change management definition in education

Assessment and Reporting

Student portfolios, portrait of a graduate, equity & inclusion, family engagement, all resources, recommended resources, discover & engage, blog & podcasts, partner stories, help center, drop-in webinar, navigating change in k-12 school districts: strategies for effective change management.

If you work in education long enough, you will likely hear someone marvel at complexity. It sounds like this, “Yes, we definitely need to rethink our grading practices, but it’s just so complex .” When people say this, they are inferring that change is impossible amidst the many intersecting interests in education today. Transformation is always possible, but it requires a deeper understanding of the research into change management. This blog outlines why change management is important in K–12 education and explores how school districts can leverage change management strategies to support educational transformation.

Why is Change Management Important in K–12 Education?

Without an understanding of change management, well-intentioned initiatives are likely to become another addition to the graveyard of good ideas that died during implementation. When change is not managed well, the initiative is seen as a top-down mandate that stakeholders will appear to comply with on the surface. However, they are often stalling long enough for the next initiative to come along. But, when change is managed effectively, we can embed a process of continuous improvement that will continue long after the initial catalyst is gone.

To understand effective change management, we need to first acknowledge that change is hard, especially in education. Organizational psychologist, Adam Grant, points out in Think Again that we’re biologically programmed to stick to what we know:

“Yet there are also deeper forces behind our resistance to rethinking. Questioning ourselves makes the world more unpredictable. It requires us to admit that the facts may have changed, that what was once right may now be wrong” (pp. 4).

This quote is profound in the context of education as everyone who enters this profession believes they are doing what’s best for kids . To suggest change is to challenge this intention. As well, every member of our community has had their own experiences in school. This makes it hard to move forward according to research-validated evidence.

Building a Vision for Transformation

Though the barriers in K-12 education are intimidating, research into change management teaches us how to create a vision that will move people away from the status quo. One of the most cited researchers in this area is John Kotter. He studied change across many organizations to land at eight critical steps to successful transformation . To create a vision, Kotter describes that a senior leader must first communicate a sense of “urgency for change.”

• What is possible for students, teachers, and society?
• What urgent problems need solving to reach that vision?
• What is the price of inaction?

After communicating a sense of urgency, the next step is to “establish a powerful guiding coalition” that represents a diversity of perspectives. It is this team that creates a compelling “vision for change.” It might be a list of guiding principles, a framework, a model, etc. Whatever format it takes, it must be an intuitive tool to guide implementation.

Example of a Change Management Vision

Balanced Assessment Framework ( Calgary Academy )

Leadership in Educational Change

Once the vision is established, leadership becomes critical to implementation. However, the definition of leadership in this context extends far beyond those with supervisory responsibilities. While district leaders maintain a sense of vision and urgency whenever they communicate to stakeholders, it’s a distributed leadership approach that will spread ideas like a virus until a tipping point.

In his research, Kotter refers to this critical stage as “empowering others to act within the vision.” One way to spark distributed leadership is to create action teams of teacher leaders to design the implementation of the vision within their contexts. For instance, a shift towards standards-based grading might engage action teams to determine the reporting standards for a particular subject across their division. Another way to spark informal leadership is to hold space for stories of innovation during PD days and staff meetings.

Engaging Stakeholders in the Change Management Process

Once the vision is established and leadership is distributed, it becomes important to engage key stakeholders. Engagement with families is most successful when it is invitational, rather than explanatory. For instance, rather than only communicating with parents once the change is enacted, engage them before implementation to build capacity and seek feedback. This can be done by inviting them to panels featuring leading experts, surveying them around the elements of the vision, and inviting them to join focus groups for a more in-depth understanding of their perspective. The same goes for students. An important consideration in stakeholder engagement is to also design focus groups that invite and amplify marginalized voices in the community to ensure equity (Safir & Dugan, 2021).

Data-Driven Decision Making

The early stages of implementation will provide the most important information for continued decision-making. When it comes to teachers deciding whether to buy into this new idea, evidence of impact is what will shift their mindset (Guskey, 1986). They need to see that this change will be a better practice for student learning.

Kotter refers to this phase of the implementation journey as “planning for and creating short-term wins.” This win is often planned by the guiding coalition as they engage with all stakeholder groups, including teachers. An example of an early win in a district looking toward grading reform was the removal of four reporting periods in exchange for one linear grading period per year. Many stakeholders felt the chunking of learning into quarters was artificial and made it hard to accurately describe the learning journey from September to June.

Overcoming Resistance to Change

Of course, despite our very best efforts to engage and include all members of the community in change, there will be vocal resistors. How do we get them on board? To return to Adam Grant’s research, “Psychologists have long agreed that the person most likely to change your mind, is you.” This means we can’t enter conversations with resistors trying to change their minds, we can only create the best conditions for them to do so on their own . Grant suggests several strategies to achieve this:

• Find the steelman in their argument. What aspect of their concerns can you validate and agree with?
• Ask questions with genuine curiosity. We want to help them explore the nuances of their own thinking.
• When the opportunity presents itself, offer only one potent point. Research shows that our influence goes down with each subsequent point we include.

Implementing Sustainable Change Initiatives

Research into change management demonstrates it takes 3-5 years for an organization to successfully navigate implementation (Learning Forward, n.d.). Though change can take five years, many organizations reach a tipping point in three years. However, a critical part of the implementation journey at this tipping point is to ensure processes and routines are in place to support sustainability. This marks the difference from an initiative being just another “thing” to it becoming an integral part of a culture. This might look like embedding the change into existing structures, such as using collaborative team meetings in a PLC to embed standards-grading principles, or creating new ones, such as building an accessible digital space to organize rubrics and instructional materials as teachers implement standards-based learning.

Addressing Common Pitfalls

Throughout the change journey, there are many common pitfalls to avoid. First, we often forget that change is more emotional than clinical. Even the most detailed implementation plans and data analysis will fall flat if we forget this truth. A common mantra my colleagues and I use in our work is, “urgency with ideas, patience with people.” While the district leader must communicate passionately about the vision, that passion cannot be misguided toward hasty implementation.

Another common pitfall is to let the loudest resistors stall the change process. In any intervention, we can predict that 5-15% of folks will need a more targeted or personalized approach (Lewis, Sugai & Colvin, 1998). Often, the reason these folks are in a leader’s office loudly protesting is they know they are the outliers. They’re feeling desperate. We can listen to them empathetically, and look for the steelman, but remember there is a quieter 80% who are curious and waiting for the next steps.

Celebrating Success and Continuous Improvement

There is one critical piece of the journey to educational change that is often forgotten – celebration. Assessment expert, author, and consultant Katie White discusses the impact of celebration when she writes, “Everyone needs to feel like they are doing things right—making good decisions and accomplishing goals” (2021). How can we support each teacher to celebrate throughout the change journey? White suggests that celebration is most impactful within the cyclical process of self-assessment. She suggests a three-phase process that teachers can be supported through as well:

• Analysis and reflection
• Goal setting
• Celebrating growth

A critical note here is to ensure that goals are evidence-based in the context of the wider vision. When celebration is personalized and tied to evidence-based goals, it becomes meaningful.

Leading change in a complex system like education is challenging, but it’s not impossible. Think of managing change like driving a car along a country road in the dead of night. Our vision, like headlights, illuminates only the next 100 yards. This allows us to take one step forward and then the vision lights our path for the next one. Eventually, we will have traveled, step-by-step, to our destination.

Adopting a new tech tool in your school or district? Download this infographic on how to get educator buy-in .

Engaging Teachers in Tech: 5 Steps to Garner K-12 Educator Buy-In

• Grant, A. (2021). Think again: The power of knowing what you don’t know . Viking, Penguin Random House; New York, New York.
• Kotter, J. (2012). Leading Change . Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
• Safir S. & Dugan J. (2021). Street data a next-generation model for equity pedagogy and school transformation . SAGE Publications.
• Guskey, T. R. (1986). Staff Development and the Process of Teacher Change. Educational Researcher , 15(5), 5-12.
• Learning Forward. (n.d.). Standards for Professional Learning. Retrieved December 1, 2023, from https://standards.learningforward.org
• Lewis, T., Sugai, G. & Colvin, G. (1998). Reducing Problem Behavior Through a School-Wide System of Effective Behavioral Support: Investigation of a School-Wide Social Skills Training Program and Contextual Interventions. School Psychology Review . 27. 446-459.
• White, K. (2021). Student self-assessment: data notebooks, portfolios, and other tools to advance learning . Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

Try these next...

SpacesEDU by myBlueprint is a digital portfolio and proficiency-based assessment platform that allows career and technical education (CTE) students to easily showcase ...

Career and Technical Education (CTE) is an integral part of today’s education system, providing career exploration opportunities and helping prepare students with ...

Career and technical education (CTE) differs from traditional education by emphasizing practical skill development and real-world application.

JavaScript seems to be disabled in your browser. For the best experience on our site, be sure to turn on Javascript in your browser.

Hello! You are viewing this site in English language. Is this correct?

Explore the Levels of Change Management

Empower and Drive Change Management in Higher Education

Timothy Slottow

Updated: April 2, 2024

Published: March 22, 2024

Research consistently supports the need to align leadership approaches with the unique needs of faculty, staff and students to achieve success. But,   according to the National Student Clearinghouse , universities and colleges face challenges on a much larger scale.

• Post-secondary enrollment is over a million students below pre-pandemic levels
• The number of students dropping out before completing a degree rose to over 40 million
• Only 3.6 million college and university students graduated last year, a four-year low

Leaders in higher education are now tasked with improving these poor outcomes while undergoing significant changes to keep pace in a transforming landscape—from incorporating remote learning opportunities to integrating new technologies.   According to EDUCAUSE , a third of surveyed institutions increased their central IT operating expenditure by over 30% between 2022 and 2023.

In this context, it’s clear that the leaders in higher education need to expand their focus to embrace a systemic   change management approach   that allows for more.  

What it Means to Be an Effective Leader in the Changing Higher Education Landscape

Leaders in higher education are as diverse and multifaceted as the institutions they represent. The context of their work is equally dynamic—institutional leaders navigate a landscape of entrenched traditions, cultural change, and the relentless tide of technological innovation.

Key academic leaders, such as university presidents, provosts, deans and department chairs, are the primary sponsors of change in higher education—not to mention key C-suite stakeholders across finance, human resources, IT and academic departments. These leaders authorize major transformations and also play a major role in helping their institution realize the desired benefits of a digital transformation or policy overhaul.

Specifically, these academic leaders help coordinate the change effort from a high level, engaging constantly with project and people leaders across academic and administrative departments.

It’s crucial to remember that key stakeholders—including students, faculty, administrative staff and well-funded academics—also play an important role during times of change. While these individuals may not be the initiators of change, some are critical influencers during change, and all of them need to adopt the change for it to be successful.

Unfortunately, there are many challenges facing both the primary sponsors and key change agents in academia as these institutions try to keep up with the changing education landscape .

The Challenges of Leading Change in Academia

The unique culture of higher education makes the change process arduous. Unlike organizations in the business world, university and college leaders must contend with a range of unique attributes while trying to implement new policies, initiatives or infrastructure changes. 

Those leading or sponsoring change initiatives in higher education often come up against many of the following issues:

Decentralized decision-making – Complex and layered governance can slow decision-making and dilute accountability. Faculty governance means deans and department chairs can have high power and autonomy.

Entrenched culture – Many leading academic institutions have been around for centuries, creating deeply rooted traditions and highly esteemed values. Furthermore, tenured faculty can often be more resistant to change than non-tenured counterparts.

Varied interests and capacity – There can be large disparities between departments regarding priorities, budgets and values. For instance, business, engineering and medical schools often have more financial resources and sway than other schools and institutes.

Multiple bottom lines – Return on Investment (ROI) is defined differently in the higher education context, especially with public funding. These institutions have the typical financial goals of large organizations but also prioritize non-financial outcomes like retention, graduation rates, growth in sponsored research, faculty recruitment/retention, faculty recognition and national rankings. The multiple stakeholders beyond students and faculty vying to influence leadership goals and decision-making can be overwhelming—e.g., alums, donors, city/state lawmakers, federal regulators, federal grant agencies, and accreditors.

Reputational damage – Many universities and colleges prioritize maintaining a strong reputation in academia and the public eye. Key stakeholders may resist significant change if they believe that failure to achieve outcomes will negatively impact that reputation.

Increased risk of losing talent – With higher education’s unique factors of tenured faculty, entrenched culture and extreme decentralization, poorly managed change efforts are more likely to lead to loss of valuable talent in key areas throughout the university.

These issues all contribute to the dismal state of change in higher education, where over 70% of large-scale initiatives fail to achieve desired outcomes. So, how can universities and colleges enact successful change in an environment where governance structures and cultures are so resistant to change? 

Empowering Higher Education Leaders to Enact Change

The sheer variation in governance structures, leadership roles, and levels of autonomy interacting in academia precludes using a one-size-fits-all change management approach. It requires a structured, flexible approach to managing the change and a nuanced understanding of the institution's culture, the specific change and those impacted.

With 25 years of applied research in organizational change, Prosci has developed a framework that adapts and scales to the needs of these complex organizations and their leaders. In that time, our team has collected over two decades of longitudinal research on the dynamics of change within large institutions. 

Here are three of the biggest findings observed over this time:

1. Active and visible sponsorship is the number one contributor to successful change management

Since 1998, one factor has led the way in Prosci benchmarking reports in terms of the biggest contributor to change management success— primary sponsorship .

These individuals ultimately sign off on investment in change and, while they may not lead the initiative directly, play an indispensable role in determining its outcome through active and visible promotion. Our research shows that primary sponsors who follow the ABCs of sponsorship—active and visible participation, building a coalition of sponsorship, and communicating support—strongly correlate with achieved outcomes.

2. The use of a structured change management approach is the second strongest predictor of successful change

Outside of effective primary sponsorship, there’s no more important contributor to successful organizational change than a structured change management approach.

Researchers, industry experts and consultants have developed methodologies, often based on change theory, that can be flexibly applied across different organizational contexts—even those as complex as higher education. Prominent examples include Kurt Lewin’s change model, Kotter’s 8-Step Change Process, and the Prosci ADKAR® Model.

Prosci research shows that organizations that apply effective change management are seven times more likely to meet or exceed objectives.

3. Middle management is the leading employee cohort in terms of resistance to change

Prosci research consistently points to middle managers as the most resistant to change within the organization. This resistance can culminate in technical system changes, an emotional reaction to a changing power structure, and other technical and human factors. Considering middle managers are the connective tissue between the upper level of a company and its front-line workers, overcoming this resistance is vital.

Over time, we’ve also discovered and tested a range of solutions for overcoming resistance to change within this central tier of the organization. 

The Prosci Methodology

The Prosci Change Management Methodology stands at the forefront of enabling organizations, including higher education institutions, to navigate the complexities of change with a structured and practical approach. At the core of the Prosci Methodology and models is the understanding that successful change isn’t just about the technical solution being implemented but also about the people involved and being impacted.

Here are the structured, scalable and adaptable approaches Prosci takes to driving organizational change:

PCT Model – The Prosci Project Change Triangle (PCT) Model is a framework that highlights these four critical aspects of successful change efforts:

• Leadership/sponsorship
• Project management
• Change management
• A shared definition of success

This model underscores the importance of a shared definition of success across these areas. In higher education, leaders need to actively sponsor and support change initiatives, aligning them with the institution's strategic goals and managing the people side of change.

ADKAR Model – The Prosci ADKAR Model is a goal-oriented tool that guides individual and organizational change through five key outcomes:

• Awareness of the need for change
• Desire to participate and support the change
• Knowledge of how to change
• Ability to implement required skills and behaviors
• Reinforcement to sustain the change

This model is handy for leaders in higher education, as it helps them understand and address the individual change journey their faculty, staff, students and other stakeholders experience.

Prosci 3-Phase Process – The Prosci 3-Phase Process is a structured yet adaptable framework designed to guide organizations through successful change management. It divides the change process into three key phases:

• Phase 1 – Prepare Approach – This phase involves defining the change strategy, preparing the change management team and developing the sponsorship model.
• Phase 2 – Manage Change – During this phase, the team develops and implements plans for communication, sponsor activities, training, coaching and resistance management.
• Phase 3 – Sustain Outcomes – The final phase focuses on collecting and analyzing feedback, diagnosing gaps, managing resistance, and implementing corrective actions and recognition.

The PCT Model, ADKAR Model, and 3-Phase Process complement each other to create change. It's particularly relevant in higher education, where institutional challenges and governance structures greatly influence the success of change initiatives.

Prosci Drives Change at Leading Institutions

The Prosci Methodology has guided prestigious institutions like Texas A&M and the University of California, San Diego (UCSD) through significant change initiatives, demonstrating the power of adaptive leadership and strategic change management.

Texas A&M University (TAMU)

The Texas A&M University System needed to overhaul its 35-year-old legacy payroll system to a cloud-based version—a process that would impact 200,000 students, faculty and retirees across numerous organizations. In addition to the technical challenges this represented, the project leader faced long review cycles, a lack of alignment on the ideal solution and a decentralized process for determining finances. What appeared to be a technical process was a change that affected every level of the university ecosystem's operations.

The Prosci team stepped in to facilitate this transition, recognizing the need for a leadership approach that was directive, inclusive and repeatable. Using the Prosci 3-Phase Process and ADKAR Model to guide the process, Prosci helped TAMU’s Executive Director of Project Management with the following:

• Identification of the over 10,000 stakeholders most impacted by the project and an assessment of their leadership styles and training needs.
• Proactive management of likely areas of resistance, including repeated communication of upcoming changes and access to technical coaching.
• Strengthening ties between the A&M System sponsors and the Chief HR and Financial Officers from each university and agency through an Executive Advisory Committee (EAC).
• Application of the ADKAR Model to create training curriculum and eLearning modules for full-time employees, HR liaisons and managers.
• Facilitate collaboration between the EAC and key change agents in middle management to develop a communications plan that resonates with all impacted parties.

Read the full case study for a closer look at how TAMU’s $4.5-billion higher education network successfully navigated change in a complex, decentralized environment.

University of California, San Diego (UCSD)

UCSD, a top-15 research university worldwide, needed to change numerous processes and systems to create a more collaborative cross-discipline environment. This plan would impact all aspects of the campus. University leadership knew that a comprehensive change management plan was required to ensure that the tens of thousands affected by the transition would receive support throughout. This required a balance of leadership styles, blending democratic and transformational approaches to engage a diverse academic community.

UC San Diego partnered with Prosci to speed up the transition process and leverage our decades of experience enacting complex change. Working closely with the Staff Education and Development team, Prosci helped drive change in the following ways:

• Preparing UCSD change agents for the necessary large group training sessions through the Prosci Train-the-Trainer Program
• Facilitating award-winning development days that empowered 90% of the 500 attendees with new knowledge and tools
• Building off the success of development days by promoting and regularly hosting change management training and services on campus
• Augmenting change management training with smaller-scale webinars based on pressing issues like resistance to change and sponsor engagement

UCSD's initiative led to a more change-capable organization, where the principles of change management became embedded in the university's culture, paving the way for ongoing and future transformations.

Read the full case study to see how Prosci helped UC San Diego empower key leaders to embed change management materials throughout their campus and foster a pro-change environment. 

Training and Supporting Key Change Agents in Higher Education

Prosci empowers leaders in various organizational contexts, including higher education, to drive and manage change effectively . Prosci has been applying research on best practices in change management for over 25 years, and we base our structured methodology and analytic tools on that research.

With decades of experience, Prosci offers comprehensive enterprise training and supportive advisory services tailored to meet the unique challenges and dynamics of leading institutions like Texas A&M and UCSD. These resources are invaluable for institutions seeking to foster transformational leadership and successfully navigate the complexities of change.

To explore how Prosci can assist your institution in harnessing effective leadership for change management, visit the Enterprise Training and Advisory Services pages for more information and guidance.

Tim Slottow is a former C-suite executive with more than three decades of experience sponsoring enterprise-wide changes while driving organizational performance in a variety of industries. The former President of the University of Phoenix, and EVP and CFO for the University of Michigan, Tim has successfully guided teams through disruptive changes, including mergers and acquisitions, organizational restructurings, and cost reduction initiatives. Tim is an Aspen Institute Fellow and frequent lecturer who has served on multiple boards in the higher education, insurance and healthcare sectors.

See all posts from Timothy Slottow

You Might Also Like

Enterprise - 7 MINS

Supporting Project Results With eLearning

5 Tips for Building Organizational Change Management

Subscribe here.

• Blended Learning
• Communications
• Competency-Based Learning
• Crisis Management
• Curriculum Strategy & Adoption
• Decision-Making
• Digital Content
• Innovative Leadership
• Instructional Model Design
• Learning Walks
• New School Design
• Organizational Leadership & Change Management
• Personalized Learning
• Professional Development
• Remote Work
• Return Planning
• School Districts
• Social & Emotional Learning
• Statewide Initiatives & Consortia
• Strategic Planning
• Teacher Retention
• Teams & Culture
• Virtual Learning

By: Nick Esposito on June 25th, 2024

Print/Save as PDF

How to Effectively Manage Large-Scale Change in School Districts

Innovative Leadership  |  Organizational Leadership & Change Management  |  District Leadership  |  Superintendents

Why is change so hard? Navigating change in schools isn't just a leadership challenge—it's a personal journey for every educator and administrator involved. Educators often find themselves adapting to new standards, implementing new initiatives, or integrating innovative tech, which can feel like steering a ship through stormy seas. In this blog, we will dive into some of the reasons why people and organizations are resistant to change and what we can do to effectively manage large-scale change to achieve our goals.

Learning Anxiety Is an Obstacle to Change

W hat is learning anxiety? Diane Coutu defines learning anxiety as coming from a feeling of "being afraid to try something new for fear that it will be too difficult, that we will look stupid in the attempt, or that we will have to part from old habits that have worked for us in the past. Learning something new can cast us as the deviant in the groups we belong to. It can threaten our self-esteem and, in extreme cases, even our identity." As leaders, you may experience anxiety about how to implement change on your campuses - and this feeling is quite normal! 

Author Nassim Taleb, an economist and statistician, investigates problems of randomness and uncertainty. His book, Antifragile , reveals how some systems can thrive from shocks, volatility, and uncertainty while others crumble. His arguments help us overcome our learning anxiety and allow us to manage change with confidence by becoming an antifragile organization.

Types of Organizations Facing Change

• In a Fragile Organization , the organization has more to lose than gain. What happens when the wind blows? We are exposed to volatility and we tend to curl up in a ball and ignore the uncertainty. 
• In a Robust Organization , the organization plans for as many potential scenarios as possible. What happens when the wind blows? We resist volatility and tend to construct a wall to shield us from the uncertainty of change. 
• In an Antifragile Organization , the organization has more to gain than lose and we welcome volatility. What happens when the wind blows? We tend to build a windmill so we are flexible and open to the uncertainty of change, knowing we are capable of managing it. 

Becoming an Antifragile District

How can we work to become an antifragile organization that is open to change and can manage it well? How can we implement changes more effectively? We can focus on building antifragile school organizations.There are several key strategies we can implement to build these muscles: 

Invest in the Right Things

In your role as leader, be thoughtful in where you invest funds. Consider the Lindy Effect , which states “the longer it’s been around, the longer it will persist” when investing in new technologies, strategies, or initiatives. Or expressed as "things that have stood the 'test of time' are things that you can rely on."

This analysis will improve your ROI and increase your chances of creating buy-in amongst your teams by not always proposing the newest and flashiest options for investment.

• Try This : Reflect on new initiatives by asking, “What opportunities does this new initiative afford us?”
• Note : Not all solutions are right and not all of the right solutions are right for us.

Minimize Downside

In your role as a leader , look for ways to limit the downside as you embark on new initiatives and execute your vision.

• Try This : Leverage our negative knowledge (what doesn’t work) of past initiatives. This preserves space for innovation AND encourages authentic collaboration.
• Note : As you ‘iron out’ potential pitfalls beware of also ironing out potential peaks. 

Embrace Randomness

In your role as a leader , intentionally plan for randomness by creating space for collaboration and writing loose and not prescriptive plans.

• Try This : Clearly communicate the initiatives’ fixed and loose guardrails. This ensures that people feel empowered to use the implementation of the initiative to address their personalized needs.
• Note : Like our students, adults each need different supports. Some people will need more guidance while others will benefit from more freedom.

Example: In Personalized Learning implementation we often guide districts through a Capstone / Prototype process in which teachers are able to apply the theory in their own spaces. We bring all of the participants together to showcase their work. This celebrates their effort and infuses a sense of innovation into the organization.

Make Time for Recovery

In your role as a leader , remember that support must come before accountability. As leaders, we must communicate clearly about what success looks like (not the data but the learning).

• Try This : Create space for people to process the realities of implementation.
• Note : Engage all voices! 

Create Buy-In

In your role as a leader , develop a vision for what the success of an initiative will look like. This vision should not  just include the end of the road, but the road to get there as well

• Try This : Consider the Law of Diffusion of Innovation to identify stakeholders to create meaningful growth. This will create valuable buy-in at the beginning of an initiative (at its most fragile.) Focus on momentum as a success metric.
• Note : Even if people aren’t directly involved in implementation, they should be involved in the communication strategy 

By taking the steps above to be a thoughtful leader in implementing change, you will have a better chance of success in achieving your vision for school improvement and transformation. As you build an Antifragile organization, you will see its benefits as you can manage change more effectively, build on success, and create an innovative and engaging learning environment for all students.

• Skip to content
• Skip to search
• Staff portal (Inside the department)
• Student portal
• Key links for students

Other users

• Forgot password

Notifications

{{item.title}}, my essentials, ask for help, contact edconnect, directory a to z, how to guides, leading curriculum k–12, change management research tools.

Lead professional conversations about effective curriculum implementation practices and change management in your school or professional learning network.

Use these research snapshots, text-based protocols, and core thinking routines for leaders to prompt professional conversations. The research snapshots support school leadership teams on their journey through the ‘Phases of Curriculum Implementation ’.

About this resource

Purpose of resource.

This research snapshot is part of the ‘ Leading curriculum Implementation toolkit '. It supports leaders, and aspiring leaders, to explore and reflect on research about effective approaches to curriculum implementation.

Target audience

School leadership teams and aspiring leaders can use this resource to initiate professional dialogue and build collective understanding amongst colleagues.

When and how to use

School leadership teams and aspiring leaders might use the research snapshot to:

• reflect on their own practice to prepare for new curriculum implementation
• mentor new and aspiring leaders through the phases of curriculum implementation
• promote discussion in their leadership team on how best to support or contextualise curriculum reform in their school.

Text-based protocols and core thinking routines can be used alongside the research snapshot to foster discussion and build collective understanding of effective approaches to curriculum implementation.

Research base

The evidence base for this resource is:

• Dao L, (2021) ‘Challenges and enablers encountered by a curriculum leadership team in implementing the national curriculum in one Australian school’, Leading and Managing, 27 (1): 77-98.

Use the pdf link or follow these steps

• Use CESE accessing databases
• Select Informit (How do I log in)
• Insert the article name and search.
• Select the article and download the pdf.
• High Impact Professional Learning (HIPL) .

Email questions, comments, and feedback about this resource to [email protected] using the subject line ‘Leading Curriculum Implementation Research toolkit’.

Alignment to system priorities and/or needs – School Excellence Policy and School Excellence Procedure

Alignment to School Excellence Framework – ‘Instructional leadership’ and ‘High expectations culture’ elements in the Leading domain as well as the ‘Learning and development’ and ‘Collaborative practices and feedback’ elements of the Teaching domain.

Alignment with the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers – 6.2.4 and 6.3.4

Consulted with: Strategic Delivery representatives, Principal School Leadership representatives

Reviewed by: CEYPL Director and CSL Director

Managing curriculum change

Research article – Jones, C and Anderson M (2001) ‘ Managing curriculum change ’. Learning and Skills Development Agency, London, accessed 2 September 2022.

‘Change management involves many factors: quality, resources, staff, students, and funding, to name a few. But above all, it is about processes – how to get to where you want to be.’ (p.9)

This article explores strategies for change management in an international context. The language has been adapted for the New South Wales context.

Research overview

Giving high priority to curriculum change is the first step to creating an environment where effective change can take place.

• Ensure changes to the curriculum are explicit in Strategic Improvement Plans.
• Provide a clear picture of how the change will affect staff, students, and parents.
• Allocate school leaders and teachers responsibility for making change happen.
• Place curriculum change at the top of agendas for meetings.
• Provide adequate resources to make sure that the change happens.

Teaching staff are more likely to accept changes to the curriculum if they are given additional support during implementation phases.

• Divide big changes into manageable steps.
• Develop the coaching skills of middle leaders.
• Demonstrate commitment to change by being visible and available for staff.

As with anything, curriculum change is most effective when it is planned.

• Be realistic about the timescales and resources needed for effective change.
• Look for champions who can motivate others.
• Define what is non-negotiable and what is fixed.
• Include a plan for clear communication.

Effective leadership teams, who lead from the front by setting an example of hard work, flexibility, responsiveness, and commitment have greater success when implementing new curriculum.

• Explain what the change means in positive terms for staff, parents, and students.
• Seek opportunities to talk to staff and community about the change.

Teachers need to develop ownership of the change and the process for curriculum initiatives and quality to be effective.

• Ensure staff understand the ‘why’ for change.
• Give teaching staff an opportunity to share responsibility for shaping curriculum change.

Using the expertise of staff can have positive effects on instigating change and improve staff morale.

• Look for evidence of previous success in curriculum change.
• Build teams that include individuals with recognised expertise.
• Map people skills to specific elements of curriculum change at an early stage of planning.

It is vital that leaders have professional credibility in the eyes of teaching staff.

• Recognise that perceptions influence behaviour.
• Communicate with students about curriculum change and how this will impact them.

Staff need to be kept informed of curriculum change and take part in regular professional development activities. Invest in your teachers.

• Implement action plans.
• Provide staff with appropriate information to keep them fully informed.
• Ensure that staff have the necessary professional development to meet the changing needs of the curriculum.

Professional discussion and reflection prompts

• As a leader, which strategies for managing curriculum change are already in place in your context? Which strategies could be strengthened to effectively implement curriculum change?
• How might you modify your current systems and processes to incorporate new strategies for managing curriculum change in your context?

Challenges and enablers

Research article – Dao L, (2021) ‘Challenges and enablers encountered by a curriculum leadership team in implementing the national curriculum in one Australian school’, Leading and Managing, 27 (1): 77-98.

‘Change is non-linear, complex and multi-dimensional.’ (p 81)

This article explores the change process for implementation of large-scale mandated curriculum change. Internal and external factors can enable, or act as barriers, to successful implementation. Teacher belief, values and motivation also influence effective implementation of educational change. The author uses Sergiovanni’s (1995) change process model to explore the complexity and interaction of different factors when seeking to effectively implement change.

Sergiovanni suggests change is dependent on four interacting ‘units of change’:

• political system.

Challenges to effective curriculum implementation are the:

• need to provide practical support for teachers
• time to plan and develop programs, systems and processes
• availability of appropriate syllabus-aligned resources
• access to professional learning aligned to new syllabuses
• willingness and opportunities to collaborate with colleagues
• effective management of workload issues when implementing multiple syllabuses.

Enablers for effective curriculum implementation include:

• collaboration when planning for implementation
• additional release time to support implementation planning
• resources to support implementation, such as digital curriculum, work samples
• formal and informal (professional dialogue and reading) professional learning both in school and through networks
• As a leader, reflect on the four ‘units of change’. How might they interact to influence implementation of educational change in your context?
• What enablers can you identify in your context?
• What challenges could impact effective implementation of change in your context?
• As a leader, what resources do you have available to overcome these challenges and enable effective curriculum implementation?
• Teaching and learning

Business Unit:

• Curriculum and Reform

• Business Essentials
• Leadership & Management
• Credential of Leadership, Impact, and Management in Business (CLIMB)
• Entrepreneurship & Innovation
• Digital Transformation
• Finance & Accounting
• Business in Society
• For Organizations
• Support Portal
• Media Coverage
• Founding Donors
• Leadership Team

• Harvard Business School →
• HBS Online →
• Business Insights →

Business Insights

Harvard Business School Online's Business Insights Blog provides the career insights you need to achieve your goals and gain confidence in your business skills.

• Career Development
• Communication
• Decision-Making
• Earning Your MBA
• Negotiation
• News & Events
• Productivity
• Staff Spotlight
• Student Profiles
• Work-Life Balance
• AI Essentials for Business
• Alternative Investments
• Business Analytics
• Business Strategy
• Business and Climate Change
• Design Thinking and Innovation
• Digital Marketing Strategy
• Disruptive Strategy
• Economics for Managers
• Entrepreneurship Essentials
• Financial Accounting
• Global Business
• Launching Tech Ventures
• Leadership Principles
• Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability
• Leading Change and Organizational Renewal
• Leading with Finance
• Management Essentials
• Negotiation Mastery
• Organizational Leadership
• Power and Influence for Positive Impact
• Strategy Execution
• Sustainable Business Strategy
• Sustainable Investing
• Winning with Digital Platforms

5 Critical Steps in the Change Management Process

• 19 Mar 2020

Businesses must constantly evolve and adapt to meet a variety of challenges—from changes in technology, to the rise of new competitors, to a shift in laws, regulations, or underlying economic trends. Failure to do so could lead to stagnation or, worse, failure.

Approximately 50 percent of all organizational change initiatives are unsuccessful, highlighting why knowing how to plan for, coordinate, and carry out change is a valuable skill for managers and business leaders alike.

Have you been tasked with managing a significant change initiative for your organization? Would you like to demonstrate that you’re capable of spearheading such an initiative the next time one arises? Here’s an overview of what change management is, the key steps in the process, and actions you can take to develop your managerial skills and become more effective in your role.

Access your free e-book today.

What is Change Management?

Organizational change refers broadly to the actions a business takes to change or adjust a significant component of its organization. This may include company culture, internal processes, underlying technology or infrastructure, corporate hierarchy, or another critical aspect.

Organizational change can be either adaptive or transformational:

• Adaptive changes are small, gradual, iterative changes that an organization undertakes to evolve its products, processes, workflows, and strategies over time. Hiring a new team member to address increased demand or implementing a new work-from-home policy to attract more qualified job applicants are both examples of adaptive changes.
• Transformational changes are larger in scale and scope and often signify a dramatic and, occasionally sudden, departure from the status quo. Launching a new product or business division, or deciding to expand internationally, are examples of transformational change.

Change management is the process of guiding organizational change to fruition, from the earliest stages of conception and preparation, through implementation and, finally, to resolution.

As a leader, it’s essential to understand the change management process to ensure your entire organization can navigate transitions smoothly. Doing so can determine the potential impact of any organizational changes and prepare your teams accordingly. When your team is prepared, you can ensure everyone is on the same page, create a safe environment, and engage the entire team toward a common goal.

Change processes have a set of starting conditions (point A) and a functional endpoint (point B). The process in between is dynamic and unfolds in stages. Here’s a summary of the key steps in the change management process.

Check out our video on the change management process below, and subscribe to our YouTube channel for more explainer content!

5 Steps in the Change Management Process

1. prepare the organization for change.

For an organization to successfully pursue and implement change, it must be prepared both logistically and culturally. Before delving into logistics, cultural preparation must first take place to achieve the best business outcome.

In the preparation phase, the manager is focused on helping employees recognize and understand the need for change. They raise awareness of the various challenges or problems facing the organization that are acting as forces of change and generating dissatisfaction with the status quo. Gaining this initial buy-in from employees who will help implement the change can remove friction and resistance later on.

2. Craft a Vision and Plan for Change

Once the organization is ready to embrace change, managers must develop a thorough, realistic, and strategic plan for bringing it about.

The plan should detail:

• Strategic goals: What goals does this change help the organization work toward?
• Key performance indicators: How will success be measured? What metrics need to be moved? What’s the baseline for how things currently stand?
• Project stakeholders and team: Who will oversee the task of implementing change? Who needs to sign off at each critical stage? Who will be responsible for implementation?
• Project scope: What discrete steps and actions will the project include? What falls outside of the project scope?

While it’s important to have a structured approach, the plan should also account for any unknowns or roadblocks that could arise during the implementation process and would require agility and flexibility to overcome.

3. Implement the Changes

After the plan has been created, all that remains is to follow the steps outlined within it to implement the required change. Whether that involves changes to the company’s structure, strategy, systems, processes, employee behaviors, or other aspects will depend on the specifics of the initiative.

During the implementation process, change managers must be focused on empowering their employees to take the necessary steps to achieve the goals of the initiative and celebrate any short-term wins. They should also do their best to anticipate roadblocks and prevent, remove, or mitigate them once identified. Repeated communication of the organization’s vision is critical throughout the implementation process to remind team members why change is being pursued.

4. Embed Changes Within Company Culture and Practices

Once the change initiative has been completed, change managers must prevent a reversion to the prior state or status quo. This is particularly important for organizational change related to business processes such as workflows, culture, and strategy formulation. Without an adequate plan, employees may backslide into the “old way” of doing things, particularly during the transitory period.

By embedding changes within the company’s culture and practices, it becomes more difficult for backsliding to occur. New organizational structures, controls, and reward systems should all be considered as tools to help change stick.

5. Review Progress and Analyze Results

Just because a change initiative is complete doesn’t mean it was successful. Conducting analysis and review, or a “project post mortem,” can help business leaders understand whether a change initiative was a success, failure, or mixed result. It can also offer valuable insights and lessons that can be leveraged in future change efforts.

Ask yourself questions like: Were project goals met? If yes, can this success be replicated elsewhere? If not, what went wrong?

The Key to Successful Change for Managers

While no two change initiatives are the same, they typically follow a similar process. To effectively manage change, managers and business leaders must thoroughly understand the steps involved.

Some other tips for managing organizational change include asking yourself questions like:

• Do you understand the forces making change necessary? Without this understanding, it can be difficult to effectively address the underlying causes that have necessitated change, hampering your ability to succeed.
• Do you have a plan? Without a detailed plan and defined strategy, it can be difficult to usher a change initiative through to completion.
• How will you communicate? Successful change management requires effective communication with both your team members and key stakeholders. Designing a communication strategy that acknowledges this reality is critical.
• Have you identified potential roadblocks? While it’s impossible to predict everything that might potentially go wrong with a project, taking the time to anticipate potential barriers and devise mitigation strategies before you get started is generally a good idea.

How to Lead Change Management Successfully

If you’ve been asked to lead a change initiative within your organization, or you’d like to position yourself to oversee such projects in the future, it’s critical to begin laying the groundwork for success by developing the skills that can equip you to do the job.

Completing an online management course can be an effective way of developing those skills and lead to several other benefits . When evaluating your options for training, seek a program that aligns with your personal and professional goals; for example, one that emphasizes organizational change.

Do you want to become a more effective leader and manager? Explore Leadership Principles , Management Essentials , and Organizational Leadership —three of our online leadership and management courses —to learn how you can take charge of your professional development and accelerate your career. Not sure which course is the right fit? Download our free flowchart .

This post was updated on August 8, 2023. It was originally published on March 19, 2020.

About the Author

The Four Principles Of Change Management

Updated: Aug 7, 2022, 10:18pm

No company or organization can operate the same way forever. Whether you’re a rapidly growing startup with agility baked into your DNA or a decades-old corporation responding to market shifts, you need to adjust to progress and improve. How well you can do that depends on how your organization approaches the process of change management.

Featured Partners

From $8 monthly per user

Zoom, LinkedIn, Adobe, Salesforce and more

On monday.com's Website

Yes, for one user and two editors

$9 per user per month

Google Drive, Slack, Tableau, Miro, Zapier and more

On Smartsheet's Website

Yes, for unlimited members

$7 per month

Slack, Microsoft Outlook, HubSpot, Salesforce, Timely, Google Drive and more

On ClickUp's Website

What Is Change Management?

Change management is a structured process for planning and implementing new ways of operating within an organization.

Many academic disciplines have studied and developed theories about the best ways to approach change in an organization. Central to theories across disciplines is the goal of making change happen—i.e., moving an organization forward—with the full support and cooperation of everyone who’s affected by it.

Change management models recognize change can’t happen within one position or department without affecting the entire organization. Theorists developed the models to approach change in ways that acknowledge its effects across an organization, prepare everyone for those effects and get everyone on board for the transition.

Several change management models exist, and your organization can choose which makes the most sense for you. One of the most prominent thought leaders in the field is John Kotter, a professor at Harvard Business School and founder of the management consulting firm Kotter International.

Kotter’s model for change management involves four key principles and eight steps.

4 Principles of Change Management

Kotter’s four change principles include:

• Select few + diverse many
• Have to + want to
• Head + heart
• Management + leadership

Select Few + Diverse Many

Who drives change in your organization? Do decisions and directives tend to come from the same small group of managers or leaders? These are known as the “select few”—and there’s a danger to this approach to change.

Everyone within an organization is affected by change. It’s the “diverse many”—the broader group of people that makes up your company—who have to adjust their processes and activities day to day to accommodate change.

When the directives come from a select few, you skip the step of understanding what everyone else needs to effectively implement change. You also miss out on an opportunity to get them on board, so they’re eager to welcome change when it comes.

Get representatives from across your organization involved at every stage of a change process—from identifying challenges and planning improvements to implementation and reflection.

Have To + Want To

Getting the diverse many involved is your first step to moving change from something they feel they have to do to something they want to do.

A workforce filled with people who feel like they have to implement changes or initiatives is a recipe for complacency. One filled with folks who want to make change is a formula for action.

When the people in your organization are involved in identifying challenges and recommending improvements, they’ll understand the reasoning behind changed processes and new initiatives. They’ll be invested in improvement. They’ll be eager to take the steps needed to implement—and sustain—change that moves your organization forward.

Head + Heart

You must drive decisions and directives for change from both:

• The head: appeals to logic, data and reason
• The heart: appeals to how people feel and what they desire

Putting hard data behind organizational decisions is smart, but implementing change requires more. It also requires employees who are inspired by what the change will mean for their day-to-day work and the organization’s ability to fulfill its mission.

This means digging a little deeper when you communicate change to your employees.

You can’t just share what the change is and how you’ll implement it. You also have to explain the why behind it, the ways it’ll move the needle for the company, your customers or clients, your employees, and the mission they come into work every day to achieve.

Management + Leadership

Navigating change in an organization requires both management and leadership.

That is, you need both the technical skills to manage projects, make a plan and oversee deliverables; and the emotional skills to communicate a vision, inspire action and empathize with concerns.

Any business leader has certainly heard an earful about the differences between managing and leading — but we’re not saying one or the other is better here. To make effective change in an organization, you need the combined strengths of both management and leadership.

Kotter’s 8 Steps to Change Management

Kotter’s eight-step process for leading change within an organization includes:

• Create a sense of urgency. Rather than simply presenting a change that’s going to happen, present an opportunity that helps the team see the need for change and want to make it happen.
• Build a guiding coalition. This group of early adopters from among the diverse many will help communicate needs and initiatives to guide change.
• Form a strategic vision and initiatives. Draw a picture of what life will look like after the change. Help everyone see—and long for—the direction you’re headed, rather than focusing myopically on the steps in front of them right now.
• Enlist volunteers. You’ll need massive buy-in across the organization to effectively implement change. Use your coalition to keep up the momentum on the sense of urgency and continue to communicate the vision.
• Enable action by removing barriers. Learn where employees face challenges to implementing a change because of structural issues like silos, poor communication or inefficient processes, and break them down to facilitate progress.
• Generate short-term wins. Keep up the momentum and motivation by recognizing early successes on the path to change. Continue to recognize and celebrate small wins to keep everyone energized and aware of your progress.
• Sustain acceleration. Lean into change harder after the first few small wins. Use those successes as a springboard to move forward further and faster.
• Institute change. Celebrate the results of successful change. How do changed processes or initiatives contribute to the organization’s overall success? How do they continue to help employees contribute to the mission they care about?

Bottom Line

Creating change within the organization can make people balk, but ensuring that all parties understand why a change is necessary, how it benefits them and the organization as a whole and allowing them to give input on how to implement said changes leads teams to feel invested in the process.

Building a clear vision and celebrating the small wins along the way will make sure that no one is left wondering what’s happening, and encourage them to take the next step forward. Before long you’ll be achieving your goals as a team—use that as an opportunity to get feedback on the process overall so that the next time flows even more smoothly.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are good change management skills.

To effectively drive and lead change in an organization, you need a combination of leadership, management and strategic strengths. You should be strong in both communication and listening, as well as strategic thinking and analysis.

What is change management risk?

Change management risk refers to factors that could derail an initiative or make it fail to achieve its purpose. Part of change management is identifying these risks and creating a plan to mitigate them.

Why is change management difficult?

Implementing change in an organization is hard because of inertia. The easiest way to operate seems to be the way we’ve always operated. Effectively implementing change means stopping and redirecting that force across dozens, hundreds or thousands of employees.

Is a change management strategy necessary to implement?

To achieve the best success with a planned change, it’s best to have a change management plan in place beforehand. It allows the operation’s leaders to create and work with change within the parameters of certain guidelines, concepts, approaches and language.

Is risk management part of change management?

Yes. Creating a plan for change in an organization involves a risk assessment to determine what effects the change will have, as well as the level of risk regarding whether you’ll face resistance to change.

• Best Project Management Software
• Best Construction Project Management Software
• Best Project Portfolio Management Software
• Best Gantt Chart Software
• Best Task Management Software
• Best Free Project Management Software
• Best Enterprise Project Management Software
• Best Kanban Software
• Best Scrum Software
• Asana Review
• Trello Review
• monday.com Review
• Smartsheet Review
• Wrike Review
• Todoist Review
• Basecamp Review
• Confluence Review
• Airtable Review
• ClickUp Review
• Monday vs. Asana
• Clickup vs. Asana
• Asana vs. Trello
• Asana vs. Jira
• Trello vs. Jira
• Monday vs. Trello
• Clickup vs. Trello
• Asana vs. Wrike
• What Is Project Management
• Project Management Methodologies
• 10 Essential Project Management Skills
• SMART Goals: Ultimate Guide
• What is a Gantt Chart?
• What is a Kanban Board?
• What is a RACI Chart?
• What is Gap Analysis?
• Work Breakdown Structure Guide
• Agile vs. Waterfall Methodology
• What is a Stakeholder Analysis
• What Is An OKR?

Best West Virginia Registered Agent Services Of 2024

Best Vermont Registered Agent Services Of 2024

Best Rhode Island Registered Agent Services Of 2024

Best Wisconsin Registered Agent Services Of 2024

Best South Dakota Registered Agent Services Of 2024

B2B Marketing In 2024: The Ultimate Guide

Dana Miranda is a Certified Educator in Personal Finance® who's been writing about money management and small business operations for more than a decade. She writes the newsletter Healthy Rich about how capitalism impacts the ways we think, teach and talk about money. She's the author of YOU DON'T NEED A BUDGET (Little, Brown Spark, 2024).

Cassie is a deputy editor collaborating with teams around the world while living in the beautiful hills of Kentucky. Focusing on bringing growth to small businesses, she is passionate about economic development and has held positions on the boards of directors of two non-profit organizations seeking to revitalize her former railroad town. Prior to joining the team at Forbes Advisor, Cassie was a content operations manager and copywriting manager.

• Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, Belonging
• ACMP Board of Directors
• ACMP & ICF: Change Management & Coaching
• ACMP Press Room
• What is Change Management?
• Join or Renew
• Corporate Member Organizations
• Chapters & Communities
• Volunteer Central
• About the Standard©
• Download Standard & Code of Ethics
• Translations of Standard ©
• Learn About CCMP™
• Apply & Prepare
• Train for CCMP™ (QEPs)
• Renew Your CCMP™
• CCMP Corporate Packages
• ACMP Connect - Learn More
• Business Solutions Center
• Career Center
• Change Hub Practitioner Directory
• Resource Library
• The Way Change Works Podcast
• Member Webinars
• Global Connect 2024
• South Africa Call for Speakers
• Sponsorship Opportunities

Remember Me

6/26/2024 ACMP® Announces Board Members for Fiscal Year 2025

5/29/2024 ACMP News: May 2024

5/25/2024 ACMP Launches New Change Management Training Search Tool

5/2/2024 ACMP News: April 2024

4/12/2024 ACMP’s 2024 Independent Research Award-Winner, Desireé Charnette Deftereos

6/27/2024 MEMBER WEBINAR - Data-driven? Data-informed? Just help me use my data!

7/9/2024 MEMBER WEBINAR - Group Coaching 101

7/25/2024 MEMBER WEBINAR - Organizational Culture and Change: Cultivating a Dynamic Environment

8/6/2024 MEMBER WEBINAR - Managing Change, Managing Meaning: AI, Identity, and a Life Worth Living

8/22/2024 MEMBER WEBINAR - The Faces of Change: Foundations and Strategies

1032 15th Street NW Suite 261 Washington, DC 20005

Join Mailing List Privacy Policy

• What is Change Mgt?
• Board of Directors
• ACMP & ICF
• Corporate Members
• Corporate Membership
• Learn About the CCMP
• CCMP Apply and Prepare
• CCMP Maintenance
• CCMP Certificants
• The Standard
• QEP Program
• QEP Training Calendar
• Change Hub Directory
• Events Calendar
• Online Store
• ACMP Connect

ACMP’s mission is to serve as an independent and trusted source of professional excellence, advocate for the discipline and create a thriving change community .

Updated: 19 March 2024 Contributors: Alexandria Iacoviello, Amanda Downie

Change management (CM) is the method by which an organization communicates and implements change. This includes a structured approach to managing people and processes through organizational change.

A change management process helps ensure that employees are equipped and supported for the entirety of the transition. Several reasons constitute a need for change management. Mergers and acquisitions, leadership adjustments and implementation of new technology are common change management drivers. The organizational development needed to compete with rapid digital transformation across the industry leads companies to implement new products and new processes. However, these innovations often disrupt workflows, presenting a need for effective change management.

Successful transformational change goes beyond a communication plan; it involves implementing change throughout the company culture. A change management strategy can help stakeholders to adopt proposed changes more readily than in situations where such a strategy is not employed. By activating employees as change agents by involving them in the workflow, business milestones can be achieved. Leaders can and should establish the benefits of change through developing a comprehensive change management plan.

Find out how HR leaders are leading the way and applying AI to drive HR and talent transformation.

Register for insights on SAP

Change management should be a thought-out, structured plan that remains adaptable to potential improvements. How change leaders choose to approach organizational change management varies in size, need and potential for employee buy-in.

For example, employees who lack change efforts experience may need a more tailored approach, like receiving guidance from human resources  (HR). Employees who experience change on an organizational level may serve as good candidates on the change management team, offering insightful support to leadership and fellow employees.

Successful change management is a cumulative result of all the key stakeholders’ success in understanding the change initiatives. This requires proactively engaging and supporting a positive employee experience —invite employees to give constructive feedback and continuously communicate the business process or scope changes.

Psychologists and change leaders have developed several methods of organizational change management:

Developed by change consultant William Bridges  (link resides outside ibm.com), this framework focuses on people’s reactions to change. The adjustment of critical stakeholders to change is often compared to the five stages of grief, but instead, the Bridges’ model is described through three stages:

• Endings: The discontinuation of old processes.
• Neutral zone: The uncertainty and confusion as new roles are being identified.
• New beginnings: The acceptance of new ways.

Owned by a joint venture between Capita and the UK Cabinet Office, Axelos developed the IT Infrastructure Library (ITIL) . The framework uses a detailed guide to manage IT operations and infrastructure. The goal is to drive successful digital transformation through incident-free IT service implementation throughout the change management process.

Over the years, ITIL was improved and expanded upon to enhance the change process. The ITIL framework has four versions, with the latest being ITIL v4. This version prioritizes the implementation of proper DevOps , automation and other essential IT processes. 1  Created to aid in modern-day digital transformation, the Fourth Industrial Revolution prompted ITIL v4.

John Kotter, a Harvard professor, created his process for professionals that are tasked with leading change. 2  He collected the common success factors of numerous change leaders and used them to develop an eight-step process:

• Creating a sense of urgency for change.
• Building a guiding coalition.
• Forming a strategic vision and initiatives.
• Enlisting a volunteer army.
• Enabling action by removing barriers.
• Generating short-term wins.
• Sustaining acceleration.
• Instituting change.

Psychologist Kurt Lewin developed the "unfreeze-change-refreeze" framework during the 1940s. 3  The metaphor implies that the shape of an ice block remains unaltered until it shatters. However, transforming an ice block without breaking it can be done by melting the ice, pouring the water into a new mold and freezing it in the new shape. Lewin drew this comparison for change management strategy, indicating that introducing change in stages can help an organization successfully attain employee buy-in and a smoother change process.

In the late 1970s, McKinsey consultants Thomas J. Peters and Robert H. Waterman wrote a book called In Search of Excellence . 4 In that book, a framework was introduced through its ability to map out interrelated factors that can influence the ability of an organization to change. Around 30 years later, this framework became the McKinsey 7-S Framework. The intersection of the elements within the framework differs depending on the culture or institution. Listed in no hierarchical order, those seven elements are:

• Shared values

The Prosci Methodology, developed by the firm Prosci, is based on various studies that examine how people react to change. The methodology comprises three main components: the Prosci Change Triangle (PCT), the ADKAR model and the Prosci 3-Phase Process.

Sponsorship, project management and change management drive the PCT Model framework. This model puts success at the center of these three elements and is used in the overall Prosci Methodology.

ADKAR Model

The ADKAR model addresses one of the most essential change management pieces: the stakeholders. The framework is an acronym that equips change leaders with the right strategies:

• Awareness of the need for change.
• Desire to participate and support the change.
• Knowledge of how to change.
• Ability to implement desired skills and behaviors.
• Reinforcement to sustain change.

The Prosci 3-Phase Process

A 3-phase process that has a structured but flexible framework. The three phases of the Prosci Methodology are to prepare an approach, manage change and sustain outcomes. 5

Stakeholders can vary depending on the size of the organization and the nature of change. For example, if you are changing a process that directly impacts a product you offer clients, then your clients are essential stakeholders. Whereas if you are changing an internal technology tool, your clients might not be critical stakeholders.

To determine the stakeholders necessary for your change management strategy, define the scope of change first. Next, determine who consistently uses and operates these current processes. Begin by engaging those stakeholders; as you go, it may be determined that there are more key stakeholders to consider. As discussed, it is important to be flexible with adjusting your change management process. Additional stakeholders may need to be included in the change management strategy at different stages.

Common stakeholders in change management are typically executives and leadership, middle managers, front-line employees, developers, project managers, Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) and potentially, clients. To identify the stakeholders involved in change management, consider asking these questions:

• Who leads the business unit undergoing change?
• Who owns the process undergoing change?
• Who are the people sponsoring change?
• Who are the people executing change?
• Who are the people most affected day-to-day by the change?

With the advent of rapid digital transformation and continual innovation, change management is a crucial tool for organizations to succeed. Among the various methodologies of change management are some best practices to consider:

• Clearly define the vision and make goals measurable.
• Ensure employee buy-in is as important as executive sponsorship.
• Be willing to adjust your process, especially if it is not driving the coveted outcomes.
• Engage employees in decision-making when necessary.
• Collaborate with project management on the automation of processes.
• Create your change management plan based on organizational risk tolerance.

Enterprise transformation demands a digital, experience-based approach that inspires continuous organizational change.

Reinvent your HR function with an employee-centric design, innovative technologies and a dynamic operating model.

Reimagine human resources with AI at the core, delivering business value, accelerating the digital agenda, unlocking workforce potential and creating agility.

Learn how to maximize the human-technology partnership to lead in an era of continuous change.

Generative AI will change how we work and what skills we need—and it's happening faster than we think.

Join IBM® experts to learn how to prepare your people, systems and business for the future of work using AI responsibly with ease and scale.

Read how AI is changing work and what HR leaders should do about it.

Read about how skills scarcity and demographic shifts are defining the new social contract

Learn how to create world-class experiences to attract, develop and retain a skills-first workforce.

IBM HR and talent transformation consulting partners work with our clients to address each company's unique talent goals and challenges, dig deep to understand their workforce realities and create strategies that unlock new levels of performance inside their business. Together, we reimagine HR with AI at the core.

1 ITIL Definition  (link resides outside ibm.com), Tech Target

2 Definition  (link resides outside ibm.com), Kotter Inc.

3 Kurt Lewins Change Management  (link resides outside ibm.com), Tech Target

4 7-S Framework  (link resides outside ibm.com), McKinsey, 2008

5 Methodology Overview  (link resides outside ibm.com), Prosci

• Corpus ID: 29500244

THE MANAGEMENT OF CHANGE IN EDUCATION

• Published 2014
• Business, Education
• Educational Alternatives

Figures from this paper

7 Citations

Leadership and change management in a rapidly changing environment, change management in education change management in education, policy implementation and the challenges of leadership in nigerian universities.

• Highly Influenced

Identifying perceptions of academic reform in pharmacy using a four‐frame organizational change model

Higher education initiative challenges based on multiple frames of leadership: the case of nepal open university, management of modern university, continuous assessment of peter senge's learning organization model for improving the quality of christian higher education in indonesia, 13 references, leading organizational change., organisational change management: a critical review, managing change: a strategic approach to organisational dynamics, understanding the management of change.

• Highly Influential

Management Theories for Educational Change

Effective change in schools, educational administration and organizational behavior, leadership in education and the strategy of the dolphin, leadership in organizations, understanding the management of change an overview of managers ’ perspectives and assumptions in the 1990 s, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

• Learning through Experience

Learning Is A Superpower When Change Is Constant

Subscribe to  Learning through Experience  in Apple Podcasts , Spotify , Google Podcasts , or or your favorite podcast player . 

How can we change and transform the education system through leadership? The Broad Center at the Yale School of Management fosters the ideas, policies, and leadership to help all students in K-12 public schools — particularly those from underserved communities — to learn and thrive. 

Broad is a stellar example of the unique mission of Yale SOM: educating leaders for business and society. Since I feel connected and inspired by the mission, I appreciate how much the presence of Broad in my experience at Yale keeps me particularly connected and inspired by the noble and meaningful work of transforming the school system.

In March of 2024, the Broad Fellows were part of an immersion learning experience with me. I love Broad and was inspired by the way they engaged in learning through an immersion intensive. This episode is a window into their learning experience in the interpersonal and group dynamics course. 

Hanseul Kang, the executive director of the Broad Center, began her journey as a Broad Fellow. The Fellowship for Public Education Leadership is a program for public education leaders dedicated to strengthening public school systems and the communities they serve.

In this episode, we also hear from current Broad Fellows : Xiomara Herman, Andrew McRae, and Jorge Robles.

Key Topics:

01:48 Challenging our understanding of leadership: How the current definition of leadership is too narrow to change and transform the education system;

03:21 The limitations of defensive interpersonal dynamics: Managing complex interpersonal dynamics from a place of defensiveness or self-protection can limit leadership effectiveness;

04:49 Why the education system needs to be transformed: In addition to individual agency, there are structural forces that play a large part in the reality of many learners;

09:59 Building range and expanding leadership capacity: The hope and challenge of learning through experience;

13:30 Directing your learning as a leader: When you need to change and transform people, systems, and possibilities, it's not just about pedagogy, transaction, or expertise- it’s also about your aspirations and how you show up;

20:35 Transforming the education sector: Reflecting and inquiring about the education sector and ways of learning that hold individuals as capable of growing as human beings.

Additional Resources

The Broad Center

Hanseul Kang

Xiomara Herman

Andrew McRae

Jorge Robles

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• PMC10361480

Change management in higher education: A sequential mixed methods study exploring employees’ perception

Rima ezzeddine.

1 Strategy and Institutional Excellence, Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai, United Arab Emirates

Farah Otaki

Sohaib darwish.

2 College of Medicine, Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai, United Arab Emirates

Reem AlGurg

Associated data.

All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

Higher education institutions need to put change management as a pivotal part of their strategy. The challenge is to effectively contextualize existing change management models to the respective work environment. Failing to properly adapt existing models to match the intricacies of the environment could lead to plenty of setbacks. For such a contextualization to take place, gauging employees’ engagement and satisfaction becomes of paramount importance. As such, the overall purpose of the current study is to explore the perception of employees of a medical and health sciences university in Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region, in relation to change management and agility, and to showcase how the captured perspectives can be systemically interpreted to inform decision-making in the context of the study.

This research study relied on a sequential mixed methods design, which started with an exploration of the perception of Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences (MBRU) leaders. Qualitative data was collected through a focus group session and was inductively analysed (based on constructivist epistemology). The output of the qualitative analysis contributed to the development of the quantitative data collection tool. The quantitative data was analysed by SPSS-version-27.

The qualitative analysis generated three key themes: Trigger, Execution, and Results, along with a thorough outline of lessons learned and opportunities for improvement. The Cronbach’s Alpha reliability score was 92.8%. The percentage of the total average of agreement was 72.3%, and it appeared that 83.2% of the variance can be explained by the instrument (p<0.001).

The current study generated a novel conceptual framework that can be leveraged by educational leadership and administration to reinforce their decisions and optimize their agility in terms of managing change. The study also introduces a data collection tool which captures the perception of higher education stakeholders regarding the way their respective institutions handle change. This tool proved to be reliable and valid in the context of the study.

Introduction

As suggested by the Greek philosopher, Heraclitus: “change is the only constant”. As such, it is of utmost importance in life to be open and adaptable to change [ 1 ]. This becomes particularly relevant in the business world, where effectively managing change within organizations can lead to many positive aspects, such as retaining a competitive edge and remaining relevant in one’s business area. Change also encourages innovation, develops skills and employees’ morale, and leads to better outcomes [ 2 ]. In fact, today’s world is commonly described using the acronym: VUCA-Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity, and Ambiguity. This acronym was initially coined in the military context [ 3 ].

There are many reasons to change. Change usually occurs in response to internal and/ or external stimuli. An internal trigger could be a change in the organizational structure or strategy (e.g., merging and/ or acquisition) [ 4 ]. As for external triggers, these might include technology advancements [ 5 ], changes in governmental regulations [ 6 ], or crises, such as COVID-19 [ 7 ].

Our world was already experiencing an extraordinary rate of change at the onset of the pandemic, and since then, the speed at which change has been occurring became even higher. This can be attributed to many factors including but not limited to those related to technology advancement and changes in human ideologies [ 8 ]. How we think about vital concepts such as our identities, globalization, and sustainability has drastically changed, as well. While change is central to humanity, as previously mentioned, today’s ever-changing world requires a new, more sophisticated paradigm of change management, in general, and of leadership, in specific. As such, organizations need to put change management as a pivotal part of their strategy.

This is of great relevance to the higher education sector, which is characterized by several unique drivers of change including its connection to the Global, knowledge economy and the growing public accountability [ 9 , 10 ]. Higher education is under increasing scrutiny to demonstrate greater accountability and transparency. The increasing diversity of students and corporatization of learning environments are other major drivers of change [ 11 ]. There is also the rising competition and for-profit education, along with the everchanging understanding of learning and teaching, the internationalization of campuses, and the rise of innovative technologies [ 12 ], where universities are enabled to run more efficiently and to educate students more effectively [ 13 , 14 ]. All this is compounded with the drastic pressure that was imposed due to the pandemic and the changes that have been taking place since then. As such, higher education institutions are caught in a critically demanding and increasing unknown present and future characterized by VUCA-Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity, and Ambiguity [ 3 ]. There are different approaches, models, and formulas that organizations, in higher education or otherwise, can adapt to effectively manage change. These include ones that perceive leading change as a process such as that of John Kotter’s [ 15 , 16 ]. Among those models that discuss the process integral to change are those that reflect upon the dismantling that is necessary to happen prior to the change such as that of William Bridges, which describes the importance of letting go as a prerequisite to the new beginning, and that introduced by Kurt Lewin, which uniquely highlights the importance of unlearning previously adapted modi operandi [ 15 , 17 ]. There are models that discuss enablers to change such as those of Beckhard and Harris, and ADKAR introduced by Hiatt [ 18 ]. Along the same lines, there is that introduced by Knoster [ 19 ] which suggests that for change to be effectively managed 6 elements need to come together, namely: Vision, Consensus, Skills, Incentives, Resources, and Action Plan.

It is evident that the literature is full of models, but the challenge is to effectively contextualize these models to the respective working environment. The model, in of itself, can be great but then if it is not properly adapted to match the intricacies of the environment, this could lead to plenty of setbacks and become counterproductive. The more complex an organization is, the more important it is to tactically adapt any existing change management theory, concept, and/ or model. For such a contextualization to take place, gauging employees’ engagement and satisfaction becomes of paramount importance. As such, the overall purpose of this research project is to explore the perception of employees of a medical and health sciences university in the MENA region in relation to change management and agility, and to showcase how the captured perspectives are systemically interpreted to inform decision-making in the context of the study. The research questions are:

• How do the employees perceive change and its management, in general, and within their higher education institution, in specific?
• How efficacious was the management of change from the perception of the participating employees?
• What are the employees’ preferences when it comes to management during times of change?

Context of the study

The current study took place in the Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences (MBRU) [ 20 – 23 ]. MBRU was established in 2016 with the aspiration of becoming a global hub for innovative and integrated healthcare education and research at the service of humanity. MBRU’s mission is to advance health in the UAE and the region, through an innovative and integrated academic health system, that is nationally responsive and globally connected, serving individuals and communities [ 24 ]. MBRU is an inclusive educational institution, comprising of a diverse faculty and student body featuring more than 32 nationalities [ 25 , 26 ]. MBRU has 3 colleges, which offer several nationally accredited and internationally recognized educational programs. It has firm affiliations with a myriad of local and international stakeholders [ 27 – 29 ].

This context has been undergoing drastic changes to first quickly grow from a start-up medical school to gain national prominence and global impact, to rapidly transition to distance learning due to the unprecedented COVID-19, and more recently to become one of the key players of the novel Dubai Academic Health Corporation: an academic health systems, which is characterized by tripartite missions of medical and health professions’ education, research and knowledge generation, and clinical practice.

Research design

This study relied on an exploratory sequential mixed methods research design [ 30 – 32 ], composed of two discrete phases ( Fig 1 ). The first phase was qualitative and meant to explore stakeholders’ perception of the subject matter. The second phase was quantitative, relying on a data collection tool that was developed based on the findings generated from the preceding phase. As such, the second phase was meant to investigate outstanding findings of the first phase, along with capturing complementary information. An electronic consent was obtained from each participant, where they had complete autonomy to choose whether, or not, to participate. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of MBRU (MBRU-IRB-2021-054).

Data collection and analysis

Qualitative.

The research study started with an exploration of the perception of the MBRU Key Opinion Leaders (KOLs) regarding agility and change management. Qualitative data was collected through a focus group session of randomly selected KOLs (i.e., directors of organizational units/ higher management); 10 were invited to participate. A tailor-made focus group protocol was developed for the purpose of this data collection initiative ( S1 Appendix ). The data collection tool underwent two validation phases. First, the current study researchers reached out to three experts in the field of change management to solicit their informed support in conducting content validity. Second, the questions of the data collection tool were discussed with six members of the University’s community, who are not among the University’s higher management team (two middle managers, two faculty members, and two students) to assess the clarity, readability, and comprehensibility of the questions, and the flow by which they are presented (i.e., face validity).The focus group protocol was composed of four segments. The first one explores the stakeholders’ general understanding of key concepts related to effectively managing change in institutions. The second segment of the protocol is more focused on change management in the context of MBRU. As for the third segment, it was evaluative in nature, where the stakeholders were asked to collectively identify the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of their first-hand experience with change management at MBRU (throughout their tenures, respectively). Finally, the last segment of the protocol invites the participants to provide suggestions, opportunities for improvement, and preferences in relation to change management in MBRU.

All participants were asked to accept the invitation to participate through electronic informed consent. The focus group session was recorded; the audio recording underwent verbatim transcription by one member of the research team (R.E.). The transcript was reviewed by the same researcher while listening to the audio recording, again, to identify and edit any errors. Each participant was assigned a unique identification number (1 through 9).

The qualitative data was inductively analyzed by three researchers (R.E., F.O., and S.D.) using a multi-staged thematic analysis framework, composed of 6 steps [ 33 , 34 ]. The approach is based on constructivist epistemology and is iterative. It is widespread and is encouraged in socio-behavioral research [ 7 , 22 , 35 ]. The role of assuring the consistency of the analytic approach (throughout the stages of the analytic approach) was assigned to one of the three researchers (F.O.), who has thorough expertise in conducting qualitative research.

To start with, the data was studied. Then, initial codes were generated. This kept going until no new information was observed in the transcript, and hence data saturation was attained. This review led to the generation of categories of text fragments; this set the stage for the researchers to work on step three. The different ways by which these categories could relate to one another were identified through several rounds of reflections. As such, the third step culminated in the generating themes, which encapsulate groups of the previously identified categories. The fourth step involved reviewing these themes and deciding on how best they relate to one another. Then, in the fifth step, themes were labeled and assigned definitions that were of relevance to the context of the study. The sixth step constituted reporting upon the results narratively; this was done in alignment with recently published recommendations for reporting upon qualitative research [ 36 – 38 ].

In between the fifth and sixth step (i.e., right after the completion of the data analysis and the formation of the study’s conceptual framework, and prior to reporting upon it), the current study researchers conducted a respondent validation. The informant feedback was obtained through a 2-hour discussion conducted. During the respective meeting, the participants were shown three PowerPoint Presentation slides that included: the research questions, an explanation of the method of qualitative analysis, and the study’s conceptual framework. After showing the conceptual framework and explaining it verbally to them, the participants were given the space to reflect upon the extent of resonance between their responses to the research questions and the conceptual framework. They agreed with all the identified codes, suggesting minor changes to their definitions (within the context of the study) and how they relate to one another.

Quantitative

The output of this analysis guided the development of the quantitative data collection tool (a survey that relies primarily on a five-point Likert-type scale). The devised tool ( S2 Appendix ) evaluated the extent to which the employees agree with the perception of their leaders, along with identifying additional variables that are of relevance to the employees (with two open-ended questions: what can MBRU do to become more agile and make the organizational change processes smoother?, and what are your thoughts and reflections regarding the recent organizational changes Implemented at/ affecting MBRU?).

Based on sample size calculation, it turned out that at least 65 surveys are needed to have a confidence level of 95%. As such, 70 MBRU employees (21 faculty and 49 staff) were invited to participate by filling in an electronic version of the survey. These 70 employees were selected using Stratified Random Sampling, where the overall body of employees at MBRU (N = 186) is 30% faculty and the rest are staff. In the respective academic year (2020–2021), most of the employees (around 60%) were female and the rest were male. The employees who made the decision to fill the survey were asked to provide an electronic informed consent prior to participating in the study.

The quantitative data was analyzed using SPSS for Windows version 27.0. The descriptive analysis constituted of computing an overall score (i.e., across the 13 components- Table 1 ). Then, the mean and standard deviation for each of the components of the tool and the overall score were then calculated. For these variables, as well, the percentages of each of the five points of the Likert-type scale for each of the 13 components were calculated ( Table 1 ).

Also, frequencies were calculated for each of the independent categorical variables (employee category, gender, & tenure). The validity tests of Cronbach’s Alpha and the Principal Component Analysis (PCA) were performed to ensure the internal consistency and check external variance, respectively, of the adapted tool. To select the appropriate inferential analyses tests, a test of normality was conducted for the overall score.

Since the data turned out to be not normally distributed, the Mann-Whitney test was used to compare the overall score between female and male employees, and the overall score between the two categories of employees (i.e., staff and faculty). Finally, Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare the overall score between the three categories of tenures (Up to 1 year; More than 1 year, Up to 3 years; & More than 3 year).

• Focus Group

Out of the 10 KOLs who were invited to the focus group session, 9 participated (i.e., 90%).

The inductive qualitative analysis of the data generated from the focus group session led to three themes, namely: Trigger, Execution, and Results, as per the study’s conceptual framework ( Fig 2 ). Within the Trigger theme, two categories surfaced, namely: internal and external. As for the execution theme, it entailed five categories, namely: direction, people, policies and procedures, communication, and resources. The last theme was Results, and it encapsulated two categories: short-term and long-term.

Theme I: Trigger

The first theme included the text segments which relate to the participants’ perception of what initiated the change. They reflected upon factors that are internal to the institution.

05: “…during my tenure in this institution, I experienced a lot of changes. These changes were mainly in the governance and organizational structure, and the most recent one is infusing MBRU into the developing Dubai Academic Health Corporation. I have been relocated several times, with several changes to my reporting lines…” 06: “…there are also internal drivers to change that propel us to move forward and change. This is how universities grow. Let us say we want to offer a new program, the only way to do so is through change…"

They also mentioned situations where the change was triggered by external factors.

05: “…it is a privilege that our leaders were selected to spearhead the COVID-19 Command and Control Center. They went on a secondment, and we rose to the occasion. We genuinely missed them, their presence, and regularly engaging with them. In this case, the onset of the pandemic (which is an external stimulus) triggered a major change…” 06: “…sometimes a governing body, such as the Commission of Academic Accreditation, introduces new guidelines, which we have to adapt, and as such we change…"

Theme II: Execution

The second theme related to the segments of the text which highlight how the institution responded to change. This theme also encapsulated the suggestions or opportunities to improve identified by the participating employees.

03: “…building resilience is now a necessity for organizations and leaders in institutions. Resilience and agility are needed for organizations and leaders in order for change to effectively take place…”

Some employees referred to the overall direction of the institution that was set in response to the need to change. This involved several components, including strategy, leadership, and culture. Almost all the participants alluded to the importance of setting in place a strategy for the respective changes, which included pinpointing goals:

03: “…specifying the purpose and goals upfront is key to effectively handling change…” 04: “…it is important to identify the objectives of any change…”

The employees also highlighted the importance of effectively raising awareness about the direction of the change.

05: “…these points need to be direct, clear, and should be referred to repetitively… for example, our Vice Chancellor has been repeating the term ‘Academic Health System’ over the past 8 years, even prior to the establishment of MBRU. It is now part of our mindset. Afterall, ‘your vibe attracts your tribe’…” 06: “…I think it is really important to be mindful of the reasons for change: why are we changing? There also needs to be a clear-cut vision. For the change to be activated, we need to know where we want to go and how we want to get there…”

A lot of the employees reflected upon the leadership skills that are needed for the change to be effective.

04: “…the role of middle managers has been so important throughout the pandemic. They are the stakeholders who need to effectively relay/ cascade all information. So, middle management need to be fully aware of what is going on, and to be able to explain the situation and guide their employees accordingly. Afterall, the line manager is the one who ‘mingles’ the most with front-line employees…”

Within the institutional direction category, the employees also reflected upon the importance of having an agile culture.

04: “…Respect, Integrity, Giving, Connectivity, and Excellence: these are the values that we stand for…” 05: “…we need to focus on how we exhibit our values, especially during change… repetition of the message is very important; the culture is nurtured through the reinforcement of key messages…”

The participating employees reflected on how, regardless of the type of change, organizational changes affect the ways in which people go about their daily business.

They also highlighted how the success of organizational changes depends on the participation and engagement of employees. Hence, change needs to be simultaneously managed at the individual-employee and organizational levels.

02: “…agility is how quickly organizations can adapt to the necessary change; this factor is primarily reliant on the individuals and the all-encapsulating structure of the organization…” 05: “…change is enabled through acceptance and adaptation, among employees. For me, this is what helps me in moving on…” 07: “…change requires keeping an open mind. The change at the beginning may seem ‘not right’. It will also likely feel uncomfortable…”

There appeared to be a consensus that people’s buy-in is essential to effective change.

03: “…making sure everyone understands the change is important… Everybody changed quickly and understood that they need to do so swiftly. There was minimal disruption, in terms of operations and students’ learning experiences. I believe that our people handled the situation in an effective manner…” 05: “…acceptance and adaption are key for people to move on, for the change process to be expedited. We need to listen to each other. We may face disagreements and conflicts: it is important to work towards reaching a consensus. People need to reach a state of conviction prior to proceeding in the set direction… we have plenty of ‘scientific mindsets’ which generate the knowledge needed to support any decision. Supporting decisions integral to change, with evidences, smoothens and facilitates the change, and maximizes its benefits…”

The employees also thoroughly reflected on the processes that are perceived to be integral to change.

02: “…agility is exhibited when there are swift changes in processes. This requires realignment across goals, processes, and policies… Also, any change needs an operational process, which needs to be coupled with policies to ensure abiding to the respective change…” 04: “…change Management is how we deal with change. Hence, we need to learn how to approach the change…” 03: “…if you are aiming to attain a positive outcome, you need to adapt the correct processes…it is the science and art of how to handle change…”

Relevantly, the employees frequently alluded to communication, and its importance in justifying how this change will have an impact on the individuals and why it is implemented.

04: “…communication is very important, it is very important to collect and analyze evaluative data, and communicate the output of analysis…” 05: “…people need to be informed. All forms of communication, at all levels, are needed. Each personality has its own preferred way of receiving information. In a way, you need different keys to unlock different minds. We need to have variety of ways of communication to reach different personalities. Some people are ‘visual’: they need to see the message to grasp it. There are people who prefer to hear the message. So, we need to use differing types of communication in order to pass the message…” 07: “…to add to that, you know: repetition. Bite-sized messages. We had the big town hall meeting from the management. Following that with bite-sized messages reinforced the key messages in our minds. Explanation, along with repetition, is key…”

The last category within this theme related to resources that the institution needs to deploy to effectively enact change.

06: “…among the strengths of our institution was that we already had a very mature Information Technology infrastructure in place. From the academic perspective, we had a fully functioning Learning Management System, for instance. Transitioning to distance learning coupled with Working From Home was possible due to the leveraging of the existing infrastructure…” 07: “…the capacity building that took place at the onset of the pandemic constituted a major strength. We had the resources necessary to offer learning and development opportunities…”

Theme III: Results

The last theme related to the consequences of the change. Some employees reflected on short-term effects.

06: “…we adapted online OSCE. We had never done anything as such before. This constituted an opportunity that we leveraged during the challenging times…” 08: “…one of the challenges, integral to the transition to distance learning, was related to the student life, which really suffered in all educational institutions across the world. The students articulated this feedback in the corresponding evaluation very clearly; they missed face-to-face interactions. In terms of Working From Home, we were fine. We like the Microsoft Teams platform, we got used to it…”

Other employees highlighted long-term effects.

04: “…flexibility and adaptability were key. I had to accept. When I was told: you need to sit at home and work using Microsoft Teams. I asked myself: what is Microsoft Teams? The changes accompanying the pandemic opened our eyes to novel ways of doing things and to differing technologies. Now, if I am asked: do you prefer Working From Home? I would say: I am open to everything, working in the office or from home; it is all the same for me…” 06: “…we built resilience, on an individual and organizational levels. We were proactive about it. For example, there were a series of mindfulness sessions organized by the university counselor’s office. This will all come-in handy on the long-run…”

• Open-ended Questions of the Survey

To start with, a lot of the reflections shared by the employees, through the two open-ended questions of the survey, were evaluative in nature. Most of the employees praised MBRU when it comes to change management.

32-Staff: “…I consider MBRU to be agile; I trust that it effectively manages change be it induced by internal or external triggers: management had set priorities and attained targets. MBRU not only did the transition with minimum disruption to organizational processes, but also converted the challenge into an opportunity in education, research, and service provision…”

49-Faculty: “…I think the recent changes have been very positive… I feel like although we have significantly grown in number of employees, we are able to maintain the simplicity and joyfulness of MBRU’s character (which has been the case since its establishment), but with a lot more experience under our belts…”

The employees perceived change to be a requirement to the institutional advancement.

12-Staff: “…I believe that change at MBRU is for the betterment of all. I strongly believe in the upper management and the leaders at MBRU…” 37-Staff: “…change is necessary towards achieving the MBRU goals, and remaining responsive and proactive in addressing local and national needs…”

In terms of opportunities for improvement around change management, four themes were generated. The theme that surfaced the most in the survey was the importance of communication, and of improving it before and during the change.

37-Staff: “…maximize communication among staff. Continuously collect feedback from employees…” 40-Faculty: “…develop capacity to effectively communicate, and continuously reflect…” 41-Staff: “…ensure constant communication with all staff members. Keeping everyone aware of the change would help teams in better preparing and planning. With a proper plan in place, everyone will be effectively guided through the transition…”

Different ideas of how to maximize effective communication were reflected upon.

25-Staff: “…townhalls can be a good form of disseminating information about organizational change…” 28-Staff: “…evaluate the changes as they are taking place, take corrective measures when necessary, and make sure all details, in relation to the evaluation, are effectively communicated across the institution…”

The importance of communication to lessen resistance was also brought-up.

20-Staff: “…employees’ resistance can be lessened by effectively communicating all aspects of the change…” 48-Faculty: “…better communication before change will help in attaining acceptance and will increase the likelihood of positive outcomes…”

Relevant to this theme, the employees also discussed the importance of transparency.

26-Staff: “…transparency is key…” 40-Faculty: “…increase transparency, when possible…”

The second theme that surfaced, in relation to opportunities for improvement, was pertaining to preparing the employees for the change. This includes, as per the employees’ suggestions, offering learning and development opportunities that equip the employees with what it takes to effectively undergo the change.

4-Faculty: “…prepare the members of MBRU family to embrace the transformation…” 8-Staff: “…human Resources department can play a vital role to educate employees on the organizational change…” 27-Staff: “…change is inevitable, especially within MBRU. I think it is important to train the employees to accept change and make the most of the situation. Having mentors in change management would help, as well…”

The third theme that surfaced was related to maximizing employees’ engagement.

32-Staff: “…empower team members in the organization and offer them opportunities to meaningfully contribute to the change…” 33-Staff: “…get as many stakeholders as possible involved in the process to help ‘socialize’ and in turn ‘institutionalize’ the changes…”

In many instances, the participating employees attributed engagement with a supportive work environment.

35-Staff: “…encourage all employees to support each other throughout the organizational change…” 42-Staff: “…continue on fostering a motivating, engaging work culture…we are always encouraged to change to the better, be it on the personal or professional fronts…”

Within this theme, the participants reflected upon the importance of having employees play an active role in decision-making during change.

29-Faculty: “…optimize communication and engage team members in the decisions to develop shared responsibility, a sense of togetherness, and a collective commitment to the change…the organizational changes that we are experiencing are in alignment with MBRU goals…” 47-Staff: “…managers should empower their team members to take decisions…” 49-Faculty: “…involve the stakeholders from all departments in decision-making…”

The last theme, in relation to opportunities for improvement around change management, was related to optimizing the utilization of technology and automation.

21-Staff: “…automate processes to avoid any delays of work…” 36-Staff: “…to leverage technologies to facilitate the change…”

Out of the 70 employees who were invited to participate, 48 responded: 36 staff and 12 faculty ( Table 2 ).

Among those 48 employees who responded to the electronic survey, 75% were staff and 25% were faculty, and 64.6% were female and 35.4% were male. In relation to the tenure at MBRU, 14.6% had up to 1 year of experience, 31.3% had more than 1 year and up to 3 years of experience, and 54.2% had more than 3 years of experience.

The reliability score of Cronbach’s Alpha for the tailor-made evaluation tool that captured the stakeholders’ perception was 92.8%.

The percentage of the total average was 72.3%, as per Table 3 below.

N = Neutral, A = Agree, and SA = Strongly Agree

According to the PCA (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy), 83.2% of the variance can be explained by the instrument, which means the instrument is not only reliable but also, according to Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity, valid to measure what it is intended to measure (p<0.001). Along the same lines, the Bivariate Spearman Correlations showed how changes in the components could explain the changes in the score.

In terms of percentages (as per Fig 3 ), more than 63% of the employees agreed or strongly agreed that “Overall, I am satisfied with how MBRU handles organizational change”. Among all the components of the scale, “I believe organizational change (be it internally or externally triggered) is good for MBRU” was the most positively rated with 96% of agreement (agree or strongly agree) among employees. Followed by “My manager is supportive of organizational changes” with 87% agreement (agree or strongly agree). The component that was least rated by the participants was: “I am aware of how organizational changes are going to affect me” with only 35% agreement (agree or strongly agree) among the employees. When it came to the employees’ competences, a significant proportion of employees also agreed or strongly agreed with “I feel confident about delivering in alignment with the organizational changes” and “MBRU employees have the competences necessary for effective organizational change” (both variables with 73% agreement).

In relation to the overall score of agreement, there appeared to be no statistical significance between the differing categories of all three independent variables (staff versus faculty; female versus male; and 3 categories of tenure).

The current study showed that, from the perspective of higher education employees, there are three groups of variables that need to be considered when structuring an effective change management system. These groups include: Trigger, Execution, and Results. The employees reflected upon internal and external triggers to change. The external ones, especially COVID-19, appeared to have relatively influenced their workflow more. According to previous literature around the subject matter, such a change is considered to be forced upon the institution, and is contrasted with the proactive change that is usually intentional and instigated by an internal trigger [ 39 , 40 ]. The employees believe that MBRU exhibited outstanding agility in responding to the pandemic. Employees’ resilience, adaptability, and openness to learn and do their day-to-day activities in different manners were evidently high. Along the same lines, previously published articles around MBRU’s rapid transition to distance learning revealed similar observations [ 41 – 43 ]. For example, when systematically investigating the perceptions of MBRU’s postgraduate dental learners and instructors, it was evident that they were satisfied with the respective change. It is worth highlighting that the instructors appeared to be significantly more satisfied than the learners. All in all, though, the stakeholders perceived themselves to have adapted well to the change. They were aware of the advantages and challenges of the transition to distance learning [ 44 ].

In terms of execution, it appeared that the strengths of MBRU are related to the strategy, leadership, and culture. The employees emphasized the importance of having clarity around the direction of the institution, and felt that MBRU has been doing a good job on that front. This expectation was especially relevant to internally triggered change since the employees appeared to assume that the institution and its employees have more control over it. According to Birkman [ 45 ], change requires of team members to maneuver through their day-to-day tasks despite substantial ambiguity. As such, clarity becomes of utmost importance. In this context, clarity is defined as the alignment between people and tasks to achieve team goals, along with reinforcement of cultural transparency. This alignment enables high-performing team members to march in the same direction [ 46 ]. It would be the responsibility of the leader to ensure clear definition of roles and responsibilities. Three steps to attain this clarity were specified. To start with, it is important to clearly define employee roles, and to communicate the job expectations upfront in the onboarding process. The second step is related to creating alignment, and this relates to continually clarifying roles, tasks, and decisions. Developing consensus around priorities is also crucial to maintain focus and engagement among employees, and to minimize chances of interpersonal conflict. The last step is about promoting transparency among employees, which is believed to enable an environment of accountability. This also relates to encouraging knowledge sharing. In fact, leadership is crucial to all institutions, especially universities. In academia, leadership is a central driving force in the pursuit of excellence and increased visibility. As such, effective change management starts with motivating change, followed by creating the vision, obtaining the necessary buy-in to enable the transition, and finally sustaining momentum, while moving forward [ 47 – 49 ].

Most of the employees praised MBRU and its leadership in relation to change management. Along the same lines, they positively rated pinpointed aspects of their first-hand experiences with change management within the institution. As such, the current study showed that, according to the participating employees, the change management within MBRU has been efficacious. Relevantly, the qualitative data showed that their leadership had clear preset targets and priorities, as a response to the onset of COVID-19, which were effectively attained. In fact, it appeared to the participating employees that the change happened with minimal disruption to the organizational day-to-day activities and processes. It is established, in the literature, that adapting to change requires leadership awareness of the internal and external environments. It is important for leaders to play the role of an environmental analyzer, learning promoter, and organizational developer. This will require for leaders to remain sensitive to environmental changes and internal barriers, and to continuously analyze these aspects of the environment, reflecting on findings, drawing implications, and establishing evidence-driven strategies to develop their organizations [ 50 – 52 ]. Leaders should also exhibit loyalty to their colleagues and organization, which instills a sense of security in employees, and which fosters their commitment towards the institution’s vision and direction [ 48 , 49 , 53 ]. A previous study recommends for leaders to deploy emotionally and morally reassuring approaches to communication with staff during the COVID-19 pandemic [ 54 ]. Paradigm shifts in education have been evident, especially from site-bounded to ‘triplisation’ (i.e., globalization, localization, and individualization), which requires leveraging of Information Technology and various networking. As such, education leaders are inevitably facing novel challenges, which is why they need to scale-up their competences to be able to effectively manage the entailed changes [ 55 ].

This study also showed that once a change is triggered, there needs to be effective communication to socialize the matter within the institution. The more engaging and collaborative the leaders are, the better it is in terms of change management [ 56 , 57 ]. It was evident in the current study that employees prefer to sense their contribution to the organizational change taking place; this inspires and empowers them. Relevantly, a previously conducted study found that employees’ morale is boosted when their feedback is listened to and acted upon [ 53 ]. They also appreciate for there to be a sense of cohesion within and in between their teams, where all employees strive to support each other. There also needs to be a thorough understanding of the internal and external customers’ needs and expectations. This will enable the change to happen in alignment with the institutional values, while leveraging the institutional strengths (including but not limited to: business processes, and partnerships and affiliations) to capitalize on external opportunities [ 58 ].

In the current study, the level of satisfaction was similar between staff and faculty, female and male, and the three specified categories of employees’ tenure. The consistency of the culture at MBRU seem to be playing a buffering role where the change experiences are received and perceived similarly across employees. The concept of culture has become the foundation of quality assurance and institutional effectiveness in universities. There is ample of literature around the importance of trust, loyalty, leadership, and reputation in building quality cultures in higher education institutions [ 59 – 61 ]. The benefits of such cultures are not limited to improving the performance of these institutions but can stretch beyond their confines to contribute to the community-at-large and its sustainable development [ 62 , 63 ].

Most of the participating employees appeared to perceive organizational change to be beneficial for the institution. The participating employees frequently alluded to the opportunities that were born amidst the challenges integral to the changes that they experienced. A lot of the employees noticed that change created the space for them to innovate, think out-of-the-box, and experiment. The benefits of leveraging existing capabilities and strengths were clear to the employees; at MBRU, they believed, the existent IT infrastructure placed the institution and its stakeholders at an advantage at the onset of the pandemic. This observation which is specific to MBRU surfaced in a previously conducted study, as well, where an inductive qualitative data analysis showed how four groups of variables, namely: People, Processes, Platform, and Policies, came together to enable the change. In other words, the interplay between the people and the processes appeared to be taking place with the existent IT platform, all of which was governed by the internal and external policies and guidelines [ 23 , 64 ]. It is repetitively suggested that such transitions need to be viewed as processes, as any change in human behavior needs to take place gradually to get positive outcomes. Successes around any such transitions are attributed to intentional change management systems [ 65 ].

The employees, in the current study, specified five aspects of their experience with change management that can be improved, namely: communication and transparency, better preparing the employees for the change through capacity building initiatives, maximizing employees’ engagement and participation, and increasing the utilization of technology and automation. In parallel, it was evident from the quantitative data analysis that the level of awareness about the change, among employees, can be improved. Communication appeared to be the ‘make it or break it’ variable; the employees perceived this aspect of their experiences to be the ultimate success factors of any organizational change. The employees thoroughly reflected upon the importance of diversifying communication formats and channels, for there to be consistency and repetition, and to start early-on (ideally prior to the actual change). It was clear to the participants that change affects employees differently, and hence, they brought-up the importance of embracing employees’ individuality, as much as possible, when managing the institutional change. It is worth highlighting, over here, that surprisingly none of the participating employees referred to financial- or budget-related matters. Relevantly, a previously conducted study showed that perceived transparent communication and employee engagement constitute key mediators between perceived authentic leadership and individual employee behavioral outcomes. These findings reinforce the value of transparent organizational communication in cultivating relationships with and fostering engagement of an organization’s stakeholders [ 66 ]. Along similar lines, another study showed that employees need to be ready for change intentionally, emotionally, and cognitively [ 67 ]. Moreover, another related study proposed a model that shows how authentic leadership, transparent organizational communication, and employee engagement significantly affect employee trust. The practical implications of this study include encouraging communication managers and organizational leaders to proactively develop authentic leadership and transparent communication skills, strategies, and tactics among their employees [ 48 ]. It also suggests creating a motivating, nurturing, and transparent organizational environment which contributes to employee engagement and trust [ 68 ].

The tailor-made data collection tool introduced in this study turned out to be reliable and valid. As such, it would be recommended for other institutions, which are similar MBRU, to deploy this tool to better understand their employees’ perception of change management in their respective institutions. There are several validated tools that can be used to evaluate the perception of employees of institutional change [ 69 – 71 ]. None of these, however, are contextualized to a higher education institution that is undergoing several, diverse changes and validated after a worldwide crisis (i.e., the pandemic).

This study is characterized by a few limitations that are worth shedding light on. To start with, although this study offered plenty of thorough insights into organizational change management in higher education, the findings can only apply to institutions that are contextually similar to MBRU. As such, it would be recommended for follow-up studies to include a representative sample of universities across the MENA region. In addition, the survey response rate was low, which might have affected the reliability of this component of the current study. Fortunately, by nature of the mixed methods design, the findings derived from the quantitative data were effectively integrated with those of the qualitative component of the study. For upcoming studies, it would be of added value to run an investigative/ deductive, cross-sectional study, which is purely quantitative and includes several randomly selected institutions, to be able to understand the associations in between the variables would be leveraged to further reinforce decision-making. Lastly, although as shown in the study the preset focus group protocol allowed for the identification of opportunities for improvement, from the employees’ perspective, and that the consent form effectively assured the participants of anonymity and data confidentiality, there is still a chance for social desirability bias to have affected the entailed conversation. Afterall, the KLOs of any one institution to prefer to maintain a positive, professional image among each other. As such, it would be useful for exploratory researchers conducting work within higher education institutions to consider deploying one-to-one semi-structured interviews as the qualitative tool of choice as opposed to focus group sessions.

In conclusion, this study highlights the importance of having agile leadership, compounded with clarity in strategy and communication, and a culture built on trust and loyalty, when it comes to organizational change. The current study specifies, from the perception of higher education employees, the triggers to change, along with key components of the organizational change execution and results. This study also introduces a valid, contextualized evaluation tool that can be leveraged by other higher education institutions to measure the perception of their employees regarding the efficacy of their change management protocols.

Supporting information

S1 appendix, s2 appendix, funding statement.

The publication of this research was supported in part by the Research and Graduate Studies (RGS) of Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences (MBRU) in the form of a grant. The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Data Availability

Change Management: From Theory to Practice

• Original Paper
• Published: 09 September 2022
• Volume 67 , pages 189–197, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

• Jeffrey Phillips   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0708-6460 1 &
• James D. Klein 2  

49k Accesses

22 Citations

4 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

This article presents a set of change management strategies found across several models and frameworks and identifies how frequently change management practitioners implement these strategies in practice. We searched the literature to identify 15 common strategies found in 16 different change management models and frameworks. We also created a questionnaire based on the literature and distributed it to change management practitioners. Findings suggest that strategies related to communication, stakeholder involvement, encouragement, organizational culture, vision, and mission should be used when implementing organizational change.

Similar content being viewed by others

Change Management

A Change and Constancy Management Approach for Managing the Unintended Negative Consequences of Organizational and IT Change

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Organizations must change to survive. There are many approaches to influence change; these differences require change managers to consider various strategies that increase acceptance and reduce barriers. A change manager is responsible for planning, developing, leading, evaluating, assessing, supporting, and sustaining a change implementation. Change management consists of models and strategies to help employees accept new organizational developments.

Change management practitioners and academic researchers view organizational change differently (Hughes, 2007 ; Pollack & Pollack, 2015 ). Saka ( 2003 ) states, “there is a gap between what the rational-linear change management approach prescribes and what change agents do” (p. 483). This disconnect may make it difficult to determine the suitability and appropriateness of using different techniques to promote change (Pollack & Pollack, 2015 ). Hughes ( 2007 ) thinks that practitioners and academics may have trouble communicating because they use different terms. Whereas academics use the terms, models, theories, and concepts, practitioners use tools and techniques. A tool is a stand-alone application, and a technique is an integrated approach (Dale & McQuater, 1998 ). Hughes ( 2007 ) expresses that classifying change management tools and techniques can help academics identify what practitioners do in the field and evaluate the effectiveness of practitioners’ implementations.

There is little empirical evidence that supports a preferred change management model (Hallencreutz & Turner, 2011 ). However, there are many similar strategies found across change management models (Raineri, 2011 ). Bamford and Forrester’s ( 2003 ) case study showed that “[change] managers in a company generally ignored the popular change literature” (p. 560). The authors followed Pettigrew’s ( 1987 ) suggestions that change managers should not use abstract theories; instead, they should relate change theories to the context of the change. Neves’ ( 2009 ) exploratory factor analysis of employees experiencing the implementation of a new performance appraisal system at a public university suggested that (a) change appropriateness (if the employee felt the change was beneficial to the organization) was positively related with affective commitment (how much the employee liked their job), and (b) affective commitment mediated the relationship between change appropriateness and individual change (how much the employee shifted to the new system). It is unlikely that there is a universal change management approach that works in all settings (Saka, 2003 ). Because change is chaotic, one specific model or framework may not be useful in multiple contexts (Buchanan & Boddy, 1992 ; Pettigrew & Whipp, 1991 ). This requires change managers to consider various approaches for different implementations (Pettigrew, 1987 ). Change managers may face uncertainties that cannot be addressed by a planned sequence of steps (Carnall, 2007 ; Pettigrew & Whipp, 1991 ). Different stakeholders within an organization may complete steps at different times (Pollack & Pollack, 2015 ). Although there may not be one perspective change management approach, many models and frameworks consist of similar change management strategies.

Anderson and Ackerman Anderson ( 2001 ) discuss the differences between change frameworks and change process models. They state that a change framework identifies topics that are relevant to the change and explains the procedures that organizations should acknowledge during the change. However, the framework does not provide details about how to accomplish the steps of the change or the sequence in which the change manager should perform the steps. Additionally, Anderson and Ackerman Anderson ( 2001 ) explain that change process models describe what actions are necessary to accomplish the change and the order in which to facilitate the actions. Whereas frameworks may identify variables or theories required to promote change, models focus on the specific processes that lead to change. Based on the literature, we define a change strategy as a process or action from a model or framework. Multiple models and frameworks contain similar strategies. Change managers use models and frameworks contextually; some change management strategies may be used across numerous models and frameworks.

The purpose of this article is to present a common set of change management strategies found across numerous models and frameworks and identify how frequently change management practitioners implement these common strategies in practice. We also compare current practice with models and frameworks from the literature. Some change management models and frameworks have been around for decades and others are more recent. This comparison may assist practitioners and theorists to consider different strategies that fall outside a specific model.

Common Strategies in the Change Management Literature

We examined highly-cited publications ( n  > 1000 citations) from the last 20 years, business websites, and university websites to select organizational change management models and frameworks. First, we searched two indexes—Google Scholar and Web of Science’s Social Science Citation Index. We used the following keywords in both indexes: “change management” OR “organizational change” OR “organizational development” AND (models or frameworks). Additionally, we used the same search terms in a Google search to identify models mentioned on university and business websites. This helped us identify change management models that had less presence in popular research. We only included models and frameworks from our search results that were mentioned on multiple websites. We reached saturation when multiple publications stopped identifying new models and frameworks.

After we identified the models and frameworks, we analyzed the original publications by the authors to identify observable strategies included in the models and frameworks. We coded the strategies by comparing new strategies with our previously coded strategies, and we combined similar strategies or created a new strategy. Our list of strategies was not exhaustive, but we included the most common strategies found in the publications. Finally, we omitted publications that did not provide details about the change management strategies. Although many of these publications were highly cited and identified change implementation processes or phases, the authors did not identify a specific strategy.

Table 1 shows the 16 models and frameworks that we analyzed and the 15 common strategies that we identified from this analysis. Ackerman-Anderson and Anderson ( 2001 ) believe that it is important for process models to consider organizational imperatives as well as human dynamics and needs. Therefore, the list of strategies considers organizational imperatives such as create a vision for the change that aligns with the organization’s mission and strategies regarding human dynamics and needs such as listen to employees’ concerns about the change. We have presented the strategies in order of how frequently the strategies appear in the models and frameworks. Table 1 only includes strategies found in at least six of the models or frameworks.

Strategies Used by Change Managers

We developed an online questionnaire to determine how frequently change managers used the strategies identified in our review of the literature. The Qualtrics-hosted survey consisted of 28 questions including sliding-scale, multiple-choice, and Likert-type items. Demographic questions focused on (a) how long the participant had been involved in the practice of change management, (b) how many change projects the participant had led, (c) the types of industries in which the participant led change implementations, (d) what percentage of job responsibilities involved working as a change manager and a project manager, and (e) where the participant learned to conduct change management. Twenty-one Likert-type items asked how often the participant used the strategies identified by our review of common change management models and frameworks. Participants could select never, sometimes, most of the time, and always. The Cronbach’s Alpha of the Likert-scale questions was 0.86.

The procedures for the questionnaire followed the steps suggested by Gall et al. ( 2003 ). The first steps were to define the research objectives, select the sample, and design the questionnaire format. The fourth step was to pretest the questionnaire. We conducted cognitive laboratory interviews by sending the questionnaire and interview questions to one person who was in the field of change management, one person who was in the field of performance improvement, and one person who was in the field of survey development (Fowler, 2014 ). We met with the reviewers through Zoom to evaluate the questionnaire by asking them to read the directions and each item for clarity. Then, reviewers were directed to point out mistakes or areas of confusion. Having multiple people review the survey instruments improved the reliability of the responses (Fowler, 2014 ).

We used purposeful sampling to distribute the online questionnaire throughout the following organizations: the Association for Talent Development (ATD), Change Management Institute (CMI), and the International Society for Performance Improvement (ISPI). We also launched a call for participation to department chairs of United States universities who had Instructional Systems Design graduate programs with a focus on Performance Improvement. We used snowball sampling to gain participants by requesting that the department chairs forward the questionnaire to practitioners who had led at least one organizational change.

Table 2 provides a summary of the characteristics of the 49 participants who completed the questionnaire. Most had over ten years of experience practicing change management ( n  = 37) and had completed over ten change projects ( n  = 32). The participants learned how to conduct change management on-the-job ( n  = 47), through books ( n  = 31), through academic journal articles ( n  = 22), and from college or university courses ( n  = 20). The participants had worked in 13 different industries.

Table 3 shows how frequently participants indicated that they used the change management strategies included on the questionnaire. Forty or more participants said they used the following strategies most often or always: (1) Asked members of senior leadership to support the change; (2) Listened to managers’ concerns about the change; (3) Aligned an intended change with an organization’s mission; (4) Listened to employees’ concerns about the change; (5) Aligned an intended change with an organization’s vision; (6) Created measurable short-term goals; (7) Asked managers for feedback to improve the change, and (8) Focused on organizational culture.

Table 4 identifies how frequently the strategies appeared in the models and frameworks and the rate at which practitioners indicated they used the strategies most often or always. The strategies found in the top 25% of both ( n  > 36 for practitioner use and n  > 11 in models and frameworks) focused on communication, including senior leadership and the employees in change decisions, aligning the change with the vision and mission of the organization, and focusing on organizational culture. Practitioners used several strategies more commonly than the literature suggested, especially concerning the topic of middle management. Practitioners focused on listening to middle managers’ concerns about the change, asking managers for feedback to improve the change, and ensuring that managers were trained to promote the change. Meanwhile, practitioners did not engage in the following strategies as often as the models and frameworks suggested that they should: provide all members of the organization with clear communication about the change, distinguish the differences between leadership and management, reward new behavior, and include employees in change decisions.

Common Strategies Used by Practitioners and Found in the Literature

The purpose of this article was to present a common set of change management strategies found across numerous models and frameworks and to identify how frequently change management practitioners implement these common strategies in practice. The five common change management strategies were the following: communicate about the change, involve stakeholders at all levels of the organization, focus on organizational culture, consider the organization’s mission and vision, and provide encouragement and incentives to change. Below we discuss our findings with an eye toward presenting a few key recommendations for change management.

Communicate About the Change

Communication is an umbrella term that can include messaging, networking, and negotiating (Buchanan & Boddy, 1992 ). Our findings revealed that communication is essential for change management. All the models and frameworks we examined suggested that change managers should provide members of the organization with clear communication about the change. It is interesting that approximately 33% of questionnaire respondents indicated that they sometimes, rather than always or most of the time, notified all members of the organization about the change. This may be the result of change managers communicating through organizational leaders. Instead of communicating directly with everyone in the organization, some participants may have used senior leadership, middle management, or subgroups to communicate the change. Messages sent to employees from leaders can effectively promote change. Regardless of who is responsible for communication, someone in the organization should explain why the change is happening (Connor et al., 2003 ; Doyle & Brady, 2018 ; Hiatt, 2006 ; Kotter, 2012 ) and provide clear communication throughout the entire change implementation (McKinsey & Company, 2008 ; Mento et al., 2002 ).

Involve Stakeholders at All Levels of the Organization

Our results indicate that change managers should involve senior leaders, managers, as well as employees during a change initiative. The items on the questionnaire were based on a review of common change management models and frameworks and many related to some form of stakeholder involvement. Of these strategies, over half were used often by 50% or more respondents. They focused on actions like gaining support from leaders, listening to and getting feedback from managers and employees, and adjusting strategies based on stakeholder input.

Whereas the models and frameworks often identified strategies regarding senior leadership and employees, it is interesting that questionnaire respondents indicated that they often implemented strategies involving middle management in a change implementation. This aligns with Bamford and Forrester’s ( 2003 ) research describing how middle managers are important communicators of change and provide an organization with the direction for the change. However, the participants did not develop managers into leaders as often as the literature proposed. Burnes and By ( 2012 ) expressed that leadership is essential to promote change and mention how the change management field has failed to focus on leadership as much as it should.

Focus on Organizational Culture

All but one of the models and frameworks we analyzed indicated that change managers should focus on changing the culture of an organization and more than 75% of questionnaire respondents revealed that they implemented this strategy always or most of the time. Organizational culture affects the acceptance of change. Changing the organizational culture can prevent employees from returning to the previous status quo (Bullock & Batten, 1985 ; Kotter, 2012 ; Mento et al., 2002 ). Some authors have different views on how to change an organization’s culture. For example, Burnes ( 2000 ) thinks that change managers should focus on employees who were resistant to the change while Hiatt ( 2006 ) suggests that change managers should replicate what strategies they used in the past to change the culture. Change managers require open support and commitment from managers to lead a culture change (Phillips, 2021 ).

In addition, Pless and Maak ( 2004 ) describe the importance of creating a culture of inclusion where diverse viewpoints help an organization reach its organizational objectives. Yet less than half of the participants indicated that they often focused on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). Change managers should consider diverse viewpoints when implementing change, especially for organizations whose vision promotes a diverse and inclusive workforce.

Consider the Organization’s Mission and Vision

Several of the models and frameworks we examined mentioned that change managers should consider the mission and vision of the organization (Cummings & Worley, 1993 ; Hiatt, 2006 ; Kotter, 2012 ; Polk, 2011 ). Furthermore, aligning the change with the organization’s mission and vision were among the strategies most often implemented by participants. This was the second most common strategy both used by participants and found in the models and frameworks. A mission of an organization may include its beliefs, values, priorities, strengths, and desired public image (Cummings & Worley, 1993 ). Leaders are expected to adhere to a company’s values and mission (Strebel, 1996 ).

Provide Encouragement and Incentives to Change

Most of the change management models and frameworks suggested that organizations should reward new behavior, yet most respondents said they did not provide incentives to change. About 75% of participants did indicate that they frequently gave encouragement to employees about the change. The questionnaire may have confused participants by suggesting that they provide incentives before the change occurs. Additionally, respondents may have associated incentives with monetary compensation. Employee training can be considered an incentive, and many participants confirmed that they provided employees and managers with training. More information is needed to determine why the participants did not provide incentives and what the participants defined as rewards.

Future Conversations Between Practitioners and Researchers

Table 4 identified five strategies that practitioners used more often than the models and frameworks suggested and four strategies that were suggested more often by the models and frameworks than used by practitioners. One strategy that showed the largest difference was provided employees with incentives to implement the change. Although 81% of the selected models and frameworks suggested that practitioners should provide employees with incentives, only 25% of the practitioners identified that they provided incentives always and most of the time. Conversations between theorists and practitioners could determine if these differences occur because each group uses different terms (Hughes, 2007 ) or if practitioners just implement change differently than theorists suggest (Saka, 2003 ).

Additionally, conversations between theorists and practitioners may help promote improvements in the field of change management. For example, practitioners were split on how often they promoted DEI, and the selected models and frameworks did not focus on DEI in change implementations. Conversations between the two groups would help theorists understand what practitioners are doing to advance the field of change management. These conversations may encourage theorists to modify their models and frameworks to include modern approaches to change.

Limitations

The models and frameworks included in this systematic review were found through academic research and websites on the topic of change management. We did not include strategies contained on websites from change management organizations. Therefore, the identified strategies could skew towards approaches favored by theorists instead of practitioners. Additionally, we used specific publications to identify the strategies found in the models and frameworks. Any amendments to the cited models or frameworks found in future publications could not be included in this research.

We distributed this questionnaire in August 2020. Several participants mentioned that they were not currently conducting change management implementations because of global lockdowns due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Because it can take years to complete a change management implementation (Phillips, 2021 ), this research does not describe how COVID-19 altered the strategies used by the participants. Furthermore, participants were not provided with definitions of the strategies. Their interpretations of the strategies may differ from the definitions found in the academic literature.

Future Research

Future research should expand upon what strategies the practitioners use to determine (a) how the practitioners use the strategies, and (b) the reasons why practitioners use certain strategies. Participants identified several strategies that they did not use as often as the literature suggested (e.g., provide employees with incentives and adjust the change implementation because of reactions from employees). Future research should investigate why practitioners are not implementing these strategies often.

Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic may have changed how practitioners implemented change management strategies. Future research should investigate if practitioners have added new strategies or changed the frequency in which they identified using the strategies found in this research.

Our aim was to identify a common set of change management strategies found across several models and frameworks and to identify how frequently change management practitioners implement these strategies in practice. While our findings relate to specific models, frameworks, and strategies, we caution readers to consider the environment and situation where the change will occur. Therefore, strategies should not be selected for implementation based on their inclusion in highly cited models and frameworks. Our study identified strategies found in the literature and used by change managers, but it does not predict that specific strategies are more likely to promote a successful organizational change. Although we have presented several strategies, we do not suggest combining these strategies to create a new framework. Instead, these strategies should be used to promote conversation between practitioners and theorists. Additionally, we do not suggest that one model or framework is superior to others because it contains more strategies currently used by practitioners. Evaluating the effectiveness of a model or framework by how many common strategies it contains gives an advantage to models and frameworks that contain the most strategies. Instead, this research identifies what practitioners are doing in the field to steer change management literature towards the strategies that are most used to promote change.

Ackerman-Anderson, L. S., & Anderson, D. (2001). The change leader’s roadmap: How to navigate your organization’s transformation . Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.

Anderson, D., & Ackerman Anderson, L. S. (2001). Beyond change management: Advanced strategies for today’s transformational leaders . Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.

Bakari, H., Hunjra, A. I., & Niazi, G. S. K. (2017). How does authentic leadership influence planned organizational change? The role of employees’ perceptions: Integration of theory of planned behavior and Lewin’s three step model. Journal of Change Management, 17 (2), 155–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2017.1299370

Article   Google Scholar  

Bamford, D. R., & Forrester, P. L. (2003). Managing planned and emergent change within an operations management environment. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 23 (5), 546–564. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570310471857

Beckhard, R., & Harris, R. T. (1987). Organizational transitions: Managing complex change (2 nd ed.). Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

Bridges, W. (1991). Managing transitions: Making the most of change . Perseus Books.

Buchanan, D. A., & Boddy, D. (1992). The expertise of the change agent . Prentice Hall.

Google Scholar  

Bullock, R. J., & Batten, D. (1985). It's just a phase we're going through: A review and synthesis of OD phase analysis. Group & Organization Studies, 10 (4), 383–412.

Burnes, B. (2000). Managing change: A strategic approach to organisational dynamics (3 rd ed.). Prentice Hall.

Burnes, B., & By, R. T. (2012). Leadership and change: The case for greater ethical clarity. Journal of Business Ethics, 108 (2), 239–252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-1088-2

Carnall, C. A. (2007). Managing change in organizations (5th ed.). Prentice Hall.

Connor, P. E., Lake, L. K., & Stackman, R. W. (2003). Managing organizational change (3 rd ed.). Praeger Publishers.

Cox, A. M., Pinfield, S., & Rutter, S. (2019). Extending McKinsey’s 7S model to understand strategic alignment in academic libraries. Library Management, 40 (5), 313–326. https://doi.org/10.1108/LM-06-2018-0052

Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (1993). Organizational development and change (5 th ed.). West Publishing Company.

Dale, B. & McQuater, R. (1998) Managing business improvement and quality: Implementing key tools and techniques . Blackwell Publishers Ltd.

Doyle, T., & Brady, M. (2018). Reframing the university as an emergent organisation: Implications for strategic management and leadership in higher education. Journal of Higher Education Policy & Management, 40 (4), 305–320. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2018.1478608

Fowler, F. J., Jr. (2014). Survey research methods: Applied social research methods (5 th ed.). Sage Publications Inc.

French, W. L., & Bell, C. H. Jr. (1999). Organizational development: Behavioral science interventions for organizational improvement (6 th ed.). Prentice-Hall Inc.

Gall, M., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2003). Educational research: An introduction (7 th ed.). Allyn & Bacon.

Hallencreutz, J., & Turner, D.-M. (2011). Exploring organizational change best practice: Are there any clear-cut models and definitions? International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences , 3 (1), 60–68. https://doi.org/10.1108/17566691111115081

Hiatt, J. M. (2006). ADKAR: A model for change in business, government, and our community . Prosci Learning Publications.

Hughes, M. (2007). The tools and techniques of change management. Journal of Change Management, 7 (1), 37–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/14697010701309435

Kanter, R. M., Stein, B. A., & Jick, T. D. (1992). The challenge of organizational change . The Free Press.

Kotter, J. P. (2012). Leading change . Harvard Business Review Press.

Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical papers . Harper & Brothers Publishers.

Luecke, R. (2003). Managing change and transition . Harvard Business School Press.

McKinsey & Company. (2008). Creating organizational transformations: McKinsey global survey results . McKinsey Quarterly. Retrieved August 5, 2020, from http://gsme.sharif.edu/~change/McKinsey%20Global%20Survey%20Results.pdf

Mento, A. J., Jones, R. M., & Dirndorfer, W. (2002). A change management process: Grounded in both theory and practice. Journal of Change Management, 3 (1), 45–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/714042520

Nadler, D. A., & Tushman, M. L. (1997). Competing by design: The power of organizational architecture . Oxford University Press.

Neri, R. A., Mason, C. E., & Demko, L. A. (2008). Application of Six Sigma/CAP methodology: Controlling blood-product utilization and costs. Journal of Healthcare Management, 53 (3), 183–196.

Neves, P. (2009). Readiness for change: Contributions for employee’s level of individual change and turnover intentions. Journal of Change Management, 9 (2), 215–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/14697010902879178

Pettigrew, A. M. (1987). Theoretical, methodological, and empirical issues in studying change: A response to Starkey. Journal of Management Studies, 24 , 420–426.

Pettigrew, A., & Whipp, R. (1991). Managing change for competitive success . Blackwell Publishers Ltd.

Phillips, J. B. (2021). Change happens: Practitioner use of change management strategies (Publication No. 28769879) [Doctoral dissertation, Florida State University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

Pless, N., & Maak, T. (2004). Building an inclusive diversity culture: Principles, processes and practice. Journal of Business Ethics, 54 (2), 129–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-004-9465-8

Polk, J. D. (2011). Lean Six Sigma, innovation, and the Change Acceleration Process can work together. Physician Executive, 37 (1), 38̫–42.

Pollack, J., & Pollack, R. (2015). Using Kotter’s eight stage process to manage an organizational change program: Presentation and practice. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 28 , 51–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-014-9317-0

Raineri, A. B. (2011). Change management practices: Impact on perceived change results. Journal of Business Research, 64 (3), 266–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.11.011

Saka, A. (2003). Internal change agents’ view of the management of change problem. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 16 (5), 480–496. https://doi.org/10.1108/09534810310494892

Strebel, P. (1996). Why do employees resist change? Harvard Business Review, 74 (3), 86–92.

Waterman, R. H., Jr, Peters, T. J., & Phillips, J. R. (1980). Structure is not organization. Business Horizons, 23 (3), 14–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/0007-6813(80)90027-0

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University Libraries, Florida State University, 116 Honors Way, Tallahassee, FL, 32306, USA

Jeffrey Phillips

Department of Educational Psychology & Learning Systems, College of Education, Florida State University, Stone Building-3205F, Tallahassee, FL, 32306-4453, USA

James D. Klein

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeffrey Phillips .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interests.

This research does not represent conflicting interests or competing interests. The research was not funded by an outside agency and does not represent the interests of an outside party.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Phillips, J., Klein, J.D. Change Management: From Theory to Practice. TechTrends 67 , 189–197 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00775-0

Download citation

Accepted : 02 September 2022

Published : 09 September 2022

Issue Date : January 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00775-0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Change management
• Organizational development
• Performance improvement
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research