HOW PRACTITIONERS PROMOTE ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE: CONTEMPORARY APPROACHES TO CHANGE MANAGEMENT

Implementing Change Management Strategies

Change managers should select effective ways to communicate the change throughout the organization. The organization should explain the reason for the change (Connor et al., 2003; Doyle & Brady, 2018; Hiatt, 2006; Kotter, 2012) and promptly communicate the need for the change (Kotter, 2012) through multiple channels (Hiatt, 2006). The communication should be explicit, and employees should receive communication from managers and leaders (Cinite et al., 2009; van der Voet et al., 2014). Additionally, change managers should continue providing clear communication throughout the entirety of the change (McKinsey & Company, 2008; Mento et al., 2002).

Many change management models state that an organization should have open support and commitment from the administration. Decker et al. (2012) think that a lack of top management support is one of the commonly known reasons for failure in the context of organizational change. The organization should have a commitment from senior executives, managers, and staff members (Sirkin et al., 2005). This helps employees see that senior leaders support the change. Phillips (1983) expresses that those in charge of the company should be committed to the new vision and should develop new skills to make the change effective. Hiatt (2006) expands upon these ideas to suggest that employees should be notified of the change by someone who has earned trust and respect from the employees.

Change managers should focus on changing the organizational culture so that employees do not return to the previous state after the change has been initiated (Bullock & Batten, 1985; Kotter, 2012; Mento et al., 2002). Kotter (2012) describes culture as “the norms of behavior and shared values among a group of people” (p. 156). Change management strategies help transform a change into organizational culture (Al-Haddad & Kotnour, 2015). However, theorists have opposing ideas on how to change culture. Burnes (2000) thinks that change managers should address current employees in the organization who are not interested in changing to create a culture that accepts change and does not fear failure. In contrast, Hiatt (2006) believes that change managers should find solutions that have previously worked for everyone instead of identifying and focusing on those who are usually resistant to change.

Organizations should distinguish the differences between leadership and management. Theorists describe leadership as the most important element of promoting change (Kane, 2005; Kotter, 2012). Change managers should provide leadership by observing what is happening to a change initiative from the perspectives of an observer and a participant (Heifetz & Linskey, 2002). Burnes and By (2012) think that leadership and change influence each other and that approaches to leadership and change should be ethical.

Theorists state that change managers should explain how the change relates to the corporate vision (Duck, 1993; Hiatt, 2006; Quinn, 1985; Smither et al., 2016). Collins and Porras (1996) believe that companies succeed when they adhere to their core values and a core purpose (i.e., mission). Change is likely to succeed when the members of the organization agree on the ideal state of the organization (i.e., vision) (Smither et al., 2016). Companies should maintain their mission and vision while determining the innovations that they need to prosper in the future (Collins & Porras, 1996; Kotter, 2012). Successful change management is the result of clear and shared visions (Paton & McCalman, 2000), and a planned vision shows employees the direction of the organization through the change (McCalman & Buchanan, 1990).

A common strategy found in change management literature is to reward new behavior. Conner et al. (2003) express that mid-level managers can influence change through a rewards system. In the rewards system, middle managers define, evaluate, and reward employee performance. Armenakis et al. (1999) mention that rewards can be an effective way to reinforce change because rewards promote new behavior until employees can develop an intrinsic value of the change. These rewards include pay increases, incentives, benefits, and recognition.

Theorists think that change managers should listen to employees’ concerns about the change. Managers should not only address individual opinions but also consider how meeting one employee’s desires affects everyone else’s attitude (Duck, 1993). Employees can be reluctant to change the status quo (Burnes, 2000; Cummings & Worley, 1993; Heifetz & Linskey, 2002; Hiatt, 2006; Mento et al., 2002; Strebel, 1996). Allowing employees the opportunity to voice their concerns can help the change manager identify points of resistance (Heifetz & Linsky, 2002; Mento et al., 2002). Garvin and Roberto (2005) express that change managers should let employees know that they are appreciated.

Organizations may include employees in change decisions, especially in emergent change management implementations. Empowering employees can make them more accepting of the change (Kotter, 2012; Strebel, 1996). Change managers can empower their employees by having the employees help plan and initiate the change instead of having them remain as passive participants (Burnes, 2000; Strebel, 1996). Hiatt (2006) states that managers should include employees in the change process by identifying what needs to be done, not how it should be done. This gives ownership of the change to the employees. Employees that feel that they are part of the change process have better attitudes toward participating in the change (Miller et al., 1994).

An organization cannot plan for all internal and external events, which requires the organization to prepare for unexpected shifts. Bridges (1991) explains that organizations should create a contingency clause to minimize the chaos created by unexpected events. Strategic changes are often ambiguous and seldom follow a planned sequence (Luecke, 2003; Pettigrew & Whipp, 1993). This requires change leaders to be adaptive and adjust for changes in schedules, sequencing, and staffing (Luecke, 2003).

Because an organizational change can take years to implement, theorists suggest that change managers should generate short-term wins to reduce uncertainty about the effectiveness of the change (Armenakis et al., 1999; Harvard Business School Publishing, 1999; Kotter, 2012). Change managers should focus on short-term wins that are high-impact and easily identifiable, achievable within one-and-a-half years, and relate to the change initiative (Harvard Business School Publishing, 1999). Sirkin et al. (2005) believe that a long change initiative with frequent reviews has a greater probability of being successful than does a shorter change initiative with infrequent reviews. Short-term wins allow change managers to provide a gradual change for employees instead of showing a complete change of behavior (Armenakis et al., 1999).

Organizations can create groups or subsystems to tackle the change. Organizations consist of numerous subsystems that contribute to a larger system, and change managers can use transition teams to distribute information about the change (Beckhard & Harris, 1987; French & Bell, 1999). Subgroups promote change by (a) having the power to promote progress, (b) providing various points of view, (c) being considered as credible by employees, and (d) containing proven leaders (Kotter, 2012).

By providing employees with training, change managers can help employees learn new ways to be a part of the organization (Kotter, 2012) and gain new skills to increase their self-efficacy. Employees should know how an organization functions so that they can understand the need for the change (Burnes, 2000). Providing employees with knowledge about the organizational structure can help them understand new roles and responsibilities. Additionally, employees may require knowledge to be capable of meeting the requirements of the change, making training a mandatory requirement of the change.

Change managers should help employees end old habits before starting new ones by identifying what the employees are losing and focusing on accepting the loss. Employees react to potential losses caused by the change instead of the change itself (Bridges, 1991). The loss is not limited to job duties or compensation; employees may also fear a loss of control or certainty (Luecke, 2003). Acknowledging what employees are losing helps the employees accept the transition of the change (Bridges, 1991; Bridges & Mitchell, 2002).

Another popular strategy found in change management models is to train managers and supervisors to be change agents. Kotter (2012) thinks that many supervisors are not familiar with empowering their employees and do not know how to help initiate change. If supervisors do not know how to facilitate change, they may revert to previous actions that they found successful. Middle managers should know basic skills in change management to conduct sessions with employees (Hiatt, 2006; Kotter, 2012) and understand the problem so that they can find and implement a solution (Al-Haddad & Kotnour, 2015). Hiatt (2006) states that organizations need to equip managers to be change leaders who (a) have conversations with employees and encourage employees to ask questions about the change; (b) inform employees of the underlying need for the change, the skills they may need, and their job responsibilities; and (c) identify points of the organizational change that are unsuccessful.

Organizations should also gain support from opinion leaders. Van Tiem et al. (2012) describe opinion leaders as organizational members at any level who have an informal influence over the organizational culture. Opinion leaders can influence an employee’s willingness to change, and research suggests that opinion leaders can promote changes that they support (Armenakis et al., 1999). Change managers need to designate a change sponsor who is informed of the progress and will influence others to accept the change (Mento et al., 2002). The sponsor should have organizational power and influence but should be at a lower level of the organization to promote change at the bottom level.

Design & Participants

We interviewed 20 change managers to determine how they implemented change management strategies in practice. The interviews allowed us to collect in-depth qualitative data about the lived experiences of participants by asking them questions about how things work in the real world (Creswell & Poth, 2018; Patton, 2015). We used purposive sampling to identify change managers who were members of one or more the following organizations: ISPI, the Change Management Institute (CMI), and the Association for Talent Development (ATD). We also used snowball sampling by asking participants to forward our request to other change managers.

A total of 20 change managers agreed to be interviewed. All had conducted at least one change implementation at a small, medium, or large enterprise. They had varying levels of work experience and could read and speak English. The interviewees discussed how they conducted change in the following industries: customs, food processing, fuel, government, healthcare, higher education, information technology, insurance, law enforcement, manufacturing, pharmaceuticals, telecommunications, technology, and transportation. Nine participants described their experiences as consultants, and 11 participants described their experiences as in-house change managers. Sixteen participants had more than 10 years of experience working as change managers, one participant had 4–6 years of experience, two participants had 1–3 years of experience, and two participant had less than 1 year of experience.

Instrumentation & Procedures

This study is part of a larger research agenda that explains how contemporary change managers promote organizational change. In a previous study, Phillips and Klein (2023) used questionnaire data to identify how frequently practitioners implemented change management strategies found in the literature. We expand upon these results to describe how practitioners implement the different strategies. This research uses Phillips and Klein’s (2023) questionnaire results to specify the core strategies in the field of change management.

We developed semi-structured interview protocol that included open-ended questions about the types of organizations in which they had worked, the change projects that they had implemented, and the strategies that they used to manage change. The interview protocol contained six primary questions with nine possible follow-up questions. The interview questions included the following:

• In what types of organizations have you led a change initiative?

• Tell us about a change management project that you have implemented in an [the organization in which the participant is bound by the study] organization.

• ∘ What were you trying to accomplish?

• ∘ Were the participants being forced to change, or were they helping lead the change?

• How did that affect how you implemented the change?

• ∘ What steps did you take to implement the change?

• Generally, which change strategies do you find yourself using?

• ∘ What types of strategies do you find most effective?

• How effective are these strategies in different types of organizations?

• How do people’s reactions influence how you implement change?

• Which strategies do you see more in a successful change than in an unsuccessful change?

• ∘ What do you use as an indicator to determine that a change was successful?

• ∘ How have you used formal assessments, such as rubrics or specific methodologies, during your implementations?

• ∘ How have you used informal assessments, such as approaches separate from the standard protocol, during your change implementations?

• What else would you like to tell us about your experiences leading organizational change?

We conducted all interviews and recordings through Zoom. The interviews progressed as series of questions and responses and narrative inquiries, and each interview took approximately one hour to complete.

Data Analysis

We used the Constant Comparative Method of Qualitative Analysis to explore and code the data (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). The stages of the Constant Comparative Method are as follows: (a) compare incidents applicable to each category, (b) integrate categories and their properties, (c) delimit the theory, and (d) write the theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967, p. 105). We used NVivo software to code and label text segments into different categories and place the segments into categories that we already created. Throughout the process, we compared new incidents with previous incidents that we had coded to create properties of the categories. After coding the incidents, we integrated the categories and their properties. Instead of examining how the incidents related to one another, we focused on how the incidents related to the different categories. The categories became integrated as we developed new themes. We began integrating the categories and their properties by meeting separately with two qualitative researchers for check coding. In both events, we discussed any coding discrepancies and developed a consensus of the appropriate codes. Afterward, we reanalyzed all the interviews to integrate the categories and their properties. Next, we had our participants confirm the themes via member checking. We provided the participants with the codes and themes as well as the interview transcript that related to them. As we created the member checks, we sent the participants the most parsimonious themes. We delimited the theory and categories by removing non-relevant properties, combining interrelated categories, and focusing on reduction. We finalized the descriptions of the themes and removed codes that did not relate to the final themes. We also removed codes that (a) were not mentioned by multiple participants, and (b) either were not discussed in depth by the participants or could not be combined across multiple themes. We integrated the coded interview themes with change management strategies found in the literature (Phillips & Klein, 2023) to identify strategies that the participants discussed in detail and used frequently in change implementations. When reporting the themes, we considered the number of participants who identified strategies that related to each theme in addition to the depth of the information. Although we interviewed 20 participants, we reached saturation at 12 participants. We included themes that at least half of the participants identified (n = 6).

Make Employees Aware of The Reasons for Change

Interviewees described the importance of providing employees with an awareness of a change (n = 13). Employees were less resistant to change when they knew the reason for the change. An interviewee in food processing explained: “It is not only about awareness; it is about creating an understanding on why we need to change and what to change. Together, during the change journey, we will work on how to do this change.”

It was important for employees to be aware of how the change impacted them, what they needed to know to change, and the date by which they needed to know it. Employees became more comfortable with the change when they were given examples of the outcome and shown a compelling reason to change. For example, an interviewee in telecommunications mentioned:

The thing that has caused the most angst in organizations is that they [employees] don’t understand why. We get too busy talking about the change instead of what we are trying to create and why…If you can have the conversation with people on why they need to do this…then people are more apt to come along. They may not like it, but they understand it. Therefore, they are willing to give it the extra effort.

Listen to Employees’ Concerns About the Change

The interviewees listened to employees’ concerns about the change to learn about the effects of the change and improve the employee experience regarding the change (n = 13). The interviewees used surveys, question and answer sessions, and training sessions to understand how the employees were feeling. An interviewee from the information technology industry explained the process for gathering information from the employees:

I feel that there has to be a good balance between interpersonal skills (of gauging the colors of the landscape) as well as quantifiable data through a scientific approach. In the absence of one or the other, you are going to see a very strange and a very low adaptation rate from the audience.

The participants used employee feedback to foster the change implementation. The interviewees found that employees were more supportive of an organizational change after engaging in a dialogue in which they could provide feedback (n = 13). The change managers learned about the employees’ concerns and used feedback to make changes that the employees supported. The employees also provided the change managers with ideas on how to improve the organization.

The interviewees included employees in change decisions to gain a diverse perspective about the change and increase employee buy-in for the change (n = 11). This assured the employees that their opinions mattered. Using employees to gain a diverse perspective of the change led to better solutions. As an interviewee from the telecommunications industry expressed, “In any organization, there are 5% to 10% of people who have figured out a better way to do it.” Including employees in the change decision (a) kept employees from leaving organizations, (b) improved training materials, (c) improved morale about the change, (d) influenced how the employees used new systems, and (e) shaped the goals and desires of the change.

The interviewees mentioned that some employees just needed to vent about the change (n = 8). Employees wanted to be heard and have their opinions valued by the organization. An interviewee in an information technology department at a university stated, “We really wanted campus stakeholders to feel like they were being involved and that their voices were being heard throughout the process.” An interviewee in the information technology industry suggested that change managers give the employees an opportunity to express their concerns:

We are enabling them to express their concerns because there is something to be said about verbalizing. To put it simply—to vent. Once folks feel that they have been heard, they may be one step closer to where we need to be. There is an element of recognizing and acknowledging their fears, their risk, their hesitation, their concerns, and their frustration in some cases…Within seconds, they will just kind of all let it out because there’s an element of fear.

Address Organizational Culture

Interviewees considered culture to be a key element of change (n = 13). Creating a change often required the participants to address the organization’s culture across multiple systems. A change manager in telecommunications continued, “If you get the culture right and the behavior right, the rest will come.” The interviewees addressed the organizational culture by first changing the behaviors of the leaders (n = 7). Participants mentioned how some leaders were comfortable with their previous administrative culture and that their unwillingness to change hurt the change implementation. However, the change managers could train the leaders to promote the change and participate in the new culture. For example, a change manager in the transportation industry explained how a general manager began leading by example to promote the new culture:

Many participants would write things [on the training evaluation survey] like, “I was so impressed that the general manager was present the whole time and wasn’t working on his Blackberry.” And these guys [the general managers] would get up there and say, “Okay, turn your blackberries off and put them in your pocket…I’m turning my Blackberry off now. And I won’t be turning it on until morning coffee.” It blew a lot of people’s minds.

Use Managers and Supervisors as Change Agents

The interviewees indicated that they used managers and supervisors as change agents to learn about the effectiveness of a change (n = 13). The participants stated that the managers and supervisors could help explain the change to their employees and assess how their employees felt about the change (n = 8). For example, an interviewee from the insurance industry had managers provide feedback about the employees’ reactions to the change:

We prepared the managers to have an open dialogue conversation. And then the managers actually reported back to us [the change team] about their employees and the ones that were a flight risk…The managers reported back their assessment. They know their people…but we prepared the managers to have these conversations.

Align the Change with the Organizational Vision and Expressed Goals

Interviewees discussed promoting change that aligned with an organization’s vision. The vision described the purpose of the change and helped clients see the intended outcome of the change (n = 12). The participants expressed that the communication was not effective unless it related to organizational goals. As an interviewee from the fuel industry stated:

Change is so much more than just communications, writing communications, and doing training. And it certainly doesn’t have anything to do with throwing communications at people. It has everything to do with working with senior executives to understand what their goals and objectives are and helping them achieve those goals.

The interviewees helped clients see the intended outcome of a change by clarifying the organization’s goals (n = 12). The interviewees created goals before implementing the change, and they would remind senior leaders of the goals throughout the implementation. For example, a change manager in the information technology sector helped the client define a change:

One question I always ask my clients when they are trying to get me to come on to a project is, “what is changing?” And 99% of the time, they cannot articulate [what is changing]. “We’re trying to streamline and save money” [the client says]. But I’m like, “So, if I am in a certain role in the organization, what does that mean to me?”

Nine interviewees explained that they would have senior leadership define success. The interviewees would develop goals with the senior leaders and use the leaders to reach the outcomes. For example, an interviewee from the telecommunications industry stated:

A successful change is when we’ve agreed to the plan and we’re continuing to get support and engagement with the senior leaders to drive it and effectively execute the change plan. Senior leaders engage their teams to make the change happen and focus on the outcome. That’s a successful change.

Another interviewee from the telecommunications industry discussed meeting with senior leadership to determine success:

I told the CEO, “I will design it for you, and you can look at everything. But I don’t need you designing it—that’s not your job. Your job is to tell me the end game here. And I’ll get you there.”

Implement Strategies Based on the Context of the Change

Although the interviewees identified strategies that they used to promote a successful organizational change, they also discussed how they used the strategies contextually (n = 12). Several interviewees from different industries explained:

• Government: “It [the change method] is always contextual to the organization. So, there are some components of every change process that I put in place. But they are quite different depending on the context that I am working with.”

• Healthcare: “Not every change is going to need the 55 resources we provided them. And, you may not have to go through every single step for every change.”

• Information technology: “Obviously, we have a toolkit that we use. But the toolkit is adapted in any situation that we are in. It’s not a hard and fast rule that I’m using every single thing in the toolkit every single time with every single client.”

• Fuel: “The professional world is divided into those who trust and follow standard procedures and believe that desired outcomes will arise only if you follow them; and those who understand that all is fair in love, war and achieving desired outcomes.”

The participants explained how organizations and people were different and that a scripted change procedure would not be effective in multiple settings. Instead of relying on a standard change procedure, the participants identified the best strategies to use for each implementation. The participants used different strategies depending on the size of the company, whether the company was private or public, and the geographic and cultural differences of the employees. They gauged the effectiveness of the strategies from their experiences, not from the credibility of a model.

Use Terminology That Employees Can Understand

The interviewees discussed the importance of using terminology that employees could understand (n = 11). The participants avoided using language that was too technical or advanced for employees. For example, a change manager in manufacturing said:

I wrote like an academic. I wrote a really good report that explained the facts and all the information that they needed. But I was blown away that some people did not understand it. That is when I realized [that] I have to remember the audience.

The interviewees also adjusted their language when talking to senior leaders. The participants would use business terms that related to the organization, and they would identify how the change impacted the organization. The interviewees said that they learned the skill through experience and studying the business practices of their clients. An interviewee working in telecommunications explained how he would use the executives’ terminology when talking with them: “I would never say, ‘I am a change management guy,’ I would say, ‘I am a grow your business guy.’” A change manager working in the transportation industry described how she used business terminology when communicating with members of the organization:

Knowing the language of the business is another thing that change managers don’t do…You have to talk the language and understand the business in some measure…I have consulted in companies where I don’t understand what they are doing, but I understand enough to be able to talk reasonably intelligently with them.

Build Trust to Increase Buy-in

Interviewees built trust with employees and stakeholders to increase buy-in (n = 11). Change managers influenced trust by focusing on human connections. By building personal relationships with employees and members of the senior leadership, change managers showed that they were interested in the employees’ concerns. A change manager in the insurance industry explained:

If you can relate and connect with your stakeholder groups, they will trust you throughout the change. However, if you are throwing all kinds of data and there is no human connection or thoughtful approach, that cold approach resonates with them. They will think, “Okay, well, that’s great, but I’m not going to trust you. And I’m certainly not going to buy into your change.”

An interviewee from the pharmaceutical industry discussed the importance of being empathetic to the clients:

I think it is really important to have a sense of empathy. You may not know exactly what the organization is about, but you should truly care, and they [the employees] should know that you care…It is trust, then empathy, and then a true sense that you care about them as individuals. That is huge in change management.

Provide Employees with Praise and Accolades

The interviewees explained how they would provide open praise and accolades to employees who met the new goals of a change (n = 10). They used praise and accolades that related to the employees’ interests. For example, an interviewee from the transportation sector explained:

It [the reward] has got to be meaningful. You don’t give someone with no safety issues for five years [the goal of the change] doughnuts for lunch. You give them a jacket—which has status in the company. Everyone sees that jacket and says, “Wow! Five years! That’s impressive.”

However, some employees were embarrassed by open praise. An interview in the telecommunications sector found different ways to provide employees with praise:

You may be one of those people who would feel mortified if I had you stand up and we applauded for you in a meeting of 30 people. Some people are like that. They may think, “Okay, God, please don’t tell the world. But please tell me privately.”

Focus on How Organizational Systems Communicate with One Another

When conducting change across multiple organizational divisions, the interviewees identified the needs of different departments (n = 9). Changes occurred throughout multiple systems and required the change managers to acknowledge how those systems communicated. For example, an interviewee in higher education stated:

Anything that you do to impact one system, you are going to have ramifications on another system…In higher education, anything that you do on the curriculum side is going to impact the advising side, the registration side, and the student population. Any change affects multiple systems or multiple departments. Always think about the communication and the interactivity of the different departments and the interactions of all of the different systems. Nothing happens in a vacuum.

Provide Training for the Leadership Team

The interviewees described how they provided leadership training for members of senior leadership and middle management (n = 9). A change manager in the telecommunications industry described leadership as “one of the most important things in a human performance system.” He found that the ideal situation for promoting rapid change was to have people work together under the direction of leadership who coached them to move forward with the change. Good leadership also promoted the new organizational culture. For example, a change manager in the information technology industry discussed training leaders:

The organization had all this disparate stuff going on that was not well-integrated. They [the leaders] could not make the culture move forward. So, we spent a lot of time and energy creating workshops and educating leaders on how to lead. So, 6–10 months later, the employees weren’t afraid to give bad news at performance reviews…All those things made the conversations much easier, and the leaders were able to confront hard situations in a very productive way.

The interviewees mentioned how they trained leaders to communicate with employees about a change (n = 8). They taught members of the leadership team how to send meaningful messages throughout the organization. The messages sent from the senior leaders were more effective at promoting change. A change manager from a fuel company promoted change by having the leadership team send messages about the change:

And they [the leadership team] communicate the change and validate the changes and processes with other end users that they work with…That’s how you communicate the change—by communicating and giving them [the leadership team] ownership of the change. Because that way, the message coming from the senior executives—or the message that I am writing and giving to the senior executives—carries a lot more weight.

Change managers helped senior leaders who were not familiar with conducting change understand the purpose of a change and how to implement a change initiative (n = 6). An interviewee from manufacturing explained how she helped senior leadership determine their organizational needs:

I get direction from the senior management team who tells me what they think they want. Unfortunately, they don’t understand training to the depth that I do. So, there’s a lot of challenges about understanding what their desired outcomes are. But their desired outcomes are really high-level, right? They just want the sight and compliance for everything that they need. But they can’t tell me what they need. So, I have to figure out what those needs are.

Create Predetermined Milestones that Show the Change is on Schedule

The participants also used evaluation results to promote change (n = 9). The change managers notified the leaders and employees when they reached predetermined milestones to show that the change was on schedule. Six interviewees suggested that the milestones were linear steps that consisted of short-term, mid-term, and long-term goals. A change manager in the food processing industry said:

I think it’s important also to celebrate success. Small steps were achieved and this is a journey—approximately one and a half years…During that period, you have 3-4 months until you reach a certain step. It was good to celebrate and say, “this is what we have done.” We are not finished yet, but let’s look at what we have done and celebrate this.

Four participants used short-term wins to show that the organization was progressing towards its long-term goals. An interviewee from the telecommunications industry explained:

It’s good to have them [the change managers] create early successes and wins so people can see progress. I think that one of the things that is absolutely essential for big, long-term change projects is that you have got to be able to spot success steps along the way and celebrate them to energize and invigorate the people to stay the course.

Four interviewees used communication strategies to openly celebrate reaching the milestones. An interviewee in government mentioned several ways to engage in open celebration:

There is also the part of the communication strategy where we are trying to celebrate accomplishments and wins constantly. It might entail creating events and messages from leadership and peers. It can get creative! I use a lot of videos.

Use Informal Evaluation and Assessment Measures to Determine Success

Interviewees evaluated their change implementations through informal communication (n = 8). These informal conversations provided change managers with candid responses about the change. An interviewee in government had conversations with insiders to learn about the change:

Basically, I had a map of key people in the organization and the ones who were closer to us. So, we had regular—almost six-monthly, maybe more—check-ins with those people. We would have a coffee chat and check-in to see…And I wasn’t surprised to see how things were going from their perspective…We got lots of intel about the organization by having these people on our team. We learned to measure success through hearing what they were saying as well.

An interviewee from the information technology industry discussed informal feedback as an assessment tool, saying, “[In 2005] I could have done more with informal assessment if I knew then what I know now…In retrospect, what I would have done was probably some qualitative approaches where we had more employee listening mechanisms.”

The most common method of informal conversation that the participants used to evaluate the change was “water cooler talks” (n = 13). Change managers used water cooler talks to gain information from both employees and managers. An interviewee from the insurance industry explained:

I would just walk the floors and talk to people and really hear how things are going and how they are doing. And they kind of looked at me like, “I can’t believe you’re like taking the time to do this.” And I’m like, “this is part of my change management approach.”

An interviewee in manufacturing also trusted informal feedback from employees:

That goes back to good rapport with the people I work with. Conversations that happen ad hoc in the hallway and people popping into the office. Or if I happen to be in the field, just asking, “Hey, you know we put that out? What do you think about it?” And they give me honest feedback. I’m going to believe it gives me honest feedback—I don’t have any reason to doubt that.

Have Senior Leaders Show Their Support of the Change Throughout the Organization

The interviewees wanted senior leadership to promote a message that was consistent across the organization and showed transparency about the purpose of the change (n = 7). This made all employees aware of the implementation and helped them understand how the entire organization was engaging in the change. For example, an interviewee in the government sector said:

An important part of communication is getting senior leaders on the same sheet. You know, having everyone talk about the same thing. We have to all be on the same sheet so that the organization sees what’s going on and you get the same communication going down through the organization.

The interviewees indicated that it was important for senior leaders to show support for the change across the leadership team (n = 8). Support from multiple leaders aligned the change across multiple systems and reminded leaders of the purpose of the change. An interviewee from the insurance industry met with all the upper executives to make sure they had a similar interest in the change and received the same communication:

So, all the C-levels were nodding their heads about our guiding principles. And they actually agreed. So, let’s review this again a year into this program. Let’s review it again two years into the program and before we complete the change. Let’s make sure that we are all staying connected and making sure it still resonates. So having that top leadership alignment was probably my third biggest success factor.

An interviewee in higher education met with senior leadership before agreeing to conduct the change implementation:

One of my very first lessons in change management consulting was with this firm that I worked with. They wouldn’t sign a contract unless they could meet with the senior leadership team. They were not going to sign a contract for teams working at a middle level. In an organization, if there isn’t buy-in and the support that you need, you oftentimes find yourself in that tricky situation.

Participants Used the Strategies Contextually

The interviewees discussed how they did not use the strategies in every change situation, suggesting that change theories should relate to the context of the change (Pettigrew, 1987). Most participants did not use a specific change management model from start to finish. Instead, they would use the models as a potential checklist. Novice change managers felt compelled to follow models closely, whereas more experienced change managers only implemented the strategies necessary for a particular change. Several participants used checklists based on Kotter’s Eight-Stage Process and McKinsey’s 7-S Framework. This suggests that all the strategies found in change management models are not relevant to all change implementations. Therefore, the linear, prescriptive designs found in some popular change management models do not align with the contextual needs of different organizations.

While some change management models explain that change managers must follow the strategies in a step-by-step progression (e.g., ADKAR, Lewin’s Three-Step Model, Cummings and Worley, and Kotter’s Eight-Stage Process), other models and frameworks present the strategies nonlinearly (e.g., the GE CAP model and McKinsey’s 7-S Framework). Anderson and Ackerman Anderson (2001) discuss the differences between change frameworks and change process models. A change framework focuses on the topics of a change and the procedures that change managers should consider when implementing the change. A change process model focuses on the actions required to implement the change and the order in which the change manager should implement the actions. The interview participants blended both approaches. Participants who used checklists contextually considered the sequences in which the strategies appeared on the checklists.

However, some of the strategies function as procedures instead of actions. For example, “Have Administrators Show Their Support of the Change Throughout the Organization” is a procedure that occurs throughout an organizational change. This strategy does not occur in a specific order; it is required and revisited throughout the change. This aligns with Pollack and Pollack’s (2015) discussion about the issues with Kotter’s Eight-Stage Process. Pollack and Pollack (2015) explain that practitioners must stop the linear sequence of strategies to revisit previous steps. Our participants conducted change management similarly. Instead of returning to the “Have Administrators Show Their Support of the Change Throughout the Organization” strategy, the participants continued the strategy throughout the implementation. Change managers should focus on the contextual needs of the specific change and determine which strategies are linear actions and which strategies are ongoing procedures throughout the change.

Implement the Strategies Systemically

Change managers should use change management strategies systemically. Although change managers plan the order in which they implement the strategies, the strategies work holistically with one another. For example, communicating with members of the organization expands across numerous strategies. In addition to communicating with employees about the change, the participants focused on using consistent communication throughout the organization, training leaders to communicate with employees, engaging in dialogue with the employees to promote feedback, and being honest with employees. Instead of limiting communication tactics to how change managers talk with employees, change managers should consider how communication is interrelated across numerous strategies.

Further, the participants did not focus on leadership as a standalone strategy; they incorporated leadership across numerous strategies. Whereas change managers can follow a checklist to communicate effectively with employees, leadership sometimes require unscripted interactions. Organizations must train managers and senior leaders on how to lead. Leadership tactics are components of multiple strategies; some areas require leadership through communication, whereas others require leaders to encourage innovation. This expansiveness of leadership reinforces that leadership is a systemic element of change management instead of a specific strategy.

Change managers must also consider the needs of different groups. Research suggests that change managers should customize messages for different audiences (Paton & McCalman, 2000). However, few change management models express that change managers should provide employees with a simplistic message that is easy to understand. Whereas senior leaders were interested in how the change affected the company, employees were interested in how the change affected them. Although the purpose of the message may be similar for different audiences, change managers should adjust their language according to the interests of the audience.