Cultivating Openness to Change in Multicultural Organizations:
Assessing the Value of Appreciative Discourse
Meghana Rao
Claremont Graduate University
Abstract
Meghana is a researcher and consultant
specializing in optimal organizational
functioning. She is the associate
director and co-founder of the Western
Positive Psychology Association and
research associate at the Claremont Evaluation Center,
Claremont Graduate University. Over the past 11 years, Meg
has served as an organizational development and evaluation
consultant to various non-profits and public institutions.
Meg has an MA in Organizational Development, MBA in
Human Resource Management and is pursuing her Ph.D in
Positive Organizational Psychology.
This article examines how openness to change
can be cultivated in multicultural settings through
appreciative discourse. In this case study, employees
participated in an appreciative inquiry process and
a focus group discussion evaluating the impact
of appreciative discourse on their feelings about
change. Findings reveal appreciative discourse led
to higher sense of psychological safety and increase
in voice behaviors. Further, a positive approach to
Contact Information:
Meghana Rao
Phone: 414-231-0287
123 E. 8th St.
Claremont Graduate University
Claremont, CA 91711 USA
Email: meghana.rao@cgu.edu
engaging with differences led to greater consensus
and energy for change.
Keywords:
management,
multicultural,
diversity,
culture,
change
appreciative
inquiry,
discourse, positive, case study, openness
_______________
Rao
75
Cultivating Openness to Change in
managing resistance to change continues to remain
Multicultural Organizations:
an area of “unfinished business” in organizational
Assessing the Value of Appreciative Discourse
development research that needs further attention
Since Lewin’s (1947) early model of unfreezing,
and “innovative work” (Burke, 2011).
moving, and freezing, facilitating organizational
Openness to Change
change has been an area of keen interest to
management scholars. One of the key barriers to
and practitioners to set aside a view of resistance
In his review, Burke (2011) urges researchers
planned change that scholars and practitioners have as an obstacle to change management, and consider
struggled with is managing employees’ resistance to
resistance as a positive force. Specifically, he notes
change (Coch & French, 1948; Kotter, 1995). Over
that compared to apathy, resistance represents
the years, a wealth of literature has sought to explore
engagement and indicates that recipients care
and identify mechanisms that drive resistance to
enough about problems to express resistance or
change, including the fear of uncertainty about
ambivalence. As such, this energy can provide
change, the desire to not lose something of value, momentum to further problem-solving and move
misunderstanding of change implications, and lack toward acceptance. Other popular areas of research
of trust. Other barriers to change include different
that have taken a positive approach have focused
assessments of change impact (Kegan & Lahey,
on the study of factors that facilitate readiness and
2001), low tolerance for behavioral and attitudinal
openness to change. Past literature on readiness
change (Kotter & Schlesinger, 2008), fear of losing to change has mostly considered cognitions and
the comfort experienced in performing in familiar beliefs (e.g. belief that change is needed, the
roles (Schabracq & Cooper, 1998), threat to self-
proposed change is appropriate, a sense of efficacy
identity (Murtagh, Gatersleben, & Uzzell, 2012),
about change implementation, belief that support
among others. Consequently, a range of approaches for change is available and that change has positive
have been tested to overcome resistance to change benefits for one’s role) as precursors to behaviors in
and exert political influence from early accounts
support of or in opposition to change (Armenakis,
of leader influence (Kotter & Schlesinger, 1979)
Bernerth, Pitts, & Walker, 2007; Armenakis, Harris,
to recent strategies of circumventing resistance & Mossholder, 1993). A recent addition to this
(Blankenship, Wegener, & Murray, 2012) and
research suggests that change readiness should
exercising power through social networks (Battilana
also consider affective components such as hope
& Casciaro, 2013).
Despite decades of related
(Rafferty, Jimmieson, & Armenakis, 2013). Along
research and scholarship on the topic, Warner
similar lines Wanberg and Banas (2000), who discuss
Burke in his recent call to action, points out that
openness to change as presence of positive affect
76
Organization Development Journal l Fall 2014
and willingness to support change, found that a key organization-wide change can feel intimidating in
predictor of employee openness to change is personal
any kind of organization, this can be particularly
resilience, consisting of self-esteem, optimism and
challenging in environments characterized by high
perceived coqntrol.
Further, contextual factors
cultural diversity. Therefore, one can expect sources
that predicted openness to change included self-
and mechanisms for resistance and ambivalence
efficacy for coping with change and participation
to change to be particularly complex in such
in the decision-making process. Similarly, change settings. Although there is a growing body of crossleadership that engaged followers in participating in
cultural comparative research on organizational
the change process and in their re-education have
development and change practices (cf. Fagenson-
been found to elicit the most positive responses to
Eland, Ensher, & Burke, 2004; Kirsch, Chelliah, &
change along cognitive, emotional and intentional Parry, 2012; Lau, McMahan, & Woodman, 1996),
dimensions compared to other strategies (Szabla,
fewer studies consider the dynamics of managing
2007). Taken together, these findings: (1) indicate
change taking into account intracountry cultural
that perceived control through active participation
diversity (for reviews see Lenartowicz, Johnson, &
in the change process is an important predictor of White, 2003; McSweeney, 2009), and still less on
openness to change, (2) support Avey, Wernsing,
multicultural organizations that are characterized
and Luthans’ (2008) findings that psychological
by high intranational and cross-national diversity
capital in terms of self-efficacy, hope, optimism
(Jacob, 2005). An aim of the current study is to
and resilience predict positive emotions that in
explore how openness to change can be cultivated
turn contribute to openness to change. Therefore,
in a context characterized by high intranational and
the current study examines how employees’ active multinational diversity.
participation can be facilitated and openness to
Appreciative Discourse
change can be cultivated.
Change in Multicultural Organizations
an alternative to a leader-centric approach to
Leaders
in
the
field
have
noted
that
A growing line of inquiry that has provided
thinking about resistance to change has favored a
organizational development and change in cross- social constructionist perspective. This approach
cultural contexts is an important emerging field of
suggests that interpretations about change and
practice (Neumann, Lau, & Worley, 2009). They
resistance to change are socially constructed by
have observed that today’s increasingly global
individuals (Prasad & Prasad, 1998), and as such,
workplace makes managing change in a context
individuals engage in sense-making through
characterized by cultural diversity a pressing informal interactions (Pieterse, Caniëls, & Homan,
issue. From the perspective of employees, while 2012).
Rao
Specifically, they construct their reality;
77
interpret change and experience acceptance or
management
scholars
(Cameron,
Dutton
&
resistance to change through shared conversations
Quinn, 2003), change management theories that
(Ford & Ford, 1995; Ford, Ford, & McNamara,
traditionally employ problem-solving approaches
2002). Marshak and Grant (2008) in their review
involving diagnoses of problems and development
of the contribution of organizational discourse to
of solutions to them often focus too much on what
new organization development practices, share that is dysfunctional, thereby invoking defensiveness
discourse constituting of conversations, dialogue
and resistance among individuals functioning in
and narratives play a crucial role in “transforming the system (Locander & Leuchauer, 2007). The
social reality, influencing organizational behavior
appreciative inquiry approach instead, combines
and shaping organizational members’ mindsets”
appreciation and a spirit of curious inquiry to tap
(p. S11).
Meaning, thus socially constructed,
into accounts of positive aspects of the organization,
often unfolds through conversations and dialogue
and inspires hope for a better future. Therefore,
in a non-systematic, non-linear iterative process
in this case study, I examine whether appreciative
(Marshak & Grant, 2008). Additionally, Gergen
discourse facilitated through the process of an
and colleagues (2004) view dialogue as a process
appreciative inquiry intervention can help cultivate
of relational coordination which can predict the
openness for change.
life or death of an organization. They suggest,
(2005) observed that diverse individuals can co-
however, that generative dialogue conceptualized
create their social reality and restructure relations
as dialogue that emphasizes affirmation, productive
using an appreciative approach. These preliminary
difference, coherence, and temporal integration
findings suggest that appreciative discourse might
carries the potential to be a transformative process.
be effective in multicultural settings. Furthermore,
They further observe that appreciative inquiry,
in one study conducted on efficacy of appreciative
developed by David Cooperrider and his colleagues
inquiry in a transcultural strategic alliance, the
in the 1980s as an organizational change practice,
process proved to be more efficacious in building
is one method that seeds such transformative
increased trust and collaboration in comparison with
Additionally, Cojocaru
generative dialogue. In agreement with this view, management education (Miller, Fitzgerald, Preston,
Marshak and Grant (2008) describe appreciative
& Murrell, 2002). Thus, other than a few cases
inquiry as a constructionist intervention “intended that have shown promising results of appreciative
to shift system member thinking to a more positive inquiry in managing change in diverse settings,
and generative consciousness in order to achieve the value of appreciative discourse in enhancing
transformational change” (p. S9).
psychological capital and cultivating openness to
As has been noted by positive change
change in multicultural contexts remains relatively
78
Organization Development Journal l Fall 2014
unexplored. Therefore, in response to Burke’s (2011)
The agency (referred as such in this article, to
call to action and recommendation, the current case
protect confidentiality), established in the 1980s,
study described in the following section is geared to
was a community-based social services agency
exploring how openness to change can be cultivated
driven by the mission to serve the needs, promote the
in a multicultural setting by facilitating appreciative interests, and enhance the well-being of immigrants
discourse.
and refugees, and also to foster their participation
Case Study
in and assimilation into the American society. The
Assimilation in the U.S.
multilingual staff addressed the most immediate
Refugees and asylum seekers in the U.S. face
survival needs of immigrants and refugees from
particular challenges to assimilation including
various countries. The staff was responsible for
discrimination,
learning
counseling them through their struggles with
language and job skills (Tomlinson, 2010). The toll
culture shock, helping families find housing,
that this takes on their health and well-being has been
referring job seekers to employment opportunities,
well documented over the years (Dolan & Sherlock,
and translating information for those who have not
2010; Procter, 2005; Williams & Westermeyer,
yet acquired new language skills. The services
1986). In order to better understand and address
offered to the clients ranged over five main areas,
their problems, social service agencies serving the
namely, education and workforce development;
needs of refugees and asylum seekers often find it
social services for seniors, healthcare and housing;
convenient to be staffed by employees that reflect
citizenship and immigration assistance; holistic
gaining
employment,
the diversity of the populations they serve. Such development of multicultural teens; and support
organizations have an important organizational programs for multicultural at-risk youth. The staff
challenge—managing the high multinational and of the agency was as culturally diverse as the clients
intranational cultural diversity among employees.
they served. Although predominantly East Asian,
In such diverse settings, as some practitioners have the staff of forty employees represented twelve
noted, managing change is particularly challenging countries and about thirty distinct subcultures and
(Zane, 2002). Therefore, this study based on an
communities. Thus, the agency experienced high
agency serving refugees and asylum seekers sets
intranational and multinational diversity.
an interesting and dynamic context to explore how openness to change can be cultivated in a highly
At the time of the study, the agency had particular
characteristics. The social norms in the agency were
multicultural setting by facilitating appreciative influenced by a variety of cultural values pertaining
discourse.
to work and the workplace. Over the years most
Background of Agency
change efforts initiated by the management had met
Rao
79
with lukewarm responses and passive-aggressive
conducted at this organization. The current study
resistance.
Employees had previously reported
focuses on an assessment of the value of introduction
feeling the need to be cautious around each other,
of appreciative discourse in cultivating openness to
to avoid saying or doing something that might be
change in a relatively volatile setting. The process
culturally inappropriate. Further, individuals from
involved two main stages. First, the whole system
different cultures differed on work ethics, attitudes
was invited to participate in an appreciative inquiry
toward work, expectations, and practices. Due to
process as a structured method to engage employees
these differences, employees tended to work in silos.
in appreciative discourse and participate in the
They did their best to reduce interdependencies
strategic planning process for the intended change
and avoided opportunities for communication or
effort. Second, participants engaged in a reflective
collaboration. Further, at the time of this study, the
evaluation of the process to discuss the value of
agency was also going through significant financial
the appreciative discourse in their feelings toward
difficulties and employees were overworked. As a
change.
result, there had been several instances of emotional The population for this study included 33
outbursts and public displays of temper over the
frontline staff, five managers in the middle
preceding months. As such, bringing about any
management, and two directors who formed the
large-scale change in this emotionally volatile upper management. The ages of employees ranged
environment was extremely challenging. There was from 20 to 60 years. At the time of this study,
little room for exchange of ideas or elaborations the racial composition of the whole population of
about concerns.
employees involved a high proportion of East Asian
The executive team was embarking on an
American front-line staff, a high proportion of
organization-wide strategic planning process to
Caucasian American managers, and all Caucasian
revitalize the agency and intended to employ concrete American directors. The employees’ ethnicity came
strategies to increase the success of planned change
from the following countries – People’s Republic of
efforts that would soon follow.
Therefore, the
China, Vietnam, Burma, North Korea, Philippines,
author was invited as an organizational development
Colombia, Laos, Ecuador, Ghana, Bosnia, Ireland,
consultant to help facilitate the development of a safe and the United States of America.
There were
environment for open dialogue and participation in
also several individuals from Hong Kong and
the change process.
Taiwan, which have distinct cultural environments,
Method
Overview
80
although technically part of the People’s Republic
of China. Out of the 40 employees invited, 17 were
This study is part of a larger multi-year study able to participate in all phases of the study. The
Organization Development Journal l Fall 2014
participants included 12 staff members and five
hopes and visions. Sample questions in this stage
managers, representing the People’s Republic of
were:
China, Vietnam, Burma, North Korea, Philippines,
(1) Imagine yourself and your organization have
Laos, Ecuador, Ireland and the United States of
been fast-forwarded by five years. What do
America.
you see around you?
Appreciative Discourse
(2) What does its structure look like? What
In this stage, appreciative inquiry was conducted
does the space like?
as a method of creating appreciative discourse with
(3) How have clients been created, retained, and
all consenting employees. The staff members were
expanded? What resources were used?
randomly divided into two sessions consisting of
The Design phase involved designing the
six members, and the five managers participated
organization’s social architecture – selecting the
in a separate session.
models, organizational strategies and plans to design
The intervention process
with each group began with an introduction to the the process that would help chart out the course to
appreciative inquiry process. Next, questions for achieving the dreams. Some questions in this phase
each segment of a 4-D cycle of appreciative inquiry
included:
were presented according to the model described by
(1) What will your ideal organizational structure
Cooperrider and colleagues (2008) and Whitney and
look like? - people, systems? How will
Trosten-Bloom (2006). The first stage of the cycle,
your organization make decisions that affect
Discovery, was aimed at asking powerful questions
the entire organization?
to bring to the surface the best practices, positive
(2) What structures need to be in place for the
experiences, strengths and successes of the people
organization to sustain and for employees to
and the organization. Sample questions were:
flourish?
(1) Describe a time when you were most proud
Finally, the Destiny phase involved developing
to be a member of your organization. What
concrete action plans to put into place structures,
was the situation?
systems and processes to implement the design and
Who was involved?
achieve the dream. Some sample questions were:
What made it a proud moment?
(2) Tell us about a time when you were inspired
by great leadership.
What made this
leadership great, who was the leader, what
did they do to inspire you?
(1) What are the action items that we need
to cover to create the organization of the
future?
(2) What additional resources will you need to
The second stage, Dream, involved urging the
create the organization you described in the
group to imagine a positive future and discuss their
Discover and Dream phases and crafted in
Rao
81
Discussion
the Design phase?
Findings and Interpretation
The appreciative inquiry process provided
The staff nostalgically shared stories about a
the employees an avenue to articulate their needs
time when a former Asian American head of the
and participate in planning for change. As the
agency “took care” of them and “protected” them appreciative paradigm avoids framing conversations
from internal and external threats. They described
as “issues”, “problems” and “concerns”, it was
the former leader as firm and strict yet benevolent
possible for the employees to discuss ideas without
and loving. Most of their stories of peak experiences risking hurting others’ feelings, or feeling the need
and the best moments revolved around their
to hold themselves back in an effort to save others’
relationship with this leader. Further, they shared face. Thus, they were more forthcoming with their
their dreams of recreating the environment they had
ideas and collectively participated in thinking about
once enjoyed under the leadership of the previous
and planning for change. As the participants shared
head of the agency. They also shared their dreams
more with each other through the discussions, they
of close relationships with peers and a “family-
were able to co-create an environment of relatively
like” atmosphere. The staff also recommended and
higher psychological safety where they continued to
discussed various design ideas for the development share ideas with each other. The focus on strengths,
of appraisal and feedback systems to enable the staff
dreams and organizational designs that work for
to provide honest feedback in a safe environment.
them helped move toward a consensus on plans and
They prioritized the need for regular department paths for change.
meetings in which the staff could share concerns and
Evaluation
discuss issues in a small group, with colleagues they
The next stage involved an evaluation group
work with closely. Further, these meetings could discussion that created a space for participant to
also incorporate informal social events to create a
reflect on the intervention and discuss their thoughts
“family-like” safe atmosphere where they could
and feelings about change. Some of the questions
feel comfortable discussing issues. They suggested
that were asked in this focus group interview were:
modification of the current organizational structure
1) How would you describe your feelings after
and development of a system to increase internal
the process?
collaboration across departments for knowledge
2) Name at least two things you liked about
sharing. Finally, members of the staff volunteered
the process and two things you did not like
to develop a planning team to help create an ongoing
about the process.
system for employees to safely share new ideas or
voice concerns.
82
3) If you were able to receive the support you
need, on a scale of 1 to 10 how would you
Organization Development Journal l Fall 2014
rate your level of motivation to be involved
between what they wanted for the organization and
in making this change plan work? (1 = not
what they needed to make it happen. Similarly, the
at all motivated, 10 = extremely motivated)
managers noted that the appreciative conversations
Findings
were useful in keeping conversations flowing and
allowing individuals to voice their opinions in an
An aspect that the staff liked most about the
appreciative inquiry session was the opportunity to
environment which had previously been hostile.
openly share ideas and find that they had more in
At the end of the appreciative inquiry session,
common than they had previously assumed. They the motivation for change as reported by the
were particularly pleased that, despite the diversity
staff and managers ranged from a score of 7 to 9
in opinions, it was easy to come to a consensus. The
(M =7.8). Some mentioned that they wanted to
positive focus helped avoid possible confrontations rate a 10/10, but did not, only because they had
and instead helped create agreement between reservations about being too hopeful that change
individuals, and inclusion and integration of diverse would occur. Contrary to initial misgivings about
ideas. As one participant commented, “the diversity
desiring change, after the intervention, they not
of personalities actually created an interesting group
only sought change but wanted it to happen as soon
dynamic.” They also reflected and noticed that each as possible.
As one staff member commented,
of the participants—even the most reticent ones— “Positive change is in itself motivating!” Finally,
had contributed valuable suggestions and ideas.
participants noted that embedding appreciative
They expressed that they felt comfortable sharing
discourse as a regular organizational intervention
honestly, because the positive focus created an through sharing expressions of gratitude could
emotionally safe environment. They noted that the
create a positive nurturing environment.
focus not only helped bring out a lot of interesting
Discussion
perspectives, but allowed them to get to know
The focus group discussion facilitated a
each other better and develop a stronger personal
reflection on the appreciative discourse and its
connection with each other in the process.
value in generating motivation and energy for
The group appreciated the model’s structure change in their setting. By the end of the session,
because it was simple and comfortable to start the all participants unanimously agreed that the
conversation and keep the conversation flowing. It
appreciative paradigm of the appreciative inquiry
was easy to think, generate ideas and share specific,
process was conducive to thinking about change in
concrete suggestions at each segment of the 4-D their context. Shifting of the focus from problems to
cycle. They felt that they learned a lot in this
possibilities made it a safer environment to discuss
environment and were able to make clear connections
complex issues. As they came to a consensus on
Rao
83
several issues around what they desired for the
based on self-report responses. Therefore, there is
future, it built their enthusiasm for positive change. a possibility of the presence of a social desirability
The high participation and enthusiasm expressed in
bias and potential for “group think.” In addition,
the appreciative discussions and their ownership of
it is possible that the presence of peers could have
change ideas suggests that given adequate support,
stifled some of the diverse opinions. However, it is
the employees would be able to overcome their
important to note that there were several instances
ambivalence to change and instead look forward to
of individuals sharing opinions contrary to those
it.
of all other participants in the room. Moreover,
General Discussion
these opinions were expressed by those who had
The primary objective of this study was to
previously claimed to be introverted and otherwise
employ appreciative inquiry as a device to facilitate avoided sharing opinions or contradicting others
appreciative conversations as an intervention
on public forums. Thus, the strengths of the study
to cultivate openness to change in a context
outweigh the limitations.
characterized by high cultural diversity. This study The study also provided some key lessons.
has several strengths.
Rigorous methodology
Engagement in appreciative discourse was able
provided for sound data. For instance, the data that
to create a safe space for individuals to discuss
were collected through all discussions involved
problems, even in a volatile and hostile environment.
member checks—review of the interpretation
For instance, although the employees were hesitant
of data by the participants—as part of the
to voice negative opinions about their current
research design. Therefore, it is expected that the
leader, discussions about ideal leadership and
interpretation of the data is as close as possible past leadership helped reduce the risk of hostility
to the intended meanings by the employees.
and provided a framework to voice their opinions.
Further, the semi-structured nature of focus group
Further, it facilitated open discussion that made
discussions allowed for meanings of questions
coming to consensus on various key topics possible.
and comments to be clarified as a group. In case
Another lesson was that the facilitation of
of language barriers, employees were able to help
appreciative discourse can allow an organization
same-language peers interpret and clarify questions
and employees to approach diversity as a strength.
and comments. The context of the study also posed
In this case study, some of the employees noted
some limitations. As a small agency providing time that an appreciative discourse allowed participants
sensitive services to a vulnerable population, the
to see more similarities than differences that
number of employees who were able to participate helped built trust and view any differences as
in the process was limited. Further, the study was
84
complementary rather than oppositional. Further,
Organization Development Journal l Fall 2014
the process facilitated acceptance and valuing of
References
diverse perspectives and helped employees find a
Armenakis, A. A., Bernerth, J. B., Pitts, J. P., &
way to integrate them into a meaningful structure
Walker, H. J. (2007). Organizational change
that worked for them. It eventually brought them to
recipients’ beliefs scale: Development of an
a consensus and generated energy for change.
assessment instrument. The Journal of Applied
Conclusion
Management of change in multicultural settings
has been increasingly receiving attention as an area
Behavioral Science, 43(4), 481-505.
Armenakis, A. A., Harris, S. G., & Mossholder, K.
of research and practice. In this context, cultivating
W. (1993). Creating readiness for organizational
openness to future change is invaluable in keeping
change. Human Relations, 46(6), 681-703.
organizations flexible and responsive in the fast-
Avey, J. B., Wernsing, T. S., & Luthans, F. (2008). Can
changing society. This article examined the value
positive employees help positive organizational
of and contributions of appreciative discourse
change?: Impact of psychological capital and
in cultivating openness to change. Findings and
emotions on relevant attitudes and behaviors.
lessons from the study indicate that appreciative
Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 44(1),
discourse can create psychological safety even
in a relatively hostile and tense environment and
generate energy for change. Further, appreciative
48-70.
Battilana, J., & Casciaro, T. (2013). Overcoming
conversations can emphasize similarities and
resistance to organizational change: Strong ties
smooth
and affective cooptation. Management Science,
movement
toward
common
goals.
59(4), 819-836.
Additionally, a positive attitude toward differences
can help an organization leverage the strengths of
Blankenship, K. L., Wegener, D. T., & Murray, R.
its diversity, by sidestepping the resistance and
A. (2012). Circumventing resistance: Using
hostility that usually accompanies discussion of
values to indirectly change attitudes. Journal
differences and bringing them to the fore. These
of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(4),
findings suggest that appreciative discourse holds
great promise for cultivating openness to change
in settings characterized by high cultural diversity.
606-621.
Burke, W. W. (2011). A perspective on the field
Further research and application hold the potential
of organization development and change: The
to illuminate new possibilities to enable change.
Zeigarnik effect. Journal of Applied Behavioral
~~~~~~~~~~
Science, 47(2), 143-167.
Cameron, K. S., J. E. Dutton and R. E. Quinn (Eds.)
Rao
85
(2003). Positive Organizational Scholarship:
Foundations of a New Discipline. San Francisco,
CA: Berrett-Koehler.
Management, 15(2), 105-121.
Gergen, K. J., M. M. Gergen & F. J. Barrett (2004).
Dialogue: life and death of the organization. In
Coch, L., & French, Jr., J. R. P (1948). Overcoming
D. Grant, C. Hardy, C. Oswick and L. Putnam
resistance to change. Human Relations, 1,512-
(Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Organizational
532.
Discourse. London: Sage.
Cojocaru, S. (2005). The appreciative perspective Jacob, N. (2005). Cross-cultural investigations:
in multicultural relations. Journal for the Study
Emerging concepts. Journal of Organizational
of Religions and Ideologies, 4(10), 36-48.
Change Management, 18(5), 514-528.
Cooperrider, D. L., Whitney, D., Stavros, J. M., &
Kegan, R. & Lahey, L. L. (2001). The real reason
Fry, R. (2008). Appreciative Inquiry Handbook:
people won’t change. Harvard Business Review,
For Leaders of Change. San Francisco, CA:
79(10), 106-114.
Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
Kirsch, C., Chelliah, J., & Parry, W. (2012). The
Dolan, N., & Sherlock, C. (2010). Family support
impact of cross-cultural dynamics on change
through childcare services: Meeting the needs
management. Cross Cultural Management,
of asylum-seeking and refugee families. Child
19(2), 166-195.
Care in Practice, 16(2), 147-165.
Fagenson-Eland, E., Ensher, E. A., & Burke, W.
(2004). Organization development and change
Kotter, J. P. (1995). Leading change: Why
transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business
Review, 73(4), 59–67.
interventions: A seven-nation comparison.
Kotter, J., & Schlesinger. L. (1979). Choosing
Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 40(4),
strategies for change. Harvard Business Review,
432-464.
57(2), 106-114.
Ford, J. D., & Ford, L. W. (1995). The role of
Kotter, J. P., & Schlesinger, L. (2008). Choosing
conversations in producing intentional change
strategies for change. Harvard Business Review,
in organizations. Academy of Management
86(7/8), 130-139.
Review, 20(3), 541-570.
Lau, C., McMahan, G. C., & Woodman, R.
Ford, J. D., Ford, L. W., & McNamara, R. T. (2002).
W. (1996). An international comparison of
Resistance and the background conversations
organization development practices: The USA
of change. Journal of Organizational Change
and Hong Kong. Journal of Organizational
86
Organization Development Journal l Fall 2014
Change Management, 9(2), 4-19.
Ready
for
consideration:
International
Lenartowicz, T., Johnson, J. P., & White, C. T.
organizational development and change as
(2003). The neglect of intracountry cultural
an emerging field of practice. Journal of
variation in international management research.
Applied Behavioral Science, 45(2), 171-185.
Journal of Business Research, 56(12), 999-
doi:10.1177/0021886309335429
Pieterse, J. H., Caniëls, M. J., & Homan, T. (2012).
1008.
Professional discourses and resistance to
Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics.
change. Journal of Organizational Change
Human Relations, 1, 5-41.
Management, 25(6), 798-818.
Locander, W. B., & Luechauer, D. L. (2007). Leader
as inquirer. Marketing Management, 16(5), 46-
Prasad, A., & Prasad, P. (1998). Everyday struggles
at the workplace: The nature and implications
49.
of
Marshak, R. J., & Grant, D. (2008). Organizational
routine
resistance
in
contemporary
discourse and new organization development
organizations. Research in the Sociology of
practices. British Journal of Management, 19
Organizations, 15(2), 225-257.
Procter, N. G. (2005). ‘They first killed his heart
(Suppl 1), S7-S19.
McSweeney, B. (2009). Dynamic diversity: Variety
(then) he took his own life’. Part I: A review of
and variation within countries. Organization
the context and literature on mental health issues
Studies, 30(9), 933-957.
for refugees and asylum seekers. International
Journal of Nursing Practice, 11(6), 286-291.
Miller, M. G., Fitzgerald, S. P., Preston, J. C.,
& Murrell, K.L. (2002). The efficacy of
Rafferty, A. E., Jimmieson, N. L., & Armenakis,
appreciative inquiry in building relational capital
A. A. (2013). Change readiness: A multilevel
in a transcultural strategic alliance. Academy of
review. Journal of Management, 39(1), 110-
Management Proceedings, ODC: E5.
135.
Murtagh, N. N., Gatersleben, B. B., & Uzzell, D.
Schabracq, M., & Cooper, C. (1998). Toward a
D. (2012). Self-identity threat and resistance to
phenomenological framework for the study
change: Evidence from regular travel behaviour.
of work and organizational stress. Human
Journal of Environmental Psychology, 32(4),
Relations, 51, 625-648.
Szabla, D. B. (2007). A multidimensional view of
318-326.
Neumann, J. E., Lau, C., & Worley, C. G. (2009).
Rao
resistance to organizational change: Exploring
87
cognitive, emotional, and intentional responses
to planned change across perceived change
leadership
strategies.
Human
Resource
Development Quarterly, 18(4), 525-558.
Tomlinson, F. (2010). Marking difference and
negotiating
belonging:
Refugee
women,
volunteering and employment. Gender, Work
and Organization, 17(3), 278-296.
Wanberg, C. R., & Banas, J. T. (2000). Predictors
and outcomes of openness to changes in a
reorganizing workplace. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 85(1), 132-142.
Whitney, D.K, & Trosten-Bloom, A. (2006). The
Power of Appreciative Inquiry: The Practical
Guide to Positive Change. San Francisco CA:
Berrett- Koehler.
Williams, C. L., & Westermeyer J. (1986). (Eds.)
Refugee
Mental
Health
in
Resettlement
Countries. Washington, DC US: Hemisphere
Publishing Corp.
Zane, N. C. (2002). The glass ceiling is the floor
my boss walks on: Leadership challenges in
managing diversity. The Journal of Applied
Behavioral Science, 38 (3), 334.
cld
88
Organization Development Journal l Fall 2014
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without
permission.