journal of chinese human resource management

5/27/2018 Journal of Chinese Human Resource Management

1/1

Intra-department communicationand employees reaction to

organizational changeThe moderating effect of emotional

intelligence

Chaoying Tang and Yunxia GaoManagement School of Graduate University, Chinese Academy of Sciences,

Beijing, China

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate the moderating effect of employee emotionalintelligence on the relationship of intra-department communications and employees reaction toorganizational change in China.

Design/methodology/approach Based on the literatures in organizational change,organizational communications and emotional intelligence, the authors derived three hypotheseswhich were tested with data collected in a large state-owned enterprise (SOE) in the telecommunicationindustry. Factor analysis and regression analysis were combined for the hypothesis tests.

Findings It was found that intra-department communications positively influenced employeesreaction to organizational change with employees emotional intelligence moderating the relationship.When employees emotional intelligence is higher, intra-department communication has greaterpositive effect on employees reaction to change.

Research limitations/implications With the adopted western measurement scales, this studywas unable to reveal the Chinese contextual aspect of organizational communications. As the data

were self-reported, they may have common source deviation.Practical implications To foster and maintain employees positive reactions to change, managersand organizations may consider developing strategies to improve employees emotional intelligence,so as to embrace future changes.

Originality/value This is an initial effort in examining the joint effect of intra-departmentcommunications and employees emotional intelligence on employees reaction to organizationalchange. It may lead to additional research on organizational change management.

KeywordsChina, Organizational change, Change management, Employees behaviour,Human resource management, Intra-department communication, Emotional intelligence

Paper typeResearch paper

IntroductionIn todays business world, change has become a constant. Facing fierce marketcompetitions, organizational change is the only way to survive and grow. Organizationalchange is coupled with uncertainty, challenges and stress (Daft and Steers, 1986;Rafferty and Griffin, 2006). The resistance to organizational change from employeeshas been recognized as an important area in change management (Duck, 1993). As such,

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/2040-8005.htm

The study is supported by the China National Science Foundation under the agreementNo. 71173214.

JCHRM3,2

100

Journal of Chinese Human Resource

Management

Vol. 3 No. 2, 2012

pp. 100-117

q Emerald Group Publishing Limited

2040-8005

DOI 10.1108/20408001211279210


2/1

successfully managing employees reaction to organizational change becomes a criticalhuman resources management (HRM) function and a key requirement for leadersinvolved in facilitating organizational change (Waddell and Sohal, 1998).

Studies have found that organizational communications are an effective way to

manage employees resistance during change (Frahm and Brown, 2007). Particularly,communications help establish organizational interactive fairness (Morrison andRobinson, 1997) and improve the employees reaction to organizational change(Kotter and Schilesinger, 2008). Yet, during a change process, uncertainty and employeeperceived unfairness tend to put the employee into negative emotion (Huy, 2002; Morrisonand Robinson, 1997), often coupled with fear, anger, and frustration (Fugate et al., 2002;Bartunek, 1984). Negative emotions in turn affect employees reaction toward the changeprocess. In other words, without appropriate emotion management, organizationalcommunications may even contribute to increased employee resistance.

Employees reaction to change is a result of cognitive appraisal affected by emotions.According to the affect infusion modelby Forgas and Joseph (1995), individuals emotionsplay a substantial role in thecognitive appraisalprocess. Positiveemotions help individualsevaluation of the risks associated with change positively and accept the outcome of thechange in advance (Johnson and Tversky, 1983; Mittal and Ross, 1998). Negative mood hasan opposite effect. The literature has noted that during an organizational change process,employees with higher emotional intelligence tend to maintain positive emotions andmanage their negative emotions when unfavorable information is communicated (Josephand Newman, 2010; Kafetsiosa and Zampetakis, 2008).

Hence, communications and emotional intelligence appear to jointly shape employeesreaction to change. Yet, few studies have empirically analyzed the joint effect oforganizational communications and employees emotional intelligence. To understandthis under-investigated topic, we aim to explore the moderating effect of employeesemotional intelligence on the relationship between intra-department communications and

employees reaction to organizational change.

Literature reviewEmployees reaction to organizational changeSuccessful organizational change management must gain the hearts and minds of theinvolved employees (Duck, 1993). Nadler (1981) has described three employees reactionsto organizational change: positive support, neutral, and resistance. During the process oforganizational change, employees often feel uncertain, thus are unable to anticipatethe likelihood of the outcomes, especially when there is a lack of information abouta cause-effect relationship (Milliken, 1987). In the meantime, new organizational strategy,new structure and work procedures during a change process often make employeesroutines disrupted, and induce more challenging work and requirements for newcompetences (Oreg et al., 2011; Porras and Silvers, 1991). Therefore, employees oftenexperience role-conflict, work-related stress and concerns for job security (Hui and Lee,2000). Particularly, they often reevaluate their organizational status and relatedtreatments in relation to the changing organizational policies, management actions, andorganizational values (Kiefer, 2005), When the employees believe that they are adverselytreated with unfair, unsupportive or unappreciated management behaviors or attitudes,they are more likely to resist the change (Kiefer, 2005; Hellgren and Sverke, 2003;Conlon and Shapiro, 2002).

Intra-departmecommunicati

10


3/1

A majority of qualitative and quantitative studies on the outcomes of organizationalchange have found employees emotions induced by change are mainly negative, oftenassociated with anger, anxiety and frustration (Huy, 2002; Fugateet al., 2002; Bartunek,1984). As a result, such negative reactions reduce the employees commitment and

motivation, hurt organizational trust, and increase employees withdrawing behaviorswith a lower level of performance (Rusbultet al., 1988). Therefore, employees reactionto change is a critical and significant element in organizational change management(Ettlie and Reza, 1992).

Psychologically, employees reaction to changeis based on a cognitiveappraisalprocess.The literature has revealed two aspects of cognitive appraisal (Lazarus, 2006; Zabid et al.,2004). One is primary appraisal, including the appraisal of the meaning and consequence ofthe change to themselves. An associated aspect is the employees assessment on whetherthey are able to handle the change and the approaches to coping with the change. Thesecond appraisal determines employees attitude towards the organizational change.A potential reactive response is often determined through the secondary appraisal, wherepeople evaluate their own capabilities fordealing with a relevant change event (Lazarus andFolkman, 1984). If they believe they have adequate resources to deal with the change or theevent, they are more likely to respond actively. Otherwise they may adopt a passiveapproach and resist the change. During the process of forming the reactions, employeesemotions are often involved. In essence, emotions are a source of information (Schwarz andClore, 1983). Cognition and emotions are closely intertwined in the cognitive appraisals thatproduce either positive or negative reactions to change (Clore and Ortony, 2000).

Organizational communications in change managementOrganizational communication is a process by which information is exchanged andunderstood by two or more parties, usually with the intent to motivate or influencebehaviors (Frahm and Brown, 2007). Organizational communications are a critical and

effective process in change management. It can substantially reduce resistance during anorganizational change (Kotter and Schilesinger, 2008) and increase employeescommitment (Sharma and Patterson, 1999). First, it is an approach to reducingperceptions on uncertainty (Brown, 2007), releasing employees stress and frustrationassociated with the change (Schneider et al., 1996), and enhancing employees sense ofcontrolling and well-being (Bordia etal.,2004a,b,p.358;Kramer etal., 2004).Second, whenleaders communicate openly and encourage employees participation and autonomy,organizational trust and perceived procedure fairness in organizational decisions canbe improved during the change (Reichers et al., 1997). With effective communications,employees are more committed to organizational change (Sharma and Patterson, 1999)and less likely to resist it (Kotter and Schilesinger, 2008).

To date, the literature on organizational change has paid more attention to cross-levelmanagerial communications (Covin, 1990; Nelissen and Selm, 2008), dyad communications(Lewis, 1999), managerial communication skills (Piderit, 2000), and communicationsamong different groups (Schein, 1993). While existing literature has offered helpfulinsights on organizational communications in change management, few have investigatedhow intra-department communications affects employees reaction to change.

During a change process, the direct supervisor often becomes a preferred source ofimplementation-related and job-relevant information (Allena etal., 2007). Compared to topexecutives being caught up in many internal and external demands, middle managers are

JCHRM3,2

102


4/1

likely to have more time to interact with their employees (Huy, 2002). In fact, middlemanagers form a self-emerging social support group that provides an emotional bufferagainst stressful events for employees (Stroebe and Stroebe, 1996; Huy, 2002). Hence,communicating with the supervisor and peers in the same department is helpful for

employees to handle change-induced stress and uncertainty. To this end,intra-department communications are an integral component of organizationalcommunications.

Generally speaking, intra-department communication includes the following aspects:first, coordinating work load and task schedules; second, encouraging employees toparticipate in decision making and problem solving; third, addressing employees concernsby the manager. Leaders as change agents must provide employees with abundant,relevant information regarding the impending change, justify the appropriateness andrationale for the change,and address employeesquestions and concernsfor the acceptanceof, and participation in the change (Green, 2004). Finally, department members share andexchange knowledge, information and opinions.

Based on the above analysis, we derive the following hypothesis:

H1. Intra-department communications create positive effect on employeesreaction to organizational change.

Emotional intelligence and employees reaction to changeStudies have found that employees resistance to change and reaction to uncertainty isrelated to their personality differences (Wanberg et al., 2000; Barrick and Mount, 1991).Some are more likely than others to accept change in the workplace. This tendency isoften demonstrated through workplace behaviors such as self-discipline, self-esteemand being optimistic, self-control (Ashford and Black, 1996; Wanberg et al., 2000),self-efficacy (Bandura, 1997), or emotional stability (Barrick and Mount, 1991). It is alsorepresented by individual orientations toward creative activities or differences in

defensive rigidity (Dodgson and Wood, 1998). Those with certain personalities takechanges with abhorrence. Such personalities include cognitive rigidity, lack ofpsychological resilience, intolerance to the adjustment period involved in changes, andpreference for maintaining the current situation (Oreg, 2003).

Studies have found that employees with a higher level of emotional intelligence (EI)perform better and have higher job satisfaction during change (Huy, 1999; George and

Jones, 2001; Vakolaet al., 2004). A primary reason is that emotions affect individualscognitive appraisal process (Huy, 1999). According to the affective events theory(Weiss and Cropanzano, 1996), organizational changes often create various affectiveevents for individuals (Basch and Fisher, 2000). Through a process of cognitive appraisal,these affective events produce different emotions in different individuals (Conlon andShapiro, 2002; Weisset al., 1999). Hence, emotions are joint outcomes of affective eventsand a cognitive appraisal process (Weiss, 2002; Weiss and Cropanzano, 1996). Butemotions and cognition are separated psychology systems (Smollan, 2006; Lazarus, 1982).Clearly, the resulting emotions will affect ones cognitive reaction to organizational change.

The affect infusion model has noted that an individuals emotions play an importantrole in determining ones risk orientation (Forgas and Joseph, 1995). Risk analysis is acritical issue on organizational change appraisal (Kiefer, 2005). Positive emotions helppeople take risks positively and accept the outcomes in advance (Mittal and Ross, 1998).In turn, employees with positive emotion can broaden or extend the pathways that are


10


5/1

generated in goal pursuit and attribute the setback to external, one-time circumstancesand consider alternative pathways to success during hard times (Fredrickson, 2001).In this process, positive emotions can also help individuals cope with stress (Martinetal.,2005; Tugade et al., 2004; Avey and Wernsing, 2008). Negative emotion has the contrary

effect (Folkman et al., 1986). Additionally, the relationship between cognition andemotions are bidirectional emotions influence cognition, cognition elicits emotions(Lazarus, 1982). Therefore, emotions are organized psychobiological responses linkingphysiological, cognitive, and motivational systems (Lazarus, 1991; Mayer et al., 2008).

Furthermore, under similar situations, employees with different abilities may respondto the same change with different emotions. Emotional intelligence is a social skill andability in interpersonal relationships (Mayer et al., 2008). The higher the level of EI anemployee possesses, the better the individual in regulating emotions in responding toappropriate emotions to the contexts (Mayerand Salovey, 1997), and in being aware of thepotential impact of corresponding behaviors on ones peers and managers (Jordan et al.,2002). Thus, the reactions of the individual to the affective event will be more positive(Kafetsiosa and Zampetakis, 2008).

Organizational communication is necessary for establishing organizational fairnessand promoting employee respect, yet its major focus is on facilitating the flows ofinformation, knowledge, and perceptions (Kickulet al., 2002). It may help individualsbuild positive emotions (Cremer et al., 2005). However, during communications, negativeemotional expression needs to be controlled (Kramer and Hess, 2002). If employees havehigh emotional intelligence, they will be more capable of maintaining positive emotionsand take advantage of the intra-department communications in coping with change(Wong and Law, 2004). As such, we hypothesize:

H2. Employees EI positively affects their reactions to organizational change.

H3. Employees EI moderates intra-department communications and their reaction

to change such that higher EI improves intra-department communicationspositive effect on employees reaction.

We present the hypothesized relationships for this study in Figure 1.

MethodSamplesWe selected a large state-owned enterprise (SOE) in the telecommunication industry inChina to collect the data for this study. At the time of the data collection in June 2010,this large SOE was experiencing a large-scale organizational change. It was a new

Figure 1.Hypothesized framework

Intra-department

Communication,

Coordination,

Participation, and

Expression

Communication.

Employees

emotional

reaction to

organizationa

l change

Employees Emotional

Intelligence (EI)

H3

H1

H2

JCHRM3,2

104


6/1

organization merging two formerly already large SOEs in the telecommunicationsmarket. During the change, new departments were created and new managers wereappointed while the employees were kept the same on similar job functions andresponsibilities. We consider this organization an appropriate site for this study. We

invited 312 employees in the newly formed organization to participate in the studythrough a random selection process. We received 290 returned responses, which resultedin 277 effective responses. The response rate was 88.7 percent.

MeasureEmotional intelligence. We used the 16-item scale by Wong and Law (2004) to measureemotional intelligence. This scale has been validated in a study in China (Law et al., 2008).The items covered four dimensions of EI: self-emotions appraisal, others-emotionsappraisal, use of emotions and regulation of emotions. The Cronbachsas for the fourdimensions were 0.775, 0.815, 0.824, and 0.823, respectively. The Cronbachs a forthe overall measure in this study was 0.816. The complete items used can be found in theAppendix.

Employees reaction to organizational change. For this measure, we adopted the27-item scale by Piderit (1999, 2000). It included five dimensions: positive emotionalreaction, negative emotional reaction, positive attitude, negative attitude, and cognitivereaction. The Cronbachs a for the five dimensions were 0.748, 0.851, 0.887, 0.774,and 0.783, respectively. The overall Cronbachs a for the measure was 0.785 in thisstudy.

Intra-department communication. We combined the communication scale(Cristina and Freek, 2003) and the department communication scale (Hatfield andHuseman, 1982) into a 17-item intra-department communication measure. It includedfour dimensions: coordination, participation, expression, and communication. Duringthe change period, leaders are often cautious about encouraging employees to expresstheir feelings (Frost, 2003). For this reason, this study did not include variables on

employees expression of their feelings in the intra-department communication. As listedin the 17 items (Appendix), perceived higher degree of coordination implies that thedepartment leaders seek to explain or communicate with subordinates on situations inthe organization and offer feedback on ones job performance. Higher levels ofparticipation indicates that department members can challenge the leaders on workstyle for being actively involved in the daily operations. Expression suggests that,during the organizational management process, department leaders are expressiveabout the subordinates job performance and personal life. Communication means thatdepartment members are able to share and exchange task information and related ideasduring the operation process. The Cronbachs as for the four dimension were 0.816,0.794, 0.803 and 0.821, respectively. The overall Cronbachsa for this measure was 0.798in this study. Detailed items are listed in Appendix.

Control variables. We included control variables for this study. They include gender,age, marriage status, education background, job category, job tenure with theorganization, and job function. We report the descriptions of the samples in Table I.

Because all items adopted in this study were originally developed in the Englishlanguage, we adopted a forward-back translation approach to ensure the accuracy of themeasures. We first translated all items into Chinese, and then back-translated intoEnglish by an independent bilingual scholar. Through comparison, potentialinconsistencies of the Chinese translation from the original items were reevaluated and


10


7/1

revised accordingly before the items were compiled into the survey. All items were ratedon the Likert scale from 1 to 7, with 7 as strongly agree, and1 being strongly disagree. Weanalyzed the data using SPSS 13.0 and AMOS 7.0.

ResultsData validationAs the data was collected from the same source, we first conducted a confirmatory factoranalysis (CFA) to determine if common method variance (CMV) presented a problem forthe analysis (Podsakoff and Organ, 1986). We compared a single latent factor to allmanifest variables with the measurement model (Podsakoff and Organ, 1986). Theone-factor model yielded a x2 of 579.92 (df 105) compared tox2 of 425.81 (df 98) forthe measurement model. The fit for the one-factor model is substantially worse than themeasurement model, suggesting that CMV bias did not constitute a serious threat.Additionally, to examine potential problem of multicollinearity, we calculated variance

inflation factors (VIF). The maximum VIF within the models was less than 2.0, whichwas well below the rule-of-thumb cut-off of 10 (Neteret al., 1990).

To test the construct validity, we used CFA. The results of CFA showed that thethree variables have acceptable construct validity as reported in Table II.

Hypothesis testWe report descriptive statistics including means, Pearsons correlation coefficients, andstandard deviations of variables in Table III. As can be seen, all three variables were

Variable Attribute n %

Gender Male 156 56.3Female 121 43.7

Marriage status Single 58 20.94Married 213 76.90Divorced 6 2.17

Education background Under-graduate 177 63.90Graduate 15 5.42Others 85 30.69

Age 20-25 years old 6 2.1726-35 years old 126 45.4936-45 years old 80 28.8846-55 years old 43 15.16

Job category Technical staff 25 9.03Assistant engineer 137 49.46Engineer 98 35.38

Senior engineer 17 6.14Job tenure 2-4 years 137 49.465-8 years 98 35.388 years or above 17 6.14

Job function Marketing 120 43.3Maintenance 105 37.9Management 52 18.8

Note:n 277

Table I.Demographic descriptionof samples

JCHRM3,2

106


8/1

positively correlated with each other. The highest correlation was between employeesemotional intelligence and intra-department communication (r 0.419, p , 0.01).

In the subsequent regression analysis reported in Table IV, we found thatintra-department communication significantly and positively affected employee reaction

to organizational change (b 0.313, p , 0.01). Intra-department communicationsignificantly and positively affected the positive emotional reaction, positiveintention and cognitive reaction (b 0.161,p , 0.01;b 0.257,p , 0.01;b 0.384,p , 0.01). This suggests that intra-department communication helps increase positivereaction to organizational change. Meanwhile, intra-department communicationsignificantly and negatively associated with the negative emotional reaction andnegative intention (b 20.096, p , 0.05; b 20.121, p , 0.05). This indicated thatintra-department communication helps reduce negative reaction to organizational change.Furthermore, its effects on positive reactions are stronger than the effects on negativereactions. Hence,H1is supported.

The moderating effect.Aftercentering the independentand dependent variables based

on the recommendation by Kreft and de Leeuw (1998), we used linear regression to explorethe moderating role of emotional intelligence on employees reaction to organizationalchange. In the analysis, we first included control variables only in the model. We then

Variable x2 df x2/df RMSEA NFI CFI IFI TLI

Intra-department communication (IDC) 542.41 105 3.20 0.08 0.86 0.84 0.80 0.78Employees emotional intelligence (EI) 425.81 98 2.20 0.08 0.89 0.88 0.89 0.79Reaction to organizational change (ROC) 768.45 187 2.20 0.08 0.90 0.88 0.89 0.88

Note:n 277

TableConfirmatory fa

analy

Variable Mean SD EI IDC ROC

EI 5.083 0.917 0.816IDC 2.601 0.861 0.419 * * 0.798ROC 2.892 0.806 0.233 * 0.316 * * 0.785

Notes: Significant at: *p , 0.05 and * *p , 0.01; n 277; EI employees emotional intelligence,IDC intra-department communication, ROC employees reaction to organizational change

Table Means, stand

deviations and zero-orcorrelations ma

Intra-department communicationDependent variables b R2 DR2 F

Employees reaction to organizational change 0.313 * * 0.115 0.090 27.36 * * *

Positive emotional reaction 20.161 * * 0.025 0.022 5.16 * *

Negative emotional reaction 20.096 * 0.019 0.016 12.56 * *

Positive intention 0.257 * * 0.066 0.063 19.44 * *

Negative intention 20.121 * 0.014 0.011 8.00 * *

Cognitive reaction 0.384 * * 0.147 0.144 47.13 * *

Note:Significant at: *p , 0.05 and * *p , 0.01

Table Hierarchical regressiothe effect of IDC on R


10


9/1

added centerized independent variables and moderating variables, EI and IDC to themodel. This treatment improved model fit significantly, yet the coefficient for EI was notsignificant. In the last step, we added an interaction term between emotional intelligenceand intra-department communication (EI*IDC). The resulting estimates showed much

better results than the earlier analysis. Particularly, the interaction between EI and IDCsignificantly influenced employees reaction to organizational change (b 2.96,p , 0.01),and the direct effect of EI on employees reaction to change also became significant(b 2.12, p , 0.05). Thus, the regression results supported both H2 and H3 andconfirmed the moderating effect of employees emotional intelligence on the relationshipof intra-department communication and employees reaction on organizational change.We reported the regression results in Table V.

To further analyze the identified moderating effect of employees emotionalintelligence in Table V, we conducted the following analysis. By comparing the ratingsof emotional intelligence and intra-department communication with the averages rating,we derived two categories of responses, high and low. The high category was the ratingsabove the average, and the low category was below the average rating. We then usedSPSS and produced a visual diagram of the interactive effect shown in Figure 2. Itshowed that when employee perceived emotional intelligence was higher,intra-department communication could better facilitate employees positive reactionto organizational change. In contrast, when the emotional intelligence is lower,intra-department communication has a limited effect on influencing employees positivereaction to organizational change.

Discussion and conclusionIn this study, we investigated the relationship between emotional intelligence,intra-department communication, and employees reaction to organizational change,particularly the moderating effect of emotional intelligence. We tested three hypotheses

derived from the existing literature. The results showed that intra-departmentcommunication improved employees positive reaction to organizational change, andthis relationship was moderated by employees emotional intelligence.

Employees reaction to organizational change (RTC)Variables Step 1 Step 2 Step 3

(Constant) 12.218 * * * 12.881 * * * 13.251 * * *

Gender 0.356 0.231 0.214Marriage 21.824 21.139 21.435Education 0.173 0.489 0.356

Job category 20.662 20.597 20.933Job tenure 1.045 20.119 0.022

Job function 20.461 20.668 20.599EI 1.692 2.122 *

IDC 4.056 * * * 4.004 * * *

EI*IDC 2.963 * *

R2 0.025 0.125 0.152DR2 0.025 0.099 0.028DF 1.164 * * 15.204 * * * 8.780 * *

Notes:Significant at: *p , 0.05, * *p , 0.01, and * * *p , 0.001

Table V.Moderating effectanalyses

JCHRM3,2

108


10/

This study contributes to our understanding of intra-department interactions among threeimportant variables during organizational change processes. First, we found a positiveeffect of intra-organization communication on employees positive reactions toorganizational change. This effect is much higher than its negative effects on undesirablereactions. More importantly, during the change process, employees emotional intelligenceplayed an important moderating role. These results highlighted that intra-departmentcommunication intervened with employees cognitive appraisal process throughinformation sharing, thus increasing employees positive anticipation to change outcomesas well as increasing procedure fairness and autonomy of the change. The findings alsosuggest that organizations need to identify ways for employees EI management in order to

realize the benefit of intra-department communication, particularly during a change process.This is because individuals negative mood toward organizational change may affect theprocess of cognitive appraisal of the change and reduce positive reactions.

Our findings are complementary to existing research on communications role in theorganizational change literature. For example, Jimmieson et al. (2004) have found that therole of communications was less obvious in later stages of organizational change(Jimmieson et al., 2004). The results of this study showed the criticality ofintra-departmental communications at an earlier stage of change. The different roles ofcommunications in a change process may be that an earlier stage of change requirescreating the momentum needed, thus often involving in changes in organizationalmissions, visions, or values other than physical changes in organizational policies or workprocesses. In other words, organizational change in an earlier stage is often coupled withmore severe shocks as being perceived by employees (Weick and Quinn, 1999). Hence,the role of communications is critical in facilitating the change. In contrast, at a later stagewhen the change starts being implemented, the dust has settled, and the direction of thechange becomes clear. What is needed for employees is to follow the change momentumand the determined direction of the change. Therefore, the role of communication as acoping strategy may appear to be less critical (Callan, 1993; Klein, 1996).

Our study is also similar to previous studies in that success in the current businessenvironment can often be predicated by an organizations ability to convince their

FigureThe interactive ef

of emotional la

3.50

3.40

3.30

3.20

Employee'sreaction

to

organizationalchange

3.10

3.00

Low High

employee's

emotional

intelligence

low

high

Intra-department communication


10


11/

employees of the benefits associated with a proposed change initiative (Kiefer, 2005).Intra-department communication helps interactive justice, which in turn helpsemployees accept the organizational change (Kickulet al., 2002).

This study offers important implications for change management in organizations.

First, effective intra-department communications during a change process improveemployees positive reaction to the change. Such communications include adoptingeffective communication channels to coordinate the department members work,encouraging members to participate in problem-solving activities, and providingupdates on the organizational change process and status. Effective communications alsoneed to maintain a high level of idea exchange among department members and payattention to employees personal life during the change. These channels ofcommunications are likely to foster employees positive reaction to organizationalchange and help reduce their feelings of uncertainty and stress caused by the change.

Second, an important management task in the process of organizational change is tomanage the employees emotions (Staw et al., 1994; Huy, 1999; Bartel and Saavedra,2000). The moderating effect explored in this study implied that intra-departmentcommunications regarding change play a limited role in handling employees negativeemotion. To foster and maintain employees positive reactions to change, a potentiallyeffective way is to improve employees emotional intelligence. Studies have shown thatEI may be increased and developed through training programs (Dulewicz and Higgs,2004). Organizations may consider developing EI training programs as part ofemployee development in anticipation of future constant changes.

Limitations and future researchA number of limitations in this study may lead to future research on the organizationalchange dynamics. First, this study adopted instruments from the existing Westernliterature regarding organizational communications, emotional intelligence, and

employees reaction to organizational change to investigate their interplays with datacollected in a large Chinese SOE organization. While the results showed consistence withthe existing Western literature, we may have missed some important contextual nuancerooted in the Chinese context. It has been well known that the workplace communicationsfor Chinese employees are more indirect than their Western counterparts (Gao et al., 1996),particularly in Chinese SOEs (Sun, 2000). With the adopted scales for this study, we wereunable to capture the contextual essence of communications during an organizationalchange. Therefore, future research needs to develop indigenous instrument and measurethe Chinese related constructs to better understand change dynamics in the Chinesecontext.

Second, the data collected for this study is self-reported, thus may have commonsource deviation. Future research needs to incorporate organizational internal recordedcommunications data for similar studies. Last, but not least, we collected data when theSOE was at the initial stage of organizational change. Based on our earlier analysis, therole of communications during organizational change process may display differentpatterns in different stages ( Jimmieson et al., 2004). Future research may explore furtherthe nature and the pattern of communication along a change process. Such studies helpbetter understanding of the role of communications in facilitating organizational changethroughout the entire change process and have important practical implications fororganizations.

JCHRM3,2

110


12/

References

Allena, J., Jimmiesona, N.L., Bordiab, P. and Irmerc, B.E. (2007), Uncertainty during

organizational change: managing perceptions through communication,Journal of ChangeManagement, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 187-210.

Ashford, S.J. and Black, J.S. (1996), Proactivity during organizational entry: the role of desire for

control, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 81 No. 2, pp. 199-214.

Avey, J.B. and Wernsing, T.S. (2008), Can positive employees help positive organizational

change? Impact of psychological capital and emotions on relevant attitudes and

behaviors, The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 48-70.

Bandura, A. (1997), Self-efficacy: The Exercise of Control, Freeman, New York, NY.

Barrick, M.R. and Mount, M.K. (1991), The big five personality dimensions and job performance:

a meta-analysis,Personal Psychology, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 1-26.

Bartel, C.A. and Saavedra, R. (2000), The collective construction of work group moods,

Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 45 No. 2, pp. 197-231.

Bartunek, J.M. (1984), Changing interpretive schemes and organizational restructuring: the

example of a religious order, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 355-72.

Basch, J. and Fisher, C.D. (2000), Affective events-emotions matrix: classification of work events

and associated emotions, in Ashkanasy, N.M. (Ed.),Emotions in the Workplace: Research,Theory and Practice, Quorum Books, Westport, CT, pp. 36-48.

Bordia, P., Hobman, E., Jones, E., Gallois, C. and Callan, V.J. (2004a), Uncertainty during

organizational change: types, consequences, and management strategies, Journal ofBusiness and Psychology, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 507-32.

Bordia, P., Hunt, E., Paulsen, N., Tourish, D. and DiFonzo, N. (2004b), Uncertainty during

organizational change: is it all about control?, European Journal of Work andOrganizational Psychology, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 345-65.

Brown, J.F. (2007), First steps: linking change communication to change receptivity,Journal of

Organizational Change Management, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 370-87.

Callan, V.J. (1993), Individual and organizational strategies for coping with organizational

change,Work & Stress: An International Journal of Work, Health & Organisations, Vol. 7No. 1, pp. 63-75.

Clore, G.L. andOrtony, A. (2000), Cognition in emotion: always, sometimes, or never?, in Lane, R.D.

and Nadel, L. (Eds), Cognitive Neuroscience of Emotion. Series in Affective Science , OxfordUniversity Press, New York, NY, pp. 24-61.

Conlon, D.E. and Shapiro, D.L. (2002), Employee postings and company responses to

downsizing inquiries: implications for managing and reacting to organizational change,

Advances in Qualitative Organization Research, Vol. 4, pp. 39-67.

Covin, T. (1990), Participant perceptions of positive and negative influences on large scale

change, Group and Organizational Studies, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 233-48.Cremer, D., Stinglhamber, F. and Eisenberger, R. (2005), Effects of own versus others fair

treatment on positive emotions: a field study, The Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 145No. 6, pp. 741-4.

Cristina, G. and Freek, V. (2003), A healthy divide: subgroups as a stimulus for team learning

behavior, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 202-39.

Daft, R.L. and Steers, R.M. (1986), Organizations: A Micro/Macro Approach, Seott Foreman& Company, Glenview, IL.


11


13/

Dodgson, P. and Wood, J.V. (1998), Self-esteem and the cognitive accessibility of strengths andweaknesses after failure, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 75 No. 1,pp. 178-97.

Duck, J.D. (1993), Managing change: the art of balancing, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 71

No. 6, pp. 109-18.Dulewicz, V. and Higgs, M. (2004), Can emotional intelligence be developed?, International

Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 95-111.

Ettlie, J.E. and Reza, E.M. (1992), Organizational integration and process innovation, AcademyManagement Journal, Vol. 35 No. 4, pp. 795-827.

Folkman, S., Lazarus, R.S., Dunkel-Schetter, C., DeLongis, A. and Gruen, R.J. (1986), Dynamicsof a stressful encounter: cognitive appraisal, coping, and encounter outcomes,Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 50, pp. 992-1003.

Forgas, J.P. and Joseph, P. (1995), Mood and judgment: the affect infusion model (AIM),Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 117 No. 1, pp. 39-66.

Frahm, J. and Brown, K. (2007), First steps: linking change communication to change

receptivity, Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 370-87.Fredrickson, B.L. (2001), The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: the

broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions,American Psychologist, Vol. 56, pp. 218-26.

Frost, P.J. (2003), Toxic Emotion at Work, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

Fugate, M., Kinicki, A.J. and Scheck, C.L. (2002), Coping with an organizational merger over fourstages, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 55, pp. 905-28.

Gao, G., Stella, T.T. and William, B.G. (1996), Chinese communication processes, inBond, M.H. (Ed.), The Handbook of Chinese Psychology, Oxford University Press,New York, NY.

George, J.M. and Jones, G.R. (2001), Towards a process model of individual change inorganizations, Human Relations, Vol. 54 No. 4, pp. 419-44.

Green, S.E. (2004), A rhetorical theory of diffusion, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 29,pp. 653-69.

Hatfield, J.D. and Huseman, R.C. (1982), Perceptual congruence about communication as relatedto satisfaction: moderating effects of individual characteristics, The Academy of

Management Journal, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 349-58.

Hellgren, J. and Sverke, M. (2003), Does job insecurity lead to impaired well-being or vice versa?Estimation of cross-lagged effects using latent variable modeling, Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 215-36.

Hui, C. and Lee, C. (2000), Moderating effects of organization-based self-esteem onorganizational uncertainty: employee response relationships, Journal of Management,Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 215-32.

Huy, Q.N. (1999), Emotional capability, emotional intelligence, and radical change,Academy of

Management Review, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 325-45.

Huy, Q.N. (2002), Emotional balancing of organizational continuity and radical change: thecontribution of middle managers,Administrative Science Quarterly,Vol.47No.1,pp.31-69.

Jimmieson, N., Terry, D. and Callan, V. (2004), A longitudinal study of employee adaptation toorganizational change: the role of change-related information and change-relatedself-efficacy, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 11-27.

Johnson, E.J. and Tversky, A. (1983), Affect, generalization, and the perception of risk,Journalof Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 20-31.

JCHRM3,2

112


14/

Jordan, P.J., Ashkanasy, N.M. and Hartel, C.E.J. (2002), Emotional intelligence as moderator of

emotional and behavioural reactions to job insecurity,Academy of Management Review,Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 361-72.

Joseph, D.L. and Newman, D.A. (2010), Emotional intelligence: an integrative meta-analysis

and cascading model, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 95 No. 1, pp. 54-78.

Kafetsiosa, K. and Zampetakis, L.A. (2008), Emotional intelligence and job satisfaction: testing

the mediatory role of positive and negative affect at work, Personality and IndividualDifferences, Vol. 44 No. 3, pp. 712-22.

Kickul, J., Lester, S.W. and Finkl, J. (2002), Promise breaking during radical organizationalchange: do justice interventions make a difference?, Journal of Organizational Behavior,Vol. 23, pp. 469-88.

Kiefer, T. (2005), Feeling bad: antecedents and consequences of negative emotions in ongoing

change, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 26 No. 8, pp. 875-97.

Klein, S.M. (1996), A management communication strategy for change, Journal ofOrganizational Change Management, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 32-46.

Kotter, J.P. and Schilesinger, L.A. (2008), Choosing strategies for change, Harvard BusinessReview, Vol. 57 No. 21, pp. 106-44.

Kramer, M.W. and Hess, J.A. (2002), Communication rules for the display of emotions in

organizational settings,Management Communication Quarterly, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 66-80.

Kramer, M.W., Dougharty, D. and Pierce, T. (2004), Managing uncertainty during a corporate

acquisition: a longitudinal study of communication during an airline acquisition,HumanCommunication Research, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 71-101.

Kreft, I. and de Leeuw, J. (1998), Introducing Multilevel Modeling, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Law, K.S., Wong, C.S., Huang, G.H. and Li, X.X. (2008), The effects of emotional intelligence

on job performance and life satisfaction for the research and development scientists in

China,Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 51-69.

Lazarus, R.S. (1982), Thoughts on the relations between emotion and cognition, AmericanPsychologist, Vol. 37 No. 9, pp. 1019-24.

Lazarus, R.S. (1991), Cognition and motivation in emotion,American Psychologist, Vol. 46 No. 4,pp. 352-67.

Lazarus, R.S. (2006), Emotions and interpersonal relationships: toward a person-centeredconceptualization of emotions and coping, Journal of Personality, Vol. 74, pp. 9-46.

Lazarus, R.S. and Folkman, S. (1984), Stress, Appraisal, and Coping, Springer, New York, NY.

Lewis, L. (1999), Disseminating information and soliciting input during planned organizational

change, Management Communication Quarterly, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 43-75.

Martin, A.J., Jones, E.S. and Callan, V.J. (2005), The role of psychological climate in facilitating

adjustment during organizational change,European Journal of Work and Organizational

Psychology, Vol. 14, pp. 263-89.Mayer, J.D. and Salovey, P. (1997), What is emotional intelligence, in Salovey, P. and

Sluyter, D.J. (Eds), Emotional Development and Emotional Intelligence: EducationalImplications, Basic Books, New York, NY, pp. 3-31.

Mayer, J.D., Salovey, P. and Caruso, D.R. (2008), Emotional intelligence: new ability or eclectic

traits?, American Psychologist, Vol. 63 No. 6, pp. 503-17.

Milliken, F.J. (1987), Three types of perceived uncertainty about the environment: state, effect,

and response uncertainty, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 12 No. 1, p. 133.


11


15/

Mittal, V. and Ross, W.T. Jr (1998), The impact of positive and negative affect and issue framingon issue interpretation and risk taking, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision

Processes, Vol. 76 No. 3, pp. 298-324.

Morrison, E.W. and Robinson, S.L. (1997), When employees feel betrayed: a model of how

psychological contract violation develops,Academy of Management Review, Vol. 22No. 1,pp. 226-56.

Nadler, D.A. (1981), Managing organizational change: a integrative perspective, The Journal ofApplied Behavioral Science, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 191-211.

Nelissen, P. and Selm, M. (2008), Surviving organizational change: how managementcommunication helps balance mixed feelings, Corporate Communications: An

International Journal, Vol. 133, pp. 306-18.

Neter, J.W., Wasserman, M. and Kutner, H. (1990), Applied Linear Statistical Models, Irwin,Homewood, IL.

Oreg, M.V., Vokola, M. and Armenakis, A. (2011), Change recipients reactions to organizationalchange,Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, Vol. 47 No. 4, pp. 461-524.

Oreg, S. (2003), Resistance to change: developing an individual differences measure,Journal ofApplied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 4, pp. 680-93.

Piderit, S.K. (1999), Navigating relationships with coworkers: understanding employeesattitudes toward an organizational change, unpublished doctoral dissertation, Universityof Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.

Piderit, S.K. (2000), Rethinking resistance and recognizing ambivalence: a multidimensionalview of attitudes toward an organizational change, The Academy of Management Review,Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 783-94.

Podsakoff, P.M. and Organ, D.W. (1986), Self-reports in organizational research: problems andprospects, Journal of Management, Vol. 12, pp. 531-44.

Porras, J.I. and Silvers, R.C. (1991), Organizational development and transformation, AnnualReview of Psychology, Vol. 42, pp. 51-78.

Rafferty, A.E. and Griffin, M.A. (2006), Perceptions of organizational change: a stress andcoping perspective, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 91 No. 5, pp. 1154-62.

Reichers, A.E., Wanous, J.P. and Austin, J.T. (1997), Understanding and managing cynicismabout organizational change, Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 11, pp. 48-59.

Rusbult, C.E., Farrell, D. and Mainous, A.G. (1988), Impact of exchange variables on exit, voice,loyalty, and neglect: an integrative model of responses to declining job satisfaction,

Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 599-627.

Schein, E.H. (1993), On dialogue, culture and organizational learning,Organizational Dynamics,Vol. 22, pp. 27-38.

Schneider, B., Brief, A.P. and Guzzo, R.A. (1996), Creating a climate and culture for sustainablechange, Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 7-19.

Schwarz, N. and Clore, G.L. (1983), Mood, misattribution, and judgments of well-being:informative and directive functions of affective states, Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, Vol. 45 No. 3, pp. 513-23.

Sharma, N. and Patterson, P.G. (1999), The impact of communication effectiveness and servicequality on relationship commitment in consumer, professional services, The Journal ofServices Marketing, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 151-70.

Smollan, R.K. (2006), Minds, hearts and deeds: cognitive, affective and behavioral responses tochange,Journal of Change Management, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 143-58.

JCHRM3,2

114


16/

Staw, B.M., Sutton, R.I. and Pelled, L.H. (1994), Employee positive emotion and favorableoutcomes at the workplace, Organization Science, Vol. 5, pp. 51-71.

Stroebe, W. and Stroebe, M. (1996), The social psychology of social support, in Hig-Gins, E.T.and Kruglanski, A.W. (Eds), Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles,

Guilford Press, London, pp. 597-621.Sun, J.M. (2000), Organization development and change in Chinese state-owned enterprises:

a human resource perspective, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 21No. 8, pp. 379-89.

Tugade, M.M., Fredrickson, B.L. and Barrett, L. (2004), Psychological resilience and positiveemotional granularity, Journal of Personality, Vol. 72, pp. 1161-90.

Vakola, M., Tsaousis, I. and Nikolaou, I. (2004), The role of emotional intelligence andpersonality variables on attitudes toward organizational change, Journal of Managerial

Psychology, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 88-110.

Waddell, D. and Sohal, A.S. (1998), Resistance: a constructive tool for change management,Management Decision, Vol. 36 No. 8, pp. 543-8.

Wanberg, C.R., Banas, J.T. and Joseph, T. (2000), Predictors and outcomes of openness to changesin a reorganizing workplace,Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 85 No. 1, pp. 132-42.

Weick, K.E. and Quinn, R.E. (1999), Organizational change and development,Annual Review ofPsychology, Vol. 50, pp. 361-86.

Weiss, H.M. (2002), Deconstructing job satisfaction. Separating evaluations, beliefs andaffective experiences, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 173-94.

Weiss, H.M. and Cropanzano, R.S. (1996), Affective events theory: a theoretical discussion of thestructure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at work, in Staw, B.M. andCummings, L.L. (Eds),Research in Organizational Behavior: An Annual Series of Analytical

Essays and Critical Reviews, Vol. 18, Elsevier Science/JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 1-74.

Weiss, H.M., Suckow, K. and Cropanzano, R. (1999), Effects of justice conditions on discreteemotions, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 84 No. 5, pp. 786-94.

Wong, C.S. and Law, K.S. (2004), The construct and criterion validity of emotional intelligenceand its potential utility for management studies, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 89No. 3, pp. 483-96.

Zabid, A.R., Murali, S. and Azmawani, A.R. (2004), The influence of organizational culture onattitudes toward organizational change,Leadership & Organization Development Journal,Vol. 25 No. 12, pp. 161-3.

Further reading

Hair, J.F., Black, B., Babin, B., Anderson, R.E. and Tatham, R.L. (2006), Multivariate DataAnalysis, 6th ed., Pearson Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

Smith, C.A. and Ellsworth, P.C. (1985), Patterns of cognitive appraisal in emotion, Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 48 No. 4, pp. 813-38.

Appendix. Emotional intelligenceSelf-emotions appraisal (SEA)

(1) I have a good sense of why I have certain feelings most of the time.

(2) I have good understanding of my own emotions.

(3) I really understand what I feel.

(4) I always know whether or not I am happy.


11


17/

Others-emotions appraisal (OEA)

(5) I always know my friends emotions from their behaviors.

(6) I am a good observer of others emotions.

(7) I am sensitive to the feelings and emotions of others.(8) I have good understanding of the emotions of people around me.

Use of emotion (UOE)

(9) I always set goals for myself and then try my best to achieve them.

(10) I always tell myself I am a competent person.

(11) I am a self-motivating person.

(12) I would always encourage myself to try my best.

Regulation of emotion (ROE)

(13) I am able to control my temper so that I can handle difficulties rationally.

(14) I am quite capable of controlling my own emotions.

(15) I can always calm down quickly when I am very angry.

(16) I have good control of my own emotions.

Intra-department communicationCoordination

(1) My supervisor asks me for suggestions about how work should be done.

(2) My supervisor informs me about company rules and regulations.

(3) My supervisor informs me about company plans for the future.

(4) My supervisor lets me know when I have done a good job.

(5) My supervisor lets me know when I have not done a good job.

(6) My supervisor explains company problems to me.

(7) My supervisor tells me why changes are made in work assignments.

(8) My supervisor explains his/her way of doing work.

Participation

(1) I question my supervisors instructions when I dont understand them.

(2) I question my supervisors instructions when I think they are wrong.

(3) I tell my supervisor when I think things are being done wrong.

Expression

(1) My supervisor criticizes my work in front of others.

(2) My supervisor ridicules or makes fun of me.

(3) My supervisor expresses sympathy to me when something unfortunate happens in mypersonal life.

Communication

(1) There is open communication in this department.

(2) Everyone has a chance to express their opinions.

(3) Department members maintain a high degree of idea exchange.

JCHRM3,2

116


18/

Employees reaction to organizational change

Positive emotional reaction

(1)-(4) The organizational change makes me feel: happy, excited, relieved and hopeful.

Negative emotional reaction(1)-(4) The organizational change makes me feel: sad, angry, frustrated frightened anddisgusted.

Positive intention

(1) I encourage others to help make this change effective.

(2) I suggest ways in which to carry out this change.

(3) I speak up about the advantages of this change.

(4) I support the implementation of this change.

(5) I am willing to make this change effective.

Negative intention

(1) I encourage others to resist to implementing this change.

(2) I oppose to implementing the change.

(3) I suggest others not to participate in this change.

(4) I try to disagree with something in this change.

Cognitive reaction

(1) This change has little influence on me (2).

(2) I care about the changes influence on my daily work.

(3) I care about the changes influence on my department.

(4) The new performance appraisal system is not meaningful for me (2).

(5) The change will increase my job satisfaction.(6) The change will improve the departments work style.

(7) The new performance appraisal system is important for me.

(8) The change will keep me working here.

(9) I can predict the benefit of the change.

About the authorsChaoying Tang is an Associate Professor in the Management School of Graduate University,Chinese Academy of Sciences. Beijing, China. Her research focuses on creativity, R&D teammanagement and emotion management. Chaoying Tang is the corresponding author and can becontacted at: [email protected]

Yunxia Gao is an MBA student in the Management School of Graduate University, Chinese

Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China. She also serves in China Unicom Mobile Company, Beijing,China. Her research focuses on change management.


11

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

journal of chinese human resource management

Documents