For this assignment, we were asked to create a visual document with corresponding text that conveys how leaders in a digital learning environment (DLE) address change. Research, consultation, and consideration of the scope of the task led me to create Figure 1, depicting four common shared themes that contribute to successful change implemented by leaders in a DLE: Communication, Collaboration, Consideration, Contemplation.
Figure 1. Leading Change in a DLE
The Visual Explained
The visual depicts the shared themes as a circular process because I consider change in a DLE an iterative process. Planning is paramount to the success of change efforts (Biech, 2007) and is central to change regardless of the time allowance for enacting change. The Luecke method (as cited in Al-Haddad & Kotnour, 2015) notes the importance of “monitoring and adjusting” (p. 250) change initiatives in its last step, which integrates into the contemplation theme in the process. This, combined with the dynamic nature of DLEs and conversations about revisiting and revising post-change (N. Kulikova, personal communication, February 10, 2023), contributed to conveying the themes as a process compared to a linear design.
Communication
Communication is essential to change, whether it be communicating objectives, the change itself or using it to engage people. Communication in a change process can be viewed as “open, honest, frequent and strategic sharing of relevant information” (Page, 2011, p. 19), with communicating openly and honestly being an ethical consideration of change (Biech, 2007). Open communication, regular meetings (before, during and after the change), and sharing experiences were part of the change process discussed with my colleague (N. Kulikova, personal communication, February 10, 2023). Al-Haddid and Kotnour’s (2015) overview of change models displays various change management methods that include communication as part of the process, indicating its importance. Communication about how and who communicates what (the chain of communication) is also important in a change process (Boyce & Harrison, n.d.; Page, 2011) to ensure that what is meant to be communicated is accurate and recognised as official. Communication from the leadership of resources (people and technology) being used and the roles that people have in the change can help create community, comfort stakeholders (Page, 2011) and create a space for collaboration.
Collaboration
Collaboration was a consistent theme that came up throughout this research. The Luecke method and Six Step (as cited in Al-Haddad & Kotnour, 2015) include creating/developing a shared vision which infers collaboration. Creating safe spaces where people “bounce ideas” (Time 2:48) with colleagues and peers (Flynn & Harrison, n.d.), share concerns and make decisions together (Norum & Harrison, n.d.) is essential to the change process to ensure that all outcomes have been considered and encourage endorsement of the change (Page, 2011). My colleague noted that when a particular change was happening in the DLE across the university, they were told what the change was by the administration, but as a team came together regularly to discuss ideas, challenges and pathways to enact change (N. Kulikova, personal communication, February 10, 2023). A leader in a DLE should facilitate and encourage collaboration to ensure that barriers to change are mitigated and that all possible outcomes are considered.
Consideration
Consideration to me includes leadership considering what support systems are needed to facilitate change and the capacity of those involved in the change: skills, access to resources and support needed. Resource availability speaks to the organisational readiness and capacity of those who are part of the change, which can impact change effectiveness (Weiner, 2009). The need to consider inclusion and access of the user in a DLE (Jones & Harrison, n.d.; Norum & Harrison, n.d.) and consider our biases when developing educational tools (Jones & Harrison, n.d) is needed when inciting change in a DLE. Considering the digital literacy of the user and providing support systems to help those who need to be digitally literate (Boyce & Harrison, n.d; Norum & Harrison, n.d.). Ultimately, a leader in a DLE needs to consider the impact of the change on all users and what is needed to mitigate barriers and support all stakeholders to make the change happen.
Contemplation
Contemplating the change’s success and adjusting accordingly is a consistent theme in change models and my colleague’s discussion. The Luecke Method, Jick and Kanter Method Leading Change Method, PAR, Wheel, Lean Thinking and Six Step all contain elements of reviewing and adjusting (as cited in Al-Haddad & Kotnour, 2015). My colleague mentioned that several meetings post-change to monitor change tend to occur: one immediately after to reflect and make immediate changes that are needed; furthermore, one or more as the progress of the change is monitored where potential updates to technology are introduced/ considered or to determine if the same support is needed (N. Kulikova, personal communication, February 10, 2023). This often occurs when the users have surpassed the introduction level support needs of the potential tool being introduced (N. Kulikova, personal communication, February 10, 2023). Leaders in a DLE need to understand that just because a change is “done,” the dynamic nature of technology and a DLE needs to be continually monitored and adjusted when and where needed.
Change in My Context
These themes are part of successful change based on research and my experience working in a DLE. One workplace has supportive leadership that embodies all that is in the model. I see change being implemented smoothly when it is communicated to instructors and students. Conversely, another workplace has a top-down approach where change is implemented in a DLE with limited digital literacy (both leadership, staff and students) and users with multiple access issues that are never considered. Change here is never smooth, well-received or successful, but without contemplation, there is no space for feedback or improvement.
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
Biech, E. (2007). Thriving through change: A leader’s practical guide to change mastery. Association for Talent Development.
Boyce, C., & Harrison, M. (n.d.). Voices of leadership. MALAT Course Site – LRNT 525. Retrieved February 16, 2023, from https://malat-coursesite.royalroads.ca/lrnt525/schedule/voices/
Flynn, C., & Harrison, M. (n.d.). Voices of leadership. MALAT Course Site- LRNT 525. Retrieved February 14, 2023, from https://malat-coursesite.royalroads.ca/lrnt525/schedule/voices/
Jones, C., & Harrison, M. (n.d.). Voices of leadership. MALAT Course Site- LRNT 525. Retrieved February 16, 2023, from https://malat-coursesite.royalroads.ca/lrnt525/schedule/voices/
Norum, S., & Harrison, M. (n.d.). Voices of leadership. MALAT Course Site – LRNT 525. Retrieved February 16, 2023, from https://malat-coursesite.royalroads.ca/lrnt525/schedule/voices/
Page, M. B. (2011). Change happens: Your guide to navigating change using the 5C model. Authenticity Press.
Weiner, B. J. (2009). A theory of organizational readiness for change. Implementation Science, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-67
Oooh, I do love good use of alliteration! Great distilling of complex ideas down to a simple four-step process, Gill! I also really appreciate the cyclical/iterative design. We had very similar sources, inspiration, and references, and built very different processes.
In my context, it seems like there is a fair amount of resistance to digital learning from both faculty and administration. In your organization, do you find changes need to be socialized with their audiences first or is the culture ready to embrace and absorb change in a resilient way?
Thanks for reading, Darren!! I too like alliteration. 🙂
It’s interesting to me how we all work with similar materials, but with context and perspective added to the mix, we get such different results. I originally had “capacity” as a separate element but combined it with “consideration” to fit the assignment.
I think there is an element of socialisation for buy-in that is needed, and if the culture is open, it makes it easier.
One thing that came up in my discussions with my colleague that did not make the cut in my post was “time and space.” Time and space to plan, time and space to build systems, time and space to digest change, time and space to learn new systems and give input, time and space to reflect on the change. Buy-in to the change is less dramatic and stressful when people are given the time to sit with what is happening, wrap their heads around it, and see the change’s value.
One of the things I have noticed at my university context is the support and notice when they make major changes in the DLE. As instructors, we are given lots of notice when the change will occur. We are given clear messaging about why it’s happening and the value of the change. We receive impact information, resources and training when needed. I have never felt uncomfortable with any changes that were being put in place. Nor have I heard any faculty grumbling about the change.
At the college I work at, change is just told to us on a day’s notice. There is no socialisation. People either do their due diligence and change or ignore it until the administration realises they are not doing what was asked. It was recently found that several instructors had not made a MAJOR change from 8 months ago in how they were recording grades and delivering their courses. But it took 8 months for anyone to notice :(. There is more of a culture of being reactive vs proactive which I think can also influence how to manage change.