Change Management and Organizational Development

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
The Personal Real Case Situation/Experience/Incident Put into Context
Reflection
Other Theories
Alternative Courses of Action
Learning and Conclusion
Works Cited

Introduction

This paper seeks to give an intrinsic evaluation of my experience with regards to the concepts of leadership, change management, and organizational development, with a special connection being established between these issues and a real case change situation experienced personally. In doing so, relevant examples, ideas, opinions, notions, theories, and facts from various scholarly quarters will be used to advance the arguments here. Notably, the central focus will be on “the M3C model of cooperative contextual change” advanced by Biscaccianti et al. This model of change emphatically posits that change management is a highly intricate and dynamic process that calls for the introduction of a dynamic stability system if full efficacy is to be facilitated in an organization (Biscaccianti et al. 19) In the M3C model, Biscaccianti et al. (22-23) asserts that the following four elements are normally considered vital in the introductions, implementation and sustainability of dynamic stability:

Provision of a fitting direction and explicitly revealing the issue at stake to everybody or, rather, all the concerned parties in the organization
Promotion of co-opting and co-building of rules and regulations in a way that the introduction, implementation, and sustenance of these ground rules are done in a consistent manner.
Adoption of a systematic work-based relationship that will facilitate the initiation and regulation of activities and actions at all levels of the company.
We are fostering a solution-oriented mindset throughout the company.

Despite the existence of several scholarly and research-based proofs that the M3C model is efficient, a joint study by Allen and Meyer (10-18) indicate that this model cannot survive on its own unless it is blended with other relevant change management ideologies and theories. It is based on this reason that other necessary scholarly arguments will be applied in this writing. For example, the “reading and carrying” framework, advanced by James and Arroba (299-316), which emphasizes the value of emotions in leadership, will be duly applied and relevantly considered in this paper.

In addition, this paper will blend Johns’ model of structured reflection and Gibb’s reflective cycle in detailing my experiences and reflecting on how they influence change management. In brief, John’s model of structured reflection recommends that, when we need to appropriately reflect on an issue, we should begin by identifying the incident/experience while putting it into the right context of analysis. Once done, John’s model recommends moving into the second stage, which entails real reflection. This is then followed by the detailing of alternative action (what you would have done differently), basing your arguments on established studies. Finally, there is the learning stage, where we show what has been learned from the change management experience.

On the other hand, Gibbs reflective cycle talks of more-or-less the same facets as John’s model, except for the fact that in Gibbs model, the key stages of the entire reflection process are summarized in a cycle that comprises of the description of the incident, feelings towards the incident, evaluation of the incident, analysis of the incident, conclusion and then an action plan or way forward if the incident was to occur again. It is upon all these models that this paper will be written.

The Personal Real Case Situation/Experience/Incident Put into Context

The incident below essentially occurred when I was a teenager and, as will exhaustively discussed later in the reflection section; the incident greatly affected my dream of being a good leader and business manager routing for change management.

In the incident, our biology organized a class trip to St. John’s Hospital, which specializes in the treatment of skin-related diseases. Unknown to the class, burns made a bulk of the diseases treated at the hospital, and there were many patients with varying degrees of burns that you could have easily confused it for a fire accident scene. Anyway, as a precaution, we were divided into groups of two and distributed to various units to avoid intimidation to the patients. In addition, stern instructions were given before being handed out to doctors and nurses who were doing rounds in the wards. It was in one of these wards that we met a woman who had experienced over 30% degree burns and was undergoing reconstructive surgery on her face. Her story is the kind that is great emotional and one that overwhelmingly shaped my thinking towards emotional issues in life and change management, as a general concept.

Allegedly, ethnic groups in that woman’s country of origin had turned against one another after a disputed presidential election, forcing some communities to flee their residences. While fleeing from her place of stay, she and some other members of her community sought refuge in a church. While in the church, some arsonists attacked them, blocked all possible escape routes from the church then set it ablaze. That is how the woman found her way in a hospital bed, miles away from her country. As the doctor told the story, I could see how moved he was, judging by the tears in his eyes and the cautious yet heartfelt way he spoke about the incident.

Being from a relatively poor family, the woman was not able to shoulder the entire cost of the treatment. However, as I later came to learn a few weeks later when I visited the hospital voluntarily, the doctor (who told us the story) had been able to ask for funds from well-wishers—in spite of his kind action being against the professional rules of the hospital which stated that “doctors should not fraternize or get too personally involved with their patients.” As a result of his actions, which were deemed “unprofessional” by the manager of the hospital, the doctor was sacked.

When I learned about the doctor being laid off his duties at the hospital, I could not help feeling confused. On the one hand, I knew that being a manager entails correcting problems and ensuring that rules are followed. Basing my arguments on this viewpoint, I told myself that the manager was probably right for sacking the doctor in accordance with the rules and regulations in the hospital.

On the other hand, the principles of morality and empathy call for us to be responsible—sometimes even at our own expense. And to this regard, I felt that the doctor was probably right for helping the patient who was in great pain yet had no way of getting help.

For a long time after that day, I kept on thinking about the incident and wondering how I would have reacted if I was the doctor or the manager. This led me to my quest of digging deep into the annals of history to find out about similar cases and how the people involved in these cases reacted while, unknowingly, orienting me towards the direction of routing for change in management systems of organizations during such instances of a professional and personal dilemma. As of today, I candidly know what I would have done differently; as the doctor, I would have done the same thing that was done by the doctor in my incident.

However, as a manager, I would have probably given a lesser punishment like a suspension or even warn the doctor in question. Justifications about why I would have acted this way will be specifically detailed in the section that comes after the reflection stage.

Reflection

In reflecting on this issue, my arguments will be detailed two-way. In the first part, I will give a general reflection based on my own experiences and general studies by other scholars. Then in the second part, the focus will mainly be on theoretical arguments put forward by authoritative academicians on the incident I had and my prospected job.

General Reflection

To begin with, Bing asserts that a good leader should be aggressive, talented, and skillful to be able to handle both internal and external demands of his/her workplace. However, Bing goes ahead to say that the aforementioned traits should be balanced such that the workplace is not “crowded out” by the leaders’ need to be effective. In other words, too much strength and aggressiveness can sometimes weaken and atrophy the workers’ ability to act interdependently, as is required of them.

As an ardent business student who is mainly concerned with managerial and leadership issues related to change, I purpose to illuminate ideas on change management and ways of identifying as well as dealing with the risks that come with this change. As opposed to the manager at St. John’s hospital who decided to quickly sack the doctor without considering other factors such as the value of what was done by that doctor to the patient, I hope to be considerate such that the doctor is punished in a less cruel way.

The above viewpoint is supported by Gosling and Mintzberg (19-22), who say that leadership is a complex endeavor that calls for astute leaders who are ready to deal with the complexities of change while managing the risks that come their way. Moreover, Gosling and Mintzberg assert that different forms of change require different change-related leadership skills (20-22). Whereas leaders in business-oriented organizations should concentrate more on profitability, the satisfaction of clients, as well as the workers and stakeholders, leaders in institutions like hospitals prioritize people being healed, and the prevention of diseases. In a case like the one earlier mentioned, the manager should be able to balance between the healing needs of the client and the hospital’s rules and not just concentrating on one end.

According to Vince, organization learning in regards to managerial change has been repeatedly proven to be a valuable element of leadership (1325-1329). This is not only because learning how to deal with change helps us to advance but is also pegged on the argument that learning helps us to avoid mistakes while intermittently dealing with risks in a fitting way (Watzlawick et al. 75-90).

It is, therefore, not just enough to look at my incident and think about what might have been done differently; it is better for me to find a way of forging ahead and advancing ways in which changes can be inculcated now, and even in the future. It is with this in mind that I seek to use the experience, together with the learning I have had, to help better today’s world, and that is one of the sole reasons I seek to positively revolutionize a myriad of organizations through relevant ideas on change management.

Importantly, Biscaccianti et al. (17-30) report that the aspect of emotional intelligence by leaders in dealing with change management has been strongly supported by many scholars such as Thomas C. Neil, and Ouchi and Johnson, among others. To these scholars, leaders should be emotionally intelligent and be ready to deal with emotional issues. However, De Bono precautions in his “six thinking hats technique” (white, yellow, green, red, black, and blue hat) that emotions and rationalities should not be mixed since they tend to complicate the process of thinking Biscaccianti et al. 23-25). This way, dilemmas, like that in my incident, will be easily dealt with.

Theory-Based Reflection: The M3C Model and Other Theories

The M3C Model

In regard to change management, Biscaccianti et al. state that the M3C model was primarily established based on the viewpoint that “effective change requires a shift in the existing paradigm” (81). Furthermore, Biscaccianti and his fellow authors assert that this shift in paradigm has to occur relevantly in accordance to the context of change as well as the perceptions of the people during that given time (81-84). In other words, change in management requires a shift in paradigm, while the context and the people’s or organization’s perceptions are duly considered. Applying this argument in our case, the doctor’s actions, as well as the change management action by the managers of the hospital, should have considered all these elements instead of emphasizing some aspects while neglecting others. To do a more circumspect analysis of this M3C model, the aforementioned four elements of dynamic stability will be discussed below.

Element 1 of Dynamic Stability: Explicitly stating what is at Stake

According to Biscaccianti et al. (84), stake simply refers to the most valuable product or service that a community or an individual usually wants to protect in any given case of change management. The invaluable nature of this asset (product or service) necessitates the need for the involved parties to have a good understanding (Biscaccianti et al. 84-85). It is for this reason that explicitness of the stake is usually considered to be very crucial since the organization or individuals are able to make a well-thought choice after considering the advantages and ramifications of a particular change initiative (Watzlawick et al. 65-71).

In our case, the treatment of the patient, the hospital regulations, and the managerial action on sacking or retaining of the doctor can all be considered as issues at stake. It would have been advisable for all these issues to be explicitly considered instead of rushing into certain decisions without careful consideration of the stake, context, and consequences of these decisions.

Element 2 of Dynamic Stability: Co-Built and Co-Opted Ground Rules

In essence, ground rules simply refer to regulations regarding the way initiatives or actions should be carried within an organization, environment, or community (Schutz 33-40). Biscaccianti et al. (85-86) state that these ground rules help in defining the responsibilities and roles of various people, delineating the overall philosophy of interaction by these people, and spelling out the interfaces of different elements in a given system. In turn, everyone clearly knows what is expected of him/her by the organization, thus facilitating the smooth running of the organization, which often leads to progress (Ouchi & Johnson 295-305). It is important to note that the efficacy of ground rules heavily relies on sustainable cooperation in the making as well as the implementation and sustenance of the rules (Biscaccianti et al. 86).

Today, there are many ground rules in different organizations or communities. However, in regard to change management, Biscaccianti et al. (86) say that there are only two major ground rules. These are:

Ground rules must be developed through a cooperative process among the involved parties.
All ground rules have to be measured against the stake and environment.

In our real case situation, the ground rules were clearly defined. The problem, however, was in measuring the rules against the issues at stake. The dynamics of the world of business have often led to such situations whereby there are no clear-cut rules and regulations in measuring the stake and environment. It is during such instances that other factors, such as the overall well-being of the organization or clients, are considered. This, probably, is the reason the decisions made by the doctor were greatly debated. As a general rule, Koestler (21-30) says that when there is contention between ground rules, the environment, and the stake, priority has to be given to the stake. Commendably, great change management improvements have been made in regard to dealing with such issues. However, more provisions on such ground rules need to be made to avoid more of such professional tussles in the future.

Element 3 of Dynamic Stability: Systematic Work-Based Relationships (to Initiate and Regulate Organizational/Individual Actions)

The way people relate in a given environment plays a very important role in facilitating that environment’s efficacy. In regard to this third element of dynamic stability, the emphasis is normally laid on the alignment and cooperation of workers. As explained in the previous sections, cooperation among workers ensures that people work towards the same goals, thus helping in the initiation and regulation of actions in a similar way, which orients success. Suppose an organization notices that some problem with regards to the relationships at work, urgent change management measures should be taken accordingly. For example, in our real case, the management usually had strict rules about the relationship between doctors and their clients. However, ever since the doctor’s personal involvement with the patient helped in saving the patient’s life, the management could decide to make certain provisions in which some form of personalized involvements are permitted. In fact, in most organizations today, such personalized involvements are permitted as long as such actions are initiated or regulated by the organization’s professional code of conduct.

Element 3 of Dynamic Stability: Solution-Oriented Mindset

A solution-oriented mindset is basically pegged on the renowned ideology of looking at a glass as being half-full instead of being half-empty. In other words, individuals and organizations should always strive to better themselves and develop instead of complaining or fault-finding one another. Through a solution-oriented mindset, an organization is not only able to foster success, but it will also be able to deal with failures by accepting them and groping for ways of improvements such as training (Biscaccianti et al. 86-87). Four conditions believed to help in inculcating a solution-oriented mindset are given below:

Individuals capable of presenting solutions to issues instead of trying to explain or complain about these issues (Watzlawick et al. 30-40).
Offered solutions should have undergone a cooperative process entailing co-opting and co-building (Schutz 29-35).
The solution must primarily ensure that the stake is duly considered and protected (Fisher et al. 15-25).
The solution must be environmentally viable. In other words, it should be able to protect the needs of the individuals, community, or organization that it serves without limiting other salient parts such as the stake (Fisher et al. 30-50).

As per the case, it can be generally said that even though there were some discrepancies with considering what was at stake and protecting the needs of the community/organization, both the management of the hospital and the doctor did their best in adopting a solution-oriented mindset.

As a rejoinder of the M3C model, it should be noted that all these elements function interdependently—the efficacy of one element greatly determines the success of the other. For this reason, all these elements should be handled with equal attention.

In addition to these elements, individuals, organizations, or environments should also ensure that the four main modules of the M3C model (contextual assessment, contextual drivers, community norms, and cooperative innovation commonly abbreviated as CA, CD, CN, and CI respectively) are also adequately considered. In essence, these modules more-or-less emphasize the already discussed elements. Having in-depth on the four elements will help us to handle other aspects of the modules such as the importance of risk assessment, risk management, and more importantly, the learning process of introducing, implementing, and sustaining the M3C model in a particular environment or organization.

Other Theories

Psychoanalytic Theory

The psychoanalytic theory is believed to have originated from the early articulations of Sigmund Freud and other psychology thinkers who supported the ideologies of psychoanalysis. This theory centers on the ideology that our early childhood (usually stored in the unconscious mind) has a lot to do with how we behave or act presently. So if we want to get solutions to certain problems, all we have to do is tap into these memories stored in the unconscious mind—while considering the hierarchy needs put forward by Maslow in that process. Below is a diagram of the hierarchy of needs:

Fig 1: Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Theory.

Once someone masters his/her mind, he/she is able to find ways of propagating positive ideas while shutting off the negative ones. One of the leading instruments developed to help leaders know themselves well is the Myers-Briggs type indicator, which is essentially based on Jung’s four personality types: extrovert versus introvert, sensor versus. Intuition, feeler versus thinker, and perceiver versus judger (Stech). Below is a diagrammatic summary of the Myers-Briggs type indicator:

Fig. 2: The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator.

According to Armstrong et al., the psychoanalytic approach is important in the “recognition of centrality and emotional experiences” in human beings as conscious and unconscious levels. This is the likely reason even though the experience at St. John’s hospital happened a while back, the details of the incident are still vivid in my mind to date, and I am still seeking to make amends through change management.

Psychodynamic Perspective Theory

According to Cilliers (1-5), the psychodynamic theory is more-or-less an extension of the psychoanalytical theory. However, in psychodynamics, the emphasis is laid on the influence of environments with organizations being viewed as external realities that significantly affect people in emotional and psychological ways. Since proponents of psychodynamics believe that personal experiences greatly affect our learning and development, it is advisable that our learning environments are tailored with leaders and people who urge positive and insightful experiences (Bing). It is with this in mind that I seek to use my knowledge of management to transform various business-oriented industries through already-proven techniques such as coaching, creating an environment with some modicum anxiety and denial enough to motivate efficacy and productivity at work proper conflict resolution, and reward and punishment systems. Below is a summary of these motivating forces:

Fig. 3: Motivating Forces in the Psychodynamic Model.

Alternative Courses of Action

According to Bing, “It does not feel possible or even advisable to have a goal of changing the leader’s character, both because it does not work and because their character has provided guidance and strength that has made the organization successful.” As an alternative, Bing advises that in the bid to reduce a “crowded out” organization, we should create a situation whereby the leader gives space on which growth of other people can be facilitated. To create this space that reduces overcrowding of the workplace by the leader, Bing gives the following pointers:

Creation of deliberate, reflective space using structured rituals during company events such as retreats and team meetings.
Use variable techniques and methods of large group design to break the monotony in the interaction between leaders and workers.
I am linking the need for various conducts to a higher-level goal of the person in leadership.
They are helping individuals and team members to improve their work skills such that they are in tandem with the leader’s governing and work style.

Therefore, if I was the manager at St. John’s hospital, I would have given a less-strict punishment like a suspension to the doctor. This would have not only taught the doctor and other people in the hospital to avoid breaking the rules, but it would have also given the doctor an opportunity for continuing with his work while striving to better his professional conduct.

Based on studies conducted in Africa, Bolden and Kirk state that good traits by leaders set a good example that can be emulated by their subjects. Consequently, by developing a system in which good leaders and good leadership traits are developed, organizations are bound to cumulatively develop as well. Put in simpler terms, “leadership development can act as a catalyst for community-level social change by engaging participants in a collective process of identity work – the construction and reconstruction of a concept of self within the community” (Bolden & Kirk 13).

In another study by Bolden and Kirk in the same year, the two scholars say that based on the contemporary changes in the world of leadership, there should be more focus on leadership and not the leader. To do so, the latter studies by Bolden and Kirk (27-33) propose that the following considerations are made:

Widening scales of operation: This entails breaking down organizational boundaries and bureaucracies to encourage inter-agency cooperation.
I am shortening time frames: Facilitating interdependency between stakeholders to facilitate flexibility, accountability, responsibility, and rapid change.
Remote working: Emphasis is laid on choosing good working environments.
Better Money management: This is mainly facilitated through proper budgeting.
We are encouraging accountability and Transparency in all organizational endeavors.

Based on the above recommendations, if I was the manager at St. John’s hospital, I would have endeavored to change or modify the rules such that they accommodate emotional intelligence at work—up to a level that is not overused. Again, instead of having to ask for funds in a way that is against the hospitals, I would have encouraged provisions that enable the hospital to seek support from well-wishers. Alternatively, the hospital would just treat the patient, based on the urgency of her case, then ask for the payments later or, as a way of giving back to the community, the management decides to shoulder the entire bill for such needy yet helpless patients.

As a matter of fact, Stech says that, in the psychodynamic model, conflicts and anxieties are viewed as acceptable facets of learning. However, they say that extreme cases of conflict and anxiety (especially those that entail highly emotional endeavors), which, in effect, lead to dire ramifications, should be avoided. This is similarly supported by a myriad of studies detailed in the M3C model where emotional intelligence is considered a key aspect of change management. One of such scholars who support the ideas of emotional intelligence and its relevance in change leadership is Thomas C. Neil (Biscaccianti et al. 17-19).

Based on the above assertions, it can, therefore, be said that the conflict between the manager and the doctor was, to some extent, acceptable. However, sacking the doctor because of a conflict which could have, otherwise, been easily resolved in other amicable ways (going by the highly emotional and urgent nature of the patient’s case, which required a speedy solution); was not an utterly right action to take.

As a rejoinder, it is worth mentioning that even though I would have done the above-mentioned things differently; it would be unfair to judge the manager of St. John’s hospital for acting the way he did since, back then, there were no pin-pointedly precise laws about how managers should act in such dilemmas or even deal with highly emotional cases.

Learning and Conclusion

Looking back at my experience, I am no longer feeling torn between supporting the manager or doctor at St. Johns hospital since I now know the right cause of action that should have been taken. In addition, as earlier mentioned, so many developments have since been made with regards to emotional endeavors which, back then, were unavailable. It is for this reason that more studies should be conducted on change management using the above-discussed models and theories so that the knowledge can be rightfully used to guide people working in similar conditions while striving to better the misconceptions that surround change management at workplaces.

Remarkably, from my incident and the extensive research, I did then, I was able to learn several lessons. A summary of the major lessons I got is embodied in the points given below.

Firstly, I learned that the nature of organizations and their operations today are hugely different from those of the past (Bolden & Kirk 1-14). For example, in today’s organizations, there is more focus on leadership as an entire entity, while in the past, the focus was on the leaders (Bolden 2-4). In spite of these changes, there is still a myriad of challenges faced by leaders or leaderships in organizations (Armstrong et al.). This, essentially, means that there is still a lot that needs to be done in order for these leaders and the leaderships in organizations to achieve full efficacy.

Secondly, Biscaccianti et al. (92-95) call for more innovation and creativity to be encouraged among leaders while we continually strive to learn from those around us. By doing this, Biscaccianti et al. say that we will not only be able to keep up with the rest of well-performing leaderships but we will also be able to establish new and better leadership methods that keep us ahead of the rest (249-250).

Thirdly, Bawany (2-3) articulates that “studies have demonstrated that leaders who consistently outperform their peers not only have the technical skills required, but more importantly, have mastered most of the aspects of Emotional Intelligence.” Based on these studies, forums and learning endeavors that encourage emotional intelligence—among other facets of learning, management and development—should be highly encouraged. Goleman et al. (42-48) supports the above by reporting that studies from various places show that the moods of leaders greatly determine efficacy at work. For this reason, working environments should be established such that leaders’ moods stay positive and jovial.

Fourthly, Gosling and Mintzberg (19-22) state that leadership positions should not be used to encourage negative activities like favoritism since this deviates from the objectivity of leadership to offer just and fair guidance to subjects. This point is supported by James and Arroba (305-310) who say that things as such as control and abandonment diminish the essence of leadership. Instead of these negative ventures, leadership should be used to champion the goals and aims of the organization, reward good workers while punish the bad ones, encourage learning and orient development.

Fifthly, the learning process of introducing, implementing and sustaining the M3C model (and other theories and models as well) is highly complex and somewhat involving. However, success in business-oriented industries is a painstaking and continuous process that calls for utter commitment and constancy to purpose. If we are to achieve this success, then it is unavoidably necessary that necessary learning, implementation and sustenance channels are put in place by the relevant individuals and organization.

As earlier mentioned, a good number of such initiatives are currently in place. Nonetheless, more initiatives—especially from learning institution—are required to ensure that change management is duly championed. It is only through such initiatives that the barriers and limitations of change management can be thwarted while development and solution-oriented endeavors are proliferated.

In finality, it is worth restating that the M3C model has been used by various individuals, organizations and environments to champion change-related endeavors. It is based on this reason that I would encourage it usage in many other organizations. However, as has been explicitly documented in this paper, full efficacy at work calls for many other leadership and managerial essentials.

Works Cited

Allen, Natalie and Meyer John. “The Measurement and Antecedents of Effective, Continuance and Normative Commitment to the Organization.” Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63 (1990): 1–18. Print.

Armstrong, David, Bazalgette John and Hutton Jean. What Does Management Really Mean? In R Casemore et al. (eds) – What Makes Consultancy Work – Understanding the Dynamics, London, UK: South Bank University, 1994. Print.

Bawany, Satter. “Leadership that Gets Results: Impact and Measurement of Emotional Intelligence on Leadership Effectiveness.” Human Capital, 10.4 (2000). Web.

Bing, Debbie. Crowding Out the Space: The Weakness of a Strong Leader. 2007. Web.

Biscaccianti, Alessandro, Esposito Mark and Williams Lloyd. The M3C Model of Cooperative Contextual Change, Mustang, Oklahoma: Tate Publishing & Enterprises, LLC, 2011. Print.

Bolden, Richard and Kirk Philip. Transforming Communities through Leadership Development: A Pan-African Example. 2006. Web.

Bolden, Richard and Kirk Philip. From Leaders to Leadership. Effective Executive, 8.10 (2006): 27-33.

Bolden, Richard. What Is Leadership Development: Purpose And Practice? 2005. Web.

Cilliers, Frans. A Systems Psycho-Dynamic Interpretation of Coaching Experiences. 2004. Web.

Fisher, Roger, Ury William and Patton, Bruce. Getting to Yes, Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1991. Print.

Goleman, Daniel, Boyatzis Richard and Mckee Anne. “Primal Leadership: the Hidden Driver of Great Performance.” Harvard Business review, (2001): 42-51. Print.

Gosling, Jonathan and Mintzberg Henry. “The education of practicing managers.” Sloan Management Review, 45.4 (2003): 19-22. Print.

James, Kim and Arroba Tanya. “Reading and Carrying: A Framework for Learning about Emotion and Emotionality in Organizational Systems as a Core Aspect of Leadership Development.” Management Learning, 36.3 (2005): 299-316. Print.

Koestler, Arthur. The Act of Creation, New York: The Macmillan Company, 1964. Print.

Ouchi, William and Johnson Jerry. “Types of Organizational Control and Their Relationship to Emotional Well Being.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 23.2 (1978): 293–318. Print.

Schutz, Will. FIRO: A Three-Dimensional Theory of Interpersonal Behavior, New York: Holt Rinehart and Wilson, 1958. Print.

Stech, Ernest. The Psychodynamic Approach. 2010. Web.

Vince, Russ. “Power and Emotion in Organizational Learning.” Human Relations, 54.10 (2001): 1325–1351. Print.

Watzlawick, Paul, Weakland John and Fisch Richard. Change; Principles of Problem Formation and Problem Resolution, New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 1974. Print.

Click Here To Order Now!