Comparison of Change Management Models: Similarities, Differences, and Which Is Most Effective?

  • Brian J. GalliEmail author
Part of the Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management book series (ITKM)


Some people welcome change, while others fear it. People who welcome change concentrate on the great opportunities brought by it, while people who fear change focus on the risks. Currently in society, the change management has been implemented in almost every aspect of all business sectors because the world is a constantly dynamic community, where the opportunities and risks rotate regularly. The key factor in obtaining great opportunities in this constantly changing environment is within proper change management. Many researchers in the literature field have realized this point. Therefore, there exist many theories about change management. This research paper makes a precise comparison among several leading change management models. Through comparison, great similarities and differences are found among these change management models. For example, the Kotter’s change model, the ADKAR, and the Lewin’s change management model share likenesses on many stages, but there are many. Thus, one cannot conclude model is most effective. Not only do these change management models emphasize different things, but their application circumstances differ as well. From this research, it is found that Kotter’s model pays close attention to the implementation of the organizational change from the perspective of the senior leaders. It is much more effective to adopt Kotter’s change model when the organizational change starts with the senior management. Moreover, the ADKAR model focuses on the large organization, and Lewin’s change management model concentrates on the reduction of the resisting force. Change management can perfectly fit into the IE field.


  1. 1.
    Galli, B. (2018). Risks related to lean six sigma deployment and sustainment risks: How project management can help. International Journal of Service Science, Management, Engineering, and Technology, 9(3), 82–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Felfel, H., Ayadi, O., & Masmoudi, F. (2017). Pareto optimal solution selection for a multi-site supply chain planning problem using the VIKOR and TOPSIS methods. International Journal of Service Science, Management, Engineering, and Technology (IJSSMET), 8(3), 21–39. Scholar
  3. 3.
    Galli, B. (2018). Can project management help improve lean six sigma? IEEE Engineering Management Review, 46(2), 55–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Agrawal, T., & Sharma, J. (2014). Quality function deployment in higher education: A literature review. International Journal of Service Science, Management, Engineering, and Technology (IJSSMET), 5(1), 1–13.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Elloumi, N., Kacem, H. L., Dey, N., Ashour, A. S., & Bouhlel, M. S. (2017). Perceptual metrics quality: Comparative study for 3D static meshes. International Journal of Service Science, Management, Engineering, and Technology (IJSSMET), 8(1), 63–80. Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gera, R., Mittal, S., Batra, D. K., & Prasad, B. (2017). Evaluating the effects of service quality, customer satisfaction, and service value on behavioral intentions with life insurance customers in India. International Journal of Service Science, Management, Engineering, and Technology (IJSSMET), 8(3), 1–20.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Galli, B. (2017). Using marketing to implement a strategic plan: Reflection of practiced literature. International Journal of Service Science, Management, Engineering, & Technology, 9(1), 41–54.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kaoud, M. (2017). Investigation of customer knowledge management: A case study research. International Journal of Service Science, Management, Engineering, and Technology (IJSSMET), 8(2), 12–22.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Badsi, H. B. A., Ghomari, A. R., & Zemmouchi-Ghomari, L. (2017). A CRM process model for agent-based simulation. International Journal of Service Science, Management, Engineering, and Technology (IJSSMET), 8(4), 56–82.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hornstein, H. A. (2015). The integration of project management and organizational change management is now a necessity. International Journal of Project Management, 33(2), 291–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cameron, E., & Green, M. (2015). Making sense of change management: A complete guide to the models, tools and techniques of organizational change. Philadelphia: Kogan Page Publishers.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Al-Haddad, S., & Kotnour, T. (2015). Integrating the organizational change literature: A model for successful change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 28(2), 234–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bartunek, J. M., & Woodman, R. W. (2015). Beyond Lewin: Toward a temporal approximation of organization development and change. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2, 157–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Altamony, H., Al-Salti, Z., Gharaibeh, A., & Elyas, T. (2016). The relationship between change management strategy and successful enterprise resource planning (ERP) implementations: A theoretical perspective. International Journal of Business Management and Economic Research, 7(4), 690–703.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cummings, S., Bridgman, T., & Brown, K. G. (2016). Unfreezing change as three steps: Rethinking Kurt Lewin’s legacy for change management. Human Relations, 69(1), 33–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pugh, L. (2016). Change management in information services. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hayes, J. (2014). The theory and practice of change management. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (2014). Organization development and change. Boston: Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Burnes, B., & Cooke, B. (2013). Kurt Lewin’s field theory: A review and re-evaluation. International Journal of Management Reviews, 15(4), 408–425.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Von Bertalanffy, L. (2016). General system theory. New York, 41973(1968), 40.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yam, R. C., Tam, A. Y., Tang, E. P., & Mok, C. K. (2015). TQM: A change management model for market orientation. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 16(4), 439–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Amagoh, F. (2014). Perspectives on organizational change: Systems and complexity theories. The Innovation Journal: The Public-Sector Innovation Journal, 13(3), 1–14.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Doppelt, B. (2017). Leading change toward sustainability: A change-management guide for business, government and civil society. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Galli, B. (2018). Continuous improvement relationship to risk management – The relationship between them. International Journal of Applied Management Sciences & Engineering, 5(2), 1–14.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Langley, A. N. N., Smallman, C., Tsoukas, H., & Van de Ven, A. H. (2013). Process studies of change in organization and management: Unveiling temporality, activity, and flow. Academy of Management Journal, 56(1), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Taylor, J. E., & Levitt, R. (2007). Innovation alignment and project network dynamics: An integrative model for change. Project Management Journal, 38(3), 22–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Leavitt, H. J. (1965). Applied organizational change in industry, structural, technological and humanistic approaches. In Handbook of organizations (p. 264). Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Institute of Technology, Graduate School of Industrial Administration.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Carter, M. Z., Armenakis, A. A., Feild, H. S., & Mossholder, K. W. (2013). Transformational leadership, relationship quality, and employee performance during continuous incremental organizational change. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(7), 942–958.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Beitler, M. A. (2013). Strategic organizational change: A practitioner’s guide for managers and consultants. Greensboro, NC: Practitioner Press International.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Galli, B. (2018). Critical analysis of the goal in relation to human resource management: A research note. Journal of Modern Project Management (JMPM), 5(3), 6–13.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Garcia, D., & Gluesing, J. C. (2013). Qualitative research methods in international organizational change research. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 26(2), 423–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Schaffer, M. A., Sandau, K. E., & Diedrick, L. (2013). Evidence-based practice models for organizational change: Overview and practical applications. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 69(5), 1197–1209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Gustafson, D. H., Sainfort, F., Eichler, M., Adams, L., Bisognano, M., & Steudel, H. (2013). Developing and testing a model to predict outcomes of organizational change. Health Services Research, 38(2), 751–776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Burden, M. (2016). Using a change model to reduce the risk of surgical site infection. British Journal of Nursing, 25(17), 949–955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Aslam, U., Ilyas, M., Imran, M. K., & Rahman, U. U. (2016). Detrimental effects of cynicism on organizational change: An interactive model of organizational cynicism (a study of employees in public sector organizations). Journal of Organizational Change Management, 29(4), 580–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Sato, S., Lucente, S., Meyer, D., & Mrazek, D. (2010). Design thinking to make organization change and development more responsive. Design Management Review, 21(2), 44–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Schumacher, D., Schreurs, B., Van Emmerik, H., & De Witte, H. (2016). Explaining the relation between job insecurity and employee outcomes during organizational change: A multiple group comparison. Human Resource Management, 55(5), 809–827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Van der Voet, J., Kuipers, B. S., & Groeneveld, S. (2016). Implementing change in public organizations: The relationship between leadership and affective commitment to change in a public-sector context. Public Management Review, 18(6), 842–865.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Gorran Farkas, M. (2013). Building and sustaining a culture of assessment: Best practices for change leadership. Reference Services Review, 41(1), 13–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Abdulkadhim, H., Bahari, M., Bakri, A., & Ismail, W. (2015). A research framework of electronic document management systems (EDMS) implementation process in government. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology, 81(3), 420.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Obonyo, E. S., & Kerongo, F. (2015). Factors affecting strategic change management and the performance of commercial banks in Kenya: A case study of Kenya commercial bank in Nairobi region. European Journal of Business and Management, 7(15), 109–117.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42(5), 533–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Taylor, S. J., Bogdan, R., & DeVault, M. (2015). Introduction to qualitative research methods: A guidebook and resource. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Sandelowski, M. (2010). Combining qualitative and quantitative sampling, data collection, and analysis techniques in mixed-method studies. Research in Nursing &Health, 23(3), 246–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Neuman, W. L. (2013). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Boston: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Bernard, H. R., Wutich, A., & Ryan, G. W. (2016). Analyzing qualitative data: Systematic approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Calder, A. M. (2013). Organizational change: Models for successfully implementing change. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Choi, M. (2011). Employees’ attitudes toward organizational change: A literature review. Human Resource Management, 50(4), 479–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Long IslandUSA

Personalised recommendations