This research introduces the concept oforganisational climate and contributes to anunderstanding of the recursive relationshipbetween organisational climate and strategicchange initiatives. In the 1990s there wasrecognition that higher education worldwide wasmoving through a period of rapid change.Alterations in the external environment wereput forward as rationales for universities toreconsider the way they organised from theirtraditional governance and managementstructures through to the way in which theyperformed their primary activities of research,teaching and learning. A common approach tothis adaptation or change has been through anincreased emphasis upon strategic planning.This was accompanied by discourses rooted intechnological determinism and the unquestioningbelief in the rightness of a particular brandof corporate management. This research focusedon one such approach to strategic change: thedevelopment of information strategies in 12 UKHigher Education Institutions. Using a groundedapproach to theory generation, it highlightsthe influence of different styles of managementon organisational climate. The paper discussesthe antecedents and influence of one of thedimensions of organisational climateidentified: insecurity/security. Itestablishes that that climates of insecurity(or security) can exist within an HEI and canbe shared on an organisational level, or can berooted in sub-cultures. Six issues wereidentified which affected the climate ofinsecurity or security within the differentHEIs. These issues related to perceptions ofchange management and its frequency,predictability, openness, degree ofparticipation, discontinuous or incrementalnature of change, and whether or not decisionsare implemented by use of persuasive power orcoercive power. The paper goes on to discussthe multi-dimensional nature of insecurity. Itnotes that `managerial' approaches are morelikely to create highly insecure environmentswhich reinforce a vicious circle: staff beingde-motivated, cautious, less willing to takerisks or exercise discretion and are morelikely to resist change. In contrast, inenvironments where a more `collegial' approachhad been used, a virtuous cycle was created,whereby there was a willingness to be open andshare information, there was a greater degreeof cognitive conflict, and more positiveinterpersonal relationships. These factorshelped create consensus, the widespreadunderstanding of decisions (acceptance of theirlegitimacy) and commitment to both thestrategic decisions and the university. Thepaper concludes by arguing that a moresophisticated approach to strategic planningand change should be utilised reflecting theneed to view the HEI as a symbioticcommunity.