Información y estructura como antecedente de la resistencia al cambio en contextos de cooperación
La investigación en resistencia al cambio (RC) ha subestimado el rol que la información sobre el comportamiento de otros individuos y la configuración estructural de interacción social tienen sobre los procesos de cambio. Las explicaciones sobre las reacciones de los individuos ante el cambio han si...
- Autores:
-
Estévez Mujica, Claudia Patricia
- Tipo de recurso:
- Doctoral thesis
- Fecha de publicación:
- 2023
- Institución:
- Universidad de los Andes
- Repositorio:
- Séneca: repositorio Uniandes
- Idioma:
- spa
- OAI Identifier:
- oai:repositorio.uniandes.edu.co:1992/70169
- Acceso en línea:
- http://hdl.handle.net/1992/70169
- Palabra clave:
- Resistencia al cambio
Cooperación
Experimentación
Simulación basada en agentes
Psicología
- Rights
- openAccess
- License
- https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/static/pdf/aceptacion_uso_es.pdf
| id |
UNIANDES2_ad40df42378f5469ade23ed831bb843e |
|---|---|
| oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.uniandes.edu.co:1992/70169 |
| network_acronym_str |
UNIANDES2 |
| network_name_str |
Séneca: repositorio Uniandes |
| repository_id_str |
|
| dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Información y estructura como antecedente de la resistencia al cambio en contextos de cooperación |
| title |
Información y estructura como antecedente de la resistencia al cambio en contextos de cooperación |
| spellingShingle |
Información y estructura como antecedente de la resistencia al cambio en contextos de cooperación Resistencia al cambio Cooperación Experimentación Simulación basada en agentes Psicología |
| title_short |
Información y estructura como antecedente de la resistencia al cambio en contextos de cooperación |
| title_full |
Información y estructura como antecedente de la resistencia al cambio en contextos de cooperación |
| title_fullStr |
Información y estructura como antecedente de la resistencia al cambio en contextos de cooperación |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Información y estructura como antecedente de la resistencia al cambio en contextos de cooperación |
| title_sort |
Información y estructura como antecedente de la resistencia al cambio en contextos de cooperación |
| dc.creator.fl_str_mv |
Estévez Mujica, Claudia Patricia |
| dc.contributor.advisor.none.fl_str_mv |
García Díaz, César Enrique Jiménez Leal, William Alexander |
| dc.contributor.author.none.fl_str_mv |
Estévez Mujica, Claudia Patricia |
| dc.contributor.jury.none.fl_str_mv |
Magallanes, José Manuel Olaya Nieto, Camilo Enrique |
| dc.subject.keyword.none.fl_str_mv |
Resistencia al cambio Cooperación Experimentación Simulación basada en agentes |
| topic |
Resistencia al cambio Cooperación Experimentación Simulación basada en agentes Psicología |
| dc.subject.themes.es_CO.fl_str_mv |
Psicología |
| description |
La investigación en resistencia al cambio (RC) ha subestimado el rol que la información sobre el comportamiento de otros individuos y la configuración estructural de interacción social tienen sobre los procesos de cambio. Las explicaciones sobre las reacciones de los individuos ante el cambio han sido en su mayoría a-sociales. En ellas los sujetos generan percepciones y responden al cambio con independencia del comportamiento o de las estructuras sociales que permean sus relaciones con otros. Ambos, factores que sabemos tienen incidencia en el comportamiento de los individuos y, que, por tanto, se esperaría estuvieran ampliamente relacionados con la emergencia de patrones de RC. Adicionalmente, esta literatura se ha centrado en establecer relaciones entre variables y no explicaciones de proceso que encajen con la naturaleza del fenómeno mismo. Más aún, en esta literatura, el concepto mismo de RC ha sido utilizado para referirse a los comportamientos, los individuos y el fenómeno en general indistintamente. El uso del término en todos estos niveles dificulta organizar o agrupar los resultados de diferentes estudios, definir con precisión qué es lo que se está investigando, estudiar el fenómeno y avanzar en la comprensión del mismo. Este proyecto proporciona una aproximación a cómo algunas variables informacionales asociadas con el comportamiento de otros y estructurales, asociadas con las interacciones sociales, se relacionan como antecedente la resistencia al cambio. En particular, este proyecto considera dos escenarios de cooperación en los cuales una aproximación de este tipo resulta relevante: el escenario tradicional de RC en organizaciones y, un nuevo escenario, de toma de decisiones asociado, en particular, a resolución colectiva de problemas, donde el concepto no había sido introducido previamente. Este proyecto propone una definición de trabajo sobre la RC que permite diferenciar distintos niveles de análisis. Al nivel del individuo se hace referencia a la persistencia en cursos de acción como conceptualización de la negativa de los individuos a abandonar y/o adoptar nuevas formas de actuar ante las posibilidades de cambio. Al nivel del sistema, y sólo a este nivel, se hace referencia a la RC como patrón emergente de las interacciones de los individuos. Una definición que permite separar los niveles micro, meso y macro en el estudio, análisis y la comprensión del fenómeno de resistencia al cambio Para alcanzar el objetivo propuesto este proyecto se enfoca en dos tipos de metodologías principales: experimentos con individuos y modelos computacionales de simulación basada en agentes (ABM por sus siglas en inglés). El uso combinado de estos dos tipos de metodología permitió proporcionar explicaciones causales sobre cómo aspectos informacionales, como las frecuencias de observación del comportamiento de otros y las características de la información social, y estructurales, asociados con la red de conexiones entre individuos, influyen como antecedente de la RC. Factores que, aunque subestimados en la literatura, son indispensables para avanzar en la comprensión del fenómeno complejo de la resistencia al cambio. |
| publishDate |
2023 |
| dc.date.accessioned.none.fl_str_mv |
2023-08-29T21:12:44Z |
| dc.date.available.none.fl_str_mv |
2023-08-29T21:12:44Z |
| dc.date.issued.none.fl_str_mv |
2023-08-29 |
| dc.type.es_CO.fl_str_mv |
Trabajo de grado - Doctorado |
| dc.type.driver.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis |
| dc.type.version.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion |
| dc.type.coar.none.fl_str_mv |
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_db06 |
| dc.type.content.es_CO.fl_str_mv |
Text |
| dc.type.redcol.none.fl_str_mv |
https://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/TD |
| format |
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_db06 |
| status_str |
acceptedVersion |
| dc.identifier.uri.none.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/1992/70169 |
| dc.identifier.doi.none.fl_str_mv |
10.57784/1992/70169 |
| dc.identifier.instname.es_CO.fl_str_mv |
instname:Universidad de los Andes |
| dc.identifier.reponame.es_CO.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositorio Institucional Séneca |
| dc.identifier.repourl.es_CO.fl_str_mv |
repourl:https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/ |
| url |
http://hdl.handle.net/1992/70169 |
| identifier_str_mv |
10.57784/1992/70169 instname:Universidad de los Andes reponame:Repositorio Institucional Séneca repourl:https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/ |
| dc.language.iso.es_CO.fl_str_mv |
spa |
| language |
spa |
| dc.relation.references.es_CO.fl_str_mv |
Alós-Ferrer, C., Hügelschäfer, S., y Li, J. (2016). Inertia and decision making. Frontiers in psychology, 7 , 169. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00169 Arciniega, L. M., y González, L. (2009). Validation of the spanish-language version of the resistance to change scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 46 (2), 178-182. doi: 10.1016/ j.paid.2008.09.024 Arendt, C., Landis, R., y Meister, T. (1995). Creating an organizational initiative that successfully addresses... the human side of change. IIE Solutions, 27 (5), 22-27 Armenakis, A. A., Bernerth, J. B., Pitts, J. P., y Walker, H. J. (2007). Organizational change recipients' beliefs scale: Development of an assessment instrument. The Journal of applied behavioral science, 43 (4), 481-505. doi: 10.1177/0021886307303654 Barkoczi, D., y Galesic, M. (2016). Social learning strategies modify the effect of network structure on group performance. Nature communications, 7 (1), 1-8. doi: 10.1038/ncomms13109 Bartunek, J. M., Rousseau, D. M., Rudolph, J. W., y DePalma, J. A. (2006). On the receiving end: Sensemaking, emotion, and assessments of an organizational change initiated by others. The Journal of applied behavioral science, 42 (2), 182-206. doi: 10.1177/002188630528545 Battilana, J. (2006). Agency and institutions: The enabling role of individuals' social position. Organization, 13 (5), 653-676. doi: 10.1177/1350508406067008 Battilana, J. (2011). The enabling role of social position in diverging from the institutional status quo: Evidence from the uk national health service. Organization science, 22 (4), 817-834. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1100.0574 Battilana, J., y Casciaro, T. (2012). Change agents, networks, and institutions: A contingency theory of organizational change. Academy of Management Journal , 55 (2), 381-398. doi: 10.5465/amj.2009.0891 Battilana, J., y Casciaro, T. (2013). The network secrets of great change agents. Harvard Business Review , 91 (7), 62-68 Baumann, O., Schmidt, J., y Stieglitz, N. (2019). Effective search in rugged performan- ce landscapes: A review and outlook. Journal of Management, 45 (1), 285-318. doi: 10.1177/0149206318808594 Bavelas, A. (1950). Communication patterns in task-oriented groups. The journal of the acoustical society of America, 22 , 725-730. doi: 10.1121/1.1906679 Beer, M., Eisenstat, R. A., y Spector, B. (1993). Why change programs don't produce change. Managing change, 2 Bernstein, E., Shore, J., y Lazer, D. (2018). How intermittent breaks in interaction improve collective intelligence. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115 (35), 8734-8739. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1802407115 Bicchieri, C. (2005). The grammar of society: The nature and dynamics of social norms. Cam- bridge University Press Boonstra, J. J. (2004). Dynamics of organizational change and learning. Chichester: John Wiley Bovey, W. H., y Hede, A. (2001). Resistance to organizational change: the role of cognitive and affective processes. Leadership & Organization development journal , 22 (8), 372-382 Brackbill, D., y Centola, D. (2020). Impact of network structure on collective learning: An experimental study in a data science competition. PloS one, 15 (9), e0237978. doi: 10.1371/ journal.pone.0237978 Browne, M. W., y Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological methods & research, 21 (2), 230-258. doi: 10.1177/0049124192021002005 Bruch, E., y Feinberg, F. (2017). Decision-making processes in social contexts. Annual review of sociology, 43 , 207-227. doi: 10.1146/annurev-soc-060116-053622 Bruderer, E., y Singh, J. V. (1996). Organizational evolution, learning, and selection: A genetic- algorithm-based model. Academy of management journal , 39 (5), 1322-1349. doi: 10.5465/ 257001 Burmeister, K., y Schade, C. (2007). Are entrepreneurs¿ decisions more biased? an experimental investigation of the susceptibility to status quo bias. Journal of business Venturing, 22 (3), 340-362. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2006.04.002 Burnes, B. (2005). Complexity theories and organizational change. International Journal of Management Reviews, 7 (2), 73-90. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2005.00107.x Carr, P. B., y Steele, C. M. (2009). Stereotype threat and inflexible perseverance in problem solving. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45 (4), 853-859. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp .2009.03.003 Centola, D. (2022). The network science of collective intelligence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 26 (11), 923-941. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2022.08.009 Ceschi, A., Sartori, R., y Guastello, S. J. (2018). Advanced modeling methods for studying indivi- dual differences and dynamics in organizations: introduction to the special issue. Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology and Life Sciences, 22 (1), 1-13 Cox, J. C., Servátka, M., y Vadovic, R. (2017). Status quo effects in fairness games: reciprocal responses to acts of commission versus acts of omission. Experimental Economics, 20 , 1-18. doi: 10.1007/s10683-016-9477-0 Csaszar, F. A. (2018). A note on how nk landscapes work. Journal of Organization Design, 7 (1), 1-6. doi: 10.1186/s41469-018-0039-0 Davis, J. P., Eisenhardt, K. M., y Bingham, C. B. (2007). Developing theory through si- mulation methods. Academy of Management Review , 32 (2), 480-499. doi: 10.5465/ amr.2007.24351453 Dean, M., Kbrs, Ö., y Masatlioglu, Y. (2017). Limited attention and status quo bias. Journal of Economic Theory, 169 , 93-127. doi: 10.1016/j.jet.2017.01.009 DellaPosta, D., Nee, V., y Opper, S. (2017). Endogenous dynamics of institutional change. Rationality and Society, 29 (1), 1-44. doi: 10.1177/1043463116633147 Demers, C. (2007). Organizational change theories: A synthesis. London: Sage Dent, E. B., y Goldberg, S. G. (1999). Challenging "resistance to change". The Journal of applied behavioral science, 35 (1), 25-41. doi: 10.1177/0021886399351003 Derex, M., Feron, R., Godelle, B., y Raymond, M. (2015). Social learning and the replication pro- cess: an experimental investigation. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 282 (1808), 20150719. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2015.0719 Derex, M., Godelle, B., y Raymond, M. (2013). Social learners require process information to outperform individual learners. Evolution: International Journal of Organic Evolution, 67 (3), 688-697. doi: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2012.01804.x Estévez-Mujica, C. P., Acero, A., Jiménez-Leal, W., y Garcia-Diaz, C. (2018). The influence of homophilous interactions on diversity effects in group problem-solving. Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, And Life Sciences, 22 (1), 77-102 Ethiraj, S. K., y Levinthal, D. (2004). Bounded rationality and the search for organizational ar- chitecture: An evolutionary perspective on the design of organizations and their evolvability. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49 (3), 404-437. doi: 10.2307/4131441 Fang, C., Lee, J., y Schilling, M. A. (2010). Balancing exploration and exploitation through structural design: The isolation of subgroups and organizational learning. Organization Science, 21 (3), 625-642. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1090.0468 Fang, R., Landis, B., Zhang, Z., Anderson, M. H., Shaw, J. D., y Kilduff, M. (2015). Integrating personality and social networks: A meta-analysis of personality, network position, and work outcomes in organizations. Organization science, 26 (4), 1243-1260. doi: 10.1287/orsc.2015 .0972 Fiebich, A., Nguyen, N., y Schwarzkopf, S. (2015). Cooperation with robots? a two-dimensional approach. En C. Misselhorn (Ed.), Collective agency and cooperation in natural and ar- tificial systems: Explanation, implementation and simulation (pp. 25-43). Suiza: Springer International Fiske, S., Gilbert, D., y Lindzey, G. (2010). Automaticity and the unconscious. En Handbook of social psychology (pp. 228-268). Wiley Frank, K. A., Xu, R., y Penuel, W. R. (2018). Implementation of evidence-based practice in human service organizations: Implications from agent-based models. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 37 (4), 867-895 Frías-Navarro, D. (2022). Apuntes de estimación de la fiabilidad de consistencia interna de los ítems de un instrumento de medida. D. Frías-Navarro, Recomendaciones para redactar el informe de investigación y lectura crítica. España: Universidad de Valencia. Retrieved from https://www.uv.es/friasnav/AlfaCronbach.pdf Furst, S. A., y Cable, D. M. (2008). Employee resistance to organizational change: managerial influence tactics and leader-member exchange. Journal of Applied psychology, 93 (2), 453. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.93.2.453 Gal, D. (2006). A psychological law of inertia and the illusion of loss aversion. Judgment and Decision Making, 1 , 23-32 Grimm, V., Berger, U., DeAngelis, D. L., Polhill, J. G., Giske, J., y Railsback, S. F. (2010). The odd protocol: a review and first update. Ecological modelling, 221 (23), 2760-2768. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2010.08.019 Hannan, M. T., y Freeman, J. (1984). Structural inertia and organizational change. American sociological review , 49 (2), 149-164. doi: 10.2307/2095567 Harrison, J. R., Kemp, A., y Saetre, A. S. (2017). Attractor-based fitness landscapes for compu- tational decision search. En 2017 portland international conference on management of en- gineering and technology (picmet) (p. 1-8). doi: 10.23919/PICMET.2017.8125307 Hernandez, E., y Menon, A. (2018). Acquisitions, node collapse, and network revolution. Mana- gement Science, 64 (4), 1652-1671. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.2016.2691 Herold, D. M., Fedor, D. B., y Caldwell, S. D. (2007). Beyond change management: a multilevel investigation of contextual and personal influences on employees commitment to change. Journal of applied psychology, 92 (4), 942. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.942 Herscovitch, L., y Meyer, J. P. (2002). Commitment to organizational change: extension of a three-component model. Journal of applied psychology, 87 (3), 474 Holt, D. T., Armenakis, A. A., Feild, H. S., y Harris, S. G. (2007). Readiness for organizational change: The systematic development of a scale. The Journal of applied behavioral science, 43 (2), 232-255. doi: 10.1177/0021886306295295 Hoogendoorn, M., Jonker, C. M., Schut, M. C., y Treur, J. (2007). Modeling centralized orga- nization of organizational change. Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, 13 , 147-184. doi: 10.1007/s10588-006-9004-5 Hoyle, R. H. (1995). The structural equation modeling approach: Basic concepts and fundamental issues. En Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues and applications (pp. 1-25). Sage Publications, Inc Ioannidis, E., Varsakelis, N., y Antoniou, I. (2020). Promoters versus adversaries of change: Agent- based modeling of organizational conflict in co-evolving networks. Mathematics, 8 (12), 2235. doi: 10.3390/math8122235 Iyengar, S. S., y Lepper, M. R. (2000). When choice is demotivating: Can one desire too much of a good thing? Journal of personality and social psychology, 79 (6), 995. doi: 10.1037/ 0022-3514.79.6.995 Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., y Thaler, R. H. (1991). Anomalies: The endowment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias. Journal of Economic perspectives, 5 (1), 193-206. doi: 10.1257/jep.5.1.193 Kahneman, D., y Tversky, A. (1984). Choices, values, and frames. American psychologist, 39 (4), 341. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.39.4.341 Kahneman, D., y Tversky, A. (2013). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. En Handbook of the fundamentals of financial decision making: Part i (pp. 99-127). World Scientific. doi: 10.1142/9789814417358_0006 Kauffman, S. A., y Weinberger, E. D. (1989). The nk model of rugged fitness landscapes and its application to maturation of the immune response. Journal of theoretical biology, 141 (2), 211-245. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5193(89)80019-0 Kotter, J. P. (2007). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. En Museum management and marketing (pp. 20-29). Routledge Kwon, D., Oh, W., y Jeon, S. (2007). Broken ties: The impact of organizational restructuring on the stability of information-processing networks. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24 (1), 201-231. doi: 10.2753/MIS0742-1222240106 Lant, T. K., y Mezias, S. J. (1992). An organizational learning model of convergence and reorien- tation. Organization Science, 3 (1), 47-71 Lau, C.-M., y Woodman, R. W. (1995). Understanding organizational change: A schematic perspective. Academy of management journal , 38 (2), 537-554. doi: 10.5465/256692 Lazer, D., y Friedman, A. (2007). The network structure of exploration and exploitation. Admi- nistrative science quarterly, 52 (4), 667-694. doi: 10.2189/asqu.52.4.667 Leavitt, H. J. (1951). Some effects of certain communication patterns on group performance. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 46 (1), 38-50. doi: 10.1037/h0057189 Lenox, M. J., Rockart, S. F., y Lewin, A. Y. (2007). Interdependency, competition, and industry dynamics. Management Science, 53 (4), 599-615. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.1060.0679 Levinthal, D. A. (1997). Adaptation on rugged landscapes. Management science, 43 (7), 934-950. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.43.7.934 Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics: Concept, method and reality in social science; social equilibria and social change. Human relations, 1 , 5-41 Lindström, B., Jangard, S., Selbing, I., y Olsson, A. (2018). The role of a "common is moral" heuristic in the stability and change of moral norms. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General , 147 (2), 228-242. doi: 10.1037/xge0000365 Lv, S., Ma, X., y Yang, R. (2020). Organization incentive driven by modeling of the co-opetition behavior in agent-based complex network. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing, 11 , 3305-3313. doi: 10.1007/s12652-019-01517-6 March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization science, 2 (1), 71-87 Martignoni, D., Menon, A., y Siggelkow, N. (2016). Consequences of misspecified mental models: Contrasting effects and the role of cognitive fit. Strategic Management Journal , 37 (13), 2545-2568. doi: 10.1002/smj.2479 Masatlioglu, Y., y Uler, N. (2013). Understanding the reference effect. Games and Economic Behavior , 82 , 403-423. doi: 10.1016/j.geb.2013.07.009 Mason, W., y Watts, D. J. (2011). Collaborative learning in networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109 (3), 764-769. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1110069108 Mason, W. A., Jones, A., y Goldstone, R. L. (2008). Propagation of innovations in networked groups. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General , 137 (3), 422. doi: 10.1037/a0012798 Mihm, J., Loch, C., y Huchzermeier, A. (2003). Problem-solving oscillations in complex enginee- ring projects. Management Science, 49 (6), 733-750. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.49.6.733.16021 Morin, O., Jacquet, P. O., Vaesen, K., y Acerbi, A. (2021). Social information use and social information waste. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B , 376 (1828), 20200052. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2020.0052 Nissen, V., y Saft, D. (2010). Social emergence in organisational contexts: benefits from multi- agent simulations. En Proceedings of the 2010 spring simulation multiconference (pp. 1-8). doi: 10.1145/1878537.1878548 Oreg, S. (2003). Resistance to change: Developing an individual differences measure. Journal of applied psychology, 88 (4), 680-693. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.4.680 Oreg, S. (2006). Personality, context, and resistance to organizational change. European journal of work and organizational psychology, 15 (1), 73-101. doi: 10.1080/13594320500451247 Oreg, S., Bayazit, M., Vakola, M., Arciniega, L., Armenakis, A., Barkauskiene, R., . . . others (2008). Dispositional resistance to change: Measurement equivalence and the link to personal values across 17 nations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93 (4), 935-944. doi: 10.1037/ 0021-9010.88.4.680 Oreg, S., Vakola, M., y Armenakis, A. (2011). Change recipients reactions to organizational change: A 60-year review of quantitative studies. The Journal of applied behavioral science, 47 (4), 461-524. doi: 10.1177/0021886310396550 Page, S. E. (2008). The difference: How the power of diversity creates better groups, firms, schools, and societies-new edition. Princeton University Press Piderit, S. K. (2000). Rethinking resistance and recognizing ambivalence: A multidimensional view of attitudes toward an organizational change. Academy of management review , 25 (4), 783-794 Pinheiro, J., Bates, D., DebRoy, S., Sarkar, D., Team, R. C., y cols. (2009). Linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. R package version, 1-339 Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., y Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of applied psychology, 88 (5), 879. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 Poole, M. S., y Van de Ven, A. H. (2004). Handbook of organizational change and innovation. New York: Oxford University Press Posen, H. E., Lee, J., y Yi, S. (2013). The power of imperfect imitation. Strategic Management Journal , 34 (2), 149-164. doi: 10.1002/smj.2007 Posen, H. E., y Levinthal, D. A. (2012). Chasing a moving target: Exploitation and exploration in dynamic environments. Management science, 58 (3), 587-601. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.1110.1420 Prochaska, J. O., y DiClemente, C. C. (1983). Stages and processes of self-change of smoking: toward an integrative model of change. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 51 (3), 390-395. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.51.3.390 Puranam, P., Stieglitz, N., Osman, M., y Pillutla, M. M. (2015). Modelling bounded rationality in organizations: Progress and prospects. Academy of Management Annals, 9 (1), 337-392. doi: 10.5465/19416520.2015.1024498 Rydzak, F., y Monus, P. A. (2018). Shaping organizational network structure to enable sustainable transformation. System Dynamics Review , 34 (1-2), 255-283. doi: 10.1002/sdr.1602 Samuelson, W., y Zeckhauser, R. (1988). Status quo bias in decision making. Journal of risk and uncertainty, 1 , 7-59. doi: 10.1007/BF00055564 Schultz, P. W., Nolan, J. M., Cialdini, R. B., Goldstein, N. J., y Griskevicius, V. (2007). The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psychological science, 18 (5), 429-434. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01917.x Schweiger, S., Stouten, H., y Bleijenbergh, I. L. (2018). A system dynamics model of resistance to organizational change: The role of participatory strategies. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 35 (6), 658-674. doi: 10.1002/sres.2509 Secchi, D. (2015). A case for agent-based models in organizational behavior and team research. Team Performance Management, 21 (1/2), 37-50. doi: 10.1108/TPM-12-2014-0063 Shah, N., Irani, Z., y Sharif, A. M. (2017). Big data in an hr context: Exploring organizational change readiness, employee attitudes and behaviors. Journal of Business Research, 70 , 366-378. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.08.010 Shore, J., Bernstein, E., y Lazer, D. (2015). Facts and figuring: An experimental investigation of network structure and performance in information and solution spaces. Organization Science, 26 (5), 1432-1446 Siggelkow, N. (2002). Evolution toward fit. Administrative science quarterly, 47 (1), 125-159. doi: 10.2307/3094893 Simon, H. A. (1956). Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychological review , 63 (2), 129-138. doi: 10.1037/h0042769 Smaldino, P. E., Moser, C., Velilla, A. P., y Werling, M. (2022). Maintaining transient diversity is a general principle for improving collective problem solving. Descargado de https:// osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/ykrv5/ Smollan, R. K. (2011). The multi-dimensional nature of resistance to change. Journal of Mana- gement & Organization, 17 (6), 828-849. doi: 10.5172/jmo.2011.828 Sparrowe, R. T., Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., y Kraimer, M. L. (2001). Social networks and the performance of individuals and groups. Academy of management journal , 44 (2), 316-325 Squazzoni, F. (2014). The "reign of mystery": Have we missed something crucial in our experimen- tal and computational work on social norms? The Complexity of Social Norms, 177-188 Susskind, A. M., Miller, V. D., y Johnson, J. D. (1998). Downsizing and structural holes: Their impact on layoff survivors perceptions of organizational chaos and openness to change. Communication Research, 25 (1), 30-65. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.08.010 Tetlock, P. E. (1983). Accountability and the perseverance of first impressions. Social psychology quarterly, 46 (4), 285-292. doi: 10.2307/3033716 Torenvlied, R., y Velner, G. (1998). Informal networks and resistance to organizational change: The introduction of quality standards in a transport company. Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory, 4 , 165-188 Uotila, J. (2018). Punctuated equilibrium or ambidexterity: Dynamics of incremental and radical organizational change over time. Industrial and Corporate Change, 27 (1), 131-148. doi: 10.1093/icc/dtx018 Vakola, M., Armenakis, A., y Oreg, S. (2013). Reactions to organizational change from an individual differences perspective: A review of empirical research. En S. Oreg, A. Michel, y R. Todnem (Eds.), The psychology of organizational change: Viewing change from the employee's perspective (pp. 95-122). Reino Unido: Cambridge University Press Van de Ven, A. H., y Poole, M. S. (2005). Alternative approaches for studying organizational change. Organization studies, 26 (9), 1377-1404. doi: 10.1177/0170840605056907 Vuculescu, O. (2017). Searching far away from the lamp-post: An agent-based model. Strategic Organization, 15 (2), 242-263. doi: 10.1177/1476127016669869 Vuculescu, O., Beretta, M., y Bergenholtz, C. (2021). The ikea effect in collective problem-solving: When individuals prioritize their own solutions. Creativity and Innovation Management, 30 (1), 116-128. doi: 10.1111/caim.12416 Wall, F. (2015). Beneficial effects of randomized organizational change on performance. Advances in Complex Systems, 18 (05-06), 1550019. doi: 10.1142/S0219525915500198 Wanberg, C. R., y Banas, J. T. (2000). Predictors and outcomes of openness to changes in a reorganizing workplace. Journal of applied psychology, 85 (1), 132. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010 .85.1.132 Watson, G. (1971). Resistance to change. American behavioral scientist, 14 (5), 745-766. doi: 10.1177/00027642710140050 Weisbord, M. R. (1987). Productive workplaces: Organizing and managing for dignity, meaning and community. Jossey-Bass Xenitidou, M., y Edmonds, B. (2014). The conundrum of social norms. En M. Xenitidou y B. Edmonds (Eds.), The complexity of social norms (pp. 1-8). Springer. doi: 10.1007/ 978-3-319-05308-0_1 Xiao, S., y Yue, Q. (2018). Investors inertia behavior and their repeated decision-making in online reward-based crowdfunding market. Decision Support Systems, 111 , 101-112. doi: 10.1016/j.dss.2018.05.005 Yang, M. M., Young, S., Li, S.-J., y Huang, Y.-Y. (2017). Using system dynamics to investigate how belief systems influence the process of organizational change. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 34 (1), 94-108. doi: 10.1002/sres.2394 Yaniv, I., y Kleinberger, E. (2000). Advice taking in decision making: Egocentric discounting and reputation formation. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 83 (2), 260-281. doi: 10.1006/obhd.2000.2909 Young, H. P. (2015). The evolution of social norms. Annual Review of Economics, 7 (1), 359-387. doi: 10.1146/annurev-economics-080614-115322 Yu, Z., Rouse, W. B., y Serban, N. (2011). A computational theory of enterprise transformation. Systems Engineering, 14 (4), 441-454. doi: 10.1002/sys.20188 Zhang, J., Ouyang, Y., Li, H., Ballesteros-Pérez, P., y Skitmore, M. (2020). Simulation analysis of incentives on employees acceptance of foreign joint venture management practices: a case study. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 27 (8), 2047-2078. doi: 10.1108/ECAM-06-2019-0321 |
| dc.rights.uri.none.fl_str_mv |
https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/static/pdf/aceptacion_uso_es.pdf |
| dc.rights.accessrights.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
| dc.rights.coar.none.fl_str_mv |
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2 |
| rights_invalid_str_mv |
https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/static/pdf/aceptacion_uso_es.pdf http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2 |
| eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
| dc.format.extent.es_CO.fl_str_mv |
176 páginas |
| dc.format.mimetype.es_CO.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
| dc.publisher.es_CO.fl_str_mv |
Universidad de los Andes |
| dc.publisher.program.es_CO.fl_str_mv |
Doctorado en Psicología |
| dc.publisher.faculty.es_CO.fl_str_mv |
Facultad de Ciencias Sociales |
| dc.publisher.department.es_CO.fl_str_mv |
Departamento de Psicología |
| institution |
Universidad de los Andes |
| bitstream.url.fl_str_mv |
https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/bitstreams/cb47b2d7-be76-4d18-b205-2a17ddf8fbbb/download https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/bitstreams/5691fa68-eeb0-4bba-9559-02cca13d0998/download https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/bitstreams/f2945757-6194-4182-a5ae-ce3766a3613c/download https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/bitstreams/8dd3a72a-e935-4c35-9a39-a3a25f288500/download https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/bitstreams/f7a3f580-2465-49d8-b4f6-7d0357a8613c/download https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/bitstreams/d068bf22-8b36-47b1-b1b4-8c37b91733e1/download https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/bitstreams/6a05134d-5caa-4a4f-961b-f19620ea2981/download |
| bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv |
5aa5c691a1ffe97abd12c2966efcb8d6 b3adfd2a683ac6c1840583830b700c3d 9bf1ae8c905e5cc3a2efca53a26a87cb a410f18212cd93b14ea02436be0925cf 5cb739e57551b3fb9af16e297af05bd2 47c4b6e5fb9c40ed7e0e92b6e58e1ee6 68b329da9893e34099c7d8ad5cb9c940 |
| bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv |
MD5 MD5 MD5 MD5 MD5 MD5 MD5 |
| repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositorio institucional Séneca |
| repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
adminrepositorio@uniandes.edu.co |
| _version_ |
1812133870510800896 |
| spelling |
García Díaz, César Enrique8814b05e-736e-480f-bade-83d9df4cada7600Jiménez Leal, William Alexandervirtual::4692-1Estévez Mujica, Claudia Patricia8187600Magallanes, José ManuelOlaya Nieto, Camilo Enrique2023-08-29T21:12:44Z2023-08-29T21:12:44Z2023-08-29http://hdl.handle.net/1992/7016910.57784/1992/70169instname:Universidad de los Andesreponame:Repositorio Institucional Sénecarepourl:https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/La investigación en resistencia al cambio (RC) ha subestimado el rol que la información sobre el comportamiento de otros individuos y la configuración estructural de interacción social tienen sobre los procesos de cambio. Las explicaciones sobre las reacciones de los individuos ante el cambio han sido en su mayoría a-sociales. En ellas los sujetos generan percepciones y responden al cambio con independencia del comportamiento o de las estructuras sociales que permean sus relaciones con otros. Ambos, factores que sabemos tienen incidencia en el comportamiento de los individuos y, que, por tanto, se esperaría estuvieran ampliamente relacionados con la emergencia de patrones de RC. Adicionalmente, esta literatura se ha centrado en establecer relaciones entre variables y no explicaciones de proceso que encajen con la naturaleza del fenómeno mismo. Más aún, en esta literatura, el concepto mismo de RC ha sido utilizado para referirse a los comportamientos, los individuos y el fenómeno en general indistintamente. El uso del término en todos estos niveles dificulta organizar o agrupar los resultados de diferentes estudios, definir con precisión qué es lo que se está investigando, estudiar el fenómeno y avanzar en la comprensión del mismo. Este proyecto proporciona una aproximación a cómo algunas variables informacionales asociadas con el comportamiento de otros y estructurales, asociadas con las interacciones sociales, se relacionan como antecedente la resistencia al cambio. En particular, este proyecto considera dos escenarios de cooperación en los cuales una aproximación de este tipo resulta relevante: el escenario tradicional de RC en organizaciones y, un nuevo escenario, de toma de decisiones asociado, en particular, a resolución colectiva de problemas, donde el concepto no había sido introducido previamente. Este proyecto propone una definición de trabajo sobre la RC que permite diferenciar distintos niveles de análisis. Al nivel del individuo se hace referencia a la persistencia en cursos de acción como conceptualización de la negativa de los individuos a abandonar y/o adoptar nuevas formas de actuar ante las posibilidades de cambio. Al nivel del sistema, y sólo a este nivel, se hace referencia a la RC como patrón emergente de las interacciones de los individuos. Una definición que permite separar los niveles micro, meso y macro en el estudio, análisis y la comprensión del fenómeno de resistencia al cambio Para alcanzar el objetivo propuesto este proyecto se enfoca en dos tipos de metodologías principales: experimentos con individuos y modelos computacionales de simulación basada en agentes (ABM por sus siglas en inglés). El uso combinado de estos dos tipos de metodología permitió proporcionar explicaciones causales sobre cómo aspectos informacionales, como las frecuencias de observación del comportamiento de otros y las características de la información social, y estructurales, asociados con la red de conexiones entre individuos, influyen como antecedente de la RC. Factores que, aunque subestimados en la literatura, son indispensables para avanzar en la comprensión del fenómeno complejo de la resistencia al cambio.Colfuturo - Convocatoria 727 Doctorados NacionalesDoctor en PsicologíaDoctorado176 páginasapplication/pdfspaUniversidad de los AndesDoctorado en PsicologíaFacultad de Ciencias SocialesDepartamento de Psicologíahttps://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/static/pdf/aceptacion_uso_es.pdfinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2Información y estructura como antecedente de la resistencia al cambio en contextos de cooperaciónTrabajo de grado - Doctoradoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesisinfo:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_db06Texthttps://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/TDResistencia al cambioCooperaciónExperimentaciónSimulación basada en agentesPsicologíaAlós-Ferrer, C., Hügelschäfer, S., y Li, J. (2016). Inertia and decision making. Frontiers in psychology, 7 , 169. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00169Arciniega, L. M., y González, L. (2009). Validation of the spanish-language version of the resistance to change scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 46 (2), 178-182. doi: 10.1016/ j.paid.2008.09.024Arendt, C., Landis, R., y Meister, T. (1995). Creating an organizational initiative that successfully addresses... the human side of change. IIE Solutions, 27 (5), 22-27Armenakis, A. A., Bernerth, J. B., Pitts, J. P., y Walker, H. J. (2007). Organizational change recipients' beliefs scale: Development of an assessment instrument. The Journal of applied behavioral science, 43 (4), 481-505. doi: 10.1177/0021886307303654Barkoczi, D., y Galesic, M. (2016). Social learning strategies modify the effect of network structure on group performance. Nature communications, 7 (1), 1-8. doi: 10.1038/ncomms13109Bartunek, J. M., Rousseau, D. M., Rudolph, J. W., y DePalma, J. A. (2006). On the receiving end: Sensemaking, emotion, and assessments of an organizational change initiated by others. The Journal of applied behavioral science, 42 (2), 182-206. doi: 10.1177/002188630528545Battilana, J. (2006). Agency and institutions: The enabling role of individuals' social position. Organization, 13 (5), 653-676. doi: 10.1177/1350508406067008Battilana, J. (2011). The enabling role of social position in diverging from the institutional status quo: Evidence from the uk national health service. Organization science, 22 (4), 817-834. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1100.0574Battilana, J., y Casciaro, T. (2012). Change agents, networks, and institutions: A contingency theory of organizational change. Academy of Management Journal , 55 (2), 381-398. doi: 10.5465/amj.2009.0891Battilana, J., y Casciaro, T. (2013). The network secrets of great change agents. Harvard Business Review , 91 (7), 62-68Baumann, O., Schmidt, J., y Stieglitz, N. (2019). Effective search in rugged performan- ce landscapes: A review and outlook. Journal of Management, 45 (1), 285-318. doi: 10.1177/0149206318808594Bavelas, A. (1950). Communication patterns in task-oriented groups. The journal of the acoustical society of America, 22 , 725-730. doi: 10.1121/1.1906679Beer, M., Eisenstat, R. A., y Spector, B. (1993). Why change programs don't produce change. Managing change, 2Bernstein, E., Shore, J., y Lazer, D. (2018). How intermittent breaks in interaction improve collective intelligence. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115 (35), 8734-8739. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1802407115Bicchieri, C. (2005). The grammar of society: The nature and dynamics of social norms. Cam- bridge University PressBoonstra, J. J. (2004). Dynamics of organizational change and learning. Chichester: John WileyBovey, W. H., y Hede, A. (2001). Resistance to organizational change: the role of cognitive and affective processes. Leadership & Organization development journal , 22 (8), 372-382Brackbill, D., y Centola, D. (2020). Impact of network structure on collective learning: An experimental study in a data science competition. PloS one, 15 (9), e0237978. doi: 10.1371/ journal.pone.0237978Browne, M. W., y Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological methods & research, 21 (2), 230-258. doi: 10.1177/0049124192021002005Bruch, E., y Feinberg, F. (2017). Decision-making processes in social contexts. Annual review of sociology, 43 , 207-227. doi: 10.1146/annurev-soc-060116-053622Bruderer, E., y Singh, J. V. (1996). Organizational evolution, learning, and selection: A genetic- algorithm-based model. Academy of management journal , 39 (5), 1322-1349. doi: 10.5465/ 257001Burmeister, K., y Schade, C. (2007). Are entrepreneurs¿ decisions more biased? an experimental investigation of the susceptibility to status quo bias. Journal of business Venturing, 22 (3), 340-362. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2006.04.002Burnes, B. (2005). Complexity theories and organizational change. International Journal of Management Reviews, 7 (2), 73-90. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2005.00107.xCarr, P. B., y Steele, C. M. (2009). Stereotype threat and inflexible perseverance in problem solving. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45 (4), 853-859. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp .2009.03.003Centola, D. (2022). The network science of collective intelligence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 26 (11), 923-941. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2022.08.009Ceschi, A., Sartori, R., y Guastello, S. J. (2018). Advanced modeling methods for studying indivi- dual differences and dynamics in organizations: introduction to the special issue. Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology and Life Sciences, 22 (1), 1-13Cox, J. C., Servátka, M., y Vadovic, R. (2017). Status quo effects in fairness games: reciprocal responses to acts of commission versus acts of omission. Experimental Economics, 20 , 1-18. doi: 10.1007/s10683-016-9477-0Csaszar, F. A. (2018). A note on how nk landscapes work. Journal of Organization Design, 7 (1), 1-6. doi: 10.1186/s41469-018-0039-0Davis, J. P., Eisenhardt, K. M., y Bingham, C. B. (2007). Developing theory through si- mulation methods. Academy of Management Review , 32 (2), 480-499. doi: 10.5465/ amr.2007.24351453Dean, M., Kbrs, Ö., y Masatlioglu, Y. (2017). Limited attention and status quo bias. Journal of Economic Theory, 169 , 93-127. doi: 10.1016/j.jet.2017.01.009DellaPosta, D., Nee, V., y Opper, S. (2017). Endogenous dynamics of institutional change. Rationality and Society, 29 (1), 1-44. doi: 10.1177/1043463116633147Demers, C. (2007). Organizational change theories: A synthesis. London: SageDent, E. B., y Goldberg, S. G. (1999). Challenging "resistance to change". The Journal of applied behavioral science, 35 (1), 25-41. doi: 10.1177/0021886399351003Derex, M., Feron, R., Godelle, B., y Raymond, M. (2015). Social learning and the replication pro- cess: an experimental investigation. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 282 (1808), 20150719. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2015.0719Derex, M., Godelle, B., y Raymond, M. (2013). Social learners require process information to outperform individual learners. Evolution: International Journal of Organic Evolution, 67 (3), 688-697. doi: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2012.01804.xEstévez-Mujica, C. P., Acero, A., Jiménez-Leal, W., y Garcia-Diaz, C. (2018). The influence of homophilous interactions on diversity effects in group problem-solving. Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, And Life Sciences, 22 (1), 77-102Ethiraj, S. K., y Levinthal, D. (2004). Bounded rationality and the search for organizational ar- chitecture: An evolutionary perspective on the design of organizations and their evolvability. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49 (3), 404-437. doi: 10.2307/4131441Fang, C., Lee, J., y Schilling, M. A. (2010). Balancing exploration and exploitation through structural design: The isolation of subgroups and organizational learning. Organization Science, 21 (3), 625-642. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1090.0468Fang, R., Landis, B., Zhang, Z., Anderson, M. H., Shaw, J. D., y Kilduff, M. (2015). Integrating personality and social networks: A meta-analysis of personality, network position, and work outcomes in organizations. Organization science, 26 (4), 1243-1260. doi: 10.1287/orsc.2015 .0972Fiebich, A., Nguyen, N., y Schwarzkopf, S. (2015). Cooperation with robots? a two-dimensional approach. En C. Misselhorn (Ed.), Collective agency and cooperation in natural and ar- tificial systems: Explanation, implementation and simulation (pp. 25-43). Suiza: Springer InternationalFiske, S., Gilbert, D., y Lindzey, G. (2010). Automaticity and the unconscious. En Handbook of social psychology (pp. 228-268). WileyFrank, K. A., Xu, R., y Penuel, W. R. (2018). Implementation of evidence-based practice in human service organizations: Implications from agent-based models. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 37 (4), 867-895Frías-Navarro, D. (2022). Apuntes de estimación de la fiabilidad de consistencia interna de los ítems de un instrumento de medida. D. Frías-Navarro, Recomendaciones para redactar el informe de investigación y lectura crítica. España: Universidad de Valencia. Retrieved from https://www.uv.es/friasnav/AlfaCronbach.pdfFurst, S. A., y Cable, D. M. (2008). Employee resistance to organizational change: managerial influence tactics and leader-member exchange. Journal of Applied psychology, 93 (2), 453. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.93.2.453Gal, D. (2006). A psychological law of inertia and the illusion of loss aversion. Judgment and Decision Making, 1 , 23-32Grimm, V., Berger, U., DeAngelis, D. L., Polhill, J. G., Giske, J., y Railsback, S. F. (2010). The odd protocol: a review and first update. Ecological modelling, 221 (23), 2760-2768. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2010.08.019Hannan, M. T., y Freeman, J. (1984). Structural inertia and organizational change. American sociological review , 49 (2), 149-164. doi: 10.2307/2095567Harrison, J. R., Kemp, A., y Saetre, A. S. (2017). Attractor-based fitness landscapes for compu- tational decision search. En 2017 portland international conference on management of en- gineering and technology (picmet) (p. 1-8). doi: 10.23919/PICMET.2017.8125307Hernandez, E., y Menon, A. (2018). Acquisitions, node collapse, and network revolution. Mana- gement Science, 64 (4), 1652-1671. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.2016.2691Herold, D. M., Fedor, D. B., y Caldwell, S. D. (2007). Beyond change management: a multilevel investigation of contextual and personal influences on employees commitment to change. Journal of applied psychology, 92 (4), 942. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.942Herscovitch, L., y Meyer, J. P. (2002). Commitment to organizational change: extension of a three-component model. Journal of applied psychology, 87 (3), 474Holt, D. T., Armenakis, A. A., Feild, H. S., y Harris, S. G. (2007). Readiness for organizational change: The systematic development of a scale. The Journal of applied behavioral science, 43 (2), 232-255. doi: 10.1177/0021886306295295Hoogendoorn, M., Jonker, C. M., Schut, M. C., y Treur, J. (2007). Modeling centralized orga- nization of organizational change. Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, 13 , 147-184. doi: 10.1007/s10588-006-9004-5Hoyle, R. H. (1995). The structural equation modeling approach: Basic concepts and fundamental issues. En Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues and applications (pp. 1-25). Sage Publications, IncIoannidis, E., Varsakelis, N., y Antoniou, I. (2020). Promoters versus adversaries of change: Agent- based modeling of organizational conflict in co-evolving networks. Mathematics, 8 (12), 2235. doi: 10.3390/math8122235Iyengar, S. S., y Lepper, M. R. (2000). When choice is demotivating: Can one desire too much of a good thing? Journal of personality and social psychology, 79 (6), 995. doi: 10.1037/ 0022-3514.79.6.995Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., y Thaler, R. H. (1991). Anomalies: The endowment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias. Journal of Economic perspectives, 5 (1), 193-206. doi: 10.1257/jep.5.1.193Kahneman, D., y Tversky, A. (1984). Choices, values, and frames. American psychologist, 39 (4), 341. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.39.4.341Kahneman, D., y Tversky, A. (2013). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. En Handbook of the fundamentals of financial decision making: Part i (pp. 99-127). World Scientific. doi: 10.1142/9789814417358_0006Kauffman, S. A., y Weinberger, E. D. (1989). The nk model of rugged fitness landscapes and its application to maturation of the immune response. Journal of theoretical biology, 141 (2), 211-245. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5193(89)80019-0Kotter, J. P. (2007). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. En Museum management and marketing (pp. 20-29). RoutledgeKwon, D., Oh, W., y Jeon, S. (2007). Broken ties: The impact of organizational restructuring on the stability of information-processing networks. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24 (1), 201-231. doi: 10.2753/MIS0742-1222240106Lant, T. K., y Mezias, S. J. (1992). An organizational learning model of convergence and reorien- tation. Organization Science, 3 (1), 47-71Lau, C.-M., y Woodman, R. W. (1995). Understanding organizational change: A schematic perspective. Academy of management journal , 38 (2), 537-554. doi: 10.5465/256692Lazer, D., y Friedman, A. (2007). The network structure of exploration and exploitation. Admi- nistrative science quarterly, 52 (4), 667-694. doi: 10.2189/asqu.52.4.667Leavitt, H. J. (1951). Some effects of certain communication patterns on group performance. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 46 (1), 38-50. doi: 10.1037/h0057189Lenox, M. J., Rockart, S. F., y Lewin, A. Y. (2007). Interdependency, competition, and industry dynamics. Management Science, 53 (4), 599-615. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.1060.0679Levinthal, D. A. (1997). Adaptation on rugged landscapes. Management science, 43 (7), 934-950. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.43.7.934Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics: Concept, method and reality in social science; social equilibria and social change. Human relations, 1 , 5-41Lindström, B., Jangard, S., Selbing, I., y Olsson, A. (2018). The role of a "common is moral" heuristic in the stability and change of moral norms. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General , 147 (2), 228-242. doi: 10.1037/xge0000365Lv, S., Ma, X., y Yang, R. (2020). Organization incentive driven by modeling of the co-opetition behavior in agent-based complex network. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing, 11 , 3305-3313. doi: 10.1007/s12652-019-01517-6March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization science, 2 (1), 71-87Martignoni, D., Menon, A., y Siggelkow, N. (2016). Consequences of misspecified mental models: Contrasting effects and the role of cognitive fit. Strategic Management Journal , 37 (13), 2545-2568. doi: 10.1002/smj.2479Masatlioglu, Y., y Uler, N. (2013). Understanding the reference effect. Games and Economic Behavior , 82 , 403-423. doi: 10.1016/j.geb.2013.07.009Mason, W., y Watts, D. J. (2011). Collaborative learning in networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109 (3), 764-769. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1110069108Mason, W. A., Jones, A., y Goldstone, R. L. (2008). Propagation of innovations in networked groups. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General , 137 (3), 422. doi: 10.1037/a0012798Mihm, J., Loch, C., y Huchzermeier, A. (2003). Problem-solving oscillations in complex enginee- ring projects. Management Science, 49 (6), 733-750. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.49.6.733.16021Morin, O., Jacquet, P. O., Vaesen, K., y Acerbi, A. (2021). Social information use and social information waste. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B , 376 (1828), 20200052. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2020.0052Nissen, V., y Saft, D. (2010). Social emergence in organisational contexts: benefits from multi- agent simulations. En Proceedings of the 2010 spring simulation multiconference (pp. 1-8). doi: 10.1145/1878537.1878548Oreg, S. (2003). Resistance to change: Developing an individual differences measure. Journal of applied psychology, 88 (4), 680-693. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.4.680Oreg, S. (2006). Personality, context, and resistance to organizational change. European journal of work and organizational psychology, 15 (1), 73-101. doi: 10.1080/13594320500451247Oreg, S., Bayazit, M., Vakola, M., Arciniega, L., Armenakis, A., Barkauskiene, R., . . . others (2008). Dispositional resistance to change: Measurement equivalence and the link to personal values across 17 nations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93 (4), 935-944. doi: 10.1037/ 0021-9010.88.4.680Oreg, S., Vakola, M., y Armenakis, A. (2011). Change recipients reactions to organizational change: A 60-year review of quantitative studies. The Journal of applied behavioral science, 47 (4), 461-524. doi: 10.1177/0021886310396550Page, S. E. (2008). The difference: How the power of diversity creates better groups, firms, schools, and societies-new edition. Princeton University PressPiderit, S. K. (2000). Rethinking resistance and recognizing ambivalence: A multidimensional view of attitudes toward an organizational change. Academy of management review , 25 (4), 783-794Pinheiro, J., Bates, D., DebRoy, S., Sarkar, D., Team, R. C., y cols. (2009). Linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. R package version, 1-339Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., y Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of applied psychology, 88 (5), 879. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879Poole, M. S., y Van de Ven, A. H. (2004). Handbook of organizational change and innovation. New York: Oxford University PressPosen, H. E., Lee, J., y Yi, S. (2013). The power of imperfect imitation. Strategic Management Journal , 34 (2), 149-164. doi: 10.1002/smj.2007Posen, H. E., y Levinthal, D. A. (2012). Chasing a moving target: Exploitation and exploration in dynamic environments. Management science, 58 (3), 587-601. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.1110.1420Prochaska, J. O., y DiClemente, C. C. (1983). Stages and processes of self-change of smoking: toward an integrative model of change. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 51 (3), 390-395. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.51.3.390Puranam, P., Stieglitz, N., Osman, M., y Pillutla, M. M. (2015). Modelling bounded rationality in organizations: Progress and prospects. Academy of Management Annals, 9 (1), 337-392. doi: 10.5465/19416520.2015.1024498Rydzak, F., y Monus, P. A. (2018). Shaping organizational network structure to enable sustainable transformation. System Dynamics Review , 34 (1-2), 255-283. doi: 10.1002/sdr.1602Samuelson, W., y Zeckhauser, R. (1988). Status quo bias in decision making. Journal of risk and uncertainty, 1 , 7-59. doi: 10.1007/BF00055564Schultz, P. W., Nolan, J. M., Cialdini, R. B., Goldstein, N. J., y Griskevicius, V. (2007). The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psychological science, 18 (5), 429-434. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01917.xSchweiger, S., Stouten, H., y Bleijenbergh, I. L. (2018). A system dynamics model of resistance to organizational change: The role of participatory strategies. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 35 (6), 658-674. doi: 10.1002/sres.2509Secchi, D. (2015). A case for agent-based models in organizational behavior and team research. Team Performance Management, 21 (1/2), 37-50. doi: 10.1108/TPM-12-2014-0063Shah, N., Irani, Z., y Sharif, A. M. (2017). Big data in an hr context: Exploring organizational change readiness, employee attitudes and behaviors. Journal of Business Research, 70 , 366-378. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.08.010Shore, J., Bernstein, E., y Lazer, D. (2015). Facts and figuring: An experimental investigation of network structure and performance in information and solution spaces. Organization Science, 26 (5), 1432-1446Siggelkow, N. (2002). Evolution toward fit. Administrative science quarterly, 47 (1), 125-159. doi: 10.2307/3094893Simon, H. A. (1956). Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychological review , 63 (2), 129-138. doi: 10.1037/h0042769Smaldino, P. E., Moser, C., Velilla, A. P., y Werling, M. (2022). Maintaining transient diversity is a general principle for improving collective problem solving. Descargado de https:// osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/ykrv5/Smollan, R. K. (2011). The multi-dimensional nature of resistance to change. Journal of Mana- gement & Organization, 17 (6), 828-849. doi: 10.5172/jmo.2011.828Sparrowe, R. T., Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., y Kraimer, M. L. (2001). Social networks and the performance of individuals and groups. Academy of management journal , 44 (2), 316-325Squazzoni, F. (2014). The "reign of mystery": Have we missed something crucial in our experimen- tal and computational work on social norms? The Complexity of Social Norms, 177-188Susskind, A. M., Miller, V. D., y Johnson, J. D. (1998). Downsizing and structural holes: Their impact on layoff survivors perceptions of organizational chaos and openness to change. Communication Research, 25 (1), 30-65. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.08.010Tetlock, P. E. (1983). Accountability and the perseverance of first impressions. Social psychology quarterly, 46 (4), 285-292. doi: 10.2307/3033716Torenvlied, R., y Velner, G. (1998). Informal networks and resistance to organizational change: The introduction of quality standards in a transport company. Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory, 4 , 165-188Uotila, J. (2018). Punctuated equilibrium or ambidexterity: Dynamics of incremental and radical organizational change over time. Industrial and Corporate Change, 27 (1), 131-148. doi: 10.1093/icc/dtx018Vakola, M., Armenakis, A., y Oreg, S. (2013). Reactions to organizational change from an individual differences perspective: A review of empirical research. En S. Oreg, A. Michel, y R. Todnem (Eds.), The psychology of organizational change: Viewing change from the employee's perspective (pp. 95-122). Reino Unido: Cambridge University PressVan de Ven, A. H., y Poole, M. S. (2005). Alternative approaches for studying organizational change. Organization studies, 26 (9), 1377-1404. doi: 10.1177/0170840605056907Vuculescu, O. (2017). Searching far away from the lamp-post: An agent-based model. Strategic Organization, 15 (2), 242-263. doi: 10.1177/1476127016669869Vuculescu, O., Beretta, M., y Bergenholtz, C. (2021). The ikea effect in collective problem-solving: When individuals prioritize their own solutions. Creativity and Innovation Management, 30 (1), 116-128. doi: 10.1111/caim.12416Wall, F. (2015). Beneficial effects of randomized organizational change on performance. Advances in Complex Systems, 18 (05-06), 1550019. doi: 10.1142/S0219525915500198Wanberg, C. R., y Banas, J. T. (2000). Predictors and outcomes of openness to changes in a reorganizing workplace. Journal of applied psychology, 85 (1), 132. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010 .85.1.132Watson, G. (1971). Resistance to change. American behavioral scientist, 14 (5), 745-766. doi: 10.1177/00027642710140050Weisbord, M. R. (1987). Productive workplaces: Organizing and managing for dignity, meaning and community. Jossey-BassXenitidou, M., y Edmonds, B. (2014). The conundrum of social norms. En M. Xenitidou y B. Edmonds (Eds.), The complexity of social norms (pp. 1-8). Springer. doi: 10.1007/ 978-3-319-05308-0_1Xiao, S., y Yue, Q. (2018). Investors inertia behavior and their repeated decision-making in online reward-based crowdfunding market. Decision Support Systems, 111 , 101-112. doi: 10.1016/j.dss.2018.05.005Yang, M. M., Young, S., Li, S.-J., y Huang, Y.-Y. (2017). Using system dynamics to investigate how belief systems influence the process of organizational change. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 34 (1), 94-108. doi: 10.1002/sres.2394Yaniv, I., y Kleinberger, E. (2000). Advice taking in decision making: Egocentric discounting and reputation formation. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 83 (2), 260-281. doi: 10.1006/obhd.2000.2909Young, H. P. (2015). The evolution of social norms. Annual Review of Economics, 7 (1), 359-387. doi: 10.1146/annurev-economics-080614-115322Yu, Z., Rouse, W. B., y Serban, N. (2011). A computational theory of enterprise transformation. Systems Engineering, 14 (4), 441-454. doi: 10.1002/sys.20188Zhang, J., Ouyang, Y., Li, H., Ballesteros-Pérez, P., y Skitmore, M. (2020). Simulation analysis of incentives on employees acceptance of foreign joint venture management practices: a case study. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 27 (8), 2047-2078. doi: 10.1108/ECAM-06-2019-0321200810909Publication01d1c9fe-ef3b-49af-b67f-514b037597e2virtual::4692-101d1c9fe-ef3b-49af-b67f-514b037597e2virtual::4692-1https://scienti.minciencias.gov.co/cvlac/visualizador/generarCurriculoCv.do?cod_rh=0000296929virtual::4692-1LICENSElicense.txtlicense.txttext/plain; charset=utf-81810https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/bitstreams/cb47b2d7-be76-4d18-b205-2a17ddf8fbbb/download5aa5c691a1ffe97abd12c2966efcb8d6MD51ORIGINALInformación y estructura como antecedente de la resistencia al cambio en contextos de cooperacion.pdfInformación y estructura como antecedente de la resistencia al cambio en contextos de cooperacion.pdfTrabajo de gradoapplication/pdf4289861https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/bitstreams/5691fa68-eeb0-4bba-9559-02cca13d0998/downloadb3adfd2a683ac6c1840583830b700c3dMD52FORMATO FIRMADO.pdfFORMATO FIRMADO.pdfHIDEapplication/pdf333817https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/bitstreams/f2945757-6194-4182-a5ae-ce3766a3613c/download9bf1ae8c905e5cc3a2efca53a26a87cbMD53THUMBNAILInformación y estructura como antecedente de la resistencia al cambio en contextos de cooperacion.pdf.jpgInformación y estructura como antecedente de la resistencia al cambio en contextos de cooperacion.pdf.jpgIM Thumbnailimage/jpeg7383https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/bitstreams/8dd3a72a-e935-4c35-9a39-a3a25f288500/downloada410f18212cd93b14ea02436be0925cfMD55FORMATO FIRMADO.pdf.jpgFORMATO FIRMADO.pdf.jpgIM Thumbnailimage/jpeg14738https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/bitstreams/f7a3f580-2465-49d8-b4f6-7d0357a8613c/download5cb739e57551b3fb9af16e297af05bd2MD57TEXTInformación y estructura como antecedente de la resistencia al cambio en contextos de cooperacion.pdf.txtInformación y estructura como antecedente de la resistencia al cambio en contextos de cooperacion.pdf.txtExtracted texttext/plain353344https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/bitstreams/d068bf22-8b36-47b1-b1b4-8c37b91733e1/download47c4b6e5fb9c40ed7e0e92b6e58e1ee6MD54FORMATO FIRMADO.pdf.txtFORMATO FIRMADO.pdf.txtExtracted texttext/plain1https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/bitstreams/6a05134d-5caa-4a4f-961b-f19620ea2981/download68b329da9893e34099c7d8ad5cb9c940MD561992/70169oai:repositorio.uniandes.edu.co:1992/701692024-08-26 15:21:35.649https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/static/pdf/aceptacion_uso_es.pdfopen.accesshttps://repositorio.uniandes.edu.coRepositorio institucional Sénecaadminrepositorio@uniandes.edu.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 |