Resisting by not resisting: Constructing inconsistencies to resist dual mandated changes

IF 4.5 2区管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT

Human Relations Pub Date : 2024-05-18 DOI:10.1177/00187267241248529

Maria Bak Skov, Jane K Lê

引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article explains how employees construct inconsistencies between two separate mandated changes and use these inconsistencies to progressively resist the realization of both changes. Specifically, they use three practices – (1) demonstrating interdependencies between change elements, (2) framing these change elements as inconsistent and (3) establishing the consequentiality of specific change elements by constructing poor outcomes for these – to build capacity to critique, revise and eventually reject elements of both changes. As a result of this resistance, neither mandated change is fully realized. Our findings contribute to the literature on strategic change by illuminating the specific processual dynamics through which actors construct and manipulate the relationship between changes. This also allows us to contribute to the literature on resistance to change by illuminating the dynamics that over time enable actors to resist even mandated – that is, externally imposed – changes, by camouflaging resistance as non-resistance.

查看原文本刊更多论文

以不抵制来抵制：构建不一致，抵制双重授权的变革

本文解释了员工如何在两个不同的授权变革之间制造矛盾，并利用这些矛盾逐步抵制两个变革的实现。具体来说，他们使用了三种做法--（1）展示变革要素之间的相互依存关系；（2）将这些变革要素归结为不一致；（3）通过构建这些变革要素的不良结果来确定特定变革要素的后果--来培养批判、修订并最终拒绝这两项变革要素的能力。由于这种阻力，这两项授权变革都没有完全实现。我们的研究结果阐明了行动者构建和操纵变革之间关系的具体过程动态，从而为有关战略变革的文献做出了贡献。这也使我们能够通过揭示行动者通过将抵制伪装成不抵制来抵制授权变革（即外部强加的变革）的动态过程，为有关抵制变革的文献做出贡献。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Human Relations Multiple-

CiteScore

12.60

自引率

7.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Human Relations is an international peer reviewed journal, which publishes the highest quality original research to advance our understanding of social relationships at and around work through theoretical development and empirical investigation. Scope Human Relations seeks high quality research papers that extend our knowledge of social relationships at work and organizational forms, practices and processes that affect the nature, structure and conditions of work and work organizations. Human Relations welcomes manuscripts that seek to cross disciplinary boundaries in order to develop new perspectives and insights into social relationships and relationships between people and organizations. Human Relations encourages strong empirical contributions that develop and extend theory as well as more conceptual papers that integrate, critique and expand existing theory. Human Relations welcomes critical reviews and essays: - Critical reviews advance a field through new theory, new methods, a novel synthesis of extant evidence, or a combination of two or three of these elements. Reviews that identify new research questions and that make links between management and organizations and the wider social sciences are particularly welcome. Surveys or overviews of a field are unlikely to meet these criteria. - Critical essays address contemporary scholarly issues and debates within the journal''s scope. They are more controversial than conventional papers or reviews, and can be shorter. They argue a point of view, but must meet standards of academic rigour. Anyone with an idea for a critical essay is particularly encouraged to discuss it at an early stage with the Editor-in-Chief. Human Relations encourages research that relates social theory to social practice and translates knowledge about human relations into prospects for social action and policy-making that aims to improve working lives.