Figure. Three Perspectives on Leading Change in a Digital Learning Environment. Images retrieved and adapted from: “Wikimedia Commons” by Ebaychatter0, 2012 (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Boeing_777.svg); “Icons website” by Icons 8, n.d. (https://icons8.com/icon/23318/graduate); and “Microsoft Office 365 ProPlus” by Powerpoint, 2016. In the public domain.
___________________________________________________________________
“The legacy of the leader’s influence is perpetuated through the followers’ incorporation of legacy principles into their lives as they become leaders” (Castelli, 2016, p. 220). By understanding how leaders addressed situations involving change in digital learning environments, it is possible to learn from their approach to successfully address leadership challenges. Through the study of three perspectives on leading change in digital learning environments discovered through interview, it was apparent that there were commonalities that lead to successful change.
Despite the different roles of interviewees, all three clearly and correctly annunciated the vision or goal of the change. Based on this, it was obvious that leadership had developed and communicated a clear vision. Unsurprisingly, this strongly aligns with literature which identifies a clear vision as a requirement for successful change (Al-Haddad & Kotnour, 2015; Kotter, 2012).
The three interviewees identified different change initiators. The replacement of a college’s Learning Management System (LMS) was advocated for by the student body after consistent failures in the legacy system. A group of advisors and a Commander were identified as the initiators in the creation of learning support centers. The third interview identified changes initiated by various groups: stakeholders, the Air Force technical training team and Commanders. Literature describes the benefits of change initiation from multiple levels (Moran & Brightman, 2000; Morrison & Phelps, 1999; Podsakoff, Whiting, Podsakoff, & Blume, 2009; Uhl-Bien, Riggio, Lowe, & Carsten, 2014), indicating there is support for change initiation from a variety of groups depending on the situation. This is especially true in the digital learning environment where leaders may not have daily contact with users of a system, so may not realize if a change is required.
Regardless of the initiator, influence tactics can be used at all levels to alter the details of the change implementation or modify the change itself (Uhl-Bien et al., 2014). When first discussing change, Uhl-Bien et al. (2014) suggests that “follower inspirational appeals and consultation were most effective” (p. 94). Both these approaches were highlighted in the examples where stakeholders either lead the projects or were consulted during the change process and where the leaders of the project emphasized presenting conditions as compared to predicted conditions following the change. Followership theories of leadership specifically focus on “how engaged followers can act as agents of change” (Uhl-Bien et al., 2014, p. 91) and how participation in the change process can enhance change development and implementation (Al-Haddad & Kotnour, 2015). When describing the consultation that occurred, two of the interviewees specifically identified modifications to the change or change implementation following the consultation, demonstrating the value of consultation as it relates to the digital learning environment as a motivational factor (Fullan, 2007), as well as a significant contribution to a successful implementation plan and change (Al-Haddad & Kotnour, 2015).
Although it was only explicitly stated in one interview, setting the conditions to ensure future success would have been a major consideration for all the leaders involved in overall project management as all of the changes were meant to be long-term (Moran & Brightman, 2000) and interoperability is important in the digital environment.
Leveraging success was specifically highlighted in two of the interviews. When learning support centers were created, the financial savings from early collaboration was publicized. Some specific projects such as the aircraft marshalling simulator were promoted as examples of successfully leveraging technology in military training to decrease costs and increase capability. Leveraging success is present in many change models such as Hamel’s insurrection model (win small, win early, win often), Kotter’s Leading Change Method (plan for and create short term wins) and Davenport’s process reengineering (communicate ongoing results of the effort) (Al-Haddad & Kotnour, 2015). These models use early wins to increase the credibility of the change and motivate people to commit to it (Kotter, 2012) as well as allowing stakeholders to compare the predicted conditions to the presenting conditions.
Despite the similarities in these three approaches, it is crucial that leaders study and react to each situation individually as what worked in one situation may not be applicable in another (Fullan, 2013). However, the examples studied have shown that in general leading change in digital learning works well when leaders develop and communicate a clear vision which informs change. Change can be successfully initiated from any level with stakeholder input. Key challenges such as convincing stakeholders of the return on investment and setting conditions for future success can be overcome by leveraging successes and emphasizing presenting issues.
References:
Al-Haddad, S., & Kotnour, T. (2015). Integrating the organizational change literature: a model for successful change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 28(2), 234–262. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-11-2013-0215
Castelli, P. A. (2016). Reflective leadership review: a framework for improving organisational performance. Journal of Management Development, 35(2), 217–236. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-08-2015-0112
Fullan, M. (2007). Understanding Change. In John Wiley & Sons Inc (Ed.), The jossey-bass reader on educational leadership (2nd ed., pp. 169–181). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, Wiley.
Fullan, M. (2013). Neither Theory nor Action. In M. Grogan (Ed.), The jossey-bass reader on educational leadership (3rd ed., pp. 207–219). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, Wiley.
Kotter, J. P. et. al. (2012). Leading Change : Why Transformation Efforts Fail. Harvard Business Review, (June).
Moran, J. W., & Brightman, B. K. (2000). Leading organizational change. Journal of Workplace Learning, 12(2), 66–74. https://doi.org/10.1108/13665620010316226
Morrison, E. W., & Phelps, C. C. (1999). Taking charge at work: Extrarole efforts to initiate workplace change. Academy of Management Journal, 42(4), 403–419. https://doi.org/10.2307/257011
Podsakoff, N. P., Whiting, S. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & Blume, B. D. (2009). Individual- and Organizational-Level Consequences of Organizational Citizenship Behaviors: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(1), 122–141. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013079
Uhl-Bien, M., Riggio, R. E., Lowe, K. B., & Carsten, M. K. (2014). Followership theory: A review and research agenda. Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 83–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.007
Image attribution for graphics used in infographic:
Ebaychatter0. (Artist). (2012). Boeing 777.svg [Digital image]. Retrieved from Wikimedia Commons website: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Boeing_777.svg
Icons 8. (n.d.). Graduate icon in flat style [Digital image]. Retrieved from icons website: https://icons8.com/icon/23318/graduate
PowerPoint 2016. (Microsoft Office 365 ProPlus). Computer [Digital image]. Redmond, WA: Microsoft.
PowerPoint 2016. (Microsoft Office 365 ProPlus). Three people [Digital image]. Redmond, WA: Microsoft.
PowerPoint 2016. (Microsoft Office 365 ProPlus). Person with screen [Digital image]. Redmond, WA: Microsoft.
