Modelos mentales (senge)
Páginas: 10 (2276 palabras)
Publicado: 4 de julio de 2011
Smollan, R.K. (2006). Minds, hearts and deeds: Cognitive, affective and behavioural responses to change, Journal of Change Management, 6(2): 143-158.
This article presents an integrated model encompassing a range of factors that contribute to individuals’ responses to organizational change (see Figure 1). At the individual level, the model considers cognitive, affective and behavioralresponses, the relationships among them, and factors that mediate between the organizational change event or intervention and individuals’ responses. The model also considers how individual responses to change are mediated by traits of the individual, traits of change leaders, and the organizational culture and change context. The various aspects of the model are described below.
[pic]
Makingsense of and responding to change
Employees become aware of changes through formal communication, peer discussion, and other channels. Their first step is to assess the significance of the change for themselves (and possibly for others and the organization), in terms of four dimensions: favorability of change outcomes, perceptions of fairness or justice, and scale, speed and timing of change.Perceived favorability of outcomes: Employees will analyze the favorability of outcomes for themselves, others and for the organization. Where differing outcomes for various stakeholders are perceived or where it is difficult to predict outcomes, employee’s responses may be either neutral or ambivalent.
Perceived justice of change: Three dimensions of fairness have been shown to influenceemployees’ cognitive and affective responses to change. Distributive justice has to do with the fairness of outcomes. Procedural justice relates to perceptions of the fairness by which decisions are made. Interactional justice (comprising interpersonal and informational justice) refers to ways in which managers communicate outcomes and procedures to staff. Systemic justice is an overarching termfor the perceived fairness of a wide variety of practices over time, and is a facet of organizational culture. Perceptions of justice tend to produce positive emotions, but perceptions of injustice will lead to more intense negative emotions. Violations of the psychological contract – the sense of mutual obligations between employer and employee – can also produce a sense of injustice andstrong emotional reactions.
Scale of change: Revolutionary or second order change is likely to be more threatening to employees than incremental or first order change, especially to employees with a strong sense of psychological ownership of some aspect of their jobs. While welcome change outcomes may engender positive reactions, the sheer scale of the change or too much change occurringsimultaneously may trigger negative reactions.
Perceived speed and timing of the change: Change that proceeds too slowly can be viewed negatively if it affects an individual’s work pace or produces schedule delays. Conversely, if the pace of change is too rapid, employees may not be able to make sense of and adapt to new circumstances. Huy (2001) offers a model of different types of change, eachimplying different tempos and requiring managers to be aware of the timing and sequencing of organizational changes. Employees may also be sensitive to the timing of the introduction of a major change; e.g., if it occurs at the busiest time of the year or month, or if a new executive bonus scheme comes right after a downsizing, reactions are likely to be highly negative.
Cognitive, affective andbehavioral responses to change
Cognition is defined as a thought process through which a person becomes aware of stimuli, appraises the significance of the stimuli, and considers possible responses. Emotions are immediate responses to environmental stimuli that are important to the individual.[1] There is a two-way relationship between cognition and emotion, whereby cognition triggers...
This article presents an integrated model encompassing a range of factors that contribute to individuals’ responses to organizational change (see Figure 1). At the individual level, the model considers cognitive, affective and behavioralresponses, the relationships among them, and factors that mediate between the organizational change event or intervention and individuals’ responses. The model also considers how individual responses to change are mediated by traits of the individual, traits of change leaders, and the organizational culture and change context. The various aspects of the model are described below.
[pic]
Makingsense of and responding to change
Employees become aware of changes through formal communication, peer discussion, and other channels. Their first step is to assess the significance of the change for themselves (and possibly for others and the organization), in terms of four dimensions: favorability of change outcomes, perceptions of fairness or justice, and scale, speed and timing of change.Perceived favorability of outcomes: Employees will analyze the favorability of outcomes for themselves, others and for the organization. Where differing outcomes for various stakeholders are perceived or where it is difficult to predict outcomes, employee’s responses may be either neutral or ambivalent.
Perceived justice of change: Three dimensions of fairness have been shown to influenceemployees’ cognitive and affective responses to change. Distributive justice has to do with the fairness of outcomes. Procedural justice relates to perceptions of the fairness by which decisions are made. Interactional justice (comprising interpersonal and informational justice) refers to ways in which managers communicate outcomes and procedures to staff. Systemic justice is an overarching termfor the perceived fairness of a wide variety of practices over time, and is a facet of organizational culture. Perceptions of justice tend to produce positive emotions, but perceptions of injustice will lead to more intense negative emotions. Violations of the psychological contract – the sense of mutual obligations between employer and employee – can also produce a sense of injustice andstrong emotional reactions.
Scale of change: Revolutionary or second order change is likely to be more threatening to employees than incremental or first order change, especially to employees with a strong sense of psychological ownership of some aspect of their jobs. While welcome change outcomes may engender positive reactions, the sheer scale of the change or too much change occurringsimultaneously may trigger negative reactions.
Perceived speed and timing of the change: Change that proceeds too slowly can be viewed negatively if it affects an individual’s work pace or produces schedule delays. Conversely, if the pace of change is too rapid, employees may not be able to make sense of and adapt to new circumstances. Huy (2001) offers a model of different types of change, eachimplying different tempos and requiring managers to be aware of the timing and sequencing of organizational changes. Employees may also be sensitive to the timing of the introduction of a major change; e.g., if it occurs at the busiest time of the year or month, or if a new executive bonus scheme comes right after a downsizing, reactions are likely to be highly negative.
Cognitive, affective andbehavioral responses to change
Cognition is defined as a thought process through which a person becomes aware of stimuli, appraises the significance of the stimuli, and considers possible responses. Emotions are immediate responses to environmental stimuli that are important to the individual.[1] There is a two-way relationship between cognition and emotion, whereby cognition triggers...
Leer documento completo
Regístrate para leer el documento completo.