The validity of a multifaceted measure of experiences of organizational change

Background: Organizational change can have significant implications for the well-being of employees. This is often reflected in guidance that describes healthy ways to manage change (e.g. the UK Health and Safety Executive Management Standards for work-related stress). Self-report measures of employees’ experiences of the way change is managed generally focus on change-related communication and consultation. Recent research shows that employees’ experiences of change may be much more multifaceted and complex than this. In this study we tested the incremental validity of a broad and multifaceted measure of employees’ perceptions of the management of change processes.Method: Participants were 2,479 employees from a large government organization. All reported experiencing some significant change at work over the preceding 12 months and responded to the items contained in the Change scale from the UK HSE Management Standards Indicator Tool (MSIT). They also responded to additional items that asked them to evaluate five other facets of change management. These were: the management of any200change-related uncertainty about role requirements and work expectations; the management of diverse employee responses during change; the opportunity for discussion with line managers about advantages and disadvantages of change; the extent of individual involvement in the implementation of change; and their expectations about the outcomes of change. Measures of two variables commonly adversely affected by poorly managed organizational change (work engagement and affective organizational commitment) were included to test the concurrent validity of the change measures. The incremental validity of each of the five items was examined using correlations and hierarchical regressions.Results: The correlations between the five additional facets and the management standards change scale were low-to-modest (r < .48) indicating that these were sensitive to different aspects of employees’ experiences of change. The MSIT Change measure accounted for 13% of the variance in employee engagement, with the five additional items together explaining significantly more of the variance (an additional 5%, making 18% in total). Similarly the MSIT Change measure accounted for 14% of the variance in affective commitment, with the new items together explaining an additional 6% (20% in total).Conclusions: Existing measures may be too narrow to detect important variance in the impact of change management on employee well-being. A focus on only communication and consultation issues may mean that important aspects of the change process do not receive adequate attention.