Roloff, M.E. (2020) Macro perspectives of change [Word Document]. Retrieved from
Northwestern University MSC 513 class email.
When organizations encounter outside threats, they respond in four possible ways. They can deny the legitimacy of the case for change by attacking the arguments; by saying the arguments are exaggerations or that the facts that the argument rely on are not accurate they can rebuff change. This makes it possible to argue that facts do not exist or are simply anecdotes, not facts. This does, however, leave room for the those providing the argument for change to do the same thing by arguing that those advocating for change are self-interested or that there is no net benefit. Organizations can also refuse to accept responsibility for the threat by saying that motives and data are helpful, but that the organization did not cause the problem so they do not need to bear the responsibility of addressing it. Organizations can be defiant by refusing to implement change. Finally, they can implement the change and begin undercutting it as soon as it is implemented. If anyone person or organization calls them out on this, the organization can be honest in articulating they are implementing change, but when the spotlight moves away, they dismantle the change attempt or revert to their original way of being.
This organizational change approach presented tactics that I have seen employed by organizations and its members during times of change implementation. In addition to organizational change this approach highlights ways individuals in positions of power can use these strategies to push for their own agendas. While this is not necessarily positive, it provided me a new perspective on analyzing and questioning communication strategies.
LO2: demonstrate the ability to assess complex organizational environments and achieve communication goals.
LO4: apply communication-centered scholarship to strengthen communication effectiveness.
Comments