Want Place Order Now? With Online Nursing Papers you can do it easy.

Assignment Leading Planned Evidence-Based Change

Assignment: Leading Planned Evidence-Based Change

  • Think about a problem in a specific unit or area of your organization or one with which you are familiar. What are the indications that there is a problem? What change may be needed? (Note: This problem should be different from the one you are addressing in the Week 2 Assignment.). A clinical problem works well; an example is that you note an increasing number of patients with deep vein thrombosis following orthopedic surgery.
  • Consider how you could locate evidence to examine the needed change. What literature would you review? Which professional organization standards or recommendations may be relevant? With whom would you communicate/network to ascertain community standards? Bear in mind that you may also look at evidence from fields other than nursing.
  • Review the information in the Learning Resources. Using your knowledge of contemporary theories of chaos and complexity, consider how you could adapt Lewin’s classic model for change and apply this to your selected problem.

By Day 3

Post a description of the problem, including relevant indicator(s). Provide a synopsis of how you would proceed in locating evidence, including research literature you would consult, which professional organization standards may be relevant, and with whom you would communicate or network to ascertain community standards. Then, identify how you would adapt Lewin’s classic model of change based on chaos and complexity theory to address this evidence–based change.

Assignment Leading Planned Evidence-Based Change

Assignment Leading Planned Evidence-Based Change

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:Assignment: Leading Planned Evidence-Based Change

Chapter 02 The Nature of Planned Change

PART 1 Overview of Organization Development

for change, decrease those forces maintaining the current state, or apply some combination

of both. For example, the level of performance of a work group might be stable because

group norms maintaining that level are equivalent to the supervisor’s pressures for change

to higher levels. This level can be increased either by changing the group norms to support

higher levels of performance or by increasing supervisor pressures to produce at higher

levels. Lewin suggested that decreasing those forces maintaining the status quo produces

less tension and resistance than increasing forces for change and consequently is a more

effective change strategy.Assignment: Leading Planned Evidence-Based Change

Lewin viewed this change process as consisting of the following three steps, which

are shown in Figure 2.1(A):

Unfreezing. This step usually involves reducing those forces maintaining the

organization’s behavior at its present level. Unfreezing is sometimes accomplished

through a process of “psychological disconfirmation.” By introducing information

that shows discrepancies between behaviors desired by organization members

and those behaviors currently exhibited, members can be motivated to engage in

change activities.


Moving. This step shifts the behavior of the organization, department, or individ-

ual to a new level. It involves intervening in the system to develop new behaviors,

values, and attitudes through changes in organizational structures and processes.

Refreezing. This step stabilizes the organization at a new state of equilibrium. It

is frequently accomplished through the use of supporting mechanisms that rein-

force the new organizational state, such as organizational culture, rewards, and


Lewin’s model provides a general framework for understanding organizational

change. Because the three steps of change are relatively broad, considerable effort has

gone into elaborating them. For example, the planning model developed by Lippitt,

Watson, and Westley arranges Lewin’s model into seven steps: scouting, entry, diagno-

sis (unfreezing), planning, action (moving), stabilization and evaluation, and termina-

tion (refreezing).


Similarly, Kotter’s eightwstage process can be mapped onto Lewin’s

phases: establishing a sense of urgency, creating the guiding coalition, developing a

vision and strategy, and communicating the change vision (unfreezing); empowering

broad-based action, generating short-term wins (moving); and consolidating gains and

producing more change, and anchoring new approaches in the culture (refreezing).


Lewin’s model remains closely identified with the field of OD, however, and is used

to illustrate how other types of change can be implemented. For example, Lewin’s

three-step model has been used to explain how information technologies can be imple-

mented more effectively.


Action Research Model

The classic action research model focuses on planned change as a cyclical process in

which initial research about the organization provides information to guide subsequent

action. Then the results of the action are assessed to provide further information to

guide further action, and so on. This iterative cycle of research and action involves con-

siderable collaboration among organization members and OD practitioners. It places

heavy emphasis on data gathering and diagnosis prior to action planning and imple-

mentation, as well as careful evaluation of results after action is taken.

Action research is traditionally aimed both at helping specific organizations imple-

ment planned change and at developing more general knowledge that can be applied

to other settings.Assignment: Leading Planned Evidence-Based Change


Although action research was originally developed to have this

dual focus on change and knowledge generation, it has been adapted to OD efforts

in which the major emphasis is on planned change.


Figure 2.1(B) shows the cyclical




ORDER Assignment: Leading Planned Evidence-Based Change

25CHAPTER 2 The Nature of Planned Change

phases of planned change as defined by the original action research model. There are

eight main steps.

Problem Identification. This stage usually begins when an executive in the orga-

nization or someone with power and influence senses that the organization has

one or more problems that might be solved with the help of an OD practitioner.

Consultation with a Behavioral Science Expert. During the initial contact, the

OD practitioner and the client carefully assess each other. The practitioner has his

or her own normative, developmental theory or frame of reference and must be



Comparison of Planned Change Models

[Figure 2.1][Figure 2.1]


ewin’s Planned

Change Model





Action Research




Consultation with

Behavioral Science Expert

Feedback to Key

Client or Group

Joint Diagnosis

of Problem

Joint Action



Data Gathering

after Action




Initiate the Inquiry

Inquire into

Best Practices

Discover Themes

Envision a

Preferred Future

Design and Deliver

Ways to Create

the Future

Data Gathering and

Preliminary Diagnosis

26 PART 1 Overview of Organization Development

conscious of those assumptions and values.Assignment: Leading Planned Evidence-Based Change


Sharing them with the client from the

beginning establishes an open and collaborative atmosphere.

Data Gathering and Preliminary Diagnosis. This step is usually completed by

the OD practitioner, often in conjunction with organization members. It involves

gathering appropriate information and analyzing it to determine the underlying

causes of organizational problems. The four basic methods of gathering data are

interviews, process observation, questionnaires, and organizational performance

data (unfortunately, often overlooked). One approach to diagnosis begins with

observation, proceeds to a semistructured interview, and concludes with a ques-

tionnaire to measure precisely the problems identified by the earlier steps.



gathering diagnostic information, OD practitioners may influence members from

whom they are collecting data. In OD, any action by the OD practitioner can be

viewed as an intervention that will have some effect on the organization.


Feedback to a Key Client or Group. Because action research is a collaborative

activity, the diagnostic data are fed back to the client, usually in a group or work-

team meeting. The feedback step, in which members are given the information gath-

ered by the OD practitioner, helps them determine the strengths and weaknesses

of the organization or unit under study. The consultant provides the client with all

relevant and useful data. Obviously, the practitioner will protect confidential sources

of information and, at times, may even withhold data. Defining what is relevant

and useful involves consideration of privacy and ethics as well as judgment about

whether the group is ready for the information or if the information would make

the client overly defensive.

Joint Diagnosis of the Problem. At this point, members discuss the feedback

and explore with the OD practitioner whether they want to work on identified

problems. A close interrelationship exists among data gathering, feedback, and

diagnosis because the consultant summarizes the basic data from the client mem-

bers and presents the data to them for validation and further diagnosis. An impor-

tant point to remember, as Schein suggests, is that the action research process is

very different from the doctor–patient model, in which the consultant comes in,

makes a diagnosis, and prescribes a solution. Schein notes that the failure to estab-

lish a common frame of reference in the client–consultant relationship may lead

to a faulty diagnosis or to a communication gap whereby the client is sometimes

“unwilling to believe the diagnosis or accept the prescription.” He believes that

“most companies have drawers full of reports by consultants, each loaded with

diagnoses and recommendations which are either not understood or not accepted

by the ‘patient.’ ”


Joint Action Planning. Next, the OD practitioner and the client members

jointly agree on further actions to be taken. This is the beginning of the moving

process (described in Lewin’s change model), as the organization decides how

best to reach a different quasi-stationary equilibrium. At this stage, the specific

action to be taken depends on the culture, technology, and environment of the

organization; the diagnosis of the problem; and the time and expense of the


Action. This stage involves the actual change from one organizational state to

another. It may include installing new methods and procedures, reorganizing

structures and work designs, and reinforcing new behaviors. Such actions typically

cannot be implemented immediately but require a transition period as the organi-

zation moves from the present to a desired future state. Assignment: Leading Planned Evidence-Based Change


Data Gathering After Action. Because action research is a cyclical process, data

must also be gathered after the action has been taken to measure and determine

the effects of the action and to feed the results back to the organization. This, in

turn, may lead to rediagnosis and new action.







27CHAPTER 2 The Nature of Planned Change

The action research model underlies most current approaches to planned change and

is often considered synonymous with OD. Recently, it has been refined and extended

to new settings and applications, and consequently, researchers and practitioners have

made requisite adaptations of its basic framework.


Trends in the application of action research include movement from smaller subunits

of organizations to total systems and communities.


In these larger contexts, action

research is more complex and political than in smaller settings. Therefore, the action

research cycle is coordinated across multiple change processes and includes a diversity

of stakeholders who have an interest in the organization. (We describe these applica-

tions more thoroughly in Chapters 20, 21, and 22.) Action research also is applied