Fostering organizational change through deliberations: the deliberative jury in a university setting

References

• Ansoff, I. H. (1984). Strategisen johtamisen käsikirja [Strategic management handbook]. Helsinki: Otava.
   Google Scholar
• Balint, P., Stewart, R., Desai, A., & Walters, L. (2006, October 25–29). Managing wicked environmental problems: Integrating public participation and adaptive management. Paper presented at the National Convention of the Society of American Foresters, Pittsburgh, PA.
   Google Scholar
• Battilana, J., & Casciaro, T. (2013, July–August). The network secrets of great change agents. Harvard Business Review, 91, 62–68.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beeson, I., & Davis, C. (2000). Emergence and accomplishment in organizational change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 13, 178–192.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bento, F. (2013). Organizational complexity: Leadership and change in research-intensive academic departments (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway.
   Google Scholar
• Blanchard, K. (2010, January). Mastering the art of change. The Training Journal. Retrieved from http://www.kenblanchard.com/img/pub/Blanchard_Mastering_the_Art_of_Change.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Burnes, B. (1996). No such thing as … a ‘one best way’ to manage organizational change. Management Decision, 34, 11–18.
   Google Scholar
• Burnes, B. (2004). Managing change: A strategic approach to organizational dynamics. Harlow: Pearson Education.
   Google Scholar
• Carson, L., & Hartz-Karp, J. (2005). Adapting and combining deliberative designs: Juries, polls and forums. In J. Gastil & P. Levine (Eds.), Deliberative democracy handbook (pp. 111–119). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Cicognani, E., Pirini, C., Keyes, C., Joshanloo, M., Rostami, R., & Nosratabadi, M. (2007). Social participation, sense of community and social well-being: A study on American, Italian and Iranian university students. Social Indicators Research, 89, 97–112.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke, N. (2013). Model of complexity leadership development. Human Resource Development International, 16, 135–150.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, J., & Fung, A. (2004). Radical democracy. Swiss Journal of Political Science, 10, 23–34.
   Google Scholar
• Collins, D. (1998). Organizational change. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Conklin, J. (2005). Dialogue mapping: Building shared understanding of wicked problems. New York, NY: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Cooperrider, D., & Whitney, D. (1999). Appreciative inquiry. San Francisco, CA: Berret-Koeler Communications.
   Google Scholar
• Crevani, L., Lindgren, M., & Packendorff, J. (2009). Leadership, not leaders: On the study of leadership as practices and interactions. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 26, 77–86.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crosby, N., & Nethercut, D. (2005). Citizens juries: Creating a trustworthy voice of the people. In J. Gastil & P. Levine (Eds.), Deliberative democracy handbook (pp. 111–119). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Cummings, T. G., & Huse, E. F. (1980). Organization development and change. St Paul, MI: West Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Cunliffe, A. L., & Eriksen, M. (2011). Relational leadership. Human Relations, 64, 1425–1449.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Denis, J. L., Lamothe, L., & Langley, A. (2001). The dynamics of collective leadership and strategic change in pluralistic organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 809–837.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Economist. (2000). Editorial: Change management: An inside job. The Economist, 15, 61.
   Google Scholar
• Fishkin, J. (2009). When the people speak: Deliberative democracy and public consultation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Forbrig, J. (Ed.). (2005). Revisiting youth political participation: Challenges for research and democratic practice in Europe. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
   Google Scholar
• Gell-Mann, M. (1995). What is complexity? Remarks on simplicity and complexity by the Nobel Prize-winning author of The Quark and the Jaguar. Complexity, 1, 16–19.
   Google Scholar
• Grint, K. (2005). Problems, problems, problems: The social construction of leadership. Human Relations, 58, 1467–1493.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gustavsen, B. (2001). Theory and practice: The mediating discourse. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), Handbook of action research: Participative inquiry and practice (pp. 17–26). London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. (2004). Why deliberative democracy? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Habermas, J. (1985). Reason and the rationalization of society (The Theory of Communicative Action, Vol. 1). Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Herne, K., & Setälä, M. (2005). Deliberatiivisen demokratian ihanteet ja kokeilut [The ideals and tests of deliberative democracy]. Politiikka, 47, 175–188.
   Google Scholar
• Hosking, D. M. (2011). Telling tales of relation: Appreciating relational constructionism. Organization Studies, 32, 47–65.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ICCS. (2010). ICCS 2009 International Report: Civic knowledge, attitudes, and engagement among lower secondary school students in 38 countries. Amsterdam: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement.
   Google Scholar
• Isaacs, W. (1999). Dialogue and the art of thinking together. New York, NY: Doubleday.
   Google Scholar
• Jarvis, C., Gulati, A., McCririck, V., & Simpson, P. (2013). Leadership matters: Tensions in evaluating leadership development. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 15, 27–45.
   Google Scholar
• Junco, R., Heiberger, G., & Loken, E. (2010). The effect of Twitter on college student engagement and grades. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27, 119–132.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalliola, S., Nakari, R., & Pesonen, I. (2006). Learning to make changes: Democratic dialogue in action. Journal of Workplace Learning, 18, 464–477.
   Google Scholar
• Kanter, R. M. (1983). The change masters: Innovation and productivity in American corporations. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
   Google Scholar
• Kashefi, E., & Mort, M. (2004). Grounded citizens’ juries: A tool for health activism? Health Expectations, 7, 290–302.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kilduff, M., & Dougherty, D. (2000). Change and development in a pluralistic world: The view from the classics. Academy of Management Journal, 25, 777–782.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kunttu, K., & Huttunen, T. (2009). Student health survey 2008: A national survey among Finnish university students. Helsinki: YTHS tutkimuksia 45.
   Google Scholar
• Küpers, W. D. (2013). Embodied inter-practices of leadership—Phenomenological perspectives on relational and responsive leading and following. Leadership, 9, 335–357.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ladkin, D. (2010). Rethinking leadership: A new look at old leadership questions. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Lewin, K. (1997). Resolving social conflicts and field theory in social science. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Mansbridge, J., Bohman, J., Chambers, S., Christiano, T., Fung, A., Parkinson, J., … Warren, M. E. (2013). A systemic approach to deliberative democracy. In J. Parkinson & J. Mansbridge (Eds.), Deliberative systems (pp. 1–27). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mansbridge, J., Bohman, J., Chambers, S., Estlund, D., Follesdal, A., Fung, A., … Marti, J. L. (2009). The place of self-interest and the role of power in deliberative democracy. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 18, 64–100.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• March, J. G. (1996). Continuity and change in theories of organizational change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 278–287.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mills, J. H., Kelly, D., & Mills, A. J. (2008). Understanding organizational change. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Mintrom, M. (2003). Market organizations and deliberative democracy: Choice and voice in public service delivery. Administration & Society, 35, 52–81.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitleton-Kelly, E. (2003). Ten principles of complexity and enabling infrastructures. In E. Mitleton-Kelly (Ed.), Complex systems and evolutionary perspectives of organisations: The application of complexity theory to organisations (pp. 23–50). Emerald: Bingley.
   Google Scholar
• Nabatchi, T. (2010). Addressing the citizenship and democratic deficits: The potential of deliberative democracy for public administration. The American Review of Public Administration, 40, 376–399.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neblo, M., Esterling, K., Kennedy, R., Lazer, D., & Sokhey, A. (2010). Who wants to deliberate – and why? American Political Science Review, 104, 566–583.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Neill, A., & Jabri, M. (2007). Legitimation and group conversational practices: Implications for managing change. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 28, 571–588.
   Google Scholar
• Van Oosten, E. B. (2006). Intentional change theory at the organizational level: A case study. Journal of Management Development, 25, 707–717.
   Google Scholar
• Pekonen, K. (2011). Puhe eduskunnassa [The speech in parliament]. Tampere: Vastapaino.
   Google Scholar
• Pettigrew, A. M., Woodman, R. W., & Cameron, K. S. (2001). Studying organizational change and development: Challenges for future research. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 697–713.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Powley, E. H., Fry, R. E., Barrett, F. J., & Bright, D. S. (2004). Dialogic democracy meets command and control: Transformation through the appreciative inquiry summit. Academy of Management Executive, 18, 67–80.
   Google Scholar
• Raelin, J. A. (2012). Dialogue and deliberation as expressions of democratic leadership in participatory organizational change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 25, 7–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raisio, H. (2011). Embracing the wickedness of health care: Essays on reforms, wicked problems, and public deliberation (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Vaasa, Finland.
   Google Scholar
• Raisio, H., & Vartiainen, P. (2011). Osallistumisen illuusiosta aitoon vaikuttamiseen: Deliberatiivisesta demokratiasta ja kansalaisraatien toteuttamisesta Suomessa [From an illusion of participation to genuine citizen influence: About deliberative democracy and implementation of citizens’ juries in Finland]. Helsinki: Association of Finnish Local and Regional Authorities.
   Google Scholar
• Richardson, K. A., & Cilliers, P. (2001). What is complexity science? A view from different directions. Emergence, 3, 5–23.
   Google Scholar
• Rittel, H. W., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4, 155–169.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ropo, A. (2011). Johtajuuden ilmiö [The leadership phenomena]. In T. Virtanen, P. Ahoneni, A. Syväjärvi, P. Vartiainen, J. Vartola, & J. Vuori (Eds.), Suomalainen hallinnon tutkimus: Mistä, mitä, minne [Finnish administrative research] (pp. 191–217). Tampere: Tampere University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Senge, P. (2003). Taking personal change seriously: The impact of organizational learning on management practice. Academy of Management Executive, 17, 47–51.
   Google Scholar
• Skordoulis, R., & Dawson, P. (2007). Reflective decisions: The use of Socratic dialogue in managing organizational change. Management Decision, 45, 991–1007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stacey, R. D. (1993). The chaos frontier: Creative strategic control for business. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
   Google Scholar
• Stacey, R. D. (2010). Complexity and organizational reality: Uncertainty and the need to rethink management after the collapse of investment capitalism. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Suomen Kuvalehti. (2012). Kuinka yliopistouudistuksesta tuli kaikkien aikojen Fiasko [How did the university reform become the all-time fiasco]? Suomen Kuvalehti, 43/2012. Retrieved from http://suomenkuvalehti.fi/jutut/kotimaa/kuinka-yliopistouudistuksesta-tuli-kaikkien-aikojen-fiasko
   Google Scholar
• The Jefferson Center. (2004). Citizens jury handbook. Minneapolis, MN: The Jefferson Center.
   Google Scholar
• The Jefferson Center. (2013). The Jefferson Center’s journey. Retrieved from http://jefferson-center.org/the-jefferson-centers-journey/
   Google Scholar
• Uhl-Bien, M. (2006). Relational leadership theory: Exploring the social processes of leadership and organizing. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 654–676.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vartiainen, P. (2005). Wicked health care issues: An analysis of Finnish and Swedish health care reforms. Advances in health care management. International Health Care Management, 5, 163–186.
   Google Scholar
• Willms, J. D. (2000). Student engagement at school: A sense of belonging and participation results from PISA 2000. Paris: OECD.
   Google Scholar
• Yukl, G. A. (1981). Leadership in organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Zaheeruddin, A., & Klein, H. (2009). Open and free deliberation: A prerequisite for positive design. Information and Organization, 19, 186–197.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zimmerman, B., Lindberg, C., & Plsek, P. (2001). Edgeware: Complexity science for health care leaders. Irving, TX: VHA Publishing.
   Google Scholar