1. Implementation is a critical phase of change and communication plays a key role in it.
2. This article synthesizes the general conceptual treatments of organizational change communication into two broad theoretical categories: programmatic and participatory.
3. Programmatic approaches emphasize top-down dissemination of information to tell employees about the change, while participatory approaches leverage dialogic communication to involve stakeholders through solicitation of their ideas and input about the change and the implementation process.
The article provides an overview of two different approaches to communicating organizational change: programmatic and participatory. The article is well-structured, providing clear definitions for each approach as well as categorizing established communication models, activities, and strategies under each rubric. The article also provides insights into the anticipated limitations and benefits associated with each implementation approach.
The article appears to be reliable in its content, as it draws from existing research on organizational change communication (Lewis & Seibold, 1998; Armenakis et al., 1993; Armenakis & Harris, 2002; By et al., 2005, 2007; Allen et al., 2007; Lines, 2007; By et al., 2008). However, there are some potential biases that should be noted. For example, the article does not explore counterarguments or present both sides equally when discussing the two approaches – instead it focuses primarily on the advantages of each approach without considering any potential drawbacks or risks associated with them. Additionally, there is no mention of any potential promotional content or partiality in the article which could lead readers to believe that one approach is better than another without considering all factors involved in making such a decision.
In conclusion, this article provides an overview of two different approaches to communicating organizational change: programmatic and participatory. While it appears to be reliable in its content due to its use of existing research on organizational change communication, there are some potential biases that should be noted such as lack of exploration into counterarguments or presentation of both sides equally when discussing the two approaches as well as lack of mention regarding any potential promotional content or partiality which could lead readers to believe one approach is better than another without considering all factors involved in making such a decision.