Journal of Change Management

Vol. 5, No. 1, 47 56, March 2005

Cultural Revitalization Movements in

Organization Change Management
MICHAEL W. PHELAN
Oracle Corporation, USA

ABSTRACT The 1992 study of Kotter and Heskett on successful corporate culture change reveals
one of the most empirically convincing models for organization change management. The procedure
demonstrated by Kotter and Hesketts research fits the pattern and dynamics of a universal social
phenomenon of culture change defined in 1956 by Wallace as revitalization. Applying the
psychodynamics of revitalization explains how this procedure of corporate culture change in
distressed organizational cultures creates an adaptable culture of new behavioral norms. The
driving force of this procedure is the transference of dependency wishes among anxious
organization members onto their perceived powerful organization leader. An understanding of
how and why organizational cultures change according to this model can guide the values and
behavior of organizational leaders in successfully managing organizational change.
KEY WORDS : Culture, anthropology, revitalization, transference, norms, leadership

Perhaps the most compelling formula for successful organizational change

management is the now-classic study by Kotter and Heskett (1992) of corporate
culture and performance. This research revealed a specific procedure for changing
organizational norms that was performed by all CEOs who successfully changed
the cultures of their organizations. Unknown or unacknowledged by the authors
of the study, the procedure they discovered for successful organizational change
follows the pattern of universal social movements known in cultural anthropology
as revitalization (Wallace, 1956).
The revitalization model is a very powerful, universal formula for culture
change, whether in a whole society or an organization, for groups that are threatened by forces with which their traditional cultural norms cannot cope. Applied
to organizational culture change, the social and psychological dynamics of
revitalization explain why, when followed correctly, this procedure for change
Correspondence Address: Michael W. Phelan, PO Box 2145, El Granada, CA 94018-2145, USA. Tel: 1 (650)
450 3123; Email: evolve@michaelphelan.com
1469-7017 Print=1479-1811 Online=05=01004710 # 2005 Taylor & Francis Group Ltd
DOI: 10.1080=14697010500036106

48

M. W. Phelan

management results in successful change. They can also guide the values and
behavior of leaders and change management professionals in successfully
managing organizational change.
The revitalization model is one of the most widely taught theories in the field
of cultural anthropology. Although revitalization has been usually applied to
explain spontaneous, religiously inspired culture change, this article takes the
position that, The obvious distinctions between religious and secular movements
may conceal fundamental similarities of socio-cultural process and psychodynamics . . . (Wallace, 2003, p. 25). The socio-cultural process and psychodynamics of revitalization have been examined in great depth; applying them to
the similar process of managing organization culture change results in a detailed
understanding of the determining variables for successful change.
Corporate Culture and Performance

John Kotter and James Heskett (1992) conducted a quantitative study of performance in 207 enterprises in 22 industries during the years 1979 through
1990. They measured performance in terms of annual growth of net income,
average returns on capital investments, and appreciation in the value of stock.
In all cases of successful culture change they found that corporate leaders
completed each stage of the change procedure in a specific sequence before
moving on to the next stage. Rushing through or skipping stages never produces
a satisfying result (Kotter and Heskett, 1992, p. 3). The procedure of successful
corporate culture change that Kotter and Hesketts research discovered holds to
the following pattern:
Initial Culture

In a typical scenario described by the authors, initially a company is successful

due to market conditions, such as lack of competition or superior products. As
the company expands and becomes more complex, they hire managers who are
skilled but not necessarily leaders.
Aberrant Behavior

Eventually, these managers are promoted and run the company. However, they
understand business processes but not the corporate vision and culture. Their
behavior conflicts with the corporations cultural norms. This aberrant behavior
can include arrogance, lack of value for key constituents, hostility towardleadership, and resistance to change.
New Leadership, New Vision

A new chief executive is appointed who identifies a crisis within the company
and presents a vision for a plan to correct it. The chief executive is often an established and charismatic business leader who has a plan for changing the corporation
before accepting the position. The new chief executive appoints task forces or
hires consultants to gather and communicate information and to clarify the vision.

Cultural Revitalization Movements

49

Reorganization

The leader maintains high visibility among employees, frequently reinforcing the
plan through word and deed, which includes restructuring systems and policies,
providing role models and communicating why new behavior is needed, endorsing
and supporting new activities proposed by others, and changing specific personnel
or the criteria by which people are recruited and promoted.
Successful Culture Change

The new actions appear to achieve the desired results, which begin to motivate
new behavior among the membership. Behavioral norms and shared values
begin to change to be more in accordance with the new vision and the new strategies. These behavioral norms seem to be driven by a value system that stresses
meeting the legitimate needs of all the key constituencies whose cooperation
is essential to business performanceespecially customers, employees, and
stockholders (Kotter and Heskett, 1992, p. 3).
Cultural Revitalization

Revitalization movements involve establishing new religious or political ideologies in societies that are threatened by cultural crisis. In describing culture,
Wallace (2003, p. 90) employs a systems-and-meaning definition in which:
Culture refers to a pattern of ideas, a cognitive system, consisting of a relatively small
set of abstract propositions, of both descriptive and normative kinds, about the nature
of the human self and society, and about how people should feel and behave. This
culture is shared, and shared uniquely, by the competent adult members of the
community; it forms a template for all behavior . . .. These high-order generalizations
about how members of a community see themselves and each other help the
anthropologist to understand the social structure and the economic system.

Regarding holistic definitions of culture which hold that behavior contributes to

human adaptation, Wallace (2003, p. 87) qualifies them with the caveat that,
Some aspects of the culture of a particular community may be maladaptive.
Although specific cultural variables determine its exact forms, revitalization
movements are marked by a distinctive, uniform procedure that occurs in the
following stages:
The Steady State Period

Preceding the revitalization movement itself is the Steady State period, in which the
culturally recognized means of satisfying emotional needs operate well enough so
that most individuals within the culture can cope with stress within tolerable limits.
The Period of Increased Individual Stress

Due to increased challenges to the culture, such as economic distress, epidemic,

political subordination, war, technological change, and so on, the traditional

50

M. W. Phelan

means of coping with stress become decreasingly effective. Some people prefer to
tolerate stress rather than change their behavior and adapt, while others resort to
regressive behavior, which can include intra-group violence, disregard for
mores, irresponsibility among public officials, and extreme passivity. Some of
these regressive behaviors become new cultural patterns, and the culture
becomes distorted. Symptoms of anxiety over the loss of a meaningful way of
life become commonplace and disillusionment and apathy develop toward
problems of adaptation.
The Period of Revitalization

During this crisis a prophet or visionary comes forth with a plan, often given by a
supernatural being in a vision, by which society can reform, giving rise to the
Period of Revitalization. The plan presents a culturally relevant goal, such as
returning to a societys golden age of success or establishing a utopia, in effect,
revitalizing the culture. The Period of Revitalization incorporates the following
six functions:
Mazeway Resynthesis:

A mazeway is an individuals total complex of generalizations about the body

and surroundings, similar to a map, which represents goals and difficulties, the
self and other people and objects, and ways of attaining or avoiding values. The
mazeway must be as consistent as possible to be realistic, believable, and functional, although some inconsistencies in the mazeway are inevitable and can be
tolerated by such mechanisms as rationalizations or beliefs. Under severe stress
the mazeway may no longer adequately represent reality and therefore becomes
dysfunctional. The experience of inspiration can reorder or resynthesize the
mazeway to be more consistent with external reality by bringing the individual
to realize new goals or new ways of attaining existing ones.
Communication:

The prophet preaches the revelation, attracts converts, and gathers disciples and
followers who believe in and proselytize the prophecy.
Organization:

A small clique of special disciples (which often includes a few already influential
people) forms around the prophet and a campaign organization develops with
three levels of personnel: the prophet, the disciples, and the followers. Disciples
become responsible for spreading the word. The converts believe that they
come under the care of the supernatural being who presented the plan and that
by following the plan they will benefit materially.
Adaptation:

The disciples develop strategies and an organized program of group action to

overcome resistance from others in the society who do not share their belief in
the prophets plan. The Adaptation stage is the greatest determinant of the
success of a revitalization movement due to two major variables: the relative

Cultural Revitalization Movements

51

realism of the groups doctrine and the amount of resistance that opponents
use against the group. As Wallace says, If the organization cannot predict successfully the consequences of its own moves and of its opponents moves in a
power struggle, its demise is very likely. If, on the other hand, it is canny about
conflict, or if the amount of resistance is low, it can be extremely unrealistic
and extremely unconventional in other matters without running much risk of
early collapse. In other words, probability of failure would seem to be negatively
correlated with degree of realism in conflict situations, and directly correlated
with amount of resistance (2003: 27 28).
Routinization:

If the degree of conflict-realism is high and resistance is low, the revitalization

movement becomes established as normal in various economic, social, and
political institutions and customs.
The New Steady State:

If the mazeway formulation of the new culture maintains a low level of stress, a
new steady state arises that incorporates the new cultural values and behavioral
norms.
Examples of revitalization movements that have created new political
organizations include the formation of the Iroquois League at the direction of
the Mohawk visionary Hiawatha (Wallace, 2003). Other revitalization movements
have occurred in segments of societies, such as the Transcendental Meditation
movement of the 1970s (Phelan, 1979).
Organizational Revitalization

Both models of change involve a new leader who organizes believers in accepting
a new plan for new behavioral norms to replace traditional norms that fail to
cope with perceived threats to the group culture. The procedure for change
must occur in specific stages that can be summarized as follows:
1. A perceived crisis induces increased stress and a sense of urgency.
2. Conventional cultural norms no longer apply, leading to increased stress among
individuals.
3. The increased anxiety leads to unsanctioned or aberrant behavior becoming
commonplace.
4. A new charismatic leader communicates a plan for new behavior.
5. The leader inspires believers in the plan and organizes followers to promote it.
6. The plan has initial success, which inspires more people to adopt it.
7. The followers consolidate and refine the plan to cope with inconsistencies and
opposition from traditionalists.
8. The new behavior becomes institutionalized as cultural norms.
Wallaces revitalization model and Kotter and Hesketts corporate culture and
performance model have important similarities and differences, most notably
the distinction between sacred and secular ideologies. Although Wallace allows
for secular applications of revitalization, he reserves the name revitalization

52

M. W. Phelan

for culture change within a whole society. As for applying the term to similar
organizational procedures, he (Wallace, 2003, p. 7) asks:
But what are we to call efforts to abruptly reform, or revive, merely an institution
like a university or a telephone company, or other small component within the
larger society, without pretension to wider goals? Here my own preference would
be to recognize the possibility of a similarity of process but not to employ the
term revitalization, lest it be diluted by too liberal usage.

The psychodynamics of the role of leadership in coping with crises are comparable
in revitalization movements and Kotter and Hesketts procedure for organization
change management.
Intention and Crisis

A significant difference between the secular and religious versions of revitalization

is intention. Although revitalization movements are, deliberate, organized
efforts by members of a society to create a more satisfying culture (Wallace,
2003, p. 164), the vision of corporate executives for a new organizational culture
is a premeditated agenda, while the visionaries of revitalization movements are
inspired intuitively and spontaneously, usually through perceived divine means.
Unlike cultural crises that induce culture change in societies, the crisis that
spurs planned corporate change may not be genuine. Some CEOs who wanted
to change their cultures, but whose organizations were not experiencing a crisis,
manipulated measures to make the existence of a crisis convincing and thereby
generate anxiety among members (Kotter and Heskett, 1992, p. 95; Kotter and
Cohen, 2002, p. 5). Kotter has summarized his culture change formula into an
eight-step procedure, the first of which is Increase Urgency (Kotter and
Cohen, 2002, p. 15).
However, Schein (1980, p. 244) questions the ethics of inducing discomfort
by inventing crises as a means to motivate employees. Nevertheless, Schein
(1992, p. 237) also says, Crises are especially significant in culture creation
and transmission because the heightened emotional involvement during such
periods increases the intensity of learning. Crises heighten anxiety, and anxiety
reduction is a powerful motivator of new learning. If people share intense
emotional experiences and collectively learn how to reduce anxiety, they are
more likely to remember what they have learned.
In the field of psychiatry, crisis theory propounds that people experiencing a
crisis are more likely to seek the help of others and to be more susceptible to
the influence of others than when they are not in crisis (Caplan, 1964). For this
reason, a crisis can provide an opportunity for individual growth if efforts to
cope with it are effective, but can jeopardize both present and future attempts at
coping if the efforts fail. According to crisis theory, the underlying element of a
crisis is a lack of resources to cope with a demanding situation.
In a culture change situation, the leader can supply direction that provides
individuals who experience the anxiety of crisis with the resources and confidence
to adapt their behavior and cope with the crisis. This anxiety-reducing function

Cultural Revitalization Movements

53

of culture change corresponds with a psychological definition of culture that

proposes that culture is:
A shared system of beliefs (what is true), values (what is important), expectations,
especially about scripted behavioral sequences, and behavior meanings (what is
implied by engaging in a given action) developed by a group over time to provide
the requirements of living . . .. This shared system enhances communication of
meaning and coordination of actions among a cultures members by reducing
uncertainty and anxiety through making its members behavior predictable,
understandable, and valued. (Bond, 2004, pp. 62 78)

By making behavior predictable, cultural norms also prepare individuals to cope

with the unpredictable, making them more adaptable to change than if they were
to follow only specified rules (Chatman and Cha, 2003). Conversely, accustomed
norms of behavior are ineffective in interactions between participants in crosscultural encounters or in mergers and acquisitions between different organizational
cultures which have different behavioral norms (Schein, 1999, pp. 119 20).
Leaders and Individuals in Crises

The role of a leader in directing individuals under stress to change their behavior
is essential to crisis theory and both the revitalization and corporate culture
change models. In corporations, the vision for change must come from the relevant
leader. If the change is intended for the entire organization, the vision must come
from the CEO; if the change is intended for a division of a corporation, then the
vision must come from the head of the division (Kotter, 1998, p. 4).
Although most CEOs might not agree with favorable comparisons of themselves with charismatic religious prophets, both the revitalization movement
and organizational culture change model describe the relevant leaders as charismatic. One CEO who completed successful culture change was described as
having had a cult following of enthusiastic employees (Kotter and Heskett,
1992, p. 103).
Wallace states that individual followers believe that they come under the care of
the supernatural being who presents the plan, which they believe that by following
they will benefit materially. To alleviate their anxiety, followers have a need to
find a powerful and potentially benevolent leader, which they satisfy by displacement of transference dependency wishes (Wallace, 2003, p. 21) onto the charismatic prophet. In other words, as the perceived representative of authority, the
prophet takes on the role of a parent surrogate who is perceived as capable
of providing well being by making things right again. Transference dependency
explains the need for the corporate leader who presents the plan for change to
be the organizations highest authority figure, whether a division head or the
chief executive officer.
Remaking Organizational Norms

As explained previously, a mazeway is an individuals total perception of the

self, others, and the environmenta perception that makes sense of reality.

54

M. W. Phelan

The purpose of revitalization movements is to resynthesize credible, anxiety-reducing mazeways among individuals. Kotter and Hesketts procedure for change
management follows the sequence and dynamics of revitalization; it can be
inferred that the purpose of this procedure for organization culture change is to
resynthesize the mazeways of organization members to realistically introduce consistent, anxiety-reducing behavioral norms into the intended organizational
culture. Wallace (2003, pp. 27 8) asserts the critical importance of credible mazeways in saying, Where conflict-realism is high and resistance is low, the movement is bound to achieve the phase of Routinization. Whether its culture will be
viable for long beyond this point, however, will depend on whether its
mazeway formulations lead to actions which maintain a low level of stress.
Contradictions and Failure

Contradictory beliefs can be rationalized or accommodated by ideological dogma,

but extreme inconsistencies in belief and behavior have been identified as a causal
element of socially unacceptable behavior and even mental illness. As Wallace
(2003, p. 172) says, Sometimes, however, mazeway development remains or
becomes inadequate. Inadequacy is possible in three dimensions: (1) internal lack
of communication, (2) internal inconsistency, and (3) lack of correspondence
with reality. Although the conventional diagnostic categories are fuzzy of definition, it would seem that the classic distinctions among psychosis, neurosis, and reactive disorder roughly correspond with these three types of mazeway inadequacy.
The idea of the role of culture as a shared belief system of predictable behavior
that reduces uncertainty and anxiety is based upon theories of terror management
and uncertainty reduction. These theories:
View the fundamental function of culture as maintaining the psychological integrity
of its members, a function that depends crucially on the sharedness of a cultures
psychological legacy. Without a high degree of consensus about what is true and
good, ones proximate social interactants will fail to provide the support and predictability necessary for a group member to meet the challenges of living and to
achieve the social goals of life. On the contrary, dissensus within ones social
network may lead to isolation, withdrawal, or violence. Undergirding this approach
to culture is the conceptualization of groups as complex systems of interrelations
among members, tools, and tasks, developed out of the conflict and coordination
required to accomplish the many tasks of living. (Bond, 2004, p. 62)

This view of cultural norms as providing predictability for shared behavior corresponds with Wallaces (2003, pp. 170 1) view that the purpose of the mazeway is,
To give meaning to messages, to relate incoming sensory data to the whole
complex of objects, values, and techniques that is the mazeway, so that action
may be taken that can be expected to reduce stress or maximize pleasure not
merely in the presenting situation but within the great maze of situations that
the mazeway represents.
An extreme example of a causal relationship between inescapable contradictions within perceived reality and mental illness is the double bind dilemma in

Cultural Revitalization Movements

55

families where the presence of schizophrenia has been diagnosed. The double bind
involves contradictory choices that inevitably result in negative consequences for
the chooser, no matter which choice is made (Bateson, 2000).
The Revitalization Phenomenon

The word revitalization seems to intuitively apply to corporate culture change,

judging from the use of the word revitalize in titles of recent books on the
subject of corporate culture (Ashby, 1999; Deal and Kennedy, 2000). Some
authors have referred to general methods of changing organizations as revitalizations (Kanter et al., 1992, p. 4). One article on business change uses the word
revitalization four times on the first page alone (Beer et al., 2002, p. 1).
However, revitalization is a specific and verifiable social phenomenon that
appears in organizations as well as in whole societies. Although the term is
already in use among organizational researchers and practitioners who apply it
intuitively, it is applied inappropriately. For example, one article that refers liberally to organizational change as revitalization states that, But revitalization
doesnt come from the top. It starts at an organizations periphery, led by unit
managers creating ad hoc arrangements to solve concrete problems (Beer
et al., 2002, p. 1).
Clearly, the procedure of organizational change that these authors describe
does not fit the classic definition of cultural revitalization. Because revitalization
is established in the social sciences as a distinctive phenomenon, the term
revitalization should be applied only to social activities that conform to the revitalization model described in whole societies by Wallace and in organizations by
Kotter and Heskett. Both procedures follow the same specific stages and seem to
function according to the same psychodynamics. Despite Wallaces preference
to reserve the term revitalization to whole societies rather than to institutional
procedures, I believe the term organizational revitalization is appropriate to
refer to instances of revitalization in organizations that undergo the sequence of
procedure and psychodynamics described here that involves transference
dependency upon an authority who is perceived as able to alleviate members
anxiety by instituting new behavioral norms.
Conclusions

An organizational culture of consistent behavioral norms is not only a powerful

motivator of efficient and productive employee behavior; it is an important
element of organizational mental health. Cultural consensus is important in
coping with anxiety, while significant contradictions or dissensus among cultural
norms contribute to increasing anxiety rather than alleviating it. Dissensus
can lead to aberrant behavior such as withdrawal, neurosis, psychosis, reactive
disorders, and violence. Cultural revitalization can alleviate collective anxiety
by transferring members dependency needs on their leader, who institutes new
norms to cope with their anxiety.
Classifying Kotter and Hesketts model of corporate culture change as a variety
of revitalization affirms the validity of their model as a universal social

56

M. W. Phelan

phenomenon subject to nomothetic principles. It also affirms in effective corporate

culture change the importance of specific leadership qualities:
. Leaders must be charismatic, highly visible to employees, very actively
involved in leading culture change, and reassure employees in time of crisis.
. Leaders must present an extremely consistent and credible value system to
replace the existing dysfunctional culture.
. For mazeways to be consistent and credible, stated plans for a new culture
that includes obvious contradictions, half-truths, or disingenuous platitudes
are self-destructive and doomed to failure.
. To be credible to their employees during the procedure of organizational revitalization, leaders must predict successfully the consequences of their moves
and of their opponents moves in any power struggle. The probability of
success in revitalizing organizational culture correlates positively with the
degree of realism in conflict situations, and correlates negatively with the
amount of resistance from opponents.
On a theoretical level, the application of the social process and psychological
dynamics to Kotter and Hesketts discovery demonstrates key variables of why
their model functions successfully. Pragmatically, it gives organizational leaders
and consultants an understanding of how and why organizational cultures function.
Moreover, it can serve as an example of the values and behavior that organizational leaders can put into practice to successfully manage organizational change.
References
Ashby, F.C. (1999) Revitalize your Corporate Culture: Powerful Ways to Transform your Company into a
High-performance Organization (Burlington, MA: Gulf Professional Publishing).
Bateson, G. (2000) Steps Toward an Ecology of Mind (Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press,
originally published 1972).
Beer, M., Eisenstat, R.A and Spector, B. (2002) Why change programs dont produce change, Harvard Business
Review OnPoint (July), pp. 112.
Bond, M.H. (2004) Culture and aggressionFrom context to coercion, Personality and Social Psychology
Review, 8(1), pp. 6278.
Caplan, G. (1964) Preventive Psychiatry (New York: Basic Books).
Chatman, J.A. and Cha, S.E. (2003) Leading by leveraging culture, California Management Review, 45(4), pp. 2034.
Deal, T. and Kennedy, A. (2000) The New Corporate Cultures: Revitalizing the Workplace after Downsizing,
Mergers, and Reengineering (Reading, MA: Perseus Books).
Kanter, R.M., Stein, B.A. and Jick, J.D. (1992) The Challenge of Organizational Change: How Companies
Experience it and Leaders Guide it (New York: The Free Press).
Kotter, J.P. (1998) Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail, in: J. Collins, J.I. Porras et al. (Eds) Harvard
Business Review on Change, pp. 120 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Review Publishing).
Kotter, J P. and Cohen, D.S. (2002) The Heart of Change: Real-life Stories of how People Change their
Organizations (Boston: Harvard Business School Press).
Kotter, J.P. and Heskett, J.L. (1992) Corporate Culture and Performance (New York: The Free Press).
Phelan, M. (1979) Transcendental meditation: A revitalization of the American civil religion, Archives de
Sciences Sociales des Religions, 24 (JulySeptember), pp. 520.
Schein, E.H. (1980) Organizational Psychology (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall).
Schein, E.H. (1992) Organizational Culture and Leadership (San Francisco: Jossey Bass).
Schein, E.H. (1999) The Corporate Culture Survival Guide (San Francisco: Jossey Bass).
Wallace, A.F.C. (1956) Revitalization movements, American Anthropologist, 58, pp. 264281.
Wallace, A.F.C. (2003) Revitalizations and Mazeways: Essays on Culture Change (Lincoln/London: University
of Nebraska Press).