Looking to the past to understand the present: organizational change in varsity sport

Abstract

Purpose -This paper aims to explore how varsity football athletes and coaches negotiate meanings when faced with the unmet expectations of a new head coach brought into lead a turnaround process. It also aims to pay particular attention to the role of history in this meaning making process.Design/methodology/approach -This paper draws on semi-structured interviews with players and coaches at two points in time. To preserve the richness of their experiences and illuminate the historical aspects of change, it focuses on the stories of three players and one supporting coach.Findings -Numerous symbols of change emerge that have multiple and contradictory meanings. The meanings around success and failure are renegotiated over time as individuals struggle with the unmet expectations of change. Moreover, individuals are unable to shed the failures of the past and move forward.Practical implications -Change is a complex and messy process of managing multiple meanings. Understanding change entails more than a snapshot picture of an organization. New leaders have no control over the past, yet they need to be aware of how individuals experienced the past in order to increase the likelihood of success in the present.Originality/value -Success and failure are experienced as an ongoing process as athletes and coaches experience, reflect on and interact with others. In illuminating the role of history in how change is experienced in the present, the paper demonstrates that the past can serve as both an immobilizing force, as well as a comparative point enabling individuals to rationalize their emotions. IntroductionEstimates from the 1980s, 1990s, and through into the 2000s indicate that up to 70-75 percent of all change programs fail (Higgs and Rowland, 2005;Miller, 2002) but give little attention to how we determine the extent to which organizational change is successful. We argue here that the evaluations of the "success" and "failure" of organizational change are subjective in nature and that we need to look to the meanings constructed by individuals over time and through interaction with others to understand better the experience of organizational change. Experiences of organizational change are complex and multifaceted (Podlog, 2002) and when change does not result in the outcomes expected the sense making processes of individuals involved in the change are likely to become even more problematic. In this research we set out to understand how individuals make sense of organizational change when it does not result in expected outcomes. We look to a sports organization, that is, a varsity football [1] team, to explore how athletes and coaches negotiate meanings when faced with the unmet expectations of a new head coach brought into lead a turnaround process. In doing this, we pay particular attention to the role of history in this meaning making process. We contend that an appreciation of the organization's past performance, leadership, and change efforts will help new leaders understand how individuals make sense...

Champions, Converts, Doubters, and Defectors: The Impact of Shifting Perceptions on Momentum for Change

“…Defectors, on the other hand, are those individuals whose support shifts from high to low. These individuals may have been disappointed when expectations about the change were unfulfilled (Louis, ; Robinson & Rousseau, ) or when new information learned in the change process led to an erosion of commitment (Gaertner, ; Parker & Grandy, ).…”

“…Conversely, Doubters are those change participants who may never recognize or acknowledge personal benefit from the change (e.g., Kanter, ), although they still may see momentum through social interaction and sense‐making activities (Gioia & Chittipeddi, ). However, Defectors likely react to perceived or actual changes as the implementation unfolds, using their early experiences as a comparison standard for later experiences (Parker & Grandy, ). As a result, these individuals are more likely to withdraw their inputs and attention with the realization that the personal benefits they once perceived have now dissipated.…”