Seminar 4

Processual Approaches to Change Management

Begin by reading Burnes, Chapter 4 and Senior, Chapter 4

Overview

We usually see change (its progress and its pace) in organisations as inevitable. To be commercially successful and survive, we commonly argue that organisations must adapt to market pressures, changing technologies and other innovations. Open the political and business pages of any newspaper and watch the evening news on the television and the evidence that the pressures for change are everywhere and occurences of change are legion. We thus argue that unwillingness to respond to technical progress and competition is a major weaknesses indicative of outdated thinking or unresponsive management, 'Luddite' and militant employees. In the rhetoric of Rosebeth Moss Kanter, giants must learn to dance. Effective change management from this standpoint requires

• evaluating changes in the organisation's environment and the impact on the organisation
• finding ways of overcoming actual or potential resistance
• formulating and implementing strategies for change

What the pressures are and what the change actually is, is covered in the literature by case studies and dissection of the cases - situation by situation and organisation by organisation. From the instances (the empirical data) we formulate models of the elements and relationships - the what, why and how. We hope that these frameworks of ideas and suggestions for 'how to do it' are useful and assist us in bringing better order and control over how we might reshape the organisation and its systems. We are interested in how management defines, interprets, manouevres and positions when facing "pressures". Typically, there is a belief that what has to be done is largely determined by external forces (in economics and the characteristics and capabilities of technology) acting upon the organisation. This is a viewpoint that says events in a causal network, beyond our control - make change inevitable. There is no alternative.

This is compelling. Our experience and common sense suggests that the "There is no choice but for us to ...... " is substantially true but the view has weaknesses.

See it as a process

Critics posing alternative accounts of change and its management stress that we will benefit as 'change ' agents' and 'theorists of change if we seen it as a process rather than as a determining, no choice, event. We end up with a different conception of change management. Rather than being messengers who just jump automatically twitching and reacting to external market and technological demands, managers (and potentially other organisational stakeholders) instead can be seen as creative mediators who

• negotiate the gap between potential and actual change.
• can actually influence the conditions in the environment itself

A decision to adopt a new technology or technique is, in itself, only the first stage in a lengthy process of innovation and change.

We generally believe also that we must beyond the technical and the economic to embrace human and organisational dimensions, if the full benefits of change are to be realised. A process orientation to change holds that strategic choice and socio-technical system models better explain the way in which we handle the complexity and speed of change situations in the early 21st century. A processual approach highlights

• the continuous, unpredictable and political nature of change.
• It sees power as a central feature element - arising from the socially constructed nature of organisational life.
• we become more realistic and less romantic about harmony and cooperation and participation and recognise that at the core of most change situations, ambiguity and disputes are evident, resulting from differences in position, interests, values and commitments of those affected by changes - even those on the fringes who at first glance may not seem to be involved or even have a 'claim right' to be involved.

A process view of change arguably gives us a better understanding of interactions between the substance, context and process of change in the organisation. It is about

• the management of meaning (defining the situation, problem and solutions)
• attempts to establish credibility and legitimacy by the actors
• analysing stakeholder positions and dealing with competing proposals.
• being aware that change must be understood according to its "level" and that we may view it differently different time periods.
• Organisational change cuts across functions, spans hierarchical divisions. There is often no neat starting and finishing point rather it is an engaging, analytical, political and cultural process which may challenge core beliefs, structures and strategies of "the firm".
• the process unfolds through an interplay of multiple variables of context, political processes, consultation as which may be puzzling, confusing and where the goal posts may move.
• A process perspective stresses the role of power and politics in initiating change and an adversarial (pluralistic) culture over a harmonious (unitary)

Strategic Choice

• contingent (depend) upon factors like the environment e.g. whether it is complex and changing.
• managers inevitably make strategic choices where the contingencies that are faced limit, constrain or shape but do not necessarily determine.
• managers choose how to operate - this creates the conditions for politics as people will support different views regarding such choices.
• Groups combine to advance preferred solutions by forming coalitions - some strong, some fragile with unclear goals or lacking credibility.
• The more complex the change, the greater the intensity of organisational politics and politics is a naturally occurring, universal phenomenon.

We may still argue the general position of organisational adaptation (as a system) to environmental change but, in terms of decision-making, this is acknowledged as a personal and thus idiosyncratic - a power position, social interpretive & political activity, designed to influence relationships between

• different groups within mgt. itself
• management/labour
• management and others in the environment

Our own experience tells us that we cannot assume that

• decision-making within all levels of management is consonant or supportive of decisions made by those at the top.
• that such decision making is (by consensus) logical, rational, inevitably resulting in a better world

Technology as the Determinant of Change

Academics analysing the social impact of technologies on work and organisations have tended to paint a picture of old mechanical technology and how it has been implemented having harsh effects in terms of work mechanisation, simplification and routinisation, de skill of jobs, lowering job satisfaction and the quality of working life with worker alienation and conflict. More contemporary "clean and clever" technologies are perhaps seen as ameliorating some of this harshness.

Thus a processual approach encourages better evaluation of how, over time a progressive model of the impact of technological change on organisations offers a better understanding. We might cast light on the question of whether the more advanced technologies today are having largely positive consequences in terms of improvements in the content and experience of work for employees or does the exploitation of these technologies "enslave" and retain "exploitative" control of workers by management. Note here the political and ethical commitments implied by terms such as "enslave" and "exploit". These are not the terms of a unitary, managerial frame of references certainly when it comes to addressing the supposed relationships between caring, participative managers and "team" members in their work force. Terms such as these belie the human resource management slogan that "people are our greatest asset".

Critical Examination

• less concerned with how change can be managed and
• more concerned with broader questions about the causes of change and the nature of its consequences.
• questions of distributive justice and politics are still not considered very well.

A more critical stance would challenge contingency-based approaches which tend to accept "a positive, progressive and inevitability" view of technical change and instead present perhaps a more quizzical, pessimistic critique of technological 'progress'. We might argue that technology

• is not a 'neutral' force having unavoidable impacts on organisations but shaped by the social and economic circumstances in which it is selected and implemented (e.g. pursuit of profit). These reflect prior decisions by management concerning its adoption and use.
• Change in organisations is rarely a brief one-off event, an 'abnormal' moment upsetting 'relatively normal' stability and routine. Instead, it is more complex, far-reaching and frequent without an obvious start point, middle and end. We see that change is more a continuous process with no obviously discernible end point, it loops and indeed may come back on itself - going over the same ground again, with similar methods being used, slightly repackaged - but nevertheless labelled as "a new approach".
• The change process itself is an arena in which outcomes are shaped as managers decide on the adoption and use of new technologies or techniques. Such adoption may be contested and negotiated by other stakeholders.

Here change and the management role is not "rational" and "neutral" but one where the rationality of actor-participants is, at best, 'bounded' and because of self-interest, political (if they have the leverage/power). Actions are enabled by capacity to mobilise power in support of individual or collective interests. Thus to understand how organisations are managed, experienced and changed, we must understand such internal and external politics.

Tenets of a Processual Approach

• internal: the history, culture, organisation and politics of the organisation
• external: the business, economic, political, technological and social environment in which we operate.

Context.

• the advent of new technologies
• changing business conditions (normally adverse)
• demographic changes affecting customer base or labour market
• new government legislation.
• 1970s' oil crisis, collapse of the Berlin Wall, the New York attack of 11 September 2001

Internal contextual factors represent the organisational back cloth against which change actually occurs - fundamental as they constrain and facilitate change. Factors here might be:

• the business's historical evolution
• its culture characteristics
• its existing technology
• the stake holding groups and powerful coalitions
• arrival of a new CEO
• threat of receivership (bankruptcy).

---

What contextual factors influenced the change process in a recent significant change in your organisation?

• What influence did each exert?
• How central was the role of power and politics?

---

 

Deterministic models of change (inevitable, causal) that stress direct cause-effect relationships tend to neglect how unconnected, chance factors may uniquely affect the nature of change in a particular organisation though the content - TQM, Internet technologies etc may seem similar (See Burnes Chapter 2). 'One best way' models of change - even those based on a contingency approach - fail to address these factors well enough. Thus their prescriptions, whilst plausibly coherent, tend to be of little practical use.

Decision points

Change occurs outwith and within organisations over time and involves decision points - critical junctures - at which strategic choices might be made by dominant individuals and coalitions. But the actors mingle and mull around such decision points construing the situation, its significance for them and whether they will do anything about it. Each may be challenged by other stakeholder interests. This compares well with Boddy and Buchanan's view (1986) that change is a process, not a single event. A new computer system or procedure usually involves substantial planning and preparation with design modifications prior to installation, staff training staff and then subsequent maintenance systems. Even a minor technical change to a product, method or system can be protracted and bitty with much wrangling, permission seeking etc.

Technical requirements and capabilities are only part of the picture. Interpretation of position (internal and external contextual conditions) and negotiation of organisational processes and outcomes is of far reaching importance. Introduction and use of new technology often involves conflicting managerial objectives, thinking and strategies around which power is mobilised.

Management as 'creative Mediators'?

• interprets and mediates 'messages' about the need for change so that they are accepted as legitimate objectives.
• influences and moulds 'meanings' within the organisation
  • putting the case and generating support for change
  • dealing with opponents and responding to counter arguments.

Pettigrew (1987) refers to major transformations which link the content of change and its context and process. Leadership behaviour becomes a key ingredient (not the whole recipe) in a complex analytical, political, and cultural process of challenging and changing core beliefs, structures and strategies. So change management takes on the characteristics of a highly political activity. This view also reflects the transformational leadership arguments of Bass et al (1985). The Bass's transformational leadership argument is summarised in this set of Powerpoint slides.

Strategic Choice and Political Resources

• decisions underpinned by expectations, beliefs and interests of key actors on or off the stage.
• organisational decision making being naturally political and negotiated process shaped by the interests of those involve. Constraints and opportunities are meanings declared by decision makers and given exercise according to power and leverage.

Implications for managing change? There are some obvious conclusions we can draw:

• not being naive about the political issue
• when people ask 'How will this affect me?' recognising that reactions are conditioned by stakeholder perceptions and beliefs about their situation, their history and their interpretation of the content of the change and how they see their 'claim rights' which may lead to defensive responses.
• our analysis of factors in the business environment is similarly conditioned by individual and group self-interest e.g. one's level of organisational membership, those in the same job or grade, in the same department with the loyalties involved.
• we should not see conflict and disagreement as being dysfunctional. This is a defensive reaction to others challenging "management's right to manage". The systems view sees conflict to an extent as dysfunctional. The planned, behavioural science based OD approaches also seeks to mediate conflict in a unitary, team consensus way. Yet potential for conflict and disagreement is always present given the diversity of interest. There is a key question however that is "should the interests of all stakeholders be taken into account in change decisions? We might reply that only those who have a legitimate, in a sense 'contracted' stake, should be involved. These would be employees, suppliers, actual customers etc. Self-authorised, groups with whom the organisation does not have formal contracts do not need to be consulted. However - if such groups can block the change significantly then there is a real problem of giving recognition to those who we might not want to give recognition too because they are fringe, protestor, self-appointed, unrepresentative groups e.g. the environmental protestors who dug themselves into the path of the Newbury Bypass or the Green protestors who organised a boycott of Shell gas stations in Germany because of a particular decision to dispose of an old oil rig in the Atlantic.
• Change agents need ability and determination to intervene in and see through the political processes, to push particular agendas to influence decision-makers, to deal with criticism and resistance - or else they will fail.

Contexts and Constraints

There are also norms - the rules of the game - in various sectors, which have a constraining effect on decision-makers. So too, might the actions of a powerful group of suppliers. Moreover, the business environment is not a 'given' -- whatever is 'given'. Account needs to be taken of such factors as legislation on health and safety, weight of vehicles, design, tax levels, depreciation on plant and exchange rates - all may hold back decision-makers.

Macro-economic issues clearly constrain: interest rates, recession, liberalisation of markets, globalisation, technological advances and changes in the labour market, for example, skill shortages and minimum wages.

Technology and Strategic Choice

A technological determinist/imperative model of explanation (see Burnes Chapter 2) would have it that new technologies exert an independent, uni-directional, causal influence over humans & organisations and that this is predictable in a way similar to the application of a physical, immutable law. The advocates of this would typically argue that the very nature of the technology requires it to be implemented in particular ways and these shape the organisation structure, they require it to be of a certain size to secure the economies of scale and to secure the performance and productivity expectations. The technology determines the degree of centralisation e.g. large, central offices, planning departments etc. The technology - particularly machine technology requires work to be arranged in particular ways e.g. the assembly line and that this unfortunately (the apologia) affects job satisfaction, task complexity and skill level etc.

However a "Softer" explanation of technology (such as the strategic choice argument) is that its influence is mediated by contextual variables. The strategic choice model does not assume "technology" is an unassailable, concrete, all or nothing at all, external object. Instead the acceptance and utilisation and arrangement of it is an intentional outcome of human action, design and appropriation. The results of pure scientific invention gave scope for applied scientists to invent and test the mobile phone. The ideas were pursued by governments and big business to establish the infrastructures. Choices were made about how the mobiles would be produced, marketed and how the markets would be regulated to secure what various stakeholders wanted.

Technology as a trigger for organisational change

A technology - the printing press, the steam engine, the electric motor, hip replacement therapy can trigger structural change by introducing new institutionalised roles & patterns of interaction - or requiring different behaviours. Changes in print technology in the early 1980s brought substantial change to Fleet Street, the power of the printing unions, the number of magazines and journals available in news agents and even the location of where the printing was done. A whole industry of freelance media designers emerged.

But the precise outcome of the application of a depends often on specific and historically embedded processes. From this angle we can view technology viewed as a social object and the meaning and significance we give to the technology, as defined by the context of use, may change also even though its physical form stays the same.

Commitment to a Socio-Technical Systems (STS) Approach

• organisations are composed of inter-dependent social and technical systems - the people and the technologies they use e.g. for a miner - the pit shaft, the explosives, the drills, the noise, the conveyor belts and lifting gear, the pit props, the ventilation and electrical equipment. If we change the way in which we extract coal using new forms of machinery then the social arrangements between the people doing the job currently may be affected. If we change the technology being used in an isolated way then we may hit problems with the affect on those who comprise the social system. We cannot reorganise the exhaust fitter away from the hyraulic car lift - standards of performance depends on the degree of fit between the two. Thus the physical technology reduces the scope for job design. If job satisfaction and team working is essential then this must go hand-in-hand with the technological change. We adapt the technology to fit social needs. This is reflected in that form of team organisation we call cell technology.
• STS promotes the participation and involvement of all relevant stakeholders acknowledging many informal aspects in the analysis of systems and their design, the arrangement of equipment and people that we term work organisation and the implementation process.
• Possible conflicts of interest are explored at an early stage. An STS approach provides an arena for bargaining and conflict resolution at the earliest possible stages enhancing user acceptance when new systems are being implemented.

The STS perspective is thus an argument for participation and consultation - sub-processes which, it is argued, encourage ownership of problems that will be encountered in the change so that there is more willingness to resolved them and obtain success.

The main elements of the STS approach involve:

• organisation of work around a given technology depends on management decisions about job allocations, the formation of work groups and the amount of discretion allowed to workers.
• Technology may serve to justify changes to work arrangements giving managers more control and reducing worker discretion.
• A scientific management approach becomes self-justifying as its outcomes themselves encourage the further application of the empirical data and control systems that are necessary.
• Some experience seems to indicate that even the separated, line aspects of mass production of cars and mining can be avoided in ways which improve team processes and performance - see semi-autonomous work groups and cell technology.
• A given technical system can be implemented by various social systems. If we can find the best 'fit' to suit both.

Semi autonomous working (see also Cell Technology and human-computer interface design)

-seen by STS thinkers as a solution to meet technical demands and human needs. It needs

• multi-skilled group of workers,
• a meaningful stage in the production process
• time, materials and equipment to carry it out
• responsibility for planning and controlling their own work activities residing with the work group.

STS thinking leads to a more people-centred approach where the relationship between the technology and the people involved is more balanced and symbiotic.

McLoughlin felt that this more human-centred approach reflected awareness, from the late 1970s onwards, that ICT-based technological and related organisational changes often bring disappointing results. Decision makers with a mechanistic orientation have difficulty in re-thinking and imagining alternative ways of shaping the technology-organisation relationship. More organismic thinking (Burns and Stalker 1961) gives attention to communication and user involvement issues, and does not assume resistance as being irrational and negative (note the strategic choice concept and the argument for sound political skills in the change agent.

The PowerDoc Case

---

1. Outline the broad relevance to the PowerDoc case of the Strategic Choice and STS approaches.
   
   
2. Which perspectives, are relevant in explaining the outcome of the PowerDoc Case? Explain your choice of perspectives with reference to one or more issues in the case.
3. How might managers at PowerDoc have approached the management of change differently?
4. What alternative organisation of work can you suggest?

---

The Importance of Determining Objectives

1. Management considered the question of new office technologies in the light of broader strategic requirements, e.g. enhanced responsiveness to customers and document quality. The data processing manager had little sense of this broader view. Management could then have given the task of assimilating the new technology into each individual's existing organisation of work with a clearer understanding of the strategic and HR issues likely to arise..
2. The new office technologies could have been introduced as a complement to the existing project-based organisation of work.

PowerDoc illustrates several practical lessons for managing change. Note particularly the complexity of managerial goals associated with introducing the new office technology. A range of objectives were present e.g.

• staffing objectives; eg productivity, control of output
• information objectives; eg market information on fine to networked wordprocessors
• operations objectives; eg reducing wage costs, faster production of documents
• strategic objectives; eg maintaining market share and competitive advantage.

We can identify a range of staffing, information, operations and strategic objectives can you identify within the case? List these:

Which of these as best served by the changes introduced in Powerdoc?

PowerDoc displays various discrete objectives which may be given a different emphasis by managers at different levels. The data processing manager promoted his operational view of the situation at the expense of both information and strategic objectives.

Also these objectives, whilst separate, are likely to clash and senior management may need to intervene to balance objectives and identify the likely 'knock on' company-wide effects of technology deciding what kinds of investment criteria are appropriate. Advocates of new technology investment can be characterised as both 'opportunists' and as 'strategists'.

Opportunistic

characterised by

• status enhancement
• narrowly specified objectives
• an expectation of short term financial gain
• traditional forms of appraisal
• cost benefit analysis
• retention of the use of expensively acquired skills and experience.

Strategist

• broadly specified objectives
• long term qualitative gains in performance benefits
• a more experimental approach to appraisal.

Integral to PowerDoc is the question of strategic choice and the politics of change. A technical specialist (the data processing manager) was allowed to make important decisions which on the surface of things concerned technology only. He exercised more control over decision making than secretarial and clerical staff, account managers, or researchers. However, as a technical specialist, he was not sufficiently knowledgeable (competent) to take a comprehensive view of the overall situation. His expertise is reflected in the narrow cost and efficiency criteria of success (ie the nature of the technology itself, which others little understood, the savings and efficiencies that were assumed to be available). As the Leavitt diamond reminds us, technology, administrative structure, tasks and the business environment were all interrelated.

PowerDoc - an Alternative Strategy

• to take a broader view of organisation and its business environment. Costs and efficiency criteria are important, but PowerDoc was competing on quality in an expanding market. Contingency theory would prompt thinking of implications for structure and managerial style.
• is a Taylorist approach to work organisation and management so appropriate here?
• the link between critical success criteria (quality and timely delivery) and work organisation shows that secretarial and clerical staff make a key contribution to project groups and company performance as a whole. Human relations theory is relevant here, particularly with regard to whole tasks. The case for Taylorist output related pay is weak.
• Technology was not so well matched to organisational needs. Technical choices were allowed to drive organisational change. The data processing manager's hard systems school of thinking excluded organisational factors.
• It does not follow that the technology required a centralised word processing pool. Other choices were possible on how this technology could be matched to the organisation. For instance, the original project management structure could have been retained with some clerks being trained in more complex "desktop publishing".

Points about decision making and organisational process are also apparent.

• A centralised/deskilled organisation of work suited the job interests of the data manager who operated independently of other functions like marketing and research.
• a more open discussion with other players may have produced a different outcome i.e. change management as an inherently political process shaped by different actors.
• Technology, far from having an independent impact, was influenced by organisational context.

Action Research as a Processual and Learning-related approach

We can argue that effective learning is closely linked to a cycle of action and experience. Checkland and Holwells (1998 p.11) summarise the relationship as follows:

Learning mobilises and generates knowledge and we develop understanding, abilities and personal orientations to support our action. The assignments and projects of an action research programme target particular organisational problems and in doing so

• focus on actual job roles, situations, organisational processes and activities - direct, practical concerns in organisational settings.
• They involve people working creatively for a purpose.
• Solutions to management situations or problems will involve finding accommodations between various interests so that approved action can be taken.
• Business research that takes real-world situations - problematic or not - requires that the overall context, values and outlooks are considered particularly where observer or participant may each have overt or covert points of view.

Classical research methods

"Classical" approaches (pure and applied) of the natural and physical sciences - do not easily fit into the pragmatism of running a business or organisational development programme. Principles of reductivism, repeatabiity and refutation of hypotheses and the formulation of abstract theories and methods do not fit easily with the busy manager-organiser. The organisation developer as a researcher nevertheless, needs an approach which emphasises action but is still systematic and rigorous. Research generally involves :

• observing a phenomena and reducing it to its component parts
• defining propositions (hypotheses) about components and relationships between these and other phenomena
• experimenting and collecting empirical data, identifying significant patterns in the data and testing relationships using reliable methods
• analysing and interpreting selected data - the results of the experiment, seeking to refute the hypotheses (disprove them)
• if the hypotheses hold up after repeated testing, drawing conclusions to confirm the hypotheses (or otherwise)

The conventional research model

The organisation developer as a researcher

The problem for the business world is that "pure research" cannot be pure. The customer or employee cannot be told to come back when things are more convenient so that variables can be isolated for a controlled, neutral experiment. Organisational activity is a human, active and dynamic process and the "pure" conditions of the laboratory do not prevail. The pure conditions of the thing being investigated may indeed not be replicated again with the situation and variables (including people) being isolated and targeted.

The business researcher by his or her very presence and intervention IS involved. Those being studied become aware that they are subjects and their responses may change because of this awareness of being observed. They readily anticipate the observer and their own reactions. The change agent/researcher by being actively engaged in a sense "sullies" the situation being studied. This demands awareness that they too are a research variable - one of the actors in "the social thing that is being studied". As someone who must evaluate their own process of interaction (behaviour) within the situation, the researcher is a principal actor - a factor which itself must be accounted for and examined. He/she, with others, "own" the project - the progress and result of which is affected by their actions and passionate feelings. Subjective and objective scientist become unavoidably intertwined in the research activity and this has to be dealt with.

How is Action Research applicable in Organisation Development?

A tenet held by "managing change" academics and practitioners who hold social science commitments is that we learn from real problems. Theory becomes immediate and relevant in so far as it can be usefully applied to these problems. The problems generate new theory, new understandings.

An organisation development programme as action learning combined with a research orientation can test

• existing frameworks of understanding (theory) and also develop new perspectives to add to bodies of knowledge relevant to business and management. The learner/researcher selects relevant conceptual frameworks and applies this to the organisational development problem or issue.
• We explore underpinning research questions. We define our "hunches" more clearly as hypotheses, challenging assumptions and ensuring critical evaluation.
• New insights and perspectives gained and may be implemented as new organisational arrangements, groupings, procedures, guidelines and recommendations.

Action research facilitates this and improves critical evaluation. It recognises the implications of researcher and researched being participants in the situation. It is social science based but accepts that:

• the researcher is "involved" in the situation being researched and cannot be non-participant.
• social situations are "in action" - they dynamic, open and not value-free.
• others become involved in the research. "&Clients and co-workers" also interpret the ideas, information, data that arise.
• the researcher must handle the conclusions, actions, solutions agreed or designed by stakeholders in the situation

Peter Checkland's soft system methodology is complementary to action research.

Interative Process, Constant Looping

The metaphor of a circular process often figures in relation to action research and there is a danger in forever going over the same ground - constant looping with the purpose having been lost. Any research (investigation, analysis, synthesis and action/implementation) must involve points or milestones where researcher-participants can take evaluate outcomes or changes and may prompt further research activity - new questions are asked even before old questions are resolved. But this may simply be a feature of the dynamic nature of social science problems and the 'messiness of management'.

An investigative cycle may be repeated or modified depending on how far the action interventions can move the "problem" on, define it differently or whether new matters and opportunities emerge. The participants may simply get bored. We have to recognise that the research process itself will be revisited routinely - particularly at milestone points - to air conclusions and restate propositions/hypotheses as evaluated. New data and new experience will be injected and a new approach to analysis and debate be needed.

If the research programme has become a complete melee going no where - then a root and branch review will be needed - hence the action research commitment to systematic method is vital.

Steps in an action research project?

Situation analysis

The initial phase of your research is exploratory - to familiarise yourself with the situation or "a" situation and come to some initial conclusions as to whether there is anything worth investigating.

It is essential that you open up and define

• what the situation is
• what the potential issues and elements under investigation are.

The project's focus may be the competitive situation, industry, product area, job, department or organisational issue, problem or opening.

Clarification requires a reconnaissance, a survey of the field and what is involved. You will need to identify data sources and the work that has already been done in this area. This involves desk as well as field research.

Meet and talk with others who have worked in this area and who are knowledgeable. Access their experience, data and insight. This applies to people both

• within the project boundary (actual or potential stakeholders) and
• people external to your project area/organisation.

This stage needs to be done quite formally and with systematic determination. The temptation will be to say "oh, I am reading around the subject and talking to a few people" - when you are actually not doing very much.

• Bring a group together to whom you can present your interest
• following your scanning of the situational context, your initial views and possibilities. Obtain their ideas and reactions.
• This is an ideal opportunity to practice techniques such as SWOT/PEST analysis, brain-storming or force field analysis in a reasonably systematic and useful way.

The group responses and feedback are helpful at this early stage in order to formulate and tune your root definitions of the real-world problem and research themes.

Project Clients and Mentors

If the political nature of the change process is significant then it is clear that the action researcher, needs a client for the project - someone who, in a sense, is the top, resource allocating owner of the problem or issue that is being researching into and who wishes to have something done about it. Action research thus assumes a political position with the tensions and dilemmas this brings for objective, dispassionate research. Yet having such a person on board gives the authority to go ahead with the project, secures permissions and resources, opens doors etc. Reports are needed to the owner and the impact of the owners interventions will need to be assessed.

A mentor is a person, separate from the client, who will act as a general listener, counsellor and support figure to the action researchers. The mentor may be within the organisation or separate. Key is the ability to support critical reflection and useful advise. Such people in themselves, can provide, a useful feedback mechanism.

Action research cannot be carried out in the lone, isolated mode that so many traditional researcher follow.

Goals and Assumptions

Before embarking on the detailed process of gathering data, decide

• What it is you are trying to achieve from the research.
• What is it that you really want to improve?
• Where do you want the situation to be in 18 months or two years time .....and so on.
• What assumptions have you made? Are these reasonable? Is the situation moving so quickly that urgent, pragmatic action is needed rather than a careful research plan? How is your client's organisation structure and policy, changing?

Challenge your assumptions. Are they tethered and bounded - based on old practices and values? Be clear about these. Check your research objectives and assumptions against those of others.

Consensus and action.

An action research project examines existing frameworks of understanding but with emphasis on contribution to performance and change. Hence choice between options will be needed at various stages.

Deciding and implementing action is assisted when group work together and through consensus. Political and other obstacles are identified and the stakeholder group may better committed to actually implementing the action themselves.

Monitoring and evaluating

It is not enough to assume that decision and action is sufficient. Changes in the situation and reaction to changes as these have arising as a result of the project need to be monitored and evaluated ideally within its scope and time-frame. This monitoring and evaluation enables the proposition to be revisited and reformulated if necessary. Conclusions can be drawn about the action research process itself as it was experienced by project participants. the project research model can be evaluated.

---

What problems face the action researcher and what guidelines are available which may help avoid the pitfalls of this type of research activity?

---

 

Difficulties of an action research approach

• Self-entrapment
• High trust and purposeful relationships, involvement, subjectivity and ownership.
• the nature of the survey methods

In Summary

• a rigorous, measured and controlled approach to business research that is different from "pure or laboratory" research.
• It recognises that everyday business phenomena cannot be isolated on a laboratory bench
• The orientation ensures that frameworks of ideas and models that usefully assist with analysis and - sometimes - enable prediction of business related events and outcomes can be applied.
• The research outcomes themselves may elaborate these frameworks and indeed contribute to new perspectives.

Conclusion

Change is best understood as a evolutionary process: slow, with no precise stopping place rather than a one-off event. In this regard, Child's strategic choice offers a viable theory of political process, negotiation and cognition. STS theory combines the concept of strategic choice with elements of systems theory plus theoretical and practical usefulness. It can be used to 'map' organisational change issues. The PowerDoc case reveals

• a processual approach to change management and
• the usefulness of the strategic choice approach for "reading" the organisation and ascertaining the influence of different interests and stakeholders.

The separate the management of organisational change from key aspects of the wider business environment. However, the latter does not have an independent determining effect on the organisation. Strategic managerial choices and 'readings' of the environment link the two. These readings bear significantly on ways in which different change options are selected. So, too, does the misreading of the environment.

The strategic choice perspective illuminates several aspects of PowerDoc. The data processing manager makes important choices on the basis of limited information and a narrow technical world view. The interests of the clerical staff, researchers and account managers appear to have been disregarded.

The STS approach combines systematic analysis of technical and organisational change with the recognition that change can be managed as a negotiated process. A change agent using an STS approach would begin by 'mapping' the existing organisation of work, and by relating different aspects of the system to the 'ownership' of different parts of the production/service process by particular groups. The change agent would then present the various parties with a range of technical-organisational options which would serve as the basis for negotiation.

Clearly, the strategic choice and socio-technical systems approaches are most relevant to PowerDoc. This document (© Chris Jarvis) was