Familiarity breeds content: The impact of exposure to change on employee openness and well‐being

Abstract

This article describes a longitudinal study of how openness to change, job satisfaction, anxiety and depression are affected by exposure to a change situation-in this case, the implementation of new technology and work practices. Measures were taken before the change was fully implemented and again several months later. Employees fell into two groups: those with high exposure to the change and those with low exposure. Longitudinal analysis revealed that greater exposure was directly related to subsequent improvements in openness to change for operational employees, but not for managers and engineers. Exposure was associated with improvements in job satisfaction and depression, irrespective of job type. The effect on job satisfaction, however, could be accounted for by the increased job complexity experienced on the new technology rather than exposure to change per se. Although the impact of exposure on depression became non-signi cant after controlling for job complexity, the result was marginal. Implications of the role of exposure in the management of change are discussed.To remain competitive, organizations need to respond to the challenges and opportunities afforded by new technologies and ways of working. It is commonly argued that the rate of such change is increasing (e.g. Conner, 1992;Wanberg & Banas, 2000). Certainly, it is clear that organizations have been taking on board a wide range of initiatives and that they plan to do so even more in the future (Clegg et al., in press;Waterson et al., 1999), even though success is often only modest. However, research also reveals that organizations are more likely to undertake changes of the kind they have experienced before (Kelly & Amburgey, 1991), possibly because earlier experience promotes openness to future changes. If this assumption is correct, it has considerable implications for change management strategy. For this reason, the current study examined the impact of exposure to a particular change on employee openness to changes of the same nature, as well as how exposure affects related well-being outcomes.

Three-way interaction effects of workaholism on employee well-being: Evidence from blue-collar workers in New Zealand

“…Criterion variables Anxiety and depression were measured using 12 items by Axtell, Wall, Stride, Pepper, Clegg, Gardner and Bolden (2002) (1 5 'never', 5 5 'all the time'). For each measure, respondents were presented with six adjectives and were asked to describe how often these apply to them at work.…”

Does a Well-Informed Employee Have a More Positive Attitude Toward Change? The Mediating Role of Psychological Contract Fulfillment, Trust, and Perceived Need for Change

“…Although resistance to change (e.g., Ford, Ford, & D'Amelio, 2008) and readiness to change (e.g., Holt, Armenakis, Feild, & Harris, 2007) are the most common ones, labels such as openness to change (e.g., Axtell et al, 2002;Wanberg & Banas, 2000), willingness to participate in change (e.g., V. D. Miller, Johnson, & Grau, 1994), cynicism about a change (e.g., Stanley, Meyer, & Topolnytsky, 2005), acceptance of change (e.g., Paterson & Cary, 2002), and commitment to change (e.g., Herscovitch & Meyer, 2002) have also been applied. Although the usage of these labels can be helpful for specific research purposes, they share the common characteristic that they are either positively or negatively phrased.…”

Building and Sustaining Proactive Behaviors: The Role of Adaptivity and Job Satisfaction

“…Research on the antecedents of adaptivity has primarily highlighted the importance of relatively stable individual differences such as cognitive ability and achievement motivation (Pulakos et al, 2002) or a positive self-concept and tolerance of risk (Judge et al, 1999). While individuals should respond more positively to change if they have successfully adapted to change in the past (Axtell et al, 2002;Pulakos et al, 2002), adaptivity does not necessarily require resources that can only be acquired through proactivity.…”