Abstract

It has been argued that the two most common approaches to change management adopted by organizations, Theory E and Theory O, represent an inefficient dichotomy and, thus, integrating elements of both into any change initiative has been proposed. The dichotomy presented by a Theory E approach, incorporating practices driven by an economic imperative and a Theory O approach, incorporating practices to improve organizational capability, are questioned by this research. By comparing the integrated model identified by Beer and Nohria (2000) with 18 other change management approaches, the limitations of their model are exposed. The considerable similarities observed between change management models leads to the conclusion that a more comprehensive integrated model should be developed and tested. This includes the importance of identifying the context for change as a prerequisite for change design. Initial research validated the use of an extended list of critical success factors and the utility of a new model for initiating change and reinforced the importance of a contingency paradigm.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.