Subjectsmanagement of change
N214 Change Management
MetadataShow full item record
AbstractThis thesis is about how systems thinking might contribute to the successful management of change (MOC). The motivation is the increasing importance of MOC in an environment where competition and internationalisation of markets are ever intensifying: organisations either "change or die", yet MOC suffers adversely with unacceptably high failure rates. A critique of MOC literature shows that current MOe methodology is characterised by reductionist approaches with a diversity of confusing and contradictory suggestions and recipes. This is seen to be impoverished where different types of organisational change are interacting. All these suggest that MOC methodology itself needs to be improved and a systemic approach is more appropriate. In search of methodological underpinnings for proposing a systemic approach to MOC, literature on systems thinking is reviewed, indicating that systems approaches, especially critical systems thinking, are potentially powerful to inform the development of MOC. Nevertheless, important questions are raised about applying systems ideas to MOC. Further research is needed. And this has been done by triangulating data, theory and method to develop a fuller understanding of systems perspectives and their relevance to MOC. By combining MOC and systems thinking together in a theoretically informed way, a systemic MOC framework is suggested and revised. This framework is seen to provide a characterisation of MOC by identifying the conceptual components, a coherent theoretical structure by specifying and ordering the relationships between these components, and a way of helping understand and manage the diversity in organisational change systemically. This framework is theoretically underpinned and applied to a case study where different types of organisational change and their interactions are surfaced. The outcomes firmly support the view that MOe is characterised by different types of organisational change and their interactions, for which systemic approaches are more appropriate; thus the systemic MOC framework developed is seen to be useful in helping understand and manage organisational change more effectively. The findings are critiqued within the study, and from this come out the conclusions, and recommendations for future research.
CitationCao, G. (2001) 'Systems thinking and managing organisational change' PhD thesis. University of Luton.
PublisherUniversity of Bedfordshire
TypeThesis or dissertation
DescriptionA thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of the University of Luton
The following license files are associated with this item:
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
Is adjustment of breeding phenology keeping pace with the need for change? Linking observed response in woodland birds to changes in temperature and selection pressureGoodenough, Anne Elizabeth; Hart, Adam G.; Stafford, Richard (Springer, 2010-10)
Are physical activity interventions for healthy inactive adults effective in promoting behavior change and maintenance, and which behavior change techniques are effective? A systematic review and meta-analysisHowlett, Neil; Trivedi, Daksha; Troop, Nicholas A.; Chater, Angel M.; University of Bedfordshire; University College London; University of Hertfordshire (Oxford University Press, 2018-02-28)Physical inactivity and sedentary behavior relate to poor health outcomes independently. Healthy inactive adults are a key target population for prevention. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of physical activity and/or sedentary behavior interventions, measured postintervention (behavior change) and at follow-up (behavior change maintenance), to identify behavior change techniques (BCT) within, and report on fidelity. Included studies were randomized controlled trials, targeting healthy inactive adults, aiming to change physical activity and/or sedentary behavior, with a minimum postintervention follow-up of 6 months, using 16 databases from 1990. Two reviewers independently coded risk of bias, the “Template for Intervention Description and Replication” (TIDieR) checklist, and BCTs. Twenty-six studies were included; 16 pooled for meta-analysis. Physical activity interventions were effective at changing behavior (d = 0.32, 95% confidence intervals = 0.16–0.48, n = 2,346) and maintaining behavior change after 6 months or more (d = 0.21, 95% confidence intervals = 0.12–0.30, n = 2,190). Sedentary behavior interventions (n = 2) were not effective. At postintervention, physical activity intervention effectiveness was associated with the BCTs “Biofeedback,” “Demonstration of the behavior,” “Behavior practice/rehearsal,” and “Graded tasks.” At follow-up, effectiveness was associated with using “Action planning,” “Instruction on how to perform the behavior,” “Prompts/ cues,” “Behavior practice/rehearsal,” “Graded tasks,” and “Self-reward.” Fidelity was only documented in one study. Good evidence was found for behavior change maintenance effects in healthy inactive adults, and underlying BCTs. This review provides translational evidence to improve research, intervention design, and service delivery in physical activity interventions, while highlighting the lack of fidelity measurement.