Creating a Context for Change:
Leading through Organizational Development
A Web-based Course
offered through the
South Central Public Health Training Center
Created and Facilitated
by
Sheila W. Chauvin, Ph. D., M. Ed.
Director
Office of Medical Education Research and Development, School of Medicine
Academy for the Advancement of Educational Scholarship
Professor
Department of Internal Medicine and the School of Public Health
Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center – New Orleans
Adjunct Professor
Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine
October 2012
Leadership and Change (SW Chauvin, 2012) - Page 1
Creating a Context for Change:
Leading through Organizational Development
Course Objectives
By the end of this course, participants will be able to:
1. Examine various factors that influence successful adoption and implementation of innovation
and change;
2. Use at least one theoretical model for examining change processes and the role of leadership.
3. Describe characteristics of effective leaders for facilitating innovation, change, and continuous
improvement.
4. Identify individual and organizational characteristics that facilitate successful change.
5. Use specific leadership strategies to create and sustain effective change.
Course Organization
Module
Introduction
Slides
Participant Materials
1-3
Course overview, page 1
1. Perspectives on Leadership and
Change
2. Factors that Influence Change
4-14
Pages 2 - 8
15-32
Pages 3-11
3. Examining the Process of Change
33-43
4. Leadership for Change: Models and
Strategies
5. Creating a Context for Change
44-65
Pages 12-15
66-74
Pages 16-21
75-80
Pages 22-25
Wrap-Up
Leadership and Change (SW Chauvin, 2012) - Page 2
Worksheet 1
Leadership and You
Write your personal definition of effective leadership.
Describe or draw your own model or conceptual framework of effective leadership.
List or mark the specific elements of effective leadership that related to facilitating
innovation and change.
Leadership and Change (SW Chauvin, 2012) - Page 3
Worksheet 2
Change and You
Describe an experience with a specific innovation or change that stands out in your memory.
List descriptors that reflect how you felt about this innovation/change.
Describe significant experiences with this innovation/change that have left lasting impressions. Label
each as either positive or negative experiences. Reflect on how your experiences with this
innovation/change influenced your receptivity and response to other innovations/changes that occurred
subsequently.
Leadership and Change (SW Chauvin, 2012) - Page 4
Change Preferences
(Based on C. Musselwhite, 2009)*
Individuals’ responses to change are driven in many ways by their personal preferences for innovation
and change. Preferences can be influenced by one’s personality, how one thinks about change and by
their prior experiences with innovation and change – positive and negative. Some individuals find
change uncomfortable, disruptive, and perhaps, even scary. Others are more comfortable with change
and may even thrive on and be energized by innovation. How individuals think about and deal with
change – creating and responding to change – is largely a function of specific personal preferences.
Christopher Musselwhite provides one framework of individual preferences for change along a
continuum that spans from conservers (highly resistant to change) to originators (highly receptive to
change), with pragmatists being a large majority that resides in the middle of these two extremes.
Musselwhite offers further the following descriptions for these three types of change preferences:
Conservers:
These individuals view change as a danger. When faced with innovation and change
they appear deliberate, focused, and disciplined. They can be helpful in that they are
good at defining the current reality. Conservers prefer a clearly defined structure.
They can be successfully engaged in change and innovation if it is presented in a way
that affords them gradual adoption or accommodation to the targeted change or
innovation, keeping within the existing systems with which they are already familiar.
Pragmatists:
These individuals represent a large majority of individual between the extremes of
Conserver and Originator preference types. Consequently, they appreciate the
perspectives held by these two other types and reflect a “middle-ground” perspective.
Pragmatists want to get the job done, are practical (as the label suggests), and are
motivated by finding solutions to challenges, problems, and needs.
Originators:
Individuals associated with the opposite extreme of the continuum from Conservers
tend to focus on new possibilities and opportunities. They are visionary, future
oriented, and see new directions. They like to change the status quo and existing
structures and ways of doing things and enjoy taking risks to realize new possibilities
and vision. Originators are action-minded, but may not be the ones to follow through
with being action-oriented, so they are not always the best individuals for implementing
what needs to be done.
Musselwhite (2009) summarized the three change preference types by providing specific
characteristics, as outlined in the table shown on the next page:
{Please continue on next page.]
Leadership and Change (SW Chauvin, 2012) - Page 5
Characteristics of Conservers, Pragmatists, and Originators
as three types of change preferences
Musselwhite (2009)
•
Conservers
Generally appear
deliberate, disciplined,
focused
•
Prefer clearly defined
structure
•
Start with traditional
ideas when problemsolving
•
Don’t like surprises and
uncertainty
•
May appear cautious
and inflexible
•
Focus on details and
implementation
•
Value tradition and best
practices
•
Are convergent thinkers
•
Pragmatists
Generally appear
practical, agreeable,
flexible
•
Value change that
produces readily visible
benefits
•
More interested in
functionality than
tradition or novelty
•
Operate as mediators
and catalysts for
understanding
•
Are open to both sides
of an argument
•
Take more of a middleof-the-road approach
•
Appear more team
oriented to their coworkers
•
Originators
May appear
unorganized,
undisciplined,
unconventional
•
Change existing
structure
•
Dismiss traditional ideas
when problem-solving
•
Enjoy risk and
uncertainty
•
May appear impractical
and miss important
details
•
Appear systemic in their
thinking
•
Can dismiss established
practices with little
regard
•
Are divergent thinkers
*Musselwhite C. Tips for managing change: A conversation with Chris Musselwhite. Leading
Effectively e-Newsletter, Center for Creative Leadership, January 2009. Access March 5, 2011 from
http://www.ccl.org/leadership/enewsletter/2009/JANtips.aspx.
Leadership and Change (SW Chauvin, 2012) - Page 6
Ideal Types of Adopters of Innovation
Rogers: Diffusion of Innovation (1995, pp. 263-266)
Rogers (1995) presented a taxonomy of five ideal types of adopters of innovation. Each was conceptualized
based on his review of the literature and portrayed as a framework for comparing different characteristics and
values among individuals who shared a similar perception or response to innovativeness. Clearly exceptions
and deviations to each of the ideal types exist, and as Rogers pointed out, there are not definitive breaks
between the types reflected in the taxonomy or continuum of individual tendency toward innovativeness.
Context plays an important role in influencing how individuals and groups will be receptive or resistant to a
particular innovation or change. Below are some descriptions that can help you think about innovations and
change, individuals and stakeholders related to a particular situation, how they react and respond to the
change/innovation, and how you as a leader might facilitate successful change with individuals representing the
various ideal types.
Innovators (2.5%)
Rogers co-described this type as venturesome. Innovators are almost obsessed with being venturesome,
pursuing the daring and risky direction. Innovators tend to have expanded and cosmopolitan (versus local) peer
networks and social relationships and gravitate to others who are also Innovators, unrestricted by geographical
boundaries. They and other innovators share similar communication patterns and friendships that are reflective
cliques. Innovators typically have control of resources (financial or otherwise) to an extent that facilitates their
abilities to rebound from unsuccessful outcomes and losses. Innovators are able to understand and apply
complex technical knowledge and are comfortable and able to cope effectively with high degrees of uncertainty
and ambiguity related to elements such as defining an innovation at the point of adoption. Oftentimes, because
of daring and risky nature and wide spread of peer networks, Innovators are not particularly popular or respected
by individuals in the local system. Despite the perceptions of individuals in the local environment, Innovators
play a very important role in diffusion of innovations and change, particularly in terms of importing innovations
and change that originated outside of the local system’s boundaries. Consequently, Innovators perform a
gatekeeper function in the introduction and flow of new ideas and practices from outside to inside the local
system.
Early Adopters (13.5%)
Rogers associated the descriptor, respect, with this ideal type. Early Adopters are generally receptive to and
among those within the local social system who adopt innovation and change early in the introductory phases.
Whereas, Innovators were grounded with others outside the local social system (cosmopolites), Early Adopters
are grounded in local networks (localites), consequently gaining respect of the local system members. Of all the
ideal types, Early Adopters have the greatest degree of opinion leadership and serve as important informal
leaders and influences on the diffusion of innovation and change. They are the ones that other feel a need to
“check with” before deciding whether to adopt or embrace an innovation or change. Early adopters are the local
missionaries that change agents seek to “lead the way” and be a role model for moving the innovation/change
forward locally. Because they are not too far ahead of the majority tendency for innovativeness, they fulfill this
missionary and role model role quite effectively. They reflect the “calculated risk taker” or careful, judicious
decision-maker about adopting innovation and change. Early Adopters tend to be at the central of the
communication networks within the local social system and contribute to decreasing the uncertainty associated
with an innovation or change; thus, facilitating wider adoption. Through informal and subjective evaluation and
communication with others about an innovation or change, Early Adopters facilitate innovation and change
through their interpersonal relationships with others in the local system. Said another way, Innovators are
important for stimulating and introducing innovation and change and Early Adopters are essential to achieving a
Leadership and Change (SW Chauvin, 2012) - Page 7
critical mass of receptivity and adoption of innovation that is required to progress toward and achieve
sustainable, long-lasting change and improvement.
Early Majority (34%)
Individuals comprising the Early Majority were also described by Rogers as being the deliberate types.
Individuals in this category adopt new ideas and innovative practices just before the typical member of a local
system. They interact frequently with each other, but rarely hold positions of opinion leadership, formal or
informal. Because Early Majority members are situated between those who are early and later to adoption
innovation, their transitional position along the continuum is critical to successful diffusion of innovation. They
also comprise the nearly a third of the populous in a local system and are those members who will contemplate
innovation and change for quite a while before deciding to adopt a new idea or practice completely.
Consequently, Early Majority members will stand on the sidelines, observe the innovation/change with interest,
and when sure of the value or potential success of the initiative (e.g., little risk or potential for loss), they will step
up and join the Innovators and Early Adopters.
Late Majority (34%)
Individuals comprising this category of adopter types were also referred to by Rogers as skeptical. The number
of individuals in a local system in this category is similar to that of the Early Majority, about one-third and
includes those individuals who will adopt an innovation or change just after the typical member has done so.
Adoption of innovation for this group occurs because of either economic necessity or peer (political) pressure.
While these individuals will eventually adopt and commit to a new idea or practice, they are among the last to do
so, and only when, the system norms are clearly indicative of the benefit and success of the targeted change.
These individuals typically have scarce resources, so to avoid risk and loss, they require the pressure of peers to
be motivated for change and need to have resolved most of their uncertainty about the change before they can
feel safe enough to adopt and commit to the change.
Laggards (16%)
This group of individuals was also referred to by Rogers and the traditional response to innovation. They are the
last to adopt innovation and may not ever fully commit to the change. Laggards have almost no opinion
leadership influence, are mostly locally oriented in their outlook regarding innovation and many are quite isolated
in their local social system. These individuals are grounded in the past, usually base decisions on their past
experiences and observations and tend to interact with others who share similar perspectives and traditional
values. They tend to be suspicious of innovation and change agents, lag far behind the awareness and
knowledge that others have of a new idea or practice, and their perspectives grounded in the past serve as
strong rationales for their resistance to change. Because their resources are significantly limited and they do not
tolerate uncertainty, ambiguity, risk and failure and avoid such situations, Laggards need substantial assurance
of benefit and success before they are willing to adopt and demonstrate commitment to change. While Laggards
are slow to adopt change, can be quite resistant and invoke negative influence on the momentum of positive
progress, they should not be viewed as “bad” or blamed for their perspectives and tendency toward resistance.
In fact, change agents can make positive use of Laggards to root out potential areas of challenge, barriers to
adopt or change implementation. Through engagement of Laggards in this way to enhance practical and
logistical success of new ideas and practices, Laggards’ receptivity to and adoption of change can often be
facilitated.
Now, continue to the next page for a comparison by Rogers of early versus late adopters.
Leadership and Change (SW Chauvin, 2012) - Page 8
Early versus Late Adopters
Rogers summarized the considerable published research pertaining to innovativeness and contrasted early and
late adopters. Early adopters included Innovators, Early Adopters, and Early Majority types and later adopters
included the Late Majority and Laggard types. Rogers noted that early and late adopters did not differ based on
age, as the empirical evidence was inconsistent. Some evidence revealed that early adopters tend to be
younger, but other studies provided evidence that they were older. However, he did report differences between
early and late adopters in three general categories: 1) socioeconomic status, 2) personality values, and 3)
communication behavior. Rogers reported that early adopters were more likely to reflect the following
characteristics than late adopters:
Socioeconomic Status
• More years of formal education
• Higher social status (e.g.,
income, level of living, wealth,
occupational prestige)
• Greater degree of upward
social mobility
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Personality
Greater empathy
Less dogmatic
Greater ability to deal with
abstractions
More favorable attitude toward
change
Greater ability to cope with
uncertainty and risk
Less fatalistic
Higher achievement and
motivation
• Greater rationality
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Personal Notes and Reflections:
Communication Behavior
More social participation
More interconnected (social
system)
Have more change agent
contact
Greater exposure to mass
media
Greater exposure to
interpersonal communication
channels
More active in information
seeking
Have greater knowledge of
innovations
Have a higher degree of
opinion leadership
Are more likely to belong to
highly interconnected systems
More cosmopolitan
Leadership and Change (SW Chauvin, 2012) - Page 9
Worksheet 3
Influences on Change
Describe your current or anticipated innovation/change:
Using Musselwhite’s framework for typical responses to change, identify individuals who are/will be
directly involved with your selected change and place each person in the appropriate Responder
category
Originator
Pragmatist
Conserver
Now, do the same thing using Roger’s model of Responders to Innovation and place each person in
the appropriate category
Innovator/Initiator
Early Adopter
Early Majority
Late Majority
Laggard
Reflect on how individuals of the different responder types might influence how change might occur or
not. How might you use this knowledge about these responder types to engage individuals you have
identified and/or build teams for initiating, adopting, and implementing the innovation/change? Write
some of your thoughts
Now, go to the next page to examine features of the innovation/change, as identified by Rogers. .
Leadership and Change (SW Chauvin, 2012) - Page 10
Worksheet 3: Influences on Change - continued
Below are the five features of innovation that Rogers identified as having important influence on the
extent to which it will be adopted. Jot down some notes about your innovation/change for each of
these five features. Think about what particular elements are likely to be positive influences (i.e.,
facilitate adoption) and those that are likely to be negative influences (i.e., hinder or interfere with
adoption). Now consider what strategies you might use to maximize the positive features and alter the
negative ones to become positive influences.
Feature
Relative Advantage
Compatibility
Complexity
Observability
Trialability
Positive
Facilitate Adoption
Negative
Hinder Adoption
Leadership and Change (SW Chauvin, 2012) - Page 11
Organizational Context for Change Inventory
Directions: This instrument contains 16 statements that pertain to various characteristics of an organization. For each
statement, please darken the bubble that best reflects your response. There is no right or wrong answer to any statement.
Your candid response is best. Try not to let your response to one item influence how you respond other items.
Right now, to what extent is each of the following features typical of
your primary work setting?
Definitely
No
Mostly
No
Neutral
Mostly
Yes
Definitely
Yes
1. Schedules and structures that reduce isolation





2. Policies that foster collaboration





3. Collegial relationships among staff within and across division/program





4. A sense of community in the organization





5. Policies that support professional autonomy





6. Policies and structures that support professional development





7. Availability of resources





8. Involvement in decision-making





9. Positive staff attitudes toward program objectives and
innovation/change





10. Staff’s interest and active involvement with program implementation





11. Supportive external community





12. External stakeholders (e.g., potential clients, employers, community
members) as partners and allies





13. Widely shared sense of purpose





14. Widely shared vision





15. Norm of continuous inquiry





16. Norm of continuous improvement





Source: Adapted from the Leadership for Change Project, Southwest Educational Development Laboratory. Used with
permission.
Leadership and Change (SW Chauvin, 2012) - Page 12
Bolman and Deal’s Four Frames Model*
Structural Frame
Leaders who facilitate change using this approach focus on structural elements within the organization, such as these
shown in the slide. They also focus on strategy implementation and adaptation. A structural approach works well when
goals are clear, cause-effect relationships are well understood, and there is little conflict, uncertainty or ambiguity.
Examples of ways in which leaders demonstrate use of a structural frame of reference in general and in specific contexts of
change include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Develops and uses a clear description of the unit’s organizational structure (e.g., organizational chart,
responsibilities and authorities associated with roles and relationships)
• Develops clear, efficient policies and procedures and uses these consistently
• Creates organizational structures that to facilitate educational leaders’ effectiveness and enhance impact
• Creates and supports structures that promote open and clear communication and exchange of relevant information
(e.g., meetings, information briefs, routine sources or schedules to assure information dissemination, particularly as
relevant to technical and operational aspects of the organization and implementation of innovations and changes)
• Provides resources necessary for professional performance and professional development (resources can include
access to expertise, educational and training, mechanisms and processes for formal and informal assessment and
feedback, provision of financial, technological, and/or logistical support for educational programs, individual and
group productivity and success)
• Assures that the working environment is adequate to assure safety, cleanliness and orderliness, and ability to
perform effectively one’s roles and responsibilities
Human Resources Frame
A human resources frame or approach to facilitating change reflects focused attention on people. Such attention can be
demonstrated in ways shown in this slide. This approach emphasizes support and empowerment (e.g., through distributed
or shared leadership), staff and professional development, and demonstrating responsiveness to individual and collective
needs. The Human Resources approach works well when there is a need to improve or sustain positive staff morale and
when there is relatively low levels of conflict.
Examples of ways in which leaders demonstrate use of a structural frame of reference in general and in specific contexts of
change include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Models consistently professionalism, work ethic, and engagement that is expected of others (including
communication of values, demonstration of integrity and honesty, and self-direction and self –regulation)
• Communicates clearly and consistently and engages others in achieving a shared understanding and commitment
to the programs’ purpose, goals, priorities and strategic direction
• Assembles teams (standing and ad-hoc) with attention to individuals talents and interests and to achieving optimal
alignment between individual and organizational goals and priorities
• Stimulates others ongoing learning and development
• Demonstrates commitment to and interest in others’ well-being and professional success
• Provides individual and personalized praise and recognition of excellent performance and achievements
• Makes oneself accessible to others and assures approachability by others
Leadership and Change (SW Chauvin, 2012) - Page 13
Political Frame
Leaders use this frame when there are clear political features within and outside the organization/unit. For example, when
there are different stakeholder groups that have varying agendas, it is necessary to build power bases, engage in coalitionbuilding, use effective negotiation to minimize or resolve conflicts related to elements such as scarce or diminishing
resources or different views regarding goals or values.
Examples of ways in which leaders demonstrate use of a structural frame of reference in general and in specific contexts of
change include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Negotiates effectively within and across individuals and various stakeholder and client groups
• Fosters coalition building to achieve win-win relationships and/or maximize access to precious resources
• Uses conflicts effectively to minimize competition and enhance consensus or clarify complementarity among
individuals and/or groups regarding goals and priorities
• Demonstrates decision-making that is in sync with expectations of stakeholders (e.g., informs other of rationale for
decisions, involves stakeholders appropriately in decision-making)
• Uses organizational policies and procedures consistently to resolve conflicts, achieve goals and priorities, and/or to
facilitate effective change
• Develops relationships among individuals and with internal and external groups that foster a context that is
conduce to change (e.g., flexibility, adaptability)
• Engages formal and informal leaders to facilitate participation and/or adoption of new ideas and practice
Symbolic Frame
A symbolic approach to facilitating change focuses on vision and inspiration and the influence of symbols, artifacts,
processes and traditions. Leaders who view a change situation from a symbolic frame recognize that stakeholders and
individuals involved in the change initiative need to believe that their personal work and the work of the organization/unit is
meaningful and important. Creating or using existing traditions, rituals, and ceremonies are important to facilitating success
change, particularly when goals and cause-effect relationships are unclear.
Examples of ways in which leaders demonstrate use of a structural frame of reference in general and in specific contexts of
change include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Creates and sustains valued traditions and rituals
• Uses visuals (objects, artifacts) to sustain focus and direction, motivate engagement, and facilitate commitment and
collaboration
• Communicate and recognize individuals’ contributions to goals and priorities that reinforce how they are
meaningful and valued by others and the organization, as a whole
• Creates and uses objects and processes to promote, recognize, and reward effective and extraordinary
performance and achievement by individuals and groups
• Creates and uses processes and objects that publicizes individual and program/unit successes, achievements, and
contributions
Personal Notes and Reflections:
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
*Bolman LG, Deal TE. Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership. (3rd Ed.) San Francisco CA: JosseyBass, 2008.
Leadership and Change (SW Chauvin, 2012) - Page 14
Stages of Concern Framework from the Concerns-Based Adoption Model*
Stage of Concern
Refocusing
Collaboration
Typical Expression of Concern
Examples of Interventions
•
•
I have a new approach that would work even better.
Now that the innovation is working well, where do I go
from here?
•
•
I would like to compare what I am doing with what others
are doing in this area.
I am available to health new users of the innovation.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Consequence
•
•
In what ways is this innovation impacting my students?
How can we determine if this new method is better than
what we did in the past?
•
•
•
•
•
Management
•
•
I am spending all of my time planning and getting
materials ready.
I am having trouble managing the parts of this new
approach and concentrating on my students at the same
time.
•
•
•
•
•
•
Encourage creative adaptation, expansions, and
enhancements (e.g., How can we make this better?)
Share vision of future directions.
Use evaluation data to identify new targets/directions or
higher levels of performance/achievement.
Share ideas with others
Invite others to visit and observe
Create opportunities for experienced users to share tips
with others.
Provide opportunities to present new ideas or projects to
others (e.g., workshops, demonstrations, professional
meetings)
Invite the user to share success stories with you
Identify ways in which evidence of effectiveness can be
measured.
Collect pre and post-test data to examine impact.
Distribute a questionnaire to users (faculty) and clients
(learners) to identify perceptions, evidence of success,
and areas in need of improvement.
Facilitate sharing among users regarding ‘what works”
Provide demonstrations of logistical planning and
implementation
Share management techniques and tips related to the
innovation
Help organize planning and work groups
Provide assistance with setting timelines for
implementation
Provide individual assistance with planning
Provide one-on-one assistance with initial implementation
(e.g., experienced user teams with and teaches a new
Leadership and Change (SW Chauvin, 2012) - Page 15
Stage of Concern
Personal
Typical Expression of Concern
•
•
How is my use of this innovation going to affect me?
I’m concerned that I don’t have sufficient
knowledge/skills/time to do this?
Examples of Interventions
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Information
•
•
•
I don’t know much about this new approach, but would
like to learn more.
Can you tell me more about this?
I am starting to think this new practice is really going to
happen and guess I should start to learn more about it.
•
•
•
•
•
Awareness
•
•
•
•
•
I’m not interested in hearing about the innovation.
I am not concerned about this innovation.
Something else will come along before I have to be
concerned with doing this.
This will never happen. When I see something really
moving forward, then I will start to think about whether I
need to know more.
I will gone/retired before this has any effect on me.
•
•
•
•
user)
Recognize perceived risks and anxiety and try to direct
attention to positive actions and benefits
Offer moral support and build confidence
Share facts to dispel inaccurate rumors and myths
Clarify information and correct misperceptions
Pair non-users with an experienced and successful user
Visit a site where the innovation is being used
successfully
Point out “little successes” and provide support and
assistance with new tasks
Pair users of an innovation with non-users
Show a videotape about the innovation
Provide an orientation or awareness workshop or
discussion session
Provide printed materials to read or opportunities to
observe demonstrations
Locate resources and provide a website, telephone
number and/or email address to contact someone for
more information
Offer new ideas
Ask questions about what is “working” and what is not
Conduct needs assessment
Provide introductory materials and/or evidence that
implementation of the innovation is imminent.
Stages of Concern: Typical expressions of concern and examples of appropriate interventions for each stage.
Source: Based on the Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM), Hall and Hord, 1987 and application to change in medical education by Chauvin SW (2002). Complete citations in
the reference and recommended reading and resources lists for this LEAD session.
Leadership and Change (SW Chauvin, 2012) - Page 16
Scenario
Your state health officer has called together a statewide task force of public health leaders, of which
you are a member. Today is the first meeting. The task force is being charged with developing a new
performance expectation and reward system for the entire state public health department. In recent
years, staff turnover has been high, the organizational work culture has become characterized by
employees “doing their job,” without much enthusiasm or interest in innovation. Incremental salary
increases have been either nonexistent or barely that of a cost-of-living raise. There is a general culture
of laissez-faire performance in most organizational units.
Your state health officer announces that the purpose of this new program is going to be implemented to
nurture, recognize, and reward productivity, quality, and achievement. She also wants to change the
organizational culture to one in which ongoing professional development is emphasized. The state
health officer describes the general structure and features of the new system. She indicates that the
task force will have some flexibility in finalizing the program before full implementation, but the following
features must be included:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
No one will be allowed to stay with the current system of scheduled salary increases
Everyone will be required to participate in the new system for determining salary increases and
merit pay.
Every employee will have an annual professional development plan that includes specific goals
and outcomes associated with their work responsibilities that must be negotiated and agreed
upon with his/her supervisor.
Every employee must complete at least 10 hours of professional development per year. Half
must be related directly to their current work responsibilities and the other half may be related
to content and skills that align with their professional development plan and future career
direction.
Employees will be provided protected time to complete professional development and training
for which agreement has been reached with his/her supervisor.
Failure to achieve negotiated goals will result in a specified reduction in salary payment.
Failure to complete the minimum number of hours of professional development will also result
in a specified reduction in salary payment.
The new system must be ready for implementation by July 1, so you have about 9 months to solicit
input, educate everyone, and get employees “on board.” During the period for comments and
questions, a number of individuals raise concerns about employee’s receptivity to the new system,
especially those who are near retirement. Others raise concerns about preparation and consistency of
implementation by supervisors. Some task force members express concern that nine months is not
enough time to be successful in achieving full implementation by July 1. On a positive note, task force
members are generally enthusiastic and agree that a new system representing the above features will
likely be attractive to many new employees and should help to attract and retain quality staff. However,
they also agree, and express concern, about how the large number of senior employees (i.e., 20 or
more years of experience) might react and influence adoption and initial implementation.
Leadership and Change (SW Chauvin, 2012) - Page 17
Worksheet 4: Part 1
Identify your organizational unit: _______________________________________________________________
Write a short paragraph or statement that you can use to clearly and succinctly describe the innovation to employees in your
work unit:
Identify each of the following for your scenario:
Who are the Change Sponsors:
Who are the Change Agents:
Who are the Change Targets:
How do you feel about this change?
How might others in your unit react to this change? Why?
Other notes and reflections:
Leadership and Change (SW Chauvin, 2012) - Page 18
Worksheet 4: Part 2
List ways in which you can increase a sense of urgency or need for change, relative to the innovation.
List potential “payoffs” or benefits that can result from the innovation (i.e. valence).
Individual:
Organization:
What are potential stressors (i.e., strain)?
Individual:
Organization:
What are ways to establish buy-in from staff and supervisors?
How can you enhance employees’ beliefs about being successful with the new system (i.e., potency)?
Leadership and Change (SW Chauvin, 2012) - Page 19
Worksheet 4: Part 3
Mark one response for each factor.
Given your selected change scenario, to what extent might
you observe each of the following factors:
(-) Restraining ------------------------------------- Driving (+)
Definitely
No
No
Neutral
Yes
Definitely
Yes





Clear, valued benefits from adopting the change





Strong, visible support from central leaders





Strong, visible support from unit leaders





Minimal burden associated with the change





Minimal risk associated with the change















Change is viewed as “fun,” rather than “work”





Change is well-organized and process is perceived as orderly








































Strong sense of ownership for the change
Collaborative relationships among individuals involved with the
change
Change fits well with established norms or culture
Information is shared openly and equally among all
stakeholders (common knowledge and understandings)
Stakeholders’ input contributes to decisions about adoption and
implementation of the change
Stakeholders are recognized for engagement in change
Change occurs as an informed and incremental process (not by
surprise or all-at-once)
Emphasis is on successes with the change
Organizational structure reflects balanced input and appropriate
decision-making from central leadership to front-line workers
(i.e., neither highly centralized or decentralized)
Little or no resistance to the change
Visually examine your results. Are most responses clustered around 1 and 2 or 4 and 5? The more responses
that are 1 and 2, the more restraining forces are potentially present and the more resistant individuals will be to
the change/innovation. Similarly, the more responses that are 4 and 5, the more that driving or facilitating forces
will be at work and the more individuals are likely to be positive about or receptive to the innovation/change.
Continue on the next page.
Leadership and Change (SW Chauvin, 2012) - Page 20
Describe one or two strategies that might be effective for enhancing or introducing driving forces (i.e.,
facilitators):
Describe one or two strategies that might be effective for minimizing or removing resisting forces (i.e.,
interference or barriers):
Other Notes or Reflections:
An example template of an action plan for facilitating innovation/change is on the next page.
Leadership and Change (SW Chauvin, 2012) - Page 21
Worksheet 5: Action Plan
GOAL:
#
Objective
(Strategy/Action Step)
Leader(s) or
Advocate(s)
Participants
Resources
Needed
Expected
Results
Monitor &
Assess
Time Frame
(Start & Finish Dates)
Leadership and Change (SW Chauvin, 2012) - Page 22
Worksheet 6
Reflective Writing Exercise
DIRECTIONS: Please use this final worksheet to reflect on what you have learned in
this course and how you can build on your learning to enhance your leadership
development and your effectiveness as a leader for change – i.e., leading by developing
the organization.
Take 10-15 minutes to write your reflections. The questions and prompts below are
provided to stimulate your thinking and reflective writing.
Consider your past experiences and perspective regarding change. How would you describe your
personal perspectives or responder type (e.g., Musselwhite or Rogers’ framework)?
How has your type/perspective influenced your Leadership for Change style in positive and/or negative
ways? Describe and reflect upon any insights that resulted from your engagement in today’s session.
How is leading organizational development currently reflected in your personal conceptual framework
of effective leadership (e.g., through facilitating individual and organizational change process)?
Please continue on the next page.
Leadership and Change (SW Chauvin, 2012) - Page 23
How has this course reinforced and/or altered your approach to achieving effective leadership.
Finally, reflect upon and write about how the various change process and leadership for change
models used in this course may help you deal more effectively with a current individual/personal or
group/organizational change.
Write any other thoughts and reflections here:
References for this course and other recommended reading and resources
begin on the next page.
Leadership and Change (SW Chauvin, 2012) - Page 24
References
Block P. The Empowered Manager. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Bolman LG, Deal TE. Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership (3rd.Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,
2008.
Busick KU, Inos RH. Synthesis of Research on Educational Change: Implementation Phase. Honolulu: Pacific Regional
Education Laboratory, 1992.
Bustable SB. Nurse as educator: Principles of teaching and learning. Sudbury MA: Jones and Bartlett, 1997.
Fox RD, Bennett, NL. Learning and change: Implications for continuing medical education. BMJ, 316 (7129), 466-368,
1999.
Hord SM, Rutherford WL, Huling-Austin L, Hall GE. Taking Charge of Change. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision
and Curriculum Development, 1987.
Houle CO. Design of Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1980.
Kotter J. Leading Change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1996.
Lewin K. Frontiers in group dynamics: II. Channels of group life; social planning and action research. Human Relations, 1,
143-153, 1947.
Musselwhite C. Knowing change preferences is a boon for leaders. Leading in Action, 28(3), 17-20, 1998.
Rogers EM. Diffusion of Innovations (4th Ed.). New York: Free Press, 1995.
Scott C, Jaffe D. Managing Organizational Change. Crisp Publications, 1989.
Recommended Readings and Resources:
Center for Creative Leadership. Web-based resources at http://www.ccl.org.
Chauvin SW. Disseminating educational research and implementing change in medical education environments, Chapter
32, p. 997-1037. In GR Norman, CPM van der Vleuten, DI Newble (Eds), International Handbook of Research in Medical
Education, Part 2. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer, 2002.
Curry B. Instituting Enduring Innovations: Achieving Continuity of Change in Higher Education. ASHE-ERIC Higher
Education Report No. 7. Washington DC: The George Washing University, School of Education and Human Development
.
Curry L. Achieving large-scale change in medical education, Ch. 33, p. 1039-1084. In GR Norman, CPM van der Vleuten,
DI Newble (Eds), International Handbook of Research in Medical Education, Part 2. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer,
2002
Dunn EV, Norton PG, Stewart M, Tudiver F, Bass MJ. Disseminating Research/Changing Practice Research Methods for
Primary Care, Vol. 6. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1994.
Leadership and Change (SW Chauvin, 2012) - Page 25
Fullan M. Leading in a Culture of Change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2001.
Fullan M. Six Secrets of Change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2008.
Gallos JV (Ed.). Organizational Development: A Jossey-Bass Reader. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2006.
Ludema JD, Whitney D, Mohr BJ, Griffin TJ. The Appreciative Inquiry Summit: A Practitioner’s Guide for Leading LargeGroup Change. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 2003.
Mitchell PH, Belza B, Schaad DC, Robins LS, Gianola FJ, Odegard PS, Kartin D, Ballweg RA. Working across the
boundaries of health professions disciplines in education, research, and service: The University of Washington Experience.
Acad Med. 81:891-896, 2006.
Westley F, Zimmerman B, Patton MQ. Getting to Maybe: How the World is Change. Canada: Random House, 2006.
Kotter J, Rathgeber H. Our Iceberg is Melting: Changing and Succeeding Under Any Conditions. New York: St. Martin’s
Press, 2005.
Kotter J., Cohen DS. The Heart of Change: Real-Life Stories of How People Change Their Organizations. Boston:
Harvard Business School Press, 2002.
Quinn RE. Building the Bridge As You Walk on It: A Guide for Leading Change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2004.
Quinn RE. Deep Change: Discovering the Leader Within. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1996.
Wheatley MJ Leadership and the New Science: Learning about Organization from an Orderly Universe. San Francisco,
CA: Berrett-Koehler, 1994.
Wheatley MJ, Kellner-Rogers M. A Simpler Way. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler, 1996.