韩雪亮(2016)组织变革准备研究回顾与整合

1248Haffar,Al–Karaghouli,&Ghoneim,2014,2013,2015,,2013Carter,Mossholder,Feild,&Armenakis,201430%~40%Kim,Hornung,&Rousseau,201170%Beer&Nohria,2000;Cartwright&Schoenberg,2006;Washington&Hacker,2005Armenakis,Harris,&Mossholder,1993;Neves&Caetano,2009Tavakoli,2014Coch&French,1948;Kotter&Schlesinger,1979Schein,2010Jennett,Yeo,Pauls,&Graham,2003;Kotter,1995Vakola,2013201320Shahrasbi&Paré,2014Santhidran,Chandran,&Borromeo,20131249Coch&French,1948;Lewin,1947Armenakis1993cognitiveprecursor1.Armenakis1993Bouckenooghe,DevosvandenBroeck2009Holt2010ShahrasbiParé20141.Haffaretal.,2014;Holtetal.,2007;Khanetal.,2014;Oreg,Vakola,&Armenakis,2011;Weiner,Amick,&Lee,20082,2012;Adil,2014;Anjani&1250Dhanapal,2012;Santhidranetal.,2013Khan2014//Shea,Jacobs,Esserman,BruceWeiner2014inter-raterreliabilityinter-rateragreementrwgj.20.21ADMj1.151.15p.01Holt2007AnjaniDhanapal2012Santhidran2013Adil2014†.Herold,Fedor,Caldwell,&Liu,2008;Oregetal.,2011;Vakola,2013Oregetal.,2011,2014Vakola,2014CEOMusteen,Barker,&Baeten,2006,2014Adil,2014King&Anderson,1995Jonesetal.,2005Rafferty,JimmiesonArmenakis2013Whelan–Berry,Gordon,&Hinings,2003Edmondson,12511999Rafferty&Jimmieson,2010George&Bettenhausen,1990emotionalapertureSanchez–Burks&Huy,20092014Ebyetal.,2000;Tetenbaum,1998Raffertyetal.,2013Jonesetal.,2005Armenakisetal.,1993;Haffaretal.,2014Raffertyetal.,2013Haffaretal.,2014.Ebyetal.,2000Kimetal.,2011Weiner,Lewis,&Linnan,2009Sheaetal.,2014Wanberg&Banas,2000Jimmieson,Terry,&Callan,2004Rametal.,2015Drzensky,Egold,&vanDick,2012Santhidraetal.,2013Vakola,2014Rafferty2013125220122014.2Shahrasbi&Paré,2014.Sheaetal.,2014)Vakola,201312Vakola,20133Vakola,2013Sharma,Upadhyaya,Schober,&Byrd-Williams,2014;Vakola,2014Shahrasbi&Paré,2014Attiehetal.,2014Chen,Bliese,&Mathieu,200520122014Montgomery,2013Haffaretal.,2014;Santhidranetal.,20131253ééñ1254é1255TheLiteratureReviewandDevelopmentofOrganizationalChangeReadinessTheoriesHanXueliang(SchoolofBusinessAdministration,HenanUniversityofEconomicsandLaw,Zhengzhou,450046)AbstractOrganizationalchangereadinessistheantecedentforimplementingchange.Thescholarsholdingapsychologicalviewarguethatitsmainpurposeistosharpenthestakeholders’mindset.However,thescholarsholdingastructuralviewarguethatitreflectsthecapacityoftheorganizationinimplementingthechangeanditsabilitytoobtaintherelatedresources.Thispaperreviewsbothviews,especiallythestudiesunderthepsychologicalperspective.However,thepurposeofthispaperisnotlimitedtothereviewofliteratures.Basedonthepresentachievementsinorganizationalchangereadinessresearch,thispaperaimstoexploreanewtheoreticalframeworkaboutorganizationalchangereadiness.Thepaperreviewsthedevelopmentandmeasurementsoftheorganizationalchangereadiness,andanalyzestheresearchtrendsunderthepanoramicview.Itshowsthat:therearemanyscholarsfocusingontheindividual-level.Incontrast,therearefewstudiesthatarefocusedonthegroup-levelandorganizational-levelofchangereadiness.Studiesontheindividual-levelhaveconfirmedthefollowingfindings:firstly,theindividualtendency,groupnormsandorganizationalculturecanpredictindividuals’readinessforchange;secondly,theindividualchange-supportivebehaviors,workingattitudeandemployee’sorganizationalcommitmentareallconsequencesoftheorganizationalchangereadiness.Therearefewstudieswhichhaveanalyzedtheconsequencesofcollectivereadiness.Contemporarystudiesonthecollective-levelhaveconcludedthatthesustainingmomentumofworkshop,teamclimate,affectivetoneandemotionalaperturecanaffectthecollectivereadinessforchange.Studiesattheorganizationlevelcanbedividedintotwostreams.Thescholarsholdingapsychologicalviewemphasizethestrengthoftheorganizationcultureinreadinessforchange.Oneofthesestudieshasconfirmedthatboththegroupcultureandadhocracyculturehavepositiveeffectonindividualreadinessforchange,whiletheothertwokindsofculture,i.e.,themarketcultureandhierarchyculture,havenegativeeffectonindividualreadinessforchange.Thescholarsholdingastructuralviewemphasizetheresourcesandabilitiesoftheorganizationinreadinessforchange,suchasfinancialreadiness,technologicalreadiness,staffreadiness,processandpracticereadiness,businessreadiness,etc.Integratingtheresultsofthepresentorganizationalchangereadinessresearch,thispaperhasbuiltanewtheoreticalframeworkoforganizationalchangereadiness.Thenewtheoreticalframeworkhasnotonlymergedthepsychologicalandstructuralviewsofreadinessforchange,butalsodividedtheorganizationalchangereadinessintothreestages:theantecedentsofreadinessforchange,theconceptsandmeasurementsofreadinessforchangeandtheconsequencesofreadinessforchange.Thenewtheoreticalframeworkinthispaperhasbridgedthegapinthisfield:boththeconsequencesincollective-levelandthemeasurementsinthethreelevels(individual-,collective-andorganizational-)oforganizationalchangereadinessneedmorestudiesinthefuture.Inaddition,theconceptualization,multi–levelstudyandcross–culturalcomparisonshouldgetmoreattentioninthefuturestudies.ThispapermakesnotablecontributionstoChineseorganizationalchangeresearchandhasimplicationsforthecompaniestoadapttothecurrenteconomictransformationinChina.