Have you ever been through an organizational change and felt like there was just “too much on your plate,” that you were “juggling too many balls,” or that you needed to “level up your game” to keep up?

If so, you’re not alone. In our article, recently published in the Journal of Management Studies we showcase how strategic changes often require employees to embody new work rhythms that can become quite intense. We examine how organizational members cope with intensive work rhythms, and how—based on the way they cope with them– influence strategic changes.

In doing so, we show just how fundamental work rhythms, defined as the temporal patterns through which people carry out their work, are to strategic changes and why managers should care about them.

What’s the context of this study?

We conducted a two-year qualitative case study following an academic department “STAR” that was trying to position itself as a group of “innovative academics.” Although many of the organizational members were enthusiastic about framing their identity in this way and eager to participate in new initiatives, the new work rhythms that accompanied the strategic change impacted their ability to do their work.

Thus, from our study, it is clear that it’s time for organizations to consider the work rhythms that accompany strategic changes.

What are work rhythms and why do they matter?

Work rhythms are repetitive temporal patterns that shape how people carry out their work. They are learned, embodied, and socially shared. Sometimes work rhythms clash with other important rhythms, which can be physiological (e.g., eating, sleeping), mechanical (e.g., computer booting up, elevator ride), natural (e.g., seasons, solar day), and social (e.g., school year, daycare hours).  

You’ve probably noticed your own work rhythms based on how they change. For example, on days in the office when many meetings are scheduled your work activities might unfold differently than on days with fewer meetings.  You might change how you work when interacting with a certain “busy” colleague. You might notice you change your work rhythm when approaching a deadline. Typically, people adjust their work rhythms without thinking too much about it.

Work rhythms are important because they help coordinate organizational activities, and can even communicate the identity of ourselves or our organization. For example, at STAR, organizational members were expected to embody an upbeat work rhythm which signified their identity as innovative academics—paralleling innovative tech start-ups. Furthermore, it ordered how STAR members carried out their work. For example, one STAR member explained “STAR is sparkling and full of energy … because so many things are happening at a fast pace.”

How do strategic changes affect work rhythms?

Having this in mind, it might not be surprising that strategic changes affect employees’ work rhythms. Employees often need to accomplish more activities in less time, perform their work in different ways, navigate conflicting priorities, or even increase hours or work pace to prove they are still valuable to the organization. As a result, employees need to figure out how to do their work differently or disengage with the strategic change.

At STAR, initially, organizational members started to embody the upbeat work rhythm. This helped coordinate their activities as STAR members knew that “Friday is STARday” and that on Fridays their work would be “just meeting, meeting, meeting.” Furthermore, STAR’s work rhythm signified that they were “very active and very ambitious,” “energetic,” and with “good vibes.”

Over time, however, the upbeat work rhythm became too much. One STAR member explained, “There’s a lot of pressure … it’s just stress, stress, stress, stress.” To respond to this mounting stress and related illnesses or injuries, some STAR members moved to the periphery or left the group altogether.

What are some of the consequences of an intensive work rhythm accompanying a strategic change?

Intensive work rhythms that accompany strategic changes can have consequences for organizational members, organizations, and strategic changes.  

First, for organizational members, work rhythms that increasingly become more intensive can lead to illness and injury and often require people to choose between their jobs and other priorities. We saw that by and large the individuals who chose other priorities and left the group were women.

This leads to the second consequence, that when coping with intensive work rhythms, organizations might become more exclusionary as intensive work rhythms can function as a “sorting mechanism” that triggers gender disbalance in organizations.

The third consequence of intensive work rhythms that accompany a strategic change is that the change might fail as organizational members alter their commitment to the strategic change.

What can we do to cope with work rhythms during strategic changes?

1. Change leaders should acknowledge that strategic changes often require organizational members to create and sustain new work rhythms.
2. Change leaders should forecast how work rhythms might be altered and assess whether the new work rhythms needed are sustainable.
3. Change leaders should prepare employees for changes to their work rhythms and teach them how to reflect on them.
4. Change plans should include junctures to evaluate work rhythms, change priorities, and organizational member priorities.
5. Managers should be aware of how intensive work rhythms can create exclusionary organizations.