CRANFIELD UNIVERSITY DAVID PARTINGTON MANAGEMENT PROCESSES IN PROJECTS OF ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE: CASE STUDIES FROM FOUR INDUSTRIES SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT PhD THESIS CRANFIELD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT PhD THESIS Academic Year 1996/97 DAVID PARTINGTON Management processes in projects of organizational change: case studies from four industries Supervisors: K Goffin; S Vinnicombe June 1997 This thesis is submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy ABSTRACT Recent decades have seen a sustained growth of interest from academics and practicing managers in structural change in the contemporary workplace. Some of this attention has been directed at the implementation of initiatives of planned organizational change, often involving newer information and communications technologies, and often conceived and labelled by managers as projects. Most empirical studies of projects of organizational change have been concerned with the promotion of universal guides to management success and, by implication, to organizational prosperity. The bias towards generalized prescriptions for performance and management ‘best practice’ has been accompanied by a relative shortage of context-bound studies intended to reveal the reality of the nature and role of the project concept in relation to organizational change. The purpose of this study is to contribute to understanding of what change project management processes are adopted and, further, how they are determined by the characteristics of an organization. In pursuit of this broad aim the research takes a grounded, theory-generating approach. The foundation of the research design is a series of case studies of projects of change in four UK organizations in contrasting sectors. The main source of data is unstructured audio-taped interviews with ‘change drivers’ - those managers responsible for the conception and implementation of the projects. The constant comparative method of qualitative analysis is used to compare and contrast instances of expressions of managerial action or intent which arise from managers’ attention to contextual considerations. Data reduction is carried out in three stages, each representing a progressively higher level of theoretical abstraction. The findings of the research are expressed as an integrated theory and a series of propositions, generalized within the boundaries of the study, relating management process to context via a set of intermediate variables representing the extent to which the change drivers feel in control of the change. The conclusions may be summarized in three statements. First, drivers of projects of organizational change apply a general repertoire of six common management processes, each of which is employed to a greater or lesser extent at any time. Second, the extent of enaction of each process element may be considered as an expression of the change drivers’ possession or pursuit of personal control over the change. Third, feelings of personal control are partly determined by managers’ attention to selected issues which arise from key characteristics of the organization and its sector. Acknowledgements Doing a PhD isn’t a solo endeavour. There’s much more to it than sitting alone for four thousand hours in front of the blurred page and the fizzing screen. Of course, the solitary bit has to be done, but not much can be achieved without a little help from one’s friends. Looking back I acknowledge the influence of some important people who have mattered along the way. I want to take this opportunity to thank them. Top billing goes to my wife Jane. Her understanding and support made the whole thing possible. If the regulations allowed it, her name would be in lights, above the title. My two supervisors deserve my sincerest thanks. Keith Goffin’s knack of providing encouragement and positive criticism, at the same time keeping an outlook on wider implications, makes him a valued mentor. Sue Vinnicombe has an enviable talent for making people feel confident and understood even while encouraging them to ask themselves searching questions. Special thanks are due to Ralph Levene, whose enthusiasm helped get the whole thing started. I would like to thank three other colleagues whom I am fortunate to have had on my doctoral review panel. Try getting a confused idea past Cliff Bowman, Jo Hatch and Colin New. On the other hand, try finding a more generous, helpful set of critics. I am grateful for the support and contribution of two colleagues with whom I formed an enduring self-help group in our first week as doctoral students. The no-nonsense style of James Aitken and Alan Harrison have helped to ensure that responding to blunt critical questioning has been a humbling feature of the PhD journey since its earliest days. Numerous others have generously given their time and energy to discuss my work, to offer me the insight of their knowledge, or to enable me to gain research access to their employing organization. They include but are by no means limited to Chris Dawson, David Downham, Anne Fletcher, Keith Hamilton, Lindsey Holbrook, Phyl Johnson, Michael Jones, Pat Lord, Janet Meacham, Peter Morris, Julian Nettell, David Norburn, Sergio Pellegrinelli, Hilary Philbin, Karl Quentel, Georgina Seery, Jane Sturges, Peter Thompson and Peter Wood. CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION . 1 1.1 Research rationale and aim . 1 1.1.1 Origins of interest . 1 1.1.2 Three concepts of project management . 2 1.1.3 A qualitative, theory building approach . 4 1.2 Research outline . 6 1.2.1 Outline of research design and methods. 6 1.2.2 Outline of research findings . 9 1.2.3 Chapter summaries . 10 2 PROJECTS OF ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE . 13 2.1 The content of change . 14 2.1.1 Forces of change and new wave themes . 14 2.1.2 Summary . 17 2.2 The process of change . 19 2.2.1 Projects and project management . 19 2.2.2 A conceptual assumption . 26 2.2.3 Prescriptive models . 28 2.3 The context of change . 34 2.3.1 Organizational change project management . 34 2.3.2 Contextual studies of project management process 38 2.4 Conclusions . 42 2.4.1 Summary of literature review . 42 2.4.2 Research questions, terminology and aims of thesis 45 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY . 49 3.1 Introduction . 49 3.2 Methodological choices . 51 3.2.1 The need for choices . 51 3.2.2 Ontology and epistemology . 51 3.2.3 Purpose of research . 54 3.2.4 Theory construction . 56 3.2.5 Lay language . 57 3.2.6 The researcher and the researched . 58 3.2.7 Summary . 59 3.3 Research design and methods . 61 3.3.1 The case study approach . 61 3.3.2 Research design . 63 3.3.3 Data collection . 68 3.3.4 Data analysis . 70 3.3.5 Quality and rigour . 76 i 4 RESULTS FROM EALING HOSPITAL NHS TRUST . 78 4.1 Introduction . 78 4.2 Case 1: Introduction of clinical directorates . 83 4.2.1 Case narrative . 83 4.2.2 Further analysis of management process . 97 4.2.3 Summary . 98 4.3 Case 2: Updating of hospital information systems . 102 4.3.1 Case narrative . 102 4.3.2 Further analysis of management process . 116 4.3.3 Summary . 118 4.4 Learning and implications for next stage . 122 5 RESULTS FROM ASSOCIATED NEWSPAPERS . 124 5.1 Introduction . 125 5.2 Case 3: Amalgamation of photoservices and optronics 129 5.2.1 Case narrative . 129 5.2.2 Further analysis of management process . 136 5.2.3 Summary . 137 5.3 Case 4: Transfer of the NEAT project . 140 5.3.1 Case narrative . 140 5.3.2 Further analysis of management process . 146 5.3.3 Summary . 146 5.4 Learning and implications for next stage . 149 5.4.1 Learning and interim conclusions . 149 5.4.2 Managerial control . 151 5.4.3 Implications for next stage . 158 6 RESULTS FROM BECHTEL . 159 6.1 Introduction . 159 6.2 Case 5: Project optimization and Technical resources 164 6.2.1 Case narrative . 164 6.2.2 Further analysis of management process . 177 6.2.3 Summary . 182 6.3 Learning and implications for next stage . 185 6.3.1 Learning and interim conclusions . 185 6.3.2 Implications for next stage . 187 7 RESULTS FROM ELECTROLUX . 188 7.1 Introduction . 188 7.2 Case 6: The step change project . 192 7.2.1 Case narrative . 192 7.2.2 Further analysis of management process . 208 7.2.3 Summary . 211 7.3 Conclusions . 214 ii 8 CROSS-CASE ANALYSIS . 216 8.1 Management processes and personal control . 217 8.1.1 Introduction . 217 8.1.2 External agents . 218 8.1.3 Formality . 221 8.1.4 Pace . 225 8.1.5 Participation . 228 8.1.6 Justification . 231 8.1.7 Role definition . 234 8.2 Central issues and key organizational characteristics 237 8.2.1 Identifying central issues . 237 8.2.2 Central issues in the six cases . 240 8.2.3 Central issues summarized as key organizational characteristics . 243 8.3 An integrated theoretical model . 245 8.3.1 Simple trios . 245 8.3.2 Complex trios . 247 8.3.3 Positive and negative features of key characteristics 248 8.3.4 Summary model . 249 8.4 Summary of learning . 251 9 CONCLUSIONS . 253 9.1 Contribution . 253 9.2 Implications for management practice . 256 9.2.1 Understanding the effects of context on personal control . 256 9.2.2 Applying the theoretical model . 258 9.3 Limitations of the study . 262 9.4 Opportunities for further research . 265 9.4.1 Six categories of management process . 265 9.4.2 Other opportunities . 269 9.5 A final word . 271 List of abbreviations . 272 References . 274 Appendices Appendix A: Coding structure I .