Relationship Between Change Management and Crisis

743 WordsFeb 22, 20183 Pages
Introduction The aim of this week literature synthesis is to define the relationship between changes and crisis, but also to investigate the reasons why a change can lead to a crisis. Further, it shall be analyzed if a crisis can be avoided or tamed and why the company culture is important in regard to prevent crisis. Relationship between change management and crisis Change management, particularly to see change as a process has its origin, according to Armenakis and Bedeian (1999) in the work of Lewin (1947, cited in Armenakis and Bedeian 1999, p. 301). Lewin (1947, cited in Burnes 2004, p. 985) argued that a successful change project goes through three different phases. First step is to “unfreeze” the current state or mind set of company. In the second step, according to Armenakis and Bedeian (1999, p. 305) the change occurs. In this phase of the change process the output of this moving is according to Burnes (2004) very difficult to predict too many forces are involved. However, there is an awareness for challenging the old ways. In step three the new state will be according to to Armenakis and Bedeian (1999) institutionalized and consolidated. Burnes (2004) argues that the new behavior must be stabilized to avoid a new round of disconfirmation. Because of the big uncertainties in regard of the forces which influences the change process a crisis can occur. According to Pauchant and Mitroff (1988) the most important and dangerous forces are the unconscious ones. One of
Open Document