The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Reflections: our Journey in Organizational Change Research and Practice
Abstract
This commentary summarizes our research and practice on the topic of organizational change over the past 30 years. Our purpose in preparing this commentary is to explain how our efforts accumulated over this period to produce the questions we addressed, the answers our findings revealed, and the direction of our future efforts. We summarize our journey thus far relative to six signposts, namely: (a) the identification of five key beliefs underlying change recipient motivations to change; (b) an emphasis on change recipient active participation in the change effort; (c) the importance of diagnosis; (d) the importance of creating readiness for change; (e) the identification of strategies for influencing the five beliefs throughout the change process; and, (f) the assessment of reactions to organizational change. To give an idea of where our journeys will take us in the future, we identify five trips we plan to make: (a) examine the relative importance of the five key beliefs for influencing change recipient support; (b) expand our cognitive view of change motivation to include emotional reactions to change; (c) investigate the relationship between change recipient characteristics (such as regulatory focus) and reactions to organizational transformation; (d) explore the relationship between internal contextual variables (relations with local change agents and co-workers) during organizational change; and (e) focus on ethics in organizational change.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
In search of how people change: Applications to addictive behaviors.
Prochaska, J. O., DiClemente, C. C., & Norcross, J. C. (1992) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.47.9.1102 · Cited by 8,596
Abrahamson, E. (1996) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258636 · Cited by 1,828
Organizational Change Recipients' Beliefs Scale: Development of an Assessment Instrument
Armenakis, A. A., Bernerth, J. B., Pitts, J. P., & Walker, H. J. (2007) · The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science · doi:10.1177/0021886307303654 · Cited by 386
Self-citation
Cited by
Cullen, K. L., Edwards, B. D., Casper, W. C., & Gue, K. R. (2014) · Journal of Business and Psychology · doi:10.1007/s10869-013-9312-y · Cited by 377
Back to the future: revisiting Kotter's 1996 change model
Appelbaum, S. H., Habashy, S., Malo, J., & Shafiq, H. (2012) · Journal of Management Development · doi:10.1108/02621711211253231 · Cited by 377
Ekendahl, P., Bäckström, I., Norrman, A., & Näslund, D. (2026) · Journal of Change Management · doi:10.1080/14697017.2026.2638768 · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Armenakis, A. A., & Harris, S. G.
- Venue
- Journal of Change Management
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2009-06
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 127-142
- ISSN
- 1469-7017 (ISSN-L)
- 1479-1811
- OpenAlex
- W2161100788
- Cited by
- 544
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 25.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.