The managerialistic ideology of organisational change management

Author:

Diefenbach Thomas

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to shed some light on the reasons and circumstances why strategic change initiatives based on new public management and managerialism go wrong. In particular, how such change initiatives are being justified, communicated, perceived, and implemented within organisational discourses and politics. It reveals personal and group interests behind ideologies, and what change management of this type is really about.Design/methodology/approachA strategic change initiative at a large Western‐European university (“International University” – IU) had been investigated between 2004 and 2005 based on qualitative empirical research. Data were gained primarily through semi‐structured in‐depths interviews with IU's senior managers. The findings were triangulated by referring to internal documents and academic literature.FindingsThe case study reveals a whole set of typical characteristics of managerialistic change management approach and how it is communicated. The paper provides insights into the narratives, organisational politics and ideology of change management processes. It draws the attention to the downsides of top‐down change management approaches, to ideologies and interests behind such initiatives as well as intended and unintended consequences.Research limitations/implicationsAcademics and practitioners might be motivated to concentrate (more) on the values, ideologies, and interests which are behind “rational” management recipes, to see management and organisational behaviour more differentiated and from a critical perspective.Originality/valueOrganisational change management is usually described on the basis of traditional strategy approaches and concentrates on “technical issues”. By drawing the attention to senior managers' perceptions and interests, and how they pursuit change management objectives on the basis of ideologies, it becomes clearer that allegedly “rational” and “objective” strategic solutions are contested terrain and objects of organisational politics.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Management of Technology and Innovation,Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management,Strategy and Management,General Decision Sciences

Reference62 articles.

1. Apple, M.W. (2005), “Education, markets, and an audit culture”, Critical Quarterly, Vol. 47 Nos 1/2, pp. 11‐29.

2. Aronowitz, S. and Giroux, H.A. (1985), Education under Siege – The Conservative, Liberal and Radical Debate over Schooling, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.

3. Aronowitz, S. and Giroux, H.A. (1991), Postmodern Education – Politics, Culture, and Social Criticism, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN.

4. Austin, J. and Currie, B. (2003), “Changing organisations for a knowledge economy: the theory and practice of change management”, Journal of Facilities Management, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 229‐43.

5. Austin, M.J. et al., (1997), “Guiding organizational change”, New Directions for Higher Education, No. 98, pp. 31‐56.

Cited by 61 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3