Return to search

What does it take for organizations to change themselves? The influences on the internal dynamics of organizational routines undergoing planned change

Accomplishing desired benefits from investments in planned change is
problematical for organizations, their leaders and the change agents charged
with delivery. This is despite a well-developed literature, replete with advice on
how change should be achieved. Examination of this literature shows the
primary focus on change agents and their practices.
This research widens the focus by observing the influence of change agents,
change recipients and line managers on organizational routines undergoing
planned change. It examines the interplay between stability and change in
organizational routines, adopting a social practice perspective, and the routine
intended to change as the unit of analysis (Feldman and Pentland, 2003, 2005).
The research builds on claims that to understand the patterns of action within
routines requires the internal dynamics – the claimed duality between ostensive
(in principle) and performative (in practice) aspects - to be examined.
A research method to operationalize the study of this claimed duality was
devised following the principles of Strong Structuration (Stones, 2005). This
method enabled a unique conceptualization of the study of routine dynamics,
focused on planned change from the perspective of multiple, interdependent
actors. Two cases of change agents following the advice in the planned change
literature were explored. In one case, stability of the routine persisted when
change was intended. In the other, change was relatively easy to achieve
irrespective of change agent actions.
The primary contribution is the demonstration of how the attitudes to change of
change recipients, line managers and change agents influence the internal
dynamics of routines undergoing planned change. Other contributions pertain to
the method of ‘unpacking’ organizational routines and its potential for shaping
future practice. This research does not offer new ‘normative’ advice but instead
sensitizes planned change practitioners to the level of analysis they need to
carry out to ensure that their interventions are suitably designed.

Identiferoai:union.ndltd.org:CRANFIELD1/oai:dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk:1826/8431
Date03 1900
CreatorsMurray-Webster, Ruth
ContributorsMaylor, Harvey
PublisherCranfield University
Source SetsCRANFIELD1
LanguageEnglish
Detected LanguageEnglish
TypeThesis or dissertation, Doctoral, DBA
Rights© Cranfield University 2014. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced without the written permission of the copyright owner.

Page generated in 0.0059 seconds