Subjects:       Organization development,  Coaches & managers,  Studies
Classification Codes    9190,  2500,  6200,  9130
Locations:      United States,  US
Author(s):      John W Malone
Document types: Feature
Publication title:      Organization Development Journal. Chesterland:
Summer 2001. Vol. 19, Iss.  2;  pg. 27, 10 pgs
Source type:    Periodical
ISSN/ISBN:      08896402
ProQuest document ID:   77151820
Text Word Count 3473
Document URL:
http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=77151820&Fmt=4&clientId=52110&RQT=309&VNa
me=PQD

Abstract (Document Summary)
Organizational change fails without individual behavior change. Social
Cognitive Theory (SCT) has demonstrated the importance of self-efficacy in
behavior change. Individuals with high self-efficacy perform new tasks at
much higher levels of success than do individuals with lower self-efficacy.
Building self-efficacy should become a primary focus of management
especially in the context of planned organizational change. Self-efficacy is
explained and coaching techniques for improving it during the process of
leading change are presented. Coaching techniques are well suited for the
management activities associated with improving self-efficacy. Coaching is
suggested as the best way to enable the following five self-efficacy
strengthening approaches: 1. self-thought, 2. mastery experiences, 3.
modeling, 4. social persuasion, and 5. physiological states. Practice tips
that every practitioner should know are provided.

Full Text (3473   words)
Copyright O D Institute Summer 2001
[Headnote]

ABSTRACT
 

[Headnote]

Organizations do not change, people do! This is a commonly held belief among
organizational researchers and practitioners in the behavioral sciences. We
see over and over again that individual behavior change precedes all
measurable improvements in organizational performance. Or put another way,
organizational change fails without individual behavior change.

Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) has demonstrated the importance of
self-efficacy in behavior change. Individuals with high self-efficacy
perform new tasks at much higher levels of success than do individuals with
lower self-efficacy. Building self-- efficacy should, therefore, become a
primary focus of management especially in the context of planned
organizational change.
 

[Headnote]

This article explains self-- efficacy and presents coaching techniques for
improving it during the process of leading change. Coaching techniques are
well suited for the management activities associated with improving
self-efficacy. Coaching is suggested as the best way to enable the following
five self-- efficacy strengthening approaches: self-thought, mastery
experiences, modeling, social persuasion, and physiological states. The
article then concludes with practice tips that every practitioner should know.
 

INTRODUCTION
Organizations do not change, people do! Organization Development (OD) and
Human Resources (HR) professionals commonly repeat this refrain as part of
selling the human dimension of planned change. Or more frequently, perhaps,
when asked to explain the latest failed change program! Individual behavior
change is a prerequisite for major improvements in organizational
performance (Robinson, Roberts, & Porras, 1993). Effective models of planned
organizational change account for this fact. However, pressures for low
cost, high-speed change often force organizations to overlook the human and
behavioral aspects of change, typically leading to disastrous results. This
article not only advocates a behavioral model; it introduces new thinking on
approaches to integrating more effective behavioral change techniques into
the planned change process.
The behavior change techniques are based on social cognitive theory (SCT)
and self-- efficacy (Bandura, 1997). Stajkovic and Luthans (1998a)
highlighted the power of self-- efficacy in a meta-analysis applied to two
decades of research. Their results demonstrate that self-- efficacy explains
a 28% increase in performance. This compares to 10.39% for goal setting,
13.6% for feedback interventions and 17% for organizational behavior
modification (O.B. Mod.) (Stajkovic & Luthans, 1998a). Organization
Development and HR practitioners should become very familiar with such a
powerful concept and should support a coaching environment that enables
management to bring about higher levels of self-efficacy - especially in the
context of change!
The remainder of this article is structured to that end. First, self--
efficacy will be defined and its power in the organizational context will be
further explained. This will be followed by recommended coaching techniques
to bring about higher self-efficacy. Finally, a section called practice tips
will highlight the do's and don'ts that no practitioner should be without.
SOCIAL COGNITIVE THEORY AND SELF-- EFFICACY
Self-efficacy is a psychological construct advanced by the prominent
Stanford psychologist Albert Bandura in his social cognitive theory.
Briefly, SCT is built from a combined behaviorist and social learning
framework and advances our understanding of psychology and organization
behavior. It explains behavior as a triadic reciprocal causation operating
through the bi-- directional relationship between 1) the employee's
cognitive and other personality factors; 2) the employee's behavior (e.g.
past successful or unsuccessful performances); and 3) the employee's
environment (e.g. perceived consequences from the organization environment).
These relationships are illustrated in Figure 1 (Wood & Bandura, 1989;
Stajkovic & Luthans, 1998b).
Self-efficacy is defined as employees' beliefs in their capabilities to
mobilize the motivation, cognitive resources, and courses of action needed
to exercise control over events in their lives (Bandura and Wood, 1989).
Self-efficacy plays a central role in regulating a wide array of motivation
and performance attainments. Employees' belief in their efficacy influences
the choices they make, their aspirations, the level of effort they will
sustain on a given task, how positively or negatively they think, the amount
of stress they experience when coping with change, and even their
vulnerability to depression (Bandura, 1991).

Figure 1:

It is no surprise to OD and HR practitioners that two individuals with
exactly the same skills will often produce different organizational results.
This is because it is one thing to have the skills, and another to use them
consistently under difficult circumstances - such as those typically created
during major change. Social cognitive theory has taught us that success
depends on having both the required skills and a resilient self-belief in
ones ability to apply the skills in such a way as to control events and
achieve desired goals. Although SCT and self-efficacy take it much further,
most experienced managers and practitioners will know at the gut level that
employees with higher confidence and a positive belief in their abilities
will perform better than those without them. Social cognitive theory now
gives us greater knowledge and confidence to leverage this experience, as
well as a scientific understanding of the factors that contribute to
increased self-efficacy. Perhaps Henry Ford was onto this when he said; "If
you think you can or think you can't, you are right" (Frank, 1999).
COACHING TO STRENGTHEN SELF-EFFICACY
Given the power of self-- efficacy to influence individual behavior, HR and
OD practitioners must help their customers tap into it as a tool to help
drive organizational change and improve business results. Coaching is
ideally suited to bring this about. Coaching here is defined as a
relationship that focuses on improving both skills and behavior in pursuit
of better individual and organizational performance. The term coach and the
coaching process represent a departure from the traditional command and
control management function. Figure 2 contrasts the traditional management
function with coaching, indicating that coaching is a more collaborative and
empowering process, deriving organizational benefits through synergistic
relationships between key stakeholders. The deeper relationships and trust
that are built in the coaching process are a requirement for helping
individuals understand and strengthen their self-efficacy.
It cannot be done to someone; the individual must do the inner work his/her
self (Hudson, 1999). Also, in an organizational change context, the manager,
the change agent, or the HR or OD practitioner can potentially play the role
of coach. In the situation where the manager is the coach, an OD or HR
practitioner could, in turn, coach the manager in the background. In fact,
Evered and Selman (1989) argue that most organizations would benefit from a
cultural change that is driven by managers transforming themselves into
coaches. Therefore, the self-- efficacy strengthening techniques described
next could also be used to help managers become coaches.
STRENGTHENING SELF-EFFICACY
 

Figure 2:

The level of self-efficacy that employees believe they possess can be
instilled or strengthened in a number of practical ways. Five of them will
be discussed here: self-thought, mastery experiences, modeling, social
persuasion, and physiological states.
Self-Thought
The power of self-thought is summed up well by Charles Swindol: "life is 10%
what happens to you, and 90% how you react to what happens to you." Manz and
Neck (1991) refer to this as inner leadership, suggesting that behavioral
choice and experiences of life largely reside in the mind. This poses a
significant new challenge to OD and HR professionals (as well as to our line
management clients) by pushing us to prioritize the cognitive processes of
employees in support of change. This must be a facilitative process,
however, because only the individual knows what is going on inside one's own
head. Nonetheless, using self-- thought techniques, coaches can facilitate
employees to 1) challenge destructive thinking, 2) establish constructive
thought patterns, 3) improve their internal self-talk and 4) leverage mental
imagery. (Manz & Neck, 1991)
1) Challenging destructive thought patterns. As many as 10 categories of
destructive thinking have been identified by researchers (Burns, 1980). Two
of these that are very frequently identified in the workplace are "Jumping
to Conclusions" and "Magnifying and Minimizing." Chris Argyris (1996)
suggests that OD and HR practitioners must learn to help people see and
understand the master programs in their heads, which shape their thinking
and behavior. "Jumping to negative conclusions," for example, is the
thinking pattern that draws negative conclusions regarding situations
despite lacking concrete evidence to support these conclusions. This
thinking pattern is very harmful to self-efficacy beliefs, and will
typically manifest itself as resistance to new ideas and ways of working.
Coaching employees to recognize and understand this type of thought pattern
should become part of the role of OD and HR practitioners.
2) Establish constructive thought patterns. This is the process of replacing
the erroneous thought patterns with constructive ones. Having identified the
destructive thoughts, it is a matter of discipline to replace the old
thinking with new productive thinking. The following example will illustrate
such a process. Most change agents have experienced the situation where an
employee group blames another group, typically "management," for all the
negatives associated with changing their work process or structure. This
"jumping to negative conclusions" thinking, once identified, can be
corrected by facilitating a discussion of more realistic, alternative root
causes for the change, and then gaining consensus on a replacement. Once the
replacement thinking is finalized, everyone in the employee group must catch
one another using old thinking, and then reinforce the new.
3) Improve internal self-- talk. This technique alters internal dialogue to
improve personal effectiveness. It is based on research that suggests that
what we tell ourselves about our environments and ourselves can become a
self-fulfilling prophecy through its effect on our emotional state (Manz &
Neck, 1991). Individuals and teams should be coached to monitor their
internal dialogue and, much as in steps one and two above, identify and
correct negative self-talk with positive self-talk. A typical example of
this occurs when employees facing a major change in their work processes
speak (internally and with others) negatively about the change requirements.
Statements such as "they are just trying to give us more work" or "I'll
never be able to learn this new system" should be surfaced and corrected.
Another example applies to coaches and managers, many of whom identify
executive level presentations as the most difficult and least desirable
aspect of their job. By simply paying attention to the self-talk messages
you send yourself internally, you can identify negative messages like, "I'm
not a good public speaker" and replace them with messages like, "I am a good
public speaker and I am consistently improving every time I speak."
4) Leveraging mental imagery. This is a very widely researched technique,
especially in sports psychology, as evidenced in a meta-analysis of sixty
different studies (Feltz & Landers, 1983). The idea here is to imagine
yourself, in great detail, actually accomplishing the selected goal in your
mind before doing it in reality. Mental rehearsal of this kind has been
shown to increase the effectiveness of actual results.
The four self-thought techniques just reviewed addressed the first of the
five self-efficacy-- strengthening techniques.
Guided Mastery
The second self-efficacy strengthening technique is guided mastery. This
involves the process of intentionally creating opportunities for employees
to be successful at undertaking new activities and then reinforcing that
success as due to their efforts. This is sometimes referred to as generating
quick-hits or celebrating small victories, which is accomplished first by
demonstrating early performance improvements associated with a change
initiative. Secondly, the coach reinforces individual and organizational
confidence in the ability to repeat the success on an on-going basis.
Interestingly, changes in self-efficacy do not occur as a result of
performance accomplishment, but rather occur based on how employees process
the information created by the success (Stajkovic & Luthans, 1998b). This
point reinforces the importance of the coaching role of the practitioner or
manager. Here the practitioner must reinforce the link between the
performance improvement and the effort of the individual or team generating
the improvement, thus making sure the employees process the information
correctly.
Modeling
The third self-efficacy strengthening technique is modeling. Modeling occurs
when one employee observes another competent employee successfully perform
an activity and then receive positive reinforcement for their performance
from the coach. This technique is based on the social learning process all
individuals employ, whether consciously or unconsciously, as part of working
in a social organization. The role of the coach is to enable individuals and
groups to observe others doing the desired new activities well, along with
the positive outcomes associated with the effective performance. During a
planned change process, practitioner coaches should ensure that a number of
project team members become highly competent performing new roles and
activities, and ensure that these individuals conduct simulations and
training in such a way that the employees can learn to model what they
observe.
Social Persuasion
The fourth self-efficacy strengthening technique to be employed by HR and OD
practitioners through coaching is called social persuasion. Social
persuasion is the combined process of providing realistic encouragement
while also ensuring that individuals are not prematurely placed into
situations where success is unlikely. The combination of verbal
reinforcement and managed exposure to increased task complexity will raise
individual willingness to exert greater effort and become successful.
Psychological States
The fifth and final strengthening technique is called psychological states.
This refers to the fact that individuals rely on their judgements of their
stress and anxiety levels as indicators of probable success. Individuals
that are stressed and anxious will attribute these states to the task at
hand, resulting in a sense of vulnerability to failure and a loss of
confidence in their ability. Coaches must encourage employees to take good
care of themselves physically, to reduce stress, and to not necessarily
associate feelings of uncertainty with the immediate activity at hand.
Coaches should also pay close attention to the physical environment of the
individuals concerned. Employees are more likely to feel an improved sense
of self-efficacy if they are not preoccupied with stress. Therefore,
eliminating environmental stresses, and ensuring that new tools provided to
do new activities work effectively, are important during planned
organizational change.
PRACTICE TIPS
The following list of coaching practice tips can aid the OD or HR
practitioner in the process of coaching individuals or groups to strengthen
their self-efficacy in the pursuit of planned change objectives.
Tip #1: Be very clear about activity descriptions and standards. The
research has shown that efficacy perceptions are based on comparing actual
to expected performance outcomes (Bandura, 1997). Employees must understand
the specific requirements of the activity and expected outcomes if they are
to accurately assess efficacy. Efficacy will be perceived even in the
absence of descriptions and measures. Highly efficacious performance can be
misinterpreted due to a lack of understanding of requirements and a lack of
standards - which should obviously be avoided.
Tip #2: Continue to use contingent consequences. Employees may have no
incentive to accurately assess their perceived self-efficacy if no
consequences exist. Bandura (1997) sums it up by saying that, "it is because
people see outcomes as contingent on the adequacy of their performance, and
care about those outcomes, that they rely on efficacy beliefs in deciding
which course of action to pursue and how long to pursue it" (p. 24).
Tip #3: Provide self-efficacy training. Task and activity training conducted
in support of planned change should be expanded to include self-efficacy
training (Gist & Mitchell, 1992). The goal here is to go beyond traditional
skill building in an effort to raise employees' beliefs about what they can
do with both current and new skills. A three-- step strategy may be helpful
for accomplishing this tip. First, initial classroom education about the
five self-efficacy strengthening techniques described above should be
conducted to introduce the concepts and approaches. Second, the coaching
techniques for each of the five strengthening activities should be built
into the project plan for the planned change process and managed
accordingly. Third, the efficacy building activities should be monitored on
an on-going basis and techniques adjusted based on feedback and measurement.
CONCLUSION
Much common sense wisdom has been espoused over the years by gurus
encouraging us to be all we can be, or to become the person of our dreams.
Examples include: Dale Carnegie's How to Win Friends and Influence People,
first copyrighted in 1936 with over 15 million copies sold; Norman Vincent
Peale's The Power of Positive Thinking, copyrighted in 1952 with over 5
million copies in print; Stephen Covey's many popular books; not to mention
Zig Ziglar, Wayne Dyer, Deepak Chopra and Anthony Robbins! We clearly have
an inner drive, often considered our spiritual nature, compelling us to
maximize our potential. In many ways, SCT and self-efficacy have taken the
soundings of these gurus and provided a scientific basis for their
application in the organizational setting. The magnitude of the research on
self-efficacy should provide the most skeptical practitioner sufficient
confidence. There is now both theory and research that suggests that
employees who perceive themselves as highly efficacious will activate
sufficient effort, which if well executed, will produce desired outcomes, as
well as reinforce expectations of self confidence (Stajkovic & Luthans,
1998). This simple but sometimes overlooked fact of human psychology must
become a primary tool in the coaching tool kit of HR and OD practitioners,
especially in the process of driving planned organizational change
initiatives.
JOHN W. MALONE is the founder and president of Jabez Partners; a consulting
firm dedicated to serving people leading change. He has 20 years of business
experience as a consultant, executive and entrepreneur. Prior to starting
Jabez Partners, he founded eBusinessChange.com, a successful change
leadership consulting practice that became a foundation for Jabez Partners.
Previously, John served as the VP of Product Design and Automation for a
$3.5 billion P&C commercial insurance organization, where he built and led a
new end-to-end product development process. Earlier in his career, John
spent 12 years with Ernst & Young management consultants. The focus of his
practice with E&Y was organizational change management and reengineering. He
served in project and team leadership capacities in major change projects at
Fortune 500 companies. John was Senior Manager on the team that developed
and deployed the organizational change management methodologies, tools,
techniques and training programs throughout E&Y's consulting services. In
addition to his North American experience, John was based in London, England
for three years serving clients throughout the UK and Europe. He has also
consulted in the Middle East and Asia.
 

John has a BS Industrial and Operations Engineering from the University of
Michigan and an MS Organization Development from Bowling Green State
University. He is a member of the Organization Development Network and a
Fellow of the Life Management Institute. He has published articles on
quality and change in both the US and UK. He is actively committed to his
community church.
 

[Reference]

Anderson, A.C., Argyris, C., de Bono,E., Dechant, K., et al. (1996). Can you
teach your people to think smarter? Across the Board, 33(3), 16-37.

Bandura, A. (1991). Social Cognitive Theory of Self-Regulation.
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 248-287.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-Efficacy: The Experience of Control. New York: W.
H. Freeman.

Burns, D. (1980). Feeling Good: The New Mood Therapy. New York: William
Morrow.

Carnegie, D. (1936). How to Win Friends and Influence People. New York:
Pocket Books.
 

[Reference]

Evered, E. D., & Selman, J.C. (1989). Coaching and the Art of Management.
Organizational Dynamics, 18(2), 16-32.

Feltz, D.L., & Landers, D.M. (1983). The Effects of Mental Practice on Motor
Skill Learning and Performance: A Meta Analysis. Journal of Sports
Psychology, 5, 25-57.

Frank, L.R. (1999). Quotationary. New York: Random House.

Gist, M.E., & Mitchell, T.R. (1992). Self-Efficacy: A Theoretical Analysis
of Its Determinants and Malleability. The Academy of Management Review,
17(2),183-207.

Hudson, F.M. (1999). The Handbook of Coaching. San Francisco, CA:
Josey-Bass.

Manz, C.C., & Neck, C.P. (1991). Inner Leadership: Creating Productive
Thought Patterns. Academy of Management Executive, 5(3),87-95.

Peale,N.V. (1952). The Power of Positive Thinking. New York: Fawcett
Columbine.
 

[Reference]

Robertson, PJ., Roberts, D.R., & Porras, J.I. (1993). Dynamics of Planned
Organizational Change: Assessing Empirical Support for a Theoretical Model.
Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 619-634.

Stajkovic, A.D., & Luthans, F (1998a). Self-Efficacy and Work-Related
Performance: A Meta-Analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 240-261.

Stajkovic, A.D., & Luthans, F. (1998b). Social Cognitive theory and
Self-Efficacy: Going Beyond Traditional Motivational and Behavioral
Approaches. Organizational Dynamics, Spring 1998, 62-74.

Wood, R., & Bandura, A. (1989). Social Cognitive Theory of Organizational
Management. The Academy of Management Review, 14(3),361-383.
 

[Author Affiliation]

John W Malone

329 E. 8th Ave.

Naperville, IL 60563

John@eBusinessChange.com

SCROLL