MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4235942613 · doi:10.1108/ict-07-2013-0045

Organizational outcomes of leadership style and resistance to change (Part Two)

2015· article· en· W4235942613 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.

Notice bibliographique

RevueIndustrial and Commercial Training · 2015
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBusiness, Management and Accounting
ThématiqueOrganizational Learning and Leadership
Établissements canadiensUniversité du QuébecConcordia University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésResistance (ecology)Context (archaeology)Organizational commitmentOrganizational studiesLeadership stylePsychologyOrganizational changeChange management (ITSM)Organizational learningKnowledge managementPlanned changePerceptionOrganizational performanceOrganizational cultureOrganization developmentOrder (exchange)Management stylesSocial psychologyPublic relationsBusinessPolitical scienceMarketingComputer science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Purpose – Organizations must react rapidly to evolving environments by engaging in change, ranging from minor adjustments to radical transformation. Many obstacles are encountered on the path towards achieving positive organizational outcomes, among which resistance to change prevents the level of mobilization critical to achieve a successful transformation. The purpose of this two-part paper is to offer a review of the body of knowledge explaining how leadership styles may address resistance to change in order to achieve desired organizational outcomes. For this purpose, multiple organizational concepts are visited and linked through a synthesized model proposing causality relationships between the various elements. Design/methodology/approach – A range of recently published empirical and practitioner research papers were reviewed to analyse the relationships in search of the variables that affect resistance during a major organizational change. In order to synthesize and bridge many concepts that are often studied separately, an overall model is proposed to help establish causal relationships between the elements of interest influencing organizational outcomes, in the context of a change. Findings – Leadership acts as an input at multiple levels, influencing organizational outcomes both directly – by continuously shaping employee attitude throughout change – and indirectly – by regulating the antecedents and moderators of their predisposition to change. These subsequently shape the extent of resistance to change, which translates from the perception of, commitment to and involvement in the change process. The interaction of the organizational environment with these factors ultimately determines the organizational outcome resulting from the change initiatives. Research limitations/implications – The model must be tested in another empirical article to measure its effectiveness. The complexity of the model may, however, hinder the ability to successfully correlate all the concepts. Practical implications – The paper suggests an overall framework that may help leaders and organizational development practitioners identify the major factors which may be considered during a change initiative or a transformation. Social implications – This paper highlights the multi-dimensional role of leadership style in successfully achieving organizational changes. Leaders’ emotional aptitude to influence their followers and employees’ natural and contextual predisposition to change transact to shape organizational outcomes. These social elements must be carefully assessed not only prior to embarking on a change implementation, but also to proactively invest in psychologically directed organizational training and development, at all hierarchical levels. Originality/value – The synthesis model is the novel contribution of the paper. It proposes an organized approach to relate multiple close yet distinct concepts that have so far been predominantly discussed separately.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,411
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,493

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,408
Tête enseignante GPT0,292
Écart entre enseignants0,116 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle