CHANGE MANAGEMENT: Why is it inevitable?

And why do people

resist change?
With example from Tanzania perspective.
By,
Shillingi, Venance
E-mail sshtz@yahoo.com
Dar es salaam – Tanzania

1.0 INTRODUCTION
Change is defined as pervasive influence, where all aspects are subject to continual
change of one form or another (Mullins, 2005, p.909). He continues to argue that, change
is an inescapable part of both social and organizational life.
The concept of organizational change is in regard to organization-wide change, as
opposed to smaller changes such as adding a new person, modifying a program, and the
like. Examples of organization-wide change might include a change in mission,
restructuring operations (e.g., restructuring to self-managed teams, layoffs, etc.), new
technologies, mergers, major collaborations, and rightsizing. Some experts refer to
organizational transformation. Often this term designates a fundamental and radical
reorientation in the way the organization operates. The decision of Mzumbe University to
restructure its operation by establishing Dar es Salaam and Mbeya Campus is an example
of organizational change. Also, Local Government Reform Program (MABORESHO) and
Public Sector Reform Program are just two notable reforms which are taking place in the
country.
Change in organizational strategy is an attempt to alter the organization’s
alignment with its environment. Organization change might also focus on any of the basic
components of organization structure or on the organization whole design. Mr. Jakaya
Mrisho Kikwete, president of The United republic of Tanzania, for instance, recently
reorganized the management hierarchy in his new government after general election of
2005. He drew up a new organization chart, he created new ministries and new appointed
ministers and permanent secretaries. All these were done in order to have a good
management team which can meet the goals and objectives under CCM Manifesto of
2005. The same applied when he decided to change CCM secretariat when he was elected
as CCM chairman, where Secretary General and other key figures were replaced by new
one.

1
2.0 The Nature and Causes of Resistance to change
Employees resist change because they have to learn something new. In many cases
there is not a disagreement with the benefits of the new process, but rather a fear of the
unknown future and about their ability to adapt to it. De Jag er (2001) argues that, ‘Most
people are reluctant to leave the familiar behind. We are all suspicious about the
unfamiliar; we are naturally concerned about how we will get from the old to the new,
especially if it involves learning something new and risking failure” (p. 24).

Further more, Folger & Skarlicki (1995) investigated resistance to change as a

response to the treatment employees receive in the change process. Specifically they
focus on resentment-based resistance -reactions by disgruntled employees regarding the
perceived unfairness of the change. They claim that “resent-based resistance behaviors,
which can range from subtle acts of non-cooperation to industrial sabotage, are often
seen by the perpetrators as subjectively justifiable - a way to “get even” for perceived
mistreatment and a way for employees to exercise their power to restore perceived
injustice” (p. 36). This argument is relevant in Tanzania, for instance, many public owned
organization which were sought to be privatized, had many of these signs of this nature,
the good example are Tanzania Railway Cooperation and The National Bank of Commerce,
whom their employees with their respective Trade Unions conducted various industrial
actions to resist the expected privatization which they sought will not accommodate their
interests.

3.0 FORCES (SOURCES) OF CHANGE

As organization encounter many different forces for change. The general
environment is parted into different dimensions: the international, the economic, the
technological, the socio-cultural and the political-legal dimension. This section therefore,
examines the forces that create the need for change. Awareness of these forces can help
managers determine when they should consider implementing an organizational change.
There are both external and internal forces, which are discussed hereunder:-
3.1 External Forces
External forces for change originate outside the organization. Because these forces
have global effects, they may cause an organization to question the essence of what
business it is in and the process by which products and services are produced. Robbins,
(1990) argues that, organizations are open system, depends on their environment, and
because the environment does not stand still, organization must develop internal
mechanism to facilitate planned change. As he continue to argue that, organization that
persist without change, eventually find themselves running or going out of the business.

2
There are four key external forces for change: demographic characteristics, technological
advancements, social and political pressures. Each component is discussed below:-

3.1.1 Demographic Characteristics

The workforce is more diverse and there is a business imperative to effectively

manage diversity. So, Organizations need to effectively manage diversity if they are to
receive maximum contribution and commitment from employees..

3.1.2 Technological Advancements

Because of the rapid rate of all technological innovation, technological changes are
becoming increasingly important to many organizations. One major area of change
involves equipment, thus a change in work processes or work activities may be necessary.
Both manufacturing and service organizations are increasingly using technology as a
means to improve productivity and market competitiveness. Manufacturing companies,
for instance, have automated their operations with computerized application. This highly
technical process attempts to integrate product design with product planning, control,
and operations (www.google.com). Also, the service sector in Tanzania, are now days
using office automation, where Office automation consists of a host of computerized
technologies that are used to obtain, store, analyze, retrieve, and communicate
information; the good examples is the use Automation Teller Machine by most if not all
banks in Tanzania including The National Microfinance Bank Limited.
3.1.3 Social factor
Socially, nearly all of the issues in change efforts revolve around people. You can
change technologies, but unless people support the new systems, problems are bound to
crop up. Because of this, the best way to bring about change is to first gain the support of
the people who will be affected by it, and the people whose support you need to
implement it. No matter how good a change seems on paper, if nobody will support it, it’s
probably not a good idea.

3.1.4 Political Pressures

Political events can create substantial change. For example, the shift from socialism
economy to liberalization of economy in Tanzania created many new business
opportunities. Although it is difficult for organizations to predict changes in political
forces, many organizations hire lobbyists and consultants to help them detect and
respond to social and political changes.

3
 3.2 Internal Forces
Internal forces for change come from inside the organization. These forces may be
subtle, such as low morale, or can manifest in outward signs, such as low productivity and
conflict. Internal forces for change come from both human resource problems and
managerial behavior/decisions.
3.2.1 Human Resource Problems/Prospects
Another area of organization change has to do with human resources. An
organization might decide to change the skill-level of its work force and the level of
performance of its workers. Perceptions and expectations, attitudes and values are also a
common focus on organizational change.
These problems stem from employee perceptions about how they are treated at
work and the match between individual and organization needs and desires.
Dissatisfaction is a symptom of an underlying employee problem that should be
addressed. Unusual or high levels of absenteeism and turnover also represent forces for
change. Organizations might respond to these problems by using the various approaches
to job design, by implementing realistic job previews, by reducing employees’ role
conflict, overload, and ambiguity, and by removing the different stressors. Prospects for
positive change stem from employee participation and suggestions
3.2.2 Managerial Behavior/Decisions
Excessive interpersonal conflict between managers and their subordinates is a sign
that change is needed. Both the manager and the employee may need interpersonal skills
training, or the two individuals may simply need to be separated. For example, one of the
parties might be transferred to a new department. Inappropriate leader behaviors such as
inadequate direction or support may result in human resource problems requiring
change. Leadership training is one potential solution for this problem. Inequitable reward
systems are additional forces for change (www.google.com).
4.0 LEVELS OF CHANGE
Mullins, (2005) argues that, change can be studied in terms of its effects at
individual, group, organization, society, national and international level. However,
because of its pervasive nature, change at any one level is interrelated with changes at
other level, and it is difficult to study one area of change in Isolation. For instance, when
NMB decided to embark on using new modern banking technology, it also embarked on
training its staff on how to use that technology and its importance in their day to day
activities; otherwise that technology could not help if employees could not support it or if
that technology could not be customer friendly.
Also, with the same perspective, Hersey, (2006) discussed levels of change by
identifying four levels which are: - knowledge change, attitude change, individual

4
behavior change and group or organizational performance change. In respect to
knowledge change, he argued that, change in knowledge tend to be easiest to make, can
occur as a result of reading an article or healing news form a respected person, on the
other hand, attitude change refer to emotional change in a positive or negative. The good
example in this area, were seminars and training which were conducted to the heads of
departments of Bukoba Municipal Council before implementation of Local Government
Reform Program (MABORESHO), where the major emphasize was to make them aware on
the importance of the program and build positive attitude towards the program, hence
made easier for them to implement the said program.
Like Hersey, Robbins,(1990) commented on individual and group change, he
argued that, at individual level, the change attempts is to affect an employee behavior,
through either training, socialization and counseling as strategies the management can
use when they target at individual change. On the case of group change, he argued that,
interventions such as sensitivity training, survey feedback and process consultation are
some of strategies the management can use if it targets to group change. For instance, the
Local Government Reform Program where Bukoba Municipal Council is inclusive, where
the sought change is to move from the existing ten departments to eight departments, in
this regard, heads of department were incorporated in the program to suggest new
organization structure, where related departments are to be merged and new
departments with unique functions are to be established. The council is now in eighth
stage among eleven stages of organization structure in local government authorities.
Also, this strategy on group change and individual behaviour change, was highly
used by Rabo bank when it acquired the mandate of running The National Microfinance
Bank Limited (NMB), where various seminar and workshop were conducted to key
managerial staff, the new heads visited almost all branches of NMB to talk with
employees on their problem and problems of NMB and allowed employees to suggest
solutions required, at the same times Trade union leaders who were the threats to the new
management, were taken to Netherlands for familiarization, the major issue was to win
trust of the workers and trade union leaders of NMB to accept changes and hence
participate in running the company smoothly.

5.0 TYPES OF CHANGE

There two types of change according to Robbins, (1990), are unplanned change
and planned change.
5.1 Unplanned Change
Unplanned change, is that change which can just happen, for instance, when
managing director of a certain company decides to resign immediately, is a type of
unplanned change to the Board of Directors, as they are forced to find another Managing

5
Director as early as possible to run their company. The good example in this type of
change in Tanzania, is when recently it was written in news papers that, the Managing
Director of TANESCO resigned from his post after experiencing external pressure, although
later it was unclear whether his resignation was accepted or not, otherwise this could
indicate more changes to come on the structure of TANESCO if new Managing Director
could have been appointed( The Guardian, 24th November, 2007).
5.2 Planned Change
Planned change on the other hand, is those changes which the organization knows
about; where the objective is to keep the organization current and viable. Mullins, (2005)
argues that, most planned change is triggered by the need to respond to new challenges
or opportunities presented by the external environment, or in anticipation of the need to
cope with potential future problems. It represents an intentional attempt to improve, in
some important way, the operational effectiveness of the organization. The vivid example
of this change in Tanzania is the case of NMB, when it decided to introduce ATM’s as an
opportunity to retain its customers in most towns who were shifting to other banks which
were using ATM’s in their operations, and also changes undertaken to change
organization structure of various local authorities including Bukoba Municipal Council,
where it changed from having ten departments to the new organization structure with
eight departments.
6.0 MODELS AND DYNAMICS OF PLANNED CHANGE
6.1 Lewin’s Change Model
In the 1940’s, social psychologist Kurt Lewin first introduced the idea of managing
and removing “resistance” to proposed changes occurring within organizations. His early
work focused on the aspects of individual behavior that must be addressed in order to
bring about effective organizational change.
Morgan (1997) states that: Lewin suggested that any potential change is resisted
by forces in the opposite direction. The idea is similar to the dialectical principle that
everything generates its opposite. But within Lewin’s framework, the forces tend to be
external to the change, holding situations in states of dynamic equilibrium. His solution
was to advocate that successful change rests in “unfreezing” an established equilibrium
by enhancing the forces driving change, or by reducing or removing resisting forces, and
then “refreezing” in a new equilibrium state (p. 294).

Before reviewing each stage, it is important to highlight the assumptions

that underlie this model (cited from www.google.com):
The change process involves learning something new, as well as discontinuing
current attitudes, behaviors, or organizational practices.

6
 Change will not occur unless there is motivation to change. This is often the most
difficult part of the change process.
People are the hub of all organizational changes. Any change, whether in terms of
structure, group process, reward systems, or job design, requires individuals to change.
Resistance to change is found even when the goals of change are highly desirable.
Effective change requires reinforcing new behaviors, attitudes, and organizational
practices.
Therefore, it is now possible to consider the three stages of change of Lewin’s
Change Model
. 6.1.1 Unfreezing
The focus of this stage is to create the motivation to change. In so doing,
individuals are encouraged to replace old behaviors and attitudes with those desired by
management. Managers can begin the unfreezing process by disconfirming the usefulness
or appropriateness of employees’ present behaviors or attitudes (Robbins, 1990).

6.1.2 Changing
Because change involves learning, this stage entails providing employees with new
information, new behavioral models, or new ways of looking at things. The purpose is to
help employees learn new concepts or points of view. Role models, mentors, experts,
benchmarking the company against world-class organizations, and training are useful
mechanisms to facilitate change (Robbins, 1990).
6.1.3 Refreezing
Change is stabilized during refreezing by helping employees integrate the changed
behavior or attitude into their normal way of doing things. This is accomplished by first
giving employees the chance to exhibit the new behaviors or attitudes. Once exhibited,
positive reinforcement is used to reinforce the desired. Additional coaching and modeling
also are used at this point to reinforce the stability of the change (Robbins, 1990)
7.0 RESISTANCE TO CHANGE
Resistance is any conduct that serves to maintain the status quo in the face of pressure to
alter the status quo. According to Dent & Goldberg (1999), individuals aren’t really
resisting the change, but rather they may be resisting the loss of status, loss of pay, or loss
of comfort. They claim that, “it is time that we dispense with the phrase resistance to
change and find a more useful and appropriate models for describing what the phrase has

7
come to mean - employees are not wholeheartedly embracing a change that
management wants to implement” (p. 26).

In today’s economy, change is all-pervasive in organizations. It happens

continuously, and often at rapid speed. Because change has become an everyday part of
organizational dynamics, employees who resist change can actually cripple an
organization (Mullins, 2005).

Resistance is an inevitable response to any major change. Individuals naturally rush

to defend the status quo if they feel their security or status is threatened. Folger &
Skarlicki (1999) claim that “organizational change can generate skepticism and resistance
in employees, making it sometimes difficult or impossible to implement organizational
improvements” (p. 25).

7.1 Why People Resist Change in the Workplace

Now days, Companies, government department and institutions, whether public or
private, are no longer have a choice, they must change to survive. Unfortunately, people
tend to resist change. It is not easy to change an organization, let alone an individual. This
puts increased pressure on management to learn the subtleties of change.
Managers and employees view change differently: top level management sees
change as an opportunity to strengthen the business and to advance in their career, but
for many employees, including middle managers, change is never sought after or
welcomed; it is disruptive and intrusive. The following are 10 reasons (cited from
www.google.com) best describe why some people resist change:-
7.1.1 Fear of failure
Resistance to change may be rooted in fear. During periods of change, some
employees may feel the need to cling to the past because it was a more secure,
predictable time. If what they did in the past worked well for them, they may resist
changing their behavior out of fear that they will not achieve as much in the future.
7.1.2 Creatures of habit
Doing things in the same routine, predictable manner is comfortable. Asking
people to change the way they operate or think is asking them to move outside their
comfort zone. “We’ve always done it this way, so why do we need to change?” becomes
the rallying cry for people who have difficulty changing their routines. In some cases,
employees may ignore or deny the change simply because it requires them to experience
something beyond their normal method of operation.

8
7.1.2 No obvious need
Some employees may see a change only from the perspective of the impact it has
on them and their particular jobs. Not seeing the big picture, they may fail to recognize
the positive impact of the change on the organization as a whole. Thus they may find the
change disruptive and totally unnecessary. Their attitude may be, “If things have been
working well all this time, why do we need to change?” or, in other words, “If it aren’t
broke, why fix it?”
7.1.4 Loss of control
Familiar routines help employees develop a sense of control over their work
environment. They feel they know what works and what doesn’t, and this makes them
confident about their contribution to the organization. Being asked to change the way
they operate may make employees feel powerless and confused.
7.1.5 Concern about support system
Employees operating within predictable routines know their support system will
back them up during challenging times. Changing the organizational structures may shake
their confidence in their support system. They may worry about working for a new
supervisor, with new employees or on unfamiliar projects because they fear that if they
try and fail, there will be no one there to support them.
7.1.6 Closed mind
Some employees seem to have the attitude, “Please don’t confuse me with any
facts or supporting documentation about this change—I’ve already made up my mind!”
Employees with this attitude approach the change process with their minds firmly made
up, muttering, “No way!” during discussions and explanations of the future.
7.1.7 Unwillingness to learn
Some employees, hesitant to try new routines, express an unwillingness to learn
anything new. They may say, “I already know all that I need to know.” Like resistant
employees who have already made up their minds that the change won’t be productive,
employees reluctant to learn something new impede the organization’s growth and
adaptation to change. They also hinder their own personal growth and development.
7.1.8 Fear that the new way may not be better
If things have been going well, some employees may resist change because they
fear that the change will not result in improvement. Focusing only on their part of the
operation, they fail to realize that change is needed in order for the organization to stay
competitive. They may resist forward movement because they are satisfied with the way
things are going. Their current status is quite sufficient, and they wish to maintain
business as usual.
7.1.9 Fear of the unknown
Employees may resist change simply because it is something unfamiliar. Not
knowing much about the specifics of the change, they may imagine a worst case scenario,

9
which can be very scary. They let fear of the unknown become their rationale for not
giving the change a chance. These employees may acknowledge that a problem exists and
agree that a change might improve it. However, they worry that the proposed change
might actually make things worse! Their fear causes them to place roadblocks in the
movement toward change.

7.1.10 Fear of personal impact

Viewing change from a personal standpoint, some employees may respond by
asking how the change will benefit them directly. Will it make their job easier? Will they
have to work harder? Will the change put their job security in jeopardy? Will the change
force them to work with different people or learn a new job?

Therefore, uncertainty is the biggest of employee resistance to change. In the face

of impending change, employees may become anxious and nervous. They may worry
about their ability to meet new job demands, they may think that their job security is
threatened, or they may simply dislike ambiguity. For instance, at the Time when TRC was
targeted for privatization, employee extended a confusing takeover battle, and during the
entire time, employees were nervous about the impending change (privatization), were
even associated with sabotage of a corporation by acceleration Train accident which
happened near Dodoma few years past and killed many people.

8.0 UNDERSTANDING AND MANAGING RESISTANCE TO CHANGE

It is important for managers to learn to manage resistance because failed change
efforts are costly. Costs include decreased employee loyalty, lowered probability of
achieving corporate goals, a waste of money and resources, and difficulty in fixing the
failed change effort.
Involving people from the beginning, clearly explaining the reasons for the change,
having a clear strategy, direction, and vision, and respecting the viewpoints of other
people are all parts of the process. Using strategic measurement can also be a way of
building support.
Starting out with a problem, and working with other people to come up with a
solution, can be far more effective than proposing a specific solution and trying to
rationalize it. People often do not like change they cannot control. However, if they lead
or have a substantial influence on change, they are more likely to embrace it
(www.google.com).
9.0 OVERCOMING RESISTANCE TO CHANGE
Employee resistance to change is a complex issue facing management in the
complex and ever-evolving organization of today. The process of change is ubiquitous,

10
and employee resistance has been identified as a critically important contributor to the
failure of many well-intend and well-conceived efforts to initiate change within the
organization. To close those gaps, managers should know how to face and overcome
resistance to change. Although there are no certain solutions, several techniques at least
have the potential to decrease or even eliminate this resistance.

Before recommending specific approaches to overcome resistance, there are three

key conclusions that should be kept in mind (cited in www.google.com).
First, an organization must be ready for change. Just as a table must be set before
you can eat, so must an organization be ready for change before it can be effective. It is
better to use survey to evaluate if a company is ready to undertake a change effort.
Second, organizational change is less successful when top management fails to
keep employees informed about the process of change.
Third, employees’ perceptions or interpretations of a change significantly affect
resistance. Employees are less likely to resist when they perceive that the benefits of a
change overshadow the personal costs. At a minimum then, managers are advised to (1)
provide as much information as possible to employees about the change, (2) inform
employees about the reasons/rationale for the change, (3) conduct meetings to address
employees’ questions regarding the change, and (4) provide employees the opportunity
to discuss how the proposed change might affect them.

10.0 POSITIVE RESISTANCE TO CHANGE

Managers often perceive resistance negatively, and employees who resist are
viewed as disobedient and obstacles the organization must overcome in order to achieve
the new goals. However in certain instances, employee resistance may play a positive and
useful role in organizational change. Insightful and well-intended debate, criticism, or
disagreement do not necessarily equate to negative resistance, but rather may be
intended to produce better understanding as well as additional options and solutions. De
Jager (2001) claims that, “the idea that anyone who questions the need for change has an
attitude problem, is simply wrong, not only because it discounts past achievements, but
also because it makes us vulnerable to indiscriminate and ill-advised change’ (p. 25).

Piderit (2000) points out that what some managers may perceive as disrespectful
or unfounded resistance to change might be motivated by an individual’s ethical
principles or by their desire to protect what they feel is the best interests of the
organization. Employee resistance may force management to rethink or reevaluate a
proposed change initiative. It also can act as a as a gateway or filter, which can help

11
organizations select from all possible changes the one that is most appropriate to the
current situation. According to De Jager (2001), “resistance is simply a very effective, very
powerful, very useful survival mechanism” (p. 26).

Folger & Skarlicki (1999) claim that, “not all interventions are appropriate as
implemented -the organization might be changing the wrong thing or doing it wrong. Just
as conflict can sometimes be used constructively for change, legitimate resistance might
bring about additional organizational change” (p. 37).

11.0 TRANSITION AND TRANSITIONAL PHENOMENA IN RESPECT TO ORGANIZATIONAL

CHANGE

The process of change is simply moving from the current way of doing things to a
new and different way of doing things. Bridges (1991) believes that it is not the actual
change that individuals resist, but rather the transition that must be made to
accommodate the change. He states, “change is not the same as transition. Change is
situational: the new site, the new boss, the new team roles, and the new policy.
Transition is the psychological process people go through to come to terms with the new
situation. Change is external, transition is internal. Unless transition occurs, change will
not work” (p. 3-4).

Morgan (1997) suggests that an understanding of the theory of transitional

phenomena would provide valuable insight into organizational change, and why it might
be met with employee resistance. This theory “suggests that change will occur
spontaneously only when people are prepared to relinquish what they hold dear for the
purpose of acquiring something new or can find ways of carrying what they value in the
old into the new” (p. 238).

In the event that it does not exist naturally, it may be necessary for the
organization to create transitional phenomena. This would help in the “letting go” of the
current way and moving forward to the new way. Morgan adds, bringing about
organization change “can rarely be done effectively by “selling” or imposing a “change
package,” an ideology or a set of techniques. The theory of transitional phenomena
suggests that in situations of voluntary change the person doing the changing must be in
control of the process” (p. 238).

12.0 ORGANIZATION CHANGE MONITORING

All change efforts are results-oriented - leaders implement change to realize new,
different and better results. If the change is not monitored, effectiveness cannot be
measured. Monitoring is particularly crucial during change processes due to the many

12
forces that will challenge, resist or disrupt efforts. Since organizations must continue to
operate day-to-day while undergoing change initiatives, the complexity of change is
increased.
The key to monitoring change effectively is to stay in touch with the people. Ask
questions, demonstrate concern for their welfare and goal achievement and commit to do
whatever is necessary to make the change successful. Leaders who can do this while
continuing to practice great leadership skills will attune themselves to how the changes
are progressing and react quickly with any required adjustments (www.google.com).
13.0 CONCLUDING REMARKS
In many cases, vast amounts of resources are expended by organizations to adjust
employees to a new way of achieving desired goals. The natural propensity for individuals
to “defend the status quo” presents a set of challenges that management must overcome
in order to bring about desired change. Management must also seriously take into
account and consider the myriad of problems that may result if they are not responsive to
issues of resistance in the workplace. In order to facilitate a smooth transition from the
old to the new, organizations must be competent in effective change management. The
process of change management consists of getting of those involved and affected to
accept the introduced changes as well as manage any resistance to them.
Although most people feel comfortable with minor changes, no one can live and
work by yesterday’s reality. Leaders must enlist the support of other organizational
members to identify the right changes to make, credibly communicate these changes
throughout the organization, provide resources to support the changes and allow enough
time and flexibility for the changes to take place. With the widespread commitment of
people throughout the organization, change efforts will succeed.
Generally, whatever the changes inside an organization might be, and whatever
the reasons that made these changes necessary, a good way of implementing the changes
successfully is for a manager to treat the participation and the communication with his
employees as integral parts of the change process.

References

Bridges, W. (1991). Managing transitions: making the most of change.

Reading, MA: Wesley Publishing Company.

De Jager, P. (2001, May/Jun). Resistance to change: a new view of an old problem.

13
 The Futurist, 24-27.

Dent, E. & Goldberg, S. (1999, March). Challenging “resistance to change.”

Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 25-41.

Folger, R. & Skarlicki, D. (1999). Unfairness and resistance to change:

hardship as mistreatment, Journal of Organizational Change
Management, 35-50.

Hersey, p. et al (2006) Management of Organizational Behavior; Leading Human

Resources; 8th Ed, New Delhi; Prentice-Hall of India.

Kotter, J. P., & Schlesinger, L.A. (1979). Choosing strategies for change. Harvard
Business Review 106-114.

Morgan, G. (1997). Images of organization Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications,

Inc.

Piderit, S.K. (2000). Rethinking resistance and recognizing ambivalence:

A multidimensional view of attitudes toward an organizational change.
Academy of Management -794. A, 783

Robbins, S.P (1990) Organization Theory; Structure, Design and Application; 3rd ed;
London; Prentice Hall International Inc.

News papers
The Guardian, Friday 24th November, 2007

14