Which of the following methodologies is likely to lead to less organizational change during a BPR project?

Restructuring Engineering is likely to lead to less organizational change during a Business Process Reengineering (BPR) project because its focus is primarily on modifying existing processes with the goal of improving efficiency and effectiveness, rather than overhauling systems entirely. This approach allows organizations to make necessary adjustments to their workflows and practices while still retaining much of the current organizational structure and culture.

In contrast, methodologies such as Complete Reengineering often entail a significant redesign of business processes, which can necessitate considerable changes within the organization. This could involve new technologies, shifts in roles and responsibilities, and potentially a cultural shift, all leading to greater organizational upheaval.

Reverse Engineering, while useful for understanding how current systems operate, typically does not actively seek to improve or redesign processes. It is more about analysis and reconstruction rather than proactive change. Similarly, Traditional Engineering focuses on optimizing existing processes rather than fundamentally changing them, but it may not foster as much adaptation to modern practices compared to restructuring efforts.

Thus, Restructuring Engineering strikes a balance by facilitating improvements while minimizing the extent of change needed within the organization.