Creating organizational knowledge during transformational change: A multi-site case study using an action theory approach

This study sought to understand the dynamic social process of creating organizational knowledge during transformational change through understanding the nature of a firm's knowledge structure concerning organizational change. To best understand how firms know what, where, when, why, and how to change, the researcher used mixed methodologies to gather real-time data to include qualitative and quantitative strategies such as: the Organizational Action Survey (Johnson, 1998) using a cross-section representation; focus group storyboarding using emerging pragmatic theory with informed sources who had both strategic and operational perspectives of the firm; interviews with top management team members; observations of planning meetings and daily routines; and document review of stated strategic direction and transformational effort plans. The methods were replicated in two firms in different industries undergoing change to maximize variation and gain insight into the phenomenon under study.;The study was based on the premise that the firm's ability to create new knowledge is a prerequisite for organizational transformation (Hedberg, 1981; Lundberg, 1989; Nonaka, 1991b; Schwandt, 1997b); and that knowledge creation is a result of the recursive social process (Giddens, 1990; Schwandt, 1997b) in which there is a dynamic interaction between the social actions of human collective and the cognitive structures that guide those actions. Using a social action theory approach that allowed for a comprehensive examination of the social processes involved at the collective level, the study was able to meet its objectives of (1) describing the nature of firm-level knowledge structure concerning organizational change; (2) examining patterns of actions at the firm-level during a transformational change effort; and (3) advancing the theoretical understanding by linking collective action, knowledge structures, and creation of knowledge through empirical grounding.;There were seven primary characteristics that represent the nature of knowledge structure concerning organizational change: (1) internally focused knowledge structure that was preoccupied with production; (2) a dominant core that suppressed rather than evoked inquiry; (3) tightly coupled elements that contributed to the reduction of equivocality and inquiry; (4) action orientation focused on performing rather than learning; (5) structuring actions that reflected an imbalance of requisite variety and equifinality; (6) default to history/culture elements in response to threatening conditions in external environment; and (7) skeptical perspective that viewed change as an outcome rather than an opportunity perspective that viewed change as an ongoing means to enhance adaptive capacity.;In general, the knowledge structure was too simple given the complexity of their external environment. The focus was on present rather than future action, performing rather than learning, and driven by prevailing norms of resistance. The knowledge structure lacked capacity to create knowledge about its change process, and in turn reinforced the performing orientation at the expense of generating new goal reference knowledge about plausible future actions. Implications and recommendations for future research included longitudinal comparative case studies using mix methodologies with real-time data to allow for the tracking of altering knowledge structures during periods of punctuated and incremental change. Additionally, continued work with multi-level theories derived from cross-disciplines that include both the macro and micro level allowed for a more comprehensive understanding to collective knowledge structures.