Knowing yourself as a change agent: A validated test based ...hansvermaak.com/wp-content/uploads/Caluwe-Vermaak-Color-Test... · Léon de Caluwé , Hans Vermaak ... , Beer & Nohria,

All rights reserved by the authors.

1

Knowingyourselfasachangeagent:Avalidatedtestbasedonacolorfultheoryofchange

LéondeCaluwé,HansVermaak

Publishedin:D.W.Jamieson,R.C.Barnett&A.F.Buono(Eds.),Consultationfororganizationalchangerevisited

(ResearchinManagementConsultingVol.23),pp.185-210.Charlotte,NC:InformationAgePublishing.

Inthelasttwodecadestherehasbeenariseinpublicationsthatadvocateamulti-paradigmaticviewoforganizationalchange(e.g.,Beer&Nohria,2000;Buono&Kerber,2005;VandeVen&Poole,1995).Thistrendtowardspluralismisgoodnewsgiventhediversityoforganizationalissuesthatcannotbedealtwitheffectivelywithauniformapproach.Changeagentsneedtobeawarenotonlyofthisrangeofapproaches,butalsooftheirownpreferences,capabilities,credibility,andlimitationsintermsofthisarrayofpossibilities.Thisimpliesaneedforreflectivepractice(e.g.,Schön,1987).Inthischapterwediscussaninstrumentthatcanaidsuchreflection:astyletestforchangeagentsthatcreatesofprofileoftheirsympathiesandantipathiesforcontrastingchangeapproaches.Wehavebasedthistestonameta-modelofchangewestarteddevelopingalmost20yearsago–thecolormodel.Thetesthasbeenfreelyavailableforthelast15yearsandhasbeenusedbymorethan100,000people.Duringthistime,wehavecontinuedrefiningthetesttoincreaseitsvalidity. Inthischapter,wedescribethisprocessandsharetheresultsofthelatestversionofthetestutilizedbyapopulationofroughly3,500people.Lastly,wediscusshowthetestcanbemosteffectivelyused,andhowtheresultscanbeinterpreted.

THECOLORMODEL

Thecolormodeldistinguishesbetweenfivefundamentallydifferentwaysof

thinkingaboutchange,witheachcolorrepresentingaparadigmofdifferentbeliefsandvaluesaboutchange.Eachoftheseparadigmsislabeledwithacolor,intendedasakindof“shorthand”withoutmuchsymbolicconnotation,andeachrepresentsdifferenttraditionsorschoolsofthoughtinourfield.Thecolorshavetheirowncharacteristicsintermsoftypeofinterventions,diagnosticmodels,roles,andoutcomes.Togethertheycompriseameta-theoryofchangethathasseveralapplications,oneofwhichwefocusonhere–toreflectonone’sownpreferencesandpossibilitiesasachangeagent.Acomprehensivedescriptionofthecolormodel(DeCaluwé&Vermaak,2004)anditsdevelopmentandmanifestations(DeCaluwé&Vermaak,2015)areavailableelsewhere.Table13-1summarizesthetheory’scorecomponents,underlyingassumptions,andkeytraitsofeachofthefivecolors.


2

Table13-1TheFiveChangeColorsatGlance

Blue-printthinkingisbasedontherationaldesignandimplementationofchange.Scientificmanagementisaclassicexample.Empiricalinvestigationoftenisthebasisfordefiningsolutionsorgoals.Plannedchangeisresponsiblefordeliveringpredefinedoutcomes:projectmanagementisoneitsstrongesttools.Keyactorsarethosemanagersinchargeofthechange,expertswhodefineit,andprojectmanagerswhocontrolitsorderlyrealization.Inmanyways,thisisstillthedominantparadigminourfield.

Yellow-printthinkingisbasedonsociopoliticalconceptsaboutorganizations,inwhichinterests,conflicts,andpowerplayimportantroles.Thistypeofthinkingassumesthatpeoplechangetheirstandpointsonlyiftheirowninterestsaretakenintoaccount,oriftheycanbecompelledtoacceptcertainideas.Thefavoredmethodsforachievingchangewiththistypeofthinkinginvolvescombiningideasorpointsofview,andformingcoalitionsorpowerblocks.Changeisseenasanegotiationexerciseaimedatfeasiblesolutions.

Red-printthinkingfocusesnotonpowerorrationality,butonmotivation.Akeyassumptionisthatstimulatingpeopleintherightwaycaninducebehavioralchange.Ititsmostbasicform,thiscorrespondstoabarteringsystem:theorganizationprovidesresourcesandhandsoutrewardsinexchangeforpersonneltakingonresponsibilitiesandtryingtheirbest.ItisattheheartofmanyHRsystems.Othermotivationalapproachesinclude:investinginpeople’sdevelopment,recognizingachievement,strengtheningcollegialtiesandteamspirit,andenticingpeoplewithavisionofthefuture.Atitscorethistypeofchangeisaboutthequalityofattentionthatispaidtopeople.

Green-printthinkinghasitsrootsinactionlearningandorganizationaldevelopment:changingandlearningaredeemedinextricablylinked.Changeagentsfocushereonhelpingothersdiscoverthelimitsoftheircompetencesandtolearnmoreeffectivewaysofacting.Theprocessischaracterizedbysettinguplearningsituations,preferablyingroupsastheseallowpeopletogiveandreceivefeedbackaswellastoexperimenttogether.Whenever


3

possible,learningisco-createdwithparticipantswhostrengthentheirlearningabilitiesintheprocess,andfacilitatorshelpthoseinvolvedtobecomefacilitatorsintheirownright.

White-printthinkingcanbeunderstoodasareactiontothe“plannedview”ofchangeheldbythefourothercolors,albeittodifferentdegrees.Akeyideainwhite-printthinkingisthateverythingischangingautonomously.Thechangeagent’sinterventionsthusonlycatalyzeschange,givingthatwhichisabouttohappenanextrapush.Sensemakingplaysanimportantparttodiscernandshowundercurrents.White-printthinkerstrytounderstandwhereopportunitieslie,supportthosewhograspthemandhelpremovingobstaclesintheirpath.

Thecolormodelcanbethoughtofasalensthroughwhichtolookatone’s

background,competencies,portfolioofassignments,imageandcredibility,networks,andsoon.Weliketopointoutthatthecolorsrefertobeliefsystemsanddeeplyheldassumptionsaboutthenatureofchange,whichimpliesthattheymaynotalwaysbeconsciouslychosentofittheissueathand.Ourbeliefsystemscancauseustobeattachedtocertainpreferences,whichshowupnotonlyintermsofwhatwethink,say,anddo,butalsoarepartofhowweperceiveourselves.Ourstyleofworking,thevaluesweespouse,andthetraditionsinwhichwetakepartcanbecomepartofour(professional)identity(see,forexample,Buono,DeCaluwé,&Stoppelenburg,2013).Theymaycauseustohavestrongantipathiesor“allergies”toothercolorsonthespectrum.Wehaveoftennoticedthatpeoplearenotfullyawareoftheirpreferencesandthiscanhaveanegativeimpactintermsofnotknowingone’slimits,notrespectingotherpointsofview,ornotexploringdifferentstrategieswhenneedbe.Insuchcases,feedbackfromotherscanbeofhelp,likeamirror.Themoresuchfeedbackisgatheredfromdifferentsources,themorereliablesuchamirrorwillbe.Wedevelopedatesttoassistinsuchself-reflection–aquestionnairetomeasurepreferencesaboutchange.Basedontheanswerstothequestionnaire,peoplecanidentifytheirowndominantbeliefs.

THEBASICCONSTRUCTIONOFTHETEST

Wedecidedearlyontoconstructatestbasedonforcedchoice,asitseemedtoofferagoodcompromisebetweeneaseofuseandreliabilityofmeasurement.Attheoutset,wetriedthreedifferenttypesoftests.ThefirstonewasaLikertfive-pointscale(Test1inTable13-2)withsixtyitems(agree/neutral/disagree).Wequicklymovedtoanipsative-styletestwiththirtyitems(Tests2–4inTable13-2),basedonasimpleforcedchoicebetweentwoalternatives(A/B).Thetestthatwehaveusedpredominantlysince2000isatestwithtentotwelveitems(Tests5–18inTable13-2)basedonamoresubtleforcedchoiceinwhichparticipantshavetodistributepointsbetweenfivealternatives:a“testofpoints”(“puntentest”inDutch).Thecombinationofreducingthenumberofitemsandincreasingthesubtletyofforcedchoiceallowedustogetresultsthatwerestillreliablebutofferedmoreeaseofuse.Thetestnowallowsrespondentsto(1)filloutthequestionnaireinashortamountoftime(10–15minutes),(2)createtheirownprofilewithoutexternalhelp,and(3)gettheirresultsimmediatelyeitherbyaddingtheirownscoresonpaperorhavingthemcalculatedonline.Italsoallowssubstantialdatatobegatheredwithease,facilitatingitsuseinresearch,teaching,andothergroupsettings.


4

Anotheradvantageofforcedchoiceisthatitnudgespeopletoshowtheir“truecolors”andmakesithardertogive“middleoftheroad”answers.Itforcesrespondentstodiscernthevaluesandbeliefstheyholdmostdear.Theuseofclosedquestionsallowsthemtodosobasedontheir“gutfeeling,”andwithoutpriorknowledgeofthemodelbehindthetest.Onedisadvantageofthismethodisthatrespondentscannotgivenuancedortailoredanswers;becauseofthis,relevantdatamaygetlostandrespondentsmaygetfrustratedbecausetheyareunabletochoosetheanswerthatismosttrueforthem(VanderVelde,etal.,2008).ExampleofaTestItem

Inordertoprovideasenseofthetest,thefollowingisanexampleofoneofthetwelvequestionsthatispartofthefinal“testofpoints”(seethelinksattheendofthechapter).

Inmyopinionchangecanonlybesuccessfulif:a. Itissupportedbythemostimportantmanagers.b. Theemployeessupportthechange.c. Clearobjectiveshavebeensetbeforehand.d. Employeesgainnewinsights.e. Thestrengthsandenergyofthoseinvolvedareactivated.

Therespondentsareaskedtodistributeeightpointsoverthesefivealternatives,

whichmakesithardtodistributethepointsevenly.Theyareinstructedtodistributethepointsbasedonhowwellthestatementsmatchtheirconvictions.Theycan,forinstance,giveeightpointstoonechoice,fourpointseachtotwochoices,orgiveone,three,andfourpointstothreechoices.Afterhavingdistributedallofthepoints,therespondent’sscorecanbeinterpreted.Intheaboveexample,letter“a”referstoyellow,“b”tored,“c”toblue,“d”togreen,and“e”towhite.Thepointsforeachquestionareaddedupbycolorandprovideanoverallprofileofone’spreferences(highscores)andantipathies(lowscores).TheContentoftheTest:TheItems

Thequestionsdelveintomanyaspectsofchangeinordertocreateacolorprofile.Somerelatetounderlyingassumptionsdirectly,othersindirectly.Thediversityofquestionsmakesthetestmorereliable.Thedivisionoftheitemsisasfollows:

• Oneitemrelatesprimarilytohowpeoplechange(item11).• Oneitemrelatesprimarilytohoworganizationschange(item5).• Fouritemsrelateprimarilytocharacteristicsofchangeprocesses,such

askeyactivitiesorinteractions(items2,4,9,10).• Threeitemsrelateprimarilytothecontextofachangeprocess,such

asconditions,measureofsuccess,orvalues(items1,7,8).• Twoitemsrelateprimarilytocharacteristicsofchangeagents,suchas

theirroleorcompetences(items3and6).• Oneitemrelatestoaresonancewithproverbsthatcapturethebelief

systemsofacolor(item12).


5

Thestatementswithineachitemarederiveddirectlyfromthecolortheoryitself.

Partoftheprocessofrefiningthetestwastocreatestatementsthatwereformulatedinawaythatdidnotpaintonecolorinamorepositivelightthanothers,whichmeantweneededtocorrectourownbiasesindescribingthecolormodel.Welearnedfirst-handoftheproblemofincommensurabilityofmeta-models–thereisnoobjectivewaytotalkaboutbeliefsystems(e.g.,Scherer&Dowling,1995).Ittookusadecadetominimizesuchbiases.

THEINCREMENTALDEVELOPMENTOFTHETEST

Table13-2givesanoverviewofthedifferenttestsandsamplesusedtorefinethequestionnaireanditsinterpretation.Thefirstcolumnshowsthat18sampleswereusedbetween2000and2013.ThesecondcolumnintheTableshowsthetypeandversionofeachtest:thereisoneversionofthefirsttypeoftest(Test1),threeversionsofthesecondtype(Tests2–4),andfiveversionsofthethirdtype(Tests5–18).Thisthirdtypeoftestisthe“testofpoints”thatwehaveusedandresearchedthemost.

Thetestofpointswasrefinedfourtimesbasedonastatisticalanalysisofthe

numberanddistributionofitemsandarewordingofthestatementswithintheitems.Theseimprovementswereresearchedanddocumentedincollaborationwithmaster’sdegreestudents.Thefirstimprovementstoversions2and3werebasedonOort(2006)whoanalyzedalmost2,700questionnaires(Test6inTable13-2).Thenextimprovementtoversion4wasbasedonLankreijer’s(2007)analysisof280questionnaires(Test7inTable13-2).Tummers(2009)validatedthisversionofthetestwithover1,700respondents,andfoundclearcorrelationsbetweenthestatementsandthecolorstheyaresupposedtorepresent(Test9inTable13-2).ThelastimprovementstothetestweremadeonthebasisofTummers’swork.Pietersen(2013)usedthefourthandthefifth(final)versionsofthetestforhisanalysiswithatotalofalmost3,500respondents(Tests14–16inTable13-2).

Becauseoftheipsativecharacterofthedata,afactoranalysiswasregardedas

unsuitable(seeBlinkhorn,Johnson,&Wood,1988).Ipsativedatatypicallyproducebipolarfactors,causedbytheforcedchoiceformat,wherechoosingoneoptioninevitablymeansnotchoosingtheother.However,inreallife,ifyouhavetochoosebetweenfishandmeat,andyouchoosemeat,itdoesnotmeanthatyoudonotlikefish.Ingeneralthecorrelationsofipsativedataarenegativeandlowerthanthecorrelationsofnormativeresults(see,forexample,Loo,1999).Forthisreason,Tummers(2009)conductedamultidimensionalscalinganalysis(MDS),whichvisualizesthedistancebetweenvariables.Itemsthatareperceivedtobesimilarwillfallclosetogetheronaperceptualmap,anditemsthatareperceivedtobedissimilarwillbefurtherapart(e.g.,Cooper&Schindler,2008).Tummers’sMDSanalysisshowedthatthedistancebetweenthetestanswerscorrespondingtoonecolortendedtobeshorterthanthedistancebetweenthetestanswerscorrespondingtodifferentcolors.Thisanalysisprovesthatacommonfactor(acolor)underliesthetestanswers.


6

Test

Type

and

version

Typeoftest Authors/year

Lang

uage

Pape

ror

electron

ic Typeofsample

Num

bero

frespon

dents

(N) Mainresearchfinding

1. 0.1 Scaletest(agree/neutral/dis-agree)(30items)

MartinsDias(2000)

NL P Changeagents/students

50 Average

Yellow2.90

Blue1.66

Red3.30

Green3.88

White4.36

Proportionalaverage*)

Yellow17

Blue10

Red20

Green23

White26

2. 1.1 ForcedchoicebetweenAandB:(30itemsonhowpeoplethinkand30itemsonhowpeopleact)

DeCaluwé&Vermaak(1999)

NL P Readers - Datalost

3. 1.2 ForcedchoicebetweenAandB;(30itemsonhowpeoplethinkand30itemsonhowpeopleact)

DeCaluwé&Vermaak(2003)

E P Readers - Datalost

4 1.3 ForcedchoicebetweenAandB;(30itemsonhowpeoplethinkand30itemsonhowpeopleact)

WebsiteTwynstraGudde(2005)

NL E Visitors - Datalost

5. 2.1 Testofpoints(10items)

MartinsDias(2000)

NL P Changeagents/students

50 Average

Yellow13

Blue11

Red14

Green18

White24

Proportionalaverage*

Yellow16

Blue13

Red17

Green22

White29


Oort(2006) NL p Changeagents/managers/supportstaff

2.688 Average

Yellow12

Blue13

Red18

Green17

White20

ProportionalAverage*

Yellow14

Blue16

Red22

Green20

White24

Indicationstoimprovesomeitems


Lankreijer(2007) NL P Changeagents/managers

280 Indicationstoimproveitems



NL E Visitors 36.664

Average

Yellow15

Blue20

Red20

Green19

White22


Tummers(2009) NL P Changeagents/managers/supportstaff

1.737 Average

Yellow13

Blue18

Red18

Green20

White25


Knoopetal.(2009)

NL E RepresentativesampleoftheDutchpopulation

4.086 DominantcolorsareequallydistributedamongtheDutchpopulation


7

*Proportionalaverageistheadjustmentoftestresultsofvariousteststoatotalscoreof96asisthecaseinthe12itemstestofpoints

Table13-2DifferentTestsandSamplesStudiedItistemptingtodiscussthedatacollectedthroughonlineversionsofthetest,

giventheirlargesamplesofmorethan80,000respondents(Tests8and12inTable13-2).However,wechoosenottofortworeasons.Thefirstisthattheonlinetestisgoodforteaching,butthesoftwareisnotgearedforresearch–thedatasetiscondensedtosimplemanagementinformationthatallowsforlittlestatisticalanalysis.Thesecondreasonisthatweregardtheonlinetestaslessreliablethanpapertestsbecausewehavenoinformationaboutthewaythequestionsareanswered(suchasthetimeorcarespentonit).Weobserve,forinstance,thatmorethan10%ofonlinetestsarefilledoutincompletely(thesearenotincludedinthedatapresentedhere).OurdiscussioninsteadfocusesontheresearchdonebyPietersen(2013),asheusedthefinalversion(s)ofthetest,hadalargesampleofrespondents,collectedthedataundercontrolledconditions,anddidthemostrobuststatisticalanalysis.



E E Visitors 18 Average

Yellow14

Blue20

Red20

Green23

White20



NL E Visitors 47.237 Average

Yellow13

Blue20

Red20

Green20

White23



E E Visitors 883 Average

Yellow15

Blue20

Red21

Green21

White20

14. 2.42.52.5

TestofpointsTestofpointsTestofpoints

Pietersen(2013)Pietersen(2013)Pietersen(2013)

NL P

Managers/changeagents/supportstaff

2.702 Average

Yellow13

Blue19

Red18

Green20

White26

15. NL P

Managers/changeagents/supportstaff

665 Average

Yellow13

Blue19

Red18

Green20

White26

16. E P Managers/changeagents/supportstaff

91 Average Yellow

15Blue17

Red20

Green20

White24

17. 2.5 Testofpoints AbbasZaidi(2013)

Rus-sian

P ManagersandworkersinRussia

243 Average

Yellow22

Blue20

Red20

Green19

White15

18. 2.5 Testofpoints Xu(2011) E P ChinesepeopleworkinginNL

50 Average

Yellow21

Blue21

Red20

Green16

White19


8

MAINRESEARCHOUTCOMES

Pietersen(2013)analyzedasampleof3,995questionnaires,collectedbetween2008and2012atmorethan150seminarsorganizedforpeopleinleadershippositions.Allresponseswererecordedinsitu:noneofthedatawassubmittedlaterorcollectedonline.Thetotalsampleusedhere(afterdeletionofincompletesets)is3,687(Tests14–16inTable13-2).Itrepresentsacross-sectionofpeopleindifferentleadershippositionsinorganizations.Morethan90%oftherespondentshavecompletedhighervocationaleducation,andmorethan80%fallsintheagecategory35–44orhigher.Reliability

Tomeasureinternalconsistency,aCronbachalphaanalysiswasperformed.Thisindicateshowwelltheitemsinonesetarepositivelycorrelatedtooneanotherforeachfactor(inourcase,foreachcolor):

Yellow:alpha=.58(Test14)and.58(Test15)Blue:alpha=.76(Test14)and.75(Test15)Red:alpha=.52(Test14)and.48(Test15)Green:alpha=.62(Test14)and.67(Test15)White:alpha=.62(Test14)and.58(Test15).

Adesirableminimumis.60(Sekeran&Bougie,2009),butipsativedatatendtoshowlowerCronbach’salphasthannormativedata(Saville&Wilson,1991).Inanycase,thereliabilitycannotbeincreasedbydeletinganswersfromanyofthe12items.DescriptiveStatistics

ThedescriptivestatisticsareshowninTable13-3forthreesamplesofthelatesttwoversionsofthetest.TheaveragescoresinbothofPietersen’s(2013)samplesareidenticalanddifferlittlefromthoseofTummers’ssample(2009).Thestandarddeviationofthethreesamplesisalsosimilar.ThestandarddeviationofBlueisthehighestinbothversionsoftest;thoseofRedandYellowarethelowestinbothversionsofthetest.Thismeansthatrespondents’preferencesforYellowandReddifferlessfromoneanotherthanthoseGreen,WhiteandespeciallyBlue. Testofpoints,version5

(Test15intable2)(Pietersen,2013)

(N=665)

Testofpoints,version4(Test14intable2)(Pietersen,2013)

(N=2702)

Testofpoints,version4(Test9intable2)(Tummers,2009)

(N=1737) Average

scoreSD Average

scoreSD Average

ScoreSD

Yellow 13 6.56 13 6.55 13 6.6Blue 19 9.35 19 9.44 18 9.2Red 18 6.69 18 6.60 19 6.3Green 20 8.21 20 7.69 20 7.4White 26 8.50 26 8.69 25 8.2Table13-3AverageScoresinThreeSampleswiththeLatestVersionsoftheTest


9

MultidimensionalScaling(MDS)ThenumberofdimensionsisidentifiedbyanalysisofS-stressvalue.Forthefourth

versionofthetest(Test14inTable13-2),thevalueisbetween“good”and“excellent.”Forthefifthversionofthetest(Test15inTable13-2),thevalueisbetween“fair”and“good.”Bothversionsappeartobebasedontwodimensions.Figure13-1showsalltheitemsandrelatedscoresintheMDSanalysiswhentheyareaggregatedbycolorandplotted.Asimilarpatternemergesforbothtests.KruskalandWish(1978)statethateachfactorshouldbeclearlyseparatedfromotherswhentheyareplotted.Thisisdefinitelythecasehere–thecolorsoccupypositionsthatarealmostatoptimaldistancefromoneanother,especiallyinthelatesttestwhereRedmovesalittleupwardstoamiddlepositioninfigure13-1.Thesepositionshadimprovedcomparedtoearlierresults,suchasfoundbyOort(2006).Thecolors–andtheirrespectiveapproachestochange–arenowclearlydifferentiatedfromoneanotherinthetest.

Figure13-1Resultsofthemultidimensionalscalinganalysis(MDS)showingclearseparationofcolorpreferencesinthetestresults.


10

TheDimensionsWecandistinguishtwodimensionsintheMDSplot.Thehorizontaldimension

clearlyseparatesBlueandYellowfromWhiteandGreen.TheverticaldimensionseparatesYellowandGreenfromBlueandWhite.Inbothdimensions,Redtakesupamiddleposition.ThecontrastsonthehorizontaldimensionareinlinewithpreviousresearchwherewefoundagapbetweenYellowandBlueononeside,Redinthemiddle,andGreenandWhiteontheotherside(VanNistelrooijetal,2007;Knoop,etal,2009).Wehavenotdonepreviousresearchonthecontrastswithintheverticaldimension.TheMDSanalysisraisesaquestionabouthowtoconceptualizethedimensions.Whatwouldexplainsuchaspacingofthecolors?Weofferthefollowingexplanationasabasisforfurtherdiscussion.

Wesuggestthatthehorizontaldimension(1)referstoapreferenceforatypeof

changeleadership.Negativescorescorrespondwithatop-downapproachtochange(BlueandYellow),whereagencyiscentralized.Blue-printchangeisgenerallydesignedandexecutedbypeoplewhoaretrustedandmandatedonthebasisoftheirexpertise.Yellow-printchangeisgenerallyinitiatedandcontrolledbypeopleonboardsorinmanagementwhowieldpowerthroughhierarchy.Bothcolorsuseatop-downapproachbasedonunderlyingbeliefsthatchangehappensbecauseofrationalanalysis,planning,andimplementation(Blue),orbecauseofapowercoalition(Yellow).

Incontrast,apositivescorecorrespondswithapreferenceforabottom-upapproachtochange(GreenandWhite)or,tobemoreprecise,anapproachinwhichagencyisdispersed.Green-printchangeisdrivenbypeople’seagernessandabilitytolearn.Suchachangemaybenefitfromfacilitation,butthisisnotmeanttolessentheparticipants’activestance.White-printchangeisofteninitiatedandshapedby“temperedradicals”(Meyerson,2003)–peoplewhocareenoughaboutanissuetotakeitupvoluntarily.Bothcolorsdemonstrateanunderlyingbeliefthatlocalownershipdrivesincrementalchange.

Wesuggestthattheverticaldimension(2)referstoapreferenceforatypeof

changerelationship.Apositivescorecorrespondswithsubject-objectrelations,whereafewpeopleareactive,knowledgeable,andinfluential,andothersfollow(e.g.,Hosking,2006).Insuchaviewofchangetherecanbenoleaderswithoutfollowersandviceversa.InBlue-printchange,theexpertsandprojectmanagersdotheanalysis,planning,anddirectingofthechange.Othersfollowtheirleadbecausetheyareputincharge,formally,forgoodreason,astheyare“intheknow.”InWhite-printchange,the“temperedradicals”makesenseofunderlyingdynamics,seenewopportunities,andenrollotherstotakepartininnovation.Heretoo,thereareafewpeopleintheleadbecausetheyareonestepaheadofothers,thoughnotinahierarchicalsense.Leadershipinbothcasesisnotsharedordistributed.

Theoppositeseemstrueforanegativescoreonthisverticaldimension.Thiscorrespondswithsubject-subjectrelations,wherechangeisacollectiveendeavor(e.g.,Kessener&Termeer,2006).ThisorientationismostpronouncedinGreen-printchange,wherelearningisdeemedsomethingthathappensthroughinteractionwithothers.Regardlessofwhetherlearninghappensbywayofinquiry,experimentation,exercises,orteaching,meaningiscreatedthroughconversations.InYellow-printchange,negotiations


11

arethekeytoformingpowercoalitionsandthesetooarecreatedininteraction.Bothapproachessharetheunderlyingnotionthatchangeisco-createdwiththoseinvolvedandthatmanycomplementarycontributionsdeepentheimpact.Leadershipissharedandpeoplemakesenseofchangetogether(e.g.,Wierdsma,2007).

Red-printchangescoresinthemiddleonbothdimensions,whichindicatesan

efforttosomehowcombineopposites.Inthehorizontaldimension,thisreferstoanattempttoreconcilecentralizedleadershipwithallowingthepeopleinvolvedsomeinfluence.Itisanapproachinwhichthedirectionofthechangeanditsplanningarestilltop-down,butimplementedwiththoseinvolved.Thusthetop-downapproachistemperedtoallowforparticipation,whiletryingtostillmaintaincoherenceanddirection.Intheverticaldimension,Red-print’sin-betweenscoreindicatesanefforttoreconcileleadershipbyafewwiththesenseofcommunityamongthemany.Itisanapproachwithacleardivisionofrolesandresponsibilitiesthatstilltriestogetasmanypeopleonboardaspossible.

Thein-betweenpositionofRed-printchangemaybeperceivedasanambivalentreactiontocontrastingworlds.ItislesscontrolledthanBlue,lesscoercivethanYellow,lessinquisitivethanGreen,andlessentrepreneurialthanWhite.Itrunstheriskofbeingalittlebitofeverythingandnotexcellinginanything.Lewis(2000,p.763)describessuchambivalenceas“thecompromiseofconflictingemotionswithinlukewarmreactionsthatlosethevitalityofextremes.”However,aRed-printapproachcanalsotrytoreconcileoppositesandexploretransformativewaystodealwiththeparadoxicaltensionsbetweenthecolors.Ifitsucceeds,itmaybeexperiencedasaprocessthatsomehowintegratescontrastingvalues.Weobservethatsuchintegrationis,asyet,notallthatcommonintermsofbothambitionandrealization.

Inarecentstudy,SmithandLewis(2011)highlightorganizationaltensions,suchas

betweenlearning(Green)andperforming(Yellow),anddescribehowouractionscaneasilycreateself-fulfillingprophecies.Thepreferenceforanambivalentsolutioncouldbeonlyaconcealingtactic,onethattemporarilyreducesdiscomfortyeteventuallyintensifiestensionsandhampersperformance.Incontrast,acontinuedinquiryintodivergentvaluesandwaystointerrelatethemcanproducerecurringmomentsoftranscendenceandpeakperformance.

DifferentiationsBetweenPopulations

Aretherecorrelationsintermsofdemographics?WhenwetakethelargestsamplestudiedbyPietersen(2013)witharecenttestofpoints(Test14inTable13-2),weobserveanumberofpatterns.Pietersenanalyzedasampleofroughly2,700peopleintermsofgender,age,employmentsector,educationallevel,andleadershipposition.Wesharesomeresultsheretounderscorethatsuchcorrelationsareoftensignificant.

Intermsofgender,malerespondentsscoresignificantlyhigheronBlueandYellow

thanfemalerespondents(p≤01).Inturn,femalerespondentsscorehigheronGreenandWhitethanmalerespondents(p<.01).ThereisnosignificantdifferencewhenitcomestoRed.Thissuggeststhatmenprefertopdownapproachesmorethanwomen,whilewomenpreferbottomupapproachesmorethanmen.


12

Intermsofage,BluescoresdecreasewithageandWhitescoresincreasewithage.WhileYellowscoresarelowatyoungerandolderages,theypeakamongthoseinearlycareerstages(aged25–34).Redstaysreasonablyconstantovertime.Forthesefourcolors,theagecorrelationsaresignificant(p≤01).Greenscoresarenotsignificantlycorrelatedtoage.OnepossibleexplanationofthecontrastsbetweenBlueenWhitescoresisthatBluechangeismoreobjectiveandWhitechangemoresubjective.MakingsenseofWhitechangephenomenarequirescomplexpatternrecognitionthatbenefitsfromyearsofexperience.Bluechangeismoreinstrumentalizedwhichmakesiteasierforlessexperiencedchangeagentstocontribute.

Therearecorrelationsbetweencolorpreferenceandthetypeofsectorinwhich

peoplework.Pietersen(2013)comparedandcontrastedthescoresfor13differentsectors.Forinstance,YellowandBluearemostrepresentedinaccounting,auditing,andprofessionalservices,butleastineducationandconsulting/interimmanagement.RedismostrepresentedinIT/ICTfields,andleastinconsulting/interimmanagement.Greenismostrepresentedineducation,andWhiteismostrepresentedinconsulting/interimmanagement.Incontrast,GreenandWhiteareleastrepresentedinthefieldsofaccountingandauditing.Allthesecontrastsaresignificant(p<.01).Itsuggeststhatthebeliefsystemsbehindprofessionsinfluencechangepreferences:forinstance,accountants’andauditors’tendencytotakeonexpertrolestomeasureandsteerprocessesrelatestoaBlue-printviewoftheworldinserviceofYellowarenas.ItmakesthemusethosetwocolorsmoreattheexpenseoftheGreenandWhitecolorsattheothersideofthespectrum.

Respondents’preferencesalsocorrelatetoeducationlevels,distinguishedas(a)

secondaryschool,(b)vocationaleducation,(c)highervocationaleducation,and(d)universityeducation.Yellowappearsmostrepresentedamonguniversitygraduatesandleastamonggraduatesofsecondaryschool.Blueismostrepresentedamonggraduatesofvocationalschoolandleastbythoseofsecondaryschool.SecondaryschoolgraduatesscorehigheronGreenandWhitethanothers,whileGreenistheleastrepresentedamonguniversity-levelrespondentsandWhiteistheleastrepresentedamongvocational-schoolrespondents.SuchcontrastsaresignificantforallcolorsotherthanRed(p<.01).Thissuggeststhatthedidacticenvironment,thenumberofyearsofeducationandthejobstheypreparepeopleforhaveanimpactonchangepreferences.Forinstance,itmayindicatethataneducationatthehighestlevelpreparespeopleforpositionsofpower,whereYellowrepertoireisrequired.Thatthisseemstobeattheexpenseofalearningorientation(Green)canbeexplainedbythedifficultytobevulnerableaslearnerinapoliticalenvironment.Ofcourse,thisalsohintsatanoccupationalriskthatpeopleinpositionsofpowermayreceivetheleastfeedbackattheirplaceofwork.

Lastly,leadershippositionisalsocorrelatedtocolorpreferences.Thesamplewas

analyzedforcontrastsbetweenmanagers,peopleinstaffdepartments,andexternalchangeagents.YellowandBluearemorerepresentedinstaffdepartmentsthantheothertwo,Yellowleastamongmanagers,andBlueleastamongexternalchangeagents.Redismostrepresentedamongmanagersandleastamongexternalchangeagents.GreenandWhitearemostrepresentedamongexternalchangeagentsandleastinstaffdepartments.These


13

differencesaresignificantforYellow,Red,andWhite(p<.01),andnotassignificantforBlueorGreen(p=0.5and.07respectively).

Allthesecorrelations,ofcourse,areopentointerpretation.Infact,whenwe

teach,weoftenengagewithparticipantsindiscussionabouthowtheirbackground,typeofwork,andsooncouldberelatedtotheirchangepreferences.Wethinksuchhypothesizingisausefullearningexercise.Weliketoillustratesuchhypothesizingherewiththeabovefindingswithregardtothecolorpreferencesbasedonleadershippositions.Onemayarguethatitstandstoreasonthatpeopleinstaffdepartmentswhohavetheleastformalpower,mightwanttowieldinfluence.GiventhatYellowandBluearethecolorsthatwoulddominateoverothercolorstrategieswhenitcomestoconflict,itmakessensethatthesecolorsaretheirpreferredchoice.Asmanagershaveformalpower,theyhavelessneedtowielditallthetime:especiallymiddlemanagerswhoareoftenmorefocusedonkeepingeverybody“onboard,”usingmotivationalstrategies(Red).Lastly,externalchangeagentsaredrawntowardentrepreneurialbehavior(White)anddidacticapproaches(Green)togainentryintotheirclient’ssystemastheyoftenlackformalpowerorlong-standingrelationships.

Allthesepreferencesmightstandtoreasonforeachofthethreetypesof

leadershippositions,butimbalancesinthecolorspectrumalsoposerisks.WhenagroupofmanagersscorelowonYellow,theymaypayinsufficientattentiontochecksandbalanceswithregardtopower.Similarly,whenstaffdepartmentsscorelowonGreenandWhite,thismaycausethemtolackentrepreneurialspiritandneglecttheirownknow-how.Lastly,whenexternalchangeagentsscorelowonBlueandRed,theymaystruggletoreconcileprofessionaldistance(Blue)andcustomerintimacy(Red).Noneoftheserisksseemcoincidental–theycanberegardedaspartandparcelofthetypeofleadershipposition.AdditionalDifferentiationStudies

Onemightnotethattheresultspresentedabovearenotbasedonarepresentativesampleofrespondents.Adisproportionatenumberofrespondentsaremiddle-agedorolderandhighlyeducated,apopulationthatcorrespondswiththetypicalparticipantsineducationalprogramsonchangemanagement.Inoneofthestudies(Test10inTable13-2),weteamedupwithanongoingresearchprojectthatlookedatthevaluesandmentalitiesoftheDutchpopulationasawhole,astudymeanttoaidinthesegmentationofmarkets(Knoop,deCaluwé&Mulder,2009).Atthetime,theresearchersusedarepresentativeonlinepanelof80,000Dutchpeoplebetweentheagesof18and65,allofwhomhadatleastsomevocationaleducation.Themainsegmentationwasintermsofstatusandvalues,creatingeightdifferentclusters,suchas“socialclimbers,”“newconservatives,”and“post-materialists.”Outofasampleofmorethan15,000people,about4,000peoplealsofilledoutthecolorquestionnaire.Inthisresearchwelookedattheprevalenceofclearsympathiesorantipathiesbasedoneitheraparticularlyhighorlowcolorscore(>0.5sd).Onaveragepeoplehadaboutthree“extreme”scoresintheiroverallprofile,bringingthetotaltoabout12,000scores.Sympathiesandantipathiesforallthecolorswereevenlyspread:eachaccountedfor


14

between9%and11%ofthe12,000scores.Onapopulationlevel,thismeant29%ofpeopleshowedsympathyforYellow,27%forBlue,25%forRed,26%forGreen,and26%forWhite,and31%showedantipathyforYellow,30%forBlue,32%forRed,26%forGreen,and32%forWhite.In51%ofthecasespeoplehadonedominantcolor.Whenanothercolorscoredhighaswell,thosecombinationsshowedapattern:YellowandBluescoreswerepairedoften(8%),aswereRedandGreen(6%),andGreenandWhite(6%).Othercombinationsscoredmuchlower.Correlationsintermsofgender,education,age,orleadershippositioninthisstudyweresimilartowhatthePietersen(2013)studyshowed.Forinstance,menscorehigherthanwomenonYellowandBlueandloweronGreen,White,andRed.

Thestudyalsoshowedsomethingnew–thecolorpreferencesdiffermarkedly

betweendifferentsegmentsofthepopulation.Withoutgoingintothespecificsofthesegmentationmodel,afewexamplescanillustratethispoint.Thestudyshowsthatpeoplewhoarepartoftheeconomicorculturaleliteorontheirwaytobecomingpartofit(“newconservatives,”“cosmopolitans,”and“socialclimbers”)preferredcolorsthatadvanceormaintainadominantposition.TheyhadmuchhigherscoresonYellowandBluethananyoftheotherfivepopulationsegments.Incontrast,thosewhoquestionthestatusquoorturnawayfromitbasedontheircriticalorpostmodernoutlook(e.g.,“postmodernhedonists”and“post-materialists”)veeredtowardstheotherendofthespectrumandhadhighWhitescores.

Weareoftenaskedaboutdifferencesincolorpreferencesbasedonnationalityor

culture.MostofourexperienceisbasedonDutchaudiencesusingaDutchtestordifferenttypesofinternationalaudiencesusinganEnglishtest.Withregardtothelatter,thefindingsdonotappearmarkedlydifferent(seeTable13-2)buttheyalsodonotdistinguishbetweenspecificnationalities.TherearetwosmallsamplesrelatedtoRussia(Test17inTable13-2,giveninRussian)andChina(Test18inTable13-2,giveninEnglish).WeobservehigherscoresonYellowandloweronWhiteinthosetwopopulationsincomparisonwiththeDutchandinternationalscores.Wethinkitisprematuretoseethisasproofofacontrastingprofileinthesepartsoftheworld,somethingthatrequiresfurtherstudy.

USEANDINTERPRETATIONOFTHETEST

Thetestisusefulasaquick“mirror”ofone’sownbeliefsystemsaboutchange.Incombinationwiththecolormodel,changeagentscanusethetesttoassesstowhatextenttheyaremakinggooduseofthefullspectrumofapproachestochange.Theycanreducetheirblindspots,tempertheirantipathytocertainchangepreferences,andexplorenewavenuesofchangethatwerepreviouslyoutofbounds.Theycanalsodiscusstheviabilityofdifferent(color)viewpointsandapproachestospecificissueswithothersandmatchpeople’scapabilitiestospecificundertakings.Theseapplicationsbecometrulypowerfulwhenthetesttriggerspeopletoexploreameta-modelofchange–likeourcolormodel–morethoroughly.Weregardthequestionnaireasanentrypointtotheunderlyingchangetheory.


15

Wehavenoticedfourtypesofdiscussionsthatareoftentriggeredbythetestscores.Afirstdiscussionconcernstheextenttowhichatestscorecorrespondstochangeagentbehavior.Thetestmirrorswhatpeoplethink,andnotnecessarilyhowtheyact.Thetwocancontrastforseveralreasons.Somepeoplehaveahardtimetranslatingtheirbeliefsintoactionbecausetheylackthecapabilitytodoso.Inthiscase,thecontrastilluminatespossiblelearninggoalsforone’sowndevelopment.Otherpeoplefindithardtoactaccordingtotheirbeliefsystembecausetheissuestheyworkondonotwarrantit;thecontrastthenpointstopossiblecareergoals,ifonewantstheirworktofittheirchangepreferences.Inbothofthesesituations,thegapmaybeuncomfortablebutnotdysfunctional–peoplecanstillactwithintheircompetencesandinawaythatfitstheissues.Athirdexplanationismoreproblematic.Whenthetestmirrorsan“espousedtheory”ratherthanthe“theoryinuse”(Argyris,1998),itmaybethatpeopleareunawareofhowtheyact,letalonetheconsequencesoftheiractions.Suchagapcanonlybebridgedbyacknowledgingthatone’sactionsshowone’struebeliefsmoreaccuratelythanone’sspeech.Throughtakingotherpeople’sfeedbackseriously,thisveilcanbelifted,demonstratingthevalueofinterpretingthescoreswithagroupofcolleagues.

Aseconddiscussioncentersonthebenefitsanddrawbacksofone’scolorprofile.

Weusetheaverageprofile(seeTable13-3)asareferencepointforthis.Peopleoftendebatethevalueofhavingabalancedprofile(closetoaverage)versusamorenarrowprofile,inwhichoneortwocolorsaredominant.Abroadprofilecanallowforstyleflexibility,switchingtodifferentapproacheswhereandwhenneeded.Thiscanbeusefulforthoseinmiddle-managementpositions,wheredifferenttypesofissuesarise,noneofwhichcanbeignoredoreasilydelegated.Incontrast,externalconsultantscanbemoreselectiveaboutthetypesorclientsofissuestheyengage–specializationallowsforamorenarrowprofile.Aseachofthecolorsrepresentsdifferentschoolsofthought,itishardtobecomehighlyskilledinallfivecolorsinonelifetime.Thetestscorescanleadonetopondertheprosandconsofflexibilityversusspecialization.Weareinclinedtospeakinfavorofspecializationwherepossible.Thepowerofanycolor’sapproachispartlydeterminedbythecredibilityandcompetenceofthechangeagent.Specializationallowsformore“colordepth,”whichbenefitschangeeffectiveness.

Thislastremarkisrelatedtoathirddiscussionaboutcollaborationwithothers

whohavecontrastingprofiles.Thetestcanspurconversationsaboutdifferencesandsimilaritiesingroups.Itcanhelppeoplefaceproblemswithcooperation,facilitatemutualacceptance,andcomplementeachother’squalities.Whereagroupisabletodoso,thetestmayhelpthemdealeffectivelywithmultifacetedissues.Arecurringinsightisthattheexistenceofcontrastingbeliefsorvalueswithingroupsdoesnotdetermineiftheyperformwellornot.Groupsseemtoonlybenefitfromdiversitywhentheyareableandwillingtodealwiththetensionsitcreates(e.g.,Shaw&Barret-Power,1992).Thereisoftenasimilardebateaboutwhetherornotitisbeneficialtohaveaprofilethatisalignedwithanorganization’sculture.Here,asimilarconclusionisoftenreached:acolorprofilethatcontrastswithone’ssurroundingscanallowonetobringsomethingtothetablethatothersdon’t.Itcanthusbeanaddedvalue.However,ifoneisnotabletodealwithpossibletensionsthatarisefromthisdifference,suchcontrastswillfailtobearfruit.


16

Afourthdiscussionpointconcernsself-fulfillingprophecies.Whenpeoplehaveacolorpreference,theymayhaveaninclinationtochoosecorrespondingapproaches,gainexperience,andbuildtheircompetence,whichinturnreinforcestheircolorpreference.Thusa“competencytrap”maybecreated,wheretheycannotescapethatpartofthecolorspectrumevenwhenitismostneeded(Levitt&March,1988).Thisargumentmakessensetotheextentthatthereissufficientpre-existingcompetenceinthatcolortoallowforsomesuccess.InmanyorganizationsBlue,Red,andGreenapproachesaresufficientlywidespreadtoallowforsuchpre-existingcompetence.WefinditintriguingthattheaveragescoreonWhiteistwiceashighasthescoreonYellow(seeTable13-3),withtheothercolorshoveringinbetween.ThismightbeexplainedbyWhitebeingmorefashionablethanYellowinpeople’simagination.Itseemsthatmanyliketoembraceidealsofself-direction,innovation,andentrepreneurialism(White)morethanthecommonlydisparagedrealityofpowergamesandpolitics(Yellow).Thisispartlydueto“persuasivelanguage,”inwhichtheupsideoftheWhiteworldisexaggeratedandbeautified–everymessagemaybetweakedtoform,strengthen,orchangetheresponseofothersinadesireddirection(Aarts&vanWoerkom,2008).ThedownsideoftheWhiteworld—thehardworkthatgoesintoit,itslimitsintermsofpredictabilityorefficiency—caneasilyescapeattentionespeciallywhenthereislittlepre-existingcompetenceorpastexperience.ThisdynamicformsanobstacletopullingoffWhite-printchangeeffectively,thusallowingittostaymorepopularinourthoughtsthaninouractions.

CONCLUDINGREMARKS

Ourtestofpointsinitsfinalversionisareliableandvalidinstrumenttomeasureindividualchangepreferences.Theaveragescoresandstandarddeviationsarerobustandstableovertime,andindividualscorescaneasilybecomparedwiththeaverageofdemographicsegments.Thetestcangiverisetodiscussionsthataidprofessionalizationandcollaboration.Inourview,thequestionnaireisprimarilyanaidtoreflection.Thescoresaremeanttostimulatediscussionabouttheirinterpretationratherthantobeadefinitiveansweraboutone’sstyle.Weareinclinedtoregardthislimitationasstrengthratherthanaweakness.

Thetestresultsreportedheregiverisetopossiblenewinquiries.Oneavenue

focusesonmorein-depthanalysisofthecontrastinchangepreferencesbetweendifferentpopulationsegmentsorcultures.Anotheravenueismorein-depthstudyofwhatunderliesthecontrastsbetweenparadigmsofchange.Wewerepleasantlysurprisedbythecleardifferentiationofthecolorsthatresultedfrommultidimensionalscaling,butourexplanationofthetwodimensionsisbynomeanstheendofthediscussion.Itcouldbeworthwhiletoexplorethisfurtherandtocontrastitwithotherstudiesinwhichchangeparadigmsareanalyzedintwodimensions(e.g.,Huy,2001;Higgs&Rowland,2005).Weinviteyoutotakethetest(seeLinkstotheTestbelow)andtoreflectonyourownthinkingaboutandpreferencesfordifferentapproachestochange.


17

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Manypeoplecontributedtothedevelopmentofthequestionnaire,especiallymasterstudents,asisclearbytheincludedreferences.WewanttoacknowledgeB.Pietersenspecifically.

LINKSTOTHETEST

ColortestforchangeagentsinEnglish:http://tg.quaestio.com/survey/qst/COLORSCAN(retrievedonJanuary1st,2015)ColortestforchangeagentsinDutch:http://www.twynstragudde.nl/kleurentest(retrievedonJanuary1st,2015)

REFERENCES

Aarts,N.,&Woerkom,C.van(2008).Strategischecommunicatie:principesen

toepassingen[Strategiccommunication:Principlesandapplications].Assen,TheNetherlands:VanGorcum.

AbbasZaidi,J.(2013).UnlearningforChange?Effectsofobviouslyhiddenpowerplay,cannypoliticsanddeafeningsilenceofmanagersonOrganisationalUnlearning.Acomparativestudyinthreeex-socialistbloccountries.Non-published,nonaffiliatedresearchpaper.

Argyris,C.(1998).Knowledgeforaction:Aguidetoovercomebarrierstoorganizationalchange.SanFrancisco,CA:Jossey-Bass.

Beer,E.,&Nohria,N.(Eds.)(2000).Breakingthecodeofchange.Boston,MA:HarvardBusinessSchoolPress.

Blinkhorn,S.,Johnson,C.,&Wood,R.(1988).Spuriouserandspuriouser:Theuseofipsativepersonalitytests.JournalofOccupationalPsychology,61,153–162.

Buono,A.F.,deCaluwé,L.&Stoppelenburg,A.(Eds.)(2013).ExploringtheProfessionalIdentityofManagementConsultants.Charlotte,NC:InformationAgePublishing.

Buono,A.F.&Kerber,K.(2005).Rethinkingorganizationalchange:Reframingthechallengeofchangemanagement.OrganizationDevelopmentJournal,23(3),23-38.

Caluwé,L.de&Vermaak,H.(2003):LearningtoChange:Aguidefororganizationchangeagents.SevenOaks:SagePublications.

Caluwé,L.de&Vermaak,H.(2004):Changeparadigms:Anoverview.JournalofOrganizationDevelopment,22,(4),9-18.

Cooper,C.R.&Schindler,P.S.(2008).Businessresearchmethods(10thed.)Boston,MA:McGraw-Hill.

Higgs,M.,&Rowland,D.(2005).Allchangesgreatandsmall:Exploringapproachestochangeanditsleadership.JournalofChangeManagement,5(2),121–151.


18

Hosking,D.(2006).Notleaders,notfollowers:Apost-moderndiscourseofleadershipprocesses.InB.Shamir,R.Pillai,M.Bligh,&M.Uhl-Bien(Eds.),Follower-centeredperspectivesonleadership:AtributetothememoryofJamesR.Meindl(pp.243–264).Greenwich,CT:InformationAgePublishing.

Huy,Q.N.(2001).Time,temporalcapabilityandplannedchange.AcademyofManagementReview,26(4),601–623.

Kessener,B.,&Termeer,C.J.A.M.(2006).Organiserenvandiepgaandleren:Veranderenalsreflexiefbetekenisgeven[Organizingdeeplearning:Changeasreflectivesensemaking).Management&Organisatie,3/4,236–250.

Knoop,L.,Caluwé,L.de&Mulder,M.(2009)Zoekennaarsynergietussenveranderkundeenmarketing:eenverkennendestudienaarovereenkomsteninachterliggendewaardenvaneenveranderkundeeneenmarketingcommunicatiemodel.[Searchingforsynergybetweenchangemanagementandmarketing:exploringthecommonalitiesinunderlyingvaluesbetweentwometamodels]ManagementenOrganisatie,6,20-38.

Kruskal,J.B.,&Wish,M.(1978).Multidimensionalscaling.NewburyPark,CA:Sage.Lankreijer,B.(2007).Validation:kleurentest[Validation:Colortest]Researchpaper.

Amsterdam,TheNetherlands:VrijeUniversiteit.Levitt,B.,&March,J.G.(1988).Organizationallearning.AnnualReviewofSociology,14,

319–340.Lewis,M.W.(2000).Exploringparadox:Towardamorecomprehensiveguide.Academyof

managementreview,25(4),760-776.Loo,R.(1999).Issuesinfactor-analyzingipsativemeasures:Thelearningstyleinventory

(LSI-1985)example.JournalofBusinessandPsychology,14(1),149–154.Martins,Dias,S.(2000).Eenexploratiefonderzoeknaarhet‘denkenoververanderingin

vijfkleuren’binnenTwynstraGudde[Anexplorativestudyof‘thinkingaboutchangeinfivecolors’atTwynstraGudde].Master’sthesis.Rotterdam:ErasmusUniversiteit.

Meyerson,D.E.(2003).Temperedradicals:Howeverydayleadersinspirechangeatwork.Boston,MA:HarvardBusinessSchoolPress.

Nistelrooij,A.van,Caluwé,L.de&Schouten,N.(2007)Managementconsultants’colorfulwaysoflookingatchange:AnexplorativestudyunderDutchmanagementconsultants.JournalofChangeManagement,17,3-4,243-254.

Oort,M.(2006).Preferencesfororganizationalchange.Master’sthesis.Amsterdam,TheNetherlands:VrijeUniversiteit.

Pietersen,B.(2013)HowvalidarethequestionnairesonthecolorsofchangebyCaluwéandVermaak?Anextensivequantitativeanalysisoftheframework.Masterthesis.Amsterdam:VrijeUniversiteit.

Saville,P.,&Wilson,E.(1991).Thereliabilityandvalidityofnormativeandipsativeapproachesinthemeasurementofpersonality.JournalofOccupationalPsychology,64(3),219–238.

Scherer,A.G.,&Dowling,M.J.(1995).Towardsareconciliationofthetheoryofpluralisminstrategicmanagement:IncommensurabilityandtheconstructivistapproachoftheErlangenschool.AdvancesinStrategicManagement,12,195–247.

Schön,D.A.(1987).Educatingthereflectivepractitioner.SanFrancisco,CA:Jossey-Bass.Sekeran,U.&R.Bougie,R.(2009).Researchmethodsforbusiness:Askillbuilding


19

approach.(5thed.).WestSussex(UK):Wiley&SonShaw,J.B.,&Barret-Power,E.(1998).Theeffectsofdiversityonsmallworkgroup

processesandperformance.HumanRelations,51(10),1307–1325.Smith,W.,&Lewis,M.(2011).Towardatheoryofparadox:Adynamicequilibriummodel

oforganizing.AcademyofManagementReview,36(2),381–403.Tummers,M.(2009).Validationofthecolorsofchange:Ameta-analysisof1,737of

changeagents.Master’sthesis.Amsterdam:VrijeUniversiteit.Velde,E.G.,vander,Jansen,P.G.W.&Anderson,N.A.(2008).GuidetoManagement

ResearchMethods(2nded.).Oxford,UK:WileyBusinessEconomics.Ven,A.H.vande,&Poole,M.S.(1995).Explainingdevelopmentandchangein

organizations.AcademyofManagementReview3,510–540.Vermaak.H&Caluwé,L.de(2015).Creatingacolorfulmodelofchange:Acasestudyof

theorydevelopment.PaperpresentedattheAcademyofManagementAnnualConference,Vancouver,BC.

Wierdsma,A.(2007).Amethodologyforincreasingcollectivecompetence:Acontextforco-creativechange.InJ.Boonstra&L.deCaluwé(Eds.),Interveningandchanging:Lookingformeaningininteractions(pp.243–260).Chicester,UK:Wiley.

Xu,Y.(2011).AresearchofinvestigatingculturaldifferencesbetweenChineseandDutchintheworkingenvironment.Master’sthesis.Amsterdam,TheNetherlands:VrijeUniversiteit.

Documents

Knowing yourself as a change agent: A validated test based ...hansvermaak.com/wp-content/uploads/Caluwe-Vermaak-Color-Test... · Léon de Caluwé , Hans Vermaak ... , Beer & Nohria,