CHANGE MANAGEMENT & HRM -Classical and Planned Change Models
CHANGE MANAGEMENT & HRM
BLOG 2
Classical and Planned Change Models
INTRODUCTION
Managing change has become a defining responsibility for HR
professionals, especially in organizations that face constant technological,
structural, and cultural shifts. Classical and planned change models offer
frameworks that help leaders and HR teams understand why change is needed, how
it should be introduced, and how it can be sustained. This article explores
several foundational theories such as Lewin (1951), Beckhard and Harris (1987),
Thurley (1979), Bandura (1986), and Beer, Eisenstat and Spector (1990) which
discusses their relevance to HRM today, illustrated with real organizational
examples.
1.
Lewin’s Three Stage Model
Unfreeze →
Change → Refreeze
Kurt Lewin’s model remains one of the most cited approaches
to planned change. According to Lewin (1951), effective change requires first
unfreezing current behaviors, then moving to a new state, and finally
refreezing the new behaviors to make them stable. HR plays a central role in
all three phases.
• Unfreeze: HR diagnoses the sources of resistance and uses communication,
training, and leadership alignment to prepare the organization psychologically.
• Change: HR facilitates new behaviors through skill-building, performance
support, and role redesign.
• Refreeze: New routines and cultural norms are reinforced through reward
systems, policies, and continuous monitoring.
Lewin also developed force-field analysis, an HR-friendly tool for mapping
driving forces (e.g., technology trends, cost pressures) and restraining forces
(e.g., employee fear, skills gaps). By strengthening drivers or reducing
restrainers, HR can accelerate change.
Example – Microsoft’s cultural transformation under Satya Nadella
When Nadella took over in 2014, he initiated a shift from a “know-it-all” to a
“learn-it-all” culture. HR teams supported the unfreezing process through
leadership development and company-wide storytelling around growth mindset. The
change phase involved revamping performance management and collaboration
systems, while refreezing occurred through new reward mechanisms and hiring
practices that reinforced the learning culture (Nadella, 2017).
2. Beckhard and Harris (1987)
The Change Formula and Planned Transition
Beckhard and Harris’ contribution is especially useful for
HR managers because it focuses on diagnosing readiness, outlining the
transition state, and developing a strategy for change.
• Diagnosis
HR assesses the
current state through surveys, competency mapping, and interviews.
• Transition
HR develops programs
for communication, training, and temporary structures to navigate the ambiguity of change.
• Strategy
HR aligns staffing, culture, and capability-building plans
to support the targeted future state.
Their model puts heavy emphasis on the “messy middle”—the transition—which HR
often has to manage through coaching and support structures.
Example – NHS Digital Transformation
In many NHS trusts, the transition to integrated digital records followed
Beckhard and Harris’ logic. Dissatisfaction existed due to fragmented
paper-based systems, a compelling vision was set through national digital
health strategies, and HR implemented first steps such as digital literacy programs
and change champions. Despite resistance, the transition was supported by
structured communication and skills development (NHS Digital, 2020).
3. Thurley’s Five Approaches to Managing Change
Thurley (1979) provides a more nuanced and people-centric
view of change management. His five approaches directive, bargained, “hearts
and minds,” analytical, and action-based help HR tailor strategies to context
and organizational culture.
1. Directive
Senior leaders decide
and enforce the change. HR’s role is compliance-oriented. Suitable for urgent
or crisis situations.
2. Bargained
Negotiation takes place, often with unions or works
councils. HR facilitates collective agreement. Useful in heavily unionized
sectors.
3. Hearts and minds
Focuses on influencing employees’ beliefs and emotions. HR
drives engagement campaigns and culture-building efforts. Best for cultural or behavioral
shifts.
4. Analytical
Change is evidence-based and follows structured analysis. HR
uses OD diagnostics, workforce analytics, and pilot studies. Effective for
large systems changes.
5. Action-based
Emphasizes trial-and-error learning. HR supports agile
teams, experimentation, and continuous improvement. Ideal in innovation
environments.
Thurley’s framework underscores the fact that change cannot be one size fits all
HR must select an approach that fits organizational readiness and stakeholder
dynamics.
4. Bandura (1986)
Behavioural Choice and Environmental
Influence
Albert Bandura’s social cognitive theory introduces a
psychological dimension to organizational change that HR practitioners
frequently rely on. Bandura argues that behavior is shaped through reciprocal
determinism the interaction between personal beliefs, behaviors, and
environmental conditions.
Three concepts stand out for HRM:
• Self-efficacy -Employees must believe they can perform new behaviors. HR can
strengthen this through training, coaching, and small wins.
• Modelling - Employees imitate observed behavior. Leaders therefore need to
exemplify the desired change.
• Reinforcement - Consistent feedback and rewards reinforce new patterns.
Bandura’s work helps explain why change often fails even when structures are in
place because employees do not yet believe in their capability or the
credibility of the change.
5. Beer, Eisenstat & Spector (1990)
The Six-Step Task-Alignment Model
Beer, Eisenstat and Spector propose a practical model focusing on aligning the organization
around clear tasks and goals. Their six steps include,
1. Mobilize commitment to change through shared diagnosis.
2. Develop a shared vision of how to compete.
3. Build consensus for the new vision, competence, and commitment.
4. Spread revitalization to all departments.
5. Institutionalize change through policies, systems, and structures.
6. Monitor and adjust strategies in response to feedback.
HR’s contribution is critical in Steps 1, 3, 5, and 6. The model highlights the
importance of participation a theme that also aligns with Bandura’s emphasis on
human agency.
Integration
How these Models complement
HR practice
Although each model has a different emphasis, together they provide HR with a
robust toolkit
• Lewin helps HR initiate and stabilize change.
• Beckhard & Harris equip HR to plan and manage transitions.
• Thurley gives HR a choice of strategies to fit situational needs.
• Bandura ensures HR addresses psychological readiness and behavior.
• Beer et al. offer a participation-heavy roadmap for large systemic change.
Across all models, HR’s core responsibilities include communication, capability
development, engagement, performance alignment, and cultural reinforcement.
Conclusion
Change in organizations is never purely structural it is behavioral, emotional,
and cultural. Classical and planned change models continue to hold value
because they help HR professionals make sense of complex transitions and choose
methods that fit their organizational context. By combining Lewin’s
foundational stages, Beckhard and Harris’ structured planning, Thurley’s
flexible approaches, Bandura’s behavioral insights, and Beer et al.’s alignment
model, HR practitioners can design change processes that are not only well
planned but also human centered and sustainable.
References
Bandura, A. (1986) *Social
Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory*. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall
Lewin, K. (1951) *Field Theory in
Social Science*. New York: Harper & Row. Available at: https://books.google.com
Thurley, K. (1979) ‘Approaches to
organizational change’, *International Studies of Management &
Organization*, 9(3), pp. 1–20.
Chiranthi this is very clear and comprehensive explanation of the major classical change models and how they support HR’s role in managing organizational transformation. I prefer the way you connect each model Lewin, Beckhard & Harris, Thurley, Bandura, and Beer et al. to practical HR actions such as communication, capability building, and cultural reinforcement. One important insight you highlight is that no single model fits every situation; HR must choose the right approach based on context, readiness, and employee behavior. Your examples, especially Microsoft and the NHS, make the theories easy to understand. Overall, this is a well-structured and very practical discussion on how HR can make changes to achieve better performance both effective and human centered.
ReplyDeleteThank you so much for your thoughtful feedback. I’m glad the connections between theory, practical application, and patient safety came through clearly. Continuous learning truly is the foundation that enables biomedical and clinical teams to manage complexity with confidence. Your perspective adds great value to the discussion.
DeleteThis page presents a concise and practical review of classical and planned change models, making complicated ideas like as Lewin, Beck hard & Harris, Thurley, Bandura, and Beer et al. more approachable. I really like how each model incorporates involvement of HR, demonstrating how psychological preparation, cultural alignment, and organized planning all work together to promote long-term transformation. Real-world examples, such as Microsoft's cultural transformation, demonstrate how theory may be put into practice, making the debate especially important for modern businesses dealing with constant change.
ReplyDeleteReply to Indika
DeleteThank you for sharing such a thoughtful perspective. I'm pleased to hear that the integration of the change models with HR’s role resonated with you. Your observation about how examples like Microsoft translate theory into real organizational practice adds real value to the discussion. I appreciate you taking the time to engage so meaningfully with the content.
Clear evaluation of the evolution of change management theories. I appreciated how you compared classical models with modern approaches. According t my point of view understanding history helps us avoid repeating mistakes your coverage is especially valuable for that.
ReplyDeleteThanks Shashi, agree with your insight, highly appreciate your comment and time taken for it.
DeleteYou highlight that effective organizational change requires blending classical models like Lewin and Beckhard & Harris with behavioral and cultural perspectives from Bandura, Thurley, and Beer et al. In your view, what practical criteria should HR professionals use to decide which combination of these models is most appropriate for a specific change initiative, especially in organizations experiencing both digital transformation and cultural resistance?
ReplyDeleteThank you for your deeply insightful comment. I'm glad to hear that the integration of the classical and planned change models from Lewin to Beckhard & Harris, Thurley, and Bandura resonated so strongly with you. Your reflection on how these frameworks collectively form a comprehensive roadmap for HR-led transformation beautifully captures the intention behind the blog. I truly appreciate the way you highlighted the importance of psychological readiness, contextual alignment, and structured planning in driving sustainable organizational change.
DeleteThis blog offers a masterful theory driven synthesis of classical and planned change models effectively demonstrating their critical relevance to modern HRM. This analysis is exceptional for synthesizing five core change theories underscoring that managing organizational transition is a core HR responsibility. By linking Lewin’s 3 Stages Model (e.g. Microsoft) with the transition management focus of Beckhard & Harris. The blog creates a complete roadmap. It further enhances this by integrating Thurley’s contextual approaches and Bandura’s focus on self-efficacy, proving that successful, sustainable change requires structured planning, psychological readiness and the alignment of behaviors through strategic HR interventions.
ReplyDeleteThank you very much for this generous and thoughtful feedback. I’m truly glad that the way the blog integrates Lewin, Beckhard & Harris, Thurley, and Bandura reflected the full spectrum of what effective change management requires in modern HRM. Your observation about the need for both structured planning and psychological readiness captures the exact message I hoped to convey. I appreciate you taking the time to articulate such a clear and insightful interpretation of the work.
DeleteBlog highlights an analysis of both planned and classical change models, demonstrating how each framework—Lewin, Beckhard & Harris, Thurley, Bandura, and Beer et al.—relates to HR practice. Real-world examples, including Microsoft's culture shift and the NHS's digital initiatives, are used to demonstrate how theory is translated into practical tactics. Because they illustrate HR's role in communication, capability development, and cultural reinforcement during transition, the examples are quite valid.
ReplyDeleteThank you for your thoughtful comment and for highlighting the connection between these change models and practical HR applications. I’m glad the real-world examples such as Microsoft and the NHS helped illustrate how theory becomes actionable during transition. Your emphasis on HR’s role in communication, capability building, and cultural reinforcement reflects exactly the message I intended to convey. I truly appreciate you engaging so meaningfully with the analysis.
DeleteThis blog provides a comprehensive and well-organised examination of classical and planned change models, effectively linking major theoretical frameworks—such as Lewin, Beckhard and Harris, Thurley, Bandura, and Beer et al.—to contemporary HRM practice. The analysis clearly demonstrates how each model offers distinct yet complementary insights for managing change, from diagnosing readiness and shaping behaviour to aligning systems and sustaining new practices. The use of real examples, such as Microsoft and the NHS, enhances practical relevance and illustrates the strategic role of HR in guiding transitions. Overall, the article delivers a balanced and theoretically grounded discussion that reinforces the importance of structured, context-sensitive and human-centred approaches to organizational change.
ReplyDeleteThank you for your detailed and encouraging feedback. I’m pleased to hear that the integration of the classical and planned change models with modern HRM practice came through clearly. Your observation about how these frameworks complement each other especially in shaping behavior, aligning systems, and sustaining new practices perfectly captures the intention behind the analysis. I also appreciate your emphasis on the real-world examples, as demonstrating HR’s strategic role in guiding transitions was a key aim of the blog.
DeleteHi Chiranthi, What I especially appreciate in this blog is how it not only compares multiple change models, but also subtly shows how HR can navigate the emotional rhythm of transformation. From uncertainty during unfreezing to confidence when behaviors finally refreeze. The way you bridge theory with practical HR touchpoints like capability building, feedback loops, and behavioral reinforcement makes the content genuinely useful for real workplace application, not just academic understanding. I also like that the article encourages HR to act as both strategist and sense maker, especially during the messy transition stage most organizations struggle with.
ReplyDeleteThank you so much for your thoughtful and detailed feedback! I’m glad the connection between multiple change models and HR’s role in guiding the emotional rhythm of transformation resonated with you. It’s great to hear that the focus on capability building, feedback loops, and behavioral reinforcement came across as practical and applicable. I also appreciate your recognition of HR as both strategist and sense-maker during the transition stage these are exactly the levers that help make change both sustainable and human centered.
DeleteReally enjoyed this post! I like how it breaks down the classical and planned change models in a way that’s easy to follow and HR-friendly. The examples, like Microsoft’s cultural shift and the NHS digital transformation, make the theories feel practical and relatable. I especially appreciate how you show that change isn’t just structural—it’s also behavioral, emotional, and cultural. For HR, the key takeaway is clear: combining these models helps create change that’s not only well planned but also human-centered and sustainable. Great read!
ReplyDeleteHappy to read your thoughtful feedback. I’m glad the breakdown of classical and planned change models felt clear and HR-friendly. It’s great to hear that the examples of Microsoft and the NHS helped make the theories practical and relatable. I completely agree successful change isn’t just about structure; it’s behavioral, emotional, and cultural. Your reflections perfectly capture the goal of combining models to create human-centered and sustainable transformation.
DeleteChiranthi, this is a clear and practical review of classical and planned change models, making frameworks such as Lewin, Beckhard and Harris, Thurley, Bandura, and Beer et al. truly accessible. Your focus on HR involvement highlights how psychological readiness, cultural alignment, and structured planning work together to enable sustainable transformation. The example of Microsoft’s culture shift effectively shows how these theories translate into real organisational practice, making the discussion highly relevant for modern workplaces navigating continuous change.
ReplyDelete