This paper have been presented at 5th Global Conference Business and Social Science (GCBSS) organized by Global Academy of Training and Research (GATR) at Bangsar South-Kuala Lumpur- Malaysia, 4-5 May, 2017. Abstract: Organizational change can produce a number of positive and negative emotional responses. This study uses the Theory of Emotional Contagion (Hatfield, Cacioppo & Rapson, 1993) where negative as well as positive feelings can be transferred to others. The aims of the study are to examine the effects of perception on technological change, leadership change and structural change towards students’ emotions; and to analyze the mediating effect of experience on perception and emotion resulting from organizational changes. The study employs the quantitative research design using the survey method with the self-administered questionnaire. A total of 223 respondents was collected from among the undergraduate students at a faculty in a public university who have faced organizational changes (technological, leadership and structural). Results reveal that perceptions of technology, leadership and structural changes are found to have moderate effects on students’ emotions. However, experiences of change partially mediate students’ emotion and perception of technological, leadership and structural changes. Experience with organizational changes affects students’ emotions badly. This implies that the Emotional Contagion Theory holds true for organizational changes as the hypotheses are supported.

1. 5TH GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES (GCBSS 2017)
4 – 5 MAY, 2017
KUALA LUMPUR, MALAYSIA
The Effects of Organizational
Change on Students’ Emotions
NADA RAHMAWATI & SAODAH WOK
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATION, INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC
UNIVERSITY MALAYSIA (IIUM), KUALA LUMPUR
,,
,,

2. • ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE IS THE PROCESS BY
WHICH ORGANIZATIONS MOVE FROM THEIR
PRESENT STATE TO A DESIRED FUTURE STATE TO
INCREASE THEIR EFFECTIVENESS (JONES, 2004).
• ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGES INCLUDE 3
ASPECTS: TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE,
LEADERSHIP CHANGE AND STRUCTURAL CHANGE.
• ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGES ARE TO
ENSURE THAT THE ORGANIZATION
REMAIN RELEVANT IN THE CHANGING
ENVIRONMENT.
BACKGROUND OF STUDY

3. Emotional Contagion Theory by Hatfield, Cacioppo & Rapson
(1993);
• Negative as well as positive feelings
• can be transferred to others. Thus. Emotional experience can be caught
from facial, vocal, mimicry and expression
• Positive emotional contagion improves cooperation and increase task
performance.
• Exhilarating or awful experience creates such emotions
that one would want to share with others
(Hashim, Wok & Ghazali. 2008)

4. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
1. To examine the effects of perception of
technological, leadership and structural changes
towards emotional effect of organizational changes.
2. To examine the relationship between the
experience and emotional effects of organizational
changes.
3. To analyze the mediating effect of experiencing
changes on perception towards emotional effects of
organizational changes.

5. LITERATURE REVIEW
 Emotional Contagion Theory states that one emotion can influence others
emotion.
Hatfield, Cacioppo & Rapson. 1994
 Students responds to organizational change differently, some may accept the
changes while others may reject those changes.
Carlson & Hatfield, 1992
 Students would share their feelings with their friends which, in turn, affect them
emotionally. This process transmission of emotions is the conscious processing
information that individual imagine how they would feel in another’s position and
thus come to share their feelings .
Bandura, 1969; Scotland, 1969
 Technological change may affect students’ emotions, thus influencing their
academic performance.
Fan, 1991; Harrison, Kelley & Gant,
1996; Imran, 2010.
 Leadership changes in a university may lead a better communication between
the students and the new leadership, giving a better understanding toward
students’ emotion.
Robinson, Lloyd, and Rowe, 2008;
Waters, Marzano and McNulty, 2003
 Structural changes if not informed properly will create confusion among
students.
DeWitt, 1993

6. HYPOTHESES OF THE STUDY

7. METHODOLOGY,
DATA POPULATION &
SAMPLING PROCEDURE

8. METHODOLOGY POPULATION
& DATA COLLECTION
SAMPLE
PROCEDURES
RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS
• QUANTITATIVE
RESEARCH DESIGN
•SURVEY METHOD
•SELF-
ADMINISTERED
QUESTIONNAIRE
• UNDERGRADUATE
STUDENTS IN A PUBLIC
UNIVERSITY.
• INTERNATIONAL &
LOCAL STUDENTS
• 10 DEPARTMENTS
• USING A SELF-
ADMINISTERED SURVEY.
• QUESTIONNAIRE,
COLLECTED FROM
NOVEMBER 1-8, 2016.
• STRATIFIED
RANDOM SAMPLING
METHOD.
•A TOTAL OF 223
RESPONDENTS.
•117 MALES AND 106
FEMALES.
•AGE RANGING 19
TO 31 YEARS OLD
S1. 5 ITEMS ON DEMOGRAPHIC BACKGROUND.
(DICHOTOMOUS)
S2: 9 ITEMS ON PERCEPTION OF TECHNOLOGICAL
CHANGES (PTC).
S3: 9 ITEMS ON PERCEPTION OF LEADERSHIP
CHANGES (PLC).
S4: 9 ITEMS ON PERCEPTION OF STRUCTURAL
CHANGES (PSC).
S5: 12 ITEMS ON EXPERIENCE OF
ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGES.
S6: 28 ITEMS ON EMOTIONAL EFFECT FROM
ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGES.
ALL ITEMS WERE MEASURED USING 5-POINT
LIKERT SCALE RANGING FROM 1=STRONGLY
DISAGREE TO 5=STRONGLY AGREE

9. Measurement Reliability Cronbach’s Alpha
Perception of technological
changes (PTC).
0.815
Perception of leadership changes
(PLC).
0.749
Perception of structural changes
(PSC).
0.530
Experience of organizational
changes.
0.737
Emotional effect from
organizational changes.
0.887
Questionnaire has been revised accordingly based on
experts’ opinion to validate the instruments.
RELIABILITY ANALYSIS

10. PARTIAL
CORRELATION
TITLE
To examine the effect of perception of technological
change, leadership change and structural change
towards students’ emotions. (H1, H2, H3, H4,H5 & H6)
To examine the relationship between the experience of
organizational changes and emotions. (H7)
To analyze the mediating effect of experience on
perception and emotion resulting from organizational
changes. (H8, H9 & H10
)
DATA ANALYSIS
PARTIAL
CORRELATION
HIERARCHICAL
REGRESSION

11. PERCEPTIONS
IN RELATION TO EMOTION
r=.587, p=.000
 PSC To Emotion
 PTC To Experience
r=.462, p=.000
 PLC To Experience
 PSC To Experience
PARTIAL
CORRELATION
Control Variable Variable To Emotion
Experience to PTC r=.430, p=.000
PLS r=.411, p=.000
PSC r=.417, p=.000
 PTC To Emotion
r=.608, p=.000 PLC To Emotion
r=.588, p=.000
r=.445, p=.000
r=.507, p=.000
EXPERIENCE TO EMOTION
r=.704, p=.000
KEY FINDING (1)

12. Table 2: Hierarchical Regression for mediating effect for experience of organizational change
on perception towards emotion
Model and
variables
B SE Beta t p
1
(Constant) 19.553 4.155 4.706 .000
PTC .764 .136 .295 5.603 .000
PLC .834 .139 .320 6.012 .000
PSC .622 .092 .340 6.779 .000
F=96.001,df1=3,df2=219,p=.000; R=.754, R²=.568, R²adj=.562; F change=96.001, p=.000
2
(Constant) 14.218 3.709 3.834 .000
PTC .567 .122 .219 4.637 .000
PLC .523 .128 .201 4.087 .000
PSC .433 .084 .237 5.161 .000
Experience .676 .083 .395 8.109 .000
F=109.732,df1=1,df2=218,p=.000; R=.817, R²=.568, R²adj=.663; F change=65.760, p=.000
KEY FINDING (2)

13. DISCUSSION ALL
HYPOTHESES
WERE
SUPPORTED
PTC, PLC AND PSC influenced students’ emotion. The higher the students’
perceptions on the changes, the happier they are.
This in line with Imrans’ (2010) that technological changes affected students’
emotion.
However, leadership change a has minimal influence on students’ emotion.
The result supports Dionne, et al, (2004) and Ngotngamwong (20140.
Whereas, structural changes if not informed properly will create confusion among students.
Findings similar to Dewitt’s (1993) results.
Results also indicate that experience would influence emotions.
therefore, organizational changes need to be communicated properly for the benefit of the students.
Thus, experience plays an important role in helping university students succeed academically
and to stabilize their emotional feelings.

14. CONCLUSION
• Students’ emotions have proven to be affected by the
organizational changes.
• Experience partially mediates the relationship between
organizational changes (technological change, leadership
change and structural change) on students’ emotions.
•Positive experience creates positive emotion which in turn
harmonize and stabilize students’ feelings.
•Hence, will affect other students to share similar feelings and
thus, enabling them to be higher achievers and leading them
toward academic success.

15. 1. DeWitt, R. L. (1993). The structural consequences of downsizing. Organization Science,
4(1), 30-40.
2. Dionne, S. D., Yammarino, F. J., Atwater, L. E., & Spangler, W. D. (2004).
Transformational leadership and team performance. Journal of Organizational Change
Management, 17(2), 177-193.
3. Andrews, R., & Boyne, G. (2012). Structural change and public service performance: The
impact of the reorganization process in English Local Government. Public Administration,
90(2), 297-312.
4. Burnes, B. (2005). Complexity theories and organizational change. International Journal of
Management Reviews, 7(2), 73-90.
5. Fan, S. (1991). Effects of technological change and institutional reform on production
growth in Chinese agriculture. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 73(2), 266-
275.
6. Harrison, B., Kelley, M. R., & Gant, J. (1996). Innovative firm behavior and local milieu:
Exploring the intersection of agglomeration, firm effects, and technological
change. Economic Geography, 72(3), 233-258.
7. Hatfield, E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Rapson, R. L. (1992). Emotional contagion. In M. S. Clark
(Ed), Review of personality and social psychology, 14. Emotion and Social Behaviour,
(151- 177). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
REFERENCES

16. CONT…
8. Howard, D. J., & Gengler, C. (2001). Emotional contagion effects on product attitudes. J Consum Res,
28(2), 189-201. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1086/322897
9. Hsee, C. K., Hatfield, E., & Chemtob, C. (1992). Assessments of the emotional states of others:
Conscious judgments versus emotional contagion. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 11(2),
119-128.
10.Imran, A.I (2010) Impact of organizational technological change on organizational communication
climate in higher learning institution. (Ph.D thesis, International Islamic University Malaysia, Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia) Retrieved from: http://www.lib.iium.edu.my
11.Ngotngamwong, R. (2014). Impacts of frequent leadership changes as perceived by employees. AU
Journal of Management, 12(1), 51-62.
12.Robinson, M. J., Lloyd, C. A., & Rowe, J. (2008). The impact of leadership on student outcome: An
analysis of the differential effect of leadership types. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(5), 635-
674.
13.Ross, J., & Gray, P. (2006). School leadership and student achievement: The mediating effects of
teacher beliefs. Canadian Journal of Education, 29(3), 798-822.
14.Waters, T., Marzano, R. J., & McNulty, B. (2003). Balanced leadership: What 30 years of research tells
us about the effect of leadership on student achievement. A Working Paper. 1-20. Retrieved from:
http://www.peecworks.org/PEEC/PEEC_Research/