Change capacity, broadly defined as an organization’s ability to effectively initiate, manage, and sustain change, is considered a critical element of long-term organizational success. It incorporates both the structural and cultural capabilities that enable an organization to navigate uncertainty and maintain operational continuity during disruptive transformations. Unlike the more reactive nature of change management, in general, change capacity is a proactive state, reflecting an organization’s readiness to embrace change as a continuous process rather than a series of episodic, planned events.

Several definitions of Organizational Change Capacity (OCC) have been proffered by researchers in this area, among them:

Heckman, Steger, & Dowling (2015), in their research paper investigating organizational capacity for change, sought to explore why some organizations adapt better than others and how OCC impacts change project success. The study analyzes data from 134 German firms in manufacturing and processing, using multiple regression analysis to examine the relationships between OCC, technological turbulence, competitive intensity, previous change experiences (both in quantity and quality), and change project performance. This study of OCC sought to answer two important research questions:

𝗤𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝟭: 𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘀𝗼𝗺𝗲 𝗼𝗿𝗴𝗮𝗻𝗶𝘇𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝗻 𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿𝘀? This question explores the factors that contribute to an organization’s capacity for change. The study examines various potential antecedents of OCC, including past change experiences, “technological turbulence,” competitive intensity, and organizational alignment.

𝗤𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝟮: 𝗔𝗿𝗲 𝗼𝗿𝗴𝗮𝗻𝗶𝘇𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗯𝗲𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗮𝘁 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲 𝗮𝗹𝘀𝗼 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝘀𝘂𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗳𝘂𝗹 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗶𝗿 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗷𝗲𝗰𝘁𝘀? This question investigates the relationship between OCC and the success of change projects within organizations. It explores whether organizations with a higher capacity for change are more likely to achieve positive outcomes from their change initiatives.

The authors did not explicitly define “technical turbulence” but they did draw on the definition of environmental dynamism from Dess and Beard (1984). Environmental dynamism encompasses both the rate of change and the degree of instability in the environment. In the context of this study, technological turbulence is a form of environmental dynamism that presents challenges for organizations. The authors characterize turbulent environments as being characterized by rapid change, short product life cycles and frequent obsolescence of current products and services, and a need to develop new competencies in response.

The authors argue that in turbulent environments, organizations need to react efficiently and quickly to change and be able to anticipate changes as early as possible.

From their study, the authors yielded three primary conclusions. First, 𝗼𝗿𝗴𝗮𝗻𝗶𝘇𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗮 𝗵𝗶𝗴𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗮𝗰𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝘀𝘂𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗳𝘂𝗹 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗶𝗿 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗷𝗲𝗰𝘁𝘀’ 𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲. This finding supports the idea that OCC enables companies to effectively manage the series of change initiatives often demanded in today’s business environment. Organizations that can readily adapt and implement change are better equipped to achieve their desired outcomes from change projects.

Second, 𝘁𝗲𝗰𝗵𝗻𝗼𝗹𝗼𝗴𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗯𝘂𝗹𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗱𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗲𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗻𝗲𝗲𝗱 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗮 𝗴𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗮𝗰𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲, 𝘄𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗲𝘁𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁. The study found that companies operating in environments with high levels of technological turbulence are more likely to develop a stronger capacity for change. This is because these organizations must be able to adapt quickly to new technologies and seize emerging opportunities. However, the study did not find a similar relationship between competitive intensity and OCC. The authors suggest that in highly competitive environments, often characterized by intense price competition, organizations may prioritize cost-cutting and efficiency over developing their capacity for change.

And finally, 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗰𝗲𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗱 𝘀𝘂𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗽𝗮𝘀𝘁 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲 𝗶𝗻𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲𝘀 𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗻𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗹𝘆 𝗮𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗰𝘁𝘀 𝗮𝗻 𝗼𝗿𝗴𝗮𝗻𝗶𝘇𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻’𝘀 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗮𝗰𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲. Companies that have experienced positive outcomes from past change projects are more likely to develop a higher capacity for change. This finding highlights the importance of making certain that change initiatives are well-managed and achieve their intended results. Positive experiences with change foster adaptability and reinforce the value of embracing change within the organization. Interestingly, the quantity of previous change experiences did not show a significant relationship with OCC. This suggests that simply undertaking numerous changes does not necessarily enhance an organization’s capacity for change. What matters most is the perceived quality and success of those initiatives.

Overall, the study emphasizes that successfully navigating a dynamically changing business landscape requires organizations to cultivate a strong capacity for change. This involves not only bending to external pressures like technological advancements but also fostering a culture that embraces change and learns from past successes (and failures). The authors suggest that companies should develop and invest in their change management capacities regardless of company size, age, or industry.

The authors further emphasize the importance of positive change experiences, noting that routines for managing change become established when they are associated with success and a positive change outcome. They explain that when organizational changes are similar in scope and content, it is easier to develop routines for initiating, managing, and implementing them. The experience gained through previous changes can then be transferred to future change projects. However, because organizations experience such a variety of change types, it can be challenging to develop such unique and effective change routines.

𝗦𝗼𝘂𝗿𝗰𝗲𝘀:

Auster, E. R., Wylie, K. K., & Valente, M. S. (2005). “Strategic organizational change: Building change capabilities in your organization”. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Buono, A. F., & Kerber, K. W. (2010). “Creating a sustainable approach to change: Building organizational change capacity”. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 75, 4–18.

Heckman, N., Steger, T., & Dowling, M. (2015), “Organizational Capacity for Change, Change Experience, and Change Project Performance”, Journal of Business Research, 69(2), 777-784.

Judge, W. Q. (2011). “Building organizational capacity for change: The strategic leader’s new mandate”. New York: Business Expert Press.

Judge, W. Q., & Elenkov, D. (2005). “Organizational capacity for change and environmental performance: An empirical assessment of Bulgarian firms”. Journal of Business Research, 58, 893–901.