Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Ambiguity and ambivalence: organizational change in government departments

By Julian Randall and Stephen Procter

Abstract

The way in which workers and managers interpret change at work has been an important focus of interest for researchers. This interpretation may find them assimilating change as they listen to accounts from other workers experienced in the outcomes of such events. On the other hand, there may be a divergence among workers concerning the value and meaning to be ascribed to the change events. If this is the case, a culture of ambiguity may be said to exist, where the nature, degree and value of the cultural change are highly contested and remarkably unclear (McLoughlin et al;., 2005). Following Piderit (2000), this paper suggests this may explain the disparity between an individual’s expectancy of change and their response to it, and also that, individuals’ ambivalence may influence whether they accept change, adapt to it, or reject it out-of-hand, . We show how different dimensions of ambivalence in different individuals can lead not only to different responses to imposed change at work, but can also account for individuals coming to terms with the demands of change

Year: 2007
OAI identifier: oai:aura.abdn.ac.uk:2164/122

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (1997). An improvisational model for change management: The case of groupware technologies’,
  2. (1999). Beyond happy families: A critical re-evaluation of the controlresistance-identity triangle’, doi
  3. (1993). Breaking the paradigm mentality’, doi
  4. (2003). Control – what control?’ Culture and ambiguity within a knowledge intensive firm’, doi
  5. (2005). Cultures of ambiguity: Design, emergence and ambivalence in the introduction of normative control’, doi
  6. (1992). Design and devotion: Surges of rational and normative ideologies of control in managerial discourse’, doi
  7. (1990). Evolving interpretations as a change unfolds: How managers construe key organizational events’, doi
  8. (2003). Good visions, bad micromanagement and ugly ambiguity: Contradictions of (non)-leadership in a knowledge-intensive organization’, doi
  9. (1982). Group ideologies and organizational change’, doi
  10. (1995). Management of Knowledge-intensive Companies, doi
  11. (1988). Managerial Job Change: Men and Women in Transition, Cambridge: doi
  12. (2003). Mudanças not removalists! Rethinking the management of organizational change, unpublished paper, doi
  13. (1994). Organizational Change: A Processual Approach, doi
  14. (1998). Organizational Change: A Sociological Approach,
  15. (1988). Organizational culture and the denial, channelling and acknowledgement of ambiguity’, in
  16. (1999). Power, Politics and Organizational Change: Winning the Turf Game, doi
  17. (1997). Reflections on conducting processual research on management and organizations’, doi
  18. (2000). Rethinking resistance and recognising ambivalence: A multidimensional view of attitudes towards and organizational change’, doi
  19. (1999). Work, Change and Competition: Managing for Bass, doi
  20. (1995). Work, Self and Society, doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.