I__. - International Military Testing Association

-----__
The results have several implications from an applied perspective. First, the use of
measures assessing aspects of the organizational context and its relationship to the perceived
value of the changes underscores the necessity to consider not only the specific features of the
changes but also how the organization operates and functions in the cultivation and promotion
of the changes. Second, the measurement of the changes in terms of their ability to produce
certain expected outcomes is useful in determining the extent to which the changes are
operating as intended. This information can be helpful particularly in the formative stage of an
evaluation when providing feedback to those implementing the changes. Third, as the
implementation process continues and evolves over time the predictive ability of the model can
be determined. To the extent this model successfully predicts the status of the changes it can
then be used during implementation of other changes that are introduced into an organization.
In summary the proposed model, comprised of variables selected on the basis of theoretical
considerations as well as the nature of the changes that were introduced and implem,ented, has .
shown promise as a framework for predicting and understanding the implementation and
acceptance of change in an organizational setting. There are recognized limitations in this
study. It is clear additional research is required. Continued assessment of the changes over
time is needed to ascertain the predictive effectiveness of the model. Additional testing of the
model on other types of changes and in other organizations is called for in order to determine
its effectiveness.
REFERENCES
Bagozzi, R.P. & Phillips, L.W. (1982). Representing and testing organizational theories: A
holistic construct. Administrative Science Ouarterly, =,459-489.
Bardach, E. (1977). The implementation game. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Berman, P., & McLaughlin, M.W. (1978, May). Federal programs sunporting educational
change. Vol VIII: Implementinn and sustaining innovations. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.
Glaser, E.M. (1973). Knowledge transfer and institutional change. Professional Psycholoey, 4.
434-444.
Gordon, G.G., & Cummins, W. (1979). Managing management climate. Lexington&l,%
Lexington Books.
James, L.R., & Jones, A.P. (1979, April). Perceived iob characteristics and iob satisfaction: An
examination of reciprocal causation (Report No.79-5). Fort Worth, Texas: Texas
Christian University, Institute of Behavioral Research.
Joreskog, K.G., & Sorbom, D. (1984). LTSREL VI: Analysis of linear structural relationshius b\.
the method of maximum likelihood. Chicago: National Educational Resources.
Mowday, R.T., Steers, R.M., & Porter, L.W. (1979). The measurement of organizational
commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 224-247.
Payne, R.L., & Mansfield, R. (1973). Relationship of perceptions of organizational climate to
organizational structure, context, and hierarchical position. Administrative Science
Ouarterlv. 18. 515-526.
Schneider, B., & Synder, R.A. (1975). Some relationships between job satisfaction and
organizational climate. Journal of Aoolied PsvcholoPv, a(3), 318-328.
Schultz, R.L., & Slevin, D.P. (1976). Implementation and organizational validity: An empirical
investigation. In R.H. Kilman, L.R. Pondy, & D.P. Slevin (Eds.), Management of
orpanization design. New York: Elsevier North-Holland.
Siegel, S.M., & Kaemmerer, W.F. (1978). Measuring the perceived support for innovation in
organizations. Journal of ADDlied Psychology, a(5), 553-562.
Sheposh, J.P., Hulton, V.N., & Knudsen, G.A. (1983, February). Imolementation of olanned
change: A review of major issues. (NPRDC TR 83-7). San Diego, CA: Navy Personnel
Research and Development Center.
Young, LE., Riedel, J.A., & Sheposh, J.P. (1979). Relationship between Dercwtions of role
stress and individual, organizational. and environmental variables _-- (NPRDC TR 80-8‘:.
San Diego, CA: Navy Personnel Research and Development Center.
479