Dissertation 76 model b

of 54
Coursework Header Sheet
173324-12
Course BUSI0011: Dissertation - General Course School/Level BU/UG
Coursework Dissertation Assessment Weight 90.00%
Tutor U Veersma Submission Deadline 21/03/2011
Coursework is receipted on the understanding that it is the student's own work and that it has not, in
whole or part, been presented elsewhere for assessment. Where material has been used from other sources
it has been properly acknowledged in accordance with the University's Regulations regarding Cheating
and Plagiarism.
000462910
Tutor's comments

of 54
Grade Awarded___________
For Office Use Only__________ Final Grade_________
Moderation required: yes/no
Tutor______________________ Date _______________

of 54
The University of Greenwich Business School
Does organisational change necessarily improve a
company`s performance? - A Meta-Analysis.
By
Business Management
21 March 2011

of 54
Executive Summary
In order to secure their survival within the corporate world, organisations have had to re-
adjust or change their business operations to adapt to the environment filled with intense
competitive forces, (Yu, 2009; Lewin and Johnston, 2000; Liu et al, 2007; Liu and Perrewé,
2005; Huy, 2002; Eriksson, 2004; Siegal et al, 1996; Rashid et al, 2004; and Taylor and
Cooper, 2007). It has been estimated that there is a massive change failure rate of about
70%, (Miller, 2010; Washington and Hacker, 2005; Eriksson, 2004; and Liu and Perrewé,
2005); hence, existing literature had stressed the importance of change management. And
while some has focused on the problems associated with change, others have studied what
causes these problems through employee attitude analysis, culture and their effects on
performance, (Elias, 2005; Vakola and Nikolaou, 2005; Frahm and Brown, 2007; Dam, 2005;
Lines, 2005; and Smollan and Sayers, 2009). Thus, further research has to be conducted to
evaluate mediating variables acting between change, its effects on culture and performance.
Consequently, this meta-analysis study attempted to address this research question, “does
organisational change necessarily improve a company`s performance?” in order in
evaluate these.
The meta-analysis research adopted in this study examined the literature from six journal
articles chosen from the literature review so as to find the mediating variables between
organisational change, employee attitudes and performance. In chapter three, the
arguments in the literature review of each paper, the approaches to data collection
undertaken, including theoretical (Lines, 2005); qualitative (Saka, 2003) and Frahm and
Brown (2007);’ quantitative (Rashid et al, 2004) and (Avey et al, 2008); and mixed methods
as well as the sample sizes, ethical considerations and the validity of all the studies were
discussed. Such an analysis was undertaken because, previously researched areas in the
field could help to identify relationships that other research methods may fail to uncover,
(Blumberg et al, 2005).
While reviewing and comparing the six journal articles regarding corporate change and
performance, five major findings were observed to help understand and address the
research question. These key variables included; psychological capital; positive emotions
and organisational citizenship; affective commitment and; change agents and
communication. Research by Avey et al (2008) further revealed that culture can affect the
employees` psychological wellbeing through the analysis of psychological capital and
emotions relative to attitudes and behaviours; and a further effect on performance, (Toor and
Ofori (2010). Emotions were revealed to be part of attitudes which affect affective
commitment, (Wang et al, 2010), that influences employee behaviour and performance in

of 54
return. Ultimately, the investigation highlighted the importance of organisational cultures and
employee attitudes especially psychological capital and positive emotions towards the
proposed change initiatives. Hence the research shows some of the aspects that change
implementers have to focus on in order to make change regarding organisational culture a
success, improve performance and possibly their competitiveness in return.

of 54
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
In acknowledgement I would like to first of all thank Dr Graham Symon because without his
support and guidance, it would have been impossible to prepare and hence finish this
management report. Also, I would also like to thank Miss Angela Bowles who always
provided useful dissertation writing tips especially at the beginning of this project. Most
importantly though; I am thanking God who helped to keep it together; even when it seemed
impossible to carry on; in addition to my family for putting up with me.
Thank You all

of 54
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER ONE – INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................9
BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................................................................9
THE RESEARCH QUESTION.........................................................................................................................................9
1.3 JUSTIFICATION OF THE STUDY.............................................................................................................................10
1.4 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY...............................................................................................................................10
1.5 THE STRUCTURE OF THE PAPER ..........................................................................................................................11
1.6 CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................................................11
CHAPTER TWO - LITERATURE REVIEW ..........................................................................................12
2.1 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................................................12
2.2 FROM ORGANISATIONAL CHANGE TO PERFORMANCE.............................................................................................12
2.3 ORGANISATIONAL CHANGE AND ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE ...................................................................................13
2.3.1 Reasons for Organisational change ....................................................................................................13
2.3.2 Change Implementation, Attitudes and Behaviour.............................................................................14
2.3.3 Barriers to Change Efforts...................................................................................................................15
2.3.4 Managing Change for success ............................................................................................................16
2.5 CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................................................19
CHAPTER THREE – REVIEW AND COMPARTIVE ANALYSIS........................................................20
3.1 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................................................20
3.2 INTRODUCTION TO RESEARCH AREAS...................................................................................................................20
3.3 KEY OUTCOMES / ARGUMENTS IN THE LITERATURE................................................................................................21
3.4 APPROACHES TO METHODOLOGY AND DATA COLLECTION.......................................................................................22
3.4.1 Research Paradigm .............................................................................................................................23
3.4.2 Research Design..................................................................................................................................23
3.4.3. Data Collection Methods....................................................................................................................24
3.4.4 Sampling Procedures and Population .................................................................................................24
3.4.5 Validity and Reliability of the Studies..................................................................................................25
3.4.6 Ethical considerations .........................................................................................................................26
3.5 RESULTS AND KEY FINDINGS FROM RESEARCH ARTICLES..........................................................................................26
3.6 COMPARISON OF THE DISCUSSIONS AND ANALYSIS OF THE OUTCOMES OF RESEARCH ARTICLES ......................................27
3.7 FUTURE RESEARCH / LIMITATIONS & IMPLICATIONS OF RESEARCH IN ARTICLES ...........................................................28
3.8 RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS DRAWN FROM THE ARTICLES ......................................................................29
3.9 CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................................................29
CHAPTER FOUR – DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF OVERALL FINDINGS ................................31
4.1 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................................................31
4.2 DISCUSSION OF THE KEY RESULTS .......................................................................................................................31
4.2.1 Key Finding One – Organisational Culture ..........................................................................................31
4.2.2 Key Finding Two – Psychological Capital; Attitudes and Behaviours and performance......................32
4.2.3 Key Finding Three – Positive Emotions and Organisational Citizenship..............................................33
4.2.4 Key Finding Four – Affective Organisational Commitment .................................................................34
4.2.5 Key Finding Five– Change Communication and Change Agents .........................................................35
4.3 ADDRESSING THE RESEARCH QUESTION ...............................................................................................................36
4.4 SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS / MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS.....................................................................................37
4.4 CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................................................38
CHAPTER FIVE – CONCLUSIONS .....................................................................................................39

of 54
5.1 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................................................39
5.2 SUMMARY OF THE STUDY..................................................................................................................................39
5.2.1 Review and Comparative Analysis ......................................................................................................40
5.2.2 Key Findings / Discussions...................................................................................................................40
5.3 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY...............................................................................................................................41
5.4 FUTURE RESEARCH ..........................................................................................................................................41
5.5 CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................................................42
REFERENCE LIST ...............................................................................................................................43

of 54
CHAPTER ONE – INTRODUCTION
Background
Within the recent years, the rapid change and competitive pressures due to globalisation,
technological changes and other internal forces, have forced organisations to re-adjust in
order to adapt to the environment and still maintain their efficiency, (Liu et al, 2007; Liu and
Perrewé, 2005; Huy, 2002; Eriksson, 2004; Siegal et al, 1996; Rashid et al, 2004; Lewin and
Johnston, 2000 and Taylor and Cooper, 2007). And even though organisational change may
be unavoidable; and still increasing at an unprecedented pace, (Gutsch, 1995), it has been
estimated that there is a massive change failure rate of about 70%; meaning that out of ten
change programmes, just three are a success, (Miller, 2010; Washington and Hacker, 2005;
Eriksson, 2004; Liu and Perrewé, 2005; and Cinite et al, 2009). The reasons may be
because, within an organisation, there many barriers to change including employee
resistance, and conflicts from the subcultures within, in addition to the existing entire
company culture (Rashid et al, 2004; Liu and Perrewé, 2005; Kotter and Schlesinger, 1979;
and Cinite et al, 2009). In fact, to facilitate change, the existing values, attitudes and
behaviours need to be tested, (Eriksson, 2004). Moreover, it has been argued that the major
factor causing failed change is the employees` attitudes; lack of readiness for change and
positive reactions that indicate receptivity, (Armenakis et al, 1993; Miller, 2010 and Cinite et
al, 2009). There has been a growing literature indicating that employee attitudes and
acceptance to change are important for change success; however little consideration has
been given to the relationship between members’ attitudes, perspectives towards change
and organisational culture, (Oreg and Berson, 2009; and Rashid et al, 2004). Consequently,
it has become vital to understand, possibly predict and manage the employee`s
psychological reactions (emotions) during the change programme, as they influence
behaviour and performance (Chen and Wang, 2007 and Liu and Perrewé, 2005). Therefore,
an investigation concerning the attitudinal consequences of culture change is needed; which
will help understand organisational change and factors affecting its receptivity.
The Research Question
From the literature analysed, some has hinted on the importance of attitudes towards
change, (Oreg and Berson, 2009), however more research is still needed to reveal how
change affects them, their cultures; and if this impacts the performance are. Hence, the
purpose of the following study is to examine the correlation between, organisational change,
employee attitudes and organisational performance. Therefore, the research question,
“does organisational change necessarily improve a company`s performance” was
devised to aid this particular research. This question aims to investigate how change affects
attitudes, beliefs and views of the employees within an organisation, and vice versa; its

of 54
effects on the subcultures that have been created within. In addition, the research aims to
examine the effects of these on the behaviours, commitment and the efforts in return.
Finally, the research aims to also investigate the significance of change communication and
change managers, towards the management of successful change.
1.3 Justification of the Study
This particular study has several reasons as to why it is of importance. For example,
it builds upon some of the less investigated topics within the topic of change management,
that is, attitude consideration within a cultural sense towards change implementation. Apart
from this it has been revealed why organisational change does not always lead to an
improved performance, through the analysis of the psychological element of those that might
be affected. Therefore, evaluating this is especially important, as they impact attitudes,
behaviours, affective organisational commitment the output in return, (Rashid et al, 2004;
Toor and Ofori, 2010; Wang et al, 2010 and; Elele and Fields, 2010). Consequently, the key
findings from this study might be able to provide businesses within the corporate world with
some key issues to consider before any major change is implemented; in order to avoid
being part of the 70% whose change implementations end up changing nothing. As a result,
so as to acquire a deeper understanding of the subject and hence answer the question, a
meta-analysis study was undertaken. This involved an evaluation of six journal articles by
different authors (from different companies and countries) who had undertaken different
research methods; that provided different results and different perspectives. This would have
been quite impossible had the quantitative or qualitative methods alone, been undertaken.
However, limitations to this particular study are apparent; and are considered in the section
below.
1.4 Limitations of the Study
Blumberg et al, (2005) suggest that all research has to reveal any possible limitations
regarding a particular topic. These are desired procedures from a methodological
perspective that have a possibility to be followed upon. The reason for providing this, is just
to ensure that the findings are not mere idiosyncrasies regarding a specific case; and for
further evaluation of the reliability and validity of a particular study, (Creswell, 2007 and
Blumberg et al, 2005). Some of these limitations regarding undergraduate research may
include; access to information and participants; and time constraints, (Saunders et al, 2007).
This research provides a meta-analysis of six key journals regarding the topic of change
management and while the study does provides an insight into the management of
employee attitudes; some significant limitations have been noted. Particularly, that fact that
no actual methodology took place could be seen as a limitation. This implies that the results
from the evaluation and analysis could only be of quality only if the original records are valid.

of 54
However, it has also been argued that investigating a previously researched field may help
to identify relationships that other research methods may fail to uncover, (Blumberg et al,
2005). Secondly, the research lacked qualitative research which is important in accessing
attitudes, (Amaturuga et al, 2002). According to Blumberg et al, (2005) however, through
evaluating different variables; using already researched data, direction of influence becomes
much clearer. The next section will lay out the structure of this investigation.
1.5 The Structure of the Paper
This study has five chapters which are all summarised in this section. The current
chapter provides an introduction to the investigation, though the introduction and discussion
of the research question. This concerns the management of organisational change regarding
culture and attitudes; and whether they affect organisational performance. Additionally, it
also, outlines the justification and limitations of the study. The next, chapter two focuses on
the research question, with an aim to critically examine the existing literature about cultural
change; employee attitudes and behaviours; the barriers to change and how it can be
managed successfully. In order to investigate these factors further, chapter three reviews
and comparatively examines the literature of six key journal articles from the literature
review. Consequently, chapter four aims to analyse and discuss the key findings that
emerged from the literature of the six journals in comparison to the literature discussed in
chapter two. Ultimately, the purpose of chapter five is to summarise the entire study, in
addition to the study`s limitations and future research.
1.6 Conclusion
In conclusion, the current chapter has provided a brief introduction to the research
topic, along with the proposed research question and aims of the investigation. Also, the
justifications of the study have been discussed together with the key issues that could be
considered by businesses before implementing change. Furthermore, the limitations to the
study were discussed, followed by the structure. With the purpose of analysing the
correlation between change in terms of culture, employee attitudes and performance, the
next chapter critically analyses the literature about the issue.

of 54
CHAPTER TWO - LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
Currently, within the business environment, change, due to internal and external
factors is happening at an unprecedented rate, (Taylor and Cooper, 2007; Rashid et al,
2004). When the environment changes, the organisation has to change or die, (Yu, 2009).
There seems to be an agreement that the success of organisational change only depends
on how the members will react to it, (Lines, 2005). Hence, this organisational change is very
important for both managers and employees. For managers, have to find ways to implement
it effectively while for employees, it will be in terms of acceptance and engagement, (Avey et
al, 2008).
Any attempt to change the organisation, will inevitably be an attempt to change the
culture of the organisation, because change tends to change tends to changes the way that
things are done, (Smollan and Sayers, 2009). Within the change management literature,
there is evidence that managing culture change has turned out to be one of the mostly
debated aspects in the recent years, (Brubakk and Wilkinson, 1996). For that reason, the
aim for this chapter is to examine the literature as regards to whether change in terms of
culture can necessarily lead to an improved performance and competitiveness in return. This
includes the factors that lead to culture change, the effects on attitudes, behaviours and
performance in return. The research will ultimately be drawing a correlation between
organisational change, employee behaviour and performance. Hence the next section,
predicts this correlation.
2.2 From Organisational Change to Performance
The concern for this chapter is the management of cultural change. For instance, due
to a merger as there will be a clash of two cultures or even a possible elimination of one of
them. Culture clash according to Marmenout (2010), as the degree to which cultures differ
has been recognized to be responsible for mergers` success or failure. In this respect, this
research will be slightly examine how change can impact a company`s culture. Also, strategy
implementation usually involves the need for cultural adaptation, (Smith, 2003); therefore,
according to Mohanty and Yodav (1996), the need to change strategically, will in some ways
affect certain attitudes and organisational behaviour patterns which consider culture as a
major factor; in addition to impacting performance. Duck (1993) supports this by stating that
in order to change, employee attitudes have to be changed, which may change behaviour
automatically, and result in improved performance. But, does it mean that any change can
automatically lead to an improvement in performance? The chapter will also evaluate the
barriers to change including, stress and conflict with also potential impacts; as they are
bound to happen during any stage of the implementation, and are closely related to the

of 54
employee receptivity of change. Furthermore, some of the ways that they can be overcome
will be highlighted. The next section will provide a few definitions about organisational
change and culture.
2.3 Organisational Change and Organisational Culture
Organisational change as defined by Lines (2005), is the is the deliberate planned
change in an organisation`s arrangement or systems and practices so as to achieve one or
other organisation`s objectives. In fact, Schalk et al (1998), in their research refer to change
as the purposeful introduction of new ways to think, act and operate in the organisation, so
as to survive and accomplish goals. Smith (2003) states that organisational change includes
a very common type which is culture change. Schein (2004), one of the most significant
authors concerning organisational culture precisely defines organisational culture as a
pattern of shared assumptions which were learned by a group through solving problems
about adapting to the external environment.
In an organisation, usually people who are like minded will group themselves
together, (Smollan and Sayers, 2009) therefore culture clearly has a big impact on
organisational behaviour; and performance. In this context, to simplify culture, one can
define it as how people feel within the organisation. Very often, management get hang up on
changing the systems in the organisation that they actually forget organisational needs; and
fact that it is the employees and culture within the organisation that make the change stick,
Smith (2003). Heracleous and Langham (1996), highlights that change strategy formulation,
is not only to be rooted within the organisation`s goal planning but also in within the cultural.
Therefore, one can argue that altering structures alone, is not enough as those held beliefs
that are deep within the culture have to be changed too. However, organisations still tend to
persist with their culture, even though these prevent it from adapting to the changing
environment, (Smith, 2003). The reasons as to why organisational change has to happen will
now be discussed below.
2.3.1 Reasons for Organisational change
Presently, the global economy requires organisations to operate in very complex
environments, which was not the case a few years back. The speed at which organisations
are changing has increased and so has the intensity of the competitive demands, (Lewin &
Johnston, 2000). This pace, at which change happens, has been mainly due to the increase
in challenges that organisations face including; survival, technology and mergers &
acquisitions, cultures changes and many more. Rashid et al, (2004) support this by stating
that for example, with technology changes including computerisation and e-commerce, new
information communication and ways of conducting business have been shaped. Because of

of 54
the shift towards globalisation and liberalization of markets, organisations have to be ready.
Therefore, they have to rapidly adapt to these changes in the environment in order to survive
and develop. Without change, organisations can easily lose their competitiveness, (Yu,
2009; Mohanty & Yadav, 1996).
Most organisations find real challenges as regards to change especially those related
to a change in culture, (Rashid et al, 2004). Indeed trying to adapt to these ever changing
goals and competitive demands has always been a challenge for companies but currently
this is very important, (Piderit, 2000). One reason why change within cultures is hard and
challenging is because, managers lack the knowledge regarding what processes will be
involved as the organisational culture changes, and how this culture might limit or show
opportunities from this change. Rashid et al, (2004) declare that these challenges arise
because within the organisation, there are different management styles, business nature,
work culture; and employee attitudes and behaviour. Jones et al (2005) state that
organisations also, tend to make a common mistake of moving directly to change
implementation before making sure that those to be changed are psychologically ready.
Therefore, the next section will discuss the effects of change on the employees by analysing
employee attitudes and behaviours.
2.3.2 Change Implementation, Attitudes and Behaviour
Organisations transform regularly, with changes that have the potential to impact the
organisation, in addition to individual employees, (Elias, 2009). According to Schalk et al
(1998), change implementation starts with creating a suitable change environment within an
organisation. Since this particular change will include moving away from the well-known to
the unknown causing an uncertain future, members usually are not very supportive of
change except if there are positive convincing reasons for them to. In their research, Elrod et
al (2002) concluded that because generally employees are not hopeful of change, their
attitudes will become resistant as soon as change appears. Lines (2005), defines these
attitudes towards organisational change as the employees’ assessment of the implemented
change, whether negative or positive. Their attitudes will ultimately have an effect on
whether the change is successful or not. When employees have strong positive attitudes,
they might be more supportive of change with focused, effortful behaviours, than those with
strong negative attitudes who could be resistant to it, (Elias, 2009). The author`s theory
proves that when managers attempt to implement change programmes, employee attitudes
will certainly play a huge role towards the outcome. Similarly, Duck (1993), argues that
employers can rent their employees behaviour which is influenced by attitudes; because
“winning attitudes” really can make a huge difference. Therefore it is very important to be

of 54
careful when marketing new change ideas within the organisation. The author further warns
that even with this approach, it will be hard to convert the cynical change survivors. Change
survivors are people who have learnt to survive through programmes about change without
actually changing in any way. These people` reaction to change will be negative, Duck
(1993).
Elias` (2009), research proves that by knowing how important their attitudes are
during organisational change, for successful implementation, managers should therefore
select those employees whose attitudes towards change are strong and positive. In order to
achieve commitment to change however, Parish et al (2008) believe that top executives
have to try and understand the main drivers of commitment to change, and the vital role it
plays in successfully implementing the change strategies, (Wang et al, 2010; Michaelis et al,
2009). Their data supported their hypothesis that employee commitment towards change
has very significant consequences. In addition, Schalk et al (1998), adds that ways in which
change is implemented can have an effect on the psychological contract, which shows a
positive correlation with employee attitudes; and attitudes with employee behaviour. The
psychological contract according to Strebel (1996) is an unwritten contract that incorporates
the implicit relationship and commitment between employer and employee. The awareness
of this contract influences employee behaviour in some ways. The section below gives an in-
depth discussion of the factors that may act as barriers to change management.
2.3.3 Barriers to Change Efforts
Waddell and Sohal (1998) pointed out that of all main corporate change efforts, one-
half to two-thirds will fail and resistance will have contributed to the failure. This is why very
often managers view resistance as the main enemy of change. Yu (2009), states that when
change within an organisation happens, there will be some kind of uncertainty, irritation and
anxiety produced within the workforce; which will certainly have lasting consequences on the
employees psychologically and, on attitudes. The increasing regularity and complexity of
change in the workplace means that employees have to adapt with minimal or no disruption;
but that resistance is also a common response. This means that change related decisions
may not only consider the effects on performance but also the effects on employees, Parish
et al (2006). Employee resistance to change has been known as one of the major obstacles,
a threat but also a significantly important factor which can impact or influence either the
success or failure of the organisation`s change efforts, (Waddell & Sohal,1998; Avey et
al,2008). Individuals perceive change differently, therefore some will welcome it as it might
provide them with opportunities for broadening professional horizons; while for others the
same change might require more effort with impacts on their motivations for work; thus will

of 54
dread it, (Elias,2009; Cutcher, 2009; Rashid et al, 2004). Therefore, in support of this Taylor
and Cooper (2007), affirms that same demands might bring challenge to for one person but
mean threat to the other.
Initially, resistance may be caused by uncertainty. Uncertainty is a sense of doubt
that arises within the organisation due to unclear recent events and their implications for the
future. This could be because there is confusing or not enough information about what is
could be happening, Bordia et al (2006). When reality clashes with expectations, distraction,
doubt and confusion takes hold resulting in a drop in performance, Elrod at al (2002). Also,
uncertainty about the future tends to rise when employees fail to make the necessary
adjustments, creating stress; and negatively affecting job commitment and satisfaction, in
return, (Yu, 2009; Bordia et al, 2004; Elias, 2005). Once any change begins, some
employees will possibly begin to face threats to their jobs and roles; with more job insecurity
sometimes leading to resignations. These are capable of lowering employees` trust in the
whole organisation. Reactions like this can be evident in employees` attitudes to their work,
(Yu, 2009).
Uncertainty can go on increase the employees` stress levels. Work stress can
increase with negative perceptions from employees about organisational change. Failure to
find ways of relieving this can heavily affect the employees` attitudes and performance, Yu
(2009). The author`s study proved that there was indeed a positive relationship between
organisational changes and stress levels within company. Dam (2005), states that it is the
employees that do not welcome change that react with feelings of stress. It seems that when
individuals consider the stress that might be accumulated due to change, their choice of
response, perception and working attitudes will all have an influence on its success; and
whether the newly formed organisation will have the ability to function efficiently, (Yu, 2009).
Hudson (1999) argues that also, too much stress can cause conflict, but also conflict can be
a cause for stress, as a result a cycle which is hard to break is suddenly formed. Some of
the approaches in which these barriers can be avoided and change managed successfully,
are discussed within the next section.
2.3.4 Managing Change for success
Firstly, managing communication is one of the strategies used during change to
reduce the employees` uncertainty and deal with resistance, (Frahm and Brown, 2007). By
communicating employees have more information about change, which is important in
reducing rumours and reduces widely spreading fears, (Schalk et al 1998). According to
Bordia et al, 2001, communication may reduce the negative outcomes of change, first
through proving quality change related information which helps them feel more prepared and

of 54
the ability to cope, (Lines,2005); and secondly, allows them to take part in decision making
more frequently. In this way, their awareness about the change events to follow is increased;
and so is their feel about control over the outcomes, (Frahm and Brown, 2007 and Lines,
2005).
People generally take time to hear, recognize and believe change massages, and as
a result not liking what they hear can be even more time consuming, Duck (1993). Kotter
(2007) warns that communication can be in form of words and actions but deeds are a more
influential form as there is nothing more undermining towards change other than the
behaviour of those important individuals which is incompatible with what they say. Sinclair
(1994) also suggests that communication can take various forms, some of which will be
ignored or misunderstood. Kotter (2007) recommends that a clear change vision should be
broadcast via every potential channel particularly those wasted on unnecessary information.
Taylor and Cooper (2007) conclude that if an organisation has excellent communication
structure, it will encourage a positive work surrounding, loyalty and dedication.
Secondly, leadership plays a very important part in change implementation. Elrod et
al (2002: 287), postulate that “the art of leadership is the art of guiding others through
change” by communicating expectations that are realistic to all the employees that will be
affected by the planned change. Leaders are responsible for successfully leading
organisational change, (Mohanty and yadav, 1996; Oreg and Berson, 2009 and Saka,
2003). This is though forming a culture with the ability to advance changes throughout the
work cultures and attitudes of all employees. Oreg and Berson (2009) anticipate that
employees` attitudes towards change, somehow reflects their leaders individual orientation
in the direction of change. Employees are more likely to display negative behaviour towards
organisational change if their leader values more stability, than if they emphasised
innovation. Similarly Miller (2002) adds that leaders that value stability have low adaptability
and are likely to resist the change strategies. Therefore, for change to be successful leaders
have to have higher adaptability levels than the employees, (Saka, 2003). Consequently, a
manager has to learn to be a figure for the new newly formed corporate culture by learning
to “walk the walk”, Kotter (2007). In support of this, Miller (2002), states that this is very true;
and also adds that the culture of the organisation has to adapt to new ways of working
through proper change implementation.
If employees continue to resist change, managers may also manipulate them in order
to create a readiness for change. This may include withholding unwelcome information until
a solution can be found or by making them very dissatisfied with their status quo which will
possibly make them motivated to try other things and possibly change their behaviour,

of 54
(Schalk et al, 1998). In contrast, Kotter (2007) argues that unless employees believe that the
proposed change will be useful, they will not take the risks, even though they are dissatisfied
with their status quo. Furthermore, according to Kotter (2007), it is impossible to change
unless people within the organisation are willing to help. Sinclair (1994), states that by
getting employees to participate and get involved within the change process, they will
become aware objectives and needs within the organisation. (Bordia et al, 2004 and Msweli-
Mbanga and Potwana, 2006), acknowledges that there is a positive result of participation on
work attitudes. Involving employees in the implementation of change can improve employee
openness and acceptance to change; and improves attitudes in return. Also they are more
likely to perceive these programmes as beneficial.
From the literature above, one can now devise these hypotheses. When culture
change is managed well, employee attitudes and behaviours will have positive attitudes,
leading to better performance. On the other hand if this change is not, it may lead to
negative attitudes and behaviours. This implies that some things were ignored or not done
right, for example, ineffective communication and poor leadership. This leads to uncertainty
and resistance, and hence negatively affecting performance. Hence, evident research by
Elrod et al (2002) suggests that organisation change implementation can be linked to
performance; and can be experimentally calculated. The figure 1 below illustrates these
theorized links between Organisational culture change and performance.
Figure 1

of 54
2.5 Conclusion
While most of the above literature support that change is good for the company,
Waddell and Sohal (1998), state that this is a misleading notion for managers to believe that
each organizational change is in actual fact good because in the end, it can only be
assessed by its costs. Successful change has to go through a number of phrases that
usually require a significant length of time. At any time, in any phrase, vital mistakes can be
made that may have devastating effects and slowing down the process. One should not
forget that even the most capable person can make the at least makes one big error, Kotter
(2007). Overall, Sinclair (1994) hypothesises that change management processes have a
huge impact on organisational cultures, which have an effect on behaviours and attitudes.
Kotter (2007), warns that since change is a lengthy process, new change approaches are
very delicate and subject to failure until the implemented changes submerge deeply in the
organisation`s culture. Furthermore, Kotter (2007) concludes that change only sticks after it
has become the way things are done in the organisation or when sinks within the corporate
body. Therefore, the literature has demonstrated and recognised, that some important
factors affecting employee receptivity during the change process are; how they react to it in
terms of attitudes and evident in their behaviours; communication and its management.
Hence, the next chapter reviews and comparatively analyses these issues form six key
journal articles.

of 54
CHAPTER THREE – REVIEW AND COMPARTIVE ANALYSIS
3.1 Introduction
At present, all organisations within the corporate world are under a great amount of
stress to change so as to survive in an environment of ever-increasing transformations; with
potential impacts on the employees` attitudes, productivity and turnover, (Weber and Weber,
2001). These progressing and apparently non-stop efforts put more stress not just on the
organisations, but on the members too, (Vakola and Nikolaou, 2005). The people element is
a significant aspect in the change process, but also the hardest to handle; which makes it a
major challenge, because people have values and attitudes that are hard to change, (Rashid
et al, 2004). In addition, change challenges culture or the daily routines, resulting into
uncertainty and fears for the possible failure while trying to cope, Vakola and Nikolaou
(2005). In the preceding chapter, existing literature regarding cultural change; employee
attitudes and behaviours; and whether they affect performance was examined. This chapter
examines the literature of six journal articles from the literature review, so as to investigate
the factors that mediate the above. For that reason, the chapter also focuses on this key
question, “Does organisational change necessarily improve a company`s
performance?”. The next section will introduce the research area, followed by the
arguments in the literature, authors` methodology; reliability of the studies and ethical
considerations and the results and discussions.
3.2 Introduction to Research Areas
This section is an introduction to the six articles that are the focus of this chapter.
These were written by different scholars from several institutions and countries and show;
empirical and empirical research regarding organisational change management and
attitudes, through the use of qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods. The first paper is
by Rashid et al, 2004:161) examines “the influence of organisational culture on attitudes
towards organisational change in Malaysia”, while in the second article, Avey et al, (2008)
investigate whether the positive employees help positive change by analysing the
psychological capital, emotions and their impacts on behaviours and employee attitudes. A
third article is by Lines (2005) aims to find out why and how employees react to change
within a company by analysing the attitude theory. In addition, commitment is introduced in
the fourth article by Elias (2009:37) who analysed “employee commitment in times of
change” by evaluating the significance of these attitudes. In the fifth paper, Frahm and
Brown (2007) study change receptivity by examining the importance of organisational
communication during change. Lastly, in the sixth article, Saka (2003:480) examines the
“internal change agents’ view of the management problem of change”.

of 54
From the literature review in chapter two, it was argued that when change is
managed well in terms of culture, the effects on attitudes and behaviours will be positive,
which could improve performance. But since many companies fail to succeed in their change
implementations, one can only conclude that, a few things are not done right, leading to
devious behaviours, resistance and poor performance. Though analysing the articles above
however, it is been noted that the journey from culture to performance is not as
straightforward, as there are many mediating variables in between. The grouping of the
chapter will be according to the emergent key findings as compared to the themes in the
literature review. Firstly, Rashid et al, (2004) examine the literature that focused on
organisational culture (in terms of Goffee and Jones` (1998) sociability and solidarity); which
introduced four culture cultural typologies. The literature studied the influence of these on
attitudes to organisational change; which suggested that the organisational culture was very
important for change management. Lines (2005), builds on this by studying how beliefs and
attitudes structures can impact the proposed change. Rashid et al, 2004 and Lines (2005)
propose that there are three of these attitudes including cognitive, affective and behavioural,
and that these can cause a person to either support or resist changes within the
organisation. In addition, Avey et al (2008) focus their study on the employees` attitudes in
the form of psychology and emotions, (Lines, 2005). Similarly, Elias (2009) emphasised the
importance of these attitudes through analysing employee commitment. Finally, Saka (2003)
evaluates the importance of managers` views are towards change, which could help through
the change process. By linking communication to how members view change, also evaluate
another way to manage change, Frahm and Brown (2007). The next section will outline the
key arguments in the literature of these journals.
3.3 Key Outcomes / Arguments in the Literature
This section outlines the key arguments within the literature reviews of the six journals.
Firstly Rashid et al, (2004) states that each organisation has a unique change process
because of the differences in business nature, work culture, values, management styles and
variations in employee behaviours and attitudes. It is also believed that indeed there may be
some kind of relationship between the culture with the organisation and the employees`
attitudes concerning change because culture includes assumptions and philosophies that
are used as a guide to functions; therefore these are expected to shape members` attitudes,
Elias (2009) and Lines (2005). Those employees that have strong negative attitudes
regarding change are likely to be resistant to change, while those with strong, positive ones
will be more supportive, Lines (2005). By focusing on employees` commitment, Elias (2009)
assesses the significance of these attitudes stating that it is important to study commitment
as part of organisational change because it precedes commitment, and commitment is

of 54
fundamental for an organisation to function. However many leaders hardly ever recognise
how important employee commitment can be during change, (Avey et al, 2008). In support,
Rashid et al, (2004) `s literature about culture typologies highlights that, a high sociability
from the research suggested a high level of commitment which can ensure general success
of the organisational change.
Avey et al (2008)`s research build on this notion about positive employees` ability to help
positive change by considering the employees` physiological well being, including the
psychological capital (PsyCap) and their positive emotions; which influence attitudes,
behaviours and performance in return. Alternatively, the authors further state that, some
pessimistic attitudes and unusual behaviours might hinder the positive change; however
engagement attitudes citizenship behaviours could improve positive change. Lines (2005,
pp.8-12) developed an attitudinal viewpoint about how employees react to change basing on
their “emotions, cognitions, and behaviours”. According to the literature, this is because
individuals have the ability to respond emotionally when they first encounter change,
depending on the information. Elias (2009) and Avey et al (2005)`s literature of the emotional
and behaviour literature suggests that for change to be successful, employees have to be
motivated intrinsically, posses the feeling of control and perceive change like an opportunity.
Similarly, Rashid et al, (2004) suggest that there is a link between motivation and attitudes
emphasising that a failure to take these into account might lead to employee cynicism,
lessen commitment and job satisfaction, (Elias, 2005); leading to employees` resistance to
change, Rashid et al, (2004). Frahm and Brown (2007) too study these by examining the
employees` change receptivity; arguing that, it is important to avoid these problems for
change initiatives to be successful arguing that, communication is a very essential aspect
towards change receptivity. In addition, Saka (2003) suggests that it is the, change agents
(managers) that are responsible for shaping and managing change conditions or processes.
3.4 Approaches to Methodology and Data Collection
According to Saunders et al (2007), research methods or data collection methods
refer to the methods and procedures that one uses to acquire and examine data; including
observations, surveys, interviews etc with either qualitative, qualitative or mixed methods.
Methodology refers to the author`s method for gathering and critical evaluation of data for
their projects, (Horn, 2009; and Saunders et al, 2007). More about these research methods
will be discussed in the next section, under the paradigm theories.

of 54
3.4.1 Research Paradigm
Looking at the six journal articles it is clear that the authors that are being focused on
here have very different types of research paradigm. Research paradigm as defined by
Burrell and Morgan (1979) is the conceptual structure about how the researcher particularly
views and makes sense of the world. This includes three elements including; methodology,
epistemology and ontology, (Cassell and Symon (2007). Epistemology, refers to the
researcher`s hypothesis of knowing and their structure of knowledge, (Horn, 2009); while
Ontology about the reality nature like how the world operates and the held views, (Saunders
et al, 2007). The author points out that epistemology can be divided into positivism and
realism; where the positivists like by Elias (2009), Rashid et al, (2004) and Avey et al (2008)
investigate the different segments to understand reality, by looking for regularities and
connecting interrelations to comprehend and foresee the social world, (Jankowicz, 2005).
Amaturuga et al (2002) states that, realism is about what the author considers to be reality
as the truth, (Saunders et al, 2007). This is the philosophy that Frahm and Brown (2007) and
Saka (2003) used to conduct their research.
Ontology too has two aspects (Healy & Perry, 2000), objectivism and subjectivism. The
difference between the two regards qualitative and quantitative data where the Quantitative
is objective while qualitative is subjective, (Amaturuga et al, 2002). From the articles in the
study, the research by Elias (2009), Rashid et al, (2004) and Avey et al (2008) is more
objective while that of Frahm and Brown (2007) and Saka (2003) is subjective. The research
design section next will discuss more about these quantitative and qualitative approaches.
3.4.2 Research Design
Yin (2003) states that this research design involves the topic that is to be explored by using
several data collection methods or, offer the essential guidelines to help do project, (Hair et
al, 2003). This includes explanatory, descriptive and causal research. It can be noted that
Elias (2009) and Avey et al (2008) `s also causal, as it tried to discover how different variable
affect each other. Ultimately, research designs include two approaches qualitative and
quantitative. According to Amaratunga et al (2002), the former focuses on expressions and
explanations to convey reality while the latter is about testing hypotheses by the use of
statistical research. In contrast, mixed methods is using both research methods through a
method referred to as triangulation. The Research Strategy includes deductive and inductive
approaches. Horn (2009) and Riley et al (2000) state that the inductive approach is where
the investigation and analysis of the situation leads to the building of a theory, while, the
deductive works quite the opposite way by beginning with a theory. The data collection
methods undertaken will now be discussed.

of 54
3.4.3. Data Collection Methods
From the articles that Elias (2009), Rashid et al, (2004) and Avey et al (2005) all
implemented the quantitative methods of data collection. Elias` (2009) research was
collected using written surveys completed by Madison Police Department employees, within
small groups. Secondly, Rashid et al, (2004) adopted another data collection method
through emailing questionnaires to Chief Executive Officers (CEO) and managers within the
sample population. And lastly, Avey et al`s (2005), research involved filled questionnaires.
Firstly, those that participated completed instruments about psychological capital, positive
emotions and mindfulness. Then after being separated for week, participants completed the
instruments about employee engagement and citizenship, cynicism and deviance.
In contrast, Saka (2003) and Frahm and Brown (2007) opted for qualitative methods
of data collection. Firstly, Saka`s (2003) research involved just 20 semi-structured interviews
with higher-ranking and mid-level managers; and document analysis from two companies,
Samson and Metis (both pseudonyms) from the UK. In comparison, research conducted by
Frahm and Brown (2007) employed a case study design approach with multiple research
methods, including focus groups interviews, documentation, organisational surveys and
participant observation where they were given unrestricted access to the company. This kind
of research has basics of ethnography. Additionally, data was also collected from company
documents related to the proposed change. According to Forster (1999), analysis of a
company`s documents strengthens a case-study`s methodology. Lastly, the authors also,
conducted five focus group interviews to extract information about the group`s general
understanding of the kind of change that was happening and the communication used.
Lines (2005) used a completely different method of data collection, which was both
conceptual and theoretical. Theoretical research is described by Riley et al (2000) as one
that involves the collection of existing data; interpreting it progressively in order to broaden
the existing and theoretical understanding of the issue. Firstly, a conceptual frame was built
to find the structure and function toward organisational change. This originated from a
theoretical framework that as seen provides an illustration on the relationships between
several variables, (Lines, 2005).
3.4.4 Sampling Procedures and Population
Avey et al`s (2008) mixed sample contained 132 adults, aged between 18 and 65,
from number of US firms. The study of Elias (2009) had 258 police officers from the

of 54
Madison, Wisconsin Police Department (MPD), with the typical person in the sample a white
male aged about 40 years and had previously been for about 15 years, either police officers,
or investigators; and had attempted technical college or college. Rashid et al, (2004) on the
other hand used a Malaysian directory as their sample population, where 281 structured
questionnaires were developed and emailed to managers and CEO`S. Nearly 65% of these
were male while the rest were female with an aim to gain an insight into the managers` view
of the management of the change problem, Saka (2003) carried out field research at
Samson and Metis, an engineering and training company; that were experiencing major
change, at the time. The respondents selected because of the position they held and the
department from which they were. Last but one, Frahm and Brown (2007:376) did not
mention an exact sample for the participant observation. However, it is shown that “five
focus groups”, with 28 participants from the five divisions were conducted, so as to link
receptivity to communication, in addition to 69 questionnaires. And finally, there was no
sample size for the conceptual research carried out by Lines (2005).
3.4.5 Validity and Reliability of the Studies
Reliability and validity refers to the measurement of several concepts used to build
ones theory, Riley et al (2000). Elias (2009) calculated the validity and reliability using
scales from different authors; and concerning different topics. The reliability coefficients were
over.69, indicating the study`s validity. Avey et al (2008) also measured psychological capital
using several questionnaires. Overall, the reliability coefficients for all the variables were
higher than .70; which showed the validity. In the study carried out by Saka (2003), choosing
participants based on position and department revealed the different realities from different
departments. This, together with another theoretical saturation, made it possible to enhance
the reliability of the data collection procedure. Furthermore, the author`s research did
address participant bias through data triangulation, which improves qualitative research
validity, Horn (2009). In the case-study carried out by Frahm and Brown (2007) using
multiple data collection methods enabled the triangulation of the collected data. Like Saka
(2003), this would help to create validity because; different information sources offer various
measures regarding similar facts. In addition, the fact that the researcher was provided
limitless access into the organisation enabled the improvement of data validity. Rashid et
al, (2004) used descriptive statistics so as to show the major features within the sample
plus the outline of organisational cultures and the employees` attitudes concerning change.
Cross-tabulation was also used for the measurement of the existing associations within the
variables.

of 54
3.4.6 Ethical considerations
In Elias` (2009) and Saka (2003) research, all participants knew their rights, and
were told that all responses were confidential. Additionally, after the data had been collected,
the participants were given the opportunity to state concerns about the process and any data
usage. On the other hand, members who agreed to participate in Avey et al`s (2008)
research, were given a link to access a secure online server; which also contained the
consent form that they had to read and approve, then register their e-mail addresses. Saka
(2003) was granted access into the company as a researcher under the conditions that upon
publication, the company`s identity would be concealed and anonymousness assured. In
contrast there is no mention of any ethical considerations in Rashid et al, (2004) and
Frahm and Brown`s (2007) research, but an assumption can be made that participation was
voluntary from the number of returned questionnaires. And since company names have
been disguised or, not mentioned within the articles, it is assumed that anonymity and
confidentiality was promised. Furthermore, it is evident that the participants were willing to
discuss the subject matter with the researchers. Both, Lines (2005) and Rashid et al,
(2004), do not mention any ethical considerations in their papers. For Lines (2005), this is
probably because it is completely theoretical, therefore not needed.
3.5 Results and Key Findings from Research Articles
Avey et al (2008) used hierarchical regression using different covariates to find out
the effects of positive employees. The results showed there was a positive relationship
between emotions, engagement, citizenship and psycap. The positive emotions acted as
mediator between psychological capital and employee behaviours and attitudes; but the test
for the relationship between Psycap and the two gave mixed results. Moreover, when Elias
(2009) examined the correlations between the employee attitudes and several mediating
psychological variables, the results for the first theoretical model showed no significant
correlations, which showed the lack of Common Method Variance; and a poor fit for the data.
For the second partial mediation theory, a straight path between growth need and affective
commitment was removed which indicated correlations between employee attitudes to
change and affective commitment; hence a good fit for the data was found.
The results from Frahm and Brown`s (2007) showed that employees had very high
scores for all attitude types which indicated that most of the participants had a positive
feeling about the positive changes and were more accepting. However the discussion
revealed that openness to change did not necessarily mean a continuation of positive
receptivity during the procedure. Also, the findings in the study by Rashid et al, (2004)
revealed that all the respondents had either a positive or strong positive attitude to change.

of 54
Furthermore, 46.9% of the organisations in the sample had Mercenary culture that
emphasises strategy and winning within the market. The literature analysed by Lines (2005),
reveals that attitudinal outcomes are most likely to be associated with many behaviours
which can reflect the entire assessment for the change process. Saka` s (2003) revealed two
perceptions of change by change agents. First was the rational-linear view that change
offers in the ideal state while the other one was the systematic-multivariate view, where
managers are forced to face the real business action at hand. Evidence from both of the
companies suggested that several stakeholder interests were acknowledged, with more
emphasis on communication or information processing.
3.6 Comparison of the Discussions and Analysis of the Outcomes of
Research Articles
According to Elias` (2009) theoretical implications, organisations change on a regular
basis with potential effects on both the company and employees. But, because there is a
diversity of employee traits, people respond to change in various ways. Some will welcome
it, due to the possible opportunities, while others will not as it may require extra efforts; and a
shift from the comfort zone. Rashid et al, (2004) revealed that organisations have different
cultures but that also within organisation there may be a presence of different cultures. In
support, Frahm and Brown`s (2007) study also showed that each of the interviewed groups
indeed had a unique culture from the other, with norms, rules and even values, thus
restructuring would mean a threat to these subcultures. Rashid et al, (2004) results reveal
that in the “Malaysian manufacturing industries”, some types of cultures like the mercenary
culture, were dominant, when it comes to optimistic attitudes; but these also with subcultures
that possessed more positive attitudes. The reason could have been because of the
economic conditions and the quick technological innovation present at the time; increasing
uncertainty and adaptation levels in return, for survival. However, Saka (2003) found out that
organisational cultures and the subcultures are harder to change because it is hard to
change the everyday rituals that are embedded within the company. Therefore culture plays
a very important role for the change implemented to be successful, (Rashid et al, 2004).
Results from the study by Avey et al (2008) suggest that, it may be possible to
counter negative attitudes and behaviours by using the members` positive emotions and
psychological capital. Furthermore, it was revealed that the employees` positivity was
connected to their emotional engagement and organisational citizenship, which might lead to
positive change. Lines (2005), agrees by stating that earlier research about change in
organisations highlighted the significance of these emotions towards change, but the
literature examined by the author does remind other researchers that, employee emotions

of 54
can be just as essential as cognitions. Commitment too was an issue, for example, Elias`
(2009) findings show that attitudes are close to employee commitment which means that,
there are probably other variables that affect affective commitment through attitudes.
During the change process, many employees tend to express frustration, uncertainty
about what exactly is happening, Frahm and Brown (2007) probably due to a lack of enough
information leading to a decrease in the change receptivity, with manifestations in form of
frustration, cynicism and resistance, Frahm and Brown (2007). According to Avey et al
(2008), resistance is mostly recognised for being an obstacle to those companies trying to
keep up with external conditions. Also, it was revealed that when change communication
was a-miss, a constructivist approach was taken; where members actively tried to make
sense of whatever was happening, (Frahm and Brown, 2007). Seeing as change is a
process, Lines (2005) suggests that highest attention and the greatest effort has to be given
to the management of the initial stages of the change process.
For restructuring, communication is important; information about all the jobs that
might be affected has to be provided to all employees. In support, Saka (2003), states that
reliable, timely communication; participation and knowledge sharing was essential for
successful performance. Furthermore, Elias` (2009) study results suggested that managers
have to look for some inner psychological processes within employees, especially if change
is likely to happen frequently. Finally, Lines (2009) and Elias (2009) argue that when
managers start to implement change, their subordinates` attitudes will definitely play a great
part in whether the proposed change is a success or not. Saka (2003) theory about Change
agents suggest that change maybe uncertain but managers have to try to form clear future
goals or structure. Lines (2005), advises that these change agents should focus on these
when formulating communication networks. Rashid et al, (2004) research discovered that
the network culture had a higher proportion, which was not surprising as that was consistent
with the Malaysian managers` cultural ideals; and other business communities. Furthermore,
high sociabilities indicated high commitment which certifies organisational success.
3.7 Future Research / Limitations & Implications of Research in Articles
The limitations from Elias` (2009) research were that it was data was collected once
and was only limited to just one police department; therefore did not account for the
differences between the different organisational cultures and authority. The author advised

of 54
that for validity, future research could repeat this same study but in a typical workplace. Avey
et al (2008) research also has limitations like, no causal conclusions reached. There were no
experiments, to determine causation between the variables; hence the authors` advice was
that in the future, more experimental studies should be carried out; with more explorations
on psychological factors, and other mediators. Saka (2003) recommendation for future
research was that there was still an area that requires more research which is the way in
which organisations could attain a healthier balance between different managerial attitude
perceptions. With the most strengths, Frahm and Brown (2007) research also has a
limitation which was that they just the used of one case-study. Further research would
involve replicating the same research methods, but use of other cases. Lines (2005)
recommended that future research must mostly be focused on the ways that different
individuals` are affected by change emotionally. From the study of Rashid et al, (2004), the
limitations are; firstly, the sample was quite small compared to the all Malaysian
manufacturing companies; and secondly other sectors were excluded. Thirdly, measuring
the organisational culture using questionnaires, in a nominal scale rather than the Likert
scale restrained better analysis.
3.8 Recommendations and Conclusions drawn from the Articles
Saka (2003) postulates that, managers are supposed to generate a logical structure
from a number of illogical and seemingly unmanageable events. However this is not always
simple therefore, the author concludes that clearly there is a difference between those
normative change patterns that are idealised and a non-rational perception. Frahm and
Brown (2007) conclude that active employee involvement is not just about making
employees feel included but also to make them more receptive to change. Rashid et al,
(2004) study did provide evidence which suggested that different cultures have different
effects on towards possible changes. In addition, Elias` (2009) research shows that when
employees are satisfied intrinsically, it leads to intrinsic motivation which might develop
some sense of affective commitment, which affects attitudes. The research by Avey et al
(2008) concludes that cognitions like perceptions initiate emotions but people are generally
not aware of this. In support, Lines` (2005) showed that emotions brought out by change can
be different in two dimensions, the hedonic and intensity. The next section will conclude all
that has been discussed in this chapter.
3.9 Conclusion
The aim of this chapter was to examine the literature of six key journals from the
literature review in order to compare and analyse the key factors that mediate cultural
change; employee attitudes and behaviours; and performance. Consequently the chapter
aimed to focus on the key question, “does organisational change necessarily improve a

of 54
company`s performance?”. The chapter was structured into nine sections including; the
introduction to the review; introduction to the research areas; the key arguments in the
literature reviews of the articles; methodology and data collection methods; results and key
findings; discussion of the results; future research, limitations and implications;
recommendations from the articles and this final section, the conclusion. The next chapter
will build upon the discussion of the results from this chapter; to analyse and further discuss
the overall findings.

of 54
CHAPTER FOUR – DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF OVERALL FINDINGS
4.1 Introduction
By examining the change management literature within the perspective of an
organisation, there has been attempt to thoroughly understand the employees` attitudes in
regards to change. In chapter three, a meta-analysis approach was taken, analysing six
journal articles written by several scholars. These conducted their research using different
gathering methods, like qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods to prove their stated
theories. As a result, the purpose of this chapter is to discuss and analyse the major key
findings that emerged from the literature of the six journals, and further compare it to the
research in the literature review. First, the key results will be briefly introduced relating to the
research question, secondly the five key findings will be discussed in detail and lastly, the
research question will be addressed before the conclusion.
4.2 Discussion of the Key Results
This part of the dissertation aims to highlight and interpret the key themes from the
literature analysed in the six journals; with an intention of addressing the stated research
question in literature review. While comparing the outcomes and discussions from the six
articles; five major issues were observed that might help to provide a thorough
understanding of the research question, ““does organisational change necessarily
improve a company`s performance?” These mediating variables regarding change
include; organisational culture; psychological capital, attitudes and behaviours linked to
employees` positive emotions and organisational citizenship behaviours; which in return
affect an employees` affective commitment to the organisation. And lastly the importance of
change communication and internal change agents will be reviewed as they were observed
to be especially important in the management of effective change processes. The
organisational culture if the first key finding that will evaluated below.
4.2.1 Key Finding One – Organisational Culture
One of the key findings stresses the importance of organisational culture and the
small subcultures during change implementation. Sadri and Lees (2001) state that, corporate
culture has turned into a very significant subject in corporations recently as it affects both
operations and employees. In addition, Lok and Crawford (2004) acknowledge that
organisational cultures influence ways in which employees set their goals and execute their
tasks. In other words, it subconsciously affects how people think; formulate decisions,
receptivity and even act. In fact, Goffee and Jones (1996) state that, a company without
culture has no ideals, direction, and principles. From the literature, Frahm and Brown (2001)
and Rashid et al, (2004) discussed the concept of subcultures within major organisational

of 54
cultures in different organisations. According to Smollan and Sayers (2009), these
subcultures exist within all organisations usually based on several groupings that exist within
the company like; department, gender, ethnicity or value systems and hierarchy. Rashid et
al, (2004) especially based their entire research on Goffee and Jones (1996) research on
cultural typologies regarding the positivity of employee attitudes towards change. The
authors argued that organisational culture is basically determined by the intensity of
solidarity (how the community pursues those goals that they share) and Sociability (how
friendly the members are; emotionally); with four dimensions including the network,
communal, fragmented and mercenary culture, (Goffee and Jones, 1996; Sadri and Lees,
2001 and Rashid and Rahman, 2004). Rashid et al, (2004) results showed that
organisations with the mercenary and network cultures had the strongest positive attitudes
towards change. The mercenary culture has low sociability but a high solidarity; where
employees strongly support the business goals, focus on getting the work done, intolerance
of poor performance and employees and have high change receptivity. Seemingly, the
mercenary culture can be related to “high involvement work systems” which reflect
important, effective and organised work patterns with an intention of increasing performance,
Mandelson et al (2009:46). The reason why the mercenary culture may be adopted by many
companies is probably for survival reasons, within the current corporate context where
survival is crucial. However, any manager or Malaysian managers may handle certain
situations in such a culture ruthlessly which could affect the employees/organisations
negatively, Rashid et al, (2004). One way to handle these is by considering the
psychological well being of employees as will be discussed next.
4.2.2 Key Finding Two – Psychological Capital; Attitudes and Behaviours
and performance
Organisational culture and performance usually involve the psychological wellbeing
of those involved, (Toor and Ofori, 2010). The literature studied by Avey et al (2008)
introduced the concept of positive psychology (psycap) and emotions in relation to attitudes
and behaviours; and their effects on performance. In this section therefore, psycap, attitudes
and behaviours will be analysed while positive emotions and organisational citizenship will
be covered in the next. Chen and Wang (2007) and Toor and Ofori (2010) highlight that
since organisations change a lot more regularly these days, it is important to understand and
predict the employees` psychological responses when managing change. Psycap is about
the strengths therefore, recent literature has emphasised the significance of highlighting the
positivity within organisations, (Norman et al, 2011 and Demerouti et al (2011). One can
argue that psychological capital is particularly essential for the development of positive
organisational behaviours, which can affect the change outcome, (Avey et al, 2010;

of 54
Nimnicht et al, 2010 and Luthans and Youssef, 2007). This positivity is what Norman et al
(2011) refers to as resilience which is the capacity to recover from any setbacks like
uncertainty; and is positively correlated with commitment and job satisfaction, (Youssef &
Luthans, 2007). Hence, those employees with higher psycap are more likely to be flexible
during change, supportive of change and can adapt better to changes, (Avey et al, 2010).
Since employees are affected psychologically, it can be expected that their attitudes
and reactions will indeed be affected. This is supported and proved by Avey et al (2010)
study. These reactions towards the proposed change, can in return influence behaviours
(e.g supporting or change resistance), Chen and Wang (2007). Additionally, Demerouti et al
(2011) state that, these affect satisfaction, performance and possibly the competitiveness of
an organisation; therefore psycap can be used a performance predictor, Rego et al (2010).
In fact, psycap supports the hunt for positivity and work fulfilment which may be required to
allocate resources, adequately necessary within the competitive environment, Avey et al
(2010).
In addition to employee psychological well being, psycap is fundamental for
leadership and therefore, has some advantages to managers and organisations in general
too, Toor and Ofori (2010). In fact the study conducted by Murray et al (2010) presents
evidence about the positive relationship there is between psycap, the employees` wellbeing
and commitment and leadership. Most leaders posses the three basic elements of psycap
which are resilience, hope and optimism which makes them well prepared to deal with the
challenges within the corporate world through understanding those that follow them, (Toor
and Ofori, 2010). This is done through paying close attention to their developmental
concerns; inspiring them with respect and high expectations and helping them to face new
situations, Mendelson et al (2011). Another link to the psychological part is the positive
emotions to be analysed in the section below.
4.2.3 Key Finding Three – Positive Emotions and Organisational Citizenship
According to Huy (2002), emotions are part of the psychological responses.
Jimmieson et al (2009) state that, members` reactions to change comprise; cognitions
(attitudes and thoughts) and emotions (like anxiety or enthusiasm). Evidence suggests that
those employees that receive more change support regarding their well being
(psychologically) are likely to be more positive and exhibit better “organisational citizenship
behaviours”, Liu (2009:307). Therefore, emotions are also related to culture; and hence
attempting to manage the culture is also attempting to deal with the emotions within, Smollan
and Sayers (2009). In other words, cultural change can affect the way members react to
change; but all together, organisational change, can alter culture, intentionally or not, hence

of 54
influencing the emotional reactions, Smollan and Sayers (2009). For this reason, Avey et al
(2008) and Lines (2005) stress the importance of positive emotions towards organisational
change. These emotions have two essential dimensions including the hedonic (that
measures the pleasantness level of the emotion e.g. excitement) and the intensity (highness
and lowness of emotion or readiness), (Huy, 2002; Eriksson, 2004 and Liu and Perrewé,
2005), which change throughout the change process. Therefore those emotions experienced
at the start of change have a lower level of readiness than those at a later stage, Liu and
Perrewé (2005). Hence, the effective management emotional management of emotions right
at the start of the change implementation is very important; together with the development of
emotion-related practices to aid adaptation, (Liu and Perrewé, 2005 and Huy (2002).
Eriksson (2004) states that, even though emotions are an essential force for change they
are, also a consequence to this change.
Organisational citizenship behaviours on the other hand, are behaviours that add to
the psychological perspective above which affects organisational performance and change
success, (Norris-Watts and Levy, 2003). These can be characterised in several ways
including sportsmanship, altruism, courtesy, conscientiousness and civic virtue, (Organ,
1988). In this change management situation however, it is sportsmanship that seems more
associated with change and attitudes. This is one`s capability to keep a positive approach
even when there are difficulties at work, Norris-Watts and Levy (2003). Nevertheless, it can
be argued that behaviours like sportsmanship and helpful behaviour is just easier to exhibit
instead of letting go of the known and usual practices, a necessity for embracing change,
Msweli-Mbanga and Potwana (2006). It is also evident that for these behaviours to be
positive participation is vital, Rego and Cunha (2008) and Msweli-Mbanga and Potwana
(2006). This is because citizenship is a behaviour which is likely to show, should
participation be allowed. Organisational members should therefore be more empowered to
contribute to the overall performance; and further attention be paid to attitudes and
management traits, Rego and Cunha (2008). An additional to psychological well being is the
affective commitment, which is the key finding four.
4.2.4 Key Finding Four – Affective Organisational Commitment
Apart from the emotions, Elias (2009) research introduced the notion of affective
organisational commitment and its effects on attitudes towards any change. Like emotions,
commitment can also be accounted for how employees react psychologically towards
change, (Chen and Wang, 2007). This is they commit depending on attitudes, values and
personal beliefs at work that are reflected in different cultures, (Lok and Crawford, 2004).
According to Wang et al (2010), Elele and Fields (2010) and Wasti (2003), affective

of 54
commitment explains one`s need to remain with the company depending on their emotional
attachment to it. Michaelis et al, (2009) state that commitment to change is a vital part of the
behaviour that is intended to aid change; and has been revealed to in influence employee
actions, firm performance, (Harrison and Kelly, 2010) and organisational citizenship
behaviours, Heffner and Rentsch (2001). In fact, higher commitment levels have been
associated with positive outcomes for both the employee and individual, (Beck and Wilson,
2000).
Since affective commitment is based on organisational emotional attachment, there
is a possibility that one, who is attached affectively, will have the motivation to contribute
more positively at work, Rego et al (2004). Also, one can argue that there is a positive
relation between age and commitment. For example, those that are older or have been with
a certain company for quite some time might have more positive commitment, (Beck and
Wilson, (2000). This could probably be because of the past positive experiences. When
employees have affective commitment, they are very likely to display productive behaviours
and improved job performance; possess more positive towards the planned change and
could work a bit harder to see that the change initiatives succeed, Shum et al (2008).
However Suliman and Iles (2000) contend that in this age filled with this kind of change
uncertainty, it is harder for employees to be committed to companies. But, positive social
interaction should help affective commitment to grow, (Heffner and Rentsch, 2001) and
create lasting benefits, Liu et al (2007). However, key finding two, three and four can be
managed using efficient communication and change agents with high adaptation levels.
4.2.5 Key Finding Five– Change Communication and Change Agents
The last key finding further analyses the importance of change communication and
change agents, two concepts that were evaluated by Saka (2003), Lines (2005), Frahm and
Brown (2007) and Avey et al (2008). Johansson and Heide (2008) postulate that change and
internal communication are processes that are, complexly related; and one cannot happen
without the other, (Daly, Teaque and Kitchen, 2003). Attempting to change a corporate
culture, is a difficult task itself because it involves different communication practices, paying
close attention to employees` reactions to these and most importantly; how change agents
perceive change, Salem (2008). Massey and Williams (2006) refer to change agents as
those with the responsibility to plan, direct and facilitate change within an organisation as
well as performing the daily change procedures, Shum et al (2008). Top management are
hence required to set a clear vision for the future for the effectiveness of the organisation,
Saka (2003).

of 54
The introduction of change will most certainly raise, negative behaviour and
resistance especially from the members that might be most affected, mainly when they feel
like have no control over the situation, Proctor and Doukakis (2003). The solution here is
clear communication which is a necessity to implement change effectively, (Elving, 2005
and). Messages regarding change have to be continuous, and be presented in different
forms to effectively manage the change process, Massey and Williams (2006). However,
understanding ways in which change can be communicated in this century, still poses
massive challenges, (Nelissen and Selm, 2008) as it involves emotions from change
recipients which change agents have to deal with first. This implies that communication
levels during the change process will in a way influence members` emotional reactions, (Liu
and Perrewé, 2005). On the other hand those that have authority too can impact
subordinates’ views, attitudes and behaviours, (Klein, 1996, Wang et al, 2010 and Case et
al, 2007). Therefore, it is important for change agents to have empathy and understanding to
those emotional impacts and anxiety that change programmes have on employees, (Massey
and Williams, 2006).
The significance of change communication is that; it facilitates to overcome ambiguity
and anxiety; and offers some control over the situation to employees that are likely to be
affected, (Proctor and Doukakis, 2003 and Liu and Perrewé, 2005). In conclusion, those
employees that receive information regarding change understand their work environments
much better hence display better psychological welfare, job satisfaction and commitment.
4.3 Addressing the Research Question
Essentially, the reason for the research undertaken throughout this study was to
provide an understanding as to why many managers in companies think that a mere change
in the working structures or activities definitely mean an improvement in the performance or
even the competitiveness. Therefore, the study intended to evaluate mediating variables
acting between change and performance; such as the organisational culture, employee
attitudes, behaviours and the barriers to change implementation. Consequently, this study
attempted to address the research question, “does organisational change necessarily
improve a company`s performance?” Some managers would believe it does, which is
why most change programmes implemented within an organisation fail; but, the results from
the investigation suggest that a change in organisational structure or any other change, in
fact does not lead to improved performance. The reason for this is that there are many,
mediating psychological variables that change agents or managers tend to ignore. These are
very important and hence managers have to look for them within the employees especially if
the change is to happen frequently.

of 54
To test the hypothesis, further research analysis has proved that when cultural is
managed well, in can in fact influence positive attitudes and behaviours, as it was discussed
in the literature review. But there several mediating variables between change and attitudes
and behaviours; that have been discussed to be psychological capital; emotions and
organisational citizenship; and affective commitment (an emotional attachment), which
influence behaviour; and vice versa. Therefore, when not managed well negative behaviours
can arise that include rumours, stress, conflict and resistance. Hence, change
communication and change agents that quickly adapt to changes are necessary for change
success and better performance. These relationships are shown on an improved
hypothesised model in Figure 2 below.
Figure 2
4.4 Summary of Key Findings / Managerial Implications
From the six journals five major findings have been fully analysed in order to aid
answer the research question. The findings from this research confirmed that because of
the change pressures from both the internal and external environment; change has turned
out to be a basis for frustration within organisations, Yousef (2000). One major finding was
the culture plays a very important role during organisational change, mostly because it can
generate emotions but also influence attitudes, Smollan and Sayers (2009). This is not
particularly unreasonable as emotions are linked to the employees` psychological well-being
that determines whether employees are supportive or resistant to change. Therefore, one
implication here is that companies have to craft cultures that are strong enough to be able to

of 54
welcome change, while avoiding the alteration of the basic cultures; and further build up the
acceptance of emotions.
The study further established that affective commitment was a significant factor
concerning change. Strongly, affectively, committed employees could easily stay with the
organisation and might be more receptive of change as it may seen as beneficial, Yousef
(2000). This is possible because it was also revealed that older employees and those who
had worked for the company for longer, were more committed to their jobs, but more like to
be resistant to new changes. Therefore, when managing change, managers can enhance
the affective commitment through the provision of fairly challenging, but satisfying jobs and
provide opportunities for further development. This, together with participation can also
improve organisational citizenship behaviours, (Msweli-Mbanga and Potwana, 2006). The
final management implication is that if cultural change is about changing the individual`s
attitudes, then more information should be provided to steer them into the positive direction.
4.4 Conclusion
Smollan and Sayers (2009) affirm that the employees` behaviours can be highlighted
by what they perceive and engage in within the subcultures and the general organisational
culture; therefore, in order to keep a company as one to face the external pressures, culture
is a very powerful tool, Goffee and Jones (1996). And, whereas culture alone cannot
establish whether a business is a success or not, a positive culture can provide a very
important competitive advantage, (Sadri and Lees, 2001). All in all, when psychological and
emotional factors are managed well, the organisation can benefit enormously from these;
through attitudinal outcomes like job commitment, (Toor and Ofori, 2010); and more efforts
which usually improves performance, Nimnicht et al (2010).
In conclusion, this chapter discussed and analysed five major findings regarding the
employees` attitudes towards change and their effects on performance. Thus, some of the
mediators between organisational change and performance have been analysed to answer
the question, “does organisational change necessarily improve a company`s
performance?”. These include; organisational culture; psychological capital; positive
emotions and organisational citizenship; affective organisational commitment and Change
Communication and Change Agents. Therefore, in the next chapter a summary of the entire
study will be outlined, in addition to the limitations and the required future research.

of 54
CHAPTER FIVE – CONCLUSIONS
5.1 Introduction
In the preceding chapter four, the discussion and analysis of key findings which
emerged from chapter three has been made. These have been discussed in relation to the
literature in chapter two, however since whole new literature has had to be introduced
because new concepts different from those in chapter two were introduced. Additionally, the
chapter also examined and presented the managerial implications that could probably be
useful for many businesses dealing with change within the corporate world. Consequently,
the aim of this chapter five is to summarise the entire study, outlining and answering the
research question, “does organisational culture necessarily improve a company`s
performance?” proposed in chapter two, the review and comparative analysis of the six
journals and the discussion of the results. Finally, the limitations to this study will be
discussed together with the recommendations for future research.
5.2 Summary of the Study
Previously, organisations would only cope with change, but today they have to learn
to manage it, (Thomson, 1992). In order to survive, corporations have attempted to plan and
begin essential changes in many forms and practices, (Yu, 2009; Lewin and Johnston,
2000). There has been a growing literature concerning the importance of change
management within the corporate world, as discussed in the study, (Miller, 2010; Thompson,
1992; Martinez-Sanchez, 2008; Saka 2003; Armenakis et al, 1993 and Avey et al, 2008;
Piderit, 2000 and; Massey and Williams, 2006). Many have focused on the problems
associated with change like stress, conflict and resistance, (Yu, 2009; Saka, 2003; Liu and
Perrewé, 2005; French, 2001; Bordia et al, 2006; Strebel, 1993 and; Waddel and Sohal,
1998). While others have concentrated on what brings about this resistance, to make the
change programmes unsuccessful. This has included the study of employee attitudes;
emotions; behaviours and receptivity, (Elias, 2005; Vakola and Nikolaou, 2005; Schalk and
Freese, 1998; Frahm and Brown, 2007; Dam, 2005; Lines, 2005; Rashid et al, (2004); and
Smollan and Sayers, 2009), that may either be affected by change or have an impact on the
implementation and performance itself, (Avey et al, 2010). All organisations have some kind
of culture, therefore, any attempt to change, will be a cultural change that can affect the
attitudes, values and the beliefs held, (Fronda and Moriceau, 2008; Rashid et al, (2004); Liu
and Perrewé, 2005; and Eriksson, 2004). In other words, change affects the employees`
psychological well being that affects the organisational citizenship behaviours, job
commitment, and performance in return, (Msweli-Mbanga and Potwana, 2006; Wang et al
(2010); and Wasti (2003). But, since there is fewer studies have focused the relationship
between the members` psychological reactions towards change and organisational culture,

of 54
(Oreg and Berson, 2009; Chen and Wang, 2007; and Rashid et al, (2004), a further
investigation was required to understand cultural change, employees and performance.
5.2.1 Review and Comparative Analysis
The research adopted in this study examined the literature from six journal articles
chosen from the literature review so as to shed a light on the question addressed above. The
section introduced the arguments in the literature review of each paper, the approaches to
data collection undertaken, including qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods as well as
the sample sizes, ethical considerations and the validity of all the studies. Furthermore, the
key findings were discussed and outcomes compared against each other. For example
Rashid et al, (2004) adopted a quantitative research method where they examined several
cultural typologies and their influences on employees` attitudes towards change with a key
finding that the mercenary culture had the highest positive attitudes; which makes some
sense considering the economic state. In addition, Avey et al (2008) qualitative research
builds on this employee attitude concept from a psychological viewpoint which connects this
to psychological capital, organisational citizenship and emotional engagement, (Lines,
2005). Also Rashid et al, (2004) add affective commitment to this while Elias (2009)
emphasised the significance of managing commitment towards attitudes. In turn, these
attitudes and beliefs can impact the proposed change, as seen in Lines (2005) theoretical
article. Finally, Saka (2003) and Frahm and Brown (2007) adopted the qualitative research
methods to evaluate the change agents (managers) perception of change and employees`
reception of change through the analysis of change communication.
5.2.2 Key Findings / Discussions
While reviewing and comparing the six journal articles regarding change, culture and
performance in chapter three, many findings were discovered however, only five major
findings were observed to help understand and address the research question. These
emergent themes or mediating variables included; corporate culture; psychological capital;
positive emotions and organisational citizenship; affective commitment and; change agents
and communication. One of the key findings is the significance of organisational culture and
the small subcultures within that determine the members` attitudes towards change, and
their effects on the execution of tasks, (Lok and Crawford, 2004; Rashid et al, (2004)).
Based on Goffee and Jones (1996) typologies, it was revealed that the culture with the
highest positive attitudes; and high change receptivity was that mercenary culture; which
many companies probably adopted for survival within the business world, (Rashid et al,
2004). Change can have an effect on culture, employee attitudes and behaviours through
psychology; and vice versa. For example, research by Avey et al (2008) further revealed that

Dissertation 76 model b

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Dissertation 76 model b

Similar to Dissertation 76 model b (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Dissertation 76 model b