Abstract

     It is no surprise that research on digital transformation (DT) has raised vast interest among academics in recent decades. Countries, cities, industries, companies, and people all face the same challenge of adapting to a digital world. The aim of the paper is twofold. First, map the thematic evolution of the DT research in the areas of business and management, because existing research in these areas to date has been limited to certain domains. To achieve this, articles were identified and reviewed that were published in the Chartered Association of Business Schools’ (ABS) ≥ 2-star journals. Based on these findings, the second objective of this paper will be to propose a synergistic framework that relates existing research on DT to the areas of business and management, which will help form the evolutionary perspective taken in this paper. Considering the emerging development of the topic under investigation, the framework is understood as a sound basis for continued discussion and forthcoming research.

Introduction

     The industrial world is evolving into a digital one (Parviainen, Tihinen, Kääriäinen, & Teppola, 2017). The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated this phenomenon (Priyono, Moin, & Putri, 2020). Digital transformation (DT) has gone from being a technological opportunity to a pure necessity for managing the needs and expectations of the world’s growing population (Kraus et al., 2021). These developments have led to considerable changes in many organizations, with DT introducing new processes and mechanisms that can affect the key structures of how a company does business. According to Heavin and Power (2018), the primary aim of DT is to solve challenges concerning efficiency and effectiveness, while Hess, Benlian, Matt, and Wiesböck (2016) state that companies that do not rapidly develop and implement DT strategies are unlikely to keep pace and compete in the new digital reality. The transition to this new reality should however not be underestimated because, like every change process, it contains several risks and challenges (Andriole, 2017, Horváth and Szabó, 2019, Vial, 2019). We know from past research that any change is difficult to implement in organizations (Deline, 2018), and up to 70% of large organizational changes fail (Barrett & Stephens, 2016, 2017; Burke, 2011). It is also known that companies are slow to respond to change (Wright, Van Der Heijden, Bradfield, Burt, & Cairns, 2004), decreasing the likelihood of companies adopting DT and implementing DT strategies. Additionally, reports by Kane, Palmer, Phillips, Kiron, & Buckley, 2015 and Carr (2003) claim that there is a general misconception that technology drives DT when, according to the authors, it is a strategy instead. The COVID-19 pandemic, on the other hand, has shown the impact of a crisis (here, an external one) on the rapid adaptation of DT (Dwivedi et al., 2020, Fletcher and Griffiths, 2020, Iivari et al., 2020, Kodama, 2020, Osiyevskyy et al., 2020, Papagiannidis et al., 2020, Rowe, 2020).

Conclusion

     Despite recent developments, research on the topic of DT is still in an early stage. The present paper has mapped the thematic evaluation of research on DT in the areas of business and management. It not only highlights the top authors and countries that have contributed to the development of the topic so far, but also outlines the journals with the highest number of articles that have focused on DT in the two areas examined. To achieve the overall aim of this paper, different methodological and analytical procedures were utilized to determine the dominating themes during the period 2010–2020. Using the Web of Science database, and including articles published in ABS journals with a rating of two stars 2 or higher gathered and provided detailed information on the high-quality work being done on the topic of DT.

     The findings of different analytical phases were connected to and synthesized in a framework highlighting the current research themes regarding DT in the areas of business and management, showing where the body of knowledge has primarily been developed so far.

Abstract

     During the last decades, organizations worldwide have replaced their fragmented and home-grown information systems with standardized Enterprise Systems that span the entire organization. The logics embedded in Enterprise Systems, such as a centralized and integrated view on the firm, standardized organization-wide working processes, and data sharing, may or may not be congruent with the cultural context of the user organization. Especially in case of a limited alignment, the adoption and full use of the Enterprise System will require specific attention from implementers. By developing a theoretical explanation of how responses to Enterprise Systems are influenced by cultural values, we contribute to the development of a cultural alignment theory of Enterprise Systems. Drawing on Hofstede’s cultural values framework, we analysed 85 published cases from firms operating in different cultural contexts, which resulted in the modelling of two contrasting archetypical cultural profiles: one that is more, and one that is less, receptive to the logics embedded in Enterprise Systems. Our model provides implementers with the necessary insights to develop implementation strategies that take the cultural context into account.

Introduction

     For the last decades, the use of packaged integrated software solutions, so-called Enterprise Systems (ES), has expanded at the expense of custom-made systems. Enterprise Systems are commercial software packages that enable the integration of transaction-oriented data and business processes throughout an organization (Davenport, 1998). Although the technology of Enterprise Systems has improved over the years due to cloud platforms, increased connectivity, improved user-friendliness, and mobile access, the large-scale adoption and effective use of Enterprise Systems is an ongoing concern since the ‘one size fits all’ logic of Enterprise Systems does not always match specific and sometimes idiosyncratic needs present in organizations (Strong & Volkoff, 2010; Berente, Lyytinen, Yoo, & Maurer, 2019). User-friendly screen layouts cannot resolve the incompatibility between the system and the organization.

     Enterprise systems affect many aspects of a company’s internal and external operations, and their successful deployment is critical to organizational performance and survival. The case for ensuring successful implementation is evident since the costs and risks of these technology investments rival their potential payoffs. Many of the problems linked with ES implementation are related to a misfit of the system with the characteristics of the internal or external context of the organization (Kohli & Kettinger, 2004; Boonstra, 2006; Strong & Volkoff, 2010; Berente et al., 2019). The logics that are embedded in Enterprise Systems can be characterized as a centralized and integrated view of the firm, disciplined and standardized organization-wide working processes, data sharing, transparency, management control, and top-down implementation approaches (Soh et al., 2000, Strong and Volkoff, 2010). One important contextual factor of ES implementations is the culture (Soh et al., 2000), referring to the dominant national, regional, organizational, departmental, or occupational culture of the adopting organization, which to some extent will fit or misfit with the logics embedded in an Enterprise System.

Conclusion

     This study has examined how the adoption of Enterprise Systems implementations is influenced by cultural values. By doing so, we contribute to the development of a cultural alignment theory of Enterprise Systems. The logics embedded in Enterprise Systems can be characterized as a centralized and integrated view of the firm, disciplined and standardized organization-wide working processes, data sharing, transparency, management control, and top-down implementation approaches. These logics may or may not be congruent with the cultural values of the user organization. Using a case survey approach and drawing on Hofstede’s cultural values framework, we analysed 85 published cases from firms operating in different cultural contexts.

     The main theoretical contribution is that we develop a model for how specific cultural values trigger certain adoption antecedents that result in adoption behaviours. The case survey data resulted in the modelling of two contrasting cultural profiles: one that is accepting and one that is resisting the logics embedded in Enterprise Systems. In the accepting profile, a combined long-term orientation and collectivism help create the facilitating conditions for successful ES implementation. At the same time, a high power distance triggers the social influence, which makes ES adoption more likely. Conversely, in the resisting profile, a short-term orientation hinders implementing an Enterprise System, and it negatively affects the facilitating conditions necessary for ES implementation. Further, this resisting profile incorporates four cultural values that may boost resistance towards the implementation: high power distance, high uncertainty avoidance, individualism, and masculinity. The main practical contribution is that cultural values have to be taken into account when Enterprise Systems are introduced. We also provide project managers with insights to develop culture-sensitive implementation strategies.

Researchers of organizational routines have begun to examine the “microfoundations” of routines, paying much closer attention to the role of individual participants in routines. These investigations have brought to light specific behaviors that introduce change or promote stability in routines, but because these behaviors are so specific to their context, it is difficult to find common threads between the papers. In this paper, we examine research focused on how employee behaviors bring about change and stability in routines and identify unifying characteristics. We find that, although the contexts of extant routines research vary wildly, employees in all of these settings enact “prescriber” or “performer” roles in the context of their focal routines and engage in proactive, adaptive, and proficient behaviors. By introducing a common language to describe employee behaviors in these various studies, we hope to build connections between them as a gateway to open new research opportunities.

Introduction

The behaviors of individual employees are the fundamental, pervasive acts of organizational life (Selznick, 1957). As Felin and Foss (2005) argue, “organizations are made up of individuals, and there is no organization without individuals.” Because of the importance of individuals in understanding organizational functioning, scholars examining organizational routines have increasingly focused on the role of employee behaviors in bringing change and stability to routines (Feldman, Pentland, D’Adderio, & Lazaric, 2016). Organizational routines, those “repetitive, recognizable patterns of interdependent actions carried out by multiple actors” (Feldman & Pentland, 2003: 95), are ubiquitous in organizations (Becker, 2008). Scholars who adopt a practice perspective of routines, in which the internal workings of routines are of keen interest, have conducted a number of case studies that describe examples of employee behaviors leading to change and stability in routines, in specific contexts (Canales, 2014; Feldman, 2000; Hong, Stanley Snell, & Mak, 2016; HowardGrenville, 2005; Pentland & Feldman, 2008; Sonenshein, 2016; Turner & Rindova, 2012). Studies like these have identified specific actions in specific contexts that affect the specific routine in which the actor was engaged.

1- Introduction

2- Literature review

3- Solution methodology

4- Application of the proposed research framework

5- Conclusion

References

Abstract

Traditionally, the metal manufacturing industry in China is focused only on economic growth and just in the past decade, environmental regulatory policies have started to emphasize organizational sustainable improvements. Thus, the metal manufacturing industry in China has a high potential for value addition and organizational change for sustainability. The success of organizational change for sustainability should be based on an in- depth insight into barriers to organizational change for sustainability and drivers which support sustainable performance. In this context, this study employed interpretive structural modeling (ISM) technique and Technique for Order Performance by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) to examine the barriers to organizational change for sustainability and drivers which support sustainable performance. Firstly, ISM technique was applied to select the key barriers to organizational change for sustainability based on experts’ evaluations in the Chinese metal manufacturing industry. Then, TOPSIS model was applied to assess and prioritize the drivers which support sustainable performance with respect to their influence on the key barriers. Based on the study results, inefficient legal framework, inadequate proactive plans, lack of sustainable waste management and preferences of institutional buyers are the key barriers. Furthermore, enforcing government regulations, integrating sustainability in proactive plans, promoting sustainable products and developing infrastructure support and facility for sustainability were found to be the most influential drivers. This study will enable managers and government bodies to manage their resources in an efficient way so that organizational change management for sustainability can be achieved in the metal manufacturing industry in China.

Introduction

Organizations are integral part of modern societies being complex social systems with sets of interrelated units in joint problem- solving to accomplish a goal and classified as civil society, companies and public agencies (Lozano and Haartman, 2018). Usually, organizations are influenced by circumstances that act beyond their boundaries, which influence their strength to acquire and utilize resources to create value. The main aim of organizational change which is generally an anticipated, prepared for and managed opportunity is to transit from a current status quo to a better state. Organizational changes that cause a shift in the status quo are bound to encounter resistance at the various organizational hierarchical levels. Resistance to organizational change and lack of appropriate response to new opportunities can result in unsustainable conditions; thus sustainable performance can be the main justification for organizational change (Lozano, 2012). Organizations have become a main focus of attention in the sustainability debate and perceived as possessing resources, technology and motivation to work towards more sustainable societies (Lozano, 2012). Sustainability is often referred to as the triple- bottom- line because it involves the integration of environmental and social responsibilities with economic goals to create value for the company as well as for society (Rankin et al., 2011). In this context, organizations and managers are increasingly recognizing the interrelationships between economic benefits, social and environmental consequences as well as their short and long term effects on change for sustainability. Long- lasting organizational change for sustainability requires in addition to the development of sustainability visions for the future, the identification and examination of barriers which pose resistance and respective drivers which support sustainable performance. Many managers not only underestimate the causes of resistance to change towards sustainability, but also the drivers which influence organizational change to sustainable performance (Kotter and Schlesinger, 2008). Organizations need to have an explicit approach for addressing and managing change. Furthermore, an insight on the appropriate strategies in order to catalyze change from the unsustainable status quo to a more- sustainable state is crucial (Lozano, 2015). Innovation can provide a solution to the main environmental issues, but often meets resistance thus necessitating adjusting its output to ensure successful adoption (Acciaro et al., 2014). Certain barriers usually hinder organizational change for sustainability; identifying them can help to apply appropriate strategies to overcome them, thus helping to better incorporate and institutionalize sustainability (Lozano, 2012).

1- Introduction

2- Literature review

3- Methodology

4- Conceptual model

5- Role of data transformation in legacy insurance company to support organizational change management

6- Discussions

References

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to propose a practicable data-driven theory for the implementation and management of organizational change by combining the organization ambidexterity research and the organization change management research.
Design/methodology/approach – This study is based on the qualitative approach and uses a single case (in-depth investigation approach) study to come up with a data-driven theory, which is usable in the context of organizational change management and organizational ambidexterity (OA). Besides, in-depth interviews of change management practitioners, this study uses various sources of secondary information. Findings – The study finds that owing to the reactive, ad hoc, and discontinuous nature of change often triggered by external factors or internal crisis within the organization, an organization need to continually engage with the existing data. The outcome must be driven toward preparing for the change through data engagement, implementation and reinforcement. The authors found that in order to be successful it is essential to have a strategy, set-up the right operating model, be clear on the scope of the change management work-stream and continuously monitor the progress through defined milestones and acceptance criteria. For companies targeting to achieve competitive differentiation through ambidexterity, a well-grounded change management program is the key for the success.
Originality/value – The study suggests that there is little work combining organizational change management and OA from a practitioner’s point of view. Accordingly, the authors propose a new data-driven organizational change management theory, which the authors term as the tripod theory for organizational change management. A practitioner’s perspective on the topic using a case study of an insurance company’s data transformation and a framework for structuring the change management program makes a meaningful contribution to the existing literature.

Introduction

Change management is critical for the changing and dynamic business environment of today. It is considered as a critical organizational capability. Organizational change management (OCM) involves continuous assessment and renewal of an organization’s direction, structure and capabilities, in response to the changing demands of different stakeholders (Moran and Brightman, 2000). There is widespread recognition among leaders in most industries that the role of digital technology is rapidly shifting, from being a driver of marginal efficiency to an enabler of fundamental innovation and disruption (World Economic Forum, 2016). However, in order for companies to transition themselves to becoming a digital enterprise there is a need for investments in digital technologies (Wamba et al., 2017). As part of digital transformation, organizations go through changes in business models, operating models, human talent and skill requirements. It is critical to get a close fit between digital transformation strategies, IT strategies and other organizational and functional strategies (Henderson and Venkatraman, 1993).

Public entrepreneurship is much like its private sector counterpart; however, public entrepreneurs face additional challenges due to weaker competitive forces in the public as compared to private sector, with objectives that often are poorly defined and performance that is difficult to measure. Despite the impact on public good, how to enact changes successfully in public sector organizations to be more entrepreneurial is poorly understood. This article summarizes current research on public entrepreneurship and presents a detailed case study of a successful entrepreneurial change in a public sector organization. A five-step change process used to enhance entrepreneurial behaviors was implemented in a public sector organization and the qualitative and quantitative results demonstrated substantial performance improvements over 4 years (i.e., quantitative performance in some areas was more than 10 times greater). We explain key steps that produced successful outcomes and how to avoid common challenges in the implementation of ongoing entrepreneurial behaviors in public sector contexts.

What is public entrepreneurship?

The term public entrepreneurship can invoke images of actions taken by a government organization to promote a common good that transforms community life; simultaneously though, the term can also invoke images of a Sisyphean struggle for the ‘freedom to manage’ while trying to update stagnant public institutions that have lost relevance and accountability (Edwards, Jones, Lawton, & Llewellyn, 2002). Public entrepreneurship is much like its private sector counterpart, with defining characteristics of opportunity alertness, judgments about investments under uncertainty, and product, process, and/or market innovation (Klein, Mahoney, McGahan, & Pitelis, 2010). However, public entrepreneurs face additional challenges due to weaker competitive forces in the public sector–—as compared to the private sector–—with objectives that are often poorly defined and performance that is difficult to measure. Specifically, public organizations are often characterized by a focus on mission rather than profitability and a lack of clarity in organizational goals due to numerous competing demands, interdependencies, and interrelationships across multiple stakeholder groups. Indeed, Klein et al. (2010, p. 4) suggested that for outdated institutions, “innovation, both technological and organizational, is required but is difficult to accomplish because of conflict between short-run and long-term performance. Entrenchment is deepened by agency problems and by lack of clarity about the public interest.”

Introduction

Discussion

Conclusions and suggestions for further studies

References

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to introduce a new research construct to depict more accurately organisational structure and the direction of organisational changes in large multinational corporations (MNCs).
Design/methodology/approach – The paper presents an overview of the existing literature on the phenomenon of anisotropy in natural sciences and the organisation of large corporations, and transforms an identified phenomenon into a research construct of organisational theory.
Findings – This paper demonstrates that anisotropy, that is, the differences in the speed and conductivity of the movement of capital (money), products (goods and services), ideas (knowledge) and talent (people) in different directions within the corporation ( from the centre to the subsidiaries, from the subsidiaries to the corporate centre and between subsidiaries) is the normal state of the internal space of the MNC. Anisotropy is increasing with the on-going restructuring of the global economic order. This leads to the divergence of business units in MNCs into the core and the periphery.
Research limitations/implications – The paper outlines a series of promising research avenues in organisational studies.
Originality/value – The paper provides a novel treatment of the composition of MNCs.

Introduction

It has become increasingly clear that a restructuring of the economic order has been taking place and, in particular, has affected multinational corporations (MNCs) and others doing business across borders. For example, after the 2008 crisis, capital flows between countries and trade in goods and services have retreated significantly to levels not seen in a quarter of a century (Sharma, 2016, p. 2). The evidence of a new era of “anti-globalisation” became evident to practitioners, policy analysts (Ludeña, 2017) and academics (Kobrin, 2017; Globerman, 2017; Meyer, 2017). The new economic order means costlier capital, an expanded government role, reinvented trade barriers, restriction of workforce movement between countries and a much larger regulatory and taxation burden as firms find it more difficult to shift activities and park funds in the most favourable locations. Our essay points out that the “new economic order” is merely a partial restoring of the state of the global economy which existed prior to 1992 and which was characterised by high anisotropy of the economic space that affected the structure and functioning of the (western) MNCs. We introduce the research construct and properties of anisotropy in the corporate space, and outline promising research avenues for organisational studies, especially research related to the changes in the organisation and functioning of large MNCs.

Change is crucial for organizations in continuous growing and high competition in business environment. Different theories of change describe the effectiveness of modification of strategies, processes and structures for organizations. The action research model, the positive model and the Lewin’s change model submit the views of the phases for change in organization. This study views the Lewin’s model as three steps process (unfreezing, movement and refreezing) for change in organization. Although this model sets a general steps to be followed, more information is considered to guide these steps in specific situations. This article is critically reviewed for change theories in different phases of organizational change. In this critical review the change management has constructive framework for managing the organizational change through different phases of the process. This review gives theoretical and practical implications and somehow the immunity to change has been discussed.

Introduction and research questions

The purpose of the study is to craft the relation between process model and change, this relation describes the ways of implementing change process by leader’s knowledge sharing, and this sharing identifies the stages of change process, and these stages delineate the functional significance between organizational change and change implementation. The organizational life has been made inevitable feature by global, technological and economic pace, and many models of organizational change have acknowledged the influence of implicit dimensions at one stage or more stages of organizational change process (Burke, 2008; Wilkins & Dyer, 1988), and these models imitate different granular levels affecting the process of organizational change, and each level of them identifies distinctive change implementation stages (By, 2005). A model of organizational change in Kurt Lewin’s three steps change process context was introduced in this study; which reflects momentous stages in change implementation process. Kurt Lewin’s model is the early fundamental planned change models explaining the striving forces to maintain the status quo and pushing for change (Lewin, 1947). To change the “quasistationary equilibrium” stage, one may increase the striving forces for change, or decrease the forces maintaining the status quo, or the combination of both forces for proactive and reactive organizational change through knowledge sharing of individual willingness with the help of stimulating change leadership style. The Lewin’s model was used from an ethnographic study assumed for the investigation of the Lewin’s model for change development, mediates implementation and leadership initiatives for change in complex organizations. The focus of this research on (i) how Lewin’s change model granulates change, (ii) how knowledge sharing affects the change implementation process, (iii) how employees involve in change and willingness to change, and (iv) how leadership style affects the organizational change process in organization.

Purpose In recent times, organizations and leaders are focusing on new strategies to increase the success rate of organizational change (OC) implementation. Therefore, the study attempts to uncover the sources and role of knowledge sharing (KS) to overcome the challenges of OC implementation. Design For this research, data have been gathered from respondents based on their key designations by using unstructured interview method. Thematic analysis was then performed using the NVivo 11-Plus software. Findings It has found that employees in public sector organizations are opposing OC due to lack of effective communication, lower level of participation in decision making, and barriers of, for example, a cultural, social, structural, and political nature. Therefore, this study suggests how KS can employ to overcome the challenges of OC implementation. Implications KS has become necessary to ensure incremental and radical changes in the survival of dynamic businesses. The results are useful to enhance understanding regarding the role of KS in the context of OC among change leaders, researchers, academicians, and policy makers. Originality The study provides meaningful and novel knowledge regarding role of KS to overcome the challenges of OC implementation. No prior research that contributes practical and theoretical knowledge in the perspective of KS and OC has been found especially in the context of developing countries and Asian culture. Therefore, this investigation attempts to explore the role of KS and presented overarching conceptual framework in the real context of OC implementation.

Introduction

KS has been recognized as a most significant construct of knowledge management (Hendriks, 1999; Baskerville and Dulipovici, 2006; Muqadas et al., 2016). KS is increasing viewed as an important feature of a successful organization (Vong, Zo, and Ciganek, 2016). It is found that KS among employees extensively influences the performance of both private and public sector organizations (Silvi and Cuganesan, 2006). In knowledge management studies, the public sector is an important research context (Massaro, Dumay, and Garlatti, 2015). A study is revealed that most of the researchers have focused on role of KS in private sector organizations (Sandhu et al., 2011). Other researchers argue that role of KS in public sector organizations have not yet gained substantial attention among researchers (Amayah, 2013; Willem, and Buelens, 2007). KS has described as a positive intentions of employees to share knowledge with their colleagues (Gibbert and Krause, 2002). Some other researchers have explained KS as a process through which knowledge (i.e. information, expertise, and competencies) is shared among employees, families, friends, communities, and organizations (Alsam, Rehman, and Imran, 2016; Bosua and Scheepers, 2007). Furthermore, KS refers to create task information, providing optimal solutions to resolve organizational issues and implementing policies, developing new ideas and facilitating synchronization among colleagues and supervisors (Alsam et al., 2016; Dorsey, 2003). In the context of progression of technology and competitive strategies, KS would be beneficially applied to bring new changes in an organization (Park and Kim, 2015). Knowledge management has focused on creating, managing, and sharing knowledge for resolving organizational issues i.e. resistance to the implementation of OC, low level of employee participation in organizational activities, and a lack of knowledge regarding the benefits of OC (Imran et al., 2016; Park and Kim, 2015). KS can enhance competency skills and enable employees to respond positively to OC (Fehér, 2004; Yang, 2007).

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate new emerging organizational parameters and their roles in successful change implementation. These organizational parameters are rarely investigated especially in the context of organizational change (OC) in private and public sector organizations. Design/methodology/approach – In cumulative, 403 valid responses have been obtained randomly from public sector workers by using self-administered questionnaires. Findings – The results reveal that knowledge sharing regarding incremental and radical changes can helpful for effective OC implementation. Findings highlight the significant role of emotional and social intelligence in managing resistance and bringing openness to change in these organizations. It is also found that social media has become an important emerging organizational parameter to foster effective communication and knowledge sharing during OC implementation. Apart from the direct effects, readiness to change has multiple effects coupled with emerging organizational parameters to implement change successfully. Research limitations/implications – The results of the current study offer diversified implications for theory, practice and global society. The theoretical base is taken from the well-known theories of management (i.e. Lewin’s three-step model, field theory, intelligence theory, cost-effective theory, social exchange theory, social network theory and social penetration theory). Emerging organizational parameters that have a potential impact on effective change implementation are identified. The findings suggest that global organizations should have to initiate effective networking structure using social media applications and social intelligence skills to remain connected and get positive responses about change formulation and implementation decision. Originality/value – A majority of studies have presented the research model on OC implementation in the context of developed countries, which form 30 percent of the world’s population, mostly the Americas and Europe. It is observed that a developing country, such as Pakistan, has a culture that is based on power distance, collectivism and more political influence as compared to developed countries. Triandis et al. (1980) argued that any theoretical contribution without considering the cultural aspect can lead to bias findings. There is limited research available in the world that is conducted to examine the interactive effects of readiness to change on the relationship between effective change implementation, knowledge sharing, intelligence and social media. These findings are useful to plan and execute OC using new emerging organizational parameters.

Introduction

A large number of researchers have investigated the negative consequences of planned organizational change (OC) such as the detrimental effects of organizational cynicism (Aslam et al., 2016a), employee turnover (Aslam et al., 2015), low level of commitment to change (Aslam et al., 2015; Bernerth et al., 2007), low level of job satisfaction (Aslam et al., 2016a), resistance to change (Stanley et al., 2005) and employee stress (Dahl, 2011). Various studies have investigated the causes of failures of OCs (Amburgey et al., 1990; Aslam et al., 2015, 2016a; Attaran, 2000; Beer and Nohria, 2000; Decker et al., 2012; Lally, 2004; Probst and Raisch, 2005). However, more specifically, OC processes and implementation are researched in the context of traditional management literature such as resistance, cynicism, politics, injustice, job insecurity, power, stress, anxiety, fatigue, support, improper information, rewards, influence, commitment and withdrawal. Furthermore, the extant of literature is available on traditional OC parameters such as trust in management (Aslam et al., 2015), employees’ participation (Aslam et al., 2016a), information about change, job security, organizational rewards (Oreg, 2006), change-related self-efficacy, personal impact, social support (Wanberg and Banas, 2000), justice (Bernerth et al., 2007), openness to change (Axtell et al., 2002), affective response to change ( Jack Walker et al., 2007), readiness for change (Madsen et al., 2005), organizational culture, organizational climate and management support (Martin et al., 2005). The above-discussed traditional OC parameters have already been widely studied. On the other hand, several studies have given planned approaches for OC implementation such as three-step change model, field theory, group dynamics, action research, complexity theories and eight steps of transforming the organizations (Kotter, 1996; Lewin, 1947a, b; Mathews et al., 1999). In the presence of these OC approaches, some studies have yet stated that 28, 30, 40, 70 and 93 percent of OC initiatives are unsuccessful (Balogun and Hope Hailey, 2004; Beer and Nohria, 2000; Bridgeforth, 2000; Burnes, 2000; Cândido and Santos, 2008; Greiner, 1967; Kotter, 2007; Wong et al., 2005). On top of that, some researchers documented that there are limited successful organizational parameters found yet (Aslam et al., 2016a; Hrebiniak, 2006; Hutzschenreuter and Kleindienst, 2006; Lally, 2004). Therefore, this study aims to unfold emerging organizational parameters that have not been widely studied yet, such as the role of emotional intelligence, social intelligence and social media in the successful implementation of change.

Purpose – The role of imagination (Gioia et al., 2002; Weick, 1995, 2005, 2006) and the potential of distributed sensemaking (Weick et al., 2005) are highlighted in existing sensemaking studies in a distinct manner. The purpose of this paper is to articulate these two perspectives by observing a specific sensemaking process defined as “distributed imagining process (DIP)” in this paper. Design/methodology/approach – From an observation conducted in 2016 within a French public organization regarding an operation that invited all organizational actors to imagine the future of their work life, this study analyzed 777 collected texts, through an inductive and qualitative approach, for understanding DIP’s functioning and results. Findings – This study identified that what actors imagine about the future is a self-contextualized observation and an interpretation of the present incorporated into an imagined future. With a distributed modality, individual imagining processes might interact with collective processes for contributing organizational change sensemaking. Originality/value – Adopting a temporality that positions the future as an imagined interpretative prolongation of the present and the past (Gioia et al., 2002), this study suggests that the combination of self-contextualized imagining process and distributed modality might be inspiring for exploring more inductive and enriched organizational sensemaking through, on the one hand, the reduction of cognitive constraints implicitly imposed by organizational and temporal contexts and, on the other hand, the incitation of interactions in and between individual and collective sensemaking processes.

Introduction

From a temporality accentuating the articulation of the past and the present, most sensemaking studies are interested in how organizational actors’ sensemaking is accomplished in the past for understanding their enactment in the present. Fully recognizing the relevance of retrospective processes in the construction of “what happened” and in the understanding of “what we did”, this research attempts to extend this approach by exploring a sensemaking process based on a temporality that articulates the present and the imagined future (Colville et al., 1999; Gioia et al., 2002; Wright et al., 2013) in the context of organizational change. More specifically, this research is interested in a distributed imagining process (DIP), which the author considers to be a specific sensemaking process. DIP could be defined, in the sensemaking context, as an inductive interactive process aimed to stimulate individuals’ sensemaking regarding to organizational change through their interpretation about imagined future, in order to trigger or enrich collective sensemaking toward organizational change. Around this definition, the first point to clarify is about the temporality of DIP in this study. The research question of this study focuses on organizational actors’ sensemaking at the present through what they imagine and interpret about the future. From this sense, beyond its apparent future-oriented form, DIP is not a prospective process seeking to predict the future from the present or the past. Neither is it a prescriptive process by which actors look to communicate, influence or convince. In a distributed future-imagining process, there is not a previous dominant story (Näslund and Pemer, 2012). The materialization of the process is more antenarrative (Boje, 2011) rather than narrative. It is composed of different puzzles resulted of an interpretative work (Weick, 2012) accomplished at two levels: the micro level and the meso level. At the micro level, sensemaking is an individual process from which an interpretative work is accomplished through the clues and connections (Weick, 1995) perceived by every individual. At the meso level, organizational actors trigger, conscientiously or unconscientiously, a dominant or sometimes a polyphonic (Cunliffe and Coupland, 2012) interpretation in an organizational context.

Purpose – Existing research on the organizational implications of the introduction of new information technology (IT) has neglected to focus on the anticipation of organizational change. In this paper, the author examines the extended pre-implementation phase prior to the introduction of the largest-ever health IT (HIT) implementation in Denmark. The purpose of this paper is to expand the conceptualization of organizational change to include the neglected pre-implementation phase preceding large-scale organizational change projects. Design/methodology/approach – The research is based on qualitative data consisting of interviews, documents and observations gathered during a three-year research project in the Danish health sector. An important source of methodical inspiration has been grounded theory, which has allowed the pertinent interview themes to evolve and allowed for the gradual development of a theoretical framework. Findings – The main finding of this paper is that the anticipatory pre-implementation phase is not simply passive waiting time for organizational members. Evidence from a three-year research project demonstrates how organizational members engage in recurring patterns of sensemaking, positioning and scripting of possible futures in preparation for the organizational changes that next generation HIT imposes. The study argues that resistance to organizational change may be better understood as resistance to having to give up institutionalized rights and responsibilities. Originality/value – The paper offers a conceptual model—the anticipation cycle—that enables the systematic analysis of the relational mechanisms at work when organizational members are preparing for pending organizational change. Early analysis based on the anticipation cycle enables organizations and scholars to bring previously black-boxed anticipatory patterns into the equation of organizational change.

Introduction

It is well established in organization studies that technology and information technology (IT) implementations affect relationships in organizations (e.g. Barley, 1986; Orlikowski, 1992; Perrow, 1967) and that for an IT implementation to be successful, the receiving organization needs to adapt (e.g. Burton-Jones and Grange, 2013; Orlikowski, 2000). The successful organizational implementation of new technologies is not merely a question of plugging in hardware, installing software and training users. From a health informatics perspective, focus has, e.g., been placed on the organizational consequences of the implementation of electronic health records (e.g. Berg, 2001; Greenhalgh et al., 2013; Lorenzi and Riley, 2010). A shared characteristic of the studies mentioned above and of the majority of the existing studies in organization studies, IT studies and health studies are, however, the focus on completed or ongoing implementations. I argue that by focusing exclusively on the experiences of past and present technology implementations, an important aspect of the implementations of new technology is missed. What about the months and years that precede the “go-live” of large-scale IT solutions, where organizational members know that changes are coming but know little or nothing specific about how they will be affected? What about the future? What can be learned from people’s anticipations and the antenarratives (Boje, 1991, 2001) of those on the receiving end of health IT (HIT)? I propose that organizational change projects that neglect to take anticipation adequately into consideration are at risk of creating blind spots and thus sowing the seeds of future problems when progressing from ideas and plans to action and actual change.

Leading organizational change involves many leadership skills. The literature indicates that there is one basic underlying skill: the ability to form and use judgment that is informed by analysis and experience. The literature also indicates that constructing and implementing good judgment from analysis and experience requires discretion in terms of autonomy and power. However, the findings from a field study of leaders with strong reputations as change agents demonstrated that it was difficult for change agents to have both autonomy and power. This result introduces critical but underexplored dilemmas associated with balancing autonomy and power in leading change. This article argues that balancing might occur when change agents have learned to understand and handle the dilemmas, and it describes enabling conditions for this learning. Furthermore, a future research agenda is indicated.

Introduction

Leading change so that an organization can adapt to new demands and challenges related to efficiency, effectiveness, social image, and legitimacy involves a number of leadership skills (Burke, 2014; Burnes, 2014; Kakabadse & Kakabadse, 1999); Kotter, 2005; March & Weil, 2005; Northhouse, 2010; Schein, 2010; Yukl, 2012). The literature indicates that there is one basic underlying skill: the ability to form and use judgment that is informed by analysis and experience (March 1994). The literature also indicates that constructing and implementing good judgment from analysis and experience requires discretion (Hambrick, 2007; Kotter, 2005; March & Weil, 2005; Northhouse, 2010; Yukl, 2012). A large portion of contemporary research on organizational change envisions organizational change as the result of the intentions and actions of leaders, and a high level of discretion is assumed to enhance leaders’ impact on the outcomes. When leaders as change agents have discretion, they have freedom of choice and, in turn, the autonomy and power to influence and structure the field of possible actions in change processes. In relation to this perspective, Foucault (1982) claimed that influencing the actions of others requires not only the capacity to act freely but also the capacity to exercise power. If there is no space to act freely, then there is no way for power to influence the actions of others. Hence, leaders have to combine or balance autonomy and power in leading change.This article is concerned with discretion in terms of autonomy and power, but the focus is on what actually happens when change agents attempt to balance autonomy and power in leading organizational change. In exploring this issue, the article proceeds as follows. First, I will outline the main features of the study’s theoretical concepts. Second, the method employed in a field study will be discussed. I will then present the results from the study and elaborate on the findings to identify principles for understanding how and under what conditions balancing autonomy and power might occur in leading organizational change. This discussion is followed by a conclusion.