Für neue Kunden:
Für bereits registrierte Kunden:
67 Seiten, Note: 1,3
Table of Graphics
Table of Appendixes
1.1 Introduction of Topic
1.2 Motivation and Objectives
2. The Theory of Organizational Change
2.1 The Importance of Organizational Change Management
2.2 Drivers of Change
2.3 Types of Organizational Changes
2.4 Models for Organizational Change
2.4.1 What is an Organizational Change Model?
2.4.2 Organizational Change Models - an Overview
2.4.3 Kotter’s 8-Step-Model
22.214.171.124 Create a Sense of Urgency
126.96.36.199 Form a Powerful Guiding Coalition
188.8.131.52 Create a Vision and Strategy for Change
184.108.40.206 Communicate the Vision
220.127.116.11 Empower Employees for Broad-Based Action
18.104.22.168 Create Short-Term Wins
22.214.171.124 Consolidate Gains and Produce more Change
126.96.36.199 Anchor the Changes in Corporate Culture
188.8.131.52 Review of Kotter’s Eight-Step-Model
3. Resistance to Change
3.1 Definition of Resistance
3.2 Symptoms for Resistance
3.3 What causes negative Behavior
3.4 Overcoming Resistance
3.5 The Role of Leaders in handling Resistance
3.6 Rethinking Resistance
4. Buy-out of a Berlin-based Real Estate Company and its consequences
4.1 Company Background
4.2 What have been the Drivers of Change?
4.3 The proposed Solution and the Organizational Change Process
4.4 What Type of Organizational Change has been existent?
4.5 What Mistakes have been made during the Change Process?
4.6 What are the Symptoms for Resistance?
4.7 What is the Motivation for Resistance?
4.8 How can the existing Resistance being managed?
4.9 Implications for future Strategies
illustration not visible in this excerpt
Figure 1: Drivers of Change Model
Figure 2: Lewin’s Three-Step Change Model
Figure 3: Kotter’s Eight-Step Change Model
Figure 4: Sources of Complacency by John P. Kotter
Figure 5: Barriers to Empowerment
Figure 6: Indicators of Resistance to Change
Figure 7: Force Field Analysis
Figure 8: Resistance Strategy Model
Figure 9: Required Leadership Styles in different Change Phases
Figure 10: Increasing Rents in Germany
Appendix 1: Types of changes according to Ackerman Anderson
Appendix 2: Active and passive resistance
In today’s turbulent environment, where things rarely remain the same, change is a very inevitable part of life. Some of the major forces contributing to this are: globalization, open and dynamic market conditions, rapid technological improvement, cultural shifts but also the high expectations of customers, through which the world has become more complex and dynamic. As a consequence, organizations are compelled to persistently reassess and reevaluate their work and need to adapt to their environment as well as implement changes continuously to remain competitive.
In comparison to the past, we know much more today about the drivers of change and how to successfully implement change management. Nevertheless, managers continue to make fundamental mistakes when they are trying to implement change.
Some changes might be easy to take, where others may overburden an organization’s ability to deal with them. Sometimes they are necessary to gain learning and improvement as well as to correct past failures. But transformation can also provide opportunities for growth and development. The ability to manage change effectively has become fundamental.
Nevertheless, most of the time change is not an easy experience to go through and employees need to learn to adjust constantly to new circumstances. It is often mentioned if adjustment fails resistance to change is the result.
Each individual or organization can react differently to change; it may be in a positive and forward-looking manner, or in a negative and rejecting manner. Lack of commitment, inactivity of leadership, inadequate planning, and failure to create a sense of urgency as well as the lack of awareness for the motives to change could be reasons why some change initiatives fail. Finally, managers need to consider the effects of change on others. It is not unusual that some change implementations face resistance and even fail, since it involves people. Human beings in general often feel insecure about a new situation and may have fears, such as fear of the unknown, fear of losing their job or others. In existing literature, resistance mostly has a ‘negative overtone’ and is seen as something that needs to be overcome as it can hinder organizational goals. But what is the right strategy to manage negative reaction? Can resistance be prevented or even be useful for an organization? How should managers treat their employees during a change process?
Sustaining change requires fundamental shift of thinking, and effective communication is considered as highly important during a change process. It is the instrument for announcing, explaining and preparing the people involved for both the positive and negative impact of implementing change in order to help people understand the need for change. This can increase the commitment to change as well as avoid confusion among employees.
The quantity of literature on change management and resistance to change has grown significantly over the past century.
Despite knowledge about change management and resistance to change, several statistics point out that successful organizational change remains elusive.1 Therefore, the complexity of these topics can be assumed. Unclear is whether small and medium sized enterprises (SME) and similar organizations apply change management theories prior to change or if they simply implement change. Nor can it be assumed that corporations with a deeper organizational structure will use change management models?
Even though there is a list of literature available on how to engage employees during organizational change, there is less research that focuses on involving employees in change processes during a management buy-out, especially with regards to a later occurring merger process. The consequences of not involving employees can have tremendous effects on the organization and its people, resulting for example in dissatisfied employees, which lead to low productivity and unwanted employee turnover.
The purpose of this thesis is to gain a better understanding of why people resist change in an organization and to explore how such resistance can be overcome. It also aspires to provide an insight to managers on how to successfully plan and implement change during a management buy-out with particular reference to the real estate sector. It can give them guidance on how to engage and motivate employees using change management tools.
This study is based on the sale of a real estate company based in Berlin and the present preparations for a merger made by the new management. This study aims to show the possible relationships between change management implementation and resistance to change in ‘post-sale’ organizations. Kotter’s eight-step change management model will be used to describe the change process and to highlight possible failures made during the change process. This thesis explores what conscious change leadership involves and why one must consider the reaction of employees involved. Kotter’s change model is used as reference point throughout this thesis, using it as a basis to guide and highlight critical aspects of the implemented changes and to point out which mistakes could have led to resistance.
This thesis is divided into three parts and five chapters. The research approach is deductive; it will go from general to more specific: beginning with organizational change, followed by resistance and an analysis of a specific example from the real estate industry and concluded with an outline of gained insights.
Chapter one provides the introduction and motivation for the research on the topic “Managing resistance during a change process, using the example of organizational change in a real estate company”. In chapter two the most important aspects of the topic organizational change management will be reviewed, however taking into account that it is not the main focus of this study. Since the chosen topic resistance to change results from the organizational change process, it is crucial to gain understanding about the process to link it with resistance. To clarify what the term organizational change means, it is necessary to give a definition as well as to explain their necessity for it. After doing so, a short overview of the factors that evoke change, existent types of change and models available in literature that can help to successfully implement change, are given. Especially the model established by John P. Kotter will be discussed in detail. Chapter three deals with the core topic of this thesis: resistance to change. Special attention is paid here to the symptoms for resistance and understanding their causes, as well as the possibilities of how to overcome resistance by applying different change management methods. The role of leadership is considered. The fourth chapter is the main part of this paper. It represents the analysis of the change process within a specific real estate company and that details the occurrence of resistance as a result of change processes. It serves to make a connection to the theoretical data mentioned in chapter two and three in a real context. Data collecting and theory developing are a result of qualitative problem oriented interviews with three employees and the external personnel manager of the company.
A brief introduction to the company affected by a management buy-out is given, covering its history and its drivers for change, as well as the transformation process itself. It allows the reader to form a picture about how the transformation took place and who has been involved. Furthermore, the existent organizational change type is analyzed, before, with cross-reference to Kotter’s change management model, possible failures made during the process will be revealed. This chapter also describes what symptoms of resistance were found, explores motivations for this resistance and assesses how the company can handle them. As a result of the above, a framework within which future changes can be carried out more easily is given.
This thesis will be concluded by summarizing the findings with reference to the theory and by evaluating the change process and its consequences at the Berlin real estate company.
To improve is to change; to be perfect is to change often.
This chapter presents the most important aspects of change management. Since change management is a very extensive topic, some aspects will not be analyzed in depth. Nevertheless, since the chosen context ‘resistance during a change’ results from organizational change processes, it is necessary to gain an understanding of what links these topics together. First, a definition of change management and its necessity is given. Subsequently the drivers for change are mentioned, before explaining the types of organizational change, discussing common models and analyzing the eight steps of Kotter’s change model.
Defining organizational change is a difficult task, given the abundance of definitions that are available in the literature. For instance, it can be understood as any structural, strategic, cultural, human or technological transformation, capable of generating impact in an organization2. But it is also “dissatisfaction with the old and belief in the new”3. Or in other words, it means that organizations are undergoing transformation. It is an essential process for growth and development of an organization. Without change, organizations would most likely lose their competitive advantage and fail to meet their customer needs.4
Some of the main causes of societies that make change so predominant are globalization, shifting demographics, new technologies, changes in market conditions, and frequent modifications in customers’ preferences.5 These factors show that change is necessary in order to stay competitive. Furthermore, there is a need for organizations to focus on when, how and in what way they must change. Institutions need awareness of the variety of factors affecting their business6 and, according to Schein, they also need continuous ‘external adaption and internal integration’.7
The prevalence of changing circumstances within organizations has demanded change management to become an important topic generating multiple theories.8 It can be described as a structured approach to deal with change from a current state to a desired future state, to fulfill or implement a vision and strategy. Both should be in consideration of the impact it can have on the organization, team and on the individual.9 Especially the noncompliance of employees leads to struggles with transformation and increases the risk for resistance.10
Given that current economies and markets are characterized as being highly competitive and fast changing, the potential ranges of actions and demands for change that organizations face are very wide according to Kotter.11 It is therefore a very broad field and approaches can differ from company to company. In the end, organizational change cannot be separated from organizational strategy or vice versa. It can provide different benefits, such as improvement of competitiveness, improvement of financial performance, enhancement of customer but also employee satisfaction, but most important it can lead to sustainability of an organization. Planning and managing organizational change is therefore crucial to any organization to ensure its survival and success but it is also still a challenge for many managers, despite the generated knowledge on change management.12
Organizational change is not something that happens surprisingly and which can be done within a day. There are different forces that trigger first awareness and then action for it. But one has to look out for the signals that show the need to change in this increasingly dynamic environment. Signals can involve moves by competitors (such as price dumping), new regulations, new inventions but also the organizations own failures in procedure. Understanding the drivers for change is critical as they form an overall context within which any organizational change occurs. In other words signals are the motives for change and create a “change effort’s relevance”13. Involving everyone and helping them understand the reasons for change will minimize the risk of resistance. Helping them understand the bigger picture of what is driving the change will most likely support them to adapt to the situation and commit to it14.
The following chapter focuses on the causes and contexts of change.
The Drivers of Change Model by Dean Anderson and Linda Ackerman Anderson (figure 1) clarifies what initiates the need for change in organizations. It states that there are seven drivers of change: environment, marketplace, business requirements, organizational imperatives, cultural constraints, leader and employee behavior, as well as leader and employee mindset.15
illustration not visible in this excerpt
Figure 1: Drivers of Change Model16
The model (figure 1) demonstrates that the need for change is influenced by the dynamics of internal and external factors and that each factor is dependent on its predecessor and calls forth change in the next. The chain begins with dynamic shifts in the environment (social, economic, political, legal, governmental, technological, demographical, natural environment), which lead to new requirements for success in an organization’ marketplace. As an example, the environment of the Berlin real estate market is shifting from a “tenant market” (high supply of apartments, decreasing market price) to an “owner market” (housing shortage and increased demand lead to higher market prices). Reasons for this include more and more international investors entering the market but also because Berlin is becoming more attractive to non-citizen as a place to live. In order to keep up with their needs, many property management companies have been founded in the past four years, which are now competing with each other. To survive in the long-term, companies have to learn to cope with this changing environment. New customer requirements (from investors and tenants) anticipate a need for new business strategies, which again requires changes in the organization (like changes to structure, Information Technology (IT) systems, process optimization or launching new technology) to serve the needs. These organizational changes can have a major impact on the organizational culture. In order to fully realize the benefits of the changes and to implement new businesses strategies, the way people operate also has to change. This cultural change strives for changes in behavior and thinking of leaders and employees.17
Figure 1 shows what triggers change and that these move from external (environment, market, business, organization) to internal drivers (culture, way of thinking). External drivers should be more familiar to leaders, while the internal drivers are new to most of them.18
Throughout the thesis, information on how to address the drivers for change is analyzed.
This chapter uses existing definitions of change from relevant literature. When attempting to manage change, one should keep in mind that changes are not of any pure form but a mixture of diverse types, in other words differ from each other.19
Like the ways for how to define change management, types of organizational change can be viewed from different perspectives. Some literature distinguishes between “planned and unplanned”20, others between “incremental and strategic”21 and still others between “discontinuous, smooth incremental and bumpy incremental”22.
In addition to it, Linda Ackerman Anderson defined three most prevalent types of organizational change occurring in organizations: developmental change, transitional change and transformational change. These will be described in more detail, as they seem more relevant to the topic of this thesis (see appendix 1).23
Developmental changes, also called first order changes, are small alterations that adjust existing skills, knowledge, methods, performance standards or conditions to future needs. They represent an improvement in the present situation, but keep the general working framework. As they ensure continuity and greater satisfaction through improvement, they keep employees motivated during the process of change and therefore have just little impact on them. Examples of developmental changes are enhancement of customer service or duplication of successful products.24
The second type of change, namely transitional change, is more complex than the first one. Rather than improving a current state, transitional change seeks to achieve a desired state that is different from the existing one by replacing it. According to Beckhard and Harris (1987), it is episodic, predictable and more radical to people, as they need to let go of old habits and gain new knowledge.25 Examples of transitional changes are corporate reorganizations, mergers, acquisition, implementation of new technology, or creation of a new product.26
Transformational or strategic change is the third type and can be understood as the most complex one, which can be more challenging and yet rewarding for organizations when led well. This type differs from developmental and transitional change. In comparison to the other forms, transformations are considered radical and often drastic. They do not just involve a “shift of strategy, structure, systems, processes or technology” but also require a “shift of culture, behavior and mindset”.27 It is common for transitional and transformation change to occur parallel. Mostly when companies face pressure from the external environment, such as unexpected competition or lack of revenue, transformational change is necessary. As its outcome is unknown in the beginning of the process, it involves discontinuity and may need adjustment and correction during the course. This can give employees the impression that their job is unstable, which can cause insecurities and discomfort. To lead this kind of change and to reduce resistance, the highest level of leadership is needed.28
If organizations understand the type of change they are dealing with, the next step is to figure out how they can effectively lead it. There are various models and approaches that can help to manage organizational change. The next subchapters will deal with the answers what an organizational change model is and what the most common models used in organizations are.
According to Warner Burke organizational models for approaching change are like conceptual frameworks – they simplify through reducing the complex aspects of organizations into manageable portions. In addition they focus by determining the most important portions. In other words, organizational models help organizations to reorganize themselves while promoting understanding and promoting action for change. Eventually they can reveal the triggers for change, how it will occur and what can happen through its process.29
There are many perspectives for handling change in the literature, even though there is no universal best practice. Each model is characterized by a different ideology and diverse assumptions, some changes are planned others unintended.30 Although, as mentioned in the introduction, the main focus will be on Kotter’s eight-step-model, others are worth consideration. Therefore, one should at least know the most common change models relevant in the framework of this thesis. The first of which is Kurt Lewin’s Three Step Model (figure 2). In 1947, he developed a three-stage theory of change commonly referred to as Unfreeze-Change-Refreeze 31, which has served as a starting point for other authors who have created their own models later. 32
illustration not visible in this excerpt
Figure 2: Lewin’s Three Step Change Model 33
The first stage – unfreeze is based on preparing an organization to accept the necessity of change and to ensure that employees are motivated to move from an existing way to a desired new state. This requires their openness. This stage of change refers to taking action and involving employees in the change process through effective communication. Refreezing aims to ensure that the change becomes permanent and that stability returns. 34
Other change models worth to be mentioned are Schein’s organizational model (1992) and Nadler and Tushman’s congruence model (1998)35, Burke and Litwin’s model (1992)36, Colin Carnall’s change management model (1990)37 as well as Bullock and Batten’s integrative model for planned change (1985)38. The choice of which model to apply in organizational change management processes has to be made by each organization depending on their circumstances and the components important for the desired output.39
Kotter’s eight-step model highlights, in comparison to other models, the importance of communication during the change process from a leadership and management perspective. It is one of the most popular and well-known models in the change management field. John P. Kotter (born 1947), professor at Harvard Business School40, developed and published this model in his book ‘leading change’ in 1995. In his study, derived from his consulting practices with more than 100 different organizations41, he identified eight common problems that were most prominent and resulted in failing change initiatives.42 Therefore, he created an eight-step-model that addresses these issues to help implementing successful transformations. The eight steps are called create a sense of urgency (1), form a powerful guiding coalition (2), create a vision and strategy for change (3), communicate the vision (4), empower employees for broad-based action (5), create short-term wins (6), consolidate gains (7) and produce more change and anchor the changes in corporate culture (8).43
illustration not visible in this excerpt
Figure 3: Kotter’s Eight-Step Change Model44
To sum up the description of organizational change models, the eight steps according to Kotter’s approach will be discussed further in the following subchapters. To demonstrate the use of this model, it will be applied to a particular change situation in the later executed analysis of a management buy-out in a real estate company.
Whether it is restoring a firm, a merger and acquisition, or working to be the industry leader, to implement change it can be helpful, if the whole company cooperates and is willing to make sacrifices. Developing a sense of urgency around the need for change is therefore crucial and may help to obtain the initial motivation to get things moving. Due to complacency, which can have various sources (see figure 2); the danger is that companies fail to create a sense of urgency.45
illustration not visible in this excerpt
Figure 4: Sources of Complacency by John P. Kotter46
With a low urgency, people (especially with enough power and credibility) will not see the need to change and may not be interested in working on the problem nor will they communicate a vision.47
Creating a sense of urgency is not simply about showing employees poor net income and declining market shares statistics, conducting jobs cuts or reorganizing departments to see this urgency. Instead it is about open, honest and convincing communication about what is happening in the marketplace, with increasing competition, and within the company. To create a sense of urgency often bold actions are demanded like moving into a new building with lower rents, cutting of staff or reducing wages for a certain period. If many people start talking about the intended change, the importance can build and feed on itself.48
To sum it up, companies need to identify potential threats and develop scenarios predicting the future. They need to examine opportunities and risks and start having open, honest discussions as well as giving convincing reasons to get people talking and thinking. Sometimes it is also necessary to get input from outsiders, like stakeholders or customers to strengthen the argument for change.49
As it is necessary to convince people that change is needed, it often takes strong leadership and visible support from key people within an organization. Thinking one person can manage change on its own, is a very dangerous disbelief according to Kotter. Therefore, he prompts the question in his book ‘leading change’, how someone can develop the right vision, communicate that to a large number of people, eliminate all doubts and resistance, generate short term wins, lead and manage dozens of change projects and anchor new approaches in the organization’s culture50. Accordingly, an influential guiding team, whose power comes from a variety of sources, needs to be identified by the manager. It should be a good mix of people from different departments and different levels, who have a good expertise in their field, own a good reputation, who are trusted and who have shared objectives needs. Once formed, this team needs to continue to build urgency.51
When people think about change, they probably have various ideas and possible solutions ready. But that people can grasp these easily and remember them, one has to link these to an overall vision. A clear concept can help everyone understand why change is crucial, which actions need to be taken and what the organization is trying to achieve with it. When people see for themselves and know the direction for change, then the “authoritarian decree”52 they're given, tends to make more sense. Therefore it can be said that a vision can bring order to chaos through coordinating the actions, which minimizes risks of “time-consuming clutter”53 like disagreements, confusion and even resistance. According to Kotter, effective visions should consequently have at least six key characteristics: imaginable; attract the long-term interest of stakeholders, such as employees; they should be realistic; focused on needed action; flexible to allow initiative; and easy to communicate.54
Developing a good vision is not as easy as it seems to some managers. Therefore, it always starts with a first draft, where central values get determined. This will be discussed with the guiding team, which modifies the original idea together. However, as many ideas come together it can always get confusing and emotional during the process – one element will be excluded, another will be added. It is necessary to always focus on the sense of urgency and to establish trust and commitment, which makes teamwork successful. One should keep in mind that visions do not emerge within a day and that it can take months to get it right. Once the end product is created, which should be communicable in five minutes, it shall combine the before mentioned characteristics.55
Gaining understanding and commitment to new courses is never an easy task for an organization. The created vision can determine the success of organizations but it will also be challenging. The message should therefore be direct and simple and the usage of metaphors or examples could help to make the vision more imaginable. It will probably have strong competition from other day-to-day communications within the company, so managers need to communicate it frequently and powerfully, and embed it within group meetings, posters, memos or informal one-to-one talk.56
Naturally many questions arise when hearing of change of directions at ones workplace. Mostly it will come down to: How much will that affect me? What will that mean to my colleagues or the organization? Will redundancies be involved? Do I need to get used to new processes or programs? What are the alternatives for me? These concerns and anxieties should be addressed openly and honestly. Under-communication can be dangerous for any change process.57
To effectively communicate the vision and to be heard, the management and/or guiding team should not just convene special meetings, but also use every other chance to spread the news through media such as memos, intranet, posters or informal one-to-one talks.58
The vision should also be applied to all aspects of the operation when making decisions and solving problems. The management and/or guiding team should keep it fresh on their employees’ minds so that they will remember and respond to it. It is important to lead by example, as actions are perceived to be stronger than words. What one does is far more important – and believable – than what one says. Senior management and guiding teams should demonstrate the kind of behavior they want from others and lead them through the change.59
One individual cannot implement major transformation; it rather needs the help of many people to be involved. Yet not everyone is willing to assist, if they have the feeling they are powerless, but also when processes or structures stop action being taken. Numerous obstacles, such as structures, skills, systems and supervisors, can block employees from creating change (figure 3).60
illustration not visible in this excerpt
Figure 5: Barriers to Empowerment61
That is where empowerment is needed. People need to know the vision; they need reassurance on a constant basis and from time to time guidance in the right direction. This might demand a lot of communication through supervisor/bosses to empower employees, some training to adapt to the new situation, development of new reward systems and also different work structures. Management should therefore continually check for structural barriers that get in the way and remove obstacles.62 Occasionally companies get blind to their organizational structures, which possibly have been there for many years. Some of them might be aware that a redesign is needed, but do not know where to start. Often it can help to hire change agents to get a different and external perspective63. With the right structure, training, systems and empowering supervisors, many employees can be mobilized to take action in a change process.64
Major changes consume a lot of time. During the process of change, managers as well as leaders have to face supporters, skeptics and nonbelievers. Nothing motivates all three types more than success and evidence that sacrifices are worthwhile. Therefore, it is important to create short-term targets instead of just one long-term goal. This does increase the pressure on one side, but keeps up the urgency for change on the other. Short-term targets need to be achievable, with little room for failure. Each "win" that is produced, motivates employees and reduces risks to be hurt in the progress by skeptics and nonbelievers.65
Kotter argues that many change initiatives fail because success is declared too early.66 He even goes further and reasons, “Whenever you let up before the job is done, critical momentum can be lost and regression may follow”67. Real changes often take a long time. First performance improvements can therefore be seen as only the beginning of what needs to be done to achieve long-term change. Analyzing what went right and what can be improved can help to keep employees energized and motivated to continue building on the momentum. It is also a good way to keep urgency up.68
Finally, to make any change sustainable, it should become part of the core of organizations. According to Kotter, cultural change in organizations can only happen after management has changed its employee’s action, after they see the benefit from this new behavior, and after they made the connection between new actions and the improvement of performance.69 Hence, corporate culture often determines what gets done, so the norms and values behind the vision must be visible in day-to-day work. Companies should make continuous efforts to ensure that the change is seen in every aspect of the organization, even though it sometimes may involve turnover. It will require a lot of talking to instruct and support people. Telling success stories about the change process can help employees see the validity of new behaviors. Especially when hiring and training new staff, ideals and values should be shared from the first moment on to make sure that the new culture will continue to grow.70
Kotter’s model is easy to understand, and can give guidance since it is made of clear steps.71 It focuses on the role of communication as well as leadership, which other models like Lewin’s did not consider, during a change process. It is mostly applicable in organizations with classical hierarchies when change is implemented top-down, such as when management made the decision to change. Above that it is a linear model that assumes predictability and manageability of change processes.72
Nevertheless there are also weaknesses; such as it is hard to change direction once the change process has begun. One should also bear in mind that it can require a considerable amount of time to implement change using this model and that in times of unplanned changes, an organization may lack of readiness and time. If one step is not followed through thoroughly it can lead to frustration of employees or failure of the change process.73 As it is top-down it does not give room for any participation by employees. It is fair to conclude that the model is not specific enough and has a lack of managerial strategy on making the vision a reality and to realizing the change.74
Due to the drawn conclusion, Kotter’s model appears to be the most adequate model to analyze the change process at the Berlin based Real Estate Company.
1 Kotter (2008), p. 132.
2 Anderson & Ackerman Anderson (2010), p. 60.
3 Harigopal (2001), p. 27.
4 Harigopal (2001), p. 13.
5 Lewis (2011), p. 23.
6 Helms Mills, Dye & Mills (2009), p. 10.
7 Senior & Fleming, Organisational Change (2005), p. 35.
8 Lewis (2011), p. 22.
9 Helms Mills, Dye & Mills (2009), p. 9.
10 Anderson & Ackerman Anderson (2010), p. 33.
11 Kotter (1996), pp. 55.
12 Harigopal (2001), p. 13.
13 Anderson & Ackermann Anderson (2010), p. 31.
14 Ibid., p. 31.
15 Ibid., p. 32.
16 Ibid., p. 33.
17 Anderson & Ackerman Anderson (2010), p. 32.
18 Ibid., p. 33.
19 Ibid., p. 51.
20 Lewis (2011), p. 37.
21 Kreitner (2009), p. 429.
22 Senior & Swailes (2010), p. 34 .
23 Anderson & Ackerman Anderson (2010), p. 51.
24 Ibid., pp. 52-55.
25 Ibid., pp. 56-57.
26 Ibid., pp. 56.
27 Ibid., p. 60.
28 Anderson & Ackerman Anderson (2010), pp. 59-68.
29 Burke (2011), pp. 25-26.
30 Harigopal (2001), p. 51.
31 Harigopal (2001), p. 50.
32 Helms Mills, Dye, & Mills (2009), p. 50.
33 Burnes, (2009), p. 341.
34 Helms Mills, Dye, & Mills, 2009), pp. 48-49.
35 Cameron & Green (2012), pp. 61, 130-133.
36 Burke (2011), p. 212.
37 Cameron & Green (2012), p. 138.
38 Harigopal (2001), p. 58.
39 Cameron & Green (2012), p. 148.
40 Kotter (2012), binding.
41 O'Sullivan, Green & Cameron (2012), p. 126.
42 Kotter (2012), p. 16.
43 Ibid., Preface.
44 Kotter & Cohen (2002).
45 Kotter (2012), pp. 37-43.
46 Ibid., p. 42.
47 Ibid., p. 36.
48 Kotter (2012), pp. 37-43.
49 Ibid., pp. 37-52.
50 Ibid., p. 53.
51 Ibid., pp. 52-53.
52 Ibid., p. 70.
53 Kotter (2012), p. 71.
54 Ibid., p. 74.
55 Ibid., pp. 82-85.
56 Ibid., p. 95.
57 Ibid, pp. 87-95.
58 Kotter (2012), p. 95.
59 Ibid., pp. 97-99.
60 Ibid., p. 106.
62 Kotter (2012), pp. 105-106.
63 Ibid., pp. 106-110.
64 Ibid., p. 119.
65 Ibid., pp. 121-135.
66 Ibid., pp. 137-138.
67 Ibid., p. 139.
68 Ibid., pp. 138-151.
69 Kotter (2012), pp. 164-165.
70 Ibid., pp. 164-166.
71 Cameron & Green (2012), p. 129.
72 Ibid., p. 148.
73 Kotter (2012), p. 26.
74 Cameron & Green (2012), p. 127.
Masterarbeit, 235 Seiten
Masterarbeit, 127 Seiten
Masterarbeit, 151 Seiten
Masterarbeit, 81 Seiten
Diplomarbeit, 179 Seiten
Bachelorarbeit, 70 Seiten
Bachelorarbeit, 32 Seiten
Masterarbeit, 151 Seiten
Masterarbeit, 81 Seiten
Bachelorarbeit, 32 Seiten
Der GRIN Verlag hat sich seit 1998 auf die Veröffentlichung akademischer eBooks und Bücher spezialisiert. Der GRIN Verlag steht damit als erstes Unternehmen für User Generated Quality Content. Die Verlagsseiten GRIN.com, Hausarbeiten.de und Diplomarbeiten24 bieten für Hochschullehrer, Absolventen und Studenten die ideale Plattform, wissenschaftliche Texte wie Hausarbeiten, Referate, Bachelorarbeiten, Masterarbeiten, Diplomarbeiten, Dissertationen und wissenschaftliche Aufsätze einem breiten Publikum zu präsentieren.
Kostenfreie Veröffentlichung: Hausarbeit, Bachelorarbeit, Diplomarbeit, Dissertation, Masterarbeit, Interpretation oder Referat jetzt veröffentlichen!