Toward a Theory of Fixative Accommodation: Explaining How Bounded Change Preserves the Conditions of Recurring Difficulty
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.07.10.15Keywords:
Bounded change, Core preservation, Fixative accommodation, Immediate stabilization, Institutional change, Process theoryAbstract
Change is often assessed in terms of adjustment by an individual, group, organization or institution. There is less worry about those cases where the adjustment is real and directly useful, but shallow, so that something associated with the original difficulty remains largely the same. This conceptual integrative review builds fixative accommodation as an explanatory construct for this pattern. By conducting a comparative conceptual analysis, we examined and synthesized literature on accommodation and assimilation, psychological flexibility and rigidity, selective information processing, resistance and ambivalence, transformative learning, and institutional decoupling. Fixative accommodation, as defined by the synthesis, is a bounded form of adjustment that restores functioning, reduces tension, answers external pressure, or preserves legitimacy while protecting deeper beliefs, identities, habits, interests, power arrangements, or structures. Based on this synthesis, the study introduces the Fixative Accommodation Cycle: Change Pressure, Response Boundary Formation, Limited Accommodation, Immediate Stabilization, Core Preservation, and Residual Difficulty and Recurrence. The proposed theory explains how immediate stabilization can be used to reinforce the boundaries of an adjustment, thus leaving the underlying difficulty intact, or allowing it to become so. It provides a relational and temporal account of change by examining what changed, what was protected, what immediate benefit ensued, and what difficulty remained. The theory is presented as a testable process explanation whose constructs, propositions, boundary conditions, and cross-context applicability can be examined through subsequent empirical research.
Downloads
References
Argyris, C. (1976). Single-loop and double-loop models in research on decision making. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(3), 363–375. https://doi.org/10.2307/2391848
Bacharach, S. B. (1989). Organizational theo-ries: Some criteria for evaluation. Acad-emy of Management Review, 14(4), 496–515. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1989.4308374
Bartunek, J. M., & Moch, M. K. (1987). First-order, second-order, and third-order change and organization development in-terventions: A cognitive approach. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 23(4), 483–500. https://doi.org/10.1177/002188638702300404
Boateng, G. O., Neilands, T. B., Frongillo, E. A., Melgar-Quiñonez, H. R., & Young, S. L. (2018). Best practices for developing and validating scales for health, social, and behavioral research: A primer. Frontiers in Public Health, 6, Article 149. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00149
Bonanno, G. A., & Burton, C. L. (2013). Regula-tory flexibility: An individual differences perspective on coping and emotion regu-lation. Perspectives on Psychological Sci-ence, 8(6), 591–612. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691613504116
Bromley, P., & Powell, W. W. (2012). From smoke and mirrors to walking the talk: Decoupling in the contemporary world. Academy of Management Annals, 6(1), 483–530. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2012.684462
Hanfstingl, B., Arzenšek, A., Apschner, J., & Gölly, K. I. (2022). Assimilation and ac-commodation: A systematic review of the last two decades. European Psychologist, 27(4), 320–337. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000463
Hornsey, M. J., & Fielding, K. S. (2017). Attitude roots and Jiu Jitsu persuasion: Under-standing and overcoming the motivated rejection of science. American Psycholo-gist, 72(5), 459–473. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0040437
Jaakkola, E. (2020). Designing conceptual arti-cles: Four approaches. AMS Review, 10, 18–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-020-00161-0
Jost, J. T. (2019). A quarter century of system justification theory: Questions, answers, criticisms, and societal applications. Brit-ish Journal of Social Psychology, 58(2), 263–314. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12297
Kashdan, T. B., & Rottenberg, J. (2010). Psy-chological flexibility as a fundamental as-pect of health. Clinical Psychology Review, 30(7), 865–878. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2010.03.001
Levitt, B., & March, J. G. (1988). Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 14, 319–340. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.14.080188.001535
Mathias, J.-D., Anderies, J. M., Crépin, A.-S., Dambrun, M., Lindahl, T., & Norberg, J. (2024). Emergence of social-psychological barriers to social-ecological resilience: From causes to so-lutions. Ecology and Society, 29(2), Arti-cle 6. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-15052-290206
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutional-ized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363. https://doi.org/10.1086/226550
Morrison, E. W. (2023). Employee voice and silence: Taking stock a decade later. An-nual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 10, 79–107. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-120920-054654
Narsico, P. G. (2024). A perspective-changing teaching experience in Araimiri. Interna-tional Journal of Multidisciplinary: Ap-plied Business and Education Research, 5(3), 993–1007. https://doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.05.03.22
Narsico, P. G. (2026a). From data to awaken-ing: A seven-level typology for trans-formative research aligned with the Unit-ed Nations Sustainable Development Goals. International Journal of Multidisci-plinary: Applied Business and Education Research, 7(4), 1734–1746. https://doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.07.04.21
Narsico, P. G. (2026b). The Integrated Dynam-ic Self-Sufficiency (IDSS) Framework: A literature-informed conceptual model for sustainable community development. In-ternational Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research, 7(8), 3537–3549. https://doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.07.08.21
Narsico, P. G., Narsico, L. O., & Rio, R. B. (2024). Individual, family, and communi-ty
transformations through opportunities facilitated by Technical Vocational Edu-cation and Training (TVET). International Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Busi-ness and Education Research, 5(8), 3390–3410. https://doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.05.08.33
Oreg, S., & Sverdlik, N. (2026). Responses to organizational change: Evolution of the concept, established findings, and future directions. Annual Review of Organiza-tional Psychology and Organizational Be-havior, 13, 387–413. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-020924-064623
Petriglieri, J. L. (2011). Under threat: Respons-es to and the consequences of threats to individuals’ identities. Academy of Man-agement Review, 36(4), 641–662. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2009.0087
Piderit, S. K. (2000). Rethinking resistance and recognizing ambivalence: A multidimen-sional view of attitudes toward an organ-izational change. Academy of Manage-ment Review, 25(4), 783–794. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2000.3707722
Ravasi, D., & Schultz, M. (2006). Responding to organizational identity threats: Exploring the role of organizational culture. Acad-emy of Management Journal, 49(3), 433–458. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2006.21794663
Rodríguez Aboytes, J. G., & Barth, M. (2020). Transformative learning in the field of sustainability: A systematic literature re-view (1999–2019). International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 21(5), 993–1013. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-05-2019-0168
Roszkowska-Menkes, M., Aluchna, M., & Kamiński, B. (2024). True transparency or mere decoupling? The study of selec-tive disclosure in sustainability reporting. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 98, Article 102700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2023.102700
Singer-Brodowski, M. (2025). The potential of transformative learning for sustainability transitions: Moving beyond formal learn-ing environments. Environment, Devel-opment and Sustainability, 27(9), 20621–20639. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-022-02444-x
Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a re-search methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
Sommer, J., Musolino, J., & Hemmer, P. (2024). Updating, evidence evaluation, and oper-ator availability: A theoretical framework for understanding belief. Psychological Review, 131(2), 373–401. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000444
Sydow, J., Schreyögg, G., & Koch, J. (2009). Or-ganizational path dependence: Opening the black box. Academy of Management Review, 34(4), 689–709. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.34.4.zok689
Torraco, R. J. (2005). Writing integrative liter-ature reviews: Guidelines and examples. Human Resource Development Review, 4(3), 356–367. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484305278283
Venus, M., Stam, D., & van Knippenberg, D. (2019). Visions of change as visions of continuity. Academy of Management Journal, 62(3), 667–690. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2015.1196
Wang, Y., Tian, J., & Yang, Q. (2024). Experien-tial avoidance process model: A review of the mechanism for the generation and maintenance of avoidance behavior. Psy-chiatry and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 34(2), 179–190. https://doi.org/10.5152/pcp.2024.23777
Whetten, D. A. (1989). What constitutes a the-oretical contribution? Academy of Man-agement Review, 14(4), 490–495. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1989.4308371
Whittemore, R., & Knafl, K. (2005). The inte-grative review: Updated methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 52(5), 546–553. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03621.x
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Peter G. Narsico

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See the Effect of Open Access).














