![undermine journal undermine journal](http://www.thegoldqueen.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/tuj1-300x240.png)
F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2: 157–182.
![undermine journal undermine journal](https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/undermine_gamepedia_en/images/9/9b/Journal_hexes.png)
Beyond Lewin: Toward a temporal approximation of organization development and change. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 42: 182–206. On the receiving end: Sensemaking, emotion, and assessments of an organizational change initiated by others. Considering planned change anew: Stretching large group interventions strategically, emotionally, and meaningfully. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47: 644–675. The ripple effect: Emotional contagion and its influence on group behavior. Academy of Management Discoveries, 4: 1–10. AMD: Clarifying what we are about and where we are going. Academy of Management Journal, 47: 523–549. Organizational restructuring and middle manager sensemaking. Senior managers’ sensemaking and responses to strategic change. Academy of Management Review, 32: 1265–1281. Constructing mystery: Empirical matters in theory development. We reveal the limitations of examining organizational change in terms of isolated initiatives and call for research that considers the dynamics between change initiatives. Our process model reveals inconsistency judgments as a previously overlooked socio-psychological mechanism underpinning interferences between change initiatives. Top managers’ responses fueled the sharing of inconsistency judgments and emotions that fed into a recursive process that, over time, provoked emotional uncertainty, elicited moral emotions, and eroded emotional attachment to change. The interfering initiatives provoked inconsistency judgments (cognitive, normative, and procedural) and the emergence of collective emotions that undermined change performance. Our longitudinal real-time study of a multinational technology firm examines how two corporate change initiatives interfered with each other. Organizational change research has concentrated on the challenges of implementing isolated changes, paying little attention to the interactions among concurrent change initiatives.