Cited by 2,268Organizational Change and LeadershipHealth Policy Implementation ScienceOrganizational Management and Change

A theory of organizational readiness for change

Open access
Weiner, Bryan J·2009·Implementation Science

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Change management experts have emphasized the importance of establishing organizational readiness for change and recommended various strategies for creating it. Although the advice seems reasonable, the scientific basis for it is limited. Unlike individual readiness for change, organizational readiness for change has not been subject to extensive theoretical development or empirical study. In this article, I conceptually define organizational readiness for change and develop a theory of its determinants and outcomes. I focus on the organizational level of analysis because many promising approaches to improving healthcare delivery entail collective behavior change in the form of systems redesign--that is, multiple, simultaneous changes in staffing, work flow, decision making, communication, and reward systems. DISCUSSION: Organizational readiness for change is a multi-level, multi-faceted construct. As an organization-level construct, readiness for change refers to organizational members' shared resolve to implement a change (change commitment) and shared belief in their collective capability to do so (change efficacy). Organizational readiness for change varies as a function of how much organizational members value the change and how favorably they appraise three key determinants of implementation capability: task demands, resource availability, and situational factors. When organizational readiness for change is high, organizational members are more likely to initiate change, exert greater effort, exhibit greater persistence, and display more cooperative behavior. The result is more effective implementation. SUMMARY: The theory described in this article treats organizational readiness as a shared psychological state in which organizational members feel committed to implementing an organizational change and confident in their collective abilities to do so. This way of thinking about organizational readiness is best suited for examining organizational changes where collective behavior change is necessary in order to effectively implement the change and, in some instances, for the change to produce anticipated benefits. Testing the theory would require further measurement development and careful sampling decisions. The theory offers a means of reconciling the structural and psychological views of organizational readiness found in the literature. Further, the theory suggests the possibility that the strategies that change management experts recommend are equifinal. That is, there is no 'one best way' to increase organizational readiness for change.

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 · 10.1186/1748-5908-4-67

Cites

67 of 67 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Weiner's theory of organisational readiness to change proposes that readiness depends on collective behaviour change linked to two key factors: change commitment (wanting to change) and change efficacy (able to change).

    “Weiner’s theory of organisational readiness to change [71] proposes that readiness depends on collective behaviour change linked to two key factors, described as change commitment (wanting to change) and change efficacy (able to change).”
  • Weiner's organizational theory of innovation implementation suggests leaders are critical for creating readiness for change, ensuring innovation-values fit, and developing plans, practices, structures, and strategies to support implementation.

    “Weiner’s organizational theory of innovation implementation suggests that leaders are critical in creating readiness for change, ensuring innovation-values fit, and developing plans, practices, structures, and strategies to support implementation (Weiner, 2009).”
  • Organizational readiness for change theory postulates that a higher level of organizational readiness increases the success of innovation adoption and decreases the risk of failure.

    “Organizational readiness for change theory postulates that a higher level of organizational readiness increases the success of innovation adoption and decreases the risk of failure (Snyder-Halpern 2001;Weiner 2009).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

8 of the 75 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Kotter JP: Leading change. 1996, Boston: Harvard Business Press
  2. Bandura A: Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. 1986, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall
  3. Turner D, Crawford M: Change Power: Capabilities that Drive Corporate Renewal. 1998, Warriewood, Australia: Business & Professional Publishing
  4. Nunnally JC: Psychometric theory. 1978, New York: McGraw-Hill, 2
  5. Elise LL, Steven VO: A measure of self-care self-efficacy. 1996, 19: 421-429.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Weiner, B. J.
Affiliations
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Corresponding author
Weiner, Bryan J
Venue
Implementation Science
Published
2009-10-19
Volume
4
Issue
1
Pages
67-67
ISSN
1748-5908 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2170135023
Cited by
2,268
References
75
Citations by year
2026: 264 · 2025: 182 · 2024: 224 · 2023: 190 · 2022: 229 · 2021: 233 · 2020: 187 · 2019: 153 · 2018: 141 · 2017: 108 · 2016: 84 · 2015: 85 · 2014: 76 · 2013: 52 · 2012: 28
FWCI
33.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Implementation Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Cancer Institute (R01CA124402)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Organizational Change and Leadership
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Organizational Management and Change
Keywords
organizational preparedness, change management, commitment to change, change efficacy, health care delivery improvement, task demands, resource availability, situational factors, implementation capability, organizational change theory

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