Strategic change leadership

Graetz, Fiona

doi:10.1108/00251740010378282

Cited by 168 publications

(122 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

106

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Recognizing the change helps understand what exactly will be changed and whom the change will affect (Graetz, 2000). The change needs to be defined clearly.…”

Section: Critical Success Factors For Change Management In Informatiomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Commitment of line managers to CM creates a situation that they identify with a change. They also manage the time of their subordinates accordingly, accounting for their involvement in change processes in their assignments (Chrusciel & Field, 2006 (Graetz, 2000). Communication by top management is seen as a powerful leverage in gaining commitment and building consensus about the required change (Kotter, 1995).…”

Section: Planning a Projectmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are many authors describing CSFs for CM (Averweg & Erwin, 1999;Graetz, 2000;Guimaraes, Igbaria, & Lu, 1992;Hotek & White, 1999;Palvia & Chervany, 1995;Rothwell & Kazanas, 1998;Underwood-Stephens & Cobb, 1999;Weber & Weber, 2001). However, there are not too many describing CSFs for CM in IS projects.…”

Section: Critical Success Factors For Change Management In Informatiomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The authors state the assumption that all factors are equally important and none of them has been prioritized. Sources: (Aladwani, 2001;Chrusciel & Field, 2006;Cocks, 2014;Davenport, Harris, & Cantrell, 2004;Graetz, 2000;Guimaraes et al, 1992;Hotek & White, 1999;Sutanto, Kankanhalli, Tay, Raman, & Tan, 2008;Weber & Weber, 2001). …”

Section: Critical Success Factors For Change Management In Informatiomentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Change management in information systems projects for public organizations

Ziemba

Obłąk²

2015

IJIKM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It can be argued that public organizations, in order to provide the public with sufficient services in the current, highly competitive and continuously evolving environment, require changes. The changes that become necessary are often related to the implementation of information systems (IS). Moreover, when organizations are faced with changes, a change management (CM) process needs to be put in place. CM theories that are currently available to practitioners and academics are often contradictory; they mostly lack empirical evidence and are supported by unchallenged hypotheses concerning the nature of the contemporary CM. The aim of this paper is, therefore, to identify critical success factors (CFSs) for CM in IS projects. In order to reach this aim an explanation of changes in public organizations and the nature of CM are presented. Following this, a framework of CFSs for CM in IS projects are identified based on the literature review. The paper also examines two IS projects and uses them to demonstrate CFSs influencing CM in IS projects in Polish pubic organizations. A discussion of the research findings is provided and the paper concludes with a presentation of the study's contributions and limitations as well as the stream of future work.

show abstract

“…Recognizing the change helps understand what exactly will be changed and whom the change will affect (Graetz, 2000). The change needs to be defined clearly.…”

Section: Critical Success Factors For Change Management In Informatiomentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Planning a Projectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Critical Success Factors For Change Management In Informatiomentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Critical Success Factors For Change Management In Informatiomentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Change management in information systems projects for public organizations

Ziemba

Obłąk²

2015

IJIKM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Bennett et al [58] noted that conceptions of distributed leadership often signal the openness of boundaries and describe its ability to encourage the development of networks rather than relying on traditional hierarchically structured decision-making and communication concept. Nevertheless, many authors (e.g., [60][61][62][63]) argue that the leader plus concept or multiple sources of influence [54,62] attached to the notion of distributed leadership, does not imply in any way that formal leaders are now redundant as distributed leadership practice also means actively, brokering, facilitating and supporting the leadership of others [63]. Their findings indicate how some forms of distributed leadership work well with strong leadership from senior leaders, and while bound by aims and values set by superior levels within and beyond the organization [64,65].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distributed Leadership in a Low-Carbon City Agenda

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper uses Spillane's (2001) theory and Gronn's (2000) concerted efforts approach to examine distributed leadership in a low-carbon city agenda. The main purpose of the paper is to find empirical evidence of a relationship between distributed leadership and the achievement of the agenda. Eight constructs emerged that informed our understanding of distributed leadership dimensions within the low-carbon city framework: vision, organizational framework, organizational culture, consensus, instructional programs, expertise, team leader leadership, and team member leadership. The evidence shows that there is a positive relationship between distributed leadership and the outcome of the low-carbon city agenda, and that a dispersed pattern in distributing leadership is required to enhance community engagement. The findings also suggest that an organizational culture that facilitates multiple sources of leadership may largely contribute to the effectiveness of distributed leadership practices in realizing the low-carbon city agenda.

show abstract

The organisational impact of undertaking a professional doctorate: Forming critical leaders

Lundgren‐Resenterra

Kahn

2019

British Educational Res J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on the impact of professional doctorates on students and their organisations has reported contested outcomes. We undertook a study to develop a causal explanation of how organisational change may, or may not, result from participation in a Doctor of Education programme (EdD). Drawing on critical realist perspectives, the research found that all the doctoral students shared professional concerns with their work colleagues. In some cases, however, this sharing fostered social relations that supported both collective meta-reflexivity and a performative collective reflexivity, and that resulted in organisational change. Variation in the students' impact on their organisations was further connected to their organisational roles, and to the extent to which their agency aligned with organisational agendas or other external regulatory and normative systems. Strictly limited, or no, organisational change was, however, evident where collective reflexivity was seen to be restricted or to involve contestation. The article concludes that there is significant value to gain by conceiving learning on a professional doctorate not simply in terms of personal growth, but also in terms of mastering a discourse that crosses both research and professional practice and developing the capacity to draw others into that discourse in an organisationally relevant and yet critical fashion.

show abstract

Strategic change leadership

Cited by 168 publications

References 14 publications

Change management in information systems projects for public organizations

Change management in information systems projects for public organizations

Distributed Leadership in a Low-Carbon City Agenda

The organisational impact of undertaking a professional doctorate: Forming critical leaders

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About