CHANGE MANAGEMENT AT MANGOSUTHU UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY

Prepared

By

BSD Ntuli

Student Number: 32543891

This Research Proposal Submitted In Partial Fulfilment Of The

Requirements for the
Honours Degree
In
PUBLIC MANAGEMENT

University of South Africa

2018
1
Table of Contents
CHAPTER ONE......................................................................................................................... 4
GENERAL INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 4
1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 4
1.2 Research Background ....................................................................................................... 4
1.3 Problem Statement ......................................................................................................... 6
1.5 Objectives ....................................................................................................................... 7
1.6 Research Question ......................................................................................................... 7
1.7 Significance of the study ............................................................................................... 7
1.8 Research Design and Methodology .............................................................................. 8
1.9 Concept Analysis ........................................................................................................... 8
1.10 Proposed layout of Chapter two ..................................................................................... 9
1.11 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 9
CHAPTER TWO .......................................................................................................................11
LETERATURE REVIEW: CHANGE MANAGEMENT...............................................................11
2.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................11
2.2 Definitions of Institutional Change and Resistance ....................................................11
2.3 Worker Resistance to Change ......................................................................................13
2.4 Influence of Perceived Justice to Change ...................................................................18
2.5 Theories of change ........................................................................................................19
2.5.1 Force Field Theory ..................................................................................................20
2.5.2 The Theory of Constraints .........................................................................................22
2.6 Overcoming Resistance to Change ..............................................................................23
2.7 Leadership and Change ................................................................................................26
2.8 Resistance as a Positive Factor ...................................................................................28
2.9 Conclusion .....................................................................................................................29
CHAPTER 3 .............................................................................................................................31
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .........................................................................31
3.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................31
3.2 Research summary and findings..................................................................................31
3.3 Conclusions ...................................................................................................................33
3.4 Recommendations ........................................................................................................34
References ...........................................................................................................................38

2
3
 CHAPTER ONE

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction
Institutions are facing the world of constant change because of ever changing
environment and technology, this change is 4th industrial revolution. For the institution
to function to it maximum productivity it need to adapt to this ever changing environment
by adopting new ways of doing things. The institutions that are able to understand the
phenomena of changing environment and rapidly adapt to 'change' will only be able to
survive and prosper institutional need to proactively pledge consistently changes in
different magnitudes of business life, business strategy, organizational structure,
culture, product/service, human resource and technology.

The global competition has increased the need for institutions to change, institutions
that are reluctant to change, they either remain in the same position or close down,
because they can’t meet the demand of the fast changing world. While the world is
rapidly changing there is a wide spread of understanding in the cooperate world and
academic circles that the rate of which the change occurrences has accelerated in the
recent years. The success of institutional change depend on how well is change
communicated and managed, if the change is not well managed those who are direct
affected by change they become resistant to the change. This research paper
investigates the impact of resistance to change at Mangosuthu University of
Technology. This chapter focuses on research background, research problem, and the
significance of the research, concept analysis as well as the research design and
methodology.

1.2 Research Background

As for institutions, the new millennium is dominated by the so-called "war for talent". In a
volatile and competitive environment, where people provide the competitive advantage,
institutions need to ensure that they foster job involvement and reduce unnecessary
turnover. Every endeavour needs to be made to find innovative ways to achieve these
4
aims, as they are crucial to the success of every institution (Maharaj and Schlechter,
2014:39).

Penceliah (2004:652) stated that the transformation process in South Africa calls for
organizations both in the public and private sectors to be managed in an innovative
manner. The techniques and methods that may have worked previously may no longer
be appropriate. Muller (2001:294) is in unison with above sentiments by saying “the
future demands that governments and public managers will have no choice but to be
innovative in the design and development of effective systems for public service
delivery. The old styles of institution and management no longer work in the new global
environment”.

Binza (2005:188) concluded that institutions operates in an ever changing environment

with continuous changing technology, they also need to adapt paradigm shift from
traditional institution to learning institution which engage to scientific market research,
staff development and performance management.

Maimela (2009:480) argued that quality management planning for institutional change
should be well researched and documented. The institution strength and weaknesses
should be understood to be able to foster change quality management efforts to reflect
feedbacks. Leadership is needed to improve quality and further states that as the world
continues to change rapidly in various factors that influence many institutions product
and services and never stops now! It remains the institutional leaderships to ensure
quality is improved to increase productivity.

Muller (2001:291) stated that leadership is viewed as a shared responsibility among

colleagues, not as a superior subordinate relationship, a manager views human
capabilities from the perspective of an internal venture capitalist, building members’
operational and entrepreneurial strengths by investing in their long-term education and

5
competence and manager acts as a partner of individual employees and self-managing
teams in locating opportunities to practice new skills and exercise new knowledge.

Oksiutycz (2006:34) maintained that automations is particularly relevant to the

institutional communication theory because it focuses on the structuring of institutional
and on management and the role of developing a closed network of relationships within
an institution as a way of improving institutions and their efficiency. Communication is
important during change because if there is a lack of communication the strategy will fail
or employees will be resistant to change. The above provided information proves that
the institutions are evolving time and the because of new technologies and new
demands. The need for this research emanates from previous research where the
researchers were more focused to the impact of institutional change, in this research the
researcher would be more focus on how to link change strategy and communication
approach to relationship outcomes and ultimately to behavioural outcomes.

1.3 Problem Statement

Change isn’t a problem, the problem is resistant to change by employees or by

management. The institutional change is a strategy on its own, to foster positive change
to the institution. In 2014 after the audit reports MUT adopted strategy 2015 to 2019
which is the document that serves as a road map to institutional change, but till today
MUT is struggling to implement the changes documented in this strategy 2015 to 2019.
Some of the goals which are neglected by Mangosuthu University of Technology is goal
7, which is to promote good governance and management principles. The other goal
that MUT is resisting to implement goal 3 to be the preferred higher education employer
for academic and support staff (MUT strategic 2015 to 2019). The institution is faced
with many challenges when it comes to change management because of its institutional
culture which is deep rooted in its employees and old management team. This research
explored how resistance to change impact institutional effectiveness.

6
1.5 Objectives

The objectives of the study were:

 To explore the concepts and theories of change management;

 To examine the impact of resistance to change on institutional effectiveness; and

 To investigate human resources interventions and mechanisms to positively
influence employees behaviour.

1.6 Research Question

The research sought to answer the following questions:

 What does the literature say regarding the concepts and theories of
change management;
 What human resources interventions and mechanisms positively influence
employee’s behaviour; and
 What is the impact of resistance to change on institutional effectiveness?

1.7 Significance of the study

The proposed study seeks to investigate the impact of resistance to change at

Mangosuthu University of Technology. This study is important because most studies
that exists focus on business or cooperate institutions not public entities such as
universities.

The findings of the research will contribute immensely to the body of knowledge in how
the institution can drive change in the institution, to achieve competitive edge amongst
its competitors. The minimal data about change in universities make this study one of a
kind studies that will contribute positively on change management literature especially in
the universities.

The study is important because it will contribute much needed information that will assist
university management in achieving goals and objectives that are stipulated into

7
strategic 2014 - 2019. The university is aiming on achieving some greater heights in
future, this study came up with findings that can accelerate this much needed change
intervention in the university.
1.8 Research Design and Methodology

The study sought to investigate the impact of resistance to change at Mangosuthu

University of Technology.

The chosen research methodology is qualitative research since the study is descriptive
in nature. Bell and Bryman (2007:64) qualitative research is a strategy that shows the
connection amongst hypothesis and inquire about and for the most part stresses on
how speculations were produced. Shank (2002:76) defines qualitative research as “a
form of systematic empirical inquiry into meaning”. Creswell (2002:20) noted
that quantitative data analysis is the process of collecting, analysing, interpreting, and
writing the results of a study, differing from the traditional, quantitative approaches.

1.9 Concept Analysis

The research sought to explore the concept of resistance to change. Below are the
definitions of the concepts as they were used in this study.

Institutional Change – Junior et al. (2018:62) referred to institutional change as an

“enduring alternation of the present state of an organization or its components or
interrelationships amongst the components, and their differential and integrated
functions totally or partially, in order to attain greater viability in the context of the
present and expected upcoming situation”. Conversely, institutional change can be
described as a reshaping of mechanisms of the particular institution to increase efficacy
and efficiency.

Institution – According to Bovey and Hede, (2001:280) An institution is an,

“establishment, foundation, or organization created to pursue a particular type of
endeavour, such as banking by a financial institution …. Consistent and organized
pattern of behaviour or activities (established by law or custom) that is self-regulating in

8
accordance with generally accepted norms”. An organised group of people with a
particular purpose, such as a business or government department or a company

Resistance – Zaltman and Duncan (1977:8) equated resistance to behaviour that works
to preserve the current situation in the appearance of force to change that current
situation. Therefore, resistance to change in the institutional situation is a manifestation
of reluctance which usually rises as a reaction or response to change (Bovey and Hede,
2001:280).

1.10 Proposed layout of Chapter two

History of change

What is change?

Why change is necessary

Theories of change

Role of leadership to drive change

Approaches to change

Resistance to change

Individual resistance to change

Institutional resistance to change

Evaluations of change initiatives

1.11 Conclusion

This study introduced the research topic of the study that of resistance to institutional
change at Mangosuthu University of Technology. The research sought to investigate the
impact of resistance to institutional change. Furthermore the research provided
introduction with detailed background to the phenomena. The significance of the

9
research was explained and the chapter also alluded to the research design and
methodology used in the study. The next chapter focuses on change management.

10
 CHAPTER TWO
LETERATURE REVIEW: CHANGE MANAGEMENT
2.1 Introduction
The previous chapter provided the overview of the study. This chapter will be
Institutional change can be described as a reshaping of mechanisms of the particular
institution to increase efficacy and efficiency. The chapter focuses on the concept of
change and employee reactions to change as well as resistance. The chapter also and
theories of change management, impact of resistance to change and human resources
interventions and mechanisms. The chapter also discusses resistance to change as a
positive factor and how managers can overcome this resistance.

2.2 Definitions of Institutional Change and Resistance

Junior et al. (2018:62) referred to institutional change as an “enduring alternation of the
present state of an organization or its components or interrelationships amongst the
components, and their differential and integrated functions totally or partially, in order to
attain greater viability in the context of the present and expected upcoming situation”.
Conversely, institutional change can be described as a reshaping of mechanisms of the
particular institution to increase efficacy and efficiency. Schein (1988:23) argued that
resistance to institutional change is the most omnipresent of institutional occurrences.
Several authors have provided diverse definitions of resistance. For instance, Ansoff
(1988:207) defined resistance “as a multifaceted phenomenon, which introduces
unanticipated delays, costs and instabilities into the process of a strategic change”
Zaltman and Duncan (1977:8) equated resistance to behaviour that works to preserve
the current situation in the appearance of force to change that current situation.
Therefore, resistance to change in the institutional situation is a manifestation of
reluctance which usually rises as a reaction or response to change (Bovey and Hede,
2001:280). This manifestation is normally observed by managers as any worker actions
alleged as trying to halt, interrupt, or modify change (Georgalis, Samaratunge,
Kimberley, and Lu, 2015:91). Consequently, resistance is utmost commonly connected
with negative worker attitudes or as counter-productive actions.

11
According to Lozano et al. (2016:171), resistance is instigated by a sum of issues, for
example:
 “Individual factors – personality factors (high need for control, the locus of
control, need for achievement etc.); attitudes based on previous experiences of
change.
 Group factors – group cohesiveness, social norms, and participation in decision-
making.
 Institutional factors – threats presented by the unknown; challenges to the status
quo; workload consequences”.

Resistance to institutional transformation can brutally hinder the changing course

(Georgalis et al., 2015:91) and has remained associated with undesirable outcomes, for
example, decreased gratification, efficiency, and mental well-being, in addition to
increased stealing, nonattendance, as well as turnover. Consequently, that particular
resistance has to be weakened or removed. Bovey and Hede, (2001:535) however,
suppose that resistance to institutional change occasionally is moral, since it precludes
roughly more positive features and meanings. For instance, if institutional resistance is
correctly accomplished, it aids to test and refine tactical and achievement plans and
advances the excellence of pronouncement. Resistance may be a productive answer to
apparent unethical activities and might foster knowledge among institution members.
Institutions function within a progressively volatile setting and are constantly in a
situation of constant modification. The strain to change shoots from a diversity of
internal as well as external sources for example political, financial, societal and
technical factors (Blanco-Portela et al., 2017:172).

Lozano et al. (2016:172) postulated that structural change is meant at adjusting to the
setting, enhancement in execution and modifications in workers’ behavioural designs at
the institution. In the interests of endurance, development, and developing a competitive
lead, institutions endeavour to predict and acclimatize to changes via strategies as well
as organizational redesign (Day et al., 2017:11), which frequently embodies altering the
very philosophy of the same (Domingues et al., 2017:292).

12
The successful managing of change becomes of utmost importance for the survival and
success of the institution in dynamic as well as unpredictable situations (Wadell et al.,
2016:7). Notwithstanding well-intentioned change tactics, roughly 70% of most change
plans flop, leading to disenchanted prospects (Burns et al., 2018) and “costs exceeding
millions of dollars in time and resources” (Beijer and Gruen, 2016:12). Although there
might be several explanations to the roots of below average or unsuccessful change,
failed change is eagerly attributed by managers to worker resistance (Domingues et al.,
2017:295), a multifaceted and moderately uncharted psychological occurrence at the
personal level.

The literature above reveals the necessity of successfully managing change in an

institution such as Mangosuthu Buthelezi University. In an institutional set-up there is
bound to be change in a historical continuum. However, due to the diversity of the
workforce, there can never be a smooth sailing change as the differences in opinions
and interests differ. However, it is not the resistance to change that really matters – as
this inevitable – but the successful management of the conflicts that arise with the
proposed changes to the institutional set-up.
2.3 Worker Resistance to Change
Cueulmans et al., (2015:8881) identified instances of resistant to change behaviours as
“strong voicing of opposing points of view; ridicule of the change, its process and its
premises; boycotts of areas where change is discussed; and blocking behaviours”.
Resistance to institutional change is consequently exhibited as a derogatory variable. It
is commonly elucidated as a challenge existing within the person, as actions which are
continuously unacceptable and a thing that administrators have to weaken (Day et al.,
2017:10). Resistance is, in addition, a way by which managers can blame workers for
unsuccessful change (Baillien et al., 2018:15). Contrary to the initial dichotomous
method to individual reactions to change, Burns (2015:92) stretched the opinion of
resistance and included a ‘multi-dimensional conceptualisation’.

Figure 2.1: Causes of employee resistance to change

13
Figure 2.1 below depicts three issues that condense into one funnel and restricts the
desired institutional change. Employees mostly fear the unknown, encounter barriers to
communication in terms of bureaucratic red tape as well as lack of trust of change
managers (perhaps due to prior experiences).

Causes Of Employee
Resistance To Change

Fear of the Barriers to

unknown
communication

Trust issues

Source: Author
Precisely, Burns (2015:92) “integrated prior psychological research to posit a tripartite
model of resistance which includes an effective, cognitive and intentional (behavioural)
response to change”. By concentrating on expressive responses, beliefs about the
envisaged change and behaviours, Burns (2015:92) generated a more general view of
employee resistance, a kind that can adapt ambivalent responses to the transformation
event. For example, it becomes conceivable for a person to know the advantages of
change and somehow concurrently feel anxious in addition to uncertain about its
consequences for his/her individual exertion. This mixed response is referred to by
Burns as uncertainty.

In recent examinations of institutional resistance to transformation Baillien et al.,

(2018:6) assert that resistance to change maybe a self-fulfilling prediction, intended at
shielding the benefits of change managers. Busby (2017:23) contended that “resistance

14
is a function of the quality of the relationship between agents and recipients, in which
resistance to change surfaces as a consequence of diminished trust”. Moreover,
Baillien et al., (2018:6) maintained that breaks in trust rise out of discernment of
injustice, “when there are changes in the distribution of resources, the processes and
procedures by which those reallocations are made, or the ways in which people of
greater authority interact with those of lesser authority”.

This opinion is supported by Domingues’ et al., (2017:294) views on justice “concerning

the role of perceived injustice, and subsequent counterproductive behaviours, including
a lack of cooperation, poor work quality, sabotage, theft, and aggressive or violent
behaviour that have been labelled ‘resistance”.

Canning and Found (2015:276) contended that there will be no prerequisite to subdue
resistance in the event that the relations among change managers and beneficiaries
were honest and based on meaningful discourse and sense. The status of these
relations is also reliant on past events as well as interactions, principally in the
background of change. For example, if the change is known to have been poorly
applied previously and workers have been exposed to broken contracts, unfair conduct
and poor administration policymaking, it is doubtful that the trust injured by such
arrangements will be effortlessly reinstated (Blanco-Portela et al., 2017:166).
Eventually, workers would be negatively inclined toward change.

Although change is applied to positive motives in an institution, workers often respond

undesirably toward change in addition to fighting change exertions. This adverse
reaction is mainly because change conveys with it amplified weight, pressure and
ambiguity for workers (Kiitam et al., 2016:114). Matos and Exposito (2014:325)
postulated that “the reasons for the failure range from a lack of understanding
surrounding an institution’s capacity for change to other human factors, such as
employee resistance toward institutional change”. Additionally, Busby (2017:3) quoted
several studies as well as Australian institutions signifying that resistance to institutional
change is the most mutual problem confronted by managers in instigating change.

15
The literature about institutional change discloses that negative worker reactions are
due to many experiences – for example, job self-doubt, nervousness or external locus
of control (Blanco-Portela et al., 2017:536) – and most recently this has been connected
to employee discernments of justice (Kiitam et al., 2016:114). Especially, “unfair
treatment of employees can lead to increased resentment, less co-operation, lower
productivity and lower work quality” (Cai et al, 2018:234). This has consequences for
employee outlooks to change. Matos and Exposito, (2014:325) suggested that views on
justice and worker reactions are inseparably theoretically connected.

Even though perceptions of fairness are significant determinants of worker judgements

around the overall work environment (Ali et al., 2016:35), up to the present time
relatively few findings have scrutinized the consequences of perceived fairness or
unfairness on employee battle. The majority of the exploration on institutional change in
addition to justice extents has inclined to focus principally on change consequences, for
example, employee dismissals and turnover (Blanco-Portela et al., 2017:536; Kiitam et
al., 2016:114). When bearing in mind employee resistance, one has to grasp a greater
consideration of the mental courses at play, principally the influence of acuities of
justice.

Issues for example “fear of the unknown and the inability to see the need for change are
common in resistance to change research” (Kiitam et al., 2016: 130). Deprived of
effective and reliable evidence, workers will resist transformation in a determination to
sustain their cohesion and understanding. Blanco-Portela et al., (2017:536) proposed
that “most change programmes fail due to lack of energy devoted to internal public
relations to help those affected by the change to better understand it”. Yet again, for the
institution to be operational, it requires to nurture an air of dependable and lawful
message, which offers for incorporation and employee obligation towards the
institutional objectives. Matos and Exposito (2014:329) postulated that “the flow of
information often stops at the supervisor level, creating gaps in the information received
by lower level staff members and impacting their ability to make sense of the change”.

16
The major limitation of the above-mentioned procedures is the capability of individuals
to lodge change, and the greater the transformation the sturdier the resistance (Lewin,
1947). Resistance may be secret or clear with obvious struggles over funds,
terminologies of hesitation, and reluctance to bind to the transformation exertions.
Resistance is painless to resolve in the event that the succession is fledgling and there
are many opportunities, somewhat than in the future when it is firmly rooted, which
narrates to the experience of clusters and persons.

Ali et al. (2016:35) suggest that individuals do not fight change, nonetheless, in its place
they worry the unfamiliar, foreseeing the loss of position, wage, or luxury. Matos and
Exposito (2014:325) recognised myriad obstacles to the transformation that touch on
the diverse institutional stages and plans and methods to overwhelm them. Whereas
many blockades and plans to change influence first individual on the institutional
stages, nevertheless, it is conceivable to discover some that distress or may be related
to more than a single stage, for instance, collaboration and classifying winners. Most
institutional change literature has fixated on personal or institutional blocks, although
few writers have engrossed on clusters, in addition to even less on contributing a clear
view of the complete system.

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 and
employee resistance is a critically important contributor to the failure of many well-
intend and well-conceived efforts to initiate change within the organization. Although
leaders can’t always make people feel comfortable with change, they can minimize
discomfort. Diagnosing the sources of resistance is the first step toward good solutions.
And feedback from resistors can even be helpful in improving the process of gaining
acceptance for change.

The literature above reveals the reasons workers resist change. Most of the time
communication is a hindrance to successful change. Change managers are sometimes

17
not great communicators leading to increasing suspicion that changes might affect the
employees’ job security. The literature also speaks to employee perceptions of fairness
in terms of envisaged changes. These perceptions can only be channelled to positivity if
the purposes of the proposed change is made clear.

2.4 Influence of Perceived Justice to Change

The literature on justice research suggests that when workers have perceptions that
there is a just treatment at an institution there is a high probability that they develop
mind-sets and behaviours favourable to the successful application of change (Canning
and Found, 2015:275). Employees are more inclined to, “contribute in more positive
behaviours such as institutional citizenship, institutional commitment and perceived
institutional support” (Ali et al., 2016:40). Justice, “is generally predictive of higher levels
of openness to change, acceptance of change, cooperation with change and
satisfaction with change” (Domingues’ et al., 2017:293).

It would appear to indicate that workers who perceive employment rehearse to be just
will not probably resist change. Nevertheless, Matos and Exposito’s (2014:325) topical
study revealed that institutional fairness was not meaningfully connected to resistance
towards institutional change, challenges this assumption. Matos and Exposito’s
(2014:325) argued that “measures of resistance to change in empirical studies
incorporate traditional pejorative interpretations through their wording”. Their findings
reveal that relations among resistance, fairness and obligation to change divulge that
“resistance to change is not significantly related to justice or commitment to change; he
concludes that conventional perspectives of resistance to change are not helpful to the
study of change implementation”.

Mostly, the work on justice put emphasis on workers and their assessments of three
kinds of actions: “first, evaluation of the outcomes employees receive from the
institution (distributive justice); second, evaluation of the formal policies or procedures
by which outcomes are allocated (procedural justice); and, third, evaluation of the
interpersonal treatment employees receive from supervisors (interactional justice)”
18
(Domingues’ et al., 2017:293). Management’s evidence of interest for workers, and the
excellence of information delivered to workers is studied to be the precursor to insights
of relational and informational fairness.

Institutional change can influence the collaborators' well-being. The literature indicates
that, when change is implemented, new behaviours can be required that are necessary
to change, but can also evoke unplanned effects, such as denial, resistance, stress,
reduced commitment or illness in the employees. These effects are potential indicators
of the success or failure of change actions affirm that well-being is mixed up with other
phenomena, such as health, suffering and satisfaction in the field of organizational
studies.

2.5 Theories of change

One feature critical to fruitful change implementation revolves around the human
element which is normally recognized in literature via the inspection of employee
reactions to change as well as resistance (Domingues’ et al., 2017:293). Resistance to
institutional change is “generally defined as any conduct that serves to maintain the
status quo in the face of pressure to alter the status quo” Busby (2017:3)
conceptualised institutional resistance to change as a “resentment based’ construct,
defined as reactions by disgruntled employees regarding the perceived unfairness of a
change”.

As the noteworthy contributing aspect to unsuccessful change Matos and Exposito’s

(2014:326) argued that, “resistance may be conceived of as employee behaviour that
seeks to challenge, disrupt or invert prevailing assumptions, discourses and power
relations”. For several years, this resistance was professed by management to be a
counterproductive experience to be overawed, depicting as personal or shared negative
defiance as well as behaviours.

Figure 2.2 Theories of change

19
The diagram illustrates an amalgamation of theories of change. These are Forcefield
theory, Leader-member exchange theory and Theory of Constraints.

Leader- Theories The

member
exchange of forcefield
theory
theory Change

Theory of
Constraints

Source: Author
2.5.1 Force Field Theory
Lewin (1951:114), depicted change in three steps: “unfreezing, moving, and refreezing”.
Lewin regarded change as originating from two services, those within (employee’s
personal needs) and those forced or brought by the situation.
 “Unfreezing – consists of the process of getting people to accept the change.
 Moving – involves getting people to accept the new, desired state
 refreezing aims at making the new practices and behaviours a permanent part of
the operation or role after the process of implementation has ended”

Appropriate to attain institutional change then breaking the condition of apathy, change
bosses and managers should endeavour to attain the condition of ‘refreezing’.
Lewin demarcated the field as “a totality of coexisting facts which are conceived of as
mutually interdependent”. He further noted that "the issue is held in balance by the
interaction of two opposing sets of forces - those seeking to promote change (driving
forces) and those attempting to maintain the status quo”. The state in which movers for

20
the institutional change as well as the opposing resistance forces will be in equilibrium
that is finely balanced and at the stage the change does not take place.
“If the organization wants to change, then the accumulated forces for change
should be more than the accumulated force for resistance to change. Change
managers should, therefore, concentrate on decreasing the resistance and increase
the forces for change”. (Burns and Bargal, 2017:92).

Figure 2.3 1 Force-Field Analysis Theory

Source: Boohene and Williams, 2012

An institution whose performance depicted as level P1 is in equilibrium, and
therefore the forces for and against change are the same. However, if the institution
changes its strategies to reduce forces against change, it can lead the institution to
move to level P2 and to increase its performance. (Boohene and Williams,
2012:136).

Lewin’s theory to change and principally his 3-Step prototypical has invoked major
censures. The important comes from Burns and Bargal (2017:92) who argued that his
assumptions presumed institutions function in a constant state, overlooked institutional
authority and policymaking, and “was a top-down method or management-driven”.

Domingues’ et al., (2017:292) contended that Lewin’s tactic is too unsophisticated and
mechanical for a humanity in which institutional change has become an incessant and
flexible process. Lewin however, added to the consideration of personal and group
actions as well as the part they perform in institutions throughout the changing course.

21
2.5.2 The Theory of Constraints
The major element of the theory of constraints that reinforces all the additional portions
of the practice is the theory of constraints thinking procedures, a set of logic gears that
address important change organization anxieties and deliver a signpost for institutional
change.

The five concentrating ladders of the theory of constraints by Goldratt (1990:91) offer a
simple but efficient approach to continuous perfection in circumstances where the
restriction is fairly obviously distinguishable. These are as follows:
 “Identify the constraint – Identify the operation that is limiting the productivity of
the system. This may be a physical or policy constraint.
 Exploit the constraint – Achieve the best possible output from the constraint.
Remove limitations that impede the flow, and reduce non-productive time, so that
the constraint is used in the most effective way possible.
 Subordinate other activities to the constraint – Link the output of other operations
to suit the constraint. Smooth workflow and avoid build-up of work-in-process
inventory. Avoid making the constraint wait for work.
 Elevate the constraint – In situations where the system constraint still does not
have sufficient output invest in new equipment or increase staff numbers to
increase output.
 If anything has changed, go back to step 1 – Assess to see if another operation
or policy has become the system constraint”.

Goldratt (1990) positioned that this stage is coherent with a procedure of ongoing
development. Nevertheless, where the restraint is triggered by rules or actions, or add
more complex coupled with messy circumstances, the limitation may be tougher to
locate, and possible solutions in regard to correct it may not be straightforward. In these
scenarios, the theory of constraints thinking process apparatuses are more valuable in
determining what to transform, anything to alter to and in what ways to instigate that
change to happen.

22
These theories of changes have a very good implication in the real world. They are
rather simple and might not be appropriate for the current change in the business world
however the fundamental aspect of change is there. Change management focus more
on the change itself however lack the element of individual level focus. I feel these
theories covers almost all the aspects of the change. It not only tells about the need of
change but also how the changes have to be implemented. It talks about the
communication and encouraging each other to work as a team. Apart from this it also
says about empowering staffs which is very important and also the motivating factors
like short term win makes this theories much more applicable for all kinds of institutions
and more reliable.

2.6 Overcoming Resistance to Change

Over and above the approaches and methods used for overwhelming the generic
barricades to change diverse authors have projected explicit ones to overwhelm
institutional change walls which are largely around institutional behavioural type.
Domingues’ et al., (2017:295) argued that the plan with the uppermost influence is
“changes in governance’ using power and authority’ may help to push forward CS but
create a high level of internal resistance, engaging and overcoming the barriers to
change can help to better incorporate and institutionalise the changes”. Burns and
Bargal (2017:93) argued that this is becoming a fundamental and incremental
procedure simultaneously.

Participative methods are the finest techniques for controlling resistance. Worker
participation in the organization as an instrument of solving resistance has remained
examined ever since the mid-1940s. Researches by Lewin (1991) in addition to Coch
and French (1948:) mutually concluded that participation in the knowledge, preparation
and implementation phases of the changing course significantly influences obligation to
change in addition to apparently lowering resistance. Fundamentally, the contention
behind participative managing methods is that within a carefully directed procedure of
two-way message, information distribution and discussion, employees incline to
become extra committed
23
Ali et al. (2016:27) argued that without submitting the discussion with respect to the
advantage and disadvantage of the participative management methods, “it is apparent
that such techniques are strongly advocated where resistance is expected to be high;
the goal being to simply reduce the level of resistance actually encountered”. The
dormant assumption seemingly is that if less resistance is encountered by any change
exertion, then all is well. Very infrequently it is recommended that resistance must be
used.

The main aim of offering information around the change will be to keep workers
knowledgeable of expected events, for example, the exact changes that are desired to
happen, the significances of the proposed change, combined with employees’ latest
work parts. Providing evidence can help decrease uncertainty and nervousness and
may ultimately add to creating augmented openness on the road to the change (Baillien
et al., 2018:3). Otherwise, “poorly managed change communication may result in
widespread rumours, increased cynicism and resistance to the change and negative
outcomes such as absenteeism and turnover (Domingues’ et al., 2017:295).

Likewise, change management measures that allow workers to contribute to the

preparation and application of transformation have been observed to upsurge change
reception (Baillien et al., 2018:4). Participation presents a diversity of potential aids, for
example, an increased grasp of the conditions that make transformation essential, a
sense of possession and influence over the transformation process, and augmented
readiness for transformation (Burns and Bargal, 2017:92).

Exploration on participative management has also reinforced the presence of such

reimbursements, and also exposed relations between contribution and receipt of,
likewise pledge to decisions (Domingues’ et al., 2017:295). With deference to
institutional transformation, Burns and Bargal (2017:92) observed encouraging effects
of contribution in decisions regarding the execution of institutional change. Likewise,

24
Domingues’ et al., (2017:295) found that involvement in the transformation decision-
making procedure was connected to an additional positive opinion of the same.

Trust in individuals leading transformation is also well-thought-out to be a significant

feature of a transformation procedure, and a precondition for workers’ collaboration with
the transformation. Trust, “has been widely recognised as a vital component of effective
and satisfactory relationships among employees and a critical element for institutions’
success” (Blanco-Portela et al., 2017:564). Empirical investigation has established the
influences of trust in a diversity of worker behaviours as well as institutional citizenship
behaviour and accomplishment.

Regarding institutional change “it is repeatedly emphasised that employees need to

have confidence in management’s reliability and integrity, and need to accept
management’s vision for change efforts to succeed” (Lozano, 2016:570). If workers
have little confidence in individuals who are in charge of the transformation, they might
estrange their selves from the transformation and respond with distress and resistance.
Consequently, several reviews have found substantial relations between worker trust
and responses to institutional transformation (Baillien et al., 2018:4).

Accordingly, as argued by Blanco-Portela et al., (2017:565), “characteristics of the

change process appear to have a key role in shaping employees’ reactions to change.
Employees will be more open to change when they receive timely and accurate
information about the change and its implications, when they have opportunities for
participation in the implementation of the change, and when they experience trust in
those managing the change”.

Regardless of how well companies manage a change, there is always going to be

resistance to change from employees. Institutions should engage those who are
opposed to a change, by doing this can actively make them see what their concerns are
and possibly alleviate the problem in a timely manner. Allowing employees time to give

25
their input, it assures them that they are part of a team that actually cares about its
employees.
Communicating both early and often is necessary when trying to convey anything to
employees. If this done correctly resistance to change will be astounded.

2.7 Leadership and Change

Advancing vision, itself a depiction of the forthcoming form of the institution, extending
obligation to that idea besides synchronisation of determination and effort are significant
leadership assets. This growth of vision, as well as the mission, prepares the prospect
for institutional modification (Baillien et al., 2018:5). Once the track has been fixed for
institutional modification, the subsequent stage in the transformation process is inducing
its ethos.

Communication in addition to strong leadership performs a vital portion in training any

institution for transformation and in superintending the institution over the disturbances
that arise from transformations made. Baillien et al. (2018:5) stated that “the ability to
create trust and to use power from an appropriate source to create an environment
where the people who make up an institution feel change is required and then commit
to that change process are two of leadership's most important qualities”. Making trust
may be attained through the distribution and debate of matters, which sequentially
guarantees that the undesirable aspects of authority are not exhibited. The extra
genuine as well as deeply seated these attributes become, the lengthier the advantages
of a transformation will survive, and this will be better for the particular institution.

Leadership study reveals the robust effect that managers have on supporters’
behaviours and viewpoints and several paradigms of institutional transformation
emphasise management’s role in applying and sustaining change (Domingues’ et al.,
2017:297). Specifically, the impact of leadership throughout change might be contingent
on the “exchange relationship the leader has developed with employees”. According to
the “leader-member exchange theory, leaders have different relationships with their
employees on a dyadic basis” (Graen, 2004:345). While “low-quality relationships
26
involve rudimentary exchanges that fall under the basic employment contract, high-
quality relationships are characterised by liking, loyalty, and professional respect
between leader and employee” (Baillien et al., 2018:5).

Links have been recognized between leader-member exchange relationships and

significant outcomes, for example, performance, occupation gratification, institutional
obligation, and staff turnover (Erdogan, Liden & Kraimer, 2006:395). Furthermore,
workers in high-quality leader-member exchange relations have been revealed to
exhibit advanced heights of institutional residency behaviour (Domingues’ et al.,
2017:297). Given that collaboration with transformation may be perceived as an
instance of social responsibility behaviour the expectation is that personnel in high-
quality leader-member exchange relationships will respond more certainly towards
institutional deviations compared with personnel in low-quality leader-member
exchange relationships. Definitely, although not verified in the setting of a definite
institutional transformation, high-quality leader-member exchange relations have been
revealed to relate with receptiveness to change (Blanco-Portela et al., 2017:563).

Simultaneously, the leader-member exchange relationship might also effect resistance

meanderingly, across its effect on the transformation process. The enquiry has revealed
that managers engage in distinct behaviour contingent on the exact association with the
worker. For example, Blanco-Portela et al., (2017:563) found that managers set
advanced goals and stipulated more reaction in high-quality leader-member exchange
relationships equated those with low-quality leader-member exchange relationships.
Variance in behaviour may likewise occur throughout institutional transformation, with
managers providing their high-leader-member exchange subordinates with additional
information and chances to participate. Additionally, Sparrowe and Liden (2005:505)
stated that

“High- leader-member exchange employees are more readily integrated into the
leader’s personal network, which in turn increases access to information and allows
for participation. In sum, it is likely that owing to a close work relationship and to

27
 network inclusion, employees in high-quality leader-member exchange relationships
will receive more information about the change, will have a greater opportunity to
participate, and will develop greater trust in management, compared with
employees in low-quality leader-member exchange relationships. As a result,
employees in high-quality leader-member exchange relationships will develop less
resistance to the change than employees in low-quality leader-member exchange
relationships”.

Institutions are embarking on change to become more agile and flat to meet the
needs of their customers. These institutions top leaders know they cannot throw
money at every problem and that they need highly committed and flexible workers. A
leader need to emphasize action to make the change as quickly and smoothly as
possible.

2.8 Resistance as a Positive Factor

One recent concession to the view that resistance is negative was done by Cai et al.
(2018:7). They focussed the subject of resistance studying the traditional interpretations
on resistance research completed the previous 50 years in addition to the present
observations. Their appraisal uncovered substantial investigation “in the 1960s and
1970s” which shades a rather dissimilar image of resistance and illustrates it has
numerous benefits: “it is better than apathy, it avoids group-think, it provides alternative
ideas for consideration, and a wider set of people involved in the evaluation of
alternatives may overcome the problem that many managers have of failing to consider
or evaluate properly enough alternatives”.

Cai et al. (2018:7) contended that there is usefulness in resistance to change, but the
present practice seems to have overlooked the instructions from this investigation and
confrontation is still understood as somewhat to be run and overwhelmed. The
supposition is that fewer resistance as well. They detect that though it is suggested that
managers evaluate “the level of resistance they expect to encounter, rarely is it
suggested that nature of resistance be diagnosed to see if there is any benefit from its
28
usefulness”. When understood as somewhat to be exploited, it offers an indicator to
areas requiring addressing, vigour for transformation, then a mover of the invention for
transformation.

Consecutively to bind the positive value in resistance, “we need to first treat resistance
as positive, and we need to be proactive in dealing with resistance, we need to
understand the issues and the underlying causes of resistance surrounding change. But
how can we achieve this?” Georgalis et al. (2015:108) lamented that there is some
prominent absenteeism of change administration theories and models that really
integrate the likelihood of value in employee resistance.

Though, there is a single model that has remained labelled as seeing resistance as not
merely omnipresent but essential and as offering respected visions to permit managers
to positively achieve change. Georgalis et al. (2015:108) argued that this methodology
proposes that directors need to involve workers in the procedure to classify
confrontation in its numerous methods along with testing and honing change plans and
action strategies, to allow a complete and fruitful execution that has a buy-in from
everybody tangled. Intrinsically, it seems that this method may well offer a management
archetypal that integrates the value of resistance completely, vigorously, as well as
straight.

As a change leader you can view resistance to change as a problem, as an obstacle, as

a negative and as something to be overcome, crushed or otherwise disposed of. On
the other side of it, there is a positive side to resistance to change and those who would
lead successful change efforts are well-served by attending to it.

2.9 Conclusion
The literature on justice research explored in the chapter suggested that when workers
have perceptions that there is a just treatment at an institution there is a high probability
that they develop mind sets and behaviours favourable to the successful application of
change. The chapter revealed that the major element of the theory of constraints that
29
reinforces all the additional portions of the practice is the theory of constraints thinking
procedures, a set of logic gears that address important change organization anxieties
and deliver a signpost for institutional change. Over and above the approaches and
methods used for overwhelming the generic barricades to change diverse authors have
projected explicit ones to overwhelm institutional change walls which are largely around
institutional behavioural type. Literature reviewed in the chapter revealed the robust
effect that managers have on supporters’ behaviours and viewpoints and several
paradigms of institutional transformation emphasise management’s role in applying and
sustaining change. The next chapter presents findings, recommendations and
conclusions.

30
 CHAPTER 3
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
3.1 Introduction
The previous chapter discussed change, employee resistance to change and change
management in institutions. This chapter focuses on providing a summarised conclusion
and research findings of the report based on the arguments, judgements and opinions
drawn from the existing literature within the context of the identified research problem
and the research objectives to be achieved. This study was undertaken to explore
change management at the Mangosuthu University of Technology. Therefore the
research questions which were looked at in this research were the following:

 What does the literature say regarding the concepts and theories of
change management?
 What human resources interventions and mechanisms positively influence
employee’s behaviour?
 What is the impact of resistance to change on institutional effectiveness?

The research objectives to be achieved have guided the appropriate research design
and methodology to be used in this research, the clarification of key concepts and the
proposed headings to be discussed for the research report. This chapter focuses on
summarising the research, evaluating the findings provided by the literature, proposing
recommendations based on the evidence accomplished when the research was
conducted and proving a conclusion thereof.

3.2 Research summary and findings

3.2.1 Objective1: To explore literature on concepts and theories on change
management
The literature revealed that when the employees have acuities that the organisation has
a fair treatment to everybody, there is a significant likelihood that they will focus on
establishing a favourable outlook to organisational change (Lewin, 1951). Change was
31
revealed to be dependent on two sources, that is the employee’s personal needs or
situation induced scenarios. In addition to the tactics and devices used for crushing the
generic resistance to change various authors have anticipated obvious ones to
overpower organisational change fortifications which are principally about organisational
behavioural nature. The literature also showed the strong effect that administrators have
on followers’ behaviours and vantage point. It also revealed that several theories of
organisational transformation underscore supervisor’s role in affecting and supporting
change. The chapter also showed that there is utility in the employee fighting against
change, but then again the present system appears to have ignored the advices from
this and therefore conflict is still fathomed as rather to be overcome.

3.2.3 Objective 2: Human resources interventions and mechanisms positively

influence employee’s behaviour
Section 2.6 of the study focused on leadership and change management.
Communication in addition to strong leadership performs a vital portion in training any
institution for transformation and in superintending the institution over the disturbances
that arise from transformations made. The MUT strategic plan (2014-2019) posit that
the institution prepared and institutional structure and relevant job description for ach
job and clearly communicate to employees as well as developing and implementing HR
policies.

3.2.2 Objective 3: The impact of resistance to change on institutional

effectiveness
Based on the documentary analysis (Section 2.7), the resistance to change from
employees may have a negative or positive influence on institutional effectiveness.
Pointing to the potential positive nature of change Cai et al. (2018:7) contended that
there is usefulness in resistance to change, but the present practice seems to have
overlooked the instructions from evidence based research and resistance to change is
still viewed by change managers as somewhat to be overcome. To secure their buy-in
and subsequent institutional effectiveness, the change managers according to
Georgalis et al. (2015:108) need to involve employees in work plans and policies.

32
3.3 Conclusions
Organisational change is intended to reshape instruments of the specific organisation to
intensify effectiveness and competence. The study revealed that resistance to
transformation in an organisational circumstance is an indicator of unwillingness which
usually increases as a response or reaction to obtaining change. This sign is normally
detected by managers as every worker actions supposed as attempting to stop, disrupt,
or alter change. Accordingly, employee resistance is usually connected with adverse
worker mind-sets or equally counter-productive activities.

The study revealed that change is associated with undesirable outcomes, for example,
decreased gratification, efficiency, and mental well-being, in addition to increased
stealing, nonattendance, as well as turnover. Employee resistance to change
sporadically is ethical, because it precludes crudely more positive structures and
connotations. For example, if employee resistance is properly done, it helps to test as
well as refine strategic and achievement tactics and spreads the quality of assertion.
Employee resistance might be an industrious answer to seeming unethical actions and
might nurture knowledge amongst organisation memberships. Institutions operate within
an increasingly volatile situation and are continually in a state of constant change. The
pressure to change sprouts from a variety of internal along with external foundations
let's say political, fiscal, common and technical aspects.

The successful management of change is important to the existence and triumph of the
company in lively as well as changeable situations. The study revealed that, roughly 70
percent of most change plans fail, leading to disillusioned prospects and expenses
beyond millions in time as well as resources”. Even though there may be several
descriptions to the origins of poor or unsuccessful transformation, disastrous change is
eagerly ascribed by administrators to employee resistance, it is a multi-layered and
moderately unexplored psychological manifestation at the individual level.

33
Findings reveal that employee resistance to change may be lessened by involving
workers in the transformation process through cumulative fairness as well as clarity of
decision making procedures, providing satisfactory clarifications for the
pronouncements and valuing employees via the provision of valuable, timely as well as
accurate communication about change. Forgetting such practices might lessen
employees’ confidence and faith in change managing programmes and might ultimately
fire workers’ resistance. Transformation agents as well as other administrative
authorities are consequently likely to profit from paying faster devotion to administrative
justice issues.

3.4 Recommendations
Based on the above findings, this researcher recommends that:

3.3.1 Objective 1: Explore literature on change and change management

South Africa is still faced with challenges of employee resistance to change, making
institutions ineffective, therefore it is recommended that change managers must
carefully deliberate on any activities that are supposed to be impervious to the planned
change scheme, since the actions might well be couched in the certainty that the
transformation initiative is incorrect from the early phase, or defective in some mode.
Institutional procedures must be redesigned and modified to specific physical and
cultural models. In addition, the workforce has to be reinstructed to obtain the desired
skills as well as knowledge for the change. The very ethos of an institution should be
redesigned to properly sustain the new methods presented. Institutional, reward
structures, appraisal dimensions and roles must be redefined. Leadership techniques
and management processes must shift plus adapt, then ways of connecting with
clienteles, contractors, and additional stakeholders ought to be redefined. Scientific
advances along with other capabilities should be presented. The effective
acclimatisation to change demands an understanding on how to alter and reconstruct

34
from the difficulties and bequests of the old-fashioned, besides generating new strategy
for the envisaged change.

3.3.2 Human resources interventions

Findings revealed that most change emanates from the leadership of the public
institutions. Grounded on these results, the researcher recommends that it is judicious
or more suitable for change directors to select a participative transformation approach.
Authority tactics or totalitarianism cannot enforce acquiescence, but induce resistance.
Methodical change is singularly mildly connected to positive conclusion evaluations and
end up in doubts when merged with good approaches. Organizations vary in their
settings and difficulties, and involve a context explicit tactic to manage worker’s
resistance to structural change. Allowing persons to contribute in the transformation
course is a critical element to the achievement of transformation. Applying the approach
of employee participation not only augments reciprocal communication inside the
establishment, but delivers a clear communication to employees to the effect that are
appreciated and that their establishment believes in them ample to be involved in the
executive process. The organisation should construct a coalition of factions for any
transformation initiative envisioned by classifying opinion leaders as well as inspire
them to validate the transformation at all stages. This would make the application of the
modification easier and positive, because the procedure of input and policymaking will
let the same to take straightforward ownership of the transformation process.

Furthermore, reward as well as discipline known as the “carrot and stick” must be
employed as instruments to attain the organizational transformation. These dual primary
apparatuses for controlling workers: reward as well as disciplinary methods, are
significantly significant in the structural change procedures. The reward structures may
be employed to generate as well as leverage change by appreciating specific
productions, behaviours as well as standards. Reward structures for example special
enticements, obtaining new idols, upsurge in wages, and granting of gratuities etc., may
be an efficient way of indicating management’s vow to transform. Incentive throughout a
change enterprise is about giving the right attitudes. Nevertheless, disciplinary methods

35
for example threatening workers with forfeiture of occupations or upgrades or by
sacking or reassigning them may be employed to conquer resistance to transform when
the supervisor has provided clear note of the requirement for the transformation and has
encompassed the workers.

Nevertheless, this tactic should be employed sparingly because this tactic can create
irritation in the individuals and consequently, the transformation may be interrupted.
Similarly, informing the requirement for the transformation to workers by offering outside
information on the justification for the transformation might be the primarily powerful
phase in regaining trustworthiness. Communication must also be nurtured in an
unlocked setting, which guarantees bottom-top method, where persons are capable of
sharing their apprehensions, irritations, and desires without anxiety of revenge,
nonetheless not top-bottom tactic always.

Additionally, results divulge the necessity for management to guarantee the

consideration of the transformation, and offer clear or unmistakable and appropriate
specifics to guarantee that individuals comprehend the transformation, in what way it
impacts them, in addition to what is anticipated of the workers. To safeguard that
workers access to valuable information conversation, management must clarify why the
transformation is essential, thereby generating employee’s willingness for the
transformation. Management must therefore, clarify the merits as well as disadvantages
of not getting on with the transformation. When transformation is continuing,
management must show “small wins” which may build pledge within the workers.

3.3.3 Objective 3: Resistance to change sometimes lead to institutional

effectiveness

Findings from the study revealed that resistance may be sometimes be a positive factor.
Based on the findings, it is recommended that change managers develop assurance
and faith in the workers as a longstanding endeavour. Managers should generate an
ambiance for constructive censure and must be inclined to review the change package

36
if suitable; transparency as well as clear enunciation of the necessity, aids, and
inspirations behind transformation. Administrators or change mediators should
encourage association, evidences, and rationality in managing though circumventing
the application of power in addition to coercion. Administrators should develop valuable
manager-worker relationships as well as employee growth opportunities to regulate how
they may be better-quality in an eloquent way. Attention must also be assumed to
fostering optimistic relationships with workers within an environment of fairness as well
as respect. Moreover, change execution practices must focus on events that increase
worker knowledge as well as identification of the transformation and inspire their
participation.

Lastly, managers must conjoin various approaches grounded on a cautious examination

of the circumstances and as portion of an evidently considered policy. These methods
comprise education as well as communication, input and participation, acceleration and
promotion, negotiation as well as agreement, handling and co-optation as well as
explicit compulsion. A better consideration of confrontation to change in addition to the
organisational circumstances under which fight against change may be accomplished is
consequently an indispensable prerequisite, as an extensive appraisal of literature
exposed a critical connection between employee insights of justice as well as the
positive consequence of change agendas. The research with this increasingly
significant relationship, by means of change procedure features of leader-member
exchange, contribution and information. The results reveal that bureaucratic and
informational fairness mediate the association amongst participation as well as
resistance, whilst insights of justice mediate the association between information plus
resistance to change. The researcher recommends that further consideration of the
responsibilities of perceived impartiality could expediate the successful administration of
change acquisition of a competitive benefit by using the diverse services and knowledge
of employees in the association.

37
References
Ali, M., Zhou, L., Miller, L. and Ieromonachou, P., 2016. User resistance in IT: A
literature review. International Journal of Information Management, 36(1),
pp.35-43.
Baillien, E., Griep, Y., Vander Elst, T. and De Witte, H., 2018. The relationship
between organisational change and being a perpetrator of workplace bullying:
A three-wave longitudinal study. Work & Stress, pp.1-20.Beijer, S. and Gruen,
J., 2016. Employee Engagement During An Institutional Change.
Bell, E. and Bryman, A., 2007. The ethics of management research: an exploratory
content analysis. British Journal of Management, 18(1), pp.63-77.
Binza, S.M. 2005. Developing a learning public organization and improving the
productivity of public human resources. Journal of Public Administration,
40(2):105120.
Blanco-Portela, N., Benayas, J., Pertierra, L.R. and Lozano, R., 2017. Towards the
integration of sustainability in Higher Eeducation Institutions: A review of
drivers of and barriers to organisational change and their comparison against
those found of companies. Journal of cleaner production, 166, pp.563-578.
Bovey, W.H. and Hede, A., 2001. Resistance to organisational change: the role of
defence mechanisms. Journal of managerial psychology, 16(7), pp.534-548.
Bovey, W.H. and Hede, A., 2001. Resistance to organizational change: the role of
cognitive and affective processes. Leadership & Organization Development
Journal, 22(8), pp.372-382.
Burnes, B. and Bargal, D., 2017. Kurt Lewin: 70 years on. Journal of Change
Management, 17(2), pp.91-100.
Burnes, B., 2015. Understanding resistance to change–building on Coch and
French. Journal of Change Management, 15(2), pp.92-116.
Burnes, B., Hughes, M. and By, R.T., 2018. Reimagining institutional change
leadership. Leadership, 14(2), pp.141-158.
Busby, N. (2017). The Shape of Change: A guide to planning, implementing and
embedding organisational change. Routledge, 1-13.

38
Cai, W.J., Loon, M. and Wong, P.H.K., 2018. Leadership, trust in management and
acceptance of change in Hong Kong’s Civil Service Bureau. Journal of
Organizational Change Management, 31(5), pp.1054-1070.
Canning, J. and Found, P.A., 2015. The effect of resistance in organizational change
programmes: A study of a lean transformation. International Journal of Quality
and Service Sciences, 7(2/3), pp.274-295.
Ceulemans, K., Lozano, R. and Alonso-Almeida, M.D.M., 2015. Sustainability
reporting in higher education: Interconnecting the reporting process and
organisational change management for sustainability. Sustainability, 7(7),
pp.8881-8903.
Creswell, J. W., 2003. Advanced mixed methods research designs. Handbook of
mixed methods in social and behavioural research, 209, 240.
Day, A., Crown, S.N. and Ivany, M., 2017. Organisational change and employee
burnout: The moderating effects of support and job control. Safety
science, 100, pp.4-12.
Domingues, A.R., Lozano, R., Ceulemans, K. and Ramos, T.B., 2017. Sustainability
reporting in public sector organisations: Exploring the relation between the
reporting process and organisational change management for
sustainability. Journal of environmental management, 192, pp.292-301.
Erdogan, B., Liden, R.C. and Kraimer, M.L., 2006. Justice and leader-member
exchange: The moderating role of organizational culture. Academy of
Management journal, 49(2), pp.395-406.
Georgalis, J., Samaratunge, R., Kimberley, N. and Lu, Y., 2015. Change process
characteristics and resistance to organisational change: The role of employee
perceptions of justice. Australian Journal of Management, 40(1), pp.89-113.
Junior, F.A.C., Lower, L., Faiad, C., Rego, M.C.B., Armond, L.P. and Silva, A.R.D.,
2018. Knowledge management, learning, social attitudes and institutional
change in a Brazilian public institution. International Journal of Innovation and
Learning, 24(1), pp.62-80.

39
Kiitam, A., McLay, A. and Pilli, T., 2016. Managing conflict in institutional
change. International Journal of Agile Systems and Management, 9(2), pp.114-
134.
Lewin, K., 1951. Field theory in social science.
Lozano, R., Nummert, B. and Ceulemans, K., 2016. Elucidating the relationship
between sustainability reporting and organisational change management for
sustainability. Journal of cleaner production, 125, pp.168-188.
Maharaj, I. and Schlechter, A.F., 2007. Meaning in life and meaning of work:
Relationships with institutional citizenship behaviour, commitment and job
satisfaction. Management Dynamics: Journal of the Southern African Institute
for Management Scientists, 16(3):24-41.
Maimela, K.K., 2009. Total Quality Management (TQM): an imperative guide for
leaders in the South African public service. Journal of public administration,
44(3):470482.
Matos Marques Simoes, P. and Esposito, M., 2014. Improving change management:
How communication nature influences resistance to change. Journal of
Management Development, 33(4), pp.324-341.

Muller, J.K., 2001. Self-organising structures: theoretical construct or practical reality?

Oksiutycz, A., 2006. Power, empowerment and institutional communication.

Communicare: Journal for Communication Sciences in Southern Africa,
25(2):25-41. Penceliah, Y., 2004. Emotional intelligence for organizational
effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration, 39(4):643-654.
Shanks, G., 2002. Guidelines for conducting positivist case study research in
information systems. Australasian Journal of Information Systems, 10(1), 76-84
Sparrowe, R.T. and Liden, R.C., 2005. Two routes to influence: Integrating leader-
member exchange and social network perspectives. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 50(4), pp.505-535.
Waddell, D., Creed, A., Cummings, T.G. and Worley, C.G., 2016. Organisational
change: Development and transformation. Cengage AU.
Zaltman, G., and Duncan, R., 1977. Strategies for planned change. Wiley.

40