Organizational Change Leadership: Metaphors and Strategies

Two Perspectives of Organizational Change

The theory of metaphors can equally well be applied to how "change" itself is defined. According to Weick and Quinn (1999), organizational change can be perceived in two ways:

1. Episodic change, in which there is an unfreeze–transition–refreeze sequence, and

2. Continuous change, which follows a freeze–rebalance–unfreeze sequence.

"The contrast between episodic and continuous change reflects differences in the perspective of the observer" (p. 362).

Much depends on the perspective of the observer. From a distance, when participants of an organization perceive the flow of events that constitute the life of their organization, they may see what appears to be repetitive action interspersed with inertia, and the occasional spurt of change. These observers would describe their organization as experiencing episodic change. On the other hand, participants looking more closely would discern patterns of continuous ongoing adjustment and adaptation — frequent small changes and gradations introduced even at the peak of revolutionary change. In this view, change is frequent and continuous, and this latter category of observers would perceive their organization as having undergone frequent and continuous organizational change.

Change is not always seen as a good thing. It is often thought that organizational change would not have been necessary had organizations done their job correctly; thus change occurs in the context of some sort of failure. As Czarniawska and Joerges (1996, as cited in Weick & Quinn, 1999) put it: "First there were losses, then there was a plan of change, and then there was an implementation, which led to unexpected results" (p. 365). Occurrence following failure is one metaphor of change, but by employing other metaphors, one can perceive change in varying ways. Ford and Ford (1994) declare that "change is a phenomenon of time. It is the way people talk about the event in which something appears to become, or turn into, something else where the 'something else' is seen as a result or outcome."

Change can be seen from various perspectives. From the organization's reference point, change can be described as differences in "how an organization functions, who its members and leaders are, what form it takes, or how it allocates its resources" (Weick & Quinn, 1999, p. 373). When seen from the leader's perspective, or from the perspective of employees involved in planning the change, it can be defined as "a set of behavioral science-based theories, values, strategies, and techniques aimed at the planned change of the organizational work setting for the purpose of enhancing individual development and improving organizational performance through the alteration of organizational members' on-the-job behaviors" (ibid.).

Change is generally thought of as a three-step linear process — unfreeze, change, and refreeze — in which: (a) difficulties occur to the organization or individual, disturbing it from its torpor; (b) revolutionary change occurs; and (c) after a period of time, the change has settled and the organization returns to a stable state.

The Benefit of Change for Organizations

This discussion of change recalls Habermas's theory of communicative action. Transferring Habermas's thesis of enlightenment as an unfinished project can help us see change in a more positive light and can also provide an organization with insights about how to achieve effective and welcomed change.

Weber had seen society as moving towards greater meaninglessness and irrationality as it becomes more capitalist and technologically oriented. Habermas disagreed; adopting a Hegelian dialectical perspective, he was more optimistic about social destiny, seeing it as based on change and therefore still able to arouse the courageous spirit that characterized, for instance, the ancient Greeks. Distinguishing between the "logic" and the "development" of progression within society, he perceived society as representing a dialectical struggle between two opposing forces, which he variously termed the Lifeworld and the System. Each benefited the other and resulted in a mutual push toward growth.

The Lifeworld represents the social dimension, which is intrinsically moderated by language and communicative action — free-wheeling, unstructured, and unpredictable. This, according to Habermas, represents the "symbolic" reproduction of society. The "material" reproduction — the System — is comprised of the rationalized format of capitalized market and state entities. These two forces pit themselves against one another in a continuous thrust: on one hand, the organization tends to remain in a rationalized situation; on the other, desacralization occurs through the Lifeworld impinging on the System. It is this dialectical tension — the unceasing conflict between Lifeworld and System — that leads Habermas to perceive enlightenment as an unfinished project, for it is in this way that change occurs and that the Lifeworld prevents human reality from becoming too stagnant and unfulfilled.

Transferring this to the organizational level, it is the tendency of organizations to resist change. Becoming increasingly rationalized, unpredictability and the tension of uncertainty — the chaos and "messiness" of the Lifeworld — can be disturbing and frightening. However, within the Lifeworld is change, and change can mean growth. Without the "messiness" of the Lifeworld, an organization can sink into stagnation and, consequently, decline. It needs the openness of communication, the existence of unpredictability, and the chaos of the social world that disregards rigid rules. In other words, it thrives — even though it may not want to — on surprise and non-structure, for only in this way can an organization move toward enlightenment and grow as it changes.

The Change Process

Change can be dealt with in various ways, depending on metaphor and perspective. Employing Dunphy's (1996) five properties of change can best teach an organization how to perceive and direct its change. The five properties are as follows:

1. A basic metaphor of the nature of the organization, in which one perceives the organization in some manner and applies a name to its activity.

2. An analytical framework to understand the organizational change process — again depending on how one perceives it, whether as a threatening element, a necessary element, or a hopeful and beneficial element for organizational growth.

3. An ideal model of an effectively functioning organization, which one then uses to structure the change situation so as to create and specify both a direction for the change — optimistic and positive — and the rules and values to enable the change and its consequences to chart that positive trajectory.

4. An intervention theory, best created with members of the organization, that specifies when, where, and how to move the organization as a unit and individual members closer to the ideal.

5. A definition of the role of the change agent — what the change will ideally achieve in the life of the organization and how it will ideally affect individual members of that organization.

In all of this, the leader plays a major role in charting this course.

Conclusion

One more metaphor of change that cannot be overlooked, and is perhaps the most insightful, is simply transforming the word from "change" to "changing." A shift in vocabulary helps one all the more easily pull out from organizational inertia, depression, frustration, or any other negative feelings associated with change. It helps one perceive change as a continuous, fluid substance that, acting as agent of change, one can continuously craft into something more pleasing. Using this latest metaphor, the leader can show that change is never merely episodic but rather continuous, and that the perception of change depends upon the meaning one accords it. Seeing change as productive and normal may enable the company all the more to embrace it.

References

Bartunek, J. M. (1993). The multiple cognitions and conflicts associated with second order organizational change. In J. K. Murnighan (Ed.), Social psychology in organizations: Advances in theory and research (pp. 322–349). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Beer, M., Eisenstat, R. A., & Spector, B. (1990). The critical path to corporate renewal. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Brand, A. (1990). The force of reason: An introduction to Habermas. London: Allen & Unwin.

Crawford, A. "The Swamp Fox." Smithsonian.com. Retrieved from

Dunphy, D. (1996). Organizational change in corporate setting. Human Relations, 49(5), 541–552.

Ford, J. D., & Ford, L. W. (1994). Logics of identity, contradiction, and attraction in change. Academy of Management Review, 19, 756–785.

Ford, J. D., & Ford, L. W. (1995). The role of conversations in producing intentional change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 541–570.

Habermas, J. (1981). The theory of communicative action: Reason and the rationalization of society (Vol. 1). Boston: Beacon Press.

Hollingsworth, T. (1990). Woolworth Corporation: A case of creativity in action. Review of Business. Retrieved from www.entrepreneur.com/tradejournals/article/9154912.html

Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Macy, B. A., & Izumi, H. (1993). Organizational change, design, and work innovation: A meta-analysis of 131 North American field studies, 1961–1991. Research in Organizational Change and Development, 7, 235–313.

Quinn, R. E. (1996). Deep change: Discovering the leader within. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Sun Tzu. (2001). The art of war. Wylie, TX: Pickard & Son.

Weick, K. E., & Quinn, R. E. (1999). Organizational change and development. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 361–386.