The “death valley” of change
Abstract
This paper provides an overview of the current body of knowledge surrounding the human response to change and transition. Models of the change process, as perceived by diverse and seemingly unrelated disciplines, are identified, compared, and contrasted by tracing the evolution of these models from seminal works through contemporary research. Surprisingly, a majority of the models studied were found to share two important characteristics: they follow Lewin’s 1952 three‐phase model of change; and they describe a degradation of capabilities in the intermediate stages of the change process. In a practical example, the authors explain their experimental verification of the change models’ applicability to an organizational change involving the introduction of teams. The interrelationship of developmental and change models is discussed. Finally, the importance to leaders and managers of developing an understanding of the current state‐of‐the‐art in human response to change and transition is discussed.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Attempts to implement organizational change are predominantly unsuccessful.
“There is a widely held view (in large supported by empirical research) that attempts to implement organizational change are predominantly unsuccessful”
From What Does It Take to Implement Change Successfully? A Study of the Behaviors of Successful Change Leaders (2011) · cites this paper as Elrod & Tippett, 2002
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Higgs, M., & Rowland, D. (2011) · The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science · doi:10.1177/0021886311404556 · Cited by 135 · see citing works
Patnaik, P., & Bakkar, M. (2024) · Technology in Society · doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102750 · Cited by 100 · see citing works
- Authors
- Elrod, P. D., & Tippett, D. D.
- Affiliations
- University of Alabama in Huntsville (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Organizational Change Management
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2002-06-01
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 273-291
- ISSN
- 0953-4814 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2090935069
- Cited by
- 288
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 9
- FWCI
- 7.39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Organizational Change Management (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 › Organizational Management and Change
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Appreciative Inquiry and Organizational Change
- Keywords
- organizational change, change models, transition, developmental model, leadership, change management
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