Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
In today's rapidly changing and competitive business landscape, organizations are constantly forced to innovate to maintain success within their industries (Bagrationi, 2022). Resistance to change is often seen as a conscious and active choice of employees against proposed changes based on various prerequisites and motives (Oreg & Vakola and Armenakis, 2011). The purpose of this research is to explore approaches to resistance to change and readiness for change in terms of their differences. The following research questions were raised during the study: 1) What areas of research exist in the scientific discourse regarding attitudes towards change? and 2) What distinguishes understanding resistance from understanding non-readiness for change in these studies? To answer these questions, a bibliometric analysis was conducted of all English-language articles published in the journals of the first quartile (Q1) in the period from 1948 to 2022 in the category «Management, Business and Accounting», with an emphasis on attitudes to organizational change. The co-citation analysis was incorporated to narrow the sample from 21,162 articles to the most significant 258 articles. With the help of thematic analysis four main areas of research related to resistance to change and readiness for change were identified: 1) the «individual psychological» stream, 2) the «group» stream, 3) the «institutional and strategic» stream and 4) the «agency» stream. Our findings indicate that the bases for resistance to change and readiness for change are fundamentally distinct. This research underscores the variance in strategies for addressing resistance to change versus a lack of readiness for change. Tackling resistance to change is a reactive process that necessitates dynamic engagement by leadership, involving transformational actions, support for staff, and conflict resolution. This stands in contrast to the proactive fostering of change readiness, which primarily involves educating and informing employees.
Багратиони et al. (Fri,) studied this question.