6: The Process of Organizational Change in Schools

tions exist because authors emphasize different aspects of the literature. It is the quantity of empirical work and speculative papers that attracts the attention of some reviewers, not its quality. As research designed to test hypotheses derived from theory about organizational change, the quality is poor, and little is contributed to systematic understanding of organizational change in schools. The review of the literature upon which this chapter is based led to several conclusions. The literature is basically atheoretical in nature. It contains little work designed to develop and test theories describing the dynamics of the change process or explaining why organizations like schools vary in the degree and speed with which they change. Moreover, confidence is not warranted in a number of currently held generalizations about organizational change because the research methods and statistics upon which they are based are inadequate. Most empirical reports reviewed were atheoretical efforts to make changes, not efforts to test theories of change. The absence of critical attention to the methodological and statistical procedures used in these studies reflects this emphasis on precipitating change rather than studying it. The extension of knowledge about organizational change will require empirical studies of greater theoretical, methodological, and statistical sophistication. Effective CHARLES E. BIDWELL, University of Chicago, was the editorial consultant for this chapter. ' The author wishes to acknowledge his appreciation to Charles Bidwell for constructive criticisms of earlier drafts of his paper and his deep gratitude to Neal Gross and Marilyn Bernstein. Many of the ideas presented here originated from work with them, and some are contained in a recent book (Gross, Giacquinta, & Bernstein, 1971). He alone, however, is responsible for the shortcomings of the paper.