Guiding Change through Chaos

Is it still effective to rely on traditional, top-down approaches to change? What if, instead, we allowed change to emerge naturally, guided by those closest to the work? This is the heart of what Kenneth Kerber and Anthony Buono call “guided change” — a more flexible, adaptive approach that lets change evolve from within, fostering continuous learning and collaboration.

In their 2005 article "Rethinking Organizational Change: Reframing the Challenge of Change Management," Kerber and Buono outline three main strategies for organizational change: directed change, planned change, and guided changing. Directed change follows a top-down approach, suitable for straightforward changes in uncomplicated settings. Planned change, often employed in complex business contexts, relies on thorough project planning, stakeholder engagement, and aligns with Lewin’s model of unfreezing, changing, and refreezing. Guided change, on the other hand, is an emergent, change agent-driven model that fosters iteration and experimentation, particularly valuable in contexts fraught with socio-technical uncertainty, although it can itself lead to chaos if not carefully managed.

Guided change capitalizes on the organic processes within an organization, emerging from the natural interactions, knowledge, and contributions of employees. It emphasizes learning, testing, and adaptation, distributing responsibility among all members rather than following a top-down mandate. This approach thrives in complex, uncertain environments, harnessing individual expertise to tackle ambiguous challenges while prioritizing adaptable solutions over fixed, predefined outcomes. Change agents play a pivotal role in facilitating this process, inspiring employees to explore new avenues and rallying them around shared purpose.

However, guided change's lack of structured boundaries can lead to what has been referred to as a state of "permanent white water," characterized by ongoing, overlapping changes. To mitigate feelings of being overwhelmed and promote alignment, robust communication and a unified purpose are crucial. Ultimately, guided change is a flexible, people-centered methodology that embraces complexity through adaptive processes rather than static plans.

Karl Weick and Robert Quinn have also examined this concept in their work on emergent and continuous change models. They emphasize the value of small, cumulative adjustments over large-scale initiatives, proposing a cyclical framework of freezing, rebalancing, and unfreezing. Their model advocates for continuous observation, reinterpretation, and iteration as opposed to seeking a new steady state. In this framework, change agents act as facilitators, helping individuals comprehend and adapt to evolving contexts while fostering a collective understanding that encourages organization-wide responses.

During the Freeze stage, change agents make previously unnoticed behavioral patterns visible within the organization. This differs from Lewin’s unfreezing, as it centers on interpreting current processes to cultivate shared awareness about ongoing dynamics, illustrating how daily actions impact the organization.

In the Rebalance phase, the emphasis shifts to redefining and reorganizing these visible patterns to eliminate barriers and optimize processes in line with desired objectives. Change agents guide employees in adjusting their behaviors and operations based on fresh insights, focusing on gradual modifications that can lead to significant changes over time.

Throughout this phase, change agents serve as facilitators and coaches, supporting employees in trying new methodologies and reevaluating existing processes. They encourage open conversations, challenge existing assumptions, and inspire innovation—all while fostering a culture of experimentation where employees feel empowered to adapt practices.

A critical aspect of this phase is the “logic of attraction,” whereby change agents create an environment that encourages desirable behaviors (nudging?) instead of imposing them. This involves aligning changes with core values and cultivating intrinsic motivation, accompanied by a compelling purpose that naturally attracts support.

The final phase, Unfreeze, entails re-engaging in continuous learning and adaptation after a focused rebalancing effort. Unlike the traditional refreezing, which aims to solidify new behaviors, unfreezing here promotes sustained flexibility and responsiveness. The organization remains in a state of perpetual evolution, enabling ongoing iterative learning and adaptation.

In this stage, change agents play the role of stewards of continuous change, fostering a culture wherein learning and adaptability are ingrained in the organizational fabric. By encouraging reflective practices, soliciting feedback, and maintaining channels for communication, they ensure that adjustments happen organically without formal mandates, keeping the workforce engaged and responsive to further changes.

Throughout these phases, Weick and Quinn view change agents not as controllers but as facilitators who enhance understanding and adaptability. They assist employees in recognizing complexity by illuminating patterns, guiding rebalancing efforts, and nurturing a culture of continuous change. This approach starkly contrasts traditional episodic models, where change agents typically function as directive leaders imposing structured plans. Instead, they focus on empowering, collaborating, and supporting an adaptable organizational culture.

Weick and Quinn’s framework positions change agents as enablers within an environment characterized by ongoing, flexible change grounded in shared purpose. Their role is to foster curiosity, build shared meaning, and instill a sense of agency among employees, promoting an adaptive culture capable of evolving with the dynamics of change.

What does this mean for us as modern change practitioners? What are your thoughts? Have you experienced a guided change approach in your organization? Share your insights or questions in the comments below. Let’s rethink what it means to guide change.

See my LinkedIn Profile

Follow me on LinkedIn

?

Sources:

Kerber, K., Buono, A.F. (2005). "Rethinking Organizational Change: Reframing the Challenge of Change Management". Organizational Development Journal 23:3:23-38.

Weick, K.E., Quinn, R.E. (1999). "Organizational Change and Development". Annual Review of Psychology 50:361-86.