Modeling centralized organization of organizational change

  • Mark Hoogendoorn
  • Catholijn M. Jonker
  • Martijn C. Schut
  • Jan Treur


Organizations change with the dynamics of the world. To enable organizations to change, certain structures and capabilities are needed. As all processes, a change process has an organization of its own. In this paper it is shown how within a formal organization modeling approach also organizational change processes can be modeled. A generic organization model (covering both organization structure and behavior) for organizational change is presented and formally evaluated for a case study. This model takes into account different phases in a change process considered in Organization Theory literature, such as unfreezing, movement and refreezing. Moreover, at the level of individuals, the internal beliefs and their changes are incorporated in the model. In addition, an internal mental model for (reflective) reasoning about expected role behavior is included in the organization model.


Organizational change Formal organizational modeling Organizational simulation Multi-agent organizations Organization verification 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Abbink H, Dijk R van, Dobos T, Hoogendoorn M, Jonker CM, Konur S, Maanen PP van, Popova V, Sharpanskykh A, Tooren P van, Treur J, Valk J, Xu L, Yolum P (2004) Automated Support for Adaptive Incident Management. In: Walle B, van de, Walle B van de, Carle B (eds) Proc. of the First International Workshop on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management, ISCRAM'04, pp 69–74Google Scholar
  2. Ackerman LS (1986) Development, transition, or transformation: the question of change in organization. OD Practitioner 18(4):1–9Google Scholar
  3. Alvesson M, (1993) Cultural Perspectives on Organizations. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Bacharach SB, Lawler EJ (1980) Power and politics in organizations. Jossey-Bass, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  5. Bashein ML, Marcus ML, Riley P (1994) Business Process Reengineering: preconditions for success and failure. Inform Syst Manag 9:24–31Google Scholar
  6. Boonstra JJ (ed) (2004) Dynamics of Organizational Change and Learning. WileyGoogle Scholar
  7. Bosse T, Jonker CM,Meg L van der, Treur J, (2005) LEADSTO: a Language and Environment for Analysis of Dynamics by SimulaTiOn. In: Eymann T et al (eds) Proc. of the Third German Conference on Multi-Agent System Technologies, MATES'05. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence. Springer Verlag, vol. 3550. pp. 165–178Google Scholar
  8. Bradshaw P, Boonstra JJ (2004) Power Dynamics in Organizational Change. In: Boonstra JJ (ed) Dynamics of Organizational Change and Learning. Wiley, pp 279–299Google Scholar
  9. Cummings TG, Worley CG (2001) Organization Development and Change. South Western College PublishingGoogle Scholar
  10. Cummings TG (2004) Organization Development and Change. In: Boonstra JJ (ed) Dynamics of Organizational Change and Learning. Wiley, pp 25–42Google Scholar
  11. Dahl RA (1975) The concept of power. Behav Sci 2:201–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Emerson RM (1962) Power dependence relations. Amer Socio Rev 27:31–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ferber J, Gutknecht O (1998) A meta-model for the analysis and design of organizations in multi-agent systems. In: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems (ICMAS'98). IEEE Computer Society Press, pp 128–135Google Scholar
  14. Ferber J, Gutknecht O, Jonker CM, Müller JP, Treur J (2001) Organization Models and Behavioural Requirements Specification for Multi-Agent Systems. In: Demazeau Y, Garijo F (eds) Multi-Agent System Organizations. Proceedings of MAAMAW'01Google Scholar
  15. Fox MS, Gruninger M (1998) Enterprise modelling. AI Magazine 19(3);AAAI Press, pp. 109–121Google Scholar
  16. Glaser N, Morignot P (1997) The Reorganization of Societies of Autonomous Agents. In: Boman M, Velde W van de (eds) Multi-Agent Rationality, 8th European Workshop on Modelling Autonomous Agents in a Multi-Agent World, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer, vol 1237 pp 98–111Google Scholar
  17. Hall G, Rosenthal T, Wade J (1993) How to make reengineering really work. Harv Busin Rev 71(6):119–131Google Scholar
  18. Hoogendoorn M, Jonker CM, Konur S, Maanen PP van, Popova V, Sharpanskykh A, Treur J, Xu L, Yolum P (2004) Formal Analysis of Empirical Traces in Incident Management. In: Macintosh A, Ellis R, Allen T (eds) Applications and Innovations in Intelligent Systems XII, Proceedings of AI-2004, the 24th SGAI International Conference on Innovative Techniques and Applications of Artificial Intelligence. Springer Verlag, pp 237–250Google Scholar
  19. Hoogendoorn M, Jonker CM, Popova V, Sharpaskykh A, Xu L (2005) Formal Modelling and Comparing of Disaster Plans. In: Carle B, Walle B van de (eds) Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management ISCRAM '05, pp 97–107Google Scholar
  20. Hosking DM (1999) Social construction as process: some new possibilities for research and development. Con Trans 4(2):117–132Google Scholar
  21. Huczynski A, Buchanan D (2001) Organizational behaviour. Prentice HallGoogle Scholar
  22. Jaffee D (2001) Organization Theory—Tension and Change. McGraw-Hill companiesGoogle Scholar
  23. Jonker CM, Treur J (2002) Compositional Verification of Multi-Agent Systems: a Formal Analysis of Pro-activeness and Reactiveness. Intern J Cooper Inform Syst 11:51–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jonker CM, Treur J (2003) Relating Structure and Dynamics in an Organization Model. In: Sichman, JS Bousquet F, Davidson P (eds) Multi-Agent-Based Simulation II. Proceedings of the Third International Workshop on Multi-Agent Based Simulation, MABS'02. Lecture notes in AI, Springer Verlag, vol 2581 pp 50–69Google Scholar
  25. Jonker CM, Schut MC, Treur J (2003) Modelling the Dynamics of Organizational Change. In: Klusch M, Omicini A, Ossowski S, Laamanen H (eds) Cooperative Information Agents VII. Proceedings of the Seventh International Workshop on Cooperative Information Agents, CIA 2003. Lecture notes in AI, Springer Verlag, vol. 2782. pp. 336–344Google Scholar
  26. Kotter JP (1999) Leading change. Harvard Business School Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  27. Lewin K (1951) Field Theory in Social Science. Harper & Row, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. Lippit R, Watson J, Westley B (1958) The Dynamics of Planned Change. Harcourt, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. Orlikowski W, Hofman D (1997) An Improvisational Model of Change Management: The Case of Groupware Technologies. Sloan Manag Rev 38(2):11–22Google Scholar
  30. Robbins SP (1998) Organizational behaviour. Prentice Hall, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  31. Schein EH (1993) On dialogue, culture, and organizational learning. Organiz dynam 22(2):40–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. SteenMWA, Lankhorst MM,Wetering RG van de (2002) Modelling networked enterprises. In: proceedings of the 6th International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC). IEEE Computer Society, pp. 109–119Google Scholar
  33. Wrong DH (1968) Some problems in defining social power. Amer J Soc 73:673–681CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark Hoogendoorn
    • 1
  • Catholijn M. Jonker
    • 2
  • Martijn C. Schut
    • 1
  • Jan Treur
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Artificial IntelligenceVrije Universiteit AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen Institute for Cognition and InformationNijmegenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations