ebbnflow, profile picture
Uploaded byebbnflow
PPTX, PDF182 views

Agile Organisational Change

The document discusses the history and evolution of agile methodologies and their application in organizational change management, highlighting the shift from traditional waterfall models to agile practices since the 1930s. It emphasizes the importance of iterative development, customer feedback, and team dynamics, while outlining core values from the Agile Manifesto and various historical change management theories. Additionally, the document reviews empirical studies on the effectiveness of agile practices in software development and the challenges faced in large-scale transformations.

Embed presentation

Downloaded 28 times
Agile Organisational Change Join the conversation 7-9pm 6th October 2022 Presented by Alex Boulting The aim of these monthly talks is to crowd-source a body of knowledge from people who have experience in Organisational Change.
2 Change Thought Talks
3 Building Change Capability Talks
4 Summary
6 History Of Agile 1
1930’s 1970s 1990s 2010s 1950/60s 1980s 2000s iterative and incremental development’s grew from the 1930s work of Walter Shewhart a quality expert at Bell Labs who proposed a series of short “plan-do-study-act” (PDSA) cycles for quality improvement adopted by Demming “The fundamental idea was to build in small increments, with feedback cycles involving the customer for each.” Evo(lutionary) method focused on time boxed short iterations Plan-Do-Study-Act Adaptive & Spiral Programming DSDM + XP Agile Alliance Agile Change In February 2001, a group of 17 process experts—representing DSDM, XP, Scrum, FDD, and others to promote modern iterative methods called the Agile Alliance (www.agilealliance.org) f Coutu (2002) 13 and Luthans (2002a, 2002b) result of 9/11 focus back on external factors and building resilience through individual strengths. Positive psychology = self efficacy & learned optimism Failing water-fall method. 1994 16 rapid application development (RAD) practitioners met in the UK to discuss the definition of a standard iterative process. Rational Unified Process = daily build & smoke test. Kent Beck developed XP with Chrysler “Managing the Development of Large Software Systems,” Winston Royce’s waterfall model hinted at iterative development Feedback-driven refinement with customer involvement and clearly delineated iterations at IBM. Waterfall is dominant method Agile Waterfall Incremental Development Major projects such as e X-15 hypersonic jet, NASA’s early 1960s Project Mercury which also seeded IBM Federal Systems Division (FSD) & Space Programme Edwards Deming pubslies Out of the Crisis. In 1982 ' Takeuchi, H. and I. Nonaka (1986) ‘rugby method’ SCRUM “1998 CHAOS: Charting the Seas of Information Technology,” a report that analyzed 23,000 projects failers associated with waterfall practices Larman, C., & Basili, V. R. (2003). Iterative and incremental developments. a brief history. Computer, 36(6), 47-56.
It’s simple to explain and recall. “Do the requirements, then design, and then implement.” IID is more complex to understand and describe. Even Winston Royce’s original two iteration waterfall immediately devolved into a single sequential step as other adopters used it and writers described it. It gives the illusion of an orderly, accountable, and measurable process, with simple document-driven milestones (such as “requirements complete”). Simplicity Illusion of order Embedded Knowledge Why did agile take so long to catch on? It was promoted in many software engineering, requirements engineering, and management texts, courses, and consulting organizations. It was labeled appropriate or ideal, seemingly unaware of this history or of the statistically significant research evidence in favor of IID. Larman, C., & Basili, V. R. (2003). Iterative and incremental developments. a brief history. Computer, 36(6), 47-56.
9 History Of Change Management 2
10 1950s 1960s 1980s 1970s 1990s 2000s 2010s 2020s 1940s From Kurt Lewin (1943) to Paul Lawrence (1958) change and organisational development is conceived as a set of causal relationships within a ‘social system’ built on scientific constructs. Allport (1937) ‘functional autonomy’ & Maslow’s (1943) ‘general dynamic theory’ integrate psychological & physiological approaches to human motivation. White 1959 uses the words ‘competence & efficacy’ to describe the human need to ‘‘learn to interact effectively with his environment’ Lewin (1947) mentions “unfreezing, change of level, and freezing on the new level” (UCF) ‘theory’. Lewin believes that force is needed to “break the habit” (unfreeze), change, Freeze change management (UCF) & restraining forces although he views people not being either entirely fluid or rigid. Coch & French (1948) – use the phrase ‘overcoming resistance to change’ Lewin’s UCF is extrapolated by Lippit et al (1958) to 7 stages who cites Lewin’s ‘three phase model’ & creates the term ‘change agents’ Schien (1961) uses Lewins ‘3-phase’ model in his model for culture change but doesn’t mention Lippit until Schein & Bennis 1965 who popularize T-Groups.. Kübler-Ross publishes her stages of grief theory (1969) based on collection of case studies taken from conversations with dying patients 1962 Maslow founds the Humanistic Psychology movement which soon becomes ‘pop’ movement 1979 Robbins’ Organizational Behavior published with no mention of Lewin’s UCF Forrester (1961) - publishes Industrial Dynamics which views organisations as complex systems. Burns & Stalker (1961) – find that less structured organisations can better adapt to dynamic environments 1965 Emery & Trist view organisations as ‘open systems’ responding to ‘environmental textures’ Katz & Kahn (1966) develop an ‘open- system theory’ of organisations. Current robust OD constructs emerge such as Dansereau’s (1973) – Leader Member Exchange, Bandura 1977 – Self- Efficacy & Gouldner, 1960 (Reciprocity) Social Exchange Theory ‘Pop’ psychology’ n-stage organisational change ‘arms race’ as 11 models in 11 years extrapolated from ‘Lewin’s’ UCR model Conner & Kotter embed ‘Sense of Urgency & Resistance Myths’. Methods fail to reference research & based mainly on personal experiences & case studies. Peters & Waterman (1982) publish In Search of Excellence Brief history of organisational change & development Birth of organisational change Birth of organisational change Explosion of management fads Meta Analysis & Myth Busting Scientific Approach to OD Systems Approach to OD Explosion of OD constructs Myth Development & Embedding OD constructs consolidated into more general theories such as Ryan & Deci (1985) Self Determination Theory, Theory of Planned Behaviour Lock & Latham (1988) Goal Setting while new theories emerge such as Kahn (1990) Psychological Safety & Employee Engagement, Weick’s (1995) Organisational Sensemaking help to build the foundations of modern OD thinking. Meta analysis techniques help to create robust OD constructs such as Self-Efficacy (Stajkovic & Luthans-1998), Organisational Justice (Colquitt et al 2013) Trust in Leadership (Dirks & Ferrin - 2002), Psychological Safety (Frazier et al 2017) Academics start to question the foundations of traditional organisational change models e.g., Hughes (2015) critiques Kotter & Cummings et al (2015) questions the Lewin’s UCF theory. BCG stress importance of evidence CIPD embrace evidence- based management (EBM) & produce ‘evidence reviews’ 2008 SCARF model loosely based on neuroscience leads to ‘brains hate change’ & other ‘neuro’ myths Lueke 2003 further embeds Kubler Ross myth & other ‘n-stage methods. Mcgregor’s (1957) X-Y theory ‘operationalises’ Maslow’s theory DiClemente and Prochaska (1982) – integrative model of behavioural change Birk & Letwin (1992) integrate OD theories into their causal model of organisational performance & change Hiatt (2006) ADKAR 5 step model uses outdated theory and case studies Stouten et al integrate organisational change methods with academic OD theories CMI Handbook (2015) integrates CM methods but also embeds myths such as MBTI, Learning Styles, Kubler-Ross, Amygdala Hijack, Maslow’s Hierarchy etc.
Organisations As Complex Systems “Traditional organisational theories have tended to view the human organisation as a closed system. This tendency has led to the disregard of differing organisational environments and the nature of organisational dependency on its environment” Katz & Kahn - 1966 01 02 03 “A main problem in the study of organisational change is that the environmental contexts in which organisations exist are themselves changing, at an increasing rate, and towards increasing complexity” Emery & Trist – 1965 “Organisations can be viewed as consisting of goal, task, technological, human-social, structural & external interface subsystems existing in a state of dynamic interdependence” p.82 French & Bell- 1972
The Origins of N-Step Change Model 01 02 1. The Develop Of A Need For Change (“unfreezing”), 2. Establishment of Change 3. Relationship, Working Toward Change (“moving”), 4. Generalisation & Stabilisation of Change (“freezing”) & 5. Achieving A Terminal Relationship Lippit’s 5-steps – 1958 1. Creating A Sense of Concern, 2. Developing A Specific Commitment to Change, 3. Pushing For Major Change, 4. Reinforcing & Consolidating New Course Phillip’s 4 Steps – McKinsey & Co - 1983 1. Create Urgency 2. Form a Powerful Coalition 3. Create a Vision for Change. 4. Communicate the Vision. 5. Remove Obstacles. 6. Create Short- Term Wins. 7. Build on the Change. 8. Anchor the Changes in Corporate Culture. Kotter’s 7 Steps – 1995
13 Mind The Gap! Traditional models not very agile?
10 Problems with N-step Change Models Mental Models Time to Change? Practice Lack Of Evidence Out Of Date Extraordinary Extrapolations Gloomy Vision Self Fulfilling Top Down Project Based Closed Episodic Linear
History Lesson ? Being comfortable with complexity We try to simplify it to make sellable, ‘operational’ & ‘practical’ methods We realise that our simplification does not work in practice We find the world as being is a complex system We re-theorise or jump on another bandwagon Reinventing or modifying the ‘wheel’ Complex Retry Failure Simplify
16 What is Agile? 3
17 What is ‘Agile’? In 1998, the word ‘‘agile” was used in combination with ‘‘software process” for the first time M. Aoyama, Web-based agile software development, IEEE Software According to Highsmith and Cockburn (2001, p. 122), “what is new about agile methods is not the practices they use, but their recognition of people as the primary drivers of project success, coupled with an intense focus on effectiveness and manoeuvrability. This yields a new combination of values and principles that define an agile world view.” “rugby approach, the product development process emerges from the constant interaction of a hand-picked, multidisciplinary team whose members work together from start to finish. Rather than moving in defined, highly structured stages, the process is born out of the team members' interplay” Takeuchi, H. and I. Nonaka (1986) Agile = A people centric approach to change = change/organisational change? Agile is method of organisational change – So the idea of Agile Change Management becomes a bit redundant?
18 Agile Manifesto The Agile manifesto written in 2001 focusses on 4 core values: 1. Individuals and interactions over processes and tools. 2. Working software over comprehensive documentation. 3. Customer collaboration over contract negotiation. 4. Responding to change over following a plan Principles behind the Agile Manifesto We follow these principles: 1. Our highest priority is to satisfy the customer through early and continuous delivery of valuable software. 2. Welcome changing requirements, even late in development. Agile processes harness change for the customer's competitive advantage. 3. Deliver working software frequently, from a couple of weeks to a couple of months, with a preference to the shorter timescale. 4. Business people and developers must work together daily throughout the project. 5. Build projects around motivated individuals. Give them the environment and support they need, and trust them to get the job done. 6. The most efficient and effective method of conveying information to and within a development team is face-to-face conversation. 7. Working software is the primary measure of progress. 8. Agile processes promote sustainable development. The sponsors, developers, and users should be able to maintain a constant pace indefinitely. 9. Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design enhances agility. 10.Simplicity--the art of maximizing the amount of work not done--is essential. 11.The best architectures, requirements, and designs emerge from self-organizing teams. 12.At regular intervals, the team reflects on how to become more effective, then tunes and adjusts its behavior accordingly. https://agilemanifesto.org/
Wellbeing Improved Learning Responsive Requirements Minimising cost of change SCRUM, XP etc Agile Methods Learning Transfer Management Support. Team Cohesion Collaboration Self Transcendence OUTCOMES??? Overview of Agile Autonomy Tension Self Organisation High Customer / Stakeholder Satisfaction STATES Customer Centric Efficiency
Kent Beck really talking about psychological safety Communication What is the simplest thing that could possibly work Simplicity Interpersonal & from the software. A precondition of complex systems Feedback Courage to speak up & challenge is an outcome of psychological safety Courage This is part of psychological safety & interpersonal relationships Respect XP Values Social States (e.g. Psychological Safety, Trust etc) + Cognitive States (e.g. Information Sharing, Collective Memory etc)
Release Daily Scrum Daily Cycle Preparation Sprint Review Sprint Retrospective Update Product backlog SCRUM PROCESS Product Backlog Sprint Planning meeting Daily Cycle Product increment SCRUM ARTIFACTS Risk & Issues Sprint Backlog Product Backlog Sprint Burn Down Product Burn Up Story SCRUM ROLES Product owner Scrum Master Stake Holders Users Team Members SCRUM – The Rugby Approach
22 The origins of the ‘rugby approach’ “A group of engineers, for example, may start to design the product (phase three) before all the results of the feasibility tests (phase two) are in. Or, the team may be forced to reconsider a decision as a result of later information. The team does not stop then, but engages in iterative experimentation. This goes on in even the latest phases of the development process.” “Traditional, sequential, linear approach to product development” “The overlap approach is represented by type B, where the overlying occurs only at the border of adjacent phases,” “Type C, where the overlap extends across several phases.”
23 Does Agile work? 4
24 2008 Systematic Review of Agile Dybå, T., & Dingsøyr, T. (2008). Empirical studies of agile software development: A systematic review. Information and software technology, 50(9-10), 833-859. Identified 36 studies on Agile Software development 76% on XP, 15% General Agility, 3% SCRUM & 3% Lean Rigour. Has a thorough and appropriate approach been applied to key research methods in the study? Credibility. Are the findings well- presented and meaningful? Relevance. How useful are the findings to the software industry and the research community?
Mixed results. Some studies found moving away from waterfall as a positive. Some XP principles work (customer collaboration, learning) others less so (paired programmers). More suited to small teams than complex organisations. Lack of attention to design and architecture issues. Introduction & Adoption 01 02 XP can thrive in different org cultures, increases collaboration, team self efficacy , mutual respect, trust & wellbeing. Balances team and individual autonomy. XP works best for experienced teams Human & Social Factors High customer satisfaction & increase involvement e.g. daily scrum. Popular amongst developers increasing productivity. Pair programming popular but difficult if imbalance in skill. Students see it as an opportunity to learn. Perceptions of Agile Methods Agile more ‘operations’ than project management. Combine gate stage with agile. Agile more able to meet customer requirements. Higher productivity on 1st iteration. Agile = high level of code but same functionality. Not necessarily higher levels of team cohesion & difficult to reassign Comparative Studies 03 04 Contradictory Findings
26 2015 Empirical Study – Does Agile Work? Serrador, P., & Pinto, J. K. (2015). Does Agile work?—A quantitative analysis of agile project success. International journal of project management, 33(5), 1040-1051. Survey completed by 859 practitioners collected from PMI, LinkedIn for all types of projects. Total of 1386 projects Asked to rank how successful project was in terms of budget, requirements, client satisfaction, and overall success. Findings - Amount of agile used has a statistically significant impact on three dimensions of project success – efficiency, stakeholder satisfaction and overall success - Vision and goals of project act as a significant moderator between Agile methods & project success. Team experience & project complexity were not found to moderate the effect - But overall small effects - Planning in Agile = Planning in Traditional methods - Best used in high tech environments
27 Challenges & success factors for large-scale agile transformations 2016 52 publications describing 42 industrial cases presenting the process of taking large-scale agile development into use. Almost 90% of the included papers were experience reports, indicating a lack of sound academic research on the topic. What is agile? a whole system change? Dikert, K., Paasivaara, M., & Lassenius, C. (2016). Challenges and success factors for large-scale agile transformations: A systematic literature review. Journal of Systems and Software, 119, 87-108.
28 2020 Factors Affecting Agile Team Capability = Utilisation of Team Knowledge, team members’ motivation and commitment, agile knowledgeable managers with an adaptive management style, and proper provision of technical training to the project team
29 Factors Affecting Agile Adoption 2022
30 A decade of agile methodologies 2012 Most importantly, a majority of agile studies do not seem to be concerned about any theoretical underpinnings for their research exploration, which reinforces the general popular perception that agile research tends to be a-theoretical. Such theory-driven research enables us to separate true innovations among agile practices from the reinventions and remixes of old approaches, thereby helping us adopt such innovations at a faster rate in the future. Therefore, we urge agile researchers to embrace a more theory-based approach in the future when inquiring into these promising research areas of agile development. it is important to remember that the field can mature and progress as a scientific discipline only if efforts are made to provide a robust theoretical scaffold for the conduct of research on agile development. “ “ Dingsøyr, T., Nerur, S., Balijepally, V., & Moe, N. B. (2012). A decade of agile methodologies: Towards explaining agile software development. Journal of systems and software, 85(6), 1213- 1221.
31 Can we apply Agile to Organisational Development 5
32 Agile – Old wine new bottles?
Early 1900’s 1965 1984 2000’s 1960 1981 1993 Mayo 1933 & Whyte 1956 viewed organisations as complex social systems Staw et al. (1981) & Meyer (1982) how organisations respond to sudden ‘environmental jolts’ to their day-to-day operations. They suggested that organisations can either absorb (e.g., use redundancy such as employee resilience) or adapt (e.g., new ways of working) Social Cohesion Threat Rigidity Organisational Reliability Collective Mind Weick & Roberts (1993) came up with the idea of the 'Collective mind' where employees are mindful of the interrelationships of their actions within a system which helps create reliability e.g. through improvisation. Ties to meaning making Perrow’s (1984) towards internal organizational reliability; in particular, the reliability of complex intra- organizational processes and the avoidance of small failures resulting from Chernobyl, Exxon Valdez, Bhopal and the Space Shuttle Challenger Evolutionary approach ((Hannan and Freeman, 1977; Aldrich, 1979) & Strategic approach organisations have taken to adapt (Argenti, 1976; Rubin, 1977; Starbuckand Hedberg, 1977) Organisational Adaptation Levels Model All organizations are simultaneously rational and natural systems; and all are both open and closed systems (Thompson 1967). Must adapt by crafting structure. Led to Contingency Theory (sociological) Cranfield School of Management (2017) define Organizational Resilience as "the ability of an organization to anticipate, prepare for, respond and adapt to incremental change and sudden disruptions in order to survive and prosper.” Organisational Resilience
A “critique of rational and linear processes of planned change and emphasizes the importance of political and cultural factors in shaping change outcomes” “The time series data in The Awakening Giant illustrated how, why, and when change can occur in radical packages interspersed with eras of incremental adjustment.” Whipp and Pettigrew (1991/2) “emphasized the interactive, learning- by-doing character of management practice and the constant need for openness and flexibility of management thought and action” 34 Agile Pettigrew, A. M. (2012). Context and action in the transformation of the firm: A reprise. Journal of Management studies, 49(7), 1304-1328. 1985
35 Multiple Approaches to Organisational Change Subjective – feel time Objective – clock time Change happens to things (people) controlled by ‘variables’ People bring change into being (reality) through ‘events’ – the world is ‘becoming’ Van de Ven, A. H., & Poole, M. S. (2005). Alternative approaches for studying organizational change. Organization studies, 26(9), 1377-1404. HOLISM REDUCTIONISM Change as interrelations between variables Change controlled by variables Change as lived experience Change brings things into being AGILE? LINEAR?
36 Helping organisations through change Unfreeze Unfreeze Refreeze Change Unfreeze Refreeze Change Change Refreeze Unfreeze Refreeze Change Change Unfreeze Unfreeze Refreeze Change Change Unfreeze Stop Motion Episodic Correlation Entities Boxes & Arrows N-Step Variance in Outcomes Reduction Outcomes Predictive from past LINEAR PARALLEL RECURSIVE CONJUNCTIVE Motion Pictures Fluid Contingent Action Entanglements Narrative Metaphor Poetics Whole Potentialities Generative from future WEAK ‘Process’ STRONG ‘Process’
37 Beliefs V Behaviours LINEAR RECURSIVE Bayesian Updating
38 Agile Organisational Change Models Training Management Transformations People Management & Resistors Impact Studies & Support Diagnostic Change Le Grand, T., & Deneckere, R. (2019, July). COOC: an agile change management method. In 2019 IEEE 21st Conference on Business Informatics (CBI) (Vol. 2, pp. 28-37). IEEE. Franklin, M. (2021). Agile change management: A practical framework for successful change planning and implementation. Kogan Page Publishers.
People Relying on people’s creativity to adapt to changing user requirements. Embraces higher levels of change 39 People v Process Process Relying on process to make change efficient & predictable. Tried to reduce variation in requriemetns V “Dybå, T., & Dingsøyr, T. (2008). Empirical studies of agile software development: A systematic review. Information and software technology, 50(9-10), 833-859.
THE DRIVE TO CONTROL Efficiency Predictability Reduce Variability Fixing Scope Command & Control Explict Knowledge Life-cycle Mechanistic Heavy Planning Late Testing THE DRIVE TO CO- CREATE Creativity Adaptivity Embrace Change Constant Feedback Self Organising Tacit Knowledge Evolutionary Organic Continuous Control Continuous Testing PEOPLE v PROCESS AGILE v TRADITIONAL
Numerosity Disorder & Diversity Feedback Non-equilibrium 41 10 characteristics of Complex Systems Spontaneous order and Self organisation Non-linearity Robustness Nested Structure & modularity History & memory Adaptive behaviour Emergence Ladyman, J., & Wiesner, K. (2020). What is a complex system?. Yale University Press.
ENTROPY how (dis)organized are you? Relationally Disorganised Fully Disorganised Dynamically Organised Fully Organised High Entropy High Randomness Low Structure High Autonomy High Free Energy Low Entropy Low Randomnes High Structure Low Autonomy Low Free Energy A system’s MEMORY (social exchange) compartmentalises (Markov Blankets) interactions & the system SPONTANEOUSLY SELF ORGANISES becoming MODULAR NUMEROSITY creates interactions between DIVERSE & DISORDERED people NON LINEAR FEEDBACK loops keep the system in dynamic (NON) EQUILBRIUM constantly adjusting to external forces creating stability through change (allostasis) The system becomes more rigid & less ROBUST & APDAPTIVE due to low autonomy & randomness and high structure Markov Blankets
Complexity & Organisational Change Characteristic 5: Spontaneity & Self Order Dynamically Organised (Variable Relationships) Forced Organised (Invariant Relationships) More Structure More Agency Purpose Co-operation Employee Voice Employee Commitment Social Exchange Organisational Justice Mediated by…
44 Best of both worlds? Bottom-up employee voice, fairness etc So what makes effective teams?
AGILE & the Mechanics of Complex Systems Free Energy Entropy Free Energy Bayesian Updating Active Inference Markov Blankets Does agile help to keep organisations as complex adaptive systems?
46 What Makes Effective Teams 6
47 What is Team Effectiveness ? 1) Formally established, 2) Assigned (some) autonomy 3) Interdependent - Task Performance - Contextual/adaptive Performance, (e.g., learning, creativity, decision making) - Behaviours = actions to achieve goals e.g., feedback seeking, reflectivity, information sharing, communication, co-ordination etc - Emergent Cognitive states = respect, psychological safety, caring, enjoying each other’s company - Permanent States - Outcomes = consequences of behaviours e.g., items sold, clients served etc - Effectiveness = results - Efficiency = cost of achieving results TEAM EFFECTIVENSSS
TEAM COGNITION Information Sharing Collective Memory Cognitive Consensus Intrateam Trust Psychological Safety Team Cohesion Team Identification DIVERSITY Protected Characteristics Organisational Tenure Experience EFFECTIVE TEAM COGNITIVE STATES TEAM COMPOSITION SOCIAL STATES Debriefing Sessions PERSONALITY (Big Five) Agreeableness & Conscientiousness TEAM LEARNING Questioning Challenging Reflecting Team learning mediates cognition Teamwork Training Team Building Group Goals Attributes of Effective Teams & Interventions A Rapid Evidence Assessment of the Scientific Literature on the Attributes of Effective Teams and Interventions Increasing Team Effectiveness (CEBMa 2019) Context rather than composition determines team performance Information Sharing drives Trust & Cohesion
1 2 3 4 Will others give you the benefit of doubt when you take a risk? Group belief People acknowledge and value being part of a team Friendships, caring for one another & enjoying each other’s company Will you give others the benefit of doubt when you take a risk? Individual belief Social States - Belongingness Intrateam Trust Psychological Safety Team Cohesion Team Identification Group Learning Accepting vulnerability & Learning 1 3 Critical for Virtual Teams & Inclusive teams 3 Organisational Citizenship Behaviours Clear Goals 4 4 Social Support Wellbeing
5 6 7 8 9 10 Collective Memory - An indexing system that allow the team to understand who knows what Overlapping mental representation of knowledge, Skills, Attitudes, Dynamicity & Environment Cognitive Consensus - How ideas are defined, conceptualised & interpreted – we all know what we are talking about Information Sharing - Are all team members able to bring in their expertise to their full potential? Promotes trust & social cohesion Drives trust & cohesion How accurate and similar the Shared Mental Models are Group learning – are we able to question, challenge & reflect on our mental models – assumptions we are making? Team Cognition - Usefulness Information Sharing Collective Memory Cognitive Consensus Reflexivity & Learning Shared Mental Models Group Learning Team Mental Models
Challenging Shared Feedback Accountability Task Clarity Autonomy Decision Making Communication Co-ordination Reflection Challenge Question GRPI Model GOALS ROLES PROCESS INTERACTIONS The best team model? Where is Trust & Psychological Safety?
Different Types of Conflict Can be positively related to performance particularly amongst senior management. unless it creates relationship conflict. Type of task doesn’t affect conflict Task Always associated with negative impact on group outcomes Process Negatively related to group performance particularly if there is task conflict Relationship De Wit, F. R., Greer, L. L., & Jehn, K. A. (2012). The paradox of intragroup conflict: a meta- analysis. Journal of applied psychology, 97(2), 360. SCRUM = Built-in instability – broad challenging goals create tension creating self order but needs autonomy, self- transcendence & cross fertilisation Takeuchi, H. and I. Nonaka (1986)
53 Given Agile – what is the future of Organisational Change? 7
Precontemplation I won’t or I can’t Contemplation I might Preparation I will Action I am Realise ‘small wins’ to build belief Embed and habitualise change behaviours Understand the need & readiness for change Develop compelling vision & leadership capability Implement evidence-based interventions Support enabling practices & structures Maintenance I still am Individual Change Process Organisational Change Process PULSE PULSE PULSE PULSE Creating high performing cultures Operational level Strategic level Process Variance
Summary of agile impact on Organisational Change Robust capabilities create the building blocks for emergent change Create contextual conversations about which OD constructs need dialing up/down when & where Use other disciplines to think differently e.g. neuroscience, complexity systems etc Create a culture ‘pulse’ keep people top of mind and on the top table Avoid defining what is culture/change but under what conditions people are most likely to thrive Bridging the gap between research & practice – create experimental learning cultures Delivering change in tiny doses builds efficacy in organisations ability to affect change
AND ... Thank you! from Alex Boulting Owner | ebbnflow +44 7562570000 alex@ebbnflow.co.u k www.ebbnflow.co.u k Stay tuned and check our newest videos on YouTube:
Individual Level - Individual Change Readiness - Motivating Change - Organisational Fairness Perceptions - Organisational Identification Group Level - High Quality Connections - Emergent Local Changes - Supervisory Support - Shared Goals & Beliefs Organisation Level - Leadership Competency - Trust In Leaders - Nature of the Change - Organisational Change Readiness BEST AVAILABLE EVIDENCE 1. Understand Get The Facts On The Nature of the Problem 2. Understand Assess & Address Readiness for Change 3. Develop & Communicate a Compelling Vision 4. Develop Effective Change Leadership 5. Implement : Evidence-Based Change Interventions 6. Support : Work with Social Networks and Tap Their Influence 7. Support : Use Enabling Practices to Support Implementation 8. Realise : Promote Micro-Processes and Experimentation 9. Realise : Change Progress and Outcomes over Time 10. Institutionalize the Change to Sustain Its Effectiveness INTEGRATED EVIDENCE BASED ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE PRINCIPLES Stouten, J., Rousseau, D. M., & De Cremer, D. (2018). Successful organizational change: Integrating the management practice and scholarly literatures. Academy of Management Annals, 12(2), 752-788. ten Have, S., ten Have, W., Huijsmans, A. B., & Otto, M. (2016). Reconsidering change management: Applying evidence-based insights in change management practice. Routledge. Integrated Organisational Change Model 57 2 Kanter, Stein, and Jick’s Ten Commandments POPULAR ORGANISATIONAL CHANGE MODELS 1 1 Except for Kotter’s 8 Steps none of these models have been empirically tested 3 Appreciative Inquiry
ORGANISATIONAL CHANGE ‘defining and adopting corporate strategies, structures, procedures and technologies to handle changes in external conditions and the business environment.’ SHRM “ ‘the application of a structured process and set of tools for leading the people side of change to achieve a desired outcome’ PROSCI CHANGE MANAGEMENT ORGANISATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ‘a planned and systematic approach to enabling sustained organisational performance through the involvement of its people’ CIPD 2020 The practice of adapting human capability to meet internal & external ambitions STRATEGIC HR MANAGEMENT The choice, alignment, and integration of an organisation’s HRM system so that its human capital resources most effectively contribute to strategic business objectives.’ Kaufman (2015: 404) IES 2019 DEFINITION : Spot the difference?
ORGANISATIONAL FLEXIBILITY ‘a combination of a repertoire of organizational and managerial capabilities that allow organizations to adapt quickly under environmental shifts’ (Hatum and Pettigrew 2004, p. 239). “ ‘‘the regulation and/or insulation of organizational processes, functions, entities, or individuals from the effects of environmental uncertainty or scarcity.” (Lynn 2005, p. 38) ORGANISATIONAL BUFFERING ORGANISATIONAL CHANGE CAPABILITY ‘a combination of managerial and organizational capabilities that allows an enterprise to adapt more quickly and effectively than its competitors to changing situations’ (Judge and Douglas 2009, p. 635). The practice of continually adapting human capability to meet an organisation’s internal & external ambitions ORGANISATIONAL CAPACITY ‘the capacity of an organization to respond to changing external environment’ (Staber and Sydow) 2002). DEFINITION : Spot the difference?
Academics v Practitioners
61 Beliefs V Behaviours LINEAR RECURSIVE Bayesian Updating
62 Similar uses of the Framework Lips‐Wiersma, M. (2002). The influence of spiritual “meaning‐making” on career behavior. Journal of Management Development. Paul Gibbons ‘The Science of Organisational Change’
The Burke-Litwin Change Model Feedback Feedback External Environment Leadership Management Practices Work Unit Climate Motivation Ind. & Org. Performance Mission and Strategy Organizational Culture Structure Systems ( Policy & Procedure ) Individual Skills & Tasks Individual Needs & Values Subjective Intersubjective Interobjective Objective
Internal Cohesion Seven Levels of Sustainability, Richard Barrett (1998) 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Organizational Motivations Human Motivations Service Making a difference Self-Esteem Relationship Survival Transformation Societal Sustainability Community Sustainability Cultural Sustainability Organizational Sustainability Social Sustainability Financial Sustainability Structural Sustainability
Schein's Culture Framework Placeholder Placeholder Artifacts & Behaviour Norms & Values Basic Assumptions What we see What they say What they may not realise
The Burke-Litwin Change Model Feedback Feedback External Environment Leadership Management Practices Work Unit Climate Motivation Ind. & Org. Performance Mission and Strategy Organizational Culture Structure Systems ( Policy & Procedure ) Individual Skills & Tasks Individual Needs & Values
67 Hatch’s Cultural Dynamics Model Values Artifacts Symbols Assumptions SUBJECTIVE ACTIVITY Identity OBJECTIVE ACTIVITY Action OBJECTIVE REFLEXIVITY Image SUBJECTIVE REFLEXIVITY Meaning REFLEXIVITY ACTIVITY DIALOGUE
68 • Hierarchy creates subsystems • Division of functions, • Specialisation pecialisms and levels of function emerge interacting with each other • Modularity as different groups have different roles formed by the the clustering of networks e.g. projects Complexity & Organisational Change Characteristic 8: Modularity
Change Commitment Organisational Citizen behaviours Supervisor Satisfaction 4 Ways to be fair PROCEDURAL - Is the process fair? DISTRIBUTED Are outcomes fair? INTERPERSONAL & INFORMATIONAL - Are people treated fairly? + Are explanations provided? Job Satisfaction Organisational & Change Commitment Trust in the Organisation Performance AGENCY STRUCTURE
Is this a Valid Construct…? COHERENCE Definition + Scope + Relationship = Coherence and CONSTRUCT VALIDITY. How can we claim to have a body of knowledge if we don’t have valid constructs? RELATIONSHIP No construct is an island so where is the body of knowledge that underpins Kotter & ADKAR when they have no (or few) references in their books. SCOPE Space = Kubler Ross extrapolation from grief counselling to Organisational Change, Time = Kotter’s 19thC model applied to 20thC problems and Values Judgements = “brains hate change” extrapolation from Neuroscience DEFINITION Precise distinctions from other concepts. Change Management = “people side of change” – a circular tautology or clear definition? Suddaby, R. 2010. Construct clarity in theories of management and organization. Academy of Management Review, 35: 346-357. Construct = an abstract categorisation of observations - exist in our brain only ;) This is not a pipe Change & Performance

More Related Content

PPTX
Change management PMI
byPMILebanonChapter
 
PPTX
Change Leadership Workshop: Managing the People Side of Change
byJewel Celestine Anizor, SPHR, MHRM, M.Ed
 
PPTX
Change management
byDeepak Singh
 
PDF
Change Management Fundamentals PowerPoint Presentation Slides
bySlideTeam
 
PPT
Change Management
bySelf Creation
 
PPTX
Identifying and managing resistance to change
byILX Group
 
PPT
Change management
byAbhi Bhatt
 
PDF
Organizational Change Management and Communications
byEnamul Haque
 
Change management PMI
byPMILebanonChapter
 
Change Leadership Workshop: Managing the People Side of Change
byJewel Celestine Anizor, SPHR, MHRM, M.Ed
 
Change management
byDeepak Singh
 
Change Management Fundamentals PowerPoint Presentation Slides
bySlideTeam
 
Change Management
bySelf Creation
 
Identifying and managing resistance to change
byILX Group
 
Change management
byAbhi Bhatt
 
Organizational Change Management and Communications
byEnamul Haque
 

What's hot

PPTX
Change management
byuniversity of Gujrat, pakistan
 
PPTX
Understanding, Initiating and Managing Change by Catherine Adenle
byCatherine Adenle
 
PDF
Agile Transformation v1.27
byLiminalArc
 
PDF
Agile mindset
byMustafa Savaşcı
 
PPTX
CCL Points of View on Leadership Development Through the Lens of Relational L...
byCharles Palus
 
PPTX
The Process of Change / Transformation
bySubbuiyer
 
PPTX
Change and Project Management Toolkit - Framework, Best Practices and Templates
byAurelien Domont, MBA
 
PPTX
Agile Mindset Shifting: Agile For All
byIndia Scrum Enthusiasts Community
 
PPT
8 Steps For Corporate Change
bynglaser
 
PPTX
How to build a case for change
bythechangesource
 
PPTX
How to Develop Strategic Thinking in Management
byNMC Strategic Manager
 
PDF
Agile Transformation in Telco Guide
byACM
 
PDF
Change Management Toolkit including Models, Plans, Frameworks & Tools
byAurelien Domont, MBA
 
PPT
Change Management
byParas Kaushik
 
PPTX
Change Management
byKhandaker Saiful Islam
 
PDF
5 Practices for an Agile Mindset
byMichael Sahota
 
PDF
Organizational Change Management for IT Projects
byd3d s3s
 
PPT
Agile Mindset
bySunil Mundra
 
PPTX
Agile leadership
byChris Davies
 
PPT
Linda rising - the power of an agile mindset
byMagneta AI
 
Change management
byuniversity of Gujrat, pakistan
 
Understanding, Initiating and Managing Change by Catherine Adenle
byCatherine Adenle
 
Agile Transformation v1.27
byLiminalArc
 
Agile mindset
byMustafa Savaşcı
 
CCL Points of View on Leadership Development Through the Lens of Relational L...
byCharles Palus
 
The Process of Change / Transformation
bySubbuiyer
 
Change and Project Management Toolkit - Framework, Best Practices and Templates
byAurelien Domont, MBA
 
Agile Mindset Shifting: Agile For All
byIndia Scrum Enthusiasts Community
 
8 Steps For Corporate Change
bynglaser
 
How to build a case for change
bythechangesource
 
How to Develop Strategic Thinking in Management
byNMC Strategic Manager
 
Agile Transformation in Telco Guide
byACM
 
Change Management Toolkit including Models, Plans, Frameworks & Tools
byAurelien Domont, MBA
 
Change Management
byParas Kaushik
 
Change Management
byKhandaker Saiful Islam
 
5 Practices for an Agile Mindset
byMichael Sahota
 
Organizational Change Management for IT Projects
byd3d s3s
 
Agile Mindset
bySunil Mundra
 
Agile leadership
byChris Davies
 
Linda rising - the power of an agile mindset
byMagneta AI
 

Similar to Agile Organisational Change

PPTX
History of Organisational Change
byebbnflow
 
PPTX
Complex Systems & Organisational Change
byebbnflow
 
PPTX
Is the future of organisational change evidence based?
byebbnflow
 
PPT
Dkdkdkdkdlddkdkdldloeoeoeeoeoeoekekekekrkrk
byalaminrahman18
 
PPTX
Chapter 8 Soft systems models for change.pptx
byMariumHasan3
 
PPTX
Building Change Capability Slideshare.pptx
byebbnflow
 
PPTX
Organizational change
byShaikh Abdul Hameed
 
PPTX
Change at work
bySandhya Johnson
 
PPT
Organizational Behavior
byJal Pari
 
PPTX
Change management 1
bywaqole
 
PDF
Leading Change
byLee James
 
PDF
Leading Change
byLee James
 
PPT
MANAGING CHANGES 12332313131312312321312312312312
byictoptiquest
 
PPTX
Organizational change and its approaches
byAamir chouhan
 
PPT
30 05-2010 organizational change and innovation
byMinistry of Public Administration and Home Affairs
 
PPT
Change As An Organization Process
byhidayahperlis
 
PPTX
Generations of planned organisational change
byShelly Jose
 
DOCX
Change ModelsDifferent models have been developed to help plan f.docx
bysleeperharwell
 
PDF
4811362.pdf
byTrentonWeber
 
PPTX
Process Approaches to Change Management.pptx
byMarshaNavarroRoberts1
 
History of Organisational Change
byebbnflow
 
Complex Systems & Organisational Change
byebbnflow
 
Is the future of organisational change evidence based?
byebbnflow
 
Dkdkdkdkdlddkdkdldloeoeoeeoeoeoekekekekrkrk
byalaminrahman18
 
Chapter 8 Soft systems models for change.pptx
byMariumHasan3
 
Building Change Capability Slideshare.pptx
byebbnflow
 
Organizational change
byShaikh Abdul Hameed
 
Change at work
bySandhya Johnson
 
Organizational Behavior
byJal Pari
 
Change management 1
bywaqole
 
Leading Change
byLee James
 
Leading Change
byLee James
 
MANAGING CHANGES 12332313131312312321312312312312
byictoptiquest
 
Organizational change and its approaches
byAamir chouhan
 
30 05-2010 organizational change and innovation
byMinistry of Public Administration and Home Affairs
 
Change As An Organization Process
byhidayahperlis
 
Generations of planned organisational change
byShelly Jose
 
Change ModelsDifferent models have been developed to help plan f.docx
bysleeperharwell
 
4811362.pdf
byTrentonWeber
 
Process Approaches to Change Management.pptx
byMarshaNavarroRoberts1
 

More from ebbnflow

PPTX
Relationships : An Evidence Based Approach
byebbnflow
 
PPTX
Resilience : Building Organisational Change Capability Talks # 5
byebbnflow
 
PPTX
Psychological Safety : An Evidence Based Approach
byebbnflow
 
PPTX
Neuroscience of Organisational
byebbnflow
 
PPTX
Neuroscience of Organisational
byebbnflow
 
PPTX
Fairness In Decision Making
byebbnflow
 
PPTX
Trust in Leadership : An Evidence Based Approach slideshare.pptx
byebbnflow
 
PPTX
Organisational Change Mythbusting
byebbnflow
 
PPTX
Evidence Based Employee Engagement Slide Show.pptx
byebbnflow
 
PPTX
Adopting a Scientific Mindset
byebbnflow
 
Relationships : An Evidence Based Approach
byebbnflow
 
Resilience : Building Organisational Change Capability Talks # 5
byebbnflow
 
Psychological Safety : An Evidence Based Approach
byebbnflow
 
Neuroscience of Organisational
byebbnflow
 
Neuroscience of Organisational
byebbnflow
 
Fairness In Decision Making
byebbnflow
 
Trust in Leadership : An Evidence Based Approach slideshare.pptx
byebbnflow
 
Organisational Change Mythbusting
byebbnflow
 
Evidence Based Employee Engagement Slide Show.pptx
byebbnflow
 
Adopting a Scientific Mindset
byebbnflow
 

Recently uploaded

PDF
Dark Side of Hosting_ Why People Buy Verified Airbnb Accounts
byUsaviral Wave
 
DOCX
Best Place To Purchase Verified OnlyFans Accounts.docx
bymarketing
 
PDF
Best 7 Sites to Buy Verified Venmo Accounts With Zero ....pdf
byndsfcm3nubx18jc4s6f4
 
PDF
Abdallah Dahhan: Harnessing Risk as a Compass for Resilient Innovation
bybmmseo25
 
PDF
Top 7 Places to Buy Aged LinkedIn Accounts and Should ....pdf
byh55oga0kd25m12iaza2
 
PDF
How to Buy Aged Facebook Accounts in 2026.pdf
byh55oga0kd25m12iaza2
 
PPTX
AI for Business - Strategy and Planning Webinar
byChristopherVicGamuya
 
PDF
Step-by-Step Guide to Purchasing USA Facebook Accounts.pdf
byndsfcm3nubx18jc4s6f4
 
PDF
PS_DB Report_Back to the Future.pdf Punter Southall
byHenry Tapper
 
DOCX
5 Simple Steps to Purchase Telegram Accounts For Best Service Topusapro.docx
bytopusapro.com
 
PDF
Pengelolaan SDM Terintegrasi Berbasis Manajemen Risiko 2025
bySeta Wicaksana
 
PDF
Unlock the Power of Leadership: The Electrolux Manufacturing System (EMS) Way
byKaiNexus
 
PDF
Buy LinkedIn Accounts_ Step-by-Step Guide for 2025.pdf
byndsfcm3nubx18jc4s6f4
 
PDF
BTP - GK 2025-4 (1) Consulting Marketing.pdf
byAyushNath13
 
PDF
How to Safely Buy Instagram Accounts in 2025 (1).pdf
byxuexmv3qbymlv32ohdjf
 
PDF
Aagami Corporate Presentation December 2025
byAagami, Inc.
 
PDF
Buy Verified Google Ads Accounts to Maximize #ROI and Launch High-Impact #PPC...
byusasmmpva3211
 
PDF
Back to the future - the return of DB surpluses (slides) - 9 December 2025.pdf
byHenry Tapper
 
PDF
Kelli Molczyk - A Seasoned Brand Strategist
byKelli Molczyk
 
PDF
Myocardial Infarction- MI for Nursing Students.pdf
byhttps://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61578457231735
 
Dark Side of Hosting_ Why People Buy Verified Airbnb Accounts
byUsaviral Wave
 
Best Place To Purchase Verified OnlyFans Accounts.docx
bymarketing
 
Best 7 Sites to Buy Verified Venmo Accounts With Zero ....pdf
byndsfcm3nubx18jc4s6f4
 
Abdallah Dahhan: Harnessing Risk as a Compass for Resilient Innovation
bybmmseo25
 
Top 7 Places to Buy Aged LinkedIn Accounts and Should ....pdf
byh55oga0kd25m12iaza2
 
How to Buy Aged Facebook Accounts in 2026.pdf
byh55oga0kd25m12iaza2
 
AI for Business - Strategy and Planning Webinar
byChristopherVicGamuya
 
Step-by-Step Guide to Purchasing USA Facebook Accounts.pdf
byndsfcm3nubx18jc4s6f4
 
PS_DB Report_Back to the Future.pdf Punter Southall
byHenry Tapper
 
5 Simple Steps to Purchase Telegram Accounts For Best Service Topusapro.docx
bytopusapro.com
 
Pengelolaan SDM Terintegrasi Berbasis Manajemen Risiko 2025
bySeta Wicaksana
 
Unlock the Power of Leadership: The Electrolux Manufacturing System (EMS) Way
byKaiNexus
 
Buy LinkedIn Accounts_ Step-by-Step Guide for 2025.pdf
byndsfcm3nubx18jc4s6f4
 
BTP - GK 2025-4 (1) Consulting Marketing.pdf
byAyushNath13
 
How to Safely Buy Instagram Accounts in 2025 (1).pdf
byxuexmv3qbymlv32ohdjf
 
Aagami Corporate Presentation December 2025
byAagami, Inc.
 
Buy Verified Google Ads Accounts to Maximize #ROI and Launch High-Impact #PPC...
byusasmmpva3211
 
Back to the future - the return of DB surpluses (slides) - 9 December 2025.pdf
byHenry Tapper
 
Kelli Molczyk - A Seasoned Brand Strategist
byKelli Molczyk
 
Myocardial Infarction- MI for Nursing Students.pdf
byhttps://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61578457231735
 

Agile Organisational Change

  • 1.
    Agile Organisational Change Jointhe conversation 7-9pm 6th October 2022 Presented by Alex Boulting The aim of these monthly talks is to crowd-source a body of knowledge from people who have experience in Organisational Change.
  • 2.
  • 3.
  • 4.
  • 6.
  • 7.
    1930’s 1970s 1990s2010s 1950/60s 1980s 2000s iterative and incremental development’s grew from the 1930s work of Walter Shewhart a quality expert at Bell Labs who proposed a series of short “plan-do-study-act” (PDSA) cycles for quality improvement adopted by Demming “The fundamental idea was to build in small increments, with feedback cycles involving the customer for each.” Evo(lutionary) method focused on time boxed short iterations Plan-Do-Study-Act Adaptive & Spiral Programming DSDM + XP Agile Alliance Agile Change In February 2001, a group of 17 process experts—representing DSDM, XP, Scrum, FDD, and others to promote modern iterative methods called the Agile Alliance (www.agilealliance.org) f Coutu (2002) 13 and Luthans (2002a, 2002b) result of 9/11 focus back on external factors and building resilience through individual strengths. Positive psychology = self efficacy & learned optimism Failing water-fall method. 1994 16 rapid application development (RAD) practitioners met in the UK to discuss the definition of a standard iterative process. Rational Unified Process = daily build & smoke test. Kent Beck developed XP with Chrysler “Managing the Development of Large Software Systems,” Winston Royce’s waterfall model hinted at iterative development Feedback-driven refinement with customer involvement and clearly delineated iterations at IBM. Waterfall is dominant method Agile Waterfall Incremental Development Major projects such as e X-15 hypersonic jet, NASA’s early 1960s Project Mercury which also seeded IBM Federal Systems Division (FSD) & Space Programme Edwards Deming pubslies Out of the Crisis. In 1982 ' Takeuchi, H. and I. Nonaka (1986) ‘rugby method’ SCRUM “1998 CHAOS: Charting the Seas of Information Technology,” a report that analyzed 23,000 projects failers associated with waterfall practices Larman, C., & Basili, V. R. (2003). Iterative and incremental developments. a brief history. Computer, 36(6), 47-56.
  • 8.
    It’s simple toexplain and recall. “Do the requirements, then design, and then implement.” IID is more complex to understand and describe. Even Winston Royce’s original two iteration waterfall immediately devolved into a single sequential step as other adopters used it and writers described it. It gives the illusion of an orderly, accountable, and measurable process, with simple document-driven milestones (such as “requirements complete”). Simplicity Illusion of order Embedded Knowledge Why did agile take so long to catch on? It was promoted in many software engineering, requirements engineering, and management texts, courses, and consulting organizations. It was labeled appropriate or ideal, seemingly unaware of this history or of the statistically significant research evidence in favor of IID. Larman, C., & Basili, V. R. (2003). Iterative and incremental developments. a brief history. Computer, 36(6), 47-56.
  • 9.
    9 History Of ChangeManagement 2
  • 10.
    10 1950s 1960s 1980s 1970s1990s 2000s 2010s 2020s 1940s From Kurt Lewin (1943) to Paul Lawrence (1958) change and organisational development is conceived as a set of causal relationships within a ‘social system’ built on scientific constructs. Allport (1937) ‘functional autonomy’ & Maslow’s (1943) ‘general dynamic theory’ integrate psychological & physiological approaches to human motivation. White 1959 uses the words ‘competence & efficacy’ to describe the human need to ‘‘learn to interact effectively with his environment’ Lewin (1947) mentions “unfreezing, change of level, and freezing on the new level” (UCF) ‘theory’. Lewin believes that force is needed to “break the habit” (unfreeze), change, Freeze change management (UCF) & restraining forces although he views people not being either entirely fluid or rigid. Coch & French (1948) – use the phrase ‘overcoming resistance to change’ Lewin’s UCF is extrapolated by Lippit et al (1958) to 7 stages who cites Lewin’s ‘three phase model’ & creates the term ‘change agents’ Schien (1961) uses Lewins ‘3-phase’ model in his model for culture change but doesn’t mention Lippit until Schein & Bennis 1965 who popularize T-Groups.. Kübler-Ross publishes her stages of grief theory (1969) based on collection of case studies taken from conversations with dying patients 1962 Maslow founds the Humanistic Psychology movement which soon becomes ‘pop’ movement 1979 Robbins’ Organizational Behavior published with no mention of Lewin’s UCF Forrester (1961) - publishes Industrial Dynamics which views organisations as complex systems. Burns & Stalker (1961) – find that less structured organisations can better adapt to dynamic environments 1965 Emery & Trist view organisations as ‘open systems’ responding to ‘environmental textures’ Katz & Kahn (1966) develop an ‘open- system theory’ of organisations. Current robust OD constructs emerge such as Dansereau’s (1973) – Leader Member Exchange, Bandura 1977 – Self- Efficacy & Gouldner, 1960 (Reciprocity) Social Exchange Theory ‘Pop’ psychology’ n-stage organisational change ‘arms race’ as 11 models in 11 years extrapolated from ‘Lewin’s’ UCR model Conner & Kotter embed ‘Sense of Urgency & Resistance Myths’. Methods fail to reference research & based mainly on personal experiences & case studies. Peters & Waterman (1982) publish In Search of Excellence Brief history of organisational change & development Birth of organisational change Birth of organisational change Explosion of management fads Meta Analysis & Myth Busting Scientific Approach to OD Systems Approach to OD Explosion of OD constructs Myth Development & Embedding OD constructs consolidated into more general theories such as Ryan & Deci (1985) Self Determination Theory, Theory of Planned Behaviour Lock & Latham (1988) Goal Setting while new theories emerge such as Kahn (1990) Psychological Safety & Employee Engagement, Weick’s (1995) Organisational Sensemaking help to build the foundations of modern OD thinking. Meta analysis techniques help to create robust OD constructs such as Self-Efficacy (Stajkovic & Luthans-1998), Organisational Justice (Colquitt et al 2013) Trust in Leadership (Dirks & Ferrin - 2002), Psychological Safety (Frazier et al 2017) Academics start to question the foundations of traditional organisational change models e.g., Hughes (2015) critiques Kotter & Cummings et al (2015) questions the Lewin’s UCF theory. BCG stress importance of evidence CIPD embrace evidence- based management (EBM) & produce ‘evidence reviews’ 2008 SCARF model loosely based on neuroscience leads to ‘brains hate change’ & other ‘neuro’ myths Lueke 2003 further embeds Kubler Ross myth & other ‘n-stage methods. Mcgregor’s (1957) X-Y theory ‘operationalises’ Maslow’s theory DiClemente and Prochaska (1982) – integrative model of behavioural change Birk & Letwin (1992) integrate OD theories into their causal model of organisational performance & change Hiatt (2006) ADKAR 5 step model uses outdated theory and case studies Stouten et al integrate organisational change methods with academic OD theories CMI Handbook (2015) integrates CM methods but also embeds myths such as MBTI, Learning Styles, Kubler-Ross, Amygdala Hijack, Maslow’s Hierarchy etc.
  • 11.
    Organisations As ComplexSystems “Traditional organisational theories have tended to view the human organisation as a closed system. This tendency has led to the disregard of differing organisational environments and the nature of organisational dependency on its environment” Katz & Kahn - 1966 01 02 03 “A main problem in the study of organisational change is that the environmental contexts in which organisations exist are themselves changing, at an increasing rate, and towards increasing complexity” Emery & Trist – 1965 “Organisations can be viewed as consisting of goal, task, technological, human-social, structural & external interface subsystems existing in a state of dynamic interdependence” p.82 French & Bell- 1972
  • 12.
    The Origins ofN-Step Change Model 01 02 1. The Develop Of A Need For Change (“unfreezing”), 2. Establishment of Change 3. Relationship, Working Toward Change (“moving”), 4. Generalisation & Stabilisation of Change (“freezing”) & 5. Achieving A Terminal Relationship Lippit’s 5-steps – 1958 1. Creating A Sense of Concern, 2. Developing A Specific Commitment to Change, 3. Pushing For Major Change, 4. Reinforcing & Consolidating New Course Phillip’s 4 Steps – McKinsey & Co - 1983 1. Create Urgency 2. Form a Powerful Coalition 3. Create a Vision for Change. 4. Communicate the Vision. 5. Remove Obstacles. 6. Create Short- Term Wins. 7. Build on the Change. 8. Anchor the Changes in Corporate Culture. Kotter’s 7 Steps – 1995
  • 13.
    13 Mind The Gap! Traditionalmodels not very agile?
  • 14.
    10 Problems withN-step Change Models Mental Models Time to Change? Practice Lack Of Evidence Out Of Date Extraordinary Extrapolations Gloomy Vision Self Fulfilling Top Down Project Based Closed Episodic Linear
  • 15.
    History Lesson ?Being comfortable with complexity We try to simplify it to make sellable, ‘operational’ & ‘practical’ methods We realise that our simplification does not work in practice We find the world as being is a complex system We re-theorise or jump on another bandwagon Reinventing or modifying the ‘wheel’ Complex Retry Failure Simplify
  • 16.
  • 17.
    17 What is ‘Agile’? In1998, the word ‘‘agile” was used in combination with ‘‘software process” for the first time M. Aoyama, Web-based agile software development, IEEE Software According to Highsmith and Cockburn (2001, p. 122), “what is new about agile methods is not the practices they use, but their recognition of people as the primary drivers of project success, coupled with an intense focus on effectiveness and manoeuvrability. This yields a new combination of values and principles that define an agile world view.” “rugby approach, the product development process emerges from the constant interaction of a hand-picked, multidisciplinary team whose members work together from start to finish. Rather than moving in defined, highly structured stages, the process is born out of the team members' interplay” Takeuchi, H. and I. Nonaka (1986) Agile = A people centric approach to change = change/organisational change? Agile is method of organisational change – So the idea of Agile Change Management becomes a bit redundant?
  • 18.
    18 Agile Manifesto The Agilemanifesto written in 2001 focusses on 4 core values: 1. Individuals and interactions over processes and tools. 2. Working software over comprehensive documentation. 3. Customer collaboration over contract negotiation. 4. Responding to change over following a plan Principles behind the Agile Manifesto We follow these principles: 1. Our highest priority is to satisfy the customer through early and continuous delivery of valuable software. 2. Welcome changing requirements, even late in development. Agile processes harness change for the customer's competitive advantage. 3. Deliver working software frequently, from a couple of weeks to a couple of months, with a preference to the shorter timescale. 4. Business people and developers must work together daily throughout the project. 5. Build projects around motivated individuals. Give them the environment and support they need, and trust them to get the job done. 6. The most efficient and effective method of conveying information to and within a development team is face-to-face conversation. 7. Working software is the primary measure of progress. 8. Agile processes promote sustainable development. The sponsors, developers, and users should be able to maintain a constant pace indefinitely. 9. Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design enhances agility. 10.Simplicity--the art of maximizing the amount of work not done--is essential. 11.The best architectures, requirements, and designs emerge from self-organizing teams. 12.At regular intervals, the team reflects on how to become more effective, then tunes and adjusts its behavior accordingly. https://agilemanifesto.org/
  • 19.
    Wellbeing Improved Learning Responsive Requirements Minimising cost of change SCRUM,XP etc Agile Methods Learning Transfer Management Support. Team Cohesion Collaboration Self Transcendence OUTCOMES??? Overview of Agile Autonomy Tension Self Organisation High Customer / Stakeholder Satisfaction STATES Customer Centric Efficiency
  • 20.
    Kent Beck reallytalking about psychological safety Communication What is the simplest thing that could possibly work Simplicity Interpersonal & from the software. A precondition of complex systems Feedback Courage to speak up & challenge is an outcome of psychological safety Courage This is part of psychological safety & interpersonal relationships Respect XP Values Social States (e.g. Psychological Safety, Trust etc) + Cognitive States (e.g. Information Sharing, Collective Memory etc)
  • 21.
  • 22.
    22 The origins ofthe ‘rugby approach’ “A group of engineers, for example, may start to design the product (phase three) before all the results of the feasibility tests (phase two) are in. Or, the team may be forced to reconsider a decision as a result of later information. The team does not stop then, but engages in iterative experimentation. This goes on in even the latest phases of the development process.” “Traditional, sequential, linear approach to product development” “The overlap approach is represented by type B, where the overlying occurs only at the border of adjacent phases,” “Type C, where the overlap extends across several phases.”
  • 23.
  • 24.
    24 2008 Systematic Reviewof Agile Dybå, T., & Dingsøyr, T. (2008). Empirical studies of agile software development: A systematic review. Information and software technology, 50(9-10), 833-859. Identified 36 studies on Agile Software development 76% on XP, 15% General Agility, 3% SCRUM & 3% Lean Rigour. Has a thorough and appropriate approach been applied to key research methods in the study? Credibility. Are the findings well- presented and meaningful? Relevance. How useful are the findings to the software industry and the research community?
  • 25.
    Mixed results. Somestudies found moving away from waterfall as a positive. Some XP principles work (customer collaboration, learning) others less so (paired programmers). More suited to small teams than complex organisations. Lack of attention to design and architecture issues. Introduction & Adoption 01 02 XP can thrive in different org cultures, increases collaboration, team self efficacy , mutual respect, trust & wellbeing. Balances team and individual autonomy. XP works best for experienced teams Human & Social Factors High customer satisfaction & increase involvement e.g. daily scrum. Popular amongst developers increasing productivity. Pair programming popular but difficult if imbalance in skill. Students see it as an opportunity to learn. Perceptions of Agile Methods Agile more ‘operations’ than project management. Combine gate stage with agile. Agile more able to meet customer requirements. Higher productivity on 1st iteration. Agile = high level of code but same functionality. Not necessarily higher levels of team cohesion & difficult to reassign Comparative Studies 03 04 Contradictory Findings
  • 26.
    26 2015 Empirical Study– Does Agile Work? Serrador, P., & Pinto, J. K. (2015). Does Agile work?—A quantitative analysis of agile project success. International journal of project management, 33(5), 1040-1051. Survey completed by 859 practitioners collected from PMI, LinkedIn for all types of projects. Total of 1386 projects Asked to rank how successful project was in terms of budget, requirements, client satisfaction, and overall success. Findings - Amount of agile used has a statistically significant impact on three dimensions of project success – efficiency, stakeholder satisfaction and overall success - Vision and goals of project act as a significant moderator between Agile methods & project success. Team experience & project complexity were not found to moderate the effect - But overall small effects - Planning in Agile = Planning in Traditional methods - Best used in high tech environments
  • 27.
    27 Challenges & successfactors for large-scale agile transformations 2016 52 publications describing 42 industrial cases presenting the process of taking large-scale agile development into use. Almost 90% of the included papers were experience reports, indicating a lack of sound academic research on the topic. What is agile? a whole system change? Dikert, K., Paasivaara, M., & Lassenius, C. (2016). Challenges and success factors for large-scale agile transformations: A systematic literature review. Journal of Systems and Software, 119, 87-108.
  • 28.
    28 2020 Factors AffectingAgile Team Capability = Utilisation of Team Knowledge, team members’ motivation and commitment, agile knowledgeable managers with an adaptive management style, and proper provision of technical training to the project team
  • 29.
  • 30.
    30 A decade ofagile methodologies 2012 Most importantly, a majority of agile studies do not seem to be concerned about any theoretical underpinnings for their research exploration, which reinforces the general popular perception that agile research tends to be a-theoretical. Such theory-driven research enables us to separate true innovations among agile practices from the reinventions and remixes of old approaches, thereby helping us adopt such innovations at a faster rate in the future. Therefore, we urge agile researchers to embrace a more theory-based approach in the future when inquiring into these promising research areas of agile development. it is important to remember that the field can mature and progress as a scientific discipline only if efforts are made to provide a robust theoretical scaffold for the conduct of research on agile development. “ “ Dingsøyr, T., Nerur, S., Balijepally, V., & Moe, N. B. (2012). A decade of agile methodologies: Towards explaining agile software development. Journal of systems and software, 85(6), 1213- 1221.
  • 31.
    31 Can we applyAgile to Organisational Development 5
  • 32.
    32 Agile – Oldwine new bottles?
  • 33.
    Early 1900’s 19651984 2000’s 1960 1981 1993 Mayo 1933 & Whyte 1956 viewed organisations as complex social systems Staw et al. (1981) & Meyer (1982) how organisations respond to sudden ‘environmental jolts’ to their day-to-day operations. They suggested that organisations can either absorb (e.g., use redundancy such as employee resilience) or adapt (e.g., new ways of working) Social Cohesion Threat Rigidity Organisational Reliability Collective Mind Weick & Roberts (1993) came up with the idea of the 'Collective mind' where employees are mindful of the interrelationships of their actions within a system which helps create reliability e.g. through improvisation. Ties to meaning making Perrow’s (1984) towards internal organizational reliability; in particular, the reliability of complex intra- organizational processes and the avoidance of small failures resulting from Chernobyl, Exxon Valdez, Bhopal and the Space Shuttle Challenger Evolutionary approach ((Hannan and Freeman, 1977; Aldrich, 1979) & Strategic approach organisations have taken to adapt (Argenti, 1976; Rubin, 1977; Starbuckand Hedberg, 1977) Organisational Adaptation Levels Model All organizations are simultaneously rational and natural systems; and all are both open and closed systems (Thompson 1967). Must adapt by crafting structure. Led to Contingency Theory (sociological) Cranfield School of Management (2017) define Organizational Resilience as "the ability of an organization to anticipate, prepare for, respond and adapt to incremental change and sudden disruptions in order to survive and prosper.” Organisational Resilience
  • 34.
    A “critique ofrational and linear processes of planned change and emphasizes the importance of political and cultural factors in shaping change outcomes” “The time series data in The Awakening Giant illustrated how, why, and when change can occur in radical packages interspersed with eras of incremental adjustment.” Whipp and Pettigrew (1991/2) “emphasized the interactive, learning- by-doing character of management practice and the constant need for openness and flexibility of management thought and action” 34 Agile Pettigrew, A. M. (2012). Context and action in the transformation of the firm: A reprise. Journal of Management studies, 49(7), 1304-1328. 1985
  • 35.
    35 Multiple Approaches toOrganisational Change Subjective – feel time Objective – clock time Change happens to things (people) controlled by ‘variables’ People bring change into being (reality) through ‘events’ – the world is ‘becoming’ Van de Ven, A. H., & Poole, M. S. (2005). Alternative approaches for studying organizational change. Organization studies, 26(9), 1377-1404. HOLISM REDUCTIONISM Change as interrelations between variables Change controlled by variables Change as lived experience Change brings things into being AGILE? LINEAR?
  • 36.
    36 Helping organisations throughchange Unfreeze Unfreeze Refreeze Change Unfreeze Refreeze Change Change Refreeze Unfreeze Refreeze Change Change Unfreeze Unfreeze Refreeze Change Change Unfreeze Stop Motion Episodic Correlation Entities Boxes & Arrows N-Step Variance in Outcomes Reduction Outcomes Predictive from past LINEAR PARALLEL RECURSIVE CONJUNCTIVE Motion Pictures Fluid Contingent Action Entanglements Narrative Metaphor Poetics Whole Potentialities Generative from future WEAK ‘Process’ STRONG ‘Process’
  • 37.
    37 Beliefs V Behaviours LINEARRECURSIVE Bayesian Updating
  • 38.
    38 Agile Organisational ChangeModels Training Management Transformations People Management & Resistors Impact Studies & Support Diagnostic Change Le Grand, T., & Deneckere, R. (2019, July). COOC: an agile change management method. In 2019 IEEE 21st Conference on Business Informatics (CBI) (Vol. 2, pp. 28-37). IEEE. Franklin, M. (2021). Agile change management: A practical framework for successful change planning and implementation. Kogan Page Publishers.
  • 39.
    People Relying on people’screativity to adapt to changing user requirements. Embraces higher levels of change 39 People v Process Process Relying on process to make change efficient & predictable. Tried to reduce variation in requriemetns V “Dybå, T., & Dingsøyr, T. (2008). Empirical studies of agile software development: A systematic review. Information and software technology, 50(9-10), 833-859.
  • 40.
    THE DRIVE TO CONTROL Efficiency Predictability ReduceVariability Fixing Scope Command & Control Explict Knowledge Life-cycle Mechanistic Heavy Planning Late Testing THE DRIVE TO CO- CREATE Creativity Adaptivity Embrace Change Constant Feedback Self Organising Tacit Knowledge Evolutionary Organic Continuous Control Continuous Testing PEOPLE v PROCESS AGILE v TRADITIONAL
  • 41.
    Numerosity Disorder & Diversity Feedback Non-equilibrium 41 10characteristics of Complex Systems Spontaneous order and Self organisation Non-linearity Robustness Nested Structure & modularity History & memory Adaptive behaviour Emergence Ladyman, J., & Wiesner, K. (2020). What is a complex system?. Yale University Press.
  • 42.
    ENTROPY how (dis)organizedare you? Relationally Disorganised Fully Disorganised Dynamically Organised Fully Organised High Entropy High Randomness Low Structure High Autonomy High Free Energy Low Entropy Low Randomnes High Structure Low Autonomy Low Free Energy A system’s MEMORY (social exchange) compartmentalises (Markov Blankets) interactions & the system SPONTANEOUSLY SELF ORGANISES becoming MODULAR NUMEROSITY creates interactions between DIVERSE & DISORDERED people NON LINEAR FEEDBACK loops keep the system in dynamic (NON) EQUILBRIUM constantly adjusting to external forces creating stability through change (allostasis) The system becomes more rigid & less ROBUST & APDAPTIVE due to low autonomy & randomness and high structure Markov Blankets
  • 43.
    Complexity & OrganisationalChange Characteristic 5: Spontaneity & Self Order Dynamically Organised (Variable Relationships) Forced Organised (Invariant Relationships) More Structure More Agency Purpose Co-operation Employee Voice Employee Commitment Social Exchange Organisational Justice Mediated by…
  • 44.
    44 Best of bothworlds? Bottom-up employee voice, fairness etc So what makes effective teams?
  • 45.
    AGILE & theMechanics of Complex Systems Free Energy Entropy Free Energy Bayesian Updating Active Inference Markov Blankets Does agile help to keep organisations as complex adaptive systems?
  • 46.
  • 47.
    47 What is TeamEffectiveness ? 1) Formally established, 2) Assigned (some) autonomy 3) Interdependent - Task Performance - Contextual/adaptive Performance, (e.g., learning, creativity, decision making) - Behaviours = actions to achieve goals e.g., feedback seeking, reflectivity, information sharing, communication, co-ordination etc - Emergent Cognitive states = respect, psychological safety, caring, enjoying each other’s company - Permanent States - Outcomes = consequences of behaviours e.g., items sold, clients served etc - Effectiveness = results - Efficiency = cost of achieving results TEAM EFFECTIVENSSS
  • 48.
    TEAM COGNITION Information Sharing CollectiveMemory Cognitive Consensus Intrateam Trust Psychological Safety Team Cohesion Team Identification DIVERSITY Protected Characteristics Organisational Tenure Experience EFFECTIVE TEAM COGNITIVE STATES TEAM COMPOSITION SOCIAL STATES Debriefing Sessions PERSONALITY (Big Five) Agreeableness & Conscientiousness TEAM LEARNING Questioning Challenging Reflecting Team learning mediates cognition Teamwork Training Team Building Group Goals Attributes of Effective Teams & Interventions A Rapid Evidence Assessment of the Scientific Literature on the Attributes of Effective Teams and Interventions Increasing Team Effectiveness (CEBMa 2019) Context rather than composition determines team performance Information Sharing drives Trust & Cohesion
  • 49.
    1 2 3 4 Will others giveyou the benefit of doubt when you take a risk? Group belief People acknowledge and value being part of a team Friendships, caring for one another & enjoying each other’s company Will you give others the benefit of doubt when you take a risk? Individual belief Social States - Belongingness Intrateam Trust Psychological Safety Team Cohesion Team Identification Group Learning Accepting vulnerability & Learning 1 3 Critical for Virtual Teams & Inclusive teams 3 Organisational Citizenship Behaviours Clear Goals 4 4 Social Support Wellbeing
  • 50.
    5 6 7 8 9 10 Collective Memory -An indexing system that allow the team to understand who knows what Overlapping mental representation of knowledge, Skills, Attitudes, Dynamicity & Environment Cognitive Consensus - How ideas are defined, conceptualised & interpreted – we all know what we are talking about Information Sharing - Are all team members able to bring in their expertise to their full potential? Promotes trust & social cohesion Drives trust & cohesion How accurate and similar the Shared Mental Models are Group learning – are we able to question, challenge & reflect on our mental models – assumptions we are making? Team Cognition - Usefulness Information Sharing Collective Memory Cognitive Consensus Reflexivity & Learning Shared Mental Models Group Learning Team Mental Models
  • 51.
  • 52.
    Different Types ofConflict Can be positively related to performance particularly amongst senior management. unless it creates relationship conflict. Type of task doesn’t affect conflict Task Always associated with negative impact on group outcomes Process Negatively related to group performance particularly if there is task conflict Relationship De Wit, F. R., Greer, L. L., & Jehn, K. A. (2012). The paradox of intragroup conflict: a meta- analysis. Journal of applied psychology, 97(2), 360. SCRUM = Built-in instability – broad challenging goals create tension creating self order but needs autonomy, self- transcendence & cross fertilisation Takeuchi, H. and I. Nonaka (1986)
  • 53.
    53 Given Agile –what is the future of Organisational Change? 7
  • 54.
    Precontemplation I won’t orI can’t Contemplation I might Preparation I will Action I am Realise ‘small wins’ to build belief Embed and habitualise change behaviours Understand the need & readiness for change Develop compelling vision & leadership capability Implement evidence-based interventions Support enabling practices & structures Maintenance I still am Individual Change Process Organisational Change Process PULSE PULSE PULSE PULSE Creating high performing cultures Operational level Strategic level Process Variance
  • 55.
    Summary of agileimpact on Organisational Change Robust capabilities create the building blocks for emergent change Create contextual conversations about which OD constructs need dialing up/down when & where Use other disciplines to think differently e.g. neuroscience, complexity systems etc Create a culture ‘pulse’ keep people top of mind and on the top table Avoid defining what is culture/change but under what conditions people are most likely to thrive Bridging the gap between research & practice – create experimental learning cultures Delivering change in tiny doses builds efficacy in organisations ability to affect change
  • 56.
    AND ... Thank you! fromAlex Boulting Owner | ebbnflow +44 7562570000 alex@ebbnflow.co.u k www.ebbnflow.co.u k Stay tuned and check our newest videos on YouTube:
  • 57.
    Individual Level - IndividualChange Readiness - Motivating Change - Organisational Fairness Perceptions - Organisational Identification Group Level - High Quality Connections - Emergent Local Changes - Supervisory Support - Shared Goals & Beliefs Organisation Level - Leadership Competency - Trust In Leaders - Nature of the Change - Organisational Change Readiness BEST AVAILABLE EVIDENCE 1. Understand Get The Facts On The Nature of the Problem 2. Understand Assess & Address Readiness for Change 3. Develop & Communicate a Compelling Vision 4. Develop Effective Change Leadership 5. Implement : Evidence-Based Change Interventions 6. Support : Work with Social Networks and Tap Their Influence 7. Support : Use Enabling Practices to Support Implementation 8. Realise : Promote Micro-Processes and Experimentation 9. Realise : Change Progress and Outcomes over Time 10. Institutionalize the Change to Sustain Its Effectiveness INTEGRATED EVIDENCE BASED ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE PRINCIPLES Stouten, J., Rousseau, D. M., & De Cremer, D. (2018). Successful organizational change: Integrating the management practice and scholarly literatures. Academy of Management Annals, 12(2), 752-788. ten Have, S., ten Have, W., Huijsmans, A. B., & Otto, M. (2016). Reconsidering change management: Applying evidence-based insights in change management practice. Routledge. Integrated Organisational Change Model 57 2 Kanter, Stein, and Jick’s Ten Commandments POPULAR ORGANISATIONAL CHANGE MODELS 1 1 Except for Kotter’s 8 Steps none of these models have been empirically tested 3 Appreciative Inquiry
  • 58.
    ORGANISATIONAL CHANGE ‘defining and adopting corporatestrategies, structures, procedures and technologies to handle changes in external conditions and the business environment.’ SHRM “ ‘the application of a structured process and set of tools for leading the people side of change to achieve a desired outcome’ PROSCI CHANGE MANAGEMENT ORGANISATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ‘a planned and systematic approach to enabling sustained organisational performance through the involvement of its people’ CIPD 2020 The practice of adapting human capability to meet internal & external ambitions STRATEGIC HR MANAGEMENT The choice, alignment, and integration of an organisation’s HRM system so that its human capital resources most effectively contribute to strategic business objectives.’ Kaufman (2015: 404) IES 2019 DEFINITION : Spot the difference?
  • 59.
    ORGANISATIONAL FLEXIBILITY ‘a combination ofa repertoire of organizational and managerial capabilities that allow organizations to adapt quickly under environmental shifts’ (Hatum and Pettigrew 2004, p. 239). “ ‘‘the regulation and/or insulation of organizational processes, functions, entities, or individuals from the effects of environmental uncertainty or scarcity.” (Lynn 2005, p. 38) ORGANISATIONAL BUFFERING ORGANISATIONAL CHANGE CAPABILITY ‘a combination of managerial and organizational capabilities that allows an enterprise to adapt more quickly and effectively than its competitors to changing situations’ (Judge and Douglas 2009, p. 635). The practice of continually adapting human capability to meet an organisation’s internal & external ambitions ORGANISATIONAL CAPACITY ‘the capacity of an organization to respond to changing external environment’ (Staber and Sydow) 2002). DEFINITION : Spot the difference?
  • 60.
  • 61.
    61 Beliefs V Behaviours LINEARRECURSIVE Bayesian Updating
  • 62.
    62 Similar uses ofthe Framework Lips‐Wiersma, M. (2002). The influence of spiritual “meaning‐making” on career behavior. Journal of Management Development. Paul Gibbons ‘The Science of Organisational Change’
  • 63.
    The Burke-Litwin ChangeModel Feedback Feedback External Environment Leadership Management Practices Work Unit Climate Motivation Ind. & Org. Performance Mission and Strategy Organizational Culture Structure Systems ( Policy & Procedure ) Individual Skills & Tasks Individual Needs & Values Subjective Intersubjective Interobjective Objective
  • 64.
    Internal Cohesion Seven Levelsof Sustainability, Richard Barrett (1998) 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Organizational Motivations Human Motivations Service Making a difference Self-Esteem Relationship Survival Transformation Societal Sustainability Community Sustainability Cultural Sustainability Organizational Sustainability Social Sustainability Financial Sustainability Structural Sustainability
  • 65.
    Schein's Culture Framework PlaceholderPlaceholder Artifacts & Behaviour Norms & Values Basic Assumptions What we see What they say What they may not realise
  • 66.
    The Burke-Litwin ChangeModel Feedback Feedback External Environment Leadership Management Practices Work Unit Climate Motivation Ind. & Org. Performance Mission and Strategy Organizational Culture Structure Systems ( Policy & Procedure ) Individual Skills & Tasks Individual Needs & Values
  • 67.
    67 Hatch’s Cultural DynamicsModel Values Artifacts Symbols Assumptions SUBJECTIVE ACTIVITY Identity OBJECTIVE ACTIVITY Action OBJECTIVE REFLEXIVITY Image SUBJECTIVE REFLEXIVITY Meaning REFLEXIVITY ACTIVITY DIALOGUE
  • 68.
    68 • Hierarchy createssubsystems • Division of functions, • Specialisation pecialisms and levels of function emerge interacting with each other • Modularity as different groups have different roles formed by the the clustering of networks e.g. projects Complexity & Organisational Change Characteristic 8: Modularity
  • 69.
    Change Commitment Organisational Citizenbehaviours Supervisor Satisfaction 4 Ways to be fair PROCEDURAL - Is the process fair? DISTRIBUTED Are outcomes fair? INTERPERSONAL & INFORMATIONAL - Are people treated fairly? + Are explanations provided? Job Satisfaction Organisational & Change Commitment Trust in the Organisation Performance AGENCY STRUCTURE
  • 70.
    Is this aValid Construct…? COHERENCE Definition + Scope + Relationship = Coherence and CONSTRUCT VALIDITY. How can we claim to have a body of knowledge if we don’t have valid constructs? RELATIONSHIP No construct is an island so where is the body of knowledge that underpins Kotter & ADKAR when they have no (or few) references in their books. SCOPE Space = Kubler Ross extrapolation from grief counselling to Organisational Change, Time = Kotter’s 19thC model applied to 20thC problems and Values Judgements = “brains hate change” extrapolation from Neuroscience DEFINITION Precise distinctions from other concepts. Change Management = “people side of change” – a circular tautology or clear definition? Suddaby, R. 2010. Construct clarity in theories of management and organization. Academy of Management Review, 35: 346-357. Construct = an abstract categorisation of observations - exist in our brain only ;) This is not a pipe Change & Performance