Running Head: STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
Storytelling and Uncertainty Reduction
Courtney A. Walker
Queens University of Charlotte
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
2
Abstract
Members of organizations who experience the process of organizational change often experience
anxiety as a result of such change. Storytelling is often used as a method to help members
understand an organization’s culture. This study, therefore, examines how storytelling reduces
anxiety or uncertainty during times when organizational change threatens an organization’s
culture. The researcher also studies how stories are typically communicated during periods of
organizational change, and why organizational change causes anxiety for those involved in the
first place. The researcher used eight focus groups of five-seven people to conduct her study.
Students were asked a series of questions related to organizational change at a private university,
Queens University of Charlotte, and how storytelling affected them throughout the change.
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
3
Introduction
Organizations must undergo changes in order to survive and grow in a market that is
constantly changing. Such changes, however, often come with backlash from an organization’s
employees. Over time, organizations create an organizational culture, and changes within an
organization often threaten the norms of said culture. This cultural change often induces anxiety
for those involved. Companies ought to examine how they should present information to their
employees in order to implement change within an organization without causing high levels of
anxiety.
Nancy Koehn (2012) of the Health Leadership Forum lists the current CEO of Starbucks,
Howard Schultz, as an example of a leader who effectively presented and executed change to his
employees. In 2007, she describes, Starbucks was experiencing both a financial crisis and a crisis
of organizational culture. Schultz stepped up to the challenge of improving the sales and the
identity of the company as a whole. In this example, Starbucks is used to present “four lessons
about leading change” (2012, p. 3). These four lessons included the existence of strong leaders
within the company, the realization that change would affect the organization’s culture and that
transparency, accountability, and teamwork were fundamental in successfully making changes,
the commitment to transforming in order to create a more sustainable business, and the ability to
make changes while remaining faithful to the organization’s identity (Koehn, 2012).
The researcher of this study was curious as to how these lessons on leadership,
transparency, and commitment to organizational identity were successfully integrated and
communicated to members of an organization during times of organizational change. The
researcher wondered if storytelling, which is most often recognized through media such as film
or books, could be successful in aiding an organization through change while reducing levels of
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
4
uncertainty and anxiety. The researcher, therefore, decided to focus on the following research
question: How does storytelling reduce anxiety or uncertainty during times of organizational
change? The researcher also included two subquestions in her study: Through what media are
stories typically communicated? Why does organizational change cause anxiety for those
involved in the first place?
The researcher believes that this study is quite important for the field of communication.
By increasing knowledge on the effects of storytelling on levels of anxiety during organizational
change, organization leaders can begin to integrate effective storytelling in the changemanagement process. If leaders learn how to most effectively reduce levels of anxiety during
organizational change, their employees are more likely to accept the change and thus be happier
employees. This, in turn, could cause an organization to become more productive and perhaps
more profitable.
In the following study, the researcher will examine the literature explaining
organizational culture, organizational change, and how storytelling reduces levels of anxiety
during times of organizational change. The researcher will then explain the methodology of the
study and present the findings of her research. She will then conduct and present her analysis of
the findings. Finally, the researcher will conclude by noting the implications of her study, as well
as the limitations of the study and any recommendations for future researchers.
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
5
Literature Review
Organizational Culture
Every organization has its own story or culture. Clifford Geertz defines organizational
culture by stating the following: “Man is an animal suspended in webs of significance he himself
has spun, I take culture to be those webs, and the analysis of it to be therefore [...] an interpretive
one in search of meaning” (Geertz, 1973, p. 5). Geertz (1973) explains that many different
factors make up a culture, including myths, rituals, or symbols. Although the factors that make
up a culture are not necessarily tangible objects, culture is always present: “Though ideational, it
does not exist in someone's head; though unphysical, it is not an occult entity” (Geertz, 1973, p.
10). While the cultures of some organizations may be more evident than others, Geertz makes it
clear that every organization has its own culture.
Stories, whether printed or verbal, are also often used to help form a cultural identity.
Well-known brands, such as Nike (Brady, 2013) and Under Amour (Guber, 2011), place great
emphasis on the element of storytelling in their organization. They regularly make use of
corporate stories in order to help shape their identity. Both companies are confident in telling
their story, which makes their organizational culture and identity very clear to those within the
organization. Because their employees know what their company stands for, it becomes very
easy for that message to be translated to consumers. Some organizations, however, do not have
one fixed, cultural story. “For some organizations, their cultural story is evolving” (Brady, 2013).
This evolution of a culture’s story may occur during periods of organizational change.
Organizational Change
Hasan Simsek and Karen Seashore Louis (1994) describe organizations as the following:
“Organizations are defined by their paradigms, that is, the prevalent view of reality shared by
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
6
members of the organization. Under a particular dominant paradigm, structure, strategy, culture,
leadership and individual role accomplishments are defined by this prevailing world view” (p.
671). Therefore, as Simsek and Louis continue to explain, when a change occurs within an
organization, it is as if a paradigm shift occurs. This paradigm shift, otherwise known as
organizational change, by definition leads an organization’s members into the unknown. This
feeling of being led into the unknown often makes people feel as if they are losing control, which
causes them to resist the change (Stanleigh, 2013). Such resistance should not come as a surprise,
for “it is human nature to exercise opposition to a process laden with uncertainties and anxieties
that generate discomfort and doubts” (Mariana, Daniela, Nadina, 2013, p. 1606). The anxiety and
uncertainty that causes resistance can be quite problematic for organizations. Uncertainty can
cause an organization to become paralyzed and, therefore, unable to progress (Bordia &
DiFonzo, 1998).
Charles Berger’s uncertainty reduction theory (1987) may give organizations an insight
into ways to reduce uncertainty in its members during organizational change. Uncertainty
reduction theory posits that humans seek interpersonal interactions in order to reduce anxiety
(Bordia & DiFonzo, 1998). Organizations must take caution, however, and realize that although
communication between individuals may help ease anxiety during organizational change, it may
also cause further harm to the situation. If those who are helping implement the change do not
properly inform an organization’s members about a change, then it is possible for the members to
form and spread rumors. Rumors, rather than easing uncertainty caused by organizational
change, may cause members to distrust their organization. Organizations ought to provide
constant communication once they decide to implement a change, even if their plan for said
change is not fully completed. It is better to keep members up-to-date on information, despite its
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
7
incompleteness, than to allow members to spread untrue rumors about a change (Bordia &
DiFonzo, 1998). Constant and clear communication will help organizations reduce uncertainty in
its members during the process of change. One important form of such communication is
storytelling.
Storytelling
Walter Fisher’s narrative paradigm theory may help organizations learn more about
storytelling as a means of communication. In fact, Fisher believes that humans at their core are
“storytelling animals,” (Fisher, 1987; Hanan, 2008). Fisher (1984) states: “In theme, if not in
every detail, narrative, then, is meaningful for persons in particular and in general, across
communities as well as cultures, across time and place. Narratives enable us to understand the
actions of others…” (p. 8). According to Fisher, this type of understanding includes two
important principles: narrative probability and narrative fidelity (Fisher, 1984). Narrative
probability implies that a narrative must be coherent within its given context: “If an argument
cannot coexist within its own narrative context (e.g., Exxon claiming to save the environment) it
is intrinsically a bad story” (Hanan, 2008, p. 5). Narrative fidelity deals with the different
aspects of a message and how it relates to the values of that message’s audience. “To make a
successful argument, claims only need approval from the narrator’s own ideal audience. To be
righteous, however, claims must fundamentally comply with the universal desires of humankind”
(Hanan, 2008, p. 6).
In addition to narrative coherence and fidelity, stories contain many other characteristics.
Stories must have a beginning, middle, and end. They “state or imply causality, which
distinguish them from other sequential forms, such as chronicles” (Dailey & Browning, 2014, p.
23). Stories can appear in many different forms including written pieces, myths, photography,
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
8
legends, movies, and conversation (Dailey & Browning, 2014). According to Gabriel, (as cited in
Gill, 2011), stories “transcend age groups, cultures, and genders and capture the imagination and
attention of listeners regardless of their backgrounds” (2008).
One of the most important characteristics of storytelling is its ability to make a message
clear: “Storytelling is a means of taking in and making sense of information” (Kowalewski &
Waukau-Villagomez, 2011). This ability involves what many researchers call “sensemaking.”
McAdams, (as cited by Yang, 2013), defines sensemaking as “the cognitive process of building
internal representations of external worlds and construing the causal relations among objects and
people to construct a functional map of social relationships.” (1993). According to Maurice
Thévenet (1992), sensemaking, although he uses the word “understanding,” is the second of
three steps that organizations must take in order to accomplish successful change. The first and
third steps are learning and integrating, respectively. Sensemaking is crucial in order to arrive at
the final step of change: the actual integration of a change into an organization’s culture.
Storytelling can be used as a means to accomplish this goal. “By constantly telling and sharing
stories about what is happening around us, we often engage in a sensemaking process” (Yang,
2013).
Organizational Storytelling and Anxiety Reduction
As previously mentioned, organizational change often leads to anxiety, and storytelling
helps people make sense of that change. What does that mean for organizations? Just as stories
can be used outside of organizations, so too do they remain a helpful tool inside of organizations,
especially during times of organizational change. Organizational crises, which frequently give
birth to significant changes in organizations, are described by Heath and Miller, (as cited in
Kopp, Nikolovska, Desiderio, & Guterman, 2011), as “inherently narrative, so it follows that
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
9
organizational storytelling can be used as an antidote” (2008). Organizational storytelling can be
useful during organizational change, therefore, to help ease anxiety that may arise within the
organization. According to O’neill (as cited in Kopp, Nikolovska, Desiderio, & Guterman, 2011)
“Organizational stories can satisfy the needs of organizational members by ‘reducing stress and
uncertainty… in providing explanations regarding events that have occurred in [or affect] the
work place’”
Storytelling not only provides a clear, reliable, sequential explanation for an
organization’s members, but it also helps reach their emotions. Michael and Elisabeth Umble
(2014) describe this characteristic of storytelling quite well. Organizational change often causes
fear, which the Umble’s indicate as a “strong emotion” (2014, p. 18). They reference Eli
Goldratt, founder of the theory of constraints (TOC) model for resistance to change: “Goldratt
often mused that if you think you can overcome emotion with logic, you never have been
married. So to proceed, you must overcome one strong emotion with another strong emotion”
(Unble & Umble, 2014, p. 18). This “other strong emotion” could be produced through the act of
storytelling. It is a tool that organizations can study and integrate into their communication
strategy in order to reduce the anxiety that oftentimes comes hand-in-hand with organizational
change.
Case study
An ethnographic study conducted by Shelley Bird (2007) provides an example of how
storytelling allows organization members to make sense of changes, therefore reducing anxiety
and preserving organizational culture. Bird conducted her study at the company, Tritech. When
she began her study in 2003, the organization was experiencing many big changes. Their CEO,
who had held his position for the previous eight years, announced that he would be leaving the
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
10
company. In fact, he would be gone one month after his announcement. The company was also
experiencing economic trouble, and even when they started to recover they continued to fail to
meet Wall Street’s expectations. The company, in turn, changed their financial structure, which
resulted in the loss of 1,500 jobs (Bird, 2007).
Throughout her time at the organization, Bird conducted interviews, focus groups, and
had informal conversations with members of the company’s women’s resource network, in
addition to observing participants for more than 120 hours. Bird reflects on what she discovered
while reviewing her data collection: “In this review process, it became apparent that the
transcribed and captured dialogue was predominantly a collection of stories that network
members shared about their work experiences and the negotiation of role balance…” These
stories, she recognizes, helped the company’s employees make sense of the changes occurring
within the organization. Furthermore, these stories helped employees deal with the negative
emotions experienced as a result of the changes. “The stories revealed a reliance on collectively
constructing stories and using stories to deal with ambiguity and anxiety” (Bird, 2007, p. 333).
Stories helped the employees overcome their anxiety in the face of uncertainty. Storytelling
made the changes start to make sense and, therefore, allowed the company to feel familiar again.
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
11
Methodology
Objective
The researcher conducted eight focus groups of five to seven participants in an attempt to
discover how storytelling reduces anxiety during the process of organizational change. The study
used the proposition of a football team at Queens University of Charlotte as an example in its
research. The focus groups were also used to answer the researcher’s two sub-questions:
Through what media are stories typically communicated during periods of organizational
change? Why does organizational change cause anxiety for those involved?
Participants
Unfortunately, time and money restraints did not allow the researcher to acquire a
random sample for her research. As such, the researcher selected a non-random sample of fortyeight traditional undergraduate university students between the ages of eighteen and twenty-two.
In order to ensure that her sample remained unbiased, the researcher attempted to recruit
participants of different class levels, majors, and genders. Eight freshman, eleven sophomores,
twelve juniors, and seventeen seniors participated in the focus groups. Out of the forty-eight
participants, twenty-seven were females and twenty-one were males. The sample included
twenty different majors. The researcher desired a varied pool of participants in order for the
sample to be more reliable than a homogenous sample.
In order to ensure that the focus groups were unbiased, the researcher had to develop a
system to ensure that she gathered participants from many different majors, grade levels, and
ages. In order to do so, the researcher recruited students from different classes of different grade
levels and majors. She sent an email to the professors of the classes before entering the
classroom to ask students to participate. The researcher only entered the classroom after having
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
12
received explicit, written permission from the professor that it was permissible for her to do so.
The researcher explained to the different professors the purpose of her study and asked
permission to use 3-5 minutes of class time to explain the study to the students and ask for their
participation.
Since the researcher was not able to recruit the necessary amount of participants strictly
from visiting classes, she also asked students found in the library, courtyard, cafeteria, dorms,
and within her own classes to participate in the study.
The focus groups were conducted in March and April of 2014. Participants were asked to
voluntarily attend 30-minute focus groups outside of their normal class times. There were not
any negative repercussions for a student if he or she declined the request to participate. (See
Appendix A for the Institutional Review Board approval form).
Procedure
The participants were each given a number so that their names remained anonymous
during the transcription process. Before the focus group began, participants were given a consent
form to complete (See Appendix B). The consent form informed the participants that the focus
group would be recorded and that the recording would only be available to the researcher
throughout the study. It also informed the participants that the recording would be properly
disposed of by deleting it from the phone, computer and the recycling bin after the research
project had been completed in order to protect their confidentiality. Participants were also asked
to fill out a sheet of paper with questions concerning their name, age, class, major, and gender in
order to collect demographic data. After they had signed the consent forms and the demographics
sheet, the researcher reminded the participants of their confidentiality throughout the study. The
researcher then began the focus group. Participants were asked to respond to questions in a
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
13
discussion format. The questions for the focus group can be found in Appendix C. The
researcher used the introduction of a football team at Queens University of Charlotte in her study
as an example to see how students responded to change within an organization. The researcher
also strove to discover how the university introduced the football team to students in order to
determine whether or not their methods were productive in decreasing or increasing anxiety.
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
14
Findings
Change
To begin the focus group, the researcher asked the participants to describe how they
usually felt when dealing with big changes in their lives. Responses were consistent throughout
all eight of the groups. A majority of the participants answered that they experienced negative
emotions when they encountered change. The negative emotions presented included the
following: anxiety, stress, suspense, freaking out, the feeling of being overwhelmed, worried,
confused, thrown off, unorganized, uncertain, scared, and helpless (feeling as if they had no
control during times of significant change). The top three negative responses included anxiety,
nervousness, and stress. One participant commented on the stressfulness of change: “I think
change is stressful because you don’t know what the outcome is going to be. You know what you
know, and change is different.” Agreeing, yet another focus group member stated, “You don’t
have control.” Another respondent noted, “I don’t like changes that much. I like familiarity.” The
researcher followed up with, “Why?” The participant answered, “I’m a lot more comfortable
with it… but I know eventually after the change I’ll get comfortable and everything, but I don’t
like that initial part.”
Continuing with the theme of familiarity, two participants commented on how change
causes negative emotions when it is introduced after experiencing consistency over a long period
of time. One of these participants described how she had grown up in the same house her whole
life until she reached junior year of high school. Her parents decided to move to a new house in
the neighboring town, and the participant was very upset. She said the change was so difficult for
her because she was leaving “all she had ever known.” Later in the focus group, another
participant made a connection between the idea of consistency and familiarity with the anxiety
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
15
that seems to be experienced during change: “When something is tied to tradition it is more
complicated to change because it becomes more sentimental.”
Other participants disagreed with the idea that change causes merely negative emotions.
Many focus group members suggested that change could be exciting and good. Another
participant responded that change makes him feel more interested. Yet another respondent stated
that he loved change and added, “Resistance is futile.”
Many of the responses to the question, “When you are experiencing big changes in your
life, how does that normally make you feel?” came with a qualifier, especially with the responses
that included positive feeling. Most people said that the feelings they experienced depended on
the type of change that they were experiencing. One participant offered, “It depends on whether
or not it [change] disrupts your comfort.” Another respondent stated that change was likeable if
they agreed with the change.
One particular participant presented the idea that a smooth transition made change a little
easier to manage emotionally. In fact, this participant began by making an extreme claim against
change stating, “I hate it.” Later, however, the participant decided to clarify that he did not hate
all change: “I don’t actually hate change. I think that some change is good; some change is very
frustrating. I think it depends on the type of change, so if it’s like an easy, positive transition […]
then it’s fine.” Another student made a similar claim: “Change stresses me out if it’s sudden, but
if I’m told far enough in advance then I’m fine with it.”
Changes at Queens
The researcher shifted the focus from general change to change happening within the
participants’ university, Queens University of Charlotte. The researcher asked participants to
describe changes that had either already occurred on campus or any changes that they had heard
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
16
were being discussed for the future of Queens. It is important to note that most participants
would not only name a change, but also state how they felt about the change. The researcher
often had to redirect the conversation and ask the participants to simply name any changes that
they had noticed on campus. Many of the participants noted physical changes in the University,
such as the construction of a new dorm and fitness center, or the plans to knock down an existing
building to create a new terrace. Other focus group members’ discussed changes in the
curriculum including the future switch to longer class times and the tweaking of the university’s
Core program. A change the participants mentioned in seven of the eight focus groups was the
possibility of a football team at Queens.
What Do You Know About the Team?
The researcher then asked the participants to tell her what they had heard or seen around
campus about the possibility of a football team at Queens. As with the previous question, the
facts often blended with the emotions and opinions about what they had seen or heard. At the end
of each focus group, the researcher asked them for a recap of the facts that they had encountered
without their emotions attached to them. The most common responses were the following:
Queens is possibly getting a football team, the Queens football team would play in the South
Atlantic Conference, the team will not play on campus, there is no room to play on campus, and
Queens is conducting a football feasibility study.
Many of the students commented on what they heard about when the football program
was set to begin at Queens. One student said that the program would take about four to five years
to develop, others said that they heard it was not happening in the current year, still others said
that they heard that it was possible that the football team would develop in the “near or far
future.” At the end of one focus group discussion, when the researcher asked for the participants
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
17
to list the consistent facts that they had come across, one of the students replied, “We might be
getting a football team. There’s no definite answer, and we don’t know when.” Another
participant then asked the group, “Are we shooting for next year? Because I heard it was 2015.”
Yet another focus group member stepped up with an explanation of the University’s hypothetical
timeline to start the football program, which he received from the leader of the university’s
football feasibility study: “They would bring in their first class of recruits in 2015, and then they
would be practicing that year, and the first snap would be played fall, 2016.” Only one other
student out of the forty-eight focus group members vocalized their knowledge about bringing in
recruits in 2015 and beginning the first real season in the fall of 2016.
Many focus group members seemed confused in their answers to the question of where
the Queens football team would play if the university brought the program to completion. In one
focus group, a participant answered that the university was considering three possible locations
for football games. A fellow focus group member asked, “What three?” The original respondent
explained that Queens would either build a place around the track at the university’s current
sports complex, use Memorial Stadium (a public field in Charlotte, North Carolina), or that the
team would play at Myers Park High School. One of the students in the focus group confused
Myers Park High School with Myers Park Traditional School, which is located next-door to
Queens, and she said, “They’re not going to let us use that one.” The participant who had
previously offered the possibility of the three locations quickly conceded: “Okay, well then that’s
out. But as of two months ago that was the three locations they were thinking…” Members in
other focus groups mentioned the Grady Cole center, which is the same as Memorial Stadium,
while other participants simply did not know where the football players would play.
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
18
Focus group participants also seemed to have discrepancies on how Queens would pay
for the program. Some participants were under the impression that their tuition and/or fees would
increase due to the introduction of the program. One participant admitted that she originally
thought that the program would be funded by tuition, but then “after talking to other people
(students and members of the Student Government Association)… made it clear that it would be
coming from outside sources.” Another participant noted that she had heard that the money
initially was supposed to go toward funding a new music building, but that the money was now
being placed toward the football program. Another participant responded that according to the
leader of the feasibility study, the university “didn’t ever have any money saved up for the
football team, and that would come primarily from philanthropy and the tuition of the 120 new
football players.” In a different focus group one participant said, “I think a lot of people didn’t
want them to take money away from academics and stuff,” implying that the university would
use money originally allocated to academics or other areas for the new program. Other students
stated that they heard that the program would be funded by donors and fundraising.
A good number of participants vocalized their awareness of the football feasibility study,
and many knew the person, by name, who was in charge of the study. The students also shared
that the feasibility study hosted an information session about the new football team. A majority
of the students, however, did not attend the information session.
At the end of each session, when the researcher asked the participants to quickly recap
the facts that they had consistently heard about the football team, the answer that appeared most
frequently was the mere fact that Queens might be getting a football team. Most students knew
that a new football team was a possibility for the Queens University of Charlotte community, but
many of the shared facts were either confused or inconsistent with one another. Some students,
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
19
in fact, shared, “I haven’t really heard much about it… They announced the feasibility study. We
participated, but the more recent announcement was that they’re still continuing the feasibility
study.” Others agreed, saying that they have not heard much about the facts of the football team
or the study, but rather have just heard others’ opinions or that Queens is asking for the students
feedback: “Do you want it [a football team]? Do you not want it? But they haven’t said anything
else really.”
Where Did You Receive Most of Your Information?
The researcher asked focus group members where they received most of their information
about the football team. Many students said that they received much of the information via word
of mouth from “other people on campus.” Other participants said that they heard the
announcement of the football team at the “Campus Update” with the university’s president at the
beginning of the school year. Many participants also received information from their emails, and
they often mentioned the name of the vice president of enrollment management as being the
sender of said emails.
The focus group members also mentioned the university’s newspaper, The Chronicle, as
being a source of information about the football team. Some students, however, mentioned that
the newspaper did not include many facts, but rather included students’ opinions: “I think I saw
an article in the Chronicle, but again it didn’t have any information. It just talked about the hype
of it if we got one.” Another student similarly stated the following when mentioning the
Chronicle:
It was more about the objections than the pro’s. A lot of students were voicing their
concerns with how they thought that it would be taking a ton of money away from our
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
20
academics, and our school already has a lot of different problems they should fix before
they spend money on that.
When discussing the Chronicle, students mentioned the importance of the information
coming from somebody in authority. One of the focus group participants answered another group
member’s comment about a particular football article in the Chronicle not containing much
information by saying, “And that was written by like a student.” The other group member
chuckled and agreed. In yet another focus group, a participant told the researcher that the best
way to get information was in person from “the powers that be.” The participant continued to say
that the problem is that “we don’t really know a lot, and so people are kind of assuming what it
would be like, and assuming what the problems would be and what the good things would be
when we don’t really know...” In contrast, some students stated that they talked to people in
authority about the subject, especially those students who were part of the student government
association or other important campus organizations. Coaches also seemed to be a source of
information for many students.
Feelings about Football at Queens
The students who participated in the focus group expressed many strong feelings about
the possibility of the football team. A few students believed that football would be good for
Queens and its growth, “I think it would be really cool. I think it would help our university
grow.” Another student stated, “I think maybe having a football team would be good because it
would bring a lot more people wanting to come to Queens.” Yet another student agreed saying
that football would “definitely bring us all together because that’s one sport that does.” While
these students spoke positively about the team, a majority of the participants did not have very
positive feelings about the new introduction.
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
21
The theme of money with the introduction of a football team seemed to be a fundamental
fear of the focus group participants. A good number of participants vocalized their anxiety that
student tuition would increase with the introduction of a football team. Other students
complained that the money that would go towards a football team ought to be spent on the
current sports programs at the university: “Why don’t we support the athletics that we have?”
Many other participants agreed. The university lacks their own tennis courts and softball field,
and the students vocalized their belief that the money that would fund the football program
would be better spent creating facilities for the sports programs already in existence. One student
athlete offered the following opinion:
Just speaking from an athletes perspective, I don’t think that the existing teams are
catered to enough, so if they were to add on another team that would literally be... quite
literally be the largest team on campus, I feel like they would put so much effort into that
since its new, and we would fall by the wayside more than we already are.
Focus group participants also voiced their concerns about the money that would have to be spent
on hiring coaches and athletic trainers, as well as building a new training facility.
Additionally, students shared that they felt a football team would be a waste of money
simply because Queens could not provide an on-campus facility for the sport. During the 20122013 school year, the Queens basketball team was forced to play off campus at the Grady Cole
center in Charlotte. Participants in the focus group shared that barely any students showed up at
games because they were off campus. One focus group member stated, “I know for the
basketball team, when last year and the year before when we played off campus, nobody came to
our games except for the regulars… So I feel like it would kind of be the same thing...” Another
student affirmed that statement adding, “Soccer is off campus, but at the Queens sports complex,
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
22
and barely anyone comes to those games besides parents… and people’s babysitting families
come more often than students come.”
Among the concerns voiced by focus group members was the practicality of adding a
football team to a land-locked campus. Students recognized that introducing a football team to
the university would add 100+ students to the student body. Many focus group participants
worried about where the university would house all of the new incoming student athletes. They
also shared their concern that an introduction of a football team would decrease the academic
standards of the university. One participant stated,
It’s a very negative stigma, and it’s definitely not true about all football players, but I feel
like in some instances you’re not going to bring in the brightest group of people, and I
think that Queens is trying to shift towards being more challenging to get in to and
increasing their academic level of success, and so I’m just not sure if… it would
contribute to that.
Perhaps most noteworthy were the students comments on Queens’ ability to handle
change. After one student expressed that she thought the football team was “a good idea in
theory, but I don’t think its right for Queens,” another participant agreed saying, “Yeah,
especially now with all the changes that we’ve already gone through in such a short amount of
time. Just wait a little bit. Take a break, and just focus on what we have right now.” Another
student chimed in and noted that Queens is currently in the process of making a huge academic
change with their Core program, as well as a large physical change with the addition of a patio.
After acknowledging these changes, the participant concluded, “It’s not like there’s nothing
going on. There’s still so much going on and so much change happening, which is really good
and really exciting, but you want to be able to really focus on that.”
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
23
Analysis
Change and Emotion
When the researcher asked focus group participants to identify the changes that they had
noticed in the past, the changes that were happening in the current moment, or those that were to
occur in the future around campus, they almost always began explaining the feelings about the
changes rather than simply naming the changes themselves. The same phenomenon occurred
when the researcher asked the participants about the facts they had heard about the introduction
of the football team. Rather than simply listing the facts, participants would often rant about their
feelings towards the introduction of a team. In fact, the researcher often had to steer the groups
back on track and ask them to clearly distinguish the facts from their opinions. This occurrence
helped reaffirm that change is rarely experienced without causing a rise in emotions. Focus
group participants helped show that it is hard to remain neutral in the process of organizational
change. Organizations, therefore, must recognize and address these emotions rather than
pretending they do not exist. One way to engage these emotions, as discussed previously in the
review of the literature, is to create more strong emotions through storytelling. Stories help mix
logic with emotion, which could be a productive way to combat feelings of anxiety during
periods of organizational change.
When asked about how participants felt about big changes in their life, a majority of
participants noted emotions such as anxiousness, nervousness, or uncertainty. Some participants
noted that they found change exciting or good. When asked why they felt that way, one student
said that change was good if there was an easy transition or if the change resulted in positive
outcomes. The problem is that the difficulty level of the transition or the quality of the outcome
is often only known once the change process is complete. One does not typically know if the
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
24
transition will be easy or if the outcome will be positive at the beginning of the change process.
This may be part of the reason why so many participants confessed that big changes often cause
them to be anxious. As previously stated, one participant shared, “I think change is stressful
because you don’t know what the outcome is going to be. You know what you know, and change
is different.” Organizations, in order to create the possibility of an easy transition and a positive
outcome, ought to begin telling clear and consistent stories from the very first day of the
introduction to change.
Through the focus groups, the researcher came to realize that many people might feel
anxious when experiencing organizational change because such change often alters their routine
or levels of security. The focus group discussions helped support that most people feel the most
comfortable when they are in familiar situations. One participant clearly stated her negative
feelings toward change and how those feelings connected with the idea of familiarity: “I don’t
like changes that much. I like familiarity because I’m a lot more comfortable with it… but I
know eventually after the change I’ll get comfortable and everything, but I don’t like that initial
part.” Organizations, therefore, must take action to make the initial part of the change process
easier for its members. One way organizations can do so is by trying to make the change feel
more familiar by providing all of the facts in a clear and consistent manner through storytelling.
Organizations create a familiar atmosphere for their members by building up a strong
identity and acting in ways that are in accordance with said identity. Group members seem to
become extremely anxious when changes cause this identity to begin to shift. What was once
taken for granted as normal begins to change, and members within an organization often do not
know how to handle such a large change. A focus group participant alluded to this sensation in
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
25
her comments on the introduction of the football team at Queens: “I just feel like it’s going to be
such a drastic change for Queens that it’s not doing to be Queens anymore.”
Other students made similar comments that also attributed to the conclusion that changes
that cause of shift in identity is a major cause of anxiety. One student argued that people do not
come to Queens because they are particularly good at any given sport. “I think most [people] do
come for the programs or for the education.” The participant added, “I mean if not then… if
that’s what somebody wanted they would go to like Georgia or Alabama.” Another student
chimed in saying, “Yeah, I mean USC and Clemson are right down the street. If you really want
to see college football… and those are established teams.” This helps clarify that perhaps
students felt apprehension towards the introduction of a football team to the university because
the university’s current identity did not revolve around a huge sports program. Students felt like
Queens’ identity focused on education, while believing that the other bigger, southern
universities placed more of their identity in football. This potential change, which moves away
from the identity of their university, caused students to become anxious and therefore resist the
possibility of change. Similarly, changes that fall in line with an organization’s current identity
may not cause as much anxiety for its members. Organizations must strive to show their
members through storytelling that the changes align with their overall mission and vision, or
with the organization’s identity. Even if the changes do not necessarily align with an
organization’s previous mission and vision, stories can help organization members become
familiar with the new changes, making the identity shift less emotional.
Media
People in charge of leading change within an organization ought to ensure that
information is being properly shared to its members. A fundamental aspect of storytelling is
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
26
knowing where and from whom members are receiving their information about changes within
an organization. Many students admitted to receiving most of their information via email, by
word of mouth, or through the university newspaper. It is interesting, however, that most of these
students did not have the correct information about the football team and/or about how the
university planned to bring it to fruition.
The researcher searched through her Queens University of Charlotte email inbox to find
at least five emails including dates and times for information sessions regarding the football team
and a list of frequently asked questions and answers. See Appendix D for an example of an email
to students about the football team. The list of frequently asked questions and answers (see
Appendix E) includes answers to many of the issues that the students were worried about during
the focus group discussion, including money issues, timeline confusion, and concerns about a
shift away from an emphasis on academics. The email inbox included a total of at least thirteen
emails mentioning the football team from October 18, 2013 through March 9, 2014.
Additionally, the Queens Chronicle wrote two news articles about the football team: the first was
published on November 11 (Herron, 2013) and the other on March 24 (Saunders, 2014).
This raises an interesting question: If students knew that information about the football
team could be found via email or the Queens Chronicle, and if email and the newspaper did, in
fact, include information regarding the Queens football team, how did students continue to not
know many of the facts surrounding the issue? There are many possible responses to this
question. First of all, most of the information presented in the emails came via RexTexts, an
online newsletter containing many different links to information. It is quite possible that
students, who receive at least two RexTexts per week with links to activities and events going on
in the Charlotte area or on campus, simply skipped over the links containing information for the
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
27
football team because all of the links appear the same way. In other words, the links for
information about the football team were not set apart or highlighted from the other links causing
them to get lost among the load of information.
Accessibility is another possible reason why students may not have known much of the
factual information about the football team. Although different media around campus presented
ways to retrieve information, it was not always very easy to locate the facts. For example, the
question and answer document could only be retrieved by logging onto the Queens portal,
locating the document on the Football Feasibility page, and clicking on the link. Although this
may not seem particularly strenuous, students may be more likely to pay attention to information
that does not require them to work to find it. Furthermore, many students in the focus groups
mentioned that the university had held different information sessions as well as sessions for
students to voice their opinions about the football team, but not one student out of the forty-eight
participants attended the meetings. Some participants stated that the meetings conflicted with
their schedules, while other participants confessed that they simply did not care to go. The
University must find innovative ways to reach out to students who may have a busy schedule and
to capture the attention of indifferent students in order to persuade them to care about the
changes. Properly informing students would help avoid rumors, which often cause anxiety to
rise, from spreading.
Lastly, the quality, timing, and validity of the factual information shared around campus
also may have contributed to high levels of uncertainty about the introduction of a football team
to Queens. Many focus group participants felt as if the information presented to them through the
Chronicle and through emails simply asked for or stated opinions rather than present them with
facts about the team. As one student noted, “I think I saw an article in the Chronicle, but again it
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
28
didn’t have any information. It just talked about the hype of it if we got one.” Furthermore,
students felt like they had heard more information at the beginning of the school year than
towards the end, leaving them confused as to the progress being made. Most participants, as
previously mentioned, received their information from other students on campus via word of
mouth. One student recognized, however, that “facts” that are spread around by people who are
not in authority might not be the most reliable: “I think in general, we are a small campus, so any
story that gets around and everyone’s talking about is going to be distorted via word of mouth.
Like it’s not going to be the same story after a while… and that’s just a fact.” Other students
admitted that they would have liked to hear more information from those in authority.
Storytelling and its Role in Uncertainty Reduction
The researcher asked focus group members in one of the focus groups if the stories they
had heard around campus about the football team had been pretty consistent or if they had heard
many contradicting versions of the story. Their responses echoed the responses of many of the
other participants in the other focus groups. One girl answered, “I feel like we haven’t heard
enough to have a story. Like the only think we’ve gotten is, ‘Oh, hey! They’re doing a survey
and looking into it,’ but end of story right there.” These same students expressed a great deal of
uncertainty when it came to the introduction of the football team and expressed that they often
felt stressed or “thrown off” during times of big change, especially when moving into unfamiliar
territory. Leaders of change, therefore, should consider storytelling as an important strategy to
use during times of organizational change, for storytelling reduces levels of anxiety. Stories help
make the information more clear. Once the information is clear, it becomes more difficult for
contradicting stories, otherwise known as rumors, to spread, which allows people to feel more
comfortable with the change.
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
29
Presenting the whole story, in fact, is an important aspect of organizational storytelling,
especially during times of organizational change. A focus group participant admitted to not
knowing the full story about the introduction of the football team at Queens:
We don’t really know because we don’t know a lot of details, and things have kind of
been blown out of proportion or like just certain things have been stated, but not the
whole… like we haven’t heard it in one consistent like, “Here’s our plan. Let me tell you
all that it entails…”
Receiving bits and pieces of the story does not allow organization members to understand why
the change is occurring, how it is going to go about, and what the possible or desired outcome
would be. Stories, in order to help reduce anxiety during organizational change, must remain
consistent in all aspects. Although stories can differ to allow them to appeal to a variety of
personalities and interests, the facts within the story must remain the same throughout every
version. In the case of the Queens football team, students heard stories containing inconsistent
information regarding funding, location, and the expected timeline for the change. Leaders ought
to strive harder to ensure that these stories remain coherent throughout the change process.
Additionally, the leaders who act as the narrators of the story should remain constant
during the introduction of change to an organization. If organization members hear stories about
the change from a particular narrator or narrators, and if the stories these narrators share are
consistent with one another, then members will begin to recognize whom they can trust for
reliable information. If stories do not have a consistent narrator (the leader or leaders of the
change) then the story will likely become confused amongst the masses.
In a society that is rich with information and that is experiencing a rise in media through
which to obtain this information, storytellers must find a way for their message to stand out from
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
30
the rest. Leaders must help their organization’s members recognize their stories before they can
start helping members understand and process the changes described within them. Consequently,
it is important for leaders to make their story engaging in order to grab the attention of
organization members. Leaders must also select a medium or media through which to send their
story to guarantee that it actually reaches its members.
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
31
Conclusion
Storytelling is an effective way to reduce anxiety or uncertainty. Anxiety or uncertainty
arises, in particular, with the introduction of change within an organization. Storytelling,
therefore, is an important tool for leaders to utilize when their organization is undergoing big
changes. The focus group discussions used in this study confirm this conclusion. A majority of
members stated they felt anxious during times of change, displayed negative emotions when
discussing the possibility of a football team at Queens, and confessed to not hearing much
information from leaders about the subject.
Many focus group members noted that the stories that they heard about the football team
contained incoherent information. In order to be effective, stories within organizations must
strive to be consistent in their stories, make the stories available to everyone within the
organization, and strive to catch the attention of members with their stories. Organizational
stories, particularly during the initial stages of change, must come from the leaders of an
organization. This will help rumors from spreading, as members will know who to trust and who
to turn to if they have any questions. If leaders in organizations effectively communicate via
storytelling during times of organizational change, perhaps they can prevent their members from
experiencing high levels of anxiety or uncertainty.
Limitations
The researcher was limited in the amount of time available to conduct the study. She was
also limited in the amount of money she could spend on the study. These two limitations
prevented the researcher from collecting a random sample, which would be ideal for unbiased
research. Furthermore, the researcher, while she accounted for gender, age, and class in her
sample, did not account for the number of student athletes in her study. Although she does not
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
32
know the exact number of student athletes present in her study, she recognizes that many of the
participants played college sports and that this may have affected their feelings toward the
introduction of football at the university. Although she would not ban student athletes from her
focus groups, the researcher believes it may be best to balance the focus groups with an equal
number of student athletes versus non-student athletes in order to have an unbiased sample. The
researcher also recognizes that she should have investigated further into what some of the best
strategies are for capturing people’s attention with stories.
Recommendations for Future Researchers
The researcher, after analyzing her findings, realizes the importance of using effective
mediums to tell stories to organization members, specifically during periods of organizational
change. With the boom of technology, possible media through which leaders could possibly send
their stories is constantly growing. Therefore, the researcher recommends that future studies
focus on the most effective medium to use in the distribution of stories to an organization during
organizational change. The researcher is also interested in the following research question: What
are some of the best strategies in terms of design to make stories stand out in a world where
people are constantly taking in information. Answering these questions would help organizations
better handle anxiety and uncertainty during times of organizational change.
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
33
References
Barnett, W., & Carroll, G. (1995). Modeling internal organizational change. Annual Review of
Sociology, 21, 217-236. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2083410
Berger, C.R. (1987). Communicating under uncertainty. In M.E. Roloff & G.R. Miller (Eds.),
Interpersonal processes: New directions in communication research (pp. 39-62).
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Bird, S. (2007). Sensemaking and identity. Journal Of Business Communication,
44(4), 311-339.
Bordia, P., & DiFonzo, N. (1998). A tale of two corporations: Uncertainty during organizational
change. Human Resource Management, 37(3,4), 295-304. Retrieved from
http://cyb.ox.or.kr/lms_board/bbs_upload/%C2%FC%B0%ED%B9%AE%C7%E54(%B
1%B9%BF%DC-%B7%E7%B8%D3%B9%CE%B0%A8%B5%B5)_1.pdf
Brady, W. (2013). Storytelling Defines Your Organizational Culture. Physician Executive, =
39(1), 40.
Dailey, S. L., & Browning, L. (2014). Retelling stories in organizations: Understanding the
functions of narrative repetition. Academy Of Management Review, 39(1), 22-43.
doi:10.5465/amr.2011.0329
Fisher, W. R. (1984). Narration as a human communication paradigm: The case of public moral
argument. Communication Monographs, 51(1), 1-22.
Fisher, W. R. (1987). Human communication as narration: toward a philosophy of reason,
value, and action. Columbia, S.C.: University of South Carolina Press.
Gabriel, Y. (2008). Organizing words: A critical thesaurus for social and organization studies.
Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
34
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books, Inc. Retrieved from
http://monoskop.org/images/5/54/Geertz_Clifford_The_Interpretation_of_Cultures_Selec
ted_Essays.pdf
Gill, R. (2011). Corporate Storytelling as an Effective Internal Public Relations Strategy.
International Business & Management, 3(1), 17-25.
doi:10.3968/j.ibm.1923842820110301.107
Guber, P. (2011). Telling Purposeful Stories: An Organization's Most Under-Utilized
Competency. People & Strategy, 34(1), 4-5.
Hanan, J. (2008). The Continued Importance of Walter Fisher's Narrative Paradigm: An Analysis
of Fisher's Extant Work. Conference Papers -- National Communication Association, 1.
Heath, R., & Millar, D. (2008). Responding to crisis: A rhetorical approach to crisis
communication. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Herron, G. (2013, November 11). Football at Queens? The Queens Chronicle. Retrieved from:
http://www.queens-chronicle.com/2013/11/11/football-at-queens/
Koehn, N. (2012, July 18). Leading change: Two stories, four lessons. Health Leadership
Forum. Retrieved April 15, 2014, from http://www.athenahealth.com/leadershipforum/leadingchange-two-stories-four-lessons
Kopp, D. M., Nikolovska, I., Desiderio, K. P., & Guterman, J. T. (2011). 'Relaaax, I remember
the recession in the early 1980s ...': Organizational storytelling as a crisis management
tool. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 22(3), 373-385. doi:10.1002/hrdq.20067
Kowalewski, S. J., & Waukau-Villagomez, L. (2011). Storytelling and career narrative in
organizations. Global Journal Of Business Research (GJBR), 5(4), 83-92.
Mariana, P., Daniela, B., & Nadina, R. (2013). Forces that enhance or reduce employee
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
35
resistance to change. Annals Of The University Of Oradea, Economic Science Series,
22(1), 1606-1612.
McAdams, D. P. (1993). The stories we live by: Personal myths and the making of the self. New
York, NY: Guilford Press.
O’Neill, J. W. (2002). The role of storytelling in affecting organizational reality in the
strategic management process. Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 4(1),
3–15.
Saunders, D. (2014, March 24). Football funding would be self-sufficient, committee says. The
Queens Chronicle. Retrieved from: http://www.queenschronicle.com/2014/03/24/football-funding-would-be-self-sufficient-committee-says/
Stanleigh, M. (2013). Leading Change. Journal For Quality & Participation, 36(2), 39-40.
Simsek, S., & Louis, K. (1994). Organizational change as paradigm shift: Analysis of the change
process in a large, public university. The Journal of Higher Education, 65(6), 670-695.
Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2943824
Thévenet, M. (1992). ¿Se puede cambiar la cultura?. In Auditoría de la
cultura empresarialRetrieved from
http://books.google.com/books?id=ri4JjI6NaVsC&printsec=frontc over
Tierney, W. (1988). Organizational culture in higher education: Defining the essentials. The
Journal of Higher Education, 59(1), 2-21. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1981868
Umble, M. (2014). Overcoming resistance to change. Industrial Management, 56(1), 16.
Yang, C. (2013). Telling Tales at Work: An Evolutionary Explanation. Business
Communication Quarterly, 76(2), 132-154. doi:10.1177/1080569913480023
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
36
Appendix A
Institutional Review Board Approval Letter:
March 26, 2014
Courtney Walker
Knight School of Communication
RESEARCH PROTOCOL APPROVAL, IRB FILE # 03-14-KSOC-00078
The Institutional Review Board reviewed your research request:
Storytelling and Uncertainty Reduction
Your protocol (03/17/14); Informed consent form, Focus group questions; and Recruitment
materials were approved for use within the facilities of Queens University of Charlotte. The
Board determined your study poses minimal risk to subjects and meets the criteria for an exempt
application. If you plan to use the protocol outside of Queens University of Charlotte, you may
need to submit it to the IRB at that institution for approval.
This approval expires one year minus one day from date above. Before your study expires,
you must submit a notice of completion or a request for extension. You are required to report any
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
37
changes to the research study to the IRB for approval prior to implementation. This form can be
found on the IRB site on MyQueens and should be sent to irb@queens.edu.
If we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us. Please use the IRB file
number when referencing your case.
Sincerely,
Daina Nathaniel
Daina Nathaniel, PhD
Chair, IRB
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
38
Appendix B
Consent Form:
Informed Consent
Perception of Dynamic Activity Study
Project Title and Purpose:
You are invited to participate in a research study: Storytelling and Uncertainty Reduction.
This study will examine how storytelling reduces levels of anxiety during the process of
organizational change. It will also aim to answer why organizational change causes anxiety for
those involved, and how stories are typically communicated during periods of organizational
change.
Investigator(s):
Courtney A. Walker, a senior Organizational Communication major in the Knight School of
Communication at Queens University of Charlotte, is conducting this study. The study will turn
into a final project for the researcher’s COMM495 class under the direction of Dr. Daina
Nathaniel.
Description of Participation:
In this study you will be in a focus group of 6-8 people. The researcher will ask you 10 questions
relating to the research question and sub-questions.
Length of Participation
It will take about 30 minutes to complete this focus group. If you decide to participate, you will
be one of approximately 55 participants in this study. Participants will be drawn on a
convenience and purposive basis from contacts in the student population at Queens University of
Charlotte across all class levels.
Risks and Benefits of Participation:
There are no risks known at this time associated with participating in the study. However, there
may be risks that are currently unforeseeable. The only benefit of participation in this study is
the ability to communicate your feelings about current changes occurring at your university. The
results of the study will only be used for this class project. You may obtain a copy of all results
by contacting me at cw24022@gmail.com any time after April 17, 2014. You will not receive
financial reimbursement for your participation.
39
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
Volunteer Statement
You are a volunteer. The decision to participate in this study is completely up to you. If you
decide to be in the study, you may stop at any time. You may choose not to answer any question
you simply do not wish to answer. You will not be treated any differently if you decide not to
participate or if you stop once you have started.
Confidentiality:
You will be recorded during this focus group. The recordings will be recorded on the researchers
phone, and then imported onto the researcher’s laptop. The recordings will be kept secure on the
researchers laptop and phone, and will be destroyed after being transcribed. The transcribed
material will be written in a separate notebook or Word document. After the research project is
complete, any paper containing transcribed material will be shredded and any Word documents
containing transcribed material will be permanently deleted. Notes will also be taken during the
focus groups in a separate notebook. Likewise, any paper with notes from the focus groups will
be shredded after the research project is completed.
All information you provide will be kept confidential. Although names will be used throughout
the focus groups, numbers, only, are used as identification once the recordings are transcribed;
no names will appear with the data. You are also asked to protect the privacy of the other
participants in the study. All data files will be destroyed at the end of the project.
Fair Treatment and Respect:
Queens University of Charlotte wants to make sure that you are treated in a fair and respectful
manner. Contact the University’s Institutional review Board (Dr. Daina Nathaniel at
704.688.2743) if you have any questions about how you have been treated as a study participant.
If you have any questions about the project, please contact Courtney Walker at 404-358-4396.
Participant Consent:
I have read the information in this consent form. I have had the chance to ask questions about
this study, and those questions have been answered to my satisfaction. I am at least 18 years of
age, am an emancipated minor*, or my guardian has signed below, and I agree to participate in
this research project. I understand that I am entitled to receive a copy of this form after the
researcher and I have signed it.
By signing your name below, you agree to participating in the focus group research and keeping
the identities and information shared by other participants confidential.
________________________
Participant Name
(PLEASE PRINT)
_____________________________
Participant Signature
______________________________________
_____________
DATE
_____________________
40
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
Researcher Signature
DATE
*Emancipated Minor (as defined by NC General Statute 7B-101.14) is a person who has not yet
reached their 18th birthday and meets at least one of the following criteria: 1) has legally terminated
custodial rights of his/her parents and been declared ‘emancipated’ by a court; 2) is married, or 3) is
serving in the armed forces of the United States.
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
41
Appendix C
Focus Group Questions:
1. Can you please describe how change normally makes you feel?
2. What are some of the big changes you have heard about happening at Queens this year?
3. Can you please describe how changes at Queens make you feel?
4. Moving specifically to the possibility of an introduction of a football program at Queens:
What are some of the stories you have heard about this change?
5. Where or from whom have you heard these stories?
6. Can you estimate how many different stories you have heard about the football program
at Queens?
7. What facts or themes remain consistent throughout the stories you have heard about the
Queens’ football team?
8. Could you give me an example of a time when a story helped make a dramatic change
easier for you?
9. Could you give me an example of a time when a story (or lack of a story) failed to help
make a dramatic change easier for you?
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
42
Appendix D
Example Email, Sent January 24, 2014:
The Football Feasibility Study Task Force continues to seek input on the prospect of football as
an intercollegiate sport at Queens and is eager to hear your thoughts. Please click on the link
below to take a brief survey. The survey will be open for two weeks, so please take just a few
moments and complete it now!
http://survey.constantcontact.com/survey/a07e8twcn2zhqqqcqrs/start
On February 6 and 7, the Task Force will also be holding information sessions to share an
overview of the information that has been gathered up this point and provide details on a timeline
for the decision. The sessions will also be a time to answer any remaining questions. We value
your input and invite you to attend one of the following sessions in the Claudia Belk Dining
Room:
Open Session for Staff:
Thursday, Feb. 6: 1:30-2:30 p.m.
Open Session for Students:
Friday, Feb 7: 1:30-2:30p.m.
Open Session for Faculty:
Friday, Feb 7: 2:30-3:30 p.m.
Please also remember that comments submitted to footballstudy@queens.edu are welcome and
will also be considered.
For additional information on the study, read the Frequently Asked Questions document that
provides more details on the scope and timeline for a decision on the topic, or visit the Football
Feasibility Task Force site on the MyQueens portal.
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
43
Appendix E
Queens Football Feasibility Study Frequently Asked Questions—January 2014:
BACKGROUND
1) Why are we doing this study?
Our new conference, the South Atlantic Conference asked us to consider football. It was not a
requirement to join the conference but we felt the timing was right to explore whether football is a good
idea for Queens.
2) Did you feel compelled to head in this direction because UNC Charlotte added a football team?
No. Our decision was influenced by the request of our new conference which of course piqued our
interest to the point of engaging in a feasibility study. While it’s true UNC Charlotte is close to us
geographically, a Division I football program like UNC Charlotte’s is a whole different ballgame (pardon
the pun) than a Division II program. We’re excited for UNC Charlotte and the 49ers, but our exploration
is completely independent.
PROCESS
3) Is the feasibility study being done just to validate a decision already made?
Absolutely not. We would not be taking the time to engage as many people as possible if we didn’t want
to get an accurate read as to whether this is a good idea for Queens.
4) How are you gaining input from various constituents at Queens?
We’ve pulled together a taskforce comprised of faculty, staff, students, alumni and trustees, and we’re
hosting open sessions with more than 20 groups to encourage feedback. We’ve also created an email
address for people to send feedback and questions (footballstudy@queens.edu), and we’ll launch a survey
to further understand the campus community’s perceptions and questions about football. One of our sport
management classes has also conducted qualitative research through dozens of student interviews and
provided the results to the taskforce.
5) What kind of timeline are you talking about here?
Our consultants expect the feasibility study to be concluded in early 2014. The taskforce will then review
the study and forward a recommendation to the President in mid-February. If it is recommended that
Queens pursue football, and the Board supports that direction, we would launch a national search for a
head coach mid-2014 and develop a plan in concert with our conference to determine the first season of
competition. Our consultants have advised us that 2016 is probably the earliest we could start playing
under this scenario.
6) It seems the study is moving pretty fast. Are we sure we can be thorough under the current
timeline?
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
44
Our goal is to conduct a thorough review and make a recommendation to the President by February 15.
SELECTIVITY AND ACADEMIC EXCELLENCE
7) How does the addition of football align with the Queens 2017 Plan strategy to further enhance
student quality?
One of the key areas of interest we will explore during the feasibility study is how to attract football
players who are academically strong and align with the high achieving standards at Queens. There are
many fine small universities and colleges, such as Washington and Lee, Davidson, Wofford and Furman
that have football teams and strong academic programs.
8) Would football take resources away from the rest of the 2017 Plan, which is all about academic
excellence?
If our preliminary analysis ends up being correct, it shows Division II football actually brings in
additional revenue, which will help Queens contribute more resources to the strategic plan. The feasibility
study will look at how football will affect the overall financial picture.
9) Isn’t it true that football programs cause institutions to lose focus of their academic mission?
While that may be the case at some institutions, it is certainly not true for all. If Queens were to add
football, just like all of our other athletic programs, student academic success would be our first priority.
10) Will Queens consider a marching band if football is added?
We’re not sure; we’ll be exploring it with the College of Arts & Sciences and music department to discuss
whether that makes sense.
OPERATIONS
11) Is the academic calendar going to have to change because of football?
We will certainly look at academic planning as part of the analysis, but we don’t expect the addition of
football to alter the calendar.
12) Where will you play?
The feasibility study is going to include an assessment of various sites, but one thing we know is it will
not be on the main Myers Park campus.
13) How many additional students will this bring to campus?
If Queens adds football, we would expect our roster to be similar in size to those in the South Atlantic
Conference which currently range from approximately 100 – 140 students.
COST
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
45
14) Why add football when it is so expensive and Queens has a lot of areas in which we need to
invest?
Our preliminary research indicates football would actually contribute an increase in net operating revenue
to the budget due to the additional tuition, room and board of football players, as well as the additional
students who might attend Queens because we have a football team. We will consider all revenue and
expenses very carefully in our recommendation to the President and Board of Trustees.
15) How can Queens afford to start a football program?
If the study shows that football makes sense for Queens, the university would raise the capital dollars to
develop and launch the program. Once the program is launched, Queens would utilize the additional
tuition, room and board resources to fund the football program and other strategic initiatives on campus.
OTHER ATHLETIC PROGRAMS
16) Will football take money away from other athletic programs?
Queens will continue to fully support all Royals athletic programs. In fact, if our preliminary assumptions
about the football budget are correct, it may actually create additional support for numerous areas on
campus including other Royals athletic teams. If, in any way, the feasibility study suggests football would
decrease the quality and support of other programs, that finding would be a strong deterrent against
adding it.
17) Will Queens evaluate the implications of adding football in the context of Title IX?
Absolutely. We will work with the consultants to ensure we continue to equally support both men’s and
women’s athletic programs.
DIVISION I VS. DIVISION II FOOTBALL
18) You’ve mentioned Queens’ football program would be Division II. How is that different from
Division I?
Division I and Division II football are two completely different approaches to the game and have more
differences than similarities. In most cases, Division II football has a more balanced focus on academic
life. There are far fewer scholarships at the Division II level, lower coaching salaries, lower operating
budgets and in fact, less than 25 Division I football programs generate net revenue whereas the majority
of Division II programs do generate additional revenue for their schools beyond the costs of running the
program.
MISCELLANEOUS
19) Don’t football coaches have really large salaries?
STORYTELLING AND UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION
46
Unlike many of the salaries you hear about in the media (which are almost always about high-profile,
Division I coaches), Division II head coach salaries are much more in line with the salaries of other
coaches, faculty and staff members on Division II campuses.
20) There seem to be a lot of scandals in the media surrounding college football. Do you think
Queens will encounter these same problems?
If Queens were to start football, the intent would be to hire a coach who would build a program on
integrity and character in order to minimize behavior that has plagued some other schools’ programs. The
vast majority of stories covered by the media are about large, Division I programs.
21) Will Queens consider the potential for serious injuries, such as concussions in the game of
football?
Queens currently has concussion prevention, testing and monitoring procedures in place for its 19 athletic
teams. As part of the consultants’ reports and taskforce discussions around the addition of football,
Queens will take an even deeper look at concussion prevention, examining everything from equipment to
practice regimens.
22) There is a belief that a football program could add to the rise of student misconduct. Will that
be considered in the feasibility study?
Yes, that will certainly be considered; however, if Queens were to add football, we would expect the
players to be outstanding representatives of the university, abiding by the same policies, procedures,
rights and responsibilities as the rest of the Queens campus. While there’s been some negative publicity
around big Division I programs; many smaller D II and D Ill programs are run without the same
disciplinary problems. There are currently 360+ student- athletes at Queens, and they don't have a higher
misconduct rate. In fact, Queens student-athletes tend to be some of our best students and fill many
leadership roles on campus.
Please send any additional questions/comments/feedback to footballstudy@queens.edu