Predicting Organizational Change Success: Matching Organization Type, Change Type and Capabilities

By Waldersee, Robert; Griffiths, Andrew et al. | Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, January 2003 | Go to article overview

Predicting Organizational Change Success: Matching Organization Type, Change Type and Capabilities


Waldersee, Robert, Griffiths, Andrew, Lai, Jessica, Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship


Executive Summary

The increasingly global world in which organizations operate has created an unstable environment that requires continuous change for most organizations. Burns and Stalker (1961) have argued that mechanistic organizations are not as suited to change as organic organizations. While mechanistic organizations have functional capabilities suited to operational efficiency, the formalized, and hierarchical nature of the organizations limits their ability to change. Organic organizations on the other hand, are thought to have capabilities which suit them to reshaping and reinventing themselves. A survey was used to study the implementation of major changes in 153 organizations. The results of the study indicate that mechanistic organizations were successful at implementing technical-structural change, but less successful at behavioral-social change. Organic organizations were equally successful at implementing both technical-structural and behavioral-social changes. These findings suggest that the argument that mechanistic firms cannot adapt to unstable environments is not correct. Mechanistic organizations may better cope with instability in the environment by identifying technical and structural change options rather than attempting to cope with instability through social and behavioral change. The results also indicate that managers understand the capabilities needed to implement behavioral-social change, and that deficits in these areas are related to the failure of change. That managers understand the capabilities needed for change, but are unable to develop them raises issues around the utility of prescriptive change recommendations.

The dynamic and increasingly global world in which organisations operate has created an unstable environment that requires continuous change for most organisations (Beer, Eisenstat & Spector, 1990; Beer & Walton, 1987; Dunphy & Stace, 1992; Tushman, Newman & Romanelli, 1986). Large organisations in particular, have been forced to undergo significant and profound change due to the increasingly competitive environment (Nadler & Tushman, 1989). Tushman et al. (1986) argue that while they may not always succeed, organisations which do not initiate change in response to changing environments will under-perform.

Within the management field, Burns and Stalker (1961) initiated a view which is seldom questioned. They argued that many mechanistic organizations are not as suited to change as organic organizations. Mechanistic firms are viewed as formalized, bureaucratic, and having structural and process characteristics that render them less capable of change than organic organizations. If correct, and competition is becoming increasingly dynamic, then the change efforts of mechanistic organizations should be failing to allow them to adapt to the unstable environment (Hitt, Keats and De Marie, 1998).

However, not all environmental instability and resultant changes are the same (D'Aveni, 1999; March, 1981). There exist potentially important differences in the types of changes that organizations undertake, and different organizational types may be suited to different types of change. Changes which rely on shifts in attitude, behavior and culture are qualitatively different from changes which involve the introduction of new technologies, processes and structures (Dunphy & Stace, 1992).

With strong communication and adaptive capabilities, organic organizations are well positioned for changes involving attitudes and behavior. However with strong functional capabilities, mechanistic organizations may be suited to the implementation of technical and structural changes. The difficulty mechanistic organizations may face in unstable environments could be restricted to change that is primarily attitudinal, behavioral or cultural.

Challenging Burns and Stalker's (1961) argument that only organic organizational types are appropriate for unstable environments, the current study investigates whether organic and mechanistic organizations are both equally capable of change, albeit of different types.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Predicting Organizational Change Success: Matching Organization Type, Change Type and Capabilities
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.