LEWIN’S MODEL OF ORGANIZATONAL CHANGE 12 Lewin’s Model Of

lewin’s model of organizatonal change 12 lewin’s model of organizational change katherine hamilton cleo miller shelly t

LEWIN’S MODEL OF ORGANIZATONAL CHANGE 12
Lewin’s Model of Organizational Change
Katherine Hamilton
Cleo Miller
Shelly Tucker
Abstract
Kurt Lewin is most remembered as the originator of the 3-step model of
change. His intention was to analyze, understand, and bring about
change at the group, organizational, and societal levels (Burnes,
2004). To develop an understanding of the different elements of
organizational change, this paper details Lewin’s 3-Step Model.
Empirical evidence is presented to show that organizations can
successfully implement change using Lewin’s 3-Step Model.
Introduction
Lewin wrote a great deal about his Field Theory, but it was only in
the last year that he was alive that he brought about the idea of
unfreeze, move and refreeze. He believed that a person’s personality
determined how they behaved and he studied it in terms of situation
(environment) and motivational needs (Powell, 2002). He believed that
all behavior came from a field that changed over a given amount of
time. He knew that people were subject to forces ‘around’ them and so
he applied these psychological states to time (Rosch, 2002). In this
paper we discuss all three stages of Lewin’s change model and
illustrated examples that have proven successful after using this
model.
Stage 1: Unfreeze
“The unfreezing stage, advocates of organizational change will
unfreeze a quasi-stationary equilibrium, a fragile balance constructed
by driving forces and restraining forces, in order to initiate the
organizational transformation” (Burnes, 2004, p. 320). According to
Lewin, the unfreezing phase involves questioning the organization’s
current state, and if a different state is desired, then equilibrium
needs to be destabilized before old behavior is discarded. The purpose
of Lewin’s model is to study organizational transformation using the
following characteristics: radical, goal oriented and longitudinal.
The transformation must be necessitated by unexpected events such as a
crisis, which would require a comprehensive plan to counteract that
crisis.
The term radical is one not normally regarded as acceptable but unlike
extremist, it is sometimes used by groups to describe themselves.
Radical change is a process by which firms regain competitive
advantage after it has been lost. The term goal-oriented is a
universal way of approaching any business change effort from a
small-scale department project to a major government program. The
concept of goal orientation was developed to describe variability in
dispositional or situational goal preferences that an individual or
company sets for themselves in achievement situations.
The key factor in this stage is conformity, defined by Kosslyn and
Rosenberg (2004) as a change of belief or actions in order to follow a
group’s norms. Oral communication is often the primary method used
during the unfreezing stage. Oral communication allows people to
quickly comprehend complicated phenomena they have never encountered,
exchange opinions immediately, and generate alternatives and solutions
in a timely fashion. For example, managers use teleconferences and
meetings that involve a great deal of oral communication to reduce
fear about crisis.
Lewin’s theory of action research states that change can only be
successful if the group gains new insight into the situation (Lewin,
1946). Individual and group learning and understanding are generated
through the process of change. All individuals and groups involved in
the change process must participate and collaborate in order for the
change to be effective. This learning approach enables the groups and
individuals to move to a more acceptable set of behaviors.
Reinforcement should occur or change could be short-lived.
Stage 2: Moving
During the moving stage, the organization will identify a plan for
change and implement strategies, taking into consideration the driving
and restraining forces within the organization. After examining all
the forces, the organization will identify and evaluate on a trial
basis. The organization will be moving and changing into new
directions through an interactive process. This could be in the form
of a new mission, work strategy, operational structure, or technology.
Different approaches are developed to replace old work patterns and
the new behavior can be modified if needed. A state of equilibrium is
established in this stage and the organization will provide support in
the form of training, coaching, or skill development.
Stage 3: Refreeze
The third and final step in Lewin’s model of change is refreezing. The
desired behaviors have been identified in stage two and now must be
implemented in a way that will bring about a new equilibrium without
regression to the old ways. Feedback must then be gathered to verify
that the behaviors have been effective (Ford & Greer, 2006). Feedback
can be formal or informal.
Research examples using Lewin’s Model of Change
Based on the fact that Lewin believed organizations were systems built
on driving and resisting forces, Zand and Sorenson conducted a study
to see if there were favorable or unfavorable forces related to each
of the three stages that in turn would correlate to make the outcome
positive or negative (Ford & Greer, 2006).
The research team chose a panel of people to identify and verify the
forces and which stage they related to. Then 150 questionnaires were
administered to scientists who looked at the positive and negative
forces involved in organizational change with their clients and the
success of their change initiatives (Ford & Greer, 2006).
Hendry (2006) believed that development of specific skills and
competencies that enable individuals to do things differently is often
neglected. The skills that are required to make new technology work,
adapt to new role demands, and relationships are very rarely given
time to develop. Ford and Greer (2006) examined movement activities
such as goal setting and skill development. They found that
organizations that cannot execute movement activities with sufficient
intensity are unsuccessful at managing change.
Results of their research confirmed what they set out to find and
their study has since helped to provide empirical support for Lewin’s
model of change. Zand and Sorenson’s findings have been influential in
organizations looking to implement and facilitate change (Ford &
Greer, 2006).
A nursing school located in the Mid-western part of the United States
went through a period of organizational change where they used Lewin’s
model. This particular model was chosen based on the ability to track
progress in each stage and for its ease of use.
After a task force was identified, a questionnaire was created that
would illicit ideas for changes that were needed and would show what
strengths and weaknesses were present in the current structure. This
was administered to past and present administrators as well as current
faculty members.
The nursing facility needed administrative relief due to excessive
workloads that were unevenly distributed. Strategies proposed during
the movement stage were development of new job descriptions to evenly
distribute responsibilities, proposal of three new undergraduate
administrative positions, and one graduate chairperson. The dean
encountered resistance from the Vice President due to budgetary
restraints. The dean addressed this resistance by collecting data on
enrollments from 1995-2005. The dean gained a part time undergraduate
administrative position and one graduate chairperson. The graduate
chairperson was full time. The new job descriptions for the positions
were implemented. This allowed for administrative relief, which was
the driving force for change within the nursing educational facility.
Evaluation has been ongoing. Several additional recommendations have
been made that include implementing a new administrative structure and
creating a backup plan in case a crisis occurs. The faculty of the
nursing school found the organizational change to be beneficial in
that it created cost savings and led to a more streamlined structure.
A hematology/oncology day unit realized a need for organizational
change when the Department of Health announced that all chemotherapy
should be administered within a designated area. During the unfreezing
stage it was determined by administration that the driving forces
outweighed the resisting forces, the hospital determined that 11
inpatient beds would be converted to day beds to meet the criteria of
the Department of Health. Once this occurred, staffing of the nursing
department would also need to change.
The movement stage began with the conversion of the beds and
implementation of a 12-hour shift schedule for employees. The change
was implemented on a trial basis for 6 weeks. During this period staff
was given the opportunity to discuss how the change impacted them.
Patients were also surveyed during this time frame to ensure they
still received quality care.
The 6-week trial was successful and the freezing stage began with the
administrator stabilizing the staffing schedule. The unit was
successful with the change and was able to continue to provide quality
care with a growing number of patients (Baulcomb, 2003).
Jobs Assistance Services (JAS) is a nonprofit organization that Medley
& Akan (2008) studied to show the stages of Lewin’s model and its
effectiveness. A public survey was administered to determine how the
community perceived JAS. The results of the survey indicated that
there was a gap between constituents regarding public awareness. The
leaders felt that this contributed to the decrease in clients. This
prompted the organizational change process within JAS.
As consistent with the unfreezing stage, JAS identified two goals.
They wanted to change how JAS was marketed to the community in
addition to critiquing the program offerings. The management and staff
needed to be highly proactive in bringing a new focus to the
organization.
Medley & Akan determined that JAS had transitioned to the movement
stage when they realized the need to revamp the program offerings to
adapt to the changing needs of their current and potential clients.
During this stage JAS proposed concepts that linked job training to
actual jobs and industries while also working to instill long-term
financial stability. JAS began to offer staff development by hiring a
grant-writing specialist to secure funding for their programs.
Marketing strategies were identified and implemented to allow JAS to
become more visible within the community.
The refreezing stage began with a new mission statement and training
to enhance employment opportunities for the clients of JAS. They
incorporated employment referrals, wealth building, and youth-oriented
educational programs. In addition, they began to formulate plans to
increase charitable contributions so they did not rely solely on
government grants. Staff restructuring also occurred to ensure that
new goals were realized.
Maon, Lingreen, and Suaen (2009) examined corporate social
responsibility (CSR) design and implementation using Lewin’s model. In
the unfreezing stage, management must identify a working definition of
CSR and establish the organization’s vision. In this stage the
organization needs to assess the current state and develop a plan to
implement CSR. The goal of the organization must be communicated
through either verbal or written means to all employees.
In this study, the companies being examined implemented integrated
strategic plans and organizational initiatives centered on CSR. The
movement stage was identified as doing, checking, and improving.
Communication between all individuals within the organization was
stressed so that everyone would have a clear understanding of the
motive behind adopting the approach and would be able to see its’
relevance to the organization. This clear communication also aimed to
provide for reporting on changes, employees being informed about the
program’s progress, soliciting input, and maintaining regular and
continuous information dissemination. Additional components of the
movement stage as it relates to implementing CSR are employee
training, incentives, and mechanisms for detection, reporting, and
resolution of any issues.
The refreezing stage can identify weaknesses and correct deficiencies
within the implementation of CSR. Barriers to success and ways to
overcome them should be visited throughout this stage to ensure that
CSR is maintained within the organizational culture. Changes should be
anchored in organizational systems. Feedback from the organization is
received through surveys.
TutorABC is an organization based in Taiwan. Taiwan faced two major
crises that brought about change. The company lost their building in
the earthquake and while TutorABC and Taiwan were rebuilding SARS
broke out. SARS left many people avoiding public places.
TutorABC began examining their current business model and realized
that traditional teaching and learning within a classroom setting had
to change. This began their unfreezing stage. Managers had to create
an awareness of the need for change and facilitate the change of
company norms. The organization’s goal was to move toward an
e-learning business model incorporating their traditional learning
practices.
TutorABC developed a new department responsible for online services
and the internal infrastructure and systems were changed. Employees
had to adapt to the new environment. They recognized the agenda and
took action to put those decisions into practice. Incentives were
offered to employees who performed well and advanced the new company
goals. Punishment was given to those that were not in compliance with
the company’s goals. Oral and written communication was enhanced
within this stage. TutorABC recovered from the crisis and moved onto
the next stage of planned organizational change.
Within the freezing stage, TutorABC unified the goals of different
departments through a Key Performance Index (KPI). It identified roles
and goals of the organization. To maximize customer service an
interface between TutorABC and customers was established. The
interface, IMS, worked with KPI to achieve goals and receive feedback
from customers.
Conclusion
This paper introduced and analyzed Lewin’s model of organizational
change and then illustrated a variety of examples that showcased the
success organizations have experienced and their support for this
model. So in the words of Lewin himself, “If you want to truly
understand something, try to change it” (Lewin, 1951).
References
Baulcomb, J.E. (2003). Management of change through force field
analysis. Journal of Nursing Management 11, 275-280.
Burnes, B. (2004). Kurt Lewin and the planned approach to change: A
re-appraisal. Journal of Management Studies 41 (6), 977-1002.
Burnes, B. (2004). Kurt Lewin and complexity theories: back to the
future? Journal of Change Management 4 (4), 309-325.
Burnes, B. (2009). Reflections: Ethics and organizational change-time
for a return to Lewinian values. Journal of Change Management 9 (4),
359-381.
Ford, M. W., & Greer, B. M. (2006, December). Profiling change: An
empirical
study of change process patterns. The Journal of Applied Behavioral
Science, 42(4), 420-445.
Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical
papers, D.
Cartwright (Ed.). New York: Harper and Row (Original work published
1944).
Maon, F., Lindgreen, A., & Swaen, V. (2009). Designing and
implementing corporate social responsibility: an integrative framework
grounded in theory and practice. Journal of Business Ethics, 87,
71-89.
Medley, B. C. & Akan, O. H. (2008). Creating positive change in
community organizations: A case for rediscovering Lewin. Nonprofit
Management & Leadership, 18 (4), 485-496.
Powell, W. R. (2002). Organizational change models. Futurics, 26(3/4),
20-45.
Rosch, E. (2002, Summer). Lewin's field theory as situated action in
organizational change. Organization Development Journal, 20(2), 8-14.
Schriner, C., Deckelman, S., Kubat, M. A., Lenkay, J., Nims, L., &
Sullivan, D. (2010, November/December). Collaboration of nursing
faculty and college administration in creating organizational change.
Nursing Education Perspectives, 31(6), 381-387.
Wilson, J., & Musick, M. (1992). Who cares? Toward an integrated
theory of volunteer work. Social Forces, 76, 251 – 272.