? 7. Zijn er nog andere omstandigheden die van invloed geweest zijn op de totstandkoming van de
ontwikkeling voorbeeld 1?
8. Wat motiveerde u om de ontwikkeling voorbeeld 1 vast te houden binnen de organisatie? 9. Heeft uw leidinggevende een rol gespeeld in het vasthouden van ontwikkeling voorbeeld 1? 10. Hebben uw collega’s een rol gespeeld in het vasthouden van ontwikkeling voorbeeld 1?
11. Zijn er nog andere factoren die van invloed geweest om de ontwikkeling voorbeeld 1 uit te voeren? Aan het begin van het gesprek heeft u twee voorbeelden van ontwikkelingen genoemd waarvan we er nu één hebben besproken. Graag zou ik nu uw ervaringen omtrent het andere voorbeeld bespreken.
*Herhaling vragen Conclusie
12. Heeft u nog belangrijke laatste toevoegingen die ik zeker mee moet nemen in het onderzoek? Heel erg bedankt voor uw tijd en zoals beloofd kom ik nog bij u terug voor de terugkoppeling van de resultaten in een later stadium.
Interview protocol leidinggevende Gemeente Groningen Inleiding
Allereerst bedankt dat u wilt deelnemen aan het onderzoek. Mijn naam is Teddy, 24 jaar oud en ik studeer een master aan de faculteit bedrijfskunde. Naast mijn master ben ik ook twee dagen per week werkzaam op het organisatieveranderingsproject van Stadsontwikkeling. Met het onderzoek dat ik ga uitvoeren hoop ik antwoorden te vinden op de volgende vragen:
• Wat zijn de veranderingen in het gedrag van medewerkers sinds de structuurverandering? • Wat heeft het management voor rol gespeeld in deze gedragsverandering?
Om dit zo goed mogelijk in kaart te brengen ben ik straks erg benieuwd naar uw ervaringen. Het gesprek duurt ongeveer een uur en zoals vanzelfsprekend wordt alle informatie vertrouwelijk behandeld. Als u het goed vindt zou ik graag ons gesprek opnemen, zodat ik en mijn scriptiebegeleider inzage hebben in het interview. Aan het einde van het onderzoek zal ik ook een terugkoppeling verschaffen van de resultaten. In welke vorm dat gaat plaatsvinden wordt nog bepaald in een later stadium. Dit wou ik u graag voorafgaand aan het gesprek vertellen. Heeft u voor nu eerst nog vragen of is er nog iets niet duidelijk? Dan lijkt het mij een goed idee om nu over te gaan tot de eerste vragen.
*Informatie voor de interviewer zelf: tijdens het gehele gesprek wordt er doorgevraagd op concreetheid, volledigheid en de onderzoeker gaat op zoek naar positieve en negatieve effecten om zo concreet mogelijk de gedragsverandering of het uitblijven van gedragsverandering in kaart te brengen.
Introductie vragen (5 minuten)
1. Kunt u iets vertellen over uw positie en taken binnen Stadsontwikkeling? Deel 1
2. Zijn er, sinds de structuurverandering, veranderingen ontstaan in hoe uw medewerkers dingen aanpakken?
Geen verandering als gevolg van structuurwijziging: • Hoe komt het dat er niks is veranderd?
• Waarom heeft de structuurverandering geen invloed gehad op het veranderen van gedrag van uw medewerkers?
• Heeft u als manager actie ondernomen om het gedrag te veranderen? Deel 2 (40 minuten)
Er zijn allerlei ontwikkelingen in de maatschappij. Ik kan me voorstellen dat dit ook voor gemeentes ontwikkelingen met zich mee brengt. Denk aan bijvoorbeeld meer contact met burgers.
3. Hebben uw medewerkers ook bepaalde ontwikkelingen doorgemaakt de afgelopen jaren?
Zojuist hebt u verschillende voorbeelden gegeven van ontwikkelingen die uw medewerkers hebben doorgemaakt. Zo noemde u voorbeeld 1 en voorbeeld 2. Elk gegeven voorbeeld zou ik graag verder met u verkennen.
4. Hoe is het zover gekomen dat de ontwikkeling voorbeeld 1 tot stand kwam?
5. Hebt u als leidinggevende een rol gespeeld in de totstandkoming van ontwikkeling voorbeeld 1? 6. Hebben collega’s onderling een rol gespeeld in de totstandkoming van ontwikkeling voorbeeld 1? 7. Zijn er nog andere omstandigheden die van invloed geweest zijn op de totstandkoming van
voorbeeld 1?
8. Wat motiveerde de medewerkers om voorbeeld 1 vast te houden binnen de organisatie? 13. Heeft u als leidinggevende een rol gespeeld in het vasthouden van ontwikkeling voorbeeld 1? 14. Hebben collega’s onderling een rol gespeeld in het vasthouden van ontwikkeling voorbeeld 1? 9. Zijn er nog andere factoren die van invloed geweest om ontwikkeling voorbeeld 1 uit te voeren? Aan het begin van het gesprek heeft u twee voorbeelden van gedragsveranderingen genoemd waarvan we er nu één hebben besproken. Graag zou ik nu uw ervaringen omtrent het andere voorbeeld bespreken. *Herhaling vragen
Conclusie
