Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Giving and Making Sense About Change: The Back and Forth Between Leaders and Employees

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business and Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Leader sensegiving—the attempt to affect employees’ sensemaking—is a crucial leadership activity during organizational change. Yet, it is unclear how employee sensemaking and leader sensegiving vary across different change phases: Although addressing employee needs is key for successful sensegiving, current literature remains vague about how leaders account for different employee needs over the course of a change process.

Design/Methodology/Approach

Data were obtained from an interview study with organizational members who underwent episodic change. To integrate both perspectives, interviews were conducted with leaders (n = 26) and employees (n = 29). Data were analyzed using template analysis.

Findings

Our analysis revealed and confirmed different sensemaking needs and respective sensegiving foci in each change phase. During exploration, leaders respond to employees’ need for reassurance with receptive sensegiving. During preparation, leaders show participative sensegiving to answer employees’ need for orientation. During implementation, leaders’ compensating sensegiving responds to employees’ need for balance. During evaluation, leaders’ evaluative sensegiving accounts for employees’ need for acknowledgment. Each sensegiving mode is associated with a specific set of discursive and symbolic strategies in each phase.

Implications

This study provides a systematic framework on how leaders can respond successfully to employee sensemaking needs in each change phase using different discursive and symbolic sensegiving strategies.

Originality/Value

The study enhances our understanding of development in sensemaking and sensegiving by outlining the specific interlocking between both processes within the different change phases. Furthermore, it outlines how the relevant sensegiving modes can be obtained through particular symbolic and discursive strategies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Available from the authors upon request.

References

  • Allen, J., Jimmieson, N. L., Bordia, P., & Irmer, B. E. (2007). Uncertainty during organizational change: Managing perceptions through communication. Journal of Change Management, 7(2), 187–210. doi:10.1080/14697010701563379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvesson, M. (1991). Organizational symbolism and ideology. Journal of Management Studies, 28(3), 207–225. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.1991.tb00945.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armenakis, A. A., Fredenberger, W., Giles, W., Cherones, L., Feild, H., & Holley, W. (1996). Symbolism use by business turnaround change agents. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 4(2), 123–134. doi:10.1108/eb028844.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balogun, J. (2006). Managing change: Steering a course between intended strategies and unanticipated outcomes. Long Range Planning, 39(1), 29–49. doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2005.02.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balogun, J., & Johnson, G. (2004). Organizational restructuring and middle manager sensemaking. Academy of Management Journal, 47(4), 523–549. doi:10.2307/20159600.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartunek, J. M. (1984). Changing interpretive schemes and organizational restructuring: The example of a religious order. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 355–372. doi:10.2307/2393029.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartunek, J. M., & Moch, M. K. (1987). First-order, second-order, and third-order change and organization development interventions: A cognitive approach. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 23(4), 483–500. doi:10.1177/002188638702300404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartunek, J. M., Rousseau, D. M., Rudolph, J. W., & DePalma, J. A. (2006). On the receiving end: Sensemaking, emotion, and assessments of an organizational change initiated by others. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 42(2), 182–206. doi:10.1177/0021886305285455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. D., Colville, I., & Pye, A. (2015). Making sense of sensemaking in organization studies. Organization Studies, 36(2), 265–277. doi:10.1177/0170840614559259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. D., & Humphreys, M. (2003). Epic and tragic tales: Making sense of change. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 39(2), 121–144. doi:10.1177/0021886303255557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryman, A. (2004). Qualitative research on leadership: A critical but appreciative review. The Leadership Quarterly, 15(6), 729–769. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2004.09.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bullock, R. J., & Batten, D. (1985). It’s just a phase we’re going through: A review and synthesis of OD phase analysis. Group and Organization Management, 10(4), 383–412. doi:10.1177/105960118501000403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buono, A. F., & Kerber, K. W. (2010). Creating a sustainable approach to change: Building organizational change capacity. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 75(2), 4–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnes, B. (2004). Managing change: A strategic approach to organisational dynamics (4th ed.). Harlow: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. L., Quincy, C., Osserman, J., & Pedersen, O. K. (2013). Coding in-depth semistructured interviews: Problems of unitization and intercoder reliability and agreement. Sociological Methods & Research, 42(3), 294–320. doi:10.1177/0049124113500475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole, M. S., Schaninger, W. S., & Harris, S. G. (2002). The workplace social exchange network: A multilevel, conceptual examination. Group and Organization Management, 27(1), 142–167. doi:10.1177/1059601102027001008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colville, I., Brown, A. D., & Pye, A. (2012). Simplexity: Sensemaking, organizing and storytelling for our time. Human Relations, 65(1), 5–15. doi:10.1177/0018726711425617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cullen, K. L., Edwards, B. D., Casper, W. C., & Gue, K. R. (2014). Employees’ adaptability and perceptions of change-related uncertainty: Implications for perceived organizational support, job satisfaction, and performance. Journal of Business and Psychology, 29(2), 269–280. doi:10.1007/s10869-013-9312-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dainty, P., & Kakabadse, A. (1990). Organizational change: A strategy for successful implementation. Journal of Business and Psychology, 4(4), 463–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiFonzo, N., & Bordia, P. (1998). A tale of two corporations: Managing uncertainty during organizational change. Journal of Business and Psychology, 37(3+4), 295–304. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-050X(199823/24)37:3/4<295:AID-HRM10>3.0.CO;2-3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eby, L. T., Adams, D. M., Russell, J. E., & Gaby, S. H. (2000). Perception of organizational readiness for change: Factors related to employees’ reactions to the implementation of team-based selling. Human Relations, 53(3), 419–442. doi:10.1177/0018726700533006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edmondson, A. C., & McManus, S. E. (2007). Methodological fit in management field research. Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1155–1179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elrod, P. D., & Tippett, D. D. (2002). The “death valley” of change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 15(3), 273–291. doi:10.1108/09534810210429309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fairhurst, G. T. (2009). Considering context in discursive leadership research. Human Relations, 62(11), 1607–1633. doi:10.1177/0018726709346379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiss, P. C., & Zajac, E. J. (2006). The symbolic management of strategic change: Sensegiving via framing and decoupling. Academy of Management Journal, 49(6), 1173–1193. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2006.23478255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foldy, E. G., Goldman, L., & Ospina, S. (2008). Sensegiving and the role of cognitive shifts in the work of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(5), 514–529. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.07.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furst, S. A., & Cable, D. M. (2008). Employee resistance to organizational change: Managerial influence tactics and leader-member exchange. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(2), 453–462. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.93.2.453.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia, D., & Gluesing, J. C. (2013). Qualitative research methods in international organizational change research. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 26(2), 423–444. doi:10.1108/09534811311328416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2001). Towards a process model of individual change in organizations. Human Relations, 54(4), 419–444. doi:10.1177/0018726701544002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gioia, D. A., & Chittipeddi, K. (1991). Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation. Strategic Management Journal, 12(6), 433–448. doi:10.1002/smj.4250120604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. Management Department Faculty Publications, 57, 218–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, D. E. (2007). Facilitating management learning: Developing critical reflection through reflective tools. Management Learning, 38(5), 495–517. doi:10.1177/1350507607083204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, B., Stensaker, I. G., & Jansen, K. J. (2012). Qualitative challenges for complexifying organizational change research: Context, voice, and time. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 48(2), 121–134. doi:10.1177/0021886312438866.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grund, C., & Schmitt, A. (2013). Works councils, wages and job satisfaction. Applied Economics, 45(3), 299–310. doi:10.1080/00036846.2011.597735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutek, B. A. (1978). On the accuracy of retrospective attitudinal data. Public Opinion Quarterly, 42(3), 390–401. doi:10.1086/268462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hadley, C. N. (2014). Emotional roulette? Symmetrical and asymmetrical emotion regulation outcomes from coworker interactions about positive and negative work events. Human Relations, 67(9), 1073–1094. doi:10.1177/0018726714529316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hernes, T., & Maitlis, S. (Eds.). (2010a). Process, sensemaking and organizing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hernes, T., & Maitlis, S. (2010b). Process, sensemaking and organizing: An introduction. In T. Hernes & S. Maitlis (Eds.), Process, sensemaking and organizing (pp. 27–37). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, R. (1999). Analyzing documentary accounts. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hollingworth, B. J., & Miller, E. J. (2007). Retrospective interviewing and its application in study of residential mobility. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board. doi:10.3141/1551-10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huy, Q. N. (2002). Emotional balancing of organizational continuity and radical change: The contribution of middle manager. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47(1), 31–69. doi:10.5465/AMR.1999.1893939.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isabella, L. A. (1990). Evolving interpretations as a change unfolds: How managers construe key organizational events. Academy of Management Journal, 33(1), 7–41. doi:10.2307/256350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isern, J., & Pung, C. (2007). Driving radical change. The McKinsey Quarterly, 44(4), 24–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, G. (1990). Managing strategic change: The role of symbolic action. British Journal of Management, 1, 183–200. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8551.1990.tb00006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, T. G., Hornung, S., & Rousseau, D. M. (2011). Change-supportive employee behavior: Antecedents and the moderating role of time. Journal of Management, 37(6), 1664–1693. doi:10.1177/0149206310364243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, N. (2004). Using templates in the thematic analysis of text. In C. Cassell & G. Symon (Eds.), Essential guide to qualitative methods in organizational research (pp. 256–270). London: SAGE.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kotter, J. P. (1995). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Review, 73(2), 59–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotter, J. P. (2012). Leading change. Boston: Harvard Business Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krippendorff, K. (2004). Reliability in content analysis: Some common misconceptions and recommendations. Human Communication Research, 30(3), 411–433. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2004.tb00738.x.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langley, A., & Tsoukas, H. (2010). Introducing “Perspectives on process organization studies”. In T. Hernes & S. Maitlis (Eds.), Process, sensemaking and organizing (pp. 1–26). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latta, G. F. (2009). A process model of organizational change in cultural context (OC3 model): The impact of organizational culture on leading change. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 16(1), 19–37. doi:10.1177/1548051809334197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, K. L. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics: Concept, method and reality in social science; social equilibria and social change. Human Relations, 1(5), 4–41. doi:10.1177/001872674700100103.

  • Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindebaum, D., & Fielden, S. (2011). ‘It’s good to be angry’: Enacting anger in construction project management to achieve perceived leader effectiveness. Human Relations, 64(3), 437–458. doi:10.1177/0018726710381149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Louis, M. R., & Sutton, R. I. (1991). Switching cognitive gears: From habits of mind to active thinking. Human Relations, 44(1), 55–76. doi:10.1177/001872679104400104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maitlis, S. (2005). The social processes of organizational sensemaking. Academy of Management Journal, 48(1), 21–49. doi:10.2307/20159639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maitlis, S., & Christianson, M. (2013). Sensemaking in organizations: Taking stock and moving forward. Academy of Management Annals. doi:10.1080/19416520.2014.873177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maitlis, S., & Lawrence, T. B. (2007). Triggers and enablers of sensegiving in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 57–84. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2007.24160971.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maitlis, S., & Sonenshein, S. (2010). Sensemaking in crisis and change: Inspiration and insights from Weick (1988). Journal of Management Studies, 47(3), 551–580. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00908.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maitlis, S., Vogus, T. J., & Lawrence, T. B. (2013). Sensemaking and emotion in organizations. Organizational Psychology Review, 3(3), 222–247. doi:10.1177/2041386613489062.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mantere, S., Schildt, H. A., & Sillince, J. A. A. (2012). Reversal of strategic change. Academy of Management Journal, 55(1), 172–196. doi:10.5465/amj.2008.0045.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mason, J. (2002). Qualitative researching. London: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, C. B., & Stensaker, I. G. (2006). Developing capacity for change. Journal of Change Management, 6(2), 217–231. doi:10.1080/14697010600693731.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1984). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, V. D., Johnson, J. R., & Grau, J. (1994). Antecedents to willingness to participate in a planned organizational change. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 22(1), 59–80. doi:10.1080/00909889409365387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morse, J. M. (2011). What is qualitative health research? In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (pp. 401–414). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mumford, M. D., Friedrich, T. L., Caughron, J. J., & Byrne, C. L. (2007). Leader cognition in real-world settings: How do leaders think about crises? The Leadership Quarterly, 18(6), 515–543. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.09.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mumford, M. D., Zaccaro, S. J., Harding, F. D., Jacobs, T., & Fleishman, E. A. (2000). Leadership skills for a changing world. The Leadership Quarterly, 11(1), 11–35. doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(99)00041-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oreg, S., Vakola, M., & Armenakis, A. A. (2011). Change recipients’ reactions to organizational change: A 60-year review of quantitative studies. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 47(4), 461–524. doi:10.1177/0021886310396550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlikowski, W. J. (1995). Improvising organizational transformation over time: A situated change perspective. Information Systems Research, 7(1), 63–92. doi:10.1287/isre.7.1.63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popping, R. (2010). Some views on agreement to be used in content analysis studies. Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, 44(6), 1067–1078. doi:10.1007/s11135-009-9258-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Press, M., & Arnould, E. J. (2011). How does organizational identification form? A consumer behavior perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 38, 650–666. doi:10.1086/660164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radcliffe, L. S., & Cassell, C. (2014). Resolving couples’ work-family conflicts: The complexity of decision making and the introduction of a new framework. Human Relations, 67(7), 793–819. doi:10.1177/0018726713506022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raelin, J. A. (2002). ‘I don’t have time to think!’ versus the art of reflective practice. Reflections, 4(1), 66–75. doi:10.1162/152417302320467571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rafferty, A. E., & Simons, R. H. (2006). An examination of the antecedents of readiness for fine-tuning and corporate transformation changes. Journal of Business and Psychology, 20(3), 325–350. doi:10.1007/s10869-005-9013-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Randall, R., Cox, T., & Griffiths, A. (2007). Participants’ accounts of a stress management intervention. Human Relations, 60(8), 1181–1209. doi:10.1177/0018726707081660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ravasi, D., & Schultz, M. (2006). Responding to organizational identity threats: Exploring the role of organizational culture. Academy of Management Journal, 49(3), 433–458. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2006.21794663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodell, J. B., & Colquitt, J. A. (2009). Looking ahead in times of uncertainty: The role of anticipatory justice in an organizational change context. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(4), 989–1002. doi:10.1037/a0015351.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sandberg, J., & Tsoukas, H. (2014). Making sense of the sensemaking perspective: Its constituents, limitations, and opportunities for further development. Journal of Organizational Behavior. doi:10.1002/job.1937.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sonenshein, S. (2006). Crafting social issues at work. Academy of Management Journal, 49(6), 1156–1172. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2006.23478243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stensaker, I. G., Falkenberg, J., & Gronhaug, K. (2008). Implementation activities and organizational sensemaking. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 44(2), 162–185. doi:10.1177/0021886307313794.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsoukas, H., & Chia, R. (2002). On organizational becoming: Rethinking organizatinal change. Organization Science, 13(5), 567–582. doi:10.1287/orsc.13.5.567.7810.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van de Ven, A. H., & Huber, G. P. (1990). Longitudinal field research methods for studying processes of organizational change. Organization Science, 1(3), 213–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van de Ven, A. H., & Sun, K. (2011). Breakdowns in implementing models of organization change. Academy of Management Perspectives. doi:10.5465/AMP.2011.63886530.

    Google Scholar 

  • van den Heuvel, Machteld, Demerouti, E., & Bakker, A. B. (2013). How psychological resources facilitate adaptation to organizational change. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 23(6), 847–858. doi:10.1080/1359432X.2013.817057.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Heuvel, M., Demerouti, E., & Bakker, A. B. (2014). How psychological resources facilitate adaptation to organizational change. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 23, 847–858. doi:10.1080/1359432X.2013.817057.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vince, R. (2002). Organizing reflection. Management Learning, 33(1), 63–78. doi:10.1177/1350507602331003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddington, J. (2011). European works councils: The challenge for labour. Industrial Relations Journal, 42(6), 508–529. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2338.2011.00654.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wanberg, C. R., & Banas, J. T. (2000). Predictors and outcomes of openness to change in a reorganizing workplace. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(1), 132–142. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.85.1.132.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Waring, T., & Wainwright, D. (2008). Issues and challenges in the use of template analysis: Two comparative case studies from the field. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 85–94. Retrieved from www.ejbrm.com.

  • Watzlawick, P., Weakland, J. H., & Fisch, R. (1974). Change: Principles of problem formation and problem resolution. New York, NY: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. (2012). Organized sensemaking: A commentary on processes of interpretive work. Human Relations, 65(1), 141–153. doi:10.1177/0018726711424235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E., & Quinn, R. E. (1999). Organizational change and development. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 361–386. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.361.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E., & Roberts, K. H. (1993). Collective mind in organizations: Heedful interrelating on flight decks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 357–381. doi:10.2307/2393372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science, 16(4), 409–421. doi:10.1287/orsc.1050.0133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wisse, B., & Sleebos, E. (2015). When change causes stress: Effects of self-construal and change consequences. Journal of Business and Psychology. doi:10.1007/s10869-015-9411-z.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by a grant of “Bund der Freunde der TU München e. V.”

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Chair of Research and Science Management, Technische Universität München, Arcisstraße 21, 80333, Munich, Germany

    Anna Kraft & Claudia Peus

  2. Chair of Management, Especially Strategy and Leadership, University of Konstanz, Constance, Germany

    Jennifer L. Sparr

Authors
  1. Anna Kraft
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jennifer L. Sparr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Claudia Peus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anna Kraft.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kraft, A., Sparr, J.L. & Peus, C. Giving and Making Sense About Change: The Back and Forth Between Leaders and Employees. J Bus Psychol 33, 71–87 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-016-9474-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-016-9474-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation