TY - JOUR
T1 - Ambivalence Toward Imposed Change
T2 - The Conflict Between Dispositional Resistance to Change and the Orientation Toward the Change Agent
AU - Oreg, Shaul
AU - Sverdlik, Noga
PY - 2011/3
Y1 - 2011/3
N2 - Following an analysis of the concept of " imposed change," we propose 2 factors that jointly contribute to an individual's experience of ambivalence to imposed change. In a secondary analysis of data (N = 172) and 2 field studies (N = 104, N = 89), we showed that individuals' personal orientation toward change interacts with their orientation toward the change agent and yields ambivalence. Specifically, among employees with a positive orientation toward the change agent (i.e., high trust in management, identification with the organization), the relationship between employees' dispositional resistance to change and ambivalence was positive. The opposite pattern emerged among employees with a negative orientation toward the change agent (Studies 2 and 3). Our findings suggest that researchers may have been misinterpreting employees' reactions to change, neglecting the possibility that some may simultaneously hold strong, yet conflicting, views about the change. By accounting for, and predicting, ambivalence, these studies provide a more accurate explanation of employees' responses to change.
AB - Following an analysis of the concept of " imposed change," we propose 2 factors that jointly contribute to an individual's experience of ambivalence to imposed change. In a secondary analysis of data (N = 172) and 2 field studies (N = 104, N = 89), we showed that individuals' personal orientation toward change interacts with their orientation toward the change agent and yields ambivalence. Specifically, among employees with a positive orientation toward the change agent (i.e., high trust in management, identification with the organization), the relationship between employees' dispositional resistance to change and ambivalence was positive. The opposite pattern emerged among employees with a negative orientation toward the change agent (Studies 2 and 3). Our findings suggest that researchers may have been misinterpreting employees' reactions to change, neglecting the possibility that some may simultaneously hold strong, yet conflicting, views about the change. By accounting for, and predicting, ambivalence, these studies provide a more accurate explanation of employees' responses to change.
KW - Ambivalence
KW - Identification
KW - Resistance to change
KW - Trust
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79953122858&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1037/a0021100
DO - 10.1037/a0021100
M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.article???
C2 - 21058806
AN - SCOPUS:79953122858
SN - 0021-9010
VL - 96
SP - 337
EP - 349
JO - Journal of Applied Psychology
JF - Journal of Applied Psychology
IS - 2
ER -