Sensemaking Processes in Organizational Change: Evidencing Sensegiving and Visual Sensemaking in a Multiple Case Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5007/2175-8077.2026.e105081Keywords:
Organizational change, Sensemaking, Industrial CompaniesAbstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to explore the processes of sensemaking and sensegiving in organizational change, focusing on how these processes influence and are influenced by organizational routines and beliefs.
Design/methodology/approach: This study employs a qualitative approach, conducting in-depth case studies across four companies. Data were collected through interviews, observations, and document analysis. An inductive coding process was used to identify recurring themes and patterns, which were then grouped into broader macro-categories.
Findings: The analysis revealed five key categories related to sensegiving: Sensemaker, Sensebreaking, Narratives in Context, Information Design, and Visual Tools. These categories emerged a posteriori and were subsequently aggregated into two macro-categories: Sensegiving and Visual Sensemaking. The study demonstrates how these categories interact to facilitate or hinder organizational change.
Originality/value: This study contributes to the understanding of sensemaking and sensegiving by providing a detailed analysis of how these processes operate in real-world organizational settings. The findings offer practical insights for managers and practitioners involved in implementing organizational change, highlighting the importance of effective sensegiving strategies.
References
Ala-Laurinaho, A., Kurki, A.-L. and Abildgaard, J. S. (2017) ‘Supporting Sensemaking to Promote a Systemic View of organisational Change – Contributions from Activity Theory’, Journal of Change Management, 17(4), pp. 367–387. doi: 10.1080/14697017.2017.1309566.
Aprianto, Y., Kumorotomo, W., and Rajiyem, R. (2023). Leaders’ Sensemaking in Communicating Organizational Change. Studies in Media and Communication, 11(6), 147-157.
Brown, A. D., Colville, I. and Pye, A. (2015) ‘Making Sense of Sensemaking in organisation Studies’, organisation Studies, 36(2), pp. 265–277. doi: 10.1177/0170840614559259.
Cascio, J. (2020) Facing the Age of Chaos, Distinguished Fellow, Institute for the Future. Available at: https://medium.com/@cascio/facing-the-age-of-chaos-b00687b1f51d (Accessed: 12 September 2021).
Castillo, C., Fernandez, V. and Sallan, J. M. (2018) ‘The six emotional stages of organisational change’, Journal of organisational Change Management, 31(3), pp. 468–493. doi: 10.1108/JOCM-05-2016-0084.
Charmaz, K. (2014) Constructing Grounded Theory: a practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage Publications.
Creswell, J. W. (2012) Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. 3rd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Daft, R. L. and Weick, K. E. (1984) ‘Toward a Model of organisations as Interpretation Systems’, The Academy of Management Review, 9(2), p. 284. doi: 10.2307/258441.
de Metz, N., Jansen van Rensburg, M. and Davis, A. (2024), Shared sensemaking during a strategic change process: a non-managerial perspective. Journal of Strategy and Management, ahead-of-print. doi: 10.1108/JSMA-10-2023-0264
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989) ‘Building theories from case study research’, Academy of Management Review, 14(4), p. 532. doi: 10.2307/258557.
Gioia, D. A. and Chittipeddi, K. (1991) ‘Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation’, Strategic Management Journal, 12(6), pp. 433–448. doi: 10.1002/smj.4250120604.
Giuliani, M. (2016) ‘Sensemaking, sensegiving and sensebreaking’, Journal of Intellectual Capital, 17(2), pp. 218–237. doi: 10.1108/JIC-04-2015-0039.
de Godoy, M. F. and Filho, D. R. (2021) ‘Facing the BANI World’, International Journal of Nutrology, 14(02), pp. e33–e33. doi: 10.1055/s-0041-1735848.
Gungadeen, S., Paull, M. and Holloway, D. (2018) ‘Partisanship and organisational change in Mauritius’, Journal of organisational Change Management, 31(3), pp. 656–675. doi: 10.1108/JOCM-06-2016-0117.
Hay, G. J., Parker, S. K. and Luksyte, A. (2021) ‘Making sense of organisational change failure: An identity lens’, Human Relations, 74(2), pp. 180–207. doi: 10.1177/0018726720906211.
Lincoln, Y. S., and Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Lüscher, L. S. and Lewis, M. W. (2008) ‘organisational Change and Managerial Sensemaking: Working Through Paradox’, Academy of Management Journal, 51(2), pp. 221–240. doi: 10.5465/amj.2008.31767217.
Maitlis, S. (2005) ‘The Social Processes of organisational Sensemaking’, The Academy of Management Journal, 48(1), pp. 21–49. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/20159639.
Maitlis, S. and Christianson, M. (2014) ‘Sensemaking in organisations: Taking Stock and Moving Forward’, Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), pp. 57–125. doi: 10.5465/19416520.2014.873177.
Manuti, A., & Giancaspro, M. L. (2021). The meaning of the organization or the organization of meaning? Metaphors as sensemaking tools to understand organizational change management. TPM: Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology in Applied Psychology, 28(1), pp. 113–127. doi: 10.4473/TPM28.1.8
Martin, D., Romero, I. and Wegner, D. (2019) ‘Individual, organisational, and Institutional Determinants of Formal and Informal Inter‐Firm Cooperation in SMEs’, Journal of Small Business Management, 57(4), pp. 1698–1711. doi: 10.1111/jsbm.12445.
Merriam, S. B. and Tisdell, E. J. (2016) Qualitative research: a guide to design and implementation. 4th edn. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mohlin, A. (2023). How to facilitate manufacturing industry learning from problems: a review on advanced technology problem-solving. Journal of Workplace Learning, 35(6), pp. 470-489. doi: 10.1108/JWL-01-2023-0008
Moon, H., Ruona, W. and Valentine, T. (2017) ‘organisational strategic learning capability: exploring the dimensions’, European Journal of Training and Development, 41(3), pp. 222–240. doi: 10.1108/EJTD-08-2016-0061.
Nag, R., Corley, K. G. and Gioia, D. A. (2007) ‘The Intersection of organisational Identity, Knowledge, and Practice: Attempting Strategic Change Via Knowledge Grafting’, Academy of Management Journal, 50(4), pp. 821–847. doi: 10.5465/amj.2007.26279173.
Onyeneke, G. B. and Abe, T. (2021) ‘The effect of change leadership on employee attitudinal support for planned organisational change’, Journal of organisational Change Management, 34(2), pp. 403–415. doi: 10.1108/JOCM-08-2020-0244.
Pisano, G. P. and Teece, D. J. (2007) ‘How to capture value from innovation: shaping intellectual property and industry architecture.’, California management review, 50(1), pp. 278–296.
Pratt, M. G. (2000) ‘The Good, the Bad, and the Ambivalent: Managing Identification among Amway Distributors’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(3), pp. 456–493. doi: 10.2307/2667106.
Sandberg, J. and Tsoukas, H. (2020) ‘Sensemaking Reconsidered: Towards a broader understanding through phenomenology’, organisation Theory, 1(1). doi: 10.1177/2631787719879937.
Sheng, M. L. (2017) ‘A dynamic capabilities-based framework of organisational sensemaking through combinative capabilities towards exploratory and exploitative product innovation in turbulent environments’, Industrial Marketing Management, 65, pp. 28–38. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.06.001.
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G. and Shuen, A. (1997) ‘Dynamic capabilities and strategic management.’, Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), pp. 509–533. doi: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3088148.
Tessema, K. A. (2024). Early-career employees sensemaking strategies in organizationally constrained workplaces: a longitudinal multiple-case study. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management, 19(1), 1-31. doi: 10.1108/QROM-05-2023-2521
VanPartter, G. K. and Pastor, E. (2016) Innovation methods mapping: de-mystifying 80+ years of innovation process design. Califórnia: Createspace Independent Publishing Platform.
Wasieleski, D., Guimarães da Costa, N. and Ivanova Ruffo, O. (2024). Change readiness in organizations: an affective cognitive process for convergent sensemaking. International Journal of Organization Theory and Behavior, ahead-of-print. doi:10.1108/IJOTB-02-2023-0047
Weick, K. E. (1995) Sensemaking in organisations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Weick, K. E., Sutcliffe, K. M. and Obstfeld, D. (2005) ‘Organizing and the Process of Sensemaking’, organisation Science, 16(4), pp. 409–421. doi:10.1287/orsc.1050.0133.
Weick, K. E. and Westley, F. (2004) ‘Aprendizagem organizacional: confirmando um oximoro’, in Clegg, S. R., Hardy, C., and Nord, W. (eds) Handbook de Estudos Organizacionais (V.3). São Paulo: Atlas, pp. 361–388.
Will, M. G. and Pies, I. (2018) ‘Sensemaking and sensegiving: A concept for successful change management that brings together moral foundations theory and the ordonomic approach’, Journal of Accounting and organisational Change, 14(3), pp. 291–313. doi: 10.1108/JAOC-11-2016-0075.
Ybema, S. (2010) ‘Talk of change: Temporal contrasts and collective identities’, organisation Studies, 31(4), pp. 481–503. doi: 10.1177/0170840610372205.
Yin, R. K. (2017) Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods. 6th edn. SAGE Publications.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Adriana Locatelli Bertolini, Fabiano Larentis, Luana Folchini da Costa
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The author must ensure:
- that there is complete consensus among all co-authors to approve the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
- that their work is original, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, these have been duly acknowledged.
Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. RCA reserves the right to use software or any other methods of plagiarism detection.
All submissions received for evaluation in the RCA journal are screened for plagiarism and self-plagiarism. Plagiarism identified in manuscripts during the evaluation process will result in the submission being archived. In the event of plagiarism being identified in a manuscript published in the journal, the Editor-in-Chief will conduct a preliminary investigation and, if necessary, retract it.
Authors grant RCA exclusive rights of first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons (CC BY) 4.0 International License.
Authors are authorized to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (e.g., publishing in an institutional repository, on a personal website, publishing a translation, or as a chapter in a book), with an acknowledgement of its authorship and initial publication in this journal.
This license grants any user the right to:
Share – copy, download, print, or redistribute the material in any medium or format.
Adapt – remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
According to the following terms:
Attribution – You must give appropriate credit (cite and reference), provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
No additional restrictions – You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
