4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ANALYSIS
4.2 P ROCESSUAL DIMENSION - APPROACHES TO CHANGE
4.2 Processual dimension - approaches to change
This dimension includes the empirical data showing participants’ approaches to change to provide us with a deeper understanding of the process of change management. Their opinions provided valuable insights and tangible activities compared to the traditional theoretical models.
4.2.1 Change as an ongoing process that drives new ways of working
Change is a complex concept with many contributing factors. In the theoretical framework we mentioned this following famous notion on change: “The only thing constant within organisations is the continual change of these
organisations” (Elving, 2005, p.129) P6 refers to this notion when talking about change; “This notion that constant change is the only thing that is constant, I think it’s very true”. All the participants agree that there is an increased need for change in organizations that is going to continue to grow more rapidly and unpredictable in the future. P4 believes that change is an ongoing process, and that we need to change our old mindsets and perspectives on change to facilitate the constant digital transformation journey for employees. P1 further explains this: “In many digital transformations I have consulted the organization still uses old methods and ways of working when implementing new tools. The lack of needed competencies and skills can result in reduced adoption.” The inclusion of
developing skills to succeed in digital change is also recognized in McKinsey’s research (McKinsey, 2018).
4.2.2 The use of change management attributes in digital transformation
All of our participants mentioned change management as an important part of gaining success with digital transformation. For example, P1 said “Digital transformation is all about using change management, because digital transformation means constantly changing”. P2 mentions that digital transformation can create competitive advantages by understanding how important the role of change management is. Hence, new technologies have the best prerequisites. Further, P2 explains the leading way to implement sustained change on employees, processes and technology is to use change management.
None of the participants work according to the models explained in the theoretical framework. Every participant understood the models, but models were not
implemented in their change management strategies for digital transformation.
When analyzing opinions by the participants we see similarities in attributes used when approaching change. The participants do not describe a step-by-step process with an end-stage such as the outlay of Kotter’s eight step change model and Lewin’s original three stages of change. Thus, the participants’ opinions are similar to Bohnsnack et al.’s research on digital transformation, leading to continuous change (Bohnsnack et al., 2020).
Ewenstein et al. are critical towards the Kotter and ADKAR models because they are stuck in a pre digital era whereas strategic plans are planned for years in advance (Ewenstein et al., 2015). P4 disagrees and believes that change needs a strategic plan to be followed through. Moreover, trying to adapt to every change process is going to result in failure. Thus, the organization has a stronger position if it sticks to the plan and has a long term perspective. However, six of the
participants agree with Ewenstein et al.’s approach. A common argument amongst the participants is that organisations need to quickly adapt to new changes.
Whenever you have implemented a new change, there is always a new
opportunity around the corner. This is supported by Ewenstein et al.’s approach
that mastering rapid change is a critical competitive advantage (Ewenstein et al., 2015).
Kotter’s model believes forming a strategic vision happens in the third step, however the participants mention this as one of the first things being covered (Calegari et al., 2015). “Having a clear vision and purpose is vital, and the first thing the management should decide”, P5 states. However, the first step of Kotter’s model, creating a sense of urgency, is similar to some of their opinions on how to approach change (Calegari et al., 2015). P3 and P6 mentioned
questions like “Why change when we are already doing successfully?”, “Why is this necessary?” arises when first introducing a digital transformation, and how important it is for them to address this. Furthermore, this is also similar to the awareness of the need for change in the ADKAR model.
P6 and P7 mentioned the ADKAR model used as a supporting tool and as an inspiration. According to Hiatt, the five elements of the ADKAR models need to be followed in order to obtain effective change (Hiatt, 2006). P1 and P3 stated that due to digital transformation, there is a lack of knowledge on change from an educational perspective. Thus, employees might feel like they are not competent enough to make such adjustments.
Moreover, lack of knowledge can increase uncertainty, which leads to higher resistance to change for employees. The third phase in the ADKAR model;
knowledge of how to change addresses these issues and is therefore an important factor to include in a change model. Resistance amongst employees is included in the second phase; desire to support and participate in change. According to the majority of participants, the amount of resistance and desire to support change is a consequence of the amount of knowledge on how to change. Consequently, their opinions question the order of the phases in the ADKAR model.
The fourth step in Kotter’s model, “Enlist a volunteer army” (Kotterinc, 2021), emphasises the need of employees as drivers for change (Calegari et al., 2015).
These chosen individuals help to share knowledge across the organization. Many of the participants mention that such ambassadors have even more advantages, such as encouraging employees, raising knowledge, and mitigating risk of
resistance. The majority of the cases when ambassadors have been used led to successful experiences.