The fatal smirk

Abstract

PurposeThe key to success and failure in change projects may lie not in groundbreaking events or heroic gestures but in the many seemingly meaningless acts and events that occur throughout all change projects. In order to gain a better understanding of factors leading to success in change projects, the purpose of this paper is to examine insider accounts of successful and unsuccessful change projects in a non‐business public context, namely the German police.Design/methodology/approachThe research can be located in the exploratory, inductive research tradition and consistent with that we used in‐depth semi‐structured interviews to elicit the views of 92 high potential future managers as to what constitutes a(n) (un)successful project, and what factors lead to (un)successful project outcomes.FindingsThe qualitative approach adopted allows for the tracing of a range social behavioural issues identified by members of the organization as criteria to evaluate the success of projects – commitment of peers and superiors, satisfaction of members with the outcome. Identifying factors leading to project success, participants identified the following – clear communication of both positive and potentially negative outcomes, commitment of leaders, and changes in work conditions resulting from the project.Research limitations/implicationsSocial and behavioural aspects of change projects, which are often relegated to a secondary position behind managerial and technical aspects, should be taken into account more often in (research on) change management projects.Originality/valueThe findings are based on research that explicitly integrates the mundane aspects, the daily mistakes and the routine obstacles facing those involved in change projects and suggests the value of incorporating such issues in (research on) change management projects given the spread of projects from a traditional engineering context to a variety of different contexts including, increasingly, non‐profit and governmental organizations.

Bringing project and change management roles into sync

“…The concept of "change projects" (e.g. Barratt-Pugh et al, 2013;Boddy and Macbeth, 2000;Edgley-Pyshorn and Huisman, 2011;Ekman Philips and Huzzard, 2007;Jacobs et al, 2006;Jorritsma and Wilderom, 2013;Kaarst-Brown, 1999;Lehmann, 2010;Lundberg, 1990;Lundy and Morin, 2013;Algeo, 2014a, 2015;Sense, 2013;Turner and Simister, 2000;Werr et al, 1997) complicates this issue even further, as its clear definition does not appear in the literature. Especially, not one that can be acceptable for both CM and PM.…”

“…Based on the analysis of Figure 2, the answer to RQ1a is the following: since CM only deals with second-order changes (domains C and D), but changes that belong to domain C are not projects, domain D contains the only common domain of PM and CM: namely, second-order changes that are also projects or, in other words, change projects (e.g. a merger between two leading state departments; Barratt-Pugh et al, 2013); an HR department at a university undergoing a cultural change initiative (Edgley-Pyshorn and Huisman, 2011); profound changes in the German police force due to the advent of new public management ( Jacobs et al, 2006); or even ( failed) change attempts ( Jorritsma and Wilderom, 2013;Kaarst-Brown, 1999).…”

Change Management’s Points of Connection with Project Management and Psychology

“…The concept of "change projects" (see examples of change projects in, e.g., Barratt-Pugh et al, 2013;Boddy & Macbeth, 2000;Edgley-Pyshorn & Huisman, 2011;Ekman Philips & Huzzard, 2007;Jacobs et al, 2006;Jorritsma & Wilderom, 2013;Kaarst-Brown, 1999;Lehmann, 2010;Lundberg, 1990;Lundy & Morin, 2013;Pollack & Algeo, 2014aSense, 2013;Turner & Simister, 2000;Werr et al, 1997) complicates this issue even further, as its clear definition does not appear in the literature. (See more on this in section 2.1.4.1.)…”

“…Since CM only deals with second-order changes (domains C and D) but changes that belong to domain C are not projects, domain D contains the only common domain of CM and PM: namely second-order changes that are also projects or, in other words, change projects. Such a change project could be, for example, a merger between two leading state departments (Barratt-Pugh et al, 2013), business process re-engineering (Binci et al, 2019) in an Italian public utility firm, an HR department at a university undergoing a cultural change initiative (Edgley-Pyshorn & Huisman, 2011) or Verizon Media's cultural change project for better cybersecurity (Pearlson et al, 2022), profound changes in the German police force due to the advent of new public management (Jacobs et al, 2006), or even (failed) change attempts (Graamans et al, 2020;Jorritsma & Wilderom, 2013;Kaarst-Brown, 1999).…”