dc.contributorJiménez Leal, William Alexander
dc.contributorGarcía Díaz, César Enrique
dc.contributorMagallanes, José Manuel
dc.contributorOlaya Nieto, Camilo Enrique
dc.creatorEstévez Mujica, Claudia Patricia
dc.date.accessioned2023-08-29T21:12:44Z
dc.date.accessioned2023-09-06T23:53:55Z
dc.date.available2023-08-29T21:12:44Z
dc.date.available2023-09-06T23:53:55Z
dc.date.created2023-08-29T21:12:44Z
dc.date.issued2023-08-29
dc.identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/1992/70169
dc.identifierinstname:Universidad de los Andes
dc.identifierreponame:Repositorio Institucional Séneca
dc.identifierrepourl:https://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/8726940
dc.description.abstractLa investigación en resistencia al cambio (RC) ha subestimado el rol que la información sobre el comportamiento de otros individuos y la configuración estructural de interacción social tienen sobre los procesos de cambio. Las explicaciones sobre las reacciones de los individuos ante el cambio han sido en su mayoría a-sociales. En ellas los sujetos generan percepciones y responden al cambio con independencia del comportamiento o de las estructuras sociales que permean sus relaciones con otros. Ambos, factores que sabemos tienen incidencia en el comportamiento de los individuos y, que, por tanto, se esperaría estuvieran ampliamente relacionados con la emergencia de patrones de RC. Adicionalmente, esta literatura se ha centrado en establecer relaciones entre variables y no explicaciones de proceso que encajen con la naturaleza del fenómeno mismo. Más aún, en esta literatura, el concepto mismo de RC ha sido utilizado para referirse a los comportamientos, los individuos y el fenómeno en general indistintamente. El uso del término en todos estos niveles dificulta organizar o agrupar los resultados de diferentes estudios, definir con precisión qué es lo que se está investigando, estudiar el fenómeno y avanzar en la comprensión del mismo. Este proyecto proporciona una aproximación a cómo algunas variables informacionales asociadas con el comportamiento de otros y estructurales, asociadas con las interacciones sociales, se relacionan como antecedente la resistencia al cambio. En particular, este proyecto considera dos escenarios de cooperación en los cuales una aproximación de este tipo resulta relevante: el escenario tradicional de RC en organizaciones y, un nuevo escenario, de toma de decisiones asociado, en particular, a resolución colectiva de problemas, donde el concepto no había sido introducido previamente. Este proyecto propone una definición de trabajo sobre la RC que permite diferenciar distintos niveles de análisis. Al nivel del individuo se hace referencia a la persistencia en cursos de acción como conceptualización de la negativa de los individuos a abandonar y/o adoptar nuevas formas de actuar ante las posibilidades de cambio. Al nivel del sistema, y sólo a este nivel, se hace referencia a la RC como patrón emergente de las interacciones de los individuos. Una definición que permite separar los niveles micro, meso y macro en el estudio, análisis y la comprensión del fenómeno de resistencia al cambio Para alcanzar el objetivo propuesto este proyecto se enfoca en dos tipos de metodologías principales: experimentos con individuos y modelos computacionales de simulación basada en agentes (ABM por sus siglas en inglés). El uso combinado de estos dos tipos de metodología permitió proporcionar explicaciones causales sobre cómo aspectos informacionales, como las frecuencias de observación del comportamiento de otros y las características de la información social, y estructurales, asociados con la red de conexiones entre individuos, influyen como antecedente de la RC. Factores que, aunque subestimados en la literatura, son indispensables para avanzar en la comprensión del fenómeno complejo de la resistencia al cambio.
dc.languagespa
dc.publisherUniversidad de los Andes
dc.publisherDoctorado en Psicología
dc.publisherFacultad de Ciencias Sociales
dc.publisherDepartamento de Psicología
dc.relationAlós-Ferrer, C., Hügelschäfer, S., y Li, J. (2016). Inertia and decision making. Frontiers in psychology, 7 , 169. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00169
dc.relationArciniega, L. M., y González, L. (2009). Validation of the spanish-language version of the resistance to change scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 46 (2), 178¿182. doi: 10.1016/ j.paid.2008.09.024
dc.relationArendt, C., Landis, R., y Meister, T. (1995). Creating an organizational initiative that successfully addresses... the human side of change. IIE Solutions, 27 (5), 22¿27
dc.relationArmenakis, A. A., Bernerth, J. B., Pitts, J. P., y Walker, H. J. (2007). Organizational change recipients¿ beliefs scale: Development of an assessment instrument. The Journal of applied behavioral science, 43 (4), 481¿505. doi: 10.1177/0021886307303654
dc.relationBarkoczi, D., y Galesic, M. (2016). Social learning strategies modify the effect of network structure on group performance. Nature communications, 7 (1), 1¿8. doi: 10.1038/ncomms13109
dc.relationBartunek, J. M., Rousseau, D. M., Rudolph, J. W., y DePalma, J. A. (2006). On the receiving end: Sensemaking, emotion, and assessments of an organizational change initiated by others. The Journal of applied behavioral science, 42 (2), 182¿206. doi: 10.1177/002188630528545
dc.relationBattilana, J. (2006). Agency and institutions: The enabling role of individuals¿ social position. Organization, 13 (5), 653¿676. doi: 10.1177/1350508406067008
dc.relationBattilana, J. (2011). The enabling role of social position in diverging from the institutional status quo: Evidence from the uk national health service. Organization science, 22 (4), 817¿834. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1100.0574
dc.relationBattilana, J., y Casciaro, T. (2012). Change agents, networks, and institutions: A contingency theory of organizational change. Academy of Management Journal , 55 (2), 381¿398. doi: 10.5465/amj.2009.0891
dc.relationBattilana, J., y Casciaro, T. (2013). The network secrets of great change agents. Harvard Business Review , 91 (7), 62¿68
dc.relationBaumann, O., Schmidt, J., y Stieglitz, N. (2019). Effective search in rugged performan- ce landscapes: A review and outlook. Journal of Management, 45 (1), 285¿318. doi: 10.1177/0149206318808594
dc.relationBavelas, A. (1950). Communication patterns in task-oriented groups. The journal of the acoustical society of America, 22 , 725¿730. doi: 10.1121/1.1906679
dc.relationBeer, M., Eisenstat, R. A., y Spector, B. (1993). Why change programs don¿t produce change. Managing change, 2
dc.relationBernstein, E., Shore, J., y Lazer, D. (2018). How intermittent breaks in interaction improve collective intelligence. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115 (35), 8734¿ 8739. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1802407115
dc.relationBicchieri, C. (2005). The grammar of society: The nature and dynamics of social norms. Cam- bridge University Press
dc.relationBoonstra, J. J. (2004). Dynamics of organizational change and learning. Chichester: John Wiley
dc.relationBovey, W. H., y Hede, A. (2001). Resistance to organizational change: the role of cognitive and affective processes. Leadership & Organization development journal , 22 (8), 372¿382
dc.relationBrackbill, D., y Centola, D. (2020). Impact of network structure on collective learning: An experimental study in a data science competition. PloS one, 15 (9), e0237978. doi: 10.1371/ journal.pone.0237978
dc.relationBrowne, M. W., y Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological methods & research, 21 (2), 230¿258. doi: 10.1177/0049124192021002005
dc.relationBruch, E., y Feinberg, F. (2017). Decision-making processes in social contexts. Annual review of sociology, 43 , 207¿227. doi: 10.1146/annurev-soc-060116-053622
dc.relationBruderer, E., y Singh, J. V. (1996). Organizational evolution, learning, and selection: A genetic- algorithm-based model. Academy of management journal , 39 (5), 1322¿1349. doi: 10.5465/ 257001
dc.relationBurmeister, K., y Schade, C. (2007). Are entrepreneurs¿ decisions more biased? an experimental investigation of the susceptibility to status quo bias. Journal of business Venturing, 22 (3), 340¿362. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2006.04.002
dc.relationBurnes, B. (2005). Complexity theories and organizational change. International Journal of Management Reviews, 7 (2), 73¿90. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2005.00107.x
dc.relationCarr, P. B., y Steele, C. M. (2009). Stereotype threat and inflexible perseverance in problem solving. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45 (4), 853¿859. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp .2009.03.003
dc.relationCentola, D. (2022). The network science of collective intelligence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 26 (11), 923¿941. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2022.08.009
dc.relationCeschi, A., Sartori, R., y Guastello, S. J. (2018). Advanced modeling methods for studying indivi- dual differences and dynamics in organizations: introduction to the special issue. Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology and Life Sciences, 22 (1), 1¿13
dc.relationCox, J. C., Servátka, M., y Vadovi¿, R. (2017). Status quo effects in fairness games: reciprocal responses to acts of commission versus acts of omission. Experimental Economics, 20 , 1¿18. doi: 10.1007/s10683-016-9477-0
dc.relationCsaszar, F. A. (2018). A note on how nk landscapes work. Journal of Organization Design, 7 (1), 1¿6. doi: 10.1186/s41469-018-0039-0
dc.relationDavis, J. P., Eisenhardt, K. M., y Bingham, C. B. (2007). Developing theory through si- mulation methods. Academy of Management Review , 32 (2), 480¿499. doi: 10.5465/ amr.2007.24351453
dc.relationDean, M., K¿br¿s, Ö., y Masatlioglu, Y. (2017). Limited attention and status quo bias. Journal of Economic Theory, 169 , 93¿127. doi: 10.1016/j.jet.2017.01.009
dc.relationDellaPosta, D., Nee, V., y Opper, S. (2017). Endogenous dynamics of institutional change. Rationality and Society, 29 (1), 1¿44. doi: 10.1177/1043463116633147
dc.relationDemers, C. (2007). Organizational change theories: A synthesis. London: Sage
dc.relationDent, E. B., y Goldberg, S. G. (1999). Challenging ¿resistance to change¿. The Journal of applied behavioral science, 35 (1), 25¿41. doi: 10.1177/0021886399351003
dc.relationDerex, M., Feron, R., Godelle, B., y Raymond, M. (2015). Social learning and the replication pro- cess: an experimental investigation. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 282 (1808), 20150719. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2015.0719
dc.relationDerex, M., Godelle, B., y Raymond, M. (2013). Social learners require process information to outperform individual learners. Evolution: International Journal of Organic Evolution, 67 (3), 688¿697. doi: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2012.01804.x
dc.relationEstévez-Mujica, C. P., Acero, A., Jiménez-Leal, W., y Garcia-Diaz, C. (2018). The influence of homophilous interactions on diversity effects in group problem-solving. Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, And Life Sciences, 22 (1), 77¿102
dc.relationEthiraj, S. K., y Levinthal, D. (2004). Bounded rationality and the search for organizational ar- chitecture: An evolutionary perspective on the design of organizations and their evolvability. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49 (3), 404¿437. doi: 10.2307/4131441
dc.relationFang, C., Lee, J., y Schilling, M. A. (2010). Balancing exploration and exploitation through structural design: The isolation of subgroups and organizational learning. Organization Science, 21 (3), 625¿642. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1090.0468
dc.relationFang, R., Landis, B., Zhang, Z., Anderson, M. H., Shaw, J. D., y Kilduff, M. (2015). Integrating personality and social networks: A meta-analysis of personality, network position, and work outcomes in organizations. Organization science, 26 (4), 1243¿1260. doi: 10.1287/orsc.2015 .0972
dc.relationFiebich, A., Nguyen, N., y Schwarzkopf, S. (2015). Cooperation with robots? a two-dimensional approach. En C. Misselhorn (Ed.), Collective agency and cooperation in natural and ar- tificial systems: Explanation, implementation and simulation (pp. 25¿43). Suiza: Springer International
dc.relationFiske, S., Gilbert, D., y Lindzey, G. (2010). Automaticity and the unconscious. En Handbook of social psychology (pp. 228¿268). Wiley
dc.relationFrank, K. A., Xu, R., y Penuel, W. R. (2018). Implementation of evidence-based practice in human service organizations: Implications from agent-based models. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 37 (4), 867¿895
dc.relationFrías-Navarro, D. (2022). Apuntes de estimación de la fiabilidad de consistencia interna de los ítems de un instrumento de medida. D. Frías-Navarro, Recomendaciones para redactar el informe de investigación y lectura crítica. España: Universidad de Valencia. Retrieved from https://www.uv.es/friasnav/AlfaCronbach.pdf
dc.relationFurst, S. A., y Cable, D. M. (2008). Employee resistance to organizational change: managerial influence tactics and leader-member exchange. Journal of Applied psychology, 93 (2), 453. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.93.2.453
dc.relationGal, D. (2006). A psychological law of inertia and the illusion of loss aversion. Judgment and Decision Making, 1 , 23¿32
dc.relationGrimm, V., Berger, U., DeAngelis, D. L., Polhill, J. G., Giske, J., y Railsback, S. F. (2010). The odd protocol: a review and first update. Ecological modelling, 221 (23), 2760¿2768. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2010.08.019
dc.relationHannan, M. T., y Freeman, J. (1984). Structural inertia and organizational change. American sociological review , 49 (2), 149¿164. doi: 10.2307/2095567
dc.relationHarrison, J. R., Kemp, A., y Saetre, A. S. (2017). Attractor-based fitness landscapes for compu- tational decision search. En 2017 portland international conference on management of en- gineering and technology (picmet) (p. 1-8). doi: 10.23919/PICMET.2017.8125307
dc.relationHernandez, E., y Menon, A. (2018). Acquisitions, node collapse, and network revolution. Mana- gement Science, 64 (4), 1652¿1671. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.2016.2691
dc.relationHerold, D. M., Fedor, D. B., y Caldwell, S. D. (2007). Beyond change management: a multilevel investigation of contextual and personal influences on employees¿ commitment to change. Journal of applied psychology, 92 (4), 942. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.942
dc.relationHerscovitch, L., y Meyer, J. P. (2002). Commitment to organizational change: extension of a three-component model. Journal of applied psychology, 87 (3), 474
dc.relationHolt, D. T., Armenakis, A. A., Feild, H. S., y Harris, S. G. (2007). Readiness for organizational change: The systematic development of a scale. The Journal of applied behavioral science, 43 (2), 232¿255. doi: 10.1177/0021886306295295
dc.relationHoogendoorn, M., Jonker, C. M., Schut, M. C., y Treur, J. (2007). Modeling centralized orga- nization of organizational change. Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, 13 , 147¿184. doi: 10.1007/s10588-006-9004-5
dc.relationHoyle, R. H. (1995). The structural equation modeling approach: Basic concepts and fundamental issues. En Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues and applications (pp. 1¿25). Sage Publications, Inc
dc.relationIoannidis, E., Varsakelis, N., y Antoniou, I. (2020). Promoters versus adversaries of change: Agent- based modeling of organizational conflict in co-evolving networks. Mathematics, 8 (12), 2235. doi: 10.3390/math8122235
dc.relationIyengar, S. S., y Lepper, M. R. (2000). When choice is demotivating: Can one desire too much of a good thing? Journal of personality and social psychology, 79 (6), 995¿. doi: 10.1037/ 0022-3514.79.6.995
dc.relationKahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., y Thaler, R. H. (1991). Anomalies: The endowment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias. Journal of Economic perspectives, 5 (1), 193¿206. doi: 10.1257/jep.5.1.193
dc.relationKahneman, D., y Tversky, A. (1984). Choices, values, and frames. American psychologist, 39 (4), 341. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.39.4.341
dc.relationKahneman, D., y Tversky, A. (2013). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. En Handbook of the fundamentals of financial decision making: Part i (pp. 99¿127). World Scientific. doi: 10.1142/9789814417358_0006
dc.relationKauffman, S. A., y Weinberger, E. D. (1989). The nk model of rugged fitness landscapes and its application to maturation of the immune response. Journal of theoretical biology, 141 (2), 211¿245. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5193(89)80019-0
dc.relationKotter, J. P. (2007). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. En Museum management and marketing (pp. 20¿29). Routledge
dc.relationKwon, D., Oh, W., y Jeon, S. (2007). Broken ties: The impact of organizational restructuring on the stability of information-processing networks. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24 (1), 201¿231. doi: 10.2753/MIS0742-1222240106
dc.relationLant, T. K., y Mezias, S. J. (1992). An organizational learning model of convergence and reorien- tation. Organization Science, 3 (1), 47¿71
dc.relationLau, C.-M., y Woodman, R. W. (1995). Understanding organizational change: A schematic perspective. Academy of management journal , 38 (2), 537¿554. doi: 10.5465/256692
dc.relationLazer, D., y Friedman, A. (2007). The network structure of exploration and exploitation. Admi- nistrative science quarterly, 52 (4), 667¿694. doi: 10.2189/asqu.52.4.667
dc.relationLeavitt, H. J. (1951). Some effects of certain communication patterns on group performance. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 46 (1), 38¿50. doi: 10.1037/h0057189
dc.relationLenox, M. J., Rockart, S. F., y Lewin, A. Y. (2007). Interdependency, competition, and industry dynamics. Management Science, 53 (4), 599¿615. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.1060.0679
dc.relationLevinthal, D. A. (1997). Adaptation on rugged landscapes. Management science, 43 (7), 934¿950. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.43.7.934
dc.relationLewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics: Concept, method and reality in social science; social equilibria and social change. Human relations, 1 , 5¿41
dc.relationLindström, B., Jangard, S., Selbing, I., y Olsson, A. (2018). The role of a ¿common is moral¿ heuristic in the stability and change of moral norms. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General , 147 (2), 228¿242. doi: 10.1037/xge0000365
dc.relationLv, S., Ma, X., y Yang, R. (2020). Organization incentive driven by modeling of the co-opetition behavior in agent-based complex network. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing, 11 , 3305¿3313. doi: 10.1007/s12652-019-01517-6
dc.relationMarch, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization science, 2 (1), 71¿87
dc.relationMartignoni, D., Menon, A., y Siggelkow, N. (2016). Consequences of misspecified mental models: Contrasting effects and the role of cognitive fit. Strategic Management Journal , 37 (13), 2545¿2568. doi: 10.1002/smj.2479
dc.relationMasatlioglu, Y., y Uler, N. (2013). Understanding the reference effect. Games and Economic Behavior , 82 , 403¿423. doi: 10.1016/j.geb.2013.07.009
dc.relationMason, W., y Watts, D. J. (2011). Collaborative learning in networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109 (3), 764¿769. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1110069108
dc.relationMason, W. A., Jones, A., y Goldstone, R. L. (2008). Propagation of innovations in networked groups. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General , 137 (3), 422. doi: 10.1037/a0012798
dc.relationMihm, J., Loch, C., y Huchzermeier, A. (2003). Problem¿solving oscillations in complex enginee- ring projects. Management Science, 49 (6), 733¿750. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.49.6.733.16021
dc.relationMorin, O., Jacquet, P. O., Vaesen, K., y Acerbi, A. (2021). Social information use and social information waste. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B , 376 (1828), 20200052. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2020.0052
dc.relationNissen, V., y Saft, D. (2010). Social emergence in organisational contexts: benefits from multi- agent simulations. En Proceedings of the 2010 spring simulation multiconference (pp. 1¿8). doi: 10.1145/1878537.1878548
dc.relationOreg, S. (2003). Resistance to change: Developing an individual differences measure. Journal of applied psychology, 88 (4), 680¿693. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.4.680
dc.relationOreg, S. (2006). Personality, context, and resistance to organizational change. European journal of work and organizational psychology, 15 (1), 73¿101. doi: 10.1080/13594320500451247
dc.relationOreg, S., Bayazit, M., Vakola, M., Arciniega, L., Armenakis, A., Barkauskiene, R., . . . others (2008). Dispositional resistance to change: Measurement equivalence and the link to personal values across 17 nations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93 (4), 935¿944. doi: 10.1037/ 0021-9010.88.4.680
dc.relationOreg, S., Vakola, M., y Armenakis, A. (2011). Change recipients¿ reactions to organizational change: A 60-year review of quantitative studies. The Journal of applied behavioral science, 47 (4), 461¿524. doi: 10.1177/0021886310396550
dc.relationPage, S. E. (2008). The difference: How the power of diversity creates better groups, firms, schools, and societies-new edition. Princeton University Press
dc.relationPiderit, S. K. (2000). Rethinking resistance and recognizing ambivalence: A multidimensional view of attitudes toward an organizational change. Academy of management review , 25 (4), 783¿794
dc.relationPinheiro, J., Bates, D., DebRoy, S., Sarkar, D., Team, R. C., y cols. (2009). Linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. R package version, 1¿339
dc.relationPodsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., y Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of applied psychology, 88 (5), 879. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
dc.relationPoole, M. S., y Van de Ven, A. H. (2004). Handbook of organizational change and innovation. New York: Oxford University Press
dc.relationPosen, H. E., Lee, J., y Yi, S. (2013). The power of imperfect imitation. Strategic Management Journal , 34 (2), 149¿164. doi: 10.1002/smj.2007
dc.relationPosen, H. E., y Levinthal, D. A. (2012). Chasing a moving target: Exploitation and exploration in dynamic environments. Management science, 58 (3), 587¿601. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.1110.1420
dc.relationProchaska, J. O., y DiClemente, C. C. (1983). Stages and processes of self-change of smoking: toward an integrative model of change. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 51 (3), 390¿395. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.51.3.390
dc.relationPuranam, P., Stieglitz, N., Osman, M., y Pillutla, M. M. (2015). Modelling bounded rationality in organizations: Progress and prospects. Academy of Management Annals, 9 (1), 337¿392. doi: 10.5465/19416520.2015.1024498
dc.relationRydzak, F., y Monus, P. A. (2018). Shaping organizational network structure to enable sustainable transformation. System Dynamics Review , 34 (1-2), 255¿283. doi: 10.1002/sdr.1602
dc.relationSamuelson, W., y Zeckhauser, R. (1988). Status quo bias in decision making. Journal of risk and uncertainty, 1 , 7¿59. doi: 10.1007/BF00055564
dc.relationSchultz, P. W., Nolan, J. M., Cialdini, R. B., Goldstein, N. J., y Griskevicius, V. (2007). The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psychological science, 18 (5), 429¿434. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01917.x
dc.relationSchweiger, S., Stouten, H., y Bleijenbergh, I. L. (2018). A system dynamics model of resistance to organizational change: The role of participatory strategies. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 35 (6), 658¿674. doi: 10.1002/sres.2509
dc.relationSecchi, D. (2015). A case for agent-based models in organizational behavior and team research. Team Performance Management, 21 (1/2), 37¿50. doi: 10.1108/TPM-12-2014-0063
dc.relationShah, N., Irani, Z., y Sharif, A. M. (2017). Big data in an hr context: Exploring organizational change readiness, employee attitudes and behaviors. Journal of Business Research, 70 , 366¿378. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.08.010
dc.relationShore, J., Bernstein, E., y Lazer, D. (2015). Facts and figuring: An experimental investigation of network structure and performance in information and solution spaces. Organization Science, 26 (5), 1432¿1446
dc.relationSiggelkow, N. (2002). Evolution toward fit. Administrative science quarterly, 47 (1), 125¿159. doi: 10.2307/3094893
dc.relationSimon, H. A. (1956). Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychological review , 63 (2), 129¿138. doi: 10.1037/h0042769
dc.relationSmaldino, P. E., Moser, C., Velilla, A. P., y Werling, M. (2022). Maintaining transient diversity is a general principle for improving collective problem solving. Descargado de https:// osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/ykrv5/
dc.relationSmollan, R. K. (2011). The multi-dimensional nature of resistance to change. Journal of Mana- gement & Organization, 17 (6), 828¿849. doi: 10.5172/jmo.2011.828
dc.relationSparrowe, R. T., Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., y Kraimer, M. L. (2001). Social networks and the performance of individuals and groups. Academy of management journal , 44 (2), 316¿325
dc.relationSquazzoni, F. (2014). The ¿reign of mystery¿: Have we missed something crucial in our experimen- tal and computational work on social norms? The Complexity of Social Norms, 177¿188
dc.relationSusskind, A. M., Miller, V. D., y Johnson, J. D. (1998). Downsizing and structural holes: Their impact on layoff survivors¿ perceptions of organizational chaos and openness to change. Communication Research, 25 (1), 30¿65. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.08.010
dc.relationTetlock, P. E. (1983). Accountability and the perseverance of first impressions. Social psychology quarterly, 46 (4), 285¿292. doi: 10.2307/3033716
dc.relationTorenvlied, R., y Velner, G. (1998). Informal networks and resistance to organizational change: The introduction of quality standards in a transport company. Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory, 4 , 165¿188
dc.relationUotila, J. (2018). Punctuated equilibrium or ambidexterity: Dynamics of incremental and radical organizational change over time. Industrial and Corporate Change, 27 (1), 131¿148. doi: 10.1093/icc/dtx018
dc.relationVakola, M., Armenakis, A., y Oreg, S. (2013). Reactions to organizational change from an individual differences perspective: A review of empirical research. En S. Oreg, A. Michel, y R. Todnem (Eds.), The psychology of organizational change: Viewing change from the employee¿s perspective (pp. 95¿122). Reino Unido: Cambridge University Press
dc.relationVan de Ven, A. H., y Poole, M. S. (2005). Alternative approaches for studying organizational change. Organization studies, 26 (9), 1377¿1404. doi: 10.1177/0170840605056907
dc.relationVuculescu, O. (2017). Searching far away from the lamp-post: An agent-based model. Strategic Organization, 15 (2), 242¿263. doi: 10.1177/1476127016669869
dc.relationVuculescu, O., Beretta, M., y Bergenholtz, C. (2021). The ikea effect in collective problem-solving: When individuals prioritize their own solutions. Creativity and Innovation Management, 30 (1), 116¿128. doi: 10.1111/caim.12416
dc.relationWall, F. (2015). Beneficial effects of randomized organizational change on performance. Advances in Complex Systems, 18 (05-06), 1550019. doi: 10.1142/S0219525915500198
dc.relationWanberg, C. R., y Banas, J. T. (2000). Predictors and outcomes of openness to changes in a reorganizing workplace. Journal of applied psychology, 85 (1), 132. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010 .85.1.132
dc.relationWatson, G. (1971). Resistance to change. American behavioral scientist, 14 (5), 745¿766. doi: 10.1177/00027642710140050
dc.relationWeisbord, M. R. (1987). Productive workplaces: Organizing and managing for dignity, meaning and community. Jossey-Bass
dc.relationXenitidou, M., y Edmonds, B. (2014). The conundrum of social norms. En M. Xenitidou y B. Edmonds (Eds.), The complexity of social norms (pp. 1¿8). Springer. doi: 10.1007/ 978-3-319-05308-0_1
dc.relationXiao, S., y Yue, Q. (2018). Investors¿ inertia behavior and their repeated decision-making in online reward-based crowdfunding market. Decision Support Systems, 111 , 101¿112. doi: 10.1016/j.dss.2018.05.005
dc.relationYang, M. M., Young, S., Li, S.-J., y Huang, Y.-Y. (2017). Using system dynamics to investigate how belief systems influence the process of organizational change. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 34 (1), 94¿108. doi: 10.1002/sres.2394
dc.relationYaniv, I., y Kleinberger, E. (2000). Advice taking in decision making: Egocentric discounting and reputation formation. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 83 (2), 260¿281. doi: 10.1006/obhd.2000.2909
dc.relationYoung, H. P. (2015). The evolution of social norms. Annual Review of Economics, 7 (1), 359¿387. doi: 10.1146/annurev-economics-080614-115322
dc.relationYu, Z., Rouse, W. B., y Serban, N. (2011). A computational theory of enterprise transformation. Systems Engineering, 14 (4), 441¿454. doi: 10.1002/sys.20188
dc.relationZhang, J., Ouyang, Y., Li, H., Ballesteros-Pérez, P., y Skitmore, M. (2020). Simulation analysis of incentives on employees¿ acceptance of foreign joint venture management practices: a case study. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 27 (8), 2047-2078. doi: 10.1108/ECAM-06-2019-0321
dc.rightshttps://repositorio.uniandes.edu.co/static/pdf/aceptacion_uso_es.pdf
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rightshttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
dc.titleInformación y estructura como antecedente de la resistencia al cambio en contextos de cooperación
dc.typeTrabajo de grado - Doctorado


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución