Formalization, conflict, and change: constructive and destructive consequences in schools

Abstract

Abstract Meeting the demands for increased effectiveness of schools cannot occur without systemic change. But the natural reaction to change is typically tension, resistance, and conflict. This analysis distinguishes between constructive and destructive conflict. First, conflict is conceptualized in terms of cognitive and affective types. Then organizational formalization is considered in terms of enabling or coercive procedures. A typology of change is created by cross‐partitioning the two types of conflict and formalization. The framework is useful in predicting the impact of change: from situations that catalyze and facilitate change to those that frustrate and inhibit it. Finally, the analysis summarizes key factors that administrators should consider as they attempt to use conflict to facilitate rather than inhibit constructive change and as they try to avoid and limit destructive change.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 40 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.