Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 668

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

First-Order, Second-Order, and Third-Order Change and Organization Development Interventions: A Cognitive Approach

Bartunek, Jean M., Moch, Michael K.·1987·The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science

Abstract

This article discusses how recent developments in the cognitive sciences, especialy the concept of schemata (organizing frameworks for understanding events), can illumine the practice of organization development. On the basis of a cognitive perspective, the authors discuss the relationship between organizational change and schemata, describing the following orders of change that might result from OD: first-order change, or incremental changes occurring within particular schemata already shared by members of a client system, second-order change, or modifications in the shared schemata themselves; and third-order change, or the development of the capacity of the client system to change the schemata as events require. To show how understanding the differences among orders of change can help clarify problems and solutions from an intervention, the authors discuss how a paternalism schema affected a particular quality of working life intervention. They conclude by suggesting implications of the cognitive perspective for OD practice and research

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/002188638702300404

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Bartunek, J. M., & Moch, M. K.
Venue
The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science
Published
1987-12
Volume
23
Issue
4
Pages
483-500
ISSN
  • 0021-8863 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-6879
OpenAlex
W2093535229
Cited by
668
References
0
FWCI
4.34
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.