Bottom-up constructions of top-down transformational change: Change leader interventions and qualitative schema change in a spatially differentiated technically-oriented public Professional Bureaucracy A thesis presented to QUEENSLAND UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY In fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY By Robert McLeay Thompson B.A. (Hons) Psych. (U. of Q.), MPsychApp (U. of Q.) School of Management Faculty of Business Queensland University of Technology 2006
325
Embed
Bottom-up constructions of top-down transformational ...eprints.qut.edu.au/16425/1/Robert_Thompson_Thesis.pdf · Bottom-up constructions of top-down transformational change: Change
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Bottom-up constructions of top-down transformational change: Change leader
interventions and qualitative schema change in a spatially differentiated
technically-oriented public Professional Bureaucracy
A thesis presented to
QUEENSLAND UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY
In fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
By
Robert McLeay Thompson
B.A. (Hons) Psych. (U. of Q.), MPsychApp (U. of Q.)
School of Management
Faculty of Business
Queensland University of Technology
2006
i
ABSTRACT
In the face of knowledge deficits in and poor outcome assessments of Organisation
Transformation (OT), there is a need for a better understanding of the relationship
between change leader interventions and qualitative organisational schema change,
the collective knowledge structures that must be replaced or significantly elaborated
if OT is to be realised.
Previous research on this relationship has (a) focused on imposed structural
interventions and given little attention to large-scale human process interventions,
(b) given little attention to the radical structural interventions frequently involved in
the transformation of public organisations, (c) given little scrutiny to how
organisational schema have been conceptualised, (d) given little scrutiny to recent
propositions on schema change dynamics that may be contentious, and (e) given
little consideration to the change management contexts in which leader influence
may be neutralised.
In the light of these gaps in the literature, this thesis investigates, from the
perspective of change recipients, the relationship between complex large-scale
change leader interventions and qualitative organisational schema change in change
management contexts thought to be inimical to leader influence. In particular, how
efficacious are change leader interventions in realising qualitative organisational
schema change in such contexts?
An interpretive longitudinal case study design was used to address this question.
The case organisation is a spatially differentiated technically-oriented public
Professional Bureaucracy located in Queensland. In this context, this thesis
investigates, over a three-year period, the creation and evolution of three schema
change contexts, or change trajectories, created by two temporally disconnected yet
Data collection techniques included focus group interviews, semi-structured
interviews, and secondary sources. Data were collected from several sites, including
Head Office functions and Regional and District offices, across Queensland. Data
were collected on four occasions across the three-year period from early 2000 to late
2002.
The results reveal that (a) while there are no panaceas, public managers need more
sophisticated intervention theories based on a knowledge of the relative efficacy of
different interventions rather than relying on, predominantly, structural interventions,
(b) viewing organisational schema in one-dimensional rather than multidimensional
terms masks both the complexity of organisational schema change and the possibility
of partial rather than configurational schema change, (c) while inter-schema conflict
or dialectical processes were apparent, successful schema change was better
explained by teleological processes than by dialectical processes, and (d) change
leaders can have a powerful influence on OT in change management contexts
thought to be inimical to change leader influence yet their influence is linked to high
investments of time and effort.
Keywords: Organisational Transformation; Leadership; Schema change; Public
Sector
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
STATEMENT OF ORIGINAL AUTHORSHIP ...............................................................................viii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................................................................. ix TABLE OF CONTENTS .....................................................................................................................iii LIST OF TABLES ...............................................................................................................................vi LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................vii ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................................ i CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW ........................................................................... 1
INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................... 1 THE RESEARCH PROBLEM ............................................................................................................ 6 THEORETICAL CONTEXT ............................................................................................................... 7 RATIONALE/JUSTIFICATION ....................................................................................................... 12 METHOD ......................................................................................................................................... 15 OVERVIEW OF THE THESIS ......................................................................................................... 16 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................. 17
OT IN PUBLIC ORGANISATIONS .......................................................................................... 23 Summary and critique ............................................................................................................... 30
ORGANISATIONAL SCHEMA AND OT ......................................................................................... 39 SCHEMA CHANGE THEORY ......................................................................................................... 42
Conflict Model of schema change ............................................................................................. 42 Paradox and contradiction ........................................................................................................ 46 Iterative Comparison theory of schema change ...................................................................... 50 Disengaged schema..................................................................................................................... 52
ORGANISATIONAL CONTEXT....................................................................................................... 54 SUMMARY AND CRITIQUE ........................................................................................................... 57
CHAPTER 3: METHODS .................................................................................................................. 61 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................. 61 CRITERIA FOR SELECTING METHODS ...................................................................................... 61 RESEARCH STRATEGY .................................................................................................................. 63 RESEARCH DESIGN....................................................................................................................... 66
THE CASE STUDY DESIGN ................................................................................................... 66 SINGLE CASE DESIGN................................................................................................................... 69 LONGITUDINAL RESEARCH ........................................................................................................ 70 QUALITATIVE DATA ...................................................................................................................... 71 DATA COLLECTION STRATEGIES ............................................................................................... 73 INTERVIEWS ................................................................................................................................. 73
RESEARCHER-RESPONDENT RELATIONSHIP........................................................................... 76 SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................... 77 RESEARCH PROCEDURE.............................................................................................................. 78
CASE SELECTION ................................................................................................................... 78 INTRA-CASE SITE SAMPLING ............................................................................................ 81 SAMPLING PARTICIPANTS WITHIN SITES..................................................................... 82
DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURE .............................................................................................. 87 FOCUS GROUP PROCEDURE............................................................................................... 87 Focus group questions................................................................................................................ 87 Focus group procedure .............................................................................................................. 88
INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................... 126 THE INTERVENTIONS.................................................................................................................. 126 A NEW VISION ............................................................................................................................ 128 LEADING-MANAGING FRAMEWORK.................................................................................... 129 CREATING A SUPPORTIVE RELATIONAL ENVIRONMENT .............................................. 131 RESULTS ....................................................................................................................................... 133
FIRST ORDER ANALYSIS.................................................................................................... 133 Leader vision............................................................................................................................. 133 The Three Frames and the Five Signposts ............................................................................. 136 Relationship Frame .................................................................................................................. 139 Change process ......................................................................................................................... 148
CONTENT CHANGE.............................................................................................................. 166 Organisational purpose ................................................................................166 Relational environment ................................................................................169 Organisation redesign ..................................................................................173 Workloads ....................................................................................................177 Reduction in career and development opportunities....................................178
CHANGE MANAGEMENT PROCESS ................................................................................ 179 Regression....................................................................................................187
SECOND-ORDER ANALYSIS .................................................................................................... 189 From top-down techno-structural change to (remains unchanged)........................................ 200
Visioning intervention ............................................................................................................... 259 Leading-managing process interventions................................................................................. 260
PATTERN OF SCHEMA CHANGE ACROSS CONTEXTS ........................................................... 264 SCHEMA CHANGE DYNAMICS................................................................................................... 265
SCHEMA CHANGE................................................................................................................ 267 Implicit vision ........................................................................................................................... 268 Facilitates achievement of critical tasks ................................................................................. 270 Feelings of confidence and competence .................................................................................. 272
POLARISATION........................................................................................................................... 273 Viability of the alternative schema ......................................................................................... 274 Threat to engineering excellence/professional identity ......................................................... 275 Increasing rather than decreasing ambiguity ........................................................................ 276
LACK OF CHANGE ..................................................................................................................... 276 Perceived paradox and contradiction ..................................................................................... 277 Perceived loss of performance................................................................................................. 278 Perceived loss of personal and professional development opportunities ............................. 278
UNREALISED CHANGE ............................................................................................................. 279 Complexity of alternative schema ............................................................................................. 280 Low perceived control ............................................................................................................... 280 Time pressure and workloads ................................................................................................... 281 Opportunities for interaction .................................................................................................... 281 Spatial differentiation................................................................................................................ 281 CHANGE MANAGEMENT CONTEXT.................................................................................. 283
CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................... 286 CHAPTER 9: CONTRIBUTION AND CONCLUSION ................................................................. 287
INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................... 287 CONTRIBUTION ........................................................................................................................... 293 LIMITATIONS OF THE RESEARCH ............................................................................................ 296 FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS ............................................................................................ 298 PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS ....................................................................................................... 299 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................... 300
References
vi
LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1: Definitions of key concepts Table 3.1: The logic of four research strategies Table 3.1: Assumptions of the interpretive research strategy Table 3.2: Yin’s contingency theory of research design Table 3.3: Key events in the case organisation’s change history Table 3.4: Age of length of service of respondents Table 3.5: Respondent gender Table 3.6: Employment classification of respondents Table 3.7: Summary of focus groups and interviews conducted Table 3.8: Focus group questions by round Table 4.1: Pre-existing organisational schema Table 5.1: Qualitative schema change Leadership Change Trajectory Table 6.1: Qualitative schema change Corporate Change Trajectory Table 7.1: Qualitative schema change Commercial Change Trajectory
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1: Diagnostic categories Figure 2.2: A model of Organisational Transformation Figure 2.3: Bartunek’s Conflict Model of schema change Figure 2.4: Lewis’ (2000) Paradox Framework Figure 2.5: Labianca, Gray & Brass’ (2000) Iterative Comparison theory of schema
change Figure 2.6: Summary of the relationship between change leader interventions and
organisational schema change Figure 3.1: Spatial dispersion of the case organisation Figure 3.2: Overview of the research Figure 5.1: The Three Frames; Aligning for success Figure 5.2: The Five Signposts of Success
viii
STATEMENT OF ORIGINAL AUTHORSHIP
The work contained in this thesis has not been previously submitted to meet
requirements for an award at this or any other higher education institution. To the
best of my knowledge and belief, the thesis contains no material previously
published or written by another person except where due reference is made.
Signature:
Date:
ix
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to acknowledge the support of and express my appreciation to the
managers and staff of the Queensland Department of Main Roads. Despite facing
high demands on their time, they generously agreed to attend interviews across the
period of the research. In particular, I would like to thank Christine Flynn, Jolanta
Szymczyk-Ellis, and Paul Connors who so ably facilitated contacts with Main
Roads. Your support was invaluable.
I would like to acknowledge the managers and staff of Main Roads on another count.
Change of the scale being undertaken is fraught, yet collective efforts to realise
organisational transformation were often inspirational. There was a degree of
commitment to transparency, openness and learning to “walk the talk” that sets the
organisation apart.
I would also like to express my thanks and gratitude to my supervisor, Professor
Neal Ryan. You helped in really important ways Neal, even if the results of your
help were not always obvious. And I would like to thank Adjunct Professor Dianne
Lewis. Thanks Di; I appreciated the time and support you gave me. Also thanks to
Leeanne Macbeth without whose help the process would have been even more
difficult.
My thanks also to the Main Roads Corporate Change project team, Professor Kerry
Brown, Dr. Jennifer Waterhouse, and Michele Little
And my love to Sarah and David; you supported me in ways that matter most.
For Jean and Alex
1
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
INTRODUCTION
Under the auspices of New Public Management (Dunleavy & Hood, 1994:543;
Hood, 1991), there has been a fundamental re-evaluation of traditional assumptions
about the role of public organisations and how these organisations should function
(Osborne & Gaebler, 1992; Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2000). As a consequence, managers
of many traditional public organisations face imperatives to transform (Young,
Gilmore, Shea, & Useem, 1997; Porras & Robertson, 1992) literature on OT is
pessimistic about the likelihood of success of these initiatives.
Several assessments suggest that about 70% of change efforts fail (M. Beer, R. A.
Eisenstat, & B. Spector, 1990; Beer & Nohria, 2000a). Porras and Robertson (1992)
reported, based on a meta-analysis of a large number of change studies, that 38% of
change efforts produced positive effects on key dependent variables, 52.5% show no
change and 9.5% showed a negative effect on change variables. Successful
transformations have been reported (Ashburner, Ferlie, & Fitzgerald, 1996; Young,
2000), yet by most accounts such reports are the exception rather than the rule.
Bate, Khan, & Pyle (2000:445) sum up the state of organisational change
management effectiveness:
As large-scale strategic change has become a major preoccupation in
contemporary management, so too has the sense of disappointment and
diminishing returns that all too often accompanies the change process.
During the 1990s, organizations in the commercial, public, and not-for-profit
sectors have experimented with and frequently failed to secure a sustainable
benefit from a variety of strategic change initiatives. They have been
restructuring, re-engineering, and refocusing but never quite realising the
gains they must have expected from their (sometimes huge) human and
financial investment in change.
In the face of such conclusions, research on unresolved gaps in the literature on OT
becomes more necessary as increasing numbers of public managers confront the task
of transforming their organisations.
14
Link to real world problem
The research is also justified on the grounds that it is directly linked to an explicit
concern of public managers. Managers of many public sectors across the world
confront the task of transforming organisations to better meet contemporary demands
(Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2000). For example, the Queensland Government has
indicated that one of its most significant challenges in reshaping the Queensland
public service:
Is how to manage the transition of the public service workforce through the
reshaping process (Queensland Government, 2003a).
This thesis has the potential to contribute to a better understanding of this process by
identifying factors that facilitate or hinder organisational schema change in the
context of the transformation of spatially differentiated technically-oriented public
Professional Bureaucracies.
Access opportunity
This research can also be justified on the grounds of access opportunity. Change
leaders seeking to transform their organisations often find it in their interests to be
more circumspect than open to external scrutiny; the risks and the potential for error
in Organisational Transformation are high. For example, Pollitt & Bouckaert (2000)
argued that:
It is usually harder for academics to obtain systematic information about
how reforms are being put into practice than about what the reforms are.
Governments are frequently keen to announce what they are going to do but
are understandably less energetic in offering a blow-by-blow account of how
things are going (90).
This researcher has had extremely good access to a technically-oriented public
Professional Bureaucracy over a period of three years. The organisation has been
undergoing transformational change for more than a decade. More recently, change
leaders have intervened in the organisation in ways that have had a significant and
ongoing impact on the organisation.
15
As a part of this process, organisational managers explicitly committed themselves to
demonstrating leadership, learning and transparency. The values driving change in
the case organisation facilitated data collection and analysis.
Summary
This research is justified, then, on the grounds that (a) there is a need to elucidate
theoretical issues and gaps in the organisational schema change literature,
particularly given poor outcome assessments of transformational change initiatives,
(b) the research is linked to a real world problem and there is an expectation that the
results of this research will contribute to better transformational change strategies,
and (c) there was an opportunity to access an organisation undergoing
transformational change
METHOD
To study the relationship between change leader interventions and organisational
schema change an interpretive, longitudinal single case study design was employed.
The case organisation is a spatially differentiated technically-oriented public
Professional Bureaucracy located in Queensland, an organisational form with
attributes that tend to make it inimical to change leader influence (Kerr & Jermier,
1978; Mintzberg, 1989).
Managers and staff at all levels agreed to participate in the study. Indeed, the
organisation was explicitly committed to providing leadership, being open and
transparent and developing its own transformational change capabilities. In
consequence, the organisation agreed to provide high levels of access for data
collection. The primary data collection methods used was focus group interviews
and semi-structured interviews.
16
OVERVIEW OF THE THESIS
Chapter 2: Gaps in the existing literature: This chapter develops the arguments
outlined in summary form in Chapter 1 by analysing the literature on selected and
unresolved research issues in the relationship between change leader interventions
and organisational schema change in organisational contexts.
Chapter 3: Methods: This chapter proposes a method of investigating these
unresolved issues in the relationship between transformational interventions and
organisational schema change. In particular, the research employs a longitudinal
single case study design.
Chapter 4: Pre-existing schema: When transformational change interventions are
implemented, organisational members often seek to understand these changes using
pre-existing schemata. This chapter identifies this pre-existing schema as a
prerequisite to better understanding organisational members’ interpretations and
constructions of transformational interventions addressed in Chapters 5, 6, and 7.
Chapter 5: The Leadership Change Trajectory: This chapter investigates the
relationship between a large-scale human process intervention and qualitative
schema change. The change involved the development of a new concept of leading
and managing. This intervention is unique in the schema change literature: previous
research has focused on structural interventions.
Chapter 6: The Corporate Change Trajectory: This chapter explores the
relationship between change leader interventions and organisational schema change
in one of two schema change contexts created by an imposed radical structural
intervention. The shift involved the development of a strategy-driven organisation.
Chapter 7: The Commercial Change Trajectory: This chapter explores the
relationship between change leader interventions and organisational schema change
in the second schema change context created by an imposed structural intervention
which truncated the organisation. The change involved a shift to a profit-driven
provider organisation.
17
Chapter 8: Schema change: An integrative analysis of factors: This chapter
provides an integrative analysis of schema change in the three contexts addressed in
Chapters 5-7. The chapter explores the implications of change leaders’ intervention
theory and identifies those factors that explain the success or lack of success of
schema change in the case organisation and draws conclusions about the efficacy of
interventions designed to transform the case organisation.
Chapter 9: Conclusion and contribution: This chapter specifies the contribution
that this research has made to the literature on intervention theory and organisational
schema change. The chapter also outlines the limitations of the study, provides
directions for future research, and specifies implications for practice.
CONCLUSION
This chapter has argued that managers of many traditional public organisations face
a transformational change imperative; they are expected to transform themselves and
their organisations to achieve better alignment with contemporary and emerging
public policy contexts. Yet the knowledge base on OT is relatively limited, the
probability of success relatively low, and change management contexts vary in terms
of their openness to change leader influence. A significant focus of change leader
interventions is the replacement or significant elaboration of organisational
members’ pre-existing knowledge structures, or schemata. Little attention has been
given to this issue in the public management literature. Consequently, there is a need
to explicate the relationship between change leader interventions and qualitative
organisational schema change in contexts thought to be inimical to leader influence.
A better understanding of this relationship contributes to decision making based on
the efficacy of change leader interventions for qualitative schema change.
18
Table 1.1: Definition of key concepts
Intervention A set of structured activities in which selected
organisational units (target groups or individuals) engage in a task or a sequence of tasks with the goals of organisational improvement and individual development (French & Bell, 1999:145)
Large-scale human process interventions An intervention directed at improving such processes as organisational problem solving, leadership, visioning and task accomplishments between groups for a major subsystem, or for an entire organisation (Waddell et al., 2004:232)
Structural intervention or techno-structural interventions
Structural interventions include changes in how the overall of the organisation is divided into units, who reports to whom, methods of control, the spatial arrangements of equipment and people, work flow arrangements, and changes in communication and authority (French & Bell, 1999:220)
Large-group interventions Interventions for involving the whole system: they engage a critical mass of the people affected by change, both inside the organisation (employees and management) and outside it (suppliers and customers) (Bunker & Alban, 1997:xv)
Intervention theory Specifies when, where, and how to intervene so as to move the organisation closer to the ideal (Dunphy, 1996:543)
Efficacy of change leader interventions for achieving qualitative schema change
Derived from previous research and data: four inter-related elements were used to explore efficacy; (a) the intervention facilitates new schema development, (b) pre-existing schema has been replaced or significantly elaborated, and (c) interventions reinforce dynamics thought to underpin schema change, and (d) interventions are sensitive to change management context
Organisational schema A schema is the interpretive framework used by individuals to give meaning to observed objects, actions, and behaviours. Thus, a schema is used for processing information, and this includes scanning the environment, selecting stimuli (e.g., events, acts, and variables), measuring observed stimuli quantitatively (e.g., large or small) or qualitatively (e.g., good or bad), and either making decisions or storing information for later retrieval (Taylor and Crocker, 1981)
Table 1.1 continued Change leader substitute Characteristics of the individual subordinate, the
work task, or the organisation that prevent hierarchical leadership from affecting employee attitudes and/or behaviour and make such leadership unnecessary. Substitutes serve two functions: 1. They prevent a specific leadership behaviour from having an impact on employee attitudes and/or behaviour 2. They ‘replace’ the leader behaviour by having a direct impact of their own on these dependent variables (Kerr & Jermier, 1978:30)
Change Change is defined as a shift from a present state to a desired future state (Beckhard & Harris, 1987) (29). In this thesis, change involves a shift from a pre-existing organisational schema to a new organisational schema under the influence of change leader interventions
Teleological theory Assumes (1) an individual or group exists that acts as a singular, discrete entity, which engages in reflexively monitored action to socially construct and cognitively share a common end state or goal, (2) the entity may envision its end state of development before or after actions it may take, and the goal may be set explicitly or implicitly (Van de Ven & Poole, 1995:525).
Dialectical theory Assumes (1) at least two entities exist (each with its own discrete identity) that oppose or contradict one another, (2) the opposing entities must confront each other and engage in a conflict or struggle through some physical or social venue, in which the opposition plays itself out, (3) the outcome of the conflict must consist either of a new entity that is different from the previous two, or (in degenerate cases) the defeat of one entity by the other, or a stalemate among the entities (Van de Ven & Poole, 1995:525).
Juxtaposition-Relocation model Assumes that change leader interventions result in the juxtaposition of a new schema with a pre-existing schema. Subsequent interventions are designed to relocate organisational members from pre-existing to new schema (Labianca et al., 2000)
Disengagement-learning model Assumes that change leader interventions disengage organisational members from their pre-existing schema. Organisational members develop new schema on the basis of ongoing experience with changing conditions. There is no duality of schema (Balogun & Johnson, 2004)
Collective efficacy Collective efficacy is defined as a group’s shared belief in its conjoint capabilities to organise and execute the course of action required to produce given levels of attainment (Bandura, 1997:477)
20
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW
INTRODUCTION
In Chapter 1, it was argued that the investigation of four unresolved issues in the
literature on the relationship between change leader interventions and organisational
schema change will contribute to a better understanding of the efficacy of change
leader interventions in the context of OT. The core assumption of the research is that
transformation involves, at its core, the replacement or significant elaboration of
organisational member interpretive schema (Bartunek, 1993; Bartunek & Moch,
1987).
This chapter has two aims. First, the chapter analyses the existing literature on OT
in public organisations to establish the need for research on the relationship between
change leader interventions and organisational schema change. Second, the
literature on the relationship between change leader interventions and qualitative
schema change is reviewed as a basis for developing a framework to guide the
development of this thesis.
ORGANISATIONAL TRANSFORMATION (OT)
The concept of OT is problematic in that it has been defined in various and
sometimes contradictory ways (Camden-Anders, 2000; Tosey & Robinson, 2002).
While the debates reflected in this literature are important, they are outside the scope
of this thesis. For the purposes of this thesis, OT is defined as:
1998 Process intervention Vision & Three Frames 2001 Five Signposts &
“One Department” Chapter 5
Reframed Process Schema
2003
Reframed Organizational
Schema 2003
Reframed Organizational
Schema 2003
Integrative analysis Chapter 8
Contribution Chapter 9
Evolution of change content
schema & change process schema
Evolution of change content
schema & change process schema
87
DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURE
This section specifies the design of data collection techniques used to generate valid
data used for subsequent interpretation in terms of organisational schema and
organisational schema change.
While the aim was to conduct rounds of focus groups six months apart, this was not
always possible and focus groups were scheduled when most convenient for
participants. Focus groups were generally conducted over a 1.5 to 2 hour time frame
and interviews over approximately one hour. At least two researchers were always
present. It has been suggested that the optimum number of participants in focus
groups is between 6 and 12 (D. L. Morgan, 1997). The total number of focus
groups, focus group participants and interviews are summarised in Table 3.7.
FOCUS GROUP PROCEDURE
As discussed earlier in this chapter, the purpose of focus group interviews in this
research was to capture organisational member evolving interpretations,
constructions, evaluations, and perceptions of the transformational change process,
their sensemaking.
Focus group questions
The research questions posed to focus groups are provided in Table 3.8. As
discussed earlier in this chapter, question design provided respondents with
discretion, within the framework of the research, to decide what was salient from
their perspective. Consequently, questions were not asked, in the first instance,
about particular transformational change interventions. Where necessary, probe
questions were used for this purpose.
Consistent with the abductive-interpretive strategy outlined earlier in the chapter, the
questions were designed to access organisational members’ accounts of the
transformation of the case organisation. The questions gave respondents the
88
opportunity to reflect on the history of change in the organisation, current changes,
and predictions about where the changes were taking the organisation.
Questions in round 2 and 3 sought to capture similar insights into respondents’
accounts of change. However, these rounds differed from round 1 in that
respondents’ accounts of change communication were sought. It had become
apparent from round 1 data that change communication was an issue however it was
unclear what messages respondents were getting about change. This question was
designed to address this issue.
Round 4 questions provided respondents with an opportunity to identify current
changes and their impact but also for a more general reflection across the three years
of the change in Main Roads.
Focus group procedure
At the outset, the moderator introduced himself and explained the purpose of the
research. The purpose of the research was explained in terms of mapping
organisational member qualitative experience of change over a three-year period.
This information would be widely disseminated in report form across the
organisation and would also be available for the purposes of academic research.
Participants were advised that senior managers supported and were committed to the
research.
Participants had an opportunity to ask questions for clarification about any aspect of
the research. In the event that participants had questions following the interview, a
telephone contact number was provided. This contact opportunity was deemed
important in that interviews were conducted in various centres across the state where
ready access to the researcher was not possible.
Participants completed a questionnaire seeking demographic data. These data were
reported in Tables 3.4 – 3.6 in the previous section of this chapter.
89
Table 3.8: Focus group questions by round
ROUND 1 1. What has been the most significant change in Main Roads over the past
five years? 2. What is the most important change affecting Main Roads now? 3. We would like to discuss how change has affected, (1) your region, (2)
your work, and (3) you? 4. How will these changes position Main Roads for the future? 5. If you had one comment to make on change in Main Roads, what would
it be?
ROUND 2 1. How has the organisation changed in the past nine months? What have
been the successes and failures? 2. What messages are you currently getting about change in Main Roads?
How consistent are these messages with the changes that are actually occurring?
3. What sort of organisation would you hope to see in six months time? What does the organisation need to do over the next six months to achieve this?
4. If there is one story that characterises the culture of Main Roads now what would it be?
ROUND 3 1. How has the organisation changed since our last visit in May 2001? What
have been the successes and failures? 2. What messages are you currently receiving about change in Main Roads?
How consistent are these messages with the changes that are actually occurring?
3. What sort of organisation do you expect to see in five years time? What sort of organisation do you expect to see in two years time? What needs to be done to achieve or avoid this?
4. Who do you see as important or responsible for achieving change and why? What do you see as your role in the future of the organisation?
ROUND 4 1. What have been the changes over the past six months in Main Roads? 2. Reflecting on the changes over the past three years, what are the main
messages you have received about culture change in Main Roads? How consistent have these messages been with the changes that are actually occurring?
3. Describe the culture of Main Roads now. How does the culture differ from three years ago? If there is one story that characterises the culture of Main Roads now what would it be?
90
The participants were informed that participation in the focus group was voluntary.
No participant left a focus group interview. Furthermore, while there would be
encouragement to respond to focus group questions, the decision about whether to
respond to particular questions rested with the participants.
The moderator asked permission to audio-tape the interview on the grounds that
audio-tapes would facilitate the accurate identification and clarification of issues
raised by participants. The process for managing audio-tapes was explained.
Specifically, the tapes would be kept in a locked cabinet at the researcher’s office.
The case organisation would not have access to these tapes. The moderator informed
the group that individual anonymity and group anonymity would be protected. No
focus group refused to permit audio-taping of the interview.
To facilitate introductions between participants and researchers and on occasion
among participants, a brief icebreaker activity was conducted. The activity ensured
that participants and researchers were on first name basis and also sanctioned
disclosure of information about their constructions of organisational transformation.
Focus group questions were presented on overhead transparencies, these questions
are provided in Table 3.9. Each transparency showed one question. The moderator
read the question. This enabled participants to both see and hear the question. The
moderator checked to see if participants had questions for clarification. Participants
were encouraged to discuss the questions among themselves and not feel that they
had to address their responses to the moderator. The value of focus group interviews
resides in this interaction among participants.
When necessary, the moderator intervened to ensure equity of air time for each
participant. In addition, the moderator summarised issues raised in the discussion,
acknowledging both agreements and disagreements. The second researcher took
notes of the discussion and monitored the tape recorder.
At the conclusion of the focus group interview, the participants were thanked for
their involvement and the main elements of our contract with them, confidentiality,
and the researchers’ availability after the meeting, were reiterated.
91
As soon after the interview as possible, the moderator prepared a summary of the
main themes and any verbatim comments that could be recalled to support the
identified themes. On return to Brisbane, the audio-taped interviews were either
summarised or transcribed verbatim or both. Discussion of this process is outlined
in a subsequent section, Analytical strategy.
In addition, a summary of the interview themes was forwarded to each focus group
participant. This summary provided a basis for respondent validation of the data. At
the beginning of the next round participants were asked to validate the summary.
A respondent contested an interview summary on only one occasion. In this
particular case, the respondent felt that the summary had not captured the intensity of
feeling that he had expressed about a particular issue. As a result he indicated that
he had chosen not to attend the next two focus group rounds. A commitment was
made to change the summary so it did reflect group sentiment.
Discussion about how these data were managed will be discussed in a later section,
Analytical strategy.
Semi-structured interview procedure
A similar process was used to administer the semi-structured interviews. Two
researchers were involved in each interview. The presence of two people facilitated
managing interview content and process. One researcher managed the interaction
while the other took notes and intervened if necessary to clarify issues raised by the
respondent.
The interviews began with the researchers introducing themselves and outlining the
purpose of the interview. Permission was obtained to audio-tape the interview.
Respondents were advised that the tapes would not be made available to the
organisation. They would be kept in a locked cabinet at the researcher’s office.
92
Respondents were also advised that their anonymity would be protected. The data
would be aggregated and individual respondents would not be identified. However,
respondents were informed that verbatim comments might be used and if there was
any doubt that a person could be identified then respondents would be asked for
permission to use the quote.
Interviewees were told that a summary of the interview would be returned to the
interviewee for validation. Respondent validation of the accuracy of the summary
was checked at the next interview.
Following the interview, the researcher wrote a summary of the interview and
recalled verbatim quotes to support themes identified. These notes were later used as
a basis for discussion with other researchers who had intimate knowledge of the
organisation. The strategy used to manage and analyse the data is reported in a later
section of this chapter.
Observation procedure As indicated earlier, unstructured observation was used in selected contexts. During
the course of the research, opportunities were provided to attend two departmental
conferences. In addition, focus group interviews are important contexts for gaining
an appreciation of organisational members’ emotional reactions to the change
agenda, reactions which are frequently reflected in the emotional tone of the
discussion rather than verbal reports.
One conference was a Diversity Conference held in a regional location held in 2000.
This conference was important in that the new Director General was the keynote
speaker and outlined his vision for the organisation and selected achievements and
challenges facing the organisation. The second conference was a Senior Officers’
Conference held in Brisbane in 2001. This conference provided an opportunity to
observe a meeting of the senior management group and their focus on personal and
interpersonal processes. This conference also provided an opportunity to observe a
small group of senior managers who were seeking to link their current operational
93
projects to the new long-term strategic plan and its accompanying reporting
framework.
As discussed earlier, transformational change is likely to have implications for
emotions (Eriksson, 2004). As well as attending to the content of focus group
discussions, the researcher also attended to what might be referred to as the
emotional tone of the group as they discussed the transformation of their
organisation. Hence the concern was not so much with individual expression of
emotion (Rafaeli & Sutton, 1987) but with an assessment of group feeling about the
change, something that was not necessarily reflected in what participants said but
how they said it. It was possible to determine whether organisational members were
positive about change, neutral, or negative.
Following the observation opportunities, field notes were typed and included in the
analysis. This was achieved by sharing and discussing field notes with other
researchers intimately involved in the case organisation to test interpretations.
Documents
During the period of the research the researcher was provided with access to several
documents relevant to the research. The documents included memoranda from the
Director-General on the transformation of the organisation, reports (eg, strategic
planning documents, annual reports, and websites), hard copies of departmental
conference presentation notes and slides.
In addition, the organisation publishes a staff magazine, Interface. This magazine is
one of the ways in which organisational members are kept informed of
organisational transformation initiatives, among others, and their progress. These
magazines were searched for references to organisational transformation and the data
in these sources were coded and incorporated in the analysis.
By way of illustration, the departmental magazine provided accounts of interviews
with senior managers and of initiatives taken by organisational members to advance
the change agenda. In particular, the magazine reported an interview with the
94
Director-General who generated the 1998 transformational change agenda on his
departure to another department.
These magazine articles served two purposes consistent with the aims of this study.
First, selected articles clarified the change interventions and change leader intentions
with respect to these interventions. For example, the Director-General reported his
assessment of change in the case organisation after his two year tenure. An insight
into the change process not mentioned in interview was the Director-General’s view
that he was only two-years into what he saw as a four-year change program.
Second, the magazine also reported occasional reactions to the change agenda. For
example, on the departure of Director-General Varghese in 2000, one manager had a
poem about the Director-General published in the magazine. This poem is
reproduced in Chapter 5.
ANALYTICAL STRATEGY
The previous section specified the data collection procedures. This section details
the strategies employed to manage, analyse and interpret the data generated by these
data collection procedures. Consistent with the abductive-interpretive strategy
outlined earlier in this chapter, the aim of the analysis is (1) conduct a first-order
analysis of respondents’ evolving accounts of transformational change, and (2) to
conduct a second-order analysis to explore the first-order data in terms of the
relationship between change leader interventions and organisational schema change.
Sixty-three focus group interviews, fifty-four semi-structured interviews,
observation, and analysis of secondary sources over three years generated a large
amount of data. The analytical strategy was designed to increase the probability that
valid conclusions were drawn from these data.
As indicated above, the data generated by focus groups and semi-structured
interviews were in the form of audio-taped records and researcher notes. A thematic
analysis of these data was considered the most appropriate approach for gaining
95
insight into organisational members’ constructions or sensemaking about
organisational transformation.
The data were analysed thematically. Strauss & Corbin (1990:61) define open
coding as the process of breaking down, examining, comparing, conceptualising,
and categorising data. This thematic analysis of the data entailed the use of written
research notes, audio tape summaries or verbatim transcripts, and a review of the
audio tapes themselves.
Initial coding of the data occurred in the interview itself in that the moderator
paraphrased the main themes at the end of the interview and checked for accuracy.
Following the interview the researcher noted the themes and any illustrative data
recollected from the interview. This was necessary in that interviews were
frequently conducted at various sites across Queensland.
A written transcript of themes was prepared and mailed to each participant. At the
next interview, participants had an opportunity to respond to these summaries and
report inaccuracies or misinterpretations.
Following return from the research site, each audio taped record was either
summarised or transcribed verbatim. The number of focus groups and interviews
prohibited verbatim transcriptions of all tapes. However, those interviews
transcribed verbatim were strategically selected to (a) validate the summaries and
recorded notes of the attending researchers, and (b) provide deeper insight into the
dynamics at particular sites to provide input into decisions about probe questions in
subsequent research rounds. Furthermore, selected interview tapes were both
transcribed verbatim and summarised. This provided an opportunity to determine
that key themes in the verbatim transcripts were reflected in the summaries.
Other researchers who were intimately familiar with the case organisation and the
focus group and interview data met regularly to discuss data coding and to reach
consensus about data codes. These meetings focused not only on agreed data codes
but also focused on contradictory and disconfirming evidence. Such evidence was
96
reflected in conflicting points of view within focus groups and across focus groups
and semi-structured interviews.
A representative of the case organisation was a part of this process and this person
was able to provide respondent validation of the data codes identified by the
researchers and to provide contextual information that explicated the data.
Respondents identified two seminal transformational change interventions, the 1996
truncation of the organisation into owner organisation and provider organisation and
the 1998/2001 large-scale human process intervention. Other transformational
change events were mentioned; for example, the amalgamation into and de-
amalgamation from a Transport mega-department (see Table 3.3).
As would be expected, respondents framed their responses to the open-ended
questions in terms of those aspects of the organisation that were being targeted by
change leader interventions. Consequently, initial codes for accounts related to
restructuring, or content changes, were organisational direction, relational
environment, which encompassed organisational – environment relationships and
internal relationships, organisation redesign (including workload implications and
implications for career and personal development), and change process.
Note, however, that the codes used to frame respondent accounts of structural change
differed from those used to frame respondent accounts of human process change. An
illustration from both change contexts is now provided.
As would be expected, given truncation of the organisation and its purpose,
respondents, in this case in Corporate Main Roads, were concerned with
organisational direction. A consistent account of organisational direction across
focus groups related to a managerial, administrative, financial focus. References to
shifts from a technical viewpoint to an economist’s viewpoint; it’s an emphasis away
from our core business of design and engineering to a management style of
operation; we are expected to be more like business managers. In addition, there
were frequent references to management reporting of financial information.
97
Responses to the human process intervention had to be treated quite differently.
First, there was much less data to draw upon in that collectively the change agenda
was unrealised. For this reason, the first-order analysis of these data reflected the
aims of the change agenda itself. For example, one element of the intervention was a
new vision and mission.
While there were few references to the change leaders’ vision in the data, there was a
great deal of discussion about the need for clearer direction, more leadership, more
linking of change to a broader strategic direction.
In addition, there were frequent references to a lack of clarity about the future of the
organisation and potential threats to this future. Similarly, the data related to the
Three Frames and Five Signposts (leading-managing schema explained in Chapter
5), and to the relational environment were used to explain on the one hand a lack of
incorporation of the ends-means schema and on the other an acceptance of the
relational schema.
Second-order analysis
To this point the analysis has focused on coding the raw data. The researcher was
also concerned with a second order analysis of these data (Poole et al., 1989). This
second order analysis was concerned with identifying interpretive schemes or the
lenses through which organisational members interpreted the transformational
change agenda being undertaken by the case organisation.
The second-order analysis involved the researcher interpreting these accounts in
terms of organisational schema. As indicated earlier in this chapter, organisational
member schema are assumed to consist of a finite set of bi-polar constructs (Isabella,
1990; Kelly, 1955). One pole of the construct, in this case the left-hand pole, reflects
organisational members’ pre-existing organisational schema. The right-hand pole
reflects the reframed schema, how organisational members interpret the situation
post intervention.
98
This interpretation of schema is consistent with, though more detailed than, in other
research. For example, Isabella (1990) used a photographic metaphor to describe a
tendency for organisational members to conceive of change situations in terms of
double exposures, they would see images of both the previous organisation and the
new.
For example, in the first round of interviews, organisational members were asked the
question, “what has been the most significant change in Main Roads over the past
five years?” One consistent response to this question was before we just built roads,
more and more efficient roads and we didn’t think much about why we build roads.
Now we act more like business managers/administrative financial managers and we
have to consult our various stakeholders much more and we try to work out why we
build roads. In this case, two bipolar constructs were abstracted, (1) road builder
focus (left-hand pole) and managerial/financial focus (right-hand pole), and (2)
operations-driven (left-hand pole) and strategy-driven (right-hand pole).
The decision to split statements into different constructs was based on other criteria.
In this example, respondents reacted to the two bipolar dimensions differently. In
the case of the road builder-managerial/financial focus organisational members
tended to be polarised, some preferred the left-hand pole and others preferred the
right-hand pole. In the case of operations-driven-strategy-driven respondents tended
to prefer the right-hand pole over the left-hand pole in that being strategy-driven the
organisation would be likely to address looming problems that adversely impacted
on the organisation. Note that this does not mean that respondents thought the
organisation was as strategic as it needed to be, just that being strategic was
preferable to being totally operational.
Kelly suggests that people tend to prefer one pole over the other. This is an
important consideration in change research in that change leaders typically expect
organisational members to prefer the pole that exactly or approximates as closely as
possible the desired organisational schema. An example of preference was provided
in the previous paragraph. Preference as determined by the degree of consistently
positive reference to one pole or the other.
99
However, change is rarely a simple preference for one thing or another.
Respondents may also be split on preference for one pole or the other. Furthermore,
even if respondents prefer the reframed schema it does not mean that cognitive order
is achieved. For example, respondents preferred a concept of the organisation as
open to external influence from stakeholders who have interests in the road system
over the pre-existing concept of being closed to external influence.
However, being open to external influence raised several contradictions. Being open
was positive but it also meant longer project timelines, increased cost, and greater
capability and workload demands on people. These contradictions were considered
important in terms of getting greater insight into organisational member schema.
The outcome of the second-order analysis then was (1) a set of bipolar constructs
that reflected the main themes derived from the first-order analysis, (2) preference
(positive when respondents tended to prefer the reframed pole, negative when they
preferred the pre-existing pole, polarised when respondents were split on one pole or
the other, and unrealised when respondents had not developed, collectively, a sense
of what the change meant), and tensions or constructs suggesting issues concerning
successfully reframing the change. Note that respondents can prefer a new schema
yet find difficulty in reconciling the inevitable contradictions involved in framing
that complex schema.
Framing respondents’ schema in terms of bipolar constructs facilitated discussion of
change and lack of change in the context of pre-existing theory and research on
schema change.
CREDIBILITY OF THE RESEARCH
The place of the usual standards of research quality, validity and reliability, has been
the subject of some controversy in discussions of qualitative research (Mason, 2002;
Seale, 1999; Silverman, 2001). It is frequently acknowledged that qualitative
research cannot meet the same standards of trustworthiness as quantitative research
yet the ideals associated with producing trustworthy research remain. Qualitative
100
researchers have sought to focus on developing convincing (Mason, 2002) or
then, an appreciation of both the pre-existing and the new or reconstructed
organisational schema (Beckhard & Harris, 1987).
This chapter identifies respondents’ pre-existing organisational schema. Chapters 5-
7 investigate the efficacy of change leader interventions designed to replace or
significantly elaborate this pre-existing schema in the light of changes in public
policy.
ANALYTICAL STRATEGY
This section provides a brief restatement of the analytical strategy outlined in
Chapter 3. This same analytical strategy is applied in each of the subsequent data
chapters (Chapters 5-7). Analysis is conducted in two stages: the first stage analyses
respondents’ first-order conceptions (Blaikie, 2000; Van Maanen, 1979) of the
traditional organisation, the second stage applies theoretical concepts to explain
first–order concepts.
As discussed in Chapter 3, the pre-existing organisational schema was determined by
asking organisational members to identify the major changes in the organisation over
the previous five years. In their responses, respondents drew contrasts between the
traditional organisation and the emerging organisation. For example, respondents
frequently indicated (in one part of the organisation at least) that we used to just
build roads now we spend most of our time micro-managing budgets.
This contrast reflects a bipolar construct; the left-hand pole reflects the traditional
organisation (road building), the right-hand pole represents a construction of the new
106
or emerging organisation (managing budgets). This chapter is concerned only with
identifying the left-hand pole of the bipolar construct. The right-hand pole will
emerge in subsequent chapters as respondent accounts of change of the
contemporary organisation are discussed. In these later discussions, it will be
possible to consider organisational members’ preferences for one pole or the other,
the basis of schema change or lack of change.
This separation of the discussion of pre-existing (left-hand pole) and new or
reframed (right-hand pole) was necessary because the two seminal interventions
identified by respondents created three schema change contexts, though each is
underpinned by the same pre-existing schema. Consequently, the data reported in
this chapter will also be used to facilitate analysis in the subsequent three chapters.
RESULTS
FIRST-ORDER ANALYSIS
Organisational purpose
Respondents commented on what they saw as the core purpose of the traditional
organisation: the organisation was driven by a single purpose: road building; or in
more colloquial terms, laying black stuff. It was a department that builds and
maintains roads, full stop (Focus Group R1C).
Moreover, respondents suggested that the organisation was operations-driven rather
than strategy-driven: the organisation:
Existed because it existed; engineers who were totally focused on the aim to
provide more roads and more efficient roads regardless of any social or
environmental costs ran Main Roads (Focus group R1A).
One implication of this operations focus was limited concern for the future or how
emerging strategic issues would impact on the organisation. This operational
orientation existed at all levels of the organisation:
107
I remember walking into the [former Director-General’s] office and he’d be
looking over a bunch of maps and that was his thing, like, a very strong
engineering focus (Focus Group R1HH).
The focus on proficient and operations-driven road building was, however, at the
expense of concern with other critical organisational processes. In particular, the
perception was that longer term issues confronting the organisation were not
addressed. For example, the organisation faced losing a large number of its
experienced technical professionals to retirement, yet there was a perception that
little had been done address this problem.
Respondents described the organisation as being motivated by a strong commitment
to high level proficiency; a commitment to and pride in technical excellence. Some
technical professional staff had developed international reputations based on
publication of their work in various technical disciplines:
The feeling of pride of workmanship, everyone used to have in the
Department, there’s still that pride and hard work but there’s so much more
to do now (Focus Group R1A).
The organisation was described as a can-do organisation not only in terms of the
technical function but also the administrative function; organisational members had
the ability to get the job done whatever the obstacles. Indeed, the level of collective
confidence was such that the organisation was perceived as arrogant by members of
other public sector organisations (Senior Manager interview), a perception
acknowledged at all levels of the organisation.
This conception of the organisation as a can-do organisation was reinforced by
organisational story-telling. Stories detailing risks and challenges overcome in the
face of diverse geographical and technical problems associated with the construction
and maintenance of the State’s road network were heavily reflected in respondents’
accounts.
Respondents see the organisation as a leader in terms of its readiness for early
adoption of new technologies and new government policy initiatives. It was an
108
organisation at the cutting edge (Focus Group R1A), able to solve any problem
confronting it.
As will be discussed in Chapters 6 and 7, the subsequent truncation of the
organisation into strategic-owner and commercialised-provider directly affected core
organisational purpose: the owner sub-organisation was required to develop a
strategic and systemic orientation to the development of the road network, a function
for the most part lacking in the traditional organisation. The commercialised
provider sub-organisation was expected to be a profit-driven provider of
infrastructure delivery services.
Relational environment
Respondents described the organisation’s traditional relationship with its stakeholder
environment as limited: relatively little consultation with external stakeholders
occurred; decisions were made internally on technical grounds:
A: Oh, I think probably the biggest change I’ve noticed is the change in what we do, like um when I first joined the department we just built roads we never consulted anyone General laughter B: Doesn’t matter if anyone wants it or not A: We never considered pedestrians General laughter C: Much noise, or rubbish in the water streams. I noticed the biggest change is the scope of the work, there’s so much more thought for other people, consultation, it’s actually probably made a remarkable difference in the amount of black stuff we put down but we are certainly doing it more considerately now.
Researcher: So that’s a very positive thing? C: Well yes, I think so. We never even used to worry about giving anyone refuge when they were crossing the road, we used to have medians with slopes like that (steep slope indicated), now we don’t do anything like that, and we never considered any room on the pavement for bikes, cyclists they just weren’t even considered I guess. They didn’t pay registration, so they had no right to be there!
109
Laughter Researcher: Would that be right? A: Yea, pretty well C: There were certainly a smaller number of them back in those days J: And we never consulted anyone about our plans. We kept all our plans secret and we never mentioned a word about any projects we had coming up, did we? A: No, no that was all C: First thing you would have known was when the trucks arrived B: Or a resumption notice A: Yea, in the mail. Yea, so we’re becoming more caring and considerate. It hasn’t necessarily translated into more roads C: No, less actually I think
Moreover, the organisation operated relatively autonomously of regulatory agencies
due to unique Federal and State funding arrangements. This autonomy allowed
organisational members to become very good at what they did, build roads: however,
at the same time it reduced the organisation’s capacity to coordinate policy
development and operations with the wider state public sector.
The internal relational environment of the traditional organisation was portrayed as
very hierarchical, which in turn was reinforced by a rigid status structure: it tended to
be paternalistic and authoritarian; engineers were god. Yet, at the same time, a large
proportion of employees had long tenure in the organisation, liked being part of
Main Roads, and took pride in organisational membership; there was a Main Roads
family, even thought one interviewee was later to describe it as a dysfunctional
family.
The traditional relational environment also placed little value on and little sensitivity
to gender, cultural or disciplinary diversity. The traditional organisation was
dominated by white male engineers. Women tended to report the traditional
organisation as paternalistic. Input from women received a pat on the head with
little evidence that their input was being taken seriously.
110
As will be discussed in subsequent chapters, change leader interventions sought to
fundamentally transform the internal and external relational environment as the
organisation positioned itself within a Whole-of-Government policy context.
Organisational members had to engage with external stakeholders and with internal
stakeholders in a fundamentally different way. Thus subsequent change
interventions would result in significant discontinuity in organisation-environment
relationships.
Managerial and leadership processes
Respondents described the organisation’s traditional management style as hard
engineering leadership and an I say – you obey, big stick management style.
However, respondents also reported that managers cared for and took an interest in
staff. Traditional managers:
Came through the engineering stream and they were very strong willed
people shall we say …. The department was driven from that engineering
focus. We seem to have lost that really hard leadership we had back in those
days with the very senior engineers who were technical leaders (Focus Group
R1A)
The top down hierarchical management style was reinforced by the organisation’s
limited governance structure. The top four managers were responsible for
organisational decision making. As will be discussed in Chapter 5, the Leadership
Change Trajectory, this governance structure was elaborated to include the top 25
managers.
Respondents frequently referred to authority and discipline as key characteristics of
the traditional organisation. Respondents tended to view organisational discipline as
a positive characteristic, it reduced ambiguity:
If you were late they drew a red line across the attendance book and you
were answerable. It honestly didn’t do me that much harm because I’m still
working here and you knew exactly where you stood. You knew what was
111
right, and you knew what was wrong, and if you did the crime well, then,
basically you had to do the time
Organisational members also reported a high obedience orientation, a characteristic
that would seem paradoxical in a professional organisation. Organisational members
reported we are an obedient lot … we do what we are told (Interview Senior
Manager R2). An implication of being obedient is a tendency to look to the top for
direction in non-routine situations and to limit questioning of top-down decisions.
As will be seen in subsequent chapters, requests for clear unequivocal direction from
the top and problematic bottom-up communication tended to be thematic.
In addition, respondents reported the existence of a blame culture in the organisation.
Managers viewed the expression of conflicting points of view as pockets of
resistance (Focus Group R1D), thereby censoring organisational communication.
The organisation was conflict averse, at least in terms of the open expression of
dissenting points of view. Conflict tended to find expression in organisational
politics. Respondents reported examples of people looking after their own turf and a
silo mentality (Focus Group R1C).
Respondents reported that the traditional organisation was characterised by a belief
that there is a right way to do everything. The large-scale human process
intervention discussed in the next chapter was designed to develop managerial and
leadership processes. The intended shift was away from authority/obedience
management to one that engaged and inspired people to contribute to organisational
outcomes.
Organisational design
Respondents also gave significant discussion time to the organisation’s design.
Structurally, the organisation was highly decentralised and spatially differentiated, a
trend that began in the early 1960s. The organisation consists of a Head Office, four
regions and fourteen districts nested within the four regions. Respondents described
the organisation as having fourteen different cultures, one for each district. These
local cultures were so strong that each culture had difficulty talking to the others:
112
The culture of the organisation is split and it’s split around the regions,
they’ve got their own culture because it’s the way we do it round here but we
want to do it our own way, and the trouble is you can’t interact with them
because they have different terms right across the whole state, and we really
need to get corporate standards, corporate policies to bring the
Organisational culture back into it when everybody starts to talk the same
language (Focus Group R1A).
Respondents reported that one significant outcome of high level decentralisation was
a strong tendency to develop customised systems and procedures to fit local
circumstances. This customisation was to later become a significant issue as
transformational change required greater connectivity to enable better management
control and better management reporting.
In addition, traditionally, professionals tended to operate autonomously of
regulation, guidelines or policy. Local decisions were made on the basis of
professional judgement; there was little codification of professional or administrative
knowledge; organisational knowledge was, for the most part, tacit (Lam, 2000).
Moreover, performance reporting was limited; local staff did what was required and
did it well and that was all that was required:
Before we could just manage our own technical assessments and the way we
were going to work out on the road … before it was sort of black and white,
yes or no answer (Focus Group R1A)
The development of local autonomy and the customisation of processes and services
were facilitated by spatial differentiation. Distance from Head Office, a neutraliser
of change leader influence (Howell, 1997), served to buffer regions and districts
against change imposed from Head Office. For example, respondents attributed the
organisation’s ability to resist Queensland Transport’s attempts to destroy the culture
of Main Roads during the period of amalgamation in the early to mid-1990s to
strong and autonomous local regions and districts.
In this highly decentralised organisational environment, organisational systems,
technical and administrative, had evolved to satisfy local requirements with little
113
consideration of whole-of-organisation or Whole-of-Government considerations.
There was, therefore, very little consistency in systems across the organisation,
contributing to the earlier view that each district had its own culture and had limited
capacity for lateral coordination.
This lack of consistency of systems would pose significant problems for the
transformation of the organisation’s design in the face of the need to standardise
systems to facilitate inter-connectivity and coordination in a Whole-of-Government
environment.
The traditional organisation staff structure was dominated by engineers with
relatively few professionals from non-technical disciplines. The organisation was:
A: Being run by engineers who were totally focused on the aim to provide
more roads
B: So the staffing was different too. It used to be 90% technical people.
C: 99% probably (Focus Group R1A).
The traditional organisational structure also provided career and professional
development opportunities; indeed the evidence suggests the organisation took pride
in its approach to developing and mentoring (providing a training environment)
junior technical professionals. Decentralisation and local autonomy provided
technical and other professionals with a range of on-the-job experiences that
contributed to a highly skilled and proficient work force.
As will be discussed in subsequent chapters, large scale structural change led to a
radical organisation redesign; the organisation was split into owner sub-organisation
and provider sub-organisation, new structures were created within each sub-
organisation aligned with purpose, and technical and administrative systems were
standardised.
Change processes
In addition to conceptions of the traditional formal organisation, respondents also
provided accounts of the organisation’s traditional change management capability.
114
Organisational members’ constructions of the organisation’s change management
capability were based on their experience with multiple changes during the 1990s
I took all my capabilities and linked them to everyone else in the department
so everyone’s capabilities and functions are linked to the D-G’s. Two people
maintained no linked capabilities with the D-G. These positions were
removed. Accountability Mapping is useful because it shows where
duplication lies and what work you are doing. It mapped out the empires.
This was used to focus every position and then got an achievement plan and
disaggregated this against the Balanced Scorecard [one of the Three
Frames]. People thought this was ambitious; I just wanted an 80/20 plan
(Director-General Interview).
To facilitate vertical communication, organisational members were invited to
communicate directly with the Director-General through a direct phone link; the D-
G’s Hotline, though the Hotline was not always well received:
By setting up a Hotline I believed it would be good to get a feeling how
people felt about the system. Outcomes exceeded this. Some managers were
very hostile to it. A lot of managers would say they agreed but would do
something different. When a problem occurred they had learning stages …
they would have meetings and ask why things went wrong, how it would be
fixed next time and what to do if it happens again? When it happened a third
time, delegations were taken from them and double-loop learning
implemented. They sat an exam. This was circulated around the department
to lead to better financial plans which lead to culture change (Interview
Director-General).
Moreover, there was some risk associated with being too open:
143
Just recently, quite a senior member of staff had actually put a message on
the D-G’s Hotline and it’s questioning portfolio roles and we’ve been told
it’s OK to put things on the D-G’s hotline, but I think a very strong message
has gone back to that person that the Main Roads culture says you don’t
question – and the gentleman put his name to it as well – so you don’t
question at that sort of level how the portfolio is working, and a bit of a wrap
over the knuckles over that one, so again you say one thing: please be open
and question and so forth, and when it is done, it’s well no, look, I know that
it says that but it’s really not appropriate to do that because you are
questioning some fundamental stuff between the portfolio, and leave that up
to the D-G’s initiative to question (Focus group R1HG).
Developing a relational orientation was also reinforced by a greater emphasis on
interpersonal process (Schein, 1988, 1999). The concern with interpersonal process
was demonstrated at senior management levels of the organisation. Focus groups
and interviews reported that prior to change, the interpersonal dynamics in the top
team were characterised by dysfunctional conflict and territorial behaviour.
A process intervention in top team meetings, check-ins and check-outs, were
designed to contribute to the development of more open confrontation of conflict. A
check-in involved senior managers reporting publicly on thoughts and feelings that
might impact on their orientation to or behaviour in the meeting. A check-out
enabled a similar sharing at the end of the meeting to achieve closure. One senior
manager instituted this approach in his own team meetings:
Ever since Jim came I start all meetings with a check-in and finish them with
a check-out. I find this very good. This is one thing that Jim brought here
which is a tangible thing that you can notice and works very well. I don't
know if it's changed the productivity of the department, I don't know
(Interview Corporate Manager).
Another manager commented on the efficacy of Varghese’s preference for face-to-
face communication and the effect this had on operational staff:
When Jim first joined that was a real revelation as well. He came out and
actually spoke to a lot of the guys on our projects on Logan Road not once
144
but twice and that went over really well with the blokes. Here’s someone
who’s interested enough to come out and talk to them and listen to what their
problems are, their fears, and act on them (Queensland Government,
Undated).
For another manager the efficacy of the process approach resided in valuing people:
Role of D-G in promoting a different kind of culture was vital; Jim believed
in people and gave [organisational members] permission to take care of
people (Manager Interview).
The concern with interpersonal process was also reflected in Varghese’s approach to
conflict resolution. There was a clear attempt to create new conflict management
norms at senior levels in the organisation:
Every manager would shaft the other ones. I made it clear this was a safe
environment. When it happened again I invited them in and told them what
each had said about the other. This gave the impression that I was happy to
hear about each problem as long as the other person was present (Director-
General Interview).
A relational orientation was also reinforced by initiating a process of identifying and
resolving blockages to organisational transformation. A participative process was
employed to facilitate the identification of significant problems constraining
organisational change. Each major problem was then delegated to a committee for
clarification and resolution.
A relational orientation was also reinforced by the publication of cases of successful
negotiations with external stakeholders. A number of success stories documenting
how technical project leaders were able to negotiate mutually satisfactory outcomes
with the community were published and widely disseminated (Department of Main
Roads, Undated).
Another manager reported relational problems with contractors and the community
on a particularly sensitive roads project, to the point where departmental officers
were subject to personal attacks. The manager reported that by using a relational
145
approach, relationships with these stakeholders on the project were significantly
improved (Queensland Government, Undated). As a result of the organisational
stories about these experiences, the idea that Main Roads is good at building
external relationships is widely acknowledged in organisational discourse across the
organisation.
The Relationship Frame also seemed to be accepted in the organisation because the
notion of relationships, particularly professional-client relationships, resonated with
pre-existing professional values. As a part of their socialisation, professionals
assume that what they do is directed toward helping a client solve a problem (Beder,
1998). Focus group reports suggest that some, even if limited, consultation occurred
in the traditional organisation. The much increased demand for, say, community
consultation, already had roots within the existing organisation.
The commitment to a relational orientation continued following the change in
Director-General in 2000. For example, one group reported:
I’m sure there’s parts of the organisation that would have thought, ‘you
beauty, a bloody engineer again’ [a few words unclear]. Steve’s not like
that. He’s been through a lot of personal change himself and I think he will
keep flowing with the direction that Main Roads has been travelling over the
last two years (Focus Group R1HG).
For technical professionals the change of leader presented opportunities for the
development of both technical excellence and relationships:
I think just answering that question, what is the most important change
affecting Main Roads now – clearly I think in my mind Steve Golding is the
new [Director-General], he’s got the engineering background, he’s had heaps
of experience in Main Roads, he’s been there, done that and he’s seen where
we’ve come from and I see a lot of positives coming up because of the
situation, not that I want to run down Jim, I think he’s done a great job in his
area, more from the relationship side, but I think Steve now has the oomph or
the ability to get something back into the system that is more balanced and
focused in our key area of operation – which is basically engineering – we
146
are road builders – and I think it’s promising at this stage that Steve’s there
(Focus Group R1HG).
The concern with promoting a relational orientation was linked to two inter-related
issues. First, there was a clear recognition that departmental managers were facing a
more complex and dynamic environment, one that required relationship building as
an organisational capability. Main Roads faced a:
More challenging and demanding environment, including managing
stakeholder and community expectations, integrating planning, and
managing perceptions both internally and externally (McCaffery, 2001:9).
In this context, there was an acknowledgement that the relational frame had not
penetrated sufficiently and that there was much more to do to institutionalise
appropriate relational behaviour in the organisation:
Not a deep penetration of that throughout the department … this is a big
challenge for us to get this coverage and understanding to an appropriate
level. The guy who drives a bulldozer does not need to know a lot but he
needs to know how the other guy feels about things, and that is enough.
Getting people to identify where there are opportunities to use this stuff.
Many of the districts have not caught on …. There are ten core
competencies: listening, technical things, asset management etc. helps people
to understand there is more to DMR than the construction and maintenance
of roads. This is where some of the learning things would come in (Director-
General Interview).
A Director-General sums up this section best. He said that:
Main Roads is based on the development of sound relationships, leadership
and the integration of our values with those of our customers and
stakeholders (Director-General Interview).
The organisation’s growing commitment to developing a relational capability is also
reflected in more inclusive attitudes towards professionals from other disciplines,
women, and minority groups. The traditional Main Roads was dominated by
engineers and males:
147
The engineering old boys club has started to be squeezed out. There is
recognition of other skills, economics, and accounting. There is a real focus
on modern leadership and an external focus. Main Roads is engaging with
the general public and politicians much better. Open communication, cards
on the table approach (Interview round 1).
A similar point was made by a focus group:
And also start to value different skill sets and which we are trying to
enhance, like the things that do mean, as [person’s name] says, moving
beyond the economic to incorporate the social and the environmental, and
actually putting some focus around capabilities of, you know, environmental
scientists and anthropologists, and everyone just about dropped dead when
they hired an anthropologist [all laugh]; fancy having an anthropologist in
Main Roads. And you know, the cultural heritage stuff and the great work
that’s been done there, and it’s actually openly celebrated and … I came
from a welfare background so, I mean, I was just horrified that it’s a hard-
line engineering couldn’t-care-less-about-anybody type organization and
that was the reputation it had (Focus Group R1HH).
The acknowledgement of the value of diversity was also reflected in changes in
attitude to women:
I really think that one of the strongest reflections of this cultural change has
been a change of attitude towards women. I’ve never experienced terrible
things as a female in the workforce anyhow, so I have to say I’ve either been
very lucky or I’m just very obtuse and haven’t noticed it, but I have certainly
noticed that it’s improved so that’s obviously something, and I really believe
that Jim’s model provided an environment where it was OK to stand up for
what you actually thought was, you know, right, which sounds like a very
[next word only partially said]… it’s not meant to sound that way, but it was
OK to pay attention to those things that perhaps we’d never really paid
attention to before, and that created an environment where people could be
themselves in an easier way, and I think that’s very important to the cultural
change process (Focus Group R1HG).
148
Another focus group participant, reflecting on positive changes in the organisation,
reported that, traditionally:
Particularly as a female, it was very much a pat on the head and sends you
on your way, and very much so that was the case (Focus group R1A).
In summary, the relationship frame was well accepted across the organisation.
However, this discussion of acceptance of the importance of the relational
orientation is not intended to suggest that the process is non-problematic. Accepting
the value of a relational orientation cognitively is not the same as incorporating the
relationship frame into behaviour. The organisation faces a number of challenges as
they seek to embed the relational orientation into behaviour.
Change process
Reflected in organisational members’ constructions of the large-scale human process
intervention and its influence was the perception that both Directors-General had a
reputation for walking the talk. There was a high level of congruence between what
was espoused and what was practiced. Indeed, it will be argued in the second-order
analysis that leader behaviour played a significant role in the acceptance of the
Relationship Frame.
A member of the case organisation will provide the conclusion to this section. This
person wrote a poem that gives some indication of the influence of one of the top-
level leaders pursuing change in this organisation (Jones, 2000). The poem is titled
Farewell Jim:
We really didn’t want him Because we all got used to Dick* But in the end we had to take him Because we didn’t get to pick
He arrived all bright and bouncy And he wore a cute bow tie “What have we done to merit this?” They’ll give anyone a try!
But he grabbed the old Department And he turned it upside down He made good people into better ones
149
Oh how easy sat the crown.
So when we all got used to being The leading roads department in the nation The premier up and scratched him And made him head up Education So Jim we all say “Thank you” For all the good things you have done And to the folk at Education Believe us, you haven’t yet begun.
* A former Director-General
SECOND-ORDER ANALYSIS
This section, consistent with the abductive-interpretive method outlined in Chapter
3, provides a second-order analysis of the respondent accounts of organisational
transformation. The second-order analysis seeks to interpret the first-order data in
terms of intervention theory and schema change theory.
As discussed in Chapter 2, the efficacy of change leader interventions is considered
in terms of (a) whether organisational members see the interventions as facilitative,
(b) the pattern of schema content change achieved across the period of the research,
(c) their contribution to schema change dynamics, and (d) their sensitivity to change
management context.
Change leader interventions
Change leader interventions are more likely to be efficacious when organisational
members experience them as facilitative of change. As discussed in Chapter 2, when
faced with the need to bring about organisational transformation, change leaders
have choices about when, where, and how to intervene to transform the organisation
in the desired direction: these decision problems are addressed by intervention theory
(Dunphy, 1996:543; Porras & Robertson, 1992).
Previous research on interventions and schema change suggest that change leaders
Operations-driven Aspiration and vision-driven; Whole-of-Government focus
Reaction: Unrealised or in progress Tensions: Potential imposed government changes; pervasive belief organisation reactive; reporting demands; here-and-now change management problems and distractions (eg top down imposed change); some discounting of the future; technical rationality; abstractness; complexity; linking current operations to vision (rather than the reverse)
Authority/obedience management with caring & friendly work climate
Three Frames/Five Signposts Leadership/Management
Reaction: Unrealised, though also examples of excellent application in both Corporate and Commercial and more general development of change management capabilities Tensions: Complexity; communicability; abstractness; relationship between Three Frames & Five Signposts; demands on managerial capabilities; perception of regression; departure of initiating leader; no clear application process; spatial differentiation
Relational environment: ordered, status-driven
Relational environment Inclusive, value diversity
Reaction: Highly positive, One Department policy; Main Roads family policy; better place to work in Tension: Regression; sub-cultural boundaries Top down techno-structural change process: frequently power/coercive; being told what to do
Change process: Normative/re-educative; modelling, persuasion; participation with limits
Reaction: Highly positive (particularly at top); check-ins, check-outs Tension: Required heavy involvement of DG Emotional tone: Adversarial relationships following truncation of the organisation into owner-provider
Emotional tone: Greater collective confidence; significant progress made in advancing content change goals
Reaction: Highly positive; started to head in the right direction Tension: Perceived regression
164
CHAPTER 6: CORPORATE CHANGE TRAJECTORY
INTRODUCTION
The previous chapter explored the efficacy of large-scale human process
interventions for achieving qualitative schema change in the context of
developing leadership and management processes linked to the realisation of
organisational vision. No prior research on this relationship could be located.
The key findings were (a) the interventions were, for those exposed to them,
experienced as highly facilitative of change, (b) configurational schema change
was unrealised, though a critical sub-schema was, (c) juxtaposition-relocation
rather than disengagement-learning and, with exceptions, teleological rather than
dialectical processes better explained schema change, and (d) contextual
attributes, professionalism and distance affected intervention influence.
This chapter investigates the first of two schema change contexts created by the
1996 truncation of the case organisation into strategic-owner and
commercialised-provider (the second context is addressed in the next chapter).
In particular, the chapter investigates interventions and schema change in the
context of the development of realising the transition from operations-driven
road builder to strategic-owner of a road system.
THE INTERVENTIONS
Consistent with broader trends in the NPM literature (Glynn & Murphy, 1996;
Osborne & Gaebler, 1992), the case organisation was truncated into strategic-
owner sub-organisation and commercialised provider sub-organisation in 1996.
Accounts of the change suggest it was implemented using power-coercive
means.
The successful creation of a strategic-owner organisation required that
organisational members’ concept of the organisation change from Main Roads as
operations-driven road builder (see Chapter 4) to Main Roads as strategic
manager of a road system within a Whole-of-Government policy environment
165
(paraphrased from information on the organisation’s website,
http://www.mainroads.qld.gov.au accessed August 2002), and the case
organisation’s strategic plan, second-order or transformational change.
Much later key capabilities were identified. Organisational members were
required to become (a) systems thinkers, (b) informed decision makers and
effective policy developers, (c) technically and professionally excellent, (d)
engaging, collaborative and consultative, (e) leaders and influencers, (f) positive
and active contributors to ecologically sustainable development, (g) innovative
and creative, (h) balanced and adaptive managers, (i) reliable performers, and (j)
good fiscal managers. (http://www.mainroads.qld.gov.au accessed August 2002).
After 1998, the transformation of the strategic-owner organisation was to be
facilitated by the large-scale human process intervention discussed in Chapter 5
(also see Figure 3.1). As discussed in Chapter 5, the large-scale human process
intervention was designed to provide organisational members with the means of
realising organisational aspirations.
ANALYTICAL STRATEGY
Consistent with the abductive-interpretive strategy outlined in Chapters 3, 4 and
5, the analysis is divided into first-order analysis and a second-order analysis .
The first-order analysis analyses organisational members’ accounts of change at
four points in time. The second-order analysis analyses first-order concepts in
terms of intervention and schema theory consistent with the unresolved issues
outlined in the previous section.
The first-order data are presented by data collection round. However, given the
high degree of consistency in respondents’ accounts in rounds 2 and 3 (and
across the four rounds generally), these rounds have been substantially
amalgamated. To maintain coherence of data in each round, analysis of the data
is provided at the end of the round rather than at the end of each subsection.
166
The framework for exploring the efficacy of change leader interventions for
achieving qualitative schema change consists of four elements, (a) the
interventions are experienced as facilitative of change, (b) the pre-existing
organisational schema is replaced or significantly elaborated, (c) interventions
reinforce dynamics thought to underpin schema change, and (d) interventions are
sensitive to change management context.
RESULTS
This section reports and analyses data collected during the four rounds of the
research. Table 6.1, included at the end of the chapter, outlines the results of this
analysis.
CONTENT CHANGE
Organisational purpose
In round 1, respondents were polarised on the change in core organisational
purpose. There was a perception that the expertise of the organisation had been
split and there had been a significant loss of organisational expertise. For many
the change was framed in terms of a shift from a technical viewpoint to an
economist’s viewpoint, the core organisational task was managing budgets
(Focus Group R1D). For some technical respondents the split had triggered
feelings of great loss:
I think the most significant change in Main Roads I think clearly one
word covers it very adequately and that is the word ‘de-engineering.’
I’ve been in the Main Roads 45 years now and come from a technical
background on [discipline name deleted] and I’ve been very disappointed
to see (I’m getting a bit emotional here) – the way the Department has
lost a lot of expert experience through the focus new direction of
commercialisation that [person’s name deleted] has brought up. So just
that one word ‘de-engineering’; it’s an emphasis away from our core
business of design and engineering to a management style of operation
with a lot of skilled people in that area. It’s a shame to me that the
Department has lost a significant slice of its long involvement of
167
operation in the last 5-6 years since QT and Main Roads joined and
commercialisation came in. So I guess there you go – ‘de-engineering’ is
what comes to mind (Focus Group R1A).
Another group of respondents acknowledged that a fundamental change had
occurred as a result of the restructure of the organisation on owner-provider
lines:
The organisation’s whole way of doing business had fundamentally
changed in line with government policies and with the orientation of
particular Directors-General; there had been a philosophical shift (Focus
group R1C).
Specifically, the organisation had shifted from being a technically-based
organisation to one that was about more than building roads (Interview);
embraced contemporary management practices (Focus Group R1C) and from a
focus almost exclusively on technical excellence to one of market leader in a
diversity of fields (Focus Group R1D).
Furthermore, respondents felt a mind-shift involving a greater focus on long term
strategic planning and development had occurred, though much more was
needed, particularly in the area of succession planning (Focus Group R1A).
Respondents saw being strategic as addressing looming problems facing the
organisation, for example, the loss of a large number of senior engineers to
retirement.
Rounds 2 and 3 reaffirmed respondents’ polarised perceptions of the
fundamental shift in organisational direction reported in Round 1. There was an
acknowledgement that Main Roads has shifted from a road builder to Main
Roads building roads that serve the community in its various forms (Focus Group
R2C) and from a technical and engineering focus to an administrative, political
focus (Focus Group R2B).
Respondents saw Main Roads’ reputation being enhanced in the process of
making this shift:
168
Main Roads has become recognised as the leading agency in cultural heritage
issues and increasing emphasis is placed on effective communication and
consultation with a range of organisational stakeholders (Focus Group R2D).
Nevertheless, and as discussed in Chapter 5, respondent accounts suggest wide-
spread uncertainty about where changes were taking the organisation. There is a
need for:
Overt leadership, decision-making and steady direction from
management; the department is hungry for consistency and visibility in
leadership and direction (Focus Group R2B); and
A more personalised delivery from the Director-General so that we have
a better sense of why the direction has been chosen, more ownership of
the future direction and higher levels of motivation (Group R3HI).
Uncertainty about future direction was reflected in reports of some uneasiness
about the future of commercialisation (Focus Group R3HI). Respondents were
concerned about the risk that Commercial will be privatised or corporatised,
which would then split Main Roads entirely. Respondents felt that Commercial
is seeking to differentiate itself from Corporate and they are more like cousins
now than brothers and sisters (Focus Group R3C).
In round 4, respondents reinforced earlier polarised perceptions:
The goal of technical excellence has become subordinate to an ongoing
importance being placed on financial and administrative aspects (Focus
Group R4B). The technical engineering focus has been supplanted by a
requirement for more people to act like business managers (Focus Group
R4HG).
As in previous rounds (also see Chapter 5) respondents reported high levels of
uncertainty about the future direction of the organisation. There was a feeling
that the department lacked specific direction and focused more on budgets than
on long term strategy.
169
In summary, these data reflect respondent acknowledgement of a fundamental
shift in organisational purpose, yet were polarised on the value of this shift. In
addition, respondents were not clear about organisational direction and saw
potential threats to the organisation. In this context, there was a wish for more
direction from the top.
Relational environment
Change in organisational purpose had significant implications for the
organisation’s relationship with external and internal stakeholders (also see
Chapter 5).
In round 1, respondents reported much greater openness to the influence of
external stakeholders, including industry groups, communities, local government,
and other government departments, particularly its portfolio partner, than was the
case in the past. There has been a shift from:
We know what is best for the public to now asking the public what they
think is best for them (Focus Group R1E).
In concept, this greater openness and a Whole-of-Government orientation was
evaluated positively; the organisation could no longer ignore the realities of the
real world (Focus Group R1A). There was a ready acceptance of the need to
incorporate the quality of external relationships and Whole-of-Government
outcomes into organisational effectiveness measures (Focus Group R1B).
Moreover, the organisation had achieved significant successes in its management
of complex external relationships. Some of these successes were published
(Department of Main Roads, Undated), which had helped create a widely held
view that the Main Roads is good at building external relationships (Focus
Group R1C).
Nevertheless, greater openness was not without significant cost. The life-spans
of most projects were substantially extended, more capital was needed to fund
170
compliance with a plethora of legislation while budgets have been reducing and
harder to shift between different projects (Focus Group R1A), insufficient
resources were available to ensure quality assurance practices were met on
construction worksites where cost efficiencies are crucial, increasing time and
resources were being spent on community consultation, cultural heritage,
environmental issues exceeding that spent on what they saw as their core
business of building roads, particularly given an assessment that the overall
quality of road construction has declined, and greater ambiguity and uncertainty.
Assessments of intra-organisational relationships between Corporate Main Roads
and Commercial Main Roads (addressed in the next chapter) were mixed. At
some research sites, there was a perception that improvements in this relationship
were necessary if local knowledge was to be enhanced (Focus Group R1D).
Other sites reported that productive relationships had been negotiated with
Commercial.
Internal relationships were an important success of the change program;
particularly relationships among senior executives. Improved relationships have
provided the organisation with a new approach to negotiation among senior
managers. The personalities of senior managers were perceived to be less of an
impediment to reaching an agreement than was previously the case, the silo
mentality was reduced, and staff had greater involvement in organisational
decision making (Focus Group R1HG).
Moreover, respondents acknowledged a more inclusive organisation in that the
traditional rigid organisational status structure was changing; engineers are no
longer treated like Gods (Focus Group R1HI) and attitudes to diversity are
changing; Main Roads values diversity (Focus Group R1HG) and interactions
across disciplinary and gender boundaries had significantly improved.
In rounds 2 and 3, respondents’ accounts reaffirmed accounts reported in round
1. Respondents evaluated the greater openness and growing sophistication of
both the community and Main Roads positively yet acknowledged the
171
problematic implications of greater openness for organisational capabilities and
resources.
Local communities, industry-based forums, environmental management and
cultural heritage groups and the public at large are now much more informed and
participating more fully in the consultation and decision making processes
(Focus Group R2C). In the context of declining budgets and a need to
demonstrate value-adding, consultation is an important means of enhancing
public and peak industry forums’ understanding of the constraints involved in
medium to long term road implementation planning and in the project delivery of
infrastructure. Moreover, respondents felt that Main Roads now demonstrates
greater maturity in the way it consults with external stakeholders (Focus Group
R3D).
As in round 1, greater openness to influence imposes significant demands on
respondent knowledge; requiring on-going training across many broad aspects
including the legal implications and for more communication and sharing of
expertise (Focus Group R2C). Moreover, the consultation process slows up the
delivery of projects as there are so many new requirements and hurdles to
overcome compared to what it used to be (Focus Group R2C). In addition:
Full consultation has to be undertaken even on very small jobs and many
external clients have decided that consultation means they can make all
the decisions regardless of whether scarce monies could be better spent
on improving other aspects like road safety (Focus Group R3A).
The nature of the relational environment is best summed up by a comment made
in one focus group; gone are the days when we can say we are Main Roads and
we know what is best for you (Focus Group R2E). This shift has been positive,
yet it has imposed significant demands on people and resources.
In round 4, as in earlier rounds, respondents reported on the positive and not so
positive aspects of the organisation’s greater openness to influence by external
stakeholders. The thrust of community consultation was viewed positively by
respondents. The importance of building alliances with local government
172
councils and shires, joint venture partnerships, and community engagement was
unquestioned. Indeed there was a feeling that Main Roads would need to be
more proactive in engaging the community in decision making.
A three-fold rationale was offered by respondents for external stakeholder
relationships. First, there was a clear feeling that the community was
increasingly knowledgeable and expected to be involved in departmental
decision making. Second, stakeholder relationships were the means by which the
organisation was able to help these stakeholders put their expectations into
perspective (Focus Group R4E); that is, it was a way for the organisation to
manage external expectations. Third, engagement with external stakeholders
was the means of prioritisation due to an ever-diminishing budget (Focus Group
R4E).
However, engagement with external stakeholders also presented respondents
with contradictory demands. For example, the legal and moral obligations
encapsulated within the legislation have caused delays and uncertainty in the
preplanning stages of many construction projects. The need for mediation with
claimants often arises when disputes occur over boundaries or perceived
demarcations (Focus Group R4D). These constraints put further pressure on
already strained financial budgets, as work is being held up while mediators,
crown lawyers and the courts decide what the appropriate outcomes should be.
In addition, respondents reported that people are finding it increasingly difficult
to keep up with community expectations with the current level of resources
allocation. Public inquiries and complaints keep increasing, so there is little
time available for training (Focus Group R4A).
The relational environment is also characterised by greater social inclusiveness.
While Main Roads is still viewed as an engineering-driven organisation, there is
now greater inclusiveness and recognition of different disciplines than there was
three years ago (Focus group R4HH).
173
In summary, compared to the traditional organisation, largely closed to external
influence (see Chapter 4), the transforming organisation is much more open to
influence from external and internal stakeholders. Moreover, respondents readily
embraced this shift to greater openness as it provided the means of better serving
their various stakeholders in the context of declining budgets. Furthermore, the
organisation had demonstrated its ability to develop and manage these
relationships though the organisation has yet to develop a sophisticated
consultation schema that provided a collective guide to practice.
Organisation redesign
The framing of a new organisational purpose is also reflected in ongoing
development of organisational design. Roles of people in several job categories
were fundamentally changed; program managers; technical staff and engineers
who had previously made decisions on technical and construction criteria now
have to consider community preferences, environmental, and cultural issues, that
is, Whole of Government criteria.
However, there is a downside. Corporate Main Roads engineers are no longer
exposed to the full range of engineering experience. Where previously engineers
had engaged in all aspects of transport planning, construction and contract
administration, they now tended to be allocated to one specialised field. To help
deal with this situation, a rotation scheme had been set up so that Corporate Main
Roads engineers can gain operational experience in Commercial Main Roads.
As a result, respondents reported increasing job dissatisfaction among junior
technical and professional officers; much of the work performed by this group is
construed as paper chasing, acting as liaison with community interest groups and
shire councils, the maintenance and widening of roads, and managing
relationships with consultants (Focus Group R1D). There are few avenues for
this group to gain in-house experience in either construction or design and they
see this as detrimental to their future career progression.
174
Organisation design has also shifted toward a multi-disciplinary team-based
structure. Respondents were polarised on the value of teams. Teams were
positive in that they provided greater opportunities for collaboration and
coordination. Yet, at the same time, there were reports of role ambiguity, more
politics, higher workloads and a shifting of the burden of responsibility from
management to the team.
From a regional/district perspective, respondents also reported that organisational
decision making is more centralised; previously decision-making was highly
decentralised and they could customise their responses to local requirements.
They have now become extremely accountable to Head Office with regard to
performance and local responsibilities. Greater centralisation has had adverse
consequences for regions in that Head Office has lost focus on what happens in
the regions that run the core business for the Department (Focus Group R1C).
Organisational redesign also incorporated outsourcing of organisational tasks, a
contentious issue for respondents (though recent policy changes had ameliorated
this concern). Outsourcing leads to a loss of organisational knowledge;
consultants … tend to dissipate their membership from projects so any necessary
design amendments are difficult and they are unable to link their designs back
into the general knowledge built up in the Department (Focus Group R1E).
In rounds 2 and 3, respondent accounts of organisation redesign reaffirmed
those in round 1. A positive outcome of restructuring has been the much-needed
clarification of roles and positions thereby reducing high levels of duplication
which had been adding to unnecessary workload pressures (Focus Group R3A).
Furthermore, the organisation appears to have entered a period of stability and
consolidation. This achievement was attributed to the decisive and stabilising
influence of the new Director-General (Focus Group R3B).
Respondents reaffirmed their perception of growing centralisation of decision
making: the organisation was more authoritarian which, in their view, was
reducing organisational effectiveness. In this context, two issues were raised, the
push for consistency of systems and management reporting. While the potential
175
benefits of standardisation were acknowledged, the drive for state-wide
standardisation has to be offset by tangible benefits for the districts and regions.
Currently, people often grapple with inappropriate systems that do not meet local
requirements and needs.
Management reporting was a particular concern: these demands demonstrate a
general lack of appreciation of the already heavy demands put on staff trying to
meet District, Regional and Corporate requirements. What intensified
respondent concerns was their uncertainty about the value of their reports:
regions and districts received little feedback.
The multidisciplinary team structure was reaffirmed, yet, at the same time, there
were concerns about the diffusion of the budget on non-core functions.
Respondents were again polarised on the value of teams; frequently they
involved shifting the burden for managing workloads from managers to teams
with little appreciation of the implications for employees.
In this round, there was a perception that structural change has re-accentuated the
focus on technical excellence at the expense of the corporate change program
(Group R3E), a regression. Yet, there was also a concern about the perceived
loss of technical excellence. Being at the cutting edge was necessary, not only to
attract high calibre people but also to improve and update Main Roads
specifications and to raise the status of the organisation to where it used to be,
on the cutting edge (Focus Group R3B).
In round 4, as in previous rounds, redesign interventions were generally
problematic. Respondents reported that the constant organisational restructures
and realignments have compounded the problems people face every day in
having to do more with less and trying to keep up with community expectations.
The concept of teamwork was of particular concern to respondents. Respondents
felt that a team structure was intended to replace the concept of family and to
enable people to deal more effectively with change but it has not succeeded
(Focus Group R4E). Working in teams has contributed to greater levels of
176
ambiguity; there is no longer a black and white way of working (Focus Group
R4A). Some people see the team concept as a means of increasing and
intensifying work demands. Furthermore, in the teams there is:
Often a lack of direction and clarity about roles and responsibilities,
decision-making is too far removed from the workplace and operational
systems are still largely imposed upon people regardless of whether they
are appropriate to particular requirements or not (Focus Group R4B).
On the other hand, the team structure has also made a positive contribution; there
is more of a team culture now with improved sharing of information and
interaction between units. Jobs are no longer strictly divided according to work
sections (Focus Group R4E).
Organisation decision making structure was again of concern to respondents.
Greater centralisation created greater dependence on the top yet the overriding
concern for staff is not being able to obtain important decisions from
management and to get straight answers to their questions. People are
struggling to get their jobs done due to the lack of full information (Focus Group
R4E).
In this round, respondents acknowledged that regionalisation/spatial
differentiation served to protect or buffer them to some degree from the effects of
corporate change; districts and regions have been relatively resilient to these
corporate changes due to the autonomy in decision-making afforded by the
decentralised nature of Main Roads (Group R4E).
As in earlier rounds, reduced outsourcing was viewed positively by respondents:
there has been a shift towards valuing internal organisational capabilities and
skills rather than simply hiring external consultants to run projects (Focus Group
R4HH).
177
Workloads
Respondents, while acknowledging management efforts to deal with the
problem, reported that change in organisational purpose and organisation design
created a dramatic increase in workload, reducing opportunities to consolidate
learning and reducing morale. The increase in workload was attributed primarily
to (a) techno-structural interventions, (b) meeting the contradictory demands,
within a project management context, of budget limitations and delivering
quality work, (c) continually changing legislative requirements, and (d) a lack of
organisational support, insufficient staff and:
The continuous constant change (Focus Group R1B).
Districts have become more short-term in their orientation as people are
continually ‘fire-fighting’ rather than regaining the organisation’s lost
technical cutting edge (Focus Group R1A).
Everyone’s trying to do three jobs at once; everyone’s acting in someone
else’s position and no one knows exactly what their jobs entail (Focus
group R1A).
In rounds 2 and 3, as in round 1, the problem of excessive workloads and stress
was again a key theme. Respondents felt they were in a high pressure
environment (Focus Group R3A) and were faced with the task of trying to put a
round peg in a square hole (Focus Group R2C).
Rather than swamping people with high-level strategic changes and
distracting them from being smart and technically excellent, the department
needs to align resources and workloads to enable people the time and ability
for refinement and innovation (Focus Group R3A).
In round 4, concerns about excessive workloads as a result of strategic and
techno-structural change were reiterated. Efforts to resolve the issue had little
effect:
Rather than the department taking steps to identify job areas or tasks that
could be redesigned to alleviate workload pressures, the emphasis is still
placed on the individual to manage their own workloads and to take
178
responsibility to talk to local management about concerns (Focus Group
R4E).
Workload increases are inevitable in organisations undergoing transformation.
Yet the intensity of feeling in respondents (at all organisational levels) accounts
of horrendous workloads warrants greater research attention being given to their
effects.
Reduction in career and development opportunities
In round 1, respondents reported that change in organisation purpose/strategy
and organisation redesign has had an adverse effect on career and development
opportunities and was leaving the organisation devoid of essential capabilities:
The overwhelming changes in technical guidelines and policies, the lack
of training and the increasing use of external consultants, have adversely
affected career prospects (Focus Group R1A).
‘Outside’ people are getting the available positions because their own people are
not getting the breadth of experience and training to allow them to compete with
external applicants on merit (Focus Group R1C). Performance reviews and the
development of individual training programs are often neglected. Valuable
employees last only three to four years before moving to more challenging
positions in other public sector organisations and the private sector. There is a
feeling of:
Deep frustration and despair over the lack of managerial attention to these
matters. Massive stress associated with the excessive workloads and long
working hours is unrecognised by the hierarchy and calls for help go
unheeded (Focus Group R1F).
In round 2 and 3, respondents, while acknowledging career working groups,
reiterated concerns about reduced opportunities for professional and career
development. Informal mentoring arrangements largely serve the purpose of
transferring technical knowledge; there is little emphasis on career and personal
mentoring or on addressing the growing age gap in levels of expertise and their
179
profound detrimental effects on the department’s future workforce capabilities
(Focus Group R2C). Respondents feet that management often does not recognise
the capabilities, skills and specialties that staff has developed.
In round 4, the themes reflected in earlier rounds emerged. There are fewer
career opportunities and those that do exist are linked to greater mobility,
insufficient attention given to succession planning, inadequate mentoring, and
Road building focus Managerial/financial focus Reaction: Polarised; about more than building roads; philosophical shift – de-engineered Tensions: Loss of technical expertise; loss of technical excellence; core versus consultation tasks; management reporting with unknown or uncertain value; career and development implications, particularly range of experience available
Operations-driven Strategy-driven Reaction: Positive, contemporary management practice; establish why organisation does what it does; potentially deals with looming problems particularly related to loss, to retirement, of large number of experienced engineers (succession planning) Tensions: Complex problems not confronted; strategy unclear; complexity of shift; perception of regression
Departmental autonomy & closed to external influence
Whole-of-Government & open to external influence
Reaction: Positive; can no longer ignore the realities of the real world; success experiences (Success Stories); social responsibility; greater maturity organisationally and in community; knowledge for decision making Tensions: Inter-departmental relationships; budget diffusion; knowledge, skill, time & resource demands; balancing core tasks and community consultation tasks
Highly decentralised and customised systems & service delivery
Greater centralisation and standardised systems & service delivery
Reaction: Negative (thought traditional organisation under-organised in terms of demonstrating performance against Whole-of-Government objectives and priorities) Tensions: Perception of reduced level of service; loss of customisation; round peg, square hole; paradoxical given that aim organisationally is flexible, responsive, decentralised learning organisation
Single dominant discipline Multidisciplinary
Reaction: Positive: enhances Main Roads capabilities in multiple fields; enhanced reputation as leader in multiple fields; reflects Whole-of-Government orientation Tensions: Diffusion of budget, non-core activities reduces investment in roads
211
Table 6.1 continued
Individual-based structure Team-based structure Reaction: Polarised: individual judgement and autonomy versus greater collaboration in meeting demands Tensions: Role ambiguity, increased ‘politics’; shifting burden of responsibility to team; team decision making; increased workload
In-house capabilities Outsourcing Reaction: Negative, though ameliorated by policy change in the direction of creating more permanent positions and rebuilding in-house capability Tensions: Loss of ownership of road network; lack of consultant commitment to road network; limited transfer of knowledge from consultants; loss of expertise, loss of career competitiveness; loss of professional work experience
Predictable/controllable career & development opportunities
Restricted & less controllable career and development opportunities
Reaction: Negative and much stronger in Corporate than in Commercial Tensions: Inadequate mentoring; outsourcing; workloads; external appointments; changed nature of work means less experience; loss of organisational knowledge and expertise
Top-down techno-structural change processes
Top-down techno-structural change processes (no change)
Reaction: Negative; change management practices reaffirmed pre-existing change management schema: Main Roads doesn’t manage change well, though we do it better than other departments; want period of consolidation and stabilisation; slowed by round 4; spatial differentiation buffers to some degree Tensions: Unclear direction; incomplete diagnosis before implementation; limited or token opportunities for input; inadequate resourcing of change; excessive pace and frequency of change; regression; horrendous workloads; perception of limited trust in organisational member capabilities; change not clearly linked to strategy
Emotional tone: Can-do; like Main Roads, pride; ordered social system, absence of ambiguity
Emotional tone: Disempowered, overwhelmed; need for consolidation and stabilisation; increased cynicism; remain committed, though tested: much ambiguity and uncertainty
Reaction: Negative, though some variation across sites Tensions: Lack of control; feeling over-whelmed – demands exceed capacity; need for consolidation and stabilisation; horrendous workloads; pace and frequency of change
*Left-hand pole anchors were drawn from Chapter 4, that is, organisational
members’ constructions of the traditional organisation
212
CHAPTER 7: COMMERCIAL CHANGE TRAJECTORY
INTRODUCTION
The previous chapter explored the efficacy of change leader interventions for
achieving qualitative schema change in the context of shifting Corporate Main Roads
from operations-driven road builder to strategic-owner of the road system. The
chapter found that (a) with exceptions, the techno-structural interventions were not
experienced as facilitative of change, (b) configurational schema change was not
achieved though critical sub-schema change was, (c) contrary to expectation,
juxtaposition-relocation rather than disengagement-learning and teleological rather
than dialectical processes better explained schema change dynamics, and (c)
contextual attributes, professionalism and distance, did hinder intervention influence.
This chapter investigates the relationship between change leader interventions and
organisational schema change in the second schema change context created by the
1996 truncation of the organisation. In particular, the chapter investigates the
efficacy of change leader interventions designed to facilitate the development of the
commercialised-provider organisation, a second-order or transformational change
(Bartunek & Moch, 1987).
THE INTERVENTIONS
From the perspective of Commercial Main Roads, the goal of the truncation of the
organisation was to shift the organisation from an operations-driven road builder to a
profit-driven provider of infrastructure delivery services within a Whole-of
Government policy environment (paraphrased from reported and internal
documents). Specifically, Commercial Main Roads is (a) becoming a commercial
profit-driven organisation while providing Whole-of-Government outcomes, (b)
adopting a highly accountable and performance-driven organisation for the future,
and (c) developing a continuous improvement mindset and organisational change
capability (Queensland Government, 2002b).
213
A key element of this shift is a fundamental change in core business. Specifically,
the change was designed:
To change the culture of the place and to move away from that strong
technical excellence of an engineering culture to a paradigm that runs on a
parallel set of railway tracks, which is the Project Management concept. The
core business that we’re in is not engineering, but project management,
which is the core business of our future (Commercial manager 2001).
A second critical intervention was the large-scale human process intervention
discussed in Chapter 5. The environment created by the large-scale human process
intervention triggered a series of subsequent interventions designed to progress the
development of new formal organisational arrangements and new organisational
schemata.
Change leaders in this sub-organisation choose, consistent with the Three Frames, a
large-group intervention (Bunker & Alban, 1997) designed to determine the
organisational design and capabilities required to create a successful profit-driven
infrastructure delivery organisation. Large-group interventions are methods for
involving the whole system, internal and external, to the change process. They
involve a critical mass of the people affected by change, both inside the organisation
(employees and management) and outside it (suppliers and customers) (Bunker &
Alban, 1997)(xv).
A key goal of the intervention was to gain the commitment and ownership of the
change process by all employees. The outcome of the large-group intervention was a
change management plan, Project 21, which focused on whole-of-organisation
change including culture change (the creation of a project management culture),
techno-structural change, and the development of new organisational capabilities.
In summary, this chapter investigates the relationship between change leader
interventions and organisational schema change in the context of efforts to
substantially replace the traditional organisation with a viable commercialised
organisation.
214
ANALYTICAL STRATEGY
As in previous chapters the analysis is divided into a first-order analysis and a
second-order analyses. The first order analysis explores organisational members’
accounts to establish their constructions of the changing organisation at four points
in time. The second-order analysis, provided at the end of the chapter, interprets
first-order concepts in terms of the relationship between change leader interventions
and organisational schema change.
The data are presented by data collection round. However, given the high degree of
consistency in respondents’ accounts in rounds 2 and 3 (and across the four rounds
generally), these rounds have been amalgamated. To maintain coherence of data in
each round, analysis of the data is provided at the end of the round rather than at the
end of each subsection.
RESULTS
CONTENT CHANGE
Organisational purpose
The dominant theme in Round 1 was the adverse effect of the restructure of the
organisation into owner-provider on Commercial Main Roads and on its
relationships with Corporate Main Roads. Respondents felt the restructure was not
well conceptualised or managed. They felt they were put into an impossible
situation in that they had to compete and make a profit or face the prospect of
downsizing yet faced significant restrictions on their ability to compete.
Respondents reported that high levels of organisational stress existed at this time.
Respondents typically experienced the restructure on owner-provider lines as sudden
and involving little preparation of people or the organisation for the new role
demands that would be imposed on them:
One Friday you are working for the State, the next Monday you are no longer
serving the public, and are having to worry about the bottom line (Focus
Group R1-1).
215
Furthermore, there was a perceived absence of a clear strategy for realising the
objectives of the owner-provider split:
With the transition from public sector operations to competing in a market
environment tendering for work against contractors, there was initially no
real direction given on how to get the job done (Focus Group R1-5).
In some cases, technical professional managers were ill-prepared for their new role
as managers of a competitive business:
We had managers who were thrown into being accountable for funds and
had to manage it in a very different way than they were used to. The
managers we used to have say eight plus years ago were engineers or people
who were at a very high level in their profession who were very good at what
they did and that was engineering, and I’m only speaking from the technical
side, so engineers or senior draftsmen, and all of a sudden these people were
then told you have to manage in a commercial business and had absolutely
no idea what to do. So some grasped it and some didn’t. I was caught
watching the ones who did succeed and I was watching the ones who were
drowning (Focus Group R1-2).
Respondents’ reactions to the large-scale human process intervention of Director-
General Varghese were viewed much more positively than the structural
intervention. Varghese was viewed as a respected and strong leader (Focus group
R1-2). Varghese’s influence was attributed to the Three Frames and its associated
“unblocking” strategies. Unblocking referred to the collective identification of
significant blockages to organisational transformation, and the creation of
committees to address those blockages. The Relationship Frame, in particular, was
reported to have had a positive impact on coordination across Commercial Main
Roads.
Furthermore, Varghese initiated structural realignment in a way that was not
altogether characteristic of public sector restructuring: he realigned Main Roads
structure to business needs rather than align business to structure (Focus Group R1-
2).
216
In addition, Varghese expanded the organisation’s governance structure from the top
four managers to top twenty-five managers. As a consequence, Commercial
managers had direct access to a member of the Senior Management Group; a person
with a relevant portfolio and through whom they could report procedures and
progress. Finally, Varghese was thought to have provided an environment in which
planning and development of the new Commercial Main Roads could be advanced.
This planning resulted in a formal change management plan, Project 21.
In summary, respondents reacted differently to the two interventions, radical
restructure and large-scale human process intervention. The radical restructure
created an environment in which change was required yet there was little evidence of
facilitation of organisational member sensemaking. Indeed, the environment created
tended to trigger dysfunctional conflict both between Commercial Main Roads and
Corporate Main Roads and within each sub-organisation. The large-scale process
intervention was viewed much more positively. This intervention triggered changes
that provided key organisational members with the means and an environment in
which needed change could be planned and implemented.
Respondents’ reactions to the change in organisational core purpose created by the
restructure were polarised. Some respondents were highly supportive of the split and
others felt that Commercial Main Roads should be reintegrated with Corporate Main
Roads. This is a critical finding in that it is contrary to the findings of Balogun &
Johnson. This issue will be taken up in the second-order analysis.
Some respondents believed that the concept of commercialisation was fundamentally
flawed; it was seen as pseudo-commercial; still having to serve the people of
Queensland and trying to act like a hardened contractor (Focus Group R1-1).
Others questioned the need for the owner – provider split; there was a feeling that
Main Roads could have commercialised without creating a division in the
department. The problem the group felt was that senior management of the day were
too easily influenced by politicians.
217
Respondents reported that the restructure on owner-provider lines had an adverse
impact on people in Commercial because, apart from the isolation of being
physically separated from Corporate Main Roads, the Commercial workforce was
constantly being downsized, leaving them with a feeling of being doomed (Focus
Group R1-4) and in a half way land (Focus Group R1-1).
In addition, respondents believed the commercialisation was detrimental to the
quality of the road system; an indication that some organisational members were
evaluating the change in terms of traditional technical excellence values. For
example, the conflict between the former concern with technical excellence and
quality of work and the need to be efficient and competitive was problematic:
Quality tends to go out the window when budgetary constraints leave you
with little or no option but to use cheaper materials and the most cost
efficient work practices; everything revolves around the dollar (Focus Group
R1-1).
This proficiency-efficiency conflict is further exacerbated, respondents reported, by
being governed by Corporate Main Roads’ policies and specifications. Respondents
also reported that they had to meet these expectations but they were not financed or
resourced to compete with private contractors who could cut corners and compete
with lower costs (Focus Group R1-1).
Respondents also mentioned the restrictions placed on them and the effect this had
on their competitiveness. For example, the organisation was not permitted to tender
for some jobs as Government policy dictated that a large percentage of State funding
allocated to road construction go to the private sector nor were they able to advertise
in the open market. They felt they were treading a fine line; any shift in the balance
will result in downsizing (Focus Group R1-4). Consequently, respondents felt like
they were trying to run a business with one hand tied behind our backs (Focus
Group R1-4).
Respondents felt that the success of the transformation of Commercial hinges on
changing culture:
218
Turning a traditional long standing public sector organisation into a
commercial business and overcoming the established territorial culture of
Commercial units in districts and regions to enhance improved cooperation,
communication, and creativity and innovation with every unit having access
to one State-wide pool of resources (Focus Group R1-2).
Despite the constraints imposed, there was polarisation in respondents’ views about
the future viability of commercialisation in Main Roads. Some respondents reported
that if Commercial was fully commercialised we would not be able to compete in the
open market due to systems and process overheads imposed by Corporate (Focus
group R1-1). Furthermore, there was a feeling that Commercial should go back to
Corporate so that we can focus on doing a decent job building roads that we know is
going to last its design life (Focus Group R1-1).
However, other respondents, despite having to juggle competing in the external
market to make a profit, maintaining existing workforce size and not being able to
increase market share, expressed much greater levels of confidence in their ability to
succeed and believed they were well positioned to accept the challenge of
privatisation (Focus Group R1-2). Respondents attributed their rapid adaptation to a
commercial focus to becoming more goals-orientated, more conscious of stringent
time deadlines, working smarter, being flexible and providing value added services:
I tend to think that the government split us all up so we’re competitive and
we’re a lot more goal-orientated and we’re a lot more competitive within
ourselves, within our groups and that sort of thing as well.
So, that’s been a good thing?
Yes, at the end of the day it’s a little more meaningful.
I suppose if you are able to get a better value for money and ….. just like it
had in our area. We’ve certainly done that. Improvements and everything
that’s taken place (Focus Group R1-2).
A greater focus on being entrepreneurial was a key shift for respondents across
research sites. For example, respondents reported that entrepreneurial activity had
increased and, consequently, their capabilities and their confidence.
219
Being in [Commercial], I think has made us a lot more skilled in different
areas like we’re doing a lot of things out of the ordinary that we were
probably doing in the last three years when I started, now we’re competing
for a lot of small jobs like schools and car parks, boat ramps. We’re just
about to start a job out at [site name deleted] doing all roads and that sort of
thing. It’s broadened our wings. To do different things and compete in the
open market (Focus group R1-5).
Having to become more accountable was another key strategic shift identified by
respondents. In this context there was a tendency to contrast the levels of
accountability required of them and that required in Corporate Main Roads.
Commercial Main Roads had to justify every dollar spent while simultaneously
having to operate under Corporate standards and purchasing policies; they were
expected to be extremely flexible in work practices, particularly in terms of their
willingness to be mobile, then required to give all the profit back to regional office
leaving nothing to reinvest back into the business (Focus Group R1-4).
If we do this, we can save ourselves a bit of time because, I still think the
Public Service hasn’t changed that much that we don’t say a deadline, yeah
maybe we can let it slip until tomorrow, sort of thing. We’re not as bad as
what we were when I first started, but at the same time, they’re kind of
thinking ohhh. You’re always conscious of it – you’re commercial focus and
so you do try and put in a little bit of effort, extra effort in to get things done
on time or to a cost or whatever it is that you’re asked (Focus group R1-5).
Experience of uncertainty about the future was a key theme in the round 1 data. In
this context, respondents had no real vision of the future; the future remains very
much an unknown (Focus Group R1-4). People are still coming to terms with
commercialisation and have little concept of what management is trying to achieve.
Moreover, respondents reported that there are small pockets of resistance at all levels
of the organisation and that it is difficult to get the message down to the coalface.
Respondents felt their future was controlled by Corporate Main Roads, not by them
(Focus Group R1-2) and it was unclear whether they would be sold off or rejoin
Corporate. As discussed above, for some research sites there was ongoing and deep
220
concern about the prospect of privatisation; the existing structure and systems would
never allow the group to successfully compete in the private sector; no private sector
organisation would carry the overheads that Commercial does (Focus Group R1-4).
Rounds 2 and 3 were characterized by a growing collective confidence in
organisational members’ ability to compete in the marketplace. While respondents
reported that they were still operating within very tight budgetary constraints, they
had had some success in tendering for open market work and the expectation is that
more work will be tendered for outside the region and with external customers and
this financial year Commercial has made a profit for the first time in five years and,
consequently, morale has improved (Focus group R3-4).
In the context of declining budgets, and a downward trend in traditional work, it is
finding ways of diversifying into non-traditional infrastructure delivery markets to
broaden its customer base.
Successful competitiveness was attributed to; (1) a perception that up-skilling, for
example, project management skills, has created higher capability levels, (2)
organisational members had more experience working in the commercial
environment, and (3) the organisation had been benchmarked by the private sector
on how to produce quality work with limited amounts of money.
Respondents have been successful in overcoming an adversarial contracting
environment and are creating an alliance environment with local governments, utility
providers, other inter-state road authorities, and private contractors. As a result there
has been greater integration of road strategies, the sharing of resources and keeping
employment within local communities Moreover, Commercial Main Roads has
been able to continually reframe and restructure the way it provides services and
generates revenue with increasing emphasis on making sure clients are getting value
for money and are getting what they want.
Building alliances was a key element of the organisation’s perceived strategy. In the
context of declining budgets and internal and external pressure to demonstrate value-
adding, Commercial will need to create more alliances with Local Governments and
221
build cooperative relationships with private contractors and other land use and road
network stakeholders to maintain the levels of budgets needed to stay in business
(Focus Group R3-2). Alliances provide a better chance of winning tenders on
bigger projects (Focus Group R3-3), encourage resource sharing, create job
opportunities (Focus Group R3-1) and provide valuable experience and ... a better
perspective of how outside contractors operate (Focus Group R3-3).
Despite the development of these alliances, however, there has been concern in some
areas about a projected downturn in available work over the next three to four years.
Coupled with a dramatic drop in the allocation of corporate funding for road
construction, it is expected that the organisation will be much smaller in the future or
possibly parts sold off.
Change will also impact on the nature of work undertaken. Commercial will become
more involved in the rehabilitation and maintenance of the network asset rather than
in the construction of roads and bridges. As a consequence, over the next couple of
years internal alignments between Corporate and Commercial will have to become
tighter to facilitate growth and continuous learning (Focus Group R3-2).
Respondents reported that Commercial is still struggling with not being able to
compete on a level playing field with private contractors and others; Commercial
should have a preferred supplier arrangement with Main Roads. The main issue is
that while Commercial Main Roads:
Is being pushed to embrace commercial principles, there are continual
impediments with the rules and regulations and associated overhead costs of
being part of government (Focus Group R2-5).
Consequently, (a) Commercial is still treading a fine line between winning tenders
on price whilst trying to maximise the quality of the work produced (b) Commercial
does not have the funding to put on new staff or trainees, age profiles of workers in
the field are rising and it is recognised that business performance will begin to suffer
as lost injury time indicators are on the increase and (c) that the quality of the
regional road network had deteriorated and that, consequently, there has been a trend
toward road maintenance work rather than major construction work.
222
As a result of these impediments, there have been fewer opportunities for younger
staff to engage in big projects (Focus Group R2-1). It is also difficult to train staff in
the context of continual shortages and excessive workloads; this is viewed as
detrimental to career progression, both professionally and organisationally. The
group felt there should be a greater focus on workforce planning, having staff and
resources in the right areas, and increasing the level of training for road workers.
As in earlier rounds, a continuing theme was the contradictions inherent in operating
simultaneously in both public and private spheres; they:
Continue to grapple with a competing agenda of having to win open market
tenders based on the lowest price, deliver a quality product, while making a
three percent profit and operating within an accountability framework that
creates excessive overheads (Focus Group R3-1).
The experience of public-private contradictions is intensified by three factors. First,
respondents perceived a tendency for Corporate to be more concerned with being
proficient than with being efficient, which significantly increased duplication.
Second, Commercial has to maintain a permanent workforce increasing their
dependence on Corporate to ensure future contracts. Third, there are still marked
differences between Commercial and the private sector in the way they can compete
and operate in the same market: private contractors have a more flexible orientation
to quality, safety and workforce flexibility, whereas Commercial is bound by less
flexible public sector rules and regulations.
As discussed in Chapter 5, respondents find Commercial’s strategic direction
difficult to interpret and, therefore, it is not always clear what is required or needs to
be implemented at the grassroots level. Consequently, there is some confusion and
uneasiness over the possible directions that Main Roads may take to future
commercialisation and privatisation. Yet, there is also an acknowledgement that
there is no going back:
Although [Commercial] has insufficient resourcing and funding with
workloads increasing and deals continually with the threat of downsizing in
223
the organisation, it is in a position where it cannot turn back (Focus Group
R2-1).
Despite business successes and greater levels of collective confidence, respondents
still reported high levels of uncertainty about their collective future. The consensus
was that it was anyone’s guess where the organisation will be in five years time
(Focus Group R3-1). Commercial’s future was governed by forces outside their
control. In particular, Commercial is influenced to a significant degree by the
political climate of the time (Focus Group R3-3). Consequently, they expect
Commercial will remain relatively dependent on Corporate Main Roads for work
over the next few years regardless of advances made in alliance contracting and
diversification.
In addition, concern was expressed about the fuzzy picture reflected in messages
from the higher echelons of Corporate Main Roads regarding their commitment to
the concept of commercialization (Focus Group R3-5). Some conflict has been
developing at the regional level over the department’s obligations to support local
employment and the recent orientation towards becoming a flexible State-wide
business. Whether cooperation exists or not between Commercial and Corporate
Main Roads at the regional level depends largely upon the persuasion and influence
exerted by the particular District Director. Staff is unsure and concerned about their
job security and future direction (Focus Group R3-5).
In the face of high level uncertainty, respondents suggested that strong leadership
and a consistent strategic vision that leaders link back to belief systems is vital for
workers to feel empowered and secure in their employment. Management:
Should take on greater responsibility to translate the strategic direction of
the organisation to the workers to cultivate a better understanding and sense
of stability in employment (Focus Group R3-2).
In round 4, respondents again acknowledged the organisation’s shift from a
technical-engineering focus to a new operating philosophy [project management]
and the development of external and internal relationships (Focus Group R4-3).
Respondents also continued to see their competitive success (and continuity of work)
224
in terms of actively engaging in alliances with external stakeholders, diversification,
and increasing their skills and expertise though exposure to other contractors.
At the same time, there was a view that the organisation has a focus on extreme
accountability and appeasing the public rather than ensuring that quality work is
achieved safely. Commercial has to be accountable for every cent spent and to
maintain a permanent local work force, private contractors do not. This conclusion
they felt was supported by evidence from the organisation’s reward system;
Excellence Awards are focused on community engagement rather than on the core
business of doing a quality job (Focus Group R4-1).
For the most part their efforts had been successful; they reported a lessening of their
dependence on Corporate for work from the initial 90%. This shift was a function of
Commercial’s growing reputation for providing quality work and not cutting corners
to win tenders has spread across local government and the private sector. The
building of these external relationships has been promoted by decreasing funds
available from Main Roads to sustain future commercial development and the
unrealistic expectations across the department of what can be achieved within
worsening budgetary constraints.
Respondents were also concerned not just with profit generation but also with the
social impact of their operations. For example, respondents reported the need to
establish closer relationships with local government to ensure that Commercial
doesn’t take bread and butter work away from local people (Focus Group R4-2).
Respondents felt this was particularly important in remote areas were partnerships
create employment and business opportunities for local people. Hence, dealing with
cultural heritage issues is at the forefront of many of these initiatives.
In addition, Corporate Main Roads was not addressing the uncertainty in
Commercial about its future. Indeed, there was a high degree of experienced
uncertainty about the future of Commercial. In particular, there was a perception
that Corporate was more concerned with short-term revenue gain than on how
Commercial’s long-term viability could contribute to Main Roads’ future.
225
This short term orientation has created significant levels of competition between
business units across the state. Business units need to be able to work cooperatively
and support each other, in order to quell the under-utilisation of resources in some
areas and scarcity in others. Overall, respondents had a sense that this had yet to be
worked out:
They need to work out what they want the organisation to look like in the
future and communicate that vision to employees in such a way that it is not
so open to different interpretations (Focus Group R4-1).
The constraints that bureaucratic controls and Corporate’s perceived internal focus
(Focus Group R4-3) placed on Commercial’s scope for innovation and viability was
a continuing issue; internal conflict and tension continue to rise from the
contradiction of trying to work within a commercial orientation and autonomous
work ethic while being constrained by bureaucratic controls (Focus Group R4-2)
and feeling frustrated and shackled by the amount of corporate overheads it has to
carry (Focus Group R4-4). Respondents felt they were trying to be commercial but
they felt they have still got the big rope on. Yet, in terms of the future, they see that
Commercial is actively positioning itself for future viability in the industry. They
believed that Main Roads still has a long way to go.
Consequently, respondents argued that Commercial should not be judged solely in
dollar terms but also on its contribution to Whole-of-Government outcomes.
Another point of contention in the relationship was the perception that while
Commercial’s employment numbers are decreasing to maintain commercial
viability, the numbers of corporate employees appear to be increasing; a point of
contention for this group.
On a more positive note, respondents acknowledged that under Steve (Director-
General) there is a better balance between above the green line and below the green
line issues (Focus Group R4-3). This group also believed that the 25-year plan,
Roads Connecting Queenslanders, was a positive intervention in that it provides a
framework for people to work towards and for implementing business plans.
226
Relational environment
Change in core organisational purpose created a need for a new relational
environment: the organisation needed to develop new types of relationship with
external clients and stakeholders, with Corporate Main Roads, and between business
units within Commercial.
The truncation of the organisation into owner and provider was problematic for
Commercial – Corporate relationships; it was described as a messy divorce rather
than a planned separation (Focus Group R1-2) and it caused a split in the expertise
of the department; a lot of senior experienced people opted to work in Commercial
to the detriment of the skills base in Corporate (Focus Group R1-3).
As a result, there were:
Real divisions between the corporate and commercial workforces with a
them-and-us mentality emerging; the sharing of ideas stopped, resources
were claimed and hidden and working relationships suffered (Focus Group
R1-1).
The issues in this relationship were intensified by Commercial Main Roads
dependence on Corporate Main Roads for projects to sustain its workforce. Indeed,
the relationship was frequently described in power-dependency terms; District Office
issued the instructions and Commercial had to comply; the owners and the doers
(Focus Group R1-1). The risks in this dependency relationship posed significant
concern for respondents.
Not only did the restructure have an adverse impact on the relationship between
Corporate and Commercial, it also adversely impacted on inter-unit relationships
within Commercial. An ‘us-and-them’ mentality [developed] within Commercial
itself (Focus Group R1-2). This internal conflict was attributed to inter-unit
differences over how quickly they were able to develop a business identity. Rather
than a collective approach to developing the organisation, units tended to operate
individualistically and sometimes competitively.
227
Efforts were made to build the relationship between Commercial Main Roads and
Corporate Main Roads. In particular, a scheme in which staff members rotate
through both areas was established; this scheme facilitates the transfer of skills and
experience and has produced more opportunities for staff in both organisations to
gain perspective, engineering, technical, and administrative experience.
Respondents viewed this intervention very positively.
Another positive initiative has been Commercial’s greater willingness to question
departmental changes and strategies in delivering core business. This has been a
significant shift from the traditional tendency to passively accept changes initiated in
Head Office. As a consequence, Commercial has started to develop a new way of
thinking about how Main Roads delivers services. This reframing of the business
has led to improved inter-unit relationships; they were not bashing each other up
(Focus Group R1-2).
Finally, respondents acknowledged that the Corporate-Commercial relationship had
improved following Director-General Golding’s One- Department and the Main
Roads family policy. However, despite the Director-General’s intervention,
respondents also felt there was still little interface between Commercial and
Corporate.
In rounds 2 and 3, despite improvements, the relationship between Commercial and
Corporate was an ongoing source of concern for Commercial respondents.
Commercial sees itself as different from Corporate; each has a totally different
driving force and focus (Focus Group R2-1). Main Roads consists of two different
cultures (Focus Group R2-4).
Respondents felt that Corporate did not always recognise the implication of these
differences. Different sets of urgency exist, with Commercial having to focus on
greater flexibility and faster decision making to optimise business outcomes.
Corporate needs to be more commercially focused:
Letting go of a lot of the checks and balances to allow Commercial to
become a streamlined, flexible, hybrid organisation that can market its
products effectively (Focus Group R3-5).
228
In particular, the two cultures are different in terms of attitude to accountability;
commercialisation provides for and requires greater accountability in all areas of
operation than is required in Corporate (Focus Group R2-1). In addition, the
group perceived inequity between the two groups; for example, the obvious
anomalies between Corporate and Commercial staff ratios and budgets.
Moreover, their relationship with certain parts of Main Roads is still tense over
territorial issues (Focus Group R2-2). Respondents felt that there are still
significant issues that need to be addressed regarding the business charter and
competition between Commercial and Corporate. The perception was that
Corporate Main Roads’ commercial focus was to be wound back but in reality
things are still very competitive on the ground (Focus Group R2-2).
In some districts, on the other hand, efforts had been made to ensure a good
working relationship between Commercial and Corporate. Respondents reported
that Commercial managers meet regularly with the District Director and staff is
then notified of outcomes. In this way agreement had been reached on how to
deal with issues of concern to Commercial. However, the group felt that when
new changes are initiated at Head Office level, consultation and communication
with branch managers is, at times, overlooked; the trend is to hear the rumours
first then actions follow.
Overall, more progress is necessary to develop cooperation among different
groups within Main Roads, fostering the One-Department philosophy and
encouraging the shift from the adversarial type of relationship based on
protecting one’s own patch (Focus Group R2-2). They recognised that this is
particularly difficult given that there are fourteen Corporate districts across the
state and they have no consistent approach for dealing with Commercial. In
consequence, Commercial is often distinctly disadvantaged when competing
against private contractors in terms of quality of work and time requirements.
229
Nevertheless, respondents also felt that although Commercial is relatively
independent of Corporate, it is important not to lose sight of the fact that the
organisation is a part of the department (Focus Group R3-3).
As in previous rounds, the relationship between Commercial and Corporate was a
key theme in Round 3. Respondents reported some improvement in establishing
relationships with Corporate business units and an increasing interest in project
management, innovative work practices and workforce capabilities from within
Corporate. Yet, Commercial staff operates primarily under hearsay and rumour
(Focus Group R3-5).
Respondents also commented on dysfunctional relationships within Commercial
itself. They believed that State-wide problem solving and decision making is
made difficult because of the inherent competition between the Commercial
branches where success at the project level is assessed on financial performance.
This has implications for the sharing of resources and whether any learning from
post project outcomes is shared across the department. In this context, the group
felt that the overall lack of cooperation and teamwork in some pockets of the
organisation also created inefficiencies.
In round 4, as in earlier rounds, a significant issue was the differing evolutionary
paths of the two organisations. Commercial was standardising its business
practices yet each Corporate Region and District had its own way of doing
business, a leftover from the traditional organisation. The lack of standardisation
in Corporate is limiting Commercial’s competitiveness.
Yet, as was the case in earlier rounds, respondents acknowledged the
interventions designed to improve the Commercial-Corporate relationship. At the
same time, there was some scepticism that this would be successful, however
given the difficulty Corporate has in understanding Commercial’s business and
customer focus.
230
Organisational redesign
The change in core organisational purpose also had implications for organisational
design. In order to be competitive, change leaders embarked on a program of
organisational redesign.
In round 1, respondents acknowledged the structural integration of the four
Commercial groups into a Commercial operations group; now they see themselves as
one organisation from a State and regional perspective. As a part of this integration,
organisational flexibility and inter-unit working relationships improved:
People are making an effort to open up lines of communication and are
willing to share resources and expertise (Focus Group R1-1).
In addition, all research sites commented on their positive experience of structural
change at the micro-level; the current work organisation allows them greater
challenge, requires them to think, and be more accountable:
You used to get paid from the neck down, now you have to think as well.
Although overworked, stressed and under-resourced, working for
[Commercial] offers more autonomy, challenges, and responsibilities than
working for the Corporate side (Focus Group R1-3).
Specifically, respondents felt that both responsibility and authority had been
devolved. For example, respondents felt that they had been given the tools,
authority, and support by the General Manager to achieve business outcomes and
make vital business decisions; and that the organisation does empower people by
allowing more individual autonomy and lateral thinking and does foster open
external and internal communication channels (Focus Group R1-2). Indeed their
experience of empowerment was so positive that some respondents would find it
difficult to work in a public sector context again.
Greater organisational flexibility was also an outcome of organisation redesign.
Work crews and administrative employees are now required to perform construction
and maintenance work around all parts of the region and consequently have to spend
231
more time in the field away from their families. This situation is causing stress as
they try to balance work and family commitments.
The development of a team structure is also contributing to greater organisational
flexibility and innovativeness; there is a continual forming and reforming of teams
to accommodate workload peaks and troughs (Focus Group R1-5). Furthermore:
Specialised people are moving around the region transferring their skills to
those areas where they are needed. Work is dispersed to where it can be
handled most efficiently and effectively (Focus Group R1-5).
I personally think that, in the Commercial side, people have tended to
gravitate to the Commercial side that are warned to give things a go or
warned to not be afraid of the change or having to work a bit harder or a bit
smarter of something like that because I find in our design area, we kind of
get our heads together and say well blah, blah, blah. You know, we can do
this and achieve that or something. (Focus Group R1-5)
Across all research sites, respondents expressed concerns about the viability of
public sector HR, financial and administrative systems and procedures. Corporate
accounting are dragging us down from providing a reasonable return on investment
(Focus group R1-3). HR recruitment and selection and reward systems make it
difficult to attract and retain talented people:
Traditional bureaucratic public sector positions with their duties and
selection criteria no longer fit this organisation (Focus Group R1-2).
In rounds 2 and 3, as in round 1, respondents acknowledged the evolving horizontal
integration of Commercial into a state-wide business. Respondents saw emerging
benefits associated with the redesign including improved lateral communication and
cooperation, resource and experience sharing, greater flexibility in staffing and
reduced fragmentation of skills and resources.
There has been a shift from being concerned primarily with local ‘backyard’ issues
to working under a State-wide product, whole-of-business model:
232
Learning is now being exchanged more freely and people are being
encouraged to be innovative in their approach so as to gain the greatest
benefits for the organisation (Focus Group R3-2).
However, reservations about the restructure were emerging. The restructure created
more financial cost centres which re-ignited internal competition:
Creating conflict among work groups to make the almighty dollar and,
thereby, splitting Main Roads even further apart (Focus Group R2-4).
Moreover, the drive for consistency in business systems through Project 21 is also a
source of concern. Standardisation makes it less likely that districts will be able to
meet local customer needs. They believe that every area of the state is a totally
different market. The issue is to make sure that Main Roads districts are more
closely aligned in their operations and increase levels of trust.
The restructure to a State-wide business based on product lines also raised concerns
that major projects would be managed by specialists from Brisbane rather than by
the regions and districts. For this group, this change would mean a loss of individual
identity and sense of local direction (Focus Group R3-3). Furthermore, managing
projects from Brisbane may cause some tension between project managers coming
into the district and the local workforce. The perception may be that the work could
not be handled locally.
The restructure will result in the need for fewer construction workers and the
remaining workers will be required to be very mobile and travel to major projects.
The perception is that the districts’ skill sets, expertise and aging workforce restricts
the high level of mobility that will be required for major projects, and some level of
external subcontracting will occur.
Project management methodology, and the training associated with it, has had
positive outcomes. Project management is producing a better-educated management
team who are more accountable and aware of what the business requires so they can
effectively exchange information across the organisation.
233
In round 4, respondents again acknowledged the emerging integration of the
business and its significance for the continued viability of Commercial Main Roads:
Work boundaries have changed and responsibilities have broadened and
there is a greater focus on State-wide business (Focus Group R4-4).
Overall, the general feeling was that redesigning the business would unite the
different commercial units, improve financial accountability, enhance the public’s
awareness of what the organisation does and facilitate the marketing of new and
existing products. In addition, the transition has encouraged networking and greater
transfer of knowledge and expertise between regions and districts; organisational
members are now being able to talk about concerns and successes with a wider circle
of people. In addition, there are greater opportunities for relieving in different
positions across the State.
As in earlier rounds, several reservations about the restructure were raised. There
was a concern that the new State-wide structure would result in a loss of local
identity, impede communication and would increase staff mobility requirements.
Under these circumstances, balancing work and family issues would be increasingly
difficult (Focus Group R4-1).
In addition, respondents raised concerns about the implications of devolving
administrative paperwork responsibilities to fieldworkers; devolution has increased
complexity; has dramatically complicated the process of accountability and financial
control, increased workload without extra resources and increased stress levels.
As in earlier rounds, respondents were very positive about the value of the project
management intervention:
Project management has increased accountability and improved risk
management and has encouraged people to plan and work a lot smarter
(Focus Group R4-3).
The standardisation of systems and processes and the formal training that has gone
with these interventions is starting to produce greater consistency across the state;
the training, which is linked to nationally-endorsed competencies, is a positive
234
intervention. However, some respondents also felt that more importance should be
placed on maintaining engineering and technical expertise in the organisation
(Focus Group R4-1).
Workloads
Change in core organisational purpose and in organisational design imposed
significant workload demands. Respondents in Commercial Main Roads reported
significant concerns about much higher workloads across all levels of the
organisation and across all data collection rounds:
Staff at grass roots level suffer information overload as they had to know how
to comply with legislative requirements, including cultural heritage,
environmental protection, and occupational health and safety (Focus Group
R1-3).
In addition, respondents felt that the department is consistently pushing for tighter
project deadlines with expectations, particularly relating to financial reporting, being
far too high. These expectations can affect the quality of work output and whether
the needs of the wider public are being met. So respondents experience conflict
about which master [they] are really serving (Focus Group R2-4).
Career and development opportunities
The ongoing transformation of the organisation was adversely affecting career and
development opportunities. There was a perception that professionals no longer had
the opportunity to work on big projects and that this was impacting on their
professional development.
This, along with the design of a much flatter organisational structure, has resulted in
blocked internal career paths, less sharing of departmental knowledge and expertise,
and has reduced staff morale:
[Staff] don’t know what the big picture is, have nothing to aspire to and do
not know what Main Roads is after in its people (Focus Group R4-5).
235
CHANGE PROCESS
Change implementation processes were frequently referred to in respondents’
accounts of change.
As discussed earlier in this chapter, the process of splitting the organisation into
Corporate Main Roads and Commercial Main Roads was viewed negatively.
However, without suggesting that no efforts were made to develop the organisation
in the interim, a major process initiative in the 1998/1999 resulted in the
collaborative development of a formal change management plan for the organisation,
Project 21.
The process involved a large-scale participative planning process designed to
determine organisational design parameters and get organisational member
ownership of the process and the outcome. Forums and state conferences were
conducted to facilitate organisation-wide implementation of the change agenda.
In round 1, respondents were very positive about Project 21. Respondents expected
the project to bring benefits (networking, communication, financial management).
Over an 18-month planning stage:
The core project team, specialised business consultants, organisational
change management consultants, and a coalition of executive officers have
identified and evaluated the skills, processes and systems necessary to deliver
the core components of the project and facilitate the development of new
business (Focus Group R1-2).
Respondents also reported that continuous incremental change is embedded in their
organisation; every work practice is continually reviewed for quality control and to
streamline the practices further (Focus group R1-5). In this context, respondents
expect to have to become more adaptable to flexible working arrangements. With
this, comes a more hands-on approach; a role for individual leadership and
involvement and a customer service focus.
236
However, concerns were raised about change implementation in the wider Main
Roads. Respondents suggested there was a need for continuity of specific change
programs, for example, the Three Frames and stabilisation of technology, not just a
continual turnover of new ideas. Furthermore, change messages are:
Not reaching everyone outside Brisbane as well as those in Brisbane; change
has to be handled sensitively as blame for problems is attributed to Brisbane
(Focus Group R1-2).
Respondents were also concerned about the constant changes to processes and
systems; changes that cause confusion for managers and staff alike and diminish a
sense of achievement (Focus group R1-4); people need to be consulted, trained and
outcomes assessed before implementation starts. In this context, there was a general
perception that Corporate had limited understanding of what it is like operating in a
commercial environment and did not appreciate that their decisions can have an
adverse impact on Commercial’s long term viability:
Corporate is slower to react and slower to understand that there are broader
issues at stake (Focus group R1-5).
In rounds 2 and 3, the issue of the implementation of new technology and systems
remained a significant issue, particularly the issue of determining change needs
before implementation.
While its full impact had not yet been felt, respondents acknowledged that Project 21
with its focus on the standardisation of quality systems, organisational integration
and project management will generate improvements for the organisation. In
addition, Project 21 has a strong focus on soft skills and providing a clear rationale
for change. However, it has been a difficult process communicating the same
message across a geographically spread, task-oriented, tactile workforce from
diverse backgrounds and educational levels (Focus Group R2-2).
Respondents also suggested that, despite the time and effort devoted to developing
strategies for improving relationships, people issues continue to be a major problem
and are often avoided (Focus Group R2-4). So people are still struggling against the
same opposition in the workplace environment, as some people are not practising
237
what they have learned on this program: respondents want more leadership, more
direction and more commitment from senior management.
Respondents felt there was a need for more leadership, direction and commitment
from senior management. Problems are not being addressed or resolved and to
obtain some middle ground or compromise over issues requires a long drawn out
process often not resulting in win- win outcomes (Focus Group R2-4). They should
have a better appreciation of current successes before making changes for the sake of
change or to merely follow some private sector management technique:
People are not fighting the change but implementation has been very poor
and a lot more attention needs to be given to the way change initiatives are
implemented and explained (Focus Group R3-1).
Moreover, there was some concern about how whatever changes were decided would
be implemented; high-level decisions are generally made with unrealistic time
frames for change to be implemented. Furthermore, these decisions have a far
greater impact on lower levels of the organisation than those making these decisions
would expect (Focus Group R3-2).
Decisions about strategic direction are already made at the top with little cross
sectional input from different groups across the state about what happens on the
ground (Focus Group R3-1). It appears as if people are being consulted but in reality
there are few opportunities given to provide input into future organisational
direction; there is frustration that local knowledge is not trusted by Head Office and
that responsibility is not devolved further down the line (Focus Group R3-1).
On the other hand, other respondents reported that Commercial has taken proactive
steps to reduce inconsistent or mixed messages being communicated throughout the
organisation (Focus Group R3-2). Consistency is difficult to achieve as different
interpretations occur when information is being filtered down several levels.
Another group reported that the work unit operates with open lines of
communication with messages being related to all staff by the individual managers
(Focus Group R3-3).
238
Nevertheless, respondents are aware of the need to seek continuous improvement in
work practices, to attract new business opportunities, to improve customer focus, and
to work harder in the field to ensure that, at the end of the day, they make a profit.
In round 4, Respondent reports of the implementation of change in Commercial
were polarised. One group of respondents said they were encouraged by
Commercial management to be forerunners in implementing new ideas and
embracing and implementing significant change. Their success in this is
demonstrated leadership in all four quadrants of the Balanced Scorecard (one of the
Three Frames). They report a genuine commitment to continuous improvement by
changing organisational culture from a builder of roads to a service provider
responsive to public’s needs (Focus Group R4-2).
At the other pole, respondents reported that change was so rapid and continuous that
there is a great deal of uncertainty about where the organisation is heading; we can
only make assumptions about what the rationale is behind the changes and where
the organisation is heading (Focus Group R4-1). The group felt that the short time
frame between changes destabilises and fragments the organisation.
In addition, these respondents acknowledge the scope of the structural change
(reducing four regions to two) but suggest that details of how the different regions
will make the transition have not yet been communicated and are concerned about
how people will adapt to this restructure; they see that some still protect their patch
and will not readily accept change. At the same time, they see no incentive for
people to look beyond their local responsibilities as they are measured on how their
local unit performs.
Continual change can waste resources; it can send out the wrong message to both
internal and external clients. These respondents reported that by phasing in different
change strategies competently, the organisation would gain a great deal more
enthusiasm and commitment from its staff and credibility with the wider community.
A similar polarisation is apparent in respondent perceptions of change leadership and
communication. One group of respondents remains confident in the openness of
239
vertical communication channels; senior management encourages staff to challenge
decision and asks for feedback on how operations can be improved, for example, at a
recent state-wide conference ideas from staff were voted on and enabled changes to
happen.
On the other hand, some respondents felt their opinions were not having much
impact or were largely ignored. This group felt that their relationship with Head
Office has become more difficult because of increasing number of layers within the
organisation made consultation with lower levels more difficult (Focus Group R4-4).
The implication is that staff will have to meet set parameters and work within a new
framework regardless of whether resources, existing systems and structures at the
regional level will support the changes driven from the top.
Regression
Few explicit concerns were raised about regression in Commercial: pockets of
resistance were acknowledged rather than broad-based resistance. The focus was
very much on a continual change mindset in which respondents were focused on
finding ways of improving the viability of the business.
The first-order analysis has provided a rich description of organisational members’
accounts of the transformation of their organisation. A summary of the main
conclusions from this analysis will be incorporated in the second-order analysis.
SECOND-ORDER ANALYSIS
Consistent with the strategy employed in previous chapters, this section explores the
efficacy of change leader interventions in schematic terms. In particular, consistent
with the framework outlined in previous chapters, change leader interventions are
thought to be more likely when (a) organisational members experience the
interventions as facilitative of change, (b) there is evidence of the replacement or
significant elaboration of pre-existing schema, (c) interventions reinforce dynamics
thought to underpin schema change, and (d) interventions are sensitive to change
management context.
240
Change leader interventions
Change leader interventions are likely to be more efficacious when organisational
members perceive the interventions as facilitative of change. While the Corporate
and Commercial Change Trajectories emerged from the same intervention, a
different intervention theory is reflected in each trajectory. Attention will be given
to clarifying these differences in Chapter 8.
The implicit intervention theory reflected in Commercial suggests the following
intervention sequence. The transformation of Commercial began with the radical
restructure of the organisation. Two years later, a new Director-General initiated a
large-scale human process intervention (Chapter 5) intended to provide
organisational members with the means of advancing OT.
Respondents’ accounts suggest that the radical restructure was traumatic, indeed this
effect seemed more intense than in Corporate in that the perceived costs of failure
were likely to be higher. It was described as a messy divorce rather than a planned
separation. In addition, respondents felt they were inadequately prepared to meet
the demands that the new structure imposed on them. From the perspective of
respondents, and in the absence of an alternative organisational schema, the
intervention created confusion and stress and a tendency for either individualistic or
adversarial behaviour rather than cooperative behaviour (Johnson & Johnson, 1994);
there were reports of fragmentation, a silo and an ‘us-and-them mentality’.
Moreover, the restructure created intense contradictory demands; they were relegated
to a half-way land between profit-driven provider organisation and a public
organisation. In this half-way land they had to satisfy profit expectations and, at the
same time, meet the standards of public policies and regulations. Moreover, the
organisation relied on Corporate for a large proportion of its revenue and while this
dependence declined over the period of the research as organisational members
developed their entrepreneurial capabilities, significant risks were associated with
commercialisation (and the prospect of privatisation).
241
However, as will be discussed in the next section, respondents were polarised on the
potential shift toward privatisation. Some research sites were very confident in their
ability to meet the demands of privatisation should it occur and other sites preferred
a re-integration with Corporate Main Roads. While this polarisation persisted
through the period of the research, there was an general increase in collective
confidence in their capabilities.
The large-scale human process interventions were designed to improve relationships
and provide an environment within which change planning could be advanced. The
outcome was a large-group intervention (Bunker & Alban, 1997) designed to
identify the structures, processes and capabilities required to create a successful
profit-driven provider organisation, and gain organisational members ownership of
and commitment to the process of developing the organisation.
Project 21, a detailed change management plan was the outcome of the large-group
intervention. Project 21 encompassed the development of a project management
culture, organisation structure and systems change. The plan reflected a belief that
strong collective initiative and engagement by organisational members was required
if the organisation was to succeed; the organisation could not succeed by relegating
organisational members to the role of passive recipients of change driven from the
top, the pre-existing orientation to change (see Chapter 4).
An initial focus of the implementation of Project 21 was the development of a
project management culture intended to embed project management capabilities in
the organisation to improve relationships, coordination, knowledge sharing, and
creativity within and among business units. Structural interventions were secondary
to the development of project management capabilities. Indeed, by the end of the
research period, some respondents were complaining about the slowness of
implementation of some aspects of the organisational restructure.
Respondents responded very positively to project management; the intervention did
create an alternative organisational schema and an optimal level of local autonomy to
realise change goals. Moreover, project management capabilities and processes were
directly linked to critical task demands, stimulated creativity and lateral
242
relationships, and contributed to organisational flexibility and staff mobility, in that
the organisation now had a common language that staff could carry with them across
the organisation.
Responses to subsequent techno-structural interventions depended on whether they
emanated from Commercial or Corporate. Responses to top-down systems changes
emanating from Corporate Main Roads were as adverse as those reported by
respondents in Corporate (Chapter 6).
Techno-structural interventions initiated by Commercial were better accepted.
Organisational members could see a clear link between these interventions and
organisational competitiveness, on which the ongoing viability of the organisation
depended. The restructure of the organisation from a highly decentralised, region-
and district-based organisation to a centralised and integrated business is particularly
noteworthy. While respondents expressed reservations about the loss of local
identity and the potential problems related to the relationship between Head Office
based project managers and local staff, there was a clear acceptance of the
restructure. The link between the intervention and organisational competitiveness
and viability was apparent to them.
In summary, while the Corporate and Commercial Trajectories arose from the radical
restructure of the organisation, there were differences in the subsequent intervention
theory that drove choices about where, when and how to intervene to produce OT
(Dunphy, 1996). In Commercial there was evidence of discontinuity in thinking
about change management. Much more weight was put, initially at least, on
Reaction: Positive: task aligned; improved lateral coordination and knowledge sharing; organisational flexibility; change leaders more managerial and less wedded to a professional identity based on engineering Tensions: Loss of technical/engineering expertise; concern with some aspects of implementation
Operations-driven road builder Profit-driven infrastructure delivery provider in Whole-of-Government
Reaction: Polarised: Viability concerns; social responsibility Tensions: Dependence on Corporate; relationship with Corporate; uncertainty about the future of Commercial; imposed constraints on business practice, including public sector administrative systems; collective confidence, loss of quality/technical excellence; perceived deterioration of the roads network
Public sector Spans Public and Private
Reaction: Negative: tempered by dependence on Corporate; evidence of emerging synthesis based on acceptance of best of public and private and rejection of worst Tensions: Paradox; a half-way land; public business and HR systems; potential for downsizing; lack of Corporate empathy; prospect of privatisation under present constraints
Relational environment: Departmental autonomy and closed to external influence
Relational environment: Whole-of-Government and open to external influence; creation of partnerships and alliances
Reaction: Positive: has been successful at building partnerships and alliances Tensions: Job and capability creation in partner workforces
254
Table 7.1 continued
Decentralised and multiple businesses Centralised, integrated business with local autonomy
Reaction: Positive: increased flexibility and competitiveness; improved coordination and sharing of knowledge Tensions: Loss of local perspective and expertise; mobility and flexibility expectations; with concerns for work-family balance; relationship between central project managers and local work teams
Individual-based structure Team-based structure
Reaction: Positive: higher levels of collaboration and participation; increased knowledge-sharing, enhanced coordination, manage workload ‘troughs’; have to think, not just obey; greater organisational flexibility Tensions: none reported
Career and development opportunities Fewer career and development opportunities
Reaction: Negative: no big projects Tensions: External appointments; fewer opportunities as a result of flatter structure; knowledge transfer; nature of work in that there is less scope for big projects
Top-down techno-structural change Top down-bottom-up Continuous improvement
Reaction: Positive with some polarisation: positive when linked to enhanced competitiveness; Project 21; flexibility; adaptability; ownership though concerns about top-down techno-structural change imposed by Corporate Tensions: Imposed Corporate systems change not aligned with business needs
Emotional tone: Can-do; like Main Roads; ordered social system; absence of ambiguity
Polarised from high enthusiasm and confidence to low levels of confidence; tolerance of ambiguity Empowered
Reaction: Polarised: High enthusiasm for Commercial to stress related to meeting demands in the context of uncertain future and work availability Tensions: Prospect of privatisation under current constraints
255
CHAPTER 8: ORGANISATIONAL SCHEMA CHANGE: AN
INTEGRATIVE ANALYSIS
INTRODUCTION
The previous four chapters, Chapters 4-7, investigated the efficacy of change leader
interventions for achieving qualitative schema change in a change management
context thought to be inimical to change leader influence. The interventions were
designed to produce second-order or transformational change (Bartunek & Moch,
1987).
This chapter provides a summary and integrative analysis of the results of these
investigations. Consistent with the research question, the discussion of the efficacy
of change leaders’ interventions focuses on whether (a) the interventions are
experienced by organisational members as facilitative of change, (b) there is
evidence of qualitative schema content change, (c) the interventions reinforce
dynamics assumed to underpin content schema change, and (d) the sensitivity of the
intervention to change management context.
CHANGE LEADER INTERVENTIONS
Change leader interventions are more likely to be efficacious if organisational
members experience the interventions as facilitative of change. Previous conceptual
research on top-down structural interventions, for example, reveals a tendency for
these interventions to mask bottom-up change (Maddock, 2002), create cognitive
disorder in those below top-level leader level (McKinley & Scherer, 2000), and
assign a passive, rather than active role to change recipients (McHugh & O'Brien,
1999).
However, the issue is not clear-cut. Some authors support structural interventions.
Galbraith (2000) argues that structural change can produce behaviour change
relatively quickly. In addition, radical structural change has the potential to create a
256
perception of crisis and unfreezing (Bartunek, 1993) in that radical structural change
disconfirms the status quo.
Within the timescale of this study, two different types of intervention were reflected
in respondent accounts, large-scale structural interventions and large-scale human
process interventions. The sequence of interventions implemented in the case
organisation was as follows (see Figure 3.2 for a graphical overview).
First, in 1996, consistent with State Government strategy (Queensland Government,
1995), the organisation was truncated into strategic-owner organisation (Corporate
Change Trajectory) and commercialised-provider organisation (Commercial Change
Trajectory). Two years later, a new ‘outsider’ Director-General initiated a top-down
large-scale human process intervention (Leadership Change Trajectory), which
provided a new ends-means leading-managing schema to facilitate the realisation of
change in the earlier trajectories.
The large-scale human process intervention (a) triggered change planning in both the
strategic-owner organisation and commercialised-provider sub-organisations, (b)
was directly related to addressing process problems created by the 1996 radical
structural intervention, and (c) was unique in the experience of the case organisation
in that it focused on developing large-scale leading-managing capabilities rather than
technical capabilities.
Change planning triggered by the large-scale human process intervention took a
different course in each sub-organisation. In Corporate, techno-structural
interventions began the transformation change program (Beer & Nohria, 2000a).
The organisation chose to re-align structure with its new core strategic-manager
purpose and to achieve greater consistency in systems and procedures. Accounts
reported in Chapter 6 suggest that techno-structural interventions were an ongoing
feature of the Corporate Change Trajectory.
A different course of action was adopted in the Commercial Change Trajectory
(Chapter 7). In the Commercial Change Trajectory change leaders initiated a large-
group intervention (Bunker & Alban, 1997; Mirvis, 2005). This intervention
257
brought various stakeholders together to (a) create a vision of a successful profit-
driven provider of infrastructure delivery services, (b) identify the capabilities and
resources necessary to realise this vision, and (c) obtain organisational member
ownership of the change process. The outcome was a change management plan,
Project 21, which incorporated multiple interventions, including the development of
a project management culture and large-scale techno-structural change.
Implementation focused first on the development of a project management culture, a
large-scale management process intervention.
Organisational members’ experience of change leader interventions varied by
intervention and by Trajectory. The initial truncation of the organisation produced
behavioural change (though not integrated schema change, which is addressed in
next section), was divisive despite ongoing interdependence between the sub-
organisations, created high levels of organisational stress, and dysfunctional
organisational behaviour. It was a messy divorce rather than a planned separation,
an ‘us-and-them mentality’ developed, there was no strategy, and there were
frequent references to organisational fragmentation, a silo mentality and a siege
mentality.
Moreover, the truncation of the organisation created significant discontinuities in
both sub-organisations and particularly in Corporate. Organisational members in
each sub-organisation were expected to develop a new schema, yet the discontinuity
was so great, it is likely that the capacity to develop this new schema did not pre-
exist in the organisation. Consequently, the learning-development task was
extremely complex and stressful, particularly as there was a perception that failure
could lead to adverse outcomes.
The heavy reliance on structural interventions in the development of the Corporate
Change Trajectory was also contentious. Organisational members were left feeling
overwhelmed by structural change: they felt as though they were at the bottom end
of a funnel and changes were being poured in at the top.
Beyond these findings, however, structural interventions tended to affect the
relationship between top and lower organisational levels in that there was a
258
perception at lower levels that the focus on structural change reflected a lack of trust
by the top. Rather than relying on organisational members’ capabilities, change
leaders tended to rely on imposing interminable structural changes. In addition,
frequent structural change intensified the differential perception of change tempo at
top and bottom of the organisation.
Structural interventions were not always evaluated negatively; some structural
change made sense. Respondents reacted positively to structural changes that
increased role clarity and reduced duplication of function. Moreover, significantly,
the major shift from a decentralised organisation to a more centralised organisation
in Commercial was accepted. Even though there were reservations about the loss of
local identity, the shift made sense in the context of the need for organisational
competitiveness.
Large-scale human process intervention
The focus on large-scale human process interventions in this thesis is unique in the
schema change literature. Across the three schema change contexts, two main
human process interventions were employed. The first was the leading –managing
schema (vision, Three Frames, and Five Signposts) introduced in 1998 to contribute
to organisational transformation. The second was the focus on what Commercial
Main Roads referred to as implementing a project management culture.
The large-scale human process intervention ameliorated the dysfunctional outcomes
of the 1996 radical restructure by (a) sanctioning the development of new
capabilities, (b) challenging traditional and now, inappropriate, organisational norms,
(c) addressing extra- and intra-organisational relationship processes, (d) engendering
greater collective confidence in the organisation’s capacity to progress the change
agenda, (e) facilitated change at the level of the top management team (Porras &
Robertson, 1992), and (f) appealing to organisational members’ commitment to the
organisation.
The results of the leading-managing interventions on organisational process schema
evolution are paradoxical: it had a profound and positive influence on organisational
259
members while, at the same time, its role in transforming organisational leading-
managing processes, at least at the time of the completion of the research, was
unrealised (a point taken up later in this chapter). Taken together, the large-scale
human process intervention served to unfetter the organisation from some change-
inhibiting aspects of the pre-existing organisational schema.
Given that so little attention has been given to large-scale human process
interventions in the empirical literature, organisational members’ experience of each
element of the intervention will be discussed in more detail.
Visioning intervention
The literature on transformational change assigns a central place to visioning
interventions for achieving OT (Kotter, 1995; Porras & Silvers, 1991). Visions are
assumed to provide organisational members with an alternative ends schema to guide
decision making and action. Moreover, visioning interventions are designed to
engage organisational members in the process of change.
Taken together, the new vision had little influence on organisational members’
experience of change. The key impediment was a strong pre-existing belief that the
organisation had no control over its own destiny: the organisation is reactive and
obedient to influences over which it had no control (see Schofield, 2001 for a similar
argument). Consequently, organisational members paid little explicit attention to the
new vision. Instead, organisation members were focused on, and wanted resolution
of, the uncertainty of and perceived threats in the future (e.g., commercialisation,
loss to retirement of a large number of experienced engineers); threats that may well
have been outside the organisation’s control.
Ironically, however, vision did play a role in facilitating change. However, the
vision was implicit to organisational members. Organisational members appeared to
possess a concept of the ideal organisation and when change interventions were
congruent with this implicit vision, change was readily embraced. This issue will be
discussed in the context of schema change dynamics.
260
Leading-managing process interventions
Models of leading and managing are not new: the academic and practitioner
literature is replete with such models (Beer & Nohria, 2000c). Moreover, many
leadership development programs espouse such frameworks. However, these
models are often not integrated with the transformational change agenda of top-level
managers.
In the case organisation, the Three Frames/Five Signposts were a cornerstone of the
transformational change agenda. These models or schema had the potential to serve
two purposes; provide an integrated leading-managing framework to guide practice
and facilitate development and change and to provide a substitute for direct change
leadership.
The results suggest that the Three Frames/Five Signposts were not well integrated
conceptually or practically, across the organisation; for some proportion of staff, the
Three Frames was just a poster on the wall. In particular, their use was not well
reflected in respondents’ constructions of change implementation processes,
particularly in the Corporate Change Trajectory. There was more evidence of their
application in the Commercial Change Trajectory. Nevertheless, by 2003, there
were few references to the Three Frames or the Five Signposts.
The data suggest that these interventions required a significant investment of time
and energy by the change leader. Where there was sufficient evidence to suggest
that they may have made a difference in their twin functions – providing
organisational members with a means of managing organisational development and
change in the direction of the vision and as a substitute for direct change leader
influence – it was in the context of face-to-face involvement of the Director General;
he was able to explain the model and its implications for practice.
Creation of a relational environment
The third element of the large-scale human process intervention was the effort to
create a relational environment in which organisational information processing and
261
decision making could be facilitated with less regard for organisational rank and
status.
The results suggest that this element was highly successful in influencing the way
organisational members construed their organisation. The concept of being
relational was well embedded in organisational discourse and the change has been
sustained over time. This is not to suggest that being relational is embedded in
behaviour. One Director-General estimated that it had about ten percent coverage.
Yet the fact that it was readily embraced at the level of schema suggests a significant
cognitive shift.
Several factors contributed to the success of relationship enhancement interventions
in the organisation: (a) some important relationships with external stakeholders were
adversarial and dysfunctional, (b) intra-organisational relationships had become
adversarial following the truncation of the organisation on strategic-owner and
commercialised provider lines, (c) they proved to be successful in enhancing
relationships, and (d) they had a positive influence on organisational climate, it is a
better place to work in.
Project management culture
A critical feature of Project 21, the change management plan developed by
Commercial Main Roads, was the creation of a project management culture. The
project management culture was intended, as a critical part, to provide organisational
members with a set of management and problem solving capabilities that would
enable them to successfully manage the planning and control of infrastructure
projects to meet customer expectations and timelines.
Organisational members valued these capabilities; they were capabilities directly
related to getting and keeping customers. Moreover, the inculcation of project
management capabilities had important flow-on effects in that project management
processes facilitated knowledge sharing, innovativeness horizontally. It improved
relationships and coordination. Furthermore, project management contributed to the
development of a common organisational language that contributed to organisational
262
flexibility. Staff could be transferred to different parts of the state and not face
having to learn site-specific procedures for managing a critical work function.
In addition, depending on how they are framed and who frames them, large-scale
human process interventions have the potential to serve as change leader substitutes
(Jermier & Kerr, 1997), a necessary function in a complex spatially differentiated
professional organisation (this issue that will be taken up in a later section of this
chapter).
In summary, the evidence suggests that large-scale human process interventions
were efficacious in achieving qualitative organisational schema change in that they
(a) influenced the way senior managers conceived of their own team dynamics, (b)
provided an environment in which planning new schema could be framed and
incorporated, (c) challenged pre-existing norms related to relationships and conflict
resolution, (d) had symbolic value in that they signalled a shift toward more
contemporary management practices, (e) recharged collective efficacy, the
organisation’s can-do orientation, in the face of severe challenges over the preceding
decade, (f) redressed some of the negative outcomes of the radical structural
intervention, and (g) enhanced organisational member engagement with the change
process.
However, large-scale human process interventions were less efficacious in that they
(a) be much slower to implement than structural interventions (Beer & Nohria,
2000a) and therefore will be more adversely affected by leadership change, (b) are
complex and difficult to communicate, (c) rely on the high level skills and direct
involvement of the change leader, (d) make discontinuous demands on
organisational members’ capabilities, (e) are abstract, making the connection to
practice less clear, (f) are subject to regression, and (g) are less likely to contribute to
a sense of urgency and crisis that would trigger unfreezing and change.
These differences highlight the advantages and disadvantages of each intervention
focus and raise the issue of intervention sequence. Sequence of change intervention
is a contentious issue in both the practitioner literature (Bartlett & Ghoshal, 1999)
and the academic literature (Porras & Robertson, 1992). While several intervention
263
targets have been identified (Porras & Silvers, 1991), sequence choice is likely to be
a function of change leader style and knowledge.
This discussion of intervention theory suggests that change leader decisions about
where and when to intervene can either facilitate or hinder schema development and
change. The issues are complex and unanticipated outcomes are likely whatever
course of action is chosen (McKinley & Scherer, 2000). The extant literature
suggests that structural interventions are frequently employed as an entry point in
leader-driven OT (Balogun & Johnson, 2004; Labianca et al., 2000).
More recently, authors have argued, as a part of a larger change model, that both
structural interventions and capability building interventions are required
simultaneously (Beer & Nohria, 2000b) However, it is yet to be established
empirically that this strategy is feasible in the context of technically-oriented public
organisations. For example, it is unlikely that senior technical professional managers
would have had sufficient exposure to intervention processes that would realise this
strategy. Technical professional change leaders’ choice of structural interventions
appeared to be the product of a change management script (Geigle, 1998). It
required an ‘outsider’ Director-General to frame and implement a large-scale human
process intervention.
In conclusion, organisational members’ experience of top-down structural
interventions reinforced extant conceptual research (e.g., McKinley & Scherer,
2000). Structural interventions tended to increase organisational change cynicism
(Abraham, 2000) and decrease commitment to change. Structural interventions that
were experienced positively, tended to be associated with reducing ambiguity.
Large-scale human process interventions tended to be experienced very positively, at
least for those aware of them. Indeed, for some, these interventions provided a
transformational experience. However, there are no simple solutions. Public
managers need capabilities in both types of intervention and the knowledge of when
to use each and in what sequence.
264
PATTERN OF SCHEMA CHANGE ACROSS CONTEXTS
Change leader interventions are more likely to be efficacious if they are associated
with the replacement or significant elaboration of organisational schema content.
The concept of schema in previous research tended to be characterised by one-
dimensional bipolar constructs. However, useful schemata tend to be organised
(Weick, 1979b) and multidimensional, that is configurational (Mintzberg, 1989).
Successful organisational schema change is, then, configurational, rather than one-
dimensional.
The case included three schema change contexts (a) the development of a new
leading-managing ends-means schema, (b) the development of a strategic manager
schema, and (c) the development of a commercialised provider organisation schema.
The results of this research suggest that, by the end of the research period
organisational members, collectively, had not achieved configuration change in any
of the three schema change contexts.
Instead, there was a complex pattern of schema change in which respondents readily
accepted some sub-schema changes, were polarised about others, rejected others,
and, in others, intended changes were unrealised (these results are reflected in Tables
5.1, 6.1, and 7.1).
This result is not altogether surprising given elapsed time since initiation of
interventions. Consequently, conclusions about the efficacy of change leader
interventions for achieving qualitative schema may be premature. As a whole, the
results suggest that schema change in each context remains a work in progress.
The shift in realising configuration schema change in the Corporate Change
Trajectory is particularly problematic. The new schema is highly discontinuous with
pre-existing schema and is associated with a high level of cognitive and behavioural
complexity. The requirements of shifts in professional identity, the capacity to
conceptualise complex socio-technical systems, the capacity to assimilate the
conflicting interests of diverse stakeholders, the capacity to strategically intervene in
265
such systems, and the capacity to create supportive organisational information
processes imposes significant demands on organisational members.
Organisational members involved in the Commercial Change Trajectory also face
discontinuous change. However, in important respects there was also more
continuity between past and future. This continuity together with innovative change
management (large-group intervention and the sequencing of interventions) have
resulted in significant shifts in the desired direction.
The Leadership Change Trajectory, incorporating large-scale human process
interventions, also involved a discontinuous relationship between the pre-existing
leading-managing schema and that espoused in the intervention. Again, there was
little evidence of a configurational schema shift. However, one element of the new
schema, being relational, was well incorporated in organisational discourse. While
much needs to be done to embed this change behaviourally, the schema shift is an
important and successful outcome.
The large-scale human process intervention had the potential to play a critical role in
facilitating the realisation of the content change agenda in both Corporate and
Commercial Change Trajectories. Had it been implemented as intended there would
have been greater congruence between schema content change and change process
schema. As it was, respondents’ accounts suggest incongruence between content
change goals and processes, particularly in the Corporate Change Trajectory, and
that this incongruence adversely influenced schema change outcomes.
SCHEMA CHANGE DYNAMICS
Change leader interventions are more likely to be efficacious for achieving
qualitative schema change when they reinforce dynamics thought to underpin shifts
in schema content. This section draws together the conclusions on this issue from
the investigation of each of the three schema change contexts.
As discussed in Chapter 2, two issues underpin this discussion. The first issue is
related to the relationship between change leader intervention and organisational
266
schema. Two models of this relationship were drawn from the extant literature. In
this thesis, the two models were labelled juxtaposition-relocation model and the
disengagement-learning model.
The two models predict different schema change dynamics (see Figure 2.6).
Juxtaposition-relocation, the dominant model in the literature, suggests that change
leader interventions result in the juxtaposition of new schema alongside pre-existing
schema: schema change is a function of dialectical processes. The disengagement-
learning model, on the other hand, suggests that change leader interventions
disengage organisational members from pre-existing schema and force learning from
experience. In the latter case, there is no interplay between pre-existing and new
schema.
The data reported in this case provide little evidence for the disengagement-learning
model. Even though change leader interventions, particularly radical structure
changes, forced a break from the past, there is no indication that organisational
members were disengaged from pre-existing schemata. Instead, the evidence
suggests that, across the three schema change contexts addressed in this thesis,
change leader interventions juxtaposed new schema, which then required the
relocation of organisational members from pre-existing to new schema.
As will become clear in the discussion in the next section, organisational members
were evaluating change messages in terms of pre-existing schema and, in some
cases, there were strong regressive tendencies as organisational members sought to
re-establish some elements to the traditional organisation. Consequently, inter-
schema conflict dialectical processes were salient dynamics.
However, pre-existing conflict management norms were not supportive of a good
dialectical process. Lateral conflict resolution tended to rely on the creation of silos.
Vertical conflict, despite significant initial progress resulting from the Three Frames
and Five Signposts (Chapter 5), tended to be suppressed. Consequently, inter-
schema conflict was characterised by ongoing polarisation, rejection, and unrealised
change.
267
It is important to note, however, that timescale may be a contributing factor. Given
the discontinuities involved, the resolution of inter-schema conflicts may take a
significant amount of time, though it is also the case that conflict norms need further
intervention by change leaders. Moreover, there is evidence of change of conflict
norms in the Commercial Change Trajectory. In this trajectory, the risks associated
with not being successful appeared to trigger challenges to the traditional authority-
obedience orientation. There was evidence of a greater tendency to question and to
challenge directives thought to be contrary to the successful creation of a
competitive, profit-driven provider organisation.
Nevertheless, on important schema dimensions, change was realised. This schema
change tended to be unrelated to dialectical processes and more to implicit
teleological processes (Van de Ven & Poole, 1995), a process not addressed in the
organisational schema change literature. The following sub-sections provide a more
fine-grained analysis of the dynamics of change, polarisation, rejection of change,
the lack of realisation of change.
SCHEMA CHANGE
Contrary to the existing literature on organisational schema change, there was
evidence of organisational members readily embracing some sub-schema, which
suggests a different schema change dynamic than the dominant conflict or dialectical
process of schema change. Schema change is thought to be problematic even when
change has potential benefits (Fiske & Taylor, 1991; Labianca et al., 2000). For
example, Labianca et al (2000:239) argued that even potentially beneficial changes
may be rejected because a well established schema is not easily disconfirmed,
schema change takes a considerable time … the process is long and iterative.
The acceptance of new schema did not mean change was unproblematic. There were
frequently unresolved tensions even though the new sub-schema was preferred. As
some authors argue, change tends to reveal and intensify the perception of paradox
and contradiction and that the management of paradox and contradiction is an
inevitable consequence (Clegg et al., 2002; M. W. Lewis, 2000).
268
Schema change occurred in all three trajectories. In the Commercial Change
Trajectory, organisational members preferred (a) a project management approach,
(b) a centralised and integrated business with local autonomy, and a team based
structure. In Corporate Change Trajectory, organisational members preferred (a) a
more strategy-driven organisation, (b) the concept of an organisation open to
external experience in a Whole-of-Government context, and (c) the concept of a
multidisciplinary organisation. Across all three Trajectories organisational members
preferred the concept of being relational.
Specifically, new schema content is more likely to be preferred when the alternative
schema is consistent with an implicit vision held by organisational members. The
data suggest that organisational members’ implicit vision is characterised by an
alignment with (1) implicit ideals, (2) critical organisational task achievement where
non-performance may result in adverse consequences, and (3) contributes to higher
collective confidence.
Implicit vision
Schema change was facilitated when the new schema was evaluated as implicitly
good, that is, it was aligned with an implicit ideal or value. The new schema may
have instrumental value yet there was also something beyond instrumentality. At
least three ideals were reflected in respondent preferences for new schema; positive
relationships, public service, and enriched work.
First, respondents preferred the concept of ‘being open and relational’ over the
traditional closed and restricted relationships. Being relational was one of the non-
rational things the traditional organisation was not good at. Consequently, the
organisation was viewed as a better place to work in, yet respondents were less clear
about the extent that being relational improved performance.
Second, organisational members were more likely to accept new schema when the
new schema reflected public service values. Being open to external influence and
engaging with the community in the context of a Whole-of-Government orientation
was viewed as socially responsible. There was a sense that the organisation could no
269
longer ignore the realities of the real world and that being concerned with job
creation, cultural heritage and environmental protection was implicitly worthwhile.
Seeing themselves as developing a multidisciplinary capability enabled them to
realise this idea in a Whole-of-Government environment.
A third ideal linked to enriched work was also reflected in respondent preferences
for new schema. Some Commercial respondents felt that, given their experience of
work in Commercial, it would be difficult to go back to a public sector work
environment again (though as will be discussed later, there was polarisation about
this issue, though there was agreement about the value of the work environment).
The shift from an individual-based structure to a team-based structure, and
teamwork, was viewed as intrinsically good in Commercial (though this was less
true in Corporate where there tended to be greater polarisation about a team-based
structure).
Commercial teams allowed organisational members, whatever their organisational
position, to participate in organisational decision making. A respondent provides a
good indication of a broad sentiment in Commercial; I have been working with Main
Roads for 25 years, and this is the first time I have been asked to think. In addition,
respondents felt that the traditional public sector position descriptions were
inappropriate in Commercial; jobs were much less specialised.
Work design theories have long advocated designing work environments to provide
organisational members with discretion, with opportunities to participate, and with
skill variety (Reger et al., 1994). More recently, Osborne & Gaebler (2000:38)
reflect a similar dynamic in their discussion of the need for reinventing government:
Many employees in bureaucratic governments feel trapped. Tied down by
rules and regulations, numbed by monotonous tasks, assigned jobs they know
could be accomplished in half the time if they were only allowed to use their
minds, they live lives of quiet desperation.
270
Facilitates achievement of critical tasks
The data also suggest (Table 8.1) that organisational members will readily embrace
new schemata when these new schemata facilitate task accomplishment, particularly
if non-performance has significant and adverse consequences. They are less inclined
to shift toward the new schema when the relationship between schema and task
demands is not clear.
A project management culture was readily embraced in Commercial Main Roads.
Indeed, respondent reactions to this intervention were strong and positive across the
period of the research. The shift to a project management culture had at least three
instrumental benefits for organisational members; (a) it facilitated planning and
control of projects where both effectiveness and efficiency were crucial, (b) it
facilitated the development of lateral relationships across business units, and (c)
facilitated the development of a more flexible organisation.
First, a project management culture facilitated the management of projects where
success was an imperative. In a competitive environment the planning and control of
infrastructure delivery projects had much greater significance. Meeting client
expectations, time lines and budgets was crucial for maintaining their reputation as
service providers, for increasing the likelihood of winning future contracts, and for
profit generation.
Second, a project management culture facilitated communication and coordination
laterally across business units. It provided a common language and framework that
facilitated knowledge transfer. Indeed, respondents reported that the system
triggered the sharing of innovations and learning across business units. The greater
level of coordination across Commercial was viewed as one of the successes of the
change program.
Finally, a standardised project management model contributed to greater
organisational flexibility in that staff could be more easily transferred across
business units. Once organisational members were socialised into the standardised
271
project management system, the organisation had greater capability to shift people to
meet task demands across the state.
Commercial respondents expressed a preference for the creation of an integrated and
centralised business (rather than a decentralised multiple business organisation).
Centralisation, particularly on high-value projects, enabled greater flexibility in
managing people and resources across the state. Centralisation, then, contributed to
organisational competitiveness, a critical concern for organisational members
concerned about the ongoing viability of their organisation. It reduced threats to
organisational viability.
Schema change that supported task facilitation was also reflected in respondents’
conceptions of a team-based structure (as opposed to an individual-based structure).
These teams were providing organisational members with opportunities to engage in
collaborative problem solving, and so improving coordination.
Task facilitation was also reflected in Corporate respondents’ preference for a
strategy-driven organisation (as opposed to operations-driven). Being strategy-
driven was linked to addressing anticipated and critical medium- and longer-term
organisational problems. Not addressing these problems would have adverse
consequences for the organisation. The most frequently identified problem was the
imminent loss, to retirement, of a large number of experienced engineers. Being
strategy-driven meant addressing such problems with, for example, succession
planning.
Greater openness to external influence, while linked to a public service ideal, also
had an instrumental value for respondents. Indeed, this was viewed as one of the key
successes of the transformational change program; Main Roads is good at building
external relationships was a common evaluation. The success was captured in a
publication, Main Roads Success Stories (Department of Main Roads, Undated), in
which roads project members had achieved win-win outcomes in the context of
difficult negotiations with the community.
272
Greater openness within a Whole-of-Government context had also resulted in a need
for a growing multidisciplinary dimension to the organisation and this shift had
instrumental value. Professionals with backgrounds in archaeology, strategic
planning, and communication were being employed. Respondents saw this change
as being positive in that, within a whole of government context, Main Roads was
developing capabilities and a positive reputation in multiple fields, not just in
engineering (and related fields). Main Roads reputation as a lead agency in the
public sector was, thereby, enhanced.
Feelings of confidence and competence
Schema change was facilitated when new schema contributed to a sense of
confidence and competence. This conclusion is less tangible than those discussed
above, yet underpins them all. The conclusion is best illustrated by an analogy
drawn by respondents; some respondents reported that Main Roads is more like
Ansett Airlines (a failed airline which at the time of the interviews was focused on
internal problems as it declined). Instead, Main Roads should be more like Virgin
Blue (another airline which, at the time, was engaged in aggressive marketing).
The concept of perceived collective efficacy beliefs (Bandura, 1997; Zaccaro, Blair,
Peterson, & Zazanis, 1995) provides a useful analytical concept. Bandura
(1997:477) defines perceived collective efficacy as a group's shared belief in its
conjoint capabilities to organise and execute the courses of action required to
produce given levels of attainment.
Bandura suggests that perceived collective efficacy is an emergent group property
that centres on a group's operational capabilities; groups or organisations with high
perceived collective efficacy are more likely to persist with a course of action in the
face of obstacles. Low perceived collective efficacy implies that group or
organisational members will give up in the face of obstacles.
Surprisingly, little attention has been given to perceived collective efficacy beliefs in
the context of change management. Collective efficacy beliefs would appear to be
usefully considered a dimension of organisational change schema in addition to
273
those identified by Lau, Kibourne & Woodman (2003) (intensity and significance,
judgement, meaning, salience, personal control, and stress).
In summary, the fact that organisational members readily embraced some sub-
schema suggests that the dominant schema change dynamic was not a prolonged
dialectical process as suggested by the conflict model of schema change (Bartunek &
Moch, 1987). A better explanation can be found in teleological change theory (Van
de Ven & Poole, 1995).
Formally, change as a result of teleological processes occurs when:
(1) An individual or group exists that acts as a singular, discrete entity,
which engages in reflexively monitored action to socially construct and
cognitively share a common end state or goal (2) the entity may envision its
end state of development before or after actions it may take, and the goal
may be set explicitly or implicitly. However, the process of social
construction or sense making, decision making, and goal setting must be
identifiable (3) a set of requirements and constraints exists to attain the goal,
and the activities and developmental transitions undertaken by the entity
contribute to meeting these requirements and constraints (Van de Ven &
Poole, 1995:516).
In the case organisation, teleological processes tended to be implicit rather than
explicit. As indicated earlier, the formal vision and mission framed by top-level
change leaders did not contribute to this dynamic. However, the evidence suggests
that organisational members had an implicit vision of how they believed the
organisation should operate. The evidence suggests that this vision incorporated a
concern with public service, with task facilitation, and with positive relationships.
When new schemata were aligned with this implicit vision, schema change was
readily embraced.
POLARISATION
On some schematic dimensions organisational members were polarised. Some
organisational members preferred the pre-existing schema and others preferred a new
274
schema. Polarisation is predicted by the conflict model of schema change (Snell,
2002). Despite the potential of conflict and dialectical processes to trigger change,
there is as much evidence that these dynamics hinder change (see Chapter 2).
In particular, organisational members in Commercial were polarised on the issue of
profit-driven operations as opposed to the traditional public road building
orientation. In Corporate, organisational members were polarised on two core issues
(a) Main Roads as a technically proficient road builder versus Main Roads as a
managerial and financial organisation involved in more than building roads, and (b)
Main Roads as a team-based organisation versus Main Roads as an individual-based
organisation.
The data suggest that polarisation was related to (a) doubts about the viability of the
alternative schema, (b) perception of threats to professional and organisational
identity, and (c) levels of ambiguity. Underpinning the organisation’s capacity to
resolve these issues is a tendency for it to be conflict averse.
Viability of the alternative schema
In Commercial, respondents were polarised about the viability of the alternative
schema; a profit-driven infrastructure delivery provider operating within the
constraints of public sector policies and procedures. For some respondents
commercialisation was a flawed concept. Moreover, there were concerns about the
prospect of declining quality of the road system in an environment driven by the
almighty dollar.
There were also concerns about their capacity to compete given the overheads
imposed by Corporate, the restrictions placed on its business practices (marketing
and tendering), the need for efficiency and its influence on the quality of work, and
its dependence on Corporate for ongoing work to support its workforce. They were
managing with one hand tied behind their backs.
For one group of respondents, then, there was a view that Commercial should be
reintegrated with Corporate so that they could get back to building quality roads.
275
This view was exacerbated by the perception that the organisation was back
pedalling on commercialisation; there were doubts about senior managers’
commitment to commercialisation. Nevertheless, another group of respondents were
highly positive about shifting toward a conception of the organisation as a profit-
driven, entrepreneurial and competitive organisation.
Threat to engineering excellence/professional identity
Perceived threats to engineering excellence and professional identity were evident in
polarisation about shifts in organisational purpose in both Corporate and
Commercial, particularly in Corporate where the shift was most pronounced.
Previous research has identified organisational and professional identity as a
powerful schematic lens through which organisational members evaluate change
interventions (Labianca et al., 2000; Reger et al., 1994).
From the perspective of respondents (rather than change leaders) Corporate Main
Roads’ purpose had shifted from a road building and engineering focus to what was
described as a managerial and financial focus. The implications of this shift were
linked to respondent perceptions of their professional and organisational identity.
For some respondents this shift represented a de-engineering of the organisation.
The shift to a more managerial focus had adverse implications for organisational
capability, how close the organisation was to the technological edge, the quality of
the road system (which was thought to be declining), and opportunities for personal
and professional development.
For other respondents, Main Roads was about more than building roads. There was
a sense that being strategic and managerial was essential if the road system was to
meet the future demands of communities and road users. One manager described it
as a need for big picture thinking. This strategic perspective was not well served by
the traditional operational road building focus of the organisation.
276
Increasing rather than decreasing ambiguity
Polarisation also occurred in the context of the shift, in Corporate, from individual-
based structure to a team-based structure. Recall that team-based structure in
Commercial was readily accepted by respondents. In Corporate some respondents
reported that team work reflected a positive shift. Teams provided an opportunity
for managing troughs and peaks in workload and supported collaboration.
However another group of respondents reported that team work created problems.
Specifically, the shift from hierarchical decision making to team-based decision
making posed difficulties. The shift created greater ambiguity about roles in the
team and increased levels of political behaviour. Furthermore, there was a
perception that the burden of responsibility for managing team problems was being
shifted to the team. The effect was much greater workloads and fewer resources.
Aversion to ambiguity was a key theme in the data. In the face of an uncertain
organisational direction and future, there was a consistent call for more direction,
strong leadership as a means of resolving ambiguities.
LACK OF CHANGE
On six schematic dimensions respondents preferred the traditional schema over their
reframed schema. In particular, Commercial staff evaluated negatively the shift to a
state that required them to operate in both public and private sectors simultaneously.
Corporate staff did not prefer the shift to (a) an organisation design that involved
greater centralisation and standardisation of systems and service delivery, (b) greater
reliance on outsourcing, though this shift was ameliorated over the course of the
research, (c) an emotional environment characterised by the experience of being
disempowered.
The reframed schema is not necessarily intended by change leaders. Respondents
perceive it that way. Three factors explain the negative evaluation of the new pole;
perceived paradox and contradiction, perceived loss of performance, and perceived
loss of personal and professional development opportunities.
277
Perceived paradox and contradiction
Lewis (2000) argued that change reveals and intensifies paradox and contradiction
and the experience of contradiction is aversive, triggering anxiety and defence
mechanisms. Contradiction and paradox underpinned almost all concerns raised by
respondents.
Reconciling the simultaneous demands of both public and private sector, that is,
attain profit targets yet as the same time adhere to public sector procedures, rules and
regulations, posed significant problems for Commercial respondents across the
period of the research; the public-private space they occupied was construed as a half
way land. Commercial was expected to adhere to public sector policies and
regulations yet at the same time be profitable in a competitive environment.
Recent work on the perception of paradox and contradiction in organisational
settings reinforces this point; it frequently results in high anxiety and defensive
responses (Reger et al., 1994), yet, at the same time, has the potential to increase
effectiveness (Palmer & Dunford, 2002). In schematic terms, human beings tend to
prefer one pole or another but not both simultaneously.
For Commercial, being public meant being constrained by policies that imposed
restrictions on their capacity to market services and to tender for certain projects. In
addition, public sector human resource management and financial systems were
perceived as limiting their capacity to be competitive. At the same time they had to
make a profit within a private sector driven by the almighty dollar and could cut
corners not permitted to them. The experience of this paradox was intensified by the
prospect of downsizing of their workforce.
The efforts by Commercial to manage paradox and contradiction were the most
obvious, yet paradox and contradiction pervaded organisational experience.
Tensions and contradictions contributed to high levels of ambiguity; there was a loss
of the certainty that had been a positive characteristic of the traditional organisation.
278
Perceived loss of performance
Change leader interventions are typically targeted at improving performance. In this
case, change implementers experienced change as reducing rather than improving
performance. From the perspective of implementers of change greater centralisation
and standardisation adversely affected their perceived ability to provide locally
relevant services. However, from the perspective of top management, centralisation
and standardisation improved their capacity to monitor and report on organisational
performance within a Whole-of-Government policy environment. Putnam (1986)
described this situation as a system paradox.
Perceived loss of personal and professional development opportunities
The data suggest that schema change is less likely when the alternative schema
conflict with organisational members’ conception of the organisation as a provider of
opportunities for personal and professional development. Organisations are political
systems in which three sets of interests interact; task interests, career interests, and
extramural (personal values and lifestyle) interests (G. A. Morgan, 1997).
Maintaining some degree of balance among these interests is critical if organisational
members’ engagement with the organisation is to be maintained.
Under the best of circumstances, the relationship among these three sets of interest is
uneasy and fluid, creating tensions that underpin organisational politics and
organisational cynicism (Abraham, 2000). Under conditions of transformational
change, this uneasy balance is put under more pressure, often linked to perceived
violations of the organisation’s psychological contract, the implicit beliefs about
reciprocal obligations held by employees and employers (Rousseau, 2001).
Violations of the psychological contract have been linked to increases in change
cynicism (Abraham, 2000) and threats to change implementation (Novelli, Kirkman,
& Shapiro, 1995).
In the present case, organisational members consistently construed the new
organisation as providing fewer career opportunities and fewer opportunities for
development, a source of significant levels of frustration. The source of this lack
279
was frequently attributed to techno-structural change, restructuring the organisation
into owner and provider changed the nature of the work, the range and/or scope of
work activities were no longer available and new tasks were often viewed as paper
chasing and liaising. Outsourcing provided work for external consultants yet there
was little transfer of expertise back to the organisation.
In addition, the high workloads of more experienced professionals meant that these
people had less time to devote to mentoring and providing career information to less
experienced staff. Perceived outcomes included reports of higher turnover among
junior staff, difficulty of attracting new graduates, and high levels of job
dissatisfaction.
UNREALISED CHANGE
On two organisational schema change dimensions, the shift from pre-existing to new
schemata was unrealised or in an early stage of development. Specifically, the
following intended shifts were not realised (a) to a vision-driven organisation, and
(b) to Three Frames/Five Signposts management.
It should be noted that the fact that the collective incorporation of the Three Frames
and Five Signposts were not realised does not mean there was no change in
managerial capabilities. Managers were ready to admit that they had been on a steep
learning curve since the 1990s in terms of their change management capabilities.
The issue here is not so much that no change has occurred but that the notion of the
Three Frames that the change leader saw as critical to the realisation of
organisational vision was not well integrated across the organisation.
The data suggest that four inter-related factors contributed to unrealised
organisational schema change; (a) complexity of the new schema, (b) low perceived
control, (c) time pressure and workloads, and (d) organisational context, in particular
spatial differentiation and opportunities for interaction. The first three factors will be
considered in this section. Organisational context will be considered in a later
section.
280
Complexity of alternative schema
As discussed in Chapter 5, the evidence suggests that unrealised schema change is
linked to the abstractness and complexity of the new schema. New schemata are
experienced as complex if they are significantly discrepant from organisational
members’ pre-existing schema. Under these circumstances, organisational members,
collectively, found it difficult to interpret and in particular see the implications for
practice.
Greater complexity of alternative schemata impeded schema change, a finding
consistent with earlier research on schema change (McKinley & Scherer, 2000;
Reger et al., 1994). Complexity of new schema has been linked with higher levels of
resistance to change, indeed previous researchers have suggested it may be a better
explanation of resistance than personal interests (Labianca et al., 2000) and reduced
likelihood of implementation (Reger et al., 1994).
Low perceived control
Schema change would seem less likely if organisational members do not believe they
have control over the realisation of the schema. Collectively, organisational
members experienced low perceived control over the future of the organisation,
despite a well publicised organisational vision and mission. For respondents the
future lay in the hands of external stakeholders. The organisation was believed to be
reactive to those stakeholders. Uncertainty about this future was a source of concern
for respondents and contributed to the lack of acceptance of the vision element of the
large-scale human process intervention.
Low perceived control was also characteristic in the Corporate Change Trajectory.
Collectively, organisational members were overwhelmed by change. The comment
by one manager summed up the reactions of many: reported that he felt as though he
was at the bottom end of a funnel and Head Office was pouring changes in at the
top. In Corporate Main Roads, there were frequent calls for a period of stability and
consolidation in order that previous changes could be implemented and people could
learn from their change experiences.
281
Time pressure and workloads
Low perceived control was linked to time pressure and workloads perceived to be
excessive. Constructing new complex and abstract schema is, in part, a reflective
rather than a rational linear sequential learning task (Schon, 1983). Such learning is
adversely affected by time pressure and workloads.
Opportunities for interaction
There appeared to be relatively few opportunities for lateral interaction about change
experience. In part, this was contributed to by the pre-existing organisation which
consisted of fourteen different cultures. Both the conflict model and the iterative
comparison models of schema change suggest that constructing new schemata is, in
part, a social phenomena; it is an outcome of interaction among organisational
members. From this perspective, it is this interaction, conflicted or otherwise, that
contributes to the development of new schema.
For managers the key forum in which sensemaking about change could occur were
Senior Officers’ Conferences. While respondents reported the development of
defensive networks in the face of change, it is likely that these networks reinforced
negative evaluations of the change rather than contributed to the development of new
schema.
Spatial differentiation
The preceding factors were compounded by the distance between change leaders and
those organisational members expected to interpret the change. Communicating the
meaning of abstract and complex information across distance poses significant
problems for change leaders. From the perspective of organisational members there
seemed to be a reliance on electronic forms of communication. Respondents
reported that they found it difficult to navigate their way through the electronic
communication system and found it difficult to separate out less important from
important messages.
282
Face-to-face communication appeared to be most efficacious yet its success seemed
to depend on the direct involvement of the Director-General. Others had difficulty
communicating the change agenda to the organisation.
More generally, change leaders must be able to hold both sides of the conflict at the
same time (Bartunek, 1993), and change interventions must be directed at the
for conflict, creating a safe environment in which conflicts could be addressed)
and to some degree these efforts had an influence. For example, there was
evidence of new conflict norms taking effect in the Commercial Change
Trajectory. Organisational members reported a much greater propensity to
challenge and question directives from the top than was the case in the traditional
organisation.
Moreover, Commercial’s need to manage the ongoing and conflicting demands
of both public and private sectors contributed to the development of new conflict
management norms. Being in a halfway land increased levels of frustration with
292
what were perceived to be bad decisions: there was a greater propensity to
challenge these decisions. Yet the extrapolation of new conflict norms across the
organisation was incomplete.
The literature on organisational schema change has given little attention to the
second schema change dynamic, teleological processes (Van de Ven & Poole,
1995). When sub-schema change did occur in the case organisation it was
typically related to alignment between the new schema and an implicit vision
(incorporating a concern with public service and task facilitation) held by
organisational members.
Much more attention needs to be given to research on teleological processes and
schema change. Presumably, the formal organisational vision is designed to
contribute to these processes. However, as discussed earlier, the formal vision
tended not to have much influence in this case. Organisational members’
implicit vision did, however.
Fourth, it seems doubtful that all change management contexts in public
organisations are the same. The present change management context is
characterised by professionalism and distance between change leader and those
implementing change. Both of these characteristics tend to neutralise change
leader influence (Howell & Dorfman, 1986; Mintzberg, 1989). The key
constraints in the situation involved clashes with pre-existing professional
identity (technical rather than managerial) and values (such as autonomy and
opportunities for professional development).
Moreover, distance, in interaction with complexity of new schema intensified
these clashes. Communicating what interventions and their implications mean
across large distances proved particularly challenging. The elaborate Road Show
established to inform and convince the organisation of the value of the new
leading-managing schema (Chapter 5) is a reflection of this. There were some
reported successes related to this intervention, yet there was little evidence of its
wider and sustained application.
293
Yet, despite the constraints there was more evidence of schema change in the
case organisation than the prior conceptual literature on this issue would suggest
possible. Where change was most successful, the change leader invested a great
deal of time and effort to effect understanding and change.
This result seems to be a key conclusion on the change management context
issue: achieving change in change management contexts inimical to change
leader influence is very labour intensive from the change leaders’ perspective.
Change leaders cannot assume that because a change has been announced and
‘implemented’ that cognitive change has occurred.
CONTRIBUTION
This section identifies the significant and original contribution that this research
has made to the literature on the efficacy of change leader interventions for
achieving qualitative schema change. In particular, the thesis makes an original
and significant contribution to intervention theory in contexts thought to be
inimical to change leader influence.
First, the research has made a significant contribution to the literature by
investigating the efficacy of large-scale human process interventions in the
context of efforts to transform a technically-oriented spatially differentiated
public professional organisation. Little previous research has focused on either
of these issues. Previous research has focused on structural interventions and
organisational schema change, a focus that is attracting some criticism
(Maddock, 2002).
While incomplete and unrealised, the evidence on the efficacy of large-scale
human process interventions suggests that they have the potential to make a
major contribution to the transformation of these change management contexts.
Much more research needs to address this intervention type and its inter-
relationship with the structural interventions, which the literature suggests are the
interventions of choice for public change leaders.
294
Second, the research has made a significant contribution to the literature on
schema change by conceptualising organisational schema in multidimensional
terms. Analysis of first-order accounts suggests that respondents conceptualised
the changing organisation in terms of core organisational purpose, organisation-
environment relations, organisation design, and organisational change
management processes. Conceptualising organisational schema in these terms
provided a better reflection of the complexity of schema change and allowed a
more fine-grained analysis of change and lack of change.
Previous research on organisational schema change has tended to conceptualise
organisational schema in terms of a one-dimensional bipolar construct.
Conceptualising organisational schema in this way does facilitate conclusions
about success or failure of schema change. However, such an approach also
masks the complexity of OT.
In the present research, it was much more difficult to establish unequivocal
success or failure of schema change. Configurational schema change did not
occur in any of the three schema change contexts investigated. However, sub-
schema change did occur and these occurrences had a profound influence on
organisational members. However, sub-schema change rather than
configurational schema change indicates that change gains are likely to be more
susceptible to regression.
However, partial rather than configurational schema change raises interesting
possibilities for further longitudinal research. In particular, it would be
interesting to determine how the pattern of sub-schema change evolves over
time: how does the relationship between sub-schema change and configurational
schema change evolve over time? At what point does configurational change
occur and how does sub-schema change contribute to this outcome?
Third, this research has made a significant contribution to understanding of
schema change dynamics in public change management contexts. Two findings
contribute to this outcome. Contrary to expectation, the disengagement-learning
model (Balogun & Johnson, 2004) was not supported, despite the radical break
295
from the past imposed by structural change. The evidence of polarisation and
regression supports this conclusion; organisational members were evaluating
change in terms of pre-existing schema and, clearly, in some cases preferred the
pre-existing schema over the new.
The juxtaposition-relocation model had more support. Moreover, there was
support for the conflict model in that organisational members’ accounts suggest
high levels of vertical and lateral conflict over the course of change. However,
organisational conflict management norms for the most part did not support
effective dialectical processes and schema change outcomes.
An important and new finding of this thesis is the role of implicit teleological
processes in organisational sub-schema change, a process not explicitly
considered in the extant schema change literature. When sub-schema change did
occur it did so relatively quickly. The best explanation of these shifts was that,
consistent with teleological theory (Van de Ven & Poole, 1995), organisational
members held an implicit vision of how the organisation should operate. Change
leader interventions juxtaposing schemata that were consistent with this vision
were readily embraced. Behavioural interventions involving organisational
members engaging in new behaviours in a safe environment appeared to
reinforce these teleological processes.
Fourth, the thesis has made an original contribution to understanding schema
change interventions in change management contexts thought to be inimical to
change leader influence. In many respects there was a clash between the new
schema and the pre-existing professional schema.
Nevertheless, contrary to previous conceptual research on this issue (Mintzberg,
1989), important changes did occur. Certainly, implicit teleological process did
contribute to this outcome, yet the investment of significant amounts of personal
time and energy into the realisation of change by the change leader also was a
contributing factor. An important finding of this research, then, is that in change
contexts inimical to change leader influence, change leaders must assume that
296
they will make a significant and direct investment in relocating organisational
members from pre-existing to new schema.
LIMITATIONS OF THE RESEARCH
This section identifies limitations of the research that may suggest more
tentativeness in accepting its conclusions.
First, despite the fact that three schema change episodes were considered in this
research, it could be argued that the data on which conclusions about top level
leader schema change interventions change were based on a single case and that
this raises issues about generalisation. However, a central argument of this thesis
is that more research on particular contexts is necessary. It is more appropriate
to view single cases in the context of a program of research in which validation
occurs across studies.
The problem of access to technically-oriented spatially differentiated public
professional organisations is also a consideration. It is not clear how many such
organisations are undertaking the scale of change involved in the case
organisation. Moreover, even if multiple case organisations were available, the
demands would exceed the resources of a single researcher.
Second, it could be argued that the focus on organisational cognition is limiting
on the grounds that it is ultimately behaviour that will provide a more adequate
measure of change. However, focusing on organisational member schema
change is an essential element of sustained behaviour change. It seems unlikely
that behaviour change can be sustained if these behaviours are not reinforced by
cognitive change.
Third, the research relies on retrospective data about the organisation’s pre-
existing schemata and history and about the first two years of the
transformational change intervention. Specifically, data collection began in
2000, two years after the initiation of the transformational change agenda and
297
four years after the structural intervention that truncated the organisation into
what have been referred to in this thesis as Corporate and Commercial.
While there are inevitable problems relying on retrospective data, the researcher
is confident in the conclusions reported in this thesis on the grounds that there
was a high degree of consistency across focus groups in terms of their memory
for past events. This was facilitated by a good proportion of long-standing
employees involved in the focus group discussions.
Fourth, focus group research raises several significant problems. For example,
focus group interviews generate large amounts of data, necessitating the use of
data reduction strategies. However, every effort was made to ensure key themes
were identified. For example, while some audio tapes were summarised rather
than transcribed verbatim, several measures were in place to ensure key themes
were captured in this process. For example, selected tapes were both transcribed
verbatim and summarised. It was then possible to compare summaries and
transcriptions. In addition, themes were discussed with and validated by others
who had intimate knowledge of the organisation, including a member of the case
organisation.
Another potential problem with focus groups relates to the member participation.
Some focus group members find it difficult to contribute, particularly if they
have to compete for air time with more extroverted members. Every effort was
made to encourage participation, for example, by going around the table to allow
each focus group member the opportunity to contribute.
Finally, while the research took place over a three year period, this is still a
relatively short period of time in OT terms. OT may take in the order of 10-15
years (Evans, 1992) depending on the scale and depth of change involved. These
circumstances suggest caution in drawing conclusions about the efficacy of
change interventions.
298
FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS
The research presented here offers several avenues for future research on schema
change in organisational settings.
First, more research on the implicit intervention theory employed by public
sector change leaders and the influence that this implicit intervention theory has
on organisational schema change is necessary. The tendency to rely on structural
change with less attention to large-scale human process interventions warrants
further attention. In particular, how can change leaders develop better synergy
between large-scale structural and large-scale human process interventions, when
the requisite capabilities for managing this synergy are not necessarily resident in
the organisation?
Second, more research on schemata as substitutes for direct change leader
influence in inimical change management contexts is necessary. While the
human process intervention in this case was incomplete and unrealised, there was
sufficient evidence of its potential to warrant further investigation. In particular,
there is a need for more research on strategies for embedding such schema in
spatially differentiated organisations.
Third, the shift from an operations-driven to a strategy-driven organisation
appears to have received little attention in the public management change
literature, at least for professional organisations. In such cases, the degree of
discontinuity in terms of capabilities and organisation design is high. More
research is needed to address those factors that contribute to the success or
otherwise of such changes.
Fourth, more research on schema change dynamics is necessary. The dominant
schema change dynamic discussed in the literature is conflict or dialectical
processes. This study suggested that when change did occur, teleological (and
behavioural) processes were better explanations of this change. More research
should address this issue to determine how such processes can support
configurational schema change.
299
Fifth, more research is necessary to elucidate the antecedents and consequences
of collective change management efficacy, a concept that has not received
attention in the literature, despite its potential value for successful OT.
Finally, more research is necessary to explicate the role and dynamics of top-
level change leader behaviour in context. While the idea that top level leaders
envision, enable and energise is intuitively appealing, it frequently ignores the
role of context. More research needs to focus on the relationship between change
leader schema and dominant pre-existing schema and change acceptance.
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS
The research suggests at least six important implications for public managers
responsible for transforming technically oriented, spatially differentiated
Professional Bureaucracies. The object is not to oversimplify a very complex
change management process, but to provide guidelines.
First, public managers need to give more attention to (a) identifying pre-existing
organisational schema, (b) framing alternative and more adequate schemata, and
(c) identifying ideals that facilitate the process of organisational member
sensemaking. If change leaders conceptualise both pre-existing and new schema,
they are in a better position to help relocate organisational members from the
pre-existing to the new schema (or find a satisfactory synthesis). Note, however,
that framing new schema may require capabilities not available in the
organisation.
Second, more attention needs to developing an appropriate intervention theory.
On the basis of the data reported in this thesis, managers are more likely to
achieve outcomes if the early interventions are experienced by organisational
members as being helpful or value-adding. Structural change would appear to
create particular problems in that the experience of the pace of change at the top
of the organisation is faster than at the bottom of the organisation.
300
Visioning interventions may also be problematic if pre-existing beliefs do not
support individual and collective initiative. Change leaders may have to consider
prerequisite interventions to address such beliefs before the goals of visioning
interventions can be realised. The uncritical acceptance of the value of visioning
interventions is unwarranted.
Third, public managers need to find a way of integrating or coordinating the
multiple change interventions necessary to produce organisational change.
Several organisational units were involved in aspects of transforming the case
organisation. Many of these changes appeared to intersect at the level of district
offices, producing significant concerns about overload.
Fourth, change leaders should seek to identify organisational members’ ideal
organisation schema. This means much more attention has to be given to
diagnosis and dialogue among organisational stakeholders affected by change
than is usually undertaken.
Fourth, change leaders need to monitor the relationship between change schema
and change process schema. Communicating a change message and then trying
to implement it with processes that contradict those reflected in the change
message will be problematic.
Finally, change leaders need to monitor the level of perceived collective change
efficacy. If organisational members have high collective confidence in the
organisation’s ability to implement change successfully then it is more likely that
the organisation will do so. Low levels of collective confidence in the
organisation’s ability to implement change will adversely affect change
outcomes.
CONCLUSION
This research investigated the efficacy of change leader interventions for
achieving qualitative schema change in the context of the transformation of a
technically-oriented spatially differentiated public professional organisation. The
301
research highlights the complexity of Organisation Transformation: it is not
sensible to reach an unequivocal conclusion about the efficacy of change leader
interventions and organisational schema change in such contexts.
Nevertheless, the findings of this study do provide a basis for ongoing research
on this relationship. In particular, there is a need for more research on (a) the
potential synergies between large-scale structural interventions and large-scale
human process interventions for transforming public organisations, (b) finding
new more sophisticated ways of conceptualising and exploring change in
organisational schema, (c) the role of teleological process in organisational
schema change and how those dynamics can be better managed, and (d) the
change management demands created by contexts that are inimical to change
leader influence.
302
References
Abraham, R. (2000). Organizational cynicism: Bases and consequences. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 126(3), 269-292.
Abramson, M. A., & Lawrence, P. R. (Eds.). (2001). Transforming organizations. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
Adams, G. B., & Ingersoll, V. H. (1990). Culture, technical rationality, and organizational culture. American Review of Public Administration, 20(4), 285.
Albert, S. (1992). The algebra of change. Research in Organizational Behavior, 14, 179-229.
Alimo-Metcalfe, B., & Alban-Metcalfe, J. (2004). Leadership in public sector organizations. In J. Storey (Ed.), Leadership in organizations: Current issues and key trends (pp. 173-202). London: Routledge.
Argyris, C. (1985). Strategy, change and defensive routines. Boston: Pitman. Argyris, C. (1990). Overcoming organizational defences: Facilitating
organizational learning. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Argyris, C. (1993). Knowledge for action: A guide to overcoming barriers to
organizational change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Armenakis, A. A., & Feild, H. S. (1993). The role of schema in organizational
change: Change agent and change target perspectives. In R. T. Golembiewski (Ed.), Handbook of organizational behavior (pp. 405-427). New York: Marcel Dekker.
Ashburner, L., Ferlie, E., & Fitzgerald, L. (1996). Organizational transformation and top-down change: The case of the NHS. British Journal of Management, 7(1), 1-16.
Australian Public Service Commission. (2004). The integrated leadership system. Canberra: Australian Government.
Bacharach, S. B., Bamberger, P., & Sonnenstuhl, W. J. (1996). The organizational transformation process: The micropolitics of dissonance reduction and the alignment of logics of action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 477-506.
Baden-Fuller, C., & Volberda, H. W. (1997). Strategic renewal: How large complex organizations prepare for the future. International Studies of Management & Organization, 27(2), 95-120.
Bailey, D., & Neilsen, E. H. (1992). Creating a Bureau-Adhocracy: Integrating standardized and innovative services in a professional work group. Human Relations, 45(7), 687-710.
Balogun, J., & Johnson, G. (2004). Organizational restructuring and middle manager sensemaking. Academy of Management Journal, 47(4), 523-549.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman. Bartlett, C. A., & Ghoshal, S. (1999). Creating the individualized corporation:
The path to self-renewal at General Electric. In J. A. Conger, G. M. Spreitzer & E. E. Lawler III (Eds.), The leader's change handbook: An essential guide to setting direction and taking action (pp. 26-52). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bartunek, J. M. (1984). Changing interpretive schemes and organizational restructuring: The example of a religious order. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 355-372.
303
Bartunek, J. M. (1988). The dynamics of personal and organizational reframing. In R. E. Quinn & K. S. Cameron (Eds.), Paradox and transformation: Toward a theory of change in organization and management. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
Bartunek, J. M. (1993). The multiple cognitions and conflicts associated with second order organizational change. In J. K. Murnighan (Ed.), Social psychology in organizations: Advances in theory and research (pp. 322-349). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Bartunek, J. M., & Moch, M. K. (1987). First-order, second-order, and third-order change and organization development interventions: A cognitive approach. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 23(4), 483-500.
Bartunek, J. M., & Moch, M. K. (1991). Multiple constituencies and the quality of working life: Intervention at FoodCom. In P. J. Frost, L. F. Moore, M. R. Louis, C. C. Lundberg & J. Martin (Eds.), Reframing organizational culture (pp. 104-114). Newbury Park: Sage.
Bartunek, J. M., & Reid, R. D. (1992). The role of conflict in a second order change attempt. In D. M. Kolb & J. M. Bartunek (Eds.), Hidden conflict in organizations: Uncovering behind-the-scenes disputes (pp. 116-142). Newbury Park: Sage.
Bartunek, J. M., & Seo, M.-G. (2002). Qualitative research can add new meanings to quantitative research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(2), 237-242.
Bate, P. (2000). Changing the culture of a hospital: From hierarchy to networked community. Public Administration, 78(3), 485-512.
Bate, P., Khan, R., & Pyle, A. J. (2000). Culturally sensitive structuring: An action research-based approach to organization development and design. Public Administration Quarterly, 23(4), 445-470.
Beckhard, R., & Harris, R. T. (1987). Organizational transitions: Managing complex change (2nd. ed.). Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.
Beder, S. (1998). The new engineer: Management and professional responsibility in a changing world. South Yarra: Macmillan Education Australia.
Beer, M., Eisenstat, R. A., & Spector, B. (1990). Why change programs do not produce change. Harvard Business Review, 68(6), 158-166.
Beer, M., Eisenstat, R. A., & Spector, B. A. (1990). The critical path to corporate renewal. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Beer, M., & Nohria, N. (2000a). Cracking the code of change. Harvard Business Review, 78(3), 133-141.
Beer, M., & Nohria, N. (2000b). Cracking the Code of Change. Harvard Business Review, 78(3), 133-141.
Beer, M., & Nohria, N. (Eds.). (2000c). Breaking the code of change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Beer, M., & Walton, A. E. (1987). Organization change and development. Annual Review of Psychology, 38, 339-367.
Blaikie, N. (2000). Designing social research: The logic of anticipation. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Bouchikhi, H. (1998). Living with and building on complexity: A constructivist perspective on organizations. Organization, 5(2), 217-232.
Brien, G. O. (2002). Participation as the key to successful change: A public sector case study. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 23(8), 442.
304
Brunetto, Y. (2001). Mediating change for public-sector professionals. The International Journal of Public Sector Management, 14(6/7), 465.
Bryson, J. M. (2004). What to do when stakeholders matter: Stakeholder identification and analysis techniques. Public Management Review, 6(1), 21-53.
Bunker, B. B., & Alban, B. T. (1997). Large group interventions: Engaging the whole system for rapid change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Burke, W. W. (2002). Organization change: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Camden-Anders, S. (2000). Transformational change: Illusion or reality? , University Microfilms International, US.
Cameron, K. S., & Quinn, R. E. (1988). Organizational paradox and transformation. In R. E. Quinn & K. S. Cameron (Eds.), Paradox and transformation: Toward a theory of change in organization and management (pp. 1-18). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
Cenek, R. E. (1995). Why improvement efforts fail and what to do about it. Journal for Quality & Participation, 18(1), 66-75.
Child, J., & McGrath, R. G. (2001). Organizations unfettered: Organizational form in an information-intensive economy. Academy of Management Journal, 44(6), 1135.
Chin, R., & Benne, K. D. (1976). General strategies for effecting changes in human systems. In W. G. Bennis, K. D. Benne, R. Chin & K. E. Corey (Eds.), The planning of change (3rd. ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Clarke, T., & Clegg, S. (1998). Changing paradigms: The transformation of management knowledge for the 21st century. London: HarperCollins.
Clegg, S. R., da Cunha, V. J., & e Cunha, P. M. (2002). Management paradoxes: A relational view. Human Relations, 55(5), 483-503.
Clemens, E. S., & Cook, J. M. (1999). Politics and institutionalism: Explaining durability and change. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 441-466.
Conger, J. A. (1999). Charismatic and transformational leadership in organizations: An insider's perspective on these developing streams of research. Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 145-179.
Conger, J. A. (2000). Effective change begins at the top. In M. Beer & N. Nohria (Eds.), Breaking the code of change (pp. 99-112). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Conger, J. A., Spreitzer, G. M., & Lawler III, E. E. (1999). Introduction: The challenges of effective change leadership. In J. A. Conger, G. M. Spreitzer & E. E. Lawler III (Eds.), The leader's change handbook: An essential guide to setting direction and taking action (pp. xxxi-xlvi). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Corley, K. G., & Gioia, D. A. (2004). Identity ambiguity and change in the wake of a corporate spin-off. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49(2), 173-208.
Cummings, T. G. (1999). The role and limits of change leadership. In J. A. Conger, G. M. Spreitzer & E. E. Lawler III (Eds.), The leader's change handbook: An essential guide to setting direction & taking action. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Davis, A. S., Maranville, S. J., & Obloj, K. (1997). The paradoxical process of organizational transformation: Propositions and a case study. Research in Organizational Change and Development, 10, 275-314.
305
Denison, D. R., Hooijberg, R., & Quinn, R. E. (1995). Paradox and performance: Toward a theory of behavioral complexity in managerial leadership. Organization Science, 6(5), 524-540.
Dent, J. F. (1992). Reality in the making: A study of organizational transformation. International Studies of Management & Organization, 21(4), 23-36.
Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (2nd. Ed. ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2001). The American tradition in qualitative research: Methods of collecting empirical materials (Vol. Vol. III). London: Sage.
Department of Main Roads. (Undated). Main Roads Success Stories. Brisbane: Queensland Government.
Dijksterhuis, M. S., Van den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. (1999). Where do new organizational forms come from? Management logics as a source of co-evolution. Organization Science, 10(5), 569-582.
DiVanna, J. A., & Austin, F. (2004). Strategic thinking in tactical times. London: Palgrave-Macmillan.
Dubois, A., & Gadde, L.-E. (2002). Systematic combining: An abductive approach to case research. Journal of Business Research, 55(7), 553.
Dunleavy, P., & Hood, C. (1994). From old public administration to new public management. Public Money & Management, 14(3), 9.
Dunphy, D. C. (1996). Organizational change in corporate settings. Human Relations, 49(5), 541-552.
Dunphy, D. C. (2000). Embracing paradox: Top-down versus participative management of organizational change, a commentary on Conger and Bennis. In M. Beer & N. Nohria (Eds.), Breaking the code of change (pp. 123-135). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Dunphy, D. C., & Stace, D. A. (1988). Transformational and coercive strategies for planned organizational change: Beyond the O.D. model. Organization Studies, 9(3), 317-334.
Eggers, W. D. (1997). The wonder down under. Government Executive, 29(3), 32-39.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14, 532-550.
Epitropaki, O., & Martin, R. (2004). Implicit leadership theories in applied settings: Factor structure, generalizability, and stability over time. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(2), 293-310.
Eriksson, C. B. (2004). The effects of change programs on employees' emotions. Personnel Review, 33(1), 110-126.
Evans, P. A. L. (1992). Balancing continuity and change: The constructive tension in individual and organizational development. In S. Srivastva & R. E. Fry (Eds.), Executive and organizational continuity: Managing the paradoxes of stability and change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition (2nd. ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Flick, E. (2002). An introduction to qualitative research (2nd. ed.). London: Sage.
306
French, W. L., & Bell, C. H. (1995). Organization Development: Behavioral science interventions for organisation improvement (5th. Ed. ed.). Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
French, W. L., & Bell, C. H. (1999). Organization Development: Behavioral science interventions for organization improvement (6th. ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: PrenticeHall.
Frese, M., & Fay, D. (2001). Personal initiative: An active performance concept for work in the 21st century. Research in Organizational Behavior, 23, 133-187.
Friedlander, F., & Brown, L. D. (1974). Organization Development. Annual Review of Psychology, 25, 313-341.
Frohman, A. L. (1997). Igniting organizational change from below: The power of personal initiative. Organizational Dynamics, 25(3), 39-53.
Galbraith, J. R. (2000). The role of formal structures and processes. In M. Beer & N. Nohria (Eds.), Breaking the code of change (pp. 139-160). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Galbraith, J. R., & Lawler III, E. E. (1993a). Effective organizations: Using the new logic of organizing. In J. Galbraith & E. E. Lawler III (Eds.), Organizing for the future: The new logic for managing complex organizations (pp. 285-299). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Galbraith, J. R., & Lawler III, E. E. (Eds.). (1993b). Organizing for the future: The new logic for managing complex organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Garratt, B. (Ed.). (2003). Developing strategic thought: A collection of the best thinking on business strategy. London: Profile.
Geigle, S. L. (1998). Schemas and sensemaking during radical organizational change: A case study of reengineering in a federal agency., Univ Microfilms International.
Gemmill, G., & Smith, C. (1985). A dissipative structure model of organization transformation. Human Relations, 38(3), 751-766.
Gersick, C. J. G. (1991). Revolutionary change theories: A multilevel exploration of the punctuated equilibrium paradigm. Academy of Management Review, 16(1), 10-36.
Gharajedaghi, J. (1999). Systems thinking: Managing chaos and complexity, a platform for designing business architecture. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Gilmore, T. N., Shea, G. P., & Useem, M. (1997). Side effects of corporate cultural transformations. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 33(2), 174-189.
Gioia, D. A., & Chittipeddi, K. (1991). Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 433-448.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.
Glynn, J., & Murphy, M. (1996). Public management, failing accountabilities and failing performance review. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 9(5/6), 125-137.
Golden-Biddle, K., & Locke, K. (1993). Appealing work: An investigation of how ethnographic texts convince. Organization Science, 4(4), 595-616.
307
Golding, S. (2000, August 2000). Key note speech. Paper presented at the Department of Main Roads Diversity Conference: Cultivating opportunities through diversity, Rockhampton, Queensland.
Golding, S. (2001). Directions for 2001. Brisbane: Department of Main Roads. Golembiewski, R. T., & Sun, B.-C. (1991). Public-sector innovation and
predisposing situational features: Testing co-variants of successful QWL applications. Public Administration Quarterly, 15(1), 106-132.
Goodman, P. S., & Dean, J. W. (1982). Creating long-term organizational change. In P. S. Goodman & Associates (Eds.), Change in organizations: New perspectives on theory, research, and practice (pp. 226-279). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Gowdy, E. A. (1994). From technical rationality to participating consciousness. Social Work, 39(4), 362.
Greenwood, R., & Hinings, B. (1996). Understanding radical organizational change: Bringing together the old and the new institutionalism. Academy of Management Review, 21(4), 1022-1054.
Greenwood, R., & Hinings, C. R. (1988). Organizational design types, tracks and the dynamics of strategic change. Organization Studies, 9(3), 293-316.
Greenwood, R., & Hinings, C. R. (1993). Understanding strategic change: The contribution of archetypes. Academy of Management Journal, 36(5), 1052.
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105-117). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Harris, L. C., & Ogbonna, E. (1998). Employee responses to culture change efforts. Human Resource Management Journal, 8(2), 78-92.
Harris, L. C., & Ogbonna, E. (2002). The unintended consequences of culture interventions: A study of unexpected outcomes. British Journal of Management, 13(1), 31-49.
Harrison, R. (1970). Choosing the depth of organizational interventions. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science.
Hennink, M., & Diamond, I. (1999). Using focus groups in social research. In A. Memon & R. Bull (Eds.), Handbook of the psychology of interviewing (pp. 113-141). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Heracleous, L. (1998). Strategic thinking or strategic planning? Long Range Planning, 31(3), 481-487.
Holmes, M., & Shand, D. (1995). Management reform: Some practitioner perspectives on the past ten years. Governance, 8(5), 551-578.
Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons? Public Administration, 69(1), 3-19.
Howell, J. P. (1997). Substitutes for Leadership: Their meaning and measurement--an historical assessment. Leadership Quarterly, 8(2), 113-116.
Howell, J. P., Bowen, D. E., Dorfman, P. W., Kerr, S., & Podsakoff, P. M. (1990). Substitutes for Leadership: Effective alternatives to ineffective leadership. Organizational Dynamics, 19(1), 20-38.
Howell, J. P., & Dorfman, P. W. (1986). Leadership and substitutes for leadership among professional and nonprofessional workers. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 22(1), 29-46.
308
Isabella, L. A. (1990). Evolving interpretations as a change unfolds: How managers construe key organizational events. Academy of Management Journal, 33(1), 7-41.
Jensen, J. L., & Rodgers, R. (2001). Cumulating the intellectual gold of case study research. Public Administration Review, 61(2), 235-246.
Jermier, J. M., & Kerr, S. (1997). Substitutes for leadership: Their meaning and measurement. Leadership Quarterly, 8(2), 95-102.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1994). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning (4th. ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Kelly, G. A. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs. New York: Norton. Kerr, S., & Jermier, J. M. (1978). Substitutes for leadership: Their meaning and
measurement. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 22(3), 375-403.
Kezar, A., & Eckel, P. (2002). Examining the institutional transformation process: The importance of sensemaking, interrelated strategies, and balance. Research in Higher Education, 43(3), 295-328.
Kilmann, R. H. (1984). Beyond the quick fix: Managing five tracks to organizational success. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kotter, J. P. (1995). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Review, 73(2), 59-68.
Kotter, J. P. (1999). Leading change: The eight steps to transformation. In J. A. Conger, G. M. Spreitzer & E. E. I. Lawler (Eds.), The leader's change handbook: An essential guide to setting direction and taking action (pp. 87-99). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Krueger, R. A. (1994). Focus groups: A practical guide (2nd. ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Kvale, S. (1996). InterViews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Labianca, G., Gray, B., & Brass, D. J. (2000). A grounded model of organizational schema change during empowerment. Organization Science, 11(2), 235-257.
Lam, A. (2000). Tacit knowledge, organizational learning and societal institutions: An integrated framework. Organization Studies, 21(3), 487-513.
Langan-Fox, J., & Tan, P. (1997). Images of a culture in transition: Personal constructs of organizational stability and change. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 70(3), 273-293.
Lau, C.-M., Kilbourne, L. M., & Woodman, R. W. (2003). A shared schema approach to understanding organizational culture change. In W. A. Pasmore & R. W. Woodman (Eds.), Research in organizational change and development. (Vol. 14, pp. 225-256): Elsevier Science/JAI Press.
Lau, C.-M., & Woodman, R. W. (1995). Understanding organizational change: A schematic perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2), 537-554.
Lee, T. W. (1999). Using qualitative methods in organizational research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Leitko, T. A., & Szczerbacki, D. (1987). Why traditional OD strategies fail in professional bureaucracies. Organizational Dynamics, 15(3), 52-65.
Levin, I. M. (2000). Vision revisited: Telling the story of the future. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 36(1), 91-107.
309
Levine, L., & Mohr, B. J. (1998). Whole system design (WSD): The shifting focus of attention and the threshold challenge. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 34(3), 305.
Levy, A., & Merry, U. (1986). Organizational Transformation. New York: Praeger.
Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science. New York: Harper and Row. Lewis, D. S. (1992). Culture change - communication, process and effects: An
empirical study of change in an Australian tertiary institution. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Griffith University, Brisbane.
Lewis, D. S. (1994). Organizational change: Relationship between reactions, behaviour and organizational performance. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 7(5), 41-55.
Lewis, M. W. (2000). Exploring paradox: Toward a more comprehensive guide. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 760-776.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic enquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage. Lurie, I., & Riccucci, N. M. (2003). Changing the "culture" of welfare offices:
From vision to the front lines. Administration & Society, 34(6), 653. Maddock, S. (2002). Making modernisation work: New narratives, change
strategies and people management in the public sector. The International Journal of Public Sector Management, 15(1), 13-43.
Maddock, S., & Morgan, G. (1998). Barriers to transformation: Beyond bureaucracy and the market conditions for collaboration in health and social care. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 11(4), 234-251.
March, J. G. (1981). Footnotes to organizational change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 563-577.
Markus, H., & Zajonc, R. B. (1985). The cognitive perspective in social psychology. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (3rd. ed., Vol. Vol. 1, pp. 137-230). New York: Random House.
Mason, J. (2002). Qualitative researching (2nd. ed.). London: Sage. Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach
(Vol. 41). Thousand Oaks: Sage. McCaffery, T. (2001). Senior officers concentrate on relationship building.
Interface: A magazine for staff of Queensland Transport and Main Roads, 8, 9.
McHugh, M., & Bennett, H. (1999a). Dream on: Team work from the confines of the bureaucratic cage. Strategic Change, 8(4), 189-203.
McHugh, M., & Bennett, H. (1999b). Introducing teamworking within a bureaucratic maze. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 20(2), 81.
McHugh, M., & O'Brien, G. (1999). Organizational metamorphosis led by front line staff. Employee Relations, 21(6), 556-576.
McKenna, S. (2000). Commercialisation, corporatisation and privatisation - The transformation of government enterprises as a feature of globalisation: A case study of scientific research. Management Research News, 23(2-4), 92.
McKinley, W., & Scherer, A. G. (2000). Some unanticipated consequences of organizational restructuring. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 735-752.
310
Melnarik, C. S. (1999). Retaining high-tech employees: Constructive and destructive responses to job dissatisfaction among engineers and other professionals. (employee retention). Univ Microfilms International.
Merton, R. K., Fiske, M., & Kendall, P. (1990). The focused interview: A manual of problems and procedures. New York: Free Press.
Miles, R. H. (1997). Leading corporate transformation: A blueprint for business renewal. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Miller, D. (1993). The architecture of simplicity. Academy of Management Review, 18(1), 116-138.
Mintzberg, H. (1979). The structuring of organizations: A synthesis of the research. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Mintzberg, H. (1989). Mintzberg on management. New York: The Free Press. Mintzberg, H. (1991). The effective organization: Forces and forms. Sloan
Management Review, 32(2), 54-67. Mintzberg, H. (1999). Mintzberg on managing professionals. Human Resource
Management International Digest, 15-17. Mirvis, P. H. (2005). Large Group Interventions. Journal of Applied Behavioral
Science, 41(1), 122-138. Molinsky, A. L. (1999). Sanding down the edges: Paradoxical impediments to
organizational change. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 35(1), 8-24.
Morgan, D. L. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research (2nd. ed. Vol. 16). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Morgan, G. A. (1997). Images of Organization (2nd. ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage. Murnighan, J. K., & Conlon, D. E. (1991). The dynamics of intense work groups:
A study of British string quartets. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 165-186.
Nadler, D. A., Shaw, R. B., & Walton, A. E. (Eds.). (1995). Discontinuous change: Leading organizational transformation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
National Institute for Governance. (2003). Public service leadership: Emerging issues: A report for the Australian Public Service Commission. Canberra: Australian Public Service Commission.
Nielsen, R. P., & Bartunek, J. M. (1996). Opening narrow, routinized schemata to ethical stakeholder consciousness and action. Business and Society, 35(4), 483-519.
Novelli, L., Kirkman, B. L., & Shapiro, D. L. (1995). Effective implementation of organizational change: An organizational justice perspective. In C. L. Cooper & D. M. Rousseau (Eds.), Trends in organizational behavior (Vol. 2, pp. 15-36). London: John Wiley & Sons.
Nutt, P. C. (1992). Helping top management avoid failure during planned change. Human Resource Management, 31(4), 319-344.
Nyhan, R. C. (2000). Changing the paradigm: Trust and its role in public sector organizations. American Review of Public Administration, 30(1), 87-109.
Orlikowski, W. J. (1996). Improvising organizational transformation over time: A situated change perspective. Information Systems Research, 7(1), 63-92.
Osborne, D., & Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing government: How the entrepreneurial spirit is transforming the public sector. New York: Plume.
311
Palmer, I., & Dunford, R. (2002). Managing discursive tension: The co-existence of individualist and collaborative discourses in flight centre. Journal of Management Studies, 39(8), 1045-1069.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluative and research methods (2nd. ed.). Newbury Park: Sage.
Perrow, C. (1986). Complex organizations: A critical essay (3rd. ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Pettigrew, A. M., Woodman, R. W., & Cameron, K. S. (2001). Studying organizational change and development: Challenges for future research. Academy of Management Journal, 44(4), 697.
Polidano, C. (2001). Why civil service reforms fail. Public Management Review, 3(3), 345-361.
Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2000). Public management reform: A comparative analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Poole, P. P., Gioia, D. A., & Gray, B. (1989). Influence modes, schema change, and organizational transformation. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 25(3), 271-289.
Porras, J. I., & Robertson, P. J. (1992). Organizational Development: Theory, practice, and research. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (2nd. ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Porras, J. I., & Silvers, R. C. (1991). Organization development and transformation. Annual Review of Psychology, 42, 51-78.
Putnam, L. L. (1986). Contradictions and paradoxes in organizations. In L. Thayer (Ed.), Organization Communication: Emerging perspectives I (pp. 151-167). Norwood, N.J.: Ablex Publishing.
Queensland Criminal Justice Commission. (1993). Report on the implementation of the Fitzgerald recommendations relating to the Criminal Justice Commission. Brisbane, QLD: Queensland Criminal Justice Commission.
Queensland Government. (1988). Quality Queensland, Building on Strength: A vision and strategy for achievement. Brisbane: Queensland Government Printer.
Queensland Government. (1990). Public Sector Management Commission. Brisbane: Queensland Government Printing Service.
Queensland Government. (1992a). Queensland - leading state: State economic development policy/a statement by the Premier, the Honourable Wayne Goss M.L.A. Brisbane: Government Printer.
Queensland Government. (1995). From strength to strength Queensland - Leading State: An economic development statement by the Premier the Honourable Wayne Goss M.L.A. Brisbane: Queensland Government.
Queensland Government. (2001). Charter of Social and Fiscal Responsibility. Brisbane: Queensland Treasury.
Queensland Government. (2002a). Main Roads Annual Report 2001-2002 and Financial Statements. Brisbane: Department of Main Roads.
Queensland Government. (2002b). Project 21: Progress report. Brisbane: Queensland Department of Main Roads, Road System and Engineering Technology Forum, Bardon Centre Brisbane 8 August 2002.
312
Queensland Government. (2003a). Realising the vision: Governance for the Smart State. Brisbane: Office of Public Service Merit and Equity.
Queensland Government. (2003b). Strategic Plan 2003-2008: Essential to connecting Queensland. Brisbane: Department of Main Roads.
Queensland Government. (Undated). Aligning for success. Brisbane: Department of Main Roads.
Quinn, R. E. (1988). Beyond rational management: Mastering the paradoxes and competing demands of high performance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Quinn, R. E. (1996). Deep change: Discovering the leader within. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Quinn, R. E., & Cameron, K. S. (Eds.). (1988). Paradox and transformation: Toward a theory of change in organization and management. Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger.
Rafaeli, A., & Sutton, R. I. (1987). Expression of emotion as part of the work role. Academy of Management. The Academy of Management Review, 12(1), 23-37.
Reger, R. K., Gustafson, L. T., Demarie, S. M., & Mullane, J. V. (1994). Reframing the organization: Why implementing total quality is easier said than done. Academy of Management Review, 19(3), 565-584.
Robbins, S. P., & Barnwell, N. S. (1998). Organisation theory: Concepts and cases (3rd. Edition ed.). New York: Prentice-Hall.
Robertson, P. J., Roberts, D. R., & Porras, J. I. (1993). Dynamics of planned organizational change: Assessing empirical support for a theoretical model. Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 619-634.
Robertson, P. J., & Seneviratne, S. J. (1995). Outcomes of planned organizational change in the public sector: A meta-analytic comparison to the private sector. Public Administration Review, 55(6), 547-558.
Robinson, O., & Griffiths, A. (2005). Coping with the stress of transformational change in a government department. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 41(2), 204.
Romanelli, E., & Tushman, M. L. (1994). Organizational transformation as punctuated equilibrium: An empirical test. Academy of Management Journal, 37(5), 1141.
Rousseau, D. M. (2001). Schema, promise and mutuality: The building blocks of the psychological contract. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 511-541.
Rowe, W. G. (2001). Creating wealth in organizations: The role of strategic leadership. Academy of Management Executive, 15(1), 81-94.
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (1995). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Schein, E. H. (1988). Process Consultation (2nd ed. Vol. 1). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Schein, E. H. (1992). Organizational culture and leadership (2nd. ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Schein, E. H. (1995). Dialogue and learning. Executive Excellence, 12(4), 3. Schein, E. H. (1996). Three cultures of management: The key to organizational
learning. Sloan Management Review, 38(1), 9-20. Schein, E. H. (1999). Process consultation revisited: Building the helping
relationship. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
313
Schein, E. H. (2004). Organizational culture and leadership (3rd. ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Schofield, J. (2001). The old ways are the best? The durability and usefulness of bureaucracy in public sector management. Organization, 8(1), 77-96.
Schon, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books. Seale, C. (1999). The quality of qualitative research. London: Sage. Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning
organization. New York: Doubleday. Senge, P. M. (1992). Mental Models. Planning Review, 20(2), 4-11. Sillince, J. A. A. (1995). Extending the cognitive approach to strategic change in
organizations: Some theory. British Journal of Management, 6(1), 59-76. Silverman, D. (2000). Doing qualitative research: A practical handbook.
London: Sage. Silverman, D. (2001). Interpreting qualitative data: Methods for analysing talk,
text and interaction (2nd. ed.). London: Sage. Snell, R. S. (2002). The learning organization, sensegiving and psychological
contracts: A Hong Kong case. Organization Studies, 23(4), 549-569. Sottolano, D. L. (2001). Facilitating cognitive reframing and organizational
readiness for large-scale change: A model of leadership, structural, and cultural dimensions., University Microfilms International.
Stace, D. A., & Dunphy, D. C. (2001). Beyond the boundaries: Leading and re-creating the successful enterprise (2nd. ed.). Sydney: McGraw-Hill.
Stensaker, I., Meyer, C., Falkenberg, J., & Haueng, A.-C. (2001). Excessive change: Unintended consequences of strategic change. Academy of Management Proceedings, G1-G8.
Stevenson, D. G. (1990, July 1990). Re-organising the Department of Transport. Paper presented at the Centre for Australian Public Sector Management Annual Conference, Griffith University, Brisbane.
Stewart, D. W., & Shamdasani, P. N. (1990). Focus groups: Theory and practice (Vol. 20). Newbury Park: Sage.
Stokes, J., & Clegg, S. R. (2002). Once upon a time in the bureaucracy: Power and public sector management. Organization, 9(2), 225-248.
Strauss, A. L. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park: Sage.
Tenner, E. (1996). Why things bite back: Predicting the problems of progress. London: Fourth Estate.
Thompson, J. R. (1999). Devising administrative reform that works: The example of the reinvention lab program. Public Administration Review, 59(4), 283-292.
Thompson, R. M., Szymczyk-Ellis, J., & Flynn, C. (2002, 8-10 April, 2002). The person most likely to lead: Images of 'new-culture' leadership in a public sector organisation undergoing strategic change. Paper presented at the International Research Symposium on Public Management, Edinburgh, Scotland.
Thurley, A. (2003). Whole-of-Government outcomes. Canberra Bulletin of Public Administration, 106, 30-35.
314
Tosey, P., & Robinson, G. (2002). When change is no longer enough: What do we mean by "transformation" in organizational change work? The TQM Magazine, 14(2), 100-109.
Vallas, S. P. (2003). Why teamwork fails: Obstacles to workplace change in four manufacturing plants. American Sociological Review, 68(2), 223-250.
Valle, M. (1999). Crisis, culture and charisma: The new leader's work in public organizations. Public Personnel Management, 28(2), 245-257.
Van Aken, E. M., Van Goubergen, D., & Letens, G. (2003). Integrated enterprise transformation: Case applications in engineering project work in the Belgian Armed Forces. Engineering Management Journal, 15(2), 3-16.
Van de Ven, A. H., & Poole, M. S. (1995). Explaining development and change in organizations. The Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 510-540.
Van Maanen, J. (1979). The fact of fiction in organizational ethnography. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 539-550.
Varghese, J. (1998). Aligning for success wall poster. Brisbane: Department of Main Roads.
Waddell, D. M., Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (2000). Organisation development & change (Pacific Rim Edition ed.). Melbourne: Nelson.
Waddell, D. M., Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (2004). Organisation development & change (2nd. Ed. ed.). South Melbourne: Thomson.
Walsh, J. P. (1995). Managerial and organizational cognition: Notes from a trip down memory lane. Organization Science, 6(3), 280-321.
Waterman, R. H., Jr. (1982). The seven elements of strategic fit. Journal of Business Strategy, 2(3), 69-73.
Weick, K. E. (1979a). Cognitive processes in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 1, 41-74.
Weick, K. E. (1979b). The social psychology of organizing (2nd. ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Weick, K. E. (1993). The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: The Mann Gulch disaster. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 628-652.
Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Weick, K. E. (1998). Improvisation as a mindset for organizational analysis.
Organization Science, 9(5), 543-555. Weick, K. E. (2000). Emergent change as a universal in organizations. In M.
Beer & N. Nohria (Eds.), Breaking the code of change (pp. 223-242). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Weick, K. E., & Quinn, R. E. (1999). Organizational change and development. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 361-386.
Westenholz, A. (1993). Paradoxical thinking and change in the frames of reference. Organization Studies, 14(1), 37-58.
Wilkinson, S. (2003). Focus groups. In J. A. Smith (Ed.), Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods (pp. 184-204). London: Sage.
Wood, T., & Caldas, M. P. (2001). Reductionsim and complex thinking during ERP implementations. Business Process Management Journal, 7(5), 387-393.
Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd, ed. Vol. 5). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
315
Young, G. J. (2000). Managing organizational transformations: Lessons from the Veterans Health Administration. California Managment Review, 43(1), 66-83.
Zaccaro, S. J., Blair, V., Peterson, C., & Zazanis, M. (1995). Collective efficacy. In J. E. Maddux (Ed.), Self-Efficacy, adaptation, and adjustment: Theory, research, and application. New York: Plenum Press.
Zaccaro, S. J., & Klimoski, R. J. (2001). The nature of organizational leadership: An introduction. In S. J. Zaccaro & R. J. Klimoski (Eds.), The nature of organizational leadership: Understanding the performance imperatives confronting today's leaders (pp. 3-41). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Zell, D. (2001). Tapping the core: Bringing about strategic change in a professional bureaucracy. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Proceedings - ODC Paper Abstracts: 17.
Zell, D. (2003). Organizational change as a process of death, dying, and rebirth. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 39(1), 73-96.