Search results

For 30 years the series, Research in Organizational Change and Development (ROCD) has provided an extensive range of scholarly research and philosophical reflections on the field of organization development and change (ODC). On the occasion of the 30th anniversary of the first volume, this chapter poses the question as to how we might learn about the philosophy of ODC research from the 24 published volumes. Taking the author’s explicit pursuit of the question as a process of interiority, it invites readers to engage with the question themselves and thereby enact interiority within ODC itself.

This research highlights the scenarios that might serve as a strategic vision to describe a future beyond the current library, one which both guides provosts and creates a map for the transformation of human resources and technology in the university research libraries. The scenarios offer managerial leaders an opportunity to envision new roles for librarians and staff which brings a much needed focus on the development of human resources as well as a thought-stream to understand decisions which effectively and systematically move the organization toward a strategic vision.

These scenarios also outline possible future directions research libraries could take by focusing on perspectives from library directors, provosts, and administrators for human resources. The four case study scenarios introduce potential future roles for librarians and highlight the unsustainability of the current scholarly communications model as well as uncertain factors related to the political, social, technical, and demographic issues facing campuses. Given the changes institutions face, scenarios allow directors to include more uncertainty when developing and articulating a vision. These scenarios may start a discussion, before a strategic planning process, to sharpen the evaluations and measures necessary to monitor achievements that define the value of the library.

Despite the breadth of knowledge on self and identity formation across the study of organizations, the field of organizational development and change has limited research on the construction of professional identity. Much has been written to describe the “self-concepts” of those practicing and researching in the field, but there have been no investigations that have explored how these “self-concepts” form. In addition, although women have contributed to defining the “self” in the field, men have held the dominant perspective on the subject. Thus, in this chapter, we address a disparity in the research by exploring the construction of professional identity in the field of organizational development and change, and we give voice to the renowned women who helped to build the field. Using the profiles of 17 American women included in The Palgrave Handbook of Organizational Change Thinkers, we perform a narrative analysis based upon the concepts and models prevalent in the literature on identity formation. By disentangling professional identity formation of the notable women in the field, we can begin to see the nuance and particularities involved in its construction and gain deeper understandings about effective ways to prepare individuals to work in and advance the field.

The central purpose of the research presented in this paper is to synthesize the current state of the field in qualitative methods in international organizational change research and to provide a call to researchers to use this type of methodology more frequently. The intent is to provide readers with an overview of how and when qualitative research methods should be used for investigating important theoretical and empirical questions in management research.

The authors developed several working hypotheses based on their own experiences in using an extensive array of qualitative methods in organizational change research. They coupled this with an extensive literature search to understand how these methodologies have been used to date. The findings from the literature search were analysed to uncover where there are gaps in the work and how organizational change and other management scholars can effectively use qualitative methods to advance their understanding of international change phenomena, given the unique questions and situations confronted in various contexts. The authors include an array of examples to show how qualitative research has been used to successfully test theories, uncover new phenomena, find connections between various situations, and provide a deep understanding of contextual influences on organizational change.

The authors' findings include several examples and ideas of how and when scholars can use qualitative methods to advance understanding of international change phenomena. This provides a much richer, deeper, and more nuanced understanding of many of the phenomena and issues under investigation by employing the more observational and human‐centric techniques available through the use of qualitative methods. Several of the implications of context are only observable through some of the qualitative methods discussed, such as ethnography, case studies, interviews, observations, and their respective analysis methods. Qualitative research can be employed successfully and fruitfully in organization studies' contexts to: help uncover new organizational phenomena; build and test theories of change; and create new methods that researchers can use specifically in international change studies.

The paper is the only one of its kind, bringing a cohesive and focused review of qualitative methods studies in international organizational change research. It provides readers and the field with a menu of ways to effectively use qualitative methods and a description of where and how to bring in these methods to answer questions and uncover new themes that are not effectively dealt with through the use of more commonly employed quantitative methods and analyses.

The purpose of this paper is to study recently published research to identify findings that provide research‐based guidance to organizational change agents and managers in addressing individual resistance to organizational change initiatives.

The paper examines published research appearing in peer‐reviewed journals since 1998 that focus on exploring individual resistance to organizational change.

Recent published research provides considerable practical guidance to organizational change agents and managers in understanding and dealing with resistance to change. Recent research examines the cognitive, affective, and behavioral dimensions of individual resistance and how it is influenced by: individual predispositions towards openness and resistance to change; individuals' considerations of threats and benefits of change; communication, understanding, participation, trust in management, management styles, and the nature of relationships with the change agents.

This paper is limited to research articles involving resistance to organizational change published in peer‐reviewed journals from 1998 to 2009. Also, the paper finds that reported research used primarily self‐report questionnaires to gather data, which are quantitatively analyzed. Such a lack of diversity of research methodologies provides a limited perspective of resistance to organizational change that might have been broadened by qualitative and practice‐based methods (e.g. case studies and action research).

A framework is presented linking organizational change research findings to specific change practitioner recommendations. Limitations of recent research are also discussed.

Most studies provide an examination of a limited number of variables influencing resistance to change, and are not necessary designed to provide practical guidance to change practitioners. This paper provides a comprehensive framework of constructs and variables specifically aimed at linking research‐based findings to guidance for change practitioners.

Given the opportunity to reflect on the three decades of research and practice that have passed since the first volume of Research in Organizational Change and Development was published, we note a number of shifts in our world that are causing us to rethink what we know and how we intervene. These shifts, and their attendant effects on individuals, organizations, and society, have opened up exciting possibilities for the advancement of the field. These advances can be achieved through combined research and action, aimed at producing new insights into core topics like motivation, leadership, and organization design. We suggest an ambitious agenda for current and future scholar-practitioners that we hope will stimulate enough thoughtful work to help fill the next three decades of volumes of Research in Organizational Change and Development.

Contemporary organizations are facing an operating environment characterized by volatile, uncertain, complex, ambiguous, and “permanent whitewater.” To sustain high performance in this context, organizations must be able to change and develop as efficiently and effectively as possible. Within organizations, there are actors who catalyze and advance change in this manner; these actors are known as “champions.” Yet the scholar who wishes to conduct research concerning champions of change and organizational development is likely to be met by a highly fragmented literature. Varying notions of champions are scattered throughout extant research, where authors of articles cite different sources when conceptualizing champions; often superficially. Furthermore, many types of highly specific and nuanced non-generalizable champions have proliferated, making it difficult for practitioners and researchers to discover useful findings on how to go about making meaningful changes in their context. The purpose of this study was to address these problems for practitioners and researchers by engendering thoroughness, clarity, and coherence within champion scholarship. This was done by conducting the first comprehensive, critical yet insightful review of the champion literature within the organizational sciences using content analysis to re-conceptualize champions and develop a meaningful typology from which the field can be advanced. The chapter first suggests a return to Schön (1963) as the basis from which to conceptualize champions and, second, offers a typology consisting of 10 meta-champions of organizational change and development – Collaboration, Human Rights, Innovation, Product, Project, Service, Strategic, Sustainability, Technology, and Venture Champions – from which change practice and future research can benefit.

This chapter provides a review and extension of research pertaining to the respective roles of leaders, managers, and human resource management (HRM) practices on employee reactions to organizational change. Particular focus is given to the differential effects of these factors on employee commitment and resistance to change. A review of organizational change research between 2001 and 2011 revealed these outcomes to be two of the most commonly studied and consequential employee reactions to change. The review also demonstrates that research lacks precision in the treatment (conceptualization and measurement) of these constructs. For instance, sometimes the leadership and management of change are clearly differentiated, other times equated, and yet other times blurred. Arguments are presented that encourage researchers to refine theory and tests of leading and managing change, as well as their respective implications for change-related HRM. A specific case is made for the academic and practical utility of theory and practice that explicitly integrates leadership and management roles and responsibilities. Doing so will more closely align with and capture the inherent complexity of organizational change and employees’ experience. The intent is to urge both scholars and practitioners of change to adopt broader, yet more precise and practical, perspectives on how to influence employee reactions and change outcomes. To this end, special attention is paid to roles of leaders, managers, and HRM practices.

The employee-organization relationship (EOR) has increasingly become a focal point for researchers in organizational behavior, human resource management, and industrial relations. Literature on the EOR has developed at both the individual – (e.g. psychological contracts) and the group and organizational-levels of analysis (e.g. employment relationships). Both sets of literatures are reviewed, and we argue for the need to integrate these literatures as a means for improving understanding of the EOR. Mechanisms for integrating these literatures are suggested. A subsequent discussion of contextual effects on the EOR follows in which we suggest that researchers develop models that explicitly incorporate context. We then examine a number of theoretical lenses to explain various attributes of the EOR such as the dynamism and fairness of the exchange, and new ways of understanding the exchange including positive functional relationships and integrative negotiations. The article concludes with a discussion of future research needed on the EOR.

The purpose of this paper is to systematically review existing research on organizational change capabilities (OCC), which remains fragmented. This study aims to fill gaps in the literature by scientifically discussing contributions and highlighting the main issues with previous research findings regarding the dimensions that comprise them, as well as the antecedents and consequences of OCC.

This paper searched all research that studied OCC and published from 2005 to 2020. In total, 48 studies out of 249, found on Scopus and EBSCO-host, were included in the review.

This research found that OCC is a complex concept and that it has many definitions and dimensions. The findings also suggest that existing research has found that a number of organizational and individual factors are antecedents of OCC and have consequences for organizational outcomes.

This review was only conducted on scientific publications from two article databases. Future research should search other databases on OCC as the broad concept may provide additional insights.

Literature on OCC is limited, and there is still no generally accepted definition of OCC, the different perspectives and measurement dimensions. On the other hand, for academics and practitioners, this study provides a comprehensive, critical systematization of the limited OCC academic literature. This study also offers opportunities for further research to address the limitations of empirical testing of OCC constructs, antecedents and consequences of the various theories and methodologies.