Older models focused on motivation through external means of inciting change through incentives and freezing once the desired state has been reached (Al-Haddad & Kotnour, 2015). More recent models have identified that change is constant; instead of external motivations, these models focus on creating valence, or the need to value upcoming change (Weiner, 2009). COVID-19 and the shift to online learning further help identify the organizations and individuals that are change-averse and change-willing. From my experience, as a participant, leader, and observer, many people lacked valence during this time and rarely attempted to change the methodological approaches to their practice. Instead of lecturing in front of a live class, they did it over Google Meet or Zoom. I hoped that educators would realize that change can be useful, that the path of least resistance does not create growth in their practice; and perhaps, understand that just because something works, it does not mean we do it verbatim until the cognitive processes associated with the action are ingrained in our memories. However, as I learned, my organization does not value change, or more accurately, they acknowledge it and attempt to show they are not change-averse through duplicity but are rarely willing to engage in change because of the fear of failure. From these realizations, I believe two things are needed for upcoming educational changes; we need organizations and people that value change, are willing to risk or even embrace failure, likewise, said organizations need to hire people who have the thirst to improve are vital to be agile and adaptable in today’s world.
Which theories/models do you think best align with your own approach to leading in a digital learning environment? Do these approaches align with your organizational context? Thinking again about how quickly shifts can occur, what ideas about introducing change would you take into future planning?
In truth, no single theory spoke to me. I found valuable things from one theory or model, but no single model would be a perfect fit. For example, I found the clash of values (Burns & Jackson, 2011) to be very applicable for K – 12 instructions because they have the unique case where they are truly not in charge of their own destiny as they are ultimately accountable to a board of elected officials. Unlike traditional organizations, their constituents, the students, and accountability, parents/communication are two separate entities that rarely are aligned in their own values. It makes inciting change and balancing the values of the associated groups a seemingly impossible juggling act. People that tend to navigate these turbulent waters do it through a shared set of values. These values tend to be simple and often shared universally throughout the surrounding community. In the future, the change should come secondary to value alignment; onces values are aligned, then change can occur through these shared values.
What role does leadership play in managing change?
In my mind, the leader has a few roles. The first role begins well before the thought of managing change, hire the right people. I do not even want to use the phrase “change resilient” because it gives the term a negative connotation. Instead, I would focus on hiring people with the same core values, that are not afraid to fail to uphold these values. By employing these people, they are automatically intrinsically motivated and not adverse to change.
When the time comes for change, the leader is often the instigator, the engineer, the maintenance crew, and the symbol of the change. The leader needs to plan for the change using an approach that aligns with their organization’s values. Giving a clear vision gives some stability to people that struggle with change. Likewise, being visible and involved in the change models it to others while giving the leader a glimpse into their followers’ perspective.
What are the unique challenges in managing change for learning in digital environments?
Well, I spent this whole time talking about values and the need for them to be aligned. Values are something personal, a part of a person, and even in the best circumstances sharing these values is not easy. Online communications are not the best means to incite change because they leave out the human aspect. Look no further than memes, gifs, and emojis for shallow attempts to convey the emotion behind these online interactions. There is still a perceived awkwardness in digital environments, and while it is, undoubtingly, possible to covey a value-based message online, it seems to be an art that few have mastered.
Reference
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://www-emeraldinsight-com.ezproxy.royalroads.ca/doi/full/10.1108/JOCM-11-2013-0215
Burnes, B. and Jackson, P. (2011), Success and failure in organizational change: an exploration of the role of values. Journal of Change Management, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 133-162.
Weiner, B. J. (2009). A theory of organizational readiness for change. Implementation Science, 4(67). https://implementationscience.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1748-5908-4-67
Hi Mike,
You highlight that in any change initiative ” the leader is often the instigator, the engineer, the maintenance crew, and the symbol of the change.” You also focus on the need for the organization/community to come to a set of shared values and outline how challenging this can be. So how can you (the general you :)) instigate and engineer a process that can steer a group in the right direction? What are some early tangible steps that can get a group to start thinking about shared values (even in a distributed environment). Our institution did a visioning exercise that had a blended approach – they used a digital tool where people could share values which then could be “upvoted” if others shared those values – then these were discussed in either F2F or online synchronous sessions. I am not sure how successful the participants found it, but our leadership did develop a new mission and values statement through this process. Has anyone else been through a successful visioning exercise?
Hey Michelle,
Oddly enough, I was part of my division’s visioning process. It was not a formal or organized system, as it lacked a voting system; it was more of a discussion at a round table. I had a few issues with the statements, as they are all address in a DO NOT do this, rather than something to strive towards. You can view them at the bottom of this page (https://www.plrd.ab.ca/teaching-and-learning), and I cite them in my assignment 1 (well, at least my current draft). Moreover, once they were developed, they were never addressed or cited again as a rationale behind change or actions. However, the administration and now some teachers often cite the following when attempting to incite change: “it is in the students’ best interest.”