Toward a Dynamic Description of the Attributes of Organizational Change

Abstract

The literature on change is characterized by an opposite, dichotomist view on the subject. Many authors describe only one or some of these characteristics and attribute a normative value to it. When discussing one of these attributes they will make a deviating classification in the way in which change arises. Although types and attributes of change are largely studied in the change literature, there is no general agreement on the attributes that can best describe the different types of change. The purpose of this chapter is to try to consolidate the vast literature on the types and attributes of change in order to find a more homogeneous set of attributes.From an extensive literature research on change articles and books from 1970 onward, eight dimensions of change attributes were found that are able to describe the characteristics of a change in a dynamic way.In order to overcome the dichotomist view, organizational change is approached not as a process changing a system but as a system by itself. Although the borders between the change system and the system to be changed are not always easy to perceive, this view seems to create a richer picture on change. A systems approach allows to define the attributes of change in a holistic way that captures the always paradoxical state change is in. TYPES AND ATTRIBUTES OF ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGEBased on our analysis of the literature on change, the following picture of the types and attributes can be drawn: A majority of articles are about some type of transformation and the difference with adaptation. Beside this the distinction between planned change and emergent change has been investigated many times. A lot of attention is also being paid to the distinction between discontinuous and continuous change as well as to the absence of change: stability or inertia. Incremental change as opposed to revolutionary change is also the subject of discussion. Finally, we found four additional attributes that received less attention in the change literature. We will now enter at length into these aspects. TransformationWhereas the adaptation perspective was a dominant perspective in the sixties and seventies, organizational transformation (OT) appeared in the eighties as a response to a new global economic perspective which started to affect more and more organizations (Singh, House, & Tucker, 1986). As the environment became more complex, adaptation was not enough, organizations needed to transform themselves (Fletcher, 1990). Johan Adams ' Transforming Work (Adams, 1984) was one of the first books to explore the concept of transformational change, quickly followed by several others who further developed the subject (

The Changing Context and the Organizational Justice Impact on the Employee Well-Being

“…The dimensions and attributes of the change context have been appointed in the literature. To give an example, Maes and Van Hootegem (2011) listed eight attributes that dynamically describe organizational change: control: refers to the emerging or planned change; scope: refers to the continuum of the adaptation to transformation; frequency: refers to the number of ongoing organizational changes; progress: the number of stages to implement the change; time: how long it takes to put the change in practice; speed: refers to how rapidly the change actions follow one another; objectives: refers to the final status, when the change is accomplished, leadership style; and decision making: defined by the degree of participation, which can vary according to the levels of cooperation and participation.…”

“…Organizational change should not be studied dissociated from its context (Kalimo, Taris, & Schaufeli, 2003;Maes & Van Hootegem, 2011;Rafferty & Griffin, 2006). The dimensions and attributes of the change context have been appointed in the literature.…”

How to succeed in the digital age? Monitor the organizational context, identify risks and opportunities, and manage change effectively

“…It is also required that change management is addressed in a systemic way (Maes and Hootegem, 2011) and in a controlled process (Burke, 2008), as ISO 9001:2015 prescribes it, through the effective application of the Quality Management System, including processes for improvement of the system, and the assurance of conformity to customer and applicable statutory and regulatory requirements (ISO, 2015).…”

Listen to ISO 9001:2015 for organizational competitiveness: Correlation between change management and improvement

“…It is also required that change management is addressed in a systemic way (Maes and Hootegem, 2011) and in a controlled process (Burke, 2008), as ISO 9001:2015 prescribes it, through the effective application of the Quality Management System, including processes for improvement of the system, and the assurance of conformity to customer and applicable statutory and regulatory requirements (ISO, 2015). Bratianu and Amza (2009) have also remarked that managing change is associated with the implementation of innovations (and improvements), and that managing innovation and managing change are inter-related, and have major strategic relevance for organizational success, indicating a relationship between change management and the capability to innovate and improve.…”