Table of Contents1Introduction32Reflective Ob.docx

Table of Contents
1 Introduction 3
2 Reflective Observation 3
3 Abstract Generalisation 5
4 Application 6
5 Conclusion 8
6 References 9
Introduction
Nowadays, change is inevitable for most
organizations, and applying effective organizational change
could direct organizations to reach a competitive advantage
(Armenakis & Harris, 2009; Clegg & Walsh, 2004). In most
cases the effort in achieving success in organizations fails due
to the lack of people’s commitment and misdiagnosis of change
(Armenakis & Harris, 2009; Oreg, 2003). Therefore, in relation
to my previous experience and relevant studies, I will argue that
leaders support in leading the change, Human Resource
Management (HRM) intervention and the process of building
commitment in organizations will enhance the success
probability of change. The outline of the reflective journal will
be as follows. The first section will be highlighting reflective
observations of these three topics, and the second section will
give an abstract generalisation where it shows the relationship
between these three topics in the change management context.
Subsequently, the application of the principles in my future

career will be discussed. Finally, conclusion will be provided in
the final section. Reflective Observation
HRM planning and intervention are encompassing all steps of
the change process framework adopted from Härtel and
Fujimoto (2010). Molineux (2013) found that the
implementation of systemic HRM is considered to have a
strategic function in change management. The ideas of systemic
HRM have not been applied in my organization where the HR
practices are not integrated well. Strategic HRM intervention
could enhance the change enablers in the organization in an
effort to increase the probability of success (Al-Haddad &
Kotnour, 2015). Jiang et al. (2012) in their research construct
the HR system and define the relationships within the system
which is influencing employees’ abilities, motivation and
opportunities. The relationships within the HR system have
gained comprehensive understanding of how the process works
and how it aligns with business strategy. Nowadays, strategic
HRM intervention from transactional to transformational
activities has made HR professionals gain more strategic values
which also relates to organizations’ performance (Buller &
McEvoy, 2012). In my opinion, E-HRM and/or outsourcing HR
role play important roles in supporting the shift, as it is provide
time for HR practitioner to work more in strategic role. From
my experience, the application of E-HRM is not as easy as it
seems, due to the lack of knowledge, skills and readiness with
new technology. Therefore, Parry (2014) suggests that
organisations should carefully design and implement E-HRM to
adjust with the condition of members in organizations.
The second topic is leading change. Leaders’ support in change
process is needed to influence the willingness to change among
employees (Bass, Avolio, Jung, & Berson, 2003; Van der Voet,
2014). From a contemporary perspective (Gilley, Gilley, &
McMillan, 2009), transactional and transformational leadership
are both effective in building employees’ commitment to change
(Bass et al., 2003), even though Tyssen, Wald, and Heidenreich
(2014) study shows that transformational leadership is more

effective than transactional leadership. I would like to say that
the degree to which both behavioural leadership models are
needed will be contingent on different context. High level
transformational leadership is needed for emergent approaches
(Bass et al., 2003) and/or for senior management. Even though I
am still questioning Avolio, Bass, and Jung (1999)
individualized consideration components of transformational
leadership. In my point of view, personalisation of individual
differences is very hard for high level management since there
is hierarchical distance (Hill, Seo, Kang, & Taylor, 2012).
Moreover, the public sector in Indonesia mostly needs
transactional leadership at low to middle management levels to
be effective. This has happened because of their high score of
power distance (Hofstede & Hofstede, 2005) and the majority of
employees still have low education. Those types of employees
need clear direction on expectations and objectives in order to
maintain the day to day routines and ensure the achievement of
the objectives (Bass et al., 2003; Tyssen et al., 2014). The
reason why high level of transformational leadership does not
appear to be important is because almost all the activities in the
organizations do not require much innovation (Paulsen, Callan,
Ayoko, & Saunders, 2013) and are more transactional activities
(Parry, 2014).
The third topic is diagnosing change. As change is usually seen
as traumatic events which might produce resistance to change
(Barclay & Kiefer, 2014; Oreg, 2003), there is a need of
organisations to cautiously assess readiness for change. I find
that force field analysis proposed by Lewin (1948) is very
useful to use in the organization where I worked. However, I am
questioning how to reduce biases in giving the score which are
identified by Barker III (2005). In high hierarchy organisations,
many people will be involved in the decision making, so
misdiagnosis of change forces and restrainers will produce false
directions such as failure to recognize negative events as
explained by Barclay and Kiefer (2014). In diagnosing change,
individuals sometimes involve their own values and experience

(Doorewaard & Benschop, 2003) in the scoring activities.
Therefore, the use of Barker III (2005) guidelines is beneficial
to reduce bias among decision makers.Abstract Generalisation
Leadership and HRM play important roles in the three
stages of change (Lewin, 1948) especially in diagnosing change.
In diagnosing change, organizations need employees’
commitment to give honest and open feedback, so the
assessment will be analysed accurately (Barker III, 2005). In
relation to the AMO framework, HR practices have capabilities
to enhance ability, motivation and also give employees
opportunity to participate in the process (Jiang et al., 2012).
The integration of HR practices will gives distinctive and
valued contribution to the change process (Molineux, 2013;
Wylie, Sturdy, & Wright, 2014). Moreover, in order to generate
the urgency for change (Kotter & Cohen, 2002), leaders are
expected to reduce biases in search of sources for diagnosing
readiness for change (Barker III, 2005). Leaders’ effectiveness
in gathering the sources will depend on organizational effort to
foster leaders’ transformational and transactional behaviours
(Bass et al., 2003; Crook, Todd, Combs, Woehr, & Ketchen Jr,
2011). Therefore, the role of leaders and HR practitioners in
analysing the situation could generate the most effective
strategy and modes of change as explained by Dunphy and Stace
(1988).
In one case study of Aerotech, Inc. (Anderson, 2012),
Patrick Delacroix as a Vice President of Engineering faced
problems in maintaining team productivity especially in the
Laser System team after structural change. The failure of one
team to meet performance requirements clearly showed that the
organization had not comprehensively assessed the readiness for
change. The organization did not seem to have understood the
team’s underlying problem such as low organizational justice
perception (Linna et al., 2012) and they were not able to see the
urgency of change (Kotter & Cohen, 2002). Therefore, effective
diagnosis of change will lead the organisation to gain a better
understanding of the problem and the action requirement to

prevent failure (Anderson, 2012).
The R&D division does not usually have high
hierarchical structure and requires people to make creative and
innovative contributions where the role of transformational
leader is very significant (Paulsen et al., 2013). Patrick’s
leadership behaviour was also considered as less
transformational. He was not able to accommodate individual
considerations as identified by Avolio et al. (1999) where
hierarchical distance were absent (Hill et al., 2012) due to low
hierarchical structure. Therefore, Patrick needs to be aware of
the development of his intelligence, personality and emotional
intelligence towards transformational leadership (Cavazotte,
Moreno, & Hickmann, 2012).
Moreover, the delegation of Patrick’s power to the
managers was supposed to provide benefit to increase
employees’ productivity by leveraging peoples’ ability,
motivation and giving them the opportunity for greater
involvement at work (Jiang et al., 2012; Linna et al., 2012).
Performance appraisals has play a significant role in leveraging
employees performance through an AMO framework in order to
leverage organizational justice perception (Linna et al., 2012).
But, Patrick did not realize that prior to the delegation of
power, he needed to develop managerial leadership skills as
explained by Mumford, Zaccaro, Harding, Jacobs, and
Fleishman (2000) through a set of HR practices such as training
and development. The integration of an HR system helps line
managers in aligning individual and team performance with
their business goals (Molineux, 2013). Therefore, integrative
HR practices (Molineux, 2013) and appropriate leader
behaviours from a contemporary perspective (Bass et al., 2003;
Gilley et al., 2009) provide considerable benefits in gathering
adequate information or feedback to diagnose the underlying
problems (Anderson, 2012).Application
By attending organisational change course in
this semester, I have gained comprehensive knowledge of
change management. In line with several studies such as that by

Armenakis and Harris (2009) and Oreg (2003), which mention
the failure of most organizations in dealing with change, The
Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources of The Republic of
Indonesia has been trying to conduct change, but always failed
due to the lack of knowledge in change management. As an HR
professional in my organization, I became more aware of my
role as a change agent. I will propose the use of performance
appraisal as a part of our strategic HRM. I feel the need to
integrate the HR system and make it more strategic by shifting
from transactional to transformational activities as suggested by
Molineux (2013), Härtel and Fujimoto (2010) and Jiang et al.
(2012), so it would shift the role of HR from transactional
activities into more strategic or transformational activities
(Härtel & Fujimoto, 2010). As the organisation does not have an
appropriate performance management system, I will try to
develop the system and integrate it with other HR practices. The
help from E-HRM will be very beneficial in order to support the
movement from routine activities into more strategic ones as
suggested by Parry (2014). Based on his recommendation, of
course I need to be very cautious in the design and
implementation of the new software or application to get
maximum benefit. I think PeopleSoft which is used at Griffith
University will be beneficial to support HR roles in my
organisation. The potentiality of using PeopleSoft will be
considered for future improvement.
In relation with leading change application in
the organisation, it will be run parallel with my own individual
development. Individually, the development of my leadership
skills will be leveraged through training, courses and other
development programs. For the organisation application, as HR
division member, I also have responsibility to develop
leadership skills as suggested by many authors such as Mumford
et al. (2000) and Bass et al. (2003). More comprehensive and
advanced leadership development programs will be needed to
leverage human and social capital in the organisation as
suggested by Crook et al. (2011).

Diagnosing change will have to be applied at the
initial stage of change process to analyse the underlying
problem in the organisation as suggested by Anderson (2012).
The adoption of force field analysis designed by Lewin (1948)
in diagnosing the readiness of change will be encouraged in my
workplace. I also recognise the importance of finding high
quality information gathered from peoples’ commitment to give
honest and open feedback in the organization. The support from
strategic HR function and leaders in reducing resistance and
build employees commitment to give honest and open feedback
will enhance the quality of information (Barker III, 2005). I will
initiate establishment of diversified management team and seek
advice from outside the organization in order to have greater
quality of information (Barker III, 2005). The method of
gathering data suggested by Anderson (2012) will be assessed to
adjust with the organisation’s conditions and needs.
Conclusion
The reflective journal discussed three major
topics which I have chosen from the course material. The topics
are HRM change, leading change and diagnosing change and
building commitment. The relation between topics and the
implementation of these three topics in my career in the future
have been examined. In summary, the shift of HR roles
transactional to transformational roles will be executed.
Secondly, the development of leadership skills through training
and development programs whether for me or the organization
will be enhanced. Finally, diagnosing change as an initial part
of change process will be implemented.
References
Al-Haddad, S., & Kotnour, T. (2015). Integrating the
organizational change literature: A model for successful change.
Journal of Organizational Change Management, 28(2), 234-262.
Anderson, D. L. (2012). (Ed). Cases and exercises in

organisation development & change. Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE.
Armenakis, A. A., & Harris, S. G. (2009). Reflections: Our
journey in organizational change research and practice. Journal
of Change Management, 9(2), 127-142.
Avolio, B. J., Bass, B. M., & Jung, D. I. (1999). Re‐examining
the components of transformational and transactional leadership
using the multifactor leadership. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 72(4), 441-462.
Barclay, L. J., & Kiefer, T. (2014). Approach or avoid?
Exploring overall justice and the differential effects of positive
and negative emotions. Journal of Management, 40(7), 1857-
1898.
Barker III, V. L. (2005). Traps in diagnosing organization
failure. Journal of Business Strategy, 26(2), 44-50.
Bass, B. M., Avolio, B. J., Jung, D. I., & Berson, Y. (2003).
Predicting unit performance by assessing transformational and
transactional leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(2),
207.
Buller, P. F., & McEvoy, G. M. (2012). Strategy, human
resource management and performance: Sharpening line of
sight. Human Resource Management Review, 22(1), 43-56.
Cavazotte, F., Moreno, V., & Hickmann, M. (2012). Effects of
leader intelligence, personality and emotional intelligence on
transformational leadership and managerial performance. The
Leadership Quarterly, 23(3), 443-455.
Clegg, C., & Walsh, S. (2004). Change management: Time for a
change! European Journal of Work and Organizational
Psychology, 13(2), 217-239.
Crook, T. R., Todd, S. Y., Combs, J. G., Woehr, D. J., &
Ketchen Jr, D. J. (2011). Does human capital matter? A meta-
analysis of the relationship between human capital and firm
performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(3), 443.
Doorewaard, H., & Benschop, Y. (2003). HRM and
organizational change: An emotional endeavor. Journal of
Organizational Change Management, 16(3), 272-286.

Dunphy, D. C., & Stace, D. A. (1988). Transformational and
coercive strategies for planned organizational change: Beyond
the OD model. Organization Studies, 9(3), 317-334.
Gilley, A., Gilley, J. W., & McMillan, H. S. (2009).
Organizational change: Motivation, communication, and
leadership effectiveness. Performance Improvement Quarterly,
21(4), 75-94.
Härtel, C. E. J., & Fujimoto, Y. (2010). Human resource
management (Vol. 2nd). Frenchs Forest, New South Wales:
Pearson Australia.
Hill, N. S., Seo, M.-G., Kang, J. H., & Taylor, M. S. (2012).
Building employee commitment to change across organizational
levels: The influence of hierarchical distance and direct
managers' transformational leadership. Organization Science,
23(3), 758-777.
Hofstede, G. H., & Hofstede, G. J. (2005). Cultures and
organizations: Software of the mind. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Jiang, K., Lepak, D. P., Han, K., Hong, Y., Kim, A., & Winkler,
A.-L. (2012). Clarifying the construct of human resource
systems: Relating human resource management to employee
performance. Human Resource Management Review, 22(2), 73-
85.
Kotter, J. P., & Cohen, D. S. (2002). The heart of change: Real-
life stories of how people change their organizations. Boston.
MA: Harvard Business Press.
Lewin, K. (1948). Resolving social conﬂicts: Field theory in
social science. Washington DC. USA: American Psychological
Association.
Linna, A., Elovainio, M., Van den Bos, K., Kivimäki, M.,
Pentti, J., & Vahtera, J. (2012). Can usefulness of performance
appraisal interviews change organizational justice perceptions?
A 4-year longitudinal study among public sector employees.
The International Journal of Human Resource Management,
23(7), 1360-1375.
Molineux, J. (2013). Enabling organizational cultural change
using systemic strategic human resource management–A

longitudinal case study. The International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 24(8), 1588-1612.
Mumford, M. D., Zaccaro, S. J., Harding, F. D., Jacobs, T. O.,
& Fleishman, E. A. (2000). Leadership skills for a changing
world: Solving complex social problems. The Leadership
Quarterly, 11(1), 11-35.
Oreg, S. (2003). Resistance to change: Developing an individual
differences measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(4), 680.
Parry, E. (2014). e-HRM: A catalyst for changing the HR
function? Handbook of Strategic e-Business Management, 589-
604.
Paulsen, N., Callan, V. J., Ayoko, O., & Saunders, D. (2013).
Transformational leadership and innovation in an R&D
organization experiencing major change. Journal of
Organizational Change Management, 26(3), 595-610.
Tyssen, A. K., Wald, A., & Heidenreich, S. (2014). Leadership
in the context of temporary organizations a study on the effects
of transactional and transformational leadership on followers’
commitment in projects. Journal of Leadership & Organizational
Studies, 21(4), 376-393.
Van der Voet, J. (2014). The effectiveness and specificity of
change management in a public organization: Transformational
leadership and a bureaucratic organizational structure. European
Management Journal, 32(3), 373-382.
Wylie, N., Sturdy, A., & Wright, C. (2014). Change agency in
occupational context: Lessons for HRM. Human Resource
10
Hello,
I need more revision on this assignment please. I have attached
a document with critical comments on part of the assignment.
Other parts have not been checked so use the comments
provided to check the whole document and rectify please.

Cross check that the feedback/comments from professor has
been addressed right through in the assignment.
The professor does not normally review the entire assignment
but rather provide feedback on one page outline based on its
structure. So based on the feedback/comments from the
professor, I am required to reflect on the feedback right through
the assignment to demonstrate that I understood the course
requirements fully.
Please HIGHLIGHT (red or yellow) where you have
demonstrated (one example) in order to address the comments
from professor, right throughout the assignment. Most
importantly the arguments are backed by literature and below is
an example.
Literature based evidence from the articles, sentences need to
start with example “ In line with the literature based evidence or
research based evidence or On review of literature I found
selection of change types, scale and approaches are not
definitive, rather a contingency model for the context (Dunphy
& Stace, 1993, 1998; Stace, 1996) or unilateral methods
(Waldersee & Griffiths, 2003) are best”.
Sorry, I sound pedantic but this assignment is last from this
course and it carries lot of weighting from the course and if I
don’t get good marks, it will affect my grades significantly. I
totally understand that it is not that easy to synthesize
everything given the word count limit but I guess that is the
challenge and obviously I was struggling, hence seeking your
service to assist me.
Based on professor’s feedback I am little bit paranoid that
perhaps I haven’t demonstrated everything required from the
course. I will also scan through the assignment to validate

whether professor’s feedback has been addressed but I am
relying on your for completeness purely from academic
perspective. I will take your response to comments this time as
final and submit my assignment
REFLECTIVE LEARNING JOURNAL REPORT – Outline
Comment by soeadmin: Number of Journal Articles: You
must overtly discuss ideas from at least 6 of the course
articles (assigned readings or lecture resource articles) in your
assignment AND reference 10 articles overall, in order to
potentially achieve a pass mark.
At the moment, I can only identify 1 article from the course
articles, and you haven’t overtly discussed it.
For e.g., “Battilana, Gilmartin, Sengul, Pache and Alexander
(2010) argue that …..” OR
“As outlined by Battilana, Gilmartin, Sengul, Pache and
Alexander ( 2010), I argue that….”
Reflective Observation and Critical Analysis of Topic Themes
Diagnosing Change & Building Commitment
What I found to be the most striking in the topic of “Diagnosing
Change & Building Commitment” is the idea of developing
commitment amongst the staff members during the change
process. To build commitment, an organization needs to assess
its readiness for the change in its entirety (Oreg & Berson,
2011; Gilley & Gilley, 2008). This gives a picture of how the
employees and management feel about the change as well as
factors such as an organization’s ability to integrate change into
the existing systems and its reward system (Fernandez &
Rainey, 2006; Mangi, Ghumro & Abidi, 2011). Comment by
soeadmin: Just focus straight in on the topic of developing
commitment. Diagnosing change and building commitment are
the topics covered in Week 5. So why did you find the idea of
developing commitment amongst the staff members during the
change process interesting? Comment by soeadmin:
Acknowledge that there are a range of activities to build

commitment but you want to focus on assessing change
readiness.
Explain why do you think assessing change readiness is
important?
Exactly how do you assess change readiness?
What do you do with the information you have gained?
Do you need to assess change readiness for all types and scales
of change?
Leading Change
From the coursework undertaken, I am convinced that
leadership is a necessary tool towards the implementation of
organisational change. Thomas & Hardy (2011); Polychronious
(2009) opine that an organisation must be able to recruit and
retain managers who are willing and able to provide the
employees with inspirational motivation, intellectual
stimulation and a sense of an idealized influence. Such practices
will enable the manager to explain the change process to the
employees (Kavanagh & Ashkanasy, 2006; Fernandez & Rainey,
2006). Comment by soeadmin: Why? Comment by
soeadmin: You don’t need to use obscure words to express your
ideas. Comment by soeadmin: What about the existing
managers? What do you do with them? Comment by
soeadmin: Mention transformational leadership.
Show how exactly how each of those leadership behaviours
makes a difference to managing people through the change
process. Comment by soeadmin: It’s not only about explaining
the change process…i.e. what is going to happen and when.
Think about what else those behaviours influence.
At the beginning of this section, you should also acknowledge
that there is a range of leadership theories, that the contrast to
transformational leadership is transactional leadership and
IMPORTANTLY explain why you are only going to talk about
transformational leadership.
Talk about which managers (frontline, middle, upper, CEO) you

are arguing should demonstrate transformational leadership
behaviours….
HRM
The assessment of employees before and after hiring is a crucial
factor in change management. The assessment process helps the
organization to acquire and retain staff members who are best
suited for the job. This also applies in the event that the new
change management structure requires the hiring of new
employees (Karp & Helgo, 2008). Assessment reduces the
chances of a high staff turnover. It also gauges the real
performance of the employees post hiring and devices ways of
pushing up their performance levels. Comment by
soeadmin: Acknowledge the other areas of HRM. Comment by
soeadmin: This needs to be in relation to organizational change.
What attributes do staff members need to be able to adapt and
be motivated to change? Comment by soeadmin: This is very
true, but only if the correct thing is being assessed. How can
HR reduce turnover caused by constant organisational change?
Comment by soeadmin: That’s the best case scenario. Not
all types of assessment result in a 100% prediction of behaviour
in the workplace post selection. You need to acknowledge this
reality.
Comment by soeadmin: How exactly?
Reflective Observation and Critical Analysis of Connections
between Topics (Abstract Generalization)
The topics of‘Diagnosing Change & Building Commitment’ and
‘Leading change’ are very much intertwined in the
implementation of organisational change. In order for an
organization to execute a change, it must understand how this
change is going to better the organization and which problems
necessitated the change (Gilley & Gilley, 2008; Oreg & Berson,
2011). For this process to be successful, there must be a sense
of commitment emanating from the employees. To do this, the

organization needs good leaders thus necessitating the
involvement of HRM (Battilana, Gilmartin, Sengul, Pache &
Alexander, 2010; Kavanagh & Ashkanasy, 2006). Comment by
soeadmin: Focus in here. Your outline above only mention
assessing readiness for change....this is what you should be
talking about here. Comment by soeadmin: You need to
particularly discuss assessing readiness for change as a way of
building commitment during a change process...how the
transformational behaviours of managers facilitate this and how
HRM can ensure that future managers employeed have these
qualities.
As you can see above...the narrrow topics you have chosen to
focus on in the previous section only tell part of the story. You
might want to include some other ways to build commitment
and think about what HRM can do to help out existing
managers. Remember all these connections need to be
examined in the context of change.
Think also whether aspects of the connections between topics
change if a different type of change is considered.
Also think practically about the how common it is that managers
(whether existing or potential applicants) have the ability to
perform transformational leadership behaviours, and as a
consquence, what HR might also have to do to retain such
managers.
Make sure all ideas are supported with literature.
Application Comment by soeadmin: All the topics,
leadership, transformational leader behaviours and HRM need to
directly discussed in relation to dealing with organizational
change.
As an aspiring human resources personnel, I will use the
acquired knowledge on employee commitment, leadership and
assessment in HRM to cultivate a people oriented behaviour in
my dealings with the employees. I will endeavour to provide
them with mentorship, intellectual challenges and
encouragement even after they have made mistakes. I will also

encourage them to be innovative and to work towards the
attainment of their personal and professional goals.
Additionally, I will also use this knowledge in the selection
process of the leaders that I will recruit for the organization
(Thomas & Hardy, 2011; Fernandez & Rainey, 2006). The
leader should be able to align the personal goals of the
employee to the required change within the organization. I will
therefore prefer to employ leaders who are more people oriented
(Vandervoet, 2014). Comment by soeadmin: How? Back up
with literature Comment by soeadmin: How exactly? What
practical steps will you take to ensure that this happens? Back
up with literature. At the moment you are not demonstrating to
you deeply understand these leadership behaviours.Comment by
soeadmin: You said you were an aspiring HR staff
member….who are the employees you are referring to? In what
context will you be dealing with them? Comment by
soeadmin: What does this mean when applied to an
organizational change context? Comment by soeadmin:
How exactly? You need to be really clear. Comment by
soeadmin: You are talking here about selection, whereas in the
HRM section, you are more specific and talk about assessment.
Make sure the same issue is talked about in both sections.
Comment by soeadmin: How will you be able to gauge this
during the selection process? Comment by soeadmin: Again,
what about the managers that are already employed in the
organization?
Assessment 3 Reflective Learning Journal Report.docx
Assessment 3: Reflective Learning Journal Report
Due Date: 29th October 2015, Friday 6.00pm (Week 13). Must
be submitted online via Turnitin text-matching software
([email protected]), under the “Assessment Submission” tab.
Weight: 35%
Task Description:
Objective

Each week, you are required to maintain a record of the
information you found particularly interesting in the lecture
content, assigned reading, case study and/or class discussions.
From these learnings, you are then required to choose 2 – 4
topic themes and incorporate them into a written report where
you reflect on these topic themes and critically analyse and
integrate them together. Use quality journal articles from the
course to justify your reflections, ideas and arguments.
Requirements
The report is to comprise three main components:
1. Reflective observation and critical analysis of 2-4 topic
themes
For example, for each topic theme:
- What did you notice or learn about this topic theme that you
want to remember from this course?
- What did you like/dislike and/or agree/disagree with in
regards to the ideas put forward and why?
- Are there theoretical or practical problems with applying the
ideas to all organisational change contexts?
e.g., How did what you have learned relate to your previous
personal/professional experience?
How did what you have learned relate to case studies discussed
in the course?
- Using the academic literature, what conclusions, principles,
and/or practical guidelines can you draw from what you have
learned about this topic?
2. Reflective observation and critical analysis of connections
between topics
Critically consider how the topics identified in the previous
section are related to one another. For example:
- How can these topics be connected to one another? Through a
particular change process model, theoretical framework (e.g.,
leadership), or specific type and scale of change (e.g., corporate
transformational culture change)?
- Using the academic literature from the course, what
conclusions, principles, and/or practical guidelines can you

draw from what you have learned about the connections between
these topics?
- In what way do these connections relate to your previous
personal/professional experience? Are they applicable?
- Can you demonstrate the connections between the topics using
case study/ies discussed in the course (e.g., a successful
organisational change example, an unsuccessful organisational
change example)?
3. Application — How are you going to apply what you have
learned from the course?
Discuss how what you have learned may influence you in your
current and/or future professional career. For example:
- Discuss what practically you would do as a change
agent/leader, based on what you have learned.
- Discuss improvements that you may make, based on what you
have learned.
- Discuss if there is anything you would do differently, based on
what you have learned.
During all three sectionsin the report, remember to demonstrate
your ability to critically reflect on the relevant academic
theoretical concepts and findings you wish to discuss. Use
quality journal articles from the course to justify your
reflections, ideas and arguments.
Number of Journal Articles: You must overtly discuss ideas
fromat least 6of thecourse articles (assigned readings or lecture
resource articles) in your assignment AND reference 10 articles
overall, in order to potentially achieve a pass mark. You may
reference the assigned journal readings, lecture resource
articles, case studies, articles mentioned in the lecture content
and group presentations (reference the theory on the lecture
slides from their original sources - DO NOT reference lecture
slides), external journal articles you found via the weekly
readings, and literature from your Change Leader Interview
Report. Importantly, the aim of this assignment is to use the

literature you have been exposed to during the course, NOT to
find additional literature.
Word Limit: The written report word limit is 2000 words (plus
or minus 10%), excluding cover page, contents, references and
appendices. Penalties will be incurred for going over word
length.
Formatting instructions:
- DO NOT include an executive summary or attach your weekly
reflective learning journals. The reflective logs are meant only
to be a guide for writing the assignment.
- You are allowed to use first-person tense (“I”) in your
assignment
- You must format your in-text referencing and reference list in
your assignment usingAPA style. There is an interactive
referencing tool on the library website (and a short APA
reference formatting guide under the Assessment tab on the
7012EHR website) that you can use to help you to work out how
to reference a variety of text documents, including websites,
using APA style.
- You must provide a reference list (not a bibliography)
- Times New Roman 12 point font and 1.5 line spacing
- A4 paper size, with 2.5cm margins
- Include a clear cover page with your name, student number,
and course code
- Your file should be named with the following format:
Surname_FirstName_7012EHRAss3
Marking Criteria:
• Understanding and critical analyses of course concepts,
theories and frameworks
• Evidence of critical reflection, evaluation and integration of
what you have learned
• Demonstrated ability to synthesise and apply course learnings
in your current and/or future job

• Report presentation (e.g., clarity, logical structure, grammar,
spelling, referencing, word limit, formatting) and number of
course articles referenced.
Reflective Learning Log
Step 1: Record your reflections
· Use the Reflective Log Template (table attached below) to
record your learning activities throughout the semester.
· The three columns in the learning log correspond with the
three sections in the report.
· There is no right or wrong answer in a reflective journal –
these are your own personal reflections.
· Reflections can be recorded during or closely after the
sessions.
· The focus of the reflection could be a specific topic within the
weekly lecture, or you may like to focus on a particular reading
for the week.
· Remember must overtly discuss ideas from at least 6 of the
course articles (assigned readings or lecture resource articles)
and reference 10 course articles overall in your assignment to
potentially achieve a pass mark.
Reflective Learning Log Template: Week X ____________
Activity
(the focus of your reflection)
Weekly lecture topics, reading, case study, group presentation
Reflective observation and critical analysis of a topic
What …
… what was interesting about this topic?
… theory is it related to?
… how did this topic relate to my existing knowledge?
… how did this topic relate to my practical experience of

change?
… was problematic about the theory explaining this topic?
… was problematic about applying those ideas in practice?
Reflective observation and critical analysis of the connections
between topics
So what …
… other topics we have discussed can I relate to this topic?
… academic framework can I use to connect this topic to other
topics?
… are the change contexts where the connection of this topic to
another topic might be inappropriate?
… practical guidelines can I draw upon that connect this topic
to other topics?
Application of topic ideas to current or future professional
career
Now what …
… best practice would I need to do to improve things?
… broader issues need to be practically considered if this action
is to be successful?
… might be the consequences of this action?
… might I do differently in the future?
… skills might I need to acquire to use these ideas in my
current/future workplace?
e.g., Week 3 – Systems Thinking and Change lecture concepts
- leveraging system interdependencies
- interactive coordination activity system in project teams
Stroh (2000) Article

Team Facilitation case study
4
Step 2: Write the Report
Once you have completed your Learning Journal Logs
throughout the semester, you then need to incorporate these
ideas into a report.
REFLECTIVE JOURNAL REPORT FORMAT – 2000 words
(plus or minus 10%), excluding cover page, contents, references
and appendices.
Preliminary Section
· A Title Page
· Table of Contents
Introduction
· Using the academic literature, provide a statement about the
importance of some aspects of organisational change that will
provide an explanation for why you are focusing on particular
topics in your report.
· Briefly outline the purpose of the report and provide an
overview of what will be discussed
Topic Themes - Reflective observation and critical analysis of
2-4 topic themes
For each topic theme:
- What did you notice or learn about this topic theme that you
want to remember from this course?
- What did you like/dislike and/or agree/disagree with in

regards to the ideas put forward and why?
- Are there theoretical or practical problems with applying the
ideas to all organisational change contexts?
e.g., How did what you have learned relate to your previous
personal/professional experience?
How did what you have learned relate to case studies discussed
in the course?
- Using the academic literature, what conclusions, principles,
and/or practical guidelines can you draw from what you have
learned about this topic?
Connection between Topics - Reflective observation and critical
analysis of connections between topics
Critically consider how the topics identified in the previous
section are related to one another, e.g.:
- How can these topics be connected to one another? Through a
particular change process model, theoretical framework, or
specific type and scale of change?
- Using the academic literature from the course, what
conclusions, principles, and/or practical guidelines can you
draw from what you have learned about the connections between
these topics?
- In what way do these connections relate to your previous
personal/professional experience? Are they applicable?
- Can you demonstrate the connections between the topics using
case study/ies discussed in the course?
Application - How you are going to apply what you have
learned from the course?
Discuss how what you have learned may influence you in your
current and/or future professional career. For example:
- Discuss what practically you would do as a change
agent/leader, based on what you have learned.
- Discuss improvements that you may make, based on what you
have learned.

Conclusion
· Briefly summarise the main points discussed
Supplementary Material
· Reference List – APA Referencing Style. An alphabetic list of
all sources cited in the report
· Appendix - Any other relevant information
Required Formatting: Line Spacing (1.5), Font (Size 12, Times
New Roman), Margins (2.5 cms)
7012EHR Reflective Learning Journal Report Marking Criteria
Criteria
Excellent
(85-100%)
Very Good
(75-84%)
Good
(65-74%)
Satisfactory
(50-64%)
Unsatisfactory
(0-49%)
Understanding and critical analysis of course concepts, theories
and frameworks
(10%)
Exceptional description and critical analysis of key course
concepts, theories and frameworks, as evidenced in the
discussion of the topic themes. Thorough selection of highly
relevant and recent (post-2000), high-quality supporting journal
articles.
Very good description and critical analysis of key course
discussion of the topic themes. Extensive selection of relevant
and recent high-quality supporting journal articles.
Adequate description and critical analysis of key course

discussion of the topic themes. Adequate selection of recent,
relevant and wide-ranging quality journal articles.
Basic description and critical analysis of key course concepts,
theories and frameworks, as evidenced in the discussion of the
topic themes. May not differentiate aspects. Basic selection of
partially recent, relevant supporting journal articles.
Limited or no description and analysis of key course concepts,
theories and frameworks as evidenced in the discussion of the
topic themes. Superficial or erroneous in parts. Incomplete,
dated and/or irrelevant selection of literature.
Evidence of critical reflection, evaluation, and integration of
what you have learned
(10%)
Exceptional ability to critically reflect on and evaluate what you
have learned throughout the course. Outstanding ability to
identify and justify the connections between topic themes.
Very good to ability to critically reflect on and evaluate what
you have learned throughout the course. Sound ability to
Adequate ability to critically reflect on and evaluate what you
have learned throughout the course. Moderate ability to
Basic ability to critically reflect on and evaluate what you have
learned throughout the course.
Basic ability to identify and justify the connections between
topic themes.
Limited or no ability to critically reflect on and evaluate what
you have learned throughout the course. Limited or no ability
to identify and justify the connections between topic themes.
Demonstrated ability to synthesise and apply your course
learnings in your current and/or future job
(10%)
Exceptional ability to demonstrate synthesis between what you
have learned and how you will apply the course learnings in

your current and/or future job
Very good ability to demonstrate synthesis between what you
Adequate ability to demonstrate synthesis between what you
Basic ability to demonstrate synthesis between what you have
learned and how you will apply the course learnings in your
current and/or future job
Limited or no ability to demonstrate synthesis between what
you have learned and how you will apply the course learnings
in your current and/or future job
Report presentation (clarity, logical structure, grammar,
spelling, referencing, word limit, formatting)
(5%)
Outstanding demonstrated proficiency in writing and structuring
the report so as to maintain a logical, grammatical, internal flow
with clear and articulate transitions throughout. Correct
spelling, referencing and formatting. Within word limit.
Overtly discussed more than 6 course articles (assigned
readings or lecture resource articles), referenced more than 15
course articles overall.
Very good demonstrated proficiency in writing and structuring
the report so as to maintain a logical, grammatical flow with
clear and articulate transitions throughout. Minor spelling and
referencing errors. Within word limit. Overtly discussed more
than 6 course articles, referenced more than 10 course articles
overall.
Adequate demonstrated ability proficiency in writing and
structuring the report so as to maintain a logical, grammatical
flow with clear and articulate transitions throughout.
Some spelling errors and few referencing errors. Within word
limit. Overtly discussed 6 course articles, and referenced 10
course articles overall.
Basic demonstrated ability proficiency in writing structuring the

report so as to maintain a logical, grammatical flow with clear
and articulate transitions throughout. Spelling and some
referencing errors.
Within word limit. Did not overtly discussed at least 6 course
articles, but referenced 10 course articles overall.
Limited or no demonstrated proficiency in writing and
structuring the report so as to maintain a logical, grammatical
flow with clear and articulate transitions throughout. Spelling
errors and incorrect referencing. Not within word limit. Did not
overtly discuss 6 course articles; referenced less than 10 course
articles overall.
Example Assignment.docx
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION: 3
2.0 REFLECTIVE OBSERVATION: 3
3.0 ABSTRACT GENERALIZATION: 4
4.0 APPLICATION: 6
5.0 CONCLUSION: 7
REFERENCE LIST: 9
1.0 INTRODUCTION:
While change is inevitable for all organizations, the pace of
change differs depending on effects from technology,
globalization, legislation, and internal and external factors for a

particular industry (Leana & Barry, 2000; Smith, 2003). Despite
this, evidence suggests that coordinating change is a difficult
and often unsuccessful challenge (Beer & Nohria, 2000; Gilley,
Gilley & McMillian, 2009; IMB Corporation, 2008), and this is
critical for performance and competitive advantage. This report
reviews learnings on leading successful change from the
Organisational Change course at Griffith University. I will
argue that applying a systems thinking (ST) approach to change
management (CM) will improve change outcomes. ST will be
linked to leadership mindsets and features of organisational
change (i.e. change type, scale and approach) as related factors.
The report will conclude with applying my insights to past and
future roles relative to these topics.2.0 REFLECTIVE
OBSERVATION:
The first topic examines ST and the notion of leverage, and how
this enhances the benefits of a robust change process framework
(CPF) to effectively manage change interventions (Hartel &
Fujimoto, 2010; IMB, 2008). What I notice about ST is that
takes a holistic approach, and uses casual loop diagrams to
make sense of problems and identify opportunities (Stroh,
2000), and I recognise that organisational systems are
interrelated and interdependent. Furthermore, ST considers
multiple stakeholder interests (Fenwich, 2007; Smith, 2003) as
it involves collaborating with stakeholders to analyse possible
cause and effect relationships, and accurately diagnose
organizational issues (Stroh, 2000). I believe applying ST in the
CPF diagnosis phase is a valuable strategy as it helps reveal
underlying causes and critical interdependencies.
Not surprisingly, I realise ST and the notion of leverage are also
valuable for strategy realisation, planning and implementation
phases. I have perceived that strategically leveraging the most
critical factors identified in diagnosis will provide the greatest
benefit (Stroh, 2000), and furthermore, I realise that this
enables efficient use of time and resources. Excellent industry
examples (see Hill, 2004; Fenwich, 2007; Reay et al., 2006)

have shown me that that there can be great value in ST and the
notion of continually leveraging critical opportunities. This
suggests to me that a ST approach is suitable for incremental
change and a participative approach (see Weick & Quinn, 1999)
as the focus is on learning and ongoing change (Stroh, 2000).
Conversely, I infer that would be less suitable when a large,
transformational change is needed (see Dunphy & Stace, 1998).
On further review of research (Fenwich, 2007; Stroh, 2000) I
recognise a ST approach has long-term benefits that should
increase productivity as in addition to promoting a learning
orientation, ST can help improve relationships between internal
and external stakeholders, and contribute to model for managing
with future change.
The second topic relates to leadership mindsets and
notwithstanding the fact that leadership mindsets will influence
the degree to which a ST approach may exist in an organisation;
leaders’ are important as they usually have the most influence
(Balogun, 2003; Bruch & Sattelberer, 2001; O’Reilly &
Tushman, 2004). I appreciate there are many different
perspectives that influence a leader’s style and approach (see
Doorewaard & Benschop, 2003; Graets & Smith, 2010; Smith,
2003), and realise that while there is complexity in the make-up
of a leader’s mindset, respecting and capitalising on different
views will enhance change outcomes (Gra & Smith, 2010).
Considering that critical change leadership competencies such
as a charismatic leadership style and people-centric focus
(Graetz, 2000) are linked to change success (see Battilana,
Gilmartin, Sengul, Pache & Alexander, 2010; Gilley et al,
2009), I realise that the dominant leadership mindset will most
influence the implementation phase of CM. Although it is
difficult to shift long-held views (Smith, 2003; Stace, 1996), I
agree that ST exposes real insights to problem-solving and
learning, including a leader’s mindset as part of the problem
(see Bruch & Sattelberer, 2001; Stroh, 2000). If accepte
accepted, these new insights should improve decisions (Stroh,
2000) regarding the type of change intervention and who, when

and how a plan is implemented.
The final topc examines features of change including change
types, scale and approach and this relates to strategy planning
and implementation phases of CM. The idea that it is necessary
to use different features of change to suit the context (Dunphy
& Stace, 1993, 1998; Reay et al., 2006; Weick and Quinn, 1999)
made me I realise that I did not previously have a foundation
for thinking and talking about change. I therefore found the use
of metaphors and frameworks to distinguish episodic from
incremental change (Weick & Quinn, 1999), and coercive verses
participatory approaches or push-pull strategies (Clegg &
Walsh, 2004) extremely useful. On review of literature I found
selection of change types, scale and approaches are not
definitive, rather a contingency model for the context (Dunphy
& Stace, 1993, 1998; Stace, 1996) or unilateral methods
(Waldersee & Griffiths, 2003) are best. Furthermore, I
recognise different change types and scales may require
multiple approaches to cater for separate levels of an
organisation, and at different times throughout the change
process (see Bruch & Sattelberer, 2001; O’Reilly & Tushman,
2004). I notice in case studies that this was a useful approach
for implementing large transformational change (see Bruch &
Sattelberer, 2001), whereas when engineering a change of
values (see Fenwich, 2007; Hill, 2004) a continuous,
participatory change was more useful.3.0 ABSTRACT
GENERALIZATION:
A range of conclusions can be drawn from the insights above.
Firstly, as ST focuses on systemic issues such as structure,
culture, technology, processes and roles rather than leader’s
views or the foibles of an individual (O’Reilly & Tushman,
2004; Reay et al., 2006; Stroh, 2000) applying a ST approach
throughout CM is an effective method to analyse problems and
determine change strategy. Also, to cope with an industry’s
pace of change, organisations need to be adaptive and flexible
(Beer & Nohria, 2000; O’Reilly & Tushman, 2004) and ST can

assist by identifying systemic barriers and critical factors that
can be leveraged to improve performance (see Fenwich, 2007;
Reay et al., 2006). However, ST requires strategic thinking
(Stroh, 2000) and will entail a new language and approach that
require a leader to value and support educating, involving and
engaging stakeholders in problem-solving, learning and
continuous change (Fenwich, 2007; Reay et al., 2006; Stroh,
2000).
Secondly, and in connection to above, a leader’s dominant
assumptions and beliefs may either assist, or pose a potential
barrier to change (Beer & Nohria, 2000; IMB Corporation,
2008; Stace, 1996) and this will directly impact the overall CM
process, including the degree to which ST is applied. Similarly,
a leader’s mindset is closely linked to other aspects of change
success such as stakeholder interests (Smith, 2003), employee
involvement and communication (Bruch & Sattelberer, 2001).
Furthermore, leadership mindset will influence the level of
involvement of others including when, how and if to include
them (Clegg & Walsh, 2004; Smith, 2003), and whether this
will leverage advantages for the organisation (see Balogun,
2003; Benn, Dunphy & Griffiths, 2007; Fenwich, 2007).
Thirdly, strategic choices regarding change scale, type and
approach are influenced by the leadership mindset and insights
that a ST approach (Stroh, 2000) and a robust CPF (IMB, 2008)
promote. As different contexts, problems and/or opportunities
require a different and/or customised change type, scale and
approach (Dunphy & Stace, 1993, 1998; Reay et al., 2006;
Weick and Quinn, 1999), a leader needs to take account the
complexities of change and impacts from multi-dimensional
factors (Eriksson & Sundgren, 2005; Graets & Smith, 2010).
Furthermore, as one-dimensional, traditional approaches (i.e.
top down, directive) do not take this into account (Graets &
Smith, 2010), in a dynamic environment other strategies should
be employed such a combined approach (i.e. top-down and
bottom-up) to best elicit success (Beer & Nohria, 2000; Dunphy
& Stace, 1993, 1998; Eriksson & Sundgren, 2005).

The capacity for two-way influence between ST and leadership
mindset is strongly linked to strategic choices regarding change
types, scale and approaches. In summary, I can infer that the
holistic nature of a ST approach provides real insights into the
casual effects and interdependencies of problems (Fenwich,
2007; IMB Corporation, 2008; Stroh, 2000). These insights
should influence how problems and associated critical factors
are viewed and understood (Stroh, 2000). Furthermore, insights
gained throughout the CPF will improve learning and decision-
making, lead to strategically-focused effective change
interventions and enable a leader to foster renewal and
adaptability (Beer & Nohria, 2000; IMB, 2008; O’Reilly 111 &
Tushman, 2004).4.0 APPLICATION:
An understanding of ST, leadership mindset and features of
organisational change are valuable additions to my skills,
knowledge and competency repertoire as a HR practioner. When
reflecting on recent incremental change I implemented to
improve employee morale and engagement, I recognise the
value a ST approach could have provided to improve outcomes.
In relation to above, I see three key opportunities I overlooked:
1) implement a more robust process through a CMF (Hartel &
Fujimoto, 2010), 2) replace linear thinking with ST to improve
diagnosis (Stroh, 2000), and 3) be strategic when implementing
interventions by leveraging the role of middle managers (see
Balogun, 2003; Sharma & Good, 2013). In this way, I could
have addressed the root causes of problems rather than
symptoms, as well as built commitment, improved relationships,
and fostered a leaning orientation (Stroh, 2000).
Based on my professional experience, I agree that leadership
mindset can be a major barrier to change success (Beer &
Nohria, 2000; IMB Corporation, 2008; Stace, 1996) and I expect
it may be problematic to introduce ST, especially where
traditional and fixed mindsets exist. To improve my
effectiveness and foster my professional development, I will
firstly broaden my understanding of others’ viewpoints and

perspective of problems encountered by considering my own
actions and bahaviours (or lack thereof) as being interrelated
and interdependent. Secondly, I will look for simple
opportunities at all levels of the organisation (i.e. individuals,
groups and organisational-wide) to apply ST and the notion of
leverage as a way to introduce this change, as demonstrated by
case studies of successful change (see Fenwich, 2007; Hill,
2004; Reay et al., 2006). Thirdly, my intention is to be more
strategic when proposing change interventions, by targeting the
most critical factors (e.g. people, systems, structure, culture,
technology). I believe taking these steps will start a journey that
enables me to better support organisational goals, performance
and competitive advantage.
Where possible, I will share my knowledge of change concepts,
models and frameworks when discussing change strategy and
implementation as a shared language is important (Eriksson &
Sundgren, 2005). As I realise that a contingency approach
should be tailored for the context (Dunphy & Stace, 1998), I
will be more discerning when assessing material for guidance
such as the plethora of management books and best practices, to
find the best fit. Furthermore, I will move away from imitations
of other organisations and base recommendations on data and
evidence specific to my workplace contest.
5.0 CONCLUSION:
Cases studies that I believe exemplify use of ST to improve the
success of incremental change (see Fenwich, 2007; Hill, 2004;
Reay et al., 2006) made me realise that significant change can
be achieved through small steps that accumulate over time.
Taking a long-term view, and having the tenacity and ability to
leverage opportunities to achieve incremental change, will help
embed and sustain change (Reay et al., 2006). The challenge is
finding the right opportunities in any part of the organisation,
and using different approaches for the context, leadership
mindset and other organisational factors as this is critical for
performance and competitive advantage.

REFERENCE LIST:
Avolio, B.J., & Gardner, W.L. (2005). Authentic leadership
development: Getting to the root of positive forms of
leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 315-338. doi:
10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.03.001
Balogun, J. (2003). From blaming the middle to harnessing its
potential. Creating change intermediaries. British Journal of
Management, 14(1), 69-83. doi: 10.1111/1461-8551.00266
Battilana, J., Gilmartin, M., Sengul, M., Pache, A., &
Alexander, J.A. (2010). Leadership competencies for
implementing planned or organizational change. The Leadership
Quarterly, 21(3), 422-438. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.03.007
Bowen, D.E., & Ostroff, C. (2004). Understanding HRM-Firm
performance linkages: The role of the "strength" of the HRM
system. Academy of Management Review, 29, 203-221.
Chapman, J. A. (2002). A framework for transformational
change in organisations. Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, 23(1), 16-25.
Cunningham, J. B., & Kempling, J. (2011). Promoting
organizational fit in strategic HRM: Applying the HR Scorecard
in public service organizations. Public Personnel Management,
40(3), 193-213.
Fernandez, S., & Rainey, H.G. (2006). Managing successful
organizational change in the public sector. Public
Administration Review, 2, 168-176.
Furst, S.A. & Cable, D.M. (2008). Reducing employee
resistance to organizational change: Managerial influence
tactics and leader – member exchange. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 93, 453-462.
Gilley, A., Dixon, P., & Gilley, J. (2008). Characteristics of
leadership effectiveness: Implementing change and driving
innovation in organizations. Human Resource Development
Quarterly, 19(2), 153-169. doi: 10.1002/hrdq.1232
Gilley, A., Thompson, J., & Gilley, J.W. (2012). Leaders and
Change: Attend to the Uniqueness of Individuals. Journal of

Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, 17(1) 69-83.
Graetz, F. (2000). Strategic change leadership. Management
decision, 38(8), 550-564.
Herold, D., Fedor, D., Caldwell, S., & Liu, Y. (2008). The
effects of transformational and change leadership on employees’
commitment to a change: a multilevel study. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 93(2), 346-357. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.93.2.346
Higgs, M., & Rowland, D. (2010). Emperors with clothes on:
The role of self-awareness in developing effective change
leadership. Journal of Change Management, 10(4), 369-385.
doi: 10. 1080/14697017.2010.516483
Karp, T., & Helgo, T. (2008). From change management to
change leadership: Embracing chaotic change in public service
organizations. Journal of Change Management, 8(1), 85-96. doi:
10.1080/14697010801937648
Kavanagh, M. H., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2006). The impact of
leadership and change management strategy on organizational
culture and individual acceptance of change during a merger.
British journal of Management, 17(S1), S81-S103.
Kerman, B., Freundlich, M., Lee, J., & Brenner, E. (2012).
Learning while doing in the human services: Becoming a
leaning organization through organizational change.
Administration in Social Work, 36(3), 234-257. doi:
10.1080/03643107.2011.573061
Kiefer, T. (2005). Feling bad: antecedents and consequences of
negative emotions in ongoing change. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 26, 875-897. doi: 10.1002/job.339
Kotter, J. and Cohen, D. (2002), The Heart of Change, Harvard
Business School Press, Boston, MA.
Kuntz, R.C.Joana., Gomes.F.S.Jorge. (2012). Transformational
change in organisations: a self-regulation approach, Journal of
Organizational Change Management, Vol. 25 No. 1, 2012pp.
143-162q doi: 10.1108/09534811211199637
Lee, I. (2005). The evolution of e-recruiting: A content analysis
of Fortune 100 career web sites. Journal of Electronic
Commerce in Organizations (JECO), 3(3), 57-68.

Mangi, R. M., Ghumro, I.A., & Abidi, A, R. (2011). A view on
leadership skills and qualities with reference to crisis, change
and employee relationship. Interdisciplinary Journal of
Contemporary Research in Business, 3(7), 398-408.
Mourier, P., & Smith, M.R. (2001). Conquering organizational
Change: How to succeed where most companies fail, Atlanta,
GA: CEP Press
Mumford, M. D., Zaccaro, S. J., Harding, F. D., Jacobs, T. O.,
& Fleishman, E. A. (2000). Leadership skills for a changing
world: Solving complex social problems. The Leadership
Quarterly, 11(1), 11-35.
Oreg, S., & Berson, Y. (2011). Leadership and employees’
reactions to change: The role of leaders’ personal attributes and
transformational leadership style. Personnel Psychology, 64(3),
627-659. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2011.01221.x
Peus, C., Frey, D., Gerkhardt, M., Fischer, P., & Traut-
Mattausch, E. (2009). Leading and managing organizational
change initiatives. Management Revenue, 20(2), 158-175. doi:
10.1688/1861-9908_mrev_2009_02_Peus
Polychronious, P.V. (2009). Relationship between emotional
intelligence and transformational leadership of supervisors: The
impact on team effectiveness. Team Performance Management,
15(7/8), 343-356. doi: 10.1108/13527590911002122
Rowe, W.G., & Guerrero, L., (2013). Cases in Leadership (3rd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications
Ruona, W. E., & Gibson, S. K. (2004). The making of twenty-
first-century HR: An analysis of the convergence of HRM,
HRD, and OD. Human Resource Management, 43(1), 49.
Schaffer, R. H. (2010). Four mistakes leaders keep making.
Harvard Business Review, (September), 87-91
Thomas, R., & hardy, C. (2011). Reframing resistance to
organizational change. Scandinavian Journal of Management,
27(3), 322-331. doi: 10.1016/j.scaman.2011.05.004
Tonkin, T. (2013). Authentic verses transformational
leadership: Assessing their effectiveness on organizational
citizenship behavior of followers. International Journal of

Business and Public Administration, 10(I), 40-61.
Van der Voet, J. (2014). The effectiveness and specificity of
change management in a public organization: Transformational
leadership and a bureaucratic organizational structure. European
Wallace, M., O’Reilly, D., Morris, J., & Deem, R. (2011).
Public service leaders as ‘change agents’ – for whom? Public
Management Review, 13(1), 65-93. doi:
10.1080/14719037.2010.501614
Wart, M. V., & Kapucu, N. (2011). Crisis management
competencies. Public Management Review, 13(4), 489-511. doi:
10.1080/14719037.2010.525034
Yang, Y. (2011). Leadership and satisfaction in change
commitment. Psychological Reports, 108(3), 717-736. doi:
10.2466/01.28.PR0.108.3.717-736
Young, M. (2009). A meta model of change. Journal of
Organizational Change Management, 22(5), 524-548. doi:
10.1108/09534810910983488
Page 1
Summary of Week 4.docx
SUMMARY OF WEEK 4 – Leading Change Journal Articles
1. Predicting Unit Performance by Assessing Transformational
and Transactional Leadership
By Bernard M. Bass, Bruce J. Avolio, Dong I. Jung, Yair
Berson
Introduction: The pace of change confronting organizations
today has resulted in calls for more adaptive, flexible
leadership. Adaptive leaders work more effectively in rapidly

changing environments by helping to make sense of the
challenges confronted by both leaders and followers and then
appropriately responding to those challenges. Adaptive leaders
work with their followers to generate creative solutions to
complex problems, while also developing them to handle a
broader range of leadership responsibilities (Bennis, 2001).
Evidence based theory: Exhibiting transactional leadership
meant that followers agreed with, accepted, or complied with
the leader in exchange for praise, rewards, and resources or the
avoidance of disciplinary action. Rewards and recognition were
provided contingent on followers successfully carrying out their
roles and assignments (Podsakoff, Todor, & Skov, 1982).
Transactional contingent reward leadership clarifies
expectations and offers recognition when goals are achieved.
The clarification of goals and objectives and providing of
recognition once goals are achieved should result in individuals
and groups achieving expected levels of performance (Bass,
1985). In its more corrective form, labeled active management
by exception, the leader specifies the standards for compliance,
as well as what constitutes ineffective performance, and may
punish followers for being out of compliance with those
standards.
Idealized influence - These leaders are admired, respected, and
trusted. Followers identify with and want to emulate their
leaders. Among the things the leader does to earn credit with
followers is to consider followers’ needs over his or her own
needs. The leader shares risks with followers and is consistent
in conduct with underlying ethics, principles, and values.
Inspirational motivation - Leaders behave in ways that motivate
those around them by providing meaning and challenge to their
followers’ work. Individual and team spirit is aroused.
Enthusiasm and optimism are displayed. The leader encourages
followers to envision attractive future states, which they can
ultimately envision for themselves.
Intellectual stimulation - Leaders stimulate their followers’

effort to be innovative and creative by questioning assumptions,
reframing problems, and approaching old situations in new
ways.
There is no ridicule or public criticism of individual members’
mistakes. New ideas and creative solutions to problems are
solicited from followers, who are included in the process of
addressing problems and finding solutions.
Individualized consideration - Leaders pay attention to each
individual’s need for achievement and growth by acting as a
coach or mentor. Followers are developed to successively
higher levels of potential. New learning opportunities are
created along with a supportive climate in which to grow.
Individual differences in terms of needs and desires are
recognized.
Application: Transformational leadership may build on these
initial levels of trust by establishing a deeper sense of
identification among followers with respect to the unit’s values,
mission, and vision
(Shamir et al., 1998). This internally based trust is associated
with the personal identification that Shamir et al. (1993) argued
that followers exhibit when working with charismatic–
transformational leaders. It may be this level of trust and
identification that sustains the performance of units operating
over longer periods of time. Indeed, transactional leadership
may have been as predictive of performance as transformational
leadership, given the short duration of the performance tasks
used here, which is consistent with results presented by Geyer
and Steyrer (1998). Geyer and Steyrer reported that
transactional leadership predicted the short-term financial
performance of bank branches, whereas transformational
leadership exhibited stronger predictions over a longer period of
time.
2. Leadership competencies for implementing planned
organizational change

By Julie Battilana, Mattia Gilmartinb, Metin Sengul, Anne-
Claire Pache, Jeffrey A. Alexander
Introduction: One of the defining challenges for leaders is to
take their organizations into the future by implementing planned
organizational changes that correspond to premeditated
interventions intended to modify organizational functioning
towards more favorable outcomes (Lippit, Watson, & Westley,
1958). Although formal strategic assessment and planning are
important elements of this process, a far more challenging task
is implementing change in the organization once a direction has
been selected. Over the last two decades, research about
transformational and charismatic leadership has explored the
relationship between leadership characteristics or behaviors and
organizational change (for reviews see Bass, 1999; Conger &
Kanungo, 1998; House & Aditya, 1997; Yukl, 1999, 2006).
There is growing evidence that change agents' leadership
characteristics and behaviors influence the success or failure of
organizational change initiatives (e.g., Berson & Avolio, 2004;
Bommer, Rich, & Rubin, 2005; Eisenbach,
Watson, & Pillai, 1999; Fiol, Harris, & House, 1999; Higgs &
Rowland, 2000, 2005; House, Spangler, & Woycke, 1991;
Howell & Higgins, 1990; Struckman & Yammarino, 2003;
Waldman, Javidan, & Varella, 2004).
Evidence based theory: The task-/person-oriented behaviors
model is particularly relevant and suitable for this study, for
three main reasons. First and foremost, this model is
particularly well suited to the study of leadership in the context
of organizational change. Nadler and Tushman (1999)
highlighted that task-oriented behaviors and person-oriented
behaviors are key to influence organizational change. Similarly,
Beer and Nohria (2000) made a distinction between “Theory E”
leaders, who are more task-oriented and “Theory O” leaders,
who are more person-oriented. They proposed that these
different categories of leaders adopt different approaches to

change implementation. Second, task-oriented and person-
oriented leadership behaviors have been shown to cover a vast
majority of the day-to-day leadership activities in which leaders
engage at the supervisory level (Casimir, 2001). The task-
/person-oriented behaviors model is thus particularly
appropriate as we focus, in the context of this study, on change
behaviors carried out by managers who were all in a supervisory
role. Finally, although the introduction of this model goes back
to the 1950s, recent empirical research shows that the task-
person-oriented behaviors model remains a powerful model to
analyze leadership effectiveness (Judge et al., 2004;
Keller,2006).
Application: While the choice of both the leadership and change
models used in this study was justified by theoretical
considerations that we detailed early on in the paper, it might be
interesting to replicate this study using different leadership
and/or change models. On leadership competencies, it would
also be interesting to examine the relationship between other
leadership competencies and change agents' likelihood to
emphasize different activities involved in the planned
organizational change implementation process. In particular, it
would be interesting to explore the influence of
transformational leadership—including individualized
consideration, intellectual stimulation, idealized influence and
inspirationalmotivation (Bass & Avolio, 1990)—and/or
charismatic leadership,which
have already been shown to influence change initiatives in
general and the communicating activities involved in the change
process in particular (Kark & Van Dijk, 2007). A number
ofmeasurement instruments, such as theMultifactor Leadership
Questionnaire (MLQ) (Bass & Avolio, 1990; Howell & Avolio,
1993), could be used to do so.10 Similarly, although the choice
of the communicating– mobilizing–evaluating model was based
on a careful literature review, we recognize that it does not do
complete justice to the complexity of the change process that

involves amultitude of activities. In future research, it might be
interesting to use changemodels comprising more than three sets
of activities (e.g., Beer, Eisenstat, & Spector, 1990; Kotter,
1995) and to analyze the relationship between leadership
competencies and these different sets of activities
3. Leadership in the Context of Temporary Organizations: A
Study on the Effects of Transactional and Transformational
Leadership on Followers’ Commitment in Projects
Ana K. Tyssen, Andreas Wald, and Sven Heidenreich
Introduction: Leadership research has accentuated the important
role of the organizational context for leadership and has called
for more empirical studies on leadership in different contexts
(Antonakis, Avolio, & Sivasubramaniam, 2003; Avolio,
Walumbwa, & Weber, 2009; Porter & MacLaughlin, 2006).
We follow this call and present a study on the effects of
transactional and transformational leadership on followers’
commitment in the context of the temporary organization. This
form of organizing is increasing as organizations face growing
uncertainties in dynamic environments (Bakker, 2010;
Schreyögg & Sydow, 2010). Temporary organizations, such as
programs or projects, are chosen for carrying out complex,
novel, and knowledge-intensive tasks (Hobday, 2000; Lundin &
Midler, 1998).
Evidence based theory: Prior research has also presented
evidence suggesting that an individual’s uncertainty exerts a
negative influence on commitment (Hui & Lee, 2000). A
transactional leadership style that supervises the day-to-day
tasks (Bass et al., 2003) will most likely fail to meet the
demands that a project’s complexity may impose on the
project’s leaders. Previous research has repeatedly confirmed
the effectiveness of transformational leadership in times of
uncertainty and change (Bass, 1990). Shin and Zhou (2007)

showed that transformational leadership positively moderates
the impact of team heterogeneity by improving the relation
between the participants’ varying educational backgrounds and
the team’s creativity. Studies that have analyzed the positive
effects of transformational leadership have generally
encompassed not only the nature of the tasks to be accomplished
but also the conditions under which these actions took place
(Atkinson et al., 2006;
Waldman et al., 2001).
Application: With regard to managerial implications, these
findings complement the knowledge on the importance of
effective administration to projects. Although conventional
leadership solemnly focuses on the fulfillment of a project’s
goals, transformational leadership focuses on the intentions of
the project’s participants to fulfill these project goals. Both
leadership foci are essential, as a project’s characteristics and
complexity could hinder a leader from having the information
necessary to giving the right directives. In these cases,
committed subordinates, unlike uncommitted employees, would
try to do the right thing. However, committed individuals might
at some point fail to recognize what needs to be done because
they lack information. Thus, both leadership behaviors seem
vital to project managers.
4. Organizational Change: Motivation, Communication, and
Leadership Effectiveness
By Ann Gilley, Jerry W. Gilley and Heather S. McMillan
Introduction: rganizational leadership behaviors have a direct
influence on actions in the work environment that enable change
(Drucker, 1999; Gilley, 2005; Howkins, 2001). Leaders may
function
as change agents—those individuals responsible for change
strategy and implementation (Kanter, Stein,

&Jick, 1992)—by creating a vision, identifying the need for
change, and implementing the change itself.
Evidence based theory: Studies suggest that work groups can be
designed to enable members with diverse skills and backgrounds
to communicate and interact in ways that constructively
challenge each other’s ideas (Williams, 2001). Furthermore, it
has been evidenced that social networks have important effects
on team performance and viability (Balkundi & Harrison, 2006).
Specifically, teams with a dense configuration of connections
within their social network tend to attain their goals more
frequently and remain intact as a group for a longer period of
time (Balkundi & Harrison, 2006). Not surprisingly, the
influence of interpersonal skills combines with group processes
and structure to create or impede teamwork and collaboration
(Fuqua & Kurpius, 1993; Nadler & Tushman, 1989). Teamwork
and collaboration suffer under conditions of a hostile
environment, unrealistic expectations, poor communications,
lack of skills training, and coercive rather than coactive control
(Follett, 1924; Longenecker & Neubert, 2000; Rayner, 1996;
Zhou & George, 2003). Conversely, teams thrive with open
communications, shared leadership, clearly defined roles and
work assignments, valued diversity of styles, and a sense of
informality (Parker, 1990).
Application: This study highlights employees’ opinions of the
linkage between leadership skills and implementing change.
Future research would be well served to explore which levels of
management are most in need of improvement and in which skill
and ability areas. Furthermore,how can organizations foster
these skills and abilities within their management teams?
Additional investigation may be warranted to reveal effective
means by which leaders should be held accountable for change.
How should their behaviors should be measured, developed, and
rewarded? The types of behaviors identified by this study could
be readily incorporated into leader performance evaluations,
particularly in 360-degree feedback instruments. Assessment of

behaviors associated with change effectiveness would help
organizations identify managers who rely on traditional
command-and-control techniques and those whose behaviors
explicitly promote successful change.
5. Building Employee Commitment to Change Across
Organizational Levels: The Influence of Hierarchical Distance
and Direct Managers' Transformational Leadership
By N. Sharon Hill, Myeong-Gu Seo, Jae Hyeung Kang, M.
Susan Taylor
Introduction: Commitment to organizational change, defined as
“a force (mind-set) that binds an individual to a course of action
deemed necessary for the successful implementation of a change
initiative” (Herscovitch and Meyer 2002, p. 475), has been
shown to be an important determinant of employee support for
change (Herscovitch and Meyer 2002, Meyer et al. 2007, Neves
2009, Parish et al. 2008). Gaining employees’ commitment is
particularly important during radical change because it involves
a fundamental, qualitative shift in the firm’s philosophy or core
perspective and strategic orientation (Greenwood and Hinings
1996, Nadler and Tushman 1995). Without the support of
employees throughout the organization, radical change efforts
are likely to fail (Herscovitch and Meyer 2002, Romanelli and
Tushman 1994). Furthermore, the disappointing results of many
radical change implementations (Attaran 2004, Marks 2006,
Paper and Chang 2005) underscore the fact that organizations
are frequently unsuccessful in achieving the required levels of
commitment to change from employees.
Evidence based theory: Research by Burns (1978) suggests that
transformational leaders are able to persuade their followers
(employees) to accept a higher vision and to motivate them to
support its accomplishment. Although research related to the
role of transformational leadership during radical change has
primarily focused on the behaviors of senior leaders, there is

ample evidence that transformational leadership can also
operate effectively at the workgroup level (e.g., Bono and
Judge 2003, Kark et al. 2003, Shamir et al. 2000). In this study,
we examine the transformational leadership behaviors of
workgroup managers at different levels of the organization.
These managers should have a unique opportunity to help shape
their direct reports’ reactions to change because of their
physical and psychological proximity to the members of their
workgroup. We expect that workgroup managers who are
generally more transformational in their leadership style will
play a particularly important role during radical organizational
change because they are likely to have particularly good
insights into the needs and concerns of those who report to them
and be best positioned to use the transformational leadership
behaviors to address these employees’ needs and concerns.
Application: Our findings also have important practical
implications for implementing radical change in organizations.
First, they suggest that the TMT should not assume that
employees at all organizational levels will respond similarly to
a radical organizational change initiative. Rather, the
organization’s TMT should proactively monitor the perceptions
of its change communications held by employees, particularly
those who are more hierarchically distant from it, and take
action to improve those perceptions, using top-down and
bottom-up communication strategies when necessary. Our
results show that both types of communication are important,
but bottom up strategies are often overlooked and, thus,
infrequently used (Lewis 2007). In general, interpersonal
communication channels (i.e., involving face-to-face
communication) and informal channels (e.g., informational
meetings, small discussions) are likely to be more effective in
communicating complex change messages and reducing
uncertainty, as well as promoting a true dialog and exchange of
information and ideas between senior leaders and employees
(Fidler and Johnson 1984, Larkin and Larkin 1996, Lewis

2006). However, given the challenge of communicating with a
large number of employees, it may be necessary to use different
combinations of technology-mediated communication to
facilitate two way communication (e.g., video combined with a
mechanism for soliciting questions and feedback).
6. Transformational leadership, relationship quality, and
employee performance during continuous incremental
organizational change
By MIN Z. CARTER, ACHILLES A. ARMENAKIS, HUBERT
S. FEILD AND KEVIN W. MOSSHOLDER
Introduction: Organizational change is a necessity for
organizations to survive and prosper. In fact, most organizations
compete by changing continuously (Brown & Eisenhardt, 1997;
Burke, 2002). A continuous incremental change context
comprises frequent, purposeful adjustments that are small but
ongoing and cumulative in effect (Brown & Eisenhardt, 1997;
Weick & Quinn, 1999). Scholars have argued that continuous
change requires employees to modify not only work routines but
also social practices (e.g., relations with their managers and
peers). To cope with the daily challenge of real-time adaptation,
employees selectively retain effective elements of their
performance routines and integrate them
with new, more efficient ones (Feldman & Pentland, 2003). As a
result, these employees often experience difficulties and
tensions in maintaining prior levels of performance while
adapting to their new job requirements (Kanfer & Ackerman,
1989).
Evidence based theory: Ideally, when a change initiative is
implemented, employees modify their old work routines to
retain more efficient and socially beneficial approaches in the
workflow. However, continuous change can also disrupt
attempted modifications, resulting in increased employee
apprehension about work procedures and social norms (Ashford,

1988). Rafferty and Griffin (2006) provided evidence that
employees experienced higher uncertainty as the number of
internal changes
(e.g., ranks of top management, consolidation of human
resource functions) increased. Higher change frequency can also
make relationships difficult to maintain, raising doubts about
the interpersonal support employees might have previously
experienced (Shaw, Ashcroft, & Petchey, 2006). Such doubts
are likely greater in work teams consisting of members with
interdependent work relations. As members’ work routines
typically involve social interactions, high change frequency
could disrupt their previously shared work responsibilities, as
well as negatively affect job performance.
Application: Because change is necessary in environments
characterized by economic instabilities, shifting market
demands, and technological advances (Burke, 2002),
organizations must condition managers to expect and prepare
for it. Through training, organizations can encourage managers
in turbulent contexts to utilize the energizing aspects of
transformational leadership to facilitate the development of
high-quality relationships. When managers are initiating in-the-
trenches change, the more personal aspects of transformational
leadership (e.g., individualized consideration, inspirational
motivation, intellectual stimulation) might have a special value.
Simons (1999) noted that transformational leadership theory
recognizes the importance of managers walking their talk with
respect to change, and maintaining behavioral integrity in the
eyes of employees undergoing necessary adaptation. During
continuing change at lower levels, it could well be that the
relationship quality associated with transformational leadership
boosts employee perceptions of managers’ behavioral integrity
which, in turn, translates into employee performance
improvements.

7. Managing Diversity and Enhancing Team Outcomes: The
Promise of Transformational Leadership
By Eric Kearney, Diether Gebert
Introduction: Organizational justice is becoming an increasingly
central question in the rapidly
changing work life (e.g. Konovsky 2000; Colquitt, Conlon,
Wesson, Porter and Ng 2001). Numerous studies have shown
that justice predicts essential organizational outcomes, such as
job satisfaction, organizational commitment, motivation,
performance, and organizational citizenship behavior (e.g.
Folger and Konovsky 1989; Moorman 1991; McFarlin and
Sweeney 1992; Korsgaard and Roberson 1995; Colquitt et al.
2001), and also essential individual mental and physical health
outcomes, such as sleeping, smoking and drinking behavior, and
emotional and bodily reactions (e.g. Tepper 2001; Kivima¨ki,
Elovainio, Vahtera, Virtanen and Stansfeld 2003; Kouvonen et
al. 2007; Greenberg 2010).
Thus, justice is important in the organizational context.
Evidence based theory: In organizations, performance appraisal
interview may be an important tool to improve the justice
judgments of the employees. Research has shown that justice
judgments and responses to a decision-making procedure are
enhanced when those affected have an opportunity to express
their views (Lind and Tyler 1988) and have an opportunity to
express their feelings during the interview (Holbrook 1999).
Thus, performance appraisal is in agreement with the main
principles of high procedural and interactional justice. It has
been suggested that organizational justice occurs differently
across public and private sectors, because public service
organizations have different decision-making procedures, work
processes, and multiple and competing goals compared with
private sectors (Rainey 2009). Furthermore, public service
employees are differently motivated from their private sector

counterparts (Khojasteh 1993; Karl and Sutton 1998). Indeed,
employees in public sector have been found to perceive lower
level of organizational justice than those in private sector
(Kurland and Egan 1999; Heponiemi, Kuusio, Sinervo and
Elovainio 2010).
Application: As predicted by Van Knippenberg et al. (2004),
diversity appears to benefit team performance via the
elaboration of task-relevant information. Ultimately, diverse
teams are likely to outperform homogeneous teams to the extent
that they utilize their greater range of task-relevant resources to
create synergies that are beyond those attainable on the basis of
a more homogeneous input. Hence, organizations may consider
what additional measures they could take to facilitate this
elaboration of task relevant information in diverse teams. At the
same time, they must prevent dysfunctional social
categorization processes from undermining the exchange,
discussion, and integration of ideas and perspectives. Although
transformational leadership apparently has this beneficial dual
effect, top managers could attempt to augment their team
leaders’ efforts by shaping their organizational culture with
these two goals in mind. Measures that emphasize
interdependence, trust, and shared goals may have similar
effects as transformational leadership. For example, team-based
incentive and reward systems may complement or perhaps even
serve as substitutes for transformational leadership in diverse
teams. This search for measures that could complement or be
used in lieu of transformational leadership may be particularly
important for organizations that establish flatter, less
hierarchical structures and rely on shared leadership and self-
managing teams.
8. Adaptability, Cognitive Flexibility, Personal Need for
Structure,
and Rigidity

By Armanda Hamtiaux, Claude Houssemand
Introduction: The question of whether a person is adaptable or
not and whether a person is able to adjust to new or changing
situations (Morrison & Hall, 2002) is becoming more and more
important in our rapidly evolving private and professional
world. Consequently, there has been an increase in the number
of articles published on this particular issue. Even though the
topic has been addressed frequently in the scientific literature,
most of the published articles treat a specific aspect of it, such
as personal adaptability at work (O’Connell, Mc Neely, & Hall,
2008), career (Savickas et al., 2009), or IA (individual
adaptability) (Ployhart & Bliese, 2006); or explore its role in a
given context (Tucker, Pleban, & Gunther, 2010).
Evidence based theory: This issue gets at the core of
adaptability. If adaptability is to be seen as a trait then probably
being more adaptable is a useful characteristic for engaging in
education. However, if adaptability is a capacity that can be
acquired and developed, then education may have an influence
on how adaptable a person is or perceives him/herself to be.
Ployhart and Bliese (2006) avoided a concrete answer to this
question when positioning IA on a distal-proximal continuum on
which IA can be seen as more trait-like (Ployhart & Bliese,
2006, p. 17). Where trait-like is thought to be relatively stable
and enduring, not much affected by situations or experience.
For example, KSAOs are described to be distal predictors that
are fairly stable and trait-like. On the same continuum, IA is
neighboring personality, cognitive ability, interest, and other
KSAOs, but it is depicted as being closer (e.g., compared to
personality) to proximal predictors that are more state-like (i.e.,
performance) and therefore somewhat more malleable. Based on
Ployhart and Bliese’s (2006) configuration, the findings could
be interpreted as saying that adaptable subjects tend to attain
higher levels of education. However, in the same breath, I-
ADAPT theory claims that IA is determined to some degree by

KSAOs like personality, cognitive ability, and interests. Thus, it
cannot be seen as absolutely stable.
Application: Similar to work stress, it appears that men report
higher confidence in their problem-solving capacity than
women. Here, again the authors suspect a masculine connotation
effect on self-perceived problem-solving capacity, as the
literature examples show that boys have higher expectations in
regard to their reasoning capacities than girls and that parents
tend to expect better mathematical performance from boys than
from girls (Eccles & Jacobs, 1986). It is possible that men have
a more positive view of their own problem-solving capacities
than women, based on their own past experience. Thus, even
though differences appear to be significantly different for these
dimensions, our findings do not allow us to conclude whether
the differences are real objective differences based on accurate
judgments or if the evaluations are biased. Regardless of the
higher of the scores for men over women, the crucial message is
that these scales differentiate between men and women and
therefore should not be used to compare adaptability level of
men and women in selection procedures. The fact that on
average women report lower adaptability competences than men
should not be
interpreted as women being less adaptable than men, and thus
the scale should not be used to make selection decisions
between men and women. Interestingly, however, no gender
related differences were detected for rigidity and PNS; again
confirming that IA as measured by this scale is different from
these two constructs.
9. Effects of leader intelligence, personality and emotional
intelligence on transformational leadership and
managerial performance
By Flavia Cavazotte, Valter Moreno, Mateus Hickmann
Introduction: Transformational leadership theory has been an

important field of inquiry in the organizational sciences, one
that has attracted the attention of a large number of researchers
(Gardner, Lowe, Moss, Mahoney, & Cogliser, 2010; Lowe &
Gardner, 2001). Various studies have found a relationship
between transformational leadership and the efficacy of
organizations (Avolio, 1999; Avolio, Bass, & Jung, 1995;
Dumdum, Lowe, & Avolio, 2002), and meta-analytic reviews
have corroborated positive connections between
transformational leadership of superiors and the performance of
their subordinates (Judge & Piccolo, 2004; Lowe, Kroeck, &
Sivasubramanian, 1996). However, despite the apparent
relevance of transformational leadership for organizational
outcomes, a smaller number of studies have empirically
investigated the antecedents of transformational leadership (Lim
& Ployhart, 2004).
Evidence based theory: Transformational leaders, in contrast to
transactional leaders, are seen as agents of social and
organizational change (Bass, 1985; Bass, Avolio, Jung, &
Berson, 2003). They are described as models for conduct and as
being able to articulate a new and stimulating vision in their
followers. In this way, they raise morale, inspire followers and
motivate them toward greater achievements or conquests (Bass,
1985). Theories of transformational leadership (Avolio, 1999;
Bass & Avolio, 1994) propose four dimensions inherent to the
construct: idealized influence, often referred to as charisma, is
related to the role played by the leader as a model for followers,
prompting them to emulate the leader, follow the leader in all
actions and adopt the leader's values and principles;
motivational inspiration, describes leaders who have the ability
to convey ambitious expectations to followers, inspiring themto
reach objectives that result in important advances for the
organization or for society; intellectual stimulation is exhibited
by leaders able to question the status quo and appeal to the
intelligence of their followers so as to promote thinking
processes that favor creativity and innovation; and

individualized consideration concerns leaders who develop an
environment of personal support for their group, who
understand and treat every follower as having distinctive
characteristics, needs and desire
Application: Likewise, there are theoretical arguments that
support a process model through the mediation of
transformational leadership. Because leadership is a rather
complex phenomenon, a combination of multiple individual
attributes could together promote effective leadership
(Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1991; Zaccaro et al., 2004). In this sense,
leader differences in intelligence and personality would
operate as distal antecedents with direct effects on outcomes,
but would have also indirect effects through their connections to
proximal antecedents of outcomes, such as the capacity to
inspire, stimulate, motivate and care for followers. As
mentioned before, intelligence could facilitate the creation and
presentation of convincing visions and facilitate inspirational
motivation, since it
promotes problem solving and solution generation capacities
(Mumford et al., 2000). Followers could construe the
assertiveness of extraversion and serenity of emotional stability
as charismatic qualities, and creative and flexible thinking
associated with openness could drive intellectual stimulation
(Judge & Long, 2012). The greater dependability and tenacity
often observed in conscientious individuals could promote their
inspirational capabilities,while emotional intelligence could
enhance a leader's sensitivity to emotional cues in reading the
specific reactions of followers (Ashkanasy & Daus, 2005), thus
allowing more effective responses to their individual
needs.intrinsic motivation that might be associated with HRO
service provision that is less transactional (Ramaswami&
Dreher, 2010).

Table of Contents1Introduction32Reflective Ob.docx

Table of Contents1Introduction32Reflective Ob.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Table of Contents1Introduction32Reflective Ob.docx

Similar to Table of Contents1Introduction32Reflective Ob.docx (20)

More from mattinsonjanel

More from mattinsonjanel (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Table of Contents1Introduction32Reflective Ob.docx