ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE
A Case Study Research at [XYZ], a Care Institution in Groningen
Master Thesis, MscBA, specialization Change Management
University of Groningen, Faculty of Economics and Business
September 6th, 2010
ANNETTE TJEERDSMA
Student number: 1467050 Tweede Willemstraat 32A
9725 JK Groningen phone: +31 (0)630 035 247 e-mail: atjeerdsma@gmail.com Supervisor / University Dr. K.S. Prins (Co-)Assessor: Dr. B.J.M. Emans
Supervisor / Field of study
Mr. Y
Care Institution [XYZ]
CHANGE DIAGNOSIS TO CHANGE AN ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE
A Case Study Research at [XYZ], a Care Institution in Groningen
Because things are the way they are, things will not stay the way they are ~ Bertold Brecht
He that never changes his opinions, never corrects his mistakes, and will never be wiser on the morrow than he is today ~ Tryon Edwards
ABSTRACT
The management question that was on the basis of this research was how to get the employees ready to change the social culture at [XYZ] into a more professional culture in order to become more effective and efficient in delivering a certain basic level of quality in their services. The central research question that results from this question and objective is: ‘To what extent do the organizational characteristics influence the readiness to change of the employees towards the desired culture at [XYZ]?’. Within the term ‘organizational characteristics’, the current 1) way of communication, 2) leadership style, 3) level of participation, 4) level of sense of urgency and 5) use of rewards were included.
In the preliminary research first the current and desired culture of [XYZ] were typified. This resulted in a current culture at [XYZ] that can be typified as ‘Clan’. A shift towards a more ‘Adhocracy’ culture type was the desired change.
A literature study and interviews were performed in order to investigate the influence of five selected factors on the readiness to change towards this desired culture at [XYZ]. The level of influence of the current use of rewards was ‘neutral’ to ‘very little’. The other four factors were said to be ‘influential’. When looking at the way of influence, the only factor that was labeled as having a positive influence was the current leadership style. The current use of rewards has a neutral way of influence, and the other three factors are perceived as having a negative influence.
Keywords: Organizational Culture, Organizational Change, Communication, Leadership Style, Participation, Sense of Urgency, Rewards
Research Theme: Change in Organizational Culture
Supervisor [XYZ]: Mr. Y
Supervisor University: Dr. K.S. (Karin) Prins
CONTENT
ABSTRACT ... 3
CONTENT ... 5
INTRODUCTION... 7
MANAGEMENT QUESTION AND OBJECTIVE ... 7
FOUNDATION FOR CARE IN THE CITY OF GRONINGEN ... 7
ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE ... 7
CURRENT AND DESIRED CULTURE AT [XYZ] ... 10
SHIFT FROM CURRENT TO DESIRED CULTURE AT [XYZ] ... 11
ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE AND CHANGE ... 13
RESEARCH QUESTION ... 14
THEORY ... 15
CONCEPTUAL MODEL ... 15
JUSTIFICATION OF THE VARIABLES ... 16
RESEARCH METHODS ... 21
DATA COLLECTION ... 21
DATA ANALYSIS ... 25
RESULTS ... 27
INFLUENCE OF ORGANIZATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS ON THE READINESS TO CHANGE ... 27
READINESS TO CHANGE TOWARDS THE DESIRED CULTURE AT [XYZ] ... 35
CONCLUSION & DISCUSSION ... 36
CONCLUSIONS ... 38
RECOMMENDATIONS ... 41
REFLECTION ON THE RESULTS OF THE PRELIMINARY RESEARCH ... 45
LIMITATIONS AND FURTHER RESEARCH ... 46
APPENDICES ... 54
APPENDIX A:JUSTIFICATION PRELIMINARY RESEARCH ... 54
APPENDIX B:OCAIQUESTIONNAIRE ... 58
APPENDIX C:RESULTS OF THE EMPLOYEE’S OCAI;CURRENT AND DESIRED CULTURE ... 63
APPENDIX D:RESULTS OF THE MANAGEMENT’S OCAI;CURRENT AND DESIRED CULTURE 66 APPENDIX E:RESULTS OCAI–CURRENT AND DESIRED CULTURE ... 69
APPENDIX F:INTERVIEWS EMPLOYEES [IN DUTCH] ... 76
INTRODUCTION
The [XYZ] is a socially based organization which grew disproportionately the last six years: in 2009 turnover increased with 75% related to 2003. This social basis impedes the delivery of a desired basic quality, and the quick growth caused blurred tasks and responsibilities. Therefore, one of the priorities of 2010 of [XYZ] is the steering quality. Under this priority the goal of ‘professionalization of the organization’ is formulated which is the reason why this research is initiated.
Management Question and Objective
Based on the motivations mentioned above, the (management)question that was asked is how to get the employees ready to change the (over) social culture into a more professional culture. Consequently, it can be summarized into the objective that [XYZ] wants a culture which contributes to becoming more effective and efficient to ultimately being able to deliver a certain level of quality in their services.
Foundation for Care in the City of Groningen
In 1900 the first Care Institutions were opened. After a few mergers and changes of names, the name [XYZ] emerged. [XYZ] is a large provider of Care within the city of Groningen and has about 1,500 employees.
[XYZ] is a socially based, non-profit, umbrella organization that covers all forms of Care. The goal of the organization is to provide affordable and high quality Care. The care centers are spread over the cities of Groningen. In total, [XYZ] has more than 15 locations in the city and region together.
Four of the 1,500 employees are in the management team of [XYZ]. This management team is composed of the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), the business controller, the manager Care, and the head of the human relations department. Each of the management team members supervises one or more departments.
Figure 1: Organizational Chart (removed due to confidentiality) Organizational Culture
In addition to this definition, culture can be approached in various ways. One way this can be done is based on the views of Smircich (1983). Smircich distinguishes two views on looking at organizational culture: 1) culture as a variable and 2) culture as a root metaphor.
The first view, culture as a variable, believes that an ‘organization has cultural characteristics’. This view can be split into two approaches: culture as an independent variable and culture as an internal variable. First, culture as an independent variable implicates that culture is imported into the organization through the membership. On the other hand, the view of culture as an internal variable implicates that organizations are themselves culture-producing phenomena. Overall, the research agenda arising from the view that culture is an organizational variable is how to mold and shape internal culture in particular ways and how to change culture, consistent with managerial purposes. Fiol (1991) adds to this view that it assumes that culture is a key to unlocking organizational commitment, productivity, and profitability.
The second view, culture as a root metaphor, leaves behind the view that a culture is something an organization has, in favor of the view that a culture is something an organization is. Fiol (1991) adds to this view that it assumes that culture is an emergent process that has as its source a set of deep, underlying values.
The management question that is on the basis of this research clearly asks for a change in culture, and therefore the view taken in this research is the first one: the view of culture as a variable implies that culture indeed can be changed.
Another way to approach organizational culture comes from Allaire & Firsirotu (1984); they distinguish between theorists who view culture as meshed into the social system and those who conceive of it as a conceptually separate, ideational system.
Culture as an ideational system is defined by Allaire & Firsirotu (1984) as cultural and social realms that are distinct but interrelated. This type of culture is located in the minds of culture-bearers and in the products of minds (e.g. shared meanings and symbols).
The second view of culture, as a sociocultural system, sees culture as a component of the social system, manifested in behavior (ways-of-life) and products of behavior. This view assumes that the ideational components (pattern of shared meanings and values, systems of knowledge and beliefs) are meshed with the social structure component in a holistic concept of organizations.
employees in that they behave more socially than professionally. Therefore, this research can be seen as a view of culture as a sociocultural system. Besides, because this research focuses on culture as something that an organization has (culture as a variable), organizations are seen as social instruments (Smircich, 1983).
In order to typify possible cultures within organizations, Cameron & Quinn (2006) have developed the ‘Competing Values Framework’. This framework has two dimensions: one differentiates effectiveness criteria that emphasize flexibility, discretion, and dynamism from criteria that emphasize stability, order, and control. The other dimension differentiates effectiveness criteria that emphasize an internal orientation, integration, and unity from criteria that emphasize an external orientation, differentiation, and rivalry. Together, these two dimensions form four quadrants; each representing a distinct set of organizational effectiveness indicators or culture types: clan, adhocracy, market, and hierarchy.
The organization that has a culture that is typified as ‘Hierarchy’ can be characterized as a formalized and structured place to work. Formal rules and policies hold the organization together. Second, a so called ‘Market’ culture is a results-oriented workplace. The glue that holds the organization together is an emphasis on winning; outpacing the competition and market leadership are important. Another typing of culture is the ‘Clan’ culture. An organization with this kind of culture is an organization that is characterized by a friendly place to work where people share a lot of themselves: it is like an extended family. The organization is held together by loyalty and tradition; commitment is high. The last one of the four dominant culture types is the ‘Adhocracy’ culture. An organization that possesses this type of culture, can be seen as a dynamic, entrepreneurial, and creative workplace. The glue that holds the organization together within this type of organization is the commitment to experimentation and innovation.
FIGURE 2
The Competing Values of Leadership, Effectiveness, and Organizational Theory
Of course, this concise discussion about typologies and definitions of culture, as well as the approaches to culture, is not exhaustive but it highlights the most important bases and aspects regarding this research.
Current and Desired Culture at [XYZ]
At this point, the context and background information are explained as well as the management question and the objective of this research. The management clearly desires a more professional culture to become more effective and efficient, and ultimately being more able to deliver a certain level of quality in the services [XYZ] is offering.
The desired culture as well as the current culture have to be defined in more detail now in order to be able to examine how the organizational culture can be changed. Therefore, the preliminary research that was conducted has focused on these two issues.
In order to typify the current and desired culture, the OCAI (Cameron & Quinn, 2006) is used. This instrument is developed to diagnose an organization’s culture and it is based on their model of four competing values as discussed above. How these four values are present and distributed in an organization can be measured by a short questionnaire. The complete
Flexibility and Discretion
Stability and Control
E x te rn a l F o cu s a n d D if fe re n tia tio n In te rn a l F o cu s a n d I n te g ra ti o n
Culture Type: CLAN
Orientation: COLLABORATIVE
Leader Type: Facilitator Mentor Team builder
Value Drivers: Commitment Communication Development
Theory of Human Development
Effectiveness: and participation produce effectiveness
Culture Type: ADHOCRACY
Orientation: CREATIVE
Leader Type: Innovator Entrepreneur Visionary
Value Drivers: Innovative outputs Transformation Agility
Theory of Innovativeness, vision,
Effectiveness: and new resources produce effectiveness
Culture Type: HIERARCHY Orientation: CONTROLLING
Leader Type: Coordinator Monitor Organizer
Value Drivers: Efficiency Timeliness
Consistency and uniformity
Theory of Control and efficiency
Effectiveness: with capable processes produce effectiveness
Culture Type: MARKET
Orientation: COMPETING
Leader Type: Hard driver Competitor Producer
Value Drivers: Market share Goal achievement Profitability
Theory of Aggressively competing
Effectiveness: and customer focus produce effectiveness
justification of this method and the sample size are included in Appendix A, and the complete questionnaire is to be found in Appendix B. The complete numerically results of the questionnaire are presented in Appendices C and D, and in Appendix E the results are explained. For now, these outcomes are summarized in the next sections.
Current culture. Whereas the employees think the culture is more or less balanced and the management team thinks that this is less the case, they both agree that the culture type ‘Clan’ is most present and the culture type ‘Market’ the least.
Although both management and employees agree about ‘Clan’ as the most present culture type and ‘Market’ as the least present, the differences in appointed scores are the largest on these two types. The employees and management also differ – but to a lesser extent – in their opinion on the present levels of the ‘Hierarchy’ and ‘Adhocracy’ culture types.
Desired culture. These results show that the employees prefer a culture that has an emphasis on the ‘Clan’ culture type, whereas the management appoints the highest score to the ‘Adhocracy’ culture type. Despite this difference, the employees and the management agree upon the least preferred cultures ‘Hierarchy’ and ‘Market’.
Again, like the current culture scores, the largest differences in appointed scores are on ‘Clan’ and ‘Market’ culture types. However, in this case, the differences are a lot smaller: especially the difference on the ‘Hierarchy’ culture type is really small.
Shift from Current to Desired Culture at [XYZ]
Now that the similarities and differences between the employees and the management are briefly described, the shift from the current to the desired culture will be discussed in this section.
Preferred shift according to the management. The management is more explicitly making clear their preferred shift. They strongly want to decrease the ‘Clan’ culture type and emphasize the ‘Adhocracy’ culture type more. The management requires an increased ‘Market’ culture type. ‘Hierarchy’ they prefer to be decreased, but this is the smallest shift of all four.
Employees and management compared. The major differences are that management wants the ‘Clan’ culture to be decreased whereas the employees want it to grow, and that management wants the ‘Market’ culture type to be increased, whereas the employees prefer a decrease in this culture type.
The similarities in direction can be found with the other two culture types: both management and the employees want the ‘Adhocracy’ culture type to be increased, and both the management and the employees want the ‘Hierarchy’ culture type to be decreased.
Remarkable on the results is that on the ‘Market’ culture type, the scores of the ‘desired’ culture of the management and the ‘current’ culture of the employees are almost the same. With this variable, it can also be questioned whether there is a difference in interpretation in answering the questionnaire. The management may have another – more broader – view on their ‘market’ definition than the employees on the locations have.
Another noteworthy outcome in line with the above, is that the scores on the current culture by the employees are very near to the scores of the management on the desired culture. To be exact, these two results are the closest to each other. The current culture of the employees and the current culture of the management have the greatest differences in their scores.
Organizational Culture and Change
The management question of SKSG is about how to get the employees ready to change the culture at SKSG, but how changeable is culture? This is an issue about which many authors differ in their opinions.
To begin with, Schein (1986) states that change of culture first requires a period of unfreezing that includes the pain of disconfirmation – old assumptions do not longer work. Leadership is critical in this stage; it requires strength to help the group cope with and not avoid anxiety: ‘one cannot simply change pieces of that stable culture without creating potentially massive anxiety’. Leaders have to take the responsibility both for the process and ultimate outcomes. Earlier, Schein (1984) wrote that managers may successfully orchestrate change through the use of a wide variety of techniques, from outright coercion at one extreme to subtle seduction through the introduction of new technologies at the other extreme.
According to the change model of Lewin (1947), the steps following to unfreezing mentioned by Schein (1986) are moving and refreezing. Lewin suggests that decreasing the forces maintaining the status quo produces less tension and resistance than increasing forces for change and consequently is a more effective change strategy.
Jones (2007) also states that culture, like structure, evolves and can be managed through organizational design and change. Also, Cameron & Quinn (2006) write that ‘without a change in organizational culture, there is little hope of enduring improvement in organizational performance’. They think change is pervasive because of the degree and rapidity of change in the external environment. In addition, Fiol (1991) thinks that managing changes in a firm’s culture requires incorporating new identities, rather than behaviors, into an existing cultural system. She describes two ways of managing cultural change: through behavioral substitution or addition and through renewal.
success in exercising the new competences; (3) the leadership of the organization should promote the mythical interpretation of success after it has happened. What counts is that the change is rationally seen as a collective success and emotionally felt as such by all concerned.
In helping to bring about a new culture, Ulrich (1998) suggests that HR should follow a four-step process: First, it must define and clarify the concept of cultural change. Secondly, it must articulate why cultural change is central to business success. Thirdly, it must define a process for assessing the current culture and the desired new culture, as well as for measuring the gap between the two. Fourthly, it must identify alternative approaches to creating culture change.
However, De Caluwé & Vermaak (2006) state that culture can be changed in various ways, but they think that a roadmap for cultural change is nonsense. Often, they state, such a cultural change needs awareness of implicit norms and beliefs that are perceived as being self-evident. Nevertheless, Wilkins & Ouchi (1983) think that culture in organizations may be more adaptive and more easily developed than we assume. It may, however, be the case that developing new or very different social understandings is more difficult than influencing contracts or establishing new rules.
Research Question
Now that the theory on organizational culture and change as well as the current culture and the desired culture are discussed, it can be investigated which aspects should be taken into account when ultimately designing the change plan for [XYZ]. To answer the management question, a central research question is applied to this research: ‘To what extent do the organizational characteristics influence the readiness to change of the employees towards the desired culture at [XYZ]?’
Within the term ‘organizational characteristics’, the current 1) way of communication, 2) leadership style, 3) level of participation, 4) level of sense of urgency and 5) use of rewards are included.
THEORY
The research can be characterized as being causal: there is an implication that the existence of, or a change in, one variable causes or leads to a change in the other. The causal variables (independent variables) of this research are the way of communication, leadership style, level of participation, level of sense of urgency, and use of rewards. These factors are selected because according to the management they are expected to be important within this case. First, the conceptual model is presented and contains these five factors which are elaborated upon in the next section. This model is on the basis of this research.
The dependent variable of this research is defined as ‘readiness to change towards the desired culture at [XYZ]’. This chapter presents the conceptual model of this research and the theoretical underpinning of the depended as well as the independent variables it includes.
Conceptual Model
As discussed above, cultural change can be approached in many different ways. Certain instruments, or factors, are supported by several researchers to influence the readiness to change towards a new culture: way of communication, leadership style, level of participation, level of sense of urgency, and use of rewards (Armenakis & Harris, 2009; Armenakis, Harris, & Mossholder, 1993; Bouckenooghe, Devos & Van den Broeck, 2009; Lyons, Swindler & Offner, 2009; McGreevy, 2009; Rock, 2007; Smith, 2005). These factors are also chosen because they are expected to contribute to the management question raised by [XYZ]: these are all outlined in the conceptual model that is shown in figure 3.
Justification of the Variables
Now that these five factors are selected to be investigated, they will be elaborated upon by literature research. It has to be investigated what is exactly meant by these terms and how they influence the readiness to change. First, the dependent variable will be explained.
Readiness to change. The variable in this research that is monitored by the researcher, expected to be affected by a manipulation of five the independent variables, is called the ‘readiness to change’ (Blumberg, Cooper, & Schindler, 2008). Readiness can be defined as the cognitive precursor of the behaviors of resistance to or support for organizational change: to guide change efforts, it is useful to assess the organization’s readiness for change (Armenakis et al., 1993). Readiness collectively reflects the extent to which an individual or individuals are cognitively and emotionally inclined to accept, embrace, and adopt a particular plan to purposefully alter the status quo (Holt, Armenakis, Feild, & Harris, 2007).
Another definition comes from Jones, Jimmieson, & Griffiths, who define readiness for change as the extent to which employees hold positive views about the need for organizational change (i.e. change acceptance), as well as the extent to which employees believe that such changes are likely to have positive implications for themselves and the wider organization (2005).
Readiness is arguably one of the most important factors involved in employees’ initial support for change initiatives (Holt et al., 2007). Also, the management of [XYZ] thinks that it is important to create readiness to change because an employee's perception of readiness for change reflects the organization’s ability to make the desired changes successfully (Jansen, 2000).
Way of communication. One of the most important impediments to change is uncertainty about what is going to happen; through communication organizational members can be provided with information about the change and how it will affect them (Jones, 2007). There are various ways of communication; face-to-face, one-on-one meetings, formal group meetings, via telephone, formal written letters, memos, and, increasingly, through electronic means such as email and videoconferencing (Jones, 2007).
RESEARCH QUESTION
According to Rock (2007), one of the most important responsibilities in organizational readiness is the development and implementation of the communications plan. Communicators must identify the key messages, analyze stakeholder concerns and recommend audience-driven tactics that can drive employees through the three basic stages of change readiness: awareness, understanding and engagement (Rock, 2007).
Additionally, in his conceptual model of communication during organizational change Elving (2005) depicts that communication affects readiness for change and ultimately the effectiveness of the change. Also By (2007) and Vakola & Nikolaou (2005) both state that several factors are crucial in order to increase the level of change readiness; one of them is communication. Basinger & Peterson (2008) think that openness is said to increase access to information and influence and maximize support among stakeholder groups.
About the way of communication, the study of Saksvik, Tvedt, Nytrø, Andersen, Andersen, Buvik, & Torvatn (2007) demonstrates the importance of manager availability to employees, and that face-to-face contact is the preferred medium and the core of optimal communication. Finally, ‘how change gets communicated and talked about is crucial to its success’ (Palmer, Dunford, & Akin, 2009). This is also stressed by Bordia, Hunt, Paulsen, Tourish, & DiFonzo (2004) who wrote that ‘if change communication is handled in a destructive manner, it may lead to widespread rumors in the workplace which will intensify the negative aspects of the change and build resistance’.
Leadership style. Fiedler (1996) defines leadership as that part of management that involves the supervision of others. The effectiveness of a leader is a major determinant of the success or failure of a group, organization, or even an entire country. Ogbonna & Harris (2000) distinguish three types of theories about leadership. The first one are the trait theories; they think that successful leaders are ‘born’ and that they have certain innate qualities which distinguish them from non-leaders. The next one on the timeline are the style and behavioral theorists; they state that leaders who adopt democratic or participative styles are more successful. Finally, the situational and contingency theories have the opinion that leadership effectiveness is dependent on the leader’s diagnosis and understanding of situational factors, followed by the adoption of the appropriate style to deal with each circumstance.
Change readiness may be facilitated by organizational leaders rewarding what is in the best interests of the organization: adopting and committing to change (By, Diefenbach &
SUB-QUESTION ONE
Klarner, 2008). Successfully driving change requires a facilitative management style (Gilley, Dixon, & Gilley, 2008). In addition, the results of the research conducted by Lyons et al. (2009) demonstrated the importance of different leadership behaviors for improving the change readiness. Also Oakland & Tanner (2007) show that one element of the cycle to create readiness to change is ‘leadership and direction’; leaders have to clarify the need for change and turn them into expectations.
Perhaps more important than facilitating employee readiness for change would be exploring how leaders can get ready to get employees ready for change. A leader who understands the principles of change readiness may be better able to facilitate readiness among his or her employees and better able to focus on creating sustainable solutions rather than focus on sustaining compliance and control (Walinga, 2008).
Leadership style can also negatively influence change readiness: the style labeled as directive was contained within many of the stories that ended in unsuccessful change implementation within any context. Also, when change is approached as being linear and relatively simple and provides change agents with ‘tool kits’, it is also ultimately unsuccessful (Higgs & Rowland, 2005). To conclude with, Gerstner (2002) wrote that ‘in fact, in the end, management doesn’t change culture. Management invites the workforce itself to change the culture’.
Level of participation. Participation can be defined as ‘a conscious and intended effort by individuals at a higher level in an organization to provide visible extra role or role-expanding opportunities for individuals or groups at a lower level in the organization to have a greater voice in one or more areas of organizational performance’ (Glew, O'Leary-Kelly, Griffin, & Van Fleet, 1995). Van der Post, De Coning, & Smit (1997) define participation as the extent to which employees perceive themselves as participating in the decision-making process of the organization. Participation can appear in various forms and degrees. Lines (2004) notices that several theorists have made distinctions between 1) autocratic decisions with no direct participation or influence, 2) joint decisions where the superior has no more influence than subordinates, and 3) delegation in which a subordinate or a group of subordinates is given the authority and responsibility for making the decision.
In general, McGreevy (2009) found that ‘those organizations that devote time and effort to communication and explain the reasons for the need to change and those that encourage the
SUB-QUESTION TWO
participation of this affected by the changes, seem to fare better than those that do not’. Also, Lines (2004) found a strong positive relationship between participation and goal achievement of the change and organizational commitment, and a strong negative relationship with resistance.
When related to change readiness, Jimmieson, Peach & White (2008) found prove for their hypotheses that employees who felt that they had received communication and participation opportunities indicated higher intentions to engage in change-supportive behaviors. Also, Armenakis & Harris (2009) describe participation as one of the strategies that are available to change agents to plan the readiness, adoption and institutionalization phases of change. In addition, they state that involving change recipients in the diagnostic process actually begins to sensitize them to the possibility of an impending organizational change, and can serve to encourage change readiness (Armenakis & Harris, 2009).
To conclude, Burnes (2009) wrote that ‘employee involvement is crucial to successful change, especially in situations that require attitudinal and cultural change’. Excluding employees and other key stakeholders may lead to disastrous consequences (Bryson, 2004).
Level of sense of urgency. According to Dess, Picken, & Lyon (1998), two kinds of anxiety are found in organizations: one is constructive, the other is not. The anxiety created by the fear of change – of doing something new and possibly making a mistake – must be replaced by the fear of not changing – the anxiety of continuing on a course of action that one knows will lead to failure. Making people aware of the shortcomings of the current situation, so, creating a sense of urgency to change, is important to create readiness: ‘People are likely to react negatively to change when they feel that there is no need for change’ (Palmer et al., 2009).
Simonelic (2006) states that to create successful and lasting change, managers and leaders must create a sense of urgency. Also, Kotter (1995) states that the vital first step towards achieving successful organizational change is the creation of a sense of urgency and a need for change.
SUB-QUESTION THREE
If a change is to be successful, according to Burnes (2009), one activity that needs to be undertaken is to create a readiness to change. To create this readiness for change, one step to be taken is to make people aware of the pressures for change through creating a sense of urgency or a feeling of dissatisfaction with the present. Also according to Smith (2005), change readiness can be accomplished by creating a sense of need and urgency for change. By actively revealing discrepancies between current and desired states, and at the same time conveying credible and positive expectations for achieving change, motivation and readiness for change can be generated – this in both individuals and organization-wide.
Although creating a sense of urgency appears to be important, it is also one of the ‘biggest time eaters in change processes’ (Jick, 1995). Jick also points to a paradox that arises: on the one hand when change takes less time to be created, the urgency has to be maintained for less time. On the other hand, however, the longer the change effort takes, the more effort has to be spent keeping the sense of urgency present (1995).
Use of rewards. A reward system can be defined as the degree to which reward allocations are based on employee performance criteria in contrast to seniority, favoritism, and so on (Van der Post et al., 1997). Reward systems seek to align individual actions to organizational objectives (Palmer et al., 2009). Rewards can be either intrinsic (such as enriched jobs, opportunities for decision making, recognition, encouragement, and praise) or extrinsic (such as salary increases, promotions, stock options, bonuses, benefits, and gain sharing).
Armenakis & Harris (2009) identified five key change beliefs that seem to underlie change recipients’ motives to support change efforts and therefore increase the likelihood of successful sustainable organizational change. One of these five beliefs is personal valence: the belief that the change is beneficial to the change recipient; there is something of benefit in it for them. People generally do those things that bring them rewards. One of the most effective ways to sustain momentum (or create readiness) for change is to reinforce the kinds of behaviors needed to implement the changes. This can be accomplished by linking formal rewards directly to the desired behaviors (Cummings & Worley, 2008). The rewards should include public recognition of those whose behaviors are consistent with the desired change; this both reinforces the behavior of the individual concerned an sends strong signals to others (Palmer et al., 2009).
SUB-QUESTION FOUR
Rewards also deserve some attention in this case of [XYZ], because Kerr & Slocum (1987) ‘believe that the reward system represents a particularly powerful means for influencing an organization's culture’.
RESEARCH METHODS
Now that the organization and the theories are introduced, the methods that were used in order to collect and analyze data are described in this chapter.
Data Collection
In order to investigate the independent variables and the dependent variable, some data had to be collected. The way these data were collected will be described in this section.
The previous theory chapter already theoretically discussed the independent variables that are expected to have the most influence on the dependent variable change readiness of the employees at [XYZ]: 1) way of communication, 2) leadership style, 3) level of participation, 4) level of sense of urgency, and 5) use of rewards. In order to investigate to what extent the factors are currently present within [XYZ] and to investigate how these factors influence the change readiness of the employees, interviews were performed. These interviews were semi-structured because the purpose of these interviews was to learn the interviewees’ viewpoints regarding situations relevant to the research questions.
The relevant population of this research contains all employees which are expected to posses the culture of [XYZ] (761). Consequently, from this population are excluded the temporary employees, trainees, and the employees of the locations in the city of ‘Leek’ which were just acquired at the time of the research. Also, the department ACA (‘After Care Activities’) is excluded from the research because this department was just added to the organization and is expected not to fully possess the culture of [XYZ] yet. To make it researchable, a sample had to be drawn from this whole population. What makes a good sample is representativity.
SUB-QUESTION FIVE
About the sample size of the interviews with the employees, Boyce & Neale (2006) state that ‘the general rule on sample size for interviews is that when the same stories, themes, issues, and topics are emerging from the interviewees, then a sufficient sample size has been reached … When choosing interviewees, one should consider a sample that best represents the diverse stakeholders and opinions of those stakeholders’.
Nine interviews with employees were planned and executed. Because at least half of the answers were the same, it could be concluded that the answers were valid.
Before calling the employees for the interviews the research was introduced in the weekly newsletter and it was announced that a few employees could be approached by the researcher for giving an interview. When calling them, a reference was made to this publication. It was also checked whether these people were also selected in the sample of the preliminary research. This appeared not to be the case. Some background information on the selected interviewees is shown in table 1.
TABLE 1
Background Information Interviewees
Sample [XYZ] GENDER Men 11% 10% AGE Average 41 Women 89% 90% Max 54 Min 28 LEVEL OF EDUCATION MBO 4 YEARS OF SERVICE Average 12 HBO 4 Max 20 University 1 Min 4 REPRESENTED FUNCTIONS
Employee of the Human Relations Department Pedagogue
Employee of the Relationship Management Department Senior Pedagogical Assistant Head of a Department Two Location Managers Pedagogical Assistant Unit Manager
Together with a representative of the management of [XYZ] the amount of interviews on each function and location were determined in order to make sure that the sample is as representative as possible. After this, the researcher randomly selected the actual employees that were to be interviewed; these were called and after a short introduction they were asked if they would like to contribute to this research. All nine selected interviewees were willing to cooperate.
The anonymity concern was taken care of as well. It was guaranteed that no names of the interviewees would be communicated in this research report. Also, the researcher assured that she would not reveal any names at all. The employees were approached individually by phone, so colleagues could only know who was interviewed when the interviewees told it themselves.
In order for the personal interviews to be successful, it is important that the interviewees possess the information targeted, that he/she understand his/her role in the interview, and that he/she must perceive adequate motivation to cooperate (Blumberg et al., 2008). Therefore, the interviews started by telling some information about the background of the interview; the topic, goal, approach, duration and the role of the interviewee, the reasons why the employee was approached, and what is expected from the employee. After that, some introduction questions about his/her position in the organization and personal background were asked, after which the used definition of ‘organizational culture’ was aligned in order to prevent misinterpretations further on.
Next, in order to know from which point of view the answers were given, general questions about the attitude of the employee towards the change was asked for: ‘What do you think about the desire of the management to work together more professionally?’, ‘Are you ready for this change?’ and ‘Are you aware of the change readiness of your colleagues?’ By using probing questions, these questions is meant to provide information about the readiness of the interviewee to go along with the change towards a more professional organization (dependent variable).
Firstly, the current presence of the variable was asked for. The research question was about the influence of these factors. However, prior to determining the influences of the five independent variables, it has to be clear to what extent or how the variables currently exist within the organization.
Way of communication:
Which ways of communication are used within the organization? Leadership style:
What kind of leadership style is currently being applied at [XYZ]? Level of participation:
To what extent do you and your colleagues participate in the organization? Level of sense of urgency:
To what extent do you and your colleagues have a sense of urgency that the current way of working no longer suffices, and to what extent there is a strong desire to change in order to function properly?
Use of rewards:
In which way the organization is currently using rewards?
The second open question of the interview was about the desire for change in the current presence of the factors. With the answers on these questions, for each factor it can be determined how the presence of this factor can be changed in order to increase the change readiness of the employees. In this way, this question is closely related to the central research question.
For all the variables, this question was basically the same: ‘Do you think that it is important to change [this variable] in order to increase your change readiness?’
The third and last open question was about the influence of the variable on their readiness to change. The answers on these interview questions should also contribute to the answer on the central research question: ‘To what extent do the organizational characteristics influence the readiness to change of the employees towards the desired culture at SKSG?’
Their answers were summarized in two concluding measurement scales which form together the fourth (closed) question: ‘If the [current presence of the variable] remains as it is now, how do you think this affects the readiness to go along in the change in culture?’
First measurement scale: from ‘Very influential’ (5) to ‘Very little influence’ (1) Second measurement scale: from ‘Very positive’ (5) to ‘Very negative’ (1)
Consequently, the interview contained twenty semi-structured questions which were on the basis of the interviews. The complete interview can be found in Appendix F. Only relevant information – that can be connected to one of the five factors – was used during the data analysis.
Most of the questions were open questions. As was written above, only the last question of each factor had to be answered based on two measurement scales. The scales used were so called ‘Numerical Scales’; often five-point scales on which employees can rate each item (Blumberg et al., 2008). The two items asked were the level of influence (very influential to very little influence) and the way of influence (very positive to very negative). The interview was closed with a ‘Multiple Rating List Scale’ which accepts a circled response from the employees on how important these factors are related to their change readiness (Blumberg et al., 2008).
The interview technique used is called probing, and aims at stimulating the employees to answer more fully and relevantly to posed questions. The styles of probing that were used are 1) assertion of understanding and interest, 2) expectant pauses, 3) repeat the question, 4) repeat the participant’s reply, 5) ask neutral questions or make neutral comments, and 6) clarify the question when the answer is inconsistent with something already said (Blumberg et al., 2008). Also, these styles of probing can also contribute to preventing response errors (both participant-initiated and interviewer errors). The types of question that were asked are follow-up questions, probing questions, specifying questions, direct questions, indirect questions, structuring questions, and interpreting questions. In table 2 on the next page, all the above and some additional information about the research design are merged.
Data Analysis
Within this research, an open analysis on the open questions was pursued; an attempt was made to distil the general message of the text. Also, the emphasis was on regularities and differences in the texts (Blumberg et al., 2008). In doing so, the sub questions served as a guide for this analysis. These sub questions are based on the variables to be investigated; therefore, for each factor it is described to what extent the factors are now represented within the organization, how this presence influences the readiness to change of the employees and if the employees think that these factors should or should not be changed in order to increase readiness.
TABLE 2
Research Design in a Nutshell
POPULATION
Selection of the employees of [XYZ] that are truly concerned with the culture of the organization
761
SAMPLE SIZE 9 employees
DEGREE OF RESEARCH QUESTION CRYSTALLIZATION
Formal study
Begins with a research question and involves precise procedures and data source specifications
METHOD OF DATA-COLLECTION
Interrogation / communication
Question the subjects and collect responses by personal or impersonal means (self-administered instrument for the preliminary research, interviews for the actual research)
RESEARCHER CONTROL OF VARIABLES
Ex-post facto design
Researcher has no ability to manipulate the variables, but can report what has happened or is happening to the variables
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
Causal study
Attempts to reveal the relationship between variables
TIME DIMENSION
Cross-sectional study
The study is conducted only once and reveals a snapshot of one point in time
TOPICAL SCOPE
Case study
Emphasizes the full and detailed contextual analysis of a single or fewer events or conditions and their interrelations for a single subject or respondent
RESEARCH ENVIRONMENT
Field condition
The actual environmental conditions where the research studies occurs
Based on exhibit 5.1, Blumberg et al., 2008
These amounts were turned into percentages and presented in pie graphs which show relationship of parts to the whole (Blumberg et al., 2008). The last question was answered on a multiple rating list scale, and was analyzed by calculating the mean score on each factor. These results were presented in columns which compare sizes and amounts of categories (Blumberg et al., 2008). These analyses of the results are discussed in the next chapter.
RESULTS
In the theory chapter the conceptual model was presented that was on the basis of this case study research. In order to investigate the influence of the five selected independent variables on the one dependent variable, nine interviews were performed. The results of these interviews are described in this section, whereas the quantitative part and its outcomes are presented in Appendix G and summarized in the pie-charts in the next sections. How important the employees and the management think the factors are in relation to their change readiness is shown in table 3; this was asked on a five-points scale during the preliminary research (employees n=65, management n=4) and at the end of each interview (employees n=9).
TABLE 3
Importance of Factors – Influence on Change Readiness Employees (n=65) Employees (n=9) Employees (n=74) Management (n=4) WAY OF COMMUNICATION 4,6 4,2 4,5 4,5 LEADERSHIP STYLE 4,1 4,1 4,1 4,8 LEVEL OF PARTICIPATION 4,1 3,4 4 0 3,8
LEVEL OF SENSE OF URGENCY 4,2 3,1 4,0 4,0
USE OF REWARDS 3,6 1,2 3,4 3,8
Influence of Organizational Characteristics on the Readiness to Change
For each factor it is described to what extent the factors are now represented within the organization, how this presence influences the readiness to change of the employees and if the employees think that these factors should or should not be changed in order to increase their readiness. These factors are discussed in order of importance – according to the above.
them about things that are going on within the organization and in its environment. The clients receive a journal with the most recent developments every quarter of the year. This journal is send to the employees as well. Also, the ‘[XYZ] journal’ is distributed among all employees once in the two months: this journal includes two columns of both the director and the manager Care, as well as a wide variety of news concerning all locations. Beside these three ways of communication, there are work meetings arranged frequently. These are held with the own department but also cross-sectional.
Only one interviewee thought that there is enough face-to-face communication, whereas the other interviewees state that the communication through email and other digital media is increasing. As a consequence, a disadvantage that was mentioned is that through digital communication inter-personal contacts are decreasing. Another shortcoming that was mentioned is the lack of communicating directly to each other: to hold each other accountable for their own acts. The way of communication is perceived as being top-down and it has to pass several layers of the organization. A limitation of this is that sometimes the information does not reach the people who should be informed, or when it does, it is twisted or incomplete. Although some of the interviewees state that the communication flows are improving, most of the employees think that the way of communication could be further improved.
The current way of communicating influences the change readiness of the employees according to most of the interviewees. The main message of the interviewees was that it is extremely important to make the employees understand the reasons why things have to happen: when that can clearly be explained, people will definitely be more ready to accept the changes that are needed within the organization. At this moment, this is not yet the case. Therefore, when looking at the current ways of communication, most of the interviewees think that it influences the change readiness quite negatively.
The alignment of the content of communication can be improved, and therefore more interpersonal contacts are needed. Some employees just do not do the things they have to because they simply are not fully informed. The employees think that in order to get ready for professionalizing the organization, people have to be more focused in the same direction. To achieve this, it is important to know the reason behind the decisions made. Finally, within [XYZ] too much communication is emotionally based: they put their hearts on their papers and this sometimes leads to misinterpretations.
communication influences their readiness to change. This influence is most of the times (78%) said to be neutral or negative.
FIGURE 4
Level and Way of Influence of the Way of Communication on Change Readiness
Leadership style. Although most of the interviewees think that the leadership styles within the organization are very different, they agree that a lot of leadership is based on the shared vision of [XYZ]. The employees prefer a greater emphasis on this kind of leadership based on a vision. The higher levels of the organization have a more balanced way of leading the organization; task and relationship orientation are equal with a little more emphasis on the task orientation and managing on results. The lower down the levels, the more relationship oriented it becomes.
However, it is mentioned that never a perfect balance is reached; every location or unit manager has the opportunity to make their own interpretations of which leadership style to adopt. This is also expected to depend on the personality of the person in question. Besides, there are no clear agreements on an appropriate leadership style within [XYZ]. Although they agree that the organization becomes more structured, the interviewees think that it is not very efficient yet. But it works and it prevents the organization from becoming completely uniform. The employees prefer the leaders to have some kind of freedom to fulfill their tasks in their own way; as long as all the necessary things get done. It is agreed upon that getting more professional is necessary and desirable in order to get along the developments within the environment and growth of the organization.
therefore better understand what is going on. On the other hand, the interviewees also stress that sometimes it is good to be top-down; otherwise decisions will never be made. One of the interviewees also states that she is missing the personal approach of some leaders: ‘when I meet a deadline, and two weeks later I receive an email with the request to please send the documents concerning this deadline of two weeks ago, I really get annoyed… Firstly, I have already send my documents, and secondly, why should I meet deadlines while it appears to be possible to exceed these deadlines this easily?’. This interviewee thinks that it is very important to address those people who are – in this case – not meeting the deadline; approach those people to their shortcomings and try to prevent that it happens again.
The current leadership style influences the change readiness of the employees according to most of the interviewees. Because the styles differ on each location, the influence on change readiness differs as well. Again, it becomes clear that when the subordinates understand ‘the reason why’, they will go along. This is partly reached already by leading more bottom-up and facilitating the lower levels: ‘Of course, firstly we kick it here and there, but finally we will agree. We also simply have to’. The more directive part of the leadership style is not supporting the readiness of the employees; on the contrary. Also, the discussed lack of personally addressing each other on shortcomings is thought of as obstructing change readiness. This split leadership style also results in split results on the positive – negative scale, which will be discussed next.
The average scores the interviewees gave on the scale-questions are summarized in figure 5. This figure shows that 89% of the interviewees think that the current leadership style influences their readiness to change. On the way of influence, their opinions are very divided; 56% thinks it has a positive influence, while 44% thinks that the influence is negative to very negative.
FIGURE 5
Level of participation. Within [XYZ], the level of participation is perceived as being very limited. Some workshops are organized in order to investigate the opinions of people with all different kind of backgrounds. Also, pilots are organized in which for a short period of time a new concept is being tested on one or a few locations. Evaluation of these projects is very important. When the new concept worked, it is the intention to implement this throughout all the locations.
Most interviewees do see this lack of participation as a shortcoming and would like to see this level increased. A few interviewees also recognize that they do not need to know everything: it is essential that when decisions are directly affecting their ways of working, they prefer to be more involved. When it concerns central decisions that do not directly affect them, they do value participation less: ‘When decisions are made about ‘central purchasing’ for example, that’s fine by me. I do not have to give my opinion on everything that happens’ and ‘sometimes it gets decided ‘over there’ but we have to work with it. Some things look nice on paper but are just not feasible’. On the other hand, it was said that sometimes decisions just have to be made and not everyone can be asked whether they agree.
The current level of participation influences the change readiness of the employees according to most of the interviewees. At the moments that the employees were involved – through either workshops or pilots – they acknowledge that their negative point of view can be turned into a positive one by experiencing the advantages of the intended decision. Therefore, the interviewees think that more participation would lead to more change readiness: ‘when people see why, they go along’ and ‘through participation management gets credibility and employees are more willing to go in their direction’. On the other hand, not all employees want to be involved in everything. Therefore, when looking at the current level of participation, the opinions of the way of influence differ between positive and negative.
Finally, the mean scores on the scale-questions are presented in the graphics in figure 6. This figure shows that 89% of the interviewees think that the current level of participation influences their readiness to change. This influence is thought of as being positive by 33%, while 44% thinks it has a negative influence.
FIGURE 6
Level and Way of Influence of the Level of Participation on Change Readiness
The current level of sense of urgency influences the change readiness of the employees according to most of the interviewees. What is important in the case of this variable, is that ‘there is a difference in receiving an announcement with an initiative to change and experiencing the sense of urgency themselves’. This holds especially for the largest group of employees; the pedagogical assistants. These are practically minded people who really have to sense an urgency in their daily duties and on their own locations in order to fully create a sense of urgency for the change. By many interviewees it was concluded that a lot has to be done here; most of the employees do possess a low level of sense of urgency. The opinions on the way of influence are divided again: on the one hand the interviewees think the influence is positive because some already possess the sense of urgency and this stimulates the readiness. On the other hand, the influence was rated negatively because a lot has to be done here: more employees have to be convinced of the need for change.
The interviewees think that it is really important to stimulate the sense of urgency because when people really feel the need to change, they are expected to get more ready to change. An increased sense of urgency probably drives people to accept – or even get committed to – the change initiative: ‘when the employees can recognize the benefit(s) for themselves, they will easily go along. When they recognize its usefulness, they are also going to like it and they think they can do it’. When [XYZ] can succeed in increasing the sense of urgency, a pedagogical assistant told that ‘then we probably look at it differently. Now we often think ‘it comes from the central office, we simply have to’, but when it can be explained why it is necessary, I often think ‘well, actually you are right’. Then it will not be perceived as being imposed and I am more willing to execute the ideas’. One of the other interviewees experienced that a lot of the pedagogical assistants think ‘I still do my job well… never mind!’. Again, a crucial role for the location manager is to get those employees increase their level of a sense of urgency.
FIGURE 7
Level and Way of Influence of the Level of Sense of Urgency on Change Readiness
Use of rewards. Within [XYZ], the use of rewards is said to be a difficult issue. According to the interviewees, the organization does not make use of rewards. However, two arrangements were regularly discussed during the interviews: 1) the year-end bonus depends on a common goal (for example absence through illness or completing the employee satisfaction survey), and 2) when you do not get sick during the year, you receive a gift. Also, it was mentioned that if – for example – a location performed very well or initiated a valuable idea this is rewarded by the organization by things like a cake or some additional money for materials for the groups.
Especially the last mentioned way of rewarding was valued by the employees. On the other hand, the gift for not getting sick is not valued at all: ‘people feel burdened when they get their gift because they were ‘accidentally’ healthy this year, while they saw their colleagues coming to work when they actually were sick but trying not to be in order to get the gift’. This year the gift was a towel with [XYZ] on it, on which one interviewee commented ‘… and it is also advertising!’.
This variable – use of rewards – is the only variable that scored on the ‘little influence’ and ‘very little influence’ on the change readiness scale items. It also scored the highest on ‘neutral’ compared to the other factors. The interviewees that think that the current use of rewards does have influence think that it is very important to notice that efforts are appreciated: ‘It is not always the value. It is quite a bit of recognition’. Because people feel that they are taken seriously, they are more concerned and committed and are therefore more ready to go along the change. The interviewees that think that it has neutral, little or very little influence do have this opinion simply because rewards are not being used right now.
the overall performance’. Also, the problems concerning measurement were raised: ‘things that are not measurable adulterate while these may be even – or maybe more – important’. These interviewees think that it can really stimulate the employees to get ready and go along the change. More generally, they also think that employees that initiate special ideas should be rewarded for their inventiveness.
A small majority of five interviewees are not willing to introduce the use of rewards with the purpose of increasing readiness: ‘I always compare it to the police I suddenly see in November checking lights on bicycles in order to meet their goals of this year. I really think that is terrible’. It is also expected to bring along a lot of stress: ‘attendants compliment us sometimes, and that is what we are working for. Or even the clients themselves compliment us’. For these employees it is more important that they can perform their jobs well; they do not think that rewards will stimulate them more to comply to the changes.
Figure 8 presents the mean scores on the measurement scales by the interviewees. This figure shows the disunity mentioned before: 22% of the interviewees think that the current use of rewards influences their readiness to change, while 44% thinks that is has little or very little influence. The way of influence is quite equally distributed: 22% thinks it has a positive influence, 22% thinks it is negative, and the majority (56%) thinks that the influence is neutral.
FIGURE 8
Level and Way of Influence of the Use of Rewards on Change Readiness
Readiness to Change towards the Desired Culture at [XYZ]
you're not just babysitting, so that is why it is important to pay attention to it. And if you grow as fast as we do, a lot of attention has to be paid actually in order to keep working effectively and efficiently’. Another one said: ‘They surely should do it! If you ask me, they should have introduced this a long time ago. It is something I really missed in this organization; a lot is done based on emotions, and I think it may be more professional’. The core business of [XYZ] is Care: that you do at your best, with the highest possible quality. Through professionalizing the organization, this may be strengthened.
However, not all employees are expected to be ready to change. Firstly, according to the interviewees problems (and consequently less readiness) are to be expected with the people working long time for [XYZ]. The employees that are working for [XYZ] for 10 or 15 years are very used to the current culture. Secondly, the people that actually work on the locations are also expected to be less ready ‘because for them it is not practically tangible, and that is sometimes very difficult’. These employees think there is a lot of bureaucracy, and they think paperwork is a waste of time; ‘I'd rather do something for the kids’.
The higher in the organization (management and staff for example), the more the interviewees think the employees are ready to change towards a more professional culture.
CONCLUSION & DISCUSSION
In the first chapter of this research report the central research question that was applied to this research was formulated: ‘To what extent do the organizational characteristics influence the change readiness of the employees towards the desired culture at [XYZ]?’. Within the term ‘organizational characteristics’, the current 1) way of communication, 2) leadership style, 3) level of participation, 4) level of sense of urgency and 5) use of rewards were included. In order to answer this central research question nine interviews were executed.
In this final chapter an attempt is made to answer the central research question as well as the sub questions. The findings in the ‘Theory’ and ‘Results’ chapters are combined in these sections on which the recommendations to [XYZ] will be formulated. Also, other interesting findings from the interviews will be discussed and six follow-up steps are introduced. The last section of this report is about the limitations of this research and suggestions for further research.
