Showing posts with label Organisational change. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Organisational change. Show all posts

28 August, 2010

Edwards, M. G. (2005). The integral holon: A holonomic approach to organisational change and transformation

Edwards, M. G. (2005).  The integral holon: A holonomic approach to organisational change and transformation.  Journal of Organizational Change Management, 18(3), pp. 269 - 288.  Retrieved on June 5, 2010 from http://www.emeraldinsight.com.ezproxy.usq.edu.au/Insight/viewPDF.jsp?contentType=Article&Filename=html/Output/Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Pdf/0230180305.pdf


Introduction
Theory in organisational studies has presented us with several models from which we can interpret, or analyse, the nature of transformation.  The perspective (e.g. frame of mind) of theorists is a contributory factor to the focus research will take.  Deconstructing models broadens perspective when viewed as component insights to the environment.  Currently there is no adaptive or flexible framework that takes into consideration all aspects of practising global communities.  Edwards proposes using Koestler 1967, and Wilber 1995 to build the integral holon.


Arthur Koestler's holon
The easiest way to imagine interlinked communities, or groups, of an organisation is to visualise a constellation pattern where stars (e.g. teams) are connected by intangible knowledge networks.  Depth can be measured in terms of hierarchical levels, and span covers all groups of a level.  No team is exactly the same owing to its position, location and purpose.  As each team looks across the space between communities, RPL (e.g. collective knowledge of team members, reputation) and interaction build up interpersonal congruence.  Mutual co-dependence develops.  Teams are developed to interact with others.  While focus has been on internal organisation structure, the theory of holonomics draws the focus away from organisational detail to organisational purpose.


A word of caution about holism: when using holonomics to describe psychological phenomena, it is vital to acknowledge that attitudes and views range across a scale (e.g. similar to positive - negative scales) without considering the multi-level framework of hierarchy that distorts the lens.


Holonomics is a model that understands evolution and transformation.  It applies to the analysis of individuals and collectives, and was expanded into the knowledge of "General properties of open hierarchical systems (OHS)" (pg. 2).  Therefore the holon can be regarded as the basis "for a more humane and developmental social science".  Holonomics can be added to existing structures or models to explain emergent behaviour.  Interaction becomes part of group function and existence that has a documented history.  The concept of holonomics indicates that tracking changes, "transcend-and-include", develops best practice policy in evolutionary progress of the social holon.  


Ken Wilber's AQAL model and the 20 tenets of holons
AQAL is the acronym for 'all quadrants, all levels' that frames integral theory.  The quadrants represent domains that undergo transformation and evolution.  They represent the interior-exterior and individual-collective dimensions that must be considered socially contrived to understand that subjective experience is based on the intangible that relates to objective observable, or tangible, behaviour.  Historically, subjective-objective research reveals that it is an analytical and flexible tool for exploring multi-paradigm systems.


The model includes a spectrum of consciousness that identifies human progress in stages from infancy to sophistication of intellect.  It is a categorisation of personal development that includes chronological development and frames the multi-paradigmatic, multi-level development of social activity.


Koestler's theory of holonomics is more concerned with the temporal nature of relationships, while AQAL places emphasis on the structural elements of development, where the tenets of holonomics (e.g. patterns or laws that are chronic in holon activity) converge on relational processes.  Comprehensively, both models integrate to explain perceived social realities.


Paradigms in organisational change
Edwards introduces the suitability of integral holonomics to study evolution in organisations.


Building the integral holon
1. Multi-paradigm capacity
Using an integral approach permits alternate theoretical views that add to the growing understanding of social integration.  Holonomics draws diverse dimensions into contact, which in turn generate new understanding and practice.


2. Multi-level adaptability
As social interaction is based on activity, holonomics views patterns of activity that are inter-connected and contribute to hierarchical process.


3. Qualitative (stage-based) change or transformation
Theorists identify a distinct difference between transformation and change.  Transformation occurs when organisations shift epistemological and ontological belief to adapt and survive economic demand (e.g. Nike).  Redefinition categorises the developmental stage of an organisation.  Although stages or levels are predictable, there is no direct correlation to indicate sequential progression.


Transformation includes dynamics and situational factors that complicate learning trajectories of individuals and groups.  In situations of unplanned spontaneous growth, dissociation from the environment may result.  The structure of holonomics allows epistemic understanding of social phenomena and organisational health.


4. The subjective-objective (interior-exterior) dimension
Subjective-objective studies have been linked to the theory of holonomics since Koestler.  Holarchic structure allows both dimensions to be understood in terms of paradigm studies, clinical approaches to organisational change, subjective values and perspectives, organisational perspectives, and voluntarism-determinism.


5. The agency-communion dimension
One of the issues in collective transformation addresses the changing paradigm of current need.  Concepts of hierarchy are flattened.  Reality is no longer limited to the physical as intangible connections to knowledge networks become the dominant social construct.


Perspectives on organisational change in research are divided.  It is viewed as either a function of the community's standardisation and control, directive management, and transformative leadership; or, it is seen through power relationships, communal networks and cultural identity.  Meta-paradigmatic perspectives consolidate events and processes to capture sources of affective power and relation.  Holonomics appreciates both sides of the scale, and is a strategic framework from which to view issues.


Organisational change requires directed goal-setting to unite members in a manner that nurtures the network.  Often disguised as masculine or feminine attributes, holonomics facilitates conceptualisation of hierarchy and dynamic action with empathic social behaviour.


6. Integral perspectives
Holons are case sensitive (e.g. able to distinguish between levels of individuality, groupness, and community), thus research on directed action of self-verification processes viewed through an holonomic lens reveals the focus of the researcher.


7.  Developmental dynamics
Organisations can be seen as self-contained, ecological communities.
Holonomics recognises the dichotomy of organisational dynamics where changes occur continuously, or transforms the community suddenly.  Historically, focus has been on increasing performance at individual level.  Transformative dynamics views the community as an interlinked structure that faces turbulence, subsequently upsetting culture.  Holonic terminology addresses progression, sustainability and support as evolutionary and involutionary dynamics.  Sustainable development can only occur when there is a balance between internal and external growth that is a result environmental requirement.


8. Developmental lines and the consciousness, behavioural, cultural and social quadrants
Constructs and concepts in literature (e.g. Bloom's Taxonomies, Gardner's Multiple Intelligences) decode aspects of self-development that have been used to distinguish development from transformation.


Group development processes are similar to individual process.  As each holon is representative of a stage of development, it should be viewed as part of the integrated whole.  As progress very rarely occurs in a specific sequential fashion,  various stages of development occur concurrently.  The ability to understand developmental lines is critical when theorising transformation and consequent complexities.


9. The integral cycle and organisational learning
Organisational learning is pivotal in the process of change, and facilitating the approach to group tranformative learning.  Double-loop or triple-loop learning is the integral cycle of learning, where each pass or wave represents an hierarchical level of learning.


10. Activity and communication
Cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT) relies on artefacts generated by the community as a means of gaining insight into the process of learning how goals are perceived, activated and achieved.  Activity system, or activity triad, is the foundation of CHAT.  As an individual, or group, or community work towards manifesting goals, the approach taken will lie in epistemic belief or alignment to culture (e.g. in archived transactions).  Exchanges are viewed as indicators of behaviour, alignment with community and culture, developmental stages, learning trajectories and dynamics.  Also taken into consideration are learning activities and process, interpersonal congruence, and the technology used to create the artefacts.


Holonomics provides an elaborate and functional framework to describe communities of practice and the various forms of creativity and innovation in conforming to standards, and the interpersonal congruence that marks the identity of group culture.  As a result of analysis, empathic communication may be realised.


Summary
Edwards has presented an overview and structure of holons and the holonomic framework to explore the multitude in perspectives.  Investigating the process of self-verification leads to better knowledge-gathering and a more complete understanding of the permutations of social interaction.  Edwards poses the following questions:
  1. How does organisational learning relate to the qualitative shift that is definitive of transformative change?
  2. How does the transformation of organisational culture relate to technological development at multiple levels across an organisation?

18 April, 2010

Johansson, C. & Heide, M. (2008). Speaking of change: three communication approaches in studies of organisational change.

Johansson, C. and Heide, M. (2008).  Speaking of change: three communication approaches in studies of organisational change.  Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 13(3)  pp. 288 - 305.  Retrieved on April 16, 2010 from http://www.emeraldinsight.com.ezproxy.usq.edu.au/Insight/
viewPDF.jspcontentType=Article&Filename=html/Output/
Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Pdf/1680130304.pdf


Introduction
The adaptation and innovation of an organisation depends upon management constantly revising tools and finding solutions through reflective and reflexive practices.  In radical restructuring that is often required during unpredictable circumstance communication is seen as a vital link to success.  Johansson and Heide note the vastness in literature on the importance of communication and it's relationship to organisational change.  Primarily focus has been on conception to implementation of planned changes.  The authors reveal a significant absence in literature on the communication perspective by which change programs are installed.  Citing Lewis and Seibold's review on implementation of planned organisational change, the authors conclude that research would benefit if the implementation of planned change was seen as a communications phenomena.


Johansson and Heide cite Weick who suggests that the main barrier to new thinking is ontological and epistemological commitments of the researchers.  Critical evaluation is required to understand research perspectives.


Planned or emergent organisational change
Popular literature in change management indicates a linear process with developmental stages.  Johansson and Heide point to studies that suggest change is developed through slow and routine processes, and focus should be on 'changing' not 'change' - an appreciation that change is evolution rather than determinate and causal.  Unanticipated change results from planned change.  Johansson and Heide have observed two approaches to change processes - a traditional approach, describe and explain planned changes; or an emergent approach, aiming to understand change processes.


Perspectives on communication
In understanding the functional role and effect communication has in an organisation, flow of communication has been studied rather than content and meaning.  Critics have argued that this oversimplification suggests communication becomes nothing more than transmission.  The interpretive perspective seeks to generate insight and understanding.  A meaning- centred view of the organisation allows social construction of ongoing processes that makes organisational life.


Three approaches: tool, process and social transformation
Johansson and Heide observed three common approaches to communication during change:

  1. used as a tool;
  2. used as a socially constructed process; and
  3. used as social transformation.



Communication as a tool
Popular press and academic literature placed emphasis on:
  • participation - members feel more included, committed and in control;
  • realistic acknowledgement of information - prior warning and open dialogue;
  • vision and objective - justification.
While Johansson and Heide do not suggest that implementation processes are smoother when members are openly informed of planned changes, they acknowledge it is the researchers aim to understand rational systems and increase the effectiveness of the change process.  The relationship between communication and the creation of readiness for change is a prerequisite, Johansson and Heide indicate based on research in resistance to change.  It works to reduce anxiety of a future situation.  Succesful programs of change correlate significantly with accurately managing trust and uncertainty.  Research indicates that employees involved in change feel more in control.  By measuring the effectiveness of internal communication during change, researchers are able to emphasise the validity of communication strategies.  Johansson and Heide refer to research on process and content in communication by Goodman and Truss who identify communication levels in timing, media and employee profiling link to successful planned change.  The most serious critique of research into communication as a tool is the absence of ontological and epistemological reflection.


Communication as a socially constructed process
Change is understood to be a phenomena that occurs within communication.  Interactions and communications build the framework of social reality.  Planned change can be seen as an occasion to create new social realities.  From this perspective, communication can be used to either report existing realities, or change social realities.  Change processes are a result of individual sense making processes.  Delivery of communication facilitates planned processes in sense making for the organisation as a whole.  Uncertainties and ambiguities are resolved.  However, Johansson and Heide argue that this does not resolve alternatives of choice.  Communication follows a linear sequence from concept to plausibility.  Experimentation is required for individuals to make sense of a process.  Employee profiling indicates that backgrounds, interests, positions and the like influence multiple ways of meaning making.  Individual sense making shapes organisational consensus.  Johansson and Heide cite Tsoukas and Chia who advocate the role and importance of communication as a daily process where members act, improvise and function during change processes.  Scholars are interested in how individuals approach change in sense-making with a particular focus on the narrative.  Narrative expression is important in sense making as a means of structuring experience.  Johansson and Heide citing Weick, Bruner and Fisher suggest that the narrative (actions of either the conscious or unconscious) conveys a starting point of action and direction for future action.  Research on background conversation from Ford, Ford and McNamara indicates that individual experience direct or tacit is reflected in narratives.  Resistance can be broken down to underlying assumptions and expectations, to be overcome through communication by constructing discourse.  Managerial tasks in sense making through story telling constitute the framework of interpretation.  Johansson and Heide cite Langer and Thorup who disagree with story telling.  They indicate that story telling is a management tool for discipline with monophonic properties.  A polyphonic story telling process needs to be addressed.  Johansson and Heide reflect that change is a process that takes time.


Communication as social transformation
The added dimension of power highlights the struggle for sense making and negotiated meaning.  Johansson and Heide indicate that there are multiple levels of reality as proposed by Beech and Cairns and cite Boolin's work on discursive practices of managers reproduced by members that cements legitimacy.  Attention is drawn to collaborative discourse, multi-level conversation, where knowledge construction and understanding of the organisation takes place.  Researchers also focus on the negotiation of social change and action.  Organisations are seen as political sites and discourse of emotion and identity are analysed.  Current literature in organisational discourse indicates that 'control' and 'empowerment' are key terms in developing a new language that create a positive emotional response.  Line manager response favoured 'command and control' style management that challenged power relations where different groups compete to structure social reality.  Also noted are Heracleous and Barrett who link discourse and context, and discern patterns in communications and the hidden assumptions.  Clashes in discourse at structural and communicative levels explain the lack of common ground on which to base dialogue.  Change that occurs at communicative levels may not similarly occur at stakeholder level.  Johansson and Heide cite Ashcraft whose study on occupational identity found overt consent to be a form of resistance.  Talking about a process while activating the opposite constitutes cooperation with management and resisting legitimate authority or a shared world view.


Johansson and Heide select Andersons' proposal to stabilise organisations through voicing current practice as a means of linking past, present and future.  Transformation occurs when past meaning is translated into future meaning.  However, the authors note that Alvesson and Karreman suggest discourse analysis should consider the inconsistencies of narrative text.  Reductionist approaches must distinguish process from agency.


Conclusions
The authors agree with Caldwell that most knowledge available in organisational practice lacks cumulative logic.  Discursive processes are unique to each organisation, but in considering communication as a tool, a process and a social transformation, there is an opportunity for theory building.  The challenge for future researchers is to consider the strengths and weaknesses of communication as tool, process and social transformation.  Integrative approaches will highlight certain areas at a time.  Concepts of effective change and resistance to change should be examined.  Background conversation has become an important link in communication, and investigation is warranted.  Communicative actions should consider what is hidden in the non verbal.