write an essay on planned and unplanned social change

Your Article Library

Essay on social change: meaning, characteristics and other details.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Here is your essay on Social Change! 

Introduction:

Change is the internal law. History and science bear ample testimony to the fact that change is the law of life. Stagnation is death. They tell us stories of man’s rise and growth from the Paleolithic age to the Neolithic age, then to the Stone Age and next to the copper age etc. On the stage of the world, scenes follow scenes, acts follow acts, and drama follows drama. Nothing stands still.

Image Courtesy : 2.bp.blogspot.com/_1-xvEOICRwA/SHQeR5CcI3I/AAAAAAAAAVs/OUtRL2GLZXg/s1600-h/PontmorlaisWest_CircusParade_1948-49_CliveArthur.jpg

The wheel of time moves on and on. The old dies and the young steps into the world. We ring out the old and ring in the new. A child changes into a boy, a boy into a youth and then into a man. The bud changes into a flower. The dawn turns into morning, morning into noon, noon into afternoon and afternoon into night.

It is said, “Today is not yesterday, we ourselves change. No change is permanent, it is subject to change. This is observed in all spares of activity. Change indeed is painful, yet needful”. Flowing water is wholesome, and stagnant water is poisonous. Only when it flows through and alters with changes, it is able to refresh and recreate.

Change is an ever-present phenomenon. It is the law of nature. Society is not at all a static phenomenon, but it is a dynamic entity. It is an ongoing process. The social structure is subject to incessant changes. Individuals may strive for stability, yet the fact remains that society is an every changing phenomenon; growing, decaying, renewing and accommodating itself to changing conditions.

The human composition of societies changes over time, technologies expand, ideologies and values take on new components; institutional functions and structures undergo reshaping. Hence, no society remains complete static. Incessant changeability is very inherent nature of human society.

A social structure is a nexus of present relationships. It exists because social beings seek to maintain it. It continues to exist because men demand its continuance. But the existing social structure is influenced by many factors and forces that inevitably cause it to change. Society is thus subject to continuous change.

The change of man and society has been the central and quite dominant concern of sociology right from the time when it emerged as branch of learning. The concern for social change is of great importance not only in studying past changes but also in investigating ‘future’ developments.

Meaning of Social Change :

Change implies all variations in human societies. When changes occur in the modes of living of individuals and social relation gets influenced, such changes are called social changes.

Social change refers to the modifications which take place in life pattern of people. It occurs because all societies are in a constant state of disequilibrium.

The word ‘change’ denotes a difference in anything observed over some period of time. Hence, social change would mean observable differences in any social phenomena over any period of time.

Social change is the change in society and society is a web of social relationships. Hence, social change is a change in social relationships. Social relationships are social processes, social patterns and social interactions. These include the mutual activities and relations of the various parts of the society. Thus, the term ‘social change’ is used to describe variations of any aspect of social processes, social patterns, social interaction or social organization.

Social change may be defined as changes in the social organization, that is, the structure and functions of the society.

Whenever one finds that a large number of persons are engaged in activities that differ from those which their immediate forefathers were engaged in some time before, one finds a social change.

Whenever human behaviour is in the process of modification, one finds that social change is occurring. Human society is constituted of human beings. Social change means human change, since men are human beings. To change society, as says Davis, is to change man.

Theorists of social change agree that in most concrete sense of the word ‘change’, every social system is changing all the time. The composition of the population changes through the life cycle and thus the occupation or roles changes; the members of society undergo physiological changes; the continuing interactions among member modify attitudes and expectations; new knowledge is constantly being gained and transmitted.

Defining Change:

The question to what social change actually means is perhaps the most difficult one within the scientific study of change. It involves the often neglected query of what ‘kind’ and degree of change in what is to be considered social change.

Most analysts of social change deal with this question implicitly somewhere in their theoretical system or in the context of the latter’s application to some empirical case. For the present purpose it should suffice to examine definitions that are frequently used to conceptualise change.

According to Jones “Social change is a term used to describe variations in, or modifications of any aspect of social processes, social patterns, social interaction or social organization”.

As Kingsley Davis says, “By Social change is meant only such alternations as occur in social organization – that is, the structure and functions of society”.

According to Maclver and Page, “Social change refers to a process responsive to many types of changes; to changes the man in made condition of life; to changes in the attitudes and beliefs of men, and to the changes that go beyond the human control to the biological and the physical nature of things”.

Morris Ginsberg defines, “By social change, I understand a change in social structure, e.g., the size of the society, the composition or the balance of its parts or the type of its organization”.

P. Fairchild defines social change as “variations or modifications in any aspects of social process, pattern or form.

B. Kuppuswamy says, “Social change may be defined as the process in which is discernible significant alternation in the structure and functioning of a particular social system”.

H.M. Johnson says, “Social change is either change in the structure or quasi- structural aspects of a system of change in the relative importance of coexisting structural pattern”.

According to Merrill and Eldredge, “Change means that large number of persons are engaging in activities that differ from those which they or their immediate forefathers engaged in some time before”.

Anderson and Parker define, “Social change involves alternations in the structure or functioning of societal forms or processes themselves”.

According to M.D. Jenson, “Social change may be defined as modification in ways of doing and thinking of people.

As H.T. Mazumdar says, “Social change may be defined as a new fashion or mode, either modifying or replacing the old, in the life of people or in the operation of a society”.

According Gillin and Gillin, “Social changes are variations from the accepted modes of life; whether due to alternation in geographical conditions, in cultural equipment, composition of the population or ideologies and brought about by diffusion, or inventions within the group.

By analyzing all the definitions mentioned above, we reach at the conclusion that the two type of changes should be treated as two facts of the same social phenomenon. Two type of changes are e.g. (i) changes in the structure of society, (ii) changes in the values and social norms which bind the people together and help to maintain social order. These two type of changes should not, however, be treated separately because a change in one automatically induces changes in the other.

For example, a change in the attitude of the people may bring about changes in the social structure. Towards the close of the 19 century, there was a tendency in the countries of Western Europe for families to grow smaller in size. There is a general agreement that this has been brought about mainly by voluntary restriction of births”.

In this case, a change in the attitude of the people is mainly responsible for change in the social structure. On the other hand, a change in the social structure may bring about attitudinal change among the members of the society. Transformation of rural society into industrial society is not simply a change in the structure of society. For example, industrialisation has destroyed domestic system of production.

The destruction of domestic system of production has brought women from home to factory and office. The employment of women gave them a new independent outlook. The attitude of independence instead of dependence upon men has become the trait of women’s personally. Hence, these two type of changes should not be treated separately but both of them should be studied together.

The problem of social change is one of the central foci of sociological inquiry. It is so complex and so significant in the life of individual and of society that we have to explore the ‘why’ and ‘how’ of social change in all its ramifications.

Characteristics of Social Change :

The fact of social change has fascinated the keenest minds and still poses some of the great unsolved problems in social sciences. The phenomenon of social change is not simple but complex. It is difficult to understand this in its entirety. The unsolved problems are always pressurising us to find an appropriate answer. To understand social change well, we have to analyse the nature of social change which are as follows:

1. Social Change is Social:

Society is a “web of social relationships” and hence social change obviously means a change in the system of social relationships. Social relationships are understood in terms of social processes and social interactions and social organizations.

Thus, the term social change is used to describe variation in social interactions, processes and social organizations. Only that change can be called social change whose influence can be felt in a community form. The changes that have significance for all or considerable segment of population can be considered as social change.

2. Social Change is Universal:

Change is the universal law of nature. The social structure, social organization and social institutions are all dynamic. Social change occurs in all societies and at all times. No society remains completely static.

Each society, no matter how traditional and conservative, is constantly undergoing change. Just as man’s life cannot remain static, so does society of all places and times. Here adjustment take place and here conflict breaks down adjustment. Here there is revolution and here consent. Here men desire for achieving new goals, and here they return to old ones.

3. Social Change occurs as an Essential law:

Change is the law of nature. Social change is also natural. Change is an unavoidable and unchangeable law of nature. By nature we desire change. Our needs keep on changing to satisfy our desire for change and to satisfy these needs, social change becomes a necessity. The truth is that we are anxiously waiting for a change. According to Green, “The enthusiastic response of change has become almost way of life.

4. Social Change is Continuous:

Society is an ever-changing phenomenon. It is undergoing endless changes. It is an “ongoing process”. These changes cannot be stopped. Society is subject to continuous change. Here it grows and decays, there it finds renewal, accommodates itself to various changing conditions.

Society is a system of social relationship. But these social relationships are never permanent. They are subject to change. Society cannot be preserved in a museum to save it from the ravages of time. From the dawn of history, down to this day, society has been in flux.

Social change manifests itself in different stages of human history. In ancient times when life was confined to caves (Stone Age), the social system was different from that of the computer age today. There is no fixity in human relationships. Circumstances bring about many a change in the behaviour patterns.

5. Social Change Involves No-Value Judgement:

Social change does not attach any value judgement. It is neither moral nor immoral, it is amoral. The question of “what ought to be” is beyond the nature of social change. The study of social change involves no-value judgement. It is ethically neutral. A correct decision on what is empirically true is not the same as correct decision on what ought to be.

6. Social Change is Bound by Time Factors:

Social change is temporal. It happens through time, because society exists only as a time-sequences. We know its meaning fully only by understanding it through time factors. For example, the caste system which was a pillar of stability in traditional Indian society, is now undergoing considerable changes in the modern India.

There was less industrialisation in India during 50s. But in 90s, India has become more industrialized. Thus, the speed of social change differs from age to age. The reason is that the factors which cause social change do not remain uniform with the changes in time.

7. Rate and Tempo of Social Change is Uneven:

Though social change is a must for each and every society, the rate, tempo, speed and extent of change is not uniform. It differs from society to society. In some societies, its speed is rapid; in another it may be slow. And in some other societies it occurs so slowly that it may not be noticed by those who live in them. For example, in the modern, industrial urban society the speed and extent of change is faster than traditional, agricultural and rural society.

8. Definite Prediction of Social Change is Impossible:

It is very much difficult to make out any prediction on the exact forms of social change. A thousand years ago in Asia, Europe and Latin America the face of society was vastly different from that what exists today. But what the society will be in thousand years from now, no one can tell.

But a change there will be. For example, industrialisation and urbanisation has brought about a series of interrelated changes in our family and marriage system. But we cannot predict the exact forms which social relationships will assume in future. Similarly, what shall be our ideas, attitudes and value in future, it is unpredictable.

9. Social Change Shows Chain-Reaction Sequences:

Society is a dynamic system of interrelated parts. Changes in one aspect of life may induce a series of changes in other aspects. For example, with the emancipation of women, educated young women find the traditional type of family and marriage not quite fit to their liking.

They find it difficult to live with their parents-in-law, obeying the mother-in-law at every point. They desire separate homes. The stability of marriages can no longer be taken for granted. The changing values of women force men to change their values also. Therefore, society is a system of interrelated parts. Change in its one aspect may lead to a series of changes in other aspects of the society.

10. Social Change takes place due to Multi-Number of Factors:

Social change is the consequence of a number of factors. A special factor may trigger a change but it is always associated with other factors that make the triggering possible. Social change cannot be explained in terms of one or two factors only and that various factors actually combine and become the ’cause’ of the change. M. Ginsberg observes: “A cause is an assemblage of factors which, in interaction with each other, undergo a change”. There is no single master key by which we can unlock all the doors leading to social change. As a matter of fact, social change is the consequence of a number of factors.

11. Social Changes are Chiefly those of Modifications or of Replacement:

Social changes may be considered as modifications or replacements. It may be modification of physical goods or social relationships. For example, the form of our breakfast food has changed. Though we eat the same basic materials such as meats, eggs corn etc. which we ate earlier, their form has been changed.

Ready-to-eat cornflakes, breads, omelets are substituted for the form in which these same materials were consumed in earlier years. Further, there may be modifications of social relationships. For example, the old authoritarian family has become the small equalitarian family. Our attitudes towards women’s status and rights, religion, co-education etc. stand modified today.

12. Social Change may be Small-scale or Large-scale:

A line of distinction is drawn between small-scale and large scale social change. Small-scale change refers to changes within groups and organizations rather than societies, culture or civilization.

According W.E. Moore, by small-scale changes we shall mean changes in the characteristics of social structures that though comprised within the general system identifiable as a society, do not have any immediate and major consequences for the generalised structure (society) as such.

13. Short-term and Long-term Change:

The conceptualization of the magnitude of change involves the next attribute of change, the time span. That is to say, a change that may be classified as ‘small-scale from a short-term perspective may turn out to have large-scale consequences when viewed over a long period of time, as the decreasing death rate since the 1960 in India exemplifies.

14. Social Change may be Peaceful or Violent:

At times, the attribute ‘peaceful’ has been considered as practically synonymous with ‘gradual’ and ‘violent’ with ‘rapid’. The term ‘violence’ frequently refers to the threat or use of physical force involved in attaining a given change. In certain sense, rapid change may ‘violently’ affect the emotions, values and expectations of those involved.

According to W.E. Moore, “A ‘true’ revolution, a rapid and fundamental alternation in the institutions or normative codes of society and of its power distribution, is rapid and continuous by definition and is likely to be violent, but may well be orderly as opposed to erratic”.

‘Peaceful’ has to do with the changes that take place by consent, acceptance or acquisition and that are enforced by the normative restraints of society.

15. Social Change may be Planned or Unplanned:

Social change may occur in the natural course or it is done by man deliberately. Unplanned change refers to change resulting from natural calamities, such as famines and floods, earthquakes and volcanic eruption etc. So social change is called as the unchangeable law of nature. The nature is never at rest.

Planned social change occurs when social changes are conditioned by human engineering. Plans, programmes and projects are made by man in order to determine and control the direction of social change.

Besides that by nature human beings desire change. The curiosity of a man never rests; nothing checks his desire to know. There is always a curiosity about unknown. The needs of human beings are changing day by day. So to satisfy these needs they desire change.

16. Social Change may be Endogenous or Exogenous:

Endogenous social change refers to the change caused by the factors that are generated by society or a given subsystem of society. Conflict, communication, regionalism etc. are some of the examples of endogenous social change.

On the other hand, exogenous sources of social change generally view society as a basically stable, well-integrated system that is disrupted or altered only by the impact of forces external to the system (e.g., world situation, wars, famine) or by new factors introduced into the system from other societies. For example, technological transfer and brain drain, political and cultural imperialism may lead to the diffusion of cultural traits beyond the limits of single societies.

17. Change Within and Change of the System:

The distinction between kinds of change has been developed by Talcott Parsons in his analysis of change ‘within’ and change ‘of the system, i.e., the orderly process of ongoing change within the boundaries of a system, as opposed to the process resulting in changes of the structure of the system under consideration. Conflict theorists draw our attention to the fact that the cumulative effect of change ‘within’ the system may result in a change ‘of’ the system.

To conclude, some of the attributes most frequently used in describing change are: magnitude of change (small-scale, large-scale changes), time pan, direction, rate of change, amount of violence involved. These dimensions should not be taken as either/or attributes but rather as varying along a continuum from one extreme to another (e.g., revolutionary vs evolutionary).

Other categorization that have been devised involve division of changes on the basis of such characteristics as continuous vs spasmodic, orderly vs erratic and the number of people (or roles) affected by or involved in change.

Although no hard and fast categories have yet been developed into which we can fit different types of change, the use of the foregoing distinctions, may be helpful in clarifying one’s conceptualization of any type of change or at least, they can help one to understand the complexities involved in developing a definition of the subject of social change.

Social Evolution :

In explaining the concept of social change, sociologists from time to time used words and expressions like evolution, growth, progress, development, revolution, adaptation etc. discarding one in preference to the other.

Though the concept of evolution was known to the generation preceding the publication of Darwin’s “Origin of Species”, the notion of social evolution was taken directly from the theories of biological evolution. Evolution in biological science means the developing of an organism.

It is a process by which a thing continuously adopts itself to its environment and manifests its own nature. Consequently it is a change which permeates the whole character of the object. Many social theorists from Herbert Spencer to Sumner applied this conception of ‘organic evolution’ in various ways to the explanation of social change.

The term ‘evolution’ is borrowed from biological sciences to Sociology. The term ‘organic evolution’ is replaced by ‘social evolution’ in sociology. Whereas the term ‘organic evolution’ is used to denote the evolution of organism, the expression of ‘social evolution is used to explain the evolution of human society.

It was hoped that the theory of social evolution would explain the origin and development of man. Anthropologists and Sociologists wanted to find a satisfactory and significant explanation of how our society evolved.

They were very much impressed by the idea of organic evolution which explain how one species evolves into another, and wanted to apply the same to the social world. Hence, the concept of social evolution is quite popular in sociological discussion.

Sociologists adopted the word ‘evolution’ to convey the sense of growth and change in social institutions. Social institutions are the result of evolution. They began to work to trace the origin of the ideas, institutions and of the developments.

The term ‘evolution’ is derived from the Latin word ‘evolvere’ which means to ‘develop’ or ‘to unfold’. It is equivalent to the Sanskrit word ‘Vikas’. Evolution literally means gradually ‘unfolding’ or ‘unrolling’. It indicates changes from ‘within’ and not from ‘without’. The concept of evolution applies more precisely to the internal growth of an organism.

Evolution means more than growth. The word ‘growth’ connotes a direction of change but only of quantitative character e.g., we say population grows, town grows etc. But evolution involves something more intrinsic; change not merely in size but also in structure.

According to Maclver and Page, “Evolution involves something more intrinsic, a change not merely in size but at least in structure also”.

Ogburn and Nimkoff write, “Evolution is merely a change in a given direction”.

Ginsberg says, “Evolution is defined as a process of change which results in the production of something new but revealing “an orderly continuity in transition”. That is to say, we have evolution when” the series of changes that occur during a period of time appear to be, not a mere succession of changes, but a ‘continuous process’, through which a clear ‘thread of identity runs’.

Evolution describes a series of interrelated changes in a system of some kind. It is a process in which hidden or latent characters of a thing reveal themselves. It is a principle of internal growth. It shows not merely what happens to a thing but also what happens within it. “What is latent becomes manifest in it and what is potential is made actual.”

Evolution is an order to change which unfolds the variety of aspects belonging to the nature of changing object. We cannot speak of evolution when an object or system is changed by forces acting upon it from without. The change must occur within the changing unity.

Characteristics of Social Evolution :

According to Spencer, “Evolution is the integration of matter and concomitant dissipation of motion during which matter passes from an indefinite, incoherent homogeneity to a definite, coherent heterogeneity.” Society, according to his view, is also subject to a similar process of evolution; that is, changing from a state of ‘incoherent homogeneity’ to a state of ‘coherent heterogeneity.’

Evolution is, thus, a gradual growth or development from simple to complex existence. The laws of evolution which were initially fashioned after the findings of charters. Darwin, came to be known as social Darwinism during the nineteenth century.

Spencer’s point of view can best be illustrated by an example. In the beginning, the most primitive stage, every individual lived an individualistic life, trying to know and do things about himself alone.

Every man was more or less similar, in so far as his ignorance about organized social life was concerned. In this sense, the people were homogenous. At that stage, neither they were able to organize their social life, nor could they work together. There was no system; nothing definite, expect their incoherent or loose-group-formations.

Thus, they formed “an indefinite, incoherent homogeneity,” But gradually, their experiences, realizations and knowledge increased. They learnt to live and to work together. The task of social organisation was taken on, division of labour was elaborated; and each found a particular type of work which he could do best. All worked in an organized and definite way towards a definite goal. Thus, a state of “definite, coherent heterogeneity” was reached.

Herbert Spencer has prescribed four important principles of evolution. These principles are:

1. Social evolution is on cultural or human aspect of the law of change of cosmic evolution.

2. Hence, social evolution take place in the same way at all places and progress through some definite and inevitable stages.

3. Social evolution is gradual.

4. Social evolution is progressive.

In addition to this characteristics, other features of social evolution are clearly evident which are discussed below.

Evolution is a Process of Differentiation and Integration:

The concept of evolution as a process of differentiation cum-integration was first developed by the German Sociologists Von Baer and subsequently by Spencer and many others.

(i) In order to understand this statement, i.e. evolution takes place through differentiation and Integration; we have to study the history of a society over a long, period of time. Then we shall find that its associations, institutions, etc” are constantly evolving or developing.

In social evolution, new and ever newer circumstances and problems are constantly appearing. In order to cope with them, new associations and institutions are evolved. For example, a community in a town previously. When the town had been a small community, its management was the responsibility of a Panchayat or a town area committee.

Now that the town has become a big commercial centre, its management is in the hands of a dozer different committees. One of them looks after the educational facilities, another looks after the sanitation, a third is deputed to look after the octroi, while a fourth manages the markets and so on. In this way, this differentiation increases with the evolution of the town.

(ii) But without Integration, this differentiation cannot take one anywhere. Hence, synthesis along with differentiation is necessary. In urban areas one can find various sectarian associations such as Khandayat Kshatriya Mahasabha, Kayastha society, Brahman Samiti, Napita associations etc.

At the same time, one also can find institutions: ‘Arya Samaj’,” etc. which synthesize and compromise associations based on various caste and class distinctions. Today, while new nations are coming into being in the human society, equally strong efforts are being made to create a world society by compromising these nations.

(iii) By virtue of this double processes of differentiation and integration, the efficiency of the society is being constantly increased. Division of labour is the magic word of modern economic evolution. By an increase in the number of associations and institutions in society, work in various spheres is performed more successfully. And because of the process of synthesis, various spheres take advantage of each other’s efficiency also.

Maclver points it out in a very systematic manner. According to him, evolution or differentiation manifests itself in society by (a) a greater division of society by labour, so that thereby a more elaborate system of cooperation, because the energy of more individuals is concentrated on more specific tasks, a more intricate nexus of functional relationships, is sustained within the group; (b) an increase in the number and the variety of functional associations and institutions, so that each is more defined or more limited in the range or character of its service; and (c) a greater diversity and refinement in the instruments of social communication, perhaps above all in the medium of language.

Various sociologists have laid stress on one or another of these aspect of evolution. Thus, Emile Durkheim has insisted on the preeminent importance of the social division of labour as a criterion of social development. Other writers have taken the various aspects together and sought to show that society passes through a definite series of evolutionary stages.

Social Evolution does not always proceed by Differentiation:

Morris Ginsberg writes, “The notion that evolution is a movement from the simple to the complex can be and has been seriously disputed.” In every field where we find the forces of differentiation at work, there the opposite trends are also manifested. For example in the development of languages, where the process of differentiation has been stressed, we have many disconnecting facts.

The modern languages derived from Sanskrit Like Bengali, Gujarati, Telugu and Tamil cannot be compared in their structure with the richness and diversity of their origin. Here the process is not towards differentiation but towards simplification.

In the development of religion too, the transition from fusion to differentiation is difficult to see. On the whole we find that social evolution does not always proceed by differentiation.

However in spite of the various difficulties, the concept of evolution still retains its usefulness. Maclver has strongly supported the principle of social evolution. He has criticised the practice of believing social evolution to be imaginary. Social evolution is a reality. Maclver has given some arguments in favour of the reality of social evolution.

He emphasizes, if we open the pages of History, we find that in the beginning there was no differentiation of institutions within human society or the performance of diverse functions. But latter on, as culture and civilization progressed, differentiation increased and it is even now increasing. This historical fact is an evidence of the extent and element of reality in the principle of social evolution.

Social Evolution and Organic Evolution :

Though ‘social evolution’ is borrowed from the biological concept of ‘organic evolution’, still then these two terms are not one and the same. There are some basic differences between the two which are as follows:

Firstly, organic evolution implies the differentiation in the bodily structure, which is generally in the form of new organs to use for different purpose. But social evolution does not imply this. Man is the centre of social evolution.

He need not have to develop new organ to adjust himself with changed conditions of life. Because man has the capacity of inventing tools, making instruments and devising techniques to control the forces of nature and to adjust himself with the natural conditions. He can look before and after.

Secondly, in organic evolution, the transmission of qualities takes place through biological heredity, i.e. through ‘genes’. But social evolution takes place through ideas, discoveries, inventions and experiences. Here the changes are transmitted mostly through the mental ability and genius of man.

Thirdly, in case of organic evolution only the descending generation is affected by the structural modification, alterations. But in social evolution even the old as well as the new generations are affected by it. For example, invention of new techniques and devices is influencing the present as well as the future generations.

Lastly, the organic evolution is continuous. There can be no break in it. It is continuous because of the irresistible pressure within the organisation and of environment or natural forces. But such a continuity may not be observed in the case of social evolution. It is subject to disruption. It is an intermittent. It lacks continuity.

Social Change and Social Evolution :

Social change is an ever-present phenomenon everywhere. When we speak of social change, we suggest so far no law, no theory, no direction, even no continuity. Social change occurs in all societies and at all times. No society remains completely static. The term ‘social change’ itself is wholly neutral, implying nothing but differences that take place in human interactions and interrelations.

In explaining this concept of social change, modern sociologists from time to time used different words and expressions. Evolution is one of them. Many social theorists form Herbert Spencer to Sumner applied this conception of evolution in various ways to the interpretation of social change. But many modern theorists, particularly American, have abandoned the idea that social change takes place by evolutionary stages.

Evolution describes a series of interrelated changes in a system of some kind. It is a process in which hidden or latent characters of a thing reveal themselves. It shows not merely what happens to a thing but also what happens within it.

Evolution is an order of change which unfolds the variety of aspects belonging to the nature of changing object. We cannot speak of evolution when an object or system is changed by forces acting upon it from without.

The change must occur within the changing unity. Evolution is a process involving a changing adaptation of the object to its environment and a further manifestation of its own nature. Consequently, it is a change permeating the whole character of the object, a sequence in which the equilibrium of its entire structure undergoes modification.

According to Maclver, evolution is not mere change. It is an immanent process resulting in increased complexity and differentiation. He writes, “the Kernel of organic evolution is differentiation, a process in which latent or rudimentary characters take a distinct and variable form within the unity of the organism.”

Maclver further says, evolution or differentiation manifests itself in society by (a) a greater division of labour resulting in great specialization (b) an increase in the number and variety of functional associations, (c) a greater diversity and refinement in the means of social communication. “When these changes are proceeding, society is evolving”, concludes Maclver.

The concept of progress found notable expression in the writings of the French Philosophers such as Turgot, Condorcent and Fancis Bacon of the 18th century and has been a dynamic agent in the social activity of modern man. Sociologists such as Saint Simon, Auguste Comte and Herbert Spencer were the earlier exponents of the idea of progress. According Comte, it was the intellectual elite who could bring about an era of progress.

Etymologically, the word progress means “moving forward.” But moving forward or backward, progress or regress are relative terms. If it be remarked that such and such country has progressed, no meaningful information can be extracted from such a statement unless the direction towards which progress has been made be known.

In this way, progress is not mere change. It is a change in particular direction. The word progress cannot be appended to change in every direction. For example, if the condition of agriculture in a particular country worsens and a famine results, it is undeniably a change, but it will not be called progress. Progress means moving forward in the direction of achievement of some aim.

Different thinkers have defined progress in different ways. The important definitions are as follows:

Maclver writes, “By progress we imply not merely direction, but direction towards some final goal, some destination determined ideally not simply by the objective consideration at work.

Lumely defines, “Progress is a change, but it is a change in a desired or approved direction, not in any direction.”

Ginsberg defines progress as “A development or evolution in a direction which satisfies rational criterion of value”.

According to Ogburn, “Progress is a movement towards an objective thought to be desirable by the general group for the visible future.

Burgess writes, “Any change or adoption to an existent environment that makes it easier for a person or group of persons or other organized from of life to live may be said to represent progress”.

Progress means an advance towards some ideally desirable end. Since progress means change for the better it definitely implies a value judgement of highly subjective character. For value, like taste, has no measuring rod.

A particular social change may seem to be progressive to one person to another it may seem retrogression, because they have different values. The concept of social progress is, therefore, subjective but it has reference to an objective condition.

Criteria of Progress :

It is difficult to explain the criteria of progress which are relative to their temporal context. Social values determine progress. Whether any change will be considered as progress or not depends upon the social values. Social values change with time and place. The criteria of progress change with the change of social values. Hence, it is difficult to formulate a universally acceptable criterion of progress. However, the following can be tentatively suggested.

Health and Longevity of Life:

Average length of life is one index of progress whether the world is growing better. But it does not necessarily follow from this that a longer life must be more pleasurable and better.

In the opinion of some persons, wealth or economic progress is a criterion of progress.

Population:

Some people are of the view that an increase in population is a sign of progress. But over-population cannot be a sign of progress.

Moral Conduct:

According to some thinkers, moral conduct is the criterion of progress.

Since life has many facets, it is not possible to formulate any one criterion of progress. But is stated that the integrated development of society is the criterion of progress. Integrated development comprehends all mental, physical and spiritual aspects including above criteria.

Nature of Progress :

By analysing above definitions, we find that progress is a change, a change for the better. When we speak of progress, we simply not merely direction, but direction towards some final goal. The nature of the progress depends upon two factors, the nature of the end and the distance of which we are from it.

The modern writers today speak of social progress though they do not have a single satisfactory explanation of the concept. In order to have a better understanding of the meaning of progress, we have to analyse the following attributes.

1. Progress is Dependent upon Social Values:

Progress dependent upon and is determined by social values. It means that progress does not have precisely the same meaning at all times and places, because values change from time to time. There is no object which can uniformly or eternally be considered valuable irrespective of time and place.

Due to this reason, Maclver and Page have written, “The concept of progress is a chameleon that take on the colour of the environment when we feel adjusted to that environment, and some contrasting colour when we feel maladjusted.

2. There is a Change in Progress:

Change is one of its essential attributes. The concept of progress presupposes the presence of change. Without change, there can be no progress.

3. In Progress the Desired End is Achieved:

The progress is not mere change. It is a change in a particular direction. Broadly speaking, progress means an advance towards some ideally desirable end. It always refers to the changes that leads to human happiness. Not all changes imply progress.

4. Progress is Communal:

Progress from its ethical point of view, may be personal but from the sociological point of view, is communal since sociology is that science of society. In it, the individual is taken into consideration only as a part of society. Only that change, whose influence can be felt on entire community or society for its betterment or welfare, can be called social progress.

5. Progress is Volitional:

Progress does not come about through inactivity. Desire and volition are needed for progress. Efforts have to be made and when these efforts are successful it is called progress. It is an uphill task. It must be remembered that every effort is not progressive.

6. Progress is Variable:

The concept of progress varies from society to society, place to place and from time to time. It does not remain constant in all times and of all places. That which is today considered as the symbol or progress may tomorrow be considered and treated as a sign of regress. For example, in India, free mixing of young boys and girls may be interpreted as an indication of regress, whereas the same may symbolise progress in the Western Countries.

7. Criteria of Progress are Variable:

As stated earlier criteria of progress are relative to their temporal context. Social values determine progress. But social values change with time and place. Therefore, criteria of progress vary from place to place. Further, different scholars have prescribed different criteria of progress. For example, health and longevity have been considered as criteria of progress by some, while other have taken economic security, moral conduct as the criteria of progress.

8. Progress does not have a Measuring Rod:

The term progress is very much subjective and value-loaded. It is not demonstrable with a degree of certainty. We cannot show it to others unless they first accept our evaluations. We may or may not agree that there is progress, but we cannot prove it. Progress is a reality which is immeasurable and undemonstrable. Anything that cannot be demonstrated and measured scientifically cannot be rejected socially. It is especially true in the case of progress.

To conclude, progress conveys the sense of something better and improved. The advancement in technology was opposed to contribute to progress. But, these developments did not carry the sense of progress. It was advancement only in a particular direction.

The comprehensiveness of progress was missing. The extremes of poverty and health, of ignorance and enlightenment had continued to coexist as ever before. Progress as conceived over the ages past, is now considered to be illusive. The end of progress, it has come to be accepted, cannot be determined.

The ‘progress’ in the West did not meet all its ends. It did not bring the fulfillment, that was taken to be its true aim. For this, the use of the term progress was considered inappropriate. The application of the term fell into disfavour. More so, the growing belief that sociology should be value-free also discouraged the use of this expression.

Social Change and Social Progress :

Change is the basic content of both evolution and progress. But the term change is wholly neutral, only suggesting variation in a phenomena over, a period of time. The moment the specifications like direction, desirability, and value-judgement are added to change, another terminology ‘progress’ becomes necessary to describe the process of change.

Progress is not mere change. It is a change in particular direction. It cannot be appended to change in every direction. The word progress means moving forward in the direction and achievement of some desired goal. It is certainly a change, a change for the better not for the worse. The concept of progress always involves and implies value judgement. It is not possible to speak of progress without reference to standards. Not all changes imply progress.

But social change is a generic term, an objective term describing one of the fundamental processes. There is no value-judgement attached to it. It is true that some changes are beneficial to mankind and some are harmful.

But social change is neither moral nor immoral, but amoral. The study of social change involves no value-judgement, while the concept of social progress implies values judgement. Social progress means improvement, betterment, moving to a higher level from a lower level.

Social Evolution and Social Progress :

In the earlier theories of biological evolution, the concept of social evolution was intimately connected with social progress. For the social evolutionists of the nineteenth century from Auguste Comte to Herbert Spencer and Lester F. Ward, social evolution was, in effect, social progress. Modern sociologists, particularly Americans, do not hold this proposition.

They point out that evolution does not mean progress, because when a society is more evolved it does not necessarily follow that it is more progressive. If it would have been progressive, Maclver and Page remark that people in the more evolved society are better or better fitted to survive or more moral or more healthy than those we call primitive. Even if the opposite were true, it would not refute the fact that their society is more evolved.”

Social evolution should also be distinguished from social progress. Firstly L.T. Hobhouse says, evolution means a sort of growth while .social progress means the growth of social life in respect of those qualities to which human beings attach or can rationally attach value. The relation between the two is thus a ‘genus-species’ relation.

Social progress is only one among many possibilities of social evolution; any or every form of social evolution is not a form of social progress. For example, caste system in India is a product of social evolution. But it does not signify progress. Hobhouse concludes, “that it is good, the fact that society has evolved is no proof that it progressed.

Secondly, evolution is merely change in a given direction. It describes a series of interrelated changes in a system of some kind. It refers to an objective condition which is not evaluated as good or bad. On the contrary, progress means change in a direction determined ideally. In other words, it can be said, progress means change for the better not for the worse.

It implies a value-judgement. The evolutionary process may move in accordance with our notion of desirable change, but there is no logical necessity that it should. The concept of progress necessarily involves a concept of end. And the concept of end varies with the mentality and experience of the individual and the group.

The affirmation of evolution “depends on our perception of objective evidences, whereas the affirmation or denial of progress depends on our ideals.” It follows that evolution is a scientific concept and progress is an ethical concept. Evolution is a demonstrable reality; out the term progress is very much subjective and value-loaded and is not demonstrable with a degree of certainty.

While social evolution is clearly distinguished from social progress, we must not loose sight of their relationships. Ethical valuations or ideas (Progress) are socially determined and hence determine the objective phenomena (Evolution) of society. They have always been powerful in shaping and moving the world. In some manner they are active in every process of social change. “All social change has this double character.”

From the above analysis we find, though the above three concepts, social change, social evolution and social progress share many common reference points, they have different intellectual framework. They all articulate same consequential effects.

In all the three processes, one cause produces a number of effects, the effect and cause get intermixed to produce other new effects, again new connections between cause and effect are established and so on goes the process.

Factors of Social Change :

A sociological explanation of change refers not only to the structure that changes but also the factors that effect such a change. Social change has occurred in all societies and in all periods of time. We should, therefore, know what the factors are that produce change. Of course there is little consensus among the representatives of theoretical proposition on the sources.

Besides, the linear as well as the cyclical theorists paid little attention to the determinations of factors involved in social change. Morris Ginsberg has made a systematic analysis of the factors which have been invoked by different writers to explain social change.

Here, our analysis is confined to sociological implantation of the origins and causes of change. Cause will be defined here as set of related factors which, taken together, are both sufficient and necessary for the production of a certain effect.

Attempt has been made to take up each factors of social change by itself and find out the way in which it effects social change. These factors are treated independently, purely for purpose of understanding and we are not of the view that they can influence social change independent of other factors.

Technological Factor :

Technological factor constitute one important source of social change. Technology, an invention, is a great agent of social change. It either initiates or encourages social change. Technology alone holds the key to change. When the scientific knowledge is applied to the problems of life, it becomes technology. In order to satisfy his desires, to fulfill his needs and to make his life more comfortable, man builds civilisation.

The dawn of this new civilization is the single most explosive fact of our lifetimes. It is the central event, the key to the understanding of the years immediately ahead. We have already crossed the first wave (agricultural revolution). We are now the children of the next transformation i.e. the third wave.

We go forward to describe the full power and reach of this extraordinary change. Some speak of a “Looming Space Age”, “Information Age”, “Electronic Era”, or “Global ‘ Village”. Brezezinski has told us, we face a “Technetronic Age”. Sociologist Daniel Bell describes the coming of a “Post-Industrial Society”. Soviet futurists speak of the STR-‘The Scientific-Technological Revolution”. Alvin Toffler has written extensively about the arrival of a “Super Industrial Society”.

Technology is fast growing. Every technological advance makes it possible for us to attain certain results with less effort, at less cost and at less time. It also provides new opportunities and establishes new conditions of life. The social effects of technology are far-reaching.

In the words of W.F. Ogburn, “technology changes society by changing our environment to which we in turn adapt. This change is usually in the material environment and the adjustment that we make with these changes often modifies our customs and social institutions”.

Ogburn and Nimkoff have pointed that a single invention may have innumerable social effects. According to them, radio, for example, has influenced our entertainment, education, politics, sports, literature, knowledge, business, occupation and our modes of organisation. They have given a list consisting of 150 effects of radio in U.S.A.

The pace of change in the modern era is easily demonstrated by reference to rates of technological development. The technological revolution enabled human kind to shift from hunting and gathering to sedentary agriculture and later to develop civilizations.

Technological revolutions enabled societies to industrialize urbanize, specialize, bureaucratize, and take on characteristics that are considered central aspects of modern society. “Modern technology,” remarks the economic historian David Landes, “produces not only more, faster; it turns out objects that could not have been produced under any circumstances by the craft methods of yesterday.

Most important, modern technology has created things that could scarcely have been conceived in the pre-industrial era the camera, the motor car, the aeroplane, the whole array of electronic devices from the radio to the high speed computer, the nuclear power plant, and so on almost adinfinitum…. The result has been an enormous increase in the output and variety of goods and services, and this alone has changed man’s way of life more than anything since the discovery of fire…”

Every technological revolution has brought about increase in the world population. Development and advancement of agriculture resulted in the increase of population in the agricultural communities; rise of commerce gave birth to the populous towns, international trade and international contact and the industrial revolution set the human society on the new pedestal.

Technological changes have influenced attitudes, beliefs and traditions. The factory system and industrialization, urbanization and the rise of working class, fast transport and communication have demolished old prejudices, dispelled superstitions, weakened casteism, and has given rise to the class based society.

Ogborn even goes to the extent of suggesting that the starter in motor car had something to do with the emancipation of women in the America and Western Europe. Development in transport and communication has changed the outlook of the people.

Railways in India have played tremendous role in bringing about social mixing of the people. It has helped people to move out of their local environments and take up jobs in distant corners of the country. Movement of people from East to West and North to South has broken social and regional barriers.

There have come into existence new vocations and trades. People have begun to give up their traditional occupations and are taking to work in the factories and in the offices-commercial as well as Government. This has also made possible the vertical mobility.

A person can now aspire to take up an occupation with higher status than he could have ever thought of in the pre-technological days. Technology has brought about Green Revolution with abundance and variety for the rich.

The rapid changes of every modern society are inextricably interwoven or connected with and somehow dependent upon the development of new techniques, new inventions, new modes of production and new standards of living.

Technology thus is a great bliss. It has made living worthwhile for the conveniences and comfort it provides, and has created numerous vocations, trades and professions. While, giving individual his rightful place, it has made the collectivity supreme.

Technologies are changing and their social consequences are profound. Fundamental changes brought by technology in social structure are discussed as under:

1. Birth of Factory System:

The introduction of machines in the industry has replaced the system of individual production by the factory or mill system. It has led to the creation of huge factories which employ thousands of people and where most of the work is performed automatically.

2. Urbanisation:

The birth of gigantic factories led to urbanisation and big cities came into existence. Many labourers, who were out of employment in rural areas migrated to the sites to work and settled around it. As the cities grew, so did the community of ‘labourers and with it was felt the need for all civic amenities which are essential for society. Their needs were fulfilled by establishing market centers, schools, colleges, hospitals, and recreation clubs. The area further developed when new business came to it with the formation of large business houses.

3. Development of New Agricultural Techniques:

The introduction of machinery into the industry led to the development of new techniques in agriculture. Agricultural production was increased due to the use of new chemical manure. The quality was also improved by the use of superior seeds. All these factors resulted in increase of production. In India, the effect of technology is most apparent in this direction because India is preeminently an agricultural country.

4. Development of Means of Transportation and Communication:

With the development of technology, means of transportation and communication progressed at a surprising rate. These means led to the mutual exchanges between the various cultures. Newspapers, radios, televisions etc. helped to bring news from every corner of the world right into the household. The development of the car, rail, ship and aeroplane made transportation of commodities much easier. As a result national and international trade made unprecedented progress.

5. Evolution of New Classes:

Industrialisation and urbanisation gave birth to the emergence of new classes in modern society. Class struggle arises due to division of society into classes having opposite-interests.

6. New Conceptions and Movements:

The invention of mechanism has also culminated in the generation of new currents in the prevalent thinking. ‘Trade Union’ movements, ‘Lockouts’, ‘Strikes”, “Hartals’, ‘Processions’, ‘Pen down’ became the stocks-in-trade of those who want to promote class interest. These concepts and movements become regular features of economic activity.

The effects of technology on major social institution may be summed up in the following manner:

Technology has radically changed the family organisation and relation in several ways.

Firstly, small equalitarian nuclear family system based on love, equality, liberty and freedom is replacing the old, authoritarian joint family system. Due to invention of birth, control method, the size of family reduced.

Secondly, Industrialisation destroying the domestic system of production has brought women from home to the factories and office. The employment of women meant their independence from the bondage of man. If brought a change in their attitudes and ideas. It meant a new social life for women. It consequently affected every part of the family life.

Thirdly due to technology, marriage has lost its sanctity. It is now regarded as civil contract rather than a religious sacrament. Romantic marriage, inter-caste marriage and late marriages are the effects of technology. Instances of divorce, desertion, separation and broken families are increasing.

Lastly, though technology has elevated the status of women, it has also contributed to the stresses and strains in the relations between men and women at home. It has lessened the importance of family in the process of socialisation of its members.

Technology has effected wide range of changes in our religious life. Many religious practices and ceremonies which once marked the individual and social life, have now been abandoned by them. With the growth of scientific knowledge and modern education, the faith of the people in several old religious beliefs and activities have shaken.

Economic life:

The most striking change due to technological advance, is the change in economic organisation. Industry has been taken away from the household and new types of economic organisation like factories, stores, banks, joint stock companies, stock-exchanges, and corporation have been setup. It has given birth to capitalism with all its attendant evils.

Division of labour, specialization of function, differentiation and integration all the products of technology. Though it has brought in higher standard of living, still then by creating much more middle classes, it has caused economic depression, unemployment, poverty, industrial disputes and infectious diseases.

Effects on State:

Technology has affected the State in several ways. The functions of the State has been widened. A large number of functions of family, such as educative, recreation, health functions have been transferred to the State.

The idea of social welfare State is an offshoot of technology. Transportation and communication are leading to a shift of functions from local Government to the Central Government. The modern Government which rule through the bureaucracy have further impersonalised the human relations.

Social life:

Technological innovations have changed the whole gamut of social and cultural life. The technological conditions of the modern factory system tend to weaken the rigidity of the caste system and strengthen industrializations. It has changed the basis of social stratification from birth to wealth. Urbanization, a consequence of technological advance, produces greater emotional tension and mental strain, instability and economic insecurity.

There is masking of one’s true feelings. Socially, the urbanites are poor in the midst of plenty. “They feel lonely in the crowd”. On all sides, one is confronted with “human machines which possess motion but not sincerity, life but not emotion, heart but not feelings”. Technology has grown the sense of individualism. It has substituted the ‘handi work’ with ‘head work’.

It is clear from the above explanation that technology has profoundly altered our modes of life and also thought. It is capable of bringing about vast changes in society. But is should not be considered as a sole factor of social change. Man is the master as well as a servant of the machine. He has the ability to alter the circumstances which have been the creation of his own inventions or technology.

Cultural Factor of Social Change :

Among all the factors, cultural factor is the most important which works as a major cause of social change. Culture is not something static. It is always in flux. Culture is not merely responsive to changing techniques, but also it itself is a force directing social change.

Culture is the internal life forces of society. It creates itself and develops by itself. It is men who plan, strive and act. The social heritage is never a script that is followed slavishly by people. A culture gives cues and direction to social behaviour.

Technology and material inventions may influence social change but direction and degree of this depends upon the cultural situation as a whole. “Culture is the realm of final valuation”. Men interpret the whole world. He is the master as well as the servant of his own inventions or technology.

To employ Maclver’s simile, technological means may be represented by a ship which can set sail to various ports. The port we sail to remains a cultural choice. Without the ship we could not sail at all. According to the character of the ship we sail fast of ‘slow, take longer or shorter voyages.

Our lives are also accommodated to the conditions on ship board and our experiences vary accordingly. But the direction in which we travel is not predestinated by the design of the ship. The port to which we sail, the direction in which we travel, remains totally of a cultural choice.

It should be noted that technology alone cannot bring vast changes in society. In order to be effective “The technology must have favourable cultural support”. When the cultural factor responds to technological change, it also reacts on it so as to influence the direction and character of social change.

It may be noted that culture not only influences our relationship and values but also influences the direction and character of technological change. For example, different countries like Great Britain, Soviet Union, U.S.A. and India may adopt the same technology, but in so far as their prevalent outlook on life differs, they will apply it in different directions and to different ends.

The atomic energy can be used for munition of war and for production purposes. The industrial plant can turn out armaments or necessaries of life. Steel and iron can be used for building purposes and for warships. Fire can be used for constructive and destructive purposes.

For a better understanding of the relationship between culture and technology, let us analyse here the concept of “cultural lag”.

Cultural Lag:

The concept of ‘cultural lag’, has become a favourite one with sociologists, it is an expression that has a particular appeal in an age in which inventions discoveries and innovations of many kinds are constantly disturbing and threatening older ways of living. In this context, it will serve also to introduce the principle that cultural conditions are themselves important agencies in the process of social change.

The concept of ‘cultural lag’ was first explicitly formulated by W.F. Ogburn in his treaties entitled ‘Social Change’. Lag means crippled movement. Hence, ‘cultural lag’ means the phases of culture which fall behind other phases that keep on moving ahead.

Ogburn’s idea of ‘cultural lag’ is perhaps one of the most important concept influencing the fact of discussion regarding technology and social change. Ogburn distinguishes between “material” and ‘non-material’ culture.

By ‘material culture’ he means things which are ‘tangible’, visible, seen or touched like goods, tools, utensils, furniture, machine. But the ‘non-material’ culture includes things which cannot be touched or tangible such as family, religion, skill, talent. Government and education etc.

According to Ogburn, when changes occur in ‘material culture’, those in turn stimulate changes in ‘non-material’ culture, particularly in what he terms the ‘adaptive’ culture. According to Ogburn, material culture changes by a process which is different in pace from changes in non-material culture.

The larger the technological knowledge of a society, the greater the possibility of a new combinations and innovations. Thus, material culture tends to grow exponentially. Because society cannot develop methods of controlling and utilizing new technology before the technology is accepted and used. There exists a “cultural lag” in creating controls and altering social relationship related to new conditions brought about by new technology.

Cultural lag is due to man’s psychological dogmatism. He is wedded to certain ideologies regarding sex, education and religion. On account of his dogmatic beliefs and ideologies, he is not prepared to change his social institutions. The failure to adopt social institutions to the changes in the material culture leads to cultural lag.

But Maclver points out that “unfortunately it is often adopted without adequate analysis and consequently it has not been developed in a clear and effective manner. According to him, the distinction is not a workable one. Nor again should be assumed that, it is always the ‘material’ or that the main problem is one of adapting the ‘non-material’ to the ‘material’ culture.

Maclver also observes that the term ‘lag’ is not properly applicable to relations between technological factors and the cultural patterns or between the various components of the cultural pattern itself. He has used different words like, ‘technological lag’, ‘technological restraint’, for the resulting imbalance in the different parts of culture.

Kingsley Davis, in his ‘Human Society’ holds that the aspect of culture cannot be divided into material and non-material and that this distinction in no way helps us to understand the nature of technology. Other sociologists, Sutherland, Wood Ward and Maxwell, in their book ‘Introductory Sociology’ point out that Ogburn is guilty of over simplifying the processes of social change.

Social change is a complex phenomenon. The rate, speed and direction of social change is not the same everywhere. So it cannot be explained by simply saying that change first takes place in material culture and thereafter in non-material culture. Ogburn has taken an over simple materialistic view of society.

In spite of various shortcomings, Ogburn’s theory of cultural lag has been proved to be beneficial for the understanding of the cultural factor in bringing about social change. It has been acknowledged by all that there is an intimate connections between the technological advance and our cultural values.

Hence, we may note here that our culture, our thoughts, values, habits are the consequences of technological changes; the latter also is the consequences of changes of the former. Both technology and cultural factors are the two important sources of social change. The two are not only interdependent but also interactive. Man does not simply want a thing but he wants a thing which may also be beautiful and appealing to his senses.

Dowson and Gettys, in introduction to Sociology’, rightly remark, “Culture tends to give direction and momentum to social change to set limits beyond which social change cannot occur.

It is the culture which has kept the social relationship intact. It makes people think not of their own but also of the others. Any change in cultural valuation will have wider repercussion on the personality of the individual and the structure of the group. Every technological invention, innovation, new industrial civilization or new factor disturbs an old adjustment.

The disturbance created by mechanism was so great that it seemed to be the enemy of culture, as indeed all revolutions seem. The wealth-bringing machine brought also, ugliness, shoddiness, haste, standardization. It brought new hazards, new diseases, and industrial fatigue.

That was not the fault of the machines and power plants. It was due to the ruthlessness and greed of those who controlled these great inventions. But human values or cultural values reasserted themselves against economic exploitation. Culture began, at first very slowly, to redirect the new civilization. It made the new means of living at length more tractable to the uses of personality and new arts blossomed on the ruins of the old.

To conclude, social systems are directly or indirectly the creation of cultural values. So eminent sociologist Robert Bierstedt has rightly remarked, “What people think, in short, determines in every measure… what they do and what they want”. Thus, there a definite relation is a definite relation between changing beliefs and attitudes and changing social institutions. So Hobhouse says, there is “a broad correlation between the system of institutions and mentally behind them”.

Demographic Factor of Social Change:

The demographic factor plays the most decisive role in causing social change. The quantitative view of demography takes into account the factors that determine the population: its size, numbers, composition, density and the local distribution etc.

The population of every community is always changing both in numbers and in composition. The changes in population have a far-reaching effect on society. During the 19th century, the population of most countries of Western Europe fell down. During the same time also, the death rate of these countries declined. This double phenomenon is unprecedented in the history of man.

Population changes have occurred all through human history. It is due to various reasons such as migration, invasion, and war, pestilence, changing food supply and changing mores. There was depopulation and overpopulation in times past. The swift and steady decline of both the birth rate and death in the past 70 years or so witnesses to a great social transformation.

In a society where the size or number of female children is greater than the number of male children, we will find a different system of courtship, marriage and family disorganisation from that where the case is reverse. Women command less respect in that community where their numbers are more.

It has always been recognised that there exists a reciprocal relation between population and social structure. The social structure influences population changes and is affected by them. It is beyond doubt that economic conditions and population rates are interdependent. Increasing 254 Social Change interaction results from an increase in the size and density of population. Increase in population also leads to an increase of social differentiation and a division of labour.

With the changes in size, number and density of population, changes take place in composition. The most important reasons for the contemporary population explosion are the tremendous technological changes on the one hand and a most spectacular advance in controlling the diseases by science and preventive medicines on the other hand.

Advancement in science and technology is indirectly boosting the world population by delaying the death rate. For example, take the case of ‘Malaria’. This disease was responsible for the death of million of people in India and other countries.

But it has now been completely eliminated by destroying the malaria carrying mosquitoes with the use of pesticides. Surgery too has advanced so much today. The vital organs of human body such as kidney and heart can be transplanted or replaced when worn out.

The growth of population has given birth to a great variety of social problems such as unemployment, child labour, wars, competition and production of synthetic goods. It has led to urbanization with all its attendant evils.

Countries with growing population and relatively limited resources have an incentive to imperialism and to militarism. These attitudes in turn, encourage a further increase of population. Increase in population threatens the standards of living and thus inspires a change of attitude.

Due to unprecedented growth of population in the 19th century, the practice of birth control took a new development. This practice (use of contraceptive), in turn, had many repercussions on family relationships and even on attitudes towards marriage.

With a change in population, there is also a change in a pattern of ‘consumption’. Societies having large number of children are required to spend relatively large amounts of money on food and education. On the other hand, societies with large proportions of elderly people have to spend relatively more amount on medical care.

In some cases, population changes may initiate pressures to change political institutions. For example, changes in the age, sex or ethnic composition of a people of then complicates the political process of country.

Besides, there is a close relationship between the growth of population and the level of physical health and vitality of the people. Because there are many mouths to feed, none gets enough nutritious food to eat, as a result chronic malnutrition and associated diseases become prevalent.

These, induce physical incompetence, apathy and lack of enterprise. Due to these people’s low level of physical well-being, they are socially backward and unprogressive. They show their indifference to improve their material welfare. An underfed, disease-ridden people are lethargic people.

Moreover, if the growth of population is checked, it would mean a higher standard of living, the emancipation of women from child-bearing drudgery, better care for the young and consequently a better society.

Demographers have shown that variation in the density of population also affects nature of our social relationship. In a low population density area, the people are said to exhibit a greater degree of primary relationship whereas in the area of high density of population, the relationship between people is said to superficial and secondary. In the opinion of Worth, high density areas witness the growth of mental stress and loneliness of life.

The importance of demography as a factor of social change has been realised by various sociologists and economists. An eminent French sociologist, Emile Durkheim, went on to the extent of developing a new branch of sociology dealing with population which he called “Social Morphology” which not only analyses the size and quality of population but also examine how population affects the quality of social relationships and social groups.

Durkheim has pointed out that our modern societies are not only characterised by increasing division of labour but also specialisation of function. The increasing division of labour and specialization of function have a direct correlation with the increasing density of population. He stresses on the fact that in a simple society with comparatively lesser number of people, the necessity of complex division of labour is less felt.

This society, according to Durkheim, is based on “mechanical solidarity”. But as the groups grow in size and complexity with the increase in population, the “services of the experts” are more required. The society, according to him, moves towards “organic solidarity”. There is, so to say, a drift from mechanical to organic solidarity.

M. David Heer, in his book “Society and Population”, has developed a “theory of demographic transition”. The theory was popularised just after the end of World War-II. It has provided a comprehensive explanation of the effects of economic development both on fertility and mortality decline.

Schneidar and Dornbusch, in their book “Popular Religion”, have pointed that decline in mortality rate evokes several changes in social structure. They have stressed on the point that due to decline in mortality rate in USA since 1875, negative attitude towards religious beliefs have been cultivated by the people.

They also point out that in a society wherein children die before reaching the age of five, parents may not develop a strong emotional attachment to their children and also in a high mortality society, arranged marriages are common, but in a low mortality society love marriages become the dominant feature. Again when mortality rate is high, individual tends to have a weaker orientation towards the future and stronger orientation towards the present.

Thomas Robert Malthus, an English cleargyman, mathematician and economist, was one of the earliest demographers. In his work, “An Essay on the Principles of Population”, published in 1978, he mentioned that under normal conditions, population would grow by geometrical progression, whereas the means of subsistence would grow by arithmetical progression. The imbalance or lag or gap between the two would create a lot of problems for society.

That is why, Malthus has pleaded for two types of checks which can keep the population down. He spoke of hunger and disease as positive check, and late marriage and enforced celibacy as the preventive check.

From the above analysis, we find that demographic factor has been contributing to the great transformations in society’s socioeconomic and political structure throughout human history. For example, most countries in Asia where more than half world population is now living, is characterised by high birth rate. These countries in general and Indian society in particular, are passing through a critical period of great poverty, unemployment and moral degeneration.

The gap between the living standards of general masses of these countries and that of the developed countries is widening. The gap is cruelly frustrating the third world country’s hopes for development.

With the current rate of population increase, it is expected that the total requirements for future health, education, housing and many other welfare needs are bound to increase. This will certainly bring the drastic changes not only in the microstructures, but also in macrostructures of Indian society.

Related Articles:

• Difference between Social and Cultural Change
• Cultural Change: Main Factors and Causes of Cultural Change

No comments yet.

Leave a reply click here to cancel reply..

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

20.1 Understanding Social Change

Learning objectives.

• Understand the changes that accompany modernization.
• Discuss the functionalist and conflict perspectives on social change.

Social change refers to the transformation of culture, behavior, social institutions, and social structure over time. We are familiar from Chapter 5 “Social Structure and Social Interaction” with the basic types of society: hunting-and-gathering, horticultural and pastoral, agricultural, industrial, and postindustrial. In looking at all of these societies, we have seen how they differ in such dimensions as size, technology, economy, inequality, and gender roles. In short, we have seen some of the ways in which societies change over time. Another way of saying this is that we have seen some of the ways in which societies change as they become more modern. To understand social change, then, we need to begin to understand what it means for a society to become more modern. We considered this briefly in Chapter 5 “Social Structure and Social Interaction” and expand on it here.

Modernization

Modernization refers to the process and impact of becoming more modern. More specifically, it refers to the gradual shift from hunting-and-gathering societies to postmodern societies, as outlined in Chapter 5 “Social Structure and Social Interaction” , and perhaps especially to the changes brought by the Industrial Revolution of the 19th century.

The terms modern and modernization have positive connotations; it sounds good to modernize and to be modern. Modernization implies that progress has been made and is continuing to be made, and who would not want progress? Yet modernization also has a downside, as we will see in this section and in the later discussion of the environment.

A related problem with the terms and concepts of modern and modernization is that many people think of Western nations when considering the most modern nations in the world today. This implies that Western society is the ideal to which other societies should aspire. While there are many good things about Western societies, it is important to avoid the ethnocentrism of assuming that Western societies are better because they are more modern. In fact, one reason that many people in the Middle East and elsewhere dislike the United States is that they resent the “Westernization” of their societies from the influence of the United States and other wealthy Western nations. When they see Coca-Cola and Pepsi logos and the McDonald’s golden arches in their nations, they fear Western influence and the loss of their own beliefs and traditions.

These caveats notwithstanding, societies have become much more modern over time, to put it mildly. We thus cannot fully understand society and social life without appreciating how societies have changed as they have become more modern. Not surprisingly, sociologists have recognized the importance of modernization ever since the discipline of sociology began in the 19th century, and much of the work of sociology’s founders—Émile Durkheim, Max Weber, Karl Marx, and others—focused on how and why societies have changed as they became more modern.

We can draw on their efforts and related work by later sociologists and by anthropologists to develop an idea of the differences modernization has made for societies and individuals. Several dimensions and effects of modernization seem apparent (Nolan & Lenski, 2009).

First, as societies evolve, they become much larger and more heterogeneous . This means that people are more different from each other than when societies were much smaller, and it also means that they ordinarily cannot know each other nearly as well. Larger, more modern societies thus typically have weaker social bonds and a weaker sense of community than small societies and place more of an emphasis on the needs of the individual.

As societies become more modern, they begin to differ from nonmodern societies in several ways. In particular, they become larger and more heterogeneous, they lose their traditional ways of thinking, and they gain in individual freedom and autonomy.

Thomas Hawk – Big City Turn Me Loose and Set Me Free – CC BY-NC 2.0.

We can begin to appreciate the differences between smaller and larger societies when we contrast a small college of 1,200 students with a large university of 40,000 students. Perhaps you had this contrast in mind when you were applying to college and had a preference for either a small or a large institution. In a small college, classes might average no more than 20 students; these students get to know each other well and often have a lot of interaction with the professor. In a large university, classes might hold 600 students or more, and everything is more impersonal. Large universities do have many advantages, but they probably do not have as strong a sense of community as is found at small colleges.

A second aspect of modernization is a loss of traditional ways of thinking. This allows a society to be more creative and to abandon old ways that may no longer be appropriate. However, it also means a weakening or even ending of the traditions that helped define the society and gave it a sense of identity.

A third aspect of modernization is the growth of individual freedom and autonomy. As societies grow, become more impersonal, and lose their traditions and sense of community, their norms become weaker, and individuals thus become freer to think for themselves and to behave in new ways. Although most of us would applaud this growth in individual freedom, it also means, as Émile Durkheim (1895/1962) recognized long ago, that people feel freer to deviate from society’s norms and thus to commit deviance. If we want a society that values individual freedom, Durkheim said, we automatically must have a society with deviance.

Is modernization good or bad? This is a simplistic question about a very complex concept, but a quick answer is that it is both good and bad. We see evidence for both responses in the views of sociologists Ferdinand Tönnies, Weber, and Durkheim. As Chapter 5 “Social Structure and Social Interaction” discussed, Tönnies (1887/1963) said that modernization meant a shift from Gemeinschaft (small societies with strong social bonds) to Gesellschaft (large societies with weaker social bonds and more impersonal social relations). Tönnies lamented the loss of close social bonds and of a strong sense of community resulting from modernization, and he feared that a sense of rootlessness begins to replace the feeling of stability and steadiness characteristic of small, older societies.

Weber (1921/1978) was also concerned about modernization. The hallmarks of modernization, he thought, are rationalization, a loss of tradition, and the rise of impersonal bureaucracy. He despaired over the impersonal quality of rational thinking and bureaucratization, as he thought it was a dehumanizing influence.

Durkheim (1893/1933) took a less negative view of modernization. He certainly appreciated the social bonds and community feeling, which he called mechanical solidarity , characteristic of small, traditional societies. However, he also thought that these societies stifled individual freedom and that social solidarity still exists in modern societies. This solidarity, which he termed organic solidarity , stems from the division of labor, in which everyone has to depend on everyone else to perform their jobs. This interdependence of roles, Durkheim said, creates a solidarity that retains much of the bonding and sense of community found in premodern societies.

We have already commented on important benefits of modernization that are generally recognized: modernization promotes creativity and individual freedom and autonomy. These developments in turn usually mean that a society becomes more tolerant of beliefs and behaviors that it formerly would have disapproved and even condemned. Modern societies, then, generally feature more tolerance than older societies. Many people, undoubtedly including most sociologists, regard greater tolerance as a good thing, but others regard it as a bad thing because they favor traditional beliefs and behaviors.

Beyond these abstract concepts of social bonding, sense of community, and tolerance, modern societies are certainly a force for both good and bad in other ways. They have produced scientific discoveries that have saved lives, extended life spans, and made human existence much easier than imaginable in the distant past and even in the recent past. But they have also polluted the environment, engaged in wars that have killed tens of millions, and built up nuclear arsenals that, even with the end of the Cold War, still threaten the planet. Modernization, then, is a double-edged sword. It has given us benefits too numerous to count, but it also has made human existence very precarious.

Sociological Perspectives on Social Change

Sociological perspectives on social change fall into the functionalist and conflict approaches. As usual, both views together offer a more complete understanding of social change than either view by itself (Vago, 2004). Table 20.1 “Theory Snapshot” summarizes their major assumptions.

Table 20.1 Theory Snapshot

The Functionalist Understanding

The functionalist understanding of social change is based on insights developed by different generations of sociologists. Early sociologists likened change in society to change in biological organisms. Taking a cue from the work of Charles Darwin, they said that societies evolved just as organisms do, from tiny, simple forms to much larger and more complex structures. When societies are small and simple, there are few roles to perform, and just about everyone can perform all of these roles. As societies grow and evolve, many new roles develop, and not everyone has the time or skill to perform every role. People thus start to specialize their roles and a division of labor begins. As noted earlier, sociologists such as Durkheim and Tönnies disputed the implications of this process for social bonding and a sense of community, and this basic debate continues today.

Several decades ago, Talcott Parsons (1966), the leading 20th-century figure in functionalist theory, presented an equilibrium model of social change. Parsons said that society is always in a natural state of equilibrium, defined as a state of equal balance among opposing forces. Gradual change is both necessary and desirable and typically stems from such things as population growth, technological advances, and interaction with other societies that brings new ways of thinking and acting. However, any sudden social change disrupts this equilibrium. To prevent this from happening, other parts of society must make appropriate adjustments if one part of society sees too sudden a change.

Functionalist theory assumes that sudden social change, as by the protest depicted here, is highly undesirable, whereas conflict theory assumes that sudden social change may be needed to correct inequality and other deficiencies in the status quo.

Kashfi Halford – More Riot Police – CC BY-NC 2.0.

The functionalist perspective has been criticized on a few grounds. The perspective generally assumes that the change from simple to complex societies has been very positive, when in fact, as we have seen, this change has also proven costly in many ways. It might well have weakened social bonds, and it has certainly imperiled human existence. Functionalist theory also assumes that sudden social change is highly undesirable, when such change may in fact be needed to correct inequality and other deficiencies in the status quo.

Conflict Theory

Whereas functional theory assumes the status quo is generally good and sudden social change is undesirable, conflict theory assumes the status quo is generally bad. It thus views sudden social change in the form of protest or revolution as both desirable and necessary to reduce or eliminate social inequality and to address other social ills. Another difference between the two approaches concerns industrialization, which functional theory views as a positive development that helped make modern society possible. In contrast, conflict theory, following the views of Karl Marx, says that industrialization exploited workers and thus increased social inequality.

In one other difference between the two approaches, functionalist sociologists view social change as the result of certain natural forces, which we will discuss shortly. In this sense, social change is unplanned even though it happens anyway. Conflict theorists, however, recognize that social change often stems from efforts by social movements to bring about fundamental changes in the social, economic, and political systems. In his sense social change is more “planned,” or at least intended, than functional theory acknowledges.

Critics of conflict theory say that it exaggerates the extent of social inequality and that it sometimes overemphasizes economic conflict while neglecting conflict rooted in race/ethnicity, gender, religion, and other sources. Its Marxian version also erred in predicting that capitalist societies would inevitably undergo a socialist-communist revolution.

Key Takeaways

• As societies become more modern, they become larger and more heterogeneous. Traditional ways of thinking decline, and individual freedom and autonomy increase.
• Functionalist theory favors slow, incremental social change, while conflict theory favors fast, far-reaching social change to correct what it views as social inequalities and other problems in the status quo.

For Your Review

• If you had to do it over again, would you go to a large university, a small college, or something in between? Why? How does your response relate to some of the differences between smaller, traditional societies and larger, modern societies?
• When you think about today’s society and social change, do you favor the functionalist or conflict view on the kind of social change that is needed? Explain your answer.

Durkheim, É. (1933). The division of labor in society . London, England: The Free Press. (Original work published 1893).

Durkheim, É. (1962). The rules of sociological method (S. Lukes, Ed.). New York, NY: Free Press. (Original work published 1895).

Nolan, P., & Lenski, G. (2009). Human societies: An introduction to macrosociology (11th ed.). Boulder, CO: Paradigm.

Parsons, T. (1966). Societies: Evolutionary and comparative perspectives . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Tönnies, F. (1963). Community and society . New York, NY: Harper and Row. (Original work published 1887).

Vago, S. (2004). Social change (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology (G. Roth & C. Wittich, Eds.). Berkeley: University of California Press. (Original work published 1921).

Sociology Copyright © 2016 by University of Minnesota is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Communication

iResearchNet

Custom Writing Services

Planned social change.

Planned social change is the result of an intervention by a change agent (an individual or organization that seeks to induce change) in order to transform the nature of human communities, most often as a response to some perceived problem such as health risks, environmental crises, political instability, economic hardships, underdeveloped infrastructures, and recovery from natural disasters. Thus, there are a variety of contexts in which planned social change is practiced including health communication, political transformation, crisis management, technological innovation, and modernization. Across each of these areas, the predominant goal is to improve the quality of life and the standard of living within a given social system. Ostensibly, the goal of planned social change is the betterment of society, though there may be no consensus on which goals of the campaign are most important and indeed whether they are socially desirable at all.

Most planned social change campaigns can be divided into three basic phases . First, there is a planning stage in which all relevant situational information is assessed and strategies are formulated. Second, there is an implementation phase in which campaign strategies are put into action. Finally, there is an evaluation phase in which the performance of the campaign is assessed so that future campaigns can benefit from lessons learned. Successful campaigns rely on extensive research during each of these stages.

The mass media are often a crucial tool in the hands of change agents by transmitting information, setting the public agenda, and mobilizing the public. A major issue in the research literature on social change campaigns is how to maximize the effectiveness of mass media in the change process. Among the keys to the successful use of mass media are creating messages that resonate with the intended audience, and placing messages efficiently by targeting the most likely prospects for inducing change, and avoiding the already converted and change-resistant members of the audience.

Evaluations of past social change campaigns indicate that significant long-term, desired change is extremely difficult to achieve. Moreover, variance in effectiveness across different campaigns suggests that the complex situational constraints that regulate success make each case unique. The effectiveness of planned social change campaigns depends on a variety of factors including the cultural compatibility of the goals, strategies, and tactics of the campaign, the quality of research and planning, the availability of necessary resources, the salience and efficacy of campaign messages in the media environment, and the lack of resistance from community institutions, opinion leaders and the public at large.

Intellectual and Social Context of Planned Social Change

Perhaps more so than any other area of communication research, planned social change research represents a dramatic mix of basic and applied research. It also brings together researchers interested in the psychological processes involved in regulating social change in individuals and those interested in more macrosociological processes related to improving society such as patterns in the distribution of information, knowledge, resources, and power.

At the heart of the planned social change process are such basic theoretical concerns as education, motivation, and persuasion. Each of these processes has been used by planned social change campaigns as both antecedents and consequences. For example, campaigns may target learning, motivation, and attitude/behavior change outcomes. Alternatively, learning and motivation may be key antecedents (mediators) to producing changes in attitudes and behaviors. In turn, changes in individual attitudes and behaviors may be key milestones on the path to the betterment of communities. Driven by the desire to maximize the power and positive outcomes of social change programs, practitioners have traditionally been very concerned with developing and testing underlying theories. By the same token, social change campaigns are concerned with applied outcomes, testing actual effects in real-world settings. In other words, planned social change projects tend to be theory-driven and research-evaluated .

Another characteristic of planned social change is an implicit assumption about the prosocial benefits of potential campaign effects. That is, in most cases, those involved in planned social change campaigns often assume that if the campaign is successful, society and the individuals that comprise it will be better off. There are value-laden decisions involved in the design and implementation of planned social change. The degree to which the larger community is in consensus regarding the social desirability of the goals and decisions of the campaign is likely to vary widely.

Research on planned social change is by nature an interdisciplinary endeavor , both historically and contemporaneously. First, historical contributions to knowledge in planned social change have come in virtually all social science disciplines (as discussed below). Second, contemporary research evaluating the effects of large-scale, planned social change campaigns often involves researchers from multiple disciplines, for example, the Minnesota Heart Health Project (MHHP), which was a community-based campaign designed to promote heart-healthy behaviors among citizens in three experimental Minnesota communities. The project, which ran from 1980 to 1993, brought together researchers from communication, psychology, sociology, social work, marketing, biostatistics, epidemiology, and medicine.

Strategic campaigns for social change are likely to be extremely resource-intensive in terms of the staffing, research, and media costs of developing, implementing, and evaluating the campaign. As such, most large-scale campaigns are dependent on government and private foundation funding. This means that such campaigns are more likely to be top-down and to reflect interests consistent with these institutions. Though such campaigns are likely to espouse elite values, many of the problems they address have the most adverse effects on the poor who may often be the beneficiaries of social change. Moreover, not all campaigns are conducted by organizations with access to copious resources. Grassroots organizations can be successful in engaging in planned social change; however, it is likely that the scope, objectives, and tactics will have to be more modest in order to reflect their relatively limited resources.

In response to these concerns, more recently, some have argued for a different approach, community-based participatory research (CBPR) where, ideally, the community is an equal partner with the researchers from the defining the problem to the execution of the study, interpretation of the data and dissemination of the research. Whether CPBR, in practice, produces more sustainable outcomes requires more empirical work.

Major Dimensions

The important dimensions of planned social change can be organized according to Lasswell’s (1948) model of the communication process: “Who says what to whom through what channel with what effect.”

Who? The Change Agents

Those who initiate planned social change campaigns are known as change agents, which most frequently consist of government agencies, political parties, businesses, academic researchers, health communication professionals, interest groups, nonprofit organizations, and social movements.

When change agents and the communication messages that they produce come in contact with the target audience, campaign effectiveness may be reduced if the audience perceives them to be external to the culture they are trying to change. As such, most campaigns engage local change agents for points of contact with the target audience.

What? The Content

This dimension focuses on the messages of the campaign. Understanding the important components of successful messages involves invoking bodies of knowledge drawn from applied academic research and professional experiences from the fields of advertising and public relations. For instance, campaign messages must be both attention-grabbing and memorable to cut through the clutter of the thousands of persuasive messages to which targeted individuals are exposed on a daily basis. There are other content choices as well that must be made on the basis of a thorough situation analysis. Should the campaign use rational, information-based appeals or more evocative emotional appeals? In part this depends on such factors as the amount of information that the audience needs in order to make decisions, the difficulty of gaining the attention of the audience, and the degree to which targeted audience members are motivated to process information.

Advertising also contributes different templates for the types of messages that might be successful in different situations such as humor, guilt, fear appeals, narratives, exemplars, and frames among others. Fear appeals are likely to be particularly useful in social change campaigns, as they often communicate negative sanctions for not complying with the recommended attitude and/ or behavior change. A variety of models have been proposed to account for the effectiveness of fear appeals (e.g., the fear drive paradigm, the protection motivation model, the threat control model). Among the factors that these models contribute are the believability of the fear appeal, the perceived likelihood that failure to follow the recommended behavior will lead to negative consequences, the perceived likelihood that the recommended behavior will prevent negative outcomes, and the perceived personal efficacy of following the recommended course of action. There is also a general consensus regarding the appropriate level of fear used in messages – it should not be so weak that it has no effect, but not so strong that it overwhelms the target audience or motivates counterarguing and other discounting strategies.

The practice of public relations has contributed knowledge on how to extend campaign resources by using strategies to engage the news media to cover stories that will advance campaign goals. Not only does good news coverage contribute free publicity, but it may also add credibility to the message. For example, campaigns to ban smoking in public places may benefit from news stories about the potential harms of second-hand smoke. To get news media attention, events and messages must be constructed to conform to the demands of news values and practices. For instance, they must fit media definitions of what constitutes a good story and must be packaged to fit media conventions in terms of content and timing.

Not only can news content be used to reinforce a campaign, but entertainment programming may be engaged as well. An “entertainment-education strategy” may be used to embed messages in entertainment programs for transmitting information to stimulate change through storytelling. For example, Mexican soap operas have been used to transmit messages about the importance of family planning, responsible parenting, and literacy. Entertainment programming has many advantages over traditional media for inducing change. Entertainment media are ubiquitous and emotionally evocative; they are valued, if not revered, by their audience. They are vivid and demonstrative. Finally, their intentions are less likely to be recognized and discounted by the audience (Brown & Singhal 1999). Unfortunately, we know little about the effectiveness of using entertainment media as part of social change campaigns. Clearly more research is needed to guide the application of nontraditional campaign media, as well as to evaluate their effectiveness.

To Whom? The Target Group

Most planned social change campaigns target individuals with messages tailored to change individual attitudes and behaviors. Successful campaigns know that it is important to target some individuals more than others, specifically, individuals who are most likely to respond to the messages, which may include those who are likely to be motivated to receive, process, and yield to campaign messages, as well as those who are likely to influence the opinions and behaviors of others. Exploratory research may be used to identify the characteristics of individuals who are likely to be persuaded and those who are likely to persuade others. Such research may also be useful in making decisions about what types of messages to create for them as well as where to place those messages as part of a cost-efficient media plan.

Researchers may not only be concerned with the characteristics of the potential target audience, but also with differences in the way that different types of individuals process these messages. For example, dual-process models (i.e., the elaboration likelihood model and the heuristic systematic model) emphasize the message receiver’s level of involvement as a moderator of message effects . High-involvement individuals tend to have greater motivation and ability to thoroughly process the crucial information in the message. On other hand, low-involvement individuals tend to look for heuristic shortcuts to message processing by focusing on peripheral information such as communicator attractiveness or the number of arguments presented. Insights from these models have a number of implications for planned social change campaigns including the production of different messages targeting high- and low-involvement audiences.

Researchers have known for many years that certain individuals (i.e., opinion leaders) among the target population are likely to have disproportionate influence. As such, many campaigns seek to capitalize on influence flows within community networks by identifying and engaging opinion leaders directly as part of the campaign. Moreover, media expenditures may be more efficient by targeting opinion leaders to take advantage of the “two-step flow” of information, as messages are filtered through highly influential individuals. Research has shown that opinion leaders differ from one context to another, so campaigns must identify the context-specific characteristics of opinion leaders. Moreover, opinion leaders may be part of community networks or part of the mediated world, such as the case of celebrity or expert endorsements.

Through What Channel? The Choice of Media

Most campaigns create messages that are disseminated through various mass media. The particular media mix (i.e., choices about which media to use to carry campaign messages) depends on the campaign goals, media goals, target audiences, and resources of the campaign. For example, the campaign goal of spreading knowledge requires media that carry credible information that can be processed and reprocessed by the target audience (e.g., print media), whereas changing attitudes and behaviors is likely to require media that carry emotional appeals, allow for the modeling of appropriate behavior, demonstrate negative consequences of not following recommended changes, and permit repetition without redundancy (e.g., television).

Media goals specify the relative emphasis of wide casting (an emphasis on reaching as many people as possible using such media as newspapers and television) or narrowcasting (targeting specific audience members using media like magazines and radio). Media choices are also dictated by the choice of target audiences as campaign planners seek media vehicles that have relatively high concentrations of target audiences for efficient message placement. Finally, choices are guided by the more pragmatic constraint of available resources (e.g., radio is very inexpensive and magazines are very expensive; television has high absolute costs, but relatively low cost per thousand persons reached).

The Internet is a growing part of the media mix for most campaigns. As a tool to disseminate campaign information, the Internet offers many advantages over traditional mass media. It is relatively low-cost, permits the transmission of large amounts of information, and is driven by the needs and interests of the audience. The Internet also permits interactive, two-way communication. Moreover, and surprisingly, a high degree of credibility is accorded to the Internet as a source of information. Still, concerns about the “digital divide” in terms of access to online information mute this optimism. Beyond mass media, interpersonal message channels are important to engage because they are very influential: messages can be personalized and reinforced through the influence of primary groups, social ties, and opinion leaders. Many small business owners can attest to the effectiveness and cost-efficiency of word-of-mouth advertising. For these reasons and the fact that they represent two-way, interactive communication, interpersonal channels are particularly effective in most social change campaigns.

There has been much recent interest in buzz/viral marketing, the nonlinear spread of information throughout social networks . It may take the form of information spread from person to person, or the form of campaign messages (e.g., humorous video clips) that are passed on through digital networks. In part, the success of such techniques stems from their relatively low cost and the positive attitude of the target audience toward such messages, though whether they are effective or not requires more research.

What Effect? Potential Outcomes of Campaigns

Finally, there are the potential outcomes of a campaign. Some campaigns may promote radical social transformation, some minor incremental change, while others may seek to prevent change altogether. Regardless of the nature of social change sought, there are a variety of different perspectives on the nature of that change. More specifically, some campaigns may focus on inducing micro-level change in the form of altering the knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of individuals. Other campaigns may focus on macro-level changes including shaping social values and norms, while yet others may focus on changing institutional policies.

Scholars have been interested in the dissemination of knowledge and the use of persuasion to change attitudes and behaviors for quite some time, such that the literature is truly voluminous. Perhaps the most influential program for studying persuasion was laid out by researchers from Yale University in the 1950s (Hovland et al. 1953). Their influential research explored such message-related characteristics as source credibility, message appeals, substantiating arguments, incentives/sanctions, and the structure of argument presentation (i.e., one-sided vs two-sided messages). Their research contributed copious evidence on message effectiveness such as the findings that messages attributed to high-credibility sources are more persuasive, but that the credibility effect wears off over time in the absence of repetition, and that conclusive two-sided messages are better than messages that present only one point of view. They helped propagate the notion that one important key to promoting change in attitudes and behaviors is to present information that provides incentives for following recommended behaviors and sanctions for doing otherwise, something that is at the heart of most planned social change campaigns. Most importantly, their research set the agenda for decades for persuasion researchers from psychology and communication.

Research also suggests the importance of targeting social norms as part of social change campaigns. Social norms are opinions, attitudes, and behaviors that are considered widely shared within a given social system. In any system, there are incentives for conformity to social norms and sanctions for violating those norms. Such normative pressures exert a powerful influence on the public. Campaigns may take advantage of such pressures by invoking and reinforcing existing norms. They occasionally seek to create or change existing norms (e.g., the “5 a Day” campaign to increase fruit and vegetable consumption in the UK). While such campaigns ultimately seek to influence individuals, they focus on influencing norms (and the perception of norms) as key mediating factors. This type of orientation is reflected by Fishbein & Ajzen’s (1975) theory of reasoned action, which incorporates social norms into the relationship between attitudes and behaviors. Conceptualizing the influence of social norms, as well as attempting to influence norms as part of the campaign, is complicated by the fact that individuals are part of overlapping social networks, each of which may have its own set of norms.

The presumed influence model (Gunther & Storey 2003) provides a perspective on campaign effects that combines the influence of social networks and perceptions of social norms. In this model, when individuals encounter multiple campaign messages, they may make the assumption that other members of their social network are going to be affected by this campaign and thus make inferences about potential changes to social norms, which then has an effect on the individual’s attitudes and behaviors. For example, a teenager may witness anti-smoking ads and infer that other teenagers are going to be affected by the campaign and become less likely to smoke. Alternatively, this inference may be matched by another inference that such campaigns wouldn’t be necessary if smoking wasn’t prevalent among teens. This example points out a precarious position for campaigns with regard to the communication of social norms – competing inferences about the normative acceptability of the behavior in question. Which inference is more influential is likely to be moderated by perceived smoking prevalence among the individual’s immediate peer network.

While social networks and social norms can be powerful tools in social change campaigns, operationalizing them is inherently difficult. A more direct approach is to actually change organizational, community, and social policies. For example, social problems may be curtailed through public policy initiatives that include the application of incentives, sanctions, and usage impediments. Examples of such incentives would include tax breaks for hybrid cars and public financing for the development of alternative energy sources. Sanctions might include usage taxes and laws with fines for noncompliance. Examples of usage impediments would include indoor smoking bans, fuel efficiency standards, and licensing/regulation. While such policies are no doubt effective in regulating the behaviors of individuals and larger collectives, they also require complicity from within the power structure of any given system.

A Multidisciplinary History of Planned Social Change

The history of planned social change in the social sciences is relatively long and variegated. A number of disciplines have made important contributions to the growth of knowledge in planned social change including psychology, sociology, economics, political science, and communication. Each of these disciplines has at some point also touched on mass media’s role in affecting social change.

The largest contributions of psychologists have been in the area of the role of motivation and persuasion in changing knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors at the individual level. In addition, psychologists were influential in early studies of the role of communication and mass media in producing such change. While the media have long played an important role in bringing about social change from religious reformations to revolutions, social science researchers have been studying the role of mass media in bringing about social change only since the middle of the last century.

One of the first systematic studies of mass persuasion was conducted during World War II in a series of research projects investigating the effect of the Why We Fight films that were designed to mobilize soldiers to fight against the Germans and Japanese. General George Marshall, who was the Chief of Staff of the US Army, engaged renowned Hollywood director Frank Capra to create a seven-film series designed to motivate American soldiers. Evaluation research conducted by a prestigious group of persuasion researchers hired by the government showed that the films were powerful in increasing soldiers’ factual knowledge, but that they had little effect on motivations and attitudes. Ultimately, this was an early study that provided evidence that campaigns designed to promote planned social change have an easier time influencing knowledge than they do shaping attitudes and behaviors. After the war, researchers involved in this project went on to conduct a long series of studies (known as the Yale Program of Research on Communication and Attitude Change) investigating factors related to using mediated message to promote attitude change.

For sociologists and economists , the aftermath of World War II was also a fruitful era for researchers studying planned social change, particularly in the area of promoting national development in developing countries. Researchers operating from the “modernization perspective” assumed that developing the economies of third world nations was a key to world stability. From this perspective, the mass media were seen as the “magic multiplier” in bringing information and motivation in order to mobilize individuals in developing countries in the process of modernization. In the development model, government and mass media were envisioned as a partnership in promoting the social good. The argument that media should play a central and coordinated role in promoting national development has often been used to justify government ownership (as opposed to private ownership) of the media. By the 1960s, the modernization perspective on national development began to draw criticism on a variety of fronts. Its assumptions were challenged as being ethnocentric and its conclusions were questioned by dependency theory (Cardoso & Faletto 1979), which argued that the developed nations through economic ties have engaged developing nations in exploitative relationships that leave them in a perpetual state of underdevelopment.

Sociologists have contributed knowledge regarding a key component in most conceptions of planned social change – social control . Most campaigns aimed at shaping individuals and their communities implicitly or explicitly recognize forces of social control. These forces operate through a combination of incentives that reward norm conformity and sanctions that punish deviance. These forces may be informal as in the case of public opinion and peer pressure, or they may be formalized in terms of laws and public policy. Many sociologists view the mass media, as primary sources of communication of social norms and the attendant incentives and sanctions that induce conformity, as social control agents. These ideas have implications for planned social change such that change agents often use media in the course of a campaign to do more than carry information and persuasive messages. The media can be used to convey or change social norms as well as to model rewards and punishments associated with them.

Another historical tradition in planned social change focuses on social engineering , a concept that comes from the political science discipline. Social engineering focuses on large-scale change (typically at the national level) in public opinions, attitudes, and behaviors. Most often, this perspective focuses on the role of government as the primary change agent. Under this perspective, public policy, laws, and other governance strategies are considered primary directives of social engineering. There is a heavy emphasis on the incentives and sanctions that induce change, adopting the social control framework from sociology. Social engineering is facilitated by the tools of social science, which provide formative and evaluative research that guides the process of social change. Such change is promoted by the use of mass communication technologies, which convey policies and rules, and shape opinions, attitudes, and behaviors. The term “social engineering” has taken on negative connotations through its associations with various historical social engineering campaigns such as the propaganda campaigns and final solution from Nazi Germany and the Cultural Revolution and Great Leap Forward campaigns in China.

Political science also provided early research on the role of propaganda as mass persuasion. Originally, the term was socially acceptable and used to describe attempts by government agencies (such as the Office of War Information, 1942–1945, and the Voice of America, founded in 1942) to influence the opinions and behavior of the public. Concerns about the negative effects of other countries’ use of propaganda during World War I, in communist revolutions, and the rise of Nazism motivated government interest in engaging political scientists in the study of propaganda effects (Lasswell et al. 1979). In the best-known example of propaganda research, Lee and Lee (1939) identified common techniques used by propagandists engaged in mass persuasion, which included such devices as glittering generalities, card-stacking, and name-calling. Like social engineering, propaganda has increasingly assumed negative connotations because of its association with brainwashing, indoctrination, disinformation, and psychological warfare, as well as its historical association with enemies of the United States. In reality, propaganda campaigns are simply a special case of planned social change for which the benefits and detriments of effects are in the eye of the beholder.

More recently, communication researchers have picked up the ball to advance research on planned social change. One of the earliest examples of research on social change by a communication researcher was a perspective on planned social change that was initiated in 1962 when Everett Rogers published his book Diffusion of innovations (Rogers 1962). The book helped launch a research tradition that examined the processes and influential factors that regulate the adoption of new technologies and practices in a given society. Rogers characterized the process of social change as a bell curve, in which innovations are in turn adopted by innovators, early adopters, early majority, majority, and laggards over a period of time. The theory viewed the process of innovation adoption as occurring through a series of stages including awareness, interest, evaluation, trial, and adoption. The mass media may play a key role in each of these stages.

Many of the research traditions discussed in this section produced a considerable amount of social science research in their day, but at some point fell dormant. For many of these traditions, their decline was precipitated by the gradual recognition and resentment of ethnocentric assumptions implicit in their model of planned social change, that is, they are predicated on assumptions such as: if only other societies were more like us, they would be better off; or, our view of social change is right and their view of social change is wrong.

Contemporary Issues in Planned Social Change

Current campaigns designed to foster planned social change are likely to employ a combination of mass, interpersonal, and interactive communication to achieve objectives, adopting many of the concepts and tools of advertising and public relations campaigns. Such campaigns revolve around defining objectives and situational constraints, creating strategic solutions, and executing them with an integrated campaign.

Campaign goals vary in terms of the degree of change sought from incremental modifications to revolutionary change. If objectives are overly ambitious, the campaign is likely to fall short of its goals and be deemed a failure. If the objectives are too modest, the agency footing the bill for the campaign may not feel that the campaign is worth the investment. Whether objectives are achieved depends on support from within the power structure, available resources, the degree to which incentives and sanctions can be invoked, and the cultural compatibility of the campaign.

Strategic decisions must be made about who to target, and how and when to target them with change efforts. Strategies may vary in the extent to which they emphasize coercion or merely seek the consent of the targets of change. Zaltman and Duncan (1977) provide a typology that organizes strategic approaches in to four categories. First, power strategies, which are on the coercive side of the continuum, involve changing laws, policies, economic incentives, and other relatively direct forms of control. Persuasion strategies tend to utilize communication media using a variety of different types of appeals to change audience knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and motivations. Normative re-educational strategies are based on a more rational model of spreading information. Facilitation strategies rely on providing resources and opportunities to the public. Most campaigns opt for a mix of these strategies, the composition of which is based on a variety of factors including available time and resources, and the nature and degree of change sought.

The tactics used in a campaign depend in large part on the amount of resources that are available to the campaign. The use of mass-mediated advertising has the advantage of maximizing the change agent’s control over the campaign messages, but paid advertising is very expensive, and may not be a viable option for other than the well-endowed campaign. Some campaigns may seek to use public service announcements (PSAs), but PSAs have been on the decline lately as media outlets have become less concerned about demonstrating social responsibility. Organizations that seek to effect social change but don’t have the resources to pay for advertising may often resort to engaging news media through the use of press releases, events, or rallies. Reliance on news media involves risks, in part because the organization can’t control whether the media will show up to publicize the story, nor can they control the nature of the message. As many protest groups that seek to change the system have discovered, getting the attention of the news media can be very difficult. Often, such groups resort to the use of dramatic tactics (such as street theater and confrontations) to attract media attention. Unfortunately, for these groups the resultant coverage is often negative and their tactics can be used as criticism against them and their cause. This has led to the realization that any publicity may not be better than no publicity at all.

Methodological Issues and Future Directions

Many of the methodological issues and problems associated with attempts to study the effects of planned social change campaigns are common to research on media effects in general. It is difficult to isolate cause and effect. How do we know that the effects are the results of the campaign and not something else? At the individual level, it is difficult to manipulate exposure to the campaign or to measure the degree of exposure to the campaign. Some campaigns have tried to set up experimental and control communities to assess change in response to the campaign, but again it is difficult to isolate campaign effects (see Hornik 2002).

One limitation of most planned social change campaigns is that they are essentially pilot campaigns designed to test the viability of a given campaign approach. They may be limited in scope and in time frame, and as such never achieve systemic change. These campaign projects may show positive campaign effects, but implementing the campaign on a system-wide basis may not be feasible. Thus, such campaigns may not have a wide or a lasting impact.

The most promising areas for the future of research and practice in planned social change are how to most effectively apply the methods of strategic communication honed by advertising and public relations practitioners, and how to harness and evaluate the power of the Internet and other new media. As the tools of strategic communication and media message production become more widely available, it may be more feasible for organizations such as social movements to engage in social change campaigns. As they go forward with these initiatives, there are a few important lessons to bear in mind. The acceptability of social change goals is in the eye of the beholder. It is far easier to spread knowledge than it is to change attitudes and behaviors. Mass-mediated messages are more effective when combined with Internet support and interpersonal communication that utilizes existing communication networks and opinion leaders. And finally, change is most likely to occur among individuals who are motivated to process information and when it is consistent with personal values and social norms.

References:

• Atkin, C., & Wallack, L. (eds.) (1990). Mass communication and public health: Complexities and conflict . Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
• Brown, W. J., & Singhal, A. (1999). Entertainment-education media strategies for social change: Promises and problems. In D. Demers & K. Viswanath (eds.), Mass media, social control and social change . Ames: Iowa State University Press, pp. 263–280.
• Cardoso, F. H., & Faletto, E. (1979). Dependency and development in Latin America . Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Demers, D., & Viswanath, K. (eds.) (1999). Mass media, social control and social change . Ames: Iowa State University Press, pp. 263–280.
• Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
• Gunther, A. C., & Storey, J. D. (2003). The influence of presumed influence. Journal of Communication , 53, 199–215.
• Hornik, R. C. (ed.) (2002). Public health communication: Evidence for behavior change . Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Hovland, C., Janis, I., & Kelley, H. H. (1953). Communication and persuasion . New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
• Lasswell, H. (1948). The structure and function of communication in society. In L. Bryson (ed.), The communication of ideas . New York: Institute for Religious and Social Studies, pp. 37–51.
• Lasswell, H. D., Lerner, D., & Speier, H. (eds.) (1979). Propaganda and communication in world history . Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
• Lee, A. M., & Lee, E. B. (1939). The fine art of propaganda: A study of Father Coughlin’s speeches . New York: Harcourt Brace.
• Lerner, D. (1958). The passing of traditional society: Modernizing the Middle East . Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
• Rice, R. E., & Paisley, W. J. (eds.) (1981). Public communication campaigns . Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
• Rogers, E. M. (1962). Diffusion of innovations . New York: Free Press.
• Salmon, C. T. (ed.) (1989). Information campaigns: Balancing social values and social change . Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
• Zaltman, G., & Duncan, R. (1977). Strategies for planned social change . New York: John Wiley.

Back to Communication and Social Change .

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons
• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

1.4: Generalist Practice

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 24546

• Aikia Fricke
• Ferris State University

When looking at generalist practice primary theories, the first question that may come to mind is what is generalist practice? Generalist practice introduces students to the basic concepts in social work which includes promoting human well-being and applying preventative and intervention methods to social problems at individual (micro), group (mezzo), and community (macro) levels while following ethical principles and critical thinking (Inderbitzen, 2014).

Now that you have some insight on what generalist practice is, we should discuss what a social work generalist does. A social work generalist uses a wide range of prevention and intervention methods when working with families, groups, individuals, and communities to promote human and social well-being (Johnson & Yanca, 2010).

Being a social work generalist practitioner prepares you to enter nearly any profession within the social work field, depending on your population of interest (Inderbitzen, 2014).

Micro, Mezzo, Macro Levels of Social Work

Micro level social work is the most common practice scenario and happens directly with an individual client or family; in most cases this is considered to be case management and therapy service. Micro social work involves meeting with individuals, families or small groups to help identify, and manage emotional, social, financial, or mental challenges, such as helping individuals to find appropriate housing, health care, and social services. Micro-practice may even include military social work like helping military officials and families cope with military life and circumstances (see Chapter 14), school social work which could involve helping with school related resources, Individual education plans, and so on (see Chapter 11), or a mental health case manager to help individuals understand and cope with their mental illnesses (see Chapter 10).

The focus of micro level practice is to help individuals, families, and small groups by giving one on one support and provide skills to help manage challenges (Johnson & Yanca. 2010).

Mezzo level social work involves developing and implementing plans for communities such as neighborhoods, churches, and schools. Social workers on the mezzo level interact directly with people and agencies that share the same passion or interest. The big difference between micro and mezzo level social work is that instead of engaging in individual counseling and support, mezzo social workers administer help to groups of people. Examples of work and interest that mezzo social workers could be involved in include the establishment of a free food pantry within a local church to help with food resources for vulnerable populations, health clinics to provide services for the uninsured, or community budgeting/financial programs for low income families.

Many mezzo social work roles exist; however social workers generally engage in micro and mezzo practice simultaneously (Kirst-Ashman & Hull, 2015).

Macro level social work is very distinct from micro and mezzo level. The focus of macro level social work is to help vulnerable populations indirectly and on a larger scale. The responsibilities for social workers on a macro level typically are finding the root cause or the why and effects of citywide, state, and/or national social problems.

They are responsible for creation and implementation of human service programs to address large scale social problems. Macro level social workers often advocate to encourage state and federal governments to change policies to better serve vulnerable populations (Kirst-Ashman & Hull, 2015).

Social workers that work on the macro level are often employed at non-profit organizations, public defense law firms (working pro-bono cases), government departments, and human rights organizations.

While macro social workers typically do not provide therapy or other assistance (case management) to clients, they may interact directly with the individuals while conducting interviews during their research that pertains to the populations and social inequalities of their interest.

Although, social work is broad and allows practitioners to move within the micro, mezzo, and macro levels. All social workers begin at the micro level to understand the inequalities, disadvantages, and the needed advocacy for vulnerable populations.

Systems Theory

Systems Theory is an interdisciplinary study of complex systems. It focuses on the dynamics and interactions of people in their environments (Ashman, 2013). The Systems Theory is valuable to the social work profession because it assists social workers with identifying, defining, and addressing problems within social systems.

As social workers, we utilize the Systems Theory to help us understand the relationships between individuals, families, and organizations within our society. Systems theory allows social workers to identify how a system functions and how the negative impacts of a system can affect a person, family, organization, and society, by working together to cause a positive impact within that system (Flamand, 2017).

Ecological Systems Theory

The Ecological Systems Theory was created in the late 1970’s by Urie Bronfenbrenner. According to Oswalt (2015), Bronfenbrenner developed the Ecological Systems Theory to explain how a child’s environment affects their growth and development. The four levels that are described below are the different levels according to Bronfenbrenner that affect the different development stages of a child.

The main concept behind ecological approach is “person in environment” (P.I.E). The ecological approach implies that every person lives in an environment that can affect their outcome or circumstance. As social workers, our job is to improve a person’s environment by helping them identify what is negatively impacting their environment.

When discussing this theory, it is important to understand the four systems that make up the ecological systems: microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, and macrosystem.

The microsystem is the smallest system, focusing on the relationship between a person and their direct environment. The mesosystem is a step above the microsystem. This system focuses on the relationship between groups and the effects that one social group may have on another social group. The exosystem is a more generalized system as it shows the effect that a group has on interactions among other groups. Lastly, the macrosystem focuses on the bigger issues such as culture, politics, government, and society (Allen-Meares & Lane, 1987).

When focusing on a client by providing case management or support to an individual that is facing hardships, we often look at a person’s microsystem. Looking at a person’s environment allows us as social workers to help identify problem areas or what is negatively impacting their lives.

This is usually done by making an eco-map to give the client a visual aide during the identifying process. An eco-map is a diagram that shows the social and personal relationships of an individual with his or her environment. Eco-maps were developed in 1975 by Dr. Ann Hartman, a social worker who is also credited for developing the genogram (Genachte, 2009).

Below is an example of what an eco-map would look like once it is completed with your client.

Eco-maps will vary in what they look like as each map will cater to the specific client/family, and will highlight the stressors (negatives), positives, and relationships.

Greg’s Eco-map

A genogram mimics a family tree. Normally when you look at a family tree you often find branches and each branch represent a family. A genogram digs deeper and identifies relationships, deaths, marriages, births, divorce, and adoptions just to name a few. When collecting information to complete a genogram it is useful to understand a family’s dynamics (Johnson & Yanca, 2010.)

Here is an example of a genogram; this genogram along with other samples and variations can be found on www.sampletemplates.com . Genograms can help clients identify their roots and culture. While completing genograms also be aware that while unraveling a client’s history, past trauma or closed wounds can be reopened. As a social worker you need to be prepared to discuss and address these issues to help your client address their past trauma.

Strengths Approach

The development of the Strength s Approach began and has been led by Dennis Saleeby and staff at the University of Kansas. The Strengths Approach is based off two very important principles:

• every person, group, family, and community has strengths
• every community or environment is full of resources (Johnson & Yanca, 2010)

In the Strengths Approach, it is the social worker’s job to help the client identify their strengths. Often clients with whom we work with are only able to identify the negative impacts of their lives and have a difficult time identifying the positive aspects of their lives and situations. When using the Strengths Approach not only is the social worker helping the client to identify their personal strengths, but the worker is also helping the client identify local resources to help the client needs.

This approach focuses on the strengths and resources that the client already has rather than building on new strengths and resources. The reasoning behind the strength approach is to help clients with immediate needs, and to help with finding solutions to immediate problems.

Planned Change Model

The planned change process was introduced to the social work profession in 1957 by Helen Harris Perlman. The P lanned Change Model is the development and implementation of a plan or strategy to improve or alter a pattern of behaviors, a condition, or circumstance to improve a client’s well-being or situation (Kirst-Ashman, 2012).

The Planned Change Model consists of a seven-step process which includes:

• Implementation
• Termination

The Engagement phase is the first interaction between the social worker and their client. The engagement stage does not have a predetermined time frame; it can last for a couple of minutes to a few hours depending on the client and the circumstances. It is very important during the engagement phase that the social worker displays active listening skills, eye contact, empathy and empathetic responses, can reflect to the client what has been said, and uses questioning skills (motivational interviewing). It is appropriate to take notes during the engagement phase for assessment purposes or for reflection. Remember, during the engagement phase, the social worker is building a level of rapport and trust with the client.

The Assessment phase is the process occurring between social worker and client in which information is gathered, analyzed and synthesized to provide a concise picture of the client and their needs and strengths. The assessment phase is very important as it is the foundation of the planning and action phases that follow.

During the assessment stages, there are five key points:

• identifying the need problem (concern)
• identify the nature of the problem
• identify strengths and resources
• collect information
• analyze the collected information

(Johnson & Yanca, 2010)

The Planning phase is when the client and social worker develop a plan with goals and objectives as to what needs to be done to address the problem. A plan is developed to help the client meet their need or address the problem (Johnson, & Yanca, 2010). The planning phase is a joint process where the worker and the client identify the strengths and resources gathered from the assessment phase. Once the strengths and resources are identified, the social worker and the client come up with a plan by outlining goals, objectives, and tasks to help meets the clients goal to address the need or problem. During the planning phase, keep in mind that the goals should be what the client is comfortable with and finds feasible to obtain. The social worker’s most important job during this phase is to help the client identify strengths and resources, not to come up with the client’s goals for them.

The Implementation / Action phase is when the client and social worker execute a plan to address the areas of concern by completing the objectives to meet the client’s goals. The action phase is also considered a joint phase as the social worker and the client act! The worker and the client begin to work on the task that were identified in the planning phase (Johnson & Yanca, 2010). The worker and the client are responsible for taking on different parts of the identified task; for example, the social worker may find a local food pantry or help with food assistance program if the client needs food. The client may work on making a grocery list of foods that will make bigger portions for leftovers to make food last longer for the family. However, the worker and the client are jointly working together to obtain the goal of providing food for the client and their family.

The Evaluation Phase/Termination p hase is a constant. The worker should always evaluate how the client is doing throughout the process of the working relationship (Johnson & Yanca, 2010). When the plan has been completed or the goals have been met, the client and social worker review the goals and objective and evaluate the change and/or the success. If change or progress has not been made the client and social worker will review the goals and objectives and make changes or modifications to meet the goal. Once the goals have been met, termination of services follows if there are no further need for services or other concerns to address. Sometimes termination happens before goal completion, due to hospitalizations, relocation, losing contact with a client, financial hardships , or the inability to engage the client.

The Follow Up phase is when the social worker reaches out to the client to make sure they are still following their goals, using their skills, and making sure the client is doing well. The follow up may not always be possible due to different situations such as death, relocation, and change in contact information, to name a few.

The diagram below shows the process of the Planned Change Model when working with clients.

Evidence Based Practice (EBP)

According to David Sackett, evidence based practice is the conscientious, explicit and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of a client. When working with clients it is important to combine research and clinical expertise. In the field of social work there is constant research being conducted to assess various assessment and treatment modalities. The research that is conducted provides the evidence that we as social workers use to help our clients improve their living situations and concerns. Lastly, keep in mind that our clients are the experts on their own lives. We must keep in mind what their personal values are and what their preferences are for the outcome of their life situation. This is very important and often can become frustrating as a social worker as we think we know what is right for our client, but it may not be their personal preference.

When working with clients and evidence based practices it is important to know that research is constant surrounding evidence based practices, and as a practicing social worker it is very important to stay abreast of the constant change of new information and changes. It is important to do your own research, and most importantly always respect your clients’ personal values and preferences.

Allen-Meares, P., & Lane, B. (1987). Grounding social work practice in theory: Ecosystems. Social Casework, 68 , 515-521.

Bonecutter, & Gleeson. (n.d.). Genograms and ecomaps: Tools for developing a broad view of family. Retrieved from http://www.tnchildren.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Genograms-and-Ecomaps.pdf

Dziegielewski, S. (2013). The changing face of health care social work (3rd ed.). New York: Springer.

Elements Behavioral Health. (2012, August 10). What are evidence-based practices? Retrieved from www.elementsbehavioralhealth.com/addiction-recovery/evidence-based-practices/

Flamand, L. (2017). Systems theory of social work. People of everyday life. Retrieved from http://peopleof.oureverydaylife.com/systems-theory-social-work-6260.html

Inderbitzen, S. (2014, February 3). What does it mean to be a social work generalist? Social work degree guide. Retrieved from http://www.socialworkdegreeguide.com/what-does-it-mean-to-be-a-social-work-generalist/

Johnson, L. C., & Yanca, S. J. (2010). Social work practice: A generalist approach (10th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Kirst-Ashman, K. K., & Hull, G. H., Jr. (2015). Generalist practice with organizations and communities (6th ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Lewin, R. G. (2009). Helen Harris Perlman. In Jewish women: A comprehensive historical encyclopedia . Retrieved from https://jwa.org/encyclopedia/article/perlman-helen-harris

Mathainit, M. A., & Meyer, C. H. (2006). Ecosystems perspective: Implications for practice. Retrieved from home.earthlink.net/~mattaini/Ecosystems.html

Oswalt, A. (2015). Urie Bronfenbrenner and child development. Gulf Bend Center. Retrieved from http://gulfbend.org/poc/view_doc.php?type=doc&id=7930&cn=28

Pardeck, J. T. (1988). An ecological approach for social work practice. The Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare, 15 (2), 134-144. Retrieved from http://scholarworks.wmich.edu/jssw/vol15/iss2/11

Steyaert, J. (2013, April ). Ann Hartman. In History of social work. Retrieved from www.historyofsocialwork.org

HYPOTHESIS AND THEORY article

Toward a psychology of social change: a typology of social change.

• Social Change and Identity Laboratory, Department of Psychology, Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada

Millions of people worldwide are affected by dramatic social change (DSC). While sociological theory aims to understand its precipitants, the psychological consequences remain poorly understood. A large-scale literature review pointed to the desperate need for a typology of social change that might guide theory and research toward a better understanding of the psychology of social change. Over 5,000 abstracts from peer-reviewed articles were assessed from sociological and psychological publications. Based on stringent inclusion criteria, a final 325 articles were used to construct a novel, multi-level typology designed to conceptualize and categorize social change in terms of its psychological threat to psychological well-being. The typology of social change includes four social contexts: Stability, Inertia, Incremental Social Change and, finally, DSC. Four characteristics of DSC were further identified: the pace of social change, rupture to the social structure, rupture to the normative structure, and the level of threat to one's cultural identity. A theoretical model that links the characteristics of social change together and with the social contexts is also suggested. The typology of social change as well as our theoretical proposition may serve as a foundation for future investigations and increase our understanding of the psychologically adaptive mechanisms used in the wake of DSC.

“Change— extremely rapid social change —is the most important fact of life today”

( Nolan and Lenski, 2011 , p. xiii).

Zoia is a lively 75-year-old Baboushka . Her eventful life has seen her experience some less-than-welcome adventures, but she has always managed to adapt to unfamiliar circumstances. After completing her studies in Moscow, she was, like many other young educated Russians, deported by USSR authorities to another state. Her destination was Frunze (later renamed Bishkek), a land in Central Asia warmer than hers and made slightly cooler by its unfamiliarity. Despite the diversity of Frunze, with ethnic Kyrgyz, Ukrainians, and other Slavic groups forming sizeable minorities, the Russian population remained a majority. During the Soviet era, Zoia was told that she lived in one of the most powerful countries in the world, where crime rates were low and the population enjoyed decent education and food supply, as well as the opportunity to save money for retirement.

The diversity of ethnicities eventually bred great tension, and the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s deeply affected Zoia's life. At the age of 54, she learned that her country was in ruins, that her rights as a Russian were diminished and that her language was widely frowned upon within the newly formed Kyrgyz Republic, Kyrgyzstan. Meanwhile, the disorganized authority allowed for an explosion in crime rates and increasing scarcity of resources. Zoia lost all of her life savings. The money she earned was no longer sufficient to cover basic necessities. Despite her position as a chief engineer, Zoia was forced to work a second job selling newspapers at the corner of her street just to make ends meet.

Although Zoia's story may seem uniquely dramatic, it is only one among over one billion ( Sun and Ryder, 2016 ). Social change is indiscriminately pervasive and global—restricted to neither developing nor western worlds (e.g., Ponsioen, 1962 ; Smith, 1973 ; Chirot and Merton, 1986 ; Zuck, 1997 ; Sztompka, 1998 ; Fukuyama, 1999 ; Weinstein, 2010 ; Nolan and Lenski, 2011 ; Greenfield, 2016 ). Dramatic social change (DSC) is the new normal and can be witnessed presently across a multitude of contexts from political and economic upheaval, to desperate mass migration, and from natural or human disasters to technological advances.

Social change has always been a field of great interest for the social sciences, especially among sociologists since it seems that “all sociology is about change” ( Sztompka, 1993 , p.xiii; see also Sztompka, 2004 ). Many sociology texts have entire sections devoted to social change (e.g., Bauman, 2003 ; Latour, 2005 ; Hewitt et al., 2008 ; Giddens et al., 2011 ) all aimed at addressing one main question: What leads to social change ? Many sociological theories have been suggested to explain the different “macro” processes associated with the onset of revolutions, social movements, or important technological changes. A “macro” theory focuses on the structural factors or defining events that contribute to DSC and are useful when considering how social changes are brought upon an entire group, community, institution, nation, or indeed society as a whole. The macro approach, however, is seriously limited when it comes to “micro” processes, which focus on the equally important question of the consequences of social change, or, in other words, how individual group members are impacted by social change (e.g., Rogers, 2003 ). Thus, the exclusive research focus on macro processes has left unanswered the pivotal question: What are the psychological consequences of social change?

Given the potentially dire consequences of DSC, it is surprising that psychologists have neglected it as a topic of rigorous academic pursuit, particularly given the current reality of vast globalization and massive immigration. To date, research focusing on the impact of social change on the well-being of individuals has not been clearly established ( Kim, 2008 ; Liu et al., 2014 ). Moreover, the adaptation mechanisms that people develop when coping with such contexts remain largely unknown ( Pinquart and Silbereisen, 2004 ).

The goal of the present paper is to argue that psychology needs to focus on the psychology of social change ( de la Sablonnière et al., 2013 ; de la Sablonnière and Usborne, 2014 ). I argue that the bridge between the “macro” processes of social change and the “micro” processes of its psychological impacts have yet to be built. I suggest that social scientists must first focus on conceptualizing social change in a manner that includes both macro and micro processes in order to understand individuals' adaptation to social change. Thus, as the first step in moving toward a psychology of social change, I target what is considered the most difficult challenge: conceptualizing social change.

First and foremost, conceptualizing social change requires untangling the complexity of the topic by formulating a typology of social change (see Table 1 ). To that end, a large-scale meta-review that assembled original perspectives, theories and definitions of social change within both the sociological and psychological literature was performed. The typology of social change that emerged distinguishes four separate social contexts associated with social change: stability, inertia, incremental social change, and DSC. DSC, because of its frequency in today's world, and because it is threatening to people, requires special attention. Thus, the proposed typology of social change drills deeper and articulates four necessary characteristics for a change or an event to be labeled as “dramatic social change”: rapid pace of change, rupture in social structure, rupture in normative structure, and threat to cultural identity. Finally, I come full circle by proposing a theoretical model that links together the four characteristics of DSC within the proposed typology of social change (see Figure 1 ). In sum, the typology of social change I am suggesting can be useful to create a theoretical consensus among researchers about what social change is that perhaps will allow for a coordinated, evidence based strategy to address the psychology of social change.

Table 1. The typology of social change .

Figure 1. Proposed theoretical model .

Social Change in Sociology and Psychology

Today, the field of sociology is at the forefront of social change theory and research, with a particular focus upon the factors that constitute and are prerequisites to social change. Within the sociological literature, three main theories have been championed for their attempt to explain social change: Evolutionary Theory, Conflict Theory , and Functionalist Theory . Each theory is characterized by key descriptive interpretations in Table 2 where a global overview of the conceptualization of social change is offered 1 .

Table 2. Theories of social change in sociology .

Despite the first appearance of “social change” in the psychological literature more than 70 years ago, only a few isolated psychologists have focused on social change per se and even fewer have offered a clear definition or conceptualization of the concept. The first paper that defined social change was published in the Academy of Political and Social Science and was entitled Psychology of Social Change . Social change was defined as “always a slow and gradual process” ( Marquis, 1947 , p. 75). From that point in time to the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, there have been very few attempts to reintroduce social change into the field of psychology (e.g., Pizer and Travers, 1975 ; Schneiderman, 1988 ). However, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the fall of the Berlin Wall, there has been a small surge of research on social change in psychology. For example, several edited books (e.g., Thomas and Veno, 1992 ; Breakwell and Lyons, 1996 ; Crockett and Silbereisen, 2000 ) and special issues of journals ( Silbereisen and Tomasik, 2010 ; Blackwood et al., 2013 ) have focused exclusively on social change and on people's reactions to it. For clarity purposes, Table 3 attempts to summarize the various theories or perspectives in different subfields of cultural and social psychology while Table 4 attempts to do so in subfields of psychology.

Table 3. Theories and perspectives addressing social change in social psychology .

Table 4. Theories addressing social change in subfields of psychology .

Limitations of Current Research and Conceptualization of Social Change in Sociology and Psychology

As indicated in the summary tables, both contemporary and traditional theorists in sociology and psychology have addressed social change through a variety of macro sociological or societal lenses, and equally from a plethora of micro, psychological, or individual perspectives. Theory and research thus far has demonstrated that social change is a complex entity (e.g., McGrath, 1983 ; Buchanan et al., 2005 ; Subašić et al., 2012 ) that can be conceptualized in many diverging (and confusing) ways. The challenge associated with defining social change may well be to explain why it is an understudied phenomenon ( de la Sablonnière et al., 2013 ) and highlight the challenge of moving forward in studying its psychological impact on ordinary people. The typology of social change presented here offers an initial attempt at clarifying the meaning of social change from a psychological perspective. That is, I focus on an individualistic perspective, but attempt to address the role that macro processes play in terms of our more micro or psychological focus. Here, I discuss three main issues that point to the necessity to properly conceptualize DSC.

First, and most importantly, the conceptualization and understanding of social change does not reach a consensus within the scientific literature (e.g., Coughlin and Khinduka, 1976 ). Furthermore, few scientists define precisely what they mean when using the concept (e.g., Saran, 1963 ). For example, when social change is studied from a social identity theory perspective ( Tajfel and Turner, 1986 ), or a sociological conflict theory perspective, social change is conceptualized almost exclusively in the context of collective action ( Krznaric, 2007 ). In light of this, collective action is defined as a means for group members to achieve an improved social position for their group in the social hierarchy ( Taylor and McKirnan, 1984 ; Batel and Castro, 2015 ; de Lemus and Stroebe, 2015 ). In contrast, cultural psychology and developmental psychology conceptualize social change in a broader manner (e.g., societal transformations such as the fall of the Soviet Union; immigration) where change is not limited to the context of intergroup conflict ( Pinquart and Silbereisen, 2004 ; Sun and Ryder, 2016 ). The fact that there is divergence in conceptualizing social change is preventing coordinated research on social change, because not all types of social change are considered. With some theories (e.g., relative deprivation theory, social identity theory, evolutionary theory, conflict theory), social change is conceived mostly as an autonomously controlled and unidirectional process toward group change; these conceptualizations do not account for social changes that are outside of human control, such as natural disasters (e.g., Coughlin and Khinduka, 1976 ). Equating social change with collective action (see Stroebe et al., 2015 ), for example, neglects uncontrollable social transformations such as socio-political reforms and natural disasters over which individuals or groups exert no control. Indeed, the majority of individuals who experience DSC have little control over such events. Since previous classifications can only explain some instances of social change, a theory that would clarify the characteristics required in conceptualizing DSC for all types of change has become a necessity.

The second issue that points to the need for a typology of social change is that not all social contexts associated with social change (i.e., stability and inertia) were considered in previous scientific literature. Most theoretical and empirical work on social change in both sociology and psychology has focused on either incremental social change or DSC (e.g., Andersson et al., 2014 ; Bernstrøm and Kjekshus, 2015 ). However, in order to have a complete theory or typology of social change, it is also necessary to take into account social contexts where there is no social change, contexts of either stability or inertia (Table 1 ). Knowing about incremental social change, inertia and stability, as well as how they relate to DSC is psychologically critical. A clear definition of the four social contexts of social change can facilitate finding solutions for the population to not only the consequences associated with DSC, but also the considerable and potentially unique challenges associated with each of these social contexts (see Abrams and Vasiljevic, 2014 ). For example, a society in a state of inertia may be misconceived as a society in a state of DSC if no clear understanding of each social context is achieved. In inertia, there might be less hope for reverting to a healthy society and consequently less long-term goals that are developed, whereas a time of DSC, such as a political revolution, may provide some hope for the future and some possibilities for some concrete long-term goals. Although the main focus of our paper is DSC, the full spectrum of social contexts associated with social change is presented. A more comprehensive theory of social change capable of accounting for stability, inertia as well as incremental and DSC is required to fully understand the psychological processes and ramifications of social change. Moreover, it is important to define stability, inertia, and incremental social change because they serve as a base for comparison or contrast to DSC. As Calhoun notes: “To understand social change, thus, it is necessary also to understand what produces social continuity” ( Calhoun, 2000 , p. 2642).

Finally, the third issue that pushes me to develop a typology of social change is that, mainly in sociology, a specific event that can be characterized as social change can be interpreted in light of different theories of social change. Let us take the 2005 Tulip Revolution in Kyrgyzstan as an example. Evolutionary theorists may argue that this revolution followed the natural evolution of Kyrgyz society. On the other hand, functionalist theorists may argue that there was disequilibrium in Kyrgyzstan at the time of the revolution. However, it would be beneficial to conceptualize social change the same way in order to be able to assess its impact on individuals. What is needed is a conceptualization of social change that can be interpreted in light of all the theories and processes that have been developed thus far. When an in-depth analysis of the literature is performed, the essential characteristics that define social change across theories may be ascertained. For example, one of the characteristics that was identified in conceptualizing DSC was the rapid pace of social change. The rapid vs. slow pace of social change is important, for instance, to distinguish a DSC from an incremental social change where transformations in the social structure take place without major disruptions. Whether one conceptualizes social change from a functionalist theory, a social identity theory, or a developmental theory perspective, most researchers from these distinctive fields point to the pace of change as one pivotal and essential element that characterizes DSC. Thus, when I base the typology of social change upon such characteristics, garnered from previous research in both sociology and psychology, an all-encompassing conceptualization of social change may be obtained, and later used to guide empirical research independently of the diverging theoretical perspectives.

My observations on the limitations of sociology and psychology should not detract from the insightful contributions these disciplines have made to our understanding of social change. Indeed, these social scientists have tapped into very important issues. For example, although collective action is not the only type of social change, the research on this topic has successfully identified factors that lead individuals and groups to be dissatisfied with their conditions and engage in collective action. However, as Sampson (1989) pointed out: “we have not gone far enough in connecting our theories of the person with social change, in particular, with major historic transformation in the social world” (p. 417). Since our contemporary social world is characterized by social change ( Weinstein, 2010 ), like Sampson (1989) , I argue that “a psychology for tomorrow is a psychology that begins actively to chart out a theory of the person that is no longer rooted in the liberal individualistic assumptions, but is reframed in terms more suitable to resolving the issues of a global era” (p. 431).

In sum, social change needs to be clearly examined because future research is limited without an all-inclusive typology of social change; one that can bridge the epistemological differences between theories from various fields of research and diverging theoretical perspectives. What is needed is a clear conceptualization of social change that considers, and includes, the different characteristics that compose DSC and that were suggested by researchers from all these diverging areas and theoretical orientations.

Constructing a Typology of Social Change: The Characteristics of DSC

Two separate databases from sociology and psychology were targeted to collate relevant peer-reviewed publications: Sociology Abstracts and PsycInfo. Including the year 2016, a total of 5,676 abstracts were carefully analyzed (90% inter-judge reliability; Table 5 ). Two inclusion criteria were used to determine if a manuscript was relevant to our typology of social change. First, the selected abstract, and then the articles, needed to a) focus on social change by including a relevant original definition or providing an original perspective on the concept (originality), or b) focus on one's perspective of social change at either the individual or group level (perceptions).

Table 5. Number of abstracts and articles that satisfied the specified inclusion criteria .

When reviewing the literature, I had one main goal: selecting and identifying the necessary characteristics of DSC that could either be present or not in other social contexts (i.e., stability, inertia, and incremental social change). Scientists refer to the characteristics in two different ways: (1) formally, when defining or describing DSC, incremental social change, stability, or inertia, and (2) informally, when introducing their research on social change 2 . I made sure that the included articles sufficiently addressed one or more of the four selected characteristics (i.e., rapid pace of change, rupture in social structure, rupture in normative structure, and threat to cultural identity, see Table 6 ). These four characteristics were chosen after a first reading of each of the articles (up to October 2013). They emerged most consistently and were singled out more often for their importance. From prior knowledge, I anticipated that “pace of change” and “social structure” would surface. The other two emerged naturally. From prior knowledge, I also expected the term “valence of change” (i.e., negative change) to emerge (e.g., Slone et al., 2002 ; de la Sablonnière and Tougas, 2008 ; de la Sablonnière et al., 2009c ; Kim, 2008 ). However, that characteristic did not appear in a significant number of papers. The fact that some authors report “positive” change as having negative consequences (e.g., Prislin and Christensen, 2005 ; Bruscella, 2015 ) and “negative” change as having positive consequence (e.g., Yakushko, 2008 ; Abrams and Vasiljevic, 2014 ) may explain why the valence did not emerge as an important characteristic of DSC.

Table 6. Characteristics of dramatic social change .

To conceptualize an event as DSC, all four characteristics must be present. For example, if an event is affecting only the normative structure in a gradual manner, it would not be possible to label that event as DSC. As for the other three social contexts (stability, inertia, and incremental social change), each has its own unique configuration of characteristics (see Figure 1 ) 3 .

The Pace of Change

The first characteristic that emerged regards the pace , which could either be slow or rapid, and is defined as the speed at which an event impacts a collectivity . When defining social change, researchers from both sociology and psychology distinguish two types of social change based on the pace of change: incremental (e.g., first-order change, beta change, decline, gradual, small-scale) and dramatic (e.g., second-order, gamma, abrupt, collapse, large-scale).

Theories of social change have explicitly and/or implicitly acknowledged the pace of social change as a central determining factor toward its characterization. For example, in one of the earliest versions of their seminal book, Lenski and Lenski (1974) state: “The most striking feature of contemporary life is the revolutionary pace of social change. Never before have things changed so fast for so much of mankind” ( Lenski and Lenski, 1974 , p. 3, see also Fried, 1964 ; Rudel and Hooper, 2005 ). In their new edition entitled Human Societies: An Introduction to Macrosociology , Nolan and Lenski (2011) describe how slowly human evolution has progressed for thousands of years until about 100 years ago, when humans began to evolve at an accelerated pace. Similarly, Weinstein (2010) suggests that for the last few decades, there has been “rapid and accelerating rates of change in human relations, from the interpersonal to the international level” (p. xvii).

It is worthwhile to note that a few key authors refer to pace when distinguishing different types of social change. For example, in organizational psychology, Nadler and Tushman (1995) distinguish slow “incremental” change from fast “discontinuous” change, where the latter would be characterized as DSC in the typology of social change. According to these authors, incremental changes are intended to continually improve the fit among the components of an organization. These changes can either be small or large; nonetheless, there is a succession of manageable changes and adaptation processes. In contrast, discontinuous changes are often linked to major changes in the global scope of the industry and involve a complete break with the past as well as a major reconstruction of almost all elements of the organization. These changes are more traumatic, painful, and demanding as individuals are required to acquire a whole new set of behaviors and discard old patterns. These dramatic changes are not made to improve the fit, but to construct a new collectivity, be it a nation-state, institution or sub-group of the larger collectivity. Newman (2000) also distinguishes between first-order change and second-order change in the context of organizations. According to him, a first-order change, which is equivalent to incremental social change, “is most likely during times of relative environmental stability and is likely to take place over extended periods of time” ( Newman, 2000 , p.604). In other words, this type of change occurs slowly and allows the organization and its members to adapt to the changes gradually. However, a second-order change, or DSC, is radical, and transforms the core of the organization ( Newman, 2000 ). In this case, the change is so sudden that it does not necessarily allow individuals to adapt to the process ( Buchanan et al., 2005 ). Similarly, Rogers (2003) defines social change as abrupt and arises when the entire system is modified and jeopardized because changes are too fast for the system to adjust. In his book, Diamond (2005) contrasts “decline”—where minor ups and downs do not restructure the society—with “collapse”—an extreme form of several milder types of decline—which make it a DSC. An example of collapse is when most of the inhabitants of a population vanish as a result of ecological disasters, starvation, war, or disease. Examples of this are genocides such as Rwanda's which claimed around 800,000 lives, destroyed much of the country's infrastructure and displaced four million people ( Des Forges, 1999 ; Zorbas, 2004 ; Pham et al., 2004 ; Staub et al., 2005 ; Schaal and Elbert, 2006 ; Prunier, 2010 ; Yanagizawa-Drott, 2014 ), the Armenian Massacres, which saw the systematic extermination of about 1.5 million minority Armenians in Turkey ( Dadrian, 1989 , 1998 ) or Cambodia's genocide, which involved the death of almost two million people through the Khmer Rouge's policies of relocation, mass executions, torture, forced labor, malnutrition, and disease ( Hannum, 1989 ). All these events led to an inordinate number of deaths and population movements in a short, restricted period of time.

To be considered dramatic , a social change needs to be quick and must involve a “break with the past” ( Nadler and Tushman, 1995 ; see also Armenakis et al., 1986 ). The example most often used in the literature is the breakdown of the communist system in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union (e.g., Kollontai, 1999 ; Pinquart et al., 2009 ; Round and Williams, 2010 ; Walker and Stephenson, 2010 ; Chen, 2015 ). For example, when Pinquart et al. (2004 , p. 341) introduced their research on social change, they made a distinction between “gradual” change, such as ideological change in many Western societies, and “abrupt social change,” which represents a form of social change that may be spurred by a sudden, dramatic transformation of economic, political, and social institutions.

Rupture in the Social Structure

The second characteristic of DSC that emerges from my review regards a rupture in the social structure of a collectivity or a group. Social structure is a term that has several different uses in the sociological literature and this is, in part, because of the lack of agreement on how the term social structure should be defined ( Porpora, 1989 ; López and Scott, 2000) . One main dispute pits the dualism of “action” (or agency) vs. “structure” in mainstream sociological work (for a discussion see López and Scott, 2000 ). Consequently, many of the definitions describe behaviors rather than the role of social institutions (e.g., Cortina et al., 2012 ; Tanner and Jackson, 2012 ; Wilson, 2012 ). For example, Tanner and Jackson (2012) define social structure as “the formation of groups via connections among individuals” (p. 260), which focuses on meso-level interactions among individuals. Similarly, Macionis et al. (2008) define social structure as “any relatively stable pattern of social behavior” (p. 13).

The social structure being discussed in the present paper refers to macro-level elements of society such as institutions that facilitate and structure collective interactions, roles or behaviors. Thus, directly inspired from the most prominent definitions of social structure in the literature ( Marx, 1859/1970 ; Giddens, 1979 ; Porpora, 1989 ; López and Scott, 2000 ; Stinchcombe, 2000 ), social structure is defined here as a system of socio-economic stratification, social institutions, organizations, national policies and laws that help structure the norms, roles, behaviors, and values of community members 4 .

In both sociology and psychology, a rupture in the social structure is at the heart of definitions of social change. For example, for Breakwell and Lyons (1996) , changes involve the disintegration of previous national and international order and sets in motion a process of re-definition and re-evaluation of societal norms, belief systems, and power structures. While the communal sense of continuity and permanence is challenged, social change often represents a period of massive transformations in political, social, and economic structures (e.g., Goodwin, 1998 ; Kim and Ng, 2008 ; Chen, 2012 ). This conceptualization is similar to the definition inspired by sociologists and provided by Silbereisen and Tomasik ( 2010 , p. 243) where “social change is understood as a more or less rapid and comprehensive change of societal structures and institutions, including changes to the economic, technological, and cultural frameworks of a society ( Calhoun, 1992 )” or to Kohn's definition of radical social change: “we refer not to the pace of change but to the nature of the change—the transformation of one political and economic system into a quite different system” ( Kohn et al., 1997 , p. 615).

When research focuses on collective action, social structure is placed at the root of their definition. For example, “Breakdown Theories” in sociology argue that social movements result from the disruption or breakdown of previously integrative social structures. This theory regards collective action as a form of social imbalance that results from the improper functioning of social institutions ( Tilly et al., 1975 ). Macionis et al. (2008) also suggest that, “revolutionary social movements attempt to target the whole collectivity by radically changing social institutions” (p. 452). Put differently, for social movements and collective action to occur, social institutions—consequently, the social structure of society—needs to be altered. In other words, social change “is the sudden shifting of power from group to group” ( Schrickel, 1945 , p. 188). To many authors, DSC involves a rupture in the social structure (e.g., Prilleltensky, 1990 ) where people need to “negotiate their way through or around social structures” ( May, 2011 , p. 367).

Rupture in the Normative Structure

The third characteristic of DSC that emerged from the literature is the rupture in the normative structure of society. While reading on the subject, I noticed an important distinction between social structure and normative structure. As mentioned in the previous section, that distinction pointed to a duality that is also observed by theorists in sociology who attempt to define social structure (e.g., Giddens, 1979 ; Mayhew, 1980 ; Porpora, 1989 ; López and Scott, 2000 ). Although both the social and normative structures refer to the functioning of a society, they each point to two different aspects of communities and groups. As discussed earlier, the social structure is associated with macro processes such as social institutions (e.g., Government), whereas the normative structure is related to micro processes as they principally refer to community members' habitual behaviors and norms.

Based on the work of Taylor and de la Sablonnière (2013 , 2014) , the normative structure is defined here as the behaviors of most community members whose aim is achieving collective goals . In other terms, when the normative structure is clear, people know what to do and when to engage in specific behaviors in order to meet the overarching goals of the collectivity. The definition of normative structure also takes its inspiration from an array of different domains in the scientific literature. Mainly, it comes from the definitions of social change that most often involve a change in behaviors and habits that are disrupted with the event of a dramatic and rapid social change. For example, Bishop ( 1998 , p. 406) clearly states that social change in its transformational form refers to “the ability of a group to behave differently, even to creating brand-new elements, within the same social identity.” This definition concurs with definitions of many more authors, such as Delanty's (2012) concept of “normative culture” or May's (2011), where the mundane “ordinary” activities take a central place in social change.

Research and theories on social change have put normative structure as one of its central tenants. For example, Tomasik et al. (2010) , argue that social change involves “changes of the macro-context that disturb habits, interrupt routines, or require novel behaviors relevant for a successful mastery” (p. 247). These authors also assert that when a gradual social change occurs, “old options of thinking and behaving are usually still available whereas abrupt social change is often associated with an immediate blocking of old options” ( Pinquart and Silbereisen, 2004 , p. 295). Therefore, in the latter case, it will be necessary to develop new ways of doing things.

Jerneić and Šverko (2001) argue that “major political and socioeconomic changes may strongly influence people's life role priorities, which are otherwise relatively stable behavioral dispositions” (p. 46). In fact, the normative structure of a society is comprised not only of norms and behaviors, but also of roles that people have in their everyday lives. When a DSC occurs, these normative elements of people's lives are all greatly affected to the point where they need to be redefined. Similarly, McDade and Worthman (2004) refer to “socialization ambiguity,” a state present in the context of DSC where “inconsistent messages or conflicting expectations regarding appropriate beliefs and social behavior during the course of socialization may be a substantial source of stress for the developing individual” (p. 52; see also Arnett, 1995 ; Tonkens, 2012 ).

This rupture in the normative structure of society is present not only when radical changes such as natural disasters occur, but also when social change is the result of collective actions within a society. Subašić et al. (2012) acknowledge that “what we do is evidently shaped by social norms, by institutional possibilities, and institutional constraints. But equally, we can act—act together that is—to alter norms, institutions, and even whole social systems” (p. 66). Therefore, when members of a society come together and engage in collective actions, an important aspect of society they aim to change deals with the norms and normative structure.

The importance of the normative component involved in DSC is in accordance with the Normative Theory of Social Change, developed by Taylor et al. ( Taylor and de la Sablonnière, 2013 , 2014 ; see also de la Sablonnière et al., 2009b ). According to their theory, any group—whether it be at the collective, community or country level—functions along the basic 80-20 principle in times of stability. According to this principle, most of the citizens in a functioning society (i.e., 80% of them) will exhibit normative behaviors that agree with the normative structure of the society in order to accomplish collective goals such as achieving a healthy society, and by extension, personal goals such as maintaining a healthy lifestyle. It is the 80% that provide social support, when necessary, to the 20% of citizens who do not function successfully in the society. In theory, as long as there is a decent majority of people who conform to the normative structure, a society should function relatively smoothly. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. Sometimes, when a society is confronted with DSC, its normative structure is ruptured which may lead to societal dysfunction or important disruptions in the “usual” behavior of group members. In such a situation, the amount of group members exhibiting behaviors that are in agreement with the collective goals of the group will be lower than usual. Therefore, it is possible that instead of having 80% of group members acting according to the normative rules of the society, only 30 or 40 % of individuals will follow these rules. In this case, it becomes very difficult for people to restore the functional equilibrium of the normative structure as only a few group members are in a position to provide the necessary social support for the entire society to function properly ( Taylor and de la Sablonnière, 2014 ). What is suggested here is consistent with the work of Albert and Sabini (1974) . These authors refer to the importance of a supportive environment, or social support, which has a sufficient presence in “slow change,” but not when the context is one of rapid change.

Threat to Cultural Identity

The fourth characteristic of social change is threats to the cultural identity of a group. This characteristic is a difficult one to label since different authors use different terms to describe a threat to cultural identity (i.e., lack of clarity, identity conflict, identity crisis, lowered identification, identity confusion). As opposed to terms such as identity conflict, identity crisis, lack of identity clarity and identity change, “threat to cultural identity” was chosen for its capacity to suggest a potential modification in identity. To be considered DSC, the cultural identity in its current form must somehow be jeopardized, challenged, or lowered. Values and beliefs are, per se , questioned and the individual may sense a general lack of clarity and feel threatened to the core of his group identity, value system, or beliefs.

Many scientists have defined and researched collective and/or cultural identity. Recently, Ashmore et al. (2004) have defined collective identity as “first and foremost a statement about categorical membership. A collective identity is one that is shared with a group of others who have (or are believed to have) some characteristic(s) in common” (p. 81). This definition is similar to the one from Taylor (1997) , in which cultural identity is referred to as the beliefs about shared rules and behaviors ( Taylor, 1997 , 2002 ; Usborne and de la Sablonnière, 2014 ).

When a social change occurs, it threatens the cultural identity of all community members. In the present paper, inspired from previous work on cultural identity, I define threat to cultural identity as a serious threat to identification and to the clarity of the shared beliefs, values, attitudes, and behavioral scripts associated with one's group . Throughout the literature I reviewed, cultural identity threat was manifested according to three main themes. The first theme that stood out is that threats to identity are associated with a loss of identity or an identity change (e.g., subtractive identification pattern; de la Sablonnière et al., 2016 ). Some authors directly mention the threat to cultural identity within the context of major social change (e.g., Vaughan, 1986 ; Smelser and Swedberg, 1994 ; Sztompka, 2000 ; Wyn and White, 2000 ; Van Binh, 2002 ; Terry and Jimmieson, 2003 ). For example, in his paper on how cultures change as a function of mass immigration Moghaddam (2012) argues that globalization results in sudden contact among different groups of people from different countries. This form of sudden contact has often resulted in the extinction of many cultures and languages such as Indigenous peoples around the world. Therefore, globalization makes people feel that their collective identity is threatened. Specifically, they experience a loss in many components of their cultural identity including their values and their language (see also Van Binh, 2002 ). The process described by Moghaddam is similar to the one proposed by Lapuz (1976) who argues that when social change occurs rapidly, people's beliefs and values are threatened since the old guidelines are no longer available. One consequence of this threat is that people become confused as values and beliefs contribute to the emotional security and psychological survival of individuals ( Lapuz, 1976 ; Varnum, 2008 ). This is in agreement with Albert's (1977) proposition: “Rapid change constitutes a major threat to self-identity” (p. 499). Similarly, in their book entitled Changing European Identities , Breakwell and Lyons (1996) discuss the mechanisms associated with change in identities in the context of the development of the European Union and refer to a loss of national identity. This change in cultural identity is similar to what Wall and Louchakova (2002) describe as a “shift in the cultural collective consciousness” (p.253). This consists of a change in the American self and the emergence of new selves, more independent and alive in the context of change (see also Neves and Caetano, 2009 ; May, 2011 ).

The second theme is associated with the lack of identity clarity in the event of DSC. This lack of clarity is due to uncertainties or inconsistencies in the definition of one's identity. A clear cultural identity is defined as “the extent to which beliefs about one's group are clearly and confidently defined” ( Usborne and Taylor, 2010 , p. 883; see also Taylor, 2002 ). It has been theorized and demonstrated that an unclear cultural identity can result in lower self-esteem ( Usborne and Taylor, 2010 ). Thus, if the entire collective is experiencing an unclear cultural identity, it may affect people's ability to function effectively in their society. Similarly, Macionis et al. (2008) refer to inconsistencies in the context of socialization in times of important change. People try to seek out new roles, try new “selves” ( Macionis et al., 2008 , p.461). They need to adapt to the inconsistent model their societies are projecting, which leads to “socialization ambiguity” ( McDade and Worthman, 2004 , p. 49). Because social change brings uncertainty in society, it can affect many aspects of individuals' lives such as family relations ( Noak et al., 2001 ), and aspects associated with the self such as “emotions, values, perceptions, identity” ( Wall and Louchakova, 2002 , p. 266).

Finally, as a third theme, authors refer to conflicting identities within the context of dramatic contextual change. For example, Becker conducted a study to find out how rapid social change, such as introducing television in a community that had never owned televisions before, would impact body images of girls and women in that community ( Becker, 2004 ). She found that television caused confusion and conflicts about ideal body images, and consequently “reshap[ed] [their] personal and cultural identities” ( Becker, 2004 , p. 551). In some cases, it even led to eating disorders ( Becker, 2004 ), which has a direct link with the way people evaluate and perceive themselves. In other words, this DSC altered their identity. In fact, severe contextual changes can challenge the meaning of identity and threaten its existence ( Ethier and Deaux, 1994 ; Macek et al., 2013 ). Similarly, Hoffman and Medlock-Klyukovski (2004) argue that contemporary organizations are “typically marked by conflicting interests and contradictory demands on individuals” (p. 389). This is similar to Chen (2012) who refers to the need for a transformation and the need to create new cultural norms and values when confronted to the context of social change ( Chen, 2012 ).

The Typology of Social Change

In order to properly conceptualize DSC and other social contexts associated with the state of a collectivity, I suggest a typology of social change comprised of four different social contexts: “stability,” “inertia,” “incremental social change,” and “DSC” (see Table 1 for definitions). These social contexts are consistent with the theoretical stance of a large number of sociologists (e.g., Durkheim, 1893/1967 , 1897/1967 ; Watzlawick et al., 1974 ; Rocher, 1992 ; Fukuyama, 1999 ; Rogers, 2003 ; May, 2011 ; Nolan and Lenski, 2011 ), psychologists (e.g., Katz, 1974 ; Moghaddam, 2002 ; Pinquart and Silbereisen, 2004 ; Goodwin, 2006 ; de la Sablonnière et al., 2009a ) and scientists in the field of organizational behavior (e.g., Golembiewski et al., 1976 ; Tushman and Romanelli, 1985 ; Armenakis et al., 1986 ; Nadler and Tushman, 1995 ; Thompson and Hunt, 1996 ).

As many different concepts surround each of the four social contexts, it was necessary to choose a meaningful label for each. For “stability” and “inertia,” the choice was relatively easy because these two labels are commonly used and applied consistently. The term “status quo” was also considered rather than “stability” (e.g., Prilleltensky, 1990 ; Diekman and Goodfriend, 2007 ; Mucchi-Faina et al., 2010 ). However, because there could also be “status quo” in the context of inertia (e.g., Subašić et al., 2008 ), the term “stability” was preferred.

When it came to “incremental” and “dramatic” social change, the decision was more arduous as authors from different research fields use different labels. For example, instead of referring to “DSC,” Golembiewski et al. (1976) refers to “gamma changes”; Nadler and Tushman (1995) , to “discontinuous change.” Others refer to “second-order change” ( Watzlawick et al., 1974 ; Bartunek and Moch, 1987 ; Bate, 1994 ; Newman, 2000 ), to “abrupt” (e.g., Back, 1971 ; Pinquart and Silbereisen, 2004 ) or even to “rapid” change (e.g., Becker, 2004 ; McDade and Worthman, 2004 ). The term “dramatic” social change was chosen for its ability to clearly and distinctively define the situation confronting ordinary people. In a similar fashion, the term “incremental” social change was preferred over the labels: “first-order change,” “beta change,” and “continuous change.”

When there is stability , the actual state of a society is maintained and the majority of group members are actively attempting to attain society's goals. As Weinstein (2010) describes it, it is a state in which “the established order appears to be operating effectively, and disturbing influences from within or from other societies are insignificant” (p. 9; see also Bess (2015) where no change is equated with stability). Indeed, none of the four characteristic of social change are present. For example, the social and normative structures fluctuate little, and changes do not affect what is defined as normal behavior in a community ( Harmon et al., 2015 ). Indeed, personal change, such as bereavement or divorce, still occurs for some members of society. However, in the event of a personal change, the social or normative structures are not disrupted, mainly because the collective social support system remains functional and people can rely on that support in case they experience changes in their individual lives. This is also consistent with the findings of Albert and Sabini (1974) who argue that changes occurring in a supportive environment or in a peripheral element of society are perceived as less disruptive than those occurring in a non-supportive environment because the strain upon society is attenuated.

Consistent with previous research, stability can be defined as a situation where an event, regardless of its pace, does not affect the equilibrium of a society's social and normative structures nor the cultural identity of group members. The event, may, however, impact an isolated number of individuals . An example that might clarify this definition of stability is the event of an election. Although many people can get excited and seem to be affected by this event, an election does not necessarily bring about a rupture in a society, even if it involves a change of political party. The core elements of society remain stable and citizens resume their activities without feeling their lives have been overly disrupted by the election and its outcome. If, for instance, supporters of the defeated party feel sad and hopeless about the defeat, plenty of other citizens will be available to help them cope since most of them will not be affected by the change of government. However, in a different context, the event of an election may trigger DSC; for example, when it leads to a social revolution.

In contrast with stability, a context where there is inertia involves a situation that does affect a large number of people, if not most of the people composing a society. Inertia is defined as a situation where an event, regardless of its pace, does not either reinstate the equilibrium of a society's social and normative structures or clarify the cultural identity of group members .

In times of inertia, if a “positive” event occurs, there is no sustainability to maintain its positive impact. Here, the example of Belarus is used, a country where the population has been in a state of inertia since the fall of the Soviet Union. Lukashenko has been the president of the country since 1994. Under his autocratic rule, Belarus is known as the last dictatorship in Europe. Many Belarusians are longing for a more democratic and open society, yet the country remains in inertia. Buchanan et al. (2005) describe a situation of inertia as an “absence of appropriate activity, a lack of capability, a failure to pay attention to signals, and thus as an impediment rather than a desired condition” (p. 190). Inertia is seen as an undesirable situation where constructive change is not possible because the organization (or the group) does not have the capacity (e.g., lack of resources or will) to carry out the needed change. These authors also argue that when a change is implemented, its sustainability requires managers and staff (or community members) to share the same objectives. Uncertainty about the future must be minimal.

Accordingly, one can assume that the criteria underpinning sustainability in the event of a change are already absent in a society that has stagnated due to inertia. Therefore, inertia in a society such as Belarus constitutes a context where the population is uncertain about the future and does not share the same long-term goals as its government. There is a desire for positive social change, but the actual structure of the society makes it difficult for any change to be implemented and be sustained. Indeed, for a positive change to be maintained, it must have the support of individuals in power since they have the appropriate resources to address society's problems. Unsurprisingly, sustainability of such a change is threatened by an autocratic style of governing ( Buchanan et al., 2005 ).

In sum, inertia differs from stability. In the case of inertia, most members of society desire a change from the actual state of their group, but are unable to properly sustain change due to a lack of collective social support and an unclear cultural identity. In contrast, in the case of “stability,” the society functions in an efficient manner when meeting the collective goals.

Incremental Social Change

Incremental social change is defined as a situation where a slow event leads to a gradual but profound societal transformation and slowly changes the social and/or the normative structure or changes/threatens the cultural identity of group members . The slow pace is necessary for incremental social change to occur. Moreover, at least one of the other three characteristics needs to occur. In their recent paper, Abrams and Vasiljevic (2014) speak of “growth,” which could represent one form of incremental social change that involves “wider acceptance of shared values and tolerance of different values” and of “recession” where “disidentification” with current groups can occur (p. 328).

One of the most cited examples of incremental social change is technological innovation (e.g., Rieger, 2003 ; Weinstein, 2010 ; May, 2011 ; Hansen et al., 2012 ). Often, there is no social structural rupture associated with the wide use of technology and normative structure as well as social support remain intact. Given its incremental nature, this type of social change does not instantly produce conflict between old and new behaviors. For instance, when television was introduced, people bought it without knowing the consequences of the implementation of this new technology in their life ( Becker, 2004 ; Macionis et al., 2008 ; Weinstein, 2010 ). Today, in retrospect, we know that buying a television set entailed a plethora of new behaviors that altered our society and our way of living. Indeed, some changes in society seem to be a “by-product of our pursuit of other goals and interests” ( Subašić et al., 2012 , p. 62). The long time span that is typical for incremental social change makes its outcomes unpredictable and unintentional. For instance, as Weinstein states ( Weinstein, 2010 ), “It would be impossible to assess exactly what role electronic telecommunication has played in our global revolution, in part because its effects continue to reverberate and magnify as you read this” (p. 4).

The cell phone is a particularly good example of incremental social change. When it came onto the buyer's market, only a few exclusive people possessed one. However, over the years, it became increasingly normative to have a cell phone and, today, it is almost inconceivable not to have one. Furthermore, when cell phones were first marketed, they were used mainly for business rather than for social purposes, which is the current primary use ( Aoki and Downes, 2003 ). In the same vein, other technological changes, such as the emergence of personal computers ( Kiesler et al., 1984 ; Robinson et al., 1997 ), Internet ( DiMaggio et al., 2001 ; Brignall III and Van Valey, 2005 ), and social media ( Robinson et al., 1997 ; O'Keeffe and Clarke-Pearson, 2011 ; Oh et al., 2015 ) will, in the future, be recognized as key events in the historical transformation of social structures and social norms. Such technology does not represent a DSC, but a social change nonetheless as it has modified the way people interact with one another in an incremental manner. As the change occurs for a relatively long period of time, there is consistency in the pattern of change, which allows social structures to adapt and, thus, to remain intact ( Nadler and Tushman, 1995 ). Individuals experiencing incremental social change are therefore able to adapt, given that the collective social support is not altered. For example, there is support for people that have yet to possess a cell phone; if they want to buy one, but do not understand how it functions, there are plenty of people that can help them adapt to this new technology. Even if technological change is conceptualized here as an incremental change, it is possible that technology is used to provoke a DSC, for example by instigating an important social revolution ( Rodriguez, 2013 ).

Despite technology being the most adequate example, other incremental changes can be observed in other aspects of society such as in medicine. Indeed, advancement in medicine such as effective birth control ( Goldin and Katz, 2002 ) was also the cause of a profound incremental social change. The example of contraception is crucial as the pill deeply affected gender roles in society by empowering women by giving them the capacity to control their sexuality. The pill had not only direct positive effects on women's career investments, but also on the opportunity of attending school longer. The pill forever changed women's involvement in our societies and the repercussions of this incremental social change still echo to us through struggles for gender equality, but also in the form of women actively involved in every level of the modern workplace, including higher managements and governmental position. In other words, the gradual nature of incremental social change makes it a profound change in society that neither disturbs the social structure nor the collective social support system.

Dramatic Social Change

DSC has been defined as “profound societal transformations that produce a complete rupture in the equilibrium of social structures because their adaptive capacities are surpassed” ( de la Sablonnière et al., 2009a , p. 325). Although this definition is based on previous sociological work ( Parsons, 1964 ; Rocher, 1992 ), it is adapted here according to the four characteristic of DSC. Specifically, I suggest that DSC be defined as a situation where a rapid event leads to a profound societal transformation and produces a rupture in the equilibrium of the social and normative structures and changes/threatens the cultural identity of group members .

As with incremental change, DSC induces fundamental transformations in society. However, the shift occurs at a much more rapid pace, provoking a break with the past. Some authors have highlighted this sense of discontinuity by referring to DSC as the disintegration of a previous social order or as the break in a frame of reference ( Golembiewski et al., 1976 ; Nadler and Tushman, 1995 ; Breakwell and Lyons, 1996 ). They also use terms such as the “construction of something new,” a “reconceptualization,” or a “re-definition.” Indeed, the breakdown of a social structure conveys the need for the reconstruction of core elements in a society. Accordingly, DSC can be conceptualized as a complete rupture in the social structure that marks the end of one period and the beginning of another one, or where a type of society is transformed into another ( Tushman and Romanelli, 1985 ; Kohn et al., 2000 ; Weinstein, 2010 ). Other researchers, such as Rogers (2003) , also see rapid social change as intertwined with the social structure. More specifically, Rogers (2003) states that rapid social change can threaten social structure by surpassing the adaptive capacities of individuals. Unsurprisingly, DSC is the most disruptive type of change not only for the social structure but also for the majority of society members experiencing it, i.e., the normative structure as well as cultural identities are challenged. As DSC entails a re-definition of values, norms and relations, individuals can no longer rely on their habits and routine; they need to learn new skills and new definitions and more challengingly, unlearn the old ways of doing things ( Nadler and Tushman, 1995 ; Tomasik et al., 2010 ). Consequently, DSC is described as a painful and confusing experience for individuals ( Hinkle, 1952 ; Lapuz, 1976 ; Nadler and Tushman, 1995 ; Kohn et al., 2000 ; Wall and Louchakova, 2002 ; Rioufol, 2004 ; Hegmon et al., 2008 ).

A good example of DSC is the breakdown of the Soviet Union. If I return to Zoia's example, it is clear that all the people in Kyrgyzstan and in the Former Soviet Union were affected by the breakdown of the Soviet Union. Zoia is not the only one who lost all her savings: the vast majority of people lost their savings within a matter of days. In terms of social support, whom could she have relied on if all of her friends were also in the same situation? Regarding to the fall of the former Soviet Union, Goodwin (2006) argues that older people were inclined to receive less social support in part because the majority of the population, including family members, were struggling with several jobs just to provide themselves with basic needs. Furthermore, elderly citizens could not even rely on formal social services because the collapse of the former Soviet Union caused a decline in formal state support, which left them no time to rebuild their retirement income. This illustrates the rupture in the structure of society that can be found when a DSC occurs as well as the effect on the majority of ordinary group members who cannot rely on collective social support.

Coming Full Circle: Theoretical Implications

Heraclitus, an ancient Greek philosopher, is credited for saying that “the only thing constant is change.” Gradually or within an instant, civilizations, societies, communities or organizations that often seem immutable face multiple DSCs. Social scientists agree that social changes are not only intensifying but also defining today's world. In fact, Weinstein (2010) has underscored that “rapid change, both peaceful and violent, is a fact of life that virtually everyone on Earth today has come to expect, if not unconditionally accept” (p. 3).

For the present paper, my aim was to initiate a conversation about the psychology of social change. Thus, I briefly reviewed the major perspectives of social change in both sociology and psychology. Research conducted in both fields and their subfields have remained in distinct silos with no effort made toward aggregating their findings. This has unfortunately resulted in the absence of an encompassing approach in the current literature of social change: social change has never been integrated into a single perspective that would define or contextualize DSC within the spectrum of different social contexts. More importantly, social change has not been conceptualized so that micro processes, macro processes, and the important relations between them are addressed. As a result, the typology of social change introduces different social contexts (e.g., stability) that can serve as a basis of comparison for DSC. Based on my review of the literature, I suggest four necessary characteristics of DSC (Table 6 ).

The present paper then offers a first step toward unifying the variety of theories of social change which are currently isolated from each other. Indeed, our approach aims at addressing the challenge raised by Sun and Ryder (2016) concerning our need for “a more nuanced understanding of rapid sociocultural change combined with sophisticated research methods designed to address change in a multilevel way” (p. 9). The typology of social change I am suggesting is an emerging concept; thus, I invite debate with the hope that the views presented here will stimulate others to contribute to a needed understanding of DSC within an individual perspective. More importantly, based on such a typology of social change, theoretical models could be suggested as they might offer a guide to understanding the consequences of social change. For instance, such theoretical models could answer these three questions: Are the different social contexts associated with one-another? What makes a society move from one social context to another (e.g., from stability to DSC)? What is the role of the different characteristics of DSC? So far, answers to the three questions raised above were left lingering and the different characteristics of DSC were not arranged in a sequential way nor were they identified as key movers of one state of society to another. In Figure 1 , I offer a theoretical model that integrates the social contexts and the characteristics of DSC as a first step toward a psychology of social change.

As seen in Figure 1 , neither a slow nor a fast pace event will influence the status quo in both stability and inertia. There will therefore be no break with the past and so no rupture in the social and normative structures. Thus, in these two social contexts, if an event were to occur rapidly, the current situation of a group or society would remain unaffected by it; that is why pace is not the only characteristic important to define DSC. For example, if a plane crashes, which is a rapidly occurring dramatic event, it does not necessarily affect an entire community. Also, in a state of stability, when a fast—or slow—event takes place, because the normative and the social structures are unaffected, there is no direct threat to the group's cultural identity. Similarly, when an event occurs in a state of inertia, there is no additional threat to the society's cultural identity, because the normative and social structure are unaffected.

In contrast, in a state of incremental social change, slow-occurring events, if profound enough, will gradually change the social and normative structures, as well as threaten or change cultural identity. For a DSC to occur, a fast event needs to take place. If that event has enough impact—therefore not in a state of stability or inertia—, it will rupture the social structure and the normative structures. As shown by many different DSC contexts, there are three possible scenarios when it comes to the rupture of these two structures: (1) the social structure ruptures first, which later leads to the rupture of the normative structure (e.g., Zhang and Hwang, 2007 ), (2) the normative structure ruptures first, which later leads to the rupture of the social structure (e.g., Centola and Baronchelli, 2015 ), or (3) both the social and normative structures rupture simultaneously and influence each other.

An example of the first scenario would be the latest presidential elections in the United States. The recent proclamation of Donald Trump as president carries the potential for political transformations as well as changes in the United States' economic structure (rupture to social structure). The leadership of Trump's administration can carry major structural change that would then lead to a rupture of the normative structure. At this point, there are indications that this new governance (social structure) may very well affect the normative structure. Some members of the population have become more “open” to expressing their reluctance to have more immigrants come to the USA, which could eventually lead to a rupture in normative structure where different ethnic groups overtly fight each other within America. A second example was the loss of the French Canadians to the English Canadians at the Battle of the Plains of Abraham in 1759. This battle was a pivotal moment in the 7 Years' War and gave power to the British troops ( Veyssière, 2013 ). The result of the battle culminated in the French losing most of their economical structural powers to the English and the start of a decline of education. Consequently, the French mentality and behaviors were modified. The norms had to be adapted to new rules and to the loss of economic power ( Veyssière, 2013 ).

The normative structure can rupture before the social structure in situations such as the African-American Civil Rights Movement in the United-States, the Fall of Apartheid in South Africa, or the Quiet Revolution in Québec. If in the past African-Americans were afflicted by a sense of resignation, leaders such as Martin Luther King Jr. and Rosa Parks gave them the will they needed to fight for a better future for themselves. This rupture in the normative structure led to the African-American Civil Rights Movement which, in turn, brought about changes to the social structure (e.g., School desegregation). This movement against racial inequality, segregation and discrimination instigated the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which banned any type of segregation based on race, color, religion or sex, as well as other changes in federal legislation.

The breakdown of the Soviet Union is an example that can be used to illustrate a simultaneous rupture of the social and normative structures. This event caused major transformations in the economic, political, and social structures (rupture to social structure). Simultaneously, a large proportion of the population found themselves in a great economic crisis, which led to disruptions in their usual behaviors and habits, such as working multiple jobs instead of just one (rupture of normative structures).

When the normative and the social structures are ruptured (regardless of the order in which this occurs), cultural identity will be threatened. There will be a global sense of confusion, ambiguity, and lack of clarity that might motivate individual group members to change their identification with their group.

Depending on society's and the individual's abilities to cope, there are two possible outcomes: stability or inertia. If the society in which DSC has taken place is able to develop coping and adaptation mechanisms—both at the individual and societal levels—stability might be restored. Stability would then be achieved when the social and normative structures however different are brought back to functionality and when cultural identity is clear and no longer under threat. In contrast, if the society and individuals are not able to develop coping mechanisms, society might enter a state of inertia. In inertia, even though a society in a state of inertia is no longer going through major social changes, the need or desire for change still lingers ( Sloutsky and Searle-White, 1993 ). This can be due to a DSC that did not, in the end, really change the way a collectivity is ruled or how its citizens are treated ( Moghaddam and Crystal, 1997 ; Moghaddam and Lvina, 2002 ).

Consequences of DSC

Knowing about the range of different social contexts such as stability, inertia, incremental change, and DSC as well as the specific characteristics of DSC, has the potential to guide researchers in terms of assessing DSC and its impact on the psychological well-being of ordinary group members. Specifically, after establishing a clear typology of social change, including potential theoretical models, it is now possible to move on to the second step of the psychology of social change. In this second step, we need to address whether and how different coping mechanisms determine (mediate, moderate) the influence of DSC on psychological well-being. This question goes hand in hand with the work of Norris et al. (2002) who reviewed 160 studies involving natural disasters, mass violence, and technological disasters. They concluded from more than 60,000 participants that such events have negative repercussions on participants' lives. In most of the research they report, social support, economic status, and age were the identified factors that may be associated with a better adaptation to social change. Although diverse factors were suggested, the research they reported was “atheoretical and little of it is programmatic” ( Norris et al., 2002 , p. 249). In accordance with Norris et al. (2002) , I argue that the mediators or moderators involved in adaptation mechanisms should become the focus of future studies. The four characteristics I have identified have the potential to become pivotal in meeting this objective. In sum, the link between social change and well-being is still unclear (e.g., Liu et al., 2014 ; Sun and Ryder, 2016 ). Such an investigation could eventually guide us in designing concrete interventions to help people adapt to the challenges of DSC ( Rogers, 2003 ; Vago, 2004 ).

The concept of resilience emerges from the literature as potentially useful for understanding people's coping mechanisms. Resilience is defined as the act of bouncing back in the face of adversity ( Bonanno, 2004 ). For the specific example of DSC, resilient individuals would be those who have been able to maintain their normal functioning and adapt themselves to adverse situations ( Masten, 2001 ; Curtis and Cicchetti, 2003 ; Luthar, 2003 ; Masten and Powell, 2003 ). Research has shown that a significant number of people are able to adapt to challenging personal situations (e.g., Bonanno, 2004 ). However, resilience has mostly been studied within the context of personal changes such as the death of a loved one or a personal trauma ( Bonanno, 2004 ). Similar to a personal change, this variation in reactions may be due to individual differences in resilience. This highlights the need to consider this variable within the psychology of social change. More concretely, the literature on resilience may prove to be important when linking people's perceptions of the characteristic of DSC to the various paths of recovery (e.g., resilience, recovery, chronic distress, and delayed reactions; Bonanno, 2004 ).

While most research on resilience focuses on “personal events,” there is, however, another type of resilience known as “collective resilience” or “community resilience” (e.g., Landau and Saul, 2004 ; Kirmayer et al., 2011 ) which may be more relevant in the context of DSC as the concept hints that the majority of society is affected by the change. To illustrate collective resilience, let us consider the case where the normative structure of a society is dissolved and its cultural identity is threatened. Individuals in this situation would no longer have guidelines and values to individually cope with DSC. Moreover, every individual affected by the change would be in the same negative situation. Consequently, individuals might need to find ways to collectively adapt to the transformations. The processes associated with resilience may thus differ in situations of personal vs. social change. I therefore believe it is important to explore whether the adaptation mechanisms are the same in a context of DSC where social support is not readily available.

Conducting Research on Social Change

In order to speak of a real psychology of social change, we must be able to actually study social change and its consequences. The use of a mix of methodologies that would include large correlational or longitudinal surveys conducted in the field as well as laboratory experiments ( de la Sablonnière et al., 2013 ; see also Liu and Bernardo, 2014 ; Sun and Ryder, 2016 ) might prove to be the only way to truly study social change and its consequences. On the one hand, correlational designs conducted in the field are necessary to capture people's firsthand experience with DSC. They are however limited by their design that prevents claims of causality. They are also known to be demanding in terms of both human and financial resources, and may well be dangerous at times for researchers. Moreover, they require an intimate knowledge of the culture such as the language as well as contacts within the community to facilitate the research and collaboration process.

On the other hand, laboratory experiments are necessary to establish the controlled conditions needed to understand associations between the characteristics of social change and the consequences. Laboratory experiments, however, are difficult to design, because it is a challenge to reproduce the actual characteristics of social change in the laboratory which limits their ecological validity ( de la Sablonnière et al., 2013 ). Indeed, social change typically entails various elements such as historical processes, a collective perspective, and associated cultural elements ( Moghaddam and Crystal, 1997 ) which must be taken into consideration in order to replicate their impact in an artificial setting. For example, the impact of the Tohoku tsunami in Japan or the Syrian conflict cannot be recreated in their entirety in a laboratory; nor can all the characteristic of social change be taken into consideration in a laboratory study designed to assess the impact(s) of social change. However, if an array of studies using different characteristic of DSC were to be conducted (or a combination of multiple characteristic), the convergence of the results would make us able to better understand and thereby predict the impact of DSC on individuals and communities. At the very least in a laboratory, researchers can expose participants to imagined changes through a scenario or a video that would include, in the experimental condition, one or more of the four characteristics of DSC (Pelletier-Dumas et al., submitted). If the scientific community accepts that experimental studies will not exactly mirror DSC, but instead test some of the characteristics in a large number of experiments, there is potential for laboratory experiments to bring an important contribution that would eventually allow a generalization to the real world (for examples see Betsch et al., 2015 ; Caldwell et al., 2016 ; Pelletier-Dumas et al., submitted).

The difficulties of conducting research on social change are, however, amplified by the challenge of obtaining ethical consent in a manner that allows for timely research. In terms of experimental manipulations of DSC, obtaining the ethical board's consent can be tedious. Indeed, according to some authors ( Kelman, 1967 ; Bok, 1999 ; Clarke, 1999 ; Herrera, 1999 ; Pittenger, 2002 ) deceiving participants is difficult to justify ethically. This objection on the use of deception can undermine any attempt to seriously study DSC, as deception can be a valuable methodological asset ( Bortolotti and Mameli, 2006 ), especially with such an elusive subject. Furthermore, research on new grounds require new techniques and methods on which ethicists can put limits, to ensure that they do not cause harm to participants ( Root Wolpe, 2006 ). As with any new technology, methods focused on inducing dramatic-like changes can be perceived as having unsuspected risks.

In order to truly understand the interplay between individuals and their context, social psychological theories must take into account that we live in a constantly changing world. Unfortunately, although social psychology was rooted in understanding social change, most modern psychological theories refrain from addressing a “true” psychology of social change and prefer relegating social change to the field of sociology.

Through increasing the focus on social change, we could combine, on the one hand, sociology's emphasis on the importance of social change with, on the other hand, psychology's emphasis on the importance of complex individual processes. As a result, my theoretical proposal aims at bringing together sociology, where social change is central, and psychology, where rigorous scientific methods allow us to study the psychological processes of individuals living in changing social contexts.

In general, more research on the concept of social change is needed so that we can help predict, prevent, and minimize the negative impact of social change. If psychologists and sociologists work together to move toward developing a psychology of social change, perhaps we could come to better understand and help people, like Zoia, who lost almost everything they had, consequently improving the quality of millions of lives experiencing DSC.

Author Contributions

RdlS thought and developed the ideas, as well as wrote the article as sole author. Research assistants were paid to find and read the abstracts of all articles reviewed in this manuscript.

This research was founded by a grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities research Council of Canada (SSHRC) and by a grant from the Fonds de recherche du Québec – Société et culture (FRQSC).

Conflict of Interest Statement

The author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments

RdlS Department of Psychology, Université de Montréal. I wish to thank all my colleagues and the members of the Social Change and Identity Lab for their comments and help. They have heard me talk about social change for the last 10 years and have never stopped encouraging me to pursue these ideas. I am also grateful to all the “Baboushkas” and the people I have met in contexts of DSC. These people continue to inspire me every day. I am grateful to the editor and the three evaluators for their insightful comments. I would also like to thank Matthew Davidson, Saltanat Sadykova, Lily Trudeau-Guévin, Alexie Gendron, Jérémie Dupuis, Raphaël Froment, and Donald M. Taylor for their help during different steps of the preparation of this manuscript. Finally, I want to thank Nada Kadhim who was patient enough to coordinate the material and the team—including me—at all stages.

1. ^ Key sociology readings, such as Human Societies: An Introduction to Macrosociology ( Nolan and Lenski, 2011 ), The Sociology of Social Change ( Sztompka, 1993 ), and Social Change ( Weinstein, 2010 ), offer an in-depth description of these theories that were beyond the scope of the present review.

2. ^ For space limitation, all methodological details and steps I encountered are not discussed here, but are available upon request to the author.

3. ^ The term “social change” must be distinguished from the term “event.” An event may or may not be considered as social change. An event has the potential to bring social change ( Sewell, 1996 ), be it incremental or dramatic. However, an event is not always tied to social change as it may represent a form of “happening” that does not influence the course of history ( Nisbet, 1972 ). In sum, an event is an intrusion or “disturbances, however mild, of the normal” (p. 26). In contrast to social change, with the event, the disruption of the normal might only be temporary and not significant in time.

4. ^ Defining social structure represents a challenge that goes beyond the scope of the present paper. From my understanding of the literature, there are as many conceptions of social structure as there are scientists working on that concept. The most important issue that demonstrates how hard it is to define social structure is the fact that one of the most prominent sociologists, Giddens (1979) , refers to a “duality of structure” when defining social structure (structure vs. agency). On the one hand, social structure represents institutions or more specifically “collective rules and resources that structure behavior” ( Porpora, 1989 , p. 195). Here, scientists refer to “groups, institutions, laws, population characteristics, and set of social relations that form the environment of the organization” ( Stinchcombe, 2000 , p. 142), or to “Lawlike regularities that govern the behavior of social facts” ( Porpora, 1989 , p. 195). On the other hand, social structure represents “the underlying regularities or patterns in how people behave and in their relationships with one another” (i.e., agency; Giddens et al., 2011 , p. 3). Here, the definitions often described normative behaviors or the roles of individuals rather than the role played by social institutions (e.g., Cortina et al., 2012 ; Homans, 1951 ; Mayhew, 1980 ; Tanner and Jackson, 2012 ; Wilson, 2012 ).

This duality lunched a debate in sociology that was reflected not only in Gidden's work but also in others sociologists that have devoted their writings to defining social structure (e.g., Parsons, 1964 ; Mayhew, 1980 ). For example, Porpora (1989) reports four principal ways of conceptualizing social structure that reflect either of these conceptions. More recently, expending on the work of Bourdieu (1975) and of Goffman (1983) , López and Scott (2000) proposed that there is another aspect of social structure that must also be considered in addition to the institutional and relational structures: the embodied structure described as the “habits and skills that are inscribed in human bodies and minds” (p. 4).

To add to that complexity, some researchers (e.g., Bronfenbrenner, 1979 , 1994 ; for other “system views” see for example Marx, 1859/1970 ; Habermas, 1987 ) describe the possible “systems” that are, like Russian dolls, embedded in each other. These systems include the ecological environments “conceived as a set of nested structures” ( Bronfenbrenner, 1994 , p. 39): the microsystems, the mesosystems, the exosystems, the macrosystems, and the chronosystems. This “ecological model” illustrates the complexity of social structure as a sociological term.

Because of the lack of clarity, or maybe because the definition of social structure points to different aspects of the social structure, scientists often avoid defining social structure in their papers, and thereby contribute to the general confusion. Not that the other aspects or levels of social structure are not important (e.g., meso, micro), but the social structure being discussed in the present paper refers exclusively to macro-level elements of society such as institutions and other environmental factors that help facilitate and structure collective interactions, norms, roles, and behaviors.

Abrams, D., and Vasiljevic, M. (2014). How does macroeconomic change affect social identity (and vice versa?): insights from the European context. Anal. Soc. Issues Public Policy 14, 311–338. doi: 10.1111/asap.12052

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Albert, S. (1977). Temporal comparison theory. Psychol. Rev. 84, 485–503. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.84.6.485

Albert, S., and Sabini, J. (1974). Attributions about systems in slow vs. rapid change. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 1, 91–93. doi: 10.1177/014616727400100131

Amiot, C., de la Sablonnière, R., Terry, D., and Smith, J. (2007). Integration of social identities in the self: toward a cognitive-developmental model. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 11, 364–388. doi: 10.1177/1088868307304091

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Andersson, C., Törnberg, A., and Törnberg, P. (2014). An evolutionary developmental approach to cultural evolution. Curr. Anthropol. 55, 154–174. doi: 10.1086/675692

Aoki, K., and Downes, E. J. (2003). An analysis of young people's use of and attitudes toward cell phones. Telematics Inform. 20, 349–364. doi: 10.1016/S0736-5853(03)00018-2

Armenakis, A. A., Buckley, M. R., and Bedeian, A. G. (1986). Survey research measurement issues in evaluating change: a laboratory investigation. Appl. Psychol. Meas. 10, 147–157. doi: 10.1177/014662168601000204

Arnett, J. J. (1995). Adolescents' uses of media for self-socialization. J. Youth Adolesc. 24, 519–533. doi: 10.1007/BF01537054

Ashmore, R. D., Deaux, K., and McLaughlin-Volpe, T. (2004). An organizing framework for collective identity: articulation and significance of multidimensionality. Psychol. Bull. 130, 80–114. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.130.1.80

Back, K. W. (1971). Biological models of social change. Am. Sociol. Rev. 36, 660–667. doi: 10.2307/2093596

Bartunek, J. M., and Moch, M. K. (1987). First-order, second-order, and third-order change and organization development interventions: a cognitive approach. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 23, 483–500. doi: 10.1177/002188638702300404

Bate, S. P. (1994). Strategies for Cultural Change . Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Google Scholar

Batel, S., and Castro, P. (2015). Collective action and social change: examining the role of representation in the communication between protesters and third-party members. J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol. 25, 249–263. doi: 10.1002/casp.2214

Bauman, Z. (2003). Liquid Love: On the Frailty of Human Bonds . Cambridge: Polity Press.

Becker, A. E. (2004). Television, disordered eating, and young women in Fiji: negotiating body image and identity during rapid social change. Cult. Med. Psychiatry 28, 533–559. doi: 10.1007/s11013-004-1067-5

Benet-Martínez, V., and Haritatos, J. (2005). Bicultural identity integration (BII): components and psychosocial antecedents. J. Pers. 73, 1015–1050. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2005.00337.x

Bernstrøm, V. H., and Kjekshus, L. E. (2015). Effect of organisational change type and frequency on long-term sickness absence in hospitals. J. Nurs. Manag. 23, 813–822. doi: 10.1111/jonm.12218

Berry, J. W. (2005). Acculturation: living successfully in two cultures. Int. J. Intercult. Relat. 29, 697–712. doi: 10.1016/j.ijintrel.2005.07.013

Bess, K. D. (2015). The impact of everyday experiences on planned organizational change: applying schematic change theory to the study of narratives in community-based organizations. J. Community Psychol. 43, 739–759. doi: 10.1002/jcop.21757

Betsch, T., Lindow, S., Engel, C., Ulshöfer, C., and Kleber, J. (2015). Has the world changed? My neighbor might know: effects of social context on routine deviation. J. Behav. Decis. Making 28, 50–66. doi: 10.1002/bdm.1828

Bishop, P. (1998). Social change and future practice. Am. Behav. Sci. 42, 406–412. doi: 10.1177/0002764298042003011

Blackwood, L., Livingstone, A. G., and Leach, C. W. (2013). Regarding societal change. J. Soc. Polit. Psychol. 1, 105–111. doi: 10.5964/jspp.v1i1.282

Bok, S. (1999). Lying: Moral Choice in Public and Private Life . New York, NY: Vintage.

Bonanno, G. A. (2004). Loss, trauma, and human resilience: have we underestimated the human capacity to thrive after extremely aversive events? Am. Psychol. 59, 20–28. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.20

Bortolotti, L., and Mameli, M. (2006). Deception in psychology: mora; costs and benefits of unsought self-knowledge. Account. Res. 13, 259–275. doi: 10.1080/08989620600848561

Bourdieu, P. (1975). Structures sociales et structures de perception du monde social [Social structures and structures of perception of the social world]. Actes Rech. Sci. Soc. 1, 18–20. doi: 10.3406/arss.1975.3507

CrossRef Full Text

Breakwell, G. M. (1986). Coping with Threatened Identities . London: Methuen.

Breakwell, G. M., and Lyons, E. (1996). Changing European Identities: Social Psychological Analyses of Social Change . Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Brignall III, T. W., and Van Valey, T. V. (2005). The impact of Internet communications on social interaction. Sociol. Spectr. 25, 335–348. doi: 10.1080/02732170590925882

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1994). “Ecological models of human development,” in International Encyclopedia of Education, 2nd Edn ., Vol. 3, eds T. Husén and T. N. Postlethwaite (Oxford: Elsevier), 1643–1647.

Bruscella, J. (2015). Holiday greeting rituals as expressions of ambivalence and indifference toward social change. West. J. Commun. 79, 116–132. doi: 10.1080/10570314.2014.943427

Buchanan, D., Fitzgerald, L., Ketley, D., Gollop, R., Jones, J. L., Lamont, S. S., et al. (2005). No going back: a review of the literature on sustaining organizational change. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 7, 189–205. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2005.00111.x

Burke, W. W., and Litwin, G. H. (1992). A causal model of organizational performance and change. J. Manag. 18, 523–545. doi: 10.1177/014920639201800306

Caldwell, C. A., Atkinson, M., and Renner, E. (2016). Experimental approaches to studying cumulative cultural evolution. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 25, 191–195. doi: 10.1177/0963721416641049

Calhoun, C. (1992). “Social change,” in Encyclopedia of Sociology , Vol. 4, eds E. F. Borgatta and R. J. V. Montgomery (New York, NY: MacMillan), 1807–1812.

Calhoun, C. (2000). “Social change,” in Encyclopedia of Sociology, 2nd Edn ., Vol. 4, eds E. F. Borgatta and R. J. V. Montgomery (New York, NY: MacMillan), 2641–2649.

Centola, D., and Baronchelli, A. (2015). The spontaneous emergence of conventions: an experimental study of structural evolution. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 112, 1989–1994. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1418838112

Chen, X. (2012). Human development in the context of social change: introduction. Child Dev. Perspect. 6, 321–325. doi: 10.1111/j.1750-8606.2012.00259.x

Chen, X. (2015). Exploring the implications of social change for human development: perspectives, issues and future directions. Int. J. Psychol. 50, 56–59. doi: 10.1002/ijop.12128

Chirot, D., and Merton, R. M. (1986). Social Change in the Modern Era . San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Clarke, S. (1999). Justifying deception in social science research. J. Appl. Philos. 16, 151–166. doi: 10.1111/1468-5930.00117

Comte, A. I. (1853/1929). Système de Politique Positive [System of Positive Polity], Vol. 3 . Paris: Carilian-Goeury et Dalmont.

Cortina, L. M., Curtin, N., and Stewart, A. J. (2012). Where is social structure in personality research? A feminist analysis of publication trends. Psychol. Women Q. 36, 259–273. doi: 10.1177/0361684312448056

Coughlin, B. J., and Khinduka, S. K. (1976). Social change and social action. J. Sociol. Soc. Welf. 3, 322–331.

Crockett, L. J., and Silbereisen, R. K. (Eds.). (2000). Negotiating Adolescence in Times of Social Change . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Curtis, W. J., and Cicchetti, D. (2003). Moving research on resilience into the 21st century: theoretical and methodological considerations in examining the biological contributors to resilience. Dev. Psychopathol. 15, 773–810. doi: 10.1017/S0954579403000373

Dadrian, V. N. (1989). Genocide as a problem of national and international law: the World War I Armenian case and its contemporary legal ramifications. Yale J. Int. Law 12, 223–326.

Dadrian, V. N. (1998). The historical and legal interconnections between the Armenian genocide and the Jewish Holocaust: from impunity to retributive justice. Yale J. Int. Law 23, 503–560.

de la Sablonnière, R., Amiot, C. E., Cárdenas, D., Sadykova, N., Gorborukova, G. L., and Huberdeau, M.-E. (2016). Testing the subtractive pattern of cultural identification. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 46, 441–454. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2178

de la Sablonnière, R., and Tougas, F. (2008). Relative deprivation and social identity in times of dramatic social change: the case of nurses. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 38, 2293–2314. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2008.00392.x

de la Sablonnière, R., and Usborne, E. (2014). “Toward a social psychology of social change: insights from Identity Process Theory,” in Identity Process Theory: Identity, Social Action and Social Change , eds R. Jaspal and G. M. Breakwell (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 203–221.

de la Sablonnière, R., Auger, É., Sadykova, N., and Taylor, D. M. (2010). When the “we” impacts how “I” feel about myself: effect of temporal collective relative deprivation on personal well-being in the context of dramatic social change in Kyrgyzstan. Eur. Psychol. 15, 271–282. doi: 10.1027/1016-9040/a000062

de la Sablonnière, R., French Bourgeois, L., and Najih, M. (2013). Dramatic social change: a social psychological perspective. J. Soc. Polit. Psychol. 1, 253–272. doi: 10.5964/jspp.v1i1.14

de la Sablonnière, R., Taylor, D. M., and Sadykova, N. (2009b). Challenges of applying a student-centered approach to learning in the context of education in Kyrgyzstan. Int. J. Educ. Dev. 29, 628–634. doi: 10.1016/j.ijedudev.2009.01.001

de la Sablonnière, R., Taylor, D. M., Perozzo, C., and Sadykova, N. (2009a). Reconceptualizing relative deprivation in the context of dramatic social change: the challenge confronting the people of Kyrgyzstan. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 39, 325–345. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.519

de la Sablonnière, R., Tougas, F., and Lortie-Lussier, M. (2009c). Dramatic social change in Russia and Mongolia: connecting relative deprivation to social identity. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 40, 327–348. doi: 10.1177/0022022108330986

de Lemus, S., and Stroebe, K. (2015). Achieving social change: a matter of all for one? J. Soc. Issues 71, 441–452. doi: 10.1111/josi.12122

Delanty, G. (2012). A cosmopolitan approach to the explanation of social change: social mechanisms, processes, modernity. Sociol. Rev. 60, 333–354. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-954X.2012.02076.x

Des Forges, A. (1999). Leave None to Tell the Story: Genocide in Rwanda . New York, NY: Human Rights Watch. Available online at: https://www.hrw.org/reports/pdfs/r/rwanda/rwanda993.pdf

Diamond, J. (2005). Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed . New York, NY: Penguin Books.

Diekman, A. B., and Goodfriend, W. (2007). The good and bad of social change: ambivalence toward activist groups. Soc. Justice Res. 20, 401–417. doi: 10.1007/s11211-007-0050-z

DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E., Neuman, W. R., and Robinson, J. P. (2001). Social implications of the Internet. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 27, 307–336. doi: 10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.307

Durkheim, É. (1893/1967). De la Division du Travail Social [The Division of Labor in Society] . Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

Durkheim, É. (1897/1967). Le Suicide: Étude de Sociologie [Suicide: A Study in Sociology]. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

Ethier, K. A., and Deaux, K. (1994). Negotiating social identity when contexts change: maintaining identification and responding to threat. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 67, 243–251. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.67.2.243

Feldman, M. W., and Laland, K. N. (1996). Gene-culture coevolutionary theory. Trends Ecol. Evol. 11, 453–457. doi: 10.1016/0169-5347(96)10052-5

Fried, M. (1964). Effects of social change on mental health. Am. J. Orthopsychiatry 34, 3–28. doi: 10.1111/j.1939-0025.1964.tb02187.x

Fukuyama, F. (1999). The Great Disruption: Human Nature and the Reconstitution of Social Order . New York, NY: Free Press.

Giddens, A. (1979). Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, Structure, and Contradiction in Social Analysis . Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Giddens, A., Duneier, M., Appelbaum, R. P., and Carr, D. (2011). Introduction to Sociology, 8th Edn . New York, NY: Norton Publishing.

Goffman, E. (1983). The interaction order. Am. Sociol. Rev. 48, 1–17. doi: 10.2307/2095141

Goldin, C., and Katz, L. F. (2002). The power of the pill: oral contraceptives and women's career and marriage decisions. J. Polit. Econ. 110, 730–770. doi: 10.1086/340778

Golembiewski, R. T., Billingsley, K., and Yeager, S. (1976). Measuring change and persistence in human affairs: types of change generated by OD designs. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 12, 133–157. doi: 10.1177/002188637601200201

Goodwin, R. (2006). Age and social support perception in Eastern Europe: social change and support in four rapidly changing countries. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 45, 799–815. doi: 10.1348/014466605X72144

Goodwin, R. B. (1998). Personal relationships and social change: the ‘Realpolitik’ of cross-cultural research in transient cultures. J. Soc. Pers. Relat. 15, 227–247. doi: 10.1177/0265407598152006

Greenfield, P. M. (2009). Linking social change and developmental change: shifting pathways of human development. Dev. Psychol. 45, 401–418. doi: 10.1037/a0014726

Greenfield, P. M. (2016). Social change, cultural evolution, and human development. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 8, 84–92. doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.10.012

Habermas, H. (1987). The Theory of Communicative Action, 3rd Edn., Vol. 2 . Transl. by T. A. McCarthy. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

Hannum, H. (1989). International law and Cambodian genocide: the sounds of silence. Hum. Rights Q. 11, 82–138. doi: 10.2307/761936

Hansen, N., Postmes, T., van der Vinne, N., and van Thiel, W. (2012). Information and communication technology and cultural change. Soc. Psychol. 43, 222–231. doi: 10.1027/1864-9335/a000123

Harmon, D. J., Green, S. E., and Goodnight, G. T. (2015). A model of rhetorical legitimation: the structure of communication and cognition underlying institutional maintenance and change. Acad. Manag. Rev. 40, 76–95. doi: 10.5465/amr.2013.0310

Hegmon, M., Peeples, M. A., Kinzig, A. P., Kulow, S., Meegan, C. M., and Nelson, M. C. (2008). Social transformation and its human costs in the prehispanic U.S. Southwest. Am. Anthropol. 110, 313–324. doi: 10.1111/j.1548-1433.2008.00041.x

Herrera, C. (1999). Two arguments for covert methods in social research. Br. J. Sociol. 50, 331–343. doi: 10.1080/000713199358770

Hewitt, W. E., White, J., and Teevan, J. J. (2008). Introduction to Sociology: A Canadian Focus, 8th Edn . Toronto, ON: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Hinkle, G. J. (1952). The “four wishes” in Thomas' theory of social change. Soc. Res. 19, 464–484.

Hoffman, M. F., and Medlock-Klyukovski, A. (2004). “Our creator who art in heaven”: paradox, ritual, and cultural transformation. West. J. Commun. 68, 389–410. doi: 10.1080/10570310409374810

Homans, C. G. (1951). The Human Group . London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Jerneić, Ž., and Šverko, B. (2001). Life-role changes in times of socioeconomic transition. Rev. Psychol. 8, 41–48.

Jost, J. T., Banaji, M. R., and Nosek, B. A. (2004). A decade of system justification theory: accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo. Polit. Psychol. 25, 881–919. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00402.x

Kanter, R. M. (1991). Transcending business boundaries: 12,000 world managers view change. Harv. Bus. Rev. 69, 151–164.

Katz, D. (1974). Factors affecting social change: a social-psychological interpretation. J. Soc. Issues 30, 159–180. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1974.tb00732.x

Kelman, H. (1967). Humans use of human subjects: the problem of deception in social psychological experiments. Psychol. Bull. 67, 1–11. doi: 10.1037/h0024072

Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., and McGuire, T. W. (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. Am. Psychol. 39, 1123–1134. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.39.10.1123

Kim, J. (2008). Perception of social change and psychological well-being: a study focusing on social change in Korea between 1997 and 2000. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 38, 2821–2858. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2008.00415.x

Kim, J., and Ng, S. H. (2008). Perceptions of social changes and social identity: study focusing on Hong Kong society after reunification. Asian J. Soc. Psychol. 11, 232–240. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-839X.2008.00262.x

Kirmayer, L. J., Dandeneau, S., Marshall, E., Phillips, M. K., and Williamson, K. J. (2011). Rethinking resilience from indigenous perspectives. Can. J. Psychiatry 56, 84–91. doi: 10.1177/070674371105600203

Kohn, M. L., Slomczynski, K. M., Janicka, K., Khmelko, V., Mach, B. W., Paniotto, V., et al. (1997). Social structure and personality under conditions of radical social change: a comparative analysis of Poland and Ukraine. Am. Sociol. Rev. 62, 614–638. doi: 10.2307/2657430

Kohn, M. L., Zaborowski, W., Janicka, K., Mach, B. W., Khmelko, V., Slomczynski, K. M., et al. (2000). Complexity of activities and personality under conditions of radical social change: a comparative analysis of Poland and Ukraine. Soc. Psychol. Q. 63, 187–207. doi: 10.2307/2695868

Kollontai, V. (1999). Social transformations in Russia. Int. Soc. Sci. J. 51, 103–121. doi: 10.1111/1468-2451.00180

Krznaric, R. (2007). How Change Happens: Interdisciplinary Perspectives for Human Development . Oxford: Oxfam.

Laland, K. N., Odling-Smee, J., and Feldman, M. W. (2000). Niche construction, biological evolution, and cultural change. Behav. Brain Sci. 23, 131–175. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X00002417

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text

Landau, J., and Saul, J. (2004). “Facilitating family and community resilience in response to major disaster,” in Living Beyond Loss, 2nd Edn. , eds F. Walsh and M. McGoldrick (New York, NY: Norton), 285–309.

Lapuz, L. V. (1976). Culture change and psychological stress. Am. J. Psychoanal. 36, 171–176. doi: 10.1007/BF01248367

Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory . New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Lenski, G. E., and Lenski, J. (1974). Human Societies . New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Liu, H., Li, S., Xiao, Q., and Feldman, M. W. (2014). Social support and psychological well-being under social change in urban and rural China. Soc. Indic. Res. 119, 979–996. doi: 10.1007/s11205-013-0534-1

Liu, J. H., and Bernardo, A. B. I. (2014). Social psychology for social change: foundations for and introduction to a program of action-oriented research. J. Pacific Rim Psychol. 8, 29–34. doi: 10.1017/prp.2014.4

López, J., and Scott, J. (2000). Social Structure . Maidenhead: Open University Press.

PubMed Abstract

Luthar, S. S. (2003). Resilience and Vulnerability: Adaptation in the Context of Childhood Adversities . New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Macek, P., Ježek, S., and Vazsonyi, A. T. (2013). Adolescents during and after times of social change: the case of the Czech Republic. J. Early Adolesc. 33, 1029–1047. doi: 10.1177/0272431613507758

Macionis, J. J., Jansson, M., and Benoit, C. M. (2008). Society: The Basics, 4th Edn. Toronto, ON: Pearson Education.

Marquis, D. G. (1947). Psychology of social change. Ann. Am. Acad. Pol. Soc. Sci. 249, 75–80. doi: 10.1177/000271624724900110

Marx, K. (1859/1970). A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy . New York, NY: International Publishers.

Marx, K., and Engels, F. (1848). Manifesto of the Communist Party, Vol. 1 . Moscow: Progress Publishers.

Masten, A. S. (2001). Ordinary magic: resilience processes in development. Am. Psychol. 56, 227–238. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.227

Masten, A. S., and Powell, J. L. (2003). “A resilience framework for research, policy, and practice,” in Resilience and Vulnerability: Adaptation in the Context of Childhood Adversities , ed S. S. Luthar (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 1–25.

May, V. (2011). Self, belonging and social change. Sociology 45, 363–378. doi: 10.1177/0038038511399624

Mayhew, B. H. (1980). Structuralism versus individualism: part 1, shadowboxing in the dark. Soc. Forces 59, 335–375. doi: 10.2307/2578025

McDade, T. W., and Worthman, C. M. (2004). Socialization ambiguity in Samoan adolescents: a model for human development and stress in the context of culture change. J. Res. Adolesc. 14, 49–72. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-7795.2004.01401003.x

McGrath, J. E. (1983). Looking ahead by looking backwards: some recurrent themes about social change. J. Soc. Issues 39, 225–239. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1983.tb00186.x

Meyer, J., and Allen, N. (1997). Commitment in the Workplace: Theory, Research and Application . New York, NY: Sage publications.

Moghaddam, F. M. (2002). The Individual and Society: A Cultural Integration . New York, NY: Worth.

Moghaddam, F. M. (2012). The omnicultural imperative. Cult. Psychol. 18, 304–330. doi: 10.1177/1354067X12446230

Moghaddam, F. M., and Crystal, D. S. (1997). Revolutions, samurai, and reductions: the paradoxes of change and continuity in Iran and Japan. Polit. Psychol. 18, 355–384. doi: 10.1111/0162-895X.00061

Moghaddam, F. M., and Lvina, E. (2002). Toward a psychology of societal change and stability: the case of human rights and duties. Int. J. Group Tens. 31, 31–51. doi: 10.1023/A:1014212700468

Mucchi-Faina, A., Pacilli, M. G., and Pagliaro, S. (2010). Minority influence, social change, and social stability. Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass 4, 1111–1123. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00314.x

Nadler, D. A., and Tushman, M. L. (1995). “Types of organizational change: from incremental improvement to discontinuous transformation,” in Discontinuous Change: Leading Organizational Transformation , eds D. A. Nadler, R. B. Shaw, and A. E. Walton (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass), 14–33.

Neves, P., and Caetano, A. (2009). Commitment to change: contributions to trust in the supervisor and work outcomes. Group Organ. Manag. 34, 623–644. doi: 10.1177/1059601109350980

Newman, K. L. (2000). Organizational transformation during institutional upheaval. Acad. Manag. Rev. 25, 602–619.

Nisbet, R. A. (1972). Social Change . New York, NY: Harper and Row.

Noak, P., Kracke, B., Wild, E., and Hofer, M. (2001). Subjective experiences of social change in East and West Germany: analyses of the perceptions of adolescents and their parents. Am. Behav. Sci. 44, 1798–1817. doi: 10.1177/00027640121958168

Nolan, P., and Lenski, G. E. (2011). Human Societies: An Introduction to Macrosociology, 11th Edn . Boulder, CO: Paradigm.

Norris, F. H., Friedman, M. J., Watson, P. J., Byrne, C. M., Diaz, E., and Kaniasty, K. (2002). 60,000 disaster victims speak: part I. An empirical review of the empirical literature, 1981-2001. Psychiatry 65, 207–239. doi: 10.1521/psyc.65.3.207.20173

O'Keeffe, G. S., and Clarke-Pearson, K. (2011). The impact of social media on children, adult, and families. Am. Acad. Pediatr. 127, 800–806. doi: 10.1542/peds.2011-0054

Oh, O., Eom, C., and Rao, H. R. (2015). Role of social media in social change: an analysis of collective sense making during the 2011 Egypt revolution. Inform. Syst. Res. 26, 210–223. doi: 10.1287/isre.2015.0565

Pareto, V. (1901/1968). The Rise and Fall of Elites: An Application of Theoretical Sociology . Towota, NJ: Bedminster Press.

Parson, T. (1951). The Social Structure of Social Action . New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Parsons, T. (1964). Essays in Sociological Theory . New York, NY: Free Press.

Pham, P. N., Weinstein, H. M., and Longman, T. (2004). Trauma and PTSD symptoms in Rwanda. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 292, 602–612. doi: 10.1001/jama.292.5.602

Pinquart, M., and Silbereisen, R. K. (2004). Human development in times of social change: theoretical considerations and research needs. Int. J. Behav. Dev. 28, 289–298. doi: 10.1080/01650250344000406

Pinquart, M., Silbereisen, R. K., and Juang, L. P. (2004). Moderating effects of adolescents' self-efficacy beliefs on psychological responses to social change. J. Adolesc. Res. 19, 340–359. doi: 10.1177/0743558403258851

Pinquart, M., Silbereisen, R. K., and Körner, A. (2009). Perceived work-related demands associated with social change, control strategies, and psychological well-being: do associations vary by regional economic conditions? Evidence from Germany. Eur. Psychol. 14, 207–219. doi: 10.1027/1016-9040.14.3.207

Pittenger, D. J. (2002). Deception in research: distinctions and solutions from the perspective of utilitarianism. Ethics Behav. 12, 117–142. doi: 10.1207/S15327019EB1202_1

Pizer, S. A., and Travers, J. R. (1975). Psychology and Social Change . New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Ponsioen, J. A. (1962). The Analysis of Social Change Reconsidered: A Sociological Study . The Hague: Mouton.

Porpora, D. V. (1989). Four concepts of social structure. J. Theory Soc. Behav. 19, 195–211. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5914.1989.tb00144.x

Prilleltensky, I. (1990). Enhancing the social ethics of psychology: toward a psychology at the service of social change. Can. Psychol. 31, 310–319. doi: 10.1037/h0078954

Prislin, R., and Christensen, P. N. (2005). Social change in the aftermath of successful minority influence. Eur. Rev. Soc. Psychol. 16, 43–73. doi: 10.1080/10463280440000071

Prunier, G. (2010). Africa's World War: Congo, the Rwandan Genocide, and the Making of a Continental Catastrophe . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Reichers, A. E., John, P. W., and James, T. A. (1997). Understanding and managing cynicism about organizational change. Acad. Manag. Exec. 11, 48–59. doi: 10.5465/ame.1997.9707100659

Rieger, J. (2003). A retrospective visual study of social change: the pulp-logging industry in an Upper Peninsula Michigan county. Vis. Stud. 18, 157–178. doi: 10.1080/14725860310001632010

Rioufol, V. (2004). Approaches to social change in social forums: snapshots of recompositions in progress. Int. Soc. Sci. J. 56, 551–563. doi: 10.1111/j.0020-8701.2004.00516.x

Robinson, J. P., Barth, K., and Kohut, A. (1997). Social impact research: personal computers, mass media, and use of time. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 15, 65–82. doi: 10.1177/089443939701500107

Rocher, G. (1992). Introduction à la Sociologie Générale [General Introduction to Sociology] . Montréal, QC: Éditions Hurtubise.

Rodriguez, S. (2013). Making sense of social change: observing collective action in networked cultures. Sociol. Compass 7, 1053–1064. doi: 10.1111/soc4.12088

Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations, 5th Edn . New York, NY: Free Press.

Root Wolpe, P. (2006). Reasons scientists avoid thinking about ethics. Cell 125, 1023–1025. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2006.06.001

Round, J., and Williams, C. (2010). Coping with the social costs of “transition”: everyday life in post-Soviet Russia and Ukraine. Eur. Urban Reg. Stud. 17, 183–196. doi: 10.1177/0969776409356158

Rudel, T. K., and Hooper, L. (2005). Is the pace of social change accelerating? Latecomers, common languages, and rapid historical declines in fertility. Int. J. Comp. Sociol. 46, 275–296. doi: 10.1177/0020715205059204

Runciman, W. G. (1966). Relative Deprivation and Social Justice: A Study of Attitudes to Social Inequality in Twentieth-Century England . Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Sampson, E. E. (1989). The challenge of social change for psychology: globalization and psychology's theory of the person. Am. Psychol. 44, 914–921. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.44.6.914

Sanzgiri, J., and Gottlieb, J. Z. (1992). Philosophic and pragmatic influences on the practice of organization development, 1950-2000. Organiz. Dyn. 21, 57–69. doi: 10.1016/0090-2616(92)90064-T

Saran, A. K. (1963). The Marxian theory of social change. Inquiry 6, 70–128. doi: 10.1080/00201746308601368

Schaal, S., and Elbert, T. (2006). Ten years after the genocide: trauma confrontation and posttraumatic stress in Rwandan adolescents. J. Trauma Stress 19, 95–105. doi: 10.1002/jts.20104

Schneiderman, L. (1988). The Psychology of Social Change . Ann Arbor, MI: Human Sciences Press.

Schrickel, H. G. (1945). Group conflict and social reform. J. Soc. Psychol. 21, 187–196. doi: 10.1080/00224545.1945.9714165

Sewell, W. H. (1996). “Three temporalities: toward an eventful sociology,” in The Historic Turn in the Human Sciences , ed T. J. McDonald (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press), 245–280.

Sidanius, J., and Pratto, F. (1999). Social Dominance: An Intergroup Theory of Social Hierarchy and Oppression . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Silbereisen, R. K., and Tomasik, M. J. (2010). Human behavior in response to social change: a guide to the special section. Eur. Psychol. 15, 243–245. doi: 10.1027/1016-9040/a000059

Slone, M., Kaminer, D., and Durrheim, K. (2002). Appraisal of sociopolitical change among South African youth: the relation to psychological maladjustment. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 32, 318–341. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb00218.x

Sloutsky, V. M., and Searle-White, J. (1993). Psychological responses of Russians to rapid social change in the former USSR. Polit. Psychol. 14, 511–526. doi: 10.2307/3791710

Smelser, N. J., and Swedberg, R. (1994). “The sociological perspective on the economy,” in The Handbook of Economic Sociology , eds N. J. Smelser and R. Swedberg (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press), 3–26.

Smith, A. D. (1973). The Concept of Social Change: A Critique of the Functionalist Theory of Social Change . London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Spencer, H. (1898). The Principles of Sociology , Vol. 1. New York, NY: Appleton and Company.

Staub, E., Pearlman, L. A., Gubin, A., and Hagengimana, A. (2005). Healing, reconciliation, forgiving and the prevention of violence after genocide or mass killing: an intervention and its experimental evaluation in Rwanda. J. Soc. Clin. Psychol. 24, 297–334. doi: 10.1521/jscp.24.3.297.65617

Steele, C. M., Spencer, S. J., and Aronson, J. (2002). Contending with group image: the psychology of stereotype and social identity threat. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 34, 379–440. doi: 10.1016/S0065-2601(02)80009-0

Stinchcombe, A. L. (2000). “Social structure and organizations,” in Economics Meets Sociology in Strategic Management (Advances in Strategic Management) , Vol. 17, eds J. Baum and F. Dobbin (Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited), 229–259.

Stroebe, K., Wang, K., and Wright, S. C. (2015). Broadening perspectives on achieving social change. J. Soc. Issues 71, 633–645. doi: 10.1111/josi.12132

Subašić, E., Reynolds, K. J., and Turner, J. C. (2008). The political solidarity model of social change: dynamics of self-categorization in intergroup power relations. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 12, 330–352. doi: 10.1177/1088868308323223

Subašić, E., Reynolds, K. J., Reicher, S. D., and Klandermans, B. (2012). Where to from here for the psychology of social change? Future directions for theory and practice. Polit. Psychol. 33, 61–74. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2011.00864.x

Sun, J., and Ryder, A. G. (2016). The Chinese experience of rapid modernization: sociocultural changes, psychological consequences? Front. Psychol. 7:477. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00477

Sztompka, P. (1993). The Sociology of Social Change . Oxford: Blackwell.

Sztompka, P. (1998). Devenir social, néo-modernisation et importance de la culture: quelques implications de la révolution anticommuniste pour la théorie du changement social [To become social, neo-modernization and importance of culture: a few implications of the anticommunist revolution for social change theory]. Sociol. Soc. 30, 85–94. doi: 10.7202/001781ar

Sztompka, P. (2000). Cultural trauma: the other face of social change. Eur. J. Soc. Theory 3, 449–466. doi: 10.1177/136843100003004004

Sztompka, P. (2004). “The trauma of social change: a case of postcommunist societies,” in Cultural Trauma and Collective Identity , eds J. C. Alexander, R. Eyerman, B. Giesen, N. J. Smelser, and P. Sztompka (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press), 155–195.

Tajfel, H., and Turner, J. C. (1986). “The social identity theory of intergroup behaviour,” in Psychology of Intergroup Relations , eds S. Worchel and W. G. Austin (Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall), 7–24.

Tanner, C. J., and Jackson, A. L. (2012). Social structure emerges via the interaction between local ecology and individual behaviour. J. Anim. Ecol. 81, 260–267. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2011.01879.x

Taylor, D. M. (1997). The quest for collective identity: the plight of disadvantaged ethnic minorities. Can. Psychol. 38, 174–190. doi: 10.1037/0708-5591.38.3.174

Taylor, D. M. (2002). The Quest for Identity: From Minority Groups to Generation Xers . Westport, CT: Greenwood.

Taylor, D. M., and de la Sablonnière, R. (2013). Why interventions in dysfunctional communities fail: the need for a truly collective approach. Can. Psychol. 54, 22–29. doi: 10.1037/a0031124

Taylor, D. M., and de la Sablonnière, R. (2014). Towards Constructive Change in Aboriginal Communities: A Social Psychology Perspective . Montréal, QC: McGill-Queen's Press.

Taylor, D. M., and McKirnan, D. J. (1984). Theoretical contributions: a five-stage model of intergroup relations. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 23, 291–300. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8309.1984.tb00644.x

Terry, D. J., and Jimmieson, N. L. (2003). A stress and coping approach to organisational change: evidence from three field studies. Aust. Psychol. 38, 92–101. doi: 10.1080/00050060310001707097

Thomas, D. R., and Veno, A. (1992). Psychology and Social Change: Creating an International Agenda . Palmerston North: Dunmore Press.

Thompson, R. C., and Hunt, J. G. (1996). Inside the black box of alpha, beta, and gamma change: using a cognitive-processing model to assess attitude structure. Acad. Manag. Rev. 21, 655–690. doi: 10.2307/258998

Tilly, C., Tilly, L. A., and Tilly, R. H. (1975). The Rebellious Century: 1830-1930 . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Tomasik, M. J., Silbereisen, R. K., and Pinquart, M. (2010). Individuals negotiating demands of social and economic change: a control-theoretical approach. Eur. Psychol. 15, 246–259. doi: 10.1027/1016-9040/a000064

Tonkens, E. (2012). Working with Arlie Hochschild: connecting feelings to social change. Soc. Polit. 19, 194–218. doi: 10.1093/sp/jxs003

Tushman, M. L., and Romanelli, E. (1985). Organizational evolution: a metamorphosis model of convergence and reorientation. Res. Organ. Behav. 7, 171–222.

Usborne, E., and de la Sablonnière, R. (2014). Understanding my culture means understanding myself: the function of cultural identity clarity for personal identity clarity and personal psychological well-being. J. Theory Soc. Behav. 44, 436–458. doi: 10.1111/jtsb.12061

Usborne, E., and Taylor, D. M. (2010). The role of cultural identity clarity for self-concept clarity, self-esteem, and subjective well-being. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 36, 883–897. doi: 10.1177/0146167210372215

Vago, S. (2004). Social Change, 5th Edn . Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

Van Binh, T. (2002). Social and cultural changes in Vietnam with the new market economy. Nat. Soc. Thought 15, 335–346.

Varnum, M. E. W. (2008). Rapid adaptation to social change in Central Europe: changes in locus of control, attribution, subjective well-being, self-direction, and trust. Sociológia 40, 215–235.

Vaughan, G. M. (1986). Social change and racial identity: issues in the use of picture and doll measures. Aust. J. Psychol. 38, 359–370. doi: 10.1080/00049538608259022

Veyssière, L. (2013). La Nouvelle-France en Héritage [New France in Heritage] . Paris: Armand Colin.

Walker, C., and Stephenson, S. (2010). Youth and social change in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. J. Youth Stud. 13, 521–532. doi: 10.1080/13676261.2010.487522

Wall, K., and Louchakova, O. (2002). Evolution of consciousness in response to terrorist attacks: towards a transpersonal theory of cultural transformation. Humanist. Psychol. 30, 252–273. doi: 10.1080/08873267.2002.9977040

Watzlawick, P., Weakland, J. H., and Fisch, R. (1974). Change: Principles of Problem Formation and Problem Resolution . New York, NY: Norton.

Weinstein, J. (2010). Social Change, 3rd Edn . Lanham, MD: Roman and Littlefield.

Wilson, W. J. (2012). The Truly Disadvantaged: The Inner City, The Underclass, and Public Policy . Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Wyn, J., and White, R. (2000). Negotiating social change: the paradox of youth. Youth Soc. 32, 165–183. doi: 10.1177/0044118X00032002002

Yakushko, O. (2008). The impact of social and political changes on survivors of political persecutions in rural Russia and Ukraine. Polit. Psychol. 29, 119–130. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2007.00615.x

Yanagizawa-Drott, D. (2014). Propaganda and conflict: evidence from the Rwandan genocide. Q. J. Econ. 129, 1947–1994. doi: 10.1093/qje/qju020

Zhang, X., and Hwang, S.-S. (2007). The micro consequences of macro-level social transition: how did Russians survive in the 1990s? Soc. Indic. Res. 82, 337–360. doi: 10.1007/s11205-006-9037-7

Zorbas, E. (2004). Reconciliation in post-genocide Rwanda. Afr. J. Legal Stud. 1, 29–52. doi: 10.1163/221097312X13397499735904

Zuck, A. M. (1997). Introduction. Am. Behav. Sci. 40, 257–258. doi: 10.1177/0002764297040003002

Keywords: identity, inertia, normative structure, social change, social structure, stability, pace of change, psychology of social change

Citation: de la Sablonnière R (2017) Toward a Psychology of Social Change: A Typology of Social Change. Front. Psychol. 8:397. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00397

Received: 25 August 2016; Accepted: 02 March 2017; Published: 28 March 2017.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2017 de la Sablonnière. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Roxane de la Sablonnière, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

• Walden University
• Faculty Portal

Webinar Transcripts: Writing for Social Change: Using Restorative Writing to Enact Social Change

Writing for social change: using restorative writing to enact social change.

Presented August 15, 2018

View the webinar

Last updated 9/5/2018

Visual: The webinar begins with a PowerPoint title slide in the large central panel. A captioning pod, Q&A pod, and files pod are stacked on the right side.

The slide says “Housekeeping” and the following:

• Will be available online within 24 hours.
• Polls, files, and links are interactive.
• Now: Use the Q&A box.
• Later: Send to [email protected] or visit our  Live Chat Hours .
• Ask in the Q&A box.
• Choose “Help” in the upper right-hand corner of the webinar room.

Audio: Beth: Hello everyone and thank you so much for joining us today. My name is Beth Nastachowski, I’m going to be facilitating the session today. And, I’m just going to get us started by going over a couple of quick housekeeping notes, here.

A couple of things. The first is that we are recording the webinar. I will be posting this recording if you’d like to come back and review it in our webinar archive in 24 hours. Keep that in mind and you’re more than welcome to come back to this session if you have to leave early or you’d like to review it again.

I’d also like to note that we have lots of interaction for the session today, Ellen and Miranda have put together lots of activities where we will be using chat boxes so please do engage with us in those chat boxes but also note that you can download our slides here. And additionally, a handout in the files pod. That’s at the bottom right-hand corner of the screen, that’ll be available throughout the session today, so feel free to download that at any time. And there are also links throughout the slides here to further information you might find is full. So, feel free to click those links when they are hyperlinked through the slides, those will open up on a new tab on your browser and then you can take a look at them now or save them for later as well, so either way works.

We also have a Q&A box on the right side of the screen. I’d like to note here too, I know we have both students and faculty joining us for this session today we’re bringing together many different people from throughout the Walden community and so for faculty I’m not sure how much, sometimes the sessions you have are more chat based we’re going to be using the Q&A box throughout the session today so I just wanted to point that out, it looks a little bit different. But it works in the same way and I’ll be monitoring that Q&A box, so if you have questions or comments throughout the session do let me know.

Additionally, if you have any questions after the session please feel free to reach out to the writing center. I have our email address here [email protected] and I’ll be displaying that at the end of the session as well. And then we also have our live chat hours, so feel free to reach out to us.

As I said we have the Q&A box if you have any questions or technical issues throughout the session please use that Q&A box I’m happy to help. And I’ll be posting announcements and other things as well throughout that Q&A box, as well. But you can also use the help box at the top right corner that’s a great place to go for any significant technical issues, as well.

With that Ellen and Miranda, I will hand it over to you.

Visual: Slide changes to the title of the webinar, “ Using Restorative Writing to Enact Social Change ” Walden University Writing Center’s Writing for Social Change webinar series. The speakers name and information: Ellen Zamarripa , Writing Instructor & Coordinator of Residency Planning, Walden University Writing Center and Miranda Mattingly , Writing Instructor, Walden University Writing Center.

Audio: Ellen:  Thank you so much Beth. So yes, I would love to welcome everyone to today's webinar. Using restorative Writing to Enact Social Change”. And I’m welcoming as Beth said, staff, faculty and students.  Kind of a unique webinar in that sense.  I’m really excited about that.  My name is Ellen Zamarripa I am a writing instructor in the writing center as well as the coordinator of residency planning.  And I’ll hand it over to you Miranda to introduce yourself.

Miranda:  Thanks, Ellen my name is Miranda Mattingly and I join Ellen and Beth in being super excited to talk to everyone today about restorative writing.  I am a writing instructor in the writing center and I'm going to be walking us through the first part of our webinar.  So, let's go on and get started.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Quick Writing Activity

Think about how you use writing in your daily life.

What different kinds of writing do you use?

Audio: So, to start today, we actually wanted to join in a conversation right off the start and get a little bit of chat going on.  Before we dive right into what restorative writing is, we wanted to have everyone to think about how you use writing in your daily life.  And the question we’re posing to you are: What are the different types or kinds of writing you use daily?  So, if you’d take a moment and put a few quick thoughts in the chat box and that will get us started for today.

[pause as students respond]

Okay awesome, we have so many ideas coming into the chat box already.  I’m seeing some common patterns here that we use.  Writing for emails and social media and texting.  Yes, that is  probably one of our most common daily uses. Although I see that some of you are also mentioning reflective journaling which is going to be a great topic that we’re going to kind of touch on today although a little bit different.  I can also see we've got some creative writers and poetry, this will be an interesting session for you all.  And finally, I'm also noticing in either in writing a paper or perhaps feedback to a paper, right? Because we have both students and faculty, thank you so much, you can feel free to keep eyeing those different types of writing into the chat box and I’m going to kind of move forward into our actual presentation for today.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Learning Objectives

• Understand the concept of restorative writing and how it developed and why it matters
• Use restorative writing to link personal feelings with events as a way to promote wellness and self-care
• Use restorative writing to reflect on how you can make change within your community
• Explore next steps for using restorative writing to influence social change in your community  

Audio: The reason we ask that question is because restorative writing is a type of writing but it may be something that is new or different to you, today.  And that’s kind of our objective, is to one, start off with understanding what the concept of restorative writing is and how it developed or even why it matters.  Now we’re going to provide some information on that today but the other thing that we’re going to do today is we’re actually going to have several restorative writing activities in our session today.  These kind of speak to our two second and third bullet points which is that we’re going to use restorative writing to link personal feelings two events as a way to promote wellness and self-care.  And we’re also going to use restorative writing today to reflect on how you can make a change on your community.

So those two aspects are our objectives, really speak to the activity portion of today and then finally what we will be doing, is we will be touching on some next steps for how you can use restorative writing to influence social change.  And that is really related to the handout that Beth mentioned at the top of the session that Ellen will be touching on at the final part of the session.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: What is Restorative Writing?

“when writing becomes a vehicle for transforming one’s pain into engagement” (Batzer, 2016)

Audio: So those are our objectives. To start us off today, since restorative writing can be a somewhat new topic or perhaps you are not familiar, we want to start with a definition itself.  Restorative writing in the research does not always have a precise definition, and you’re going to see that later on, when we explain how restorative writing develops.  But one thing in the literature we found that was useful was the definition we put here.  Restorative writing refers to when writing becomes a vehicle for transforming one's pain into engagement.

Now, we pulled this particular quote because it does a nice job of setting the context for when restorative writing applies.  Restorative writing really can apply to when you’re trying to deal with a difficult event, perhaps one that is filled with conflict or even can be traumatic, but it’s a way to work through that process and hopefully get to the sense of engagement understanding, healing and potentially even social change.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: What is the Goal of Restorative Writing?

• Defined as “any event in which one is forced to respond to ‘the extremities of helplessness and terror’” (Herman, 1997, p. 33).
• Trauma’s potency “derives from how our brains process and sustain” painful episodes (Batzer, 2016, para. 4).
• Trauma Recovery
• Feel empowered again
• Remember the trauma and describe it
• Regain a sense normalcy and reconnect with community
• Understanding

Audio: So, we want to offer that particular definition because restorative writing is a concept of writing that’s rooted in understanding trauma.  Now, this can seem like a surprising connection here for writing, and today Ellen and I are by no means are trying to position ourselves an expert in trauma, but what we did want to do is momentarily apply the context for how restorative writing can be applied and established its connection to restorative writing's overall goal.  So that’s what we are kind of doing here, in this particular slide.

Let's dive in to what trauma is.  We are starting off with the definition and since Ellen and I are not experts in trauma we are really relying on the scholarship here.  We're using Herman, as our definition who defines trauma as, any event in which one is forced to respond to the extremities of helplessness or terror.  We’re referring here to events that can be traumatic, difficult to process, may take time to understand, heal and recovery from.  In that sense we’re really talking about traumas potency, something that derives from how our brain sustains a painful event over time.  It may not be something you can readily understanding and what we are looking at and our goal today is to explore how writing can help in that process.

Now, another aspect of trauma that we want to touch on is recovery.  And while we are not experts in recovery, it’s a rather complex topic but we wanted to highlight a few steps or details that impact trauma recovery in order to draw this parallel to restorative writing's goals.  In that regard, Herman notes that trauma recovery occurs when victims feel empowered again, they can have control back over the experience that they’ve, they can remember the trauma and describe it maybe in writing on a personal level.  But then also gaining a sense of normalcy over that event, your own way of life and finding connections with the community.

Now overall, these parallel quite nicely with the goals of restorative writing that we’re going to talk in more great detail about today, about. Those goals are about healing, understanding, processing information and also getting to a sense of self-care.  We also added empathy and engagement here, because restorative writing as we’ll talk today, can be used for the self but it can also be used to engage with your community.  So, that empathy is understanding how others have engaged with trauma or experienced a similar trauma or even engage in the community to promote change around the particular event.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Why Does Restorative Writing Matter? 

Given the conflict and violence we see and experience in our daily lives, Restorative Writing offers a way to:

• Understand and Heal
• Express a Point of View Without Judgment
• Build Stronger Communities
• Enact Social Change

Audio: Let's dive deeper into why restorative writing matters.  Now in our daily lives, we see a lot of conflict and violence, whether it is a wildfire in California, whether it is a hurricane in Puerto Rico or whether it is a shooting that we see on TV.  As a result of that, it can be difficult to process that information.  Our goal today is to talk about how restorative writing can help you on a self and also your community to process that information.  To understand it and heal from it and then also move to a point where you can express your point of view.  And this one’s going to be really important for us today, we’re going to work on activities about expressing your point of view but in a space that’s without judgment.  We are not going to be grading or commenting on the writing today which I know can often be what the writing center does.  You come to us, you want to hear about APA, but that’s actually not our goal today.  This is the webinar based on social change.

So, in that regard once we talk through how restorative writing can be used to process information, understand and express were also going to talk about how restorative writing can be used to build stronger communities and to ultimately enact social change.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: What You Can Gain From Restorative Writing?

• Ability to process difficult, even traumatic events and express your own thoughts, perspectives, and feelings through writing (Knieling, 2016)
• Gain an enhanced understanding of the root causes of conflict and violence (Duckworth, Allen, & Williams, 2012)
• Gain increased empathy for others (Duckworth et al., 2012)
• Learn to think systemically about local, community, and global problems (Duckworth et al., 2012)
• Learn ways to increase cross-cultural communication (Duckworth et al., 2012)
• Discover new ways to enact social change and community building

Audio: So, one more aspect of restorative writing that I want to touch on and then we’re going to have a quick chat, I do believe. Is we are going to highlight a few things you can gain from restorative writing.  It is going into more detail from the previous slide.  In fact, we had so many things you could gain we felt a little limited here in this box. It was already filled with a lot of information. Let's walk through a few of them. 

One of the things you can gain from restorative writing is the ability, and this is one we’ve been talking about a lot, to process difficult or even a traumatic event and express your own thoughts and perspectives and feelings through writing. In essence we are really talking about restorative writing for the self. It can give you an enhanced sense and understanding of the root causes of conflict and violence. This might be understanding the policy, the lack of communication, the lack of funding, something that produce the conflict, or it might be related to how you feel about the conflict that has occurred in some way.  It’s kind of using writing as a way to understand the cause itself, the violence or the conflict. 

As we mentioned before, restorative writing can also increase empathy for others, in this case we’re often talking about understanding how different people experience trauma.  Sometimes that can be a matter of finding connections but other times it is about having different perspectives of the same event.

Restorative writing can also be a way to think systematically about local community or global problems.  So, we’re building outward from restorative writing of the self onto how it can impact your community, looking at those larger problems, policies that can create larger systematic problems. In this process, restorative writing can also increase your ability to have cross-cultural communication or conversations with others.  And in this case, we’re moving closer and closer to enacting social change and building community in the process of restorative writing. Now I gave you so much information here.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Chat

• Have you ever engaged with restorative writing?
• Or is the concept new to you?

Audio: So, we wanted to pause for a moment and ask everyone whether or not you have ever engaged in restorative writing before.  It maybe that you’ve engaged with it, it’s just been under a different name or if it is in an entirely new concept.  And it is okay if it is an entirely new concept.  I’m going to pause for a minute and see if, what everyone's reactions are.

[pause as students participants comment]

Okay we have several comments coming in.  And it sounds like we are actually getting somewhat of a 50-50 split.  I feel like every time I see it’s new to me, somebody else is saying that yes, I’ve engaged with it. Whether they journal daily or they’ve taken a class on it, which sounds amazing, I’d love to hear about that.

Also, it comes in different forms whether it’s journal and advocacy class, and that’s really something we're going to talk about later in the session, but it is okay too if it is completely new to you.  We actually going to do a bit of background information to get you acclimated to this concept before we dive in.  So, feel free to keep adding those ideas into the chat box.  And we’re going to keep moving on because I want to make sure we have plenty of time for the actual activities.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Background: How did Restorative Writing Develop?

• Restorative Justice and Peace Education
• Restorative English Education
• Restorative Writing

Audio: So, before we move into the writing activity portion of this webinar, we did want to give some background on how restorative writing develops.  And as I mentioned at the top of this webinar, restorative writing builds on a longer history of writing as being a therapeutic way of understanding.  And I think this is what several people were saying in the chat box, they've either use journaling or they’ve been in and advocacy class of some kind, and as a result they have always done it. As a field or as a concept, it is still emerging.  We want to talk through the different places we have seen it in the scholarship to give us a little bit of a grounding of what it is.  In order to talk about it we will look momentarily at restorative justice and peace education, which aren’t exactly the same thing, but they have common goals and objectives and then we’re going to look at how the ideas from these two fields shift into restorative English education and eventually emerge into restorative writing.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Restorative Justice & Peace Education: Definitions

• -  An approach to crime that focused on repairing harm and giving a voice to victims
• - Restorative justice “assumes that justice can and should promote healing, both individual and societal” (Zehr, as cited in Winn, 2013, p. 70)
• - Encourages students to investigate violence’s root causes in society and discover definitions of justice that spark social transformation (Duckworth et al., 2012)
• - Empowers students to create “a more peaceful, just future for their communities” (Duckworth, 2011, p. 237)

Audio: Let's dive in.  So, I’m starting here with restorative justice and peace education.  And again, these two are separate fields but our goal here is to demonstrate how they have common objectives in some way in terms of the effect that they’re intending to have.  So, if I start with restorative justice, restorative justice may be a slightly more familiar concept to you.  It was kind of a buzz word, I think in the recent years. But it is also is a field really coming out of criminal justice.  So, you can see here is a definition we are using, is an approach to crime that focus on repairing harm and giving voice to victims. 

I always give the example when talking about restorative justice of if a student were to per se graffiti the side of a building.  Instead of immediately punishing the student, perhaps suspending them of some kind, restorative justice would probably have the student sit down with stakeholders affected by it and have a conversation about why that action or why that behavior occurred. They might have the victims talk about how that action had an impact on them.  And then they would talk about ways to restore from it and create a new sense of justice or remedy from that process. 

So, this is a different approach that comes largely again out of criminal justice and you’ll see that the goal here is to think through justice and how it can promote healing both for the individual and society.  And then we've mentioned this before that restorative writing is always kind of working with the individual but also looking for those outward connections.

Now, we want to build a parallel here to peace education as well.  Peace education is coming largely from international studies.  Restorative writing coming out of criminal justice, peace education largely out of international studies.  You’ll see that they have a connection. And the goal is to encourage students to investigate violence's root causes in society, so again looking at if there’s a policy in place, miscommunication and misunderstanding how people interact in some that can cause violence.   But then ultimately having students think through different ways that you could approach the problem and come up with new definitions that can create social transformation in this way.

In this regard its really about empowering students to create a more peaceful or just future for the community.  And this is where I feel like there is a lot of similarities here between restorative justice and peace education, but also ultimately restorative writing.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Background: Shift to Restorative English Education

• Joins restorative justice with critical pedagogy and communication
• Restores classrooms to peacemaking spaces where students learn to empathize and to build healthy relationships with themselves and each other
• Uses literate acts to inspire “radical healing” and ways of becoming an agent for change

What we wanted to do is demonstrate how those two concepts coming from the scholarship kind of merge and shift into restorative English education.  Now restorative English education is taking restorative justice and essentially placing it in the classroom.  It’s placing it in connection with a full critical pedagogy and communication.  It also positions classrooms as a peacemaking space, a place where students can learn to empathize with others who have experienced similar conflicts, understanding their point of view of the same event but also building healthy relationships with them, building a sense of communication to understand how you can build, as it said in the previous slide, a just or more peaceful future.

What’s interesting about restorative English education, English comes in there a little bit but you also see in the third bullet that it uses literacy or literate acts to inspire radical healing or way of becoming social change.  You’ll start to see writing introduced into the process. It may be a form of journaling it could be writing a paper or an essay on the topic. Restorative English education can produce poetry, spoken word art, it can be a play of some kind of.  There's different ways you can engage with this process.  Our objective is to talk about it, how it can apply to our own practice, so we wanted to kind of shift into the development of restorative writing for social change.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Background: Development of Restorative Writing

Builds on writing’s history as a means of healing and empowerment

• Restorative Justice
• Peace Education
• Applications Beyond the Classroom: Self and Community

Audio: As we’ve mentioned throughout this webinar, writing has a long history as a means of healing and empowerment.  The reason we introduce peace education and justice and restorative English education is because they build on those same principles.  However, the idea of restorative writing is not exclusive to the classroom.  We really want to talk about it today in terms of how it applies and can be used for yourself and for your community.  And that’s really our objective today.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: What Can Restorative Writing Look Like?

• Affirmations
• Action Plans
• Letters to the Editor
• Social Media
• Discussion post
• Word Association
• Free-Writing
• Reflection Essays
• Personal narratives
• Circle Dialogues

Audio: So, what does that look like? Some of you have already thrown out several of these ideas about what restorative writing can look like and it sounds like several of you are already doing them. So, I’ll pick a few that it sounds like people are doing, which in terms, we had ideas about mentioning journaling, probably discussion posts and classes are quite common.  Maybe doing some free writing or reflective essay or personal narrative, these can be forms of restorative writing.  We also highlight things like doing affirmations statements, whether for your health or your community that you do together to respond to an event.  It might be creating an action plan or response plan for yourself or community in response to an event.  Or even taking ideas that you've learned from your journaling, your reflective essay, and turning them into a blog, a letter to an editor, a social mediate of some kind to promote advocacy around that particular event.

So, ask you can see restorative writing can look like a lot of things and were going to actually practice some of these today, although we will not get to all of them which is why we have a hand out for you at the end of today's session.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Why Does Restorative Writing Work

• Is a non-threatening starting point into a problem or project
• Expressing your point of view can be confusing, scary, and difficult
• Allows for the discovery of your authentic voice
• Helps to find commonalities in challenging situations

Audio: Before we get into the actual writing activity we want to highlight white restorative writing actually works.  One way to think about it is that restorative writing offers you a non-threatening, starting point into a problem. No one is there to judge you in the beginning of the writing process.  It is a way to get the ideas out on the page so you can understand process and move into the space of both healing, engagement and recovery. Restorative writing also helps to express your point of view that can be at first confusing or scary, but it allows you the opportunity to come to a place where you can discover your own authentic voice about that particular event.  The authentic voice might be initially just regaining a sense of normalcy over a particular event at first, however over time it might lead you to engage your community to promote advocacy around it and that may be a good discovery of authentic voice over time.  It can also help you to find the commonalities and challenging events with others, as well.

So, we are kind of moving always from that self to the community.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: How Does Restorative Writing Work?

• Connect personal feelings and events
• What happened? (DeSalvo, 2000)
• How do you feel about it? (DeSalvo, 2000)
• Use the writing you do to help you reflect and process
• Gain an enhanced understanding of the root causes of conflict and violence (Duckworth, 2012)

Audio: Before we dive into our activities for today, we wanted to highlight essentially, how it works or how we are going to be approaching it today.  When we talk about restorative writing we are talking about how to connect your personal feelings to an event that perhaps has been traumatic or difficult or filled with conflict of some kind.  As you are trying to connect those feelings, you're often asking yourself the larger questions about what happened and how do you feel about it.  When you engage with those questions, it allows you to use writing to reflect on and process the event itself in order to achieve these larger goals that restorative writing offers you in terms of healing, wellness and self-care that can be useful to yourself but also to the community, but then gain those other elements about empathy with others, gaining enhanced understanding of conflict with your community.  In our goal today is really to talk about social change as well.

So, I’ve given you a whole lot of information and I’m looking forward to the activity in the next session that Ellen will lead us through.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Restorative Writing in This Webinar: What to Expect

We’ll provide:

• Prompting questions that encourage you to link events with feelings
• Guide you through prompts that encourage you to consider how restorative writing can help you enact social change 
• Zero judgment

You’re welcome to:

• Respond to the provided questions in writing (this is writing for you)
• Reflect on your restorative writing process (and post your reflection in the chatbox, if you want)
• Process, reflect, empathize

Audio: Ellen:  Thanks, so much Miranda, great. Like Miranda said, we are going to jump into some activities where we’re actually applying this concept of restorative writing.  And so, I want to give you an idea of what we will provide and what you are welcome to do.  On the part of Miranda and I, and Beth as our facilitator, we're going to provide you with some prompting questions that I encourage you to practice this formula for restorative writing which is linking events with your feelings about those events.

And we’re going to guide you through these prompts and continue encouragement about how we can apply restorative writing to enact social change.  And you’ll see we have a progression planned for you, we start with the self, build to the community, and then think about how to apply these concepts from community to enact social change. 

Lastly, we’ll be providing zero judgment.  What I mean by that is exactly what Miranda said a little bit earlier in this presentation. You might think of Miranda and I in the capacity of the writing center.  We are writing instructors and a huge part of our jobs is to review student writing.  So, in this case, this is not going to be our role.  The objective of this webinar isn’t to judge the quality of your writing.  And in return, you also don’t need to focus on things like scholarly writing rules or APA rules.  This writing is essentially for you, for starting at the self and we’ll work up.

We welcome you to do two things.  We have a two-part series three times.  We have these restorative writing prompts to which we encourage you to respond to in writing.  Again, this writing is for you but then we have an opportunity for you to reflect on your restorative writing process and this is an opportunity for you to post your reflection in the chat box, but only if you want.  That is completely optional to you. And of course, we encourage you to think about the foundational goals of restorative writing as we walk through these activities.  So, processing, reflecting and empathizing.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Just a Reminder…

• This writing is for YOU. You are under no obligation to share what you write.

Audio: I think I reiterate this were Miranda and I need to several times throughout the webinar, but I think it is important to reiterate that this writing is for you.  You are under no obligation to share anything that you write today, and we have a little bit of information at the end with encouragement for how to share your writing, if that is the next step you would like to take toward social change.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Restorative Writing Starts with…

Audio: Like I said, we are building up and starting with the self.  Restorative writing really starts with you. 

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Restorative Writing for the Self

• A traumatic event
• An event that included conflict
• A event with you and one other person
• A community event
• A nationwide event 
• A worldwide event
• Try not to worry about things like grammar, spelling, and correct punctuation
• Write what you feel, and write the way you want to write
• 3 minutes of writing

Audio: We have two short prompts here where you are going to practice linking an event to linking how you feel or felt about that event.  So, our first question is, what event have you experienced that has impacted you?  This could be on quite a spectrum.

It could be an event that is personal between you and one other person.  And it could range to a worldwide event that influenced you or impacted you in some way.  Once you have that event in your head and maybe it’s the first thing that comes to mind – one you have that event in your head, you're going to think about, how do you feel about what happened?  How do you feel about that event?

Again, when you're thinking about this and writing about it, try not to worry about little things, try not to worry about the grammar, spelling or punctuation.  That’s not again the goal of this type of webinar. We want you to write what you feel and write the way that you want to write and that might not necessarily mirror scholarly writing rules or APA.  That is okay, this is the start.  This is the self.  So, get your event in mind and then write about how you feel about what happened.  We’re going to take three minutes to complete this restorative writing activity.  I have a timer next to me and I will give you one 30 second warning when we are about to finished.  And if you are not done that is totally okay. This is something you can continue writing about on your own. So, I’m going to go on mute and we’re going to take three minutes to write about an event, and how you feel about what happened.

[Participants working on activity]

This is your 30 second warning, as promised.

All right that is the three-minute marker so over those three minutes you probably wrote about a lot of different things, which is awesome.  I feel like three minutes always seems like forever and then it's over, maybe you have that same experience. But we can go then to the next slide where we are going to check in. 

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Check In

• What did you learn about yourself through this restorative writing process?
• Reflect and write (2 minutes)
• You may choose to post in the chat box or not for any reason

Audio: Let us check in and reflect and write about that restorative writing process.  And what we’d like you to think about is, what did you learn about yourself?  We are starting with yourself and building from there.  What did you learn about yourself through this restorative writing process?  We’re going to reflect and write for two minutes. And I’ll set the timer for myself.  Here is where you are welcome to share in the chat box about your experience.

This is your 30 second warning.

Alright, that’s the two-minute mark.  As I’m reading your responses I genuinely feel very touched by your choice to be so vulnerable with what you are sharing and your honesty.  This is very inspiring to me, and I don’t mean to sound inauthentic because I really am inspired by this, this is eye opening.  Thank you for so much for sharing, this is really great and I am seeing some consistencies throughout responses and things I did not even expect.  And I love this and I hope you are learning from a too. 

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Restorative Writing Can Grow to Involve…

• The Community

Audio: Great.  So, let's move on with building, we thought about the self, we engaged in restorative writing for the self, let's build on that, let’s think about how restorative writing can grow to involve our community. 

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Restorative Writing for Your Community

What three words best describe your community? (1 minute)

Community can mean different things to different people:

• Neighborhood community
• Work community
• Religious community
• Communities of people with something in common

Audio: I would like to start with a quick chat, what three words best describe your community?  And feel free to post in the chat box if you like, but community of course can mean different things to different people. It can be a neighborhood community like a neighborhood watch or a school board community or parent counsel.  Perhaps it’s a work community of your colleagues or religious community.  Many people are part of communities where you are planning something, where you have a common goal or just something in common.  So, think about what three words best describe the community you’d like to focus on for two days restorative writing practices.   let's take about one minute to think about that and post in the chat box, if you would like.

Thank you so much for sharing I can tell that everyone, some people are talking about maybe similar communities and some completely different.  I love that.  There is such a diverse range of answers here which is really interesting.  And it is eye-opening as we go through this process.  Thank you so much for sharing. 

Audio: Let's move on to our restorative writing prompt to help us think about how restorative writing can be applied to our community. You will see a pattern, we are applying that same formula of restorative writing to these prompts.  So what kind of issues or conflicts do you think your community is facing?  This is relating to that event, identifying an event but particularly focusing on an issue or conflict your community is facing. 

This could be a conflict with people, perhaps it’s a money or resources issue or something outside the box that is particular to your community.  What kind of issues or conflicts do you think your community is facing?  And then apply your feelings about those issues or conflicts to this event.  How do you feel about those issues or conflicts?  And again, you are so encouraged to write what you feel and write the way that you want. I noticed that someone in the checkbox earlier said that their grammar and punctuation was terrible, and that is completely, completely okay.  And perhaps even a good thing because it shows that you are writing exactly what you feel in the way that you wanted to write which is what restorative writing involves at this stage.

We’re going to take another three minutes to reflect on these two questions.  What issues or conflicts you think your community is facing?  And how do you feel about those issues or conflicts?  I will provide you with 30 second warning.

We will take 30 more seconds to complete this activity.

Thank you so much for participating in the second restorative writing activity. 

• What did you learn about your community through this restorative writing process?

Audio: We now have another opportunity to check in, to think about, what did you learn about your community through this restorative writing process?  So, we thought about ourselves in the previous check in.  Now let’s think about, what we learn about our communities through this writing process?  Sue can reflect and write and post in the chat box if you would like.  You are under no obligation to do so.  We will take about two minutes to reflect on what you learned about your community through this restorative writing process.

We will take about 30 more seconds to complete this activity.

Thank you so much for thinking and reflecting and writing about what you learned about your community through this process. I am again amazed at these responses, I’m seeing threads of hope, of diversity, of love and of reliving pain, and I think that, that is very human. It looks like we are all reflecting and learning things from that reflection which is wonderful.  Thank you so much.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Restorative Writing Can Lead to…

• Social Change

Audio: Alright, let's build that last block here, as restorative writing can lead to social change.

Visual: Slide Changes to the following: How Restorative Writing Can Lead to Social Change

• 3 minutes of writing 

Audio: We are actually going to jump right into our question so thinking about social change, what can you do today to help remedy an issue or conflict your community is facing?  You've already thought about the issue or conflict, you’ve already thought about the community you want to focus on, so what can you do today to help remedy that issue or conflict?  We will write for three minutes. 

We will take 30 more seconds to complete this prompt.

• What did you learn about your role in social change through this restorative writing process?

Audio: We will end there without prompt and new one last check in.  What you can think about here is what did you learn about your role in social change through this restorative writing process?  And here is where you can share, if you would like in the chat box, reflect and write for two minutes, and I will start the timer now.

We will take 30 more seconds to write and reflect.

Alright that’s the two-minute mark and see we have responses coming in.  I just have to say again how amazing these responses are.  And if you're thinking about community, of course we are all part of the Walden community, so when thinking about myself as part of this community, I’m very proud. When thinking about these reflections -- I love all these reflections, they are so deep and vulnerable and authentic so thank you so much for those. 

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Continue with Conversation

• This writing was for YOU, but we encourage you to continue the conversation with your family, friends, teachers, and community.

Audio: I will reiterate one more time that the writing that we did today was really for you, but you are encouraged to continue the conversations that you began with yourself today and with your Walden community members today, to share those with family, friends, teachers perhaps your community as well.  People you feel safe with and comfortable with because that is the next step to social change.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Restorative Writing: Other Sample Activities

• Create an action plan
• Community Affirmation Statements
• Consider other ways to reach out to community (e.g., social media, blogs, letters to editors)
• Establish your collaborative labor network

Audio: I would like to talk a little bit about, what do we do from here?  What are some activities you can do to an enact social change that perhaps we talked about today, you have thought about today, you reflected on and wrote about today? 

One thing you can do is to create an action plan.  So instead of asking yourself, what can I do today to end social change or to remedy a conflict?  Ask yourself, what can I do this week?  What about this month?  What about this year?  That’s something you might be prompted to share with your community members.  And think about how you can work together to enact the social change that you create in this plan.

Another thing you can do is host an organizational event that perhaps features restorative writing.  Maybe you provide similar prompts to the ones that we provided today.  Maybe you work on building community affirmation statements. Where you’re thinking about commonalities between you and your other community members. Thinking about how those affirmations speak to the culture and core values of your community. What do you believe? What are your goals? 

Perhaps you enact circle dialogues as part of your community culture. Circle dialogues are essentially the agreement that everyone has a chance to listen and everyone will have the change to speak.  I think that is a really great way to enact a social change on a small level within your community itself.

You might also consider other genres of writing to enact social change. Miranda talked a lot about these earlier in the presentation. Maybe you’re thinking about social media or writing a blog post, letters to the editor, all of these start with writing for the self, and writing for the community. And maybe you want to clean it up a little bit before it’s sent out to other people.  But you always can start with a conversation.

Lastly, we have here perhaps thinking about establishing a collaborative labor network which is simply a list of contacts, or other organizations or resources that can assist you in helping you enact the plan you create for social change. I would like to reiterate that these activities, Miranda and I outlined them in a little bit more detail on the handout which is in the files pod in the lower right-hand corner of your screen – So we very much encourage you to download that.  We also include some more restorative writing prompts within that handout that you might find interesting or helpful.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Other Writing Center and Related Resources

• WriteCast Episode 36 : Social Change and Difficult Conversations (podcast)
• “How to Write for Positive Social Change” blog post
• “Exploring Perspectives” webinar – (a webinar focused on writing for social change)
• Creative Writing for Social Change – (Academic Skills Center webinar)
• Social Change at Walden (web site)

Audio: If you are thinking about social change and you’d like to think about it in different capacities you might consider checking out some of the pod cast, blog post and other webinars that we have in the writing center, that relate to social change. The academic skills center also has a source here, and we have the Social Change at Walden website linked here.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Final Takeaways on Restorative Writing

Try practicing restorative writing (linking feelings with events) on your own as a way to:

• Engage in self care and wellness
• Think about how you can help others (social change)

Audio: So, for final takeaways from this webinar, and thank you so, so much for your participation, this was really great and inspiring -- when you're thinking about linking feelings to events on your own, think about the fact that it is a way to reflect, to process, to heal, it is for the self to start.  But it can lead to engagement and then can lead you to help others, which is really the basis and foundation of social change.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: References

Batzer, B. (2016). Healing classrooms: Therapeutic possibilities in academic writing. Composition Forum, 34. Retrieved from http://compositionforum.com/

DeSalvo, L. A. (2000). Writing as a way of healing: How telling our stories transforms our lives . Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

Duckworth, C. L., Allen, B., & Williams, T. T. (2012). What do students learn when we teach peace? Journal of Peace Education, 9 (1), 81-99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17400201.2012.664548

Duckworth, C. (2011). Restorative classrooms: Critical peace education in a juvenile detention home. Peace and Conflict Studies Journal , 18 (2), 234-262. Retrieved from https://nsuworks.nova.edu/pcs/

Herman, J. L. (1997). Trauma and recovery. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Knieling, M. (2016, Aug 30). Writing through conflict: Restorative practices in an ELA classroom [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://www2.ncte.org/blog/2016/08/writing-conflict-restorative-practices-ela-classroom/

Winn, M. T. (2013). Toward a restorative English education. Research in the Teaching of English, 48, 126-135. Retrieved from http://www2.ncte.org/resources/journals/research-in-the-teaching-of-english/

Audio: Miranda and I included our references here that we referenced throughout the presentation, those are also included on the handout. 

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Questions: Ask Now or Later

[email protected] •  Live Chat Hours

Learn More:

“Writing for Social Change: Exploring Perspectives”

Audio: And that is the conclusion of our webinar today.  Did you have closing comments, Beth?

Beth:  Yes, thank you so much Ellen, I guess what I would say since we are at time, thank you both to Ellen and Miranda, this is been a fantastic session and I'm so glad to add this to the repertoire of webinars.  I really appreciate everyone's participation for coming and going through the restorative writing prompts and activities with us.  I guess since we are at time I will just say thank you again for everyone coming into Ellen and Miranda.  Do reach out if you want to talk about restorative writing or writing in general or writing for social change, anymore.  As Ellen said, we have other webinars around social change so go ahead and check out those recordings too.  Have a wonderful day.  Thank you so much.

• Previous Page: Synthesis and Thesis Development
• Next Page: Successfully Writing Doctoral Capstone Abstracts
• Office of Student Disability Services

Walden Resources

Departments.

• Academic Residencies
• Academic Skills
• Career Planning and Development
• Customer Care Team
• Field Experience
• Military Services
• Student Success Advising
• Writing Skills

Centers and Offices

• Center for Social Change
• Office of Academic Support and Instructional Services
• Office of Degree Acceleration
• Office of Research and Doctoral Services
• Office of Student Affairs

Student Resources

• Doctoral Writing Assessment
• Form & Style Review
• Quick Answers
• ScholarWorks
• SKIL Courses and Workshops
• Walden Bookstore
• Walden Catalog & Student Handbook
• Student Safety/Title IX
• Legal & Consumer Information
• Website Terms and Conditions
• Cookie Policy
• Accessibility
• Accreditation
• State Authorization
• Net Price Calculator
• Contact Walden

Walden University is a member of Adtalem Global Education, Inc. www.adtalem.com Walden University is certified to operate by SCHEV © 2024 Walden University LLC. All rights reserved.

Unplanned Change and Crisis Management

• Reference work entry
• First Online: 01 January 2018
• pp 6058–6063
• Cite this reference work entry

• Mahauganee Shaw 2  

755 Accesses

Unplanned Change – Organizational changes that are not foreseen prior to the need to change, often made necessary by shifts in the organizational environment.

Crisis Management – The process of preparing for, mitigating, responding to, recovering from, and learning from emergency incidents.

Introduction

Organizational crises “forward the awkward dimension of ‘un-ness’: unexpected, unscheduled, unplanned, unprecedented and definitely unpleasant” (Rosenthal and Pijnenburg 1991 , p. 1). In both their onset and their impact, crises are inherently unpredictable. Despite the unexpected, unscheduled, and unplanned nature of crises, people in positions of power are expected to respond in a manner that is both scheduled and planned. The general public expects that leaders will have a written response plan to consult, and the ability to offer regular scheduled updates, in the midst of a crisis response. Herein lies a conflict: expectation, scheduling, and planning as a desired...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Bess JL, Dee JR (2008) Understanding college and university organization: theories for effective policy and practice. Stylus, Sterling

Google Scholar  

Cintrón R, Weathers ET, Garlough K (2007) College student death: guidance for a caring campus. University Press of America, Lanham

Eckel P, Green M, Hill B, Mallon W (1999) Taking charge of change: a primer for colleges and universities. American Council on Education, Washington, DC

Gersick CJG (1991) Revolutionary change theories: a multilevel exploration of the punctuated equilibrium paradigm. Acad Manag Rev 16(1):10–36

Article   Google Scholar  

Harper KS, Paterson BG, Zdziarski EL II (eds) (2006) Crisis management: responding from the heart. National Association of Student Personnel Administrators, Washington, DC

Hemphill BO, LaBlanc BH (eds) (2010) Enough is enough: a student affairs perspective on preparedness and response to a campus shooting. Stylus, Sterling

Kezar A, Eckel PD (2002) The effect of institutional culture on change strategies in higher education: universal principles or culturally responsive concepts? J High Educ 73(4):435–460

Lewin K (1951) Field theory in social science: selected theoretical papers. Harper & Brothers, New York

Mayhew E (2006) Organizational change processes. In: Jones BB, Brazzel M (eds) The NTL handbook of organizational development and change: principles, practices, and perspectives. Wiley, San Francisco, pp 104–120

Pauchant TC, Mitroff II (1992) Transforming the crisis-prone organization: preventing individual, organizational, and environmental tragedies. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco

Rosenthal U, Pijnenburg B (eds) (1991) Crisis management and decision making: simulation oriented scenarios. Kluwer Academic, Norwell

Shaw MD (2012) Crisis begets change: hurricane recovery at gulf coast institutions. Doctoral dissertation, Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database

Simsek H, Louis KS (2000) Organizational change as paradigm shift. In: Brown III MC (ed) ASHE reader series: organization & governance in higher education, 5th edn. Pearson, Boston, pp 550–565

Tushman ML, Newman WH, Romanelli E (1986) Convergence and upheaval: managing the unsteady pace of organizational evolution. Calif Manage Rev 29(1):29–44

Wooten LP, James EH (2008) Linking crisis management and leadership competencies: the role of human resource development. Adv Dev Hum Resour 10(3):352–379

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Miami University, Oxford, OH, USA

Mahauganee Shaw

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mahauganee Shaw .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, FL, USA

Ali Farazmand

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Shaw, M. (2018). Unplanned Change and Crisis Management. In: Farazmand, A. (eds) Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20928-9_748

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20928-9_748

Published : 16 June 2018

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-319-20927-2

Online ISBN : 978-3-319-20928-9

eBook Packages : Economics and Finance Reference Module Humanities and Social Sciences Reference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Share this entry

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

PSYCH 424 blog

Social change and your community.

The social change that you want to see is really all within the palm of your hand. The thought that you have to look very far to make a difference is not true. Your community alone can make conscience social changes with just a few steps. The community you live in just needs to identify the social changes that they want to see and implement for social reform.

Social change leads to increased awareness and more understanding due to the presence of more information in the community, which enables people to make informed decisions based on the concerns at hand. Social change is the transformation of the social order in the community by making adjustments and variations to social institutions, behavior, and relations. It involves social evolution where the society makes amendments to traditional societal norms leading to the necessary changes.

Positive social change results in the improvement of human and social conditions and in the betterment of society. Such change can occur at many levels, including individuals, families, communities, organizations, and governments. Positive social change is driven by ideas and actions with real-world implications. Social change is ways human interactions and relationships transform cultural and social institutions over time, having a profound impact of society. Relationships have changed, institutions have changed, and cultural norms have changed as a result of these social change movements.

A community outreach center that can provide programs is a great start to bringing social change to the forefront of communities agendas. Community outreach programs are a standard way for groups such as social service agencies, nonprofit groups, and church or other religious groups to identify a certain specific need in its community and provide services to the people who need it. The three main goals of an outreach program are to improve learning, promoting civic engagement, and strengthening communities through addressing their societal needs. An outreach program creates a partnership between the communities and the educational institution (Suresan, 2019).

Suresan, V., Jnaneswar, A., Swati, S. P., Jha, K., Goutham, B. S., & Kumar, G. (2019). The impact of outreach programs on academics development, personal development and civic responsibilities of dental students in Bhubaneswar city. Journal of education and health promotion, 8, 188. https://doi.org/10.4103/jehp.jehp_56_19

This entry was posted on Tuesday, November 16th, 2021 at 8:03 pm and is filed under Uncategorized . You can follow any comments to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a comment , or trackback from your own site.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Posts

• Seinfeld’s Final Social Statement: The Cost of Inaction
• The psychological power of digital books in education
• Understanding Masculinity, Suicide, Prejudice, and Discrimination
• NGO of My Climate: Empowering Environmental Protection Through Innovative Carbon Offset Solutions
• Talk about Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT)

Recent Comments

• ama7669 on Does the justice system skew the reliability of eyewitness testimony?
• ama7669 on Escape Rooms need team cohesion for success!
• ama7669 on Lesson 6 Blog
• ama7669 on The Hopelessness Theory, Biomedical Model, and Depression from Diagnosis of a Chronic Illness
• tvz5192 on Embracing Diversity in a World of Uncertainty
• February 2024
• January 2024
• December 2023
• November 2023
• October 2023
• September 2023
• February 2023
• December 2022
• November 2022
• October 2022
• September 2022
• February 2022
• December 2021
• November 2021
• October 2021
• September 2021
• February 2021
• December 2020
• November 2020
• October 2020
• September 2020
• February 2020
• December 2019
• November 2019
• October 2019
• September 2019
• February 2019
• November 2018
• October 2018
• September 2018
• February 2018
• November 2017
• October 2017
• September 2017
• February 2017
• December 2016
• November 2016
• October 2016
• September 2016
• February 2016
• December 2015
• November 2015
• October 2015
• September 2015
• February 2015
• December 2014
• November 2014
• October 2014
• September 2014
• February 2014
• January 2014
• create an entry
• Uncategorized
• Entries feed
• Comments feed
• WordPress.org

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

NCJRS Virtual Library

Toward a theory of planned social change - alternative perspectives and ideas, additional details.

619 South Fifth Street , Minneapolis , MN 55415 , United States

No download available

Availability, related topics.

Organizational Change: Strategies for Planned and Unplanned Changes

An excerpt from bill pasmore’s leading continuous change: navigating churn in the real world.

B The Change

Change is constant, multifaceted and, at times, overwhelming. To meet this challenge, Bill Pasmore offers four keys to help leaders decide the most effective ways to focus change initiatives in Leading Continuous Change: Navigating Churn in the Real World (Berrett-Koehler, 2015). The following excerpt about organizational change has been excerpted from Chapter 1: “Riding the Coaster.”

The field of organizational development was conceived by behavioral scientists as a way of helping organizations introduce planned change. Changes to work practices, strategy, organizational design, mergers and acquisitions, and so forth were too often resisted by those whose help was required for them to succeed. Kurt Lewin, the most widely recognized progenitor of the field, in the 1940s and ’50s laid out the basics of what became the backbone for change work in organizations. His model was simple and intuitive. It called for leaders to (1) “unfreeze” the organization by clarifying the need for change; (2) introduce change using highly participative methods that allowed others to see for themselves the logic and necessity of change and even to contribute to the design of the change itself; and (3) “refreeze” the organization by institutionalizing new ways of working through the adoption of new methods, policies, and procedures that would not allow it to relapse into comfortable but ineffective ways of operating.

Later others added to Lewin’s three steps. It was recognized, for example, that before the leader could help others change, the leader himself had to be committed to the change. If a leader refused to acknowledge the clear need for change, engaging him in learning about the threats or sharing with him the results of careful diagnoses could increase his readiness to act.

If a leader had difficulty getting her staff on board with the change, techniques were developed to understand people’s concerns and address them. Using surveys to gather opinions and then summarizing the data so that it could be discussed by leaders and employees in a search for solutions became an extremely popular approach. In other cases, when the implementation of good ideas failed to happen, reward systems were realigned to provide incentives for desired new behaviors. Over the years literally hundreds of techniques and approaches for managing change were invented, ranging from individual coaching to large-scale interventions involving thousands of people simultaneously. Despite the proliferation of approaches to managing change, the planned change success rate has remained stuck at around 30 to 40 percent.

John Kotter’s eight-step model, introduced in 1996, became the most widely cited roadmap for changing organizations:

1. Increase urgency. 2. Build the guiding coalition. 3. Get the vision right. 4. Communicate for buy-in. 5. Empower action. 6. Create short-term wins. 7. Don’t let up. 8. Make change stick.

Kotter’s approach followed Lewin’s basic framework, which is premised on a linear notion of how single changes occur.

But at about the same time that Kotter’s model was published, others were questioning whether Lewin’s linear, single-focused thinking could still be applied successfully to the world we live in today. Peter Vaill was among the first and most vocal to articulate this alternative point of view. His 1989 book, Managing as a Performing Art: New Ideas for a World of Chaotic Change , struck a chord with beleaguered managers who could not keep up with the changes occurring around them. Just as one change was introduced, another was needed, and often that change required undoing something the previous change had accomplished. Under these circumstances orderly steps and one-at-a-time sequential changes went out the window. One explanation for why all the tools and techniques that were devised to help with change were not actually helping is that there was simply too much change going on. Tools designed to manage one change at a time could not keep up with the constant interruptions that came from the need to change course continuously.

What Vaill called “permanent whitewater” we refer to here as complex, continuous change, that is, a series of overlapping, never-ending, planned and unplanned changes that are interdependent, difficult to execute, and either cannot or should not be ignored . Organizations facing triple-C can reach the point of change saturation in which the many important changes that must be undertaken can no longer be addressed through parallel, linear, sequential change efforts. Changes start falling off the plate because there are not enough resources to address them, and organizational performance suffers as more effort is put into transformation and less is left over to support ongoing operations. What is a leader living in a world of complex, continuous change to do?

This excerpt about organizational change was published with permission from Leading Continuous Change by Bill Pasmore (Berrett-Koehler, 2015).

Read the next excerpt in this series: Implement Change Programs to Build Productive Workplaces

Check out the full series from Leading Continuous Change: Understanding and Leading Successful Continuous Organizational Change

Photo courtesy of Viktor Hanacek .

B the Change gathers and shares the voices from within the movement of people using business as a force for good and the community of certified B Corporations. The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the nonprofit B Lab.

Written by B The Change

Published by B Lab & the community of B Corps to inform & inspire people who have a passion for using business as a force for good. Join at www.bthechange.com .

More from B The Change and B The Change

16 Apps for Social Change That Make it Simple to Impact the World

10 Celebrities Making an Impact as Socially Responsible Company Founders

CONSCIOUS COMPANY

A Look Inside the 6 Types of Social Enterprises

Innovative, mission-driven businesses come in many models—and purpose lies at the heart of them all.

How Viscose Rayon Fabric Masquerades as Bamboo Clothing

‘fake bamboo’ fabric floods and fools the market, recommended from medium.

Stephanie Gioia

What is designable in organizations?

In search of a practical framework for org design.

Roger Martin

Where to Start with Strategy?

Focus on betterment.

Stories to Help You Grow as a Designer

Interesting Design Topics

How to Lead Well as a New Manager

Intro to People Ops: Not Your Mama's HR

Agile | Adapt

Systems Thinking in Agile Program Management

Agile program management is a dynamic and iterative approach that focuses on delivering value through flexible planning, progressive….

Ashwin Suresh

Design trends of 2023 from a novice designer

By ashwin suresh.

Ignacio de Gregorio

OpenAI’s ‘Leaked’ GPT2 Model Has Everyone Stunned.

On-purpose leak.

Greater Good Studio

Design Education’s Big Gap: Understanding the Role of Power

Conventional design education believes that by training the mind and the hand, a designer can solve just about any problem. in many ways….

Text to speech

The Concept of Planned and Unplanned Organizational Change Essay

Introduction.

An organizational change could be either planned or unplanned. Planned change happens after leaders identify the need for transformations and organize a strategy to realize the change. Even if the planned change is anchored in a proactive and well-founded approach, it sometimes fails to occur in an organized manner. Instead, it may arise in a chaotic and disruptive style attributable to resistance to change by employees.

Unplanned changes often emanate from major, unexpected incidences in the organization. Such occurrences may encompass a manager unexpectedly leaving the organization, decreased quality of products and services leading to the loss of clients, and other unsettling situations (Oreg, Bartunek, Lee, & Do, 2018). Resistance to change denotes the practice of opposing transformations that affect the status quo in an organization (Shimoni, 2017). Workers resist change if it is undertaken poorly, transformation affects the mode of operation, they do not understand the need for modifications, or are not adequately involved.

The best means of making sure that resistance does not occur is through effectively communicating the change process to employees and making them understand its necessity. Through clearly and comprehensively informing employees why change is occurring, the way in which it will affect their tasks, and what is anticipated of every one of them before, during, and after transformation, resistance to change is avoided as nothing will be left to question. The application of both informal and formal communication enables the executive to ensure that workers obtain all details concerning the change (Christensen, 2014).

Moreover, the management should use communication channels, for instance, electronic mail, face-to-face talks, conferences, and organizational intranets to inform all workers and stakeholders about the imminent change while taking their views and answering any posed questions. This has the benefit of leaving everyone satisfied or at least knowledgeable rather than hearing unfounded rumors about the intended modifications.

Christensen, M. (2014). Communication as a strategic tool in change processes. International Journal of Business Communication , 51 (4), 359-385. Web.

Oreg, S., Bartunek, J. M., Lee, G., & Do, B. (2018). An affect-based model of recipients’ responses to organizational change events. Academy of Management Review , 43 (1), 65-86. Web.

Shimoni, B. (2017). What is resistance to change? A habitus-oriented approach. The Academy of Management Perspectives , 31 (4), 257-270. Web.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, November 2). The Concept of Planned and Unplanned Organizational Change. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-concept-of-planned-and-unplanned-organizational-change/

"The Concept of Planned and Unplanned Organizational Change." IvyPanda , 2 Nov. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/the-concept-of-planned-and-unplanned-organizational-change/.

IvyPanda . (2023) 'The Concept of Planned and Unplanned Organizational Change'. 2 November.

IvyPanda . 2023. "The Concept of Planned and Unplanned Organizational Change." November 2, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-concept-of-planned-and-unplanned-organizational-change/.

1. IvyPanda . "The Concept of Planned and Unplanned Organizational Change." November 2, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-concept-of-planned-and-unplanned-organizational-change/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "The Concept of Planned and Unplanned Organizational Change." November 2, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-concept-of-planned-and-unplanned-organizational-change/.

• Unplanned Pregnancy and Preventive Measures
• Changes in the Company Due to External and Internal Factors
• Advantages and Disadvantages of on-the-job and off-the-job Training and Development
• J&J Bridal Salon's Financial and Marketing Plans
• Planning in Business and Project Management
• The Office Assistant Company's Operational Plan
• Multicultural Management and Professional Development
• Schwartz Cultural Value Inventory and Management

• Organizational Behaviour
• Change Management
• Forces of Organizational Change: Planned vs. Unplanned Change and Internal & External Change

In the fast-changing business environment, the contemporary organization’s must learn to be more adaptable and flexible for successfully facing the environmental challenges.

Most of the organizational changes are implemented in a planned manner for realizing the specific objectives or goals. However, organizational change can be implemented in any one of the following ways as described below:

Planned Internal Change

Planned internal change can be regarded as a strategic move by the organization implemented with the objective of changing the nature of the business itself or the way in which an organization is doing its business. This can be administered in one of the following ways: by changing the services or the products, bringing a change in the administrative systemic framework and also by changing the organizational structure or its size.

On the other hand, if there is a requirement for changing the very nature of work itself in an organization (changing the technical core), bottom-upward approach for the change is usually adopted.

Previous studies have identified that organizations which are more mechanistic instead of being organic in its approach, in other words, which are more centralized and formal in nature, tend to achieve a greater degree of success in successfully implementing administrative change.

Planned External Change

Organizations as a system is governed by both internal factors as well as external factors of change. Various factors like technological innovation and advancements in the communication and information processing field come under this category. These factors are external in nature but somehow are introduced in an organization in a planned manner with the objective of enhancing work efficiencies and improving the overall productivity.

Technological development has altered the ways in which people handle their jobs. For example, in the automobile industry, a large part of the design and manufacturing process has been automated and equally depends on IT. Siemens (Germany) holds the credit for being the world’s first paperless office.

Unplanned Internal Change

Unplanned internal change can be regarded as a change which takes place within an organization not in a planned manner or as a strategic intervention, but are introduced in an unplanned manner in response to either a change in the demographic composition of an organization or due to performance gaps.

Unplanned External Changes

Two crucial factors like economic uncertainties and changes in the government regulations, play a crucial role in compelling organizations to change.

In the era of globalization, the formidable challenge for the organizations for staying ahead in the competitive race is to remain innovative and to position itself as a unique brand.

To conclude, it can be interpreted that managing organizational change is one of the most essential pre-requisite for adapting with the competitive challenges and transitioning from the present state of business to a desired futuristic course of action. It is vital to develop and implement a plan of action for managing change successfully.

  Related Articles

• Pre-Requisites for Successful Change Management
• Overcoming Barriers to Change
• Senior Managers as Barriers to Change

View All Articles

Authorship/Referencing - About the Author(s)

The article is Written and Reviewed by Management Study Guide Content Team . MSG Content Team comprises experienced Faculty Member, Professionals and Subject Matter Experts. We are a ISO 2001:2015 Certified Education Provider . To Know more, click on About Us . The use of this material is free for learning and education purpose. Please reference authorship of content used, including link(s) to ManagementStudyGuide.com and the content page url.

• Change Management - Introduction
• The Need for Change Management
• Kinds of Change & Barriers to Change
• Reasons for Resistance to Change
• Individual and Organizational Sources of Resistance to Change
• Techniques for Overcoming Resistance to Change and Selection of Appropriate Technique
• Financial Crisis & Organizational Change
• Complexities in Driving Change
• Organizational Change and Managing Resistance to Change
• Catalysts in Organizational Change
• Creating Sustainable Change
• Top-Down versus Bottom-Up Change
• Fundamental Issues with the Top Down Approach in Change Management
• Role of HR in Change Management
• Innovation and Change Management
• Change Management Programs
• Some Ways to Actualize Change
• Importance of Middle Level Management
• Bureaucracy and Change
• Family Businesses vs Companies
• Change is the only Constant
• Different Types of Change
• What is Strategic Change ?
• Why First 100 Days Targets are a Myth ?
• The Changing Role of Management
• Exponential Change and What it means for Businesses and Workers
• Transactional vs Transformational Leadership in Change Management
• Organizational Learning and Change Management
• Organizational Vision, Mission, Strategy and Change Management
• Models/Approaches to Implement Change Management Programme
• Kurt Lewin’s Change Management Model: The Planned Approach to Organizational Change
• Kotter’s 8 step Model of Change
• Contingency Model of Change Management
• Mintzberg and Quinn’s Model of Change
• Scott and Jaffe Change Model
• Anderson & Anderson’s Change Model
• McKinsey 7S Change Model
• Transformational Change & Change Management
• Models of Transformational Change
• Organizational Change and Transition Management
• Determining Forces of Organizational Change
• Systems Model of Change Management and Continuous Change Process Model
• Importance of Communication in Change Management
• Action Research for Successful Organizational Change
• Psychological Contract and Change Management
• Emotional Competence Framework and Change Management
• Characteristics and Capabilities of Successful Change Agents
• Key Factors in Effective Change Management
• Battle Between Change Agents and Status Quo Interests in Every Organization
• Managing the Transition from Hierarchical to Network Organizational Structures
• Why it is Becoming Difficult to Change the Status Quo in Economies and Organizations?
• Disruptive Initiatives Must be Well Thought and Carefully Executed to Avoid Chaos
• Future Shock, Present Shock, and the Fourth Industrial Revolution
• The Changing Nature of Power in the Age of Networks
• How Organizations Must Learn to Deal with Radical, Disruptive, and Disorienting Change
• Driving Organizational Change by Embracing Agile and Facing the VUCA World
• How Relevant is the Corporate Planning Function in the Digital Age of Agile Organizations
• Paradigm Shift is Needed for Organizations to Succeed in the Digital Age
• The Organizational Challenges as the American Economy Transitions to the Digital Age

How to Differentiate Between a Planned & Unplanned Change in an Organization

by Fraser Sherman

Published on 28 May 2019

The difference between planned and unplanned change is exactly what it sounds like. Planned change is something you choose, such as implementing a new strategic direction or a system reorganization. Examples of unplanned change in an organization include unexpected developments such as a new product's failure, a key executive quitting or a public relations disaster.

The Types of Change

There are many different ways that an organization can change. Planned vs. unplanned change is only one of them.

• Company-wide vs. Subsystem : Restructuring an entire organization is a major challenge, sometimes compared to teaching an elephant to dance. Changing one part of it, such as your sales force or your IT department, is simpler though not necessarily easy.
• Transformational vs. Incremental : Incremental change can be so gradual that your people may not even notice it happening. Transformational changes such as a merger or a company-wide reboot are far more drastic and obvious.
• Remedial vs. Developmental : A remedial change fixes a problem, while developmental change builds on success. If, say, employees are burning out, a remedial change might be hiring more staff. If employees are loyal and committed, a developmental change plan might make them even more loyal.

Planned Change vs. Unplanned Change

Both unplanned and planned changes can be company-wide or small scale. Whether a talented employee gives notice well in advance or dies unexpectedly, the loss is a change to which you have to adapt. There are other ways that planned and unplanned changes resemble each other.

• Change is chaotic. Even if you carefully plan for change, the process may become chaotic once you put it into action.
• Making one change at a time is not always an option. If you're in the middle of a reorganization when you get hit with a major lawsuit, you'll have to cope with both the planned and unplanned change simultaneously.
• Change has to be managed. Whether you're planning an incremental improvement or coping with an unanticipated change, you'll need to think your way through and not react blindly.
• However you deal with the change, you have to show commitment. Your employees will find it hard to support changes, planned or unplanned, if you're not leading the way.

" id="managing-people-during-change " class="title"> Managing People During Change

One difference between planned and unplanned change is that planned changes give you time to prepare your team. To manage change effectively whether planned or unplanned, it's important to manage your employees and possibly other parties through it. Asking yourself some questions is a good way to start:

• Who are the external and internal stakeholders affected by the change?
• What are their primary concerns? If you're downsizing, for instance, employees will worry about their jobs. Customers may worry about whether they'll get the same level of service with fewer people.
• Have you provided them with enough information about the change? How do you plan to share information as the transition moves along?
• Will the change require retraining employees, such as to replace someone who's left the company?
• Do employees have a chance to offer feedback? Are you paying attention when they do?
• Are you and the other team leaders guiding employees through the process?
• How will you deal with employees who are stuck and don't want to move on?

Preparing for Unplanned Change

Another difference between planned and unplanned change is that with planned changes, you have time to think your way through the key questions. In a crisis of unplanned change, you'll have to come up with the answers quickly.

One way to avoid that is to think of examples of unplanned change that might hit your company. If you're on the Gulf Coast, for instance, hurricane damage and flooding are a risk. You can't know when a storm will devastate your community or destroy your business, but you can have backup plans in place that allow you to keep operating when it happens.

• Scroll to top

•   / Sign Up
• HOW WE HELP CLIENTS
• schedule your conversation

Planned Change Theories and Process in Organizational Development

Published: 14 January, 2024

Social Share:

Organizational Development

Get the Full Package for FREE & OpenSource

• Get instant access to this model including a full presentation, related tools and instructions!
• You will equally get instant access to all 50+ UNITE Innovation & Transformation Models!
• Completely FREE and OpenSource!

Table of Contents

Planned change in organizational development is preparing the entire organization for new goals or a new digital business strategy . The direction can be culture, metrics, internal structures, processes, or other relevant areas.

Change does not appear randomly but needs a structured approach. With John Kotter’s proven 8 Steps of Change model, you have all the tools needed to structure and implement your change plan from the bottom up: You create the right climate and empower your organization to create sustainable change that matters!

Thus, it is important to note that planning for change and planning for innovation are not the same things. Innovation is a massive transformative process that requires significant change.

This post will explore planned change in organizational development and organizational development and change.

What is Planned Change Meaning in Organizational Development

Planned change refers to a purposeful and intentional effort to bring about modifications, improvements, or transformations within an organization. Unlike changes that occur organically or reactively, planned change involves a systematic and structured approach to address specific issues or achieve particular objectives. This type of change is typically initiated with a clear understanding of the need for change and a well-thought-out strategy for implementing it.

In organizational development (OD) , planned change refers to a purposeful and intentional effort to bring about modifications, improvements, or transformations within an organization. It is a systematic and structured approach to managing and implementing changes in various aspects of an organization, such as its structure, processes, culture, or technology. Planned change is a key concept within the field of organizational development, which is focused on enhancing organizational effectiveness and facilitating long-term success.

Theories of Planned Change in Organizational Development

There are three significant organization development and change cummings theories used to help the organizational members manage the change.

1) Lewin’s Theory of Planned Change Model in Organization Development

Lewin’s model is the basis for comprehending organizational change . It was first developed by Kurt Lewin and had three steps in it.

So, Lewin’s change model suggests increasing the factors that trigger a change in the organization while reducing the forces that preserve the existing status of the organization. This reduces the resistance to change.

The three steps involved in this model include:

• Unfreezing : As the name suggests, this step involves reducing the factors which maintain the existing organizational behaviour at the current level. It is named unfreezing because the existing state is unfrozen here. Unfreezing is sometimes accomplished by the causes of psychological disconfirmation.
• Moving : In this step, there is a displacement of existing organizational culture , innovation strategy , and individual or department to a different level. It also involves interfering in the present system to develop new attitudes and relevant organizational change .
• Refreezing : In this step, stabilization of the organizational equilibrium occurs. Supporting mechanisms and procedures are used to achieve refreezing, which forces the new organizational state.

These are the forces that gradually become regular, and the cycle continues.

2) Action Research Organization development and change model

Planned change in organizational development is a cycle, and the action research model focuses on the planned change as a cycle. The core research about the organization gives information to guide further action. The results are assessed on the amount of information provided.

Action research has the objective of assisting companies with implementing their planned change. It also helps develop general knowledge gathered from implementing the planned change so that it can be applied to other companies.

3) Contemporary approaches to change

The contemporary approaches to change are culled from an action research model. However, the difference here is that the member involvement is relatively high in the change process. This includes educating the members of the organization about their company and how they should change it to apply the planned change.

Process of Planned Change 8 Steps in Organizational Development

Once business leaders commit to planned change in organizational development, they need to create a logical step-by-step approach to accomplish the objectives. Planned change requires managers to follow an eight-step process for successful implementation, which is discussed below:

1) Identify the need for change

Identifying or recognizing the need for change happens at the top management level or in peripheral parts of the organization. The change may be necessitated due to internal or external forces, and the senior management team determines it.

2) Develop goals for the change

it is important to note that you need to determine why the change is necessary before any action is taken. The goals that change need to be defined before starting the planned change in organizational development . Both business market opportunities and problems must be evaluated. Then it is important to define the needed changes in terms of organizational culture, structure, technology, products, and services.

3) Appoint a change agent

As the name implies, the change agent is the person who takes leadership responsibility to oversee and implement the planned change in organizational development . He may be selected from the management team or externally. The change agent must realize the need for organizational development & change, be it a product, service culture, or other areas. He should be open to new ideas, Creativity and innovation, and supportive of implementing those ideas into actual practice.

4) Analysis of the organization’s current state

in this step, the change agent gathers data to analyze the organization’s current state. This data gathering has only one sole intention: to prepare existing employees for organisational change and development. Preparing employees for this planned change requires direct and forceful feedback about the negatives of the organization’s current state compared to the desired future state. It also involves sensitizing employees and stakeholders about the need for the planned change. This will motivate them to overlook the organization’s current deploring state and adopt the new planned change.

5) Select the implementation method

This step requires deciding on the best way to bring about organization development and change cummings. Different possible methods of implementation will be presented. Once all the queries are solved, the chosen plan is selected for implementation. Managers and business leaders must ensure that they are open and self-motivated towards change. They understudy organizations that have implemented new ideas, talk to people with different views and ideas, and use external performance standards such as competitors’ progress.

6) Developing a plan

As the name implies, thorough planning takes place in this step. This phase also determines the when, where, and how of the plan, otherwise known as the specifics of the plan. The plan acts like a road map or GPS map, providing direction for the organization. It considers specific events and activities that must be integrated to produce the planned change. It also delegates responsibility for each of the goals and objectives.

7) Implementation of the selected plan

There could be multiple plays and innovation strategies in the entire process, some of which may be rejected or selected. After much deliberation and the right questions answered, the selected plan is implemented. Day-to-day problems faced by employees during the implementation of change can dilute the excitement of the change. It is the responsibility of business leaders and managers to maintain the excitement for the change by providing the required resources for the employees. They can also encourage the employees to develop new skills and reiterate the change by having a strong support system for those employees who drive the change in their teams.

8) Follow-up and evaluation

During this step, managers and business leaders must compare the results to the established goals in step 4. Therefore, it is important to sincerely determine whether the goals were met. If necessary, a complete follow-up should be done to determine the completion since a positive result is expected by implementing a planned change in organizational development .

Types of Planned Change

Organizations may undertake one or a combination of these planned changes based on their specific needs, goals, and the external environment. The successful implementation of planned change often requires careful planning, effective communication, and the involvement of key stakeholders.

There are several types of planned change, each tailored to address specific aspects of an organization’s structure, processes, or culture. Here are some common types of planned change:

1) Structural Change

• Definition: Involves altering the organizational structure, roles, and reporting relationships.
• Example: Implementing a new hierarchy, reorganizing departments, or changing reporting lines.

2) Strategic Change

• Definition: Aim at aligning the organization with its strategic goals and responding to external environmental changes.
• Example: Shifting the organization’s focus, entering new markets, or diversifying product offerings.

3) Process-Oriented Change

• Definition: Concentrates on improving specific processes within the organization to enhance efficiency.
• Example: Implementing lean methodologies, Six Sigma, or process reengineering.

4) People-Oriented Change

• Definition: Centers on the human aspects of change, addressing attitudes, skills, and behaviors of individuals within the organization.
• Example: Leadership development programs, training initiatives, or performance management system changes.

5) Technological Change

• Definition: Focuses on introducing or upgrading technology to improve efficiency or effectiveness.
• Example: Implementing new software systems, upgrading hardware, or adopting automation processes.

6) Procedural Change

• Definition: Involves altering how tasks and processes are carried out within the organization.
• Example: Changing project management methodologies, revising workflow procedures, or implementing new standard operating procedures.

7) Cultural Change

• Definition: Focuses on modifying the shared values, beliefs, and behaviours of employees to foster a desired organizational culture.
• Example: Promoting collaboration, innovation, or diversity and inclusion.

8) Policy Change

• Definition: Involves revising organizational policies and guidelines to better align with strategic objectives or external changes.
• Example: Updating HR policies, revising ethical guidelines, or implementing new safety protocols.

9) Merger or Acquisition Change

• Definition: Occurs when organizations combine or when one acquires another, leading to changes in structure, culture, and processes.
• Example: Merging two departments, integrating different corporate cultures, or harmonizing policies after an acquisition.

10) Leadership Change

• Definition: Involves changes in leadership roles, either through promotions, retirements, or organizational restructuring.
• Example: Appointing a new CEO, restructuring the executive team, or changing leadership responsibilities.

11) Product or Service Innovation

• Definition: Focuses on introducing new products or services or significantly updating existing ones.
• Example: Launching a new product line, adopting new technologies, or diversifying service offerings.

12) Training and Development Change

• Definition: Aim at enhancing the skills, knowledge, and capabilities of employees.
• Example: Implementing a new training program, offering professional development opportunities, or introducing mentorship initiatives.

Example of Planned Change in Organizational Development:

The planned change involves a comprehensive digital transformation strategy to address shifts in the retail industry. It demonstrates key elements of planned change, including strategic alignment, leadership involvement, employee engagement, and a focus on continuous improvement.

Real-Life Example: Digital Transformation in a Retail Company

1. Identifying the Need for Change:

• The retail company recognizes the increasing demand for online shopping and the changing preferences of its customer base. The existing brick-and-mortar model is becoming less effective in meeting customer expectations.

2. Setting Objectives:

• The leadership team sets objectives for a digital transformation, aiming to establish a robust online presence, enhance the e-commerce platform, and integrate digital technologies to improve the overall customer experience.

3. Strategic Alignment:

• The planned change aligns with the organization’s strategic goals of adapting to changing consumer behaviour, expanding market reach, and remaining competitive in the digital age.

4. Leadership Involvement:

• The CEO and top executives take a leading role in championing the digital transformation. They communicate the urgency of the change, articulate the vision for the company’s digital future, and allocate resources to support the initiative.

5. Employee Involvement:

• Cross-functional teams are formed, including IT, marketing, sales, and customer service representatives. These teams collaborate to ensure that the digital transformation meets the needs of various departments and addresses potential challenges.

6. Communication:

• Clear communication is maintained throughout the change process. Town hall meetings, newsletters, and regular updates are used to keep employees informed about the digital transformation journey, its milestones, and the expected impact on their roles.

7. Training and Development:

• Training programs are implemented to upskill employees in digital tools, e-commerce practices, and customer engagement strategies. Workshops and online courses are offered to ensure that the workforce is prepared for the shift to digital operations.

8. Pilot Implementation:

• A phased approach is taken, with a pilot implementation of the e-commerce platform in a specific region. This allows the company to test the functionality, gather customer feedback, and identify any technical or logistical issues before a full-scale rollout.

9. Adaptability:

• The organization remains adaptable, continuously monitoring market trends, customer feedback, and technological advancements. Agile methodologies are adopted to respond quickly to changes, ensuring that the digital transformation strategy remains relevant.

10. Continuous Improvement:

• Post-implementation, regular evaluations are conducted to measure the success of the digital transformation. Feedback from customers and employees is used to refine the online platform, optimize user experience, and introduce new digital features.

11. Positive Organizational Development:

• Successful digital transformation leads to positive organizational development . The company experiences increased online sales, improved customer satisfaction, and a stronger competitive position in the market. Employees adapt to the digital environment, contributing to a more innovative and forward-thinking organizational culture.

Planned and Unplanned Change: What is The Difference Between Them

Planned change involves intentional and systematic efforts by organizations to make purposeful modifications, often following a structured process with proactive leadership and employee involvement. In contrast, unplanned change is spontaneous and reactive, responding swiftly to unforeseen events like economic downturns or natural disasters, often requiring immediate adaptation without a predefined strategy or extensive employee participation.

Planned change

Planned change refers to a purposeful and intentional effort by an organization to bring about modifications, improvements, or transformations. It is a proactive approach where leaders and stakeholders collaborate to achieve specific goals, address identified issues, or adapt to changing environments.

Characteristics:

• Intentional: Planned change is initiated through a deliberate decision-making process, guided by the business goals and strategic vision.
• Systematic Approach: It follows a structured and organized process, typically guided by agile change management methodologies, involving diagnosis, planning, implementation, and evaluation.
• Proactive Leadership: Leadership plays a proactive role in initiating and leading the change, setting a clear vision, strategy, and commitment to achieving desired outcomes.
• Employee Involvement: Employees are often involved in the change process, with their input sought through various mechanisms, fostering a sense of ownership.
• Communication: Clear and transparent communication is a key component, ensuring stakeholders are informed about the reasons for change, expected outcomes, and the process involved.
• Predictability: The organization can anticipate and plan for the change, leading to a more predictable timeline and expected outcomes.
• Examples: Implementing a new performance management system, restructuring departments, adopting a new technology platform, or launching a new product line.

Unplanned Change:

Unplanned change, on the other hand, occurs spontaneously and is often a reaction to unforeseen events, crises, or external factors. It is not initiated through a deliberate decision-making process but rather emerges in response to unexpected circumstances.

• Spontaneous: Unplanned change is often triggered by unexpected events or circumstances, catching the organization off guard.
• Less Predictable: It is less predictable and may lack a structured process, as the need for change arises abruptly.
• Reactive Leadership: Leadership reacts to the situation rather than proactively initiating the change, focusing on immediate decision-making and crisis management.
• Limited Employee Involvement: In some cases, there may be limited involvement of employees in the decision-making process, especially if the change is a rapid response to a crisis.
• Communication: Communication may be more immediate and crisis-driven, with a focus on managing the immediate challenges.
• Adaptability: The organization needs to adapt quickly to unexpected circumstances, and there might be less time for thorough planning.
• Examples: Responding to a sudden economic downturn, addressing the impact of a natural disaster on operations, or adapting to a significant shift in market conditions.

The main difference lies in the intentionality and process of the change. Planned change is purposeful, systematic, and initiated with specific goals in mind, while unplanned change is reactive, often arising from unforeseen circumstances, and requires quick adaptation. Both types of changes present unique challenges and opportunities for organizations. Let’s explore the key differences between them:

Benefits of Organization Development and Change

Increasing productivity and efficiency comes with many benefits. One of the best ways to encourage positive results in these metrics is by using a well-thought-out organizational development structure. Organizational development and change are used to equip an organization with the right tools to adapt and respond positively to changes in the market.

The benefits of organization development and change cummings include the following:

1) Continuous development

Entities that participate in organizational change & development continually develop their digital business models . Organizational development creates a constant pattern of improvement in which strategies are developed, evaluated, implemented, and assessed for results and quality.

2) Increased vertical and horizontal communication

One considerable merit of organizational development is effective communication, interaction, and feedback in an organization. An effective communication system aligns employees with the company’s core values, objectives, and goals. An open communication system enables employees to understand the importance of change in an organization. Active organizational development increases communication in an organization, with feedback shared continuously to encourage improvement.

3) Employee growth

Organizational development and change emphasize effective communication, which is used to encourage employees to effect necessary changes. Many industry changes require employee development programs. As a result, many organizations are working toward improving the skills of their employees to equip them with more market-relevant skills.

4) Increased profit margins

Organizational development and change influence the bottom line in many ways. As a result of increased productivity and innovation, profits and efficiency increase. There is a reduction in overall cost because the organization can better manage employee turnover. Finally, after the alignment of an entity’s objectives, it can focus entirely on development and product service quality, leading to improvement in customer satisfaction.

Related: Introducing the UNITE eXtended Business Model Canvas

Organizational development and change are necessary for every organization, and its implementation has to be done methodically. The number of steps in planned change may vary, depending on the organization and the type of industry. Nonetheless, organizations must be prepared for the change.

Planned change in organizational development is essential, as it helps organizations transition into a more productive phase. Change helps to bring new ideas and ways of doing things, and it ensures that an entity is profitable and innovative.

The UNITE Business Model Framework: A Framework for Innovation Success

Examples and Types of Effective Functional Level Strategy for Business Support

A key objective of any business strategy is to improve operational efficiencies...

The Three Levels of Strategy: Corporate Strategy, Business Strategy, and Functional Strategy

Understanding the intricate levels of strategy is crucial for any organization aiming...

• FREE LIVE TRAINING

How To Overcome The 90% Failure Rate in Innovation

Learn the winning formula from over 80+ successful innovation projects

SAVE MY FREE SPOT NOW

Learn how to overcome the 90% failure rate in innovation from a master innovator & bestselling author!

Your e-mail address: * Your first name: *

One Last Step..

Help us better understand the UNITE community

Free guide to improve your innovation success rate*

Our 35-page comprehensive innovation guide covers the key areas why innovation fails. While it cannot cover all the solutions (that would take books to fill), it provides you with a convenient starting point for your analysis and provides further resources and links to the corresponding UNITE models, ultimately allowing you to work towards a doubling and tripling your chances of success.

Discover the largest library of innovation & transformation tools on the entire Internet!

LOG IN VIA E-MAIL

Forgot password?

New to Digital Leadership? Create your account

Get access to the UNITE Models now!

Discover the largest library of innovation & transformation tools on the internet!

First name *

Last name *

Professional E-mail *

Choose Your Password *

Confirm Your Password *

I want to be kept up-to-date and accept the privacy statement *

By signing up, you agree to receive news and accept the privacy statement (mandatory)

Already have an account? Log in

Verify your e-mail address now by entering the 6-digit code we’ve just sent to your inbox

Don't receive Code? Resend code

Country * Please Select Afghanistan Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin (Dahomey) Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Brunei Brunswick and Lüneburg Bhutan Bulgaria Burkina Faso (Upper Volta) Burundi Cabo Verde Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cayman Islands Central African Republic Central American Federation Chad Chile China Colombia Comoros Congo Free State Costa Rica Cote d’Ivoire (Ivory Coast) Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czechia Democratic Republic of the Congo Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Eswatini Ethiopia Fiji Finland France Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Grand Duchy of Tuscany Greece Grenada Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Holy See Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Laos Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Micronesia Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nassau Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria North Macedonia Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Panama Papal States Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Piedmont-Sardinia Poland Portugal Qatar Republic of Congo Republic of Korea (South Korea) Republic of the Congo Romania Russia Rwanda Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Schaumburg-Lippe Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Sweden Switzerland State of Palestine Syria Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United States United Arab Emirates United Kingdom Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Vietnam Württemberg Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Industry * Please Select Automotive, mobilty & transport Financial Services Chemical & agriculture Construction & Real Estate Consulting Education Energy Banking, insurance & FS FMCG Food Gov / Public Industry Health & lifestyle Logistics, Aero & Shipping Media & Entertainment Natural resources & mining Pharma & Biotech Retail & trade Tech & E-Commerce Telco Tourism design Information technology & services Management consulting Retail Pharmaceuticals International trade & development Professional training & coaching luxury goods & jewelry Automotive Insurance Mechanical or industrial engineering Company Size * XS - 1-10 S - 10-100 M - 100-1000 L - 1000-5000 XL - > 5000

Seniority * Please Select Junior Consultant Senior Consultant Manager Senior Manager Director VP SVP Partner CXO Board Member

Areas of interest * Innovation Digital Transformation Culture & Organization IT Strategy & Bus. Alignment Customer Experience

Editable UNITE models (PowerPoint) included

Most of our models and canvases are designed to be applied! 


To help you personalize them to your exact business requirements, you can download fully editable versions of the UNITE models available (PowerPoint format)!

They are straightforward to work with, and you can directly incorporate them into your presentations as you need…thus saving countless hours of replication!

PS: did you know that you are also getting hi-res print-ready versions for your workshops?

Monthly live webinars

Each month we host our exclusive, invitation-only webinar series where one of our industry-leading experts updates our members on the latest news, progress and concepts around business strategy, innovation and digital transformation, as well as other related topics. 



You will receive the book in PDF and EPUB formats, ideal for your computer, Kindle, Tablet or other eReading device.

Bi-weekly live group Q&A sessions

These sessions are your opportunity to bring any questions or challenges you’re facing and receive expert guidance on the spot. 


Come and be a part of engaging discussions where your unique concerns are heard and addressed.

1x personal coaching session / month

If you are occasionally looking for a sparring partner or you need limited support, then this option will be ideal for you. Coaching sessions are 1-2 hours where we can discuss any challenge or opportunity you are currently facing.

If you need a few more hours outside of this provision, then these could be billed transparently.

Unlimited video call support! – it’s like always making the right decision!

We believe support shouldn’t be limited. Because we typically find that the occasional hour just doesn’t cut it – particularly if you and your team are in the midst of a large and complex project.

Your time with Stefan is therefore unlimited (fair usage applies) – in his function as coach and sparring partner. That does mean that you will still have to do the work – we cannot take that off you, unless you hire us as consultants. But you will get valuable strategic insight and direction to make sure you are always focusing your efforts where they will lead to the best results.

One personal coaching session / month 
+ unlimited support via e-mail & WhatsApp

We believe support shouldn’t be limited. If you generally know what you are doing but want a sparring partner to frequently raise questions to, this is the perfect choice!

In addition to your monthly 1-1 live coaching sessions with Stefan, you will also get unlimited support from him via email and WhatsApp messaging (fair usage applies). This not only allows you to get valuable strategic direction in your calls, but also gives you instant access to expert help as you work through your plans each month.



The fact that support is text-based means that we can speed up our responses to you while keeping the overall cost of support down.

Welcome gift of our book 
 “How to Create Innovation” 
 (digital + physical editions)*

As a welcome gift, you will receive the both the digital and physical version of our book “How to Create Innovation”, which covers numerous relevant resources and provides additional deep dives into our UNITE models and concepts.


The print version will be shipped out to you on sign-up. The digital version will be emailed to you, and comes in PDF and EPUB formats, ideal for your computer, Kindle, Tablet or other eReading device.

1x major workshop or 2x smaller workshops / month

1x major or 2x smaller workshops based on the UNITE models.

• Topics covered: almost any challenge under the header of #strategy, #innovation or #transformation, leveraging the UNITE models.
• Hands-On Learning: solve your challenges while learning the practical application of the UNITE models and walk away with concrete plans and tools to take your next steps.
• Industry thought leadership: facilitated by Stefan, the founder of Digital Leadership and the main author of the UNITE models, ensuring top-tier guidance and knowledge sharing.
• Collaborative approach: engage in interactive sessions that foster collaboration, idea exchange, and real-time problem-solving among peers and industry leaders.
• Continuous Improvement: Regular workshops ensure ongoing development in your organization staying ahead of industry trends and customer needs.

Access all of our UNITE models, 
 (incl. editable & print versions)

All of our Professional plans offer full access to the following:

• 6x UNITE model package downloads are included per month, if you need something in addition to these however, please let us know!
• Hi-res, print-ready versions you can use in your workshops
• Fully editable PowerPoint versions where applicable – personalize to your needs.
• Exclusive access to our vault of never-before-published strategic materials. We have much more to share – a lot of our concepts have never been published!

Exclusive access to our private UNITE community (upcoming)

We are currently in the process of launching our brand new community., we are designing our community to specifically help you:.

• Get answers to questions (“How do I …”)
• Share leading practices & knowledge
• Jointly develop new models
• Network amongst a highly qualified group of peers

Please, select the reason

Cancelling your plan will deactivate your plan after the current billing period ends. You will not be charged further, but also won’t be able to access [exclusive features/services].

• Cost-related issues
• Unsatisfied with the service
• Features I need are missing
• Switching to a different service
• Other (Please specify)

Book Your Initial Blueprint Session Now

Simply fill out the below form and book in a time for our initial session that works for you. This initial session is free, no strings attached, and is where we can discuss your Blueprint needs more in-depth before moving forward.

Stefan F. Dieffenbacher

Founder of digital leadership.

Adam D. Wisniewski

Partner for it strategy & business alignment.

Get in touch with Digital Leadership

Speak to our team today to find the best solution for your business to grow and scale.

We are here to support you across the entire lifecycle in all topics related to #digital, #innovation, #transformation and #marketing!

Stefan F. Dieffenbacher Founder of Digital Leadership

Contact Us!

Contact form, contact details, book a call.

Title, first name & last name * Email address * Phone number Please let us know how we can best support you! *

By clicking “Send”, I agree to Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

Let’s have a conversation!

“Please be invited to reach out! We are happy to help and look forward to a first meeting!”

+41 (0) 44 562 42 24

[email protected]

Schedule Your Call With Our Team

Find a time on our calender that best suits you !

Founder and CEO of Digital Leadership

SCHEDULE YOUR INITIAL CALL

A Quick Survey!

What is the main challenge you're currently facing in your business?

You Want To Drive Change?

Let’s find the best solution for your business to grow and scale sustainably!

Let’s kick start it!

We will uncover your current business situation and goals and provide you with a bespoke solution that helps you drastically grow your business working with us.

Stefan F. Dieffenbacher, M.B.A.

Feedback about our consulting that we are proud of

Read the reviews and make sure that this is not a waste of time, but a super effective tool.

You want to drive change?

Schedule your free business assessment call with our founder.

On this call, we will uncover your current business situation and goals and talk about how to drive change and solve your need.

Choose the meeting type that applies to your needs and schedule a time to meet with someone from our team. We look forward to speaking with you soon!

Thanks, We’ve Received Your Updated Details

Schedule Your Free Business Assessment

Schedule Your Free Business Assessment Call With Adam D. Wisniewski

Welcome to our scheduling page.

Let’s Design your Customer Experience Blueprint !

In a uniquely designed 60 or 90 minute session* , we will …

• > identify where to start with near-certainty
• > define what approach it takes to create success in your organization

Based on the Blueprinting session, you will receive a tailored blueprint that aligns with your objectives, vision and goals, ensuring that your initiative is a success from start to finish.

In this session, you will be working together with Patrick Zimmermann, Associate Partner for Customer Experience

Let’s Design your Culture & Org-Change Blueprint !

In this session, you will be working together with Dr. Andreas Rein, Partner at Digital Leadership for Culture & Org Change

Let’s Design your Innovation Blueprint !

In this session, you will be working together with Sascha Martini, Partner at Digital Leadership for Innovation and Digital Transformation

Let’s Design your Transformation Blueprint !

In this session, you will be working together with Stefan F. Dieffenbacher, Founder of Digital Leadership Stefan is a global thought leader in the innovation space

Let’s Design your IT Strategy & Business Alignment Blueprint !

In this session, you will be working together with Adam D. Wisniewski, Partner for IT Strategy & Business Alignment

Patrick Zimmermann

Sascha Martini

Dr. Andreas Rein

Write a personalized review! Log in

Create Review