The stage model of transition

Big idea

A project has a set budget, timeframe, deliverables and have a unique objective as its goal. Especially in long, complex projects, many things can change, for example, deadlines can be altered, budgets can be cut, and management can change. During changes in a project, it is an important part of People management to make sure that all stakeholders are guided through changes properly. If people are mismanaged during changes, it can result in lowered productivity and feelings of resentment towards the management. This article will describe and discuss The Stage Model of Transition, which is a model of the seven stages stakeholders must go through when a change happens, and how self-efficacy develops throughout the stages. It is claimed that the person experiencing a transition must go through all seven stages in order to eventually accept the change. It is therefore essential for the People aspect of project managent, that the project manager is aware of the stages, and allows each individual to work through them (Kreye, 2020).

[Figure of the model coming soon]

Self-efficacy

”…a person's estimate of his or her capacity to orchestrate performance on a specific task” (Gist and Mitchell, 1992).

The stages

A walk-through of the stages, and how the level of self-efficacy correlates.

From the reading material for the course 42543 (Kreye, 2020).

Shock

• Paralysis, unable to grasp the reality of the change that will come
• Self-efficacy falls

Denial

• Employees wish to ignore the fact that change will be happening and go about their work as though the change will not be happening.
• Self-efficacy rises, as employees go about their regular work, or may even work even harder in the old ways in attempt to prevent a change from happening

Depression

• Employees begin to realize that a change will be happening, and that it cannot be stopped
• Self-efficacy falls, as moving into the unknown in some fashion means that their skillset may or may not apply directly

Acceptance

• Acceptance that the change will be happening, accompanied by an all-time low self-efficacy. This is because the benefits of the change are not yet realized, yet things are changing

Testing

• Finding a way of working with the change is necessary, which may bring with it some creativity and experimentation of how to perform even better. Self-efficacy generally increases, but may go up and down, as testing can bring small failures as well as successes with it

Consolidation

• People are feeling more confident of their capabilities of dealing with the change and a new way of working, increasing self-efficacy

Internalization, reflection, and learning

• When people are feeling more distanced from the turbulent first stages of the change, they can more rationally reflect on the change, their own performance and feelings, and how it was managed. Self-efficacy returns to a ‘normal’ level

Application to project management

Project managers must be aware of the stages, so that they can keep track of which stages their team have gone through and manage them as they go. It is also important for project managers to be aware of the stages, so they do not try to force the team to skip any of the stages, for example the “awareness/shock” stage. When a team receives the news of a significant change being made to their project, they may have a difficult time continuing work right away, and it is important that each individual is allowed time to process the information without feeling pressured to move on as though nothing has happened. The examples and description of the stages above are exaggerated to promote understanding, and may not be so prominent in smaller changes. This model in particular is created in the context of organizational change, but it can be argued that it can also be applied in project management, and here’s why; projects are a temporary organization (Turner and Müller, 2003), and changes are bound to occur in any project. Therefore, stakeholders (employees) must be managed through the changes to ensure their participation and continued interest.

Limitations

This model has many different names (”Stage model of transition” (Kreye, 2020), adapted from Adams et al. (1976), ”The seven stages of change” (Manion, 1995), and many more), and there are many different terms used for the stages. There is therefore not one clear-cut model that is tried and tested to be the best. Moreover, people are different, as are their reactions to changes and management styles, so perhaps it is not possible to create a one-size-fits-all model. O’Connor and Fiol (2006) compare the emotional phases employees go through during a change to the seven stages of grief, describing how human reactions to change follow similar pattern, even under very, very different circumstances.

Bibliography

Gist, M.E., Mitchell, T.R., 1992. Self-Efficacy: A Theoretical Analysis of Its Determinants and Malleability. Acad. Manag. Rev. 17, 183–211. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1992.4279530

Kreye, M.E., 2020. Reading Material - 42543 Management of Change 146.

Manion, J., 1995. Understanding the seven stages of change. Am. J. Nurs. 95, 41–43. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000446-199504000-00018 O’Connor, E.J., Fiol, C.M., 2006. Handling emotional reactions to change. Physician Exec. 32, 78–80.

Turner, J.R., Müller, R., 2003. On the nature of the project as a temporary organization. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 21, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(02)00020-0