Top Five: Leadership, Ethics, Resistance to Change, and More

How can management scholars and practitioners better understand the factors that enable (or disable) ethics in organizational life? How can organizations heal after a crisis, and end up stronger than before? How are middle managers creating positive social change? These and other questions of organizational effectiveness and humane organizing are addressed in The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science’s current top five most-read articles. Some classic, some new, these papers are freely available to access using the links below through April 26. Please share and enjoy!

Linda Smircich and Gareth Morgan
Leadership: The Management of Meaning
The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, September 1982

Eric B. Dent and Susan Galloway Goldberg
Challenging “Resistance to Change”
The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, March 1999

David S. Bright and Ronald E. Fry
Introduction: Building Ethical, Virtuous Organizations
The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, March 2013

Garima Sharma and Darren Good
The Work of Middle Managers: Sensemaking and Sensegiving for Creating Positive Social Change
The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, March 2013

Edward H. Powley
The Process and Mechanisms of Organizational Healing
The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, March 2013

Stay abreast of the latest most-read and most-cited articles from The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science: subscribe to the RSS feed, and click here to receive e-alerts about new articles and issues published online before they’re in print.

Where Is Change Research Getting Us?

Bill_Owen (CC BY 2.0)

Change research in organization theory abounds, but is it leading to progress in the field? A new study in The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science (JABS) challenges basic assumptions and asks “the question of what exactly is the ‘change’ in organizational change research.” Gavin M. Schwarz of The University of New South Wales published “Shaking Fruit out of the Tree: Temporal Effects and Life Cycle in Organizational Change Research” in the JABS September 2012 issue. Click here to view the Table of Contents.

Dr. Schwarz writes:

Faced with an infinite number of “facts” that have shaped what is currently known about organizational change, one must wonder which one of these statements is accurate. More specifically, with this inconsistency as a backdrop, how exactly do change researchers convert established ideas, rules, procedures, and information into tangible outcomes? The framing question of this current research—of progress and life cycles—seeks to understand the accuracy of these varied knowledge assumptions by focusing on what change has been studied, and whether this convention has resulted in progress in knowledge.

Read the complete article here. To learn more about The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, please follow this link.

Are you interested in receiving email alerts whenever a new article or issue becomes available? Then click here!

Visionary Ambiguity and Strategic Change

Scottwdw (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

When is ambiguity in business a positive thing? When it enables leaders to effectively initiate strategic change. The Journal of Management Inquiry (JMI) tells us how it’s done. Dennis A. Gioia of Pennsylvania State University, Rajiv Nag of Georgia State University, and Kevin G. Corley of Arizona State University published “Visionary Ambiguity and Strategic Change: The Virtue of Vagueness in Launching Major Organizational Change” on May 23, 2012 in JMI. To see other OnlineFirst articles, click here.

The abstract:

Can ambiguous vision statements help to initiate strategic change? We draw on organizational and political concepts to make the case that ambiguity in the expression of future aspirations enables a sense of alignment between local and larger organizational goals that eases the political path to successful change. We also explore the paradox that, occasionally, the path out of ambiguity involves the initial injection of even more ambiguity into an already ambiguous situation. In addition, we demonstrate that consideration of a practical problem (how to effectively initiate strategic change) and a nonobvious recommendation (to employ an intentionally ambiguous vision) leads to a deeper exploration of key processes involved in the revision of personal and organizational knowledge.

Click here to continue. To learn more about the Journal of Management Inquiry, please follow this link.

Are you interested in receiving email alerts whenever a new article or issue becomes available online? Then click here!

Thoughts and Feelings About Organizational Change

Lee_Salford (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

The change process is “not just thought out but also is ‘felt out,’” according to an article in the Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies (JLOS) — and managers who want to lead change successfully will benefit from understanding this interplay of thought and emotion.

Mel Fugate of Southern Methodist University, Spencer Harrison of Boston College, and Angelo J. Kinicki of Arizona State University published “Thoughts and Feelings About Organizational Change: A Field Test of Appraisal Theory” in the JLOS November 2011 issue. The abstract:

This longitudinal field study examines the relationships among the three focal constructs within appraisal theory—appraisal, emotion, and coping—at the beginning of change and their relationship with employee withdrawal at the end of an organizational restructuring. New theory is used to integrate past theory and research to propose and test a model containing synchronous reciprocal relationships between negative appraisal and negative emotions. Results confirmed a synchronous reciprocal relationship between negative appraisal and negative emotions, which suggests that appraisal is not a sequential process as often conceptualized and tested in the past. Negative appraisals and negative emotions also had negative relationships with control coping, which was negatively associated to intentions to quit, which in turn predicted subsequent voluntary turnover. This study thus extends appraisal theory and demonstrates it is a powerful alternative (theoretical) means for examining employee reactions to organizational change. Theoretical and practical implications of the results are discussed.

Click here to continue. To learn more about the Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, please follow this link.

Are you interested in receiving email alerts whenever a new article or issue becomes available online? Then click here!

Overcoming Relational Inertia

Forrest Briscoe and Wenpin Tsai, both of Penn State University, published “Overcoming Relational Inertia: How Organizational Members Respond to Acquisition Events in a Law Firm” on December 20th, 2011 in Administrative Science Quarterly. To view other OnlineFirst articles, please click here.

The abstract:

This paper examines how organizational members overcome relational inertia and contribute to integration and value creation following an acquisition, through an analysis of a large law firm’s acquisition of two smaller firms. When merging law firm partners share clients with one another, both within and across the boundaries of the formerly separate firms, they create new relationships that connect the organizational units together. We examine both the antecedents and consequences of post-acquisition integration through client sharing. Drawing on network theory, we consider how the configuration of prior referral relationships influences new sharing of clients undertaken by individual partners. We also use the prior referral-network structure to predict which partners will cut their former intraunit client-sharing ties. To ascertain how client sharing creates value for the combined organization, we analyze the effects of client sharing on revenue generation and human capital development. Our findings uncover a paradox in integration behavior: the same referral-network structures that contribute to integration by increasing interunit sharing also tend to detract from integration because they are associated with cutting existing intraunit ties. We also find that interunit client sharing is positively associated with revenue generation but negatively associated with human capital development. Overall, this research advances a relational perspective on post-acquisition integration and sheds new light on how networks are formed and become reconfigured inside organizations.

To learn more about Administrative Science Quarterly, please follow this link.

Are you interested in receiving email alerts whenever a new article or issue becomes available online? Then click here!

Data for Decision Making: Three Instances of Inquiry for Improved Action

The May 2011 issue of Advances in Developing Human Resources is available online and can be found here. This special issue concerns the theme of  “Data for Decision Making: Three Instances of Inquiry for Improved Action.”

The lead article, “Conflicts Over the Utilities of Teaching Using Educational Technologies: An Interpretive Critical Inquiry” was published by Elaine L. Demps, Texas A&M Health Science Center, Yvonna S. Lincoln, Texas A&M University, College Station, and Lauren Cifuentes, Texas A&M University–Corpus Christi.

The Abstract:

Public research universities are experiencing a major transformation today as they become more entrepreneurial and engage in academic capitalism (Bok, 2003; Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004). At the same time, faculty members in higher educational institutions are pushed to integrate educational technology into their teaching (Bennett & Bennett, 2003). These two requirements appear to be conflicting demands and affect, among others, faculty performance and job motivation. An interpretive critical inquiry was conducted to understand the faculty experience of attending to the two apparently conflicting demands. Based on the findings, offered are suggestions and recommendations for organizational change that will serve to alleviate the conflicts faculty may experience as well as implications for HRD in public research universities in terms of addressing academic capitalism and teaching using educational technology. The stakeholders at whom this inquiry is aimed include faculty, administrators, students, HRD scholars and practitioners, as well as the system of the public research university.

For more information about Advances in Developing Human Resources, please follow this link. If you would like to receive an email alert whenever a new article or issue becomes available, please click here.

The Adaptive Approach

Ching Fang Lee, Shih Chien University, Stephen Dun-Hou Tsai, and Mansour Amjadi, both from National Sun Yat-Sen University, published “The Adaptive Approach: Reflections on Knowledge Management Models,” in OnlineFirst in Journal of Management Inquiry. Professor Amjadi shared some background information about the article.

 

Who is the target audience for this article?

Scholars and practitioners interested in Knowledge Management (KM) approaches in high-tech companies, for example, the semiconductor and biotechnology industries.

What inspired you to be interested in this topic?

We have been doing research on Knowledge Management (KM) and believe knowledge management systems have become an important means of organizational development and survival. The question we asked was: why the more knowledge is managed by practitioners, the more they lost? This intriguing question inspired us to pursue this research. We noticed two totally different (KM) approaches in the semiconductor industry in Taiwan: the Object-Based KM (OBKM) and Community-Based KM (CBKM) models. Therefore, we became interested in learning more by analyzing these two approaches.

Were there findings that were surprising to you?

As we reviewed our collected data, we noticed that organizational knowledge is not only distributed differently in different workplaces, but also embedded in the specific context of interactions. One important finding was that the two models (OBKM & CBKM) had different pre-understanding about knowledge based on Resource Based View (RBV) and Complex Adaptive System (CAS). Therefore, we proposed the adaptive approach to bridge the two different KM models.

How do you see this study influencing future research and/or practice?

Further inquiries can possibly concentrate on different aspects of object-based and community-based models of KM at both individual and organizational levels. In addition, future research can focus on different patterns of adaptive approach and how to adapt between the two models of OBKM and CBKM.

How does this study fit into your body of work/line of research?

In the past, the research stream in knowledge management was mainly focused on knowledge-as-object. In recent year, however, knowledge-as-cognition or knowledge-as-practice has become the main research concentration. We believe, in the future, knowledge-as-performative will be the area which will get most of the attention. The adaptive approach facilitates research on knowledge-as-performative with different pre-understanding about knowledge in organizations.

How did your paper change during the review process?

The editor, Marvin Washington, and the two reviewers provided very helpful suggestions for strengthening the manuscript overall. We think they made constructive comments which improved the paper significantly. Initially, we compared the two different KM models. Then, Dr. Washington and the reviewers helped us to go deeper and beyond the data presented. As a result, we reframed the paper and proposed the adaptive approach.

What, if anything, would you do differently if you could go back and do this study again?

We start with the adaptive approach which was proposed in this paper. We think the adaptive approach offers intriguing research questions. There are different adaptive patterns in different industries. We need to look at the different process in the industries.

Multisource Feedback Assessment

Scott N. Taylor, University of New Mexico, and David S. Bright, Wright State University, published “Open-Mindedness and Defensiveness in Multisource Feedback Processes: A Conceptual Framework” in Online First in The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science. Professor Taylor and Professor Bright provided a reflection upon the article in their responses below.

Who is the target audience for this article?

Both scholars and practitioners. Specifically, our work is most relevant to those who work with or conduct research on leader/employee/ organizational development, leader and employee assessment, and resistance to change.

What inspired you to be interested in this topic?

We are interested in how organizations can better help leaders grow and development by being more open. We have witnessed the effectiveness of many approaches to reach that goal. We also found that the topic of openness and defensiveness related to multisource feedback had not be sufficiently explored in the literature.

Were there findings that were surprising to you?

That there was not a conceptual framework available to scholars and practitioners that rests on creating conditions of open-mindedness to feedback to help evaluate multisource feedback assessment effectiveness.

How do you see this study influencing future research and/or practice?

Hopefully it will inspire scholars to ask a new set of research questions related to multisource feedback assessment. For practitioners, we hope our paper is a catalyst for change in how multisource feedback assessments and the coaching that goes with them is conducted. The end result of both of these will be better leader development in organizations.

How does this study fit into your body of work/line of research?

Scott researches leadership development and tools used to help leaders develop, like multisource feedback assessment. David studies organizational change and development. We brought our interests together to look at how organizations can look at a widely used tool (multisource feedback assessment) differently and what the implications would be if they did so. That said, we think our work and the principles we discuss have application to many other approaches and tools used for leader development and organizational change.

How did your paper change during the review process?

We became more clear on how to convey our message. We became more focused on the organizational development (OD) perspective of our work rather than just a focus on the individual.

What, if anything, would you do differently if you could go back and do this study again?

Not a thing. It was a great learning journey, and we look forward to further testing and explore what we have written up for JABS.

Managing Voluntary Turnover

Paul T.Y. Preenen, Irene E. De Pater, Annelies E.M. Vianen, all of University of Amsterdam, and Laura Keijzer, of TNO Quality of Life, collaborated on “Managing Voluntary Turnover through Challenging Assignments,” published in Online First in Group & Organization Management. Professor Preenen provided an additional commentary regarding the article.

Who is the target audience for this article?

First, academics in the field of management and organizational behavior. Second, managers, consultants, and other practitioners.

What inspired you to be interested in this topic?

I was inspired to investigate the relationship between challenging assignments and voluntary turnover by popular literatures that stressed the importance of job challenge for employee retention. Moreover, I often heard people say that they want to leave their jobs because they don’t feel challenged (anymore). However, surprisingly, it has never been investigated empirically whether and why challenging employees can help organizations to retain their employees. Given the importance of finding ways to maintain personnel for organizations, I felt the current study was warranted.

Were there findings that were surprising to you?

No, we did not encounter any surprising findings.

How do you see this study influencing future research and/or practice?

In today’s highly competitive and dynamic labor market, it is of utmost importance for organizations to understand how to retain their valuable employees. In view of our findings that challenging assignments can enhance on-the-job learning and lower voluntary turnover, organizations need to seek ways and opportunities to provide their employees with challenging assignments. Supervisors and managers in particular should play an active role in providing their employees with challenging tasks.

As supervisors play such an important role in the amount of challenging assignments their employees perform, I advocate that future research should focus on gaining a thorough understanding of the factors that influence supervisors’ task allocation decisions.

How does this study fit into your body of work/line of research?

My research focuses on antecedents, characteristics, and consequences of job challenge, so the current study fits perfectly in my line of research.

How did your paper change during the review process?

The review process helped us in a great manner. Because of some great suggestions of our reviewers, we were able to improve our theoretical rationale underlying the study, as well as the way we analyzed our data.

What, if anything, would you do differently if you could go back and do this study again?

The present sample merely consisted of employees working in the healthcare and welfare industry. Therefore, if we could do this study again, we would like to use different samples of people working in different industries to investigate whether our current findings can be generalized to other industries.

Moreover, although we used a two-wave design in the present study, it would have been nice to add some extra waves to better study the impact of challenging assignments and on-the-job learning on voluntary turnover.

The Art of Acquisition Integration

“Contradiction and Sensemaking in Acquisition Integration“by Samia Chreim and Marzieh Tafagood, University of Ottawa, was published in Online First in  Journal of Applied Behavioral Science.

Professor Chreim provided some background information on the article.

Who is the target audience for this article?

Scholars interested in acquisition integration, newcomer experiences, and sensemaking during change in organizations and managers involved in acquisitions and acquisition integration.

What inspired you to be interested in this topic?

Acquisitions are some of the most complex changes that organizations can undertake. Acquisitions create a lot of uncertainty for organizational members – especially those at the acquired end. Although acquisition integration has been studied from the perspective of organizational members before, research continues to unearth aspects of the experience that contribute further to our understanding of this complex change.

Were there findings that were surprising to you?

Some findings were surprising – notably that

1) organizations that engage in serial acquisitions will perpetually contain sites of contradiction

2) codification of knowledge gained from previous acquisition experiences does not necessarily enhance subsequent acquisition integration.

Other findings were less surprising, but are important, though not given sufficient attention in the literature. These findings pertain to relationships between acquired and acquiring managers, and how they affect the sensemaking and experiences of acquired managers.

How do you this study influencing future research and/or practice?

This study can influence future research on acquisition integration by directing attention to

1) how managerial roles are experienced during acquisitions

2) how serial acquisitions affect organizations and individuals.

It can also influence research on newcomers, by directing attention to acquired managers – a category of newcomers that has been mainly ignored in the literature.

How does this study fit into your body of work/line of research?

I have done research on different aspects/types of change, and this study builds on and extends my past work.

What, if anything, would you do differently if you could go back and do this study again?

I would try to negotiate a longitudinal access with the organization in order to follow how acquired managers’ experiences evolve with time.