Figure 1: Definition of change types (Gareis, 2010)

Thus, talking about organizational learning it’s necessary to mention that its main objective consists in continuous business improvement by changing one or few parameters of the enterprise. Being a continuous change process it assumes that some formal processes and tools supporting changes already exist in organization. According to Gareis, change process consists of two phases: acquiring and stabilizing new knowledge. To complete this process different methods like monitoring, database, workshops etc. could be applied.

The further development is more complicated change type aimed to improvement of business results, including product, process or organizational improvement and requires changes in several organizational dimensions. To handle this change process some standardized tools and techniques could be applied, therefore, in this case the main tasks are concerned with resource allocation, management support and aligning changes with strategy. Thus, the change management process is represented by three phases: conceptionalizing a development, piloting a development and rolling-out a development.

Coming to the transformation type, it’s worthy to highlight that this kind of changes is a fundamental one and involves almost all organizational parameters from strategy to relations. Its main objective could consist in rationalization, growth, strategic and cultural new-orientation. Hence, uniqueness and high complexity of the objectives requires thorough development of change process. The change phases that are interrupting the routine, developing a vision and a plan, making decisions, implementing, and stabilizing are almost similar to the stages proposed by Kotter in his model described above.

Finally, in case of radical repositioning urgent changes are usually required due to crisis situation or serious threat that question the survival of organization on the whole. Such situations involve all the organizational dimensions and require urgent solutions and results. According to Garies, in this case the change management stages should include crisis definition, short analysis and ad hoc measures, detailed crisis analysis and planning, implementing the resolution strategies and closing-down the crisis.

Talking about the methods of change implementation, Garies highlights that project and program management approaches are more relevant for the second-order changes, however, one or several projects could be also required in further developing. While, the organizational learning is a repetitive process which should be incorporated in daily business.

As well it’s necessary to highlight that second-order changes are especially exposed to resistance from employees and require special attention from change managers.

3. Resistance to change and managing resistance

Initially, in change management literature resistance had been perceived as behavior not in line with the attempts of the change leader (Bartunek, 1993) and barrier to change (Kotter and Schlesinger, 1979; Klein, 1984). Consequently, the issue of resistance has been discussed from the perspective of the change agent. Afterwards, the focus has moved to perception of changes by employees and motivational factors. According to the last approach people resist not to the changes but to their consequences (Dent, Goldberg, 1999). Thus, Dijk and Dick have defined to types of resistance: person-oriented and principle-oriented. In the first case resistance could be caused by the expectation of losses as a result of departure of status quo. People could be afraid that changes will negatively influence their job or relations inside the organization (Lawrence, 1954). In the second case changes and their consequences are evaluated from organizational point of view, its objectives and success. It means that the expected results of changes are not aligned with views of employees and their expectations how an enterprise should develop.

Depending on the strength and intensity active and passive forms of resistance could be distinguished. Active resistance includes finding fault, ridiculing, appealing to fear, and manipulating. Passive resistance includes agreeing verbally but not following through, feigning ignorance and withholding information (Bolognese, 2002).

As well, there are different classifications based on situational variables, various dimensions and reasons for changes. According to the model proposed by Mc.Elroy the perception of changes depends on two factors: change experience and expectations about them. Thus, if the experience is small and failure is expected the fear appears, but, in contrary, when expectations are positive people tend to perceive changes with willing and passion. In case when experience is quite big but failure is expected people feel tired, but with positive expectations changes are perceived as something usual and comfortable.

In its turn, the reaction to coming changes could also be represented by the model with two dimensions: perception of changes and ability to influence them. The combination of these parameters forms four reaction types: hostility, anxiety, ability to handle with changes and skillfulness in managing changes (McElroy, 1996).

Talking about managing resistance it’s necessary to mention that the first ideas on this issue has been proposed still in the 1940s by Lewin within the change management model. He suggested that any potential change is resisted by forces in the opposite direction. His solution was to advocate that successful change rests in unfreezing an established equilibrium by enhancing the forces driving change, or by reducing or removing resisting forces, and then refreezing in a new equilibrium state (Morgan, 1997).

Subsequently, a range of models taking into account the issue of managing resistance has been developed (Kotter, 1996; Kotter and Schlesinger, 1979 etc.). Talking about the models concerned directly with resistance to changes it’s necessary to mention Folger’s model which, therefore, also present a list of recommendations rather than practical guide.

One of the most complex model about has been proposed quite recently by Armenicans and Harris. The model is based on parameters of change perception which are crucial for all the further stages of change management process. To handle it different influence strategies are also defined. As well the assessment component is also incorporated into the model that allows to evaluate the change management process and make adjustments that is especially important in case of turbulent environment discussed in the beginning of this paper (Armenakis, Harris, 2009).

At last, we would like to describe one more quite recent model which is especially interesting from project management point of view. Fiedler’s model proposes to perceive resistance to changes as a risk of change project or program. Consequently, managing the resistance could be realized from risk management perspective, which is already a well-studied area, using its processes and tools. Thus, it’s proposed that process of managing resistance could consists of the following stages: identification and evaluation of resistance potential, planning of managing resistance, avoidance/promotion and preparation for resistance, resolution of resistance and controlling of resistance measures and potentials. In its turn each stage consists of various phases and utilizes existing risk management structures and methods (Fiedler, 2010).