1
Juggling in the middle
Middle managers’ perceptions on leading through the
complexity of change
Fanny Bergkvist and Anna Johansson D’Ath
Stockholm Business School
Master’s Degree Thesis 30 HE credits Subject: Management
Program: [Master program in leadership], 120 HE credits Spring semester 2016
2
Acknowledgements
We would like to express our gratitude to our supervisor, Ass. Professor Svante Schriber at Stockholm Business School for providing guidance during the research process.
We would also like to sincerely thank our supervisor at the case company, for providing us with enthusiasm and valuable advice regarding the empirical data collection. Finally, we would like to send out our gratitude towards our respondents, who have provided us with insights into their profession in an open-minded manner. A special thank you to the people travelling far to participate in this study.
Sincerely,
3
Abstract
Dealing with change is crucial for organizations in order to survive in today's constantly changing business environment, such tasks are included in the role of the middle managers’. There are plenty of studies made on change and how managers’ successfully should lead through change, but managers’ own perceptions and considerations of what is important when proceeding with change, seems less researched. The aim of this paper is to contribute with a better understanding of how middle managers’ perceive their own position and leadership in change. A case study was conducted on a large international company within the construction and property development industry. The study is based on significant competences and procedures required by middle managers’, when leading through change. The methodology used was a deductive and qualitative approach, and contain in-depth interviews on middle managers’ perceptions on change. In total, 18 middle managers’ was interviewed and the interviews were then transcribed, thematized and presented through quotes. Our results indicate that middle managers’ perception of leading teams through change is a difficult process due to the often short time frames, high expectations coming from above and leadership norms shaped in society. From a learning perspective, a change process is suggested to be less focused on the leader and rather enable the whole team to manage change. The most neglected aspects of learning was to take the time to reflect and to consider mistakes as part of a learning process.
Key words: Leadership perception, Leading change, Learning through change, Middle managers’
4 ABSTRACT ... 3 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ... 5 1.1 BACKGROUND ... 5 1.2 CASE COMPANY ... 6 1.3 PROBLEMATIZATION ... 7
1.4 AIM AND PURPOSE ... 7
CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW ... 9
2.1 PREVIOUS RESEARCH ... 9
2.1.1 Complexity of leading change ... 9
2.1.2 The focus on the leader ... 9
2.1.3 Leading change in steps ... 10
2.2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ... 11
2.2.1 Leading change ... 11
2.2.2 Communicating change ... 12
2.2.3 Accepting and believing in change ... 13
2.2.4 Leading teams through change ... 14
2.2.5 Learning in change ... 15
2.2.6 Enabling reflection ... 16
CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY ... 20
3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN AND STRATEGY ... 20
3.2 DEDUCTIVE APPROACH ... 21 3.3 SELECTION OF RESPONDENTS ... 21 3.4 COLLECTION OF DATA ... 22 3.5 DATA ANALYSIS ... 22 3.6 VALIDITY ... 23 3.7 INTERNAL VALIDITY ... 23 3.8 ETHICAL ASPECTS ... 24 3.9 METHODOLOGICAL LIMITATIONS ... 25
3.10 THE RESEARCH PROCESS ... 25
CHAPTER 4 ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ... 26
4.1 BACKGROUND TO THE CASE ... 26
4.2 PERCEPTIONS OF LEADING CHANGE ... 26
4.2.1 Perceptions of communicating change ... 28
4.2.2 Perceptions of accepting and believing in change ... 28
4.2.3 Perceptions of leading teams through change ... 30
4.2.4 Perceptions of learning in change ... 32
4.2.5 Perceptions of enabling reflection ... 33
CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION & CRITICAL REFLECTION ... 35
5.1 THEMATIZATION OF FINDINGS ... 36
5.2 PRACTICAL CONTRIBUTION TO KNOWLEDGE ... 38
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION ... 40
6.1 FUTURE RESEARCH ... 43
CHAPTER 7: LIMITATIONS OF RESEARCH ... 44
REFERENCES ... 45
5
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
Dealing with change is crucial for organizations’ to survive in today's constantly changing business environment (Brown & Eisenhardt, 1997; Burns 2004). In order to keep up with such a rapidly changing environment, companies need managers that can lead through change (Brimm, 2015; Burke, 1992), who are able to deal with varied circumstances connected to organizational change (Kotter & Schledinger, 2008). However, more than half of change initiatives fail (Young, 2009; Cabrey & Haughey, 2014). Even though some succeed, they are not entirely successful, either being more time consuming than first expected, emotionally difficult and/or exceeding budget (Kotter & Schledinger, 2008). When reorganizations occur feelings of fear and threat usually appear, resulting in increased costs and a lack of efficiency (Kotter & Schledinger, 2008). Selander and Henfridsson (2012) describe that, change can be troublesome due to delays, unethical behaviors and cynicism. Commitment is an important aspect when going through change, but it is also considered important to look at attitudes, change behaviours, emotions and reactions (Herold, Fedor, Caldwell & Liu, 2008). Ricciardi and Schaller (2005) argue that within management literature, change is usually connected to success, neglecting possible shortcomings. When projects are finished success factors are considered, while mistakes many times are forgotten (Ricciardi & Schaller, 2005). Kotter and Shledinger (2008) claim, that many managers’ underestimate the variety of reactions on how employees respond to change, along with the managers’ perception on their own ability to influence these reactions, revealing a focus on the manager within change literature. The most prominent behaviour expressed throughout change literature is resistance, which is expressed to be one of the many responsibilities for managers’ to influence and reduce (Lorenzi & Riley, 2000). Moreover, Kotter (2012) claim, that change can benefit from a manager who is proactive in the procedures of implementing change processes. For
instance, to take proactive measures, it is suggested that managers’ have a clear vision, empower employees, support them and communicate the message appropriately.
Managers’ have been deeply affected by the increased urgency of organizational change, according to Dobson and Stewart (1990). Furthermore, the task of handling change have mainly landed on middle managers’, who at the same time are stuck in a hierarchy, exposed for pressure from above and below (Dobson & Stewart, 1990). Adding even more pressure to
6
managers’ are the dehumanization of the role of being a manager (Petriglieri & Petriglieri, 2015). According to the authors, the understanding of the leadership role, have been narrowed down to include a goal-focus with an aspiring set of skills and into a virtue. Such virtue may include unaffectedness to the pull of incentives and the push of emotions. In this sense leadership becomes disembodied through the rejection of identity, community and context (Petriglieri & Petriglieri, 2015).
There are plenty of studies made on change and how managers’ successfully should lead through change. There are many different models and recommended leadership attributes on how a leader should lead. There is also a lot of research on how leaders’ ideally should act in best practise procedures. These procedures are for instance suggested by Kotter's (2012) change model of eight stages, and by Lewin’s functional approach, followed by a three step stage model of “freeze, unfreeze, refreeze” group behaviours, in order to manage teams in change (Burnes & Cooke, 2013).
Managers’ own perceptions and considerations of what is important when proceeding with change, seems to be less researched. Sveningsson and Alvesson (2010) argue, that research sometimes neglects the importance of the leader’s context, in order to achieve universal truths and generalised results. We are interested in finding out how these rather functionalistic management perspectives on change are perceived in reality. Both to see when current theoretical perspectives correlate and when they do not correlate with practise but also to
highlight middle managers’ perspectives on change and learning in relation to each other.
Therefore, we want to fill this theoretical gap, consisting of the managers’ own perception of the complexity of change in practise. This is interesting in order to better understand the complexity of change and the context of the middle managers’ role within change. Therefore, we want to contribute with knowledge and a deeper understanding of middle managers’ own perception on leading change.
1.2 Case company
The case company is operating within the construction and building industry. This company is interesting to study in relation to change due to its high contrast between being a large,
traditional and hierarchical organisation operating in a rapidly changing market. The company has recently implemented a new strategy to unite large parts of the organization. This change is the largest one in 15 years and the aim with the new, extensive change initiative is to enhance the sharing of knowledge and resources, to respond to market demands more rapidly.
7
Middle managers’ have been interviewed about their leadership, whereas both “managers” and “leaders” are used as terms throughout this report.
1.3 Problematization
Change projects have a tendency to start with a coherent planning stage but miss out following up on the finished outcome (Meredith & Mantel, 1995). Gino and Staats (2015) claim that short-time behaviors are lacking in long-term solutions. A long-term perspective on change, include instruments of how learning can affect the outcome of change to a higher extent (Gino & Staats, 2015; Dweck, 2015). Since over half of organizational changes fail (Young, 2009) this area is crucial to continue researching and might benefit from extended theoretical contributions. There is an organisational perspective, or at least organisational vocabulary in current change literature, downplaying the human perspective on change (Petriglieri & Petriglieri, 2015). This is problematic since change managers and employees are the actual ones changing and going through change. Not understanding middle managers’ perspectives on change is severe, as they are the ones implementing change and living
through the complexity of change. Specified competences in literature have been conflicting with practice, one competence can be used diversely by different managers that are operating within different contexts (Caldwell, 2003). The solution is therefore to research managers’ perspectives on leading change, which is important, both from a theoretical and practical perspective.
1.4 Aim and purpose
The aim of this paper is to contribute with a better understanding of how middle managers perceive their own position and leadership in change. But also to pinpoint discrepancies and similarities between theory and practise by investigate middle managers implications when leading change. The finished outcome is expected to both deepen and broaden an
understanding of how these perceptions are manifested in reality and more extensively contribute to current theories on change. This will provide the literature with a more nuanced perspective on change. To nuance and include more, in-depth, subjective perspectives on change, we can move closer toward understanding more perspectives of the complexity. To better grip the complexity of change is necessary for everyone operating in today's business environment including organisations within both the private and the public sector. This phenomenon is also important to study, compare and analyse in order to enrich and test
8
perspectives within current change literature. To reach our purpose, qualitative data will be collected in a single case study interviewing eighteen middle managers’ during an on going change process. This choice of method is used in order to reach a deeper understanding of middle managers own perceptions on leading change. To reach our aim, the following research question was formulated:
How do middle managers’ perceive their leadership when leading their teams through change?
To further understand this phenomenon, the following sub-question was formulated: What are the major discrepancies and/or similarities between theory and practise for
9
CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW
The first part of this chapter will present previous research within the field of organisational change and learning. The second part regards our theoretical framework, which is structured in accordance to the thematization made from the data.2.1 Previous research
Change literature has pinpointed the complexity of leading change and unpredictable human behaviour. Presumptions in relation to idealised leadership, has revealed a possible
shortcoming in current literature as it is also argued to be focusing too much on the leader, forgetting team competences. Some suggests simplified step-by-step models but these aspects are argued by others to be neglecting the context. The literature is not coherent regarding change and learning in multiple aspects, but most parts are agreeing upon how crucial it is to somewhat comprehend this complexity. To sort out the different concepts, ideas and possible shortcomings these will now be presented.
2.1.1 Complexity of leading change
Managing change include dealing with emotions, and as Burke (1992) exemplifies, dealing with the unpredictability of human behaviour. Even changes that seem rational and are received as something positive can contain emotions of uncertainty (Kotter & Schledinger, 2008). There are techniques for how one can avoid these uncertainties, and in the long run resistance. Resistance is a returning theme throughout change literature, with many
suggestions and explanations on how to avoid. For instance, recommendations made by Burke (1992), on avoiding resistance are that managers should try to let go of the past, recognize staff members through feedback and communicate the right amount of information. These aspects are to be considered to proactively handle in change procedures to avoid mistakes, claims Burke (1992).
2.1.2 The focus on the leader
Caldwell (2003) argues that the role of the middle manager is of high importance when implementing change, due to their central role and responsibilities during change. Caldwell (2003) suggests that there is a difference between project management and the skillset
required to implement change. Change beneficial competences are rarely overlapping, and are usually demonstrated with learning, forecasting anticipation and creating change (Caldwell,
10
2003). Managing large-scale changes is very complex and involves a high risk whereas the skillset goes beyond the skills of a project manager, according to Caldwell (2003).
It is however common that organisational members look at their manager as the expert, excluding their own learning process and competences (O’Brian & Buono, 1996). Here it is important for managers’ to see the value from each team member, with an aim to move away from the expert role. Suggested instead is to see the potential within the whole team and encourage the learning processes within the team (O’Brian & Buono, 1996). O’Brian and Buono (1996) emphasise the importance of managers’ raising team competences, learning processes and that they see the potential of the whole team. This reasoning goes in line with, Boies, Fiset and Gill (2015), who argue that in complex and competitive environments’ organisations’ depends on collaboration and teamwork.
2.1.3 Leading change in steps
The change literature has emphasised how managers’ should go about change. One perspective of how this should be processed, is established by Kotter (2012), discussing change with a step model, aiming to avoid risks of anxiety, cynicism and resistance. The steps include implying urgency that the change is important, creating appropriate guidance, support and strong coalitions. It is also suggested not underestimate the power of a vision, which is more important than the above points mentioned, and is key to change as it gives direction, align co-workers, inspires and affects multiple people in the organisation at once (Kotter, 2012). The importance of communicating the vision and explaining its potential is also crucial in the steps, and then to empowering, support people to proceed with the new vision. The final step is about incorporating the changes as the only way to behave, both in corporate culture and work tasks (Kotter, 2012).
The model by Kotter has been criticised for neglecting the context of the change (Appelbaum, Habashy, Malo & Shafiq, 2012). It has also been criticised for ignoring the individual.
Suggested, by Appelbaum et al (2012), is to combine Kotters’ model with other change models, dependent on the need and context. In favour for Kotter, is his reasoning at the time regarding that the main problem people face in change is not due to strategies, structures, cultures or systems but the changing of people's behaviours (Appelbaum et al., 2012).
11
2.2 Theoretical Framework
2.2.1 Leading change
A common description of leadership throughout management literature, is emphasising the
leader’s ability to “lead with a vision” and reach targeted goals: “The movement of others in the direction of goals that are clearly fixed as a vision in the mind of the leader and the use of those others to achieve the end state desired by the leader” (Cartwright, 2002:115).
Moreover, Pendleton and Furnham (2011) describe the attributes of a leader, as a person who is again, lifting a person's vision and raising performance and personalities to a higher
standard, beyond limitations.
According to Dobson and Stewart (1990), many middle managers’ are stuck in the middle of hierarchy and have become frustrated and disillusioned. Organisations’ need to respond quickly in order to survive and these implications has mainly landed on middle management, argue Dobson and Stewart (1990). The pressures of being responsible for change include factors as; intensified global competition, deregulation of markets, changing attitudes to authority and demographic changes (Dobson & Stewart, 1990). Furthermore, Petriglieri and Petriglieri (2015) describe that leadership has been dehumanized which includes a process of narrowing down our understanding of leadership to include goal-focus with an aspiring set of skills and into a virtue. Such virtue may include unaffectedness to the pull of incentives and the push of emotions. In this sense leadership becomes disembodied through the rejection of identity, community and context. By doing so, the nature of leadership as a form of personal expression and social stewardship is ignored. Furthermore, such conduct denies the
ambiguity, emotional dilemmas and relational dynamics that leadership entails. According to the authors, this dehumanization process has created a rift between people in leadership positions and their followers, and if not given attention one can become complicit in sustaining it (Petriglieri & Petriglieri, 2015).
In change literature the leaders competences are often in focus. Sveningsson and Alvesson (2010) question the leadership qualities when presented as continuously something positive. According to Sveningsson and Alvesson (2010) the leader is often described as a subject for change and development, as well as the person to attain the holistic picture and develop enthusiastic employees. The work leaders are today in the spotlight and expected to
implement change, develop, engage and formulate visions into reality, and described as more or less heroes determining whether organisations will survive or not (Sveningsson &
12
Alvesson, 2010). For instance, suggested by Caldwell (2003) interpersonal skills the leaders should have include team building competencies, communicating and being a good listener, as well as good at motivating change. Caldwell (2003) continues with suggesting qualities such as to be good in dealing with uncertainty, motivating staff members and to be flexible in their leadership. Other wanted personal attributes of managers’ are being risk taking and having a positive attitude towards change (Caldwell, 2003). Important change competences of leaders are to engage, motivate and lead followers in the right direction (Herold, Fedor, Caldwell & Liu, 2008; Dalton, 1970). Furthermore, to be communicating expected
performance and appropriate behavior, as well as providing intellectual stimulation and to be supportive as a leader are described as important qualities of leaders (Dalton, 1970).
On the subject of motivating employees for change there are other views expressing different opinions on the leader's ability to motivate change. According to, Knights and McCabe (2000), many employees are already committed, even beyond the call of duty, but
management are still not in control (Knights & McCabe, 2000). Another aspect emphasized to attain as a leader during change is trust, in order to motivate and create effective teams.
2.2.2 Communicating change
The leader is suggested to be an excellent communicator during change and to deliver
transparency (Jacobsen, 2005) and customized messages (Amy, 2008). According to Jacobsen (2005) information gathered must be variated and at the same time be transparent throughout the organisation, whereas the absorption and also the transparency of information is crucial. A tightly connected internal environment must therefore be created in order for communication flows to work within and between teams (Jacobsen, 2005). According to Amy (2008), leaders can, through individual, collective and critical reflection guide others in dialogue. This
process involves creating shared meanings by providing constructive confrontation, make subtle suggestions, raise alternative perspectives and customize messages based on the needs of the receiver.
According to Marks (2007), it is important to formally try to have employees adapting to the transition of change by being optimistic when communicating where the organisation is heading. It is good to enable a somewhat stable environment, even though it is constantly changing (Marks, 2007).
13
2.2.3 Accepting and believing in change
To believe in the purpose and to avoid resistance as a leader is described as important when leading change. Challenges can consist of both the uncertainty when having an unclear purpose (Marks, 2007). One major challenge is for employees and leaders to end old
behaviours and accept change, according to Marks (2007). It is important also to take the time to allow staff members to deal with their feelings regarding the change (Marks, 2007). Stages of change will follow whether leaders like it or not, whereas time for closure is suggested for the new processes to naturally proceed, claims Marks (2007). Large-scale programs usually affect the whole organisation and can have dangerous consequences if not successfully implemented, yet quick fixes are often used (Caldwell, 2003). Carlson and Nilsson (1999) describe that there is a high risk in change if it goes to fast, whereas the employees do not fully understand the purpose of the change and instead decide to go back to old behaviours. It is important that leaders inform subordinates about the change and its value, in order to avoid resistance towards the change (Dalton, 2007). Sometimes employee resistance is described as irrational, however this can be a predictable result dependent upon how the change is
communicated, and whether old behaviours are accepted or not, claims Dalton (1970). Many organisational programs that are prematurely initiated do not persist in the long run (French, Bell & Zawacki, 1994).
Other than establishing a vision, a buy in, working out tough decisions and creating models for successful behaviors there are also the leaders own experiences to consider when
researching change mechanisms, according to Ashby and Miles (2002). Careful guidance is also important throughout the process and to explain how it will proceed for involved members to make the employees understand the change, but also to consider the importance in understanding the complications that can occur. Once the leaders understand the change it needs to be shared and understood by staff members including the what and the why (Ashby & Miles, 2002).
Cynicism is described as something devastating for organisations going through change, and this should be reduced by the leader introducing the change (Boomer, Rich & Rubinet, 2003). Cynicism can lead to feelings of unfairness, distrust, low commitment, being against the organisation and even staff members leaving the organisation. Moreover, cynicism is expressed as to include negative behaviors such as less motivation, performance and attentiveness to feedback (Boomer, Rich & Rubinet, 2003). Reducing cynicism is therefore
14
important to consider for organisational change processes according to this perspective on change. Reassurance, providing information and reducing surprises is therefore suggested (Boomer, Rich & Rubinet, 2003).
Resistance in organisational change is often seen as a hindrance or a negative factor, according to Thomas, Sargent and Hardy (2011), but the author’s studies also show that resistance can be useful in different aspects. The conventional perception of resistance in change literature is that “resistance is an inevitable and natural reaction, triggered because individuals are fearful, have resistant personalities, or misunderstand the benefits of the proposed change” (Thomas, Sargent & Hardy 2011: 35). Thomas, Sargent and Hardy (2011) suggest that resistance can play a facilitative role in organisational change for example through conceptual expansion and reframing. This kind of thoughtful resistance can be more effective in organisational change than unquestioned acceptance. Thoughtful resistance is a communicative process, which involves counter-offers by both middle and top managers’ and by change recipients. Thomas, Sargent and Hardy (2011) also highlight the importance for top managers’ to be open for counteroffers, otherwise a degenerative dialogue can arise where change is imposed based on existing knowledge. Hence, if top managers’ or change agents are resistant to new ideas or counter-offers they: “may be as much to blame for failed change initiatives as so-called resistance by subordinates” (Thomas, Sargent & Hardy, 2011: 35). In such situations middle managers’ seldom engage with senior or top managers’ and are more likely to defend their own meanings.
2.2.4 Leading teams through change
The leader of change is considered to lead the group and adapt to different phases of change, dependent upon which phase the group is in. Wheelan (2005) describes that different
development stages of teams require different types of leadership, when proceeding with change. In a newly formed team, members expect the leader to be decisive, confident, structured and focused on the task at hand, according to Wheelan (2005). Since the members do not have time to organize themselves, they rely on the leader to provide structure. The author gives the following advice to reduce the member's anxiety and fear of being rejected: provide positive feedback and create open discussions about goals, values and work tasks. It is also good to consider making sure members feel confident by providing guidance, training and task education. It is suggested when forming teams in change to also, according to Wheelan (2005), not take challenges personal as a leader.
15
When leading change, it is considered of value to involve members in leadership functions by delegating, share the power of decisions and encourage the group to make the necessary structural changes and enhance performance, argues Wheelan (2005). The decisive role of the leader is no longer as important as in the early stages, since the goals and roles have already been clarified, instead the leader takes a more consultative role within the group. In the final stage, the leader becomes an expert member within the group and works alongside the other members in order to reach goals and make the team successful. It is suggested to maintain the team processes, look for signs of regression and important also to continue being an effective team member regardless of which stage the group is in (Wheelan, 2005).
2.2.5 Learning in change
Change management literature has emphasised learning combined with change, as learning is a change process and changing is a learning process, according to Young (2009). When change is effective learning is involved (Young, 2009). According to Yukl (2009)
organisational learning can appear through encouragement and by questioning traditional methods, inspire through vision, facilitate required skills, create a learning culture, develop a
cause-effect relationship and facilitate knowledge sharing through social networks.To acquire
knowledge about the change where the change were effective or ineffective can be helpful, in order to learn about the change. These reviews can indicate when to abandon projects, how to use decentralised subunits and how to implement reward systems for knowledge and learning (Yukl, 2009).
Leaders can facilitate and enable environments for learning, according to Amy (2008), and suggested by Lima (2007), employees can reach a higher level of skills with the help from the leader and colleagues. Amy (2008) describes further that, leaders can facilitate individual and organisational learning, whereas the leadership role as a mentor/coach is the basis to facilitate learning. This role can be seen as an informal and accessible communication style. The aim is to create an open and trusting environment, where the leader facilitates learning by asking questions, teaches employees about personal experiences, clarifies expectations, controls learning projects and maintains standards. Furr and Dyer (2014) argue that leaders need to manage their teams by including aspects of learning, in order to keep up with competition. It is not solely about providing time for reflection but also distributing the right tools. Moreover, not solely focusing on creating new ideas but making the company ready to also process new ideas (Furr & Dyer, 2014).
16
Lima (2007) goes far in the responsibilities by the leader. The leader is personally responsible for employee development including new skills that did not previously exist in the
organisation. Dialogue is the educational leader's tool, using it creates a link between
organisational goals and opportunities for individual development. The dialogue should focus on the immediate future and the dialogue needs to include: the player, positions and the organisation, as well as its associations, to identify and develop these opportunities (Lima, 2007).
Dweck (2015) discusses attitudes in forms of fixed and growth mindset as a process to self appreciate one self’s learning abilities. Employees attitudes and job satisfaction is affected by their viewpoint of the organisation as having a growth or fixed mindset in terms of
empowerment, value for innovation and creativity as well as support for taking risks (Dweck, 2015). It is also important to make mistakes into something you can improve and not as something dangerous. A process based attitude is important in order to provide good
strategies and to view learning as a process rather than a project that ends (Dweck, 2015). The “fixed mindset” -genetics influence intelligence and talent, which decreases the ability to learn as failure and appearance matters largely. Whereas a “growth mindset” means that you are more willing to seek risks and learn from mistakes rather than avoiding them. Dweck (2015) discusses how a growth mindset that includes belief in one's ability to grow and learn, leads to better results compared to people who believe their intelligence is fixed.
There is also critique directed at the concept of learning. According to Levitt and March (1988), when combining action and learning, the concept of intelligence become unclear. Various contexts make it hard to distinguish between the different concepts of intelligence. For example, experimentation with managerial illusions of control and risk taking may be perceived differently in a community than in an organisation. Even within the context of one single organisation the concept “intelligence”, is limited, “learning does not always lead to intelligent behaviour” (Levitt & March, 1988: 534).
2.2.6 Enabling reflection
Gino and Staats (2015) argue that companies seeking for a quick solution enforce a short-term approach forgetting the importance of learning and the resources available. These short-term approaches are apparent when companies do not prioritise reflection, causing quick fixes and a decreased ability to learn, instead of continuous improvements and long-term learning processes (Gino & Staats, 2015). There is a gap between what companies say and what they
17
do when it comes to continuous learning, which causes issues in remaining as learning organisations. One example is that managers’ can say that learning starts from failure but at the same time they are scared to fail causing a lack in developing new capabilities (Gino & Staats, 2015).
Argyris (1991) describes that the key to success is to have learning organisations. At the same time, people in management positions, even though highly educated, do not seem to know how to learn and how to learn from failure. For instance, too much focus lies within problem solving and correcting the external environment. Problem solving is important but it is also crucial to look inward, to effectively unblock defense behaviors and for learning to persist. Argyris (1991) believe managers’ need to critically distingusih their own behaviors: “They
need to reect critically on their own behavior, identify the ways they often inadvertently
contribute to the organisation’s problems, and then change how they act. In particular, they
must learn how the very way they go about dening and solving problems can be a source of
problems in its own right.” (Argyris, 1991:4). At the same time, descriptions regarding continuous improvements are usually not executed in the same procedure, leading to contradicting stories. “Put simply, people consistently act inconsistently, unaware of the contradiction between their espoused theory and their theory-in-use, between the way they think they are acting and the way they really act.” (Argyris, 1991:7).
Performance is many times in focus rather than learning. However, to learn from mistakes leaders must enable a learning environment, see potential and embrace risk taking (Gino & Staats 2015). Gino and Staats (2015) explains their study where a fifteen minute reflection spent each day increased performance with 20 percent compared to those who worked on as usual. Reflection increases with breaks between sights, downtime, vacations, to get outside during breaks and plan to reflect either before or after your original work tasks starts.
Reflection enables adjustments of the outcome.It is important also to aim for competence
before following norms and as a leader listen to different competencies rather than explaining what to do. Leaders can support staff members through feedback, identify strengths and include competencies as a goal and individualised empowerment. One method is to ask
questions rather than explaining material in order to engage learning(ibid).
According to Yukl (2006), team leaders can facilitate and encourage team learning through two main activities; after-activity reviews and dialogue sessions. Employees are more likely
18
to learn, when an important activity is finished, by discussing the reasons for failure or
success (Yukl, 2006). An after-activity review is an event where the team collectively discuss the outcomes of an activity (Yukl, 2006). Then it is suggested to plan how to use learning for the future, in order to improve the performance. The role of the leader in such sessions is to guide the review process and make sure that the focus is on constructive problem solving. The analysis should be done objectively and not to criticize separate individuals in order to
improve future performance (Yukl, 2006).
Another important factor is dialogue sessions, in order for team members to understand each other's perceptions and role expectations, in order to easier coordinate actions. A mutual understanding is also an important factor since it is more difficult when team members have different assumptions about the cause of the problem. The team leader should encourage team members to identify implicit assumptions and discuss perceptions. Members of the team should try to identify points of agreements and disagreements about how they perceive task variables. The possibilities of a consensus should be discussed together with ways of obtaining additional information that can refine models and possibly solve disagreements (Yukl, 2006).
In summary, there are many competencies required by the manager as described by previous change literature (Kotter, 2012; Amy, 2008; Burke, 1992). It will be interesting to see whether the leaders themselves believe they possess these and if the competencies are regarded
important in practise. The problem found in current literature is that competencies and procedures focus on the actions of the leader (Caldwell, 2003) as well as neglects the context of the leader (Alvesson & Sveningsson, 2010; Appelbaum, Habashy, Malo & Shafiq, 2012). There seems to be an identified problem of high expectations on change leaders, and these expectations of being idealised, heroic descriptions (Alvesson & Sveningsson, 2010), instead of using the competencies of the whole team (O’Brian & Buono, 1996).
Previous literature also shows a theoretical problem, change divided into simple steps, such as described by Kotter (2012), versus regarding change as a more complex process. This will be interesting to investigate perceptions in practise. Emotional aspects and different behaviors are also considered throughout previous literature, this will also be interesting to see how perceived in practise. Resistance is said to best be avoided by some (Burke, 1992; Kotter, 2012) but could be perceived as useful by others (Thomas, Sargent & Hardy, 2011), whereas this will be interesting to further investigate.
19
Learning in relation to change is unavoidable when scanning literature on change, whereas ideas of learning is interesting to see how they are perceived in practise. Change and learning are incorporated and necessary to succeed, according to Young (2009) and having a learning mindset is also suggested to ease organisational change, according to Dweck (2015). It is also suggested by some, that the leader is responsible for learning (Furr & Dyer; Lima, 2007; Amy, 2008). Whether the respondents agree or share another opinion is to be further inquired. How leaders perceive their leadership during an on-going change process is somewhat limited throughout the research, whereas there is a theoretical gap between how the managers’ own perceptions on leading change. Therefore, a qualitative study, investigating their perceptions on change will be presented in the next chapter.
20
CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY
3.1 Research design and strategy
This study is designed to investigate leaders subjective opinions and experiences of what they consider important during change. Merriam (2009) describes case studies are rooted in
situations from reality, whereas the aim is to find the effects of “cause and output”, between various contexts. A simple case study design is based on solely one analysis model (Ghuari & Gronhaug, 2010), which correlates with this thesis aim, to explain and understand specific explanations, rather than general outcomes. When interviewing middle managers’ at the case company, we aimed to deepen our understanding of the middle managers’ individual
perceptions of change, in order to better understand discrepancies and similarities in literature regarding the phenomena of managing change. The research aims to study the phenomena in its natural context, whereas the gathering of data was made on the headquarters location outside of Stockholm, in accordance to Farquar (2012); Swanborn (2010)’s description of what a case study research should consider. This study is autonomously designed as it studies perspectives of middle managers within one organisation. Due to the this design, it will not enable generalised results but rather deepen an understanding for the studied phenomena, in accordance to Swanborn (2010)
The focus of the study lies on understanding how individuals create, modify and interpret their surroundings, hence a qualitative method is chosen. In accordance with Merriam (2009), this deepens an understanding of the phenomena, and according to Widerberg (2002) enables the important focus of the characteristics in data. Furthermore, the research question indicates a subjective character of the study in line with Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2011).
Regarding epistemological aspects, Cohen et al. (2011) describe, focus on how knowledge is gathered and passed on to other people. The knowledge of our data is subjective, personal and unique, whereas a close involvement is required by us as researchers (Cohen et al., 2011). In other words, to answer our research question, we have to understand that the data will be subjective and that the relationships created can affect the respondents and thereby the results. Furthermore, our study takes on a nominalistic perspective as the objects experiences must be seen and understood in their social context. The aim is not to find universal concepts or shared
21
meanings, therefore the words are interpreted in their own context, similar to descriptions made by Cohen et al. (2011).
3.2 Deductive approach
This study uses a deductive approach, in which case studies are appropriate to use as the approach starts in theory with established research, and then is tested on empirical findings (Ghauri & Gronhaug, 2010). Tested theories in this case, have started off in theories regarding leadership in change. The first step in this research project, was to establish what is already known about leadership and change within literature. This was done to establish a better theoretical grounding and with this in mind the data collection began, in a similar manner described by Bryman and Bell (2003). These findings were compared with theories and later extended with more theories. This is in general common to do throughout the process, according to Bryman and Bell (2003), within the deductive approach. Not following a linear deductive model was apparent, since when data was collected, new insights were made. As Bryman and Bellman (2005) state, the theories available are often informative and
enlightening, but must be tested in reality to be understood. This nonlinear model helped us to better form an interpretation, in regards to answer our research question.
3.3 Selection of respondents
In this study, a sample size of 15 was first selected but in order to better understand the purpose, another three interviews were executed. This element was at first difficult to decide as there are no clear answer on how large a sample size should be, as it depends on the purpose of the research, expected amount of responses, number of variables included in the study, and whether the study is qualitative or quantitative (Cohen et al. 2011). Saturation was reached after eighteen interviews as most of the answers started to contain patterns from the respondents. Corbin and Strauss (2008) describe that a saturation of the results are obtained when the empirical data does not exceed the already found result, which happened in the data collection, even though each interview of course is unique.
When it comes to the sample selection, this study uses a non-probability sample. According to Cohen et al. (2011) this type of sample builds on the assumption that the researcher focuses on a particular group and is aware that the group is not representative of the entire population. Non-probability samples are appropriate in qualitative studies, according to Merriam (1988)
22
as generalisations are not the goal. According to Cohen et al. (2011), there are different types of non-probability samples. The type that is best suited for the current study is a purposive sample. The respondents were chosen due to their operational responsibilities and experience of an ongoing change process. The middle managers positions within the company consist of; one business relationship manager, one business manager, one quality manager, one
construction site manager, one development manager, one property development manager and one manager of digitalisation strategy. Furthermore, two project development managers, three head of unit/department, three commercial/sales/marketing managers and three regional/area managers.
3.4 Collection of data
In qualitative research, a combination of data can be collected such as interviews,
observations, analysis of documents as well as recordings and transcribing (Silverman, 2001), where this study contains recorded and transcribed interviews with a duration of
approximately one hour. An interview guide was conducted following a more flexible semi-structured outline (Merriam, 2009) with open-ended questions in order to get the participants perspective on the change initiative. Out of eighteen interviews, sixteen were executed
through personal meetings and two interviews via telephone. Bryman and Bell (2003) explain one issue with telephone interviews as the researcher cannot see facial expressions, this was solved by video conference calls where we could see the respondents.
3.5 Data Analysis
The process of analyzing qualitative data includes organizing, accounting for and explaining the data (Cohen et al., 2011). One way of analysing data is through Creswell’s data analysis spiral, which is described by Randolph (2008). The first step is to organize the data, which means that the data is broken down into smaller segments. The data we found was transcribed and then thematized in order to proceed with our analysis. The second step is to classify, describe and interpret data (Randolph, 2008). In our data we found themes to structure our theoretical analysis, which were perceptions of: communicating, accepting and believing, leading teams through change, learning and reflecting. The goal with the themes is to achieve a detailed description of the data, which later on will be developed into different categories (Randolph, 2008). The above-mentioned categories reappeared and were strongly emphasised as important throughout the interviews, and were therefore selected as themes. The analyses
23
were made separately, in order to generate further perspectives on underlying patterns. The presentation of the data is the third step (Randolph, 2008). We chose to use quotations in order to present some of the original content from the interviews to provide vivid examples of our findings.
3.6 Validity
Validity can traditionally, according to Cohen et al. (2011), question if a researcher really examines what the study aims to investigate. More recent research, defines many forms of validity, for example in chosen qualitative research method. Validity can be seen as a measure of extent, depth, detail and honesty within the data. It also includes questions of how
participants took part, to which extent triangulation was used and the researcher's objectivity (Cohen et al., 2011). The interviews were based on in-depth, qualitative questions in forms of “How” and “What”, to reach the measure of extent, similar to Cohan’s et al. (2011)
explanation on validity, in relation to qualitative research.
The results were fairly presented and analysed in detail, using direct citations and research triangulation. A research triangulation throughout the research process aims to see the research from a holistic and accurate perspective of the studied phenomena. As we both analysed, interpreted and compared data independently, a research triangulation has been used in order to better validate found data (Merriam, 2009). The results are able to be repeated (Bryman & Bell, 2005) due to the consistency in the structuring of analysing the results, chosen citations are carefully selected either speaking for what multiple respondents expressed or where there was a significant difference in their answers, which has been described either before or after the quotes. Furthermore, the results have reached confirmability with two researchers bringing more than one perspective of the study.
3.7 Internal validity
Internal validity means that a study should have an internal coherence and that the results should be congruent with reality, as well as ensure a valid conclusion properly derived from the previously given premises (Merriam, 2009). Furthermore, Cohen et al. (2011) describe that internal validity for qualitative data should focus on plausibility, credibility and provide more convincing evidence for enabling greater claims. Internal validity can also be addressed in several ways, for example by the use of multiple researchers and by the use of peer
24
examinations of data (Cohen et al., 2011). In the current study several measures were taken, in order to ensure the internal validity of the research project. For example, in order to provide plausibility and credibility we have been meticulous in quoting our respondents properly and not taking quotes out of context. Furthermore, more evidence in forms of extensive quotes, commentary and references to established theories, have been added when presenting, analysing and concluding bold claims. The educational process of this study has also added elements that can be said to further ensure the internal validity of this study, by having peers evaluate our data and as aforementioned being two authors (Cohen et al., 2011). We have been able to use different perspectives and opinions on the same data and a dialogue regarding coherence as the study has progressed.
3.8 Ethical aspects
To answer the current research question, deep rooted data is required. Data can be severe and possibly unethical to collect, unless the data is handled in an ethical manner (Cohen et al., 2011). Based on the research question’s subjective and possibly private nature, this report needs to consider the ethical guidelines significantly. To obtain the required data the
respondents must feel trust and therefore the study must be ethically anchored (Cohen et al., 2011). It is important to have a balance of being personal and professional, in order for the respondents to not cancel their participation and ensure that the interviews are not taking to long (Bryman & Bell, 2003). A relationship was established with each respondent and no cancellations were made during the process, the interviews remained around an hour long and an attempt of balancing being personal and professional in the meetings was made. If the data is not sufficiently detailed and honest it can jeopardize the study's validity (Cohen et al., 2011).
In line with Farquhar (2012), below aspects have been considered while ethically proceeding with the research. Integrity has been carried out in a professional manner where no names have been revealed and no one but the researchers and supervisor have accessed the material of data collected. The aspect of plagiarism has been ethically considered where new ideas and data has been collected and theories referred to correctly. No financial aspects has been involved in this paper where there has not been any conflict of interest to consider. The data has been handled in an effective manner and kept confidential, even though the company asked for the collected data, the researchers turned down this request in order to keep the
25
material confidential and value the integrity of our respondents’ coherent with Farquhar (2012).
3.9 Methodological limitations
Criticism of case studies have been regarded aspects of objectivity, however the aim of this study is to achieve a subjective, in-depth understanding, whereas a case study is chosen as research design, in accordance to Farquhar (2012). The generalisation and sample of a population is another criticism, which neither is the aim for this study and we are aware that the single case study presented does not represent the whole population, but rather
investigates and deepens the phenomena (Farquhar, 2012). Factors and influences that have restricted this study are the time-frame, which for instance limits a longitude study to follow up the experiences further along the change process. Another restriction to mention is the budget, which does not allow any technical equipment for data transcription. This has been solved by manual transcriptions but affects the option of for instance making more interviews, as it is more time-consuming than digitalised options. Both of these factors suggested by Cohen et al (2011) suggests to consider when preparing a research design.
3.10 The research process
We started the thesis process by brainstorming together, in order to interoperate our various interests to find an interesting field to study. After that we researched into literature reviews and found a gap, where our problematisation took form and led us to our research question. Already in November 2015, we initiated the first meeting with our contact person at the case company. We presented our topic and looked into possibilities of how to best proceed with the collection of data. Beforehand, the leaders received a smaller version of our idea paper and the estimated time frame, in order to enable preparation and familiarity to the upcoming interview situation for our respondents. The interviews took place at the company’s
headquarters where we were allowed to use available meeting rooms. During the interviews we took turns asking questions while the other person took notes. The collected data was recorded, transcribed, summarised and analysed separately, in order to establish more valid information. Data was then compared and analysed with our theoretical framework. Finally our conclusion led to answering our research question, but also an understanding of its limitations and options of what can be studied in the future.
26
CHAPTER 4 Analysis and findings
4.1 Background to the case
The case company is one of the leading construction and property development companies within northern Europe. The Nordic region is the home market but the company is also present in other parts of Europe, developing and building residential and commercial properties, industrial facilities, public buildings and roads. The organisation is proceeding with an on-going organizational change and physically re-locating some departments within the organisation. The organisation is trying to apply a Nordic perspective, which involves extensive cooperation within the company to unite the large organisation, and increase the cooperation between countries and departments.
To enable analyses of found data the interviews were recorded, transcribed and thematized. The themes in the findings were developed from what most managers emphasized as important during change. All of the respondents’ answers were organised in a table in a separate document to easier visualize prominent themes. This was made to enable the choices of citations and to group and count the answers for each question. Chosen citations were, presented exactly as stated, and selected in regards to what most respondents expressed as important. Sometimes an answer stood out from the rest and therefore cited to present a fuller picture. The respondents are anonymous whereas no real names or form of middle
management position will be revealed in order to protect their identity, the distribution of gender is neither coherent with actual findings. In appendix 1 the interview guide is attached.
4.2 Perceptions of leading change
The current literature (Dalton, 1970, Boies, Fiset & Gill 2015; Caldwell 2003) and our empirical findings suggest a coherent picture of which attributes managers should attain during change. The focus is on leaders’ competences and ability to lead with a vision (Cartwright, 2002; Pendelton & Furnham, 2011). According to Petriglieri and Petriglieri (2015), the role of leaders have been dehumanized as leadership has in some sense become disembodied through the rejection of identity, community and context. We find a similar kind of dehumanization in some of our data, not perhaps explicitly but more implicitly through the high expectations exerted on the managers to lead.
27
As previous literature suggest, which also is supported by our empirical findings, middle managers are described as being of high importance when introducing change (Caldwell, 2003). One manager described that he was a “good leader” since: “I think many things but one of them is that I dare to speak about things and also to say that we want to go this way. But I think a good leader is not only speaking about but also is showing the way so I have to lead the pack and show good examples.” (Interview “Ryan”). The respondent’s answer describe a perception of the leaders to be the person in the forefront of the change process within the team. Many other attributes were rather general of how the respondents thought their leadership needed to be. Attributes that are less focused on the leader themselves included for instance honesty, listening and being understanding. For instance: “I think I am a good listener and I know my team very well” (Interview 13, “Michael”). Attributes that was more emphasising that responsibility to lead the team, was mentioned in descriptions of; to lead by example, have courage, guide, coach and to be comfortable in uncertain situations. For instance: “I try to give some vision of what we are going to do and try to sell it to the rest of the organization also.” (Interview 11, “Kate”).
To understand the middle manager’ context (Alvesson & Sveningsson, 2010), questions regarding challenges were asked. Time emerged, as one of the biggest challenges, according to 6 out of 18 respondents. Time and the lack of working less proactively, are simultaneously described in literature (Carlson & Nilsson, 1999; Selander & Henfridsson, 2012; Burke,
1992). A short-term perspective prevailing a lack of time was questioned: “If you put the
water on the most urgent fire that makes you go home and feel that you have done a great job and there are no more crises. That is wrong since it should not be any crises and we do not have time for that… to work so proactively.” (Interview 2, "Bryan"). The crucial aspect of time was also described with following quotes: “That is a problem, big companies can not change so much that fast, in a very short time.” (Interview 13, “Michael”). “We try to support in different tools and courses etcetera but change will take time” (Interview 8, “Hanna”).
The combination of leading the team forward, challenges of coping with time and proactive measures, emphasise the difficulties of managing change for the organisations middle
managers, and that middle managers are stuck in the middle of the hierarchy and have become frustrated (Dobson & Stewart, 1990).
28
4.2.1 Perceptions of communicating change
Communication was mentioned by more than half of the managers as important when implementing change, simultaneously with literature (Caldwell, 2003; Boises, 2015;
Jacobsen, 2005; Marks, 2007;). The ability to explain the purpose adapted to the individual, was expressed as important, in order to involve and motivate team members forward. There is a coherent perspective on how communication should be manifested, and also an interesting presumption that the middle manager is to be the one motivating: “Yeah, I think the
communication part is so crucial, to keep them informed about the change, to involve them (...) you have to maybe motivate them in different ways, you have to include them in
different ways” (Interview 14, “Nathalie”).
The information provided to the employees must, according to the respondents, be carefully selected. This is also emphasized in previous literature, describing the importance of having the ability, as a manager, to customize information based on the needs of the receiver (Amy, 2008) and to strongly emphasise dialogue (Lima, 2007). Many of the respondents expressed the dilemma: “It is a lot about information, you can actually have too much information. because we have so much information, going around. We have emails, we have, some people will write too long, you don’t have time to read it, we have information everywhere, so from my perspective I just shut it off. So that’s a balance.” (Interview 16, “Peter”). To involve people by encouraging an accepting climate for individual needs was emphasised by the interviewees. The leader is here described as the enabler and motivator of creating this accepting climate, whereas an excellent communicator can be interpreted as an important attribute to possess as a middle manager in change. This requirement adds to the complexity of being a middle manager, as the information relies on their ability to manage the huge information flow, take the time to go through it and then customize it individually.
4.2.2 Perceptions of accepting and believing in change
To “be on board” and “explaining the why” is coherent in the descriptions of what is
considered important, in literature (Ashby & Miles, 2002; Jacobsen, 2005) and expressed by the respondents. Defined as crucial was, for the managers not only to understand the why of the change, but accepting and believing in the change as well. This resulted in a dilemma, as not all of the respondents’ completely believed in the change: “I can understand it but not by
29
the heart and that is the key to get people involved.” (Interview 4, “David”). (Context suggest in the heart and not by the heart).
Another manager also described considerations amongst top managers regarding the change initiative: ”I experienced that the managers that did make the decisions, they don’t walk the talk, so when we made the change they were complaining and you know in front of many others, complaining about this change. However they made the decision.(...) ...so you need to you know, be in the forefront and really try to adapt to this, be positive, even though its tough, I understand its tough, its tough for everybody. But you have a responsibility as a manager to yeah, adapt.” (Interview 8 “Hanna”). This reveals that some managers’ higher up in the hierarchy have been rather resistant or negative towards the change. It also shows that the emphasis is put on the leaders to deal with the tough challenges ahead, be in the forefront and to take the responsibility for change.
There was another respondent who expressed a sense of being suspicious toward the change. The respondent described that this change happened about five to ten years ago and that it would reverse: “This is changing so we just relax and okay we are gonna change again. Doesn’t affect us too much. In a few years it's gonna go back.” (Interview 18, “Sarah”). The citation reveals a cynical reaction towards the change, whereas the manager certainly did not believe that this change was going to persist.
If not sticking to a constant message it can be perceived as short-time fluctuations, confirmed by Marks (2007). Programs that are prematurely initiated do not persist in the long run (French, Bell & Zawacki, 1994). The following quote illustrates a potential outcome: “It is very important that you with such initiative, that we talk about for the company that we stick to it. Because people see that initiatives are up for such a short time and then suddenly they disappear”. (Interview 17, “Ryan”). This reveals that the initiatives was not perceived as persistent nor including time for adjusting to the recent change, perhaps causing a potential challenge for middle managers’ to defend new change initiatives, towards their teams. Unwanted behaviours and emotional responses that emerged during the change and these were expressed by the managers to best be solved in group discussions, with a climate of acceptance. However, difficulties in engaging team members was expressed: “Most, ehm, most part the people are working here under me are not that, they are quite reluctant to change, especially bigger change.” ( Interview 5, “Ewe”). Most of the employees were
30
described as accepting the change whereas others: “A lot of people stick their heads in the sand.” (Interview 16, “Peter”). Emotional responses were expressed as a hindrance to motivate and encourage some team-members to change. A simultaneous perspective on how to handle unwanted behaviours is described by Burke (1992), suggesting emotional responses to be solved by having individuals involved to reach a higher commitment toward change. However, these behaviours were not always solved, not amongst employees nor middle management.
Meanwhile, there are other perspectives concerning the same matter, which have shed light on resistance from another angle. According to, Thomas, Sargent and Hardy (2011), resistance does not entirely have to be seen as a negative factor, instead it can act as a facilitative factor through conceptual expansion and reframing. Such facilitative roles require both middle and top managers to be more open for providing counter-offers. Furthermore, if managers are unwilling to negotiate and provide counter-offers, they can be as much to blame, if the change initiative fails (Thomas, Sargent & Hardy, 2011). Hence, the question of who is really to blame for being resistant in our study? The answer seems to be far more complex than to blame unwilling and hesitant followers. It is probably far easier to name the followers as the source of resistance than scrutinizing your own or a superior's way of acting. How to deal with resistance in a favourable manner is easier said than done. Dealing with resistance amongst everyone in an organisation seem complex, at the same time several actors within an organization need to align throughout the teams, in order to benefit from resistance.
4.2.3 Perceptions of leading teams through change
All of the eighteen respondents expressed the first phase as most crucial and did not put a lot of emphasis on other phases, in the change process. Wheelan (2005) does not suggest any of the phases to be more or less important, whereas literature and the respondents’ perspectives diverge. 9 out of 18 respondents uttered extensive strategies regarding the initial phase. However, no significant plans described about following up the initial phase and how to maintain the momentum of the change. Most of the respondents focused on the first phase of change, which is not coherent with Wheelan (2003); Burke (1992). For instance “to challenge all aspects in the beginning” was expressed as important. Moreover, the explaining of “the why” (purpose) was also emphasised in the first phase: “I think especially in the beginning it is very important to talk about the why, why we are doing this.” (Interview 17, “Ryan”). Another respondent expressed the importance of overcoming resistance in the beginning:
31
“They were really stuck in the resistance phase saying this is just stupid and you are all wrong but eventually we overcame that hurdle and people started buying into things”. (Interview 7, “George”). These contradicting facts suggest that literature is not used properly
or that the theories need updating, toward the first phase of change.
The heavy emphasis on explaining the why in a change process is interesting as this implies that leaders perceive themselves, to lead their teams. However, the context the leaders operate in, include highly educated people, whom should be able to grasp the context of an
organizational change process. Perhaps the pressure brought on leaders, to achieve remarkable outcomes in change processes has created such behaviours.
The individual was emphasised when describing perceptions of change phases by seven of the respondents, for example: “yeah I don’t think you can talk about a phase the team is in, I think you can talk about the phase the individual is in…”(Interview 12, “Lydia”). To lead teams through phases of change is emphasised in the literature (Wheelan, 2005), however, as
many of the respondents chose to pinpoint the individual although answering questions regarding their teams. This reveals a remarkable contradiction in theory and practise, whereas findings suggest adapting change toward the individual, whereas the literature treats the whole team as a solid unit, whereas these perspectives clash.
There is emotional aspects to consider when leading teams through change (Burke, 1992), and this change was described as something rather complex: “…for myself it is tough in an emotional way because you have to absorb all the feelings, so ehm, in my own, person, I’ve sensed that maybe a little, lower on energy than I’m used to. Because you know you have to adapt so much and you have to absorb so many questions, and feelings and emotions, and not just mirroring the emotions back in the organization but take it out.”...“Then it’s a very vital process running, in the middle of the storm in the ocean. And that can emotional be a hard one to be in.” (Interview 12 “Lydia”). The emotional aspects amongst employees are something that throughout literature is described for leaders to handle (Lorenzi & Riley, 2000; Kotter & Shledinger, 2008). The leader's own emotional journey (Petriglieri & Petriglieri, 2015), behind the somewhat heroic descriptions of middle managers (Alvesson &
Sveningsson, 2010; Knights & McCabe, 2000), is less considered in current change literature. The findings reveals that it can be very emotional being a middle manager in change
processes. Findings reveal that the heroic picture of the leading manager perhaps should be re-evaluated and change focus toward all individuals throughout the organisation.
