Articles OC
Inhoudsopgave
Week 1.......................................................................................................... 2
Stouten et al. (2018)....................................................................................................... 2
Week 2.......................................................................................................... 4
Knight et al. (2017)......................................................................................................... 4
Junker et al. (2025)......................................................................................................... 5
Bakker & Junker (2025)................................................................................................... 6
Week 3.......................................................................................................... 9
Oprea et al. (2019)......................................................................................................... 9
Boudreau et al. (2019)..................................................................................................10
Nielsen & Miraglia (2017)..............................................................................................12
Week 4........................................................................................................ 15
Brown & Eisenhardt (1997)...........................................................................................15
Romanelli & Tushman (1994)........................................................................................16
Week 5........................................................................................................ 18
van Dam (2018)............................................................................................................ 18
Hagl et al (2023)........................................................................................................... 19
Week 6........................................................................................................ 22
Petrou et al. (2018)....................................................................................................... 22
Oreg & Berson (2019)................................................................................................... 24
,Week 1
Stouten et al. (2018)
The article examines how organizations can successfully implement
planned change. It addresses a key problem:
- Many organizations attempt change, but most efforts fail or fall short
- There is no clear agreement in research on how change should be
managed
- Managers often rely on popular models (e.g. Kotter) that are not
strongly evidence-based.
So, the purpose of the article is to combine practice models and scientific
research to figure out what actually works.
Findings
1. Change management knowledge is fragmented
There is no single agreed-upon framework, practice models overlap
but are not consistently supported by evidence and sometimes
incomplete or misleading. This explains why change efforts are
inconsistent and often unsuccessful.
2. Some commonly used ideas are not well supported
Example: urgency
Popular models emphasize creating urgency and evidence shows it
can increase stress & fear, and lead to resistance or poor decisions.
not all ‘common wisdom’ in change management is effective.
3. What actually matters for successful change
The article identifies core principles supported by evidence
o Clear problem diagnosis: change must start with a deep
understanding of the problem and poor diagnosis leads to
ineffective solutions.
o Employee understanding and meaning: employees support
change when they understand why it’s happening and see it
as logical and justified.
o Shared goals and vision: a shared understanding across teams
strongly improves implementation and alignment is one of the
most powerful drivers of success.
o Employee involvement: participation increases commitment
and acceptance; people are more supportive when they are
part of the process.
o Effective local implementation: success depends heavily on
how middle and lower-level managers execute change and
strategy alone is not enough.
o Alignment with stakeholder needs: change works best when it
benefits both the organization and employees, and ignoring
employee expectations leads to resistance.
o Reinforcement over time: change must be embedded in
routines and systems otherwise it does not last.
4. There is no universal formula
, No single model works in all situations and no clear ‘best speed’ or
fixed sequence of steps.
change must be adapted to context
Conclusion
Successful organizational change is not about following popular step-by-
step models, instead it depends on a combination of:
- Careful diagnosis
- Strong employee understanding and involvement
- Shared goals and alignment
- Effective implementation and reinforcement
There is a gap between what research shows works and what managers
actually do.
The authors conclude that organizations should adopt a more evidence-
based approach to change management.
Inhoudsopgave
Week 1.......................................................................................................... 2
Stouten et al. (2018)....................................................................................................... 2
Week 2.......................................................................................................... 4
Knight et al. (2017)......................................................................................................... 4
Junker et al. (2025)......................................................................................................... 5
Bakker & Junker (2025)................................................................................................... 6
Week 3.......................................................................................................... 9
Oprea et al. (2019)......................................................................................................... 9
Boudreau et al. (2019)..................................................................................................10
Nielsen & Miraglia (2017)..............................................................................................12
Week 4........................................................................................................ 15
Brown & Eisenhardt (1997)...........................................................................................15
Romanelli & Tushman (1994)........................................................................................16
Week 5........................................................................................................ 18
van Dam (2018)............................................................................................................ 18
Hagl et al (2023)........................................................................................................... 19
Week 6........................................................................................................ 22
Petrou et al. (2018)....................................................................................................... 22
Oreg & Berson (2019)................................................................................................... 24
,Week 1
Stouten et al. (2018)
The article examines how organizations can successfully implement
planned change. It addresses a key problem:
- Many organizations attempt change, but most efforts fail or fall short
- There is no clear agreement in research on how change should be
managed
- Managers often rely on popular models (e.g. Kotter) that are not
strongly evidence-based.
So, the purpose of the article is to combine practice models and scientific
research to figure out what actually works.
Findings
1. Change management knowledge is fragmented
There is no single agreed-upon framework, practice models overlap
but are not consistently supported by evidence and sometimes
incomplete or misleading. This explains why change efforts are
inconsistent and often unsuccessful.
2. Some commonly used ideas are not well supported
Example: urgency
Popular models emphasize creating urgency and evidence shows it
can increase stress & fear, and lead to resistance or poor decisions.
not all ‘common wisdom’ in change management is effective.
3. What actually matters for successful change
The article identifies core principles supported by evidence
o Clear problem diagnosis: change must start with a deep
understanding of the problem and poor diagnosis leads to
ineffective solutions.
o Employee understanding and meaning: employees support
change when they understand why it’s happening and see it
as logical and justified.
o Shared goals and vision: a shared understanding across teams
strongly improves implementation and alignment is one of the
most powerful drivers of success.
o Employee involvement: participation increases commitment
and acceptance; people are more supportive when they are
part of the process.
o Effective local implementation: success depends heavily on
how middle and lower-level managers execute change and
strategy alone is not enough.
o Alignment with stakeholder needs: change works best when it
benefits both the organization and employees, and ignoring
employee expectations leads to resistance.
o Reinforcement over time: change must be embedded in
routines and systems otherwise it does not last.
4. There is no universal formula
, No single model works in all situations and no clear ‘best speed’ or
fixed sequence of steps.
change must be adapted to context
Conclusion
Successful organizational change is not about following popular step-by-
step models, instead it depends on a combination of:
- Careful diagnosis
- Strong employee understanding and involvement
- Shared goals and alignment
- Effective implementation and reinforcement
There is a gap between what research shows works and what managers
actually do.
The authors conclude that organizations should adopt a more evidence-
based approach to change management.
