BECOMING GRAND AT CHANGE BY MAKING THE HUMAN ELEMENT TOP-SHELF

(1)

BECOMING GRAND AT CHANGE BY MAKING THE HUMAN

ELEMENT TOP-SHELF

The effects of change communication, interpretative change leadership,

participation and top management support on the commitment to change and

readiness for change at employee-level.

Master Thesis, MscBA, specialization Change Management University of Groningen, Faculty of Economics and Business

August 28, 2012 Daan van Manen Student number: 1944738

Grote Leliestraat 2 9712 SV Groningen Phone number: (050) 5893801 Mobile Phone number: (06) 11048580

E-mail: dvanmanen@yahoo.com

Primary supervisor university: Karin Prins

Faculty of Economics & Business Secondary supervisor university:

Ben Emans

Faculty of Economics & Business Supervisor field of study:

Marjolein Verhoeven Grand-Grocer, the Netherlands

(2)

Abstract

At the heart of this study lays the desire of Grand-Grocer to increase their change competence by becoming more proficient at the human element of change. To this end, research was conducted on how four change factors have an influence on the commitment to change and readiness for change of employees. The change factors are 1) change communication quality, 2) participation, 3) interpretative change leadership and 4) top management support. The main data source was qualitative through twenty-five in-depth interviews. Two quantitative methods were also used through a questionnaire before the interviews and a questionnaire after the interviews. The first questionnaire was mainly used to increase the effectiveness of the in-depth interviews. The second questionnaire was used to increase the reliability of the results generated by the qualitative method. As hypothesized, change communication quality and change leadership style were found to have a strong positive influence. A moderate level of interpretative change leadership was found to be preferred by employees. This study also confirms the hypothesis that participation has a positive influence, however was also found to be dependent on the other change factors. Unlike what was hypothesized, top management support was not found to have a direct positive influence. Instead, this change factor seems to have a strong indirect positive influence which is mediated by the other three change factors.

(3)

2.3 Conceptual model... 18 3. Method ... 19 3.1 Respondents ... 20 3.2 Data collection... 21 3.2.1 In-depth interviews ... 21 3.2.2 Pre-questionnaire ... 23 3.2.3 Post-questionnaire... 24 3.3 Data analysis ... 24 3.3.1 In-depth interviews ... 25 3.3.2 Pre-questionnaire ... 27 3.3.3 Post-questionnaire... 28 4. Results ... 28

4.1 Commitment and readiness... 28

4.1.1 The level of commitment to change ... 28

4.1.2 The level of readiness for change ... 30

4.1.3 Summary... 31

4.2 Influence of change communication quality on commitment and readiness ... 31

4.2.1 Content... 32

4.2.2 Method ... 34

4.2.3 Alignment ... 35

4.2.4 Influence of change communication quality in general ... 36

4.2.5 Summary... 37

4.3 Influence of the level of interpretative change leadership on commitment and readiness . 37 4.3.1 Change leadership style by item... 38

4.3.2 The preferred level of interpretative change leadership... 40

4.3.3 Summary... 42

4.4 The influence of the level of participation on commitment and readiness ... 42

4.4.1 The preferred level of participation ... 42

4.4.2 Summary... 45

4.5 The influence of the level of top management support on commitment and readiness .... 45

4.5.1 Direct top management support... 46

4.5.2 Indirect top management support ... 46

4.5.3 The influence of top management support on commitment and readiness ... 47

(4)

5. Discussion ... 49

5.1 Findings and theoretical implications ... 49

5.1.1 Prevailing level of commitment and readiness ... 49

5.1.2 Change communication quality ... 50

5.1.3 The level of interpretative change leadership... 52

5.1.4 The level of participation ... 53

5.1.5 The level of top management support... 54

5.2 How do four change factors influence the commitment to change and readiness for change of employees?... 56

5.3 Recommendations for Grand-Grocer ... 57

5.3.1 The primary strong points... 57

5.3.2 Recommendations... 57

5.4 Limitations and future research suggestions ... 60

5.5 Viability and usability ... 62

Literature... 63

Appendix A (Pre-questionnaire & Results) ... 68

A.1 English version ... 68

A.2 Dutch version ... 71

Appendix B (Interview guide employee level) ... 75

B.1 English version:... 75

B.2 Dutch version ... 80

Appendix C (interview guide management level) ... 87

C.1 English version... 87

C.2 Dutch version ... 93

Appendix D (Post-questionnaire) ... 99

D.1 English version ... 99

D.2 Dutch version... 100

Appendix E (Data analysis of transcripts - 1)... 101

Appendix F (Data analysis of transcripts - 2) ... 103

Appendix G (Data analysis of transcripts - 3) ... 105

Appendix H (Statement on evaluation)... 107

Appendix I (Recent, positive developments of the change)... 107

Appendix K (Leadershipstyle scenarios) ... 108

K.1 English version ... 108

(5)

1. Introduction

Can the implementation of a complex information system be successful without change management? This study will reveal that change management can be considered crucial in order to implement such a change both efficiently and effectively. It is possible to get there without change management, however the road to it will be longer and more problematic.

With over 30.000 employees Grand-Grocer is a very complex and multi-entity organisation. For a while now Grand-Grocer is making major steps towards updating its IT infrastructure. One project concerns multiple departments and stakeholders in the organization and will be the focus of this study. It involves the implementation of a single software-package for both personnel and salary administration.

This study concerns three departments at the corporate headquarters: Human Resources, Salary Administration and Application Management. All three departments will use the new software-package once it is installed and since this will bring new work procedures and interdependencies, the departments will have to change. This change is of course broader and can be considered company wide. However, due to scope limitations it would be impossible to analyse every single stakeholder (over 400 entities).

The reason this research was done was twofold; first, the HR Development department wants to further professionalize its change competence and second, Grand-Grocer was experiencing both technical and human difficulties with the implementation of the system. The latter will be the focus of this study. The HR Development department’s goals are to:

a. Insure that changes really land in the organisation; b. Involve stakeholders in the change;

c. Prepare employees for the changes in their work environment; and d. Achieve collaboration during the change processes across functions.

(6)

Another positive perspective on the human element is described by Cunningham (2006), Herscovitch & Meyer (2002) and Meyer, Srinivas, Lai & Topolnytsky (2007) as they describe the human element in terms of commitment to change. They argue that affective commitment to change should lead to enthusiastic change efforts and a greater ability to cope with the change. So, to cover the human element of change, a combination of commitment to change and readiness for change was selected as the dependent variable of this study.

In this study four change factors which influence the commitment to change and readiness for change will be researched. After discussing a number of variables with the HR Development manager at Grand-Grocer it became apparent that the change communication quality and interpretative change leadership were important variables to investigate. Two other variables, participation and top management support, were proposed by the student researcher and were approved by Grand-Grocer. Thus, the independent variables in this study will be the change factors:

- Change communication quality; - Interpretative change leadership; - Participation; and

- Top management support.

Besides aiding Grand-Grocer in improving their change competence, this study also wants to contribute to the body of knowledge on the human element of change through qualitative research. The literature mentions many change factors which can have an influence on the commitment to change and readiness for change. However, the vast majority of these studies (Armenakis et al., 1999; Armenakis et al., 1993; Cunningham, 2006; Herscovitch et al., 2002; Meyer et al., 2007; and others) use quantitative research methods.

Therefore this study wants to contribute to the existing literature by providing a qualitative perspective on what, and in what way, specific change factors influence the commitment to change and readiness for change. By investigating the relationships, a contribution is made towards becoming more effective in using these change factors to increase the effectiveness of the human element of change. This should then lead to more successful change initiatives.

(7)

The focus of this study will be on how employees experience the four change factors and how this influences their commitment to change and readiness for change. The main research question for this study is therefore:

How do four change factors influence the commitment to change and readiness for change of employees?

This study contains five chapters of which this introduction is the first. Chapter two will describe the theory used for this study and will reveal how the independent variables are related to the dependent variable according to literature. Chapter three will explain the research method and chapter four will show the results of this study. The discussion in chapter five compares the results of this study with theory. In this chapter the recommendations for Grand-Grocer will also be included and finally the limitations of this study are discussed.

2. Theory

This chapter concerns the theoretical framework for this study and contains three sections. First, the dependent variable will be described, second the change factors and their relation to the dependent variable are explained and third a conceptual model is shown in figure 2.1.

2.1 Commitment to change and readiness for change

Jones, Jimmieson & Griffiths (2005) note that there are many factors which influence planned change outcomes, yet few are so important as the employees’ attitudes towards the change event. A number of researchers have already established that change does not happen without the human element. Kavanagh & Ashkanasy (2006) and Schein (1980) found that many change efforts fail because the implementers underestimate the importance of the individual, cognitive-affective nature of organizational change. Devos, Buelens & Bouckenooghe (2007: 608) indicate that: “The ability and drive of an organization to change depends heavily on the openness, commitment, and motivation to change of its employees.” The dependent variable in this study will be commitment to change and readiness for change, the dependent variable will be referred to as commitment and readiness during the rest of this paper. Before describing the similarities and differences between commitment and readiness it is first important to describe these variables separately.

2.1.1 Commitment to change

(8)

willingness to engage in change-related behaviours. The second construct is a multidimensional view of commitment to change consisting out of affective, normative and continuance commitment.

Continuance reflects being ‘forced’ to go along with a change due to high costs of resisting, affective and normative reflects the employee’s ‘free’ choice to implement the change. He concludes by stating that continuance should be associated with mere compliance with the change, while affective and normative commitment should lead to enthusiastic efforts (Herscovitch & Meyer, 2002; Meyer et al. 2007) and a greater ability to cope with the change (Cunningham, 2006).

Herscovitch & Meyer (2002) also found that when only affective commitment is strong it relates more strongly to supportive change related behaviour than when both affective and continuance commitment are strong. This is because the drivers to support the change will come from different ‘mindsets’ and evidence was found that continuance commitment can become a more important driver than affective or normative commitment. This means that while both affective commitment and continuance commitment are present and equal in strength, the continuance commitment will determine behaviour and this will reflect the less desirable compliance, or going along, with the change.

2.1.2 Readiness for change

An important driver for change in the literature is considered to be readiness for change. When employees do not believe that change is needed, or if they feel the organization will not be able to change then change initiatives may fail (Armenakis et al., 1993; Cunninham et al., 2002; Eby, Adams, Russel & Gaby, 2000). This “felt” need for change can also be found in the studies of Kotter (1995) where he refers to this as creating a high enough sense of urgency. The most well accepted definition of change readiness is provided by Armenakis et al. (1993). They state that readiness for organizational change refers to the individuals’ “beliefs, attitudes and intentions regarding the extent to which changes are needed and the organization’s capacity to successfully undertake those changes.” (p. 681) They suggest that when readiness for change exists, an organization is primed to embrace change and resistance to change is reduced.

The dependent variable of this study will be commitment and readiness. As these two elements show many similarities it is important to describe what separates them.

2.1.3 Distinctions between readiness and commitment

(9)

one’s job (normative commitment) or because of fear of negative consequences when they resist the change (continuance commitment) (Herscovitch & Meyer, 2002).

Thus, the readiness focuses more on how an employee looks at, and feels about, a change and commitment is more a determinant of how the employee is motivated to support and contribute to a change.

For this study commitment to change is defined by the:

- Motivation to support the change from truly believing the change is absolutely necessary (affective);

- Motivation from feeling it is part of one’s job to support the change (normative); and

- Motivation to support the change out of fear of the negative consequences from resisting (commitment).

Readiness for change is defined by the:

- Confidence in the necessity of the change; and - Confidence in the feasibility of the change.

2.2 The relationship with the independent variables

The chosen independent variables of this study are change communication quality, the level of participation, level of interpretative change leadership and the level of top management support. A number of studies (Allen, Jimmieson, Bordia & Irmer, 2007; Armenakis & Harris, 2002; Higgs & Rowland, 2005; Jaros, 2010; Kotter, 1995; Kotter & Schlesinger, 2008; Kramlinger, 1998; Manville & Ober, 2003; Msweli-Mbanga & Potwana, 2006; Wanberg & Banas, 2000) have shown that there is a relation between these independent variables and dependent variables similar to the dependent variable used in this study. For example, the study by Allen et al. (2007) shows that the provision of quality change communication created more positive attitudes, openness and acceptance of change which is similar to the commitment and readiness used in this study. In the next paragraphs the chosen independent variables, and their relationship with the dependent variable, will be described.

2.2.1 Change communication quality

(10)

information is important in facilitating acceptance of change by employees (Armenakis & Harris, 2002; Kramlinger, 1998). However, it is the quality of the information employees receive rather than the mere provision that appears to be critical in influencing their openness to change.

As change communication is a very broad variable to investigate the quality will be determined using three separate research questions. The first of which concerns the quality of the content of change communication. The second concerns the method of change communication and the third concerns the alignment of change communication.

The content of change communication

In their article Hammond, Gresch & Vitale (2011) indicate that the content determines the quality of change communication and consistently increases individual readiness for change which leads to positive organizational outcomes (Jimmieson, Peach & White, 2008; Lines, 2004; Wanberg & Banas, 2000). Armenakis et al. (1999) and Hammond et al. (2011) further indicate that an employee’s attitude is influenced by the content of the message and this should combine and shape an individual’s motivation, or commitment as it is defined in this study.

Armenakis et al. and Hammond et al. also argue that a change message consists of five principal components: discrepancy, appropriateness, principal support, personal valence and efficacy. Discrepancy addresses why the organization must change. Appropriateness is the concurrence that the proposed solution to the discrepancy is the correct solution. Principal support is the belief that both formal and informal leaders within the organization support the change. Personal valence is the perceived personal benefit arising from the organizational change. Finally, efficacy refers to the change recipient’s belief as to whether or not he can personally perform the job changes required by the organization-wide change and his belief that the organization can successfully implement the change (Hammond et al. 2011: 490).

The quality of the content of change communication in this study is defined by the extent to which communication has clarified the:

(11)

This leads to the first sub-question of this study:

Research sub-question 1

How does the quality of the content of change communication influence the commitment and readiness at employee-level?

The method of change communication

Besides the content of change communication there is also the method of communicating. Researchers have drawn upon the theory of media richness to determine quality and positive attitudes as well. (Daft & Lengel, 1984; Lengel & Daft, 1988). Byrne & LeMay (2006: 150) indicate that media richness theory “states that different communication media (e.g., phone, email, memos) used within organizations possess different levels of richness (e.g. amount of data shared) of information, and the level of richness affects how communication is perceived.” Goodman & Truss (2004) used this theory in defining the effective type of media based on the complexity of the change. Quality is also defined by Zmud (1978) as the relevance, reliability and timeliness of communication.

In the study by Byrne & LeMay (2006) they found that employees derived most of their satisfaction with the information they received about their job from rich communication sources. In their study three communication channels were examined: 1) Rich (face-to-face meetings, phone conversations and departmental meetings), 2) Lean (Quarterly meetings, written memos and notices) and 3) moderate (E-mail and intranet).

Method richness is defined by the degree to which communication takes place through: - Richer channels (face-to-face individual and group meetings); and

- Poorer channels (E-mail, intranet, newsletters, written memos and notices).

This leads to the second sub-question of this study:

How does the method richness of change communication influence the commitment and readiness at employee-level?

The alignment of change communication

(12)

much better than company B, which performed poorly. According to the authors the importance of feedback and evaluation in order to effectively update the communication plan became apparent.

The study by Goodman & Truss (2004) shows that four quadrants, message, media, channel and approach, can be used as an evaluation mechanism during change efforts. Message refers to three types of information that affect employees. These three types are described by Kitchen & Daly (2002) as job-specific information (must know), desirable information about the organization (should know) and relatively unimportant office gossip (could know). Media is similar to the rich, lean and moderate channels as described by Byrne & LeMay (2011). Channel is defined by Goodman & Truss as the source of information (supervisor, top management, project manager, etc.) and finally approach refers to how information is considered (Balogun & Hope-Haily, 2003). Byrne & LeMay (2006) define channel in terms of communication methods (meetings, e-mail, etc.) and this definition will be used for channel in the rest of this paper.

Goodman & Truss argue that all four quadrants need to be aligned to create a high degree of quality communication. For this study the importance of content and method has already been established, the study by Goodman & Truss suggests that the alignment between content and method is also important.

For this study alignment is defined by the extent to which:

- Content is communicated using the appropriate communication channels; and - Change communication is being evaluated.

This leads to the third sub-question:

How does the degree of alignment of change communication influence the commitment and readiness at employee-level?

The quality of change communication is thus determined by its content, method and alignment. High quality should therefore include enough rich media (method) communicating a message (content) which covers all five principal components as described by Hammond et al. (2011). Finally, the degree of alignment should also determine quality. High quality change communication should positively influence the commitment and readiness at employee-level.

2.2.3 Interpretative change leadership

(13)

Lyons, Swindler & Offner (2009) indicate that transformational and change leadership styles show many similarities, however they are distinct. Given the recent developments and frequency of change in organizational contexts, leadership researchers have started to distinguish traditional leadership behaviours from change leadership (Herold, Fedor, Caldwell & Liu, 2008). Change leadership represents specific, transient behaviours which address an ongoing or impending change.

In a study by Palmer & Dunford (2008) these behaviours are defined through six different images of managing change. These images are defined along two dimensions: assumptions about change outcomes and assumptions about managing. Where the outcomes are defined as intended, partially intended and unintended and managing as controlling or shaping. According to the authors the leader can be seen as directing (intended, controlling), navigating (partially intended, controlling), caretaking (unintended, controlling), coaching (intended, shaping), interpreting (partially intended, shaping) and nurturing (unintended, shaping). In the control side the management is seen as top-down, hierarchical and mechanistic. The shaping side sees things more organic and the emphasis is on anthropomorphizing the organization (Palmer & Dunford, 2008). This resembles Beer & Nohria’s (2000) E and O theory, where E focuses on top-down shareholder maximizing activities and O focuses on the development of organizational capabilities and bottom-up activities.

Four types of change leadership styles can be defined using Beer & Nohria’s E and O theory: E-type, E+o-type, O+e-type and O-type. Six types of change leadership styles can be defined using Palmer & Dunford’s images: directing, navigating, caretaking, coaching, interpreting and nurturing. In order to be able to combine these theories a simplification needs to be made to Palmer & Dunford’s theory. To this end, the nurturing and caretaking change leadership styles are not included in this study. Two reasons for this can be provided; firstly the interpreting change leadership style, in terms of intended versus unintended change, comes close to the O-type change leadership style as can be defined by Beer and Nohria. Secondly, the change initiative at Grand-Grocer concerns an at least partially intended change and so the unintended assumption about change outcomes, as defined by Palmer & Dunford, is not very suitable in this change context. Thus the interpreting, or O-type, change leadership style will signify the high end of the interpretative change leadership continuum.

(14)

planned, there will also be emergent changes. In terms of Beer & Nohria this would be considered E+o-type change leadership style. In the coaching change leadership style, change leaders are able to intentionally shape an organization’s capabilities. These create the right set of values and skills that are deemed necessary for organizational members to achieve desired organizational outcomes. In terms of Beer & Nohria this would be O+e-type change leadership style.

(15)

TABLE 2.1

Four levels of interpretative change leadership defined by seven characteristics

Based on Beer & Nohria’s (2000) E and O theory and Palmer & Dunford’s (2008) images of change leadership Level of

interpretative change leadership

Very low Low-moderate Moderate-high Very high

Change leadership style

Directing (E) Navigating (E+o) Coaching (O+e) Interpreting (O)

Goals Project Management Success* (PMS) (Efficiency) PMS & Project Success (PS) PS & PMS PS (Effectivity)

Focus Technical element

(structures and systems)

Technical element with room for human element

Human element with room for technical element Human element (Corporate culture: employees’ behaviour and attitudes) Process Planned implementation and program (AB) Planned implementation with room for course shifts (A C D G) Planned process (A B) Experimentation and evolution (A ? ? ?) Reward System

Purely Extrinsic Mostly Extrinsic Mostly Intrinsic Purely Intrinsic

Vision Building Based on resources and acceptance of the need to change. Based on debates amongst different groupings within and

across the

organization.

Ground rules and parameters set but with wide-ranging consultation taking place on it.

Through the ‘inner voice’ of the organization (Quinn, 1996)

Resistance Negative, not

everybody

welcomes the change

Understandable, there are different interests

within the

organization.

(16)

According to a study by Higgs & Rowland (2005) the more controlling approach to change is ineffective across most change contexts. Emergent change approaches were closest related to successful change outcomes. However, the researchers do mention that most participants in the interviews indicated a change as emergent when the complexity of change initiatives was taken into account during implementation. According to Higgs & Rowland the interpreting change leadership style should be best for the creation of commitment and readiness. This relation is not based on any empirical evidence however and this study will focus on how the level of interpretative change leadership influences the commitment and readiness of employees. The fourth sub-questions will therefore be:

How does the level of interpretative change leadership influence the commitment and readiness at employee level?

2.2.4 Participation

Participation gives employees the opportunity to have an impact on the change. Cunningham et al. (2002) suggested that an employee’s perceived control over his or her job, organization or change process is a necessary condition to create readiness for change. Several studies have indicated that employee participation is central to increasing employees’ acceptance of change (Kotter, 1995; Manville & Ober, 2003; Msweli-Mbanga & Potwana, 2006; Wanberg & Banas, 2000). Kotter & Schlesinger (2008: 135) note that: “considerable research has demonstrated that, in general, participation leads to commitment, not merely compliance.”

An article by Basinger & Peterson (2008) indicates a clear difference between ‘insiders’ (people who participate in the decision to change) and ‘outsiders’ (people who did not participate in the decision) in the way they perceive and react to change. During their study they found that the decision to merge was broadly supported by the insiders and broadly rejected by outsiders. Based on this research the insiders clearly felt they were doing the right thing and thus carried on with the change. Relevant to this study is that three years after the merger the insiders still stood by their decision to merge while outsiders still opposed it. Basinger & Peterson (2008: 253) indicate that: “Inclusion of key stakeholders in organizational decisions increases their approval of decisions, while exclusion can lead to resistance.”

(17)

In their study Devos et al. (2007) found that even when organizational change means the loss of jobs, people will not necessarily feel entirely opposed to it. If they are given the opportunity to participate in the implementation of change and feel that they have a reliable top management, they will adopt more positive attitudes towards the change. Zigarmi & Hoekstra (2011) indicate that in order to increase people’s commitment to change, leaders should expand opportunities to increase involvement and influence of those being asked to change. This indicates the importance of either complete or vicarious participation towards the creation of commitment and readiness.

For this study the level of participation is defined as:

- The low, moderate (vicarious) or high (complete) level of influence on the decision to implement or reflect on the course of implementation.

The fifth sub-question of this study will be:

How does the level of participation influence the commitment and readiness at employee-level? 2.2.5 Top management support

Jaros (2010: 81) indicates that Armenakis and Harris constructed a model which explicitly recognizes that the efforts of leaders may influence an employee’s felt-need for change and thus willingness to commit to it. Kotter & Schlesinger (2008: 133) indicate that (top)managers can deal with potential resistance by being supportive. The articles of Jaros (2010) and Kotter & Schlesinger (2008) indicate that there should be a relationship between top management support and the felt-need for change and willingness to commit to change. These elements are similar to the commitment and readiness used in this study.

Young & Jordan (2008: 715) define top management support as: “devoting time to the change-project in proportion to its cost and potential, reviewing plans, following up on results and facilitating the management problems.” Their study shows evidence that top management support can be considered the critical success factor to create project success. Project management success does not necessarily mean project success and top management is normally more interested in the latter (Young & Jordan, 2008). A good practice in top management support is to become the champion of a project (Beath, 1991; Morton, 1983). Skills belonging to project championing are mobilizing public opinion, resolving stakeholder conflicts and winning the hearts and minds of the project team.

(18)

information and training) support the change. Tracking refers to the establishing of clear goals, assessing the progress and adjusting if necessary. A notable difference can be made between the core elements described by Bevan and the championing factors described by Beath and Morton. The championing elements are more direct and visible forms of support and the core factors are more indirect and less visible forms of support.

Findings in a study by Rafferty & Simons (2006) indicate that trust in organizational leaders is significantly uniquely associated with high readiness for both fine-tuning and transformational changes. Michaelis, Stegmaier & Sonntag (2009) confirm that trust in top management gives individuals a sense of control through the good intentions of top management. From their research it can be concluded that trust in top management is associated with higher levels of affective commitment. Trust is created through championing, allocation of sufficient resources and the provision of support and this should influence the degree of commitment and readiness.

In this study the level of top management support is defined by the:

- Championing elements - mobilizing public opinion, resolving stakeholder conflicts and winning the hearts and minds of the project team; and the

- Core elements - resources, alignment of resources and tracking.

This leads to the final sub-questions of this study:

How does the level of top management support influence the commitment and readiness at employee-level? 2.3 Conceptual model

(19)

FIGURE 2.1 Conceptual Model

3. Method

In this section the research methods used for this study will be explained. To answer the research questions of this study, three different research methods were used.

- Firstly, a quantitative study was done amongst employee-level participants by means of a questionnaire. As this questionnaire was taken before the interview took place it will be referred to as the pre-questionnaire. The main goal of the pre-questionnaire was to make the in-depth interviews more effective.

- Secondly, a qualitative study was done through the use of in-depth interviews amongst 25 participants from the employee, management and support-level1_{. The interviews will serve as the} main data source for the results.

- Thirdly, at the end of each interview participants were asked to fill out a short questionnaire. This would then show their satisfaction with the quality of the separate variables and to what degree these variables had influenced their (subordinates’) commitment and readiness. As this questionnaire was taken after the interview took place it will be referred to as the post-questionnaire. The main goal of the post-questionnaire was to capture the conclusion the participants drew based on the preceding interview. These results would serve as a benchmark for the findings of the interview.

In paragraph 3.1 key characteristics about the participants of this study will be provided. Paragraph 3.2 will explain the data collection method. Paragraph 3.3 describes how the resulting data was analyzed. The main

1_{Support level includes members of the organization who are not directly involved in the management or day to}

(20)

data source for the results of this study are the in-depth interviews. As such, this method will be described first in paragraphs 3.2 and 3.3, followed by the pre-questionnaire and post-questionnaire respectively.

3.1 Respondents

The three departments involved in this study will be called department A, B and C in the result section and contains a total of seventeen employees and five managers. Besides these participants, three participants at the support-level were also included. Table 3.1 shows the characteristics of the participants in this study.

TABLE 3.1

Gender, age, educational level, tenure, department and hierarchical level characteristics of participants in this study

Characteristic Category Number of

participants Gender Male Female 13 12 Age 18-30 30-45 45-60 60+ 3 8 12 2 Educational level High school

College Applied science University 3 8 5 9 Tenure 0-10 11-20 21-30 30+ 13 7 3 2 Department* Human Resources

Salary Administration Application Management Project team 12 10 3 1 Hierarchical level Employee-level

Management-level Support-level

17 5 3

(21)

3.2 Data collection

In total 16 pre-questionnaires, 25 in-depth interviews and 22 post-questionnaires were conducted. The reason the number of participants per method differed was because: a) the pre-questionnaires were only aimed at the employee-level participants, b) pre-questionnaires were not obligatory in order to do the interview, and c) the level participants were not included in the post-questionnaire. The support-level participants were not undergoing the change in the same fashion as the other participants and would thus not base their answers on the same reality as the participants in the three departments. They were included in this study to gain an external perspective on the change from supporting members of the organization. Also, the first interview was done with one of the support-level participants in order to test the interview guide and filter out poor or vague questions.

3.2.1 In-depth interviews

The main data source for this study were the in-depth interviews. The interview-guides used for the interviews contained the following phases:

1. Introduction phase 2. Dependent variable phase 3. Independent variables phase 4. Post-questionnaire phase 5. Closing phase

The first phase of the interviews, introduction, was used to explain the structure of the interview and how the resulting data would be used. Any questions the participants might have could be answered and the participants were asked whether they understood and agreed with the conditions of the interview.

The most important phases of the interviews were the second, dependent variable, and third, independent

variable, phases. The dependent variable was the starting point of each interview and participants were

asked if, and why, they felt committed and ready for the change. Next, questions were asked about the change factors: change communication quality, the level of interpretative change leadership, the level of participation and the level of top management support. During this phase questions were also asked if, and how, these change factors had influenced the commitment and readiness of the participant.

(22)

Employee-level participants were asked how they felt these change factors had influenced their own commitment and readiness. The management and support-level participants were asked how they felt the change factors had influenced the employees’ commitment and readiness, not their own. This was done for two reasons; firstly, this study focuses on the commitment and readiness at the employee level and secondly, it would make comparing the employees’ and managements’ result more interesting as one perspective will come from the employees themselves and the other will come from the management and support-level participants (with regard to the employees).

During the fourth phase the post-questionnaire, which will be described in paragraph 3.2.3, was filled out on paper while the student-researcher was present and answered questions of the participant. During the final, closing, phase the participants were asked what their thoughts were on the interview and the interviewer. The full interview-guides for both the employee and management-level participants can be found in appendix B and C. The next section will describe the basis for the interviews and provides some background information.

Basis and background

The basis for the interview analysis was grounded theory as described by Silverman (2012). However it is not truly the grounded theory method as this is based on using a single variable and does not begin with a set of research questions before the study. It would instead: “induce them from close data analysis” (Silverman, 2012: 67). However, this study started out with specific research questions and variables already in place. The similarity with grounded theory can be found in the semi-structured way in which the interviews were conducted. A semi-structured interview guide and probing was used to gain a deeper understanding of the relationship between the selected dependent and independent variables (Emans, 2002). This also allowed new variables or categories to emerge and be explored during the interviews. The way in which the interviews were analyzed exactly will be explained in paragraph 3.3.1.

The interviews were voluntary and each interview averaged around 90 minutes, a majority of the interviews were recorded and transcribed. Unrecorded interviews were summarized. The interviews were face-to-face, one-on-one interviews and care was taken that each interview was conducted in the same setting as much as possible. Field-notes were taken on the setting, atmosphere and composure of the participant.

(23)

3.2.2 Pre-questionnaire

Prior to the interviews the participants were invited to take the pre-questionnaire through an online survey. In this survey statements were used and participants could indicate to what extent they agreed with the statements on a five-point scale. For example, in order to measure the affective commitment the following statement was used: I want to support this change-project because of the advantages it will bring. Similar statements were used to measure all the variables in this study. A number of statements were directly derived from the study by Herscovitch & Meyer (2002). Other statements were either self-fabricated or adapted from other studies (Bouckenooghe, Devos, Van den Broeck 2009; Lines, 2004).

The pre-questionnaire’s primary function was to increase the effectiveness of the main data-source, the in-depth interviews. By itself it did not serve to investigate the relationships between the separate variables, instead it primarily generated descriptive data of the variables at Grand-Grocer. By gaining this insight the interviews became more effective as attention areas became apparent before the interviews were taken.

The pre-questionnaire further served as a benchmark for the interviews in the sense that the results could confirm or contradict the findings of the qualitative study. If, for example, top management support was found to be adequate during the interviews while it was found to be inadequate in the pre-questionnaire, another close look at the interview analysis might be taken. If necessary, additional interviews could be taken to find out what had caused the difference.

Additionally, this study used four scenario’s to measure the level of interpretative change leadership (defined by four change leadership styles: directing, navigating, coaching and interpreting). As these scenario’s were quite lengthy, valuable time was saved by allowing participants to read the scenario’s during the pre-questionnaire and answer two related questions. Valuable time for the depth of the interviews was also saved because:

- The participants knew what would be discussed and had already thought about the different variables;

- Possible questions participants might have about the subjects were answered before the interview started; and

- The participants would receive questions from an interviewer who was aware of important attention areas.

(24)

FIGURE 3.1

The directing change leadership style scenario

Boss A:

[G] This leader always prioritizes the finishing of projects on time and within budget, even when

this means possible additional advantages for the organisation have to be bypassed. [F] He/she is only concerned with the technical side of the change and does not have much attention for the human side of the change. [P] This manager works with a tight and unchangeable planning and [R1] mostly motivates his/her subordinates through bonuses and/or other financial stimulation. [V] When a future vision for projects is formulated the subordinates are not or barely involved and any form of [R2] resistance is almost always perceived as something negative.

G = Goals R1 = Reward system

F = Focus V = Vision building

P = Process R2 = Resistance

The letters and numbers in brackets in the scenario of figure 3.1 were not included in the scenarios presented to the participants. Only employee-level participants were invited to participate in the pre-questionnaire as the focus of this research method was at that hierarchical level. However, the scenarios were also distributed by e-mail to the management-level participants prior to the interviews. All the statements and other scenarios used in the pre-questionnaire can be found in appendix A and K.

3.2.3 Post-questionnaire

The rationale behind this research method was that the variables were explored in-depth and, by this stage, the participant would have a very good idea about the quality and influence of the independent variables during this change initiative. By explicitly allowing the participants to indicate this in the post-questionnaire this result could be used to confirm or contradict findings of the in-depth interviews. It would also show the influence at a higher abstract level. This would further increase the reliability of the answers to the research questions in this study.

During the post-questionnaire the participants were asked to grade the independent variables on a ten-point scale in such a way that it reflected their satisfaction with the quality of the variable. Each participant was also asked to indicate, on a five-point scale, how much influence these variables have had on the commitment and readiness. The post-questionnaire can also be viewed in appendix D.

3.3 Data analysis

(25)

3.3.1 In-depth interviews

The analysis of the interviews ‘lend’ certain aspects of grounded theory, however certain aspects of content analysis and other methods were also used to analyze data from the interviews. This is not uncommon for qualitative data analysis; the key is to use a proper qualitative analytic attitude. Or, as Rapley (2011: 274) puts it: “the practices of good (or even adequate) qualitative data analysis can never be adequately summed up by using a neat tag. They can also never be summed up by a list of specific steps or procedures that have been undertaken. Above all, you need to develop a working, hands-on, empirical, tacit knowledge of analysis.”

In this study the student-researcher can be considered the expert on the theory while analyzing data. It was up to the student-researcher to a) chose and construct a method using a proper qualitative analytic attitude and b) use the expertise to filter relevant from irrelevant data in light of the research questions. Point a has been described in paragraph 3.2 and now a closer look at point b will be taken.

After the interviews were either transcribed or summarized the resulting text was analyzed by the student researcher. In the analysis the following steps were executed:

Reading and marking the transcripts

Firstly, the text was closely read and sections of the transcripts/summaries which were relatable to the variables of this study were marked with a color marker. Secondly, these sections were then put into a table and coded, for example the first section of the first interview would be coded A1.1.

Re-reading and label assignment

Thirdly, the sections were then closely read again to see if labels could be assigned to certain words, lines, sentences or even paragraphs. Section A1.1 could thus contain no labels or a number of labels. The labels were assigned based on the relevance with the research questions and variables of this study. For example, section A1.1 could contain three sentences, which showed the current commitment of the participant. Or a section could contain a paragraph, which described the influence of the discrepancy of change communication on the commitment. Labels were then assigned to these sentences or paragraphs. At the end of this step the complete sections were removed and only the codes and their affiliate labels would remain. The initial labels would remain as close to the original text as possible, for example a label could originally have been aware of the new job-description after the change.

Analyzing and merging labels

Fourthly, all the labels were then analyzed to see if they were synonymous and could be merged using ‘in vivo coding’ (Rapley, 2011: 282). This means that the label aware of the new job-description after the change could be changed to clear role division.

(26)

Putting the labels into the theoretical framework

Fifth, after this process the remaining labels were then put into the theoretical framework of this study using a ‘scoring card’ designed by the student-researcher. For example: label 1 of A1.1 clear role division was put under the efficacy category of the content of change communication.

During this step the labels were interpreted and categorized based on the expert-knowledge of the student researcher. For example, many participants indicated to have a structurally high work pressure because of the change. As there is no such category in the theoretical framework, the labels were then investigated to see if it would fit under any of the existing categories. The tracking element of the top management support variable concerned the planning and monitoring of progress. As the structurally high work pressure was mostly caused by either poor planning or poor monitoring, the label structurally high work pressure would be categorized under the tracking category of top management support.

When a label could not be categorized in this fashion it would be put into the category other which would later be analyzed again to see if new categories and variables needed to be included in this study. The scoring card was first filled out per participant and would generally contain multiple labels at the end of the analysis.

Finding the relationship with the dependent variable

The sixth step involved analyzing the labels if they showed a relationship with the dependent variable of this study. The relationship could either be found to be positive, neutral or negative. The labels could have been either directly related to the commitment and readiness or indirectly. For example, some participants would indicate that frequent meetings increased their motivation to support the change. In this case the positive relationship of the richer communication method was directly linked to the commitment and readiness by the participant.

In another example however, the participants could indicate that top management support had not influenced their commitment and readiness, while at the same time indicate that the structurally high work pressure lowered their commitment and readiness. As was explained before, the structurally high work pressure could be categorized under the tracking category of top management support. In this sense top management support or

tracking was not directly positively related to commitment and readiness by the participant during the

interview, however was positively related through the interpretation and categorization process of the student-researcher after the interview.

(27)

These ratings could then also be compared with the descriptive data from the pre-questionnaires to see if the interviews generated confirming or contradicting outcomes.

Simplifying the scoring card

The seventh step involved simplifying the scoring card in such a way that the labels could be removed and only the variables and underlying categories would remain. The rule during this step was that if one of the labels was mentioned by at least 20% of participants and also showed the relationship with the dependent variable, it would mean that the specific category in which it fell influenced the commitment and readiness. The general attitude about a category was found by counting all the plusses and minuses of the separate labels within the category. This process would result in a scoring card which clearly showed the a) relationship with the dependent variable and b) attitude of the participant concerning the categories and variables.

Counting labels in each category

The eighth, and final, step was to count all the labels in each category to find the relationship of the independent variable with the dependent variable. These were then put into a table to see what percentage of labels had indicated a positive, neutral, negative or no relationship. The no relationship labels would indicate that something relevant was said about the independent variable, however nothing was said about its relationship with the dependent variable.

The categories will be described as ‘items’ in the result chapter, as these were the specific items which were measured in relation to the dependent variables. The most important effect the use of this method had was that the research questions could be answered in more depth, which was the primary reason why this research method was used. An example of the previously described steps of the qualitative analysis can be found in appendix E, F and G.

3.3.2 Pre-questionnaire

Prior to the interviews a pre-questionnaire was taken and the most notable results were marked. During the interviews, extensive probing was used to explore these attention areas. For example, it was found that participants were very negative about the content of change communication in the pre-questionnaire. During the interviews this topic was then given extra time to be explored and find how this had influenced the commitment and readiness of employees.

(28)

3.3.3 Post-questionnaire

The post-questionnaire would mostly serve as a benchmark for the interview results. This was because it could capture the participant’s conclusion after extensively discussing the variables and relationships of this study. The resulting data was put into tables and included in the results. The grades the participants gave to the separate variables were averaged. The range between the lowest and highest grade was used to show whether participants mostly agreed (low range) or disagreed (high range) with the average. The table will also show how much influence the independent variable had on the dependent variable. Employees and management were separated in these tables to find if there were differences between employee and management-level participants.

4. Results

This chapter consists out of five parts. In order to describe the current situation at Grand-Grocer, the level of commitment and readiness at the moment of the interviews were measured. This is described in chapter 4.1. Chapters 4.2, 4.3, 4.4 and 4.5 will show how the independent variables change communication quality, level of interpretative change leadership, level of participation and level of top management support have influenced the commitment and readiness.

4.1 Commitment and readiness

The commitment and readiness will be described in three paragraphs. The first paragraph will show the current commitment to change of employees and the second paragraph describes the readiness for change. The third paragraph will contain a summary of the results.

4.1.1 The level of commitment to change

The pre-questionnaire results suggested that most participants were affectively committed to this change. The interview results confirm this as 70% of employees and 60% of management also indicated affective commitment. 24% of participants indicated to be normatively committed and 6% indicated continuance commitment. However, a number of participants that agreed with the affective commitment statement during the pre-questionnaire also agreed or did not disagree with the normative or continuance statements. This means that even though affective commitment can currently be the prime motivator for employees to support the change, the other forms of commitment are also present in a number of affectively committed employees. Participants who were affectively committed generally indicated to really want the change to happen and succeed and were motivated to support the initiative.

“Yes, I’m absolutely motivated to support this change, I really enjoy getting to know a new software-package and to

also look at its possibilities and I do feel this is a good system.” – Employee 4

(29)

would bring advantages. For management this was mostly illustrated by the commitment they saw in their subordinates during the implementation of the new system.

“Last week I was present in one of the other departments. The performance of the new software package was very poor last week. And I was amazed that people were so incredibly patient, I would have walked away ages ago if it had happened to me. And I would have said I don’t want to do this anymore, what can I do for you [supervisor]? Can I clean up the archives or something instead? [laughs]” - Manager 3

During the analysis of the pre-questionnaire an additional interesting result appeared. Even though a majority of participants indicated to be affectively committed to this change, only one of the participants indicated to feel happy when he/she thought about the change-project2_.

Table 4.1

Interview result on employees’ commitment to change at employee and management level

Hierarchical level Commitment to change Percentage of participants

Employees Affective Normative Continuance 70% 24% 6% Management Affective Normative Continuance 60% 20% 20% FIGURE 4.2

Level of agreement with the statements from the pre-questionnaire which reflect the level of affective, normative and continuance commitment

2

(30)

4.1.2 The level of readiness for change

A majority of participants in this study can be considered to be moderately ready for change. 60% of management and 40% of employees have high levels of readiness at the necessity level. During the interviews it was found that nearly all participants knew why the change was necessary and why this change-project was the right change to make. However, this did range from understanding why the change was necessary to really feeling this change needed to happen. The group that fell into the high readiness group (41%) generally felt this change was absolutely necessary and the medium group (41%) generally understood why the change was necessary. The difference between these two groups was that the first group generally felt that not changing is no longer an option and the second group still generally felt the organization could continue without the change.

“I really can’t describe how happy it makes me that this is finally happening [cheerful tone]…So many advantages, not just for us but for other stakeholders as well!” – Employee 7

In terms of feasibility the results show that the majority of participants were not highly confident in the successful implementation of the change. A significant number of employees felt the change would eventually succeed, however thought it was not going to be on time and to specification. ‘Eventually’ is really the keyword most participants used when discussing the readiness in terms of confidence in the feasibility.

“I think that, eventually [chuckles], it will all work out but I do think it’s going to be a very long and miserable year.” – Employee 11

(31)

TABLE 4.2

Interview results on readiness for change showing the level of confidence in the necessity and feasibility Hierarchical level Readiness for change -

Necessity Percentage of participants Employees High Medium Low 41% 41% 18% Management High Medium Low 60% 20% 20% Hierarchical level Readiness for change -

Feasibility Percentage of participants Employees High Medium Low 24% 53% 23% Management High Medium Low 20% 80% - 4.1.3 Summary

The results show that most employees are primarily affectively committed to this change. However the pre-questionnaire and interviews also suggest that a substantial minority is normatively and/or continuancely committed to this change as well. Most participants can be considered moderately ready for this change as most feel confident in the necessity of this change. However, there appears to be room for improvement in the confidence that this change is feasible. Only one of the participants indicated to feel happy when they thought about the change-project.

This has described the situation at Grand-Grocer in terms of commitment and readiness. The following paragraphs will show if and how the independent variables have influenced the commitment and readiness.

4.2 Influence of change communication quality on commitment and readiness

(32)

Figure 4.6 shows the degree to which participants were positive on the content, method and alignment of change communication. The most notable result is that most participants were very negative about the content side of communication.

FIGURE 4.6

Results from the interview showing the degree to which participants were positive on the content, method and alignment of change communication at two hierarchical levels

4.2.1 Content

In order to establish the quality of the content of change communication, five principal items of change communication were measured. These were the discrepancy, appropriateness, principal support, personal valence and efficacy items. A majority of participants was found to be neutral or positive on the discrepancy, appropriateness and principal support components of change communication. It is primarily the last two items, personal valence and efficacy, which show a negative result. It became apparent that the change communication primarily focussed on the why of the change and not so much on the how. Communicating the why of the change primarily influenced the commitment of participants whereas the

how primarily influenced the readiness.

Many employees did not know how their role was going to change which shows the importance of efficacy. This ranged from not knowing in detail to not even knowing that their role was going to change at all. The management of department A indicated that it is difficult to decide when to inform subordinates about the consequences of the change. Especially with a change-project of this scale and timeline it is difficult to time it right. However, during the interviews with the employees in this department it was found that nearly all participants were anxious and annoyed by not receiving this information.

“Management must think that when they tell us [about the role changes] they will create a lot of uncertainty, however I wouldn’t know how you could possibly create more uncertainty than by not telling anything at all.” –

(33)

These participants were aware, to some extent, that jobs would be lost. What had not been communicated was how many, who and when. Efficacy is an important item that was missing from the change communication at the moment of the interviews. Many participants wondered what they could do to prepare themselves for their new role. Some also mentioned not feeling ready because they did not know what to prepare themselves for.

“I want to know what I have to do, do I have to retrain myself? Or will they simply drop the bomb on me one day and say: here’s your new job, you had better be prepared! I would like to prepare myself before that happens.” –

Employee 3

A number of participants also wondered whether or not other stakeholders and colleagues were going to be able to undergo the change and were worried that, because of the new interdependence, this would affect their own performance. This can also be considered part of the efficacy component of the change message.

FIGURE 4.8

Results from the interview showing the level of positivity on the five items of the content of change communication. This reflects to what degree these items have been communicated to the participants.

6 18 53 23 29 7 29 35 36 18 46 20 40 7 26 7 18 38 25 13 6 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Discr epan cy App ropr iate ness Prin cipa l Sup port Pers onal Val ence Effic acy Very positive Positive Neutral Negative Very negative

Figure 4.8 shows that the quality of personal valence and efficacy can be considered to be low in change communication. Besides the five principal components of change communication, “issues concerning feedback” were mentioned by a large majority of participants.

Feedback

(34)

“Well you get much more involved [when feedback is provided] and then you know what’s going on and you know that they’re doing something with your criticism, well positive criticism…Now I sometimes feel like I’m a voice crying in the wilderness.” – Employee 14

Participants also indicated that feedback was usually only provided when the participant had made a mistake or when things had gone wrong. A number of participants indicated to desire more positive news and appreciation for the effort they put into the change. This would then positively influence the participant’s commitment and readiness.

The influence of the content of change communication

The first sub-question was: How does the quality of the content of change communication influence the commitment and

readiness at employee-level?

The content of change communication has a strong positive relationship with the commitment and readiness. Because Grand-Grocer had communicated the why of the change it had a positive influence on the affective commitment. However, because the how of the change is not properly communicated the quality of the content of change communication is not experienced as very high and is thus not effectively contributing to higher levels of commitment and readiness. Of the five principal components of the change message it is clear that both personal valence and efficacy have not been clearly communicated to the employees. Besides this, a significant number of issues concerning feedback were also found. This was also found to have a strong influence on the commitment and readiness.

4.2.2 Method

In terms of method the results are quite positive and two recent events have had a great influence. The first event was a group-meeting in one of the departments where both the supervisor and top manager were present. The second event was a meeting between two of the departments. Most participants indicated this was very positive because now they could finally ask some important questions. And this shows the importance of rich media in terms of commitment and readiness. During these meetings questions most participants had were finally answered or disclosure was provided on when those questions could be answered.

“For the group as a whole it’s good that our supervisor provides feedback in a group setting…Informing people together at the same time insures that they stay involved, committed and confident.” – Employee 5

BECOMING GRAND AT CHANGE BY MAKING THE HUMAN ELEMENT TOP-SHELF