Ambiguity and ambivalence Senior managers’ accounts of organizational change in a restructured government department

Julian Adrian Randall, Stephen Procter

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

27 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Abstract
Purpose – Imposed change at work can present individuals with ambiguous events about which
they experience ambivalence in their interpretation of meaning. This paper seeks to examine the
dimensions of ambivalence as defined by Piderit among a group of managers in the public sector.
Design/methodology/approach – The research is based on a group of 20 Band 11 senior managers
responsible for collecting tax and between them covering the UK in a business restructured into a large
business group. The authors adopted a qualitative approach involving semi-structured interviews
seeking to uncover individual accounts of imposed change, allowing subjects to reflect on their
experience of change and its meaning to them.
Findings – The findings suggested that long-service civil servants and private sector managers
draw on their previous experience to interpret the changes they experience, giving rise to different
perceived ambiguity between rhetoric and reality. Each group either comes to terms with ambiguity
by interpreting the meaning of change to fit in with their expectancies of change, or, in one case, do not
reconcile the change which then becomes a point of resistance.
Practical implications – The case highlights the need for change agents to understand the full
complexity of employee attitudes. Not only can a variety of attitudes be identified, but each set of
responses can be understood in variety of ways.
Originality/value – The devil in the detail of imposed change offers both researchers and managers
of change a significant source of information about likely individual and group responses to imposed
change at work. Piderit’s framework offers three dimensions of ambivalence which clarify different
individual responses to imposed change.
Original languageEnglish
Article numberDOI 10.1108/09534810810915727
Pages (from-to)686-700
Number of pages15
JournalJournal of Organizational Change Management
Volume21
Issue number6
Publication statusPublished - 2008

Fingerprint

Taxation
Managers
Personnel
Industry
Organizational change
Ambivalence
Government
Senior managers

Keywords

  • Change management
  • Organizational change
  • Employee attitudes
  • Senior managers
  • United Kingdom

Cite this

Ambiguity and ambivalence Senior managers’ accounts of organizational change in a restructured government department. / Randall, Julian Adrian; Procter, Stephen.

In: Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 21, No. 6, DOI 10.1108/09534810810915727, 2008, p. 686-700.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{7bb9f23630d04d679fb8c5fd0bd928aa,
title = "Ambiguity and ambivalence Senior managers’ accounts of organizational change in a restructured government department",
abstract = "AbstractPurpose – Imposed change at work can present individuals with ambiguous events about whichthey experience ambivalence in their interpretation of meaning. This paper seeks to examine thedimensions of ambivalence as defined by Piderit among a group of managers in the public sector.Design/methodology/approach – The research is based on a group of 20 Band 11 senior managersresponsible for collecting tax and between them covering the UK in a business restructured into a largebusiness group. The authors adopted a qualitative approach involving semi-structured interviewsseeking to uncover individual accounts of imposed change, allowing subjects to reflect on theirexperience of change and its meaning to them.Findings – The findings suggested that long-service civil servants and private sector managersdraw on their previous experience to interpret the changes they experience, giving rise to differentperceived ambiguity between rhetoric and reality. Each group either comes to terms with ambiguityby interpreting the meaning of change to fit in with their expectancies of change, or, in one case, do notreconcile the change which then becomes a point of resistance.Practical implications – The case highlights the need for change agents to understand the fullcomplexity of employee attitudes. Not only can a variety of attitudes be identified, but each set ofresponses can be understood in variety of ways.Originality/value – The devil in the detail of imposed change offers both researchers and managersof change a significant source of information about likely individual and group responses to imposedchange at work. Piderit’s framework offers three dimensions of ambivalence which clarify differentindividual responses to imposed change.",
keywords = "Change management, Organizational change, Employee attitudes, Senior managers, United Kingdom",
author = "Randall, {Julian Adrian} and Stephen Procter",
year = "2008",
language = "English",
volume = "21",
pages = "686--700",
journal = "Journal of Organizational Change Management",
issn = "0953-4814",
publisher = "Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ambiguity and ambivalence Senior managers’ accounts of organizational change in a restructured government department

AU - Randall, Julian Adrian

AU - Procter, Stephen

PY - 2008

Y1 - 2008

N2 - AbstractPurpose – Imposed change at work can present individuals with ambiguous events about whichthey experience ambivalence in their interpretation of meaning. This paper seeks to examine thedimensions of ambivalence as defined by Piderit among a group of managers in the public sector.Design/methodology/approach – The research is based on a group of 20 Band 11 senior managersresponsible for collecting tax and between them covering the UK in a business restructured into a largebusiness group. The authors adopted a qualitative approach involving semi-structured interviewsseeking to uncover individual accounts of imposed change, allowing subjects to reflect on theirexperience of change and its meaning to them.Findings – The findings suggested that long-service civil servants and private sector managersdraw on their previous experience to interpret the changes they experience, giving rise to differentperceived ambiguity between rhetoric and reality. Each group either comes to terms with ambiguityby interpreting the meaning of change to fit in with their expectancies of change, or, in one case, do notreconcile the change which then becomes a point of resistance.Practical implications – The case highlights the need for change agents to understand the fullcomplexity of employee attitudes. Not only can a variety of attitudes be identified, but each set ofresponses can be understood in variety of ways.Originality/value – The devil in the detail of imposed change offers both researchers and managersof change a significant source of information about likely individual and group responses to imposedchange at work. Piderit’s framework offers three dimensions of ambivalence which clarify differentindividual responses to imposed change.

AB - AbstractPurpose – Imposed change at work can present individuals with ambiguous events about whichthey experience ambivalence in their interpretation of meaning. This paper seeks to examine thedimensions of ambivalence as defined by Piderit among a group of managers in the public sector.Design/methodology/approach – The research is based on a group of 20 Band 11 senior managersresponsible for collecting tax and between them covering the UK in a business restructured into a largebusiness group. The authors adopted a qualitative approach involving semi-structured interviewsseeking to uncover individual accounts of imposed change, allowing subjects to reflect on theirexperience of change and its meaning to them.Findings – The findings suggested that long-service civil servants and private sector managersdraw on their previous experience to interpret the changes they experience, giving rise to differentperceived ambiguity between rhetoric and reality. Each group either comes to terms with ambiguityby interpreting the meaning of change to fit in with their expectancies of change, or, in one case, do notreconcile the change which then becomes a point of resistance.Practical implications – The case highlights the need for change agents to understand the fullcomplexity of employee attitudes. Not only can a variety of attitudes be identified, but each set ofresponses can be understood in variety of ways.Originality/value – The devil in the detail of imposed change offers both researchers and managersof change a significant source of information about likely individual and group responses to imposedchange at work. Piderit’s framework offers three dimensions of ambivalence which clarify differentindividual responses to imposed change.

KW - Change management

KW - Organizational change

KW - Employee attitudes

KW - Senior managers

KW - United Kingdom

M3 - Article

VL - 21

SP - 686

EP - 700

JO - Journal of Organizational Change Management

JF - Journal of Organizational Change Management

SN - 0953-4814

IS - 6

M1 - DOI 10.1108/09534810810915727

ER -