Evaluating a model of planned organizational change: integrating theory, research and practice

Abstract

The field of organizational development (OD) lacks integration of practitioners' knowledge of change methodology and academics' theories which help demystify the underlying process of change. Previous attempts to empirically validate models of planned change using previous research (Robertson, Roberts, & Porras, 1993) have been successful, although limited. The goal of this study was to test several components of a planned change model developed by Porras and Robertson (1992), and to extend this model using a longitudinal design and data collected from an organization undergoing change. Study variables were suggested by the Porras and Robertson model, as well as by organizational psychology research and psychotherapy research that relates to individual behavioral change at work (i.e., organizational climate, psychological contract, exchange ideology, distributive justice, procedural justice, interpersonal justice, informational justice, readiness for change, self-efficacy, and individual reactions to change). Survey data (N = 690) from a medium-sized technology manufacturing organization did not support the hypothesized relationships suggested by the model; most study variables remained fairly constant following the change intervention. Two variables changed significantly over time (e.g., psychological contract and contemplative stage of readiness), although in a negative direction, as a result of the change intervention. Social exchange relationships (e.g., organizational climate, psychological contract and exchange ideology) within the model were also explored. Social exchange relationships did not significantly moderate the relationship between fairness perceptions and individual reactions, as well as the relationship between readiness for change and self-efficacy. The findings of this study do not seem to provide support for expectations of significant positive change in work setting variables and individual behavior change following an organizational development intervention. Study limitations and reasons for why change did not occur in the hypothesized manner are discussed. Implications for future research, theoretical development, and practice of planned change are presented.