Cited by 7Organizational Change and LeadershipOrganizational Management and ChangeManagement and Organizational Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

Memory-based change management: Using the past to guide the future

Do, Boram, Lyle, Matthew C. B.·2022·Organizational Psychology Review

Abstract

Scholars have suggested that individual change recipients affectively respond to change events but have yet to examine how change recipients’ memories influence those affective responses. Drawing from prior scholarship on memory, we propose that two theoretically distinct forms of memory – explicit and schematic – produce different forms of affective and behavioral responses when recipients process change events consciously or non-consciously. Given this proposed importance of memory to affective and behavioral responses, we then develop a stage model of memory-based change management, which we define as the managing of change recipients’ responses to change events through memory work. We theorize four discrete strategies – guided consolidating, schematic re-framing, contextual delimiting, and selective re-instating – that, based on recipients’ memory-based actions during particular stages of a change, would be likely to enhance positive affective responses and support for change. Plain Language Summary This paper explains how memories of organizational change influence affective and behavioral responses to ongoing change initiatives. We identify two types of memories related to change contexts: 1) abstracted, comprehensive schematic memory (i.e., “change is chaotic”) and 2) anecdotal, specific explicit memory (i.e., “I was demoted in a restructuring process last year”). We suggest that, when change events are highly ambiguous, schematic memories non-consciously influence employees’ general moods and a broad range of work behaviors which may or may not relate to the change (i.e., feeling unpleasant for an unknown reason and becoming less cooperative with coworkers than usual). When change events are less ambiguous, explicit memories play a larger role by eliciting discrete emotions triggering change-targeted behaviors (i.e., feeling angry at a change agent and confronting them about it). Since these responses are rooted in memory, we further suggest how change agents can manage affective and behavioral responses through four types of memory-based change management. We explain how during four stages of change – gestation, preparation, implementation, and aftermath – change agents can engage in guided consolidating (i.e., having recipients behaviorally engage in sharing positive experiences of change), schematic re-framing (i.e., framing a change as a continuation of past precedent), contextual delimiting (i.e., generalizing positive memories of change while isolating negative ones) and selective reinstating (i.e., having recipients selectively recall positive experiences in the recent change initiative), respectively. Our model complements existing studies focusing on the conscious, future-oriented processing of change events to provide an alternative view of change management.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/20413866221093512

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 106 · Cited by 7

Research works printed but not linked: 114

  1. 10.2307/2393986 · DOI
  2. 10.1080/17439760802650519 · DOI
  3. 10.5465/amj.2010.0245 · DOI
  4. 10.1177/0021886307303654 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Armenakis A. A., Harris S. G., Feild H. S. (2000). Making change permanent: A model for institutionalizing change interventions. In Pasmore W., Woodman R. (Eds.), Research in organizational change and development (pp. 97–128). JAI Press. · DOI
  6. 10.1177/001872679304600601 · DOI
  7. 10.1177/001872679504800201 · DOI
  8. 10.5465/amr.2016.0474 · DOI
  9. 10.1177/0021886307311470 · DOI
  10. 10.5465/AMR.2010.51141732 · DOI
  11. 10.1177/0170840605054624 · DOI
  12. Barrett F. J., 2005, Appreciative inquiry: A positive approach to building cooperative capacity
  13. 10.1177/0021886305285455 · DOI
  14. 10.1177/0170840618789211 · DOI
  15. 10.1177/1744935906060627 · DOI
  16. 10.1023/B:JOBU.0000028449.99127.f7 · DOI · Paper page
  17. 10.1177/1059601110392990 · DOI
  18. 10.1080/14792779343000112 · DOI
  19. 10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.191 · DOI
  20. Casey A., 1997, Advances in strategic management: organizational learning and strategic management, 14, 111
  21. Challenger G. & Christmas, Inc. (2020). 2019 Year-End Job Cut Report. http://www.challengergray.com/press/press-releases/2019-year-end-job-cuts-report-fewest-monthly-cuts
  22. Chen S., 1999, Dual process theories in social psychology, 73
  23. 10.1002/job.433 · DOI
  24. 10.1002/job.2191 · DOI
  25. 10.1177/001872674800100408 · DOI
  26. 10.1017/CBO9780511628061 · DOI · Paper page
  27. 10.1037/0033-295X.107.2.261 · DOI · Paper page
  28. 10.2307/4131471 · DOI
  29. Crawford B., Painful memories as mnemonic resources: grand canyon dories and the protection of place
  30. 10.2307/255754 · DOI
  31. Damasio A. R., 1994, Descartes error: emotion, reason and the human brain
  32. 10.5465/amr.2007.23463682 · DOI
  33. 10.1080/09658210802010463 · DOI
  34. 10.1177/0170840618765573 · DOI
  35. 10.1177/26317877211029666 · DOI
  36. 10.1037/0003-066X.49.8.709 · DOI · Paper page
  37. 10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093629 · DOI · Paper page
  38. 10.5465/AMR.2010.48463331 · DOI
  39. 10.5465/amr.2008.31193235 · DOI
  40. 10.1037/0033-2909.117.1.39 · DOI · Paper page
  41. 10.1016/0022-1031(84)90040-4 · DOI
  42. 10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.218 · DOI · Paper page
  43. 10.1037/0022-3514.57.2.212 · DOI · Paper page
  44. 10.1017/CBO9781139096690.003 · DOI
  45. 10.2307/258134 · DOI
  46. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2010.01206.x · DOI
  47. 10.1002/job.619 · DOI
  48. 10.1080/14697017.2012.728534 · DOI
  49. Hansbrough T. K., 2021, Rater Memory Systems and Leadership Measurement. Leadership Quarterly, 32, 1014
  50. 10.1177/0001839217692535 · DOI
  51. 10.1108/JOCM-05-2016-0088 · DOI
  52. 10.1037/apl0000174 · DOI · Paper page
  53. 10.2307/3094890 · DOI
  54. 10.2307/256350 · DOI
  55. Izard C. E., 1993, Handbook of emotions, 631
  56. 10.4324/9781315887111-12 · DOI
  57. Kahneman D., 2011, Thinking, fast and slow
  58. Kotter J. P., 2012, Leading change
  59. 10.1016/j.obhdp.2007.08.002 · DOI
  60. 10.1037/0003-066X.46.8.819 · DOI · Paper page
  61. Lewin K., 1951, Field theory in social science
  62. 10.1177/1534484304273818 · DOI
  63. 10.1016/j.hrmr.2005.12.001 · DOI
  64. Livne-Tarandach R., 2009, Research in Organizational Change & Development, 17, 1
  65. Lyle M. C. B., Organization Studies
  66. Lyons R., 2017, Forbes
  67. 10.5465/amj.2008.0045 · DOI
  68. 10.5465/amr.2014.0208 · DOI · Paper page
  69. 10.1037/0033-295X.106.1.3 · DOI · Paper page
  70. 10.1177/1754073909351755 · DOI
  71. 10.1007/978-1-4612-3500-2_4 · DOI
  72. 10.1080/02699930512331392562 · DOI
  73. 10.1111/1467-8551.13.s2.4 · DOI
  74. 10.1080/13594320500451247 · DOI
  75. 10.5465/amr.2014.0335 · DOI
  76. 10.1177/0021886310396550 · DOI
  77. 10.3758/s13423-014-0688-0 · DOI
  78. 10.1177/1750698008102055 · DOI
  79. 10.2307/3069411 · DOI · Paper page
  80. 10.5465/amj.2007.25525647 · DOI
  81. 10.1002/hrm.21782 · DOI
  82. 10.1177/0149206309341480 · DOI
  83. 10.1037/0022-3514.67.2.206 · DOI · Paper page
  84. 10.1177/0170840609347056 · DOI
  85. 10.1037/0033-295X.110.1.145 · DOI · Paper page
  86. 10.1037/0022-3514.76.5.805 · DOI
  87. 10.1146/annurev.ne.16.030193.001111 · DOI
  88. 10.1287/orsc.1110.0731 · DOI · Paper page
  89. 10.2307/20159052 · DOI
  90. 10.1016/S0007-6813(97)90027-6 · DOI
  91. 10.1037/0033-295X.94.4.439 · DOI
  92. 10.1002/job.2287 · DOI
  93. 10.1037/0022-3514.48.4.813 · DOI
  94. Smith C. A., 2000, Feeling and thinking: the role of affect in social cognition, 83
  95. 10.1080/02699930902860386 · DOI
  96. Smith E., 2005, Emotion and consciousness, 287
  97. 10.1207/S15327957PSPR0402_01 · DOI
  98. 10.5465/amj.2014.0181 · DOI
  99. 10.1017/S0145553200017910 · DOI
  100. 10.1207/s15327957pspr0803_1 · DOI · Paper page
  101. Strack F., 2005, Social Motivation: Conscious and Unconscious Processes, 5, 91
  102. 10.1177/S0038038599000462 · DOI
  103. 10.1108/S0742-3322(2010)0000027009 · DOI
  104. 10.1177/1476127017739843 · DOI
  105. Trice H. M., 1985, Using six organizational rites to change culture. Gaining control of the corporate culture
  106. Trice H. M., 1993, The cultures of work organizations
  107. 10.1037/a0018963 · DOI · Paper page
  108. 10.1007/BF00122574 · DOI · Paper page
  109. 10.2307/258786 · DOI · Paper page
  110. 10.1086/229783 · DOI
  111. 10.1108/09534810710831000 · DOI
  112. 10.1037/0033-295X.92.4.548 · DOI · Paper page
  113. 10.1177/1350508414527255 · DOI
  114. Zerubavel E., 1998, Social Research, 65, 315

Metadata

Authors
Do, B., & Lyle, M. C. B.
Affiliations
  • Yonsei University (KR)
  • University of Colorado Colorado Springs (US)
Corresponding author
Do, Boram
Venue
Organizational Psychology Review
Published
2022-04-26
Volume
12
Issue
3
Pages
306-331
ISSN
  • 2041-3866 (ISSN-L)
  • 2041-3874
OpenAlex
W4224863955
Cited by
7
References
106
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1
FWCI
1.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Organizational Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
Funders
Yonsei University (Research Grant of 2020 (2020-22-0393))
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 › Management and Organizational Studies
Keywords
organizational change, memory, declarative memory, change management, memory work, change agents, change recipients

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Memory-based change management: Using the past to guide the future. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/20413866221093512
The paper
Do, B., & Lyle, M. C. B. (2022). Memory-based change management: Using the past to guide the future. Organizational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/20413866221093512