CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 183Organizational Change and LeadershipJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorOrganizational Management and Change

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 50 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Change fatigue: Development and initial validation of a new measure

Bernerth, Jeremy B., Walker, H. Jack, Harris, Stanley G.·2011·Work & Stress
DOI 10.1080/02678373.2011.634280
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Although organizational change often places strain on employees, few studies have explored the impact of multiple organizational changes on their well-being and withdrawal, including organizational commitment and turnover intentions. To provide a means of directly investigating such issues, we developed a measure of change fatigue, and then empirically examined its implications for employees. Using data from change consultants and a manufacturing organization in the United States that had undertaken a number of organizational changes over the last three years, the authors developed a six-item measurement scale, obtained initial evidence of construct validity, and then investigated the relationship between change fatigue and harmful outcomes, including exhaustion, organizational commitment and turnover intentions. Results indicated that change fatigue was positively associated with exhaustion, and exhaustion was in turn negatively related to organizational commitment and positively related to turnover intentions. Implications for organizations and employees facing multiple changes are discussed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/02678373.2011.634280

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Glick W.G., 1990, Longitudinal field research methods: Studying processes of organisational change, 126
  2. Hogan R., 2007, Personality and the fate of organisations
  3. Sobel M.E., 1982, Sociological methodology, 290
  4. Sutton R.I., 1987, Handbook of organisational behavior, 272
  5. Zorn T.E., 1999, Do we really want constant change

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 183

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Bernerth, J. B., Walker, H. J., & Harris, S. G.
Affiliations
  • Louisiana State University (US)
  • Texas Tech University (US)
  • Auburn University (US)
Corresponding author
Bernerth, Jeremy B.
ORCID
Venue
Work & Stress
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2011-10
Volume
25
Issue
4
Pages
321-337
ISSN
  • 0267-8373 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-5335
DOI
10.1080/02678373.2011.634280
OpenAlex
W2155823771
Cited by
183
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 42 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 2
FWCI
5.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Work & Stress (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Organizational Change and Leadership
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Organizational Management and Change
Keywords
change fatigue, organizational change, employee well-being, exhaustion, organizational commitment, turnover intention, scale development, construct validity, work withdrawal

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review