Proposing a model for resilient change

Image by Midjourney

As we shift from our examination of leadership into learning about and evaluating various models and frameworks for change (and change management), we had the opportunity to conduct interviews to gather experiences with the change process from our network. The change process could start with an ongoing process of assessing the landscape, identifying opportunities, then facilitating positive change, and socializing those changes into a “new normal” within the organization, to re-establish stability before starting the iterative change process again. This idealized process is often not as smooth or as simple as this in reality.

Weller and Anderson (2013) explore the origins of theories of digital resilience as applied to higher education, and summarize the idea of resilience as the capacity of a system to absorb change while retaining its core function and identity, but allowing those functions to be expressed in new forms. The distinction between form and function is essential here, particularly as it applies to digital learning. The functions of learning should remain constant, but the forms can evolve. Al-Haddad and Kotnour (2015) provide a broad range of systematic change and change management methods in their analysis of change management literature. Building on those examples, I will attempt to articulate a model for change that includes building resilience into the change management process.

Drawing upon elements of the Integrative approach to change (Bullock and Batten, 1985; Beckhard and Harris, 1987, as cited in as cited in Al-Haddad & Kotnour, 2015, p. 246) the Wheel model (Galpin, 1996, as cited in as cited in Al-Haddad & Kotnour, 2015, p. 246) and Luecke’s method (Luecke, 2003, as cited in Al-Haddad & Kotnour, 2015, p. 249), this model seeks to integrate considerations of resistance vs. resilience (Weller and Anderson, 2013) with the goal of creating a more resilient change process for digital learning.

powered by Advanced iFrame

1. Explore opportunities for change: Preserve existing learning functions while encouraging new forms.
2. Assess latitude: Determine how much change is realistically possible.
3. Identify resistance: Are leadership and the culture of the organization open and ready to accept change?
4. Consider internal and external influences: What cultural, political, economic, technological, and environmental drivers may encourage or inhibit change?
5. Design: Use the iterative design process to assess, design, prototype, and test new forms that support the functions of learning.
6. Develop: Finalize design and scale to a working model.
7. Socialize change: Prepare the organization for participatory change at the periphery, through pilot projects and engaged leadership.
8. Implement change: Roll out change to the broader organization.
9. Integrate change: Stabilize and establish “new normal,” while continuing to assess for further improvement opportunities and fostering a culture of ongoing dialog around change.

My proposed model suggests that change is indeed a complex process that must account for both internal and external influences, and must also acknowledge that change must be properly socialized into the culture of an organization in order to be fully embraced and accepted (Biech, 2007). In the post-secondary context where I currently teach, organizations seem to be more resistant to change than resilient, with a firm and unwavering commitment to campus-based learning delivery, despite demonstrated successes in digital delivery over the last three years. 

Interviewing colleagues within the digital learning community provided additional insights into successful change initiatives and the role leadership played in digital learning transformation. “Stephen,” a manager in a corporate learning environment, shared that having the trust of senior leadership was essential for managers to successfully work through change and move toward goals. Senior leaders reiterated goals often, and teams responded with commitments to moving forward and achieving those goals. Although digital training initiatives did take more time and more people than initially anticipated, Stephen still felt supported in their efforts, and empowered to voice concerns to senior leadership throughout the change process.

Chad Flynn echoed the importance of senior management support in sharing his perspective from the post-secondary context. Chad spoke of the dramatic shift in learning delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic, and how many post-secondary trades instructors were averse to using technology in teaching and had to learn a lot of new skills quickly (Flynn, 2022). But they quickly adapted and began to develop innovative approaches to teaching content that they previously thought could only be taught face-to-face.

[H]onestly they are problem-solvers. That’s what they do. They diagnose, they troubleshoot, they fix. And so, we just had to listen to them. We had to look at the ideas that they were coming up with and we had to champion [the ones that were out there] and provide them the support that they needed in order to do that.

Flynn, 2022

It is encouraging that many of the innovative teaching methods developed during COVID-19 have continued as programs returned to in-person instruction, with more of a hybrid delivery model. Flynn (2022) also notes that his learning organization adopting greater flexibility with hybrid delivery, which suggests an acknowledgement that the core functions of learning can be maintained even though the forms of learning have evolved. 

Dave Cormier (2017) wrote of the importance of building trust (both within an organization and with its suppliers), of a process of constant improvement, and development of strong digital citizenship in creating sustainable change. I noticed that the link to the project he initiated in 2017 seems to be dead, and that it was a Google hosted platform. Was it a re-evaluation of the Terms of Service that prompted a move to a different platform? Insights shared by corporate learning professionals have indicated that learning software platform vendors will often respond to RFPs and market their platforms based on checklists of real or perceived needs provided by learning administrators, often leaving it up to those doing the implementation to do much of the work of integration into both systems and culture. 

These reports from the field point to the importance of learning organizations to develop the ability to successfully absorb disruptive change, to recognize that change needs to be communicated and supported by leadership, that successful change must account for external and internal influences, and that it must be properly socialized into the culture of the organization in order for the change to be both resilient and sustainable.