Volume 6, Issue 2 (Summer 2023)
Iranian Journal of Educational Sociology 2023, 6(2): 63-85 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Tanhayee A, Mojibi T, Gholipour A, Ahmadi M. (2023). Identifying, Quantifying, and Prioritizing the Components of Reducing the Resistance of Managers of Government Organizations in the Administrative Transformation Plan. Iranian Journal of Educational Sociology. 6(2), 63-85. doi:10.61186/ijes.6.2.63
URL: http://iase-idje.ir/article-1-1286-en.html
URL: http://iase-idje.ir/article-1-1286-en.html
1- PhD student in Public Administration, Sari Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sari, Iran
2- Professor, Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran (Corresponding author).
3- Assistant Professor, Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Humanities,Sari Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sari, Iran
4- 4. Assistant Professor, Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Humanities, Sari Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sari, Iran.
2- Professor, Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran (Corresponding author).
3- Assistant Professor, Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Humanities,Sari Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sari, Iran
4- 4. Assistant Professor, Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Humanities, Sari Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sari, Iran.
Abstract: (459 Views)
Purpose: The purpose of the current study was to identify, quantify, and prioritize the components of reducing the resistance of managers of government organizations in the administrative transformation plan.
Methodology: The mixed study method is based on exploratory mixed study. The statistical population in the qualitative section was university professors, managers, and experts of executive systems, in the quantitative section, managers and experts of government agencies, and in the prioritization section, high and middle managers of executive systems of selected organizations. In-depth interviews were used in the qualitative part, while questionnaires were used in the quantitative part, and matrix questionnaires were used in the prioritization one. Acceptability (expert review) and confirmability (expert review) were used to determine the validity and reliability in the qualitative stage, while in the quantitative stage, the validity of the questionnaires was confirmed by three methods: form, content, and structure. Reliability was estimated and confirmed by three methods of determining factor loadings of items, Cronbach's alpha of components (between 0.760 and 0.888) and combined reliability (between 0.842 and 0.923). In the prioritization section, the content of the matrix questionnaire was approved by five academic and organizational experts in terms of comprehensibility and expressiveness, and the rate of inconsistency of the criteria was calculated and confirmed as 0.05 to 0.07. Qualitative data were analyzed with the ground theory technique, while quantitative data with structural equation modeling technique, exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis tests in SPSS and Smart PLS software, and the prioritization section, data were analyzed through hierarchical analysis (AHP) in EXPERT CHOICE software.
Findings: The results of the qualitative part indicated that the paradigm model includes 10 dimensions (categories) and 22 components (concepts) in the form of causal, contextual, interventional, strategy, and consequence conditions.
Conclusion: The results of the quantitative part showed that all the components of the study model were confirmed. The results of the prioritization section show the greater importance of the outcome and organizational productivity component.
Methodology: The mixed study method is based on exploratory mixed study. The statistical population in the qualitative section was university professors, managers, and experts of executive systems, in the quantitative section, managers and experts of government agencies, and in the prioritization section, high and middle managers of executive systems of selected organizations. In-depth interviews were used in the qualitative part, while questionnaires were used in the quantitative part, and matrix questionnaires were used in the prioritization one. Acceptability (expert review) and confirmability (expert review) were used to determine the validity and reliability in the qualitative stage, while in the quantitative stage, the validity of the questionnaires was confirmed by three methods: form, content, and structure. Reliability was estimated and confirmed by three methods of determining factor loadings of items, Cronbach's alpha of components (between 0.760 and 0.888) and combined reliability (between 0.842 and 0.923). In the prioritization section, the content of the matrix questionnaire was approved by five academic and organizational experts in terms of comprehensibility and expressiveness, and the rate of inconsistency of the criteria was calculated and confirmed as 0.05 to 0.07. Qualitative data were analyzed with the ground theory technique, while quantitative data with structural equation modeling technique, exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis tests in SPSS and Smart PLS software, and the prioritization section, data were analyzed through hierarchical analysis (AHP) in EXPERT CHOICE software.
Findings: The results of the qualitative part indicated that the paradigm model includes 10 dimensions (categories) and 22 components (concepts) in the form of causal, contextual, interventional, strategy, and consequence conditions.
Conclusion: The results of the quantitative part showed that all the components of the study model were confirmed. The results of the prioritization section show the greater importance of the outcome and organizational productivity component.
Keywords: Organizational Change, Managers' Resistance to Change, Administrative Transformation Plan.
Type of Study: Research Article |
Subject:
Special
Received: 2023/01/20 | Accepted: 2023/05/13 | Published: 2023/09/1
Received: 2023/01/20 | Accepted: 2023/05/13 | Published: 2023/09/1
References
1. Alfes K, Shantz A. D, Bailey C, Conway E, Monks K, Fu N. (2019). Perceived human resource system strength and employee reactions toward change: Revisiting human resource's remit as change agent. Hum Resour Manage. 58(3): 239-252. [DOI:10.1002/hrm.21948]
2. Alqudah IHA, Carballo-Penela A, Ruzo-Sanmartín E. (2022). High-performance human resource management practices and readiness for change: An integrative model including affective commitment, employees' performance, and the moderating role of hierarchy culture. European study on management and business economics 28: 100177. [DOI:10.1016/j.iedeen.2021.100177]
3. Aslani F, Kohi M, General Khozani M. (1400). Investigating the role of mental models in the process of organizational change (case study of Isfahan medical records office). Management science study. 3(7): 189-174. [Persian]
4. Barani S, Faqihi A, Najaf Bigi R. (2016) Obstacles to the transformation of Iran's administrative system: a study in organizational culture, Public Management Study Publications. 10(36): 5-30. [Persian]
5. Boohene RB, Williams AA. (2012). Resistance to Organisational Change: A case Study of Oti Yeboah Complex Limited. Internatinal Business and Management. 4 (1): 135-145.
6. Corbin JM, Strauss A. (1400). Corbin's principles of qualitative study, methods and procedures for developing grand theory. Translation: Mohammad Ali Chiraghi et al., Andishe Rafi Publications, Tehran.
7. Creswell John W. (1400). Qualitative survey and study design, choosing among five approaches (narrative study, phenomenology, grounded data theory, ethnography, case study). Translation: Hassan Danai Fard and Hossein Kazemi. Eshraghi and Safar Publishing House, Tehran.
8. Dehim J, Ghorbani M, Zindadel A, Akbari A. (2021). Designing and explaining the organizational transformation model in government service organizations with a mixed approach (case study: Iran's education departments). business management. 13(50): 455-480. [Persian]
9. Eftekhari A, Alavizadeh Shirazi S, Thabet Maharloi A. (2013). The relationship between factors affecting resistance to change and change management strategies, International Conference on Accounting and Management, Tehran, Mehr Eshraq Conference Institute, Tehran University Conference Center. [Persian]
10. Farahani A, Azmoun J, Mousavi SM. (2014). The relationship between dimensions of collaborative management and resistance to change in physical education officials. Sports management studies. 29: 233-221. [Persian]
11. Found P. (2015). The effect of resistance in organizational change programmes: A study of a lean transformation. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences.
12. Hadavi-Nejad M, Safi-Khani H. (2015). Exploring the phenomenon of resistance to change in a university using hermeneutic phenomenology. Public administration perspective. 7(4): 111-135. [Persian]
13. Hadavi-Nejad M, Ramezani H. (2015). A phenomenological study of the situational consequences of behavioral resistance against organizational change. Change management study paper. 8(16): 21-39. [Persian]
14. Haffar M, Al-Karaghouli W, Djebarni R, Gbadamosi G. (2017). Organisational culture and TQM implementation: investigating the mediating influences of multidimensional employee readiness for change. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence. 1-22. [DOI:10.1080/14783363.2017.1369352]
15. Hamidianpour F, Arman M, Zarei R. (2013). Investigating factors affecting resistance to change, International Conference on Business Development and Excellence, Tehran. [Persian]
16. Heckmann N, Steger T, Dowling M. (2016). Organizational capacity for change, change experience, and change project performance; Journal of Business Study. 69(2): 777-784. [DOI:10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.07.012]
17. Kianfar F, Daris J. (1400). Analysis of strategic leadership for organizational transformation and employee engagement. Specialized scientific quarterly of new study approaches in management and accounting. 5(52): 183-172. [Persian]
18. Kleanthis KK, Tsirikas AN, Bani SN. (2014). Exploring employees' perceptions, job-related attitudes and characteristics during a planned organizational change, Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management. 9(1): 36-50.
19. Kremer H, Villamor I, Aguinis H. (2019). Innovation leadership: Best-practice recommendations for promoting employee creativity, voice, and knowledge sharing. Business Horizons. 62(1): 65-74. [DOI:10.1016/j.bushor.2018.08.010]
20. Li JY, Sun R, Tao W, Lee Y. (2021). Employee coping with organizational change in the face of a pandemic: The role of transparent internal communication. Public Relations Review. 47: 101984. [DOI:10.1016/j.pubrev.2020.101984] [PMID] []
21. Maddi Mahani H. (2019). The relationship between executive functions and resistance to change among the employees of the administrative department of the welfare organization. Psychology studies and educational sciences. 59: 149-159. [Persian]
22. Nashifar V, Arzamjo H, Taqvi Fard MT. (2014). Designing an integrated model of changes in Iranian organizations using the fuzzy Delphi approach. Human resource management study. 7(2): 266-237. [Persian]
23. Jahanbakhsh O, Darvishpour I. (2009). Effective solutions to reduce resistance to change from the perspective of professors and employees of Islamic Azad University. Scientific journal of education and evaluation (quarterly). 2(8): 167-149. [Persian]
24. Rezazadeh F. (2016). Management of change and transformation of the improvement and growth strategy in government organizations. Specialized scientific-educational monthly magazine of Tadbir management. 27(292): 9-4. [Persian]
25. Sabouri S, Sabouri MR. (2015). Investigating the causes of employees' resistance to organizational change and transformation, International Congress of Community Empowerment in the field of Management, Economics, Entrepreneurship and Cultural Engineering, Tehran. [Persian]
26. Safuwan S. (2015). reactions to planned organizational change: the review of resistance behavior
27. UPM-sage Publications Young Writer's Award 2015 Papers. 191 - 213.
28. Salari B. (2021). The relationship of resistance to change with job satisfaction and organizational performance of Khaf education employees during the epidemic of the epidemic of covid-19. Applied study es in management and humanities. 2(2): 40-30. [Persian]
29. Sana B, Habibi N. (2022). Management of change and transformation and effective solutions to prevent and reduce the resistance and stress of employees against organizational change. Management, tourism and transformation. 4: 1-20. [Persian]
30. Soleimani V, Sharifi P. (2013). Investigating the effective causes of individual resistance to organizational changes, the second international conference on managing challenges and solutions, Shiraz, Hamish Nagar Scientific Conference Center. [Persian]
31. Stanleigh M. (2019). Effecting successful change management Initiatives, Industrial and ommercial Training. 40(1): 34-37. [Persian] [DOI:10.1108/00197850810841620]
32. Vakilpour M, Sharifzadeh F, Salehi Sedkiani J, Golafshani S H. (2018). Designing the transformation model of Iran's administrative system from the perspective of cultural policies. Strategic scientific quarterly. 28(2): 166-141. [Persian]
33. Van der Voet J. (2014). The effectiveness and specificity of change management in a public organization: Transformational leadership and a bureaucratic organizational structure. European Management Journal 32 : 373-382. [DOI:10.1016/j.emj.2013.10.001]
34. Vedel J. B, Kokshagina O. (2021). How firms undertake organizational changes to shift to more-exploratory strategies: A process perspective. Study Policy 50: 104118. [DOI:10.1016/j.respol.2020.104118]
35. Weber E, Buttgen M, Bartsch S. (2022). How to take employees on the digital transformation journey: An experimental study on complementary leadership behaviors in managing organizational change. Journal of Business Study. 143:238-225. [DOI:10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.01.036]
36. Yazdipour M, Saboni H. (2021). Examining the evolution and organizational changes and its relationship with organizational communication and the degree of optimal changeability of employees (case study: Caspian Pharmaceutical Company). Study progress and excellence. 7: 14-29. [Persian]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
.jpg)
