未雨绸缪：变革前非正式信息对员工变革抵制意愿的影响

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2019.00248

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

组织变革前总会有小道消息等非正式信息传播, 这些信息是员工提前了解变革的重要来源。研究探索变革前非正式信息对员工变革前抵制意愿的影响, 以及员工变革抵制意愿随时间推移的变化。基于255位样本数据的结构方程模型及多层次线性增长模型分析表明：(1)变革前非正式信息的消极性及不完整性, 显著负向影响员工变革认知, 进而使员工变革抵制意愿上升; (2)随着时间推移, 员工变革抵制意愿显著衰减, 即从变革前到变革发生时抵制意愿显著降低。研究揭示了变革前非正式信息对员工有“热身准备”的作用, 能够帮助员工提前适应, 从而更好地应对变革。研究结果有助于变革的顺利实施。

关键词: 变革前非正式信息, 变革认知, 变革抵制意愿, 衰减

Abstract:

Informal information before organizational change refers to unconfirmed information moving through informal channels. Such information can pertain to the content and objectives of organizational change during the preparatory phase. Although previous studies have found the distribution of informal information before the organizational change, its impact on employees has been unknown. To shed light on informal information before organizational change, we investigated the impact of informal information quality and character before the organizational change on employee initial change resistance. We investigated the mediation of organizational change cognition as well as the attenuation of employee resistance to the change over time and the moderating effect of informal information frequency.
Our theoretical propositions are collected from 255 MBA students in a reputable university in China. Our original plan for the data to be collected before the organizational change was rejected by top executives due to the possible negative influence of informal information gathering. Thus, a retrospective self-report was utilized for MBA students to complete the questionnaire. To avoid common method variance, a two-wave collection was designed. MBA students reported the informal information before the organizational change, their change cognition, and initial change resistance in the first wave. Two weeks after the first wave, MBA students reported their change resistance during the implementation of the organizational change. Structural equation model and multi-level linear growth model were utilized to conduct analyses regarding the impact of informal information before the change and the attenuation of employee resistance to change, respectively.
The results showed the low quality and negative informal information before the organizational change were positively related to the employee initial resistance to change, and this relationship was mediated by change cognition. The resistance to change of employees attenuated significantly over time from the preparatory phase to the implementation of organizational change.
The research focused on the informal information before organizational change and explored its impact on employee resistance to change. Based on adaptation level theory, we found the attenuation of employee resistance to change over time. Our study extends implementation of organizational change to preparatory phase where the organizational change has been brewed, which contributes to adaptation level theory. The results demonstrated that informal information can prepare employees in advance and reduce resistance to change. Thus, managers could focus more attention to informal communication before the organizational change occurs in the workplace.

Key words: informal information before the change, change cognition, resistance to change, attenuation

中图分类号:

B849:C93

杜旌, 崔雨萌. (2019). 未雨绸缪：变革前非正式信息对员工变革抵制意愿的影响. 心理学报, 51(2), 248-258.

DU Jing, CUI Yumeng. (2019). Take precautions: Impact of informal information before organizational change on employee resistance to change. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 51(2), 248-258.

图/表 7

参考文献 36

1	Aaker J., Drolet A., & Griffin D . ( 2008). Recalling mixed emotions. Journal of Consumer Research, 35( 2),268-278. doi: 10.1086/588570 URL
2	Aiken, L.S., & West S.G, . ( 1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc.
3	Baumeister R. F., Zhang L., & Vohs K. D . ( 2004). Gossip as cultural learning. Review of General Psychology, 8( 2), 111-121. doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.8.2.111 URL
4	Beersma, B., & Van Kleef G.A, . ( 2011). How the grapevine keeps you in line: Gossip increases contributions to the group. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2( 6), 642-649. doi: 10.1177/1948550611405073 URL
5	Bonanno, G.A., & Burton C.L, . ( 2013). Regulatory flexibility: An individual differences perspective on coping and emotion regulation. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8( 6),591-612. doi: 10.1177/1745691613504116 URL
6	Bordia P., Jones E., Gallois C., Callan V. J., & DiFonzo N . ( 2006). Management are aliens! Rumors and stress during organizational change. Group & Organization Management, 31( 5), 601-621.
7	Bouckenooghe D., Devos G., & van Den Broeck, H. ( 2009). Organizational change questionnaire-climate of change, processes, and readiness: Development of a new instrument. The Journal of Psychology, 143( 6), 559-599. doi: 10.1080/00223980903218216 URL
8	Brady D. L., Brown D. J., & Liang L. H . ( 2017). Moving beyond assumptions of deviance: The reconceptualization and measurement of workplace gossip. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102( 1), 1-25. doi: 10.1037/apl0000164 URL
9	Brickman P., & Campbell, D. T .( 1971) . Hedonic relativism and planning the good society. In M. H. Appley (Ed.), Adaptation level theory: A symposium (pp. 287-302). New York, NY: Academic Press.
10	Cheng C., Lau H.-P., & Chan M.-P. S . ( 2014). Coping flexibility and psychological adjustment to stressful life changes: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 140( 6), 1582-1607. doi: 10.1037/a0037913 URL
11	Chung G. H., Du J., & Choi J. N . ( 2014). How do employees adapt to organizational change driven by cross-border M&As? A case in China. Journal of World Business, 49( 1),78-86. doi: 10.1016/j.jwb.2013.01.001 URL
12	DiFonzo, N., & Bordia P. ( 2002). Corporate rumor activity, belief, and accuracy. Public Relations Review, 28(1), 1-19.
13	DiFonzo, N., & Bordia P. ( 2007). Rumor psychology: Social and organizational approaches. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
14	Enders, C.K., & Tofighi D. ( 2007). Centering predictor variables in cross-sectional multilevel models: A new look at an old issue. Psychological Methods, 12( 2),121-138. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.12.2.121 URL
15	Farrell, D. ( 1983). Exit, voice, loyalty and neglect as responses to job dissatisfaction: A multidimensional scaling study. Academy of Management Journal, 26( 4),596-607.
16	Feinberg M., Willer R., & Schultz M . ( 2014). Gossip and ostracism promote cooperation in groups. Psychological Science, 25( 3),656-664. doi: 10.1177/0956797613510184 URL
17	Gholipour A., Kozekanan S. F., & Zehtabi M . ( 2011). Utilizing gossip as a strategy to construct organizational reality. Business Strategy Series, 12( 2),56-62. doi: 10.1108/17515631111114859 URL
18	Hayes A. F. ( 2013). Methodology in the social sciences. introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach, New York: Guilford Press.
19	Herzig, S.E., & Jimmieson N.L, . ( 2006). Middle managers' uncertainty management during organizational change. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 27( 8),628-645.
20	Johlke, M.C., & Duhan D.F, . ( 2001). Supervisor communication practices and boundary spanner role ambiguity. Journal of Managerial Issues, 13( 1), 87-101.
21	Luo, Y.J., & Du J . ( 2016). The role of informal information prior to organizational change. Advances in Psychological Science, 24( 12),1819-1828.
	[ 骆元静, 杜旌 . ( 2016). 组织变革前非正式信息的作用机制. 心理科学进展, 24( 12),1819-1828.]
22	Malhotra N. K., Kim S. S., & Patil A . ( 2006). Common method variance in is research: A comparison of alternative approaches and a reanalysis of past research. Management Science, 52( 12),1865-1883. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.1060.0597 URL
23	Miller V. D., Johnson J. R., & Grau J . ( 1994). Antecedents to willingness to participate in a planned organizational change. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 22( 1),59-80. doi: 10.1080/00909889409365387 URL
24	Oreg, S. ( 2003). Resistance to change: Developing an individual differences measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88( 4), 680-693. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.4.680 URL
25	Oreg, S. ( 2006). Personality, context, and resistance to organizational change. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 15( 1), 73-101. doi: 10.1080/13594320500451247 URL
26	Rafferty A. E., Jimmieson N. L., & Armenakis A. A . ( 2013). Change readiness: A multilevel review. Journal of Management, 39( 1),110-135.
27	Raudenbush, S.W., & Bryk A.S, . ( 2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Newbury Park: SAGE Publications.
28	Ritter K.-J., Matthews, R A., Ford, M T., & Henderson, A A . ( 2016). Understanding role stressors and job satisfaction over time using adaptation theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101( 12), 1655-1669. doi: 10.1037/apl0000152 URL
29	Robinson, M.D., & Clore G.L, . ( 2002). Episodic and semantic knowledge in emotional self-report: Evidence for two judgment processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83( 1),198-215. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.83.1.198 URL
30	Shapiro, S.A., & Nielsen J.H, . ( 2013). What the blind eye sees: Incidental change detection as a source of perceptual fluency. Journal of Consumer Research, 39( 6),1202-1208. doi: 10.1086/667852 URL
31	Sheng, Q.F., & Ni J . ( 2010). An empirical study on the relationship between organizational change and employee's resistance to change. Science & Technology Progress and Policy, 27( 24),109-112.
	[ 盛琼芳, 倪婧 . ( 2010). 组织变革与员工抵制变革关系的实证研究. 科技进步与对策, 27( 24), 109-112.]
32	Van den Heuvel M., Demerouti E., Bakker A. B., & Schaufeli W. B . ( 2013). Adapting to change: The value of change information and meaning-making. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 83( 1),11-21. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2013.02.004 URL
33	Wanberg, C.R., & Banas J.T, . ( 2000). Predictors and outcomes of openness to changes in a reorganizing workplace. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85( 1),132-142. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.85.1.132 URL
34	Xiao S. F., Yan M., & Zhao J . ( 2018). Role ambiguity and counterproductive workplace behavior: A model of mediated moderation. Luojia Management Review, 19( 3),39-52.
	[ 肖素芳, 鄢苗, 赵君 . ( 2018). 角色模糊与反生产行为: 一个被中介的调节作用模型. 珞珈管理评论, 19( 3),39-52.]
35	Zhang L., Lin Y. C., & Chi D. M . ( 2012). Research on the influence of communication modes on communication satisfaction: The moderating effect of communication cognition and tendency. Science of Science and Management of S & T, 33( 2),167-175.
	[ 张莉, 林与川, 迟冬梅 . ( 2012). 组织沟通方式对沟通满意度的影响: 沟通认知与沟通倾向的调节作用. 科学学与科学技术管理, 33( 2), 167-175.]
36	Zhou, H., & Long, L.R . ( 2004). Statistical remedies for common method Biases. Advances in Psychological Science, 12( 6),942-950.
	[ 周浩, 龙立荣 . ( 2004). 共同方法偏差的统计检验与控制办法. 心理科学进展, 12( 6), 942-950.]

信息类型	(有关变革的)正式信息	(有关变革的)变革前非正式信息	八卦	谣言
传播者	上级	上级、同事、自己	同事、自己	不确定来源
传播方式	公告、通知等由上而下明文规定	由上而下散播、之后各个方向的人际之间传播	各个方向的人际之间传播	各个方向的人际之间传播
传播动机	发起变革、制定规则	无意或有意提前散播、上级收集意见获取反馈、员工之间验证信息、确认细节	社交娱乐、团体保护、个人私心	扰乱现状、混淆视听
传播内容	变革的内容和具体流程	变革内容、流程	不在场的第三方成员	各种虚假内容
信息特点	严肃正式、完整真实地传递变革内容	反映未来的变革、具有可参考性、发生在变革前	评价的对象针对不在场的成员, 而非客观事件	没有证据、虚假信息、空穴来风
参考文献	Johlke和Duhan (2001)	Bordia et al., (2006)、骆元静和杜旌(2016)	Brady et al., (2017)	Difonzo和Bordia (2007)>

信息类型	(有关变革的)正式信息	(有关变革的)变革前非正式信息	八卦	谣言
传播者	上级	上级、同事、自己	同事、自己	不确定来源
传播方式	公告、通知等由上而下明文规定	由上而下散播、之后各个方向的人际之间传播	各个方向的人际之间传播	各个方向的人际之间传播
传播动机	发起变革、制定规则	无意或有意提前散播、上级收集意见获取反馈、员工之间验证信息、确认细节	社交娱乐、团体保护、个人私心	扰乱现状、混淆视听
传播内容	变革的内容和具体流程	变革内容、流程	不在场的第三方成员	各种虚假内容
信息特点	严肃正式、完整真实地传递变革内容	反映未来的变革、具有可参考性、发生在变革前	评价的对象针对不在场的成员, 而非客观事件	没有证据、虚假信息、空穴来风
参考文献	Johlke和Duhan (2001)	Bordia et al., (2006)、骆元静和杜旌(2016)	Brady et al., (2017)	Difonzo和Bordia (2007)>

模型	χ²	df	CFI	NFI	TLI	RMSEA	AIC
双因子模型(合并信息消极性、信息完整性和信息频次, 合并变革认知和变革前抵制意愿)	1045.66	103	0.56	0.65	0.56	0.17	1143.66
三因子模型(合并信息消极性、信息完整性和信息频次)	697.63	101	0.79	0.77	0.72	0.14	799.63
四因子模型(合并变革认知和变革前抵制意愿)	487.05	98	0.86	0.84	0.81	0.11	595.05
五因子模型(信息消极性、信息完整性、信息频次、变革认知、变革前抵制意愿)	172.51	95	0.97	0.94	0.96	0.05	286.50

模型	χ²	df	CFI	NFI	TLI	RMSEA	AIC
双因子模型(合并信息消极性、信息完整性和信息频次, 合并变革认知和变革前抵制意愿)	1045.66	103	0.56	0.65	0.56	0.17	1143.66
三因子模型(合并信息消极性、信息完整性和信息频次)	697.63	101	0.79	0.77	0.72	0.14	799.63
四因子模型(合并变革认知和变革前抵制意愿)	487.05	98	0.86	0.84	0.81	0.11	595.05
五因子模型(信息消极性、信息完整性、信息频次、变革认知、变革前抵制意愿)	172.51	95	0.97	0.94	0.96	0.05	286.50

变量	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13
1.年龄	33.05	6.66	--
2.性别	0.45	0.50	-0.10	--
3.工作年限	10.72	7.87	0.95^**	-0.12^*	--
4.现岗年限	5.49	6.18	0.67^**	-0.05	0.71^**	--
5.战略制度变革	0.36	0.48	0.06	-0.02	0.04	-0.09	--
6.人事薪酬变革	0.40	0.49	-0.32^**	-0.05	-0.33^**	-0.23^**	-0.61^**	--
7.信息完整性	3.44	0.88	-0.07	-0.05	-0.06	-0.07	0.02	0.08	--
8.信息消极性	2.86	1.07	-0.13^*	0.07	-0.12^*	-0.03	0.05	0.03	-0.14^*	--
9.变革前抵制意愿	2.56	0.88	0.03	0.06	0.04	0.05	-0.02	-0.00	-0.21^**	0.27^**	--
10.变革认知	3.5	0.92	0.13^*	0.04	0.14^*	0.10	0.03	-0.04	0.15^*	-0.47^**	-0.35^**	--
11.信息频次	3.2	1.01	0.06	0.09	0.03	-0.01	-0.02	0.10	0.15^*	-0.14	-0.14	0.16^*	--
12.变革信息一致性	3.44	0.72	-0.13	-0.06	-0.11	-0.05	-0.02	0.10	0.19^**	0.03	0.11	0.03	-0.16	--
13.变革时抵制意愿	2.12	0.74	0.06	-0.07	0.07	0.04	-0.03	0.08	-0.18^*	0.22^**	0.38^**	-0.31^**	0.12	0.05	--