Process Models of Change (Part 2)

Chapter 1
Process models of change (part 2)

1
The impact of change sequences on the
outcome of the change process
This tutorial considers the impact of reactive or self-

reinforcing sequences and examines how they can affect
change agents’ ability to determine outcomes and manage
change trajectories.
© John Hayes (2014), The Theory and Practice of Change Management, 4th ed. 2
The impact of sequence on outcome
Teleological and dialectical theories suggest that members of a
system have considerable freedom to construct change trajectories.
The nature of the change sequence (whether reactive or self-

reinforcing) will affect the extent to which those leading the
change will be able to realise this possibility.
A B C D E
The way an earlier event will impact on later events depends

on how others respond.
Reactive sequences
Dialectical theories focus on the conflicting goals of those involved
in a situation.
These conflicts give rise to reactive sequences in which one party
challenges another party’s attempt to secure a particular change.
A B C D E F
X
= critical junctures Y G H
Reactive sequences
Reactive sequences highlight the importance of not only working to set
a viable direction for change but also acting in ways that will align all
those involved to support it.
Those leading a change can attempt to avoid conflict by formulating a
vision that accommodates the interests of many constituencies (bosses,
peers, subordinates, customers, suppliers, bankers) but it may not always
be possible to satisfy them all and therefore some may resist the change.
A B C D E F
= critical junctures
BA-cabin crew dispute (an example of reactive
sequences)
A proposal to reduce the number of cabin crew

was resisted.
Actions and reactions, including strikes,

suspensions and dismissals, continued for 18
months.
© PhotoDisc/Getty
images
Self-reinforcing sequences
Self-reinforcing sequences occur when a decision or action produces
positive feedback that reinforces earlier events and supports the
direction of change.
 This reinforcement induces further movement in the same
direction.
 This deliver benefits over a short term.
 Change managers need to be alert to the possibility that they
may draw them into the path that will deliver suboptimal
outcomes over a longer term.
This is illustrated with reference to three drivers of self-
reinforcing sequences:
• increasing returns
• psychological commitment to past decisions
• cognitive biases.
Four conditions promote increasing returns
• Set-up costs
• Learning
• Coordination
• Adaptive expectations
© ImageSource
NOKIA – Sticking with a winning formula for too long
For almost two decades hardware had delivered increasing

returns for Nokia and had been the source of the company’s
profitability.
tock
© Thinks
© PhotoDisc/Getty
2. Psychological commitment to past decisions
Two factors appear to encourage the escalation of commitment:
1. The leader’s need to demonstrate competence and justify an

earlier decision.
This can take the form of self justification to protect their own self image
or justification to others in order to prove to them that an earlier decision
was not wrong.
2. A response to a perceived pressure for consistency.

In many organisational settings there is a perception that change
managers who are consistent in their actions are better leaders
than those who switch from one course of action to another.
This self-reinforcing mechanism often makes it difficult to change

course, even when those leading the change are aware that a series
of past decisions have been sub-optimal.
Failure of the Fire Control project
The project was launched in 2004 with a budget of £70 million, but
following a series of delays and difficulties, was terminated in
December 2010 with none of the original objectives achieved and a
minimum of £469 million being wasted.
© GETTY
© PhotoDisc/Getty Images
3. Cognitive biases and interpretive frames
Those leading the change can become so committed to a project

that they only pay attention to information that supports their
own position.
This cognitive bias may be reinforced if:

1. The leader(s) have a history of past successes
2. Members of the leadership team suppress dissent and

impede reality testing
Unrealistic goals for change at Direct Banking
A new CEO was appointed and quickly announced his

intention to introduce Voice Activation and Routing
(VAR) technology.
© CORBIS
© ImageSource
Path dependence
An important feature of many self-reinforcing sequences is that early
steps in a particular direction can produce further movement in the
same direction.
Path dependence begins with some critical events ( ) that trigger a pattern of
self-reinforcing practices which eventually squeeze out alternatives and limit
the change manager’s scope for action.
A critical event New critical events
constrains Range of
further constrain
future possible
possibilities
possibilities futures
Few constraints on A pattern of events begins to Leader locked in to

the leader’s’ freedom dominate and diverts the leader’s a particular way of
to act attention away from alternatives functioning
Minimising the impact of reactive and self-reinforcing
sequences
Leaders can be less effective than they might be because they fail to
recognise some of the dynamics that affect outcomes.
Reactive sequences
Change agents can improve their effectiveness by scanning
their environment for threats and by anticipating resistance or
responding quickly when others fail to support their actions.
Self-reinforcing sequences
A minimum condition for breaking out of the path dependency
that is often associated with self-reinforcing sequences is the
restoration of choice. Change managers need to do whatever
they can to maintain an awareness of and the freedom to
adopt alternative courses of action.
Improving the practice of change management
In order to minimise any negative impact from reactive and self-

reinforcing sequences those leading change need to be able to:
• step back and observe what is going

on, including their own and others’
behaviour,
• identify critical junctures and
subsequent patterns – some of which
may be difficult to discern, and
• explore alternative ways of acting that © PHOTODISC
might deliver superior outcomes.

Process Models of Change (Part 2)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Process Models of Change (Part 2)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 1

Process models of change (part 2)

This tutorial considers the impact of reactive or self-

The nature of the change sequence (whether reactive or self-

The way an earlier event will impact on later events depends

A proposal to reduce the number of cabin crew

Actions and reactions, including strikes,

For almost two decades hardware had delivered increasing

Two factors appear to encourage the escalation of commitment:

1. The leader’s need to demonstrate competence and justify an

2. A response to a perceived pressure for consistency.

This self-reinforcing mechanism often makes it difficult to change

Those leading the change can become so committed to a project

This cognitive bias may be reinforced if:

2. Members of the leadership team suppress dissent and

A new CEO was appointed and quickly announced his

Few constraints on A pattern of events begins to Leader locked in to

In order to minimise any negative impact from reactive and self-

• step back and observe what is going

might deliver superior outcomes.

You might also like