ORGANISATIONA L CHANGE MANAGEMENT AND WORKERS’ BEHAVIOUR:

A CRITICAL REVIEW

Imhonopi, David Favour

&

Urim, Ugochukwu Moses

Department of Sociology
Faculty of Social Sciences
Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ago-Iwoye, Ogun state
Email: [email protected]; [email protected]

Abstract
Change is the only constant phenomenon. An organisation that fails to
recognise the inevitability of change is doomed to fail. However, workers’
behaviour towards change has become a serious issue facing today’s
management in complex and ever evolving organisations. Employees’
resistance to change has been identified as a critical contributor to the failure of
many well-intended and well-conceived efforts to initiate change within the
organisation. This paper therefore examines the reasons for workers’ resistance
to change as well as the impact of organisational change on workers’
behaviour within the workplace and how organisations can manage change
processes in order to elicit the right and anticipated behaviour from workers in
line with the changing business needs. The theoretical synthesis of thoughts
drawn from the tenets of the “Individual Perspectives School” and “the Group
Dynamics School” is the basis for the explication of the dynamics of
organisational change and workers’ attitude towards it. This paper contends
that securing the support and cooperation of workers through obtaining the
right and anticipated behaviour is critical today as ever to the successful
implementation of change programmes in organisations.

Key words: Organisation, Organisational change, Change management, Workers, Behaviour,

Management

Introduction
Change is inevitable in any organisation. The pace of change is ever increasing –
particularly with the advent of the internet and the rapid deployment of new technologies,
there is evidence of new ways of doing business and new ways of conducting one’s life. Since
organisations are a sub-system within the society, changes that take place in the society affect
the operations, policies and outlook of organisations and vice versa. Business, we all know,
operates in a dynamic environment which implies change, and an organisation that fails to
recognise the inevitability of change will be self-destruct. Similarly, the management or
manager that succeeds is one that is constantly adapting the direction and operation of his
enterprise to changes in technology, social, political and economic environment in which it
operates.

216
 International Journal of Development and Management Review (INJODEMAR) Vol. 6 June, 2011

However, it must be considered that there is nothing neither more difficult nor more
challenging to handle than to initiate a new order of things. Workers’ behaviour towards
change has become a serious issue facing management in complex and modern organisations
today. As Chin and Berne (1976) acknowledge, employee resistance is one significant
contributor to the failure of many well-intended and well-conceived efforts to initiate change
within the organisation.
For most people, predictability and stability in both their personal and professional
lives is preferred to change. Such people typically avoid situations that upset order, threaten
their self-interests, increase stress or involve risk (Kotter, 2002). When faced with changes to
the status quo, people usually resist initially. This resistance continues, and in some cases
increases, until they are able to recognise the benefits of change and perceive the gains to be
worth more than the risk or threats to their self-interest. As Bellinger (2004), Inga (2003) and
Kotter (2002) point out, people resist change due to the fundamental human objection to
having the will of others imposed upon them. Nevertheless, since no organisation can afford
to stand still in the ever dynamic whirlpool of the global business environment, organisational
change management is therefore important to secure, modify and elicit the behaviour of
workers in line with the changing business needs. As part of our contributions to existing
literature on effective organisational change management, our objectives in this research work
are to: examine what areas change manifests itself often in organisations; examine if there is a
relationship between the leadership style an organisation practises and organisational change;
examine if workers would still resist change even if they are duly informed; examine if
organisational change is best managed when workers are carried along and ascertain whether
improvement in the quality of communication and interpersonal relationship between
management and workers reduce workers’ resistance to change.

The Concept of Change Process

A century ago, advances in machine technology made farming so highly efficient that
fewer hands were needed to plant and reap the harvest. The displaced labourers fled to nearby
cities, seeking jobs in newly opened factories, seizing opportunities created by some of the
same technologies that dislodged them from the farm (Coleman and Morton, 2000). The
economy however shifted from agrarian to manufacturing, piloted by the industrial revolution.
With it, came drastic shifts in where people lived, how they worked, how they spent their
leisure time, how much money they made, and how they spent it. Today, we are at the
threshold of another kind of industrial revolution piloted by a new army of economic and
technological forces. In recent years, just about all companies, large and small, have made
adjustments in the ways they operate, some more pronounced than others. For instance, as
Edward and Heller (2006) argue, a study of Microsoft, Compaq, Dell and a multitude of their
ilk shows that organisations are inventing new ways of running their businesses and their
methods are pre-eminently based on people. In other words, leading organisations are rapidly
altering the way they operate: their culture, the technology they use, their structures, and the
nature of their relations with employees are a clear departure from the old and traditional
concept of the corporation. With so many companies making such drastic changes, the
message is clear, “Either adapt to changing conditions or shut your doors.” As technology and
markets change, organisations face a formidable challenge to adapt. However, not all
organisational changes are planned and are intentional (Chapman, 2008).

217
 Imhonopi, D. F. & Urim, U. M. - Organisational Change Management and Workers’ Behaviour: A Critical Review

Change Situation in Organisations

Organisations resort to two forms of change, namely incremental and fundamental.
Incremental change is self-evident as it includes changes of work methods and processes,
factory layout, new product launches, and other situations where most people would see
continuity from the old state to the new. It is progress by evolution rather than revolution.
Fundamental change on the other hand refers to change that is on a wide-scale and one that
touches deeply at the very heart of the organisational structures and processes. Such a change
is usually dramatic and could affect future operations of the organisation and frequently
involves major upheavals (Greiner, 1967). Examples are process re-engineering, mergers and
acquisitions, downscaling or moves into different activities.

Forces of change
An organisation can only perform effectively through interactions with the broader
external environment of which it is a part. Hence, its structure and functioning must reflect the
nature of the environment in which it operates. To a large extent, the environment in which an
organisation operates tends to exert a need for organisational change. According to Adler,
Rosen and Silverstein (1998), causes of change include: change in technology, intense
competition, change in customer demand, changing demographic profile, privatisation of
public enterprises, and shareholders’ demand. Other forces of change include those that
originate within the organisation itself like the deterioration of buildings, equipment and
machinery and obsolescence of skills and abilities of workers. However, changes within the
organisation can be managed. On the contrary, uncertain economic conditions like the global
financial and economic meltdown of 2007 - 2009, government policy and intervention in
industry, scarcity of natural resources, etc, create an increasingly volatile environment
(Wardale, 2009). Thus the main pressure of change is from external forces and organisations
must be ready to brave the demands of a changing environment.

Change Agents
Tichy and Hoernstein (1995) consider change agents as elements that are responsible
for bringing about change in the individual’s behavioural patterns. Since human behaviour is
such a volatile and complex phenomenon, changing it will require a number of strategies for
the desirable response to be achieved in the human activity areas targeted. Tichy and
Hoernstein have identified four types of change agents.
1. Outside Pressures These are pressures from the external environment and are
directed towards change in the entire organisation. Government interventions in the
area of health or safety defects, government policies banning certain importation of
products in the country, etc, are examples in this line.
2. Internal organisational development This can come slowly through and within an
organisation itself and includes redefinition of goals as well as participative goal
setting. Instances are development fostered through management by objectives
(MBO), work redesign, team development, etc.
3. Individual change This involves modifying or improving the behaviour of workers
whereby personal goals may be better served with a changed environment of the
organisation. For example, with the coming in of the Fashola administration in Lagos
state, Lagos state civil servants no longer go to work late neither do they leave early
for their homes before the closure of work.

218
 International Journal of Development and Management Review (INJODEMAR) Vol. 6 June, 2011

4. Change from central management Change may come from the top management
convinced about its necessity and thereby direct the structural, strategic or
technological changes that could benefit the organisation and its members.

According to Shaskin and Williams (1984), the change agent may be in the form of a
consultant who helps clients find solutions to organisational problems or a trainer who trains a
client’s workforce to achieve a set of skills that could be used in bringing about the change
needed for optimal outcomes. Shaskin and Havelock (1983) identified the characteristics of
successful change agents as tabulated below:

CHARACTER ISTICS OF SUCCESSFU L CHANGE AGENTS

1 Hemophily This is the degree of closeness and similarity between
the change agent and the client. The easier and more
successful the change.
2 Empathy It is about the understanding of feelings, emotions and
thoughts between the change agent and his client which
leads to improved communication.
3 Linkage It refers to the collaboration between the change agent
and the client; the tighter the linkage, the better.
4 Proximity The change agent and the client should have easy
access to each other.
5 Structuring When all the necessary activities related to change are
well planned, then implementation becomes easier.
6 Capacity This is the ability of the organisation to provide the
resources needed for successful organisational
development.
7 Openness The degree of openness between the change agent and
the client will affect the outcome of the programme.
8 Reward The greater the potential for rewards, the more
determined the efforts of workers in making or
supporting the required change.
9 Energy This refers to the amount of effort put into the change
process.
10 Synergy This refers to the community of support, resources,
people, energies and activities put together for the
implementation of organisational change.
Source: Shaskin and Havelock, 1983.

Resistance to Change
Change, no matter how beneficial, is generally resisted and is always difficult to carry out.
Like Lawrence and Lorsch (1967) and Ross (2000) acquiesced, man prefers to proceed with
known methods than change to new ones where the outcomes may not be so certain.
However, change will be easier to make and adjust to, if the potential rewards after the change
are sufficiently attractive. Since change must occur as a result of the dynamic nature of the
human environment, the reasons for resisting change must be studied carefully and addressed.

219
 Imhonopi, D. F. & Urim, U. M. - Organisational Change Management and Workers’ Behaviour: A Critical Review

Toffler (1970) has identified a number of reasons that account for resistance to change. They
are:
1. Insecurity Change scares people. Individuals are afraid of losing the security they
have concerning the known for an unknown future.
2. Misunderstanding and lack of trust This occurs when there is a lack of trust in the
change initiator-employee relationship.
3. Lack of proper communication If the need for the change is not communicated to
those who would be affected on time and in an acceptable manner, it can lead to stiff
resistance.
4. Rapidity and extent of change The nature of the change, either minor or drastic, will
determine the resistance level of employees.
5. Group resistance This is resistance that stems from herd instinct. Employees resist
change in this sense because the group they belong to is not in support of it.
6. Emotional turmoil This arises when employees are emotionally not prepared for the
change about to take place.
7. Loss of power and control When change is to reduce the power base of certain
individuals and groups, it can lead to resistance.
8. Selective perception When the perception employees or a group has about the change
process is negative, it will lead to resistance.
9. Habit Change of habits may lead to frustration and resistance.
10. Economic implications When change directly or indirectly reduces the pay or other
rewards of employees, they will resist it.
11. Security in the past Some people may be comfortable with the status quo and may
feel threatened when a proposed change programme seems to alter it.
12. Fear of the unknown Change confronts people with the unknown and causes them to
have anxiety.
13. Investment in resources Since change often requires large resources, which may not
be available, resistance may greet efforts made to raise resources to implement a
change situation.
14. Past contracts and agreements For example, agreements entered into by an
employer association with a trade union may frustrate any attempt for future change.

Tactics for Managing Resistance to Change

According to Kotter, Schlesinger and Vijay (1979), managers may use a number of
tactics to deal with resistance to change. These include education, communication,
participation, facilitation and support, negotiation, co-optation, coercion and manipulation.
They however point out that manipulation and coercion even though they have their obvious
short-term benefits also have their long-term drawbacks. Similarly, research conducted by
Rogers (1995) in a clothing factory identified certain potent strategies for managing resistance
to change. These are itemized.
1. Leadership.
2. Willingness for the sake of the group.
3. Right timing of change.
4. Simplicity.
5. Clear definition of what is over and what is not.
6. Involvement of informal leaders.

220
 International Journal of Development and Management Review (INJODEMAR) Vol. 6 June, 2011

7. Existence of formal avenues of appeal.

8. Availability of distributive justice to correct inequities and make amends.

Theoretical Paradigms on Organizational Change and Workers’ Behaviour

We will look at change management and its impact on workers’ behaviour from the
theoretical viewpoints of the Individual Perspective School and the Group Dynamics School.
The individual Perspective School is divided into the Behaviourists and the Gestalt-field
theorists (Inga, 2003). The Behaviourists view behaviour as resulting from an individual’s
interaction with his environment. To the Behaviourist, all behaviour is learned and human
actions are conditioned by their expected consequences. For instance, behaviour that is
rewarded tends to be repeated, while behaviour that is ignored is not repeated. Therefore, in
order to change behaviour, it is necessary to change the conditions that cause it. Behaviour
modification involves the manipulation of reinforcing stimuli so as to reward desired activity.
The aim is to reward immediately all instances of the wanted behaviour, but to ignore all
instances of the unwanted behaviour. This is based on the principle of extinction; behaviour
will stop eventually if it is not rewarded. The drawback of the Behaviourist approach is its
reductionist tendency, treating human beings as cogs in a machine that respond solely to
external stimuli.
For the Gestalt-field theorists, learning is a process of ongoing or changing insights,
outlooks, expectations or thought patterns (Inga, 2006). The Gestalt therapy is based on the
belief that people function as whole, total organisms, and that each person possesses positive
and negative characteristics that must be “owned up to” and permitted expression (Ewton,
2006). People get into trouble when they get fragmented, and when they do not accept their
total selves. Therefore, Gestalt-field theorists argue that behaviour is not just a product of
external stimuli, rather it arises from how the individual uses reason to interpret these stimuli.
They believe that when individual members of an organisation change their understanding of
themselves and the situation in question, which they believe in, it will lead to change in
behaviour. Essentially, the Individual Perspective School interprets behavioural change to be
a result of how the individual relates with or interprets external stimuli or the environment.

The Group Dynamics theory

The Group Dynamic theorists emphasise on bringing about organisational change
through teams or work groups, rather than individuals. The rationale behind this according to
Lewin (1947) is that because people in organisations work in groups, individual behaviour
must be seen, modified or changed in the light of the group’s prevailing practices and norms.
In other words, to bring about change in organisations, the focus of change must be at the
group level and should concentrate on changing the group’s norms, roles and values
(Bellinger, 2004). Despite its limited focus, the Groups Dynamics theory has proved very
influential in developing both the theory and practice of change management. This is because
it is now usual for organisations to see themselves as comprising groups and teams, rather
than merely collections of individuals. In spite of the emphasis that the Group Dynamics
school places on groups, there is no way organisational change management can be done
without recourse to the support of and from individual workers.

221
 Imhonopi, D. F. & Urim, U. M. - Organisational Change Management and Workers’ Behaviour: A Critical Review

Discussions on Organisational Change Management and Workers’ Behaviour

This research work shows that organisational change takes place in all aspects of an
organisation. This agrees with existing literature that successful organisations in the twenty-
first century are organisations prepared to embrace the concept of change management
(Macredie, Sandom and Paul, 2000). In fact, many organisational theorists and practitioners
postulate that the rate of change organisations are subjected to is set to increase significantly.
In fact, some even go so far as to suggest that the future survival of all organisations will
depend on their ability to successfully manage change (Burnes, 1996; Peters, 1989; Toffler,
1983). For Inga (2003), the rapid changes taking place in the external environment and which
impinge on organisational structures, operations and systems are influenced by the
globalisation of the world economy and international economic integration. According to him,
globalisation has succeeded in linking humans, organisations, markets, technologies, finances,
and information into one common interaction network across all national state borders. He
therefore concludes that organisations that must survive this fast-paced era must do away with
former traditional methods and structure of operations and constantly search for new methods
on how to get ahead of their competitors, roll back on cost and reach their targets. However,
Edward and Heller (2006) further amplify the argument for new methodology in the area of
people-based human management system. According to them, the era of command-and-
control methods by which most organisations are run cannot fly in the face of changes taking
place in the present global business environment. Such practices if not abandoned will lead to
workplace crisis and dysfunctions.
Our research also shows that there is a relationship between the leadership style
adopted by an organisation, organisational change and the mode of implementing
organisational change. When democratic, change management procedures and processes are
put in place to guide change initiatives and vice versa. Leadership style therefore is
responsible for workers’ negative attitude towards change. This follows that for organisations
to get the anticipated supportive behaviour from their workers, the leadership style in place
must also be wearing human face. This view is shared by Bellinger (2004), Inga (2003) and
Edward et al (2006).
Furthermore, there is abundant literature that also shows that workers will not resist
change if they are duly informed, involved and carried along. This substantiates existing
literature that workers should be involved in the change process as much as possible
(Bellinger, 2004; Inga, 2003; Kotter, et.al, 1979; Kotter, 2002; Rogers, 1995; Tichy and
Hoernstein, 1995). However, in a situation where the change is perceived not to have a direct
and immediate impact on workers, they will resist the change programme irrespective of
whether they were duly informed or not. Therefore as Lawrence and Lorsch (1967) and Ross
(2000) argue, for workers to support any change efforts, the reward from implementing the
change programme must be very attractive and is to have a direct and immediate positive
impact on them.
Principally this paper postulates that employees tend to react negatively to change
especially if it involves learning something new and risking failure. To mitigate this, there is
need for workshops, seminars, formal and informal discussions between management and
workers during any transitional period of change. This view was shared by Chapman (2008)
and Kotter (2002). They predicted that whenever organisations imposed new things on their
workers there would be difficulties. They then advised that rather than imposition,
participation, involvement and earlier open and full communication are the important factors

222
 International Journal of Development and Management Review (INJODEMAR) Vol. 6 June, 2011

that should be used by organisations in the change management process. They also identified
workshops as being very useful to develop collective understanding, approaches, policies,
methods, systems, ideas, etc, regarding an intended change programme.
Lastly, this paper amplifies the notion that improving the quality of communication
and interpersonal relationship will definitely reduce workers resistance to change and even
elicit the right behaviour that would be supportive of the change effort. As Inga (2003)
admits, having an effective communication policy is especially important when innovations
are introduced. Regular improvement of the main elements of the communication system and
assessment of internal and external changes in the environment will further the achievement
of organisational goals. In effect, management must explain the necessity of changes, and the
objectives that will be achieved as a result of the change efforts.

Conclusion
In today’s dynamic human environment characterised by the invasion and pervasion of
technology, global competition and increased streamlining of institutional practices and
structures, both public and private organisations are facing change at an unprecedented rate.
As the environment is changing by the day, even so organisations are forced to change their
structures and processes to accommodate the changes in the environment. Denying change
will not stop it from happening, instead the challenge is to manage change by understanding
its role as a positive agent for corporate progress and personal achievement. Managers who
seize the moment and effectively manage change can make it work for their organisations and
get a return from change-inspired opportunities.

Recommendations
The following recommendations are made for the acceptance and management of
change in organisations:
· In implementing change, management should try to win the support of the most
powerful and influential groups in the organisation. This is in line with the Group
Dynamics Theory that suggests that change can only be secured on a group-level
basis. By securing the support of groups, their members would be forced to comply.
· The workforce should also be educated to see change not as an enemy but as a friend.
This responsibility lies with management. As Edward and Heller (2006) argue, for this
to happen, management has to become multi-disciplinary, cross-functional and
interdepartmental, while vertical chains of command are supplemented or superseded
by horizontal relationships.
· As a corollary to the above, management must show great emotional sensitivity when
it comes to the implementation of change programmes. This will endear workers to
support the change process. This view was shared by Chapman (2008) and Kotter
(2002) that change management entails thoughtful planning and sensitive
implementation, and above all, consultation with, and involvement of, the people
affected by the changes. They contend that since change is unsettling, management
needs to be a settling influence. Therefore, change needs to be understood and
managed in a way that people can cope effectively with it.
· Managers also should involve the workers in the change process/efforts because from
the study it is revealed that most workers resist change because they are not carried
along.

223
 Imhonopi, D. F. & Urim, U. M. - Organisational Change Management and Workers’ Behaviour: A Critical Review

· Managers should reward constructive behaviours. The most successful mechanism for
facilitating organisational change is rewarding people for behaving in a desired fashion.

· Finally, managers should create a learning organisation. This will help workers
embrace new ways of thinking, freely share new ideas and be willing and ready to
adapt to the changing realities in the business environment without nursing the fear of
an unknown future.

References
Adler, R. S., B. Rosen, and E.M. Silverstein. (1998). Emotions in Negotiation. How to
Manage Fear and Anger. Negotiation Journal 14, 161-179.

Bellinger, G. (2004) Change Management: The Columbo Theory. http://www.systems-

thinking.org/columbo/columbo.htm, Retrieved 15th March, 2009

Burnes, B. (1998). Managing Change, Strategic Approach to organizational Dynamics.

London: Pitman Publishing.

Bush, R.A.B. and Folger, J.P. (1994). The Promise of Mediation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,
1994.

Cameron, K. S. (1994). Strategies for Successful Organisation Downsizing, Human Resource

Management Journal, Vol. 33, pp. 189 – 212.

Carstarphen, B. (2002). Shift Happens. George Mason University.

Certo, S. C. (1999). Modem Management. New Jersey: A. SIMON & SCHUSTER Company.

Certo, S. C. (1999). Principles of Modern Management. London: Allyn and Bacon, London.

Chapman, A. (2008). Change Management: Organizational and Personal Change

Management, Process, Plans, Change Management and Business Development Tips.
http://www.businessballs.com/changemanagement.htm, Retrieved on 15th March,
2009

Coleman, P. T. and Morton, D. (eds.). (2000). Some Guidelines for Developing a Creative
Approach to Conflict. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Davis, T. (2001). Revising Psychoanalytic Interpretations of the Past. International Journal

of Psychoanalysis.

Driscoll, M. (2000). Psychology of Learning for Instruction, Second Ed.. Boston: Allyn and
Bacon.

224
 International Journal of Development and Management Review (INJODEMAR) Vol. 6 June, 2011

Change Management (2009). “How Well Are Your Managers Equipped to Manage The
Resistance To Change?” in www.managechangeresistance.com. Retrieved on 13th
March.
Chin, R. & Benne, K. (1976). General Strategies for Effecting Changes in Human Systems. In
Bennis, W., Benne, K., Chin, R. & Corey, K. The Planning of Change 3rd Ed. New
York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

Connell, J. & Kubisch, A. (1998). “Applying a Theory of Change Approach to Evaluating

Comprehensive Community Initiatives” In Fulbright-Anderson, Kubisch, & Connell
(Eds.) New Approaches to Evaluating Community Initiatives, Vol 2. Washington, D.C:
Aspen Institute.

Davis, T. (2001). Revising Psychoanalytic Interpretations of the Past, International Journal of

Psychoanalysis, 82

Do Change Management Theories Really Work? (2009). “Will change management theories
work for you?” http://www.family-business-experts.com/change-management-
theories.html, Retrieved on March 15th

Driscoll, M. (2000). Psychology of Learning for Instruction (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and
Bacon.

Fitzduff, M. (1989). From Ritual to Consciousness: A Study of Change in Progress in

Northern Ireland. New University of Ulster. Doctoral Dissertation.

Fajana, Sola (1992). “Managing Human Resources for Productivity in Small and Medium
Scale Enterprises in Nigeria” in J.A.T. Ojo (ed) The Management of Small and
Medium Scale Enterprises in Nigeria, Faculty of Business Administration, University
of Lagos, Akoka.

Edward de Bono and Robert Heller, Bobo, E. D. and Heller, R. (2006). "Managing People: In
modern business, people-based management is as important as ever" in
http://www.thinkingmanagers.com/management/managing-people.php, Retrieved on
15th March, 2009

Ewton, Zane (2006). Change Management Theories.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/56933/change_management_theories.html?c
at=3, retrieved on 15th March 2009

Galtung, J. & Tschudi, F. (2001). Crafting Peace: On the Psychology of the Transcend
Approach. In Christie, D., Wagner, R. & Winter, D.N. (Eds.) Peace, Conflict and
Violence. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Gilbreth, L. M. (1989). The Psychology of Management, New York: Macmillan

Gleich, J. (1987). Chaos: Making a New Science. New York; Viking.

225
 Imhonopi, D. F. & Urim, U. M. - Organisational Change Management and Workers’ Behaviour: A Critical Review

Greiner, L. (1967). Patterns of Organisational Change, Harvard Business Review, May –

June, pp. 119 – 130.

Heller, R. (1998). Managing Change. London: DORLING KINDERSLEY Limited.

Hunt, J. (1992). Managing People At Work (3rd edit.), McGraw Hill.

Inga, S. O. (2003). "Analysis of the Innovative Changes of the Bank and Customer
Relationship Management, Situation in Latvia."Issue 2003, Vol. 1, No. 2, October 22.
http://www.spa.msu.ru/e-journal/2/23_3.php, Retrieved on 24/3/2009

Jackson, D. (1997). Dynamic Organizations: The Challenge of Change. London: Macmillan

Press Ltd.

Kanter, R. M. (1983). The Change Path, New York: Simon and Schuster.

Kotter, J. P., Schlesinger L. and Vijay, A. S. (1979). Organisations: Test, Cases and Readings
on the Management of Organisational Design and Change, Irwin: Homewood, III

Kotter, J. P. (2002). Eight Steps to Successful Change.

http://www.businessballs.com/changemanagement.htm, Retrieved on 15th March,
2009

Kuhn, T. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolution. Chicago: University of Chicago

Press.

Lawrence, P. L. and Lorsch, J. (1967). Organisations and Environment Managing

Differentiation and Integration, Boston: Harvard Press.

Macredie, R. D., Sandom, C. and Paul, R. J. (2000). “Modelling for Change: An Information
Systems Perspective on Change Management Models.” Department of Information
Systems and Computing, Brunel University, Uxbridge, Middlesex.

Morgan, G. (1999). Images of Organisation, London: Macmillan Press Ltd.

Organisational Change Management (2009). “Organisational Change Management: Why,

What, How?” in www. orgchangemgt.com. Retrieved on 13th March.

RDI, (2008). Types of Organisation and Associated Structures, Unit 1, Lesson 1.

Rogers, E. (1995). Diffusion of Innovation. New York: Free Press.

Ross, M. (2000). Creating the Conditions for Peacemaking.

226
 International Journal of Development and Management Review (INJODEMAR) Vol. 6 June, 2011

Scimecca, Joseph (1993). Conflict Resolution: The Basis for Social Control or Social
Change? In D. Sandole & I. Sandole-Staroste (Eds.) Conflict Management and
Problem-Solving New York: New York University Press, pp. 30-33.

Shapiro, I. (2002). Training for Racial Equity and Inclusion. Washington, D.C: Aspen
Institute.

Shapiro, I. (2005). Theories of Change.

http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/theories_of_change/, Retrieved on 15th
March, 2009

Shaskin, M. and Havelock, R. G. (1983). Help Scores: A Guide Promoting Change in Groups
and Organisations, in H. H. Blumberg et. al. (eds) Small Groups and Social
Interactions, UK: Willey, Vol. 2.

Shaskin, M. and Williams, M. (1984). Organisational Behaviour: Concepts and Experiences.

Reson Publishing Company.

Slocum, H. (1995). Management, 5th Edition. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, p.884.

Staub, E.(1989) The Roots of Evil. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Steiner, C. (2000). Emotional Literacy. New York: Avon Books.

Wardale, D. (2009). 4 Components of the Module".

http://mmhr.org.au/uploaddocs/Rural%20Health%20Change%20_OHT_.pdf.
Retrieved on 15 March

Tichy, N. and Hoernstein, H. (1995). “Stand When Your Number is Called: An Empirical
Attempt to Classify Types of Social Change Agents,” in Human Relations Journal,
Vol. 29. No. 10, pp.945 – 967.

Toffler, A. (1970). Future Shock, Bodley Head.

Waterman, R.H.(2006), The Renewal Factor, The Hutchinson Dictionary of Business

Quotes. Helicon Publishing, Oxford, UK.

227