A CHANGE WITHIN A CHANGE HITCHING A RIDE, PAST EXPERIENCES AND FUTURE ATTITUDES

(1)

1

A CHANGE WITHIN A CHANGE

HITCHING A RIDE,

PAST EXPERIENCES AND FUTURE ATTITUDES

BY

MARC DE HEI

University of Groningen

Faculty of Economics and Business

(2)

2 ABSTRACT

The purpose of this research is to explore the effect of previous change experiences on the interaction between individual and team attitudes towards change. Due to the fact that the causal mechanism between multiple levels of attitudes and previous change experiences over time is not clearly addressed in the change literature, it is proposed to conduct a qualitative case study in order to explain „the how‟ of this relationship. The case study is conducted in the public sector. Semi-structured interviews were conducted; the critical incidents technique is applied in order to gather relevant reactions of the change recipients to important events over time. In short, the findings suggest that previous negative group experiences have a negative influence on individual attitudes through the individual-group interaction. Besides, previous change experience could explain a possible discrepancy between affective and cognitive attitudes and the intentional attitude towards next changes. A practical message from this study is that change agents and management should be aware of previous change history and this impact one the interaction between individual and group attitude towards change.

(3)

3

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

(4)

4 TABLE OF CONTENTS

„Describing human behavior in all its complexity is a difficult task‟ (Ajzen et al., 1991: 179). The authors Smith and Graetz (2011) of Philosophies of Organizational Change, mentioned that „the impact of change is perceived as powerful, complex and potentially severe‟. Multiple authors mentioned that „a high proportion of change efforts tend to fail‟ (Beer & Nohria, 2000; Senturia et. al., 2008; Smith & Graetz, 2011). In fact, the failure rate of organizational changes is tremendous; „change initiatives have a failing rate estimated between 50% and 70%‟ (Beer & Nohria, 2000; Fay & Lührmann, 2004; M. Hughes, 2011). In conclusion, there is need for an improved understanding of factors leading to manage organizational change successfully.

(7)

7

From another perspective, attitudes „should be conceived as a socially constructed phenomenon shaped by its context‟ (Ford, Ford, & D‟Amelio, 2008) and „individuals make sense of change and develop a certain attitude towards change not only through a process of individual reflection but also through collective sense-making that comes from a series of interactions with colleagues and change agents‟ (Bouckenooghe, 2010: 519). Hence, groups have a crucial role in developing the attitudes of the individual (Vakola, 2013). A large amount of research focuses on either the individual, group or organizational level neglecting the interaction between multiple levels (Bouckenooghe, 2010; Bouckenooghe, Devos, & van den Broeck, 2009), while a great number of researchers have confirmed that organizational change is a multilevel process (Caldwell, Herold, & Fedor, 2004; Caldwellet al., 2009; Pettigrew, Woodman, & Cameron, 2001; Whelan-Berry, Gordon, & Hinings, 2003). Hence, multiple authors propose a multilevel perspective concerning the attitudes towards change (Bouckenooghe, 2010; Dansereau, Yammarino, & Kohles, 1999; Pettigrew et al., 2001). Adopting this multilevel perspective will unravel new insights that previously have been overlooked (Rafferty, Jimmieson, & Armenakis, 2013; Vakola, 2013). In conclusion, this study will adopt a multilevel perspective (individual and groups) of attitudes towards the change initiative.

(8)

8

mentioned that previous change experiences of employees will be carried forward in their mind and will influence their future behavior towards new changes (Pettigrew et al., 2001). Moreover, previous change experiences are seen as a trustworthy indicator in explaining how employees will experience and react towards a new change (Palmer, Dunford & Akin, 2009). However, the consequences of frequent change and previous change experiences on employees‟ attitudes are ambiguous (Rafferty & Simons, 2006; Stensaker & Meyer, 2012). Therefore new insights are recommended to explain this ambiguity, a process analysis is used when there are „a sequence of events that describes how things change over time‟ (Van de Ven, 1992). As a result, the organizational change literature has ignored the influence of previous change history as an important contextual factor that shapes future employees‟ change related beliefs, attitudes and behavior (Bordia et al., 2011; Pettigrew et al., 2001). Thus, it seems interesting to explore the effect of previous change experience on the interaction between the individual and group attitude over time, to capture factors that have not yet been discovered.

(9)

9

A further environmental development is that public organizations are essential in facilitating the necessary conditions and infrastructure to enhance national competitiveness for the private sector at national, regional and local levels (Rashman, Withers, & Hartley, 2009). Rashman et al. (2009) concluded that „there continues to be an over-reliance on the private sector‟. Organizational researchers should be aware of public organizations as an under-represented field of research within the organizational change literature (Ferlie, Hartley and Martin, 2003; Pettigrew, 2001; Rashman et al., 2009). As a matter of fact, only 22 papers of the total 131 papers, just over 22%, reviewed by Rashman et al. (2009) are related to public organizations. Meanwhile, the scale of recent public organizations changes has caused major issues that demand attention from organizational researchers (Ferlie, Hartley, & Martin, 2003; Pettigrew, 2005). To conclude, relatively little research has been conducted regarding public organizations and organizational change, while „they exist in a specific context which is worthy of consideration‟ (Kelman, 2005). Thus, exploration of organizational change in public service organizations provides a wider range of organizational contexts in which to develop an improved understanding of previous change experiences and the attitudes towards change. These outcomes can help to clarify and illuminate elements of the private sector.

(10)

10

Knippenberg et al., 2006). In this research setting, it should be interesting to see how the group identity has a possible influence on the interaction between the individual and group attitude. Overall, the difference between high and low identifiers and their impact on the individual and group attitude is interesting to explore further as a possible background mechanism. However, this concept is not the main focus of this study.

(11)

11

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

A great number of theories have explained the phenomena of organizational change. Although the literature covers a wide collection of similar theories regarding attitudes towards change, an improved understanding of the interaction between individual and group attitude will enrich the current change literature. In order to provide an explanation of the research question, a deeper understanding of the following concepts is required: 1) individual attitudes towards change, 2) group attitude towards change, 3) the interaction between individual and group attitude and 4) previous change experience. In addition, a possible role of team identification will be explained.

2.1 Individual Attitudes towards Change

(12)

12

According to Bouckenooghe (2010: 501), attitudes towards change could be identified „as an all-encompassing term because different concepts (either negative or positive) are covered by the term attitudes towards change‟. Other concepts that were found in the literature: openness to change, coping with change, commitment to change and cynicism about change. In addition, 90% of the research on change attitudes has been conducted on resistance to change or change readiness (Bouckenooghe, 2010; Choi, 2011). Hence, a great diversity of concepts or according to Bouckenooghe (2010: 502) „conceptual muddle‟ are used to capture the concept attitudes towards change. Furthermore, an inadequate amount of research includes both a negative and positive view of attitudes towards change (Bouckenooghe, 2010; Nikolaou, 2005; Piderit, 2000a; Vakola, Tsaousis, & Nikolaou, 2004; Yousef, 2000). For instance, change resistance is usually perceived as negative, while it could also be used as possible feedback to improve the change process (Bouckenooghe, 2010; Ford et al., 2008; Ford & Ford, 2010). To conclude, for the advancement of the field (Bagozzi, 2003; Bouckenooghe, 2010; Zapf & Holz, 2006), it is recommended that future studies should examine concepts that are embedded in both perspectives (positive and negative attitudes).

(13)

13

the change, this reaction could be positive in support of change or negative to oppose change (Bouckenooghe, 2010; Choi, 2011). „Each of these three facets reflects three different manifestations of people‟s evaluations of a change‟ (Elizur and Guttman, 1976: 612). This multifaceted view has also been applied to change readiness and change resistance literature to ´better capture the complexity of the phenomenon´ (Bouckenooghe et al., 2009; Piderit, 2000b). To conclude, attitudes towards change is a broad concept, this study addresses attitudes towards change positively and negatively and will use the three components of Elizur and Guttman (1976) to capture the complexity of the phenomenon.

2.2 Group attitude towards change

(14)

14

Table 1|Possible impact of trusted team members on the reaction of recipients towards the change

(Bouckenooghe, 2010: p.520). Thus, a distinction could be made between the positive and negative attitudes of a group or team of individuals.

In the past decade, organizations have been organizing their work more around teams (Carton, 2012). At the same time, the role of groups is critical in the formation of the individual attitudes and beliefs (Battilana & Casciaro, 2013; Carton, 2012; Vakola, 2013). Cawsey et al. (2012: 231) mentioned that work groups and co-workers „play a pivotal role in how individuals react towards change‟ and „our views are influenced by the actions and comments of those around us‟. Fishbein & Ajzen (1975) discussed the term „subjective norms‟; through the process of social influence change recipients ensure themselves that their behavior is in line with the behavioral expectations of other co-workers. Besides, Cawsey et al. (2012) provided an overview of the possible impact of trusted team members on the individual attitude towards change (table 1).

Opinions of trusted Team members

Individual initial attitude towards change

Possible Implication

Negative towards change Negative towards change Initially opposed to the change, is reinforced by trusted group members

Positive towards change Support for change may decline, due to different negative perspectives of trusted team members.

Positive towards change Negative towards change Initially opposed to the change, however potentially open to new perspectives due to peer pressure Positive towards change Very motivated to support and to

(15)

15

For instance, if the people around us behave negatively towards the change, they will influence other individuals to consider arguments moving to the opposite direction. However, it should be mentioned that Cawsey et al. (2012) mentioned a possible impact. Over time, when change recipients interact with each other, each individual in that group converges to an unified view of events (Klein & Kozlowski, 2000; Rafferty et al., 2013), because „an individual and group sense-making process taking place in a social context is a product of constant and ongoing human production and interaction in organizational settings‟ (George & Jones, 2001: 421). Thus, the social factors and the social context in which the individual attitudes towards change are shaped, play a major role in the reinforcement of personal attitudes (Lines, 2005; Wood, 2000). In conclusion, the majority of studies concerning attitudes towards change have individual-level roots. However those attitudes could become shared at collective levels (i.e., team or organization). The tripartite view encompasses both positive and negative views of change and reveals how change recipients intend to behave. It should be interesting to examine the impact of team member attitudes over time on the individual attitude towards change.

2.3 Previous Change Experience

(16)

16

referred to as the change history of individuals (Bernerth, Walker, & Harris, 2011; Schneider, Brief, & Guzzo, 1996) or the change history of organizations / groups (McCabe, 2010; Prywes, 2011). The organizational history of change could be defined as the historical data and development of change events within a company (Prywes, 2011). The change experience of change recipients is defined as the previous change experience someone had with the previous change programs within the current organization and the preceding organization(s).

(17)

17

represent knowledge structures that influence subsequent perceptions and attitude formation of future change events (Lau & Woodman, 1995; Fiske & Taylor, 1991). Overall, the preceding literature suggests that as change recipients gain change experience, they use that experience to interpret subsequent changes (Procter, John, Julian, & Randall, 2007; Stensaker & Meyer, 2012).

Thus, to which extent change events are interpreted by change recipients, depends particularly on their previous change experiences. In this sense-making process, individuals exchange past change experiences and stories, seek new information and engage in gossip in order to give meaning to change events (Gioia, Thomas, Clark, & Chittipeddi, 1994; Gioia & Thomas, 1996; Labianca, Gray, & Brass, 2000). During these inter-recipient processes within the work group, change events are interpreted by the individuals (Balogun, Johnson, 2005). Thus, those past change experiences influence someone‟s „unique interpretive reality of an event‟ and change recipients make sense of change by reviewing past experiences through inter-recipients processes ( Balogun, Johnson, 2005; Cameron, 2006; Eby, Adams, Russell & Gaby, 2000). In conclusion, it seems interesting to explore the effect of previous change experience on the interaction between the individual and group attitude over time, to capture factors that have not been discovered before.

2.4 Group Identification

(18)

18

(19)

19

further. However, this is not the main focus of this study and will therefore be more considered as a background approach.

2.5 Interaction Attitudes towards Change and Previous Change Experience

(20)

20

3. METHODOLOGY

The aim of this study is to explore the underlying mechanism of the impact of previous change experiences on the interaction between individual and group attitude towards change in a public organization. The answering of the research question: „What is the influence of previous change experiences on the interaction between individual and group attitudes towards the change? ‟ is done by means of a case-based process approach (Pettigrew, 1992). A qualitative single-case (Yin, 1994) study was conducted at a public company named Synergon located in Winschoten in order to capture contextual complexity and richness (Dyer & Wilkins, 1991). First, the research design is described, followed by the description of the case. Next, the data collection is described, followed by a detailed explanation of the data analysis.

3.1 Research design

(21)

21

(Burnes, 2004; Dawson, 1994; Pettigrew et al., 2001; Pettigrew, 1992; Yazdifar, Askarany, Mohammad, & Moradi, 2012). This qualitative approach attempts to understand and explain in detail the individual change experiences and their interpretations in interaction with the group (Veal, 2005).

An important aspect of research from case studies is the selection of the cases (Eisenhardt, 1989). Therefore, several case selection criteria will be used. First of all, the research site needs to be subject of an ongoing change initiative and should have had multiple previous change experiences. The business office has experienced multiple changes before and multiple changes were occurring at the same time. Hence, this research site meets the first criteria. Secondly, since this study is multilevel focused on the individual and team level, the research will be conducted in a setting in which the individual and group attitude could be analyzed. Thirdly, the research should be conducted in a public setting, because a small number of studies have been conducted at governmental organizations (Rashman et al., 2009). Altogether, the case is a suitable research site to answer the research question. This multilevel qualitative case study approach will unravel new insights concerning the attitudes towards change over time, that previously have been overlooked (Bouckenooghe, 2010; Rafferty, Jimmieson, & Armenakis, 2013; Pettigrew et al., 2001; Vakola, 2013). Observing this phenomenon in practice will be the next step (Van Aken et al., 2012).

3.2 Research setting

(22)

security-22

Head Business

Office

Change Agent

Business Office

downstairs

Change Recipients (5)

Business Office

upstairs

Reception

indication (In Dutch: „Wet Sociale Werkvoorziening‟). In January 2015 the Participation Law (In Dutch: Participatie Wet) has taken effect, causing a major change in the social service for the partially incapacitated (Wajong) and social security-indication (In Dutch: WSW- indicatie, „Wet Sociale Werkvoorziening‟). The consequence for the sheltered workshops is that more employees with a social security-indication will be detached to the private sector. Because of this new law, Synergon and Wedeka will be transformed into one organization as mentioned in the agreement of Westerlee (appendix 1). In appendix 1 additional information is provided concerning the Participation Law and the Agreement of Westerlee.

The Agreement of Westerlee and the Participation Law are causing major changes for Synergon. This case study focuses on the impact of those changes within the Business Office (Bedrijfsbureau) of Textile and Paper („Textiel en Papier‟ or T&P). Within the Business Office, the head business office (the change agent) is responsible for the complete Business Office. The business office is separated in a downstairs and upstairs office (figure 1).

(23)

23

Both offices work independent of each other and have their own customers. Their main activity is managing the complete order process of their customers (e.g. capacity planning, purchase of materials, work planning and the coordination of work outsourced). However, the office upstairs is autonomous, because they are already responsible for the complete order process. Meanwhile, the head of the business office mainly supervises the Business Office downstairs and he is responsible for managing the complete ordering process. Hence, the change agent works in the office downstairs to supervise the employees. Finally, the reception has got a support function for both business offices. Two different kinds of groups could be identified within each group as depicted in figure 1, namely: 1) the employees with a social-service indication and 2) employees without an indication (table 2). Those groups are important to analyze throughout this research, because of different sense-making processes (Bouckenooghe, 2010) and interpretations among each distinct group. Therefore, the consequences for social security-indicated employees could be different from for the employees without an indication.

Groups within Groups Social security-indicated Not social security-indicated

Business Office Upstairs 2 1

Business Office Downstairs 3 3 (also Change Agent)

Business Office Reception 2 0

Table 2| Groups within groups

(24)

24

change directly influenced them, while the head of the business office is acknowledged as change agent. Overall, this change only had an impact on the office downstairs. In October, the change agent gave a second presentation regarding the change. However, a second change occurred during the start-up phase. Namely, two weeks after this presentation the contract of the change agent was not extended. As a result, he was not able to guide the change and to complete the change process, with all its consequences. This change within a change affects the Business Office as a whole. To conclude, the first change has a major effect on the business office downstairs. Meanwhile, the second change, the resignation of the change agent had a major impact on the entire business office.

3.3 Data Collection

(25)

25

The interviews lasted on average 38 minutes and were conducted in Dutch, the native language of the interviewees on the research site (appendix 3). Besides, the change agent was interviewed for the second time to analyze the change process from multiple perspectives. He received an adjusted interview (Appendix 5). At the introduction of the interview, the respondents were assured the confidentiality and anonymity of the conversation and were asked whether they agreed to the recording of the interview. To ensure the anonymity of the interviewees, all persons are referred to as males („he‟). Directly after the data collection, the interviews were transcribed in exact words, which increased the reliability of the instrument (van Aken et al., 2012). All transcriptions were uploaded and analyzed with the software program Atlas.ti. Alongside the interviews, secondary data were collected from a powerpoint presentation regarding the change, newspapers, annual reports and corporate records. „Documents can be as significant as speech in social interaction‟ and secondary data provides valuable information that complements the interviews and presents a richer picture (Myers, 2009; Prior, 2003). Moreover, documentation may provide relevant information and may complement the interviews (Van Aken et al., 2012).

3.4 Data Analysis

(26)

26

hand‟ (Flanagan, 1954: 335). Interviewees were asked to discuss incidents or events that seem exceptionally relevant (Meyers, 2009; Miles & Huberman, 1994). This method provides „a systematic instrument for collecting the significance others attach to events, analyzing emerging patterns and outlining a tentative conclusion‟ (Kain, 2004: 85). Afterwards, the data were connected to the existing theory. Eventually, a new theory was developed that „closely fits the data obtained‟ (Eisenhardt, 1989).

CIT provides a clear, systematic and sequential research process (Flanagan, 1954; Hughes, 2007). The first step is establishing the general aim or defining the activity to be studied. In this research, the aim is to provide a deeper understanding of previous change experience on the interaction between the individual and group attitude (table 3). The second step is to develop a detailed plan for the data collection. This includes the identification of critical incidents, behaviors or critical interactions between individuals and the group. Furthermore, the third step involves „collecting the critical incidents that relate to the activity being studied‟ (Belkora et al., 2011; Flanagan, 1954; Hughes, 2007: 5). In this study ten semi-structured interviews were conducted: nine change recipients and one change agent were interviewed. For data collection purposes, each interview was audio-recorded and each interview was summarized by creating an overview of the attitudes (tripartite view) for all critical incidents (appendix 2).

Aim of the activity To provide a deeper understanding of previous change experience on the interaction between the individual and group attitude over time.

Activity Multiple change events / incidents will be used to analyze the effects of previous change experience on the interaction of attitudes over time.

The situation Where: a public company named Synergon

Who: nine change recipients and one change agent

What: using semi-structured interviews and secondary data

(27)

27

Critical interactions Occasions and actions influencing the interaction between the individual and group attitude over time

Dimensions The cognitive, affective and behavioral responses of the individual and groups towards change events

Groups The difference between the groups (Business Office downstairs, upstairs and the reception), also the different reactions of the non- social security-indicated persons and the persons who have a social security indication.

Table 3| Data Collection

The objective of step four is summarizing the data in a useful manner, while sacrificing as little details as possible in order to classify critical incidents and critical interactions between individual and group attitude (Flanagan, 1954; Hughes, 2007). The categorization framework was deductively and inductively developed (table 4). A deductive coding list was used as a starting point for the data-analysis (appendix 6). The coding scheme was arranged to provide an overall view of qualitative data, speeding up the data-analysis for retrieving and organizing data (Miles & Huberman, 1994). The coding scheme first defined the codes, thereafter an explanation of the subcategories was provided and the related quotes of the interviews were presented. In this research, the following deductive codes were used: previous change experience, individual attitude (affective, cognitive and intentional), group attitude (affective, cognitive and intentional), the interaction between individual and group attitude and team identity. Since this is a multilevel study, it is important not to „blindly generalize findings across levels of analysis to commit a fallacy‟ (Klein & Kozlowski, 2000b: 213). In this study, the individual attitudes were identified when change recipients used the word „I‟ and group attitude were identified when the word „we‟ was used during the interviews (Chan, 1998). Level 1

Previous change experience

The different points in time in which change recipients have experienced previous change initiatives.

Level 2

Critical interactions

Events and actions influencing the interaction between the individual and group attitude over time. The following main critical incidents were identified: Participation Law, Act of Westerlee, change at the business office, resignation of the change agent and the discussion in December.

Level 3

individual and group

(28)

28

attitude experienced among the group („we‟). These evaluations are classified as: positive, negative or neutral.

Level 4a

Components individual attitudes

ICR –Individual Cognitive reactions IAR – Individual Affective reactions IIR – Individual Intentional reactions Level 4b

Components group attitude

GCR –Group Cognitive reactions GAR – Group Affective reactions GIR – Group Intentional reactions Level 5a

The difference between the groups

The following groups were identified: - Business Office downstairs - Business Office upstairs - The Reception

Level 5b

The difference between the groups

The following groups within groups were identified: - Persons without a social security indication - Persons with a social security indication. Table 4| Categorization Framework

(29)

29

Corbin, 1998). The intention is to create a predictive statement that could form propositions regarding the phenomena under examination (Myers, 2009).

3.5 Controllability, validity and reliability

(30)

30 4. RESULTS

This section provides the results from the interviews and secondary documents that were analyzed. Each critical event is explained according to the categorization process as described in the previous section. In this study the following main critical incidents were identified: Participation Law, Act of Westerlee, change at the business office, the resignation of the change agent and the discussion in December. In appendix six an overall evaluation of individual and group attitude (cognitive, affective and behavioral) for each critical incident was categorized (level 3 and level 4). Finally, the reactions of the individuals were placed in the appropriate group (level 5a and level 5b).

4.1 Previous change experience Individual attitudes

Most change recipients experienced other changes before within Synergon. Some change recipients with a social security indication have experienced quite radical changes, namely (a takeover by Synergon):

“You hear very little, sometimes at the last moment… They stand behind you to take you to new workplaces, while others still did not know we were leaving. So, that was not thoughtful”.

Thus, at the last moment change recipients were informed of the change; causing negative change experiences for employees with an indication. A possible explanation for the lack of information is the multiple changes of managers:

“They all know exactly what they want, without results. That's my experience. All these changes and in practice, nothing happens. I've already experienced that before... Every time a new manager is hired, he wants to change every time and that usually is not successful”.

(31)

31

recipients with an indication are interpreted as negative, with some positive experiences. Also, change recipients without an indication mentioned previous change experiences within Synergon:

“Just normal not burdensome. In that respect, I am willing to change… I have experienced the last change very positively… I do not really know, so I think I have experienced that quite neutral… This is my first real job after graduating”.

Remarkable, change recipients without an indication experienced previous changes neutral or positive. One recipient downstairs mentioned that he has not experienced any previous changes before, because this was his first job. To conclude, there is an importance difference between previous change experience of change recipients with a social security-indication and change recipients without such indication (table 5). Because change recipients with a social security indication remembered previous changes as more severe than change recipients without an indication. Altogether, the individual change experiences of the Business Office downstairs are more negative, while the precious change experiences of the reception and office upstairs are more mixed.

Social Security Indicated Not Social Security Indicated “My previous change experiences are about

fifty-fifty. On the one hand I say they have succeeded, but on the other hand not”. (Neutral)

“I have been through reorganization in 1995. Then everything changed dramatically and almost everyone had to apply for other positions. I have experienced this change just normal, not burdensome”.

“The metal division has closed; the people were placed here and were taken over by another company”.

“I do not really know, so I think I've been pretty neutral stand. Otherwise I might have known”.

Table 5| Individual change experiences

Group attitude

A recurring pattern shared among all change recipients were the frequent unfinished changes within the organization and the Business Office:

(32)

32

that the changes over the years are reversed back. Because the changes had not the intended outcomes"... "All these intended changes and in practice, nothing happens." Thus, most of the change recipients within all groups have experienced multiple changes with no follow-up of the change initiative. This caused indecisive and doubtful reactions of those recipients involved. Also, the change agent mentioned that:

"Someone introduces a change and before it is actually fully implemented, the person is gone, and the change initiative is cancelled. That has happened a lot lately”…”Something is dropped and then nothing is done with it, resulting in a sequence of multiple changes. What I often miss in this organization, finish a change first, before you start with a new change”.

Thus, from multiple groups and perspectives (change recipients and change agent) it was mentioned that the sequence of multiple changes caused negative reactions that became shared within the groups. When change is perceived as too frequent, recipients experienced change fatigue. A reason for those frequent changes is the frequent change of management, with a new course and changes ahead: “We had a lot of different managers, nearly every year another manager was hired. With many changes, since every manager had a different goal and then the organization could change again”. As a result, the change recipients of all groups developed an awaiting attitude, because most changes were started but never finished or explained but never started.

(33)

33

downstairs were confronted that they were not capable enough to have the responsibility for the complete ordering process.

To conclude, from the individual perspective, it was found that previous changes experience had a more negative impact on the recipients with an indication. On the group level, two main themes were identified as previous change experience: 1) the frequent unfinished changes caused an awaiting attitude for the business office as a whole and resulted in change fatigue and 2) low trust in their own capabilities to receive responsibility of the ordering process. Change recipients will use these main themes as „their „unique interpretive reality of an event‟ and they make sense of change by reviewing these past experiences.

4.2 Participation Law / Agreement of Westerlee Individual attitudes

Most individual attitudes of the indicated recipients towards the Participation Law were negative:

“This is a sheltered workshop and it is being managed as a private company. They forget that there are people with disabilities, which is often forgotten…I understand that there are changes, which applies to The Netherlands in general. Yet, you hear nothing, that's it”.

Those recipients were nervous regarding the possible consequences of the Participation Law. Specifically, a lack of information caused negative (cognitive and affective) reactions towards the change, because they do not know what happens next. However, some change recipients reacted rather neutral:

“What has to be done has to be done. The law simply states that, so what could you do? I have still got my work and as long as I still have my job, why should I worry?... The law is the law, so what could you do about it”.

(34)

34

consequence that both sheltered workshops are reduced to one organization in 2018. The first reactions of indicated change recipients were entirely negative, for instance:

“What are they doing for God's sake?… So how do you want to guide people who work here to the private sector? That will not work here in Groningen…So I do not know what they are doing…And what they want, detaching 80 % to private organizations will not work".

Most change recipients disagreed (cognitive component) with the intentions of this change, because they perceived the goals as not feasible. Moreover, most change recipients did not know what to expect of the merger. This uncertainty caused much unrest within the business office:

“The consequences of the merger with Wedeka are still unknown. Perhaps both business offices will be merged in one location… It is quite uncertain, you do not know what will happen. I always thought I work here until I retire well, but I have my doubts now”.

Thus, the details and consequences of the merger are still unclear for change recipients, causing negative affective reactions. The employees with a social service-indication might be detached somewhere else in the new sheltered workshop or could be detached to private companies. To conclude, multiple recipients expressed negative cognitive and affective reactions. The consequences for employees with a social service-indication are more uncertain than employees without an indication. Hence, this major national change has a great impact on the attitudes of recipients with an indication.

Group attitude

The attitudes of the group towards the Participation Law are identified as more negative than positive. For instance, some change recipients sensed a more negative group attitude towards the Participation Law:

(35)

35

In general, the changes concerning the Participation Law were not communicated in a clear way to all change recipients within the Business Office. Thus, during this change the perceived uncertainty and the lack of clear information caused an increase of negative (cognitive and affective) attitudes among change recipients. The Agreement of Westerlee has not a direct effect on the change of the Business Office. However, indirect this change impacts the future of the Business Office:

“Because of this we will get more tasks and responsibilities at the business office, for example customer contact and sales… This has an indirect effect on how we as business office will proceed in the future”.

“We might get detached somewhere else, but that is not certain. This concerns only to people with a Security-indication…They can lose their jobs, and not sufficient information is provided regarding the change… that brings a great deal of unrest within Synergon”.

The details and consequences were unclear for change recipients, because employees might lose their job or could be detached in the private sector. This uncertainty caused unrest within the Business Office, because a limited amount of information is available. As a result, a change recipient sensed pessimistic (affective and cognitive) attitudes: "I think they were all negative, when they heard of the agreement of Westerlee”. Consequently, this negativity is shared within the group: “Even at work, you notice that people are very uncertain and that just has intensified at work. People do not know what will happen”. Thus, the perceived uncertainty and concerns increased even further within the group.

(36)

36

as negative, while the intentional component is identified as an awaiting-attitude. Also, negative interactions with the group resulted in a more negative individual attitudes.

4.3 Business Office Individual attitudes

The main objective of the first change was to provide the office downstairs more responsibility, to provide a better understanding concerning the current division of tasks (functions) and optimizing operations. Consequently, the office downstairs received the complete responsibility of the ordering process. The recipients downstairs responded quite pessimistic towards their new responsibilities:

“My reaction? What trouble will happen again? I expect something bad will happen… A little in shock… I'm not optimistic, with everything that is going to happen. It is quite hectic here… I feel a little anxious about how things will progress”. (Negative cognitive and affective reactions)

“The first reaction was positive…I am confident about the change, more responsibility”. (Positive cognitive and affective reactions)

Most recipients downstairs expressed negative (cognitive and affective) reactions. However, two recipients downstairs expressed positive attitudes. The difference in individual attitudes could be explained by previous change experiences. Recipients with a positive or no change experience revealed positive attitudes towards their new responsibilities. Meanwhile, recipients displaying a negative attitude have experienced negative previous changes. Thus, the different reactions are rather mixed and this reaction depends on previous change experiences.

Influence individual on group

(37)

37

“Another colleague who is very negative impacting the group, he is trying to influence the group… The people who are negative are trying to influence the people who are positive, by bringing negative things forward… And the people who are positive, they are not able to express their positivity”.

Hence, the recipients with a negative attitude have more impact on the group attitude than the recipients with a positive attitude. This means that over time, individuals in the group were increasingly exposed to negativity and therefore were not able to express their positive attitude. Moreover, the change agent mentioned that a negative person caused a tension within the business office downstairs. Also, the other four recipients expressed their negative concerns about their new responsibilities:

“There was someone clearly in resistance…and then you'd create a new tension and the other four were not familiar with their new role… Some wondered if they could carry out the new tasks”.

A few change recipients expressed some concerns regarding the new tasks, resulting in tensions within the group. This had a negative impact on attitudes of the group downstairs. To conclude, recipients with a negative attitude had more impact on the group attitude than the recipients with a positive attitude. Thus, this event is a negative turning point, because over time positive attitudes became negative.

Group attitude

There were two moments that the recipients were informed of the change at the office downstairs. After, the first presentation of the change program in March 2015, the reaction of the group downstairs was particularly negative:

“Negative, many remarks of how does this work? We have never done that before, we are not capable enough to do that… The first reaction of the group, that was negative from the start".

(38)

38

downstairs did not have confidence in their own capabilities. Since the first presentation, change recipients experienced no follow-up:

“After that presentation, I heard a lot of negative sounds. Everyone was very uncertain…Very negative at first and a negative attitude to the change”.

“Nothing happens. You just continue with the work that you did and nothing changes… A number of changes are initiated and suddenly there is no follow-up”. After the first presentation, the change abruptly stopped recipients perceived more uncertainty and anxiety. This was caused by the fact that change recipients were not further informed what the management was expecting from the office downstairs: “We do not know what is expected of us, because you hear nothing". This uncertainty and the lack of clear expectation resulted in rumors regarding the change. As a result, the perceived uncertainty and negative attitudes in the business office downstairs increased until the next critical incident. In October, the change agent presented a follow-up procedure. The same thing happened:

“It's half a year ago, and you still hear nothing about the change… There was a timeline in the presentation, a number of steps must already been carried out. And to what extent these steps have been finished, that is still unknown… In the beginning it was all clear and then due to the uncertainty you notice tensions within the business office”.

Hence, due to the uncertainty after the first presentation and negative reactions, the group attitude became more negative. Since there was no follow-up, the behavior of the group downstairs is interpreted as awaiting:

“Awaiting, we do not know where we stand, because you hear nothing… What you see in the office is that people have an awaiting attitude… We'll see what will happen”.

(39)

39 Influence group on individual

Multiple change recipients mentioned the impact of the group attitude on their own attitude towards the change. One change recipient downstairs mentioned that the rumors and uncertainty impacted his attitude: “I have become more cautious, however I still want to cooperate”. Some recipients were negative from the beginning and this had a major impact on the recipients with positive attitudes. After the second presentation in October tensions among recipients downstairs resulted in a negative attitude group attitude:

“The negative talking of people, which does no good and the work is not going well… Many negative reactions from people around me… Because the attitude of other people was very negative in the beginning, thereby my negative thinking increased”. Hence, most change recipients downstairs mentioned that the negativity concerning the change caused them to become more negative. To conclude, change recipients experienced negative group attitudes and this had a negative impact on individual attitudes. Thus, this event is a negative turning point, because over time positive attitudes became negative.

4.4 Resignation Change agent Individual attitudes

Soon after the second presentation of the change (in October), the change agent was informed that his contract was not extended, therefore his last day of work at Synergon was December 8th. This change had a large impact on the business office as a whole. In other words, „a change within a change‟ occurred. After the resignation of the change agent, there was a greater amount of uncertainty and negativity until the discussion in December:

(40)

40

Therefore, recipients reacted extremely negative towards the resignation of the change agent. Because, they expected that the change will be chaotic. Moreover, the trust of change recipients declined even further:

“In the beginning, I had the impression that if the change is well managed, it could succeed. Only, then it was not clear that he was leaving… This alone is the reason that the change will not go as it was supposed to go, because that expertise is just gone”. “The attitude of the employees became more negative, it was for them again that their manager had to leave”. (Change agent)

Hence, it is clear that the attitudes of the change recipients became more negative after the resignation of the change agent, because recipients had little confidence in the change. To conclude, this critical incident increased the negative attitude towards change at the Business Office. This change within a change had a great impact on change recipients.

Group attitude

In contrast to the change within the office downstairs, the resignation of the change agent had a major impact on the Business Office as a whole. The group downstairs expressed unfavorable cognitive and emotional reactions towards the resignation of their supervisor:

“That we were all surprised that our boss did not receive his contract extension, causing much uncertainty… I think most of us were sad… They have no idea how severe this impacts us... They are all upset that he will leave, we do not know what will happen next…I have been very angry and I am not the only one”.

“This has created a different situation, with a great impact on the group”.

(41)

41

change within a change clearly had a negative impact on the Business Office as a whole, since the attitude upstairs developed more negative.

4.5 Discussions December Individual attitudes

Only, two change recipients downstairs (not indicated employees) and the change agent were able to discuss their attitudes of this critical event. After the resignation of the change agent, there was a great amount of uncertainty within the Business Office. To provide more clarity regarding the distribution of tasks and the new supervisor, the change agent organized a group discussion to discuss the new roles within the business office. This group discussion provided more clarity concerning: 1) the division of tasks, 2) their new supervisor and 3) the expectations of the Business Office in 2016.

“Because it is clear now, how it will happen, what will happen and what their intention is... They will gradually change the business office… It is slightly more positive… I think it is a good sign that everything is clear”.

The above-mentioned reactions are positive individual attitudes. During those conversations the level of uncertainty decreased, because of the clear expectations and goals. Uncertainty has been removed and the expectations for each change recipient were made clear. For instance, a recipient mentioned: “The last three weeks I have better feelings, because the goals and expectations of the business office are clear”. To conclude, the group discussion provided the individual with more clarity of their new roles and clarified mutual expectations. As a result, the individual attitudes developed positively.

Group attitude

(42)

42

“This week it becomes clearer what is expected of each other and the future of the business office… Recently, the group's attitude became more positive… So yes, eventually everyone have a positive attitude towards the change”.

|The group attitude shifted positively because the expectations were made clear. Additionally, the change agent mentioned the effect on the group: “Interesting to notice this positive impact on the whole group”. As a consequence of these conversations most change recipients expressed more positive intentions:

“Everyone has now realized that he is going away and that we have to work together, communicate with each other in order to succeed. So, everyone is now more positive about the change, because everything is clear… We must all make effort and go for it”.

Thus, the group discussion in December provided the group with a new positive attitude. Moreover, the recipients were informed that a production manager was appointed as their new supervisor. As a consequence, over time the group attitude changed in a more positive way.

4.6 Group Identification

Some change recipients mentioned that group identification changed over time:

"At the beginning, I felt connected to the group, because of the all the changes and negativity… I notice that the last couple of weeks, I feel more connected to the whole group. So, there is some progress in my opinion”.

Thus, during the different changes, some recipients experienced tensions within the group downstairs. However, after the discussion in December the identification between recipients downstairs increased. Because of all those different changes at the same time, some change recipients experienced a shift in their group identification:

“It is not a team, with half of them I have a good connection and with the two people I cannot work with, because those two are constantly negative. Well for me it was a long time that these relations did not work... I can identify with two other colleagues but the other two absolutely not”.

(43)

43

the business office upstairs also mentioned some tension downstairs: “Also among themselves, what I have heard there are tensions. Due to all those changes, I know that they handle it differently, since they are undergoing a large change”. During all those changes and uncertainty the group identity influenced the group attitude in a negative way. As a result the group identification declined, due to negative interactions with close team members. Thus, over time this negative group identification influenced individual attitudes in a pessimistic way.

4.7 Case Summary

(44)

44 Figure 2| Model of recurring change

time recipients became more negative. A group discussion provided the business office with more clarity of their new roles. This critical event could be seen as a positive turning point.

(45)

45

5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The initial aim of this study was to provide a deeper understanding of the impact of previous change experiences on the interaction between individual and group attitudes towards change. After analyzing the data, several patterns were revealed and a model was proposed. This section will discuss the empirical findings and will relate these findings to the current change literature. Finally, the theoretical and practical implications are discussed, including the limitations of this study and suggestions for further research.

5.1 Research Question

“What is the influence of previous change experiences on the interaction between individual and group attitudes towards change over time?

(46)

46 5.2 Discussion and propositions

(47)

47

„decides‟ partially their reaction towards new changes and this scheme develops over time. Thus, previous change experiences impact the interpretive reality of a new event and this process is iterative (Balogun & Johnson, 2005; Eby et al., 2000). In this study, the changes had no follow-up after the announcement, as a result a wait and see attitude was developed. As a result, change recipients with negative previous change experience expressed negative cognitive and affective reactions, while the behavior of those change recipients was more of an „awaiting attitude‟.Therefore, previous change experiences could cause this discrepancy. Proposition 1: Previous change experiences without a follow-up cause a discrepancy between affective and cognitive attitudes and the intentional behavior for the next change.

(48)

48

attitude. However, two persons had a positive attitude from the beginning. Despite their positive intentions, the negative group attitude continued to dominate. The change agent also supported this perspective, because two negative change recipients had a great influence on other team members. Hence, most change recipients downstairs mentioned that the negativity concerning the change caused them to become more negative. This is in line with the literature, since people constantly compare their behavior with the behavior of others in order to behave in conformity with the expected group norms (Eckhardt, Laumer, & Weitzel, 2009: Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). Thus, this subjective norm (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980), which indicates that social pressure, affects the behavior of individuals. To conclude, change recipients experienced negative group attitudes and this had a negative impact on their individual attitudes.

Proposition 2: The more unfavorable the subjective norm towards change, the stronger the negative influence on change recipients‟ individual attitude towards change.

(49)

49

influenced individual attitudes negatively. This corresponds with the existing literature, over time change recipients interact with each other, each individual in that group converges to a unified view of events (Klein & Kozlowski, 2000; Rafferty et al., 2013). Because of „collective sense-making and interaction with colleagues, individual attitudes and perceptions will be developed and altered‟ (Bouckenooghe, 2010). Therefore, it is suggested that over time previous negative group experience will influence and frame individual attitudes, beliefs and behavior negatively towards new changes.

Proposition 3: Previous negative group experiences have a negative influence on individual attitudes through the individual-group interaction.

5.3 Theoretical and Practical contributions

(50)

50

by the group and through collective sense-making the individual attitude will be altered and refined, each individual in that group converges to a unified view of events (Bouckenooghe, 2010; Klein & Kozlowski, 2000a; Rafferty et al., 2013). Fourth, research on change attitudes seldom covers all three attitudinal components (cognitive, affective and intentional), either negative or positive over time (Bouckenooghe, 2010; Piderit, 2000a; Stensaker & Meyer, 2012). This is the first study that addressess the multifaceted view over time, to better capture the complexity of change attitudes. Fifthly, relatively little change research concerning attitudes has been conducted within public organizations (Kelman, 2005). Often employees working within a public organization keep working for their employer for an extended period of time. When employees remain in the same organization, they use previous change experience to frame future attitudes.

(51)

51

this study is that change agents and management should be aware of previous change history and this impact one the interaction between individual and group attitude towards change. As when driving a car, a change of organizational direction should include a rear view examination of previous change experiences.

5.4 Limitations

This study has several limitations that need to be mentioned. First, this study is only based on a single organization. A disadvantage of a single-case study is the difficulty of providing a strong groundwork for theory building (Yin, 2009). Nonetheless, it should be noted that generalization was not an objective of this study; since case studies are of an explanatory nature (Yin, 2009). Because the study was conducted during a complex change process, an opportunity was created to explore an extreme case (Eisenhardt, 1989b). Secondly, during the research process, multiple changes occurred and occasionally it was complicated for the recipients to give a clear explanation for each change. Indeed, the „critical incidents technique relies on events being remembered accurately and truthful by respondents‟ (Gremler, 2004: 67). However, this approach produces an opportunity for the respondents to give a detailed explanation of their own experiences (Gremler, 2004). The interviews were partly conducted after the discussions in December; therefore only three respondents were able to share their opinions and attitudes regarding the discussions in December.

5.5 Future Research

(52)

52

(53)

53

6. REFERENCES

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour. Englewood-Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall

Armenakis, a a, & Bedeian, a G. (1999). Organizational change: A review of theory and research in the 1990s. Journal of Management, 25(3), 293–315.

Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. (1989). Social Identity Theory and the Organization. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 20–39.

Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. A. (1998). The power of resistance: Sustaining valued identities. Power and Influence in Organizations, (January), 89– 120.

Balogun, J. (2005). From Intended Strategies to Unintended Outcomes: The Impact of Change Recipient Sense-making . Organization Studies, 26(11), 1573–1601.

Balogun, J. Johnson, G. (2005). From Intended Strategies to Unintended Outcomes: The Impact of Change Recipient Sense-making . Organization Studies, 26(11), 1573–1601. Bartunek, J. M., Rosseau, D. M., Rudolph, J. W., & DePalma, J. A. (2006). On the Receiving

End: Sense-making , Emotion, and Assessments of an Organizational Change Initiated by Others. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 42(2), 182–206.

Beer, M., & Nohria, N. (2000). Cracking the code of change. Havard Business Review, (MayJjune), 133–141.

Belkora, J., Stupar, L., & O‟Donnell, S. (2011). Using the Critical Incident Technique in Community-Based Participatory Research: A Case Study. Progress in Community Health Partnershiips, 5(4), 443–451.

Bergami, M., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2000). Self-categorization, affective commitment and group self-esteem as distinct aspects of social identity in the organization. The British Journal of Social Psychology, 39(4), 555–577.

Bernerth, J. B., Walker, H. J., & Harris, S. G. (2011). Change fatigue: Development and initial validation of a new measure. Work & Stress, 25(February), 321–337.

Bordia, P., Restubog, S. L. D., Jimmieson, N. L., & Irmer, B. E. (2011). Haunted by the Past: Effects of Poor Change Management History on Employee Attitudes and Turnover. Group & Organization Management, 36(2), 191–222.

Bouckenooghe, D. (2010). Positioning Change Recipients‟ Attitudes Toward Change in the Organizational Change Literature. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 46(4), 500–531.

Bouckenooghe, D., Devos, G., & van den Broeck, H. (2009). Organizational Change Questionnaire-Climate of Change, Processes, and Readiness: development of a new instrument. The Journal of Psychology, 143(6), 559–599.

Bovey, W. H., & Hede, A. (2001). Resistance to organizational change: the role of cognitive and affective processes. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 22(8), 372– 382.

Bryant, M. (2006). Talking about change: Understanding employee responses through qualitative research. Management Decision, 44(2), 246–258.

Burnes, B. (2004). Kurt Lewin and the planned approach to change: A re-appraisal. Journal of Management Studies, 41(6), 977–1002.

Caldwell, S. D., Herold, D. M., & Fedor, D. B. (2004). Toward an understanding of the relationships among organizational change, individual differences, and changes in person-environment fit: a cross-level study. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), 868–882.

A CHANGE WITHIN A CHANGE HITCHING A RIDE, PAST EXPERIENCES AND FUTURE ATTITUDES