In Search of Evidence

Chapter 1
addition, it was argued that the domain of management is not researchable. The
results of studies in the domain of management are often confounded by multiple
variables that affect each other as well, and causality is often hard to demonstrate. As
a result, it is assumed by many scholars and practitioners that the principles of
evidence-based medicine are not applicable to management. At the start of my
journey it was therefore clear that the assumed differences between medicine and
management had to be addressed first. For this reason I interviewed several experts in
evidence-based medicine, discussed the similarities and differences between the two
fields with numerous researchers and physicians, and, finally, reviewed a large number
of publications. The outcome made it clear that many assumptions stemmed from a
rather naïve image of the discipline of medicine. In addition, the assumptions
demonstrated a clear lack of understanding of the basic principles of evidence-based
medicine. It was therefore apparent that a greater insight into and understanding of
the concept of evidence-based medicine was needed. Answering the questions ‘What
are the similarities and differences between medicine and management?’ and ‘What
can managers and academics learn from evidence-based medicine?’ could provide this
insight. These two questions are addressed in chapter 2.
Question 2: What is the current quality of the scientific evidence on change
management interventions?
Evidence-based medicine involves decision-making through the conscientious,
explicit, and judicious use of the best available evidence from multiple sources. By
using and critically appraising evidence from multiple sources, the likelihood of an
effective decision will increase. One of the most important sources is scientific evidence
— findings from scientific research. As I have been a change manager for almost 20
years, this raised for me the inevitable question ‘What is the current quality of the
scientific evidence on change management interventions?’ To answer this question, a
systematic review was conducted of change management research published in peerreviewed
journals over the last 30 years. The outcome of this review — that the body of
scientific evidence on change management interventions is low in internal validity — is
discussed in chapter 3.
Question 3: How can researchers increase the internal validity of the body of scientific
evidence on management interventions?
The outcome of the systematic review presented in chapter 3 sparked a discussion
among leading scholars in change management. As a result, a new question had to be
answered: how can researchers increase the internal validity of the body of scientific