Organizational Change:Motivation, Communication ...

1 Organizational change : Motivation, Communication , and LeadershipEffectivenessAnn Gilley, Jerry W. Gilley and Heather S. McMillanOrganizational leadership behaviors have adirect influence on actions in the work en-vironment that enable change (Drucker,1999; Gilley, 2005; Howkins, 2001). Leaders may func-tion as change agents those individuals responsibleforchangestrategyandimplement ation(Kanter,Stein,&Jick,1992) bycreatingavision,identifyingtheneedfor change , and implementing the change remain competitive when they sup-port and implement continuous and transformationalchange(Cohen,1999).Asare sult,organizationalchangehasbeenthesubje ctof much research. Many have sought to explain the fundamentals of change ,how to manage change , and why change is so difficult to achieve. In spite ofnumerous theories, models, and multistep approaches, Organizational lea-ders lack a clear understanding of, or ability to engage, the steps necessary toimplement change successfully (Armenakis & Harris, 2002).

2 Researchsuggests that the problem is limited understanding of change implementa-tion techniques and inability to modify one s management style. Theories,models, and multistep approaches might not include sufficient implementa-tion studies reveal that change efforts often suffer a dismal fate. Someresearch indicates a failure rate of one-third to two-thirds of major changeinitiatives (Beer & Nohria, 2000; Bibler, 1989); more pessimistic resultssuggest a higher rate of failure (Burns, 2004) that may reach 80% to 90%(Cope, 2003) or may make the situation worse (Beer, Eisenstat, & Spector,1990). Furthermore, resistance by change agents themselves may contributeconsiderably to the inability of organizations to achieve their changeobjectives (Ford, Ford, & D Amelio, 2008).Wecontribute to the literature and research on leadership and organiza-tional change by exploring the following questions: (1) How effective areleaders in implementing change within their organizations?

3 And (2) What75 PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT QUARTERLY, 21(4) PP. 75 94&2009 International Society for Performance ImprovementPublished online in Wiley InterScience ( ). DOI: indicates that numerousvariables have an impact on a leader seffectiveness. This study explores thebehaviors associated with leadershipeffectiveness in driving change . Thefindings confirm previous research thatidentifies change effectiveness skills,while isolating the specific leader be-haviors deemed most valuable to im-plementing change : motivation leader behaviors are most necessary to execute change initiativessuccessfully? Throughout this article, our reference to leaders implies alllevels of leaders and managers within an organization. The literature wereview here explains change and the leadership behaviors positively asso-ciated with successful change decades have seen increasing emphasis on change as a criticaldriver of Organizational success (Drucker, 1999; Ford & Gioia, 2000; Fried-man, 2005; Johansson, 2004; Kuhn, 1970).

4 Research, in turn, has exploredchange as a variable in creating Organizational competitive advantage(Florida, 2005; Friedman, 2005; Howkins, 2001).Understanding Organizational change involves examining types ofchange within firms. No matter its size, any change has a ripple effect on afirm (Miles, 2001). At the corporate or macro level, frequent organizationalchanges focus on strategy and business models (IBM, 2006), structure,processes, culture, technology, products, and services (Lewis, 1994), ofteninvolving multiple leaders or reporting lines, incorporation of new technol-ogies, acquisitions or expansion, or downsizing. Consequently, managingthe complexities of change challenges leaders at all levels of an organization(Biech, 2007).Weick and Quinn (1999) perceived Organizational change as eitherepisodic or continuous. Episodic change is infrequent and sometimesradical, while continuous change may be incremental, emergent, and with-out end.

5 Whether continuous or radical, researchers agree that the pace ofchange is increasing (Quinn, 2004; Weick & Sutcliffe, 2001). change may be further defined when viewed from an evolutionaryperspectiveastransitional,tr ansformational, , the most common, improves the current state through minor,gradual changes in people, structure, procedures, or technology. Thesemanagement-driven changes may be department or division specific, ororganizationwide, in their attempt to enable the organization to get better atwhat it change efforts represent a fundamental, radicalshift that rejects current paradigms or questions underlying assumptionsand mind-sets (Kuhn, 1970). Transformational change represents leader-ship-driven modifications of culture, formulation of drastically differentstrategy, or demands for conformity due to a merger or acquisition by adominant company. Although transformational change is disruptive innature, its successful execution has been identified as leading to increasedcompetitiveness, to the extent that an organization can clearly differentiateitself in the market (Denning, 2005).

6 Unfortunately, corporate results,anecdotes, and research highlight the rarity with which organizationsachieve transformational change (Beer & Nohria, 2000; Cope, 2003; Sengeet al., 1999).76 DOI: Improvement QuarterlyDevelopmental change stems from an overall philosophy of growth anddevelopment that creates a culture of building competitive advantagethrough continuous dynamic yet manageable change . Developmentalchangeavoidsinfrequent radical,large-scalechangebycontinually scanninginternal and external environments, creating motivational work environ-ments, and rewarding individual innovation, growth, and development(Gilley & Maycunich, 2000). The disconnect between a firm s intentions toimplement change and the ability of its leaders to execute transformationalor developmental change warrants further ModelsModels of change attempt to help leaders and managers understandchange and guide their organizations through the process.

7 The literaturereveals numerous models designed to clarify phasesof change , individual acceptance rates, and steps forimplementation. Rogers (2003), for example, de-scribes how individuals accept rates of change indifferent waysand atvarying ratesinhisresearchonadoption of innovations. An innovation representsany change , large or small including an idea, prac-tice, procedure, or object perceived as new by anindividual. The recipient s reaction to change systems influence how and when the change is of change occurs in stages, which Rogers (2003) describes asawarenessofthechange,interestinthechan ge,trial,thedecisiontocontinueor quit, and adoption of the change into one s life. Five categories ofindividuals have been identified on the basis of their general acceptance ofchange: innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, and lag-gards. Innovators thrive on change ; early adopters seek challenges andgenerally like change ; the early majority prefer to observe the impact ofchange on innovators and early adopters prior to making a deliberatedecision to change ; the late majority are skeptical, sometimes suspicious,and occasionally change only as a last resort; and laggards are traditional,steadfast resisters who often reject change models of change management followed a relatively simple three-step process that included evaluating and preparing a firm for change ,engaging in change , and solidifying the change into the fabric of employees daily lives.

8 Lewin s (1951) classic model, for example, consists of unfreezing,movement, readying individuals and organizations for change . Movement behaviors into the daily routine and culture of the ,multistepframeworkshaveevolvedthatinclu deleadership,employee involvement, rewards, Communication , and more. Models by KotterCorporate results,anecdotes, and researchhighlight the rarity withwhich organizationsachieve 21, Number 4 / 2009 DOI: (1996) and Ulrich (1998), for example, suggest the importance of leadership andvision, forming guiding coalitions, communicating, motivating and empower-ing others, and anchoring new approaches in the firm s culture (see Table 1).Criticsofthesemodelscitefailuretoreco gnizethecomplexityofchange,simplistic assumptions of success should one follow the rigid steps in order,failure to recognize the human factor, and lack of preparedness for resis-tance, to name a few (Gilley, 2005).

9 Nadler (1998, p. 3) stated, The reality ofchange inthe Organizational trenchesdefies rigidacademic models as well assuperficial management fads. Hence, the importance of the leader s role indriving change is Skills and AbilitiesPossessing skills in change management has been linked to bringingabout successful Organizational change . Lack of understanding ofchange implementation techniques and the inability to modify one smanagement style or Organizational functions are cited as barriers tosuccess (Bossidy & Charan, 2002; Gilley, 2005). Other barriers revealed byresearch include the inability to motivate others to change , poor commu-nications skills, and failure of management to reward or recognize indivi-duals who make the effort to change (Burke, 1992; Kotter, 1996; Patterson,1997; Ulrich, 1998). Leaders thoughts and skills are manifested inactions, structures, and processes that enhance or impede change , furtherstrengthening the linkage between their behaviors and effectiveness inimplementing of leadership encompass frameworks such as trait, behavioral,and contemporary theories.

10 Leadership trait theory represents an effort toidentify a set of psychological traits that all successful leaders possess (Ilies,TABLE 1 change ModelsLewin s ModelUlrich s Seven-Step ModelKotter s Eight-Step ModelUnfreezeLead changeEstablish a sense of urgencyMovementCreate a shared needForm a guiding coalitionRefreezeShape a visionCreate a visionMobilize commitmentCommunicate the visionChange systems and structuresEmpower others to actMonitor progressPlan for and createshort-term winsMake change lastConsolidate improvements andproduce more changeInstitutionalize new (1996); Lewin (1951); Ulrich (1998).78 DOI: Improvement QuarterlyScott, & Judge, 2006). More than 300 trait studies have failed to generate aconclusive list of agreed-on traits inherent in effective leaders (Bass, 1990),although certain traits such as supervisory ability, the need for achievement,intelligence, decisiveness, self-assurance, and initiative are deemed signifi-cant (Ghiselli, 1971).