What the research says

Should change be top-down or bottom-up?

The short answer

The research does not settle it: about half the studies support starting change close to the work, and nearly as many find it depends. In one survey, employees backed change most when middle managers started it and top managers carried it out. In an empowerment experiment, managers' sense of control rose only where they felt their own bosses backed them, though their units' measured performance also improved. More freedom for managers does not help everywhere. This is the most studied part of the Loop, and the most contested.

Based on 9 studies from the Atlas of the Middle: 1 rated high strength, 5 medium, 3 low. Designs: qualitative case (4), survey (3), experiment (1), qualitative interviews (1).

Who starts it matters

One survey compared where a change began with how much support it drew.

Heyden et al. (2017) · survey · MediumRethinking ‘Top‐Down’ and ‘Bottom‐Up’ Roles of Top and Middle Managers in Organizational Change: Implications for Employee SupportEmployees backed change most when middle managers started it and top managers carried it out; change started at the top drew no more than average support.

Empowerment needs backing from above

The only randomized study on this question found empowerment raised managers' sense of control only under a condition, and a utility's change program found top-down direction and shared leadership working together throughout.

Logan & Ganster (2007) · experiment · HighThe Effects of Empowerment on Attitudes and Performance: The Role of Social Support and Empowerment BeliefsAt a large trucking company, a randomized empowerment program raised unit managers' sense of control only where they felt their own bosses backed them, and it also lifted their units' measured performance.Binci et al. (2016) · qualitative case · LowDo vertical and shared leadership need each other in change management?At an Italian power utility's change program, top-down direction and a middle-manager change team's shared leadership worked together in every phase, with the balance between them shifting as the project's needs changed.

More freedom isn't always better

Some studies find limits: high autonomy weakened the payoff from initiative for risk-takers, gains depend on experience and unit size, and room to act can be misused.

Glaser et al. (2016) · survey · MediumManaging the Risks of Proactivity: A Multilevel Study of Initiative and Performance in the Middle Management ContextAmong 383 middle managers in a multinational, the tie between a tendency to take initiative and job performance was weaker for risk-takers, a gap that widened with high autonomy and narrowed in units with strong performance management.Caza (2011) · survey · MediumTesting alternate predictions for the performance consequences of middle managers' discretionAcross European R&D units, middle managers who felt freer to manage their own people tended to run better-performing units, though the link depended on the managers' experience and was limited by unit size.den Nieuwenboer et al. (2017) · qualitative case · MediumMiddle Managers and Corruptive Routine Translation: The Social Production of Deceptive PerformanceFacing performance obstacles in a telecom desk-sales unit, middle managers coerced their reps into deceiving upper management, so the unit's reported results were not real.

When the middle shapes it

Several cases show change shaped or carried by the middle, sometimes after the leader who started it has left.

Rasins et al. (2007) · qualitative case · LowA Systemic Approach to Career Development at McDonald's. McDonald's USA let a representative group of its own middle managers design changes to their career paths, with top leaders sponsoring; the authors report 3,000 middle managers embraced it.Starke et al. (2011) · qualitative interviews · MediumExploring archetypal change: the importance of leadership and its substitutesAt a small manufacturer, most of a transformation happened after its champion CEO left and an unsupportive former CEO returned, with supervisors, staff and new systems filling the leadership gap.Canales (2013) · qualitative case · LowConstructing Interlocking Rationales in Top‐driven Strategic RenewalIn a top-driven renewal, after top managers repositioned the middle level, middle managers built reputation through operational efficiency, then shaped their own strategic role, until top and middle were reinforcing each other's efforts.

What I take from it

I don't read this as a vote for either direction. The pattern I take from it is that a change needs real input from the people closest to the work and visible backing from the top, at the same time.

This is my reading, Gabriel Lopez's, not a finding of the studies above.

Common questions

Is bottom-up change more effective than top-down?

The studies we mapped do not settle it. Of 52 studies that bear on whether change should start close to the work, 26 support it, 23 find it depends, and 3 push back.

Does empowering middle managers improve results?

In a randomized program at a large trucking company, empowerment raised unit managers' sense of control only where they felt their own bosses backed them, and it also lifted their units' measured performance.

Every summary on this page was written by Unfrozen from the study's abstract or full text and checked twice by independent reviewers. Loop coding is exploratory and AI-assisted, pending human verification. Spot an error? Email info@unfreeze.us and it gets fixed.