Several contributions on change management (Paquier 2005; Charpentier, 2004; Johnson and Scholes, 1997; Autissier and Moutot, 2003) agree on the fact that the force of habit is the main obstacle for change.
Introducing change is disrupting the work habits of the agents, without allowing them to see immediately the value for themselves and the organization. It is here that the styles or strategies of change management can promote a positive perception of the proposed change and attracting the adherence of the agents.
Driving styles change described are oscillating between two poles: the technocratic pole and participatory pole between which the authors develop intermediate styles.
a) Model based on the authority: This is the technocratic model (Paquier 2005) or style "management / coercion" (Johnson and Scholes (1997) this model, is based on the authority of the management teams. to enforce, by agents, draft changes designed unilaterally by these teams.
Based on a vertical mode and down, these models do not value the agents; they are observed especially in situations of grave crisis.
b) Model based on the intervention: Also called "innovative" (Paquier 2005) style, this model is applicable in situations that need for change to involve the intervention of a team that supports the development of the draft change and the development of an approach that enforces while caring for acceptance. In this case, the constraint is mitigated by the gradual nature of the changes.
c) Model based on the information / communication: The proposed change is designed and finalized by the management team then presented to agents in order to make them adhere; developers deploy and care for communication skills and negotiation to convince the base and bring it to the membership.
d) Model based on participation: In this model, the core agents have the opportunity to participate in the same project design changes. This is an endogenous model in which agents have the proposed change in all its stages. Thus, it is thought to take their membership. If this model carries the suffrage of many authors who associate the success of the project, this does not prevent them to specify in some modalities without them would lead to a confusing Blurred.
First, they point