|WikiProject Business||(Rated C-class, Top-importance)|
- 1 Peer Reviewed Citations?
- 2 Could anyone please add the topic written in red....
- 3 Reverted Edit
- 4 Removed deletion tag
- 5 Blah, this article is really weak
- 6 basis of article
- 7 Re: Proposal to merge ITIL Change Management article with Change Management article
- 8 Hear hear!
- 9 Re: Proposal to merge ITIL Change Management article with Change Management article
Peer Reviewed Citations?
This page needs more citations from the Journal of Organizational Change Management and the Journal of Change Management.
The Change Management Learning Center is a for-profit, commercial business and should not be the primary citation, as their work lacks references of the pioneers of organizational change 50 years before they started and change management practitioners that started 10-15 years before PROSCI: http://www.change-management.com/tutorial-definition-history.htm
I don't mind the Hiatt definition, but let's put it into context. It is one of many, many definitions out there ... not the definitive one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronkoller (talk • contribs) 23:01, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
- Hi Ron, please note that you cannot promote your own articles on Wikipedia. Pm master (talk) 08:13, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
Pm master, I am aware that I cannot prompt my own articles on Wikipedia. I have co-authored 2 books and 1 journal article, none of which are included in these citations. I moved the Whelehan article over to Slideshare.net, moving it from the change management resources site, a wikipedia-like non-profit community website.
NONE of these good, peer-reviewed sources are in any way related to me personally. Please look up these citations before you delete them. They are good.
Could anyone please add the topic written in red....
and in corporating with the following
http://www.health.qld.gov.au/publications/change_management/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 01:21, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
http://www.latrobe.edu.au/aipc/pchnetwork/conf_nat_nov_06/susan_lambert.ppt#269,8,What are the necessary characteristics of the care-team coordinator?
I recently reverted an edit on the article's page. The edit was done in good faith, however, it removed the important role of change management in Project Management (and associated with the narrower IT industry), as well as the references. The role of change management in IT (which probably should be software industry) is unsourced. Thankks! Pm master 15:22, 1 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pm master (talk • contribs)
This edit was actually correct and should not have been reverted as noted above. The role of change management in a project management process is not different than the definition provided. Now the presentation is simply confusing and inaccurate. This is one of the problems with an unmoderated Wiki environment. The references that are remaining are not relevant and if references were to be included about change management there are many much more pertinent to this subject. I would encourage the Wiki editor for this page to delete these references as they only serve a commercial purpose.
Removed deletion tag
I have made some changes to the article and removed what I (and other contributors) think is trash. The article is notable, but still has some way to go in terms of history, current application, etc...
- Thanks. It reads a bit better now, although almost all of the second section looks like original research still. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 19:32, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
- You're more than welcome, and thanks for notifying. I will add more content to it and edit it later on. I hope other contributors will do the same.
I'd agree that this article is quite weak, although it's a good start. I didn't notice any mistakes. The needed improvements are mainly in the way of additions. As a training resource, it's not yet helpful to me. One of the first things to add is a link to the Kubler-Ross cycle of the emotional reactions to announced change. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 07:19, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Blah, this article is really weak
This is a very partisan view of change management that purports to be 'scholarly' but is very one-sided indeed. The perspective is about the 'push' side of 'selling' change to the workforce. It pays no attention to the importance of researching potential pathways for change or of involving users in planning how change might be implemented and getting their insights on current processes and how changes to them might be good/bad. Neither does it acknowledge the potential negatives -either those that are anticipated or the inevitable unexpected/unintended ones and how they should be handled. This article needs a good dose of socio-technical systems approaches starting with Tryst and the Tavistock Institute (all still current) and moving forward to the current day with especial reference to the likes of Shackel and Eason if one wants to have an especial emphasis on change involving IT or any other technology. Ned lad (talk) 14:35, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
basis of article
from what I have read in this article, I could only conclude that most if not major part of the article was written to for a single purpose. I do not concur that the context of organization change management which has fell out of context. I shall contribute more writings toward this article.
Re: Proposal to merge ITIL Change Management article with Change Management article
This is my first posting so please excuse any poor form on my part.
My experience is in IT governance but with many organizational and cultural changes behind me and well.
While my opinion on this subject may be biased, I feel that it would serve both subjects (ITIL Change Management and Change Management in general) better to be treated as separate subjects. Managing change is a very broad subject. There are many types of changes that can and need to be be managed: Technical, Organizational [US English], Cultural, Life, Physical etc. Bundling all these change types and the managing of them in one article could render a very unwieldy result.
Also, the current article on Change Management is rather weak in substance and would require better annotations and references before it should be considered as a master article on the subject of General Change Management.
I would propose that each type of change management be treated separately and that a disambiguation page be created as has been done with other broad ranging subjects in Wikipedia.
I totally agree IT Change Management and organizational change management are very different this should be a separate article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 15:46, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
Ditto! 13:30, 28 June 2013 (EDT)
I am pleased to see this dialogue about the contrast between project management (esp IT (primarily software)) Change Management and the 'socio-technical'/aka Organisation Development term "The Management of Change". To my mind they are very different and it's a shame that they are getting confused here by extending the scope of "change management".
Re: Proposal to merge ITIL Change Management article with Change Management article
I agree with the user above. I'm studying ITIL as part of my work/Continuing Education for the State of Ohio. Already there are links in the main ITIL article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_Technology_Infrastructure_Library which lead to very ambiguous pages. They don't define, for instance, Availability Management or Business Resource Management at all in the context of ITIL. Having to wade through these pages to finally find what I need is a waste of time. I don't need to know all the study related to these -- I'm studying ITIL.
An edit was removed from a page where I added the link to the ITIL Glossary. This was because it was at the top of the page. The recommendation with the edit deletion was that the definition might better be placed in the page at the link above. It was not understood that the link IN the page above led to me wanting to let the world know there's a downloadable and VERY comprehensive glossary of ITIL terms at ITIL® glossary and abbreviations, http://www.itil-officialsite.com/InternationalActivities/TranslatedGlossaries.aspx. This has them all -- someone really nit-picked the whole discipline and gathered all basic definitions here. Unusually, none of these are erudite and pithy, rather each definition is self-contained except when it is necessary for comparison of several defintions to round out a concept.
My opinion: A disambiguation page is the approach -- now I know what this means. :) Keep major topics separate, particularly when these are entire disciplines or in the case of ITIL, a large scope containing many disciplines.