Author: Mark

  • A Place to Rest on Iford Hill

    A Place to Rest on Iford Hill

    It is strange but true, that I have walked over Iford Hill on the South Downs over three decades. I enjoy the magic when a forest wakes up in the springtime, but our lockdown currently precludes such adventures. Pragmatically/creatively, I have found myself revisiting local South Downs rambles from decades earlier. The weather forecast for today was some sort of Arctic disaster movie scenario. High up on top of the downs, it was cold, but the huge fluffy clouds and bright sunshine more than compensated for the over-hyped chill.

    I found myself revisiting some footpaths in a triangle between Lewes, Rottingdean and Saltdean. These were paths I first walked in the late 1980s and early 1990s. I used to escape up onto this downland when Brighton got too busy in summer.  I remembered wearing shorts and a T-shirt. Back then, the challenge was the heat, not the cold wind. The walk revealed itself to me step by step.  As I walked, it was like catching up with an old friend, as I remembered and misremembered parts of the walk. The walk witnessed somebody thirty years older, now with an arthritic knee, but still purposefully walking as if he knew where he was going. As I walked up Swanborough Hill, I remembered/fantasised about a resting place. Would that seat still be there decades later, or had I misremembered?

    Iford Hill Bench
    Iford Hill Bench

    I was delighted to see that the large tree trunk, which had been hollowed out to create a long seat, was still there. It offered a wonderful vantage point (see photograph) from where you could see Iford, Kingston near Lewes, Lewes, and so much beautiful countryside. There was a plaque (see photograph) remembering David Cripps and a second plaque remembering his Mum. The seat had been designed by pupils at Northease Manor School. I have the vaguest of memories of when this seat first appeared in the early 1990s; it became a favourite lunch stop for sandwiches on my 10/12-mile rambles back in the day. Now, it seemed to serve more as a milestone urging myself and others to remember. The land in front of this seat was bare from footprints, so many stories invested in this special place.

    The seat was being reclaimed by nature and I strangely approved. It was a wonderful spot in nature but exposed to all of the elements, nature was always going to claim it back. As I meditated on my journey through life, I began to wonder about the pupils who designed this seat. What twists and turns had their lives taken, what about David Cripps, was he a teacher at the school?

    The internet makes desk research too easy. I found in the January 2019 Weekly Digest of Northease Manor School a feature about this seat that had captured my imagination. A Duke of Edinburgh group from the school had encountered the seat on a hike. Oddly though, the feature had to acknowledge that they were uncertain of Mr Cripps association with their school and that an internet search had yielded no further information. I am certain that there was an association, but the memorial was placed three decades ago. Memories fade as we fade away. Again I found myself strangely comfortable with this passage of time.

    Update 24/12/22

    Unexpectedly, I found myself passing this bench again on a Christmas Eve downland walk from Lewes to Saltdean.

    As reflected on earlier the bench was slowly and elegantly being reclaimed by nature. As a resting place and as a wonderful viewpoint it gave joy to many ramblers. However, eventually everything and everyone returns to nature.

  • Notebook No.3 – Did I really say that?

    Notebook No.3 – Did I really say that?

    Notebook No.3 is a gentle tirade against business school academics frequently and repeatedly claiming that organizational change tends to fail.  Addressing these ‘failures’ informs university leadership and management courses for students and consultancy for organizations. Perversely I am now referenced as the missing change tends to fail ‘evidence’.

    This Notebook reflects my increasingly paranoid scream!!!

    The Chapters

    In this third and final Notebook in this series, Chapter One sets the scene and connects with the first two Notebooks. Understanding depictions today of organizational change as tending to fail requires an appreciation of the historical evolution – a chronology of framing organizational change failure over decades features in Chapter Two.

    A special issue of a prestigious academic journal, themed around organizational change failure, is this Notebook’s focus. There are reviews and commentary on the contributions in Chapter Three and the guest editorial in Chapter Four. The contributions and editorial make a significant contribution to understanding organizational change failure. I am referenced as claiming organizational change tends to fail on four occasions, and these instances are highlighted. Chapter Five takes the form of a discussion, offering four explanations; innocent misunderstanding, association fallacy, confirmation bias and impression management.

    Chapter Six draws this Notebook to a conclusion reflecting on the writing process and further potential dissemination. An awkward question has featured in all three Notebooks, why have organizational changes been depicted as tending to fail? The Notebook subtitle captures my succinct answer. Finally, I believe that erroneous depictions of organizational change failure have implications for universities, organizations and societies.  The debates featured here were never purely academic; they have enormous practical importance.

    AppendixThe Graveyard of Disappointed Hope features a conference paper where I question the gap-filling fetish of academics.  These three Notebooks have been my attempt instead to challenge sacred academic assumptions.

    Accessing Notebook No.3

    This Notebook and the other two were available on the Amazon self-publishing platform in paperback format. I enjoyed being a publisher – cover design, proof reading, layout etc. The Notebook even sold a few copies, which was a pleasant bonus. Today, if you would like a digital copy of the draft please contact me using the Contact page.

    References

    Hughes, M. (2011) Do 70 per cent of all organizational change initiatives really fail?” Journal of Change Management 11(4): 451-464.

    Schwarz, G.M., Bouckenooghe, D. and Vakola, M. (2021) Organizational change failure: Framing the process of failing. Human Relations, 74(2): 159-179.

  • Challenging the 70% Organizational Change Failure Myth

    Challenging the 70% Organizational Change Failure Myth

    Challenging the 70% organizational change failure myth is pertinent to organizational practices, research and education. Unfortunately, business schools and consultants have a vested interest in promoting and amplifying the change failure myth.

    Do 70 per cent of all organizational changes really fail? The answer to this rhetorical question is – NO!

    Updated November 2024

    Organizational Change Tends to Fail, That’s Interesting! (YouTube 14.40min video, March 2023)

    Do 70 per cent of all organizational changes really fail?

    The question provides the rhetorical title for my paper published in 2011, in the Journal of Change Management 11(4): 451-464. It is gratifying that at the time of writing, this paper has been downloaded 26,880 times with an altmetric score of 61.

    I was troubled by academic claims that all organizational change tended to fail. The claims had apparently been substantiated by Harvard Business School research with a 70 per cent organizational change failure rate cited. In 2011, I highlighted the complete absence of either empirical evidence or theories in support of these rhetorical claims.

    The 70 per cent organizational change failure statistic was frequently cited by leading business schools and in leading journals before 2011. I would like to tell you that after 2011 the academic claims that organizational change practitioners tend to fail ceased, but sadly this has not been the case.

    My suspicion is that business schools depict change as failing in order to underpin their highly lucrative leadership courses, research and consultancy.

    Abstract A 70 per cent failure rate is frequently attributed to organizational change initiatives, raising questions about the origins and supporting evidence for this very specific statistic. This article critically reviews five separate published instances identifying a 70 per cent organizational change failure rate. In each instance, the review highlights the absence of valid and reliable empirical evidence in support of the espoused 70 per cent failure rate. Organizational change research and scholarship now exists which enables us to question the belief in inherent organizational change failure rates. Inherent failure rates are critically questioned in terms of the ambiguities of change, the context-dependent nature of change, competing perceptions, temporal aspects and measurability. In conclusion, whilst the existence of a popular narrative of 70 per cent organizational change failure is acknowledged, there is no valid and reliable empirical evidence to support such a narrative.

    Journal access If you have online access to academic journals the full published 2011 paper may be downloaded here:

    https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14697017.2011.630506

    Access to the final draft of the 2011 paper Alternatively, I have linked to this post the final draft of the 2011 paper, accepted for publication, after review. Please click on the link below.

    How studying organizational change lost its way

    A decade later in a Special Issue of Human Relations on organizational change failure the 70 per cent failure statistic was still being cited.  More troublingly my 2011 paper was now cited in support of the belief of the guest editors (Schwarz et al, 2021) that organizational change tends to fail. For example:

    Page 160 – Central to this outlook is that organizational research has long been concerned with the features of and mechanisms for how organizations change, while at the same time acknowledging separately that large-scale organizational changes tend to fail (Hughes, 2011).

    Page 167 – We do so recognizing that, even though the majority of change initiatives fail in some way (Hughes, 2011), there is perpetual interest in successful firms and success stories (Bledow et al., 2017).

    Source: Schwarz, G.M., Bouckenooghe, D., and Vakola, M. (2021) Organizational change failure: Framing the process of failing. Human Relations, 74(2) 159-179.

    For the avoidance of doubt, I never generalized in 2011 that change tends to fail. I never would make such a sweeping generalization given that organizational changes are highly context dependent and outcomes very dynamic. An either ‘fail’ or ‘succeed’ dualism misses the subtleties and processes of both failure and success in any organizational change.

    I did write to the lead guest editor on the 10th June 2019, collegially restating my position, but I never received a reply. In 2021, I included the lead guest editor in a tweet, highlighting my concern that I had been misrepresented, immediately after my tweet he left Twitter. I turned to the editorial office of Human Relations, seeking an impartial review. Their conclusion was that I hadn’t been misrepresented.

    If you have the time/inclination I have included a link below to my 2022 paper, in which I respond to the perceived misrepresentation.

    As this paper is part of the journal’s Reflections series it should be freely accessible (no firewall) to download using the link below.

    https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14697017.2022.2030980

    If you have any difficulties accessing this paper, or you want to agree/disagree with my conclusions please email using the contact form on the home page.

    70 Per Cent Organizational Change Failure?
  • Organizational Change – YouTube Playlist

    Organizational Change – YouTube Playlist

    Introduction

    (updated 05/12/25)

    This organizational change YouTube lockdown playlist has featured my highly opinionated reviews of organizational change literature. If nothing else, I have enjoyed the distraction of this creative process. Critical thinking primarily informs my review choices rather than my reviews. I concentrate on the literature that I appreciate and I celebrate that literature, rather than objectively reviewing it. There are some critical reviews, but the ‘dodgy’ organizational change literature doesn’t really merit the time and energy it takes to create a video.

    This post lists all of the videos that I produced. I am not going to embed all videos into this post. I have embedded the final two videos and included a short commentary. I enjoyed the creativity of making these videos; filming, editing and uploading proved to be a fascinating learning curve.

    Organizational Change YouTube Playlist

    Videos Listing

    1. Introduction to the OCRD playlist.
    2. The Dynamics of Planned Change. (Lippitt, Watson and Westley, 1958).
    3. Politics of change: The discourses that inform organizational change and their capacity to silence. (McMillan, 2016)
    4. Upbeat leadership: A recipe for – or against – “successful” leadership theory. (Alvesson, 2020)
    5. Chapter (8) ‘Leading Change’ in A handbook for leaders in higher education: Transforming teaching and learning. (Marshall, 2016)
    6. Organizational Silence in the NHS: ‘Hear no, See no, Speak no’. (Pope, 2019)
    7. Philosophies of Organizational Change. (Smith and Graetz, 2011)
    8. Success or failure? Making sense of outcomes in a public sector change project. (Hagebakken, Olsen and Solstad)
    9. Leaders and managers: Are they different. (Zaleznik, 1977)
    10. The Dark Side of Transformational Leadership: A Critical Perspective (Tourish, 2013)

    My most critical video. Many academics still cite this 1977 magazine article when they are attempting to encourage a differentiation between managers and leaders. If you watch the video, you will see why I am suspicious about this encouragement.

    Celebrating one of my favourite contributions to the leading organizational change and transformation debate.

    Organizational Change: YouTube Playlist