Archived: Change Has Changed: Implications for Implementation of Assessments from the Organizational Change Literature

A r c h i v e d I n f o r m a t i o n

Systemic Reform: Perspectives on Personalizing Education - September 1994

Processes: What Makes Change Work

Strategies

Strategies to support the understanding of innovations are as important as support for individuals working with the innovations. Such strategies need to be directed at a number of factors at once. It used to be the case that simply announcing the change was considered the same as implementing it. Successful change, however, requires a long-term process of action, refinement, and support to clarify and to integrate innovation use. When we talk about process, we mean those factors that go into the three phases of change (see Figure 2). They are (1) initiation: deciding on an agenda and beginning work; (2) implementation: putting the innovation into action, in context; and (3) institutionalization or continuation: seeing the innovation in place and integrated into the daily life of the school. Going through these phases can take three to five years for stable implementation and predictable outcomes.

At any point in this sequence, the direction of the process may be altered, resulting in adaptations to the innovation or even in dropping it. The more lock-step, "technical rationality" approach to change would see this as undesirable, though occasionally inevitable. In fact, a "hyperrational" approach, which views change in terms of "what should be changed" (Wise, 1977; Fullan, 1991) often acts as a barrier to setting up an effective process of change, given the nonrational quality of social systems (Patterson, Purkey, & Parker, 1986). New views on change look at this process and the events within it as opportunities to improve goals and outcomes for the health of the organization -- systems, teachers, and students alike.

Both the change process and the people involved in it go through something like developmental stages. Different kinds of activities are needed to address each stage. At its simplest, an image of this process can be configured around Hall & Hord's (1987) Stages of Concern model: early in the process, activities need to be addressed to personal issues, then to management tasks, and, later, to refinement issues. Implementation and organizational requirements for resources and support also must be considered early in the process. Involving teachers early on in problem identification and task-related strategies, such as peer coaching for skills, helps develop commitment. True commitment, however, is usually the effect of seeing outcomes occur, not the cause. "The commitment of teachers increases as they simultaneously see themselves master the practice and perceive that their students are doing better" (Crandall, et al., 1986, 34). Finally, the organization has to provide resources, ongoing training and coaching, and monitoring to nurture the immediate process of imple- mentation (Hall & Hord, 1987). Strategic conceptualizations like these provide facilitators with a starting point.

Another way to begin is through the use of temporary systems -- project groups, task forces, consultative relationships that "...at some more or less clearly defined point in time will cease to be" (Miles, 1992, 9), but which support the change through the process of implementation. These temporary groups have the advantage of being able to define themselves and are often more egalitarian and experimental than the organizational environment around them. These kinds of bounded groups become a model for the management of change, so that "...creative attention given to the invention and use of new types of temporary systems could show very high payoff", Miles stated in 1964 (1992, 10). As they form new norms within the team, they are often able to influence the norms around them to good effect. When the team disbands, members have new skills they can contribute to other projects.

Research and Organizational Themes

Research on temporary systems has influenced thinking on the management of change, including what the organizational environment should look like. With that as a given, enter the reality of larger, multilevel efforts for change. Here other factors come into play, including nonrationality, or non-linear effects in the process. Research suggests that activities directed to some broader but consistent organizational themes also have a positive effect on a change process (Fullan, 1991; Louis & Miles, 1990). Organizational themes include:

Vision building, or the capacity of the school to develop a shared vision of what the school and its change should look like. When this shared purpose is present, schools are better able to build consensus and credibility through the use of symbols, public dialogue, and the example of those for whom the change makes sense.
Evolutionary planning, closely related to the first theme, embodies the capacity of organizations to "take advantage of unexpected developments in the service of vision" (Miles, 1987, 13). Have a plan, but learn by doing (Fullan, 1991, 83).
Initiative-taking and empowerment allow leadership to come from a variety of sources, including cross-hierarchical steering groups in contact with other groups with similar interests. This, the basis of collaborative work cultures that reduce the professional isolation of teachers, increases the potential of social progress to support implementation. As one gains the recognition of one's peers, incentives to succeed increase.
Staff development and resource assistance are often seen as start-up training for innovation use, not as a continuing process. One of the least developed yet most important elements of staff development is follow-up. New conceptions, skills, and behaviors require continuous, interactive, cumulative learning to be fully taken advantage of. This means in-service must happen all the way through the process of implementation, not just at the beginning. Fullan describes it this way:

"Implementation, whether it is voluntary or imposed, is nothing other than a process of learning something new. One foundation of learning is interaction. Learning by doing, concrete role models, meetings with resource consultants and fellow implementors, practice of the behavior, and the fits and starts of cumulative, ambivalent, gradual self-confidence all constitute a process of coming to see the change more clearly " (1991, 85).
Monitoring, problem-coping, and restructuring the change process are just as important as measuring its outcomes. This is in part an information issue: information about what is working can be shared, while information about what is not working can serve as a stimulus to problem-coping-- arriving at solutions that make sense. This is another form of Miles' process analysis (1992) -- shared, self-analytic behavior, a sort of sustained mindfulness that leads to further diagnosis and action taking (Miles, 1986, 6).

Needless to say, perhaps, evaluation is always a delicate point. Getting monitoring right requires sophistication and trust. In this context, restructuring refers to how the school as a workplace is or is not organized to support change, which includes policies, organizational arrangements, roles, funding, availability of time to hold meetings, and demands on teachers and other staff. Working with innovation may require that the organization change to make the change work.

Interactive Change

The change process being described in the above themes is interactive and complex. While these themes may be a part of all three of the phases of process -- initiation, implementation, and institutionalization -- they are especially in demand during the implementation phase, when most of the learning about change occurs. It also is the phase requiring the most person support, in group and one-on-one consultation and coaching, in order to problem-cope as matters progress. This is the time to hang fast and wait for group consensus, cumulative learning, and critical mass to have an effect.

Institutionalization

The last phase of the change process, institutionalization, has its own requirements. Institutionalization depends upon change becoming embedded in the context and structure through policy, budgets, and timetables; and through generating a critical mass of administrators and teachers skilled in and committed to change (Huberman & Miles, 1984). While institutionalization may seem to connote a final phase, it actually is difficult to complete. In fact, evidence suggests that, rather than support institutionalization, organizations tend to enter a process of renewal, which may result in either tailoring the innovation to more current needs or to replacing it as emphasis is given to yet another change. Institutionalization succeeds best when all phases of the change process are considered at the beginning (e.g., how will funding be maintained for ongoing inservice activities and needed materials?).

The "Bottom Line"

Rather than implementing single innovations, schools are beginning to develop their capacity for continuous improvement as a generic skill, based on changing needs and new programs. This is not to say that successful innovations should not be continued, only that they should be viewed in terms of their relevance to renewal and to the improvement of practice, not just in terms of mastery. The single innovation approach often has benefits in mediating the chaos of change, especially early in the process. The "bottom line" to any change, however, is how it fits within the organization, since it is organizational health that will make the longer-term difference. Educational reform is largely a local process wherein central support is vital; effective linkage systems between leaders, facilitators, and users within a system are essential; and wherein emphasis is on continuous evolution, with a focus on classroom practices and outcomes (IMTEC, 1992).

-###-

[Practices: Need, Complexity, Clarity, Quality, Practicality]

[Policies: Supporting Change]