Favián González, Manuela Pardo del Val, Ana Redondo Cano
{"title":"系统的文献综述解释立场和组织变革阻力的潜在来源","authors":"Favián González, Manuela Pardo del Val, Ana Redondo Cano","doi":"10.3926/ic.1806","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: This article addresses the main concerns of existing literature about resistance to change (RC) in organizations, namely the limited interpretative position regarding RC focusing mainly on negative aspects and excluding potential benefits, and the poor consensus or even understanding of RC sources in organizations. Design/methodology: To approach our goal, a systematic literature review will be carried out. The initial sample, obtained using reproducible search algorithms on Scopus and Web of Science, comprises 65 papers. After applying five inclusion/exclusion criteria supported by previous systematic reviews, the final sample consists of 30 papers. Findings: This article demonstrates the prevalence of a negative position toward RC and reveals efforts to harness the potential benefits of RC. In addition, from 126 specific RC sources extracted from the analyzed papers, it discovers and discusses 22 sub-typologies of RC sources, which are grouped into five typologies. Practical implications: The paper enables the future identification of, evaluation of, and intervention in 22 potential RC sources in organizations distinguished into five typologies. The taxonomy also enables researchers to organize and summarize study topics/subtopics regarding RC in the organizational arena. Social implications: This paper draws attention to the need to recognize the meaning and implications of three alternative positions relating to RC in organizations (positive, negative, and neutral). Originality/value: The paper provides a comprehensive taxonomy of RC sources beyond the traditional classification of individual/organizational factors.","PeriodicalId":45252,"journal":{"name":"Intangible Capital","volume":"227 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Systematic literature review of interpretative positions and potential sources of resistance to change in organizations\",\"authors\":\"Favián González, Manuela Pardo del Val, Ana Redondo Cano\",\"doi\":\"10.3926/ic.1806\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose: This article addresses the main concerns of existing literature about resistance to change (RC) in organizations, namely the limited interpretative position regarding RC focusing mainly on negative aspects and excluding potential benefits, and the poor consensus or even understanding of RC sources in organizations. Design/methodology: To approach our goal, a systematic literature review will be carried out. The initial sample, obtained using reproducible search algorithms on Scopus and Web of Science, comprises 65 papers. After applying five inclusion/exclusion criteria supported by previous systematic reviews, the final sample consists of 30 papers. Findings: This article demonstrates the prevalence of a negative position toward RC and reveals efforts to harness the potential benefits of RC. In addition, from 126 specific RC sources extracted from the analyzed papers, it discovers and discusses 22 sub-typologies of RC sources, which are grouped into five typologies. Practical implications: The paper enables the future identification of, evaluation of, and intervention in 22 potential RC sources in organizations distinguished into five typologies. The taxonomy also enables researchers to organize and summarize study topics/subtopics regarding RC in the organizational arena. Social implications: This paper draws attention to the need to recognize the meaning and implications of three alternative positions relating to RC in organizations (positive, negative, and neutral). Originality/value: The paper provides a comprehensive taxonomy of RC sources beyond the traditional classification of individual/organizational factors.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45252,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Intangible Capital\",\"volume\":\"227 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Intangible Capital\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3926/ic.1806\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Intangible Capital","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3926/ic.1806","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
摘要
目的:本文解决了现有文献中关于组织中变革阻力(RC)的主要问题,即关于RC的有限解释立场主要关注消极方面而排除潜在利益,以及对组织中变革阻力来源的共识甚至理解不足。设计/方法:为了达到我们的目标,将进行系统的文献综述。最初的样本是通过Scopus和Web of Science上的可重复搜索算法获得的,包括65篇论文。在应用先前系统综述支持的5个纳入/排除标准后,最终样本包括30篇论文。研究结果:这篇文章展示了对RC的负面立场的普遍存在,并揭示了利用RC的潜在好处的努力。此外,从分析论文中提取的126种具体的RC源中,发现并讨论了RC源的22个子类型,将其分为5个类型。实际意义:本文使未来识别、评估和干预组织中22个潜在的RC来源分为五种类型。该分类法还使研究人员能够在组织领域组织和总结有关RC的研究主题/子主题。社会影响:本文提请注意,有必要认识到组织中与RC相关的三种替代立场(积极、消极和中立)的意义和影响。原创性/价值:本文提供了超越个人/组织因素传统分类的RC来源的综合分类。
Systematic literature review of interpretative positions and potential sources of resistance to change in organizations
Purpose: This article addresses the main concerns of existing literature about resistance to change (RC) in organizations, namely the limited interpretative position regarding RC focusing mainly on negative aspects and excluding potential benefits, and the poor consensus or even understanding of RC sources in organizations. Design/methodology: To approach our goal, a systematic literature review will be carried out. The initial sample, obtained using reproducible search algorithms on Scopus and Web of Science, comprises 65 papers. After applying five inclusion/exclusion criteria supported by previous systematic reviews, the final sample consists of 30 papers. Findings: This article demonstrates the prevalence of a negative position toward RC and reveals efforts to harness the potential benefits of RC. In addition, from 126 specific RC sources extracted from the analyzed papers, it discovers and discusses 22 sub-typologies of RC sources, which are grouped into five typologies. Practical implications: The paper enables the future identification of, evaluation of, and intervention in 22 potential RC sources in organizations distinguished into five typologies. The taxonomy also enables researchers to organize and summarize study topics/subtopics regarding RC in the organizational arena. Social implications: This paper draws attention to the need to recognize the meaning and implications of three alternative positions relating to RC in organizations (positive, negative, and neutral). Originality/value: The paper provides a comprehensive taxonomy of RC sources beyond the traditional classification of individual/organizational factors.
期刊介绍:
The aim of Intangible Capital is to publish theoretical and empirical articles that contribute to contrast, extend and build theories that contribute to advance our understanding of phenomena related with management, and the management of intangibles, in organizations, from the perspectives of strategic management, human resource management, psychology, education, IT, supply chain management and accounting. The scientific research in management is grounded on theories developed from perspectives taken from a diversity of social sciences. Intangible Capital is open to publish articles that, from sociology, psychology, economics and industrial organization contribute to the scientific development of management and organizational science. Intangible Capital publishes scholar articles that contribute to contrast existing theories, or to build new theoretical approaches. The contributions can adopt confirmatory (quantitative) or explanatory (mainly qualitative) methodological approaches. Theoretical essays that enhance the building or extension of theoretical approaches are also welcome. Intangible Capital selects the articles to be published with a double bind, peer review system, following the practices of good scholarly journals. Intangible Capital publishes three regular issues per year following an open access policy. On-line publication allows to reduce publishing costs, and to make more agile the process of reviewing and edition. Intangible Capital defends that open access publishing fosters the advance of scientific knowledge, making it available to everyone. Intangible Capital publishes articles in English, Spanish and Catalan.