Boundary activities and readiness for ... - Projekti-Instituutti

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Theoretical background of each type of boundary activity in advancing the program progress and in creating readiness for change program implementation. Based on this analysis, the study aims to build propositions on the associations between a temporary change program’s external activities and the program’s early success. The fifth research question examines the role of contextual factors. Indicators of parent organization-level, program-level and individual-level contextual factors are examined, analyzing their association with the boundary activities and with readiness for change program implementation. The aim is to identify key contextual factors that may impact the use of boundary activities in building readiness for change program implementation. While the external environment of the parent organization may be in a significant role in the change program, for example, by providing the rationale for the whole change effort, this dissertation focuses on the relationships within the parent organization, i.e., on the inner context of organizational change (cf. Pettrigrew, 1990). The research framework is summarized and illustrated in Figure 3. Figure 3 Research framework The study focuses on program initiation. While the history of the examined programs is also briefly discussed, the analysis of a change program’s boundary activities starts from the birth of the formal program organization, typically from an explicit decision to allocate resources for program preparation. In this dissertation, the early program stage is defined to encompass program definition and planning activities that take place before detailed project-level planning and program implementation. 76
Theoretical background Readiness for change is assessed at the end of the early stage, when the program moves to implementation. In practice it may be difficult to define where the specific stages of a change effort begin and end (Child & Smith, 2000), especially in the case of iterative change programs. Thus, casespecific judgment is used in defining the duration of the early program stage in the empirical analysis. 77
Page 1:
DepartmentofIndustrialEngineeringan
Page 4 and 5:
Supervisor Professor Karlos Artto I
Page 7:
Tiivistelmä Aalto-yliopisto, PL 11
Page 10 and 11:
I would also like to thank many oth
Page 12 and 13:
4.3 Boundary activities at the prog
Page 14 and 15:
List of tables Table 1 Comparison o
Page 16 and 17:
Introduction require different mana
Page 18 and 19:
Introduction information on the pla
Page 20 and 21:
Introduction activities contribute
Page 22 and 23:
Introduction spanned and protected
Page 24 and 25:
Theoretical background 2. Theoretic
Page 26 and 27:
Theoretical background management i
Page 28 and 29:
Theoretical background (Grabher, 20
Page 30 and 31:
Theoretical background require coll
Page 32 and 33:
Theoretical background 2.1.2 Defini
Page 34 and 35:
Theoretical background on large pro
Page 36 and 37:
Theoretical background to the progr
Page 38 and 39:
Theoretical background detailed pla
Page 40 and 41: Theoretical background As the early
Page 42 and 43: Theoretical background organization
Page 44 and 45: Theoretical background Although man
Page 46 and 47: Theoretical background The multipli
Page 48 and 49: Theoretical background types of cha
Page 50 and 51: Theoretical background disruption o
Page 52 and 53: Theoretical background the impact o
Page 54 and 55: Theoretical background change, unre
Page 56 and 57: Theoretical background plans should
Page 58 and 59: Theoretical background Rainey, 2006
Page 60 and 61: Theoretical background pamphlets, b
Page 62 and 63: Theoretical background change capac
Page 64 and 65: Theoretical background change proce
Page 66 and 67: Theoretical background (2005) descr
Page 68 and 69: Theoretical background Similarly, p
Page 70 and 71: Theoretical background Petersen, Ha
Page 72 and 73: Theoretical background already duri
Page 74 and 75: Theoretical background physically i
Page 76 and 77: Theoretical background environment.
Page 78 and 79: Theoretical background satisfaction
Page 80 and 81: Theoretical background As can be se
Page 82 and 83: Theoretical background directional:
Page 84 and 85: Theoretical background Delbecq, 197
Page 86 and 87: Theoretical background managed. Wit
Page 88 and 89: Theoretical background change progr
Page 92 and 93: Research methodology and data 3. Re
Page 94 and 95: Research methodology and data chara
Page 96 and 97: Research methodology and data theor
Page 98 and 99: Research methodology and data As al
Page 100 and 101: Research methodology and data In li
Page 102 and 103: Research methodology and data and p
Page 104 and 105: Research methodology and data termi
Page 106 and 107: Research methodology and data main
Page 108 and 109: Research methodology and data progr
Page 110 and 111: Research methodology and data point
Page 112 and 113: Research methodology and data case.
Page 114 and 115: Research methodology and data activ
Page 116 and 117: Results Center has a long tradition
Page 118 and 119: Results Figure 8 The program struct
Page 120 and 121: Results made the change extremely c
Page 122 and 123: Results from Bureau’s various uni
Page 124 and 125: Results Figure 9 The program struct
Page 126 and 127: Results “Domain” (a pseudonym).
Page 128 and 129: Results Instead of an official prog
Page 130 and 131: Results program was seen to be on t
Page 132 and 133: Results Figure 11 Illustration of t
Page 134 and 135: Results Q4 (Center, program manager
Page 136 and 137: Results Q8 (Bureau, project partici
Page 138 and 139: Results stronger during the course
Page 140 and 141:
Results personnel of the local unit
Page 142 and 143:
Results Figure 12 Different types o
Page 144 and 145:
Results planning. Information seeki
Page 146 and 147:
Results practice, guarding activiti
Page 148 and 149:
Results Table 14 Comparison of boun
Page 150 and 151:
Results categories, based on the ac
Page 152 and 153:
Results 4.4 Readiness for change pr
Page 154 and 155:
Results In case Center, the overall
Page 156 and 157:
Results Q42 (Center, top manager):
Page 158 and 159:
Results daily work to take care of
Page 160 and 161:
Results work. At the time of the se
Page 162 and 163:
Results view of readiness for chang
Page 164 and 165:
Results Table 17 Identified associa
Page 166 and 167:
Results has been vital to show that
Page 168 and 169:
Results Table 18 Identified associa
Page 170 and 171:
Results this fall we have establish
Page 172 and 173:
Results 4.5.3 Identified associatio
Page 174 and 175:
Results central line managers in pr
Page 176 and 177:
Results Table 20 Summary of the ide
Page 178 and 179:
Results Like task coordinating acti
Page 180 and 181:
Results The characteristics of the
Page 182 and 183:
Results authority, but he gradually
Page 184 and 185:
Results Regarding the third case, t
Page 186 and 187:
Results happen in this challenging
Page 188 and 189:
Results program launch the program
Page 190 and 191:
Results The other two cases, Bureau
Page 192 and 193:
Discussion hand, in time orientatio
Page 194 and 195:
Discussion To sum up the discussion
Page 196 and 197:
Discussion and resource seeking has
Page 198 and 199:
Discussion differ on the amount of
Page 200 and 201:
Discussion Case Center demonstrated
Page 202 and 203:
Discussion Previous empirical resea
Page 204 and 205:
Discussion description responsible
Page 206 and 207:
Discussion and these representative
Page 208 and 209:
Discussion achieving the required l
Page 210 and 211:
Discussion 2009; Blomquist & Mülle
Page 212 and 213:
198 Discussion program initiation a
Page 214 and 215:
Discussion 5.2.3 Program autonomy a
Page 216 and 217:
Discussion may even be portrayed as
Page 218 and 219:
Discussion presented by Ericksen an
Page 220 and 221:
Discussion a legitimate position, a
Page 222 and 223:
Discussion internal validity, espec
Page 224 and 225:
Conclusion 6. Conclusion In this ch
Page 226 and 227:
Conclusion Finally, in line with re
Page 228 and 229:
Conclusion provided indications of
Page 230 and 231:
References References Aaltio-Marjos
Page 232 and 233:
218 References Balogun, J. 2003. Fr
Page 234 and 235:
References Cacciatori, E. 2008. Mem
Page 236 and 237:
References Dunphy, D. 1996. Organiz
Page 238 and 239:
224 References Glueck, W. F. 1969.
Page 240 and 241:
References Jensen, C., Johansson, S
Page 242 and 243:
References Lehtonen, P. 2007. The e
Page 244 and 245:
References Mealia, L. W. 1978. Lear
Page 246 and 247:
References Parker, R., & Bradley, L
Page 248 and 249:
234 References Sashkin M., & Burke,
Page 250 and 251:
References Thompson, J. D. 1967. Or
Page 252 and 253:
Appendices Appendices Appendix 1: I
Page 254 and 255:
Appendices Interview outline: case
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Appendices Appendix 2: Code framewo
Page 262 and 263:
Boundary type Overall view in case
Page 264 and 265:
Boundary type Overall view in case
Page 266 and 267:
Boundary aspect Temporal Most progr
Page 268 and 269:
Categories and types of boundary ac
Page 270 and 271:
Page 272 and 273:
Page 274 and 275:
Indicators of readiness for change
Page 276 and 277:
Page 278:
show all

Boundary activities and readiness for ... - Projekti-Instituutti

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?