PAPERS Project Leadership Influences

Resistance to Change: The Case of the

Canadian Public Service
Valerie Lundy, Université du Québec en Outaouais, Canada
Pierre-Paul Morin, Université du Québec en Outaouais, Canada

ABSTRACT ■ INTRODUCTION ■

P
This article analyzes how leadership affects roject Management Institute’s (PMI’s) Pulse of the ProfessionTM survey
resistance to change in projects. Using Dulewicz for 2012 (PMI, 2012) has stated that 73% of organizations using proj-
and Higgs’ (2005) leadership framework in the ect management use change management. This is the highest per-
context of the Canadian Public Service, types of centage of all common practices surveyed. The same source identified
resistance and factors influencing them were the skill set of project and program managers as being “a top concern” (PMI,
listed, leading to the identification of compe- 2012, p. 2). The subject of change and the role of the project manager in
tence areas for the project manager. It was found increasing its chance for success are, as of today, a priority within this
that an engaging leadership style, developed community.
through proper training, effectively reduced Indeed, successful project management largely depends on the ability of
resistance to change. Other factors, such as the the project team to manage change (Hornstein, 2010; Huntoon, 1998; Jacob,
inclusion of affected people in the decisions, as Rondeau, & Normandin, 2008; Schifalacqua, Costello, & Denman, 2009).
well as a formal project management method- Much has been written on change and its consequence: resistance. Resistance
ology, were instrumental in reducing resistance. to change, even in the narrower context of projects, is still a fairly
Finally, upper management support was identi- comprehensive subject. This article therefore focuses on the impact of the
fied to be a mandatory success factor. project leader on the management of resistance to change. Not only is this
perspective conducive to a deeper understanding of this aspect of project
KEYWORDS: project leadership; change; management change, but it is more useful in terms of providing the research
resistance to change; competencies; critical subject, a Department of the Canadian Government, with applicable
success factors; public service conclusions.
In this article, literature describing the links between change, resistance
to change, and project leadership in the realm of project management is
reviewed. Research exploring the differences between public and private
sectors, as well as between project and nonproject changes, has been
discussed. Finally, the widely recognized concept of project success and the
findings from Pinto, Thoms, Trailer, Palmer, and Govekar (1998) on critical
success factors are taken into consideration for comparison purposes.

Organizational Change
Change has been the subject of extensive research for many years. Developed
in the 1940s, Kurt Lewin’s (1952) model of unfreeze, transition, and refreeze
has been of major influence. Often referred to as the origin of the planned
change approach, Lewin’s work was eventually perceived as being more suit-
able to bureaucratic and relatively predictable environments and its ability to
generate rapid change was questioned (Mintzberg & Waters, 1985; Weick &
Project Management Journal, Vol. 44, No. 4, 45–64 Quinn, 1999). Lewin’s model was followed by several structured change
© 2013 by the Project Management Institute models and processes—Kotter’s (1996) eight-stage process was one of the
Published online in Wiley Online Library most cited. Many of these models still prevail today, providing managers
(wileyonlinelibrary.com). DOI: 10.1002/pmj.21355 with a methodology to implement changes. Limitations for such approaches

August 2013 ■ Project Management Journal ■ DOI: 10.1002/pmj 45

PAPERS
Project Leadership Influences Resistance to Change

are clearly stated in Kotter’s work: “First, is the best perspective. This point of 2003). Further empirical studies by
useful change tends to be associated view has been supported by many other Andersen (2010a, 2010b), Heres and
with a multi-step process that creates researchers, including Gareis (2010) Lasthuizen (2012), Nawab, Ahmad,
power and motivation sufficient to and Partington (1996). and Khuram (2011), and Nutt (1999)
overwhelm all the sources of inertia. Further illustrating the wide consistently supported those
Second, this process is never employed spectrum of change models, Weick and differences, specifically in the areas of
effectively unless it is driven by high- Quinn (1999) observed that, despite leadership and decision-making styles,
quality leadership, not just excellent considerable recent research on change, motivation, and ethical conduct.
management—an important distinc- there seems to be no long-term Explanations for such differences are
tion” (pp. 20–21). direction and coherence among those numerous and can be summarized by
Regrouped under the banner of models. the added complexity of these typically
emergent change, several other models large systems.
have since investigated the perspectives Change Complexity
of unintentional goals and strategies There has been a general consensus in Change Project
(Burnes, 2004; Mintzberg & Waters, the literature that complexity is a major In recent years, the project manage-
1985; Weick & Quinn, 1999), looking for determinant of change strategy (Erwin & ment community and its broader
potentially more effective ways to Garman, 2010; Jaafari, 2003; Williams, management vis-à-vis largely have
manage certain types of organizational 2005), which is why organizational developed independently, creating a
change. These models generally not change can be an even bigger challenge gap between the two perspectives
only introduce the concept of when it happens in the public sector (Williams, 2005). This article partly
intentionality but also refer to the pace (Corby, 2005; Hornstein, 2010; Jacob addresses this concern because the lit-
and type of change, with emergent et al., 2008; McNulty & Ferlie, 2004). erature, models, and tools chosen are
changes tending to be more gradual, In a meta-analysis based on 47 from both environments.
continuous, and systemic (Senge, studies comparing the outcomes of Not only do projects generate
1990). Burnes (2004), in an effort to planned organizational change in the change (Crawford, Costello, Pollack, &
determine which approach is the best, public versus the private sector, Bentley, 2003; Thoms & Pinto, 1999),
concluded, “Whilst there is a growing Robertson and Seneviratne (1995) but they can also be used to formally
chorus of disapproval of planned concluded that even though “there is not manage change (Fiedler, 2010; Gareis,
change over the last 20 years, and much compelling evidence from which 2010; Gilley, Godek, & Gilley, 2009;
increasing support for a more emergent to conclude that public organizations Lehmann, 2010; Schifalacqua et al.,
view of change, there is also a view that differ in ways that could restrict planned 2009). Winch, Meunier, Head, and Russ
just one approach to change may be change success . . . it does appear that it (2012) referred to the first concept as
sub-optimal” (p. 890). is more difficult to generate consistent, being the content of change and the
Van de Ven and Sun (2011), while high levels of change in the organizing second one as the process of change.
making a valuable contribution in arrangements, technology, and physical These two perspectives are used in
providing the management community setting sub-systems of public identifying issues facilitating the
with an integrated conceptual organizations” (p. 555). change process.
framework of organizational change, Turner and Müller (2001) also The concept of “change project” as
introduced the concepts of action and stressed that goals in the public service used by Krysinski and Reed (1994), is
reflection in the change strategies. are typically longer term on one hand, defined by Lehmann (2010): “By
Action represents the formal, logical politically influenced, and the subject ‘changes as projects,’ we bring up here
side of the intervention, whereas of public scrutiny on the other hand. this idea that (all) changes depending of
reflection focuses on the making sense Furthermore, changes happening in their objects could be processed as
of and the socially constructed side of governmental organizations are usually projects are” (p. 329). Change projects
the change process. Their model more global and imply a shift in generate systemic impacts, affecting
described resistance to change as the paradigms, and are therefore more the organization overall (Morin, 2008).
expected result from regulated change complicated to manage (Arnaboldi, Systemic changes are long-term,
or imposed change, in a life cycle theory Azzone, & Savoldelli, 2004; Haringa, continuous engagements organized in
perspective. Discussing the value of 2009; Hornstein, 2010). These phases, linked in unrestrained time
various schools of thought, change transformations are of cultural and frames (Jaafari, 2003; Krysinski & Reed,
strategies, and models, they came to the systemic nature and also require a 1994; Morin, 2008).
conclusion that a “contingency theory greater time investment (Jacob et al., Project management is often
of organization change process” (p. 71) 2008; Laframboise, Nelson, & Schmaltz, seen as a natural when implementing

46 August 2013 ■ Project Management Journal ■ DOI: 10.1002/pmj

planned changes (Alsène, 1998; both (Collerette et al., 1997; Langley & Sometimes viewed as a positive
Schifalacqua et al., 2009), but this does Denis, 2008); (b) the strategy for factor (Morin, 2007; Waddell & Sohal,
not imply that the methodology implementing change, like adopting a 1998), resistance is generally considered
g u a r a n t e e s s u c c e s s : “P r o j e c t stepped approach (Laframboise et al., to be a problem, something to be
management is increasingly used to 2003); and (c) the structure of a global overcome. It is also a familiar concept,
manage organizational change change seen as the sum of specific examined by several researchers and
initiatives and there is evidence of critical stakes (Jacob et al., 2008). Those authors in the project management field
the use of inappropriate systems for the factors, when appropriately managed, (Fiedler, 2010; Pinto et al., 1998). Despite
management of such projects” will increase s t a k e h o l d e r s’ the abundance of research on the
(Partington, 1996, p. 13). Its ability to understanding and perception of subject, very few studies have been
generate radical changes, as for planned legitimacy of the change (Jacob et al., performed in the context of
changes in general, is particularly 2008; Krysinski & Reed, 1994; Truong & governmental organizations (Hornstein,
limited (Lehtonen & Martinsuo, 2008). Swierczek, 2009). Diagnosing, planning, 2010; Laframboise et al., 2003). Even
Literature on change, more and reviewing a change action plan fewer studies have examined the
specifically on change created by with clear objectives and implementing resistance level resulting from changes
projects in an organization, is extensive that plan has historically been an created by projects (Laframboise et al.,
(Collerette, Delisle, & Richard, 1997; agreed-upon way to go about managing 2003). Moreover, Erwin and Garman
Jacob et al., 2008; Krysinski & Reed, change (Gilley et al., 2009; Jacob et al., (2010), just as in the case of organizational
1994; Legris & Collerette, 2006; 2008). Not only do the steps for change, state that “we would characterize
Lehmann, 2010). The concept of project undertaking change—the “how”—need the research of the last decade [on
change has been studied for decades to be well defined, but the motivations resistance] as more divergent than
through theoretical and/or empirical and objectives—the “why”—should convergent . . . [suggesting] the
studies (Lehmann, 2010). The effect of also be communicated ( Jacob et al., complexity of studying resistance,
change in an organization and its 2008; Laframboise et al., 2003). individuals, and the relationship to each
impact inside and outside of the The dilemma between using other” (p. 42). Notwithstanding work by
organization has also been well planned or emergent change strategies Mabin et al. (2001) and Fiedler (2010)
documented (Gilley et al., 2009; Szabla, finds echo in the project management proposing a multi-phased process for
2007; Vas, 2005). community in the concepts of change managing resistance, there is still a lack
Change affects both the organi- control and change leadership, where of clear guidelines on how to reduce
zation as a whole and how it manages change control mainly refers to the level of resistance to change in the
its projects. When change occurs, a the activities required to perform the context of a change project in public
series of events and reactions follow, change, and change leadership refers to administrations, especially from a
such as organizational restructuring, the human aspects of change initiatives human resource perspective. (Hornstein,
modified work and decision processes, (Griffith-Cooper & King, 2007). 2010; Laframboise et al., 2003;
transition in work dynamics, resistance Seemingly prisoner of its dominant Partington, 1996; Vann, 2004).
from affected individuals, and so forth being ontology, much of the project There are several reasons for
( Jacob et al., 2008; Langley & Denis, management research and practice has resisting change: uncertainties about
2008; Legris & Collerette, 2006). not readily considered the “soft,” human the unknown, novelty, routine
But, the limitations of a strictly side of organizational change. distraction, culture change, loss of
positivist interpretation of change status/control/power/security, and so
projects are clear: traditional Resistance to Change forth (Gilley et al., 2009; Kanter, 1985;
methodologies are appropriate to reach More than two thirds of change projects Krysinski & Reed, 1994; Laframboise
specific objectives but are not capable fail (Burnes, 2004) and resistance is et al., 2003). The level of acceptance and
of delivering results at the corporate often identified as a reason for failure the forms of resistance of the affected
strategy level (Love, Holt, Shen, Li, & (Erwin & Garman, 2010). The next con- stakeholders were therefore examined
Irani, 2002) unless they incorporate cept, resistance to change, is therefore in this research. The understanding of
tools to facilitate innovativeness and considered an essential aspect of the “whys” and the “by which means”
communication (Kapsali, 2011). change management (Gale, 2012; Gilley resistance happens is the first step in
Because of its complexity, three et al., 2009; Jacob et al., 2008; Karp & identifying ways to reduce it (Vann,
factors influence the possibility of a Helgø, 2008; Laframboise et al., 2003; 2004; Winch et al., 2012).
successful outcome to a change project: Mabin, Forgeson, & Green, 2001; Maire & When associating change with
(a) the nature of the change, which Collerette, 2011; Saksvik & Hetland, resistance to change, three observations
could be occasional, progressive, or 2009). ought to be kept in mind: first, change

August 2013 ■ Project Management Journal ■ DOI: 10.1002/pmj 47

PAPERS
Project Leadership Influences Resistance to Change

enablers can change projects and life cycle (Curran, Niedergassel, Picker, & 2008; Müller & Turner, 2010; PMI, 2007;
organizations, but in return, projects Leker, 2009; Thoms & Pinto, 1999). This Turner & Müller, 2005). The competence
and organizations can modify the is why numerous authors have school, introduced in the 1990s, includes
nature of these change interventions considered leadership skills to be most of the previous leadership schools
while being implemented (Langley & essential to project success (Pinto et al., (i.e., behavior school, contingency
Denis, 2008); second, resistance 1998; Thoms & Pinto, 1999). “Successful school, visionary and charismatic school,
sometimes translates into a benign transformation is 70% to 90% leadership emotional intelligence school) (Müller &
uneasy feeling rather than the dreaded and only 10% to 30% management” Turner, 2010). Competence is generally
rise of a human shield against change (Kotter, 1996, p. 23). It is therefore defined as being a combination of
(Jacob et al., 2008; Laframboise et al., interesting to further investigate which knowledge, skills, attitudes, and
2003); and third, change and resistance aspects of leadership affect project behaviors that trigger work performance
to change are dynamic phenomena. performance; despite this interest, (Gehring, 2007; Müller & Turner, 2010).
however, the impact of leadership styles The focus of this research was therefore
Project Leadership on project success is vastly under- to assess the influence and impact of
Leadership has been the subject of researched (Williams, 2005). leaders’ competencies on change
thousands of books and references for projects.
the past 80 years (Turner & Müller, Competencies In 2003, Dulewicz and Higgs
2005). In the project management lit- Leadership competencies are central to developed an assessment model and a
erature, some consideration has been project success to the point at which tool called the Leadership Development
given to leadership styles, but little has the extent of the change is a function of Questionnaire (LDQ; Dulewicz & Higgs,
been written on the overall impact of available individual and collective 2004). These have been used in several
the leadership of a project manager on change competencies (Gareis, 2010). recent studies on leadership in project
a project and its stakeholders (Pinto Reinforcing the concepts of change management. The questionnaire is well
et al., 1998; Turner & Müller, 2005; Yang, control and change leadership, known and recognized for its scientific
Huang, & Wu, 2011). Research on the Crawford and Nahmias (2010) thoroughness (Geoghegan & Dulewicz,
concept of project leadership is now distinguished between activities and 2008; Müller & Turner, 2010). In their
growing (Müller & Turner, 2010; Pinto competencies required to manage model, Dulewicz and Higgs (2005) used
et al., 1998; Thoms & Pinto, 1999). It is change, as they identify them in two 15 leadership dimensions, defining
now accepted that project leadership, separate lists. Among the competencies, three leadership styles:
among other things, facilitates changes in leadership stands on top. Even though 1. Goal oriented: a leader-centric style
the human aspects of a project (Battilana, not specifically defined, leadership is focused on delivery of clearly
Gilmartin, Sengul, Pache, & Alexander, seen as distinct from stakeholder understood results in a relatively
2010; Bejestani, 2011; Müller & Turner, management, planning, communication, stable context
2007; Schifalacqua et al., 2009; Turner & decision making, problem solving, and 2. Involving: a more participative style
Müller, 2005). Hence the human side of cultural skills competencies, for for transitional organizations that
leading change is becoming an essen- example. face significant but not necessarily
tial aspect that should be considered The International Project Manage- radical changes in their business
when referring to project leadership ment Association (IPMA) specifically model or way of working
(Battilana et al., 2010; Clarke, 2010; addresses leadership as one of 46 3. Engaging: a style based on
Partington, 1996; Schifalacqua et al., competencies seen as instrumental to empowerment and involvement in
2009). “Change leadership refers to a project managers’ success (ICB-IPMA, highly transformational context. This
set of principles, techniques, or activi- 2006; PMI, 2007). In their description of leadership style is focused on
ties applied to the human aspects of the process to develop this competence, producing radical change through
executing change to influence intrinsic selecting the appropriate leadership engagement and commitment.
acceptance while reducing resistance” style is required, and the methodology
(Griffith-Cooper & King, 2007, p. 14). to do so is left to the reader, opening the These dimensions and leadership
In that respect, project managers door to further investigation of this profiles are listed in Table 1.
play a central role in their organizations, aspect of the concept. These dimensions and leadership
namely in linking a variety of For the purpose of the current profiles have been compared and
stakeholders, in trying to keep a unified research, leadership was examined analyzed with the gathered information
project team spirit, and in aiming to through the lens of the competence from this research. Similar leadership
balance the requirements, time, and school (Dulewicz & Higgs, 2005; components between Dulewicz and
cost constraints throughout the project Gehring, 2007; Geoghegan & Dulewicz, Higgs’ study and the interviews

48 August 2013 ■ Project Management Journal ■ DOI: 10.1002/pmj

 Group Competence Goal Oriented (L/M/H) Involving (L/M/H) Engaging (L/M/H)
Intellectual (IQ) 1. Critical analysis and judgment High Medium Medium
2. Vision and imagination High High Medium
3. Strategic perspective High Medium Medium
Managerial (MQ) 4. Engaging communication Medium Medium High
5. Managing resources High Medium Low
6. Empowering Low Medium High
7. Developing Medium Medium High
8. Achieving High Medium Medium
Emotional (EQ) 9. Self-awareness Medium High High
10. Emotional resilience High High High
11. Motivation High High High
12. Interpersonal sensitivity Medium Medium High
13. Influencing Medium High High
14. Intuitiveness Medium Medium High
15. Conscientiousness High High High
Leadership through good behavior and example
Support for incremental change, building habits
A good level of project management team competence, developing a robust project management foundation through training and
education
Table 1: Leadership competencies and leadership profiles of Dulewicz and Higgs’ tool.

conducted for the current study have compared with previous project man- Research Methodology
been extracted and are the basis of the agement studies and literature. The Literature Review
analysis of the evaluation of the impact well-known findings from Pinto et al. The literature search has been con-
of these leadership components on (1988; 1998) on project success and the ducted on the last 30 years of publica-
change and the resistance of change 10 critical success factors are still con- tions, using two major university search
found in the results section. sidered a milestone in project man- engines: one from the Université du
A theoretical framework is provided agement’s body of knowledge. Recent Québec en Outaouais and the second
in Figure 1, and the main authors one from the École des Hautes Études
research found that the influence of
addressing the concepts are indicated Commerciales in Montreal. They access
the project manager or project leader-
in parentheses. The table numbers 147 major databases; including the fol-
ship should be added to the list of
resulting from the research are also lowing 13 databases, which mainly
critical success factors (Dulewicz &
indicated in the appropriate locations. cover the domains of administration
Higgs, 2005; Geoghegan & Dulewicz,
science (including project manage-
2008; Turner & Müller, 2005). Indeed,
Project Success the competence school and, even more
ment), finance, and economics: ABI/
Project success has been explored INFORM Complete, Academic Search
so, the leadership competence find-
in project management literature Complete, Business Source Complete,
since the early 1970s, leading to differ- ings consider leadership as an essen-
Cambridge Journals Online, Emerald,
ent schools of thought (Geoghegan & tial component of project success
Érudit, JSTOR Business Collection,
Dulewicz, 2008; Turner & Müller, (Crawford, 2003; Dulewicz & Higgs, Regional Business News, Sage Journals
2005). In this research, an aspect of 2005; Gehring, 2007; Geoghegan & Online, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Vente et
project success, more specifically, crit- Dulewicz, 2008; Müller & Turner, 2010; Gestion, Wiley InterScience. Other sourc-
ical success factors, was explored and Turner & Müller, 2005). es were used, including government

August 2013 ■ Project Management Journal ■ DOI: 10.1002/pmj 49

 PAPERS

50
Styles and
Competences
(Dulewicz et al., IPMA)
Change Leadership (Tables 1, 6, and 7)
Change Role
Types of Change Reflection
Emergent Resistance (Kotter, Griffith-Cooper
Change (Table 4) and King, Gareis,
(Mintzberg, Burnes) Van de Ven and Sun)
Continuous Project Leadership
Change (Turner et al., Müller
(Weick and et al., Schifalacqua)
Quinn, Senge) Resistance Change Control
to Change Change Tasks
(Erwin and Change Action
Garman, Gilley (Kotter, Griffith-Cooper
et al., Mabin et al.) and King, Gareis,
Planned Change Van de Ven and Sun)
(Table 5) Other Factors
Change Project
(Lewin, Kotter) (Fiedler, Gareis, Influencing
Resistance

August 2013 ■ Project Management Journal ■ DOI: 10.1002/pmj

Regulated Change Lehmann,
(Van de Ven and Sun) Winch, et al.) (Table 8)

Level of
Acceptance
(Table 2)
Change
Project Critical
Complexity
Success Factors
Project Leadership Influences Resistance to Change

(Robertson and
(Pinto et al, Dulewicz et
Seneviratne, Andersen,
al., Turner et al.)
Nutt)

Factors
Supporting
Change
(Table 3)

Figure 1: Theoretical framework.

reports, theses, school research papers, with open questions and also allowed On average, their work experience
and specialized textbooks. The main for the measurement of specific in the government of Canada varied
keywords used were project change, dimensions through indicators. Among from 15 to 19 years, and their experience
project management, change organiza- those dimensions were current project in the domain of project management
tion, change management, resistance to delivery context, description of ranged from 10 to 14 years. This
change, leadership, project leadership, perceived change, impacts of change, considerable experience guaranteed
leadership-resistance, federal govern- resistance to change, consequences of that their overall knowledge of the
ment, public service, and government of resistance to change, project leadership, general practice of project manage-
Canada; they were used independently and impacts of project leadership. ment and, more specifically, their
or in combination. understanding of the context and
Selection of Participants reality of the federal government when
Case Study, Qualitative Research
Because the focus of this study was on it pertains to managing projects was
The case study methodology was chosen
information management and infor- appropriate.
for this research because it allowed for a
mation management organization, Sixteen interviews were necessary
more holistic, in-depth investigation of
the interviewees were selected from the to reach data saturation; they were all
the subject matter (Yin, 2009). This
computer systems (CS) work classifica- performed within the same month to
approach provided the subjective reality
tion group. The majority of the employ- ensure uniformity.
of the current state of the organization,
ees in the branch were classified as CS
its projects, and the research concepts, Data Gathering, Links With
and were mostly involved in the project
as perceived by the interviewees. Literature, and Analysis
delivery process. The computer systems
Based on the constructivist paradigm, Analysis was performed using two main
levels go from CS1 to CS5. CS1s are con-
this study is a phenomenological techniques. The first one was a direct
sidered junior in their computer sys-
qualitative research. Jacob et al. (2008) data gathering and interpretation from
tems expertise; CS2s are usually com-
posited that a case study is a good vehicle the researchers via an iterative process
puter systems expert technicians; CS3s
to highlight key success factors for of cleaning-grouping-summarizing the
are team leaders and/or project leaders;
implementing change in the public data. In the process, the reasoning
CS4s are usually managers and/or proj-
service. It is therefore believed that behind the inclusion or exclusion of
ect managers; and, finally, CS5s are on
knowledge development might be more each observation was documented. The
the director level doing executive tasks.
significant because of this. second technique was to use the data
CSs account for approximately 80% of
Semi-Structured Interviews processing tool NVivo, version 8.
the branch’s pool of employees, the
Semi-structured interviews were per- Analyses were made on the basis of the
remaining 20% were other work classifi-
formed on 16 employees of Environ- most frequently used keywords. The
cations providing services outside the
ment Canada’s Information queries also included “wildcards” (e.g.,
discipline of computer science. A mini-
Management/Information Technology “structure,” which would include “struc-
mum of 5 years of project experience
branch, at three hierarchical levels. tures” and “structured,” and so forth).
was required for an employee to be
Since one of the researchers is a current Using those tools, project leadership
considered for an interview. In the fed-
employee of the studied organization, competencies, based on Dulewicz
eral system, 5 years of experience in the
observation was used as an additional and Higgs’ (2005) model, were assessed
same position or within a similar field is
tool to get a better understanding of the and analyzed. The results were
also considered a minimum to access
answers. Independence between the compared with pre-established criteria,
senior level. For this reason, CS1s were
participants and this researcher was namely the situational context in which
not considered for this case study. To
scrupulously respected. No Information the defined leadership competence
ensure a good project management sam-
Management/Information Technology occurred, the relationship of the
pling pool representation of the inter-
employee who might have had any participant with the source of project
viewees’ in the context of the branch, the
direct line of authority with the leadership, and the impact on change
following sample of participants has
researcher was interviewed or observed. and resistance to change.
been chosen: four CS5s, recruited in two
An interview guide provided a directorates; seven CS4s, recruited in
reliable, comparable qualitative all directorates; three CS3s, recruited Research Validity and
database for the research. The in one directorate; and two CS2s, recruit- Limitations
information sought in this case study ed in two directorates. The majority of Reliability
had the potential to be intricate and the participants were recruited at the Reliability was a concern for the
multifactorial; therefore, the semi- CS5–CS4 level, because the impact of researchers throughout this project
structured interview allowed the the changes was anticipated to be at a (Gagnon, 2005). Internal reliability of
participants to supply some direction maximum at these levels. the research findings was ensured by

August 2013 ■ Project Management Journal ■ DOI: 10.1002/pmj 51

PAPERS
Project Leadership Influences Resistance to Change

using concrete and precise descriptive been tracked, with its explanation. has been using project management for
terms, by protecting the raw data, and Confidentiality and ethics in general many years. Up until the end of 2007,
by using informants. The academic were also continuous concerns. federal projects were chosen, planned,
researcher and at least one employee tracked, and reported based on their
Research Questions and Context
from the Information Management/ return on investment, estimated using
There have been few studies on the
Information Technology branch were their total cost of ownership. It has
impact of project leadership on project
asked to validate the data and review been recognized by the Canadian
change in organizations (Battilana
their analysis. The internal reliability Treasury Board that this return on
et al., 2010; Gehring, 2007); even fewer on
was also optimized by controlling the investment–based approach needed to
the impact of project leadership on resis-
researcher’s impartial position. External be reviewed. Reports issued by the
tance to change (Kan & Ken, 2004; Oreg &
reliability was ensured by describing Auditor General in 1981, 2004, and 2005
Berson, 2009); and no studies linking the
the informant’s selection, the identifi- on federal government research and
impact of project leadership on change
cation of the characteristics of the case development organizations have criti-
and resistance to change were found.
study environment, the study concepts, cized project management practices
Obviously, this is true for studies on the
constructs, and theoretical framework, (Procca, 2008). Some of the concerns
same subject performed in the public
and the data-gathering strategy. raised by the Auditor General were (a)
sector in general (Brown, Waterhouse &
Flynn, 2003; Crawford et al., 2003) and the limited use of formal project man-
Validity more specifically in the context of the agement processes and documenta-
The internal validity is fundamental in Canadian public service (Hornstein, tion; (b) a general inconsistency in the
a case study and represents its main 2010; Laframboise et al., 2003). use and application of project manage-
advantage (Gagnon, 2005). The internal The Canadian federal government ment principles within federal organi-
validity of this study was addressed by will spend considerable time and zations; and (c) a low level of maturity
controlling the influence of the pres- money on implementing changes in the in the overall practice of project man-
ence of the researcher on the nature of way projects are created, chosen, agement (Procca, 2008). Consequently,
the collected data via the interviewer’s managed, tracked, and reported. It is a more efficient and modern approach
corroboration notes by using a repre- expected that these changes will create was required to assist federal depart-
sentative selection of participants, by resistance, and there is a need to examine ments in their quest for better project
making sure that any potential change whether and how this resistance can management processes and practices.
would not influence the data-gathering be reduced or eliminated. The role of the The goal of the revised approach was to
procedure and by cleaning any chal- project manager is of particular interest, ultimately increase project success
lenging information using confirming because the change projects have within the government of Canada.
or contradicting information or data by reached their administrative levels and For that purpose, the Canadian
means of triangulation (McNulty & are to be implemented. This leads to the Treasury Board came up with a new pol-
Ferlie, 2004). The triangulation was following research questions: icy in October 2007 called Policy of the
made between the information gath- • What is the influence of the project Management of Projects (Treasury Board
ered from the semi-structured inter- manager, if any, on the change pro- Secretariat, 2009a). It was expected to
views, literature reviews, and other cess and on the potential resistance bring a more relevant evaluation proce-
studies when available. Other validity resulting from it? dure for projects. A new perspective was
tools were used when needed. For • What actions, behaviors, and atti- thereby introduced in the assessment
example, interview sampling, respon- tudes of the project manager, if any, process of federal projects. Instead of
dent validation, extended engagement can potentially reduce resistance and the previous return on investment–
of participants, and recordings of the facilitate the change? based project evaluation, projects
interviews were used. The external would now be evaluated according to
validity was addressed by making sure their level of risk and feasibility
of the applicability of the concluding The Canadian Federal ( Treasury Board Secretariat, 2009).
constructs and results to other contexts. Government A project assessment tool to support the
Idiosyncratic positions were avoided, Public sector organizations worldwide Treasury Board’s project management
promoting instead possible parallels are expected to increase efficiency policy and the Standard for Project
with other circumstances (Gagnon, while simultaneously providing Complexity and Risk (Treasury Board
2005). Overexposure of the study envi- improved and integrated services Secretariat, 2008) was developed by the
ronment was not permitted in order to (Brown et al., 2003; Crawford et al., Canadian Treasury Board Secretariat.
avoid saturation applied to one site. 2003). The Canadian public sector is no This instrument is called the “Project
History of the gathered information has exception. The government of Canada Complexity and Risk Assessment Tool”

52 August 2013 ■ Project Management Journal ■ DOI: 10.1002/pmj

 Canadian
Parliament

CANADIAN PUBLIC SERVICEa,b

Treasury
Board

Treasury Board
Secretariat

Separate Crown Other federal

Commissions
Departments agencies corporations organizations

aCanadian Public Service: Where the Treasury Board (via the Treasury Board Secretariat—TBS) has the authority for management
(administration and organization) of the Canadian public service.
bThere are more than 300 departments, agencies, commissions, Crown corporations, and other federal Canadian organizations.

Departments are established through legislation; their mandates typically cover broad areas of public policy, such as industry, justice,
and health. Separate agencies are organizations of the federal public administration in which the separate agency is its own employer.
Commissions are federally based organizations with the authority to perform a task or are mandated with specific duties. Crown corpo-
rations are government organizations that operate following a private sector model but usually have a mixture of commercial and public
policy objectives. Other federal organizations hire independently from (or are not governed by) the Public Service Employment Act.

Figure 2: Canadian Federal Public Administration organizational chart.

(Treasury Board Secretariat, 2009b). As representation of the essential responsible for (a) providing
the name implies, the Treasury Board components of the organization is accountability to the Canadian
Secretariat assessment tool evaluates shown in Figure 2. The decision-making population; (b) maintaining proper
the risk and complexity level of a gov- process of the federal public values and ethics in all departments;
ernment of Canada project based on administration follows a firmly (c) managing the federal budget and
seven project focus areas: (a) project established, hierarchical, bureaucratic financial reporting; (d) approving
characteristics, (b) strategic manage- structure. The Treasury Board has the regulations; and (e) communicating
ment risks, (c) procurement risks, (d) mandate to manage the Canadian administrative decisions issued by the
human resource risks, (e) business risks, government by translating the policies Governor General of Canada. In essence,
(f ) project management integration and programs approved by Cabinet into the Treasury Board manages the
risks, and (g) project requirements risks. a context proper for its implementation Canadian public sector by translating
The Canadian Treasury Board at the federal department’s level. Even the policies and programs approved
Secretariat was chosen to lead and manage though the Treasury Board Secretariat by the Cabinet into the proper context for
the implementation of this new project has the mandate to manage and their implementation in the federal
management policy across all Canadian administer the applicability of the departments. It also provides resources
departments. Starting in 2007, Treasury policy of project management it does and administrative tools to departments in
Board Secretariat chose to implement this not serve the function of the project order to facilitate their work. The Treasury
new policy in phases (October 1, 2007, management office. Board has an administrative wing, the
Treasury Board Secretariat, 2009a). For the Established in 1867, Treasury Board Secretariat (Treasury Board Secretariat).
first phase, ending in early 2008, four of Canada is a Cabinet committee. The Treasury Board Secretariat was
departments were invited to implement A Cabinet committee is basically a established as a department in 1966
the new policy in the management committee of federal government (Treasury Board Secretariat, 2007a). The
process of their major projects. ministers. It plays a central role in the Treasury Board Secretariat supports
The Canadian federal government overall performance of the Canadian the Treasury Board with its committee of
structure is quite complex; a high-level public sector. The Treasury Board is ministers; it also carries out its

August 2013 ■ Project Management Journal ■ DOI: 10.1002/pmj 53

PAPERS
Project Leadership Influences Resistance to Change

mandated statutory responsibilities of a Beleya, Raman, & Ramendran, 2012; their projects and, specifically, on how
central government agency (Treasury Saksvik et al., 2009. the project team would be structured.
Board Secretariat, 2006a, 2006b). By In order to adequately identify the Often, PMI’s A Guide to the Project
being the central government agency of stakeholders in that change, further Management Body of Knowledge
the federal government, the Treasury explanation of the branch setting follows. (PMBOK® Guide) was mentioned in
Board Secretariat is the employer of the An assistant deputy minister plays the reference to the participants’ former
core public administration (i.e., the role of a chief executive officer. Under his project management approach or
federal departments and the other parts or her authority, at the time of this because they still used parts of it within
of the federal public administration). research, there were about 840 full-time PRINCE®. It should be noted that most
Because of these responsibilities, public servants in the branch, divided participants used one of the terms
the Treasury Board Secretariat has into five directorates, each under a “people, stakeholder,* team,* member,*
decided it should make the overall director general. Under each directorate staff, employee,*” in their answers; this
project management practice and the are divisions, each lead by a director. illustrates their human resources focus
reporting process more efficient, For the purpose of this study, any even at the pre-project stage.
transparent, and part of an established branch within a federal department The second, third, and fourth
work process ( Treasury Board affected by the change has been questions were about the nature of the
Secretariat, 2009b, 2009c, 2010b). This considered as an independent change imposed by the new procedure.
imposed change has an immediate organization (Hornstein, 2010). This The purpose was to evaluate the
impact on all federal departments and should prove to be useful, because interviewees’ perceptions of this change,
their related branches. It is therefore the new procedure should foster the how it affected them, and what would be
within the Treasury Board Secretariat’s creation of new conceptual frameworks required to face these changes. All
mission to be familiar with the at the department level, reflecting a interviewees understood the goal and
challenges confronting the management shift from a centralized bureaucracy to purposes behind the policy addressing
of projects in the Canadian government a more flexible, contextualized model the reality of failed information
under the present project evaluation (Crawford et al., 2003). Under this technology (IT) projects (Treasury Board
procedure and prepare for the next. model, it is expected that the need for Secretariat, 1994, 2009a) and providing
Typically, these challenges were found new conceptual frameworks will arise standardized expectations on what to
to be related to the implementation and locally and that the frameworks will report. It was almost unanimous that this
management of project management include a focus both on strategic issues was a positive requirement because it
standards and procedures and and structured managerial processes. didn’t require major changes in an
perceived to be even more complex in Again, the specific federal organization organization already using a standardized
the case of soft projects. Because of this, under study is the Information project management methodology.
having the Information Management/ Management/Information Technology However, one common issue raised was
Information Technology branch of branch of Environment Canada. about how the project management
Environment Canada as a case to study methodology and its practice would be
makes good sense. Indeed, the Summary of Findings implemented in the branch. The use of a
forthcoming change in the project Project Management Methodology specific methodology was often per-
evaluation criteria, focusing on risk and and Change ceived as a “filling project management
feasibility, is expected to have a major The first question of the interview ques- template documents” exercise rather than
impact on Environment Canada. As an tionnaire was about the participants’ a tool that could be tailored to each project.
example, one of the consequences of project management methodology. All One manager summed up the
the change is to impose formal project participants at all responsibility levels recent reality of IT projects and how
reporting, on a regular basis, compliant recognized the value of a structured the Treasury Board Secretariat project
with Treasury Board Secretariat project project management methodology. management policy affected the
management directives and reporting According to them, this structured employees:
expectations related to projects approach is required to properly man-
(Treasury Board Secretariat, 2007b, age projects, on the one hand, and to IT department shops across the
government are forced to become
2007c, 2008, 2010a). Even if the new create measurable business value and
more conscious of how they run
procedures are expected to deliver return on investment, on the other. A
projects, how they express business
better long-term results, they are also majority of participants expected the value, [how they] do cost analysis and
expected to create some significant existing PRINCE® methodology (Office business cases, and to express it in
short-term resistance (Gilley et al., of Government Commerce, 2007) would such a way that it’s clear to manage-
2009; Jacob et al., 2008; Nodeson, have an impact on how they manage ment of the IT side and it can actually

54 August 2013 ■ Project Management Journal ■ DOI: 10.1002/pmj

 be explained in such a way that the their objectives. It was also perceived on resistance to change, a majority of
business side can understand it. that the procedure should be transpar- participants considered the project
ent; in order to achieve this the human manager as having an important
How the change affected the resources aspect and the related work impact on how change is implemented,
participants’ daily work has been processes should be assessed before for- and therefore, a direct impact on its
summarized and classified according to malizing and using a project manage- success. The project manager, using
their hierarchical levels and is shown in ment methodology. As mentioned by people management soft skills, should
Table 2. one of the interviewees, “Culture change foster the more holistic approach nec-
Half of the participants thought that is the hardest thing to achieve.” essary to manage projects that involve
the implementation of the new Treasury Consequently, facing this specific change several stakeholders from different
Board Secretariat project management calls for the inclusion of affected people, programs.
policy affected their daily work in a as well as clients, in the change manage- One participant summarized the
positive way, whereas the other half did ment process by creating: answers: “An experienced project leader
not perceive that it would have a major • a comprehensive project manage- with a positive attitude, who believes in
impact on their daily work. ment training program; and understands the change, will
However, even considering their • a robust project management sup- typically create positive reactions from
generally positive evaluation of the port/guidance mechanism; team members and stakeholders,
impact of the change, participants con- • a structured and enforced communi- thereby reducing resistance.”
sidered that using only a formal project cation mechanism, including mes- But, interestingly, half of the
management methodology was not sages on communicating the reasons participants insisted on the fact that,
enough to guarantee success. and benefits and the whys behind the regardless of how good a project
Participants believed that planning and change, and not only the how to go manager is, his or her impact is as good
handling projects on the basis of a struc- about the change; as nil in the absence of clear senior
tured methodology could potentially • an avenue for employees to be able to management support. This fact is not
encourage bureaucracy or become a provide feedback and find informa- surprising according to one of the
futile administrative exercise if no tion about the change, leaving room interviewees, because it is a conse-
resources and time were to be allocated for a possible continuous improve- quence of the governmental culture
to further integrating the methodology; ment function to track and monitor and hierarchical structure.
hence, management should consider improvement and success; and
this change from a more holistic per- • a clear upper management support,
spective. According to the participants, including an overall incremental, Resistance to Change
at some point, projects should be evalu- stepped approach. The first two questions regarding resis-
ated through the lens of their ability to tance to change were about the inter-
generate business value and return on viewees’ perceptions of available
investment for the department as a Project Leadership and Its resources and their expectations about
whole. Therefore, the new system based Impact on Change support from the organization to face
on risks and feasibility was perceived to Impact of the Project Manager these changes. A majority of interview-
be a logical step in making sure that proj- When answering the question regard- ees did not believe they had the required
ects are eventually completed and reach ing the impact of the project manager resources to face the changes.

Hierarchical Level
Impact on Participant’s
Daily Work CS02 CS03 CS04 CS05 Observations
Positive Impact Most participants perceived the need to be
2 2 2 1 more structured and transparent in the man-
agement of projects and in reporting
Negative Impact No participant perceived the change as having
0 0 0 0
a negative impact on his or her daily work
Neutral or No Impact Most of these answers included a description of
0 1 5 3
indirect changes on the overall work process
Table 2: Level of acceptance.

August 2013 ■ Project Management Journal ■ DOI: 10.1002/pmj 55

PAPERS
Project Leadership Influences Resistance to Change

A participant on the director level when faced with change. Reference was pants’ perceptions of the role of the
summarized the answers: “Resistance made to Rogers’s model (2003) (cited in project manager and of his or her com-
to change is all about how you Gilley et al., 2009), namely, those who petencies. There was a consensus on
communicate, who you communicate embrace change (early adopters); those what is required from the project man-
to, how often, and what the message is.” who eventually go for the change (mid- ager to facilitate change, presented in
For example, many interviewees dle adopters); those who are indifferent Table 6:
thought that the change and (lurkers); and, finally, those who will • Leadership competencies, including
implementation strategy used when not embrace it (despisers of change). several people management related
PRINCE2® was introduced were either One point raised by a majority of soft skills;
under-planned or not done properly. participants as one of the main sources • Communication skills; and
One of the often-mentioned flaws was of the possible resistance is the • Positive involvement and commit-
the exclusion of the clients, mainly at perception of an increased workload. ment.
lower management levels, in the For example, the volume of project
implementation process. To somewhat management documentation to be Analysis and Discussion
mitigate that issue, project managers had filled “on top” of managing or directing Empirical data support the theoretical
to become salespeople, ambassadors, a project is seen as an additional burden framework facilitating change des-
and/or educators to clients about the and creates resistance. This resistance cribed earlier (i.e., the nature of the
new project management approach. will take on different forms, depending change, the adoption of a stepped
This was a challenge. Not only did on the hierarchical level. Table 4 approach, and the identification of spe-
available project managers in the Chief illustrates the several types of resistance. cific critical objectives). Jacob et al.’s
Information Officer branch not Table 5 summarizes the factors (2008) model on the concepts of change
necessarily have the additional required decreasing resistance as seen by the and resistance to change has also been
project management or soft compe- participants. validated by the participants’ answers
tencies to take on these tasks; in Those participants who mentioned to the questions.
addition, clients usually did not care that some resistance would come from As previously mentioned, all
much about the methodology, but management or senior management interviewees expected resistance
rather focused on results. Table 3 expected a high level of resistance from whenever there is change. The kinds of
summar izes what par ticipants that group. Participants who thought resistance they depicted based on
considered was missing or would be a resistance would come from employees types of personalities are directly in
source of support from the organization: expected a medium to high level of line with those of Gilley (Gilley et al.,
resistance. Participants who mentioned 2009). The only significant difference in
that resistance would come from the the case of the empirical data was the
Expected Resistance and Its Related clients expected a low to medium level absence of the innovators category
Decreasing/Increasing Factors of resistance. described in the model. In a federal
The last two questions were on the department, because of its intricate
kinds of resistance, if any, the partici- The Role of the Project Manager and a n d r i g i d b u r e a u c r a c y, t h e
pants were expecting from employees Its Competencies Related to Change opportunities to initiate a change
and what would potentially increase or The first, third, and fourth questions before any prior indication or plan are
decrease this resistance. All participants on this concept explored the partici- indeed quite rare.
expected resistance whenever there is
change. As one interviewee stated,
“There is always resistance to change, Change management: Implementation strategy to provide consistency and governance
because a change impacts the way
Visible commitment to provide adequate resources
a person views the world and the
way this person interacts with the Project delivery and/or management office (PDO/PMO)
world.” The types of resistance the par- Proper training
ticipants expected were essentially Inclusion and collaboration with client
based on human resources issues: the
employees’ personalities, their motiva-
Project management expertise for guidance and mentorship purposes
tions, the nature of the businesses they Open communication: Communication strategy and plan
work in, their hierarchical levels, and Clear roles and responsibilities for the change enablers
their age groups. These often lead to a
Table 3: Source of organization support to face the changes.
reference to the “type of employee”

56 August 2013 ■ Project Management Journal ■ DOI: 10.1002/pmj

 Hierarchical Level Types of Resistance
Middle Management and Reduced participation/change seen as a threat because of inherent increase in
Top Management the required responsibilities and/or workload
Unwillingness to provide human resources for projects/reduction of active
involvement and accountability
Inappropriate selection of human resources to address the change
Unwillingness to provide time for employees’ learning curves
Employees Active opposition/stubbornness/lengthy discussions/visible frustration
Increased delays/focus on other tasks
Reduced participation/change seen as a threat because of inherent increase in
the required responsibilities and/or workload
Passive aggressiveness (e.g., do not volunteer as project managers; continue
usual daily work)
Sabotage/make themselves unavailable, negative advice to high management or
being a problem to a project
Contradiction/interpretation
Complaints to demonstrate the resistance
Say one thing, do another
Clients Objection to new or external procedures
Undue delays; do not understand the usefulness of project management policy
Table 4: Types of resistance.

a significant number of participants,

Clear communication/communication strategy, including presenting clear
intentions/vision and set desired outcomes this dimension was highlighted in bold
characters in the Dulewicz and Higgs
Supply of adequate resources, including appropriate human resources, time tool.
allocation, proper funding, and tools
The results of the interviews
People seeing themselves as part of the solution, being clear about “what’s in it for indicated that participants considered
them,” building a sense of ownership four leadership dimensions under the
A change implementation strategy and good planning including change manage- goal-oriented leadership style to be
ment techniques important. Ten leadership dimensions
A clear commitment from high management and clear leadership from proper people fell under the involving leadership style,
and leadership by example and 13 dimensions were under the
engaging leadership style. Therefore,
Organized training, adapted to audience
the conclusion can be drawn that the
A clear demonstration of the value of the change in terms of increased efficiency, engaging leadership style is perceived
effectiveness to be the most effective for reducing the
A people management approach including psychological techniques and being resistance to change.
empathetic to employees’ context and reality To determine the corresponding
Table 5: Factors decreasing resistance to change. factors that would reduce the resistance
to change, the same exercise was
performed on the 13 highlighted
leadership dimensions under the
The interviewees highlighted five researchers looked into each of the 15 engaging leadership style, considering
main dimensions of project manager’s leadership dimensions and graded their their level of importance:
competencies within Dulewicz and level of importance, based on the • Mandatory Factors (9): Engaging
Higgs’ (2005) leadership model (Table content of the interviews. Every time a communication, empowering, self-
7). To arrive at this conclusion, the particular dimension was mentioned by awareness, emotional resilience,
August 2013 ■ Project Management Journal ■ DOI: 10.1002/pmj 57
PAPERS
Project Leadership Influences Resistance to Change

Leadership competencies including an important number of human, people, and social management–related soft skills; skills
required to create cohesion and trust with team members and stakeholders while making decisions on time to align with project
end goal; inspire by example
Good and clear communication
Positive commitment in leading the change
Structured yet flexible attitude in applying phased approach to introduce the change; clear definitions of roles and responsibilities
Knowledge and expertise related to project management process and strategy, contextualization of the change
Transparent strategy within departments to implement the project management methodology change
Project leadership competencies related to analysis and judgment considered only “nice to have” in helping a project manager to
reduce resistance to change
Critical analysis and judgment a less significant competence

Table 6: Project manager competencies facilitating change.

Group Competence Goal Oriented (L/M/H) Involving (L/M/H) Engaging (L/M/H)

Intellectual (IQ) 1. Critical analysis and judgment High Medium (Low) Medium (Low)
2. Vision and imagination High High Medium
3. Strategic perspective High Medium Medium
Managerial (MQ) 4. Engaging communication Medium Medium High
5. Managing resources High Medium Low
6. Empowering Low Medium High
7. Developing Medium Medium High
8. Achieving High Medium Medium
Emotional (EQ) 9. Self-awareness Medium High High
10. Emotional resilience High High High
11. Motivation High High High
12. Interpersonal sensitivity Medium Medium High
13. Influencing Medium High High
14. Intuitiveness Medium Medium High
15. Conscientiousness High High High
Leadership through good behavior and example
Support for incremental change, building habits
A good level of project management team competence, developing a robust project management foundation through training and
education
Table 7: Project leadership competencies mapped into the Dulewicz and Higgs leadership model.

motivation, interpersonal sensitivity, • Less Significant Factor (1): Critical related to emotions, as found under
influencing, intuitiveness, conscien- analysis and judgment Dulewicz and Higgs’s emotional
tiousness competencies grouping. The project
• Significant Factors (3): Vision and With these results, the interviewees leadership competencies related to
imagination, strategic perspective, were stressing the importance of the management skills, as found under
achieving project leadership competencies Dulewicz and Higgs’s managerial
58 August 2013 ■ Project Management Journal ■ DOI: 10.1002/pmj
 • Open communication is highly important
• The engaging leadership style is the preferred leadership style to reduce resistance to change
• The development of a project manager’s social skills training program is central to lowering resistance to change. Those skills
include the project leadership competencies that are related to emotions
• The implementation of a project management support/guidance mechanism such as a project management office is also perceived
as very helpful
• Feedback from the impacted people should be part of a continuous improvement function to monitor the progress and success of
the change
• Upper management support should be visible and active
• The use of an overall incremental, stepped approach in dealing and implementing the change is perceived as very helpful
• To face such a change calls for the inclusion of the impacted people, including clients, in the change management process
• The project leadership competencies related to management skills are significant in helping a project leader in reducing resistance
to change
• A positive, experienced project manager who understands the change is influential on how change is implemented. The project man-
ager reduces resistance and therefore has a direct impact on the successful implementation of the change
• The mandatory nine competencies for the project manager to reduce the resistance to change are: Capable of engaging communi-
cation, ability to be empowering, self-awareness, emotional resilience, good motivator, interpersonal sensitivity, capable of positive
influence, intuitiveness, and conscientiousness
• The significant project manager qualities are: Visionary and imaginative; has as a holistic, strategic perspective; thrives in action
• Having a more formalized project management approach structure is useful and important, because it brings governance and
structure to the work process, especially at the management and lower levels
• A project management methodology in the organization is useful but not sufficient for success
Table 8: Summary of the case study research key findings.

competencies grouping, are clearly in order of their importance according improvement perspective. This
valuable, whereas the project leadership to the participants’ answers. retroactive approach allows stake-
competencies related to analysis and A conceptual model based on the holders impacted by the change to share
judgment, as found under Dulewicz top eight findings is proposed in Figure observations and questions. The change
and Higgs’s intellectual competencies 3 as a tool for implementing change is fully implemented when no further
grouping, seem to be more “nice to while reducing resistance. The model concentric implementation phases are
have.” starts at the center, representing necessary.
As confirmed by the participants, the change itself. From the center, the
the quality of communication is highly stepped approach of the implementa-
Conclusion
important when dealing with resistance tion is developed, including: the Answering Research Questions
to change. Without good commu- strategic considerations, the planning of The participants unanimously per-
nication, there can be no exchange of the change, the management, the ceived that the project manager has a
information on objectives, goals, direction, and the implementation. direct impact on change and resistance
implementation strategy, and status Each concentric circle represents an to change. They also thought that a
updates to and from the various implementation phase. The four arrows combination of skills, attitudes, and
stakeholders. These stakeholders stemming out from the center represent behaviors on the leader’s part would
include the directly affected people, the four main continuous activities that effectively reduce resistance to change.
such as the employees and the project should be part of the overall change Not only do communication and social
team, and the indirectly affected people, implementation process. These skills play important roles, they
such as the clients and administrative activities are the concentric quadrants believed, but specific actions are also
resources. of the model. Each arrow has opposite instrumental in facilitating change.
Table 8 summarizes the main ends to reflect the iterative nature of the They also stated that all projects do
findings of this research; they are listed change process in a continuous have at least one team member who

August 2013 ■ Project Management Journal ■ DOI: 10.1002/pmj 59

PAPERS
Project Leadership Influences Resistance to Change

High
Management
Support

1
Project
Management
Communication
4

4
Support and
Guidance
(Including Training) 1

Engaging Project
Leadership Style

Figure 3: Incremental project management methodology change implementation model.

can be identified as the project leader. personality per se; it has been and the visible support from top
Consequently, there always is an indi- described as a set of behaviors that management. (Public Works and
vidual who can act as a change facilita- can be acquired through proper Government Services Canada, 2011;
tor (Stummer & Zuchi, 2010). With this training (Arnaboldi et al., 2002). Samina, Jawwad, & Khuram, 2011).
conclusion in mind, other factors affect- 2. According to the participants, no This would be different from the
ing change should also be considered. matter what the project manager’s private sector, in which project
qualities and positive attitude are, his profitability is typically central
Other Research Findings or her success in reducing the (Joseph, 2001; Kragh & Andersen,
The preceding results were not unex- resistance to change will be conditional 2009; Procca, 2008).
pected; in fact, they empirically confirm to upper management support
literature findings, this time in the spe- provided early in the project, at the The preceding statements are
cific context of a project management conception phase, and is perceived as thought to be distinct from previous
methodology and in a public service being a prerequisite to his or her project management studies because
environment. They add the dimension success. This is a distinct and this research was performed in the
of a preferred management style, name- interesting perspective; a complement context of the Canadian government. In
ly, the engaging style. Through data com- to Pinto et al.’s (1998) well-known view of the current government of
pilation and analysis of the findings, this findings on project success (Kenny, Canada reality, many departments will
research identified additional conclu- 2003; Partington, 1996). undergo a series of change projects in
sions worth emphasizing: 3. There are differences between the order to implement the new procedures.
1. The project manager will maximize public and private sectors influencing It is hoped that findings from this
his or her positive impact on the the resistance to change. In research and proposed conceptual
resistance level to change only if he or government, the credibility of the model will prove to be usable, practical
she has useful and engaging social project manager and his or her ability tools in addressing some of the
behaviors. According to the parti- to influence resistance to change is challenges government of Canada
cipants, this ability to relate to fellow closely linked to a combination of the employees will be facing (Public Service
workers is not based on the leader’s dollar value of his or her portfolio Alliance of Canada, 2011).

60 August 2013 ■ Project Management Journal ■ DOI: 10.1002/pmj

 By implementing change through also has a major influence. Finally, the Burnes, B. (2004). Emergent change and
change projects, using the model and use of an existing change model, such planned change: Competitors or allies?
conclusions of this research, the as that of Lewin, Ulrich, or Kotter (Gilley The case of XYZ Construction.
creation of a “comprehensive project et al., 2009), is perceived to be a International Journal of Operations &
management implementation potentially profitable proposition. Production Management, 24(9),
management process” is now possible We think that further research on 886–902.
(Legris & Collerette, 2006). the applicability of the article’s Clarke, N. (2010). Emotional intelli-
conclusions and model to the broader gence and its relationship to transfor-
Contribution to Project Management field of complex projects in contexts mational leadership and key project
Knowledge and Implications for other than public organizations would manager competences. Project
Future Research be interesting. Further links between Management Journal, 41(2), 5–20.
The originality and relevance of this project management and existing
knowledge in other disciplines should Collerette, P., Delisle, G., & Richard, P.
research lie in its context, namely a (1997). Le changement organisation-
project management methodology also be investigated. ■
nel: Théorie et pratique. Sainte-Foy: Les
within the public sector, more specifi- Presses de l’Université du Québec.
cally the Canadian federal government. References
The key findings, including references Alsène, E. (1998). Internal changes and Corby, S. (2005). Spot the difference
to Dulewicz and Higgs’ (2004, 2005) project management structures within between the public and private sec-
competence framework and to Pinto enterprises. International Journal of tors: Disputes and third-party inter-
et al.’s (1998) project success findings, Project Management, 17(6), 367–376. vention in Britain. Public Money &
are perceived to be useful and should be Management, 25(2), 107–114.
Andersen, J. A. (2010a). Assessing pub-
taken into consideration when address- lic managers’ change-oriented behav- Crawford, L., Costello, K., Pollack, J., &
ing change and resistance to change in ior: Are private managers caught in the Bentley, L. (2003). Managing soft
a governmental environment. doldrums? International Journal of change projects in the public sector.
Future studies in the public service Public Administration, 33(6), 335–345. International Journal of Project
in Canada or abroad could compare the Management, 21(6), 443–448.
Andersen, J. A. (2010b). Public versus
results from this study with other Crawford, L., & Nahmias, A. H. (2010).
private managers: How public and pri-
mainstream leadership models. Also, Competencies for managing change.
vate managers differ in leadership
the hierarchical and functional roles of International Journal of Project
behavior. Public Administration
the project leader could be further Management, 28(4), 405–412.
Review, 70(1), 131–141.
investigated, because the current
research revealed that the project leader Arnaboldi, M., Azzone, G., & Savoldelli, Crawford, L. H. (2003). Assessing and
may not necessarily be the project A. (2004). Managing a public sector developing the project management
manager (Edmonds, 2011). project: The case of the Italian Treasury competence of individuals. In J. R.
Project management is increasingly Ministry. International Journal of Turner (Ed.), People in project manage-
being recognized for its usefulness and Project Management, 22(3), 213–223. ment. Aldershot, England: Gower.
value in the public sector. In this Battilana, J., Gilmartin, M., Sengul, M., Curran, C-S., Niedergassel, B., Picker,
research we have seen that a Pache, A.-C., & Alexander, J. A. (2010). S., & Leker, J. (2009). Project leader-
bureaucratic system, where measurable Leadership competencies for imple- ship skills in cooperative projects.
performance and credible reporting are menting planned organizational Management Research News, 32(5),
essential practices, has its own set of change. The Leadership Quarterly, 458–468.
rules when confronted with resistance 21(3), 422–438. Dulewicz, V., & Higgs, M. J. (2004). A
to change. Leadership competencies new instrument to assess leadership
Bejestani, H. S. (2011). Improving proj-
were found to be important in managing dimensions and styles. Selection &
ect change management using leader-
those resistances, but, in order to Development Review, 20(2), 7–12.
ship spirit. Scientific Research, 3(3),
increase the likelihood of success in
302–306. Dulewicz, V., & Higgs, M. J. (2005).
governmental projects, there is also a
need to identify an organizational Brown, K., Waterhouse, J., & Flynn, C. Assessing leadership styles and organi-
structure capable of providing (2003). Change management practices: zational context. Journal of Managerial
c o m p re h e n s i v e p l a n n i n g a n d Is a hybrid model a better alternative Psychology, 20(2), 105–123.
management tools right from the start for public sector agencies? Edmonds, J. (2011). Managing suc-
of the project. A holistic perspective, International Journal of Public Sector cessful change. Industrial and
inclusive of all affected stakeholders, Management, 16(3), 230–241. Commercial Trainings, 43(6) 349–453.

August 2013 ■ Project Management Journal ■ DOI: 10.1002/pmj 61

PAPERS
Project Leadership Influences Resistance to Change

Erwin, D. G., & Garman, A. N. (2010). Hornstein, H. (2010). Successes and Kotter, J. P. (1996). Successful change
Resistance to organization change: potential obstacles to change manage- and the force that drives it. Canadian
Linking research and practice. ment in the public service. Ivey Manager, 21(3), 20–24.
Leadership & Organization Business Journal, 74(6), 1–25.
Kragh H., & Andersen, P. H. (2009).
Development Journal, 31(1), 39–56. Huntoon, C. L. (1998). The executive Picture this: Managed change and
Fiedler, S. (2010). Managing resistance point of view: Managing change. resistance in business network set-
in an organizational transformation: A Project Management Journal, 29(3), tings. Industrial Marketing
case study from a mobile operator 5–6. Management, 38(6), 641–653.
company. International Journal of ICB-IPMA. (2006). Competence Krysinski, P. R., & Reed, D. B. (1994).
Project Management, 28(4), 370–383. Baseline Version 3. G. Caupin, H. Organizational change and change
Gagnon, Y. C. (2005). L’étude de cas Knoepfel, G. Koch, K. Pannenbäcker, F. leadership. Journal of Leadership
comme méthode de recherche: Guide de Pérez-Polo, C. Seabury (Eds). Retrieved Studies, 1(2), 65–72.
réalisation. Montreal, Québec: Les from http://users.ntua.gr/jpp/icb3.pdf Laframboise, D. L., Nelson, R., &
Presses de l’Université du Québec. Jaafari, A. (2003). Project management Schmaltz, J. (2003). Managing resis-
in the age of complexity and change. tance to change in workplace accom-
Gale, S. F. (2012). In times of change.
Project Management Journal, 34(4), modation projects. Journal of Facilities
PM Network, 26(6), 31–37.
47–57. Management, 1(4), 306–321.
Gareis, R. (2010). Changes of organiza-
Jacob, R., Rondeau, A., & Normandin, Langley, A., & Denis, J-L. (2008). Les
tions by projects. International Journal
F. (2008). La gestion du changement dimensions négligées du changement
of Project Management, 28(4), 314–327.
stratégique dans les organisations des organisationnel. Télescope, 14(3),
Gehring, D. R. (2007). Applying traits secteurs public et parapublic: Le point 13–32.
theory of leadership to project man- de vue des praticiens. Télescope, 14(3), Lehmann, V. (2010). Connecting
agement. Project Management Journal, 107–113. changes to projects using a historical
38(1), 44–54. perspective: Towards some new can-
Joseph, M. T. (2001). Consideration in
Geoghegan, L., & Dulewicz, V. (2008). public and private leadership: The dif- vases for researches. International
Do project managers’ leadership com- ferences in goals. Vital Speeches of the Journal of Project Management, 28(4),
petencies contribute to project suc- Day, 67(6), 183–186. 328–338.
cess? Project Management Journal, Lehtonen, P., & Martinsuo, M. (2008).
Kan, M. M., & Ken, W. P. (2004).
39(4), 58–67. Change program initiation: Defining
Identifying paradox: A grounded the-
Gilley, A., Godek, M., & Gilley, J. (2009). ory of leadership in overcoming resis- and managing the program-organiza-
Change, resistance, and the organiza- tance to change. The Leadership tion boundary, International Journal of
tional immune system. SAM Advanced Quarterly, 15(4), 467–491. Project Management, 26(1), 21–29.
Management Journal, 74(4), 4–10. Kanter, R. (1985). Managing the Legris, P., & Collerette, P. (2006). A
Griffith-Cooper, B., & King, K. (2007). human side of change. Management roadmap for IT project implementa-
The partnership between project man- Review, 74(4), 52–56. tion: Integrating stakeholders and
agement and organizational change: change management issues. Project
Kapsali, M. (2011). Systems thinking in
Integrating change management with Management Institute, 37(5), 64–75.
innovation project management: A
change leadership. Performance match that works. International Lewin, K. (1952). Frontiers in group
Improvement, 46(1), 14–20. Journal of Project Management, 29(4), dynamics. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Field
Haringa, D. (2009). Can organizational 396–407. theory in social science. London,
change be sustained? A qualitative Karp, T., & Helgø, T. I. (2008). From England: Social Science Paperbacks.
study of embedding organizational change management to change leader- Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social
change within the context of public ship: Embracing chaotic change in science. New York, NY: Harper.
service. ProQuest Dissertations and public service organizations. Journal of Love, P. E. D., Holt, G. D., Shen, L. Y., Li,
Thesis, 1–213. Change Management, 8(1), 85–96. H., & Irani, Z. (2002). Using systems
Heres, L., & Lasthuizen, K. (2012). Kenny, J. (2003). Effective project man- dynamics to better understand change
What’s the difference? Ethical leadership agement for strategic innovation and and rework in construction project
in public, hybrid and private sector change in an organizational context. management systems. International
organizations. Journal of Change Project Management Journal, 34(1), Journal of Project Management, 20(6),
Management, 12(4), 441–466. 43–53. 425–436.

62 August 2013 ■ Project Management Journal ■ DOI: 10.1002/pmj

Mabin, V. J., Forgeson, S., & Green, L. in handling employee’s resistance: Public Service Alliance of Canada.
(2001). Harnessing resistance: Using Implementation of innovation. (2011). Work Force Adjustment
the theory of constraints to assist Interdisciplinary Journal of Appendix—Treasury Board Agreements.
change management. Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, Retrieved from http://www.psac-afpc.
European Industrial Training, 25(2), 4(1), 466–477. com/what/wfa/index-e.shtml
168–191. Nutt, P. C. (1999). Public-private differ- Public Works and Government
Maire, S., & Collerette, P. (2011). ences and the assessment of alterna- Services Canada. (2011). Government
International post-merger integration: tives for decision making. Journal of of Canada to reduce information tech-
Lessons from an integration project in Public Administration Research and nology costs and save taxpayers’ dollars.
the private banking sector. Theory, 9(2), 305–349. Retrieved from http://news.gc.ca/web/
International Journal of Project Office of Government Commerce. article-eng.do?nid⫽614499
Management, 29(3), 279–284. (2007). Official PRINCE2® site. Robertson, P. J., & Seneviratne, S. J.
Retrieved from http://www.prince- (1995). Outcomes of planned organiza-
McNulty, T., & Ferlie, E. (2004). Process
officialsite.com/home/home.asp tional change in the public sector: A
transformation: Limitations to radical
Oreg, S., & Berson, Y. (2009). Leaders’ meta-analytic comparison to the pri-
organizational change within public
characteristics and behaviors and vate sector. Public Administration
service organizations. Organization
employees resistance to organizational Review, 55(6), 547–556.
Studies, 25(8), 1389–1416.
change. Communication presented at Saksvik, I. B., & Hetland, H. (2009).
Mintzberg, H., & Waters, J. A. (1985). Of the Annual Meeting Proceedings Exploring dispositional resistance to
strategies, deliberate and emergent. (Conference Theme: Green change. Journal of Leadership &
Strategic Management Journal, 6(3), Management Matters), Haifa, Israel. Organizational Studies, 16(2), 175–183.
257–272.
Partington, D. (1996). The project Samina, N., Jawwad, A., & Khuram, S.
Morin, P.-P. (2007). Suffering as a quest management of organizational (2011). An analysis of differences in work
for adaptation. In A. M. Davila Gomez change. International Journal of motivation between public and private
& D. Crowther (Eds.), Ethics, psyche and Project Management, 14(1), 13–21. sector organizations. Interdisciplinary
social responsibility (pp. 93–105). Journal of Contemporary Research in
Pinto, J. K., Thoms, P., Trailer, J.,
Aldershot, England: Ashgate. Business, 2(11), 110–127.
Palmer, T., & Govekar, M. (1998).
Morin, P.-P. (2008). La gestion des Project leadership: From theory to prac- Schifalacqua, M., Costello C., &
changements profonds en gestion de tice. Newtown Square, PA: Project Denman, W. (2009). Roadmap for
projets: Que faire quand rien ne va Management Institute. planned change, Part 1: Change leader-
plus? La Revue des Sciences de la ship and project management. Nurse
Pinto, J. K., & Slevin, D. P. (1988).
Gestion, 43(231–232), 45–52. Leader, 7(2), 26–29, 52.
Critical success factors in effective
project implementation. In D. I. Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline.
Müller, R., & Turner, J. R. (2007).
Cleland & W. R. King (Eds.), Project New York, NY: Doubleday.
Matching the project manager’s leader-
ship style to project type. International management handbook (2nd ed., Stummer, M., & Zuchi, D. (2010).
Journal of Project Management, 25(1), pp. 479–512). New York, NY: Van Developing roles in change processes:
21–32. Nostrand Reinhold. A case study from a public sector
Procca, A. E. (2008). Development of organisation. International Journal of
Müller, R., & Turner, J. R. (2010). Project Management, 28(4), 384–394.
a project management model for a
Leadership competency profiles of suc-
government research and develop- Szabla, D. B. (2007). A multidimensional
cessful project managers. International
ment organization. Project view of resistance to organizational
Journal of Project Management, 28(5),
Management Journal, 39(4), 33–57. change: Exploring cognitive, emotional,
437–448.
Project Management Institute (PMI). and intentional responses to planned
Nawab, S., Ahmad, J., & Khuram, S. (2007). Project management compe- change across perceived change leader-
(2011). An analysis of differences in tency development framework (2nd ship strategies. Human Resource
work motivation between public and ed.). Newtown Square, PA: Author. Development Quarterly, 18(4), 525–558.
private sector. Interdisciplinary Journal Thoms, P., & Pinto, J. K. (1999). Project
Project Management Institute (PMI).
of Contemporary Research in Business, leadership: A question of timing. Project
(2012). PMI’S pulse of the professionTM.
2(11), 110–127. Management Journal, 30(1), 19–26.
Retrieved from http://www.pmi.org/~/
Nodeson, S., Beleya, P., Raman, G., & media/PDF/Research/2012_Pulse_of_ Treasury Board Secretariat. (1994).
Ramendran, C. (2012). Leadership role the_profession.ashx Project Management Policy. Retrieved

August 2013 ■ Project Management Journal ■ DOI: 10.1002/pmj 63

PAPERS
Project Leadership Influences Resistance to Change

from http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/ management capacity. Retrieved from project overruns. IEEE Transactions on
doc-eng.aspx?id⫽12077 &section⫽text http://www.psagency-agencefp.gc.ca Engineering Management, 52(4),
Treasury Board Secretariat. (2006a). /pol/doc-eng.aspx?evttoo⫽X&id⫽1822 497–506.
About the Secretariat. Retrieved from 9&section⫽text Winch, G., Meunier, M-C., Head, J., &
http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/tbs-sct/abu- Truong, T. L. A., & Swierczek, F. W. Russ, K. (2012). Projects as the content
ans/tbs-sct/abu-ans-eng.asp (2009). Predicting the relationships and process of change: The case of the
Treasury Board Secretariat. (2006b). between human resource factors and health and safety laboratory.
MAF Assessment Scale. Retrieved from the effectiveness of a change project. International Journal of Project
http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/maf-crg Asia Pacific Management Review, 14(1), Management, 30(2), 141–152.
/assessments-evaluations/2006 69–83. Yang, L.-R., Huang, C.-F., & Wu, K.-S.
/scale-echelle-eng.asp (2011). The association among project
Turner, J. R., & Müller, R. (2001).
Treasury Board Secretariat. (2007a). managers’ leadership style, teamwork
Consideration in public and private
About the Treasury Board. Retrieved and project success. International
leadership: The differences in goals.
from http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/tbs-sct Journal of Project Management, 29(3),
Vital Speeches of the Day, 67(6),
/abu-ans/tb-ct/abu-ans-eng.asp 258–267.
183–186.
Treasury Board Secretariat. (2007b). Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research
Turner, J. R., & Müller, R. (2005). The design and methods (4th ed.).
Areas of management and lines of evi-
project manager’s leadership style as a Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
dence to be assessed in Round V.
success factor on projects: A literature
Retrieved from http://www.tbs-sct.gc.
review. Project Management Journal,
ca/maf-crg/indicators-indicateurs
36(1), 49–61.
/2007/elements-elements-eng.asp
Treasury Board Secretariat (2007c). TB Van de Ven, A. H., & Sun, K. (2011). Valerie Lundy manages major projects in the
management accountability framework. Breakdowns in implementing models Canadian federal government. She has been
Retrieved from http://www.tbs-sct.gc. of organizational change. Academy of employed in the high technology field since
ca/maf-crg/index-eng.asp Management Perspectives, 25(3), 58–74. 2006 and is responsible for program manage-
ment and special change assignments. Working
Treasury Board Secretariat. (2008). Vann, J. (2004). Resistance to change
in the federal government structure since 2001,
Standard for project complexity and and the language of public organiza-
her research activities have practical objectives
risk. Retrieved from http://www.psa- tions: A look at “clashing grammars” in
and lead to sustained innovations. She holds an
gency-agencefp.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.asp large-scale information technology
undergraduate degree in mechanical engineering
x?evttoo⫽X&id⫽18229&section⫽text projects. Public Organization Review: A
from the École Polytechnique de Montréal and a
Treasury Board Secretariat. (2009a). Global Journal, 4(1), 47–74.
master’s degree in project management from the
Policy on the management of projects. Vas, A. (2005). Revisiter la résistance au University du Québec en Outaouais.
Retrieved from http://www.psagency- changement aux différents niveaux hie-
agencefp.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?evtto rarchiques: Une étude exploratoire.
o⫽X&id⫽18229&section⫽tex Gestion 2000, 22(5), 131–154.
Treasury Board Secretariat. (2009b).
Waddell, D., & Sohal, A. (1998). Pierre-Paul Morin holds a doctoral degree in
Project Complexity and Risk Assessment
Resistance: A constructive tool for industrial project management. Since 1974, he
Tool. Retrieved from http://www
change management. Management has been president and manager of several high-
.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pm-gp/doc/pcra-ecrp
Decision, 36(8), 543–548. tech firms and has managed his own consulting
/pcra-ecrp-eng.aspx
firm, specializing in business performance and
Treasury Board Secretariat. (2010a). Weick, K., & Quinn, R. E. (1999).
project management. He has been a full-time
Management accountability framework. Organizational change and develop-
teacher at the master and doctoral levels at the
Leaflet. Retrieved from http://www.tbs- ment. Annual Review of Psychology,
Université du Québec en Outaouais for 12 years,
sct.gc.ca/maf-crg/documents /leaflet- 50(1), 361–386.
where he directs the Master in Project
depliant/leaflet-depliant-eng.asp Williams, T. (2005). Assessing and Management program. His research focuses on
Treasury Board Secretariat. (2010b). moving on from the dominant project the management of high uncertainty projects
Standard for organizational project management discourse in the light of and change.

64 August 2013 ■ Project Management Journal ■ DOI: 10.1002/pmj