Table of contents

Aknowledgements Table of contents 1.0 Abstract 1.1 Key words 1.2 Introduction 1.3 literature review 1.4 Research and reports in the Mauritian context 1.5 Factors facilitating change 1.6 The six system factors for successful transformational Change 1.7 conclusion References

1 2 3 3 4 10 23 36 38 40 42

Abstract
The Mauritian education system has witnessed a wide range of changes whereby some have encountered resistance and others have been popularly accepted. Successful school improvement requires establishing a clear educational vision and a shared institutional mission, knowing how well the school is accomplishing that mission, identifying areas for improvement, developing plans to change educational activities and programs, and implementing those plans or new programs effectively. It is essential that leaders of school improvement link to others in the school and district and connect the school's goals to the broader and deeper mission of providing high-quality learning for all students. Leaders also must consider equity issues when developing and implementing change initiatives - asking themselves, for example, whether proposed programs will improve access to higher-order learning tasks for marginalized students. For school improvement efforts to be successful, teachers, parents, community and business partners, administrators, and students must share leadership functions. Likewise, the principal's role must change from that of a top-down supervisor to a facilitator, architect, steward, instructional leader, coach, and strategic teacher. Bearing in mind that change implies activities ranging from transforming an organisations basic culture and values to introducing a new policy or system, the former colonial vested system of education is demarcating slowly and is innovating whereby it is bound to adapt means and ways to pave its way towards a knowledge hub- a launching pad for a modern economy. These changes have been developmental, transitional as well as transformational. After all, James Baldwin rightly declared: Not everything that is faced can be changed, but nothing can be changed until it is faced. This assignment aims at unveiling some of these changes by attempting at disseminating the factors facilitating change.

1.1 KEY WORDS

Change, Organizational change, Educational system, Factors facilitating change

1.2 INTRODUCTION
Any system that remains static is bound to self-destruct. A society, organisation or corporation is a system in motion. The system intrinsically is subjected to change. Change, therefore, is not only necessary, but also inevitable. However, we dont always readily accept change. For example, the extension of school hours in the secondary level of education of Mauritius has and is creating frustration, confusion and disorder in relationship. The admission of 4 years children in primary schools in Mauritius was highly criticized by many psychologists, parents, and activists. When change occurs, people lose their routine. Most of the time, they are asked to deal with unfamiliar situations. For example, the PMS (Performance Management System) is advocating for more paper work rather than effective teaching. It is being introduced to replace the Confidential Report in the civil service and the Rectors will appraise the performance of Educators before recommending for the payment of increments Inevitably when people tread in unfamiliar waters, they become uncomfortable because they have a sense of losing control. Therefore, they are reluctant to embrace new things that are unpredictable or difficult to predict. Understanding that resistance is normal, implies the understanding of the reasons why people resist change. The ability of people to change is related to a plethora of reasons. First, people hold back or reluctantly adhere to change because they fear the uncertainty or the unknown. Hence, when the purpose for change is not made clear, the fear of the unknown is exacerbated. Resistance to change also has its roots in the lack of participation of the impacted population in the planning process. Once people are involved in the planning for change, their sense of loss of control is greatly minimised. People sometimes resist change because they have no faith in whoever initiates it. In other words, when people do not respect or trust their leader, they are insensitive to any change their leader attempt to make in the organization. In this situation, resistance to change can lead to sabotage and therefore to chaos. Successful leaders also understand that implementing change is a progressive process. Indeed, change implies relinquishing old habits and adopting new ways of operation. Since growth is the foundation for evolution, we must build on the strength rather than the weaknesses of individuals impacted by change. This will allow them to gradually get accustomed to the change made.

Leading successful change and improvement involves developing and managing six critical components of schooling:

(1) A clear, strong, and collectively held educational vision and institutional mission; (2) A strong, committed professional community within the school; (3) Learning environments that promote high standards for student achievement; (4) Sustained professional development to improve learning; (5) Successful partnerships with parents, health and human service agencies, businesses, universities, and other community organizations; and (6) Systematic planning and implementation process for instituting needed changes. Louis and Miles (1990), drawing on several case studies of urban high schools, emphasise the importance of planning: "Substantial change programs do not run themselves. They need active orchestration and coordination." SCHOOL LEADERS MAY ENHANCE CHANGE THROUGH:

Encouraging and supporting the development of a collaborative school culture, with clear educational missions and processes, structures, and resources that allow educational change to flourish. Shaping the school culture through their actions, words, and deeds; what they get excited about; and the plans and activities to which they devote their energy (Deal & Peterson, 1994). Understanding the dynamics of the change process. Successful schools have leaders in administration and the classroom, who can overcome the obstacles and challenges that develop during the change process. Committment to providing high-quality learning for all students, initiating, implementing, and integrating programs that improve access to engaged teaching and learning for all students. They are concerned with issues of equity and access to powerful learning, particularly for those students most at risk of academic failure. Appreciation of the importance of working in teams and facilitate the development and work of teams that lead school improvement initiatives. Use of the resources and expertise of parents, businesses, and social service and community agencies to foster the academic, emotional, and social wellbeing of students.

Understanding and overcoming resistance to change and build teachers' sense of efficacy. Recognizing the knowledge, will, and skill required for successful change.

HOW TO PREPARE FOR THE CHANGE PROCESS?

Before beginning the change process, become familiar with the school improvement cycle, the stages of the change process, and change models associated with each. Leaders must be able to distinguish between the school improvement cycle and the change process, determine where the school is located within the change process, and identify appropriate next steps. Learn more about the complexities of the change process by reading (see, for example, Sparks's (1993) "thirteen tips for managing change"), talking with expert practitioners, and attending seminars. Accept the change process as a positive experience to be understood and embraced, rather than a negative experience to be feared and avoided. See, for example, Fullan and Miles's (1992) "seven propositions for successful change." When you are ready to begin the school improvement process, bring in change experts and facilitators to build the capacity of school staff to lead change efforts. It is important to draw upon the expertise and skills of university faculty, central office personnel, external consultants, professional staff developers, and others. Lead discussions about the school's "history of change" in order to understand how and why past change efforts have succeeded or failed. Fullan (1993) favors simply beginning the change process - without necessarily planning every step in advance. However, it is important to manage, guide, document, and learn from the change process. Learn about the roles that principals, teachers, central office staff, parents, board members, and others involved in serving children and youth play in the school improvement process, and use this knowledge to form effective school improvement teams. School leaders should understand and cultivate their roles and the roles that others play within improvement initiatives. To build a more collaborative school culture, institute faculty study groups and cross-grade or department teams and provide time for collegial work.

Build commitment and a collaborative culture to support the change process by being a "leader of leaders," having and communicating high expectations, and demonstrating confidence in school staff and the surrounding community. Form partnerships with parents, businesses, and social service and community agencies to consolidate resources and meet the entire range of student needs emotional, social, and academic - in order to improve student learning. Create high-achieving learning environments by selecting and integrating a variety of programs to improve teaching and learning. Establish and follow a set of guidelines for implementing new approaches to student learning.

RECTORS, HEADS OF SCHOOLS, UNIVERSITIES SHOULD: Reflect on their leadership practices using leadership style inventories, surveys, and/or checklists.

Use a variety of methods to celebrate success; for example, some schools have used the following activities to celebrate success: 1. Planning teams have meals together at the end of the year to review progress and celebrate success. 2. Principals send out congratulations and notes that celebrate success. 3. Schools hold assemblies to recognize not only the success of students but of their teams. 4. The principal passes out coffee cups with the school logo to recognize teachers and teams that have been particularly successful. A text transcript is available.

IMPLEMENTATION PITFALLS:

The school improvement process takes place in three stages: initiation, implementation, and institutionalization (Louis & Miles, 1990). Knowing about the challenges and problems as well as the success factors associated with each stage of the change process can increase the likelihood of success (Fullan, 1993). Initially, some members of the school community - including school staff may be reluctant to change. School leaders, through their actions and words, can overcome such reluctance by rewarding risk-taking and encouraging school community members to offer new ideas and strategies. PREPARING FOR REFORMS:

If reforms are to improve learning for all students, leaders must find and implement meaningful curriculum and effective instructional programs for an increasingly diverse student population. To ensure that reforms do not overlook entire groups of students, leaders must understand the culture and needs of diverse students. Without a focused effort to align and integrate school improvement initiatives, the probable result will be fragmented, uncoordinated programs and activities that may have conflicting objectives. It is up to school leaders to create a shared vision and mission for school improvement, to coordinate various change efforts so that they work together toward similar objectives rather than against one another, and to ensure that these efforts reach for the common goal of improved learning for all students. Leaders of improvement efforts need to address the problems of resources (time, money, and support), the need to train and retain knowledgeable and motivated personnel, and the challenge posed by the shifting goals of the central office, the state, and the local community.

Leaders should be wary of mismanaged agreement. Everyone in a group agrees to a decision - even though no one in the group supports the decision - because they are unwilling or unable to communicate their reservations; it also refers to a situation in which everyone in the group agrees about a problem that must be solved, but no one actively pursues strategies or actions to deal with the problem. Therefore, leaders must nurture teams that are able to communicate and solve problems openly.

DIFFERENT POINTS OF VIEW: Fullan (1993) points out that the change process can be chaotic and that leaders should not expect always to be systematic in their efforts. While planned change including organized assessment and problem solving - can be useful, leaders often need to be able to cope with more informal, turbulent, and spontaneous change. Some educators disagree about the degree to which change should be top-down versus bottom-up (Fullan, 1993). Most agree that successful change requires both topdown and bottom-up efforts, but the best mixture of pressure and support is difficult to determine. Still other educators point out that school cultures are extremely difficult to change, and therefore schools should change the curriculum and instruction first. Such changes could reshape the existing school culture.

1.3 LITERATURE REVIEW Organisational change is an empirical observation in an organisational entity of variations in shape, quality or state over time (Van de Ven and Poole, 1995), after the deliberate introduction of new ways of thinking, acting and operating (Schalk, Campbell and Freese, 1998). The general aim of organizational change is an adaptation to the environment (Barr, Stimpert and Huff, 1992; Child and Smith, 1987; Leana and Barry, 2000) or an improvement in performance (Boeker, 1997; Keck and Tushman, 1993). This definition encompasses many situations that should be distinguished by applying certain dimensions to establish typologies of change. We will refer to the scope of change, because it is one of the most used variables in literature to design change typologies. That way, changes can be defined along a continuum starting in low-scope or evolutionary changes to high-scope or strategic ones. With the aim of making the use of this dimension ( scope) easier, we will describe both extremes of the continuum, but we should always keep in mind that real changes are not a pure type but a mixture. Incremental, or first order changes are small changes that alter certain small aspects, looking for an improvement in the present situation, but keeping the general working framework (Blumenthal and Haspeslagh, 1994; Goodstein and Burke, 1991; Greiner, 1972; Levy, 1986; Mezias and Glynn, 1993; Nadler and Tushman, 1989; 1990). The second type of changes are strategic, transformational, revolutionary or second order ones. They are radical transformations, where the organization totally changes its essential framework (Blumenthal and Haspeslagh, 1994; Ghoshal and Bartlett, 1996; Goodstein and Burke, 1991; Marshak, 1993; Nadler and Tushman, 1989, 1990), looking generally for a new competitive advantage (Hutt, Walker and Frankwick, 1995) and affecting the basic capabilities of the organization (Ruiz and Lorenzo, 1999). On one hand, resistance is a phenomenon that affects the change process, delaying or slowing down its beginning, obstructing or hindering its implementation, and increasing its costs (Ansoff, 1990). On the other hand, resistance is any conduct that tries to keep the status quo, that is to say, resistance is equivalent to inertia, as the persistence to avoid change (Maurer, 1996; Rumelt, 1995; Zaltman and Duncan, 1977). So, inertia and thus resistance are not negative concepts in general, since change is not inherently beneficial for organizations. Even more, resistance could show change managers certain aspects that are not properly considered in the change process (Waddell and Sohal, 1998). Our research follows Rumelt (1995), and divides the sources of resistance into five groups. We have added certain sources of resistance to Rumelts proposal, so we have also altered the names of the categories in order to include the new topics. Although Rumelt (1995) insists that inertia is a problem in the strategy formulation stage as well as in the implementation one, he does not distinguish the five groups of sources of inertia according to both stages. We have tried to make this distinction and

suggest that the first, second and third group are sources of resistance that appear during the formulation stage, because they deal with factors that complicate the situations analysis and the evaluation of the various change alternatives. Groups four and five correspond to the implementation stage, since they are an obstacle once the change strategy is already formulated. Regarding the first group of sources of resistance, change starts with the perception of its need, so a wrong initial perception is the first barrier to change. We call this first group distorted perception, interpretation barriers and vague strategic priorities. It includes: (a) myopia, or inability of the company to look into the future with clarity (Barr et al., 1992; Krger, 1996; Rumelt, 1995); (b) denial or refusal to accept any information that is not expected or desired (Barr et al., 1992; Rumelt, 1995; Starbuck et al., 1978); (c) perpetuation of ideas, meaning the tendency to go on with the present thoughts although the situation has changed (Barr et al., 1992; Krger, 1996; Rumelt, 1995; Zeffane, 1996); (d) implicit assumptions, which are not discussed due to its implicit character and therefore distort reality (Starbuck, Greve and Hedberg, 1978); (e) communication barriers, that lead to information distortion or misinterpretations (Hutt et al., 1995); and (f) organizational silence, which limits the information flow with individuals who do not express their thoughts, meaning that decisions are made without all the necessary information (Morrison and Milliken, 2000; Nemeth, 1997). The second main group of sources of resistance deals with a low motivation for change. Five fundamental sources have been identified: (a) direct costs of change (Rumelt, 1995); (b) cannibalization costs, that is to say, change that brings success to a product but at the same time brings losses to others, so it requires some sort of sacrifice (Rumelt, 1995); (c) cross subsidy comforts, because the need for a change is compensated through the high rents obtained without change with another different factor, so that there is no real motivation for change (Rumelt, 1995); (d) past failures, which leave a pessimistic image for future changes (Lorenzo, 2000); and (e) different interests among employees and management, or lack of motivation of employees who value change results less than managers value them (Waddell and Sohal, 1998). The lack of a creative response is the third set of sources of resistance. There are three main reasons that diminish the creativeness in the search for appropriate change strategies: (a) fast and complex environmental changes, which do not allow a proper situation analysis (Ansoff, 1990; Rumelt, 1995); (b) reactive mind-set, resignation, or tendency to believe that obstacles are inevitable (Rumelt, 1995); and

10

(c) inadequate strategic vision or lack of clear commitment of top management to changes (Rumelt, 1995; Waddell and Sohal, 1998). Implementation is the critical step between the decision to change and the regular use of it at the organization (Klein and Sorra, 1996). In this stage, two more resistance groups can be found. The first of them deals with political and cultural deadlocks to change . It consists of: (a) implementation climate and relation between change values and organizational values, considering that a strong implementation climate when the values relation is negative will result in resistance and opposition to change (Klein and Sorra, 1996; Schalk et al., 1998); (b) departmental politics or resistance from those departments that will suffer with the change implementation (Beer and Eisenstat, 1996; Beer et al., 1990; Rumelt, 1995); (c) incommensurable beliefs, or strong and definitive disagreement among groups about the nature of the problem and its consequent alternative solutions (Klein and Sorra, 1996; Rumelt, 1995; Zeffane, 1996); (d) deep rooted values and emotional loyalty (Krger, 1996; Nemeth, 1997; Strebel, 1994); and (e) forgetfulness of the social dimension of changes (Lawrence, 1954; Schalk et al., 1998). A set of five sources of resistance with different characteristics have been bunched together around the last group of sources of resistance: (a) leadership inaction, sometimes because leaders are afraid of uncertainty, sometimes for fear of changing the status quo (Beer and Eisenstat, 1996; Burdett, 1999; Hutt et al., 1995; Kanter, 1989; Krger, 1996; Maurer, 1996; Rumelt, 1995); (b ) embedded routines (Hannan and Freeman, 1984; Rumelt, 1995; Starbuck et al., 1978); (c) collective action problems, specially dealing with the difficulty to decide who is going to move first or how to deal with free-riders (Rumelt, 1995); (d) lack of the necessary capabilities to implement change capabilities gap (Rumelt, 1995); and (e) cynicism (Maurer, 1996; Reichers, Wanous and Austin, 1997). Resistance to change is an essential factor to be considered in any change process, since a proper management of resistance is the key for change success or failure. By resistance to change we understand any phenomenon that hinders the process at its beginning or its development, aiming to keep the current situation. Many authors (Lawrence, 1954; Maurer, 1996; Strebel, 1994; Waddell and Sohal, 1998, among others) stress that the reasons for the failure of many change initiatives can be found in resistance to change. Resistance to change introduces costs and delays into the change process (Ansoff, 1990) that are difficult to anticipate (Lorenzo, 2000) but must be taken into consideration. Resistance has also been considered as a source of information, being useful in learning how to develop a more successful change process (Beer and Eisenstat, 1996; Goldstein, 1988; Lawrence, 1954; Piderit, 2000; Waddell and Sohal, 1998). Undoubtedly, resistance to change is a key topic in change management and should be seriously considered to help the organization to achieve the advantages of the transformation. Considering the importance of resistance to change, this paper aims to deepen in this field through a theoretical exposition of the concept. Later, we will offer the results of an empirical study of Spanish firms that

11

had recently undergone a change process. In this study, we analyzed the main sources of resistance to change and their relationships with types of changes. De Wit and Meyer (1999) identify two types of strategic change, evolutionary and revolutionary. They point out that when well managed major organisations make significant changes in strategy the processes used are typically fragmented, evolutionary and largely ntuitive (pp. 120-121). In their view, the strategy evolves and the formal planning process is just one building block in a continuous stream of events. They maintain the normal process for the development of strategy is a process which they call logical incrementalism by which the executives of an organisation will broadly outline the strategic directions, but delay committing to detail until as late as possible, recognising the complexity of reality. Rogers (1995, p. 20) defined the term innovation in terms of how it is perceived by individuals or workgroups in an organisation. "An innovation is an idea, practice or object that is perceived as new by an individual or other unit of adoption. If the idea seems new to the individual, it is an innovation" (p. 11). From this definition it is clear that the decision to adopt an innovation is made not only at the top management levels. Clearly strategic change will only happen if a shared vision is agreed through a combination of top down and bottom up processes. Rogers (1995), described the process of adopting an innovation as one of social construction: When a new idea is first implemented in an organisation, it has little meaning to the organisations membersThrough a process of the people in an organisation talking about the innovation they gradually gain a common understanding of it. Thus the meaning of the innovation is constructed over time through a social process of human interaction (Rogers, 1995, p. 399). This process to establish shared meaning is a far cry from the 'cascade of plans' described by Lines (2000). It relates well with the 'learning conversations' proposed by Laurillard (1997). Effective change therefore requires buy-in of the individuals in an organisation. Rogers (1995) identified a five-stage process individuals go through as they adopt an innovation: gaining knowledge, persuasion, making a decision, implementation and confirmation. This process allows individuals to 'reduce uncertainty' about the innovation. Staff need time to understand and adjust to an innovation. He also pointed out that if the decision to adopt an innovation was made by the organisation, rather than the individual, the adoption process was more complicated. He viewed the organisation as a system in which the innovation decision occurs (p. 371), and warned that if the implementation of an innovation is too rapid, it often leads to disastrous results: The more radical an innovation, indexed by the amount of knowledge that organisational members must acquire in order to adopt, the more uncertainty it creates and the more difficult its implementation (Rogers, 1995, p. 397). Rogers (1995) also noted that adopting an innovation changes the organisation itself. He maintained that the process of implementation should aim for dynamic equilibrium (p. 424). This refers to change at a rate that allows the system to adjust also. Implementing strategic change in an organisation is therefore a fluid process that has to take account of the 12

uncertainties due to change. Verwey and Comninos (2002) recommended a similar approach. They were concerned with how to effectively manage 'fuzzy' business projects. They used the term fuzzy to describe the intangible characteristics of many projects such as business process improvements, customer service improvements, organisational restructuring, etc. These are characterised by a need to address "changes in peoples actions, organisational culture and stakeholder perceptions". De Wit and Meyer (1999) claimed that a logical loop must exist linking strategy to the activities in an organisation and constant feedback to inform strategic planning. The projects set up therefore have to be considered in the context of the achievement of the strategic goals of the organisation, not just a narrow project focus. According to Rogers (1995, p. 392), the innovation process in an organisation has five stages. These stages can be divided into two sub-processes: an initiation sub-process which includes agenda setting and matching; and an implementation sub-process which includes redefining/re-structuring; clarifying; and routinising.

Initiation This sub-process amounts to the setting of strategic directions and priorities. It is the responsibility of a senior management group. It consists of two phases: Agenda setting is a continuous process of reading the landscape and setting strategic directions and priorities. The priorities may take several years to arise from perceived needs for the organisation, gaps in performance, etc. Matching is the process by which the organisation attempts to identify solutions to match the needs and to test their feasibility. It involves a reality testing of the proposed ideas. There needs to have been some investigation into and evaluation of potential solutions, with a view to a decision to reject or adopt them. Implementation Once the implementation stage has been reached senior management has decided to implement a strategic change within the organisation. The process of its implementation across the organisation has begun. Rogers (1995) noted the importance of a champion for the innovation from within the higher levels of an organisation. Others writers have also noted this as a key success factor: Alexander (1998), Sheasley (1999), Lester (1998). Redefining/restructuring. During this phase of the adoption process, Rogers (1995) identified that the innovation and the organisation adjust to accommodate each other and that there is only a small window of opportunity for this to happen. A particular innovative solution can rapidly become set once the decision to adopt it has been made by an organisation. Clarifying. As the innovation is put into more widespread use, its meaning becomes clearer to the members of the organisation. Rogers (1995, p. 18) indicates that the

13

attitude of the individuals to an innovation is very influenced by their peers: "most people depend mainly on a subjective evaluation of an innovationfrom other individuals like themselvesSo diffusion is a very social process". Surry (1997) agreed with this observation. Routinising. This occurs when the innovation becomes a part of the normal operational activities of the organisation. Rogers (1995) work suggests innovation decision making as a generalised process. It stemmed from studies of a range of cases and situations. Much of the work refers to the implementation of technological innovations. When considering educational innovations, the process needs to be more carefully crafted to the specifics of the situation. In particular, since educational change will impact upon teaching staff and academics, the nature of how these individuals adopt an innovation becomes critical. Bates (2000), and Phelps, Ledgerwood, and Bartlett (2000) identified specific cultural issues associated with managing educational projects. Bates (2000) noted that academic and teaching staff have traditionally operated as independent professionals in relation to their teaching. Four key points emerge which need to be addressed in managing radical educational change: 1. The issue of how professional educators and academics interact with their peers, adapt to change and grow professionally is central to the success of strategic educational change and innovation projects. 2. The independent nature work of the professional educators and academics implies that they will have a great influence on the ultimate outcomes of an educational innovation. 3. The implementation phase must allow time for staff to interpret, understand, contextualise and adopt the change. In terms of an innovation with significant implications for changing teaching practice, this is likely to involve considerable time and support. 4. The broad educational agenda or strategy might be set in the initiation subprocess, but the real meaning of an educational innovation, can only emerge during the implementation sub-process, as the practitioners interpret the change or innovation. Professional growth The development of professional expertise has been explored by many writers. The importance of professional growth that involves reflection on practice is a common thread. Schon (1987, pp. 6-7) referred to the indeterminate zones of practice which require of the professional practitioner more than the simple application of theories and techniques. He considered the artistry associated with the way particularly competent professionals perform their work. Senge (1990, p. 168) observed similar 14

intuitive behaviour in expert managers and Benner (1984) in her study of nursing offered a similar view of the acquisition of expertise. An educational innovation is likely to require that new understandings and skills be incorporated into teaching practice. Carr and Kemmis (1986, p. 40) suggest that teacher change comes about when the teachers themselves consciously examine their own activities and critically reflect upon their own practice, the situational constraints in which they work, the consequences of their actions. They claim that in these circumstances, teachers adopted a "project perspective" and approach their work more strategically; seeing it work as a "research project". Taylor (2000) pointed to the developmental nature of adopting new technologies in teaching. Kenny and McNaught (2000) discuss how the implementation of an innovation presented an opportunity to re-examine teaching practice. ZuberSkerritt (2000) suggest that the processes of action learning and action research are very suitable for addressing complex workplace issues. Both processes involve drawing on practice as the source of learning. Any underlying theoretical models are articulated during the process and examined in the light of experience. Both processes involve groups working to understand particular problems through critical reflection and to apply their learning to future action. A practitioner may have to adjust his/her own mental models in the light of evidence. The distinction between action learning and action research are that the former is more suited to individuals working for their own professional growth, while the latter involves more formal accountability processes and the requirement to collect data and publish the findings. According to Elliott (1991) action research is integral to a view of teaching as a professional activity and not simply a craft (i.e., a series of techniques applied to learning situations). For him, reflection is necessary for teachers to develop expertise. He reports however, that the time needed for reflection is often considered optional. "It appears that the vision of teaching as a unified reflective practice awaits changes in the organisational prioritising of teacher time before it can be realised on a large scale" (Elliott, 1991, p. 66). These observations suggest that action research and action learning processes provide opportunities for the social construction necessary to adopt an innovation, while at the same time addressing the requirements for changing educational practice. For this reason, they should be at the heart of any process to implement educational change or innovation . Accountability and innovation Clearly organisational management processes have to recognise the value of reflective activity to bring about real change. McGill and Beaty (2001) report that action learning is applicable to projects which are linked to organisational needs. The importance of the involvement of management in supporting such action learning projects is again emphasised:

15

For organisational support, there is a need for a champion in the organisation to make action learning happen. This is particularly important where resources of time, finance and project initiatives are required (McGill & Beaty, 2001, p. 82). The link here to the organisation management processes is clearly made. Action learning groups need to be resourced and cannot effectively occur outside of the organizational planning processes. Kenny (2002) agreed that the projects need to be incorporated as part of the organisational planning processes and that accountability measures need to be set-up in a form that does not stifle the learning process. Kenny (2002) proposed that the full extent of an educational innovation cannot be specified up front because it will emerge from the implementation process itself. The initiating idea, concept or tool produces a compounding effect in that it becomes the trigger for change and learning on the part of the professional educators involved. McGill and Beaty (2001) identify reflection as the key, but reflection on experience does not happen naturally. Experience does not necessarily translate into learning or increased expertise. Shenhar and Dvir (1996), Sheasley (1999) and Lester (1998) described similar processes for innovation projects in industrial settings. Key success factors identified in such projects included: senior management support, creation of self managed teams, open communication processes, iterative development cycles, and sharing of ideas to reduce uncertainties. Lester (1998) also recommended that members of the project team need to be involved for at least 50 percent of their time on project activities. Sheasley (1999) and Lester (1998) both identified potential conflict in organisations around the accountability processes. The mechanisms used to account for the resources allocated to a project may clash with the degree of freedom needed by teams involved in innovative projects. To address this tension, Sheasley (1999) advocated a process called 'cycle-time management' whereby the project teams reported at the end of each development cycle. In addition, Kenny (2002) suggested broadening the expected outcomes of innovative projects to include such things as: the growth in staff capabilities, the generation of new ideas or directions and the achievement of unexpected benefits. Rogers (1995) also noted that the more an innovation requires individuals to change the more complex is its nature and therefore its implementation. These innovations require highly flexible processes: Some innovations are so radical and create such a high degree of uncertainty, that they must be adopted through an innovation process that is relatively unstructured and almost completely non-routine (Rogers, 1995, p. 397) Project management is the accepted means of managing projects and ensuring accountability. The question is then, what are the most appropriate project management processes for projects with high levels of uncertainty? Bates (2000) saw project management not as a microplanning tool, but more as a means of ensuring the required resources are identified

16

and provided. This is the link into the organisational planning processes mechanisms. Kenny (2002) claimed that what is valued in an organisation is reflected in its processes, particularly those concerned with resource allocation, promotion and reward and the accountability processes. Desiring certain reforms and making them happen are very different matters. The case for the desired reforms presented above has strong support in the research literature. On the other hand, the means by which these reforms can be attained is not so certain. There are many barriers to change and the strategies for overcoming them are not fully understood. A major resource delineating both the characteristics and the systemic nature of educational change is Fullan's and Stiegelbauer's The New Meaning of Educational Change (1991). Barriers to Change. Among the barriers to change are 1) the beliefs and values on the part of everyone involved, 2) the lack of teacher preparation to teach constructively, 3) the need to reeducate students to their role in learning constructively, 4) the need for new instructional, curricular and assessment materials and high learning outcomes and expectations to support the teaching and learning changes, and 5) the tensions of instituting the new while operating in the old education system. Primary barriers to change are the operational and cultural belief and value systems and priorities of stakeholders including the teachers, administrators, students, the community, and reformers themselves. A certain amount of consensus is needed for reform efforts to be mobilized effectively over the years of time required. The more diverse these beliefs and values are, the more difficult the change. Even if reformers should agree on the matter of goals and the nature of learning and teaching, there is still the need for consensus regarding the means for reaching this new vision of education. Given the political context of reform efforts, it is clear that the lack of consensus among the public at large is a barrier to reform as well. Teacher and administrator beliefs and values coupled with few models and a general lack of preparation to teach constructively present a second major barrier to change. Constructivist teaching requires changes in at least three areas of educational identity--subject matter, pedagogy, and personal. As a coach, teachers must monitor both process and product through changes in classroom management, teaching strategies, and assessments. Similarly the new expectations of students are a barrier. Many students, often those who are most successful in the current system, resist changing from a predictable process in which they know how to succeed to one which fosters intellectual development in a context of some uncertainty, problems with multiple solutions and a lack of specific directions as to what to do. Students may be joined in their resistance by parents who understand the existing system but also find the new expectations confusing and demanding.

17

Even if there is an adequate consensus vision of what education should be on the part of everyone involved, change is not assured. Change is not easy; in particular, changes in roles of people are difficult. It is not easy for teachers to learn the new roles required of those who want to foster constructivist learning among students. It is not easy for students to overcome passivity and learn the needed role as a responsible and proactive learner. There are many barriers to educational reform; change clearly is difficult. It requires resources, commitment, knowledge and skills. Moreover, success depends upon applying them in the correct setting with appropriate timing. It is this approach to change which needs further attention.

Process of Change. The process by which change occurs varies greatly from one setting to another and from one time to another. Although certain generalizations appear to apply to successful change endeavors, there is no particular set of processes (plural) to apply to ensure success. The overall process (singular) varies greatly but there are some important understandings that seem important to success--a systemic outlook, the empowerment of teachers and the development of a change culture in the school. First, a systemic outlook is essential. All efforts to introduce new instructional approaches, new curriculum materials or instructional goals demand such actions as inservice education for teachers, discussions with parents to develop consensus on goals and new directions and leadership from administrators. Change requires attention to the subculture of students, schools, and communities. None of these actions by itself is sufficient. All of them together may not work if initiated without consideration for how they interact with each other. A systemic thinking approach to change accounts for the synergy of the individual perspectives--institutional, sociocultural, psychological, organizational, philosophical, political and subject matter-which all play a role in the initiation, implementation and continuation of change (Anderson, 1992). Actions taken at the national, state, district, school, and classroom levels, for example can interact to support change in a common direction, or they can counteract each other in such a manner that change is defeated. And even though actions taken are complementary, there is the possibility that the omission of some particular action or actions could stall what would otherwise be a successful reform effort. A vision of what should be must be combined with a systemic process of working toward that vision.

Second, positive and lasting change requires empowerment of teachers and an opportunity for them to develop their professional competency. Constructivist learning demands constructivist teaching. Such substantial change demands

18

that teachers be empowered to examine and reshape their professional identity and develop their professional competencies. In effect, teachers need to construct new understandings of their role and develop the ability to incorporate these new understandings into their actions as teachers and to become reflective learners themselves. These new changes need to be reaffirmed by the development and use of constructivist assessments to support the changes in materials and teacher development.

Third, such fundamental and far-reaching changes imply significant changes in the culture of the schools. It means new roles for teachers, students, parents, and administrators. More collaboration among teachers and new responsibilities, for example, may emerge as important elements in this changed culture. Such changes demand a systemic outlook that causes individuals to reassess values and beliefs pertaining to education.

There are many strategies and processes which research (Fullan and Stiegelbauer, 1991) indicates are part of such a systemic approach. They are important to successful reform. This research has many facets and deserves close consideration. This consideration, however, must take place within the framework of systems thinking and an organizational context that is changing (Senge, 1990). Organizations go through four main changes throughout their growth: 1. Formative Period - This is when a new organization is just getting started. Although there is a founding vision (the purpose of the organization), there are no formal definitions. This is just as well because normally there are a lot of experimentation and innovation taking place. These changes of creativity and discovery are needed to overcome obstacles and accomplish breakthroughs. 2. Rapid Growth Period - Direction and coordination are added to the organization to sustain growth and solidify gains. Change is focused on defining the purpose of the organization and on the mainstream business. 3. Mature Period - The strong growth curve levels off to the overall pace of the economy. Changes are needed to maintain established markets and assuring maximum gains are achieved. 4. Declining Period - This is the rough ride. For many organizations it means down-sizing and reorganization. To survive, changes include tough objectives and compassionate implementation. The goal is to get out of the old and into

19

something new. Success in this period means that the four periods start over again. For some organizations the four periods of growth come and go very rapidly, for others, it may take decades. Failure to follow-through with the needed changes in any of the four growth periods means the death of the organization. The Japanese have a term called "kaizen," which means continual improvement. It is a never-ending quest to do better. And you do better by changing. Standing still allows your competitors to get ahead of you. Change Acceptance Throughout periods of changes, which is just about all the time for a good organization, leaders need to concentrate on having their people go from change avoidance to change acceptance. There are five steps accompanying change (Conner, 1993):

Denial - cannot foresee any major changes Anger at others for what they're putting me through Bargaining - work out solutions, keep everyone happy Depression - is it worth it? doubt, need support Acceptance - the reality

This is why a worker's first reaction to change is often to resist it. People get comfortable performing tasks and processes in a particular manner. This comfort provides them with the security that they are the masters of their environment. Some of the things that cause them to fear change include a dislike of a disruption in their lives, looking like a fool by not being able to adapt and learn, their jobs might become harder, and a lose of control. Leaders can help the change process by changing their employees' attitude from avoidance into acceptance. This is often best accomplished by changing avoidance questions and statements into acceptance questions: In handling resistance we were reminded on Kotter and Schlesinger's Six Approach Model: 1. Facilitation. Support helps employees deal with fear and anxiety during a transition period. 2. Education and Communication Up-front communication and education helps employees see the logic in the change effort. 3. Participation and Involvement. When employees are involved in the change effort they are more likely to buy into change rather than resist it.

20

4. Negotiation and Agreement. This can be done by allowing change resistors to veto elements of change that are threatening, or change resistors can be offered incentives to leave. 5. Manipulation and Co-option. This often involves selecting leaders of the resisters to participate in the change effort. If these leaders are given only a symbolic role then there is high chance that this tactic will back fire. 6. Explicit and Implicit Coercion - Where speed is essential and to be used only as last resort. Managers can explicitly or implicitly force employees into accepting change by making clear that resisting to change can lead to losing jobs, firing, transferring or not promoting employees. An early model of change developed by Kurt Lewin described change as a three-stage process. The first stage he called "unfreezing". It involved overcoming inertia and dismantling the existing "mindset". Defense mechanisms have to be bypassed. In the second stage the change occurs. This is typically a period of confusion and transition. We are aware that the old ways are being challenged but we do not have a clear picture to replace them with yet. The third and final stage he called "freezing" (often called "refreezing" by others). The new mindset is crystallizing and one's comfort level is returning to previous levels. Rosch (2002) argues that this often quoted threestage version of Lewins approach is an oversimplification and that his theory was actually more complex and owed more to physics than behavioural science. Later theorists have however remained resolute in their interpretation of the force field model. This three-stage approach to change is also adopted by Hughes (1991) who makes reference to: "exit" (departing from an existing state), "transit" (crossing unknown territory), and "entry" (attaining a new equilibrium). Tannenbaum & Hanna (1985) suggest a change process where movement is from "homeostasis and holding on", through "dying and letting go" to "rebirth and moving on". Although elaborating the process to five stages, Judson (1991) still proposes a linear, staged model of implementing a change: (a) analysing and planning the change; (b) communicating the change; (c) gaining acceptance of new behaviours; (d) changing from the status quo to a desired state, and (e) consolidating and institutionalising the new state.

21

1.4 - RESEARCH AND REPORTS IN THE MAURITIAN CONTEXT Mauritius acceded to independence without a war of liberation, without a national revolutionary spirit. Opinions were divided on the question of independence and it was in an atmosphere of conflicts and tensions that the country achieved its independence in 1968. Before independence schools did not effectively foster an imperial sentiment in colonial Mauritius and neither does present Mauritian education foster a nationalist sentiment. Colonial schooling was divided along racial, ethnic and gender lines but a few Indians and Creoles did penetrate the schooling system as colonial educational policies started to change and the economy too started expanding. The curriculum, with its emphasis on languages such as Greek, Latin, English and French, and the literature, history and geography of Europe, added an intellectual element to the dependence on western culture. The asymmetry in the relationship and flow of culture was confirmed by schooling. These western cultural traits exhibit the roots of dependence and act as a blockade to an independent development. The rots of an independent strategy lies not only in a countrys productive structure or military capability but also in a culture strong enough to avoid alienation especially dependence on an imported way of perceiving the nations own needs. Mauritius, however, has not been able to develop a strong, homogeneous culture. The history, religions, and languages of the Mauritian people are so diverse that with each group wanting to retain its own particularities, the development of a Mauritian ethos or culture has been impossible. In addition to this, schools were offering a curriculum which was in disjuncture with the realities of the different cultural groups living on the island. Schooling was intended to equip people with skills, attitudes and values needed to fill the subordinate echelons of the colonys bureaucracy and larger commercial enterprises. It was during this process that many of the countrys leaders were formed. The emergence of leaders and potential revolutionaries were some of the unintended consequences of schooling. Although education in colonial Mauritius never played a major role in mobilizing the masses, it certainly shaped some peoples ideas and thinking. Many of the Mauritian leaders forbears, and in some cases the leaders themselves, have experienced oppression and blatant injustices. These experiences contributed to the development of strong anti colonialist feelings and the urge to bring about change in the conditions of life of the people. The emergent leaders actually became a dominated national element (with an Indian majority) who had to be content with political power while economic power remained in the hands of the white sugar plantocracy (Durand and Durand, 1978). This dominated national group had no alternative but to maintain the structures as they were if they wanted to ensure their own position. Independence was achieved, but it was within a framework of dependence.

22

Education, which can be regarded as an arena for the development of patriotism or nationalism, did not occupy this role in pre independent Mauritius. Neither has it taken up this role after independence. Hobsbawns (1964: 166) assertion that the progress of schools and universities measures that of nationalism, just as schools and especially universities became its most conscious champions is perhaps correct for schools is restricted to an expansion of school places and greater access to knowledge, then this has certainly happened in Mauritius but no sense of nationalism has actually emerged. There is no nationalist ideology; divisions which existed during the colonial period remain except that they are now more disguised. During the colonial period, there was nothing to unite the ethnically and linguistically diverse Mauritian population; even their oppression was not enough to unite them. Education too was organized in such ways as to keep the different groups divided. Prithipaul (1976) explains that although there was an expansion of education, discrimination on the basis of creed, colour, race and sex persisted. During the post independence period, education in Mauritius became increasingly an affair of the state. The latter now gears education in ways which it sees fir for Mauritian society. Discrimination on the basis of race, colour and sex has been reduced but linguistic discrimination remains. Those who have linguistic competence are favoured by the system. This linguistic discrimination however takes the guise of an ideology of meritocracy and ability. Ramdoyal quotes Barnard as saying that education should be withdrawn from the control of the Church and that a state system should be set up (Ramdoyal, 1977: 21). This was partially achieved during British colonial rule. The state has played an even more important role in educational matters since independence. The newly born state concentrated on bringing education more in line with the development needs of the country these needs relating mainly to improvement in the economic performance of the country. In practice, Mauritian education does not reflect the ideas put forward by theoreticians such as Kant, Hegel and Dewey. For Dewey, the objective of education should be the ideal of a common humanity among the subgroups of each political society and across national boundaries. Dewey (1916: 112) argues that, in a democracy, the control of education should be in the hands of the members of the society directly rather than the central political authority. In explaining what he believes to be the democratic ideas of education, Dewey draws a contrast with Hegels institutional idealism and the individualistic cosmopolitanism of the 18 th century educational theory endorsed by Kant. Proponents of the latter were moved by the ideal of a common humanity. This made them wary of the state intervention and led them to believe that the objectives of education could be attained through private initiative. However, others were convinced that governments would help in bringing about important changes through education. For Hegel and other German theorists the association between the national state and education was a very important one (Crittenden, 1988). The mode of thinking characteristic of state schooling since its

23

formation in the early nineteenth century was that education should be oriented towards the formation of the citizens rather than the person of broad human values and that the states interests depended on this goal being achieved. Prussia was perhaps the first country to adapt this mode of thinking to actual practice, and this model was followed in the development of state education systems in other Western countries. Just as the modern curriculum served the Prussia national interests in the nineteenth century by becoming a vehicle for the moral and cultural regeneration of the nation state, Mauritian schooling during the countrys post independence period is regarded as a vehicle for the countrys economic development. Unlike most countries which have experienced various stages in the development of their education, Mauritius bypassed the stage of a curriculum which cultivates citizenship and a sense of commitment to the state in its members. Instead, it moved straight into commodifying its citizens, looking upon the different members of Mauritian society as contributors to economic production rather than contributors to a socially just, knowledgeable and compassionate society. Mauritian education displays an absence of philosophy and the planning that characterizes nation formation. It seems to be concerned with economic matters only. None of the national development plans nor the 1991 Master Plan for education have goals or aims connected with the making of a nation. They are however full of terms and concepts such as modern economy, quality and cost effectiveness of education, and making education more relevant to the world of work. Education is seen entirely in a functional relation to the economy. Mauritiuss national development plans since independence. A glance at the different national development plans, beginning with the firs 1971 1975 national plan and continuing through to the 1988 1990 development plan and the 1991 Master Plan for education indicates very similar objectives. July 1991 saw the launching of the Master Plan for education. This plan opens with a quote from the 1984 White Paper indicating that the emphasis and objectives of the countrys policy makers and politicians are following the same direction. The view that the promotion and expansion of the relevant kind of education would help to accelerate development and promote economic growth made itself felt soon after independence. After 1968, the government had to face a number of economic and social problems, the most pressing one being unemployment. The development strategy that the government wanted to implement is clearly laid out in the 1971 1975 four year plan: The most important resource of Mauritius is its manpower. A well motivated labour force possessing the requisite mental and physical skills for a modern economy is the most valuable economic asset. While the cultural background and progress of education in Mauritius has provided the basis for an intelligent and

24

adaptable labour force, there is a need to create the skills required to meet the demand generated by prospective economic development. This would require a change in the quality and content of education from its present generally academic emphasis to more technical and vocational orientation at all levels. (1971 - 1975 National Plan: 68) As early as 1971, three years after independence, mention is being made of technical and vocational education (TVE). The educational policy formulated by the government in the 1971 - 1975 plan had the following objectives: 1) To provide free education for all children at primary level. 2) Opportunity for secondary and vocational training for at least 60 per cent of boys in the age group 15 19 by 1980. 3) A balanced curriculum which will include technical subjects and integrated science at all levels. 4) Technical and vocational orientation of education at secondary and post secondary levels. 5) Equality of educational opportunity for all according to their educational potential. The objectives in the 1971 - 1975 plan and the general philosophy behind it was very much in line with the International Development strategy put forward in the second United Nations development decade, but an analysis of the objectives reflect a certain number of inequalities in the strategy to be adopted. The very fact that education was to be made free at primary level but not compulsory implies that there could well be a section of the population who would not be attending schools. Also there is no mention of pre primary schooling which, unlike the other educational sectors remains fee paying up until this day. The second objective is the most astounding one. The plan grossly neglects Mauritian girls. Mention is made of opportunity for secondary and vocational training for at least 60 per cent of boys in the age group 15 19 by 1980 but nothing is mentioned for the girls. In this respect the plan reminds us of the situation of the colonial period when girl were strongly discriminated against and were deprived of education. The third objective speaks about a balanced curriculum. They policy makers seem to imply that the inclusion of technical subjects and integrated science at all levels brings about a balanced curriculum. In the years immediately after independence the curriculum was very much the same as the colonial curriculum. Attempts to bring about a new curriculum only started when the Mauritius Institute of Education (MIE) was established in 1973. The fourth objective refers to technical and vocational education (TVE) but there is no indication as to why and how the country should have more such education.

25

During colonial rule, education was academic in content and academic qualifications were a passport to the security of a job in the public sector. Within a few years after independence, the market for white collar jobs was saturated. Many educated youths could not find a job. The unemployment problem prompted the government to find an outlet for school leavers by instituting technical and vocational education. The government may have been prompted technical and vocational education after the World Bank launched a new educational policy with a strong vocational content (World Bank, 1974). A number of projects were financed by the World Bank, but by the end of the 1971 - 1975 plan, vocational education had not achieved the desired result, namely to reduce unemployment. Critics went as far as to say that vocational education did not even get off the ground, in spite of the governments effort. The fifth objective has little meaning it itself. Educational potential is a term drawn from ideology rather than science. It is difficult to square the idea of equality of educational opportunity with a practice in which entry into secondary school is based on a competitive examination, resulting in almost 50 per cent of students failing. Manpower needs were further emphasized in the 1975 1980 national plan. In the foreword of the plan, the Prime Minister wrote: Most of our unemployed are young educated and adaptable. With little extra effort they can be trained easily for skilled jobs in industry. A far greater emphasis will therefore be placed on technical education to enable the young to participate in industrial development fully equipped for the skilled jobs which will become available during this plan period. (1975 1980 National Plan: iv) The aims of the1975 1980 plan were: 1) To democratize the education system. 2) To spread out schools and colleges evenly over the country so as to balance the educational facilities between the urban and rural areas. 3) To diversify the curricula. 4) To make an integrated approach to the concept of education as a lifelong process for the development of a well balanced personality. 5) To adjust the education system to meet the manpower requirements. (1975 1980 National Plan: 37) The 1975 1980 plan extended the objectives of the previous plan, but emphasized that educational change would be made to meet the socio economic needs of the country.

26

During the early 1970s, a few years after independence, the country had to face a number of economic problems, some local and others as a result of international economic development. The worldwide recession began to take its toll on the small island. The Arab oil crisis had repercussions everywhere and Mauritius was not spared. Inflation was rampant and unemployment was soaring. Locally, severe cyclones damaged the sugar crop thus reducing output. Moreover, the price of sugar on the international market was declining. These factors hampered the attainment of the objectives laid out by government to promote overall development. Although 17 percent of the annual budget went to the education sector, the government found it very hard to attain all its aims and equality of educational opportunity seemed to be well out of reach. Having realized the intensity of the problems, the government launched an interim plan in 1980. The latter, known as the 1980 1982 Development Plan, suggested a tightening the belt policy. There were to be cuts in public expenditure. The government was concerned with trying to avoid waste and increase efficiency by trying to make all development projects, including education, as cost effective as possible. The educational objectives of the 1980 1982 plan were: 1) To improve the efficiency of the school system at all levels. 2) To prepare for self education. 3) To produce various types and levels of skills required for the socio economic and cultural development of the country. 4) To improve the existing educational infrastructure and to ensure their more even distribution between rural and urban areas. (1980 1982 National Plan: 188) The above plan was prepared at a time when the country was still trying to find a solution to the unemployment problem. Vocational education was, under such circumstances, heavily emphasized as a partial solution to the unemployment problem but nothing concrete was done for its provision. Two years passed by without the objectives of 1980 1982 plan being attained. The country then launched a new plan, the 1984 1986 Plan. The 1984 1986 Development Plan laid out a new set of objectives: 1) To adapt schools to the evolving socio economic and cultural system of the country. 2) To promote the extension of pre- primary schooling and to provide equal opportunities to all school going children. 3) To explore all means for bringing the educational system into conformity with employment opportunities. 4) To ensure quantitative and qualitative improvement at all levels and make the system more cost effective. (1984 1986 Development Plan: 193)

27

Once more there was a strong emphasis on the desire to bring schooling more in line with the world of work. The concept of equal opportunity was largely rhetorical. Also, there was great concern with trying to make the system cost effective a term that was repeatedly being used by planners and politicians. The 1988 1990 national plan was also very similar to the previous plans. Its aims were: 1) To bring education more in line with the development needs of the country. 2) To promote the development of science, technology and business studies and encourage research to respond to new demands of a modern economy. 3) To raise standards of low achieving schools and to make the education system fairer. 4) To mount staff development programmes at all levels to improve the quality of education. 5) To strengthen and stimulate the participation of the community in school life. 6) To increase cost effectiveness by fully utilizing all existing school facilities; and 7) To make the educational system more efficient. The same educational objectives are more or less emphasized with minor additions or differences here and there. As opposed to the two plans proceeding it and the one following it, the 1988 1990 plan does not mention the cultural development of the country at all. Although the cultural development of the country is mentioned in the previous plans and the ensuring 1991 Master Plan, the idea is not pursued any further. One gets the impression that the term is simply thrown in. Also, the fact that it is not mentioned in the 1988 1990 plan indicates some inconsistency. The inconsistency perhaps indicates a lack of planning or uncertainty about how education could help to develop a Mauritius culture. The Master Plan 1991 The Master Plan 1991 has certainly not deviated from the emphasis placed on the link between education and the economy. Education in Mauritius is regarded as a wealth generating activity. It is seen and discussed in terms of its contribution to the national cake. The Master Plan (1991: 29) states: A major achievement of the system has been that it has provided the greater part of the manpower required for the first stage of Mauritian industrialization.

28

The first stage of industrialization was highly labour intensive. The schooling system could afford to eliminate a large section of the population at an early age and the labour intensive were there to absorb them. Now that Mauritius embarks on its second phase of industrialization, and faces a labour constraint, it seeks to adopt capital intensive techniques of production. The achievement of the education system this time would perhaps be to equip some with the motivation, knowledge and intellectual skills required by the highest levels of the economy, others will be provided with the skills and attitudes required for manufacturing; and others still will be excluded as not possessing the potential needed for use in the economy. The Master Plan 1991 suggests the introduction of a nine year schooling system to replace a six year one. Previously, if students failed at the end of primary school, they were not given access to secondary school and were made to drop out from the system around the age of eleven. With the new plan, students will be given nine years of schooling after which they will be channelled either into technical and vocational education or the academic stream. Given the emerging tight labour situation in Mauritius, the country cannot afford to let its manpower go to waste. With the second phase of Mauritian industrialization in view, the Minister of Finance (1990) spoke of manpower training and the acquisition of modern high technology equipment as the two sine qua nons to steer Mauritius through this critical and crucial phase of development. The education system will be called increasingly to provide mangers, the professionals and the technicians who will be required for the second phase of industrial development. (Master Plan, 1991: 18) In being increasingly called to provide managers, professionals and technicians, the education system is expected to produce an intellectually trained group an appropriate manpower for Mauritiuss second phase of industrialization. To implications of even a moderate recession on the world market are referred to in the Master Plan, 1991. Fears about the possibility of a somber Mauritian economy developing are expressed. The necessity of making education more instrumental to the needs of the economy is emphasized. The Master Plan (1991: 9) states: Thus the growth rates experienced recently are unlikely to be repeated in the near future. An adjustment process is inevitable and the planning of the education sector is an integral part of the restructuring exercise. The restructuring exercise plans for the development of a highly skilled, adaptive and productive workforce needed to increase Mauritian competitiveness for the international market but neglects the promotion or development of a cohesive society. The education system becomes a slavish devotee of the market. Education has never really been a culturally integrative force in Mauritian society. The tendency towards increasing dependency on capital intensive techniques and

29

information technology is moving education even further away from its potential role as an integrative force. The restructuring that Mauritian education is about to experience minimizes the possibility of any humanistic values, any Mauritianness emerging. Schooling in Mauritius does little to give its people a sense of place and origin. Perhaps Mauritian history is at work, however. In the days of slavery and the importation of indentured labourers the ancestors of the present people were torn from their place and their place and their place and their cultures. Mauritian education confirms the process. Culturally and intellectually it now emphasizes the technological and economic relations with the rest of the world; its people are remade as a new form of marketable resource. The restructuring of the Mauritian education system hoes not leave much place for Mauritianisation. The term Mauritianisation was first coined in the early 70s when reforms in the school curriculum were being attempted. The post 1975 curricula of the lower secondary forms highlight the attempts at Mauritianisation. More Mauritian history and geography were introduced but Mauritian literature is only scantily part of the curriculum. The confusion about which language to use as a medium of instruction remains. The reforms in effect boiled down to a diversification of curricula, an increase o subjects being taught, less distinctiveness in the different subjects, and the introduction of some more local content and local examples. Discussing the concept of Mauritianisation Tirvasen (1991) argues: On se demande aujourdhui si ce concept a t defini alors que se pose galement la question de savoir si on a identifi les outils pour assurer sa mise en oeuvre, ce qui est plus complexe (LExpress, July 1991) Tirvassens questioning as to whether the concept Mauritianisation has been defined is consistent with earlier remarks made be Alladin. Alladin (1988) writes the process of democratization and Mauritianisation seems to lack definition, direction and commitment. There seems to be a certain vagueness around the use of the term, also, most of the people interviewed during field work were not sure what the concepts meant. To some, democratization simply meant more access and Mauritianisation was the introduction of some local content in subjects such as geography and history. Many others simply did not know what the terms meant. The central objectives of the plan for the year 2000 are summarized as follows in the 1991 Master Plan: a) Every child should reach an agreed standard of basic education. This should include the acquisition of the skills of literacy and numeracy and the development of attitudes conductive to the healthy growth of Mauritian culture and society. The principal means of meeting this objective will be the introduction of a minimum of nine years of basic education for all. b) The quality of education should be improved at all levels. c) Differences in life chances resulting from inequalities in the educational system should be reduced by improving standards in low achieving schools.

30

d) The educational system should help in the continued economic and social development of the country. e) The different abilities and aptitudes of those passing through the system should be developed to the fullest practicable extent. f) The management and structure of education should promote the most effective use of resources in this sector. Although the Master Plan 1991 has been widely supported in many ways, it has not escaped criticism. Any criticisms, however, are quickly played down when Mauritian politicians and policy makers demonstrate, to the Mauritian population, the extent to which Mauritius is making a name for itself on the international scene. The media too has a contributory role to play. In the widely read Mauritian newspaper, the Week- End of 14th July 1991, F. Mayor, general director of UNESCO says that Mauritius is the first American country to implement the principal recommendation education for all of the Jomtien conference held in Thailand in March 1990. F. Mayor also claims that Mauritius is an example to be followed by other developing countries. Mauritian politicians capitalize on this since Mauritius being an example to be followed gives a new significance to Mauritius and the local population takes pride in this. What is left unsaid however is that there is not much that can be followed since Mauritius has its own particularities and needs. Also, Mauritius does not in reality present anything new or a remedy to other countries problems, let alone its own. What is new in Mauritius is that the government is planning the introduction of a nine year basic education to replace the six year primary schooling offered by the structure actually in place. The Master Plan proposes a nine year schooling to attain an agreed standard of basic education. Virahsawmy comments: The least we could expect from a Master Plan are the guidelines but it prefers the non committal vagueness. Nothing in the Master Plan throws light on numeracy or literacy We are not told why after six t nine years of schooling over 50% of all children attain a level of literacy proximate to zero. Tou korek! no problem! In lieu of meaningful reforms a catchphrase is chosen: nine year schooling will now top the hill parade. (LExpress, 7 July 1991) Mauritians such as Tirvassen, Virahsawmy, Meetoo as well as the Government Teachers Union and other s have drawn to the weaknesses and blindspots of the Master Plan. Speaking about the Master Plan, D. Virahsawmy during an interview with LExpress of February 1991 says that it is simply une vieille dame farde un trompe oeil. Virahsawmy (1984: 118) argues that the principal cause of the high failure rate at the end of Mauritian primary schooling is: La mauvaise politique de langue au niveau du pr primaire et du primaire. Ignorer la ralit linguistique de lenfant est une invitation la catastrophe.

31

Virahsawmy deplores the fact that the Master Plan 1991 does not deal with the language problem. It is somewhat ironical that one of the objectives of the Master Plan is to achieve literacy. It is hard to delineate literacy and language yet the Master Plan has very little to say about the complex language problem existing in Mauritius. The Master Plan 1991 also speaks of the growth of Mauritian culture and society as one of its objectives when in fact Mauritian culture is hard to define and has not been conceptualized. What is even more ridiculous is the Master Plans argument that the principal means of attaining the above mentioned objective is the introduction of a nine year basic education for all. One is left to wonder how the introduction of a nine year basic education would help towards the growth of Mauritian culture and society. The language issue in Mauritius As early as 1941, Ward, the then newly appointed Director of Education brought the language problem to the fore. According to Ward, the language problem in Mauritius was influenced by three forces of sentiment. The first was a sentiment in favour of French, which is very strong among the White and Coloured population. The second was a sentiment in favour of English as a second language, which is strong among many educated Indians. The third was a sentiment in favour of basing education on the mother tongue, which was supported by an increasing number of Indians (Ward, 1941: 12). Ward explained that both English and French could be regarded as official languages in Mauritius but recommended that French be used as the medium of instruction and as the principal instrument of literacy. He was convinced that it was not possible to teach both English and French thoroughly in primary schools. He added that English entirely, and French very largely are foreign languages to the Creole speaker (Ward, 1941). Although language is so very important in polyethnic and polylingual Mauritius, the colonial office did not pay heed to Wards advice. That language is a major problem and a stumbling block in Mauritian education is a reality that is often ignored. The Ordinance no. 31 of 1941 ensured the more effective teaching of English and the spread of the English language in the colony. The teaching of French took second place. As far as Indians languages were concerned, there was no place for them in the primary schools. The language policy adopted by the government led to discontent among the Indian community. Ramgoolam and Bissoondoyal, leaders of the Indians, mounted pressure on the government to reform its language policy. A new language programme was introduced by the Education Ordinance 1944. It stipulated that the medium of instruction should be English in standard five and six and that conversations between teacher and pupil were to be carried on in English. In the lower classes, up to standard four, the head teacher was free to choose the language most sited t o the pupil, provided that French was used instead of Creole, and that English was gradually introduced as the medium of instruction (Education Code,

32

Government notice no. 88, 1945, para. 61 and 62). French was to be introduced as a subject of instruction in standard three and provisions were to be made by the Director of Education for the teaching of Chinese, Hindi, Tamil and Urdu languages and literatures in primary schools. The language problem became even more complex. The teaching of Asian language problem led to greater difficulty since there was few qualified teachers to teach the languages and some schools could not get a teacher at all. The absence of trained teachers and the way in which Indian languages are being taught in the primary schools reflect the sprit with which the Indian languages are considered in the curriculum. They cannot claim to have any cultural values, but their presence on the curriculum gives a kind of vague satisfaction to the Indian people, on political grounds that their children are learning the language. (Sevremont, 1951: 130) The situation has changed to some extent over the years. There are now specially trained teachers for the different oriental languages. The primary school curriculum comprises English and French amongst other subjects, and in addition to learning the subjects of the common curriculum, the pupils who wish to study Hindi, Urdu, Tamil, Telegu, Marathi or Chinese can be taught the language of their choice by specially trained teachers (Ramdoyal, 197: 131). Although taught, these languages are not considered terribly important especially when the students come to the last years of primary school and enter the very competitive examination which will determine the secondary school they attend. Pupils who choose to take the Asian languages cab do so but performance in the latter is not taken into account when ranking by results is done. However, this situation would change since the Report of the select committee on the certificate of primary education / oriental languages recommends the inclusion of the oriental languages for ranking purposes from 1995 onwards. Language as the major source of problems in Mauritian education is an argument which has been repeatedly put forward to no avail. The Lalit Document on Education n Mauritius (June) states: The major source of inefficiency in the education system up till now, has been a prejudiced, colonized language policy. Ramdoyal (1991) speaks of the linguistically overburdened Mauritian child. Meetoo, Trvassen and Virahsawmy also stress upon the language problem in the education sector yet the Master Plan for education chooses to ignore it. Criticisms also emerged from other quarters. The Government Hindi Teachers union expresses its view in the following terms: If primary education is mainly thought as a process of selection to segregate the few who will carry on with academic studies, then the system appears too costly, in terms of resources and of human frustration and wastage. If language in Mauritius is meant to help education prepare for the needs of

33

development and of the construction of the nation, then the system appears largely inefficient. (cited in LExpress, 17th July, 1991) Although the system appears largely inefficient, a consequence of the language problem, the latter remains unresolved. Ending the rat raceThe way forward 2001 has the imprints of Steeven Obeegadoo who wanted to eliminate CPE to create two types of secondary schools: 1. One to five secondary schools 2. Form six colleges. With the coming back into power or the present government Honourable Dharambeer Gokhool was made Minister of Education and he wanted a World Class Quality Education.Ranking was abolished. A+ GRADING came instead. Now we have HON. Dr. Vasant Bunwaree, the present Minister Of Education, Arts and Culture who will come foreword with a strategic plan shortly. The Future in our hands. Mauritian education for today and tomorrow. Written by Sir Kher Jagatsing is also a reference since he was behind the creation of JSS (JUNIOR SECONDARY SCHOOLS) in Mauritius.

34

1.5 FACTORS FACILITATING CHANGE Thinking about the personal perspectives on change and preparing responses to the issues that might arise will help you to address concerns. In the initial stages of the development of proposals it can be useful to test your ideas with staff who are prepared to be more sceptical and act as a devil's advocate. This can help prepare for battles to come. To do so staff will need a safe forum in which to voice their concerns and work on the change. Change is generally met with enthusiasm when: we propose the change we are involved in the design of the change we feel that our opinion/views are heard, and contribute to the new reality we benefit from the change the organisation benefits from the change the students benefit from the change the wider community benefits from the change we dislike the present status quo we are confident about our competence in the new context we trust/respect/like the person/group, proposing the change we can see the big picture and how the change contributes to it we are given support and time to adjust to the changes we are not expected to change too many things at the same time change is spaced we understand the reasons for the change we believe the change is important we believe the change is necessary Change in education is met with confrontation when: we are not involved in the change design we feel that our opinion/views are not considered we do not see benefits for ourselves, arising from the change we do not feel the University would benefit from the change we do not feel the students would benefit from the change we do not feel the wider community would benefit from the change we like the present status quo We lack confidence about our competence in the new context we do not trust/do not respect/do not like the person/group, proposing the change we can not see the big picture and how the change would contribute to it we are not given support and time to adjust to the changes we are expected to change too many things at the same time change is not carried through properly we do not understand the reasons for the change there is no clarity about change aims and objectives we believe other things need changing more urgently 35

we believe the time is not right for this particular change the degree of change is too great to be readily assimilated

Most major change processes elicit some or all of the following reactions: Initial disbelief - it won't happen! Anger - it won't happen if I can help it! Acceptance - if it's going to happen then I might as well do it! Accommodating new reality in - that works quite well and I wouldn't want to change it. Dealing with resistance often requires challenging and changing colleagues' perceptions and beliefs - such changes are not easy to effect and the effort put in working through the barriers must be commensurate to the outcomes. However, large-scale change, especially cultural change, is likely to be more difficult to manage if the barriers are not addressed. When estimated resistance is going to take a long time to deal with there are a number of strategies that can be adopted:

Work with the early adopters and then move onto the main group of staff. Recognise that there will always be some staff who find difficulty in making the change and marginalise them by ensuring the majority are on board. Confront the sceptics head on. Return to the drawing board, are there other ways in which the outcomes can be achieved?

36

1.6 - The Six System Factors for Successful Transformational Change .

Shared

Vision

When embarking on any Change Effort, its the Change Leaders job to develop and deliver an inspiring view of the future state, and enlist others to move towards it. People assimilate a lot easier, and work with greater commitment, when they are guided by a vision. This is the starting point for transformational change. If this step is missing, any one of the other five factors for successful change will suffer. You are Accountable Starting at the top and cascading down through the organization, leadership must be held accountable for the Change Effort. Accountability is all about action. Participation, communication, resource commitment, sharing the vision early and often each one of these actions demonstrates leaderships commitment to the change. The saying What you do speaks so loudly, I cant hear what you are saying, sums it up nicely. People commit to a change with their hearts not their heads. Leadership accountability is a critical factor when it comes to gaining buyin for the change.

37

Stakeholder Involvement Change Leaders must not only understand who the stakeholders are, but also the level of support each has for the Change Effort and the degree to which each can affect it (positively or negatively). This information is often tracked in a Stakeholder Management Plan. Change Leaders often ask Is such a comprehensive plan really worth the time and effort? The answer is absolutely! Understanding, supporting and establishing two-way communication with stakeholders can make or break the success of the Change Effort. Tools and Skills Jim Collins, author of Good to Great, writes that the difference between good leaders and great leaders is that Great Leaders practice the fundamentals, consistently and extraordinarily well. So what are these fundamentals when it comes to Change Leadership? Weve already covered three of them: creating and sharing an inspiring vision, leadership accountability, and comprehensive stakeholder involvement. Effective communication is another fundamental skill required of a Change Leader. To be effective communicators, Change Leaders must understand individual communication styles and conflict modes, as well as be able to recognize resistance and know how to overcome it. Effective communication also means using language appropriate to the audience, and the right balance of logic and emotion. A leaders ability to communicate is called upon over and over again while executing the Change Effort, making it a critical component for success.

Enabling Behaviour Change happens at the behavioral level. Modifying the organizations infrastructure to support the Change Effort is key to sustaining the change. This may take the form of re-aligning job descriptions, performance management plans and measurement systems. But dont forget that individuals respond differently to change, so Change Leaders need to provide support, training and coaching to keep the Change Effort moving forward without alienating stakeholders. Successful Change Leaders must recognize and reinforce desirable behavior by celebrating small wins, providing constant feedback on the progress of the change, and remembering that each individual moves along the change.

38

1.7 CONCLUSION If teachers and educators can take the time to reflect on their own assumptions and beliefs, they will find that at the heart of almost everything that is now taken for granted about education is a belief in the three statements above. One implication, for instance, is that teachers, administrators and some others are in charge of knowledge and how it reaches students. Thus they are in charge of dividing knowledge, on topics ranging from the Egyptians to the Solar System, into appropriate "chunks" of information given to students within appropriate time slots. All this is done in fairly sterile buildings and rooms that house large numbers of students, and the entire enterprise is monitored and motivated by testing and grades. Now the brain research doesn't say that this approach is necessarily wrong. It just reveals that this kind of approach is not compatible with how the brain learns best. And the brain research does provide a foundation for understanding ways to teach that help students learn better and become healthier, happier learners for life. For instance we now know that the brain processes parts and wholes simultaneously, that we are all innately motivated to search for meaning, that the search for meaning occurs through patterning and is profoundly influenced by emotions, that we have different forms of memory, that each brain is uniquely organized and more. When the brain is fully engaged then students acquire more than memorized surface knowledge. They acquire knowledge that is dynamic - the sort of knowledge that is naturally and spontaneously invoked in authentic interactions in the the real world. Also, if we consider what technology in the information era makes available to children and students, we find that trying to control knowledge the way we are used to is beginning to look like holding water in our hands. Information is available everywhere and in multiple forms, from complex software to 500 television channels to the world wide web. Not all children have access to everyone of these, but not having access is already handicapping children now in school and will continue to do severe damage to their futures as the school years progress. This massive flow and availability of information, together with our new appreciation of just how interconnected the human brain is, will be for education to become much more complex. And that is precisely what is needed if we are to teach for dynamic rather than surface knowledge. We can not know exactly how things will turn out. But we have to capitalize on what is the best of what is known about how people learn and how systems function. For those who work with education extensively, a great deal of learning is needed. In addition, one element is absolutely indispensable if the new forms of education are to be available for all children, and that is that the community as a whole needs to have an appropriate set of fundamental assumptions about the nature of learning itself. The systems that emerge will be the product of those assumptions.

39

So what does all this mean? We suggest that if the three assumptions described above are changed, and if we take an appropriate set of new assumptions seriously, then society will get the system that it needs, even if we do not now know what it will look like. Here, then, is our suggestion for new assumptions that can guide us in the next century. Dynamic knowledge ( the sort of knowledge that is naturally and spontaneously invoked in authentic interactions in the the real world) requires individual meaning making based upon multiple sources of information; The role of educators is to facilitate the making of dynamic knowledge; Dynamic knowledge is revealed through real world performance. The change involves everyone, and as yet (or perhaps never again) no one has the exact answers. The world we are entering is one of multiple answers and infinite possibilities. It looks "messy" and trial and error is essential. But we must learn how to live in that world. Because our children have no choice.

40

References
Ansoff, I.H. (1990), Implanting Strategic Management, Prentice Hall International, Ltd. London Barr, P.S., Stimpert, J.L. and Huff, A.S. (1992) Cognitive Change, Strategic Action, and Organizational Renewal, Strategic Management Journal, 13 (Special Issue), pp. 15-36. Beer, M. and Eisenstat, R.A. (1996) Developing an organization capable of implementing strategy and learning, Human Relations, 49 (5), pp. 597-617. Beer, M. Eisenstat, R.A. and Spector, B. (1990) Why Change Programs Dont Produce Change, Harvard Business Review, 68 (6), pp. 158-166. Blumenthal, B. and Haspeslagh, P. (1994) Toward a Definition of Corporate Transformation, Sloan Management Review, 35 (3), pp. 101-106. Boeker, W. (1997) Strategic change: The influence of managerial characteristics and organizational growth, Academy of Management Journal, 40 (1), pp. 152-170. Burdett, J.O. (1999) Leadership in change and the wisdom of a gentleman, Participation & Empowerment: An International Journal, 7 (1), pp. 5-14. Child, J. and Smith, C. (1987) The context and process of organizational transformation - Cadbury Limited in its sector, Journal of Management Studies, 24 (6), pp. 565-593. Ghoshal, S. and Bartlett, C.A. (1996) Rebuilding Behavioral Context: A Blueprint for Corporate Renewal, Sloan Management Review, 37 (2), pp. 23-36. Goldstein, J. (1988) A Far-from-Equilibrium Systems Approach to Resistance to Change, Organizational Dynamics, (Autumn), pp. 16-26. Goodstein, L.D. and Burke, W.W. (1991) Creating Successful Organization Change, Organizational Dynamics, 19 (4), pp. 5-17. Greiner, L.E. (1972) Evolution and revolution as organizations grow, Harvard Business Review, (July/Aug.), pp. 37-46. Hannan, M.T. and Freeman, J. (1984) Structural Inertia and Organizational Change, American Sociological Review, 49, pp. 149-164. Hutt, M.D., Walker, B.A. and Frankwick, G.L. (1995) Hurdle the Cross-Functional Barriers to Strategic Change, Sloan Management Review, 36 (3), pp. 22-30.

41

Kanter, R.M. (1989) The New Managerial Work, Harvard Business Review, 67 (6), pp. 85-92. Keck, S.L. and Tushman, M.L. (1993) Environmental and Organizational Context and Executive Team Structure, Academy of Management Journal, 36 (6), pp. 13141344. Klein, K.J. and Sorra, J.S. (1996) The challenge of innovation implementation, Academy of Management Review, 21 (4), pp. 22-42. Krger, W. (1996) Implementation: The Core Task of Change Management, CEMS Business Review, 1, pp. 77-96. Lawrence, P.R. (1954) How to Deal with Resistance to Change, Harvard Business Review, (May/June), pp. 49-57. Leana, C.R. and Barry, B. (2000) Stability and Change as Simultaneous Experiences in Organizational Life, Academy of Management Review, 25 (4), pp. 753-759. Levy, A. (1986) Second-Order Planned Change: Definition and Conceptualization, Organizational Dynamics, (Summer), pp. 5-20. Lorenzo, J.D. (2000) Barreras en los procesos de cambio en las organizaciones: estudio de un caso, Paper presented at the X Congreso Nacional de ACEDE, Oviedo (Spain). Marshak, R.J. (1993), Managing the Metaphors of Change, Organizational Dynamics, 22 (1), pp. 44-56. Maurer, R. (1996) Using resistance to build support for change, The Journal for Quality and Participation, 19 (3), pp. 56-66. Mezias, S.J. and Glynn, M.A. (1993) The three faces of corporate renewal: institution, revolution, and evolution, Strategic Management Journal, 14, pp. 77-101. Morrison, E.W. and Milliken, F.J. (2000) Organizational silence: a barrier to change and development in a pluralistic world, Academy of Management Review, 25 (4), pp. 706-725. Nadler, D.A. and Tushman, M.L. (1989) Organizational Frame Bending: Principles for Managing Reorientation, Academy of Management Executive, 3, pp. 194-204. Nadler, D.A. and Tushman, M.L. (1990) Beyond the Charismatic Leader: Leadership and Organizational Change, California Management Review, 32 (2), pp. 77-97.

42

Nemeth, C.J. (1997) Managing innovation: When less is more, California Management Review, 40 (1), pp. 59-74. Piderit, S.K. (2000) Rethinking resistance and recognizing ambivalence: a multidimensional view of attitudes toward an organizational change, Academy of Management Review, 25 (4), pp. 783-794. Reichers, A.E., Wanous, J.P. and Austin, J.T. (1997) Understanding and managing cynicism about organizational change, Academy of Management Executive, 11 (1), pp. 48-59. Ruiz, J. and Lorenzo, J.D. (1999) Cambio estratgico y renovacin organizativa: utilizacin de las capacidades latentes y perifricas, Revista Europea de Direccin y Economa de la Empresa, 8 (4), pp. 71-82. 19 Rumelt, R.P. (1995), Inertia and transformation, in Montgomery, C.A., ResourceBased and Evolutionary Theories of the Firm, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Massachusetts, pp. 101-132. Schalk, R., Campbell, J.W. and Freese, C. (1998) Change and employee behaviour, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 19 (3), pp. 157-163. Starbuck, W., Greve, A. and Hedberg, B.L.T. (1978) Responding to crisis, Journal of Business Administration, 9 (2), pp. 111-137. Strebel, P. (1994) Choosing the right change path, California Management Review, 36 (2), pp. 29-51. Van de Ven, A.H. and Poole, M.S. (1995) Explaining development and change in organizations, Academy of Management Review, 20 (3), pp. 510-540. Waddell, D. and Sohal, A.S. (1998) Resistance: a constructive tool for change management, Management Decision, 36 (8), pp. 543-548. Zaltman, G. and Duncan, R. (1977), Strategies for Planned Change, Wiley, Toronto. Zeffane, R. (1996) Dynamics of strategic change: critical issues in fostering positive organizational change, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 17 (7), pp. 36-43.

43