Fort Hays State University Fort Hays State University
FHSU Scholars Repository FHSU Scholars Repository
Management Faculty Publications Management
10-30-2020
Towards a model and strategy for transformational change Towards a model and strategy for transformational change
Abeni El-Amin Ph.D.
Fort Hays State University
Babu George
Christian Brothers University
Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.fhsu.edu/management_facpubs
Part of the Strategic Management Policy Commons
Recommended Citation Recommended Citation
El-Amin, A., & George, B. (2020). Towards a model and strategy for transformational change. Economics,
Management and Sustainability, 5(2), 28-38. doi:10.14254/jems.2020.5-2.2.
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Management at FHSU Scholars Repository. It has
been accepted for inclusion in Management Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of FHSU Scholars
Repository.
Economics, Management and Sustainability
ǣǣȀȀǤǤ
Ǧǡ ǤǡƬ ǡǤ ȋʹͲʹͲȌǤǤ
Economics, Management and Sustainability, 5ȋʹȌǡ ʹͺǦ͵ͺǤǣͳͲǤͳͶʹͷͶȀǤʹͲʹͲǤͷǦʹǤʹǤ
ISSN 2520-6303
ǣBabu George
Ǧǣ[email protected]u
ȋǦȌͶǤͲǤ
‹ 28 ›
Scientific Platform
Towards a model and strategy for transformational
change
Abeni El-Amin * , Babu George **
* Fort Hays State University, Hays, Kansas, USA
** Christian Brothers University, Memphis, TN, USA
Abstractǣ
ǣǫ
ǫ
ǫ
Ǥ ǡ
Ǥ ǡ
ǣ
Ǥ
ǡ ǡ
Ǥ
Ǥ
Keywords: ǡ ǡ ǡ
ǡǤ
Article history:
ǣ ͳʹǡʹͲʹͲ
ͳǣ ͳʹǡ
ʹͲʹͲ
ǣ ͵Ͳǡ
ʹͲʹͲ
JEL classification:
ͳ
͵͵
ͳͳ
DOI:
ͳͲǤͳͶʹͷͶȀǤʹͲʹͲǤͷǦʹǤʹ
1. Introduction
ǡ ǡ
ȋǡǡƬǡʹͲͲͺȌǤǡ
ǡǡ
ȋǡʹͲͳʹȌǤǡǡ
Ǥ ǡ
Ǥ ǡ
Ǥ
ǡȋƬǡʹͲͲȌǤǡǦ
ǡǦ
ȋǡ ʹͲͳʹȌǤ
Ǥ
Ǥ ǡ
ISSN 2520-6303 Economics, Management and Sustainability, 5(2), 2020
‹ 29 ›
need in the promotion of leadership (Barsh, Capozzi, & Davidson, 2008). There is a dichotomy
between innovative leadership agendas and traditional leadership initiatives. For instance, Uhl-Bien
and Arena (2018) expanded the research on leadership evaluation from a strategic management
perspective. They examined whether the use of the organizational methodology approach can enable
effective delivery of leadership strategies, thus strengthening the link between leadership and
organizational goals. Action research methodology is the base of the research. The research findings
indicated that organizational methodologies allow visualization of a clearly focused and internally
consistent map of cause and effect relationships. Turning practical leadership efforts into strategic
results, while adequately supporting leadership functions both in managing leadership processes
and in delivering targeted organizational outcomes is the mark of constructive leadership. Offering a
specific set of critical measures for evaluating leadership performance, and permits the fostering of
alignment between leadership program objectives and functional goals.
Change management initiatives must accommodate adherents or followers based on
organizational capabilities and chosen a change management framework. Leaders should utilize a
multitude of change management activities and provide adherents or followers with assistance as
they become more proficient using change management processes (i.e., Kotter's Eight Steps or
Lewin's Theory of Planned Change) (Kotter, 2012; Shirey, 2013). These frameworks and models offer
valid explanations of why leading with one style is counterintuitive. The use of one or more change
management style instruments should be given to adherents or followers so leaders can better
develop their change management strategy. Change management style instruments help adherents,
and other stakeholders consider the depth of change management possibilities.
Extant literature on leadership and change presents a coherent set of strategies to lead
transformational change. It begins by highlighting the role of vision as something setting the scene
for a change. Then, the role of servant leadership as a change agent and the roles of training and
development as change enablers present opportunities for reflection. With these as the basis, a model
for transformational change management and strategies for implementing change ensues.
2. Setting the scene for change
To remain a salient competitor in business, organizations must adjust quickly to changing
business conditions (Kotter, 2012). Thus, change management assumes an important function, which
organizations and professionals regularly apply to organizational change initiatives when planning
and executing change endeavors. Similarly, resistance from change creates a positive perspective,
which implies that it is considered an opportunity as opposed to a hindrance (Solano & Preuß, 2019).
Consequently, this adjusted change model conception incorporates leadership approaches
disregarded in Kotter's change models. For instance, novel leadership communication strategy is
distinct among female and male leaders, which indicates differences in how vision ensues
communicative form during the process (Şahin, Gürbüz, & Şeşen, 2017). Out of this knowledge, an
alternative or coinciding change model to that of Kotter (2012) deals with the dynamics of leadership.
Regardless of how a leader proceeds with change management, the process of change needs a
verified model to make a needed change within an organization. As a result, present change
management frameworks for small to medium enterprises (SMEs), utilize existing frameworks in
light of professional endorsement from logical perspectives in effectively dealing with change
management programs (Rajan & Ganesan, 2017). Likewise, suggestions for improving this
framework expand the knowledge of change management leaders and practitioners across various
business types concerning communicating the vision for change. Propositions to improve upon this
model include making comparable analyses across various organizations and noting how other
leaders execute their change management initiatives.
The outcomes recommended indicating that there must be a need for change, which intercedes
the connection between leadership vision and organizational development (Haque, TitiAmayah, &
Liu, 2016). Likewise, there is an immediate effect of how leaders communicate the need for change
and subsequent actions to initiate change within organizational development strategy. Initially, the
need for change may not necessarily connect with organizational development or the connection
between vision communication at the time. Yet, it is how leaders begin the discussion leading to the
implementation of change initiatives that makes the process easier. From a theoretical perspective,
dissecting the connection between organizational vision and the need for organizational change
enhances the command of leaders within the organizational change process, and this way improves
ISSN 2520-6303 Economics, Management and Sustainability, 5(2), 2020
‹ 30 ›
organizational execution and development. Moreover, the significant role of employees' support
within the change process is an invaluable asset to attain organizational goals.
In perspective, Kotter's (2012) methodology provides guiding principles about how
transformational leaders can execute change within organizations. Primarily, individuals and the
procedural parts of change become the dominant focal point within a change management strategy;
a need for change disrupts the status quo within the organization, and individuals need to be part of
the change process for change to be sustainable (Page & Schoder, 2019). By including others,
commitment and empowerment expand the ability of leaders to make lasting change. Last, a change
lasts in the event when linked with organizational structures and strategy.
The importance of providing vision in an organization means to communicate information
regarding education strategy to stakeholders. It can be challenging for leaders to be transparent
when communicating with stakeholders and clients because some information is too complicated.
Yet, leaders much find a way to connect to their followers. Moreover, while email or virtual
technology has its benefits, it's not the best communication method. There are times when a leader
must provide personal interaction to rally support. Person-to-person presentations are the most
effective manner to communicate (Markovic & Salamzadeh, 2018). Regarding a change management
strategy, the leader's role is of great importance in inspiring stakeholders and creating a productive
working environment (Kotter, 2012). Utilizing vision initiatives and assessing organizational issues
in context are viable mechanisms to improve interactions in organizations.
Creating a vision is about directing support to galvanize one's initiatives. Finding ways to
encourage others inspires the vision as visions provide a framework of what the future holds for the
organization (Kotter, 2012). Creating a vision that is relatively simple to convey offers stakeholders
an efficient way to process concepts. Most importantly, stakeholders cannot grasp onto a vision they
do not understand. Visions developed with a long-term strategic focus are a key indicator or
performance. A vision communicates the direction an organization needs to take. In doing so, the
vision develops by a leader. Visions are developed over time, using a methodological approach
(Kotter, 2012). Without a reasonable vision, mismanaged organizational resources become the norm,
stakeholders become confused about the direction of the organization, and initiatives of the
organization tend to fail or become unsustainable (Chappell, Pescud, Waterworth, Shilton, Roche,
Ledger, & Rosenberg, 2016). In failed organizations, there are often several plans, proposals, and
programs; however, a formulated vision has yet to occur. The overall objective must be to provide
the team with a vision of how their cumulative efforts result in success.
3. Barriers to organizational change
There exists a gap in leadership knowledge of how to execute change management initiatives
(Easdale, 2001). From this perspective, there appears to be a decay in social capital (Putnam, 2012).
Analyzing the organization between business leadership style and consequences for social capital
spotlights on leadership advancement. Servant leadership as a leadership style may influence social
capital (Greenleaf, 1970). Articulation is a technique in which four principle practices connect
different viewpoints of servant leadership: leadership style, community, service, and how power is
exercised (Easdale, 2001). Finally, outcomes demonstrate that an organization that constructs social
capital, both internally and externally, serves the most important needs of its staff while additionally
impacting its external alliances.
Moreover, people resist change because of the fear of the unknown. Some leaders experience
that driving change fast creates confusion and anxiety. To learn about an organization, new leaders
must ask questions to extant stakeholders and chart plans in 18-24 months or more instead of 6-12
months. In the end, as a leader, the most important lessons is what difference if a change takes place
in 6 months or 24 months if there is no exacting need? The most important vehicle is building
community, trust, and lasting change. A quickly contrived or innovative change falls short if a leader's
stakeholders’ are not on board as they resist change, and generally, the organizational environment
becomes shaded by ambition, instead of service
Organizations have found innovative ways to mitigate and/or counter staff and volunteer
resistance to organizational or program changes by reducing or streamlining processes to
accomplish more effective work across teams and departments. For example, agencies establish
improved volunteer processes such as volunteer on-boarding, post-hire evaluations/meetings, and
train/re-training. Aspects such as these are incorporated to inspire a renewed energy for
organization-volunteer relations. Likewise, incorporating a Mentorship Program to acclimate new
ISSN 2520-6303 Economics, Management and Sustainability, 5(2), 2020
‹ 31 ›
volunteers to organizational climate properly is ideal. Additionally, processes added to hold
stakeholders (administration, staff, volunteers, Board Members) accountable to volunteer initiatives
increase connective organizational culture. These processes are often different from what some
organizations have done in the past, so this different manner of doing things takes time to organize
and accept by stakeholders of the organization. Last, the most inspiring story of successful change is
when there is buy-in from stakeholders.
Blanchard (2018) indicated that the change process has four distinct stages: discovery,
immersion, alignment, and refinement. Besides, critical success factors for cultural transformation
are acknowledged by organizations that effectively develop high performing, values-adjusted
organizations and propose five fundamental success factors. For instance, senior leadership must
exhibit the senior leadership group must advocate a commitment to the long-term process as the
change process culture. Leaders are held to high standards as the qualities are characterized and
imparted by them. Cultural transformation is a systematic endeavor that never changes as leadership
sets the stage to embrace an innovative organizational culture. Organizational culture is the critical
process that makes desired practices observable, tangible, and measurable; Responsibility for
conveying guaranteed performance practices is fundamental. The results must be quick and
consistent. Positive ramifications for meeting execution and qualities requirements extol
interpretation, demonstration, and establishment based upon adverse outcomes. Results must be
applied when implementation is below standards or esteemed practices not exemplified.
It is crucial that all staff who are associated with and buy-in to change management strategies
at each stage. This process need not be linked with management by announcements, where leaders
communicate new directions yet do not welcome feedback from staff. For staff to envision the ideal
culture, they should be part of the process. Staff should help depict and apply what the new culture
demands of them in their roles; Change must coincide with management initiatives in the scope of
change activities. Most importantly, leaders must not attempt to change the whole organization at
one time. They should begin with a distinct part of the organization (an office, division, plant, or local
office) to figure out how the process flows. At that point, because of knowledge gained, they may
choose another part of the organization, and lead the change process until all parts of the
organization change.
Servant leadership is a widely accepted leadership style (Blanchard, 2018). While an
instinctively exciting idea, it is methodically indistinct and not yet supported by present research
(Cinite & Duxbury, 2018). Servant leadership is a hypothetical structure that executed to develop
influential organizations. This development is necessary for classifying and assessing the practical
nature and qualities of servant leaders. When well-organized, a progressive servant leadership
quality model evolves (Russell and Stone, 2002).
Further, Cinite and Duxbury (2018) demonstrated that staff most often resist change by
voicing their concerns about change. Second, the staff who are focused on the change are most likely
to voice their concerns to their superiors within the chain of command.
4. Change that serves, get their support: Servant leadership as change agent
Greenleaf defined the servant-leader as follows: "The servant-leader is servant first... It begins
with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first." Greenleaf (1970). Meanwhile,
Greenleaf portrayed a way of thinking, not a hypothesis. In any case, in light of the perspectives of
various practitioners, the components that are nuanced to servant leadership are contrasted.
Different hypotheses contend moral aspects, not just regarding individual morality and propriety of
the servant-leader, but by how a servant-leader empowers improved moral behavior among their
adherents. In this manner, test the moral premise of the servant-leader's visions and organizational
goals. The focus on serving supporters to their benefit, not merely the good of the organization, and
framing long-term associations with devotees, empowering their development and advancement are
goals of servant leaders. Achieving leadership potential requires servant leaders who are concerned
with the success of all stakeholders, broadly defined; 'employees, customers, business partners,
communities, and society as a whole, including those who are the least privileged. Self-reflection,' as
a counter to the leader's ego or self-confidence, develops out of the need to support stakeholders
(Greenleaf, 1970).
Servant leadership, a conjectured leadership model where the moral ethics of humility
coincides with interest-driven conduct. Sousa and van Dierendonck (2017) postulated an analysis
that determined how these two paradoxical aspects of servant leadership interact in generating
ISSN 2520-6303 Economics, Management and Sustainability, 5(2), 2020
‹ 32 ›
adherent engagement while considering the hierarchical power of the leader as a contingency
variable. They found that unassuming leaders demonstrated the most empowering effects on
adherent commitment regardless of their position. Less unassuming leaders in lower leveled
positions can compensate through a resilient action-oriented leadership style. Most eminently for
leaders in hierarchical positions, humility appears to reinforce the impact of their behavior as action-
oriented leaders the most. These findings offer an understanding of the transaction between the
moral ethics of humility and the action-oriented practices of servant leaders (Sousa & van
Dierendonck, 2017).
Further, while applying servant leadership, it has two aspects: vision and implementation. In
the visionary role, leaders typify the direction. They must outline and convey organization needs
(Blanchard, 2018). Next, the implementation stage is categorized by purposeful conduct to drive
servant culture. Subsequently, great leaders urge adherents to bring their full being to work as
implementation is impacted the most. Two types of leadership develop strategic leadership and
operational leadership (Blanchard, 2018).
Strategic leadership is the "what" that guarantees everybody is going in a similar direction. It
is a response to the inquiry, "What is the purpose of the business?" Strategic leadership incorporates
action, to develop a definite vision, maintaining a culture adapts its qualities to that vision, and
communicating activities or strategic imperatives the organization needs to achieve. Strategic
leadership is about the vision and direction aspect of servant leadership (Blanchard, 2018). Also,
operational leadership is everything else. It gives the "how" for the organization. It incorporates the
approaches, strategies, frameworks, and leadership practices that progress from senior leadership
to staff. These leaders create an environment that staff and clients associate with and react to
consistently. Operational leadership is about the execution aspects of leadership or the servant part
of servant leadership.
Additionally, being a servant leader is an issue of the heart. Servant leaders lead with hearts
encouraged without self-interest of motivation, security, and status. Leaders delight in the success of
those around them.
While some leaders are driven, others are called into leadership. Self-serving leaders surface
in two different ways (Blanchard, 2018). The first is how they gain feedback. A subsequent indication
is that self-serving leadership is reluctant to develop different leaders around them. They fear the
potential rivalry for their leadership position. Though called leaders have hearts of a servant, and
they welcome feedback. They know they are driven to serve, and if anyone has recommendations on
how leaders can serve better, they want to hear them. They receive this input as a blessing. Servant
leadership is about taking individuals from one position to the next. The significance of having a
convincing vision cannot be underestimated. When a practical vision is developed, goals and
procedures can be formed to establish the vision. Transformational leadership endeavors emerge
from self-leadership to one-on-one leadership, to group leadership, to organizational leadership. As
a leader, when the vision and direction are set, they need to flip the hierarchical pyramid and focus
on goals as defined by the vision. Finally, trust is fundamental to the leader-follower relationship.
Trusting leaders empower adherents, which can lead to a more significant commitment to the
organization and the leader (Davis, 2017).
Professionals must continuously reinvent themselves; continuous improvement is necessary
for professionals as changing business demands require professionals to stay current with the latest
industry knowledge. Dean and Bowen (1994) conveyed that knowledge acquisition could be
enhanced by incorporating some insights into continuous improvement into management theory.
Moreover, management practice could be improved by incorporating continuous improvement to
improve leadership training and development initiatives. More professionals should incorporate
continuous improvement theory into career plans. In the field of educational leadership, compliance
and regulation require leaders to stay informed of regulatory and budgetary policies affecting
institutions. Just as the information is essential, so is the training necessary to execute policies. In this
light, institutions must ensure that leaders have the support needed to acquiesce.
Incorporating leadership principals lends to the overall notions of why servant leadership is
an excellent management tool. As such, servant leadership constitutes a contemporary instructive
theory of leadership, which emphasizes the use of the heart in professional practices, as such, the
follower-leader interaction both internally and externally and within the organization (Gandolfi &
Stone, 2018). Using the heart is essential in communication to build rapport and trust with others.
Heart-based communication is deeply rooted by the emphasis on other fields and cognitive
disciplines that embrace servant leadership (Abu Bakar & McCann, 2016). Servant leadership
ISSN 2520-6303 Economics, Management and Sustainability, 5(2), 2020
‹ 33 ›
execution is respected by followers, is an impetus for collaboration, and is progressive as a
management tool. In practice, providing followers with a servant leader in organizations engages
follower motivation. Organizations that include servant leadership practices become alive with spirit
when followers incorporate servant leadership culture into their daily work.
5. Training and development as change enablers
If servant leadership is a significant change agent, training and development are also equally
essential to change management. Making the change sustainable is espoused via an emphasis on
training and development. As such, pragmatic learning methodologies should be considered when
developing organizational change management training. Scaffold and Eddy (2006) presented the
idea of an organizational change management methodology to utilize andragogy. Organizational
training and development benefits are that it differs from traditional learning methodologies.
Organizational change management is an articulation of what needs to be assessed and altered within
an organization. As a result, organizational change management can be used in most disciplines
(Kasworm, Rose, & Ross-Gordon, 2010). Organizational change management learning methodologies
offer some valuable learning approaches, such as the utilization of various engagement applications
such as apps, slide decks, video, mp3, mp4, sound bites, graphic designs, and e-learning (Binkley,
Erstad, Herman, Raizen, Ripley, Miller-Ricci, & Rumble, 2012; Steiner, Albert, & Heller, 2007).
While incorporating dynamic learning methodologies is an additional facet to creating
engaging presentations, one must evaluate the significance of utilizing a variety of learning
methodologies in organizational change management. While a majority of surveys affirm the
satisfaction of training and development in different organizations, there is debate regarding the full
utilization of information after a training program (Steiner, Albert, & Heller, 2007). For example, the
selection of learning methodologies in organizational change management imparts adequacy of
training content to improve employee's capabilities. Additional benefits of training and development
are assisting organizations in comprehending the skills of instructors in engaging employees in
learning. Training and development offer instructors alternative and adaptable instructional
methods, which are highly valuable with different learning styles (Cheng, Wang, Yang, & Peng, 2011).
While innovation can empower employees and instructors, adaptable instructional methods are
supported and expressed through innovative practices.
When planning for training effectiveness, financial, cultural, and social changes experienced
by organizations determine training and development procedures in change management
endeavors. In progressive working environments, the abilities and skills of employees can quickly
become obsolete, and thus, employees must consistently train to maintain competitiveness in the
global organization. On the other hand, traditional models of training and development both inside
and outside of the organization environment have created inconsistent organizational change
management practices. Before the advent of systematic training and development practices in
employee development programs, unfocused training environments were the norm (Billett, 2010).
Moreover, these aspects of the training were unorganized. Little focus on the overall mission of the
organization or consideration of the employee's capabilities past their existing roles often occurs. As
such, these environments create versatile training programs, useful, and epistemologically sound
practices.
Halverson and Sheridan (2014) portrayed the underlying foundations of the development of
formal training and development methods. Moreover, the Human Resource Manager's (HRM) goal is
to provide managerial execution through training and development practices and management of
organizational information. HRM methodologies result in better training through training and
development, leadership advancement, and adds to accomplishing leadership execution (Halverson
& Sheridan, 2014). Leadership support for training and development programs enhances its ability
to improve human resource capacity. Leadership development adds to the foundation of
improvement; therefore, employment organizations should utilize organizational change
management to improve training standards. These findings are particularly valuable for executives,
HRM managers, and training departments (Kuo, 2011). Further, innovative organizational change
management curriculum design utilizes tools to engage audiences. Notwithstanding, the role of
training and development in change management programs establishes permanency because
employment training develops leadership skills in employees, while simultaneously provides
evaluation metrics to demonstrate training effectiveness within change management initiatives
(Greller & Drachsler, 2012; Manuti, Pastore, Scardigno, Giancaspro, & Morciano, 2015).
ISSN 2520-6303 Economics, Management and Sustainability, 5(2), 2020
‹ 34 ›
6. Transformational change management
Each organization is unique, and each transformation initiative different. However, the
objective of any transformation is a sustainable improvement regarding a change in an organization's
development. Characterizing a transformation indicates different components of leadership
decisions (Kotter, 2012). It underscores, for example, the significance of improvement, establishing
a platform, and profit utilization. Therefore, leaders must consider a framework to initiate
organizational change. For instance, Kotter (2012) expressed an eight-step process for successful
change management to create urgency, form a powerful coalition, create a vision for change,
communicate the vision, remove obstacles, create short-term wins, build on the change, and anchor
the changes in corporate culture. As a result, leaders must routinely consider methods of execution
for organizational wellbeing.
Further, Dent and Goldberg (1999) found that one of the most generally acknowledged
conceptual models that drive hierarchical performance is the possibility there is protection from
change and that supervisors must be the only group responsible for the change. This psychological
model is typically held by staff at all levels, interferes with effective change. The one constant is that
change is persistent. Moreover, before Kotter, Kurt Lewin presented change management as a
framework and a powerful mechanism for leaders and staff similarly (Woodward & Hendry, 2004).
Since the broad acceptance of a change model, professionals and academics alike have confounded
the comprehension of change components. Consequently, some have gone so far as to relinquish the
term change management and instead opt for less stressful terminology such as organizational
development. This typifies a path for increasingly valuable models of change lexicon.
7. Leadership strategies for transformational change
The following five change management leadership strategies and their outcomes describe an
effective process for leading change (Blanchard, 2012).
Strategy 1: Expand Involvement and Influence
(Outcome: Buy-In) By involving stakeholders in decision making about the change, leaders
significantly increase the probability that the change is successfully implemented. Stakeholders are
less likely to resist change when they have been involved in creating change.
Strategy 2: Explain Why the Change Is Needed
(Outcome: Compelling Case for Change) This strategy addresses information concerns. When
leaders present and explain a rational reason for the change, the outcome is a compelling case that
helps stakeholders understand the change being proposed, the rationale for the change, and the
reason the status quo is no longer a viable option.
Strategy 3: Collaborate on Implementation
(Outcome: The Right Resources and Infrastructure) When leaders engage others in planning
and piloting the change, they encourage collaboration in identifying the right resources and building
the infrastructure needed to support the change.
Strategy 4: Make the Change Sustainable
(Outcome: Sustainable Results) Rather than simply announcing the change, leaders must
make the change sustainable by providing stakeholders with the new skills, tools, and resources
required to support the change. By modeling the behavior they expect of others, measuring
performance, and praising progress, leaders create conditions for accountability and good results.
Strategy 5: Explore Possibilities
(Outcome: Options) Possibilities and options should be explored before a specific change is
chosen. By involving others in exploring possibilities, you immediately lower information concerns
when a new change is announced, because stakeholders are "in the loop" about deciding what needs
to change. To summarize, organizations should spend more energy reinforcing the change they just
made than looking for the next great change to implement.
ISSN 2520-6303 Economics, Management and Sustainability, 5(2), 2020
‹ 35 ›
8. Concluding remarks
The change process connects theory to the field of change management. Change management
acumen in the field of organizational management is an important core competency, which is derived
from organizational focus and change management strategy, which enables professionals to create
significant improvements in management (Webber & Scott, 2008). As a leader in instruction and
management, one will become so by creating processes to address organizational problems as well
as more abstract technical issues that occur in organizations (Baltaci & Balcı, 2017). The ability to
bring innovative ideas and processes to light leads to better management of organizational initiatives
(Hosseini, Kees, Manderscheid, Röglinger, & Rosemann, 2017). As a result, core competencies
learned are best utilized by conceptualizing, initiating, leading, organizing, delegating, and executing
plans when necessitated.
As such, Harris (2019) contended that freedom of intellectualism is needed in organizations.
Greater attention must be given to the examination of change management in organizational
development. That is, staff must be provided an opportunity in the change management process to
conjecture without fear of reproach. This is concurrent with change management theories within the
field, which indicate that leaders should not seek to limit unpopular perspectives of staff (Harris,
2019). A good leader is open to both positive and negative critique and uses this information to make
decisions. From an organizational perspective, organizations typically adopt a divisional structure
(Manning, 2017). In doing so, they have created the kind of structure which provides leaders a way
to systematically work through issues of each unit to sustain, improve, and develop new programs,
thereby achieving organizational change (Kurtz & Berston, 2019).
Given the sizable and complex nature of many organizations, an appreciation of how to lead in
this environment is important. Therefore, as a leader, the objective is to assist the organization in
succeeding in a precipitously changing environment (Thoms & Burton, 2016). Hence, a change
management mindset is critical (Ho, Salleh, & Chua, 2019). While organizations are ultimately driven
by demand, they also have to deal with economic, technological, socio-cultural, and environmental
concerns. Governmental policy and global competition are also chief influences when recruiting,
admitting, educating, supporting, and retaining students. As a result, the traditional roles of leaders
have been redefined (Jacob & Gokbel, 2018). Currently, the objective is to provide solutions and
strategies to predict an uncertain future. Meaningful contributions are made in areas such as
designing a vision for the institution, managing resources effectively and engaging in dialogues that
reflect diverse viewpoints of all stakeholders to foster a spirit of advancement (Howard, O'Brien, Kay,
& O'Rourke, 2019). Keeping stakeholders engaged in the process of changing demands is vital to
sustainability.
Intentional evaluation helps leaders understand organizational assets and strategic
capabilities, as well as the expectations of all stakeholders. Through deliberate analysis, leaders
create methodical change management plans, indicate a direction, increase the span of independence
and accountability of employees, and help improve the competitiveness of organizations (Ho, Salleh,
& Chua, 2019). Certainly, the advantages of management lie in the ability of leaders to incorporate
change management strategies to improve upon the capacity of organizations to work better with its
stakeholders, provide excellent services, expand demand capacity, express brand awareness, and
demonstrate a commitment to corporate social responsibility (CSR) (Albliwi, Antony, & Lim, 2015).
Finally, it is important to connect change management opportunities to present realities. Today's
professional operates in a global environment, and the ability to apply these concepts improves the
discipline of leadership.
Appendix A. Supplementary material
Supplementary data associated with this article can be found, in the online version, at
https://doi.org/10.14254/jems.2020.5-2.2
Citation information
El-Amin, A., & George, B. (2020). Towards a model and strategy for transformational change.
Economics, Management and Sustainability, 5(2), 28-38. doi:10.14254/jems.2020.5-2.2.
ISSN 2520-6303 Economics, Management and Sustainability, 5(2), 2020
‹ 36 ›
References
Abu Bakar, H., & McCann, R. M. (2016). The mediating effect of leader-member dyadic communication
style agreement on the relationship between servant leadership and group-level
organizational citizenship behavior. Management Communication Quarterly, 30(1), 32-58.
Albliwi, S. A., Antony, J., & Lim, S. A. H. (2015). A systematic review of Lean Six Sigma for the
manufacturing industry. Business Process Management Journal, 21(3), 665-691.
Alfaro Solano, M. J., & Preuß, M. (2019). An alternative approach on resistance to change and
leadership and its resulting development of Kotter’s change models.
Baltaci, A., & Balcı, A. (2017). Complexity change management: A theoretical
perspective. International Journal of Educational Change management and Management, 5(1),
30-58.
Barsh, J., Capozzi, M. M., & Davidson, J. (2008). Leadership and innovation. McKinsey Quarterly, 1, 36.
Billett, S. (2010). The practices of learning through occupations. In Learning through practice (pp.
59-81). Springer, Dordrecht.
Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., Miller-Ricci, M., & Rumble, M. (2012). Defining
twenty-first-century skills. In Assessment and teaching of 21st-century skills (pp. 17-66).
Springer, Dordrecht.
Blanchard, K. (2012). 5 Strategies for surfacing and resolving concerns about
change. https://leaderchat.org/2020/02/20/5-strategies-for-surfacing-and-resolving-
concerns-about-change/
Blanchard, K. (2018). Leading at a higher level: Blanchard on leadership and creating high performing
organizations. FT Press.
Chappell, S., Pescud, M., Waterworth, P., Shilton, T., Roche, D., Ledger, M., ... & Rosenberg, M. (2016).
Exploring the process of implementing healthy workplace initiatives: Mapping to Kotter's
leading change model. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 58(10), e341-
e348.
Cheng, B., Wang, M., Yang, S. J., & Peng, J. (2011). Acceptance of competency-based workplace e-
learning systems: Effects of individual and peer learning support. Computers &
Education, 57(1), 1317-1333.
Cinite, I., & Duxbury, L. E. (2018). Measuring the behavioral properties of commitment and resistance
to organizational change. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 54(2), 113-139.
Davis, N. (2017). Review of followership theory and servant leadership theory: Understanding how
servant leadership informs followership. In Servant Leadership and Followership (pp. 207-
223). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
Dean, Jr, J. W., & Bowen, D. E. (1994). Management theory and continuous improvement: Improving
research and practice through theory development. Academy of management review, 19(3),
392-418.
Dent, E. B., & Goldberg, S. G. (1999). Challenging "resistance to change." The Journal of applied
behavioral science, 35(1), 25-41.
Easdale, D. (2017). Serving from the center: Servant leadership and social capital.
Gandolfi, F., & Stone, S. (2018). Leadership, leadership styles, and servant leadership. Journal of
Management Research, 18(4), 261-269.
Gilley, A., Dixon, P., & Gilley, J. W. (2008). Characteristics of leadership effectiveness: Implementing
change and driving innovation in organizations. Human Resource Development
Quarterly, 19(2), 153-169.
Greenleaf, R.K. (1970). The servant as leader. Indianapolis, IN. Robert K. Greenleaf Center.
Halverson, E. R., & Sheridan, K. (2014). The maker movement in education.
ISSN 2520-6303 Economics, Management and Sustainability, 5(2), 2020
‹ 37 ›
Harvard Educational Review, 84(4), 495-504.
Greller, W., & Drachsler, H. (2012). Translating learning into numbers: A generic framework
for learning analytics. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 15(3), 42.
Haque, M. D., TitiAmayah, A., & Liu, L. (2016). The role of vision in organizational readiness for change
and growth. Leadership & Organization Development Journal.
Ho, J. M., Salleh, H., & Chua, P. H. (2019). Local evidence synthesis on school change management:
Volume 2.
Hosseini, S., Kees, A., Manderscheid, J., Röglinger, M., & Rosemann, M. (2017). What does it take to
implement open innovation? Towards an integrated capability framework. Business Process
Management Journal.
Howard, P., O'Brien, C., Kay, B., & O'Rourke, K. (2019). Leading educational change in the 21st
century: Creating living schools through a shared vision and transformative governance.
Sustainability, 11(15), 4109.
Isern, J., & Pung, C. (2007). Driving radical change. McKinsey Quarterly, 4, 24.
Jacob, W. J., & Gokbel, V. (2018). Global higher education learning outcomes and financial trends:
Comparative and innovative approaches. International Journal of Educational
Development, 58, 5-17.
Kasworm, C. E., Rose, A. D., & Ross-Gordon, J. M. (2010). Handbook of adult and
continuing education. American Association for Adult and Continuing Education. Los Angeles:
SAGE.
Kotter, J. P. (2012). Leading change. Harvard business press.
Kurtz, D. L., & Berston, S. (2019). Contemporary business. John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated.
Kuo, T. H. (2011). How to improve organizational performance through learning
and knowledge? International Journal of Manpower, 32(5/6), 581-603.
Manning, K. (2017). Organizational theory in higher education. Routledge.
Manuti, A., Pastore, S., Scardigno, A. F., Giancaspro, M. L., & Morciano, D. (2015). Formal and informal
learning in the workplace: a research review. International journal of training and
development, 19(1), 1-17.
Markovic, M. R., & Salamzadeh, A. (2018). The importance of communication in business
management. Business Management, Entrepreneurship, and Entrepreneurial Tendencies.
Page, L., & Schoder, J. (2019). Making change last: leadership is the key. Journal of Business Strategy.
Putnam, R. (2001). Social capital: Measurement and consequences. Canadian journal of policy
research, 2(1), 41-51.
Rajan, R., & Ganesan, R. (2017). A critical analysis of John P. Kotter's change management
framework. Asian Journal of Research in Business Economics and Management, 7(7),
181-203.
Russell, R. F., & Stone, A. G. (2002). A review of servant leadership attributes: Developing a practical
model. Leadership & Organization Development Journal.
Şahin, F., Gürbüz, S., & Şeşen, H. (2017). Leaders' managerial assumptions and transformational
leadership: the moderating role of gender. Leadership & Organization Development Journal.
Shirey, M. R. (2013). Lewin’s theory of planned change as a strategic resource. JONA: The Journal of
Nursing Administration, 43(2), 69-72.
Sousa, M., & van Dierendonck, D. (2017). Servant leadership and the effect of the interaction between
humility, action, and hierarchical power on follower engagement. Journal of Business
Ethics, 141(1), 13-25.
ʹͷʹͲǦ͵Ͳ͵ Economics, Management and Sustainability, 5ȋʹȌǡ ʹͲʹͲ
‹ 38 ›
ǡǤǤǡǡǤǡƬǡǤȋʹͲͲȌǤ ǦǤ Adult
principles of effective e-learning, 59-111.
ǡǤǤǡƬǡǤǤȋʹͲͳȌǤǡǡǣ
Ǥ International Journal of Adult Vocational Education and
Technology (IJAVET), 7ȋͶȌǡͺͷǦͳͲͶǤ
ǦǡǤǡƬǡǤȋʹͲͳͺȌǤǣ
Ǥ The Leadership Quarterly, 29ȋͳȌǡͺͻǦͳͲͶǤ
Webber, C. F., & Scott, S. (2008). Evidence‐based chang ǣ Ͷ
Ǥ Journal of Educational Administration.
ǡ Ǥǡ Ƭ ǡ Ǥ ȋʹͲͲͶȌǤ Ǥ Journal of Change
Management, 4ȋʹȌǡͳͷͷǦͳͺ͵Ǥ
© 2016-2020, Economics, Management and Sustainability. All rights reserved.
This open access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license.
You are free to:
Share – copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format Adapt – remix, transform, and build upon the material for any
purpose, even commercially.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
Attribution – You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made.
You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
No additional restrictions
You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Economics, Management and Sustainability (ISSN: 2520-6303) is published by Scientific Publishing House “CSR”,
Poland, EU and Scientific Publishing House “SciView”, Poland
Publishing with JEMS ensures:
• Immediate, universal access to your article on publication
• High visibility and discoverability via the JEMS website
• Rapid publication
• Guaranteed legacy preservation of your article
• Discounts and waivers for authors in developing regions
Submit your manuscript to a JEMS at http://jems.sciview.net or submit.jems@sciview.net
