Success of the redesigning project
A study at Fresh Supermarket about influence of resistance and participation to
success of change
By Suzanne Luttmer
University of Groningen
Faculty of Economics and Business
Pre-MSC Change Management
June 2012
Eendrachtskade zuidzijde 10 E10 9726 CW Groningen
(06) 29319441
Success of the redesigning project
A study at Fresh Supermarket
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION ... 4
1.1 Initial motive ... 4
1.2 Organization ... 4
1.3 The current situation ... 5
1.4 The desired situation ... 5
1.5 Research question ... 6
2. THEORY ... 7
2.1 Conceptual model ... 8
2.2 Organizational change ... 8
2.3 Success of an organizational change ... 8
2.4 Resistance to change ... 9 2.5 Participation... 10 3. RESEARCH DESIGN ... 12 3.1 Research Method ... 12 3.2 Data Collection ... 12 3.3 Analysis ... 14 4. RESULTS ... 15
4.1 Success of the redesigning project ... 15
4.2 Resistance to the redesigning project ... 18
4.3 Participation to the redesigning project ... 18
5. DISCUSSION ... 20
5.1 Conclusion ... 20
5.2 Recommendations ... 21
5.3 Limitations and further research ... 22
ABSTRACT
This research has been conducted to investigate the influence employees have to the success of an organizational change. Fresh Supermarket in Groningen was recently going through a redesigning project which made changes throughout the whole organization. The subject of this research is how characteristics influence the success of a change. The main characteristics, which have part in this research are, resistance to change and participation during a change process. This research clarifies that resistance to change and participation definitely influenced the organizational change. This influence affected the redesigning project at Fresh Supermarket in both positive and negative ways. Data was gathered via literature study and semi-structured interviews with the manager and the employees of the bakery department. The gained information from the participants is structured and analysed in order to answer the research question and to give recommendations.
Key words: Resistance to change, participation to change, organizational change, success of
an organizational change
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Initial motive
Nowadays it is necessary for organizations to response and react to the environment and anticipate and adapt on new trends and changes. To respond to these changes companies must be fast and have innovative initiatives to stay ahead of competition (Lu & Ramamurthy, 2011).To realize this it is important to contribute to organizational change. The realization of a change can only be accomplished with the cooperation of the employees. Resistance to change can severely obstruct the change process (Dam, Oreg, & Schyns, 2008) So an interesting question is in which way does resistance to change influence an organizational change? Or in which way does participation influence an organizational change. This research will investigate if these different characteristics had an in influence on the redesigning project of Fresh Supermarket Groningen.
The redesigning project is part of a national change program which changes every Fresh supermarket and is decided by top management team. The reason for the redesigning project is because of recent acquisitions with other supermarkets , Fresh wants to have the same appearance, uniformity and way of working in every supermarket. This will contribute to more efficient en successful way of working. The redesigning project gave the store itself a make-over but also the individual departments have changed. After the change employees worked in a new way, their department was redesigned and upgraded, tasks were expanded and more responsibilities added.
1.2 Organization
1.3 The current situation
To reach company goals such as; uniformity, efficiency and costumer focused working, Fresh Supermarket Groningen needed to implement the redesigning program. As mentioned before this research will focus on the bakery department, because this department will change the most. The situation before the organizational change was that employees had their own tasks and responsibilities. The distribution of tasks is clear and new employees are trained to work the same way. Employees help customers, check the inventory of stocks, bake bread, produce bread, make orders and keep the department neatly and clean. There is one manager who steers the team and provides feedback to the employees. Every month there is a team meeting were the manager talks about team developments, team performances, department targets, department results, problems if there are so. Each employee has an individual job evaluation with the manager twice a year. The bakery department consists of one manager and twenty employees. These employees can be divided in categories of gender, age, types of contracts and fulltime and part-time.
1.4 The desired situation
To achieve this management has set up following goals:
All Fresh supermarkets have uniformity in the same way of working and appearance.
Make sure employees understand the necessity of the change and make them part of the process, so together with the management organizational goals are achieved.
Managers must lead the employees into the right direction and guide and support them during the change process
New job profiles for the employees with a clear description of their and responsibilities
Give employees the opportunity to develop themselves within all the departments.
The bakery department will expand the range and make more sales
The bakery department will have a more effective and efficient way of working.
1.5 Research question
This research will identify how resistance to change and participation can influence the success of an organizational change. Furthermore, possible obstacles of the change process will be identified. The aim of this research is to get insight how the characteristics resistance and participation had an influence of the success of the redesigning project of Fresh Supermarket Groningen. In what way did these characteristics influenced the organizational change? To achieve this objective a research question is stated and needs to be answered. ‘How did resistance to change and the participation influenced the success of the redesigning project of Fresh Supermarket Groningen.’
2. THEORY
This chapter represents the conceptual model for this research. This conceptual model is the central concept for this research and is based on the research question and sub-questions. This conceptual model displays the central concept of this research which is: success of the redesigning project and the independent variables resistance to change and participation. First the dependent variable will be described and the independent variables will be defined. Furthermore the relationship between the variables will be analysed. During literature search it became clear that these variables connect best in this research. According to Van Dijk & Van Dijk (2009) resistance to change and the success of a change project have a causal relationship. Several studies have indicated that employee participation is central to increasing employees’ acceptance to change and this contribute to the success of a change. (Kotter & Schlesinger, 1979; Wanberg & Banas, 2000; Msweli-Mbanga & Potwana, 2006). Together these variables have meaning on the success of a change and both contribute to it. After deliberation with the manager of the bakery department and based on literature study the variables were chosen. Resistance to change is very applicable, there were a lot of rumours and objections from the employees towards the change. Management noticed that employees had negative feelings towards the redesigning project. They indicated that they were interested in participation during the change process as well. Especially for future organizational changes the management want to have a clear view of the influence of resistance and participation towards the change.
In order to answer the research question, the following sub questions are formulated.
1. How does resistance to change has an influence on success of the organizational change?
2.1 Conceptual model
The conceptual model is displayed in figure 1. Several organizational characteristics can have an influence on a change success in a positive or negative way. This research will focus on resistance to change and the amount of participation during a change. In the following sections will be described they influence the success of the change.
2.2 Organizational change
Metselaar (1997) defines organizational change as “the planned modification of an organization’s structure or work and administrative processes, initiated by the organization’s top management, and which is aimed at improving the organization’s functioning”. One of the earliest change models was developed by Lewin (1947). This model describes change as a three stage process. The first stage, called "unfreezing," involves setting aside the existing mindset and preparing to change. During the second stage, change occurs, creating a period of transition and confusion as adaptation occurs. The third and final stage, called "freezing" or sometimes "refreezing," involves solidification of the new mind-set and a return to pre-change comfort levels
2.3 Success of an organizational change
Unfortunately, effective organizational changes are rare (Gilmore et al., 1997; Meaney and Pung,2008). Recent statistics reveal that only one- third of organizational change efforts were considered successful by their leaders (Meaney and Pung, 2008). Most change projects take longer than expected, the costs are higher than predicted and they are emotionally loaded for both management and employees (Kotter & Schlesinger, 1979).
An organizational change can be seen as successful when the goals which are determined upfront are reached. Thus, when the performance of the people involved matches with the goals that are set. Change is also a success when it is socially constructed as a success. According to Burns (2009) when a manager lays focus on the success of the change the employees will believe it.
This research will determine the organizational change as a success, when it is clear what the necessity of the change is, there is understanding from employees and clear goals are stated. Also the manager will be taken into account, is he convincing the employees that the change is a success? If a change actually is a success could be controlled by checking if the upfront stated goals of the organizational change are achieved. Also the behaviour of the manager can be controlled, is he convincing employees the change is a success?
2.4 Resistance to change
The implementation of a change project comes with a lot of challenges. One major problem which managers are confronted with is to deal and manage resistance to change (Atkinson, 2005). According to Van Dijk & Van Dijk (2009) resistance to change and the success of a change project have a causal relationship.
Resistance is a common research topic in today’s academic literature and there are numerous definitions. Schaefer (1998) states, that many organizations avoid change that would improve performance, because the management is afraid of the negative consequences of change. One of these negative consequences is resistance to change. As a result it is important for managers to be aware of the possibility that change can cause resistance and to be informed about the variety of resistance to change. Resistance is seen to be a factor in organizational change that affects a change process, delaying or slowing down its beginning, obstructing or hindering its implementation and increasing its costs (Ansoff, 1990). Resistance to change can severely obstruct the change process (Dam, Oreg, & Schyns, 2008) and is an inevitable response to a change process (Maurer, 1996).
People have a natural tendency drift toward negativity when a change is upcoming. It is important to understand why they are having difficulties accepting the change. They may feel they lack skills for dealing with the change, or they may be coping with stresses in other parts of their lives. Reassurance that they will still have their jobs or take away uncertainty can help them overcome resistance (Woodward, 2007).
change process and ask questions. When resistance is properly understood as feedback, it can be an important resource in improving the quality and clarity of the objectives and strategies at the heart of a change process. And, properly used, it can enhance the prospects for successful implementation. According to Maurer (1996) showing respect towards resistors builds a strong relationship and thereby improves the prospects of success of the organizational change. Managers become competitive and defensive, when they perceive resistance as a threat and must embrace resistance (Ford & Ford, 2009). Waddel & Sohal (1998) state that resistance can also be seen as a way to show aspects of the change that have not been properly considered.
Managers must join with the resistance, build support for change blending own intensions with those of others. This allows a manager to search for a common vision to overcome the resistance and develop and execute the change together with the employees. By overcoming the resistance there is nothing to hold-up the change, this will increase the success (Maurer 1996).
2.5 Participation
Another aspect that may influence the success of a change is participation. Several studies have indicated that employee participation is central to increasing employees’ acceptance to change and this contribute to the success of a change. (Kotter & Schlesinger, 1979; Wanberg & Banas, 2000; Msweli-Mbanga & Potwana, 2006). According to Locke and Schweiger (1979) participation means that there is some degree of sharing information and decision-making in relation to the change process.
One of the earlier works that links participation to change is that of Lewin (1948), who put forward a contention that participation is useful in changing conduct during a process of change in organizations. Lewin (1948) argued that a person’s conduct, perception and sentiment can change to the degree to which the individual becomes actively involved in the problem. Lewin’s theory essentially emphasizes that it is through participation under suitable conditions, that an individual can willingly change his conduct.
• No information is given to employees about a decision • Employees are informed in advance
• Employees can give their opinion about the decision to be made • Employees opinions are taken into account
• Employees can negatively or positively influence veto a decision • The decision is completely in the hands of employees
Reviews of the participation literature have indicated that the effect of participation in decision making on work attitudes is generally positive (Locke and Schweiger, 1979). With respect to organizational change, Sagie and Koslowski (1996) observed positive effects of participation in decisions concerning the implementation of change. Participation during change processes has been presumed to positively influence the successful implementation of change initiatives (Lines, 2004). With respect to change management it is important that employees should have the opportunity to express their concerns and ask questions, this will ensure participation. Employees will feel part of the organization and part of the organizational change. This increases participation and decreases resistance. Because of this their contribution to change will be high and employees will not obstruct the change process. This all can contribute to the success of organizational change. (Woodward, 2007)
3. RESEARCH DESIGN
This chapter describes how the research was performed and which data was needed in order to answer the research question and sub questions of this research. First described will be the research method, than the collected data, the procedure, participants and the way the data was processed.
3.1 Research Method
In order to investigate what influence resistance to change and participation had on the redesigning project, a proper research design had to be constructed. As mentioned before, the aim of this research is to investigate how these characteristics influenced the success of the redesigning project within Fresh supermarket Groningen. Because of the how question this research will be qualitative, therefore the research can be best qualified as a semi structured research, which is exploratory and explanatory (Blumberg., Cooper., & Schindler 2008). When researchers want to find out about the how and why of a problem statement the most preferred strategy is to use case studies (Yin, 1994).
3.2 Data Collection
The main question of this research was: ‘How did resistance to change and participation influenced the success of the redesigning project of Fresh supermarket Groningen.’ In order to answer this question theoretical data and data from the organization were needed. The data from the organization was divided into the dependent variables resistance to change, participation and the dependent variable the success of the redesigning project. This case study used one method to collect this data, interviews. As a method to collect data interviews are chosen. Interviews fits this research best because insight into the underlying motivations and thoughts of the participants are needed. According to King (2008) interviews are an appropriate method to gather more personal data of participants, like attitudes, values and motives (King, 2004). Miles and Huberman (1984:15) show that qualitative data ‘are a source of well-grounded, rich descriptions and explanations of processes occurring in local contexts’. It is possible to get more insights into the thought of the participants and the reasons for certain behaviour using interviews.
part-time employees. The age level is between eighteen and thirty, with the exception of the manager who is forty. To get information from different perspectives, two groups of participants were selected. One group are the employees of the department and the other group is the manager of the department. Because the change effects all the employees of the department, including the manager, both parties are included in the group of participants. To get a good overview of the participants a table has been made.
Funtion Gender Age Employment
Manager Male 40 Fulltime
Employee Bakery Male 20 Part-time
Employee Bakery Male 25 Fulltime
Employee Bakery Female 18 Part-time
Employee Bakery Female 30 Fulltime
Figure 2: Participants overview
To maintain a higher level of objectivity the researcher choose employees of every represented gender, age and employment. This results in an objective investigation with a mixed group of participants.
There has been chosen for a semi-structured interview structure (Blumberg., et al 2008). The main topic was the success of the change and how this was influenced by resistance or participation. Because of the semi-structured character of the interviews, the interviewer formulated per topic questions. The interviews were conducted in Dutch and together with supervisor this was translated into English.
3.3 Analysis
After finishing the data collection the data had to be categorized. A table was made with in the left row the variables organizational change, participation, resistance and success of the redesigning project. With every variable the corresponding interview questions were given. The rows next to these contain the summarized answers from the participants. This gave a clear overview of the outcomes from all the participants and can be easily compared. From the table the results were written. In order to maintain anonymity for the respondents this table is not included in this paper. To make a link between the different variables the subjectivity of the researcher has been used. In some cases participants gave different inputs on one single issue. To resolve this problem the overall impression of an interview has been used. This overall impression has been measured by looking at the intensity in which a respondent stated a certain answer. In order to answer the research- and sub questions the theoretical data and organizational data were compared and analyzed.
4. RESULTS
In the previous chapter the research design has been described. The following chapter will describe the results of the conducted research at Fresh supermarket. The results will be given in order of the sub questions earlier stated.
4.1 Success of the redesigning project
The topic of this research is the success of the redesigning project of Fresh supermarket and what influence the variables resistance and participation have on the success. Before giving insight into the influence of these variables it needs to be clear if the change was a success or not. To measure the success goals were stated, per goal will be discussed whether this is achieved, partially achieved or not achieved.
1. All Fresh supermarkets have uniformity in the same way of working and appearance. This goal is partially achieved, the appearance has changed because of the renovation of the store. The same way of working is not achieved. The tasks have been expanded and not every employee is trained for all these expansions. The headquarters had set up guidelines for the same way of working, but at the bakery department these guidelines are not fully implemented yet.
participation during the change. They were able to ask questions and were provided information but that was not enough for the employees. They would like to be informed earlier and not hear parts of the change in gossip. Because it came out of the blue for the employees they were not able to see the necessity of the change immediately. The manager did try to let the employees participate but said he was just following orders form the headquarters. Hearing this employees were not encouraged to see the necessity of the change, they felt the manager also wasn’t seeing this. Employees complained a lot about lack of participation. As respond to this management came up with a plan for a future change. The manager also complained about how to deal with the situation, as respond to this the manager followed a training. During this training the manager learned more about how to deal with the problems of the change. He was able to make the employees feel the necessity of the change more.
3. Manager must lead the employees into the right direction and guide and support them during the change process.
This goal is achieved but it took some time to accomplish this. In the beginning of the change process the manager felt guilty towards the employees about the change. The manager said that he was afraid for the reactions, and he didn’t want to ruin the pleasant atmosphere at the bakery. The employees felt like they were not heard and resisted the change. The manager declared to the management that he had difficulties supporting the employees. As respond to this the manager received training. This had a positive effect on all parties involved. The manager organized a team meeting every week and talked to every employee individual about the change. This really helped the employees, they felt more involve, heard, guided and supported during the change process.
4. New job profiles for the employees with a clear description of tasks and responsibilities.
5. Give employees the opportunity to develop themselves within all the departments. This goal is achieved, employees are given the opportunity to develop themselves. Training programmes are set up and there are possibilities to be exchanged to other establishments. Employees have more responsibilities, opportunities and stimulations in their jobs. The interviewees stated that they are satisfied with this development and that they feel more secure. One employees said: “I am very happy with the new possibilities, I feel more secure about my position because I can be placed at different departments and even in a different establishment”.
6. The bakery department will expand the range and make more sales
This goal is achieved. Because of the expansion of the bakery department the range expanded and they make more sales. Despite of the expand of the range and sales the department is still missing out on more sales. This is due to the lack of education about the new tasks and equipment at the department.
7. The bakery department will have a more effective and efficient way of working.
This goal is not achieved. There are clear job profiles but in practice these are not implemented. The bakery department expanded almost twice, there is new equipment available and there is a lot more work pressure. The new equipment does not promote the effectiveness. Not even half of the employees is trained to work with this equipment, this causes a lot of frustration and missing out on sales. The manager has declared this to the management and together with the employees a new goal is stated. Within two months all employees are trained with regard to the new tasks and equipment. The management admits that this goal is not yet achieved but is determined to accomplish this within two months.
a supporting manager. Looking at the goals he noticed that they are making more profit, expanded the range and give employees self-development opportunities. The manager stated: “I know we are not there yet but we are still working on the goals and I am convinced that we will reach all of them. The employees are committed and I feel confident as a manager, together we will bring this to a success”.
4.2 Resistance to the redesigning project
The employees felt resistance towards to redesigning project, among the participants this were two full-time employees and one part-time employee. They worked longest at Fresh supermarket and felt left alone by this decision. The change came out of the blue and they did not understood why it was necessary. Two employees were very negative and thought they would lose their jobs. There was a lot of gossiping what caused insecurity and had an effect on the pleasant atmosphere. As respond to the resistance the management tried to reduce this by giving the employees a lot of information and kept them updated with the progress that was made. Also the manger talked to each employee individual to take resistance away. After a while they saw the necessity of the change more, the resistance reduced and the employees settled down. The resistance slowed the change process down in the beginning. The management did not expected to receive this much resistance and had to adapt to the situation. After informing the employees repeatedly about the change, training the manager how to deal with this, the change process went on. The manager understood were the resistance was coming from and in the beginning he felt guilty that he had to proceed the change. He had difficulties with supporting the employees and guiding them into the right direction. But he did tried his best and after he followed a training he succeeded on this. So answering the sub question: How does resistance to change has an influence on success of the organizational change? The resistance did slow the change process down and caused insecurity among the employees. Looking at the stated success goals, resistance influenced goals two and three the most. Employees did not see the necessity of the change and the bakery department was not working together as a team to achieve the organizational goals. But the resistance was handled the right way and had a little but negative influence on the change.
4.3 Participation to the redesigning project
5. DISCUSSION
The next chapter discusses the results and consequences for the theory and the organization. The research question of this study will be answered, recommendations and potential criticism on the research will be given.
5.1 Conclusion
After introducing the redesigning project to employees they were surprised and shocked, the change came out of the blue and this caused resistance towards the change. According to Woodward (2007) lack of knowledge about the change can cause resistance and insecurity. During the interviews came forward that employees felt left alone an didn’t understand were the change was coming from. They felt insecure about their position wanted more explanation and were unwilling to change. Fresh Supermarket should have taken more care about this. Lewin (1947) describes change as a three stage process. In the unfreezing stage the organization is prepared to the change and must leave the old mindset behind. At Fresh Supermarket the change was already decided the headquarters, the unfreezing stage is not completed by the employees themselves. In this stage it is important to create necessity for the change and prepare employees for the upcoming changes that will be made. Fresh Supermarket had to prepare the employees better and make this a priority.
According to Maurer (1996) managers must join resistance, build support, create a common vision to overcome resistance together with the employees. The manager said in the interview that he first had difficulties with this, after a training he was able to support the employees. Because of this employees felt comfortable to talk about the change, there was an open communication and all this together slowly took the resistance away.
degree of decision-making present. For a future change, management must take employees’ opinions into account and involve them.
In this study an organizational change can be seen as successful when goals which are determined upfront are reached and according to Burns (2009) when a manager lays focus on the success of the change employees will believe this At this point management, manager and employees stated that the change is not yet a success. So, answering the research question, ‘How did resistance to change and the participation influenced the success of the redesigning project of Fresh supermarket Groningen?’ The results show that resistance and participation did had an influence on the success of the change. Resistance had a negative influence and it did slow the process down. In this research it a negative and positive influence on the success. In the beginning there was not participations at all, employees were unwilling to change and slowed the process down. After training of the manager they became more participated and willing to change.
5.2 Recommendations
An important finding is that the change process is slowed down. The management could have prevent this by foresee the amount of resistance, and giving employees possibility to
participate. The manager stated that they expected resistance but not this amount. To lead a change into a success management can use Kotter’s Eight-Step Change Management Model. According to Kotter (1995, 1996) this model is important for achieving successful change and its motivating for people to engage in change. It enclosures the whole change process and its actions that need to be taken.
Step Action
1. Establish the need for urgency Perform market analyses
Determine problems and opportunities
Use techniques to focus people’s attention on the importance of change to meet these challenges
2. Ensure there is a powerful change group to guide the change
Create team structures to help drive the change
Ensure teams have sufficient power to achieve the desired change 3. Develop a vision Develop a vision that provides a
focus for the change
4. Communicate the vision Role model the behavior implied by the vision
5. Empower staff Remove organizational policies and structures that inhibit achievement of the vision
Encourage risk taking
6. Ensure there are short-term wins Wins help support need for change
Rewarding wins helps to provide motivation
7. Consolidate gains Continue to remove organizational policies and processes that inhibit change
Reward those who engage positively with the change
Establish new, related change projects
8. Embed the change in the culture Link change to organizational performance and leadership Figure 3: Kotter's Eight-Step Model
5.3 Limitations and further research
As in every study, there were some limitations during the research. This study is conducted within one establishment and might not be applicable to other establishments. Within the organization only the bakery department took place in this study, and because of that it might not be relevant to the whole organization. However this limitation, a department that has endured most changes is chosen, the bakery. A wide range of participants is composed with different age, gender, contract, duration of employment, to get a clear overview of the organization.
The research could have been more reliable by conducting more interviews, a wider variety of participants, including more departments or including more organizational characteristics in this research. By using semi-structured interviews, there has been tried to guarantee validity. Because of the qualitative nature of the interviews it is hard to guarantee complete measurement of the variables. Despite this the research gives clear insight between the variables, resistance to change and participation, and the success of the redesigning project.
This research can be combined with other organizational characteristics like leadership, culture or communication. These characteristics often occur in literature and it is assumed they play an important role in an organizational change and the related success of the change.
Organizations planning organizational change should take this study into account. The characteristics resistance to change and participation are extensively discussed. People have a natural tendency drift toward negativity when change is upcoming. It is important to understand why they are having difficulties towards the change (Woodward, 2007). Organizations should take the employees into consideration during a change process and create a common vision to make the change, together, a success!
REFERENCES
Ansoff I.H., (1990), Implanting Strategic Management, Prentice Hall International Ltd, London
Atkinson, P. 2005. Managing resistance to change. Management Services, 49, 14-19
Blumberg, B., Cooper, D. R., & Schindler, P. S. (2008). Business research methods. 2nd
European edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Dachler, H.P. & Wilpert, B. 1978. Conceptual dimensions and boundaries in participation in organizations: a critical evaluation, Administrative science quarterly, 23: 1-34
Dam,van K., Oreg, S., Schyns, B., (2008) Daily Work Contexts and Resistance to Organisational Change: The Role of Leader–Member Exchange, Development Climate, and Change Process Characteristics
Dijk, van R. & Dijk, van D. 2009. Navigating organizational change: Change Leaders, employee resistance and work-based identities. Journal of Change Management, 9, 143-163
Ford, J.D., Ford, L.W. 2009, “Decoding resistance to change”, Harvard Business Review, 87:99-103
Gilmore, T.N., Shea, G.P. and Unseem, M. 1997, “Side effects of corporate cultural transformations”, Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 33: 174-89.
Lewin, K. 1948. Resolving social conflicts selected papers on group dynamics. New York: Harper & Brothers.
Lu, Y., & Ramamurthy, K. 2011. Understanding the link between information technology capability and organizational agility: an empirical examination. MIS Quarterly, 35(4): 931-954.
King, N.2004. ‘Using interviews in qualitative research’. Cassel, C & Symon, G. (Eds.)
Essential guide to qualitative methods in organizational research: 11-22. London: Sage
publications, Inc.
Kotter, J.P. & Schlesinger, L. 1979. Choosing strategies for change, Harvard Business
Review, 57 (2): 106-114
Kotter, J.P.1995. Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Review, 73 (2): 59-67
Kotter, J.P. 1996. Leading change. Boston, M.A: Harvard Business School Press.
Maurer R., (1996), Using Resistance to build support for Change, Journal of Quality and
Participation, Vol. 19, No. 3, p56-66.
Meaney, M. and Pung, C. 2008 McKinsey global results: Creating organizational transformations, The McKinsey
Quarterly: 1–7.
Metselaar, E.E. (1997). Assessing the willingness to change: Construction and validation of the DINAMO. Doctoral dissertation. Amsterdam: VU-huisdrukkerij. 0-184
Miles, M.B & Huberman, A.M. 1984. Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new
methods. Beverly Hills, Ca: sage Publications, Inc.
Msweli-Mbanga, P., & Potwana, N. 2006. Modelling participation, resistance to change, and organisational citizenship behavior: A South African case. South African Journal of
Schaefer, S. 1998. Influence costs, structural inertia, and organizational change. Journal
of Economics & Management Strategy, 7, 237-263
Sagie, A & Koslowsky, M. 1996. Decision type, organizational control, and acceptance of change: An integrative approach to participative decision making. Applied Psychology: An
international Review, 45 (1), 85-92
Wanberg, C.R., & Banas, J.T. 2000. Predictors and outcomes of openness to changes in a reorganizing workplace. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85 (1): 132-142.
Woodward, N.H. To make changes, manage them. HR Magazine, 52(52):62-67
