1.

Introduction

Change has always coexisted with nature and with mankind, but studies on change and in particular

on the change of organizations take their first steps only fifty years ago. In this paper we refer to

Kurt Lewin, famous pioneer of social psychology, and his theory on change which was the first

explicit formulation on the subject. His study was published in 1947 and afterwards subsequent

elaborations were built. This is how the line of studies called Organizational Development started.

2. Change Management

The phrase "change management" (often shortened as "CM") refers to any approaches for

supporting individuals, teams, and organizations in undergoing organizational transformation. It

includes techniques that redirect or redefine how resources are used, business processes, budget

allocations, or other operating models that materially alter a company or organization.

The term "change management" can be used to describe how an organizational change affects teams

and individuals. It covers a wide range of issues, including information technology, commercial

solutions, and behavioral and social sciences.

3. Lewin’s 3-Stage Model of Change Theory

Lewin was the first behavioral scientist to offer a theory-based, practical and ethical approach to

change. He was primarily interested in resolving social conflict through behavioral change.

Lewin proposed a simple, three-step change paradigm that facilitates employees' capacity for

adaptation.

The three phases of Lewin's change model are as follows:

1.Unfreeze

3.Refreeze 2.Change
 3.1. Stage 1 - Unfreeze

Lewin's model's first stage deals with perception management and seeks to get the involved parties

ready for the impending organizational transformation. Change leaders must consider how to

increase the organization's readiness for change and generate a feeling of urgency.

Effective change communication is crucial during this phase for gaining the desired team member

support of the change management team. It is easier to accept change by engaging in the activities

listed below during the "unfreeze" stage:

 Conduct a needs analysis by asking your company to identify any gaps in the way business

is now done

 Obtain organizational support

 Create a strategic change vision and change strategy

 Persuade people of the need for change

 Address employee concerns openly and honestly

3.2. Stage 2 - Change

This stage deals with the implementation of change when the status quo is shaken. To ease the shift

at this stage, it's necessary to think about a fast and flexible approach that takes employee feedback

into account.

To further reduce uncertainty, the following concrete steps need to be taken into consideration:

- Obtain the cooperation of the team members by maintaining an open line of communication

- Organize change management training and sessions

 - Empower employees to approach the change head-on

- Generate quick victories that will inspire the team

3.3. Stage 3 - Refreeze

In the final "refreezing" step, workers go from the transition phase to stabilization or acceptance.

Employees may revert to old habits if change leaders don't reinforce the change by integrating it

into the organizational culture. The actions listed below will assist the manager in supporting the

change:

 Early adopters and change champions should be identified and rewarded. 

 Regular employee feedback should also be collected.

4. Understanding the change

There are several disciplines and scholars who after Lewin have tried to understand more deeply the

change in order to be able to approach it in a successful way. Fields like the psychology of

organizations, sociology, management studies, philosophy, physics and natural sciences influenced

the common vision of the organizations and their models of change management.

The result is a complex web of theories and models on organizational change. None of them is

exhaustive nor substitutive of the others, in fact they have to be treated in a complementary way.

Each contribution is based on specific interpretations and has its attention focused only on some

dimensions of organizational change. Just to name a few, there are studies which have been focused

on defining the different types of change, studies which have adopted models for the analysis of

change, some have developed rules and suggestions for managing the process of change, others

which connected learning and change at the individual and collective level, studies which have

focused on the leadership of change and on the tools to support it.

 4.1. Distinction between planned and emerging change

We can distinguish between planned and emerging change, where the latter occurs in an unintended

way as a result of a series of decisions not correlated or because of external or internal factors,

beyond the control of managers. However, the planned change is intentional and scheduled. What

the recent organizational theory and management literature has shown is that organizational change

processes are never linear and permanent but always contain important emerging elements. This

represents the paradox of the planned change.

4.1.1. Emergent approach as a dominant approach

From the 1980s onwards, in response to the criticism of Planned change many alternative

approaches to change have been offered. The Emergent approach is one of them and starts from the

assumption that change is not a linear process or a one-off isolated event but is a continuous, open-

ended, cumulative and unpredictable process of aligning and re-aligning an organization to its

changing environment. From the Emergent perspective, successful change is less dependent on

detailed plans and projections than on reaching an understanding of the intricacy of the issues

concerned, including the central role played by power and politics in initiating and managing

change, and in identifying the range of available options. The ideal change agent is an individual

who is highly skilled and well-trained political operator. The change agent’s role is to get the job

done, come what may. If Lewin’s view of change can be summarized as “the end reflects the

means”, then the summary of the Emergent view would be “the end justifies the means”.

The proponents of the Emergent approach do not appear to consider the issue of ethics. Typical

examples of this are cases where managers promote or block restructuring depending on how it

affects them and their part of the organization. An example was the merger of SmithKline Beecham

and Glaxo. In 1998, the two companies announced that they planned to merge and form the largest

pharmaceutical company in the world. However, the merger was quickly called off owing to a
rumored clash between SmithKline’s CEO and Glaxo’s Chairman over who would run the merged

company. It was only when they both announced their retirements that the merger proceeded.

Obviously, the proponents of Emergent change do not necessarily support such abuses of power.

However, they do see power and politics as a fact of organizational life, which must be accepted

and exploited if change is to be achieved.

4.2. Distinction between episodic and continuous change

Another way of analyzing the different types of change is by distinguishing between episodic and

continuous change. The first, according to Weick and Quinn, is infrequent, discontinuous and

intentional. It’s also called radical change and it involves replacement of a strategy or a program.

The continuous change, also called ongoing is evolutionary, cumulative, is characterized by people

constantly adapting and editing ideas they acquire from different sources.

4.3. Distinction between developmental, transitional and transformational change

Finally, the change can be read in relation to its scope. Ackerman distinguished three types:

developmental, transitional and transformational change. Developmental changes are small,

incremental improvements or corrections in the way an organization conducts business. Some

developmental changes are planned while others occur because of outside influences. The

transitional change tries to reach a state different from the existing one, it is episodic, planned. This

type of change is at the basis of most of the literature on organizational change and has its origins in

Lewin’s three-phase model, enriched by Schein 30 years later. Transformational change is radical

and requires a shift in the way a business operates and typically involves developmental and

transitional changes. It can determine a transformation in the culture of the organization.

5. Three different levels of organizational change

Change was analyzed at 3 levels: individual, group and organization. These represent the different

points of view in which change can be observed and also the points from which change can start. It

is possible to identify for each level what are the type situations, both evolutionary and

revolutionary, the reactions/resistances to change and the strategies to deal with it.

5.1. Change at the individual level

It concerns those situations in which the intervention of change is focused on the individual. Burke

identifies 3 types of situations: recruitment, selection, replacement. To cope with these activities, he

identifies training and development, coaching and counseling as a support for change. Burke lists a

series of individual responses to change, describes the forms of resistance, and proposes activities to

help people embrace change and manage the transition phase.

5.2. Group Level Change

The literature dedicates different insights to the topics of team building, group dynamics, the

correlation between team characteristics and its performances, the analysis of group responses to

change.

5.3. Organizational change

Changes affecting entire systems often start from more simplified units, an individual, a group, or a

part of the organization, particularly if it is large and complex. Individual and group changes are the

basis from which can start a wider change.

6. “Learning organization”
Another metaphor about organization and change is the one of the “learning organization”.

Although studies of organizational learning are from the ‘90s, in the last ten years organizational

learning has become the main topic of organizational themes.

We are in the age of knowledge: the strategic resources of an organization reside in knowledge and

its ability to acquire, integrate, and recombine it in unconventional ways. The evolution of the

market has therefore led to a greater appreciation of organizational learning as a resource to

implement a process of functional adaptation and transformation.

The organizations operate through the use of permanent and customized working groups. The

people within them operate continuous transactions, symbolic and material exchanges, make

choices, take decisions, solve problems, evaluate results, individually and collectively, each with

different degrees of responsibility. The life of organizations is based on repeated acts of choice and

decision. Each choice implicitly refers to an individual and collective knowledge, each verification,

each result goes to compose, rectify, enrich a common deposit of individual and company

knowledge, a repertoire of practices, behaviors, techniques and meanings. Thought and action are

inextricably linked in decision making and organizational problem solving. The organization lives,

develops, is designed through continuous learning acts by the people who populate it and as a result

of the shared exchanges put in place, conversations and interactions acted.

7. Resistance to change

It has long been understood that resistance to change plays a crucial role in determining whether an

organizational transformation attempt is successful or not.

Managers frequently consider resistance as the enemy of change, the adversary that must be

defeated if a change attempt is to be successful.

However, a detailed study of the literature on resistance reveals that this hostile approach has no

theoretical support. Instead, a significant amount of research published in the 1960s and 1970s
discovered that resistance really had value and should not be avoided or suppressed as indicated by

classical management theory.

According to Schein, resistance to change is one of the most pervasive organizational phenomena.

Many authors have provided definitions of resistance. For instance, Zaltman and Duncan define

resistance as any conduct that serves to maintain the status quo in the face of pressure to alter the

status quo, while Ansoff defines resistance as a multifaceted phenomenon, which introduces

unanticipated delays, costs and instabilities into the process of a strategic change. In an

organizational setting, resistance is an expression of reluctance that typically develops as a response

or reaction to change. This expression is typically used by management to describe any employee

actions considered to be an attempt to prevent, postpone, or alter change. As a result, resistance is

frequently associated with bad employee attitudes or with unproductive behaviors.

This study came to the conclusion that resistance was influenced by a number of social factors, such

as:

• Rational factors: When employees' rational estimations of the planned change's effects don't

match those the management has in mind, resistance may emerge. These disagreements

make the employees question the value or quality of the changes, and they may decide to

oppose them or express their concerns as a result.

• Non-rational factors: Individual workers' responses to suggested changes are also influenced

by their predispositions and preferences, which are not always based on an economic-

rational evaluation of the change. Workers that just do not want to shift offices, want to

work close to a certain colleague, or are unsure of the results of deploying new technology

are examples of resistant workers.

• Political factors: Favoritism is an example of political factors that have an impact on

resistance.

• Management factors: ineffective or inefficient management techniques also cause resistance.

Over time, as organizational theory evolved, it became clear that organizational factors can also

generate resistance to change. Systems, processes, sunk costs, and other factors all help create a

type of inertia that leads a company toward increased reliability and predictability, which inhibits

change. This research led to a greater understanding of resistance to change as the intricate,

multifaceted phenomenon that it is, a phenomenon brought on by a multitude of causes.

Additionally, a consensus started to emerge that, in contrast to traditional thinking, resistance (and

the risk of conflict it can bring) may not necessarily be an enemy. Instead, there is a convincing

case that argues resistance should not be viewed with suspicion because it can contribute to

organizational transformation efforts.

According to Hultman, when the word resistance is mentioned, we have a tendency to associate it

with negative connotations. This is a mistaken assumption. Resistance is frequently the best

possible answer in many situations. Resistance is a perfectly legitimate response o a worker,

according to Leigh , while Zaltman and Duncan cite Rubin stating that resistance should be utilized

constructively.

The idea that resistance can be helpful in an organizational change attempt contrasts with the

traditional view that sees it as an obstacle that is frequently faced on the way to a successful change

process. However, a number of authors have come to the opinion that there are a number of benefit

thanks to resistance. These benefits can actually be used by the company to effectively aid change

when managed appropriately. Resistance make us realize that it is incorrect to believe that change is

always positive. Only the effects of change can be measured, and they cannot be known for sure

until the change effort has been completed and enough time has passed.

In order to push the organization toward more stability, resistance is essential. It is a force that can

balance the pressure from both the internal and external contexts to push change.  Human systems

that remain in a stable condition promote the stabilization, consolidation, and improvement of

processes and specializations, giving the organization some level of predictability and control.
People don't necessarily oppose change; rather, they oppose the uncertainties and potential

outcomes that change might bring about. This has become increasingly clear as our understanding

of resistance has evolved.

8. Conclusion

Managing change is a planned approach in dealing with different types of changes. In an

organization dealing with changes, as well as defining and implementing procedures and

technologies to benefit from changing opportunities is the main responsibility for managing change.

Over the last 25 years, much of the debate on organizational change has been dominated by the

issue of power and politics. This has led to a decline in interest in Kurt Lewin’s Planned approach

to change. With its ethical basis and stress on democratic participation. Its place has been taken by

the Emergent approach, which focuses on use of power a politics to bring about change. The

Emergent approach was consistent with the free-market, winner-takes-all spirit of the last 25 years.

According to Burnes, we are now entering a new era where ethical and socially responsible

behavior is becoming more important than profit maximization and self-interest. This can only be

achieved if those concerned are able to change of their own volition through the type of ethical and

participative change process advocated by Kurt Lewin.

There are four main reasons for the advent of this new era. The first is that governments across the

world are beginning to take action to make financial institutions take economic and social

responsibility seriously. The second is the rising of environmental awareness, especially in the USA

and China. The third is the decision by some private organizations, as the GlaxoSmithKline, to
break with the mantra of “profit first”. The fourth reason was the election of President Barak

Obama, with his message of change, his attack on unrestrained capitalism and his call for personal,

social, economic and environmental responsibility.

Behavioral change cannot be achieved by imposition, trickery or manipulation. It requires people to

change of their own volition. Unlike the Emergent school, Lewin offers us an optimistic view of

human nature and the ability of human beings to create better organizations and build a better

world.

9. References

- Bernard Burnes (2009) Reflections: Ethics and Organizational Change – Time for a Return

to Lewinian Values, Journal of Change Management, 9:4, 359-381, DOI:

10.1080/14697010903360558

- Waddell, D., & Sohal, A. S. (1998). Resistance: a constructive tool for change

management. Management decision, 36(8), 543-548.

- Ghavifekr, S., Afshari, M., Siraj, S., & Razak, A. Z. A. (2017). Managing change in

educational organization: a conceptual overview. MOJEM: Malaysian Online Journal of

Educational Management, 1(1), 1-13.

- Liebhart, Margrit and Garcia-Lorenzo, Lucia (2010) Between planned and emergent change:

decision maker’s perceptions of managing change in organisations. International journal of

knowledge, culture and change management, 10 (5). pp. 214-225. ISSN 1447-9524