American Journal of Industrial and Business Management, 2012, 2, 145-152
http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ajibm.2012.24019 Published Online October 2012 (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/ajibm)
145
Adaptive Collaboration Model for Organizational Change
Mohammad Essawi, Oleg Tilchin
Department of Computer Sciences, Al-Qasemi Academic College of Education, Baqa El-Gharbieh, Israel.
Received April 25th, 2012; revised May 25th, 2012; accepted June 25th, 2012
ABSTRACT
In order to survive and develop effectively in an increasingly dynamic and uncertain environment, an organization
should have the capacity for continuous and adaptive changes. Change can only occur through the collaboration of par-
ticipants of this process. Collaboration should be adaptive. Adaptability of collaboration is expressed by its adjustment
to dynamic organizational changes. Adaptive collaboration (AC) is an organizational capacity needed for coping with
adaptive changes. The goal of the developed model is to shape AC, which provides stimulation and facilitation of col-
laborative interaction so as to face the challenges of conducting adaptive changes. The suggested DOCA (Determining,
Organizing, Creating, Assigning) model includes these components: Determining an infrastructure of AC; Organizing
AC; Creating AC groups; Assigning collaborative group members to perform the tasks required to conduct adaptive
changes. Determining AC infrastructure consists in building an adaptive organizational structure, and forming dynamic
change and task structures. Organizing AC consists in defining the conditions that provide creation of suitable AC
groups. Creating AC groups is meant to encourage facilitation of adaptive collaboration. Assigning the group members
tasks allows stimulation for collaborative interactions.
Keywords: Organizational Change; Adaptive Collaboration Model
1. Introduction
In order to survive and develop effectively in an increas-
ingly dynamic and uncertain environment, an organiza-
tion should conduct continuously complex adaptive changes
[1-4]. For this, it is necessary first to develop the strategy
of adaptive changes [5-8].
Development of the strategy takes into account the
dynamics of the outside environment, and its specific in-
fluence on organizational activity. Detailed elaboration
of organizational development strategy involves: Deter-
mining the direction of organizational changes, which
should take into consideration the characteristics of a
change process, strengths and weaknesses of the organi-
zation, and threats and opportunities of the outside envi-
ronment; Setting a multitude of adaptive changes based
on evaluation their importance is determined by the
measure of their influence on organizational activity to-
wards adaptation to a changing outside environment. The
most important change has the most influence on the
activity of an organization; Building a structure of adap-
tive changes by establishing logical interdependences
among adaptive changes.
The complexity of adaptive changes in an organization
causes the need for sharing accountability among nu-
merous participants of change [9-12]. The change par-
ticipants include a leader of the organization (a top man-
ager), a change management team, and staff. They must
cope with current and forecasted changes and provide
breakthrough development of an organization [13].
Multiplicity of change participants requires the avail-
ability of organizational capacity, providing their effec-
tive relationships through collaboration [14-16]. Col-
laboration should be adaptive [17,18]. Adaptability of
collaboration is expressed by its adjustment to the dy-
namics and specificity of organizational changes. In es-
sence, adaptive collaboration (AC) is the organizational
capacity needed for coping with adaptive changes.
AC requires a suitable infrastructure, and adaptability
of the change participants. It should motivate, facilitate,
and stimulate collaboration among them, and promote
effective management of changes [19]. The infrastructure
of AC involves a structure of the adaptive changes, the
dynamic structure of the changes’ tasks, and a flexible
organizational structure. The organizational and the task
structures are adjusted to the adaptive changes. Adap-
tability of the change participants allows dynamic rela-
tionships among them through mutual adjustment of
personal qualities.
The qualities of a change participant involve knowl-
edge, skills, and competencies. A skill is an ability to do
something. There are soft skills and hard (professional)
skills. Soft skills are personal traits, habits, and attitudes

Adaptive Collaboration Model for Organizational Change 146
that characterize relationships with other people [20].
Professional skills, for example, are innovative openness
(use and development of innovation). A competency is
the ability of a person to achieve a goal by using a skill.
For example, there are emotional intelligence competen-
cies [21] and problem solving competencies (analytical
and creative).
Adaptability of the change participants is expressed by
the completeness, flexibility, and efficiency in the use of
these qualities. The aggregate of the qualities used for
coping with changes characterizes the completeness of
the use of qualities. Flexibility in the use of these qua-
lities characterizes the adjustment of qualities to organ-
izational changes. Efficiency in the use of qualities is
evaluated by the measure of accomplishment of organ-
izational changes by the set deadline.
Building AC (providing adaptive use of the change
participants’ qualities) is aimed at creating a dynamic
change management team, forming managed adaptive
collaborative groups of employees to conduct changes,
and assigning the members of the collaborative group
for the tasks realizing the change. Adaptability of the
collaborative group is expressed by building the most
adjusted group for conducting a change. The AC group
is managed by a member of the change management
team.
The goal of this paper is to present an AC model for
conducing adaptive organizational changes. The model
shapes the process of building AC and provides faci-
litation and stimulation of collaborative interactions. It
allows adaptive changes required in an organization to be
conducted effectively.
2. Related Research
Complex adaptive change in an organization is a dyna-
mic iterative process for which change and uncertainty
are assumed to be a natural state [4,9,22,23]. The com-
plexity of this process drives the need for collaboration
among change participants [4]. Hence, effectiveness of
adaptive change can be attained in many respects owing
to productive collaboration. The approaches, methods,
models, and tools used in sustaining collaboration for
conducting adaptive change in an organization are ex-
amined here.
Harris & Beyerlein [24] introduce the concept of a
collaborative work system (CWS) which engenders in-
tra-teams’ and inter-teams’ collaborative interactions. A
team level and organizational level of the CWS are
considered. The team level of CWS is represented by a
collaborative group who performs interdependent tasks.
The organizational level is represented by a set of in-
terdependent teams realizing inter-team collaborative
interactions. The authors do not reveal the potential use
of CWS for conducting adaptive changes in an organiza-
tion.
Chrislip [15] contends that a leader should facilitate
collaborative interactions among change participants. The
methods and tools which can help the leader to facilitate
the collaborative interactions are not concretized.
According to Heifetz, Linsky, Grashow [3], adaptation
relies on diversity, which promotes receiving value from
difference. Therefore, leading diversity provides adap-
tability. Nevertheless, a mechanism of leading diversity
is not evident.
Rubin [25] suggests creating the structure and climate
of an environment that supports the collaborative rela-
tionship as a result of building a heterogeneous team.
The author does not consider the possibility of creating
an adaptive structure and climate of an environment that
engenders adaptive collaboration. Furthermore, the con-
ditions of building a heterogeneous team (while taking
into account the qualities of change participants) are not
determined by him.
Edmondson & Watkins [26] developed a dynamic
model of organizing teamwork. According to the model,
composition of a team is stable, and there are situations
in which the interests of team members diverge. Re-
searchers present a leader process to mitigate the damage
from such situations. The authors do not examine the
possibility of determining team composition based on ex-
ploration of collaborative participants’ qualities, which
are directed towards providing effective mutual adjust-
ment of team members. As a result of this, adaptation to
different situations can not be attained.
Offner A., et al., [27] developed a tool to foster AC
through the use of models based on theories of organiza-
tional psychology. The tool can be used to assess and
influence individual behavior and group performance.
The authors do not propose an AC model aimed at build-
ing a group.
There are several works devoted to the development of
methods and tools of AC for different knowledge do-
mains [17,18,28,29].
The analysis of publications above shows that no com-
plex approach exists that provides effective AC during
organizational change. Development of the approach in-
volves creating productive models and methods of build-
ing and realizing the AC.
3. The Model of Building Adaptive
Collaboration
Concepts, principles, and methods of conducting adap-
tive changes [3,4] create the need for adaptive collabora-
tion. Such work requires coordinated, full, and flexible
use of qualities of a top manager of an organization, a
change management team, and a staff conducting changes.

Adaptive Collaboration Model for Organizational Change 147
structure of changes expresses interdependence of the
changes. This structure may be represented by graph G
(C, E) of dependencies between changes, where C is a set
of changes,


,
ij
cc E

, if conducting preceding change
ci is required prior to realizing change cj.
AC is adjusted to the dynamics of required organiza-
tional changes. The goal of creating the AC model is to
shape the process of adaptive collaboration, promoting
stimulation and facilitation of collaborative interaction so
as to effectively face the challenges of conducting change.
Dynamics of the model correspond to the dynamics of this
process.
Every change is conducted by performing suitable in-
terrelated tasks. Hence, a task structure corresponds to a
change. The task structure may be represented by graph
D(Z, R) dependencies between tasks, where Z is a set of
tasks,


,
ij
zz R

, if performance of task zi precedes
performance of task zi. The set Z of tasks is put in order
according to the ordinal function of the graph [30]. As a
result, graph D has several levels. The tasks of the first
level do not have preceding tasks. The tasks of the last
level do not have subsequent tasks.
Development of the model includes elaboration and
integration of the following model components: Deter-
mining an infrastructure of AC; Organizing AC; Creating
adaptive collaborative groups; Assigning collaborative
group members to perform the tasks required to conduct
adaptive changes. The DOCA (Determining, Organizing,
Creating, Assigning) model of adaptive collaboration is
illustrated by Figure 1.
Example 1:
3.1. Determining AC Infrastructure Two-level structure of tasks is represented by Figure
2.
The objective of determining an AC infrastructure is to
create a favorable environment furthering AC. The AC
infrastructure includes: a structure for changes, a struc-
ture of the tasks needed to perform a change, and an
adaptive organizational structure. Determining AC infra-
structure consists in forming dynamic change and task
structures, and building an adaptive organizational struc-
ture.
As appears in the above, the aggregate of task struc-
tures corresponds to the structure of changes. The con-
nections between the tasks from different task structures
are caused by the order of conducting the changes. There-
fore, dynamics of task structures are engendered by dy-
namics of the structure of changes.
3.1.2. Building an Adaptive Organizational Structure
3.1.1. Formin g Dynamic Change and Task Structures A functional organizational structure (FOS) should pro-
vide the opportunity to making essential changes in an
Required organization changes are interdependent. A
Figure 1. The DOCA model of adaptive collaboration.

Adaptive Collaboration Model for Organizational Change 148
Figure 2. Two-le vel task structure for conducting a change.
organization. FOS involves a top manager, managers of
subdivisions, and a staff for every subdivision. An orga-
nization can cope with current and future changes only
by coordinating actions and the collaboration of change
participants. However, in most cases FOS is a hard hier-
archic structure. Such structure prevents collaboration
when conducting changes.
Consequently, it is necessary to form an adaptive struc-
ture for conducting changes—change organizational struc-
ture (COS). Adaptability of this structure to required or-
ganizational changes is provided by shifts in the number
and composition of the conducting change participants.
COS involves a top manager, a change management team,
and groups of employees for conducting changes. A change
management team formed by the top manager contains
the managers selected from different subdivisions. A
change manager selected from a change management
team by a top manager builds a group of employees for
conducting some change. The members of a group are
selected from different subdivisions. The aggregate of
the employees realizing all the changes constitutes the
staff for conducting changes.
Integration of FOS and COS is needed so as to coor-
dinate management of changes with management of cur-
rent work in an organization. The adaptive organizational
structure is formed as a result of the integration. Avail-
ability of the managers and the employees from different
subdivisions in the change groups indirectly defines
fullness of changes produced in an organization. For
example, if a multitude of change participants does not
include some subdivision of managers or the employees,
the produced changes are not complete.
The proposed adaptive organizational structure clari-
fies the participants’ collaboration when conducting a
change. The collaboration participants include a top ma-
nager, members of the management team, and employees
occupied with conducting a change. Consequently, the
following forms of collaborative interactions can be de-
fined: Between a top manager and change managers;
among the change managers; between the change man-
agers and the employees; among the employees.
3.2. Organizing AC
The objective of organizing AC is to define the condi-
tions providing creation of AC groups and promoting
facilitation and stimulation of collaborative interactions.
AC among participants conducting changes is organiza-
tional capacity allowing to face complex change chal-
lenges. According to the proposed change organizational
structure, the set of interacting dynamic groups of em-
ployees should be created in order to cope with required
interdependent changes in an organization.
Adaptive intra- and inter-group collaboration among
the change participants is based on these principles: Com-
pleteness and flexibility of use of qualities of collabora-
tive participants that provides the chance to cope effec-
tively with adaptive changes, and a diversity of qualities
of collaborative participants that facilitates the adjust-
ment to required changes. These principles allow to de-
fine conditions for building AC groups able to cope with
the required changes.
A necessary condition for coping with a change is:
A) The multitude of qualities of the minimal quantity
of the group members unified with qualities of the group
manager should be equal to or exceed change-relevant
qualities (the multitude of the qualities necessary to cope
with a change).
The conditions aimed at building a managed dynamic
group are:
B) Combined qualities of a group manager and group
members should differ as little as possible from change-
relevant qualities. It empowers the collaborative group to
cope with a change without assistance.
C) Maximal mutual supplementation of qualities of the
group members. It provides heterogeneity of a collabor-
ative group.
D) Interpersonal compatibility. It provides an oppor-
tunity for effective collaborative work owing to the avail-
ability of consistent personal qualities.
E) Qualities of the group manager must differ as much
as possible from the combined qualities of the group mem-
bers. During collaboration it provides an extension of the
manager’s strengths by compensating for his lacking qua-
lities with the qualities of group members.
The defined conditions provide synergy due to the di-
versity of qualities of the group members, stimulation of
collaboration, and facilitation of two-way collaborative
interactions [31]. Consequently, these conditions may
serve as a means of guiding the process of building adap-
tive collaborative groups.
3.3. Creating Adaptive Collaborative Groups
The objective of creating AC groups to conduct change is
to facilitate adaptive collaboration. The aforementioned
conditions of AC empower to create a collaborative

Adaptive Collaboration Model for Organizational Change 149
group satisfying this objective. Creating AC groups is
realized by the following steps:
Step 1. Selection of a group manager from a team
of the change managers
For that determination of diversity measure between
the change manager’s qualities and the change-relevant
qualities is needed.
A diversity measure is determined according to the
formula:

 



 


,
,
iji j
ij ij
qm qcqmqc
qm qcqm qc
 
 
(1)
where

i
qm

—qualities of change manager mi.
j
qc —change cj-relevant qualities.
A change manager is selected according to condition B.
The diversity measure for the selected change manager
should be minimal. If for some change managers the di-
versity measures are minimal and equal, then any change
manager can be selected.
Example 2
Change-relevant qualities are q(cj) = <q1, q2, q3, q4, q5,
q6, q7, q8, q9>. Qualities of change managers m1, m2, m3
from a change manager team are q(m1) = <q1, q2>, q(m2) =
<q4, q12>, q(m3) = <q10, q11>.
The diversity measures between qualities of change
managers m1, m2, m3 and change-relevant qualities deter-
mined by formula (1) are 7, 9, and 11, accordingly. Hence,
according to condition B, change manager m1 is selected
for management of a group which would conduct change
cj. Step 2. Adaptation of change-relevant qualities
Change-relevant qualities are adapted by taking into
account the qualities of the selected group manager.
Adapted change-relevant qualities

j
qc
 are deter-
mined as
 

j
ji
qcqc qm
.
Example 3
Adapted change-relevant qualities after choice of
group manager m1 (Example 2) are

123456789 12
3456789
,,,,,,,,\ ,
,,,,,, .
j
q cqqqqqqqqqqq
qq qq qqq


Step 3. Combined analysis of the employees’ quali-
ties
Mutual supplementation of the employees’ qualities,
interpersonal compatibility of individual qualities, diver-
sities between qualities of the employees and the change-
relevant qualities are analyzed. Mutual supplementation
of the employees’ qualities is characterized by the sup-
plementation measure determined by formula:
 

 
,
iji j
s
qe qeqeqe, (2)
where q(ei), q(ej)—qualities of employee ei and ej, ac-
cordingly.
If the supplementation measure


 
,
ij
s
qe qe is
equal zero, then mutual supplementation of the qualities
of employees ei and ej is maximal. If the measure ex-
ceeds zero, then mutual supplementation of the employee
qualities is reduced.
Employee ei is compatible with employee ej, if their
personal qualities are completely consistent. Diversity
measures between qualities of the employees and the
adapted change-relevant qualities can be determined also
by formula (1). While doing so, qualities of the employees
are compared with adapted change-relevant qualities.
Results of the analysis are presented in a matrix (Fig-
ure 3). Row and column names of the matrix correspond
to qualities of the employees which are the candidates in
a collaborative group for conducting a change. Diagonal
cells of the matrix contain diversity measures between
qualities of employees and adapted change-relevant
qualities. Each cell from other cells of the matrix is di-
vided into two parts. The upper part of a cell contains the
sign of complete interpersonal compatibility (+) or sign
incomplete interpersonal compatibility (−). Under part of
a cell contains the sign of maximal mutual supplementa-
tion of the qualities of employees (∞) or the determined
supplementation measure.
Example 4
Qualities of the employees—the candidates into a col-
laborative group for conducting a change cj are q(e1) =
<q3, q4>, q(e2) = <q5, q6>, q(e3) = <q7, q8, q9>, q(e4) = <q6,
q7>, q(e5) = <q4, q8>, q(e6) =<q5, q8, q9>. Results of
analysis of the employees’ qualities are presented in a
matrix (Figure 3).
Step 4. Building a suitable collaborative group
First, a set of possible collaborative groups for conduct-
ing a change and their composition satisfying condi-
q(e1) q(e2) q(e3) q(e4) q(e5) q(e6)
+ + _ _ +
q(e1) 5
∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞
+ + _ +
q(e2) 5
∞ 1 1 ∞
+ _ _
q(e3) 4
2 1 1
_ _
q(e4) 5
2 ∞
_
q(e5) 5
1
q(e6) 4
Figure 3. A matrix presenting results of combined analysis
of employee qualities.

Adaptive Collaboration Model for Organizational Change 150
tion A is determined as a result of examination of the
qualities of the candidates to a collaborative group, uni-
fication of the candidate qualities, and a comparison of
the joint qualities with the multitude of the adapted
change-relevant qualities.
The groups are then examined by correspondence to
condition B. According to this condition, minimal dif-
ference between joint qualities of group members and the
adapted change-relevant qualities should be observed. In
other words, the sum of diversity measures determined as
a result of comparison between the group members’
qualities and the adapted change-relevant qualities by
formula (1) should be minimal. If a group doesn’t satisfy
condition B (sum of diversity measures isn’t minimal in
comparison with other groups), then it is removed from
the set of possible collaborative groups.
At last, the groups are compared relative to mutual
supplementation and interpersonal compatibility of indi-
vidual qualities of the group members according to con-
ditions C and D. As a result of comparison, the group
with complete interpersonal compatibility of group mem-
bers and maximal mutual supplementation of their quali-
ties is selected from the set of possible collaborative
groups.
Example 5
The possible collaborative groups satisfying condition
A, and determined based on data from Example 4 are Gr1 =
<e1, e2, e3>, Gr2 = <e2, e3, e5>, Gr3 = <e1, e4, e6>. The
multitude of qualities received as a result of unification
of the group members’ qualities is equal to adapted change-
relevant qualities (Example 3) for each from these groups.
Quantity of group members is minimal. Minimal sum of
diversity measures determined based on data included in
diagonal cells of the matrix (Figure 3) is the same for
these groups and equal to 14.
Comparison of the group relative to mutual supple-
mentation and interpersonal compatibility of the individ-
ual qualities of the group members realized based on data
from the matrix (Figure 3) allows the conclusion that: all
members of the group Gr1 have complete interpersonal
compatibility and maximal mutual supplementation of
their qualities; the members of the group Gr2 have in-
complete interpersonal compatibility and maximal mu-
tual supplementation of their qualities; all members of
the group Gr3 have maximal mutual supplementation of
their qualities but complete interpersonal compatibility is
only between the group members e1 and e6.
Consequently, the collaborative group Gr1 is the most
suitable for conducting organizational change cj.
3.4. Assigning Collaborative Group Members for
Performing Tasks
The objective of assigning the group members for per-
forming tasks is to stimulate collaboration by creation a
maximal number of two-way collaborative interactions
among the group members. A two-way collaborative
interaction is a result of interdependence of the group
members relative to their qualities.
Each change is conducted by performing suitable in-
terrelated tasks. The task structure is presented by dif-
ferent levels (Figure 2). A level contains unrelated tasks.
The group members are assigned to the tasks sequentially:
from the beginning to the tasks of first level of task
structure, then to the tasks of second level, and so forth.
Assigning the group members to the tasks is done as
follows:
1) Calculation of the diversity measures





,
ij
qe qz  between the qualities q(ei) of the col-
laborative group members and task-relevant qualities q(zj)
is done by used of formula (1). The task-relevant quali-
ties are the qualities necessary to perform a task. The
results of calculations may be shown in a table. Row
names would correspond to task-relevant qualities. Col-
umn names would correspond to qualities of group mem-
bers. At the intersection of a row and a column would be
a measure of diversity between the task-relevant qualities
and the group member qualities.
2) Assignment of the group members to perform the
tasks of some level L of the task structure according to
conditions:
The group member qualities should differ as little
as possible from the task-relevant qualities. It provides
maximal ability of a group member to complete the task.
If a group member satisfying this condition is missing,
then several group members are assigned to the task ac-
cording to this condition.
Interdependency of the group members’ qualities.
It promotes two-way interactions among group members
performing various tasks.
Assignment of the group members to the tasks is real-
ized with the help of aforementioned table containing the
diversities between the qualities of the collaborative group
members and task-relevant qualities. The rows corre-
sponding to the tasks of some task structure level and
columns corresponding to the group members are se-
lected from table. In each of the chosen rows a minimal
value is searched. The found values are compared. The
column corresponding to the least value from these val-
ues determines a suitable group member for assigning to
the task.
If the rows contain minimal and equal values in the
same column, then the group member corresponding to
the column can be assigned to perform either task from
the tasks’ corresponding rows. If the rows contain mini-
mal and equal values in the different columns, then as-
signment of the group members to the tasks correspond-
ing to the rows is equivalent. After assigning a group

Adaptive Collaboration Model for Organizational Change 151
member to perform a task, the corresponding rows and
the columns of the table are deleted.
Example 6
Task-relevant qualities of the tasks performed during
conducting a change (Example 1) are
q(z1) = <q3, q5>, q(z2) = <q1, q4, q6>, q(z3) = <q3, q5,
q7>, q(z4) = <q4, q8>, q(z5) = < q2, q6, q7, q9>. The aggre-
gate of task-relevant qualities is equal to the change-rele-
vant qualities (Example 3). The results of the calculated
measures of diversity between the qualities of the col-
laborative group members (Example 4) and task-relevant
qualities are shown in Table 1.
The rows of Table1 corresponding to the tasks z1 and
z2 of first task structure level (Figure 2) and columns
corresponding to members e1, e2, and e3 of collaborative
group Gr1 (Example 5) are selected from Table 1. In
these rows minimal values are searched. The found val-
ues are 2 and 3, accordingly. The least value from these
values reveals the group member e1 who should be as-
signed to perform the task z1. Then, the group member e2
is assigned to perform the task z2.
Analogously, the minimal values in the rows of Table
1 corresponding to the tasks z3, z4, and z5 of the second
task structure level are 3, 2, and 3, accordingly. The least
value from these values detects the group manager e1who
is assigned to perform the task z4. Assignments of the
group members e2 and e3 to perform the tasks z3 and z5
are equivalent since the rows corresponding to the tasks
contain the same minimal value. The group members e2
and e3 are assigned to perform the tasks z3 and z5, ac-
cordingly.
Proposed assignment of the group members e1 and e2
to perform the tasks z1 and z2, accordingly, provides
two-way collaborative interaction between them. It
stimulates collaboration as a result of created interde-
pendence of the group members relative to their qualities.
The interaction creates the need to compensate for the
lack of the group members’ qualities required for suc-
cessful performance of the tasks. The group members e1
and e2 have the lack of qualities q5 and q4, accordingly.
Furthermore, collaboration of group member e2 with
change manager holding quality q1 allows to compensate
Table 1. The diversities betw een task-relevant qualities and
the group members’ qualities.
q(e1)
= <q3, q4>
q(e2)
= <q5, q6>
q(e3)
= <q7, q8, q9>
q(z1) = <q3, q5> 2 2 5
q(z2) = <q1, q4, q6> 3 3 6
q(z3) = <q3, q5, q7> 3 3 4
q(z4) = <q4, q8> 2 4 3
q(z5) = <q2, q6, q7, q9> 6 4 3
additionally for the lack of his qualities.
4. Conclusions
The suggested DOCA (Determining, Organizing, Creat-
ing, Assigning) model shapes adaptive collaboration and
provides stimulation and facilitation of collaborative in-
teraction so as to face the challenges of coping with
adaptive changes. Adaptability of collaboration is ex-
pressed by its adjustment to dynamics of organizational
changes. The model includes the components: Deter-
mining an infrastructure of AC; Organizing AC; Creating
AC groups; Assigning collaborative group members to
perform the tasks required to conduct adaptive changes.
Determining an infrastructure of AC consists in creat-
ing a dynamic change structure, forming a structure of
the tasks conducting change, and forming an adaptive
organizational structure which is adjusted to the dynam-
ics of organizational changes. It is provided by shifts in
the number and composition of change participants.
Organizing AC consists in defining the conditions
guiding process of building self-sufficient AC groups.
The conditions require providing interpersonal compa-
tibility and interdependency of participants in a collabo-
ration.
Creating AC groups is based on combined analysis of
data characterizing interpersonal compatibility, mutual
supplementation of employee qualities, and measures of
diversity between qualities of employees and adapted
change-relevant qualities. It allows to facilitate AC.
Assigning the group members to the tasks is done by
taking into account conditions of assignment using re-
sults of calculation of the measures of diversity between
the qualities of the collaborative group members and the
task-relevant qualities. It allows stimulation in two-way
collaborative interactions.
The model may serve as a constructive basis for creat-
ing a tool that supports AC.
REFERENCES
[1] W. W. Burke, “Organization Change: Theory and Prac-
tice,” 2nd Edition, Sage Publications Inc., New York,
2007.
[2] T. Cummings and C. Worley, “Organization Development &
Change,” South-Western Cengage Learning, Mason, 2009.
[3] R. A. Heifetz and M. G. A. Linsky, “The Practice of Adap-
tive Leadership: Tools and Tactics for Changing Your
Organization and the World,” Harvard Business Press,
Harvard, 2009.
[4] N. Obolensky, “Complex Adaptive Leadership,” Gower
Pub Co., Aldershot, 2010.
[5] M. Beitler, “Strategic Organizational Change,” 2nd Edi-
tion, Practitioner Press International, Greensboro, 2006.
[6] J. P. Kotter and L. A. Schlesinger, “Choosing Strategies

Adaptive Collaboration Model for Organizational Change 152
for Change,” Harvard Business Review, Vol. 86, No. 7-8,
2008, pp.130-139.
[7] D. L. Anderson, “Organization Development: The Pro-
cess of Leading Organizational Change,” 2nd Edition,
Sage Publications Inc., New York, 2011.
[8] M. E. Porter, “What is Strategy, in ‘On Strategy’,” The
Harvard Business Review, Boston, 2011.
[9] E. Olson and G. Eoyang, “Facilitating Organization Change:
Lessons from Complexity Science,” Pfeiffer, San Fran-
cisco, 2001.
[10] H. J. Evans, “Winning with Accountability: The Secret Lan-
guage of High-Performing Organizations,” Corner Stone
Leadership Institute, Dallas, 2008.
[11] C. S. T. Hickman and R. Connors, “The Oz Principle: Get-
ting Results through Individual and Organizational Ac-
countability,” Portfolio Trade, New York, 2010.
[12] R. Connors and T. Smith, “Change the Culture Change
the Game,” Penguin Group Inc., New York, 2011.
[13] R. Heifetz and D. Laurie, “The Work of Leadership,” The
Harvard Business Review, Boston, 2001, pp. 5-14.
[14] D. Tapscott and A. D. Williams, “Wikinomics: How Mass
Collaboration Changes Everything,” Atlantic Books, 2006.
[15] D. Chrislip, “The Collaborative Leadership Fieldbook—
A Guide for Citizens and Civic Leaders,” Josey Bass, San
Francisco, 2002.
[16] R. M. Kanter, “Challenge of Organizational Change: How
Companies Experience It and Leaders Guide It,” Free
Press, New York, 2003.
[17] S. Demetriadis and A. Karakostas, “Adaptive Collabora-
tion Scripting: A Conceptual Framework and a Design
Case Study,” Proceedings of International Conference on
Complex, Intelligent and Software Intensive Systems,
Barselona, 4-7 March 2008, pp. 487-492.
[18] J. Yu, et al., “Adaptive Collaboration in an Ever-Chang-
ing Environment,” Journal Multiagent and Grid Systems,
Vol. 4, No. 2, 2008, pp. 125-140.
[19] J. P. Kotter, “Leading Change: Why Transformation Ef-
forts Fail,” In: On Change Management, Harvard Busi-
ness Review, Boston, 2011.
[20] J. Jaworski and O. Scharmer, “Leadership in the New Eco-
nomy: Seeing and Actualizing Emerging Futures,” Work-
ing Paper, Society for Organizational Learning, 2000.
[21] D. Goleman, A. McKee and R. E. Boyatzis, “Primal Lead-
ership: Realizing the Power of Emotional Intelligence,”
Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation, Boston,
2002.
http://www.sol-ne.org/static/research/RedBook4-10Final.
pdf
[22] S. A. Malone, “Creating Organizational Capacity for Con-
tinuous and Adaptive Change,” Midwest Academy of Ma-
nagement, 2008.
http://www.midwestacademy.org/Proceedings/2008/paper
s/Malone_38.pdf
[23] C. Mase, “The Adaptive Organization, Shift: At the Fron-
tiers of Consciousness,” Institute of Noetic Sciences
(IONS), 2009.
http://www.cairnconsultants.com/articles/cmase_adaptive.pdf
[24] C. Harris and M. Beyerlein, “Team-Based Organization:
Creating an Environment for Team Success,” In: M. West,
K. Smith and D. Tjosvold, Eds., International Handbook
of Organizational Teamwork and Cooperative Working,
Wiley, West Sussex, 2003.
[25] H. Rubin, “Collaborative Leadership: Developing Effec-
tive Partnerships for Communities and Schools,” Corwin
Press, Thousand Oaks, 2009.
[26] A. Edmondson, M. Roberto and M. Watkins, “A Dynamic
Model of Top Management Team Effectiveness: Manag-
ing Unstructured Task Streams,” The Leadership Quar-
terly, Vol. 14, No. 3, 2002, pp. 297-325.
[27] A. Offner, et al., “Change Management: Developing a Tool
to Foster Adaptive Collaboration,” International Confer-
ence on Collaboration Technologies and Systems, Phila-
delphia, 2011. doi: 10.1109/CTS.2011.5928743
[28] P. Brusilovsky and E. Millan, “User Models for Adaptive
Hypermedia and Adaptive Educational Systems,” In: P.
Brusilovsky, A. Kobza and W. Nejdl, Eds., The Adaptive
Web, Methods and Strategies of Web Personalization,
Springer, New York, 2007.
[29] W. S. Knoll, T. Plumbaum and W. E. De Luca, “Semantic
Group Support System for Context Adaptive Collabora-
tion,” Workshop Context-Adaptive Interaction for Col-
laborative Work, Atlanta, 10 April 2010, pp. 1-5.
http://www.dai-labor.de/fileadmin/files/publications/Sem
antic%20Group%20Support%20System%20for%20Cont
ext%20Adaptive%20Collaboration.pdf
[30] J. M. Harris, J. L. Hirst and M. J. Mossinghoff, “Com-
binatorics and Graph Theory,” 2nd Edition, Springer,
New York, 2008.
doi:10.1007/978-0-387-79711-3
[31] S. Puntambekar, “Analyzing Collaborative Interactions:
Divergence, Shared Understanding and Construction of
Knowledge,” Computers & Education, Vol. 47, No. 3,
2006, pp. 332-351.