This document summarizes a case study examining resistance to change within the US State Department during the implementation of a new management initiative called ICASS. ICASS aimed to restructure administrative support and shift costs to other agencies with overseas presences. The study used interviews and surveys of State Department and other federal agency employees involved in ICASS implementation. It found significant resistance from stakeholders who felt their roles, control, and benefits were threatened by the changes. Understanding sources of this political and psychological resistance could help make future organizational reforms more successful.
Four different views of a policy model: an analysis and some suggestionsBruce Edmonds
A policy model has (at least) four different interpretations: (a) intention: the intention/interpretation of the simulation designer/programmer, (b) validation: the meaning established by the validation of the model in terms of the mapping(s) to sets of evidence, (c) use: the meaning established as a result of the use of a model in a policy making/advice context and (d) interpretation: the narrative interpretation of the policy maker/advisor when justifying decisions made where this refers to a policy model.
These four different interpretations are loosely connected via social processes. The relation between intention and validation is relatively well discussed in the context of “scientific” model specification and development. The relation between use and interpretation has been discussed in a number of specific contexts. However when and how a relationship between the scientific world of intention/validation and the policy world of use/interpretation are established in practice is an area with little active research.
Both personal experience and philosophical considerations suggest that these two worlds are very different in terms of both purpose and method. However this does not mean that there cannot be any well-founded connection between them. The key question is understanding the social processes of how this can happen, what are the conditions that facilitate it happening and what is the nature of the relationship between the four views when it does happen.
Interestingly these issues have been faced and extensively discussed in the field of Artificial Intelligence, which has confronted the distinction between meaning of internal models (loosely, the beliefs of an agent about its environment) in these four ways. The field of AI has not come up with a final solution to these problems, and is itself divided into those that inhabit separate approaches that adopt a subset of these approaches to model meaning. However it is suggestive of some ways forward, namely:
• a recognition of the problem that there are these different ways of attributing meaning to a policy model (and hence avoid some common errors derived from conflating these four views);
• symbol grounding in the sense of learning meanings through repeated use and adjustment (either in response to validation or interpretation views or both);
• and the observation of scientific-policy interaction as it actually occurs (e.g. an ethnographic study of scientist/policy advisor interaction).
Some developments in the area of participatory policy modelling can be seen as forays into this arena, albeit without structured assessment.
Four different views of a policy model: an analysis and some suggestionsBruce Edmonds
A policy model has (at least) four different interpretations: (a) intention: the intention/interpretation of the simulation designer/programmer, (b) validation: the meaning established by the validation of the model in terms of the mapping(s) to sets of evidence, (c) use: the meaning established as a result of the use of a model in a policy making/advice context and (d) interpretation: the narrative interpretation of the policy maker/advisor when justifying decisions made where this refers to a policy model.
These four different interpretations are loosely connected via social processes. The relation between intention and validation is relatively well discussed in the context of “scientific” model specification and development. The relation between use and interpretation has been discussed in a number of specific contexts. However when and how a relationship between the scientific world of intention/validation and the policy world of use/interpretation are established in practice is an area with little active research.
Both personal experience and philosophical considerations suggest that these two worlds are very different in terms of both purpose and method. However this does not mean that there cannot be any well-founded connection between them. The key question is understanding the social processes of how this can happen, what are the conditions that facilitate it happening and what is the nature of the relationship between the four views when it does happen.
Interestingly these issues have been faced and extensively discussed in the field of Artificial Intelligence, which has confronted the distinction between meaning of internal models (loosely, the beliefs of an agent about its environment) in these four ways. The field of AI has not come up with a final solution to these problems, and is itself divided into those that inhabit separate approaches that adopt a subset of these approaches to model meaning. However it is suggestive of some ways forward, namely:
• a recognition of the problem that there are these different ways of attributing meaning to a policy model (and hence avoid some common errors derived from conflating these four views);
• symbol grounding in the sense of learning meanings through repeated use and adjustment (either in response to validation or interpretation views or both);
• and the observation of scientific-policy interaction as it actually occurs (e.g. an ethnographic study of scientist/policy advisor interaction).
Some developments in the area of participatory policy modelling can be seen as forays into this arena, albeit without structured assessment.
The British College provides an
accredited university learning
experience along with in-depth
personal and professional
development. With graduates
already making their mark in their
chosen careers, The British College
is pleased and proud to welcome
you to become an integral part of
our institution.
Quality Control of RNA Samples - For Gene-Expression Results you Can Rely onQIAGEN
By their very nature RNA molecules, especially mRNA and regulator RNA, are labile and can be highly unstable and sensitive to heat, UV and RNase contamination. The quality, relevance and scientific impact of gene expression results directly depends on the ability to extract RNA without losing any fraction of interest, while preserving the integrity of the biological information it carries. RNA quality control is thus critical to ensure high-quality results and for turning these results into actionable insights with confidence.
In this webinar, we will introduce you to the main parameters influencing RNA-based assays and their respective impact on downstream applications, discuss how to monitor them and cover the advantages of automation for quality control along complex workflows.
Since 1983, Marble Slab Creamery® has been serving chef created, super-premium, hand-mixed ice cream. Every batch of Marble Slab Creamery ice cream is fresh made in small batches in the store using ingredients from around the world and dairy from local farms. Today, Marble Slab Creamery is enjoyed by consumers across the globe with locations in the Bahrain, Canada, Guam, Kuwait, Lebanon, Mexico, Oman, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, St. Lucia, Trinidad and Tobago, the United Kingdom, United Arab Emirates, and the United States.
As the innovator and the first to develop the now famous "frozen slab" technique for ice cream preparation, Marble Slab Creamery has set the bar for the ice cream industry.
In 2011, Marble Slab Creamery and MaggieMoo’s Ice Cream and Treatery merged into one combined ice cream concept … taking the best of both worlds to create a playful, crave-able taste experience. Marble Slab Creamery brings a rich history of super-premium ice cream using fresh dairy from around the corner and the finest ingredients from around the world. Mix in MaggieMoo’s celebrated history of innovation – award-winning flavors, first to introduce ice cream cupcakes and ice cream pizza, first to utilize online ordering – and you have a combination that can’t be beat!
WHEN CHANGEBECOMESTRANSFORMATIONA case study of change.docxphilipnelson29183
WHEN CHANGE
BECOMES
TRANSFORMATION
A case study of change
management in Medicaid
offices in New York City
Kimberley R. Isett, Sherry A.M. Glied,
Michael S. Sparer and Lawrence D. Brown
Kimberley R. Isett
School of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of
Technology, Atlanta, USA
E-mail: [email protected]
Sherry A.M. Glied
Department of Health Policy and Management
Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia
University, New York, USA
E-mail: [email protected]
Michael S. Sparer
Department of Health Policy and Management
Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia
University, New York, USA
E-mail: [email protected]
Lawrence D. Brown
Department of Health Policy and Management,
Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia
University, New York, USA
E-mail: [email protected]
This work was completed under contract to the
Human Resources Administration in New York City.
Abstract
This paper examines the implementation of
large, transformative change in the Medicaid
offices in New York City to improve efficiency
and consumer-friendliness. A bottom-up
process was engaged to design and imple-
ment the needed changes from those who
were most affected by the change. Key
informant interviews and observational site
visits were conducted to assess the extent to
which the change efforts were successful. We
found that the changes impacted both
quantitative measures of success (such as
client processing times and number of clients
served) as well as less tangible qualitative
indicators of success such as staff attitudes
and office climate.
Key words
Change, human services
Vol. 15 Issue 1 2013 1–17
Public Management Review ISSN 1471-9037 print/ISSN 1471-9045 online
! 2013 Taylor & Francis
http://www.tandfonline.com
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2012.686230
The organizational change literature frequently stresses the difficulty of motivating
frontline employees to accept and implement change initiatives. Employees
presumably have a vested interest in maintaining status quo for a variety of reasons
including institutional pressures, power, comfort level and ambivalence towards a
proposed change (Cyert and March 1963; Piderit 2000; Tucker 1993). However,
new research refutes the traditional view of frontline employees as recalcitrant
obstacles to change, and instead sees their position and resourcefulness as a generally
untapped opportunity to make change efforts successful (e.g. Ford et al. 2008;
Kelman 2005).
One of the environments where it is thought that change is difficult to accomplish is
in public organizations. Public organizations are often structured to emulate Weber’s
ideal bureaucracy – control through rules and technical adherence to those rules is
prized (Mashaw 1983; Weber 1946). Inertia and adherence to rules can make it difficult
for real change to happen. Further, Federalist systems can exacerbate inertia through
creating layers of rules and regulations at each level of government. And in locations
with strong organized labour unions, whose mai.
Chapter Five Policy Entrepreneurship and the Common GoodThe qui.docxchristinemaritza
Chapter Five Policy Entrepreneurship and the Common Good
The quintessential problem of politics [is] how to judge rightly the lesser evil, the relatively best, the ends that justify the means and the means themselves….
Mary Dietz
The common good … is good human life of the multitude, of a multitude of persons; it is their communion in good living.
Jacques Maritain
We now turn to policy entrepreneurship, or coordination of leadership tasks over the course of a policy change cycle. Leaders who are policy entrepreneurs—such as Marcus Conant, Stephan Schmidheiny, Gary Cunningham, Jan Hively, and many of their colleagues—are catalysts of systemic change (Roberts and King, 1996). Policy entrepreneurs “introduce, translate, and implement an innovative idea into public practice” (1996, p. 10). Like entrepreneurs in the business realm, they are inventive, energetic, and persistent in overcoming systemic barriers. They can work inside or outside government organizations; unlike Nancy Roberts and Paula King (1996), we do not reserve the term policy entrepreneur for nongovernmental leaders.
The essential requirements of policy entrepreneurship are a systemic understanding of policy change and a focus on enacting the common good. This chapter offers an overview of these two requirements; subsequent chapters are devoted to individual phases of the policy change cycle.
Before going further, we should note that public policy has both substantive and symbolic aspects. It can be defined as substantive decisions, commitments, and implementing actions by those who have governance responsibilities (including, but going beyond government), as interpreted by various stakeholders. Thus public policy is what the affected people think it is, and based on what the substantive content symbolizes to them. Public policies may be called policies, plans, programs, projects, decisions, actions, budgets, rules, or regulations. Moreover, they may emerge deliberately or as the result of mutual adjustment among partisans (Lindblom, 1959; Mintzberg and Waters, 1985). Exhibit 5.1 presents brief definitions of public policy and other key terms in this chapter.
Understanding Policy Change
The policy change process can be described as a seven-phase cycle (Figure 5.1), in which a shifting set of change advocates work in multiple forums, arenas, and courts to remedy a public problem. The phases are interconnected and build on each other, but policy entrepreneurs are seldom able to march through them in an orderly, sequential fashion. In the case of a highly complex public problem such as AIDS or global warming, the cycle (and “re-cycling”) may extend over decades. The effort to enact solutions for less complex problems, such as homelessness in a particular city, may be successful in a much shorter period. No matter what, the same set of leaders and constituents who began a change effort may not be able to see the effort all the way through the cycle. Moreover, new leaders and constitue ...
Chapter 8 Policy Entrepreneurs and Morality Politics Lea.docxmccormicknadine86
Chapter 8
Policy Entrepreneurs and Morality Politics: Learning
from Failure and Success
Michael Mintrom
Introduction
In this volume, political entrepreneurs are viewed as special actors, embedded in the socio-
political fabric, who are alert to the emergence of entrepreneurial opportunities and act upon them
(see Petridou, Narbutaité Aflaki and Miles, this volume). During the past two decades, I have
devoted considerable attention to observing and understanding the actions of a subset of political
entrepreneurs that have come to be called policy entrepreneurs (Mintrom, 1997, 2000; Mintrom
and Norman, 2009; Mintrom and Vergari, 1996, 1998). Following Kingdon (1984) and Roberts
and King (1996), I have employed the working definition of policy entrepreneurs as political actors
who seek policy changes that shift the status quo in given areas of public policy.
This chapter documents how policy entrepreneurs have conducted themselves in the face of
intense opposition from groups which disagree with the moral positions embodied in their policy
objectives. While the chapter considers instances of policy entrepreneurship in three distinctive
jurisdictions, each case involves efforts to secure government funding and permissive regulation
of human embryonic stem cell research. Such research promises future therapies that could
both extend lives and improve their quality. It also invites serious discussion of the meaning of
life (Beckmann, 2004; Hauskeller, 2004; Banchoff, 2005; Fukuyama, 2005; Mintrom, 2009;
Karch, 2012).
Human embryonic stem cell research has deep symbolic significance and opens up moral
disagreement. Some governments have found effective ways to support this research despite
its controversial nature; others have strongly opposed it. Through case studies of policy
entrepreneurship and human embryonic stem cell research in California, the United Kingdom, and
Italy, the chapter shows how policy entrepreneurs have sought to promote more funding and less
restrictive regulation for this controversial area of contemporary science. In each case, the policy
entrepreneurs involved met with significant opposition due to the morality issues at stake.
By placing policy entrepreneurship in a broader political context, this chapter makes four
contributions. First, it shows how policy entrepreneurs pursue their goals in the face of intense
morality politics. Second, it shows how the work of policy entrepreneurs can be both supported
and inhibited by ideas, institutions, and interest-groups in the polis. Third, it demonstrates how, by
adapting to their contexts and adjusting their strategies, policy entrepreneurs can learn from failures
and take new runs at securing policy change. Finally, in making these points, this chapter assists
in identifying what makes policy entrepreneurship a distinctive form of political work. Policy
entrepreneurship is presented here as a crucial subset of the broader set of activiti ...
The British College provides an
accredited university learning
experience along with in-depth
personal and professional
development. With graduates
already making their mark in their
chosen careers, The British College
is pleased and proud to welcome
you to become an integral part of
our institution.
Quality Control of RNA Samples - For Gene-Expression Results you Can Rely onQIAGEN
By their very nature RNA molecules, especially mRNA and regulator RNA, are labile and can be highly unstable and sensitive to heat, UV and RNase contamination. The quality, relevance and scientific impact of gene expression results directly depends on the ability to extract RNA without losing any fraction of interest, while preserving the integrity of the biological information it carries. RNA quality control is thus critical to ensure high-quality results and for turning these results into actionable insights with confidence.
In this webinar, we will introduce you to the main parameters influencing RNA-based assays and their respective impact on downstream applications, discuss how to monitor them and cover the advantages of automation for quality control along complex workflows.
Since 1983, Marble Slab Creamery® has been serving chef created, super-premium, hand-mixed ice cream. Every batch of Marble Slab Creamery ice cream is fresh made in small batches in the store using ingredients from around the world and dairy from local farms. Today, Marble Slab Creamery is enjoyed by consumers across the globe with locations in the Bahrain, Canada, Guam, Kuwait, Lebanon, Mexico, Oman, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, St. Lucia, Trinidad and Tobago, the United Kingdom, United Arab Emirates, and the United States.
As the innovator and the first to develop the now famous "frozen slab" technique for ice cream preparation, Marble Slab Creamery has set the bar for the ice cream industry.
In 2011, Marble Slab Creamery and MaggieMoo’s Ice Cream and Treatery merged into one combined ice cream concept … taking the best of both worlds to create a playful, crave-able taste experience. Marble Slab Creamery brings a rich history of super-premium ice cream using fresh dairy from around the corner and the finest ingredients from around the world. Mix in MaggieMoo’s celebrated history of innovation – award-winning flavors, first to introduce ice cream cupcakes and ice cream pizza, first to utilize online ordering – and you have a combination that can’t be beat!
WHEN CHANGEBECOMESTRANSFORMATIONA case study of change.docxphilipnelson29183
WHEN CHANGE
BECOMES
TRANSFORMATION
A case study of change
management in Medicaid
offices in New York City
Kimberley R. Isett, Sherry A.M. Glied,
Michael S. Sparer and Lawrence D. Brown
Kimberley R. Isett
School of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of
Technology, Atlanta, USA
E-mail: [email protected]
Sherry A.M. Glied
Department of Health Policy and Management
Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia
University, New York, USA
E-mail: [email protected]
Michael S. Sparer
Department of Health Policy and Management
Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia
University, New York, USA
E-mail: [email protected]
Lawrence D. Brown
Department of Health Policy and Management,
Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia
University, New York, USA
E-mail: [email protected]
This work was completed under contract to the
Human Resources Administration in New York City.
Abstract
This paper examines the implementation of
large, transformative change in the Medicaid
offices in New York City to improve efficiency
and consumer-friendliness. A bottom-up
process was engaged to design and imple-
ment the needed changes from those who
were most affected by the change. Key
informant interviews and observational site
visits were conducted to assess the extent to
which the change efforts were successful. We
found that the changes impacted both
quantitative measures of success (such as
client processing times and number of clients
served) as well as less tangible qualitative
indicators of success such as staff attitudes
and office climate.
Key words
Change, human services
Vol. 15 Issue 1 2013 1–17
Public Management Review ISSN 1471-9037 print/ISSN 1471-9045 online
! 2013 Taylor & Francis
http://www.tandfonline.com
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2012.686230
The organizational change literature frequently stresses the difficulty of motivating
frontline employees to accept and implement change initiatives. Employees
presumably have a vested interest in maintaining status quo for a variety of reasons
including institutional pressures, power, comfort level and ambivalence towards a
proposed change (Cyert and March 1963; Piderit 2000; Tucker 1993). However,
new research refutes the traditional view of frontline employees as recalcitrant
obstacles to change, and instead sees their position and resourcefulness as a generally
untapped opportunity to make change efforts successful (e.g. Ford et al. 2008;
Kelman 2005).
One of the environments where it is thought that change is difficult to accomplish is
in public organizations. Public organizations are often structured to emulate Weber’s
ideal bureaucracy – control through rules and technical adherence to those rules is
prized (Mashaw 1983; Weber 1946). Inertia and adherence to rules can make it difficult
for real change to happen. Further, Federalist systems can exacerbate inertia through
creating layers of rules and regulations at each level of government. And in locations
with strong organized labour unions, whose mai.
Chapter Five Policy Entrepreneurship and the Common GoodThe qui.docxchristinemaritza
Chapter Five Policy Entrepreneurship and the Common Good
The quintessential problem of politics [is] how to judge rightly the lesser evil, the relatively best, the ends that justify the means and the means themselves….
Mary Dietz
The common good … is good human life of the multitude, of a multitude of persons; it is their communion in good living.
Jacques Maritain
We now turn to policy entrepreneurship, or coordination of leadership tasks over the course of a policy change cycle. Leaders who are policy entrepreneurs—such as Marcus Conant, Stephan Schmidheiny, Gary Cunningham, Jan Hively, and many of their colleagues—are catalysts of systemic change (Roberts and King, 1996). Policy entrepreneurs “introduce, translate, and implement an innovative idea into public practice” (1996, p. 10). Like entrepreneurs in the business realm, they are inventive, energetic, and persistent in overcoming systemic barriers. They can work inside or outside government organizations; unlike Nancy Roberts and Paula King (1996), we do not reserve the term policy entrepreneur for nongovernmental leaders.
The essential requirements of policy entrepreneurship are a systemic understanding of policy change and a focus on enacting the common good. This chapter offers an overview of these two requirements; subsequent chapters are devoted to individual phases of the policy change cycle.
Before going further, we should note that public policy has both substantive and symbolic aspects. It can be defined as substantive decisions, commitments, and implementing actions by those who have governance responsibilities (including, but going beyond government), as interpreted by various stakeholders. Thus public policy is what the affected people think it is, and based on what the substantive content symbolizes to them. Public policies may be called policies, plans, programs, projects, decisions, actions, budgets, rules, or regulations. Moreover, they may emerge deliberately or as the result of mutual adjustment among partisans (Lindblom, 1959; Mintzberg and Waters, 1985). Exhibit 5.1 presents brief definitions of public policy and other key terms in this chapter.
Understanding Policy Change
The policy change process can be described as a seven-phase cycle (Figure 5.1), in which a shifting set of change advocates work in multiple forums, arenas, and courts to remedy a public problem. The phases are interconnected and build on each other, but policy entrepreneurs are seldom able to march through them in an orderly, sequential fashion. In the case of a highly complex public problem such as AIDS or global warming, the cycle (and “re-cycling”) may extend over decades. The effort to enact solutions for less complex problems, such as homelessness in a particular city, may be successful in a much shorter period. No matter what, the same set of leaders and constituents who began a change effort may not be able to see the effort all the way through the cycle. Moreover, new leaders and constitue ...
Chapter 8 Policy Entrepreneurs and Morality Politics Lea.docxmccormicknadine86
Chapter 8
Policy Entrepreneurs and Morality Politics: Learning
from Failure and Success
Michael Mintrom
Introduction
In this volume, political entrepreneurs are viewed as special actors, embedded in the socio-
political fabric, who are alert to the emergence of entrepreneurial opportunities and act upon them
(see Petridou, Narbutaité Aflaki and Miles, this volume). During the past two decades, I have
devoted considerable attention to observing and understanding the actions of a subset of political
entrepreneurs that have come to be called policy entrepreneurs (Mintrom, 1997, 2000; Mintrom
and Norman, 2009; Mintrom and Vergari, 1996, 1998). Following Kingdon (1984) and Roberts
and King (1996), I have employed the working definition of policy entrepreneurs as political actors
who seek policy changes that shift the status quo in given areas of public policy.
This chapter documents how policy entrepreneurs have conducted themselves in the face of
intense opposition from groups which disagree with the moral positions embodied in their policy
objectives. While the chapter considers instances of policy entrepreneurship in three distinctive
jurisdictions, each case involves efforts to secure government funding and permissive regulation
of human embryonic stem cell research. Such research promises future therapies that could
both extend lives and improve their quality. It also invites serious discussion of the meaning of
life (Beckmann, 2004; Hauskeller, 2004; Banchoff, 2005; Fukuyama, 2005; Mintrom, 2009;
Karch, 2012).
Human embryonic stem cell research has deep symbolic significance and opens up moral
disagreement. Some governments have found effective ways to support this research despite
its controversial nature; others have strongly opposed it. Through case studies of policy
entrepreneurship and human embryonic stem cell research in California, the United Kingdom, and
Italy, the chapter shows how policy entrepreneurs have sought to promote more funding and less
restrictive regulation for this controversial area of contemporary science. In each case, the policy
entrepreneurs involved met with significant opposition due to the morality issues at stake.
By placing policy entrepreneurship in a broader political context, this chapter makes four
contributions. First, it shows how policy entrepreneurs pursue their goals in the face of intense
morality politics. Second, it shows how the work of policy entrepreneurs can be both supported
and inhibited by ideas, institutions, and interest-groups in the polis. Third, it demonstrates how, by
adapting to their contexts and adjusting their strategies, policy entrepreneurs can learn from failures
and take new runs at securing policy change. Finally, in making these points, this chapter assists
in identifying what makes policy entrepreneurship a distinctive form of political work. Policy
entrepreneurship is presented here as a crucial subset of the broader set of activiti ...
Assignment ResourcesFrom Support to Mutiny.pdfFROM SUPPOR.docxrock73
Assignment Resources/From Support to Mutiny.pdf
FROM SUPPORT TO MUTINY: SHIFTING LEGITIMACY
JUDGMENTS AND EMOTIONAL REACTIONS IMPACTING THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF RADICAL CHANGE
QUY NGUYEN HUY
INSEAD
KEVIN G. CORLEY
Arizona State University
MATTHEW S. KRAATZ
University of Illinois
Based on a three-year inductive study of one organization’s implementation of radical
organizational change, we examine the critical role played by middle managers’
judgments of the legitimacy of their top managers as change agents. Our analysis
revealed middle managers’ shifting judgments of the change agents’ legitimacy that
arose with their emotional reactions and produced rising resistance to the change
effort. Our inductive model illustrates the dynamic, relational, and iterative relation-
ships among change recipients’ legitimacy judgments of change agents and arising
emotional reactions in various phases of planned change, which explain recipients’
emergent resistance to the change effort. Our model allows us to contribute to theory
on radical organizational change, resistance to change, and legitimacy judgments.
Organizational scholars have long recognized the
severe challenges involved in organizational trans-
formation efforts and the necessary role that indi-
vidual agents play within them (Amis, Slack, &
Hinings, 2004; Hinings & Greenwood, 1996; Huy,
2002; Singh, House, & Tucker, 1986). Planned rad-
ical organizational change (PROC), which funda-
mentally alters the power structure, culture, rou-
tines, and strategy of the entire organization, often
appears to be the only option available in dire
circumstances (Miller & Friesen, 1980; Tushman &
Romanelli, 1985). As such, scholars have generally
treated radical change as an inherently volitional
phenomenon and placed change agents at the cen-
ter of their theories and empirical research (Bar-
tunek, 1984; Pettigrew, 1985). These agents can, in
principle, emerge from anywhere inside the organ-
ization (e.g., Plowman, Baker, Beck, Kulkarni, So-
lansky, & Travis, 2007); however, top managers
(TMs) have been the conventional focus—and for un-
derstandable reasons. These actors play a readily vis-
ible and public role in many change initiatives and
are often hired for the express purpose of transform-
ing failing organizations. In addition, they appear to
possess many of the resources that are most necessary
for this task, such as formal decision authority, con-
trol over resources, and centrality (e.g., Denis, Lang-
ley, & Cazale, 1996; Romanelli & Tushman, 1994).
Over the last two decades, scholars have exam-
ined many different instances of radical change and
presented ample evidence that supports an agentic
view of the process. They have also provided many
useful insights about change agents’ role within
this process and some prescribed requirements for
success in the job (e.g., Tushman & Romanelli,
1985; Wiersema & Bantel, 1992). Despite its many
important contributions, a closer examination of
this ...
A theoretical framework oforganizational changeGabriele .docxstandfordabbot
A theoretical framework of
organizational change
Gabriele Jacobs
Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam,
The Netherlands
Arjen van Witteloostuijn
University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium, Tilburg University, Tilburg,
The Netherlands, and Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands, and
Jochen Christe-Zeyse
Fachhochschule der Polizei Brandenburg, Brandenburg, Germany
Abstract
Purpose – Organizational change is a risky endeavour. Most change initiatives fall short on their
goals and produce high opportunity and process costs, which at times outweigh the content benefits of
organizational change. This paper seeks to develop a framework, offering a theoretical toolbox to
analyze context-dependent barriers and enablers of organizational change. Starting from an
organizational identity perspective, it aims to link contingency-based approaches, such as
environmental scan, SWOT and stakeholder analysis, with insights from organizational behaviour
research, such as knowledge sharing and leadership.
Design/methodology/approach – The framework is informed by long-lasting field research into
organizational change in an international policing environment. The theories in the framework are
selected from the perspective of field validity in two ways; they were chosen because the topics
covered by these theories emerged as relevant during the field research and therefore it can be
expected they have applicability to the field. The authors’ insights and suggestions are summarised in
13 propositions throughout the text.
Findings – The analysis provides a clear warning that organizational change is more risky and
multifaceted than change initiators typically assume. It is stressed that the external environment and
the internal dynamics of organizations co-determine the meaning of managerial practices. This implies
that cure-all recipes to organizational change are bound to fail.
Originality/value – This paper makes an ambitious attempt to cross disciplinary boundaries in the
field of organizational change research to contribute to a more comprehensive and holistic
understanding of change processes by integrating perspectives that focus on the internal context and
the external environment of organizations.
Keywords Organizational change, Contingency analysis, Culture, Leadership, Environmental scan,
Police, Public security, Public management, International environment, Costs of change, Policing
Paper type Research paper
Organizational change as a risky strategy
Organizational change is omnipresent, being the raison d’être of the consultancy
industry (Sorge and van Witteloostuijn, 2004). Modern organization sciences have
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0953-4814.htm
The authors would like to thank the project partners for their contribution to this work. This
research is partially funded by the European Commission in the context of the COMPOSITE
projec.
watch at least three of the following short videos from the PBS Fr.docxjessiehampson
watch at least three of the following short videos from the PBS Frontline World (Stories by Region - Africa) site or one longer documentary film from the PBS Frontline site. Frontline is a highly respected documentary film producer. While a few of the films are somewhat older, the content is relevant to our study of Sub-Saharan Africa and this week’s DB topic. If any of the links are inaccessible, simply select another film.
For this week's DB assignment you should discuss one or both of the following questions:
1. How much should Sub-Saharan Africa's current challenges (poverty, conflict, debt, etc.) be attributed to factors such as European colonization or outside forces such as globalization …or how much are they now the responsibility of Africans?
2. Does (and if so, how much) the international community have a responsibility to help Africans with challenges such as diseases (HIV/AIDS, Malaria, etc.), poverty, inequitable land distribution, ethnic and religious conflict, debt, etc.? If so, please give some specific examples of what should and can be done.
Here are a few links:
· Liberia: Give peace a chance - http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/rough/2007/05/liberia_give_pe.html
· Zimbabwe: Shadows and Lies - http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/zimbabwe504/video_index.html
· South Africa: Inside the cycle of rape - http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/rough/2010/07/south_africa_a.html
· This Land is Ours: Who should own Namibia's farms? - http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/rough/2005/08/this_land_is_ou.html
· Somalia: A Reporter's Search for Al Qaeda - http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/rough/2007/02/somalia_a_repor.html
· Ghana: Digital Dumping Ground - http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/ghana804
Business and Economics Research Journal
Volume 5 Number 4
2014
pp. 143-166
ISSN: 1309-2448
www.berjournal.com
The Role of Corporate Communication and Perception of Justice
during Organizational Change Process
Neşe Saruhan
a
a
PhD., Bahcesehir University, Istanbul, Turkiye, [email protected]
Abstract: Today, researchers have been exploring employee’s resistance to change and how to
foresee these aversive behaviors during organizational change process (Armenakis & Harris, 2002, Dent
& Goldberg, 1999, Oreg & Sverdlik, 2011). Some employees view organizational change in a negative
way even if change efforts will results in favorable consequences for them. At this point,
communication process has a crucial effect on the perception of employees towards change process. In
addition, several studies confirm the role of perceived justice in the organization during organizational
change. So, the effects of communication and perception of justice on behaviors of employees during
change process and the contribution of communication on resistance to change through perception of
organizational justice was explored. The research was conducted among 583 employees in Turkey. The
results of the regres ...
Business and Economics Research Journal Volume 5 Number .docxRAHUL126667
Business and Economics Research Journal
Volume 5 Number 4
2014
pp. 143-166
ISSN: 1309-2448
www.berjournal.com
The Role of Corporate Communication and Perception of Justice
during Organizational Change Process
Neşe Saruhan
a
a
PhD., Bahcesehir University, Istanbul, Turkiye, [email protected]
Abstract: Today, researchers have been exploring employee’s resistance to change and how to
foresee these aversive behaviors during organizational change process (Armenakis & Harris, 2002, Dent
& Goldberg, 1999, Oreg & Sverdlik, 2011). Some employees view organizational change in a negative
way even if change efforts will results in favorable consequences for them. At this point,
communication process has a crucial effect on the perception of employees towards change process. In
addition, several studies confirm the role of perceived justice in the organization during organizational
change. So, the effects of communication and perception of justice on behaviors of employees during
change process and the contribution of communication on resistance to change through perception of
organizational justice was explored. The research was conducted among 583 employees in Turkey. The
results of the regression analysis showed that perception of organizational justice plays a mediating
role between communication to resistance and change.
Keywords: Change, resistance to change, perception of justice, communication.
JEL Classification: M10, M12
1. Introduction
Global competition, new age information technologies, global economic crises, new
political strategies and rapidly evolving consumption trends are stimulants for organizational
change. Organizations must implement continuous and transformational change to remain
competitive (Cohen, 1999). For instance, Forbes published its first Top 100 Companies list in
1917. It re-printed it in 1987, showing that 61 of the original 100 companies has no longer
existed (Foster & Kaplan, 2001). This shows that in today’s dynamic world, organizations must
change or go out of business.
So, organizational change has become a very popular subject for scholars and
researchers. Organizations have been spending huge amounts of money, time and human
capital to be successful in their change efforts. However, Beer, Eisenstat and Spector (1990)
noted that change programs often failed or made situations worse. Such results have led
researchers and practitioners to search how organizations can successfully accomplish
change processes. The reasons for failure in the change process were found as technological
difficulties and lack of money, but most importantly, human related problems (Lawrence,
1954 cited in Foster, 2008).
The Role of Corporate Communication and Perception of Justice during Organizational Change Process
Business and Economics Research Journal
5(4)2014
144
There are several studies that have attempted to understand and predict emp ...
Business and Economics Research Journal Volume 5 Number .docxhumphrieskalyn
Business and Economics Research Journal
Volume 5 Number 4
2014
pp. 143-166
ISSN: 1309-2448
www.berjournal.com
The Role of Corporate Communication and Perception of Justice
during Organizational Change Process
Neşe Saruhan
a
a
PhD., Bahcesehir University, Istanbul, Turkiye, [email protected]
Abstract: Today, researchers have been exploring employee’s resistance to change and how to
foresee these aversive behaviors during organizational change process (Armenakis & Harris, 2002, Dent
& Goldberg, 1999, Oreg & Sverdlik, 2011). Some employees view organizational change in a negative
way even if change efforts will results in favorable consequences for them. At this point,
communication process has a crucial effect on the perception of employees towards change process. In
addition, several studies confirm the role of perceived justice in the organization during organizational
change. So, the effects of communication and perception of justice on behaviors of employees during
change process and the contribution of communication on resistance to change through perception of
organizational justice was explored. The research was conducted among 583 employees in Turkey. The
results of the regression analysis showed that perception of organizational justice plays a mediating
role between communication to resistance and change.
Keywords: Change, resistance to change, perception of justice, communication.
JEL Classification: M10, M12
1. Introduction
Global competition, new age information technologies, global economic crises, new
political strategies and rapidly evolving consumption trends are stimulants for organizational
change. Organizations must implement continuous and transformational change to remain
competitive (Cohen, 1999). For instance, Forbes published its first Top 100 Companies list in
1917. It re-printed it in 1987, showing that 61 of the original 100 companies has no longer
existed (Foster & Kaplan, 2001). This shows that in today’s dynamic world, organizations must
change or go out of business.
So, organizational change has become a very popular subject for scholars and
researchers. Organizations have been spending huge amounts of money, time and human
capital to be successful in their change efforts. However, Beer, Eisenstat and Spector (1990)
noted that change programs often failed or made situations worse. Such results have led
researchers and practitioners to search how organizations can successfully accomplish
change processes. The reasons for failure in the change process were found as technological
difficulties and lack of money, but most importantly, human related problems (Lawrence,
1954 cited in Foster, 2008).
The Role of Corporate Communication and Perception of Justice during Organizational Change Process
Business and Economics Research Journal
5(4)2014
144
There are several studies that have attempted to understand and predict emp ...
1. Case Study: Identifying Resistance In Managing Change
Journal of Change Management
Vol. 15 No. 2, 2002
Manuscript
Karyn E. Trader-Leigh
KTA Global Partners
Change Management Consultants
5915 Parkridge Lane
Alexandria, Virginia 22310
Acatalyst4change@cs.com
2. 2
Case Study: Identifying Resistance In Managing Change
Keywords: Managing Change, Resistance to Change, Reinvention of Government,
US State Department-ICASS, Implementation Strategies
Abstract
This study examines stakeholder attitudes about change and resistance to change
in a management initiative within the US State Department. Resistance to change may be
an obstacle to successful implementation of reinvention initiatives based on how
individuals and organizations perceive their goals are affected by the change. This study
suggests that improved identification and understanding of the underlying factors of
resistance may improve implementation outcomes.
3. 3
Within the embassy system, there has been significant expansion of the overseas
presence of foreign and non-foreign affairs agencies due to increased globalization.
Consequently, the function of diplomatic posts has expanded, reflecting broader interests
of U.S. agencies in fields like energy, environmental protection, technology, customs,
and immigration control to name a few. This escalation increased the demand for
management support and services provided by the State Department. Traditionally, the
State Department a sole service provider and economic principal for resource
management supported Foreign Affairs staff and co-located federal agencies in U.S.
embassies worldwide. A major initiative to restructure the business and administrative
management support infrastructure was implemented in response to demands to reduce
the cost of government. This initiative had the impact of altering traditional governance
systems and changing the interface between federal agencies and the State Department.
Implementation of such large-scale initiatives have far-reaching consequences for human
and organizational systems. Yet much of the implementation planning typically focuses
on technical, procedural and operational aspects of the bureaucracy and its infrastructure.
Resistance to change, which shows up in the social, cultural and political systems is
largely an unmanaged process.
Resistance: A Powerful Organizational Force
Major organizational changes or innovations can anticipate resistance, especially
if proposed changes alter values and visions related to the existing order. Programs that
satisfy one group often reduce satisfaction of other groups because the survival of one set
of values and visions may be at the expense of the other.
This study identified constructs and dynamics of resistance that can undermine
organizational change and suggests that resistance effects should be assessed and
managed as a part of the implementation strategy. These factors may be understudied
dimensions of resistance. The study of these variables and factors are important to
developing successful implementation models. To examine the resistance phenomenon in
this change initiative the study posed the following research questions:
1. What variables are related to resistance?
2. What factors are underlying causes of resistance?
3. What is the level of resistance?
Value of study
In this project the researcher was provided considerable client access which
allowed the gathering of empirical data on difficult to access multi-actor
perspectives. As a result the findings may yield useful insight for managers, evaluators of
implementation outcomes, change management practitioners and other interested
researchers. This study provides value by going beyond change readiness assessments of
resistance barriers and demonstrates the need to gain a deeper understanding of the
fragile and complex character of organizational affairs that resistance represents. An
implication of the findings suggest that resistance behavior requires risk management.
Resistance reflects the subtext of organizational humanity on stage during
organization transformation efforts. Future resistance studies and change implementation
strategies must recognize and situate this humanity at play. Future research might also
examine the nature of resistance in public vs. private organizations to determine if similar
effects are enacted during organization transformation processes. Additionally, research
4. 4
would benefit from the application of postmodern organizational analysis tools to
examine this theater. The postmodern perspective offers frameworks that look at
achieving organizational justice (Wooten and White, 1999) in change outcomes that may
serve to decrease obstructing behavior. Other postmodern analysis tools examine
competing views and conflicting interests that are often significant sources of resistance.
Such a lens would look strategically at the impact of power coalitions, the advantaging of
the status quo, the consequences of disenfranchising them, the impact of changing
enculturated traditions and recognition of marginalized perspectives. Findings from this
kind of analysis could legitimate resistance as an organizational effect that must be
consciously managed.
A pathology of resistance to implementation
strategies in public sector reform
Today’s federal management reform efforts reflect a shift in the traditional
administrative management paradigm to a more entrepreneurial federal administration.
Public sector managers, not unlike private sector managers, are being pressured with
turbulence and substantial change. These new forces demand efficiency and economy in
order to withstand the budgetary pressures brought on by the demand for a balanced
federal budget and by anti-bureaucracy sentiments. To move in this direction, however, a
strong case must be made for change. Existing stakeholders often perceive that these
changes result in disenfranchisement and a redistribution of benefits as a result of the
actions taken. Consequently, organization designs for major change often result in failure
or a struggle between forces supporting change and those resisting change followed by
long and bitter implementation battles. It is critical to understand how stakeholders are
affected and understand the often hidden dynamics and cost of change.
In one of the more comprehensive reviews of implementation studies, O’Toole
(1986) found that while there was a trend in the growth of academic literature about
implementation of public policy, there was no theory of implementation that commanded
general agreement. He noted that researchers continue to work from diverse theoretical
perspectives, do not agree on the outlines of a theory of implementation, or on the
variables crucial to implementation success.
O’Toole identified variables from over one hundred studies noting those
considered key to the implementation process. He found that half of the studies identified
policy characteristics (clarity of goals, procedures, validity of the policy) and
approximately the same number indicated that resources are crucial, along with other
frequently identified categories of variables that included the multi-organization
structure, the number of actors, attitudes and perceptions of implementing personnel.
Variables identified by O’Toole in his comprehensive review have a direct
relevance to resistance and helped inform the development of the author’s survey
instrument. Some of those include: resources and interorganizational structure (Ackerman
and Stienmann, 1982); interests of subordinates, (Baum, 1976); degree of resistance
(Berman, 1980); operational demands (Chase, 1979); complexity of the change
mechanism (Cleaves, 1980); structure of power relationships (Elmore, 1985); type of
policy (Hargrove, 1983); administrative linkages (Lazin, 1980); incentives (Luft, 1976);
political constraints (Mead, 1977); configurations of intergovernmental relationships and
institutional relationships (Menzel, 1981); level of conflict, (Scharpf, 1977); and degree
of change required (Mueller, 1984), as cited in O’Toole (1986).
5. 5
In the Berkley Symposium on Initiating Change: Public Policies and Institutions,
Charles Lindblom of Yale University (1994) points out that initiating change is a
competitive, often hostile activity. Anyone who wants change has to overcome massive
inertia. Change initiation is a kind of warfare. Lindblom notes that while it is possible to
find policies or changes that benefit almost everyone, changes ordinarily benefit some
people by injuring others, particularly where change is feared and members of the
organization are not made to see its possibilities.
Lindblom argued that the best way to block change is to render people unaware of
possibilities. If those most affected are the dominant stakeholders, they may use
communication less for exposing others to the possibilities and more for maintaining
control, thus giving messages that are designed to hide, misrepresent or put a better face
on the status quo. He noted that dominant stakeholders often possess powerful incentives
to resist along with formidable capacities to resist.
Lindblom defines this collective defensive behavior within the organization as
impairment and states that this kind of impairment is an instrument of resistance to
change. Because these stakeholders are dominant and powerful, their advantages include
an overwhelming capacity to communicate and in other ways influence the thinking of
significant numbers of others in the organization, thereby increasing the pattern and depth
of change obstructing impairments. Change is resisted according to Lindblom, often more
successfully than it is initiated, because its opponents are many and powerful. A profound
struggle occurs wherein systematically impaired minds are fundamental barriers to
change. These impairments are not the consequence of accident or apathy, but the
practices, some deliberate and some not, of the advantaged. The latter struggle to resist
perceived disadvantaging change. Resistances to change are powerful and persistent.
Lindblom argues that if we want changes, we have to engage in a political struggle; no
important changes will come without it. (Lindblom, 1994).
Chris Argyris of Harvard University (1994) agrees with this diagnosis of
impairment as an obstacle to change. He describes it as “cognitive impairment” that is a
result of striving for control that results in defensive reasoning. Such defensive reasoning
is self-serving, anti-learning, and overprotective. It is used to maintain and reward
existing patterns of behavior. These organizationally defensive routines reflect actions,
policies or practices that prevent members from experiencing embarrassment or threat
and protect positions of power and control. Thompson and Ingraham (1996) conducted an
exploratory survey of reinvention laboratories to ascertain if tensions arose, and to see
where resistance might occur. Their study recognizes the importance of addressing
politically based resistance and underscores the need to understand those organizational
forces. In examining reinvention laboratories, projects so designated by the National
Performance Review (NPR) as efforts to promote innovation within agencies, found
resistance to change could be a formidable obstruction to attempts at governmental
reform.
6. 6
A new model of change management might include organization analysis of
resistance factors as a component of the implementation plan (see Illustration I.)
“take in Illustration I.”
Illustration I: Change Strategy
Institutional reform: The imperative for system-wide change
The recent Washington, DC political environment has focused on reducing the
cost of government and balancing the national budget in response to the national deficit
and anti-big-government public opinion sentiments. In response to the demand for
government reform, “the reinventing government movement” took on a life of its own.
The Clinton Administration introduced the National Performance Review (NPR), which
was designed to initiate long-term change in the culture of federal operations, recommend
appropriate forms of organization and management, and introduce new forms of
entrepreneurial administration. The Republican majority in Congress expressed its views
on restructuring government through the publication of the Horn Report (Carroll and
Lynn, 1996), which stated that Congress should drastically restructure government.
Hence, both political parties pursued initiatives that would drive institutional changes
designed to “focus on reductions in the cost of government, examine federal
administrative management, reinvent government and produce a balanced budget.”
State Department Reform
In response to pressure for reform, The President’s Management Council (PMC)
undertook a study to identify specific steps that could be taken to streamline overseas
foreign affairs operations linked to embassies. This change initiative is known as the
International Cooperative Administrative Support Service (ICASS) System, an outgrowth
of the renewed emphasis in the Reinventing Government movement. Under ICASS,
greater responsibility and authority for managing resources and making decisions about
paying for common administrative support services are delegated to the post (embassies).
Change Strategy: Manage Implementation Success
Manage Resistance
Impact Analysis on
People and Organization
Systems: Assess vested
interests, Assess Politics,
Identify Losses, Competing
Views, Engage Issues
The Risk
Management
Investment
Manage Politics of
Change,
Manage Multi-
Stakeholder Interest,
Develop Integrity
Framework - Ethical
Behavior – Values,
Strategy for
Disrupting
Resistance,
Address
Disenfranchisement,
Adjust
Implementation
Strategy
Identify Strategies to
Address
Resistance
Variables in
Implementation Plan
Rewards
Political
Constraints
Operational
Constraints
Benefits
Culture Support
Goal
Agreement
Commitment
Key Resistance Forces
Self-Interest
Psychological Impact
Tyranny Of Custom
Redistributive Effects
Destabalization Effects
Culture Compatibility
Political Factors
7. 7
At the inception of ICASS, the expectation was that it would better rationalize the
delivery of overseas administrative services, identify measures that could be taken to
streamline overseas operations, reduce the cost of administrative services and make better
use of information systems and communications technology (United States General
Accounting Office (GAO), 1996). The need for change was widely recognized. Congress,
NPR, Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and GAO, all saw a need to manage
with fewer resources. At the same time it was important that 21st century diplomacy was
not threatened with irrelevance because it lacked infrastructure necessary to support its
mission (Center for Strategic and International Studies, 1998).
ICASS implementation
The 1996 Department of State Appropriations Act required that allocations for the
full cost for each department and agency’s overseas presence be in place by fiscal year
1997. Under the sponsorship of the President’s Management Council the State
Department and other US agencies with presence at US embassies developed a system
that devolved authority for overseas support to individual embassy interagency councils,
and shifted financial responsibility for administrative resource support to those overseas
agencies. This was a radical change in philosophy from the previous unilateral
management of the State Department administrative support platform overseas.
This change effort occurred in an environment where the coexistence of multiple
cultures with conflicting objectives could result in significant conflicts. The ICASS
concept incorporates many of the principals of the National Performance Review and the
President’s Management Council. The process sought to facilitate culture change,
particularly at the embassy level, by: (a) offer agencies choice in the provision of
administrative services; (b) decentralize and shift decisions and costs for resource
allocations to principal agencies; (c) provide more effective embassy management; (d)
enhance service provider competency and efficiency; and (e) introduce service standards
that maintain an administrative support platform in concert with country diplomatic
objectives.
In general, ICASS is regarded as a better way to deliver administrative services.
Some State Department representatives believed that “it was the most significant
management change in the last 25 years, but that this was realized more overseas than in
Washington”. Federal Agency representatives noted that “it was an eye opener because
they never new what particular services cost, we paid a token amount, this is making
better managers out of us.” ICASS took an administrative system that was run in-
efficiently and forced it to improve. While the majority of stakeholders may have agreed
that ICASS is a better way to deliver services, it did not change the fact that
organizational transformation processes that effect roles, culture and governance
structures would produce resistance. ICASS gave the State Department financial relief
but forced it to share control. A reform initiative of this magnitude becoming a theatre of
conflict was a predictable response.
Method
This empirical study represents an exploratory, non-experimental, descriptive
research design using case study methodology to assess resistance phenomena in a
federal agency implementing a “reinvention of government” (REGO) initiative. While
this case study was done in the context of a single federal agency, data was collected
world wide, from multiple organization units that function autonomously (e.g., globally
8. 8
co-located foreign affairs agencies and embassies. The study combined ethnographic
observation, qualitative interview methodology and quantitative procedures of descriptive
statistics and factor analysis.
The study was conducted in multiple phases over a two-year period. Prior to data
collection the researcher was given the opportunity for ethnographic observation through
site visits to embassies in three countries involved in the pilot implementation of this
initiative. The researcher was provided access to the interagency assessment findings of
the “virtual” implementation of the ICASS project in 19 pilot embassy sites.
Additionally, the researcher observed council and working committee meetings in
Washington Headquarters and the field. During the second year of the study, survey
interviews and survey questionnaires where administered. The results of this data are the
basis of this article.
Participants.
Participants in the survey interviews and the survey questionnaire were in a
sampling frame within the State Department or other federal agencies that have ICASS
oversight responsibility, or an ICASS implementation responsibility. The survey
interview population consisted of 38 State Department and federal agency executives and
senior foreign affairs officers. Of those interviewed, 23 (65 %) were State Department
employees, one former State Department Under Secretary and 11 (32%) federal agency
personnel. Six hundred survey questionnaires were distributed to 35 embassies in six
global regions as defined by the State Department’s global database (Europe, Near East,
Africa, Asia, South Asia, Western Hemisphere). Survey respondents reflected the
following professional categories: career service and political appointees, embassy-based
personnel, Ambassadors, Chiefs of Mission, State Department and federal agency
Foreign Affairs Officers, and Foreign Service Nationals. Federal agencies with overseas
presence were represented by, but not limited to USAID, Department of Defense,
Agriculture, Justice, Treasury, and Peace Corps. Of the 107 survey respondents, 55
persons or 53% of the sample were State Department employees and 49 persons or 47%
of the respondents were federal agency personnel.
Procedure.
Phase I defined the population for the study and developed a survey
instrument. Phase II involved pilot testing the interview protocol and survey instrument
and its administration. The interview protocol and survey instrument developed were
used to determine if there was resistance and, if found, its source. The questions in the
interview protocol and survey instrument form the basis for the study of the variables that
were examined. Organizations or departments identified as interview candidates received
a letter from the State Department’s Chief Financial Officer (CFO) within the Office of
the Undersecretary for Administration and Management. Similarly, the distribution of
surveys was preceded by letters to the Deputy Chiefs of Mission (DCM) issued from the
State Department’s Chief Financial Officer requesting embassy participation in the
survey. This introductory letter to survey participants indicated that the questionnaire was
designed to assist in understanding the degree of support for change in the organization as
it related to the U.S. State Department’s ICASS Implementation Initiative. The letter
stated that bringing about change in a large and complex organization is a challenging
task with a recognition that change in one component of the organization may have
consequences for other areas. Survey participants were informed that their participation
9. 9
was essential to providing a greater understanding of organizational factors vital to
managing the successful implementation of ICASS.
In Phase III the acquired data set was analyzed. Interview data was coded and
content analyzed using ATLAS/ti software, which offers a systemic approach that gets at
the complexity of underlying qualitative data. The survey questionnaire was developed
by the researcher to assess employee perceptions of the transition to the International
Cooperative Administrative Support System (ICASS), identify primary sources of
resistance, understand which variables correlate most to resistance and examine the
relationship between them. Identification of variables of interest were informed by the
literature search and other validated surveys.
All of the variables in the analysis were evaluated using the one-to-five Likert
ordinal scale to determine levels of measurement. The survey design involved 40
questions in a five-part questionnaire. Once statistical analysis of the data was performed
to identify key variables, factor analysis was then used to refine the variables, identify the
existence of fewer, more basic, and unique variables underlying the large number of
variables that demonstrate the strongest efficacy to the construct of resistance.
Results.
This research began with a premise that resistance as a response to change could
undermine implementation of change initiatives particularly if the scope of the change
and range of the changes affected roles, boundaries, resource allocations and budget
politics. Such potential consequences make it important to understand the cost of change
and understand how stakeholders are affected. The findings are discussed under the
research questions.
Research question 1. What variables are related to resistance to change?
Factor analysis generates an “eigenvalue”, which is a measure of the efficacy of
the 24 questions representing survey variables. Variables selected were those where the
eigenvalue loads .90 or higher. This level of significance was chosen in order to obtain
greater explanatory power and identify underlying effects that may be important below
1.0 level. The identified variables were reward, political constraints, operational
constraints, capacity to handle additional work, cultural support for change, goal
agreement and commitment. Eigenvalues were then used to determine the research
variables with the highest factor loadings. Correlation is shown in Table 1.
“take in Table I”
Table I: Research Variables and Their Eigenvalues
Variable Eigenvalues Percentage
Rewards 3.743176 25.19
Political Constraints 2.199659 14.80
Operational Constraints 2.251283 15.15
Capacity 1.451603 9.77
Benefits Achieved
Culture Support
1.168242
0.989753
7.86
6.66
Goal Agreement 0.979948 6.59
Commitment 0.900122 6.06
10. 10
These eight variables accounted for 92.08 percent of variance in the 24 variables
considered.
Research question 2. What factors are underlying causes of resistance?
Analysis of the Factor Pattern Structure
A factor is a construct or latent variable that is assumed to underlie tests or
measures (Kerlinger, 1992). Factor analysis is valuable for the very purpose of
identifying unobservable constructs and because it posits that any correlation among the
indicators or variables is due to common factors. A varimax rotation was performed on
these variables to yield a factor matrix, a table of coefficients that express the relationship
between the test and the underlying factors called factor loading. In this study, ten factors
were derived from the loading of the eigenvalues1
. Only seven of those factors had
significant loadings (factors one through six and eight). The identified factors are as
follows: self interest (factor one); psychological impact (factor two); tyranny of custom
(factor three); destabilization factor (factor five); and, political effect (factor eight), see
Table 2. Factors with statistically significant negative correlation were: redistributive
factor (factor four), and culture compatibility (factor six) see Table II.
“take in Table II”
Table II: Factor Pattern Structure
Factor One Factor Two Factor Three Factor Four Factor Five Factor Six Factor Eight
Self –
Interest/Buy-In
Psychological
Impact
Tyranny of
Custom
Redistributive
Factor
Destabilization
Factor
Cultural
Compatibility
Political
Constraints
Commitment .78 Job Security .88 Low Tolerance for
Change .83
Benefits .25 Turnover .66 Reward .27 Political
Constraints
.73
Beneficial .73 Loss of
Expertise .73
Limited
Understanding of
Change
implications .73
Agreement State
Dept. Goals .22
Communication
Processes Shift .55
Support for
Culture Change
.27
Rewards .72 Loss of Social
Status .47
Loss of Social
Status .48
Over Control -.71
Incompatible
Culture -.63
State Dept Goal
Agreement .70
Funding,
Policiesand
Procedures -.60
Fed. Agency Goal
Agreement .61
Operational
Constraints -.40
Cultural Support
for Change .53
Political
Constraints -.24
Capacity for
Additional Work
.50
Self Interest.
The relationship of variables to this factor suggest that individual buy-in is
affected to the degree that interests are met. People must see ways they will benefit from
1
To increase the explanatory value, levels of significance were identified above the.20 range. Kerlinger
(1992) reports that there is a newer trend of thinking that advocates reporting the significance of all results.
While it is recognized that some would object (significance levels above.20), this is an exploratory factor
analysis where there was no advance knowledge about the factor structure and not a lot of theory on
resistance. The character of resistance is subtle and may be deeply embedded and factor analysis is valuable
for identifying unobservable constructs. The researcher noted in some instances that negative correlations
were very strong and that such indicators should be examined for statistical significance in the opposite
direction.
11. 11
change in order to buy-in and support it. Depending on how the changes preserve, erode
or promote one’s position this may lead a person to act in one way or another (Morgan,
1996). This is not only evident in the effect on the Regional Bureaus but was evident in
key support roles within the embassies like that of the Administrative Officer. This
position had significant autonomy in managing the administrative platform with in the
embassy. Many role incumbents perceived the position as having limited flexibility in
their newly designated service provider role. Administrative Officers must take direction
from a post counsel of advisors, who would set service standards and assess service
levels, a change many viewed as threatening.
Factor Two
Psychological Impact. This factor addresses perceptions of threat in the form of
job security, one’s professional expertise and one’s social status in the organization. This
phenomena was reflected in the interview data. An exemplary comment: “ the majority of
people who have to do it don’t want the change, not that they don’t think it is right, they
don’t like how it will affect them.” Resistance behavior reflects emotion that expresses
peoples feelings about how they personally experience the impact of the change. The
psychological impact of change was evident in anecdotal data from field visits, e.g., some
Administrative Officers preferred retirement rather than dealing with this new change and
being micro managed. Others saw its possibilities even though it changed their roles.
Factor Three
Tyranny Of Custom. James O’Toole (1995), in writing on resistance, draws on
the insights of John Stuart Mill who pointed out that the despotism of custom inhibits
change. People who are in the driver’s seat are often more content with the established
order. They have more to lose if it is overturned. The majority of those interviewed
believed that State Department culture was difficult to change: “The way the State
Department is set up there is no real incentive to reform, we have a very unresponsive
structure”. Others indicated that when change occurred “it comes from without not
within”; “change comes when there is a condition of crisis”; or change “has been by
force”.
Factor Four
The redistributive factor. This factor was marked with statistically significant
inverse relationships on issues related to the loss of control, funding, policies and
procedures, operational and political constraints. Issues exemplified this over the focus of
post authority and what the relationship should be to the ICASS Support Center (ISC)
and to Regional Bureau (RB). Changing policy and funding strategies redistributed
resources, power and changed institutional relationships. These issues were so
emotionally charged that ISC or RB convened offsite meetings to address these problems
they would deliberately exclude each.
Factor Five
The destabilization effect. Field interviews shed light on this variable and suggest
that it is related to the challenges faced by post councils when Foreign Affairs Officers
(both State Department and federal agency personnel) change assignments, and move on
to new posts. In this process, turnover effected this new council system of governance.
Agreements on management processes and service levels might be disrupted by new
members not trained or invested in existing agreements. The shift in control within the
Washington support structure and the pushing of responsibility to the post level may
12. 12
result in destabilization until the changes were leveraged highly enough in Washington.
Some executives thought this was a “Faustian deal” for indicating State did not really
want agencies to assume their fair share of costs because they would be forced to share
control, and control is important in bureaucracies. Others thought that destablization
occurred because the system was shifting to a “business way” of operating that people
were not trained for.
Factor Six
Culture compatibility: The inverse relationships in this factor suggest conflicting
currents at work. The radically new approach to resource management in this case study
(embedded with principles of participation, accountability, customer-driven, local
empowerment, entreprenuership) conflicts with bureaucratic structures that have been
traditional monopolies. This approach may be inhospitable to the way the existing culture
operates.
Factor 2
Eight
The political effect. Political systems are the ordering concept of the dynamics of
organizations. Who makes what decisions in whose interests and how? (Dyson, 1976).
Resistance occurs because proposed reforms threaten the values protected by present
arrangements (Kaufman, 1969). This factor makes it clear why political constraints are
viewed as hampering implementation of ICASS. Significant change upsets the balance of
power among groups and affect individual and group relative positions of power and
control.
Qualitative Responses
Interviews were conducted with State Department and other federal agency
personnel involved with the ICASS project. These interviews included members of an
interagency board and working group, Regional Bureaus, the ICASS Service Center
(ISC), personnel from four embassies, senior State Department executives including a
former Under Secretary, and an Assistant Secretary.
Software for qualitative analysis was employed for a systematic approach to
content analysis to get at the complexity underlying the qualitative data provided by the
interviews. The content analysis generated a number of themes. Those occurring with the
greatest frequency across the majority of the classes of respondents are identified.
Selection was based on those themes where more than 50% of the interview participants
addressed the issue as a concern. The dominant themes from the interviews supported the
factor analysis pattern that emerged and supported the assessment of the level of intensity
evident in this system.
“take in Table III”
Table III: Frequency of Response by Theme
Theme Frequency Number of
Respondents
Percent of
Respondents
Role 66 25 71
Adaptability to Change 27 25 71
Buy-In 45 24 68
Support 52 23 66
*fFactor seven was eliminated.
13. 13
Resistance 71 20 57
Control 56 20 57
Regional Bureau 38 20 57
Conflict 41 19 54
Threat 30 19 54
Politics 20 17 49
Cultural Change 37 17 49
Career 18 17 49
Governance 41 14 40
Vision 31 14 40
State 20 12 34
Research Question 3: What is the Level of Resistance?
Narrative data from the interview analysis definitively identified sources of
resistance to change that are far more pronounced in the Washington, D.C. headquarters
than in the US embassy system concerning ICASS. Three levels of intensity of resistance
were considered as described by Mauer (1996); Level One, where people question or
oppose the idea. Level Two, where resistance is deeper than the change at hand indicating
there are other forces at work, such as distrust, culture change, and loss of control. And,
Level Three, where there is deeply imbedded, deeply entrenched form of resistance. The
themes from interview data were compatible with the explanatory variables generated in
the factor analysis. The narrative on qualitative data findings reflected Level Two
resistance. Interview findings indicated that ICASS created a better interagency
community in Washington and overseas and generally there was wide spread support.
However in the Washington support structure tremendous animosity existed between the
ICASS Support Center (ISC) and the Regional Bureaus. The ICASS Support Center had
implementation responsibility for ICASS and the Regional Bureaus (RB) integrated
policy and management issues to support political initiatives. RB prestige and status
flowed through linkages to the prestigious “P” (political) side of the State Department,
where as ICASS authority flowed through the Secretariat for Management and
Administration, the “M” side of the State Department. The Bureaus had policy and
budgetary discretion needed to meet emergent needs of posts and were resource brokers
with a great deal of autonomy. They feared loosing this control and ability to respond.
Under ICASS much of their autonomy is taken away. Consequently some believed that
ICASS administration was “not exactly democratic”, that ICASS “directives to the field
needed to be cleared through the regional bureaus”. Within the Regional Bureau and in
other departments in the Washington support structure the ISC was described as “militant
and aggressive in manner”. The feeling that “the vision was not grand enough to overlook
the antagonism” coupled with beliefs that the Administrative side of the organization
merely wanted to “ be able to check the appropriate boxes in reinventing government, get
a “Hammer “ award and tell Congress that they were implementing the changes. Some
viewed the ICASS Service Center as constantly under attack. These sentiments reflected
the antipathy between the ICASS Service Center and the Regional Bureaus. Yet almost
every interview expressed the view that State Department culture was very difficult and
slow to change, suggesting that the level of inertia to be overcome required compelling
forces for change.
14. 14
Level Two resistances indicate that there is still the need to respond to those who
believe their roles, political authority and operational effectiveness, are marginalized by
this change.
Interestingly, this level of resistance was localized to the Washington, DC
support structure and was not pervasive in the embassy system. Despite these contentious
relationships among key players there was considerable buy-in among overseas posts. In
fact, data on the commitment variable from the survey suggested substantial commitment
to ICASS in the field. For an organization with near unanimous agreement on the
difficulty of adapting to change, and the absence of cultural support for change, the
implementation and field acceptance of this revolutionary change was considered to be a
major accomplishment.
Summary and Conclusions
Pursuing change and transforming organizations is hard work. Many change
initiatives fail because cultures do not readily accept change, and don’t effectively
anticipate the impact on human systems. This is where bitter implementation battles and
strident resistance can occur. Increasing the success of implementation strategies
demands leadership in the management of resistance.
The resistance management model suggested as an outcome of the findings of this
study proposes the following approach: Strategies to address resistance variables should
be part of the execution of the implementation plan. An organization impact analysis
should be done to determine impact on people and organization systems affected by the
change. The representational effects of key resistance forces and dynamics should be
clearly characterized in order to understand and manage conditions creating internal
tension and bifurcation points. The key resistance forces identified in the study included
the following: self-interest, psychological impact, and tyranny of custom, redistributive
effects, destabilization effects, culture compatibility, and political factors. It is important
to map these dynamics if leadership is to create a new context which will break the hold
of the forces of resistance.
A risk management framework is a useful paradigm for managing resistance
phenomenon and addressing the tensions inherent in multi-level, multi-actors systems.
This framework would include managing organizational politics at the “super political
level” (interagency/executive), managing politics at the “organizational level” (addresses
power relationships and jurisdiction issues across organization/departmental boundaries),
and managing politics at the “implementation level” (local politics- in this instance
embassies). Stakeholder interests must be managed at every level. Organizational players
experience different frames of reality and face different organization forces that drive
their behavior and interactions. In multi-actor agencies (e.g., State Department and
Federal Agencies) executive leadership at the strategic political level must assure that all
stakeholders have a clear vision about the nature of the change. Some sectors believed
ICASS was primarily a cost management mechanism and did not buy into reform. Others
embraced the management vision as a genuine reinvention of government. All
stakeholders must understand the full impact of the change, understand the vision and be
clear about expected outcomes.
Leaders should develop guidelines for ethical behavior and interactions which
includes development of a set of principles around how people are to be treated,
informed, and listen to. This could insure that marginalized voices are heard and that a
15. 15
concern is demonstrated for the effects of disadvanting change. Executive leadership
must be exercised to assist individuals and organization units in preparing and adjusting
to change goals and to settle disputes -when deeply entrenched cultural traditions support
the status quo - when there are disagreements over the role of new centers of bureaucratic
power - when powerful coalitions exhibit change obstructing behaviors. Cultures with
very strong traditions require unambiguous signals about the commitment of leadership
to avoid a crisis of legitimacy in the change initiative. Managing implementation success
requires constant vigilance over forces working in the opposite direction, and requires
constant adjustment to the implementation strategy to assure that genuine concerns are
addressed and that outcome success is not sub-optimized.
16. 16
References
Argyris, C. (1994), “Organizational defensive routines”, Journal of Public Administration
Research and Theory, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 343-355.
Bartunek, J. M., and Ringuest, J. L. (1989) “Enacting new perspectives through work
activities during organizational transformation”, Journal of Management Studies,
Vol. 26 No. 6, pp. 340-560.
Bawn, K. (1995 ) “Political control versus expertise: Congressional choices about
administrative procedures”, American Political Science Review. Vol. 89 No.1,
pp. 62-73.
Beckhard, R., and Harris, R. T. (1987), Organizational Transitions Second Edition,
Managing Complex Change, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company,
Massachusetts.
Bowornwathana, B. (1997), “Transforming bureaucracies for the 21st century: the new
democratic governance paradigm”, Public Administration Quarterly, Vol. 21 No.
3, pp. 295-308.
Carroll, J. D. (1995), “The rhetoric of reform and political reality in the national
performance review”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 55 No. 3, pp. 302-312.
Carroll, J. D., and Lynn, B. D. (1996), “The future of federal reinvention:
Congressional perspectives”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 56 No. 3, pp.
299-304.
Burt, R. , and Robison, O. (1998) , Reinventing Diplomacy in the Information Age.
Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington, DC.
Dyson, K. H. F. (1976), “Institutional government: a new perspective in organization
theory”, The Journal of Management Studies, Vol.13 No. 3, pp. 130-151.
Fox, C. J. (1996), “Reinventing government as postmodern symbolic politics”, Public
Administration Review, Vol. 56 No. 3, pp. 256-261.
Frederickson, H. G. (1996), “Comparing the reinventing government movement with the
new public administration”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 56 No. 3, pp.
263-270.
Golembiewski, R. I., and Scott, P. (1989), “A micro-political perspective on rational
budgeting: a conjectural footnote on the dissemination of PPBS”, Public
Budgeting and Financial Management, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 327-370.
Gore, A. (1996), The Best Kept Secrets In Government. U.S. Government Printing
Office. Washington, DC.
Gore, A. (1994), Reinventions’ Next Steps: Governing in a Balance Budget World.
(1994), U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
Hennessey, J. T. Jr. (1996), Organizational Culture and the “Reinvention of
Government”. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, George Mason University,
Fairfax, Virginia.
Johnston, V. R. (1996), “The entrepreneurial management transformation: from
privatization, reinventing, and reengineering, to franchising, efficiency and
entrepreneurial ethics”, Policy Studies Journal, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 439-443.
Johnston, V. R. (1996), “Optimizing productivity through privatization and
entrepreneurial management”, Policy Studies Journal, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 444-
17. 17
463.
Kerlinger, F. N. (1992), Foundations of Behavioral Research. Harcourt Brace College
Publishers. Fort Worth, TX.
Kolb, D. M., and Baratunek, J. M. (1992), Hidden Conflict in Organizations. Sage
Publications. Newbury Park
Light, P. C. (1997), The Tides of Reform: Making Government Work 1945-1995. Yale
University Press, New Haven and London.
Lindblom, C. E. (1994), “Modes of inquiry”, Journal of Public Administration Research
and Theory, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 327-343.
Matland, R. E. (1995 ), “Synthesizing the implementation literature: the ambiguity-
conflict model of policy implementation”, Journal of Public Administration
Research and Theory, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 145-174.
Mauer, R. (1996), Beyond the Wall of Resistance: Unconventional Strategies that Build
Support for Change. Bard Books, Inc., Austin, Texas.
Mintzberg, H. (1985), “The organization as political arena”, Journal of Management
Studies, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 134-153.
Moe, T. M. (1994), “Integrating politics and organizations: positive theory and public
administration”, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol. 4
No. 1, pp. 17-25.
Morgan, G. (1997), Images of Organization. 2nd
Ed. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks,
California.
Neuby,B. L. (1997), “On the lack of a budget theory”. Public Administration Quarterly.
Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 131-141.
Nufrio,P. M. (1998), Changing Organizational Culture: The National Performance
Review (NPR) Experience. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The State
University of New Jersey, Newark, New Jersey.
Nutt, P.C., and Backoff, R. W. (1997), “Second order change”, Journal of Management
Inquiry. Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 235-254.
O’Toole, J. (1995 ), Leading Change. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
O’Toole, L. J. Jr. (1993), “Interorganizational policy studies”, Journal of Public
Administration Research and Theory. Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 232-251.
O’Toole, L. J. Jr. (1986), “Policy recommendations for multi-actor implementation:
an assessment of the field”, Journal Publication Policy, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 181-
210.
ODR Consultants. (1991). Change Resistance Scale. Atlanta, Ga.
Olsen, J. P., and Peters, G. B. (1996), Lessons From Experience: Experiential Learning
in Administrative Reforms in Eight Democracies. Scandinavian University Press,
Oslo, Sweden.
Olsen, J. P., and Peters, G. B. (1996), Bureaucracy in a Divided Regime: The United
States. Scandinavian University Press, Strady, Sweden.
Osborne, D., and Gaebler, T. (1992), Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial
Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass.
Osborne, D. (1993), “Reinventing government”, Public Productivity and Management
Review, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 349-369.
Osborne, D., and Plastrik, P. (1997), Banishing Bureaucracy: The Five Strategies for
Reinventing Government. Plume Publishers, Washington, DC.
18. 18
Overman, E. S., and Boyd, K. J. (1994), “Best practice research and postbureaucratic
reform”, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol.4 No. 2, pp.
67-83.
Price Waterhouse Change Integration Team. (1995 ), Better Change: Best Practices for
Transforming Your Organization. New York:
Rourke, F. E. (1965), Bureaucratic Power in National Politics. Little, Brown and
Company, Boston.
Seidenstat, P. (1996), “Privatization: trends, interplay of forces, and lessons learned”,
Policy Studies Journal, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 464-477.
Senge, P., Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross, R., Roth, G., and Smith, B. (1999), The Dance
of Change. Doubleday, New York.
Stone, E. F. (1978), Research Methods in Organizational Behavior, Good Year
Publishing Company, Inc., USA.
Thomas, C. W. (1993), “Reorganizing public organizations: alternatives, objectives, and
evidence”, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol. 3 No. 3,
pp. 457-486.
Thompson, J. R., and Ingraham, S. W. (1996), “The reinvention game”, Public
Administration Review, Vol. 56 No 3, pp. 291-297.
U.S. General Accounting Office (1996), State Department Options for Addressing
Possible Budget Reductions. GAQ/NSIAD-96-124. U. S. Government Printing
Office, Washington, DC.
U.S. General Accounting Office, and U.S. Government Subcommittee on Government
Reform and Oversight. (1994), Management Reform: Implementation of the
National Performance Review’s Recommendations. GAO/OCG-95-l ,
Congressional Hearing. Washington, DC.
U.S. Government Subcommittee on Government Reform and Oversight. (1997), OMB
2000 Reforms: Where Are They Heading? U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington, DC.
U.S. House Appropriations Committee. (1998), Economies and Efficiencies Achieved by
the International Cooperative Administrative Support Services System. U.S.
House Appropriations Committee. Washington, DC.
U.S. State Department. (1998), Report: ICASS Strategic Planning Session December 17,
1998. Washington, DC.
U.S. State Department Office of the Inspector General. (1998), (Report No.
98-FM.JM-107), U.S. State Department, Washington, DC.
West, W. F. (1997). “Bureaucracy: searching for a theory of bureaucratic structure”,
Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 590-
611.
Wolf, P. J. (1995 ), What History Advises About Reinventing Government: A Case
Meta-Analysis of Bureaucratic Effectiveness in U.S. Federal Agencies.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge,
Massachusetts.
Wolf, P. J. (1997), “Why must we reinvent the federal government? Putting historical
developmental claims to the test”, Journal of Public Administration Research
and Theory. Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 353-387.
Wooten, K. C. and White, L. P. (1999), “Linking OD’s philosophy with justice theory: