1990
DOI: 10.1108/eum0000000001147
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Internal and External Change Agents

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

1994
1994
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
1
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Akey concern is whether internal or external change agents do better in implementing change. Case, Vandenberg, and Meredith (1990) define internal change agents as "those who are full time employees of organizations undergoing change" and external agents as independent consultants "whose association with changing organizations is fleeting" (p. 4). Hunsaker (1985) notes that there are relative advantages and disadvantages for both internal and external change agents: External change agents are more independent and tend to have more objective, fresher perspectives, but are strangers to the organization, may lack inside understanding, and may not be able to identify with the problems of the organization; internal change agents are more intimately familiar with the organization, know who the opinion leaders are, speak the language of the organization, understand the norms of the organization, and have greater personal motivation to bring about the success of change programs.…”
Section: Characteristics and Factorsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Akey concern is whether internal or external change agents do better in implementing change. Case, Vandenberg, and Meredith (1990) define internal change agents as "those who are full time employees of organizations undergoing change" and external agents as independent consultants "whose association with changing organizations is fleeting" (p. 4). Hunsaker (1985) notes that there are relative advantages and disadvantages for both internal and external change agents: External change agents are more independent and tend to have more objective, fresher perspectives, but are strangers to the organization, may lack inside understanding, and may not be able to identify with the problems of the organization; internal change agents are more intimately familiar with the organization, know who the opinion leaders are, speak the language of the organization, understand the norms of the organization, and have greater personal motivation to bring about the success of change programs.…”
Section: Characteristics and Factorsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Change is often the result of a previous initiative or stressor, which serves as a 'trigger' for further development. These triggers are typically categorized as either internal triggers or external triggers (Case, Vandenberg, & Meredith, 1990). Whether internal or external, triggers and subsequent changes are commonplace within the industry and often come with a unique set of challenges, benefits, and risks.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While this practice has its advantages and disadvantages (Rebeiz, 2011), we felt that a process-driven approach to eff ecting change through innovation and entrepreneurial behaviour would be more eff ective. Hence, when we took it over in 2012, we decided to follow the change-agent approach(Barratt-Pugh, Bahn, & Gakere, 2013;Case, Vandenberg, & Meredith, 1990;Daniels, 1994), and found the text Corporate Entrepreneurship and Innovation (Morris et al, 2011) ideally suited for this purpose. Students tell us this is a book they actually read, from cover to cover.…”
Section: Theoretical Underpinnings and Cei Change Agent Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%