From Intended Strategies to Unintended Outcomes: The Impact of Change Recipient Sensemaking

By Julia Balogun, G. Johnson. 2005

667 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management Information Systems, Management Science and Operations Research, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e36e02b5f4fac58c86879876bd99f0732b88dba2

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Management Information Systems

In Management Science and Operations Research

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

Citations in the corpus

The Conjoint Influence of Top and Middle Management Characteristics on Management Innovation (2018, background): “Although MM plays a critical role in the realization of TM’s intent when supportive, they can also introduce delays to, reduce the quality of, or even sabotage changes advocated by TM (Balogun & Johnson, 2005; Mantere, 2008; Wooldridge, Schmid, & Floyd, 2008).”
Coping with Problems of Understanding in Interorganizational Relationships: Using Formalization as a Means to Make Sense (2006, background): “A third mechanism through which formalization facilitates sensemaking revolves around its role in instigating and maintaining interaction (Avadikyan et al. 2001; Balogun and Johnson 2005; Simons 1995).”
Rethinking ‘Top-Down’ and ‘Bottom-Up’ Roles of Top and Middle Managers in Organizational Change: Implications for Employee Support (2017, neutral): “Conventional thinking is still dominated by models of change assuming that TMs initiate change and either assume delegation of its execution to MMs (Balogun and Johnson, 2005; Huy et al., 2014; Lüscher and Lewis, 2008) or do not explain how the theorized change comes about (Westley, 1990).”
Considering planned change anew:stretching large group interventions strategically, emotionally and meaningfully (2011, background): “…getting significant strategic issues onto the agenda of senior managers to influence strategic direction and in facilitating change implementation (Balogun & Johnson, 2004, 2005; Bower, 1970; Burgelman, 1983, 1991; Burgelman, 2005; Dutton & Ashford, 1993; Dutton, Ashford, O'Neill, & Lawrence,…”
Sensemaking in Organizations: Taking Stock and Moving Forward (2014, background): “…high level aspirations into local changes that underpin the vision and keep Sensemaking in Organizations † 89 D ow nl oa de d by [ Ju st ic e In st o f B ri tis h C ol um bi a] a t 1 4: 53 0 5 M ar ch 2 01 4 business going during the transition (Balogun, 2003; Balogun & Johnson, 2004, 2005).”
The “Other” Time: A Review of the Subjective Experience of Time in Organizations (2020, background): “…and aspirations relative to past and present circumstances (Carlsen, 2006*; Costas & Grey, 2014*) Interpreting change – Sensemaking processes that arise from interaction processes in response to organizational change over time (Balogun & Johnson, 2005*; Bean & Hamilton, 2006*) K Kairos –”
Work-Life Events Theory: Making Sense of Shock Events in Dual-Earner Couples (2019, background): “Partners go through the process of sensemaking in a dyadic fashion, considering each partner’s thoughts in order to make a decision about resource investment (Balogun & Johnson, 2005; Smith&Moen, 1998).”
Implementation Activities and Organizational Sensemaking (2008, background): “…are clear, the translation from strategic objectives to operational plans is not necessarily a simple or uncontested procedure (Baier et al., 1988; Balogun & Johnson, 2005; Drazin, Glynn, & Kazanjian, 1999; Whittington, 2002) but is subject to different interpretations by the change recipient…”
Experiencing Gossip: The Foundations for a Theory of Embedded Organizational Gossip (2010, background): “…middle managers made sense of top-down change strategies and the intended and unintended consequences of their sensemaking activities (Balogun, 2006; Balogun & Johnson, 2004, 2005), employees’ sensemaking about a change from traditional office-based work to nomadic work (Bean & Eisenberg, 2006;…”