Theories Of Change

Theories of change
The evolution of the change management field stems from psychology, business and engineering. Hence, some models are derived from an organization development perspective whereas others are based on the individual behavioral model. For this reason, this section is divided into two sub-categories: Individual Change Management and Organizational Change Management.
[edit]Dynamic conservatism
This model[1] by Donald Schön explores the inherent nature of organisations to be conservative and protect themselves from constant change. Schön recognises the increasing need, due to the increasing pace of change for this process to become far more flexible. This process being one of 'learning'. Very early on Schön recognised the need for what is now termed the 'learningorganization'. These ideas are further expanded on within his frame work of 'reflection-in-action'[2], the mapping of a process by which this constant change could be coped with.
[edit] Individual change management
An early model of change developed by Kurt Lewin described change as a three-stage process[3]. The first stage he called "unfreezing". It involved overcoming inertia and dismantling theexisting "mindset". Defense mechanisms have to be bypassed. In the second stage the change occurs. This is typically a period of confusion and transition. We are aware that the old ways are being challenged but we do not have a clear picture to replace them with yet. The third and final stage he called "refreezing". The new mindset is crystallizing and one's comfort level is returning to previouslevels. Rosch (2002) argues that this often quoted three-stage version of Lewin’s approach is an oversimplification and that his theory was actually more complex and owed more to physics than behavioural science. Later theorists have however remained resolute in their interpretation of the force field model. This three-stage approach to change is also adopted by Hughes (1991) who makes reference to:"exit" (departing from an existing state), "transit" (crossing unknown territory), and "entry" (attaining a new equilibrium). Tannenbaum & Hanna (1985) suggest a change process where movement is from "homeostasis and holding on", through "dying and letting go" to "rebirth and moving on". Although elaborating the process to five stages, Judson (1991) still proposes a linear, staged model ofimplementing a change: (a) analysing and planning the change; (b) communicating the change; (c) gaining acceptance of new behaviours; (d) changing from the status quo to a desired state, and (e) consolidating and institutionalising the new state.
Some change theories are based on derivatives of the Kübler-Ross model from Elizabeth Kubler-Ross's book, "On Death and Dying." The stages of Kubler-Ross's modeldescribe the personal and emotional states that a person typically encounters when dealing with loss of a loved one. Derivatives of her model applied in other settings such as the workplace show that similar emotional states are encountered as individuals are confronted with change.
A Formula for Change was developed by Richard Beckhard and David Gleicher and is sometimes referred to asGleicher's Formula. The Formula illustrates that the combination of organisational dissatisfaction, vision for the future and the possibility of immediate, tactical action must be stronger than the resistance within the organisation in order for meaningful changes to occur.
The ADKAR model for individual change management was developed by Prosci with input from more than 1000 organizations from 59countries. This model describes five required building blocks for change to be realized successfully on an individual level. The building blocks of the ADKAR Model include:
1. Awareness – of why the change is needed
2. Desire – to support and participate in the change
3. Knowledge – of how to change
4. Ability – to implement new skills and behaviors
5. Reinforcement – to sustain the change...