Managing Change Handbook April 2013 Faranani Facilitation ... Management Handboo… · Managing Change Handbook (2013) 4 3 A body of knowledge 4 A control mechanism The Task of Managing

Managing Change

Handbook

April 2013

Faranani Facilitation Services Pty Ltd

The views expressed in this document are not necessarily those of

Fasset’s.

Managing Change Handbook (2013)

2

CONTENTS

SECTION 1: CONTEXT FOR CHANGE .......................................................................... 3

1.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 3

1.2 UNDERSTANDING WHAT CHANGE IS ............................................................... 3

1.3 THE ROLE OF CHANGE IN THE ORGANISATION ............................................ 10

1.4 DRIVERS OF CHANGE ...................................................................................... 12

1.5 EFFECTS OF CHANGE ...................................................................................... 12

1.6 CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS IN CHANGE MANAGEMENT ......................... 15

1.7 PLANNED VS. REACTIVE CHANGE .................................................................. 18

SECTION 2: IMPLEMENTING CHANGE ...................................................................... 19

2.1 GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT ....................................... 19

2.2 CHANGE MANAGEMENT MODELS ................................................................... 19

2.3 STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT IN THE CHANGE PROCESS ......................... 33

2.4 TRENDS IN CHANGE MANAGEMENT ............................................................... 39

2.5 MANAGING CHANGE IN THE SECTOR ............................................................ 42

2.6 FACTORS IN SELECTING A CHANGE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY ................ 43

2.7 CHANGE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES ........................................................... 44

2.8 CREATING AN ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE THAT EMBRACES CHANGE

MANAGEMENT ............................................................................................................ 45

2.9 DEVELOPING A CHANGE MANAGEMENT PLAN ............................................. 48

2.10 THE ROLE OF THE CHANGE AGENT ............................................................ 51

2.11 HOW HR/SDF CAN DELIVER CHANGE MANAGEMENT RESULTS .............. 57

2.12 WHY CHANGE MANAGEMENT OFTEN FAILS .............................................. 62

2.13 MEASURING THE IMPACT OF CHANGE PROCESSES ................................ 63

SECTION 3: ADAPTING TO CHANGE ......................................................................... 71

3.1 CREATING RESILIENT ORGANISATIONS ........................................................ 71

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................. 84

HANDY RESOURCES .................................................................................................. 87

USEFUL LINKS ............................................................................................................ 88


3

Section 1: Context for Change

1.1 Introduction

“It is not the strongest species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the ones are most

responsive to change” - Charles Darwin

Change management is a structured approach to transitioning individuals, teams, and

organisations from a current state to a desired future state. The current definitions of Change

Management include both organisational change management processes and individual change

management models, which together are used to manage the people side of change. Some

thoughts on change to consider: Change takes time, but quick-fixes are essential to make it

happen; You can’t expect to get every-thing right, so expect mistakes - don’t be paralysed at the

possibility of making them; If you wait until all the facts are in, they’ll be useless and the biggest

risk in change processes is to avoid taking any risks at all.

This handbook is a concentrated collection of various aspects of managing change in

organisations, team and in individuals. Aspects covered include definitions and concepts related

to change, principles of change, drivers of change, models of change management, the role of

the change agent, the role that HR and the SDF specifically play within change processes,

dealing with resistance to change, and selecting and applying various strategies for change. As

part of the added value component of this handbook, additional aspects such as trends in change

management, which include Real Time Strategic Change, as well as creating Organisational

Resilience, are included. Specific organisational change management assessment tools are

added as annexures for participants to use when back in the work environment. These

assessment tools will be discussed in the session and focus on:

Organisational-Type Inventory

Organisational Climate Questionnaire

Organisational Readiness Inventory

Practical suggestions, steps and tips are given on specific aspects of change management that

related to selecting a change strategy, creating a culture that embraces change and

understanding why change often fails. Finally, useful references, tools and handy links are

provided for further reading and use by the reader.

1.2 Understanding what change is

“To cope with a changing world, an entity must develop the capacity of shifting and changing - of

developing new skills and attitudes; in short, the capability of learning” – A De Gues, The Living

Company

Change management is most commonly understood from four basic perspectives which define

the concept, process and tools. In thinking about what is meant by “change management,” at

least four basic definitions come to mind:

1 The task of managing change

2 An area of professional practice

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individual

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Team

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organization


4

3 A body of knowledge

4 A control mechanism

The Task of Managing Change: The first and most obvious definition of “change management”

is that the term refers to the task of managing change. The obvious is not necessarily

unambiguous. Managing change is itself a term that has at least two meanings. One meaning of

“managing change” refers to the making of changes in a planned and managed or systematic

fashion. The aim is to more effectively implement new methods and systems in an ongoing

organisation. The changes to be managed lie within and are controlled by the organisation.

(Perhaps the most familiar instance of this kind of change is the “change control” aspect of

information systems development projects.). However, these internal changes might have been

triggered by events originating outside the organisation, in what is usually termed “the

environment.” Hence, the second meaning of managing change, namely, the response to

changes over which the organisation exercises little or no control (e.g., legislation, social and

political upheaval, the actions of competitors, shifting economic tides and currents, and so on).

Researchers and practitioners alike typically distinguish between a knee-jerk or reactive response

and an anticipative or proactive response.

An Area of Professional Practice: The second definition of change management is "an area of

professional practice." There are dozens, if not hundreds, of independent consultants who will

quickly and proudly proclaim that they are engaged in planned change, that they are change

agents, that they manage change for their clients, and that their practices are change

management practices. There are numerous small consulting firms whose principals would make

these same statements about their firms. And, of course, most of the major management

consulting firms have a change management practice area. Some of these change management

experts claim to help clients manage the changes they face – the changes happening to them.

Others claim to help clients make changes. Still others offer to help by taking on the task of

managing changes that must be made. In almost all cases, the process of change is treated

separately from the specifics of the situation. It is expertise in this task of managing the general

process of change that is laid claim to by professional change agents.

A Body of Knowledge: Stemming from the view of change management as an area of

professional practice there arises yet a third definition of change management: the content or

subject matter of change management. This consists chiefly of the models, methods and

techniques, tools, skills and other forms of knowledge that go into making up any practice. The

content or subject matter of change management is drawn from psychology, sociology, business

administration, economics, industrial engineering, systems engineering and the study of human

and organisational behavior. For many practitioners, these component bodies of knowledge are

linked and integrated by a set of concepts and principles known as General Systems Theory

(GST). It is not clear whether this area of professional practice should be termed a profession, a

discipline, an art, a set of techniques or a technology. For now, suffice it to say that there is a

large, reasonably cohesive albeit somewhat eclectic body of knowledge underlying the practice

and on which most practitioners would agree — even if their application of it does exhibit a high

degree of variance.

A Control Mechanism: For many years now, Information Systems groups have tried to rein in

and otherwise ride herd on changes to systems and the applications that run on them. For the

most part, this is referred to as “version control” and most people in the workplace are familiar

with it. In recent years, systems people have begun to refer to this control mechanism as “change


5

management” and "configuration management." Moreover, similar control mechanisms exist in

other areas. Chemical processing plants, for example, are required by OSHA to satisfy some

exacting requirements in the course of making changes. These fall under the heading of

Management of Change or MOC.

The Content and Process Dimensions of Change

Organisations are highly specialized systems and there are many different schemes for grouping

and classifying them. Some are said to be in the retail business, others are in manufacturing, and

still others confine their activities to distribution. Some are profit-oriented and some are not for

profit. Some are in the public sector and some are in the private sector. Some are members of the

financial services industry, which encompasses banking, insurance, and brokerage houses.

Others belong to the automobile industry, where they can be classified as original equipment

manufacturers or after-market providers. Some belong to the health care industry, as providers,

as insured’s or as insurers. Many are regulated, some are not. Some face stiff competition, some

do not. Some are foreign-owned and some are foreign-based. Some are corporations, some are

partnerships, and some are sole proprietorships. Some are publicly held and some are privately

held. Some have been around a long time and some are newcomers. Some have been built up

over the years while others have been pieced together through mergers and acquisitions. No two

are exactly alike.

The preceding paragraph points out that the problems found in organisations, especially the

change problems, have both a content and a process dimension. It is one thing, for instance, to

introduce a new claims processing system in a functionally organized health insurer. It is quite

another to introduce a similar system in a health insurer that is organized along product lines and

market segments. It is yet a different thing altogether to introduce a system of equal size and

significance in an educational establishment that relies on a matrix structure. The languages

spoken differ. The values differ. The cultures differ. And, at a detailed level, the problems differ.

However, the overall processes of change and change management remain pretty much the

same, and it is this fundamental similarity of the change processes across organisations,

industries, and structures that make change management a task, a process, and an area of

professional practice.

Types of change that organisations needs to manage:

Different kinds of change require different strategies and plans to effectively gain employee

engagement and acceptance of change. The three types of change that occur most frequently in

organisations are developmental, transitional and transformational. Change management theories

effectively support how to deal with developmental and transitional change, but are less effective

at dealing with successfully implementing transformational change. A critical step in determining

which approach to use in overcoming resistance to implementing organisation change is to

determine which type of change the organisation is experiencing.


6

Developmental Change

Companies are continually processing developmental change to some degree in order to stay

competitive. This type of change should cause little stress to current employees as long as the

rationale for the new process is clearly conveyed and the employees are educated on the new

techniques. When senior management want to bring about a major change such as the decision

to close a division, if the company attempted to implement developmental change as the first step

in streamlining the business, employees may be more likely to accept the change. The

employees could see that the company attempted different strategies before determining that

closing the division was the only option.

Transitional Change

A corporate reorganisation, merger, acquisition, creating new products or services, and

implementing new technology are examples of transitional change. Transitional change may not

require a significant shift in culture or behaviour but it is more challenging to implement than

developmental change. The future of the organisation is unknown when the transformation begins

which can add a level or discomfort to employees.

The outcome of transitional change is unknown so employees may feel that their job is unstable

and their own personal insecurities may increase. Education on the new procedures should be

commenced at each stage of the new process. This will allow employees to feel that they are

actively involved and engaged in the change. As an employee’s level of engagement in the new

procedure increases, their resistance to change may decrease. Management should be cognizant

of the impact and stress these changes will have on their employees. The company should

continue to inform the employees of their status offer support in helping them deal with the

personal adjustments they will be forced to make.

Developmental change occurs when a company makes an improvement to their current business.

If a company decided to improve their processes, methods or performance standards this would be

considered developmental change.

Transitional change is more intrusive than developmental change as it replaces existing processes or procedures with something

that is completely new to the company.

The period when the old process is being dismantled and the new process is being implemented is called the transitional phase.


7

Transformational Change

When companies are faced with the emergence of radically different technologies, significant

changes in supply and demand, unexpected competition, lack of revenue or other major shifts in

how they do business, developmental or transitional change may not offer the company the

solution they need to stay competitive. Instead of methodically implementing new processes, the

company may be forces to drastically transform themselves.

The Change Process as Problem Solving and Problem Finding

A very useful framework for thinking about the change process is problem solving. Managing

change is seen as a matter of moving from one state to another, specifically, from the problem

state to the solved state. Diagnosis or problem analysis is generally acknowledged as essential.

Goals are set and achieved at various levels and in various areas or functions. Ends and means

are discussed and related to one another. Careful planning is accompanied by efforts to obtain

buy-in, support and commitment. The net effect is a transition from one state to another in a

planned, orderly fashion. This is the planned change model.

The word “problem” carries with it connotations that some people prefer to avoid. They choose

instead to use the word “opportunity.” For such people, a problem is seen as a bad situation, one

that shouldn’t have been allowed to happen in the first place, and for which someone is likely to

be punished — if the guilty party (or a suitable scapegoat) can be identified. For the purposes of

this paper, we will set aside any cultural or personal preferences regarding the use of “problem” or

“opportunity.” From a rational, analytical perspective, a problem is nothing more than a situation

requiring action but in which the required action is not known. Hence, there is a requirement to

search for a solution, a course of action that will lead to the solved state. This search activity is

known as “problem solving.”

From the preceding discussion, it follows that “problem finding” is the search for situations

requiring action. Whether we choose to call these situations “problems” (because they are

troublesome or spell bad news), or whether we choose to call them “opportunities” (either for

reasons of political sensitivity or because the time is ripe to exploit a situation) is immaterial. In

both cases, the practical matter is one of identifying and settling on a course of action that will

bring about some desired and predetermined change in the situation.

At the heart of change management lies the change problem, that is, some future state to be

realized, some current state to be left behind, and some structured, organized process for getting

from the one to the other. The change problem might be large or small in scope and scale, and it

Transformational change occurs after the transition period.

Transformational change may involve both developmental and transitional change.

It is common for transitional and transformation change to occur in tandem.


8

might focus on individuals or groups, on one or more divisions or departments, the entire

organisation, or one or on more aspects of the organisation’s environment.

At a conceptual level, the change problem is a matter of moving from one state (A) to another

state (A’). Moving from A to A’ is typically accomplished as a result of setting up and achieving

three types of goals: transform, reduce, and apply. Transform goals are concerned with

identifying differences between the two states. Reduce goals are concerned with determining

ways of eliminating these differences. Apply goals are concerned with putting into play operators

that actually effect the elimination of these differences (see Newell and Simon).

As the preceding goal types suggest, the analysis of a change problem will at various times focus

on defining the outcomes of the change effort, on identifying the changes necessary to produce

these outcomes, and on finding and implementing ways and means of making the required

changes. In simpler terms, the change problem can be treated as smaller problems having to do

with the how, what, and why of change.

The change problem is often expressed, at least initially, in the form of a “how” question. How do

we get people to be more open, to assume more responsibility, to be more creative? How do we

introduce self-managed teams in Department W? How do we change over from System X to

System Y in Division Z? How do we move from a mainframe-centered computing environment to

one that accommodates and integrates PCs? How do we get this organisation to be more

innovative, competitive, or productive? How do we raise more effective barriers to market entry by

our competitors? How might we more tightly bind our suppliers to us? How do we reduce cycle

times? In short, the initial formulation of a change problem is means-centered, with the goal state

more or less implied. There is a reason why the initial statement of a problem is so often means-

centered and we will touch on it later. For now, let’s examine the other two ways in which the

problem might be formulated — as “what” or as “why” questions.

As was pointed out above, to frame the change effort in the form of “how” questions is to focus

the effort on means. Diagnosis is assumed or not performed at all. Consequently, the ends

sought are not discussed. This might or might not be problematic. To focus on ends requires the

posing of “what” questions. What are we trying to accomplish? What changes are necessary?

What indicators will signal success? What standards apply? What measures of performance are

we trying to affect?

Ends and means are relative notions, not absolutes; that is, something is an end or a means only

in relation to something else. Thus, chains and networks of ends-means relationships often have

to be traced out before one finds the “true” ends of a change effort. In this regard, “why” questions

prove extremely useful.

To ask “why” questions is to get at the ultimate purposes of functions and to open the door to

finding new and better ways of performing them. Why do we do what we do? Why do we do it the

way we do it? Asking “why” questions also gets at the ultimate purposes of people, but that’s a

different matter altogether, a “political” matter, and one we’ll not go into in this handbook.

The Approach taken to Change Management Mirrors Management's Mindset:

The emphasis placed on the three types of questions just mentioned reflects the management

mindset, that is, the tendency to think along certain lines depending on where one is situated in

the organisation. A person’s placement in the organisation typically defines the scope and scale


9

of the kinds of changes with which he or she will become involved, and the nature of the changes

with which he or she will be concerned. Thus, the systems people tend to be concerned with

technology and technological developments, the marketing people with customer needs and

competitive activity, the legal people with legislative and other regulatory actions, and so on. Also,

the higher up a person is in the hierarchy, the longer the time perspective and the wider the range

of issues with which he or she must be concerned.

For the most part, changes and the change problems they present are problems of adaptation,

that is, they require of the organisation only that it adjust to an ever-changing set of

circumstances. But, either as a result of continued, cumulative compounding of adaptive

maneuvers that were nothing more than band-aids, or as the result of sudden changes so

significant as to call for a redefinition of the organisation, there are times when the changes that

must be made are deep and far-reaching. At such times, the design of the organisation itself is

called into question.

Organisations frequently survive the people who establish them. At some point it becomes the

case that such organisations have been designed by one group of people but are being operated

or run by another. Successful organisations resolve early on the issue of structure, that is, the

definition, placement and coordination of functions and people. Other people then have to live

with this design and, because the ends have already been established, these other people are

chiefly concerned with means. This is why so many problem-solving efforts start out focused on

means.

Some organisations are designed to buffer their core operations from turbulence in the

environment. In such organisations all units fit into one of three categories: core, buffer, and

perimeter.

In core units (e.g., systems and operations), coordination is achieved through standardization,

that is, adherence to routine. In buffer units (e.g., upper management and staff or support

functions), coordination is achieved through planning. In perimeter units (e.g., sales, marketing,

and customer service), coordination is achieved through mutual adjustment (see Thompson).

People in core units, buffered as they are from environmental turbulence and with a history of

relying on adherence to standardized procedures, typically focus on “how” questions. People in

buffer units, responsible for performance through planning, often ask “what” questions. People in

the perimeter units are as accountable as anyone else for performance and frequently for

performance of a financial nature. They can be heard asking “what” and “how” questions. “Why”

questions are generally asked by people with no direct responsibility for day-to-day operations or

results. The group most able to take this long-term or strategic view is that cadre of senior

executives responsible for the continued well-being of the firm: top management. If the design of

the firm is to be called into question or, more significantly, if it is actually to be altered, these are

the people who must make the decision to do so.

Finally, when organisational redefinition and redesign prove necessary, all people in all units must

concern themselves with all three sets of questions or the changes made will not stand the test of

time.

To summarise: Problems may be formulated in terms of “how,” “what” and “why” questions. Which

formulation is used depends on where in the organisation the person posing the question or

formulating the problem is situated, and where the organisation is situated in its own life cycle.


10

“How” questions tend to cluster in core units.

“What” questions tend to cluster in buffer units.

People in perimeter units tend to ask “what” and “how” questions.

“Why” questions are typically the responsibility of top management.

In turbulent times, everyone must be concerned with everything.

1.3 The role of change in the organisation

Change management plays an important role in any organisation since the task of managing

change is not an easy one. When we say managing change we mean to say that making changes

in a planned and systemic fashion. With reference to the IT projects we can say the change in the

versions of a project and managing these versions properly. Changes in the organisation or a

project can be initiated from within the organisation or externally. For example a product that is

popular among the customers may undergo a change in design based on the triggering factor like

a competitive product from some other manufacturer. This is an example of external factor that

triggers a change within the organisation. How the organisation responds to these changes is

what that is more concerned. Managing these changes come under change management.

Reactive and proactive responses to these changes are possible from an organisation.

Change management is done by many independent consultants who claim to be experts in these

areas. These consultants manage the changes for their clients. They manage changes or help

the client make the changes or take up the task themselves to make the changes that must be

made. An area of change that needs attention is selected and certain models, methods,

techniques and tools are used for making these changes that are necessary for the organisation.

When there is a process in an organisation it is not an easy task to make changes to this process

immediately. Sometimes a single organisation may have varied business entities and changes in

an entity may be reflected in another entity. In such organisations changes are not so easy. There

are different types of organisations which have many branches across the world with varied

cultures. Implementing a change in such organisations is a task by itself.

The change process can be thought of a process which stops the current process, makes the

necessary changes to the current process and the run the new process. It is easy said than

implemented. Stopping a current process in some industry is fatal for that organisation. Hence it

has to be done in steps which have the minimal effect in the process. These changes cannot take

place for a longer time in the organisation since that may also be a disaster for the organisation.

The involvement of the staff concerned is also very important for the change process to be

smooth.

The change process could also be considered as a problem solving situation. The change that is

taking place could be the result of a problem that has occurred. You should know that a problem

is a situation that requires some action to be taken positively to handle that situation. This positive

action is known as problem solving. The change process could be problem solving for a particular

situation. In this process there is a move from one to state to another so that the problem gets

solved. The change process is leaving the current state and moving to the final state through

some structured organized process.


11

Managing the changes in an organisation requires a broad set of skills like political skills,

analytical skills, people skills, system skills, and business skills. Having good analytical skills will

make you a good change agent. You should evaluate the financial and political impacts of the

changes that can take place. You should know that following a particular process at that instant

would fetch you immediate financial effects and start that process so that the change process is

noted by the management. The workflow has to be changed in such a manner to reflect the

financial changes that are taking place. Operations and systems in the organisation should be

reconfigured in such a manner that you get the desired financial impact.

Hence change management plays an important role in an organisation. This allows the

organisation to give a reactive or a proactive response to the changes that happen internally or

externally. Knowing the change management and its process would help an organisation and its

processes to be stable.

Performance improvement in organisations is built around three core areas of focus:

Leadership sponsorship

Project management

Change management

This diagram shows the interrelations between these three core elements of performance

improvement in any organisational environment. The application of all three will result in projects

meeting organisational objectives, which directly results in delivery on time and on budget with a

significant return on investment.

Successful change management in organisations therefore requires effective communication, full

and active executive support, employee involvement, organisational planning and analysis and

widespread perceived need for the change. These are the big five when successful change is

achieved.


12

1.4 Drivers of change

Organisational change management is becoming increasingly important to the business

community. The intensification of competition from manufacturers in emerging economies who

can produce superior goods at cheaper prices, the introduction of new technology and changing

consumer preferences and tastes can result in companies having to redefine their business goals

and objectives. The following factors are some of the primary drivers of organisational change.

Inadequate Financial Performance: Companies that fail to achieve financial benchmarks are

forced to evaluate their business objectives and processes. This is one of the most important

drivers of organisational change. If a new competitor enters the market with cheaper labor or a

superior technology, companies that formally enjoyed prosperity can suddenly find a

cannibalization of their market share. A failure to maintain a competitive presence in the market

place can stress company resources and force a rethink of the opportunity cost of capital and

resource redeployment.

Change in Strategic Objectives: If a company shifts its focus form a product centric to a

customer centric orientation, new processes are required to facilitate this re-orientation. This can

result in redundancy to existing staff or manufacturing processes. Company restructuring from

this is a primary driver of organisational change as the old is replaced with the new.

End of the Product Development Life Cycle: A product can reach the end of its product life

cycle and companies are forced to cut production and operating costs or exit the market. At this

stage some companies sell out or merge with existing competitors. This results in structural

changes to a company’s business processes to either maintain profitability or refocus on new

opportunities.

New technology: New technology can be a significant driver of organisational change. Consider

the effect the internet is having on old style media and print companies. As internet access levels

increase on a worldwide scale, companies are forced to adapt their existing operations to shifting

consumer preferences. Companies that neglect rising trends face a diminishing market share to

competitors who better understand and address the demands of their customers.

Mergers and Acquisitions: When companies merge or consolidate operations, significant costs

cutting and a re-engineering takes place. Redundancy and restructure to align with management

objectives drives organisational change. The integration of two companies creates significant

challenges to streamline operations and integrate existing IT operations into a centralized

structure. Consider the implications of merging two independent billing systems which use

different platforms and infrastructure. The careful dedicated planning required to bring this to

fruition is part of the change management process.

1.5 Effects of change

Managing change has intended and unintended effects for both organisations, teams and

individuals that are involved in the process. This section contains some of the effects that you

should consider as part of your plans and processes for managing change.

Managing organisational change will be more successful if you apply simple principles. Achieving

personal change will be more successful too if you use the same approach where relevant.

Change management entails thoughtful planning and sensitive implementation, and above all,


13

consultation with, and involvement of, the people affected by the changes. If you force change on

people normally problems arise. Change must be realistic, achievable and measurable. These

aspects are especially relevant to managing personal change. Before starting organisational

change, ask yourself: What do we want to achieve with this change, why, and how will we know

that the change has been achieved? Who is affected by this change, and how will they react to it?

How much of this change can we achieve ourselves, and what parts of the change do we need

help with? These aspects also relate strongly to the management of personal as well as

organisational change.

Do not ‘sell' change to people as a way of accelerating 'agreement' and implementation. 'Selling'

change to people is not a sustainable strategy for success, unless your aim is to be bitten on the

bum at some time in the future when you least expect it. When people listen to a management

high-up 'selling' them a change, decent diligent folk will generally smile and appear to accede, but

quietly to themselves, they're thinking, "No bloody chance mate, if you think I'm standing for that

load of old nonsense you've another think coming…" (And that's just the amenable types - the

other more recalcitrant types will be well on the way to making their own particular transition from

gamekeepers to poachers.)

Instead, change needs to be understood and managed in a way that people can cope effectively

with it. Change can be unsettling, so the manager logically needs to be a settling influence. Check

that people affected by the change agree with, or at least understand, the need for change, and

have a chance to decide how the change will be managed, and to be involved in the planning and

implementation of the change. Use face-to-face communications to handle sensitive aspects of

organisational change management. Encourage your managers to communicate face-to-face with

their people too if they are helping you manage an organisational change. Email and written

notices are extremely weak at conveying and developing understanding.

If you think that you need to make a change quickly, probe the reasons - is the urgency real? Will

the effects of agreeing a more sensible time-frame really be more disastrous than presiding over

a disastrous change? Quick change prevents proper consultation and involvement, which leads to

difficulties that take time to resolve. For complex changes, refer to the process of project

management, and ensure that you augment this with consultative communications to agree and

gain support for the reasons for the change. Involving and informing people also creates

opportunities for others to participate in planning and implementing the changes, which lightens

your burden, spreads the organisational load, and creates a sense of ownership and familiarity

among the people affected.

For organisational change that entails new actions, objectives and processes for a group or team

of people, use workshops to achieve understanding, involvement, plans, measurable aims,

actions and commitment. Encourage your management team to use workshops with their people

too if they are helping you to manage the change. You should even apply these principles to very

tough change like making people redundant, closures and integrating merged or acquired

organisations. Bad news needs even more careful management than routine change. Hiding

behind memos and middle managers will make matters worse. Consulting with people, and

helping them to understand does not weaken your position - it strengthens it. Leaders who fail to

consult and involve their people in managing bad news are perceived as weak and lacking in

integrity. Treat people with humanity and respect and they will reciprocate.

Be mindful that the chief insecurity of most staff is change itself. Senior managers and directors

responsible for managing organisational change do not, as a rule, fear change - they generally

http://www.businessballs.com/project.htm

http://www.businessballs.com/project.htm

http://www.businessballs.com/workshops.htm


14

thrive on it. So remember that your people do not relish change, they find it deeply disturbing and

threatening. Your people's fear of change is as great as your own fear of failure. The employee

does not have a responsibility to manage change - the employee's responsibility is no other than

to do their best, which is different for every person and depends on a wide variety of factors

(health, maturity, stability, experience, personality, motivation, etc). Responsibility for managing

change is with management and executives of the organisation - they must manage the change

in a way that employees can cope with it. The manager has a responsibility to facilitate and

enable change, and all that is implied within that statement, especially to understand the situation

from an objective standpoint (to 'step back', and be non-judgmental), and then to help people

understand reasons, aims, and ways of responding positively according to employees' own

situations and capabilities. Increasingly the manager's role is to interpret, communicate and

enable - not to instruct and impose, which nobody really responds to well.

Be wary of expressions like 'mindset change', and 'changing people's mindsets' or 'changing

attitudes', because this language often indicates a tendency towards imposed or enforced

change, and it implies strongly that the organisation believes that its people currently have the

'wrong' mindset, which is never, ever, the case. If people are not approaching their tasks or the

organisation effectively, then the organisation has the wrong mindset, not the people. Change

such as new structures, policies, targets, acquisitions, disposals, re-locations, etc., all create new

systems and environments, which need to be explained to people as early as possible, so that

people's involvement in validating and refining the changes themselves can be obtained.

Whenever an organisation imposes new things on people there will be difficulties. Participation,

involvement and open, early, full communication are the important factors.

Workshops are very useful processes to develop collective understanding, approaches, policies,

methods, systems, ideas, etc. Staff surveys are a helpful way to repair damage and mistrust

among staff - provided you allow people to complete them anonymously, and provided you

publish and act on the findings. Management training, empathy and facilitative capability are

priority areas - managers are crucial to the change process - they must enable and facilitate, not

merely convey and implement policy from above, which does not work.

You cannot impose change - people and teams need to be empowered to find their own solutions

and responses, with facilitation and support from managers, and tolerance and compassion from

the leaders and executives. Management and leadership style and behavior are more important

than clever process and policy. Employees need to be able to trust the organisation. The leader

must agree and work with these ideas, or change is likely to be very painful, and the best people

will be lost in the process.

Planning, implementing and managing change in a fast-changing environment is increasingly the

situation in which most organisations now work. Dynamic environments such as these require

dynamic processes, people, systems and culture, especially for managing change successfully,

notably effectively optimising organisational response to market opportunities and threats. Key

elements for success in these dynamic environments include:

Plan long-term broadly - a sound strategic vision, not a specific detailed plan (the latter is

impossible to predict reliably). Detailed five years plans are out of date two weeks after

they are written. Focus on detail for establishing and measuring delivery of immediate

actions, not medium-to-long-term plans.


15

Establish forums and communicating methods to enable immediate review and decision-

making. Participation of interested people is essential. This enables their input to be

gained, their approval and commitment to be secured, and automatically takes care of

communicating the actions and expectations.

Empower people to make decisions at a local operating level - delegate responsibility and

power as much as possible (or at least encourage people to make recommendations

which can be quickly approved).

Remove (as far as is possible) from strategic change and approval processes and teams

(or circumvent) any ultra-cautious, ultra-autocratic or compulsively-interfering executives.

Autocracy and interference are the biggest obstacles to establishing a successful and

sustainable dynamic culture and capability.

Encourage, enable and develop capable people to be active in other areas of the

organisation via 'virtual teams' and 'matrix management'.

Scrutinise and optimise ICT (information and communications technology) systems to

enable effective information management and key activity team-working.

Use workshops as a vehicle to review priorities, agree broad medium-to-long-term vision

and aims, and to agree short term action plans and implementation method and

accountabilities.

Adjust recruitment, training and development to accelerate the development of people who

contribute positively to a culture of empowered dynamism.

Management's responsibility is to detect trends in the macro environment as well as in the micro

environment so as to be able to identify changes and initiate programs. It is also important to

estimate what impact a change will likely have on employee behavior patterns, work processes,

technological requirements, and motivation. Management must assess what employee reactions

will be and craft a change program that will provide support as workers go through the process of

accepting change. The program must then be implemented, disseminated throughout the

organisation, monitored for effectiveness, and adjusted where necessary. Organisations exist

within a dynamic environment that is subject to change due to the impact of various change

"triggers", such as evolving technologies. To continue to operate effectively within this

environmental turbulence, organisations must be able to change themselves in response to

internally and externally initiated change. However, change will also impact upon the individuals

within the organisation. Effective change management requires an understanding of the possible

effects of change upon people, and how to manage potential sources of resistance to that

change. Change can be said to occur where there is an imbalance between the current state and

the environment

1.6 Critical success factors in change management

In today's fast pace business environment where the business landscape continually changes in

response to shifting consumer preferences, new and superior production processes, and the

development and introduction of disruptive technologies, companies need to have flexible and

planned business practices to facilitate change to adapt to the market environment. Aligning

resources and employees to a company’s goals and objectives is imperative. Whilst machines

can easily adapt to a change in command, the human composition does not always provide for

such an easy transition. Dealing with the human psyche, entrenched values, fears, anxieties and


16

insecurities necessitates careful change management planning. Several critical success factors

for organisational change are discussed further below.

Change to company processes requires dedicated organisational strategic planning. With the

dependency between integrated business units, a change in one area of the business can

severely impact another. Consider the implementation of a new project management framework

in a web development company. Failure to consider the requirements and dependencies of the

production process can sabotage development time and create project cost blowouts. Involving

team members from business units that will be affected by the change will maximize planning

feedback, minimize areas of risk and improve the chances that team members will be prepared

for and accept the change to the organisational process. Having the foresight to involve important

personnel is a critical success factor for organisational change.

Adopting a long term vision is a critical success factor for managing change. Companies that

commit to the process are more likely to experience a greater acceptance than those who

implement short term or damage control practices. Initiatives take time to iteratively refine and

sometimes processes require an adjustment for best fit. Managing and committing to this can

raise a company’s chance of success.

Building performance metrics to measure the change process provides a framework for

benchmarking the change process. The evaluation stage of change management scopes and

bounds this requirement. When you know where you are going you have an immediate point of

reference for determining how close you are to goal realization and can make the necessary

adjustment when slightly off course. Establishing performance metrics is a critical success factor

for organisational change.

A top-down approach is important for widespread company adoption. If management set the

mandate and fail to adhere to the initial objectives, company personnel can start to assume that

goals and objectives are no longer important. It is, therefore, imperative that all levels of

management champion the cause and remain accountable.

Committing to employee training and development is a critical success factor for organisational

change. When technology processes change or new initiatives are adopted, empowering the

workforce, overcoming fear or failure and facilitating change is improved by educating the

affected personnel. This is imperative for change management strategic planning success.

An awareness of critical success factors for organisational change better prepares a company for

the strategic planning and implementation of change. The above guidelines are an example of

proven considerations that need to be factored into the change management framework.

Further to the above, while the executive vision and support, clearly communicated, is important,

it is not enough. More fundamental approaches to planning and analysis need to occur to

encourage effective change management.

Assess the readiness of your organisation to participate in the change. Instruments are

available to help you assess readiness, as well as qualitative information from internal or

external staff and consultants. Answer questions such as these. What is the level of trust

within your organisation? Do people feel generally positive about their work environment?

Do you have a history of open communication? Do you share financial information?

http://humanresources.about.com/od/changemanagement/a/change_lessons.htm


17

These factors have a tremendous impact on people’s acceptance of and willingness to

change. If you can start building this positive and supportive environment prior to the

change, you have a great head start on the change implementation.

Turn the change vision into an overall plan and timeline, and plan to practice forgiveness

when the timeline encounters barriers. Solicit input to the plan from people who “own” or

work on the processes that are changing.

Gather information about and determine ways to communicate the reasons for the

changes. These may include the changing economic environment, customer needs and

expectations, vendor capabilities, government regulations, population demographics,

financial considerations, resource availability and company direction.

Assess each potential impact to organisation processes, systems, customers and staff.

Assess the risks and have a specific improvement or mitigation plan developed for each

risk.

Plan the communication of the change. People have to understand the context, the

reasons for the change, the plan and the organisation’s clear expectations for their

changed roles and responsibilities. Nothing communicates expectations better than

improved measurements and rewards and recognition.

Determine the WIIFM (what’s in it for me) of the change for each individual in your

organisation. Work on how the change will affect each individual directly, and how to make

the change fit his or her needs as well as those of the organisation.

Some stakeholders might find the development of a theoretical underpinning for the

change effective in helping individuals understand the need for change.

Be honest and worthy of trust. Treat people with the same respect you expect from them.

In building support for effective change management provide as much information as possible, to

as many employees as possible, about the business. Share financial information, customer

feedback, employee satisfaction survey results, industry projections and challenges, and data

from processes you measure. Assuming decisions about needed change are made based on

http://humanresources.about.com/od/employeesurvey1/index.htm


18

relevant data, an informed workforce will understand and agree with the need for change. (They

may not agree on the how and/or what, but you are miles ahead if you have agreement on the

why and the whether.)

Create urgency around the need to change. Project for your workforce what will happen if you

don’t make the needed changes. Communicate this information honestly and use data whenever

it is available. You do have compelling reasons for making the changes? Right? Spend extra time

and energy working with your front line supervisory staff and line managers to ensure that they

understand, can communicate about, and support the changes. Their action and communication

are critical in molding the opinion of the rest of your workforce.

Align all organisational systems to support needed changes. These include the performance

management system, rewards and recognition, disciplinary approaches, compensation,

promotions, and hiring. A consistency across all Human Resources systems will support faster

change. Align the informal structures and networks in your organisation with the desired changes.

If you can tap into the informal communication and political network, you will increase change

commitment. (As an example, eat lunch in the lunchroom and discuss the changes informally.

Spend extra time communicating the positive aspects of the change to people you know are “key

communicators” in your organisation.)

1.7 Planned vs. reactive change

“The main dangers in this life are the people who want to change everything or nothing” - Lady

Nancy Astor

Planned Change: This occurs when a change results from a deliberate decision to alter

the organisation. A company may wish to move from one structure to another and, thus,

engage in a carefully constructed or orchestrated approach to alter the structure or

functions of the organisation. Planned change has three facets:

Incremental change: This is change of a relatively small scope, such as making a small

modification in a work procedure. It is change involving minor improvements.

Strategic change: This is change of a larger scale, such as the restructuring of an

organisation. In strategic change, the organisation moves from an old state to a known

new state during a controlled period of time. Strategic change usually involves a series of

transitional steps.

Transformational change: This is the most massive scope of change. With this change,

the organisation moves to a radically different, and, at times, unknown future state. In this

change process, the organisation’s mission, culture, goals, structure, and leadership may

all change dramatically.

Unplanned Change: Alterations may occur as a result of imposed conditions. Such change

may be unforeseen. Unplanned changes may be environmental, for instance, natural

disasters. Government regulations and economic conditions may lead to abrupt and

unexpected changes for organisations. Whether forced or planned, but especially in the

case of the latter, change needs to be managed, especially because it can be either

disruptive or constructive

http://humanresources.about.com/od/performancemanagement/a/quick_perf.htm

http://humanresources.about.com/od/performancemanagement/a/quick_perf.htm


19

Section 2: Implementing Change

2.1 Guiding principles of change management

Guiding principles to consider and build into your change management plans are:

1 At all times involve and agree support from people within system (system = environment,

processes, culture, relationships, behaviours, etc., whether personal or organisational).

2 Understand where you/the organisation are at the moment.

3 Understand where you want to be, when, why, and what the measures will be for having

got there.

4 Plan development towards above No.3 in appropriate achievable measurable stages.

5 Communicate, involve, enable and facilitate involvement from people, as early and openly

and as fully as is possible.

6 When people are confronted with the need or opportunity to change, especially when it's

'enforced', as they see it, by the organisation, they can become emotional. So can the

managers who try to manage the change. Diffusing the emotional feelings, taking a step

back, encouraging objectivity, are important to enabling sensible and constructive

dialogue. To this end, managers and trainers can find it helpful to use analogies to assist

themselves and other staff to look at change in a more detached way.

7 Just as the state of 'unconscious incompetence', needs to be developed into 'conscious

competence' to provide a basis for training, so a person's subjective emotion needs to be

developed into objectivity before beginning to help them handle change. None of us are

immune from subjectivity, ignorance or denial.

2.2 Change management models

There are many different models on change management. Each attempts to describe the process

through which organisations successfully alter their business practices, their organisational

structure, or their organisational climate. A summary of the most popular and practical models are

included in this section for you as a reference. These models of change include:

Model/Approach Summary

Lewin's three-step model Old activities must be unfrozen, a new concept introduced, then new activities must be frozen

Bullock and Batten's planned change

Exploration, planning, action, and integration

Kotter's eight steps Establish a sense of urgency, form a powerful guiding coalition, create a vision, communicate the vision, empower others to act on the vision, plan for and create short-term wins, consolidate improvements and produce still more change, institutionalize new approaches

Beckhard and Harris's change formula

C = [ABD] > X, Where C = change, A = level of dissatisfaction with the status quo, B = Desirability of the proposed change or end state, D = practicality of the change, and X = cost of changing

Nadler and Tushman's congruence model

Organisation is a system that draws inputs from internal and external sources and transforms them into outputs through four components: the work itself, the people, the informal organisation, and the formal

http://www.businessballs.com/consciouscompetencelearningmodel.htm


20

Model/Approach Summary

organisation

Bridges's managing the transition

Transition, which differs from change, consists of three phases: ending, neutral zone, and new beginning

Carnall's change management model

Change depends on level of management skills in managing transitions effectively, dealing with organisational cultures, and managing organisational politics

Senge et al.'s systematic model

Start small; grow steadily; don't plan everything; expect challenges

Stacey and Shaw's complex responsive process

Change emerges naturally from communication and conflict; and mangers are a part of the whole environment

Lewin's three-step model for change

In the late 1940’s social psychologist Kurt Lewin developed a three-step model for implementing

change based on the concept of force field analysis. Force field analysis addresses the driving

and resisting forces in a change situation. Driving forces must outweigh resisting forces in a

situation if change is to occur. Thus, managers must be willing to advocate change strongly in

order to overcome resistance from employees.

There are three steps in Lewin's model. The first step is "unfreezing," which involves dismantling

those things that support or maintain the previous behavior. In an organisation, these elements of

the old could be the compensation system or the approach to performance management. In the

second step, the organisation "presents a new alternative." This means introducing a clear and

appealing option for a new pattern of behavior. The final step in this model is "freezing" which

requires that changed behavior be reinforced both formally and informally in the organisation. It is

in this step that managers can have a great amount of influence through their use of positive

reinforcement.

Lewin's model does not explicitly state the notion that simply introducing change will result in the

change being adopted or being sustained over the long run. If an attempt to create change in the

organisation is unsuccessful, it means that there is a problem in one of the three steps in the

model.

Unfreeze Transition Refreeze


21

Bullock and Batten's Phases of Planned Change

R.J. Bullock and D. Batten derived their ideas from project management and they recommend

using exploration, planning, action, and integration for planned change. Exploration occurs when

managers confirm the need for change and secure resources needed for it. These resources may

be physical or they may be mental, such as managers' expertise. The next step, planning, occurs

when key decision makers and experts create a change plan that they then review and approve.

Next, action occurs with enactment of the plan. There should be opportunities for feedback during

the action phase. Finally, integration begins when all actions in the change plan have taken place.

Integration occurs when the changes have been aligned with the organisation and there is some

degree of formalization, such as through policies and procedures in the organisation.

Kotter's Eight Steps

John P. Kotter identified eight steps every organisation must follow in order to reap long-term

benefits from organisational change: establish a sense of urgency; form a powerful guiding

coalition; create a vision and strategy; communicate the vision; empower others to act on the

vision; generate short-term wins; consolidate improvements and produce still more change; and

institutionalise the new approach (i.e., make it a part of the organisational culture).


22

The first step, establishing a sense of urgency, involves selling the need for change to managers

and employees. Kotter recommends creating a "felt-need" for change in others. The second step

is for managers to create a powerful group of people who can work together to enact change.

Their power will be a driving force in encourages others to adopt change. Third, the organisation

must have a vision that will guide the entirety of the change effort, and this vision must be

communicated repeatedly (step four)—as much as ten times as often as one would expect to.

Steps five through eight occur after the sense of urgency is created and these steps are easier to

delegate or decentralize. In step five, others in the organisation are empowered to act on the

vision. Managers should assist in this process by eliminating barriers such as old systems or

structures. Step six asks managers to plan for and to create short-term wins. This means that

small improvements should be recognized and celebrated publicly. In step seven, the current

improvements are built upon with new projects and resources. Finally, in step eight, the new

approaches should be institutionalized; that is, they should become a routine path to

organisational success.

Beckhard and Harris's Change Formula

The change formula is a mathematical representation of the change process (see Exhibit 1). The

basic notion is that, for change to occur, the costs of change ( X ) must be outweighed by

dissatisfaction with the status quo ( A ), the desirability of the proposed change ( B ), and the

practicality of the change ( D ). There will be resistance to change if people are not dissatisfied

with the current state of the organisation ( A ), or if the changes are not seen as an improvement (

B ), if the change cannot be done in a feasible way ( D ), or the cost is far too high ( X ).

C = [ABD] > X

This formula can also be conceptualized as ( A × B × D ) > X. The multiplicative nature of this

formula indicates that if any variable is zero or near zero, resistance to change will not be

overcome. In other words, the variables of A, B, and D do not compensate for one another, and

when one is very low, the cost of change is likely to be too high.

Nadler and Tushman's Congruence Model

Nadler and Tushman's model presents the dynamics of what occurs in an organisation when we

try to change it. The foundation of this model is that of the organisation as an open system, in

which organisational subsystems are influence by the external environment. The organisational

Kotter's 8 steps for leading change

•Create urgency

•Form a powerful coalition

•Create a vision for change

•Communicate the vision

•Remove the obstacles

•Create short-term wins

•Build on the change

•Anchor the changes in Corporate Culture


23

system draws inputs from internal and external sources—such as the organisation's own strategy,

its resources, and its environment—and transforms them into outputs, such as behavior and

performance. This transformation from inputs to outputs occurs through four organisational

elements: the work, the people, and the formal and informal organisation. The work involves the

daily activities carried out by individuals in the organisation. The skills and capabilities of the

people involved in the organisation are critical. The formal organisation is characterized by its

structure, its standard procedures, and its policies. The informal organisation encompasses things

such as norms, values, and political behavior.

In this model, effective change occurs when all four components (work, people, formal, and

informal organisation) are managed, because they are all interrelated. A change in the work

procedures themselves may not be effective if the people do not have the capabilities to engage

in the new practices. A change to the formal organisation may not be effective if the beliefs and

values of people (i.e., the informal organisation) do not support it. If there is a lack of congruence

among these four elements, then there is resistance to change. Furthermore, there may be

control issues in which there is confusion over who regulates the new structures and processes.

Finally, power problems may occur as managers and employees feel threatened that their current

power may be removed by the change.

William Bridges's Managing the Transition

William Bridges distinguished planned change from transition. He believes that transition is more

complex because it requires abandoning old practices and adopting new behaviors or ways of

thinking, whereas planned change is about changing physical locations or organisational

structures. Bridges believes that transition often lags behind planned change because it is more

complex and more difficult to achieve. Because it is psychological, it is harder to manage.

Bridges describes three phases of transition: ending, neutral zone, and new beginning. Ending is

similar to Lewin's concept of unfreezing in that you must end a current situation before you can

begin something new. So, in this phase, old structures, practices, and behaviors must be

stopped. Ideally, this ending can be commemorated or marked in some way. In the second

phase, the neutral zone, the old practices have been stopped, but new ones have not yet been

adopted. In this phase, many employees will feel disoriented and anxious; nevertheless, it may be

a time in which creativity rises. Finally, new beginnings are not planned and predicted, but must

evolve as organisational members psychologically adjust to transition. Managers can encourage,

support, and reinforce these new beginnings. Bridges recommends that four key elements be

communicated to people during a new beginning: the purpose behind the change; a picture of

how the organisation will be after the change; a step-by-step plan to get to that stage; and the

part they can play in that outcome.

Carnall's Change Management Model

Carnall's view of change is focused on managers and the skills they can use to manage change.

Carnall describes three skills that must be present at all levels of management: (1) managing

transitions effectively; (2) dealing with organisational cultures; and (3) managing organisational

politics. Managing transitions involves helping employees learn as they change and supporting a

culture of openness and risk-taking. Managing organisational cultures involves creating a "more

adaptable culture." This is an organisational culture in which people are more open, there is

greater information flow, and perhaps greater autonomy. Finally, to manage organisational

politics, the manager should recognize and understand different organisational groups and their


24

political agendas. The manager should be able to build coalitions and control the agenda through

his or her political skill.

Senge's Systemic Model

Senge and colleagues encourage managers to think like biologists when approaching

organisational change. That is, to better understand how organisations react to change, one

should view them as systems bound by many interrelated actions that may affect each other over

a long period of time. To enact change, Senge et al recommend that managers start small, grow

steadily, do not plan the whole thing, and expect challenges. Furthermore, Senge et al offer a

number of issues related to the challenges of first initiating change, then sustaining that change,

and finally redesigning and rethinking change.

Other alternative models of change include:

ADKAR

The first step in managing any type of organisational change is understanding how to manage

change with a single individual. Prosci's model of individual change is called ADKAR - an

acronym for Awareness, Desire, Knowledge, Ability and Reinforcement. In essence, to make a

change successfully an individual needs:

Awareness of the need for change

Desire to participate and support the change

Knowledge on how to change

Ability to implement required skills and behaviours

Reinforcement to sustain the change

ADKAR describes successful change at the individual level. When an organisation undertakes an

initiative, that change only happens when the employees who have to do their jobs differently can

say with confidence, "I have the Awareness, Desire, Knowledge, Ability and Reinforcement to

make this change happen."

Because it outlines the goals or outcomes of successful change, ADKAR is an effective tool for:

Planning change management activities

Diagnosing gaps

Developing corrective actions

Supporting managers and supervisors

The 3-phase process gives structure to the steps project teams should take. Prosci's

organisational change management process was first introduced in 2002 after the third change

management benchmarking study was conducted. Prosci felt that with the third study, there was a

strong enough research basis for the process below. This process is built in steps that a project

team can complete for a particular change or initiative they are supporting. The methodology

includes research-based assessments and templates that are available in the online Change

Management Pilot or hardcopy Change Management Toolkit, or by attending one of Prosci's 3-

day certification programs.

http://www.change-management.com/cm-pilot.htm

http://www.change-management.com/cm-pilot.htm

http://www.change-management.com/change-management-toolkit.htm

http://www.change-management.com/change-management-training.htm

http://www.change-management.com/change-management-training.htm


25

Phase 1 - Preparing for change

The first phase in Prosci's methodology is aimed at getting ready. It answers the question: "how

much change management is needed for this specific project?" The first phase provides the

situational awareness that is critical for effective change management.

Outputs of Phase 1:

Change characteristics profile

Organisational attributes profile

Change management strategy

Change management team structure

Sponsor assessment, structure and roles

Phase 2: Managing Change

The second phase of Prosci's process is focused on creating the plans that are integrated into the

project activities - what people typically think of when they talk about change management. Based

on Prosci's research, there are five plans that should be created to help individuals move through

the ADKAR Model.

Outputs of Phase 2:

Communication plan

Sponsor roadmap

Training plan

Coaching plan

Resistance management plan


26

Phase 3: Reinforcing change

Equally critical but most often overlooked, the third phase of Prosci's process helps project teams

create specific action plans for ensuring that the change is sustained. In this phase, project

teams develop measures and mechanisms to see if the change has taken hold, to the see if

employees are actually doing their jobs the new way and to celebrate success.

Outputs of Phase 3:

Reinforcement mechanisms

Compliance audit reports

Corrective action plans

Individual and group recognition approaches

Success celebrations

After action review

The image below shows the connection between the change management tools developed in the

organisational change management process and the phases of individual change described by


27

the ADKAR model. This picture is the essence of effective change management and is the core of

Prosci's change management methodology.

Change Management Matrix Approach:

The four key factors for success when implementing change within an organisation are:

Pressure for change – demonstrated senior management commitment is essential

A clear, shared vision – you must take everyone with you. This is a shared agenda that

benefits the whole organisation

Capacity for change – you need to provide the resources: time and finance

Action – and performance – “plan, do, check, act” (PDCA) – and keep communication

channels open

Factor 1: Pressure for change (the top-down approach)

Firstly there must, of course, be pressure for change – a driving force. The need for change has

been identified, the decision to proceed has been taken, and this now needs to be communicated

throughout the organisation.

Pressure for change could be senior management commitment from the outset, but it may have

come from customers or clients in a supply chain. It could come from a regulatory regime, such as

Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC), the implementation of an Environmental

Management System or, and this can often be the most effective source, pressure from the

workforce itself.

Who wants to work for a company or an organisation that has developed a notorious reputation

for polluting the environment or exploiting its suppliers? It is widely accepted that when people

take a pride in the organisation they work for, they perform better and will more readily put

themselves out to help achieve corporate goals.


28

For success, however, regardless of where the original pressure came from, senior management

commitment and drive for change is essential if momentum is to be maintained for effective

implementation.

The rest of the organisation will need to be convinced of the need and the case for change - this

is dealt with in more detail in Factor 2 (A clear shared vision). Only this can happen to good effect

if senior management, including the Chairman and Chief Executive, are collectively behind the

changes sought.

Senior management must be seen to be fully supportive by what they do and say - both privately

and publicly. If, however, senior management “talks the talk” by failing to back up their statements

with action and a continuous commitment, progress can soon stall. Other conflicting or new

priorities emerge and the momentum can be lost if senior management fail to remain fully

supportive of the project.

So, get senior management signed up to the change. And communicate this to all staff – giving

them the opportunity to feed in their contributions and feel that they have joint ownership of the

change being implemented.

Forward-thinking companies are already signed up to becoming more sustainable through

resource efficiency, using cleaner technologies, minimising waste and embracing the principles of

producer responsibility. But being more sustainable in its broadest sense also means attending to

social responsibilities as a good employer by, for example, encouraging fairness at work; helping

staff to develop their skills; introducing green transport plans; being a ‘good neighbour’ that is

responsive to the local community; and as an ethical trader. That is the positive message that

needs to be communicated throughout the organisation.

An environmental policy (whether new or improved) can be the signal to staff that things are

changing, and that they have a role to play in making this happen. It’s their agenda too. It’s in

their interests and in the interests of the organisation that the changes are made. This is where a

clear, shared vision (Factor 2) is essential.

Factor 2: A clear, shared vision

“Businesses are nothing more or less than organisations of people trying to get to a jointly

defined future” – Professor Howard H Stevenson, Harvard Business School

“As a manager the important thing is not what happens when you are there, but what happens

when you are not there” - Ken Blanchard

For change to be effective, it needs to be implemented at all levels; embedded in the culture of

the organisation. To keep colleagues with you and not against you they need to be motivated and

you need to understand what motivates them. You should never forget that change is a major

cause of stress amongst the workforce. Staff will usually respond well to challenges (that they feel

they can meet!); it’s fear of the unknown that raises stress levels. Getting staff motivated to

support the changes that are to be implemented is therefore crucial for success.

Staff, their managers and senior managers are all motivated by similar things. They do not,

however, necessarily place them in the same order of importance. These ‘motivators’ include

pride, happiness, responsibility, recognition, security, success, and, of course, money. The trick in


29

successfully managing change and getting the commitment and support from staff is to provide

these ‘motivators’ for your staff – or at least as many of them as possible. Here are some tips,

questions and ideas to help you:

PRIDE

“Follow where your enthusiasm takes you”

When was the last time you [or senior management] told or showed your staff how proud you are

of what they have achieved? The performance of your staff can drop significantly if they feel

unappreciated or taken for granted. Staff that take pride and some level of enjoyment in their work

and working environment are much more likely to perform well and provide new ideas for

improving the organisation’s own well-being.

HAPPINESS

“A happy team is an effective team”

A culture where laughter is permitted and encouraged can make all the difference in helping

everyone get through the day. A caring approach to your staff can reap many benefits; because if

they know their employer cares about them as individuals then they will be more likely to care

about the employer’s interests.

Taking the approach of ‘treating others as we would wish to be treated ourselves’ is the ‘golden

rule’ for strengthening and improving relationships between everyone at all levels in the

organisation.

RESPONSIBILITY

“It is amazing what you can accomplish if you do not care who gets the credit"- Harry Truman

Giving people more responsibility is a demonstration of trust. If people feel they are trusted they

usually respond by taking greater care and pride in their work. Is management prepared to

delegate responsibility and provide the back-up? Will management then take responsibility when

things go wrong? – Or does it have a blame culture?

SUCCESS

“Success in your life is not a single achievement. It’s all that you do with others and for others”

We all have slightly different views on what constitutes success. But there can often be common

factors such as market profile, corporate reputation and product quality. A useful exercise here is,

following a presentation on why change is being undertaken, to ask staff, individually or in small

focus groups, what they have as a vision for the company/organisation and also for themselves

as individuals. Good questions to get things going are:

What or where are you now?

What or where would you like to be? (ask teams to apply these questions to the company

as well as themselves)


30

A facilitated discussion can tease out where ideas overlap and demonstrate where common

ground exists and can be strengthened.

RECOGNITION

When the leader’s work is done, the people say ‘We did it ourselves’ – Lau Tzu

Are your staff valued and made to feel part of the organisation’s success? Even when times are

hard? When was the last time you took time out to say ‘thank you’ to staff at all levels of the

organisation for their individual contributions? To ignore this important motivator would be a

serious error; and could result in losing the support you need when implementing change.

An effective approach employers can take is to treat its employees as its most important and

valued customers. The employer is providing employment activity and wages; the employees

purchase these with their effort. The spin-off is that the external customers benefit from a more

highly motivated company to do business with.

SECURITY

“You do not lead people by hitting them over the head – that’s assault, not leadership” -

Eisenhower

Whenever change is being implemented the fear factor can set in. This can be the fear of change

itself and its consequences such as the possible loss of job security or loss of responsibility or

control. Continuous, honest and open communication is essential here. Change can take people

out of their ‘comfort zone’ and raise their stress levels. The challenge is to demonstrate that the

new ‘zone’ is even more comfortable and secure – or at least it will be once the initial short-term

discomfort of implementing change has been overcome.

MONEY

“I am not interested in money. I just want to be wonderful” – Marilyn Monroe

Money is of course an important motivator. Underpaid staff feel under-valued and are less likely to

respond positively to change – especially if it means more effort for little or no increase in either

pay or recognition – or both! Many, especially those with captivating outside interests, ‘work to live

rather than live to work’, but we need to recognise that most full-time employees spend more of

their waking hours at work than they spend on pursuing leisure interests or with their families.

This means that providing the other six motivators are equally as important as paying a fair wage

for a fair job of work done.

If your company is already highly profitable, staff may not have a strong inclination to reduce

operating or production costs by, for example, switching off equipment when not in use –

especially if the shareholders rather than their own pay packets benefit from cost-saving

measures. However, informing staff of the environmental impacts of the organisation (for example

carbon dioxide emissions or waste volumes going to landfill) and how staff have an important role

in reducing these, can be an effective motivator – especially as environmental awareness

continues to increase amongst the general population. The positive feedback to staff of

reductions in harmful environmental impacts can increase this motivation (“Haven’t we done well,

can we keep this up and do better?”).


31

Staff suggestion schemes, with financial rewards for employees, need to be handled sensitively.

Make sure you do deliver the rewards that you promise. Better still, let a percentage of costs

savings (subject to a capped limit perhaps) go towards supporting a local charitable cause that

has been chosen by staff. This can motivate those who are not unduly concerned with

environmental issues, but who may have local community interests.

Finally, management and staff alike need to remember that, in the words of Henry Ford,

“it is not the employer who pays wages; he only handles the money. It is the product that pays

wages”.

Factor 3: Capacity for change (resources)

“More business is lost every year through neglect than through any other cause” – Jim Cathcart

Capacity here means resources and these are staff time and, where appropriate, money. To

implement change you need to identify the resources that will be required before you proceed and

make sure these are provided. Often, the cost benefits from implementing energy efficiency

measures and waste minimisation programmes can provide the financial resources for an

ongoing programme of improvement.

It is usually the organisation’s own employees that have the information, intuition, ideas and

instincts necessary for implementing change effectively. When given the capability and the

opportunity to participate in improvement programmes, it is employees who often can find the

greatest cost savings and efficiency improvements.

Factor 4: Action

“We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence then, is not an act, but a habit” – Aristotle

Having got the other three factors in place (pressure, a clear shared vision and capacity) you now

have to implement the planned change.

“Energy is equal to desire and purpose” – Sheryl Adams

Keeping up momentum is what matters here and implementing the PLAN – DO - CHECK – ACT

management methodology is essential to maintaining the effectiveness and appropriateness of

the change. Good monitoring and analysis of the resulting data is essential. Make sure you

continue to keep employees informed of progress.


32

The Change Management Matrix

Plan

Do

Check

Act


33

Other interesting approaches to managing change

Appreciative Inquiry: A collaborative approach to organisational change, is partly based on

the assumption that change in a system is instantaneous ('Change at the Speed of

Imagination')

Scenario Planning: Scenario planning provides a platform for doing so by asking

management and employees to consider different future market possibilities in which their

organisations might find themselves

"Organize with Chaos": by Robin Rowley and Dr. Joseph Roevens. Essentially, change-

efficiency can improve greatly when management realise that "People do not resist their

own ideas". Open, information-sharing teams and networks, knock power hierarchies flat

when it comes to rapid innovation and change. The authors describe Change as a creative

cyclical process where some events can be managed, but others must be deliberately

'under'-managed and left alone to self-organize, ripen, and eventually improve the

business naturally. By looking at how things change in Nature, the authors observed that

major changes in the environment can precipitate a ubiquitous process of transformation.

Essentially the system moves away from efficient Control and refinement and

disintegrates into creative Chaos. As all the various dormant mutations and experiments

begin to assert themselves in the evolutionary soup, many fail, but a few of them 'fit'

successfully and may reproduce. Thus, they move through a transformational phase, back

into a higher level type of Control. Watching the system as a whole, it appears to move

through four distinct cyclical phases, which run like this: ENHANCE / PERTURB /

ATTRACT / EXCITE. In practice, Management can ENHANCE (a response to events

shifting in the environment, or the "change field"). PERTURB (self-organising

perturbations occur spontaneously; old ways disintegrate, etc.) Under-management and

executive silence reigns here if the natural process is not to be prematurely collapsed. The

system then moves into a creative, 'free for all' state of Chaos. ATTRACT (eventually new

people, groups, ideas and/or actions emerge, cluster and maybe resonate. EXCITE (time,

energy, resources and management can now be applied to enable the new systems to

synergise and develop. Profits occur as higher order control and efficiency rule

temporarily. Then, depending on the stability of the environment, or market competition, it

all starts over again as a continuous cycle of change.

Theory U: of Otto Scharmer who describes a process in which change strategies are

based on the emerging future rather than on lesson from the past

The Solution focused brief therapy approach to change, developed to assist individuals,

is equally useful for organisations

The Closework theory of intervention says change is driven by the champions, be they

internal project teams or consultants, working alongside the delivery team, individuals and

management in the places where the work gets done. Champions should get involved

rather than instruct and bring practical and implementable ideas

2.3 Stakeholder involvement in the change process

Everybody talks about change and Change Management. Few people actually know what it

means in practice. And, yes, we know that 90% of Change Management is good leadership,

transparency, a little bit of good luck and a strong belief in the higher Gods of management.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appreciative_Inquiry

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Theory_U&action=edit&redlink=1

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Otto_Scharmer&action=edit&redlink=1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solution_focused_brief_therapy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closework


34

On the other side, most large organisations run so many change projects at the same time, that

change fatigue predominates the attitude of their staff: new companywide software, new training

programs, new leadership guidelines, merger and acquisitions, implementation of matrix

organisation, new customer relation management programs, etc. - all this happens, if not in

parallel, then at least in a short subsequence.

Seeing the reality of many companies, what often surprises (and fascinates) us is the fact that

they still produce and sell (and often very successfully)! So, if organisations want to change, what

is the best route? A central question for a manager who is about to start a new project is the

question of stakeholder involvement. In few cases, those who want to initiate a change process

ask themselves, whether top down or bottom up is the right direction to drive the change. The

history of failures shows that in many cases those who are affected by the change are not

consulted before the start of a project.

A good example is Nestlés ERP story. Read more at:

http://www.cio.com/archive/051502/nestle.html. Whoever thought that companywide projects for

implementation of a new software has something to do with Change Management – here is the

proof!

"Nestlé learned the hard way that an enterprise wide rollout involves much more than simply

installing software. ‘When you move to SAP, you are changing the way people work,' Jeri Dunn,

CIO of Nestle, USA, says. 'You are challenging their principles, their beliefs and the way they

have done things for many, many years.'"

For a systems thinker, there is no alternative than involving the whole system in the change.

Because of the auto-poetic forces of a complex system, it will always try to rearrange internally to

avoid change. Because change is firstly a threat, and only secondly an opportunity.

However, the reality of many organisations is different. Involving many stakeholders in a change

process does not only need a lot of resources. It also needs a new approach to leadership that

identifies more with process facilitation than with process control. Not all companies qualify for

that call.

Therefore, although we advocate whole systems change, we know that not all organisations are

ready to go along that path. Should we leave those alone? Should we talk them into organisation

of large stakeholder conventions in which the vision and the strategy of the company is delivered

from bottom up - even if they are not ready? The answer is a clear NO. As change practitioners,

we need to see the reality of the organisation, and make appropriate suggestions for a change

strategy. This could an advice to strong and charismatic boss of a medium size company to

implement her dreams against all odds. Or it could be helping the well-established international

organisation promoting new tools and techniques for planning. Or, it could be a large institutional

learning process involving the "Whole System". The following matrix is based on a design Peter

Senge has provided in his famous Fifth Discipline Fieldbook. It shows the different steps of

involvement and participation in change processes:

"Telling" means that decisions about the change process are taken on the highest managerial

level. Stakeholders / employees have only the choice of accepting the top-down plan or to leave

the system. Implementing an entire chance process top-down leads to frustration and refusal of

co-operation.

http://www.cio.com/archive/051502/nestle.html


35

"Selling" means that change plans are designed at top-level and stakeholders are invited to join

in--the change is advocated. The limitation of selling lays in the fact that the top management

wants to hear a "yes", and the staff wants to hear that they will keep their jobs. So, most will give

a compliant "yes", which is not a safe base for commitment.

"Testing", whilst still a top-down approach, lays the vision out for inspection by the stakeholders

and asks for their comments. The management intends to find out whether stakeholders support

the change process, and opens up for proposals. Testing can be done on a limited scale

("piloting") perhaps better to expand, to differentiate between representation and piloting, but

could also concern the whole system. The vision remains as is, but the way to reach the vision is

subject to negotiations between the different stakeholder groups.

"Consulting" is the preferred mechanism for a management that recognises that it cannot

possibly have all the answers. Consulting the stakeholders about the change, strengthens the

vision of change. In recent time, many tools have been developed to allow a large number of

stakeholders to participate in the planning process. However, such a process takes time and

requires commitment at the top-level to correct initial decisions.

"Co-creating" means developing a vision jointly with stakeholders from the very beginning. It

secures the highest degree of ownership.

Have a look at a figure that shows tools that are related to the five different steps, and the

required degree and type of leadership.


36


37

Ralph Stacey's Agreement and Certainty Matrix

In the last ten years, complexity science had a strong impact on the theory and practice of change

facilitation. Tools like Open Space Technology, Appreciative Inquiry and others are based on the

assumption that highly complex social systems like organisations follow certain generic principles

and resemble other systems such as the body, colonies of ants, swarms of fish or birds, etc. Also,

cybernetic models have been applied, for example for the description of systems archetypes by

Peter Senge. Searching for a model that gives a simple road map for dealing with complexity, the

model of Ralph Stacey is most useful.

As it can be seen in the diagram below, Stacey has proposed a matrix that introduces two

dimensions with regards to management of organisations: Certainty and Agreement:

Certainty depends on the quality of the information base that facilitates individual and joint

decisions in organisations. Rational management has tried hard to increase uncertainty by

introducing tools like fishbone analysis, the Boston Matrix, customer research, etc. And, in fact

there are many day-to-day decisions in management, where analytical decision making is highly

successful. There are, however, many situations in which decision is made on assumptions.

Depending on the number of stakeholders involved, the projected time frame, the susceptibility of

the project to external influence factors, etc., projects might become very complex and it becomes

impossible to realistically predict outcomes.

Modern social systems such as organisations are mainly self-organised on the base of

negotiation processes. The degree of agreement among the people directly involved on what

should be done ("the truth") with respect to the implementation methodology of a project is an

important factor determining success.

Many simple business processes are situated at a level in which it is certain what needs to be

done and people involved agree on that. Here, traditional management approaches, e.g.

management by objectives apply and work well. However, leaders should always question

themselves, "How do we know that we know?", "Have we assessed all the critical variables?"

and, "What have we done to assure that people in our organisation share a common

perspective?" Often, managers are blinded by their own vision. A tool to assess different

perspectives is a participatory risk analysis.

http://www.change-management-toolbook.com/mod/glossary/showentry.php?courseid=1&concept=Change+Facilitation

http://www.change-management-toolbook.com/mod/glossary/showentry.php?courseid=1&concept=Change+Facilitation


38

Very often, strategic analyses show a strategy that is most likely to lead to a better business

performance. What has to be done, and what will be the outcome, is quite obvious to analysts.

However, members of the organisation might not agree or, for any reason, show resistance to the

planned changes. Take, for example, the implementation of company-wide software platforms

that facilitates management of business processes. There are hundreds of examples where such

projects have faced severe problems during the implementation phase. A case study how Nestlé

has learned this the hard way can be found at http://www.cio.com/archive/051502/nestle.html.

So, what to do in situations characterized by certainty but disagreement and resistance? If you

can't (or don't want) to fire all that are blocking your plans, there is no other way than selling your

project. This takes time and resources but will save you a lot of money at the end. Of the modern

Change Management approaches, Real Time Strategic Change (RTSC) is certainly one

methodological framework to be applied in such situations.

The other extreme in which managers find themselves and their organisations is characterised by

a high agreement of stakeholders - what Senge calls "shared vision", but a high degree of

uncertainty. "How will our business sector evolve?", "What new technologies will be available

tomorrow?", "Which political decisions will influence our future?” etc. are just some key questions

http://www.cio.com/archive/051502/nestle.html


39

that apply. This is the area of scenario design. Also, the current theories of Otto Scharmer

(http://www.ottoscharmer.com/) provide leverage to navigate through such environments. Also,

participatory approaches for defining strategies apply very well in such situations.

You wouldn't like to be in the manager's hot seat who faces a situation in which the future is

highly uncertain and the stakeholders are far beyond any agreement. However, many political

leaders are operating in exactly such an environment. In an organisation you would do everything

to avoid that situation, because it is what complexity scientists call "The Edge of Chaos". The fall

of the Berlin wall, one of my favorite stories that illustrate complexity, is such a story, where a

system that had been stable for 40 years, collapsed in one night of freedom celebration.

Most contemporary management processes are situated in a field that fluctuates between the

extremes that have been delineated above. Characterised by a medium to high level of

uncertainty and by stakeholders with highly diversified perspectives on what should be done.

Here, laws of complexity science and neurobiology apply to change in organisations, and change

is the norm. In such environments, the main task of management is to facilitate the co-creation of

the organisation's future, to provide room for self-organisation and to let people decide

themselves about their own and their organisation's issues. I firmly believe that such strategies

are the only way to lead out of the political crisis of the world, and that more and more profit and

non-profit organisations will adapt management tools for co-creation, such as Open Space

Technology, Appreciative Inquiry, World Café, and other tools to come.

2.4 Trends in change management

The top ten trends are:

1. A recognition of the need for change management

Overall, participants saw a greater understanding of and appreciation for the role of change

management. Organisations and project-focused employees saw change management as

important and as a needed aspect of any change project. Change management was identified as

a key contributor to project success. There was a wider appreciation of the role change

management played in contributing to return on investment (ROI) and benefit realization of

projects; it was viewed as essential. A number of participants also commented on the growing

interest and attention by senior leaders.

2. Change management competency building

Viewing change management as an emerging and necessary competency moved up from

number five on the trends list in 2007 to number two in the 2009 study. Participants indicated

more demand for training and knowledge around change management, as well as more

widespread competency building programs. Change management competencies were becoming

evident in senior leadership levels and front-line management levels.

3. Dedication of resources for change management

Participants identified the use of dedicated resources focused on change management as a key

trend in their organisation. Project leaders were more likely to appoint change management

http://www.ottoscharmer.com/


40

resources to support their change initiative, and change management specialists were being

identified and developed within the organisation.

4. Use of change management tools

The fourth most-cited trend was a greater adoption of change management tools, processes and

methodologies. Participants indicated that change management and its application was becoming

more consistent and formalized in their organisation. The use of more structured and formal

processes was number two in the list of trends in the 2007 study.

5. Application of change management on projects

Participants commented that change management resources were now sought out by project

teams, rather than looking for projects to support as they had done in the past. Project teams

were bringing change management resources on board earlier in the project, during the planning

phase, and were considering people-side issues earlier. Several participants indicated that

change management had become a requirement and that no major projects moved forward

without change management.

6. Project management and change management integration

Integration of change management and project management moved down several spots from the

2007 study in the list of top trends. Participants commented on the partnership, alignment and

involvement in the planning process that was taking place with the project management and

change management functions.

7. Change saturation

As evidenced by other findings in the study, organisations were increasingly facing a point of

change saturation. The recognition of this condition and an increasing pace of change were

highlighted as emerging trends. One participant noted the “change avalanche” the organisation

was experiencing.

8. Standard change management approach

More organisations were establishing a standard change management methodology for the entire

enterprise.

9. Establishment of a change management group

Some organisations were creating and staffing a change management function in the

organisation, sometimes called the Change Management Office (CMO). Advances were made in

staffing this group which centrally supported change management and change management

training efforts. A number of participants indicated they were currently trying to decide where this

group would reside in the organisation.


41

10. Management of the portfolio of change

Several participants indicated that their organisations were making progress in understanding the

people impact across the multiple projects underway. Participants mentioned steps including

managing the portfolio of change, tracking projects, mapping future changes and prioritizing

projects based on the change load.

Trends in terms of change management methodologies: Principle-based Real Time Strategic

Change

Real Time: This principle challenges people to think and act as if the future were now.

Preferred Future: This principle reminds people to pay attention to bringing the best of

the past and present with them while at the same time they build the future they desire.

Creating Community: This principle encourages people to join together as strong

individuals while at the same time becoming a strong community, and vice versa. A key

question related to this principle is: "What kind of community do we want and need to be?"

Common Understanding: This principle ensures that informed decisions are made

through inviting diverse viewpoints while at the same time establishing a larger collective

organisational intelligence.

Reality is a Key Driver: This principle guides decisions and actions through people

focusing in on specific issues and opportunities that provide significant leverage for

change. They simultaneously scan for relevant information amidst the complex, wide-

ranging, and often messy realities of change.

Empowerment/Inclusion: This principle focuses on empowering individuals and teams

through inclusion and delegation while clearly defining where power will be retained where

it currently resides.

http://humanresources.about.com/od/glossarye/a/empowerment_def.htm


42

2.5 Managing change in the sector

As primary agents of transformation within finance and, increasingly, the company at large, CFOs

are expected to demonstrate a high level of expertise in change management. Just about any

initiative, from implementing a new software package to a restructuring the department calls on

this crucial set of leadership skills. But while change management has been the subject of much

research for decades, there's not a lot of evidence that corporate leaders are getting any better at

it. Consulting firm Bain and Co. recently studied 100 strategy and performance improvement

projects and concluded that in more than 80 per cent of cases, companies failed to establish a

true point of departure for their initiative: They failed to adequately understand the performance

issues that they wanted to tackle.

The basic elements of successful change management are straightforward, but many leaders

omit or ignore them. In a new report, Bain offers a useful framework for driving change based on

the acronym PLOT: plan, lead, operate, and track. Along the way, the report gives some

fascinating insights into failed initiatives as well as massively successful ones, such as Idris Jala's

turnaround of Malaysia Airlines.

Plan. The first stage involves cutting through complexity to identify the primary drivers of change,

defining the current state and the successful end-state, and mapping the transition from the one

to the other. While this may seem like not much more than common sense, many initiatives end

up unraveling precisely because leaders devote insufficient time and attention to this phase.

They also underestimate the human capital and financial resources they need to get the job done.

Under-investing in the project leads to two problems: it sends a signal that the initiative may not

be that important after all, and it often results in slow progress toward key goals. The result is a

negative cycle that can easily derail the project.

Lead. This is the people phase; it centers around assembling the right team for the job, setting

accountabilities, and communicating the goals. It also encompasses the process of creating

milestones and mobilizing the troops around them. At Malaysia Airlines, for example, Jala held

prolonged think sessions with key managers to identify ways to achieve interim goals. He then

broke the objectives down into specific activities and assigned responsibility for each one.

Operate. At this point, leaders have to make the difficult choices, including people-related ones

that are necessary to keep the project on track. They may need to overrule or remove managers

who are resistant to change. And they'll certainly need to develop a system to keep people

accountable. For example, Jala achieved that by establishing a separate PandL statement for

every route in the airline's book. And he made sure that each PandL has a manager responsible

for overseeing it.

Track. As the initiative unfolds, leaders need to monitor a small number of key indicators, reward

relentlessly, and celebrate successes. Bain recommends a review of progress every two weeks to

two months. Incentive programs can be linked not only to personal performance and the

company's financial objectives, but also to specific operational milestones.

Jala's initiative is sharply focused on his company's cash position, and he receives a daily report

showing exactly how much the airline has in its various accounts around the world. He also gets a

PandL statement and details of sales and passenger loads on a daily basis. It seems to be


43

working. Jala's approach has helped him take Malaysia Airlines from near-bankruptcy to

profitability levels nearly five times original projections for 2007 -- within the space of two years.

Case study example: Australian Finance Change Management Project

Overview: Australian Bank was merging with a Finance and Insurance company. A significant

component of this merger was to create one way to operate across all customer contact points

(branches, call centers, websites, ATM’s etc). Our assignment was to project manage the:

Creation of a Standard Operating Environment (SOE).

Develop and implement a new "front end" for a post-merger banking system.

The system was to be used by 235 bank branches, 450 Call Centre staff and corporate

staff; in total over 2,500 end users.

Our assignment was to manage the project, across entire lifecycle:

Strategy development

RFP's and vendor selection

Detailed scope

Build and test, pilot

Implementation and review

Post Go Live support

Project budget was AUD$25M with a team of 65 (internal and consultants).The project was

completed on time within budget and with full functionality.

2.6 Factors in selecting a change management strategy

Generally speaking, there is no single change strategy. You can adopt a general or what is called

a "grand strategy" but, for any given initiative, you are best served by some mix of strategies.

Which of the preceding strategies to use in your mix of strategies is a decision affected by a

number of factors.

Some of the more important ones follow.

Degree of Resistance. Strong resistance argues for a coupling of Power-Coercive and

Environmental-Adaptive strategies. Weak resistance or concurrence argues for a

combination of Empirical-Rational and Normative-Re-educative strategies.

Target Population. Large populations argue for a mix of all four strategies, something for

everyone so to speak.

The Stakes. High stakes argue for a mix of all four strategies. When the stakes are high,

nothing can be left to chance.

The Time Frame. Short time frames argue for a Power-Coercive strategy. Longer time

frames argue for a mix of Empirical-Rational, Normative-Re-educative, and

Environmental-Adaptive strategies.

Expertise. Having available adequate expertise at making change argues for some mix of

the strategies outlined above. Not having it available argues for reliance on the power-

coercive strategy.


44

Dependency. This is a classic double-edged sword. If the organisation is dependent on its

people, management's ability to command or demand is limited. Conversely, if people are

dependent upon the organisation, their ability to oppose or resist is limited. (Mutual

dependency almost always signals a requirement for some level of negotiation.)

2.7 Change management strategies

Change strategy components:

Clarify what “change” is understood as for the business – link to strategy;

Clarify role of change management support (change agent) – what can be expected,

included and excluded;

Clarify process/philosophy to be used to approach to deal with change – include possible

levels, types, outputs, inputs, processes and outcomes

Strategy Description

Empirical-Rational

People are rational and will follow their self-interest — once it is

revealed to them. Change is based on the communication of

information and the proffering of incentives.

Normative-Re-educative

People are social beings and will adhere to cultural norms and

values. Change is based on redefining and reinterpreting existing

norms and values, and developing commitments to new ones.

Power-Coercive

People are basically compliant and will generally do what they are

told or can be made to do. Change is based on the exercise of

authority and the imposition of sanctions.

Environmental-Adaptive

People oppose loss and disruption but they adapt readily to new

circumstances. Change is based on building a new organisation and

gradually transferring people from the old one to the new one.

Types of change management strategies include:

1. Directive strategies. This strategy highlights the manager's right to manage change and the

use of authority to impose change with little or no involvement of other people. The advantage

of the directive approach is that change can be undertaken quickly. However, the

disadvantage of this approach is that it does not take into consideration the views, or feelings,

of those involved in, or affected by, the imposed change. This approach may lead to valuable

information and ideas being missed and there is usually strong resentment from staff when

changes are imposed rather than discussed and agreed.

2. Expert strategies. This approach sees the management of change as a problem solving

process that needs to be resolved by an 'expert'. This approach is mainly applied to more

technical problems, such as the introduction of a new learner management system, and will

normally be led by a specialist project team or senior manager. There is likely to be little

involvement with those affected by the change. The advantages to using this strategy is that

experts play a major role in the solution and the solution can be implemented quickly as a

small number of 'experts' are involved. Again, there are some issues in relation to this strategy

as those affected may have different views than those of the expert and may not appreciate

the solution being imposed or the outcomes of the changes made.


45

3. Negotiating strategies. This approach highlights the willingness on the part of senior

managers to negotiate and bargain in order to effect change. Senior managers must also

accept that adjustments and concessions may need to be made in order to implement

change. This approach acknowledges that those affected by change have the right to have a

say in what changes are made, how they are implemented and the expected outcomes. The

disadvantage to this approach is that it takes more time to effect change, the outcomes

cannot be predicted and the changes made may not fulfil the total expectations of the

managers affecting the change. The advantage is that individuals will feel involved in the

change and be more supportive of the changes made.

4. Educative strategies. This approach involves changing people's values and beliefs, 'winning

hearts and minds', in order for them to fully support the changes being made and move

toward the development of a shared set of organisational values that individuals are willing,

and able to support . A mixture of activities will be used; persuasion; education; training and

selection, led by consultants, specialists and in-house experts. Again, the disadvantage of this

approach is that it takes longer to implement. The advantage is that individuals within the

organisation will have positive commitment to the changes being made.

5. Participative strategies. This strategy stresses the full involvement of all of those involved,

and affected by, the anticipated changes. Although driven by senior managers the process will

be less management dominated and driven more by groups or individuals within the

organisation. The views of all will be taken into account before changes are made. Outside

consultants and experts can be used to facilitate the process but they will not make any

decisions as to the outcomes. The main disadvantages of this process are the length of time

taken before any changes are made, it can be more costly due to the number of meetings that

take place, the payment of consultants/experts over a longer time period and the outcomes

cannot be predicted. However, the benefits of this approach are that any changes made are

more likely to be supported due to the involvement of all those affected, the commitment of

individuals and groups within the organisation will increase as those individuals and groups

feel ownership over the changes being implemented. The organisation and individuals also

have the opportunity to learn from this experience and will know more about the organisation

and how it functions, thus increasing their skills, knowledge and effectiveness to the

organisation.

2.8 Creating an organisational culture that embraces change management

Changing your organisational culture is the toughest task you will ever take on. Your

organisational culture was formed over years of interaction between the participants in the

organisation can feel like rolling rocks uphill. Organisational cultures form for a reason. Perhaps

the current organisational culture matches the style and comfort zone of the company founder.

Culture frequently echoes the prevailing management style. Since managers tend to hire people

just like themselves, the established organisational culture is reinforced by new hires.

Organisational culture grows over time. People are comfortable with the current organisational

culture. For people to consider culture change, usually a significant event must occur. An event

that rocks their world such as flirting with bankruptcy, a significant loss of sales and customers, or

losing a million dollars, might get people's attention. Even then, to recognize that the

organisational culture is the culprit and to take steps to change it, is a tough journey. In no way do

I mean to trivialize the difficulty of the experience of organisational culture change by


46

summarizing it in this article, but here are my best ideas about culture change that can help your

organisation grow and transform.

When people in an organisation realize and recognize that their current organisational culture

needs to transform to support the organisation's success and progress, change can occur. But

change is not pretty and change is not easy. The good news? Organisational culture change is

possible. Culture change requires understanding, commitment, and tools.

Steps in Organisational Culture Change

There are three major steps involved in changing an organisation's culture.

Before an organisation can change its culture, it must first understand the current culture,

or the way things are now. Do take the time to pursue the activities in this article before

moving on to the next steps.

Once you understand your current organisational culture, your organisation must then,

and decide what the organisational culture should look like to support success. What

vision does the organisation have for its future and how must the culture change to

support the accomplishment of that vision?

Finally, the individuals in the organisation must decide to change their behavior to create

the desired organisational culture. This is the hardest step in culture change.

Plan the Desired Organisational Culture

The organisation must plan where it wants to go before trying to make any changes in the

organisational culture. With a clear picture of where the organisation is currently, the organisation

can plan where it wants to be next. Mission, vision, and values: to provide a framework for the

assessment and evaluation of the current organisational culture, your organisation needs to

develop a picture of its desired future. What does the organisation want to create for the future?

Mission, vision, and values should be examined for both the strategic and the value based

components of the organisation. Your management team needs to answer questions such as:

What are the five most important values you would like to see represented in your

organisational culture?

Are these values compatible with your current organisational culture? Do they exist now?

If not, why not? If they are so important, why are you not attaining these values?

Take a look at the rest of the actions you need to take to change your organisational culture.

What needs to happen to create the culture desired by the organisation? You cannot change the

organisational culture without knowing where your organisation wants to be or what elements of

the current organisational culture need to change. What cultural elements support the success of

your organisation, or not? As an example, your team decides that you spend too much time

agreeing with each other rather than challenging the forecasts and assumptions of fellow team

members, that typically have been incorrect.

In a second example, your key management team members, who must lead the company, spend

most of their time team building with various members of the team on an individual basis, and to

promote individual agendas, to the detriment of the cohesive functioning of the whole group.

Third, your company employees appear to make a decision, but, in truth, are waiting for the

"blessing" from the company owner or founder to actually move forward with the plan.

http://humanresources.about.com/cs/strategicplanning1/a/strategicplan.htm

http://humanresources.about.com/od/organizationalculture/a/culture_change_2.htm


47

In each of these situations, components of the organisational culture will keep your organisation

from moving forward with the success you deserve. You need to consciously identify the cultural

impediments and decide to change them.

However, knowing what the desired organisational culture looks like is not enough. Organisations

must create plans to ensure that the desired organisational culture becomes a reality.

Change the Organisational Culture

It is more difficult to change the culture of an existing organisation than to create a culture in a

brand new organisation. When an organisational culture is already established, people must

unlearn the old values, assumptions, and behaviors before they can learn the new ones.

The two most important elements for creating organisational cultural change are executive

support and training.

Executive support: Executives in the organisation must support the cultural change, and

in ways beyond verbal support. They must show behavioural support for the cultural

change. Executives must lead the change by changing their own behaviours. It is

extremely important for executives to consistently support the change.

Training: Culture change depends on behaviour change. Members of the organisation

must clearly understand what is expected of them, and must know how to actually do the

new behaviours, once they have been defined. Training can be very useful in both

communicating expectations and teaching new behaviours.

Additional Ways to Change the Organisational Culture

Other components important in changing the culture of an organisation are:

Create value and belief statements: use employee focus groups, by department, to put

the mission, vision, and values into words that state their impact on each employee's job.

For one job, the employee stated: "I live the value of quality patient care by listening

attentively whenever a patient speaks." This exercise gives all employees a common

understanding of the desired culture that actually reflects the actions they must commit to

on their jobs.

Practice effective communication: keeping all employees informed about the

organisational culture change process ensures commitment and success. Telling

employees what is expected of them is critical for effective organisational culture change.

Review organisational structure: changing the physical structure of the company to

align it with the desired organisational culture may be necessary. As an example, in a

small company, four distinct business units competing for product, customers, and internal

support resources, may not support the creation of an effective organisational culture.

These units are unlikely to align to support the overall success of the business.

Redesign your approach to rewards and recognition: you will likely need to change

the reward system to encourage the behaviours vital to the desired organisational culture.

Review all work systems such as employee promotions, pay practices, performance

management, and employee selection to make sure they are aligned with the desired

culture. As an example, you cannot just reward individual performance if the requirements

http://humanresources.about.com/cs/managementissues/a/walktalk.htm

http://humanresources.about.com/od/glossaryp/g/promotion.htm

http://humanresources.about.com/od/salaryandbenefits/index.htm

http://humanresources.about.com/od/performancemanagement/

http://humanresources.about.com/od/performancemanagement/

http://humanresources.about.com/od/selectemployees/index.htm


48

of your organisational culture specify team work. An executive's total bonus cannot reward

the accomplishment of his department's goals without recognizing the importance of him

playing well with others on the executive team to accomplish your organisational goals.

You can change your organisational culture to support the accomplishment of your business

goals. Changing the organisational culture requires time, commitment, planning and proper

execution - but it can be done.

2.9 Developing a change management plan

Change management is a process that allows companies to effectively implement a change

within their organisation. But, before you begin trying to implement the intended change, you

need to create a change management plan. There are many advantages and disadvantages of

change management. You need to decide for yourself if you are willing to accept the

disadvantages before you move forward with your plan. It helps to read an overview of change

management before you start.

Change management is necessary because most businesses nowadays are very decentralized.

Multiple employees or users may be the ones who are making a change to a system. This could

lead to trouble if those making the changes do not understand how these changes could affect

the organisation as a whole. This is why you should always have a change management plan in

place before a change is made.

Plan Objectives

The objectives of your plan should be pretty obvious, but you should have them written down

somewhere. For example:

Train and educate employees, stakeholders, management, and clients about why the

change is necessary and what the change will involve.

Come up with back-out procedures in case the change is not having the desired effect.

Implement the planned change.

Monitor and evaluate the change before, during and after its implementation.

Plan Guidelines

Your change management plan should involve plenty of documentation. Every change needs to

be documented so that you have a written record of what was done. Also, communication before,

during, and after the process is a must. You need to show why the change is necessary, what is

being done and what risks are involved in the change.

A change management plan can be broken down into several steps. If you follow these steps, it

will help you successfully implement your plan.

1. Create your plan and define your change management process.

You need to come up with procedures for your change management process. Who is responsible

for what? Who will be your change management coordinator? How will you measure the change

http://humanresources.about.com/od/workrelationships/a/play_well.htm

http://www.brighthub.com/office/project-management/articles/18477.aspx






49

and its effectiveness? What tools will be used? What types of changes are being implemented?

What has priority?

2. Submission of change requests.

You need to obtain in writing all of the changes that are being proposed. Change requests need

to be given to the change management coordinator. You should have an established change

request form on hand, which contains both the date, time and what is being requested. You can

see an example of a change management request/record form in our Media Gallery.

3. Implementation of change management strategy.

Start implementing your change management strategy, and monitor it before, during, and after

the change. You should have back-out strategies in place in case the change is not effective.

4. Evaluation.

The change coordinator needs to see where change was effective, where it created problems,

and whether or not it was effective as a whole.

5. Update the change management plan if the initial plan is not effective.

You may need to modify the plan for a variety of reasons, including ineffectiveness, too many

back-outs, only a certain amount of changes are being handled, etc.

Once your change management plan has been implemented, you need to constantly evaluate its

success and its impact for years to come. A plan that was effectively implemented, for example,

could fall apart way after its adoption because employees have slipped back into their old ways of

doing things.

http://www.brighthub.com/office/project-management/media/p/18069.aspx


50


51

2.10 The role of the change agent

A change agent may be a full time organisational development professional, a leader of a division

or a middle manager charged with the responsibility of bringing about a change in his/her area.

Anyone involved in helping a team achieve something new becomes an agent of

change. Depending on the type of change he/she is tasked with, a change agent may perform

any of the following roles.

However a change master is able to perform all of these roles.

Change managers are responsible for garnering support for change and overcoming resistance to

change. There are ten techniques that change managers can use to accomplish this:

1. Plan well. Appropriate time and effort must go into planning change before implementation

begins.

2. Allow for discussion and negotiation. Employees must have some input into the changes.

This two-way communication can help reduce employee concerns.

3. Allow for participation. If employees participate in changes that affect them, they are more

likely to support those changes.

4. Emphasize the financial benefits. If employees can earn higher compensation through

organisational change, telling them about this possibility will help to increase support for

the change.

5. Avoid too much change. Employees can only handle a certain amount of change before

there are negative repercussions from stress, so changes should be introduced slowly and

over time.

6. Gain political support. For change to be successful, certain key employees (those with

informal power in the organisation) must support it.

7. Let employees see successful change. Employees will be more willing to support change

if they see that it has worked successfully in other companies or other areas of their

company.

8. Reduce uncertainty. Uncertainty about the change effort can cause negative emotions and

actions, and any information that change managers can give to reduce uncertainty can

reduce resistance to change.

9. Ask questions to involve workers. Change managers should ask workers questions that

move them toward a goal or objective or that reinforce positive accomplishments.

10. Build strong working relationships. Better working relationships in general will aid in

change management; trust and mutual respect are critical elements of good working

relationships.

Managing change can be a reactive or a proactive process, and there are a number of different

models of organisational change. Each model emphasizes different approaches to understanding

and managing change. In many of these models, the role of the change manager is emphasized.

The change manager may be a part of a transitional management team or may be a change

agent. This person facilitates the changes to the organisation and is often a critical element in the

success or failure of the change.


52

The various roles of the change agent:

Diagnostician and developer of clear change goals

Like a medical practitioner, the change agent will begin by diagnosing what the real issues are,

and then proposing clear goal directed solutions. He/she will begin by analysing:

The existing problems or issues.

The current reality of the organisation/division.

The desired future ideal state.

The barriers preventing the organisation from achieving that desired state.

The forces for change that exist within the organisation.

The dreams, goals and values of the key stakeholders within the organisation

The organisation's future strategy.

The organisation's values.

The organisation's readiness and capacity for change.

Changes occurring in the organisation's external environment that may impact on the

organisation and its customers.

From this the diagnostician will determine the type of change required by the organisation.

The facilitator

The most complex role of a change agent, is getting others to 'buy in' to the change process, and

getting them committed to taking relevant actions. The facilitator gets involved in:

Identifying the key stakeholders of the change.

Involving these stakeholders in the diagnostic process. This means helping them to

achieve consensus on the changes the organisation needs to make. When done in a

participative process, this helps create ownership for change.

Helping the stakeholders to set clear goals for their change process.

Educating these stakeholders about the changes they want to make and helping them to

understand how the changes they've selected will impact on the rest of the organisation.

(systems thinking.)

Helping the stakeholders to understand how these changes will benefit the company, their

division and themselves. This in turn builds commitment to the change.

Helping the stakeholders understand the 'costs' of these changes to the company, their

division and to themselves personally.

The designer

Designing a change process that will achieve specific change goals, is a creative process. This

involves:

Reviewing all the change tools and interventions that are available.

Selecting those specific change tools and interventions that will help the organisation to

achieve its change goals.

Creating additional activities and interventions to fill any gaps.

Checking that each intervention supports every other intervention, and that all

interventions support the company's values and strategies.


53

Arranging and integrating these interventions into one simple, seamless, step by step

process.

Deciding on the roles that need to be played to support the process.

The project manager

Many different roles are required for a change process to work. Often a change agent will play the

role of a project manager and co-ordinate the activities of the different role players. Typical roles

in a change process include:

A change steering committee

The CEO of the company

The executive team

Regional coordinators (in large scale changes)

External consultants

Internal consultants

Middle managers

Departmental or divisional change agents

Communications coordinators

Change web designers

Marketing professionals

Individuals within the company

The educator

Those involved in managing the change, and those who will be affected by the change, often are

surprised by their feelings when confronted by change. Resistance, frustration and confusion of

common emotions associated by change.

A successful change agent educates people about what to expect from the change process. This

includes topics such as:

The psychological phases people go through when experiencing change

How to deal with these feelings How to help others understand and deal with their feelings

How to deal with 'resistance to change'

How to make a change process fun, exciting and developmental rather than scary and

frustrating

How to overcome barriers to change

Tools for making your change process successful

The role of creativity in a change process

The marketer

Many individuals dislike change. While they see that it may benefit the company, change

to them simply means additional work, inefficiencies, feelings of incompetence, and

maybe a more limited career path.

The skillful marketer creates the belief that participating in this change will be:

Fun and rewarding

An opportunity to develop new useful skills


54

An opportunity to increase one's visibility within the organisation

Like embarking on an exciting adventure through which every individual discovers his/her

personal magic

To do this, the marketer applies innovative marketing techniques more often found in the

advertising, communications industries. These include:

Advertising

Competitions

Participative media such as web sites, theatre, and clubs.

Creative media such as themes, logos, slogans, storytelling, art, music, songs and 'war

cries'

Themed gifts to reinforce the change

Awards and prizes

Role models and success stories

Inspiration agent

Why is the Oprah show so successful? People react with love, energy, excitement and creativity

to anything that touches their soul. An inspiration agent finds ways to use the change process to:

Help individuals discover the magic they have within them.

Help individuals to dream of the personal greatness they could achieve.

Encourage individuals to take risks to use their special magic

Help individuals to overcome barriers to personal success

Celebrate individual's small successes

Systems integrator and coordinator

Often individuals who contribute to a change, get discouraged when they find they are being

punished rather than rewarded for their efforts. This situation arises when the reward and

recognition systems in the company are not aligned to the change. The change agent often needs

to ensure that the following systems support the change he/she is making.

Budgeting

Performance management

Compensation systems

Incentive and reward systems

Reporting systems

Measurement criteria

Promotions criteria

Monitor

Since organisations are integrated systems, any change to one part of the system may trigger or

unexpected changes to other parts of the system. Similarly, unless you consider changes to the

culture of your company, you may find that certain elements of the system may prevent your

change from working.


55

The monitor role regularly measures progress towards the change goals. He/she constantly

questions "what is working", "what isn't working" and "what do we need to change".

He/she provides regular feedback on progress to:

The CEO

The executive team

Other change agents or change roles

Managers

Individuals involved in change

He/she encourages them to:

Identify obstacles to change and find creative ways of overcoming these at their own

levels.

Identify obstacles that require changes to the entire system and may require approval from

the CEO

Identify and share success stories

Turn successful people into role models to encourage others

Recognise and reward those who contribute to change

Qualities of a change agent:

While many people will find that they can perform one or two of the change agent roles with ease,

a change master would be able to perform all the change roles.

The ideal change master would have the following qualities:

Common sense. And the courage to use it.

Credibility and trust - the ability to work at all levels in the organisation.

A wide range of business knowledge - preferably someone with experience in 3-4 different

areas, or an MBA, or a general management experience.

Knowledge of change management.

The ability to work with teams of people both inside and outside the organisation. This

includes the ability to work with people across all departments.

The ability to do very unstructured work.

Creativity. The ability to custom design processes to meet the goals of the organisation.

Self-confidence balanced by humility.

Facilitation skills

Design skills.

Coaching skills.

A love of innovation and new ways of doing things.

A sense of humour and a sense of fun.

A spirit of caring.

The ability to inspire people. To bring out the magic within every individual and every

team.


56

Skills essential for a change agent:

Skills and Strategies: Managing the kinds of changes encountered by and instituted within

organisations requires an unusually broad and finely honed set of skills, chief among which are

the following:

Political Skills: Organisations are first and foremost social systems. Without people there can be

no organisation. Lose sight of this fact and any would-be change agent will likely lose his or her

head. Organisations are hotly and intensely political. And, as one wag pointed out, the lower the

stakes, the more intense the politics. Change agents dare not join in this game but they had

better understand it. This is one area where you must make your own judgments and keep your

own counsel; no one can do it for you.

Analytical Skills: Make no mistake about it, those who would be change agents had better be

very good at something, and that something better be analysis. Guessing won’t do. Insight is nice,

even useful, and sometimes shines with brilliance, but it is darned difficult to sell and almost

impossible to defend. A lucid, rational, well-argued analysis can be ignored and even suppressed,

but not successfully contested and, in most cases, will carry the day. If not, then the political

issues haven’t been adequately addressed.

Two particular sets of skills are very important here: (1) workflow operations or systems analysis,

and (2) financial analysis. Change agents must learn to take apart and reassemble operations

and systems in novel ways, and then determine the financial and political impacts of what they

have done. Conversely, they must be able to start with some financial measure or indicator or

goal, and make their way quickly to those operations and systems that, if reconfigured a certain

way, would have the desired financial impact. Those who master these two techniques have

learned a trade that will be in demand for the foreseeable future. (This trade, by the way, has a

name. It is called “Solution Engineering.”)

People Skills: As stated earlier, people are the sine qua non of organisation. Moreover, they

come characterized by all manner of sizes, shapes, colors, intelligence and ability levels, gender,

sexual preferences, national origins, first and second languages, religious beliefs, attitudes

toward life and work, personalities, and priorities — and these are just a few of the dimensions

along which people vary. We have to deal with them all.

The skills most needed in this area are those that typically fall under the heading of

communication or interpersonal skills. To be effective, we must be able to listen and listen

actively, to restate, to reflect, to clarify without interrogating, to draw out the speaker, to lead or

channel a discussion, to plant ideas, and to develop them. All these and more are needed. Not all

of us will have to learn Russian, French, or Spanish, but most of us will have to learn to speak

Systems, Marketing, Manufacturing, Finance, Personnel, Legal, and a host of other organisational

dialects. More important, we have to learn to see things through the eyes of these other

inhabitants of the organisational world. A situation viewed from a marketing frame of reference is

an entirely different situation when seen through the eyes of a systems person. Part of the job of

a change agent is to reconcile and resolve the conflict between and among disparate (and

sometimes desperate) points of view. Charm is great if you have it. Courtesy is even better. A

well-paid compliment can buy gratitude. A sincere “Thank you” can earn respect.


57

System Skills: There’s much more to this than learning about computers, although most people

employed in today’s world of work do need to learn about computer-based information systems.

For now, let’s just say that a system is an arrangement of resources and routines intended to

produce specified results. To organize is to arrange. A system reflects organisation and, by the

same token, an organisation is a system.

A word processing operator and the word processing equipment operated form a system. So do

computers and the larger, information processing systems in which computers are so often

embedded. These are generally known as “hard” systems. There are “soft” systems as well:

compensation systems, appraisal systems, promotion systems, and reward and incentive

systems.

There are two sets of systems skills to be mastered. Many people associate the first set with

computers and it is exemplified by “systems analysis.” This set of skills, by the way, actually

predates the digital computer and is known elsewhere (particularly in the United States Air Force

and the aerospace industry) as “systems engineering.” For the most part, the kind of system with

which this skill set concerns itself is a “closed” system which, for now, we can say is simply a

mechanistic or contrived system with no purpose of its own and incapable of altering its own

structure. In other words, it cannot learn and it cannot change of its own volition. The second set

of system skills associated with a body of knowledge generally referred to as General Systems

Theory (GST) and it deals with people, organisations, industries, economies, and even nations as

socio-technical systems — as “open,” purposive systems, carrying out transactions with other

systems and bent on survival, continuance, prosperity, dominance, plus a host of other goals and

objectives.

Business Skills: Simply put, you’d better understand how a business works. In particular, you’d

better understand how the business in which and on which you’re working works. This entails an

understanding of money — where it comes from, where it goes, how to get it, and how to keep it.

It also calls into play knowledge of markets and marketing, products and product development,

customers, sales, selling, buying, hiring, firing, EEO, AAP, and just about anything else you might

think of.

2.11 How HR/SDF can deliver change management results

Human Resources generalists, Skills Development Facilitators (SDFs), Managers, and Directors,

depending on the size of the organisation, may have overlapping responsibilities. In larger

organisations, the Human Resources Generalist, the Manager, and the Director have clearly

defined, separated roles in HR management with progressively more authority and responsibility

in the hands of the Manager, the Director, and ultimately, the Vice President who may lead

several departments including administration.

HR directors, and occasionally HR managers, may head up several different departments that are

each led by functional or specialized HR staff such as the training manager, the compensation

manager, or the recruiting manager.

Human Resources staff members are advocates for both the company and the people who work

in the company. Consequently, a good HR professional performs a constant balancing act to

meet both needs successfully.

http://humanresources.about.com/od/jobdescriptions/a/HR_Generalist.htm

http://humanresources.about.com/od/jobdescriptions/a/HR_Director.htm

http://humanresources.about.com/od/glossaryh/f/hr_management.htm

http://humanresources.about.com/od/jobdescriptions/a/HR_Director.htm

http://humanresources.about.com/od/glossaryh/f/hr_department.htm

http://humanresources.about.com/od/jobdescriptions/f/hr_job_train.htm

http://humanresources.about.com/od/jobdescriptions/f/hr_job_comp.htm

http://humanresources.about.com/od/jobdescriptions/f/hr_job_comp.htm

http://humanresources.about.com/od/jobdescriptions/a/HR_recruiter.htm


58

The Changing Human Resources Role

The role of the HR professional is changing. In the past, HR managers were often viewed as the

systematizing, policing arm of executive management. Their role was more closely aligned with

personnel and administration functions that were viewed by the organisation as paperwork.

When you consider that the initial HR function, in many companies, comes out of the

administration or finance department because hiring employees, paying employees, and dealing

with benefits were the organisation's first HR needs, this is not surprising.

In this role, the HR professional served executive agendas well, but was frequently viewed as a

road block by much of the rest of the organisation. While some need for this role occasionally

remains — you wouldn’t want every manager putting his own spin on a sexual harassment policy,

as an example — much of the HR role is transforming itself.

Management of

employee

contribution

Future/Strategic focus

Processes People

Day to day operational focus

Management of firm

infrastructure

(HR processes

and systems)

Management of

strategic

human resources

Management of

transformation

and change

HR roles in building a competitive organisation

New HR Role

The role of the HR manager must parallel the needs of his or her changing organisation.

Successful organisations are becoming more adaptable, resilient, quick to change direction, and

customer-centered.

Within this environment, the HR professional, who is considered necessary by line managers, is a

strategic partner, an employee sponsor or advocate and a change mentor. At the same time,

especially the HR Generalist, still has responsibility for employee benefits administration, often

payroll, and employee paperwork, especially in the absence of an HR Assistant.

http://humanresources.about.com/od/jobdescriptions/a/HR_assistant.htm


59

Depending on the size of the organisation, the HR manager has responsibility for all of the

functions that deal with the needs and activities of the organisation's people including these areas

of responsibility.

Recruiting

Hiring

Training

Organisation Development

Communication

Performance Management

Coaching

Policy Recommendation

Salary and Benefits

Team Building

Employee Relations

Leadership.

With all of this in mind, in Human Resource Champions, Dave Ulrich, one of the best thinkers and

writers in the HR field today, and a professor at the University of Michigan, recommends three

additional roles for the HR manager.

HR Role: Business and Strategic Partner

In today’s organisations, to guarantee their viability and ability to contribute, HR managers need

to think of themselves as strategic partners. In this role, the HR person contributes to the

development of and the accomplishment of the organisation-wide business plan and objectives.

The HR business objectives are established to support the attainment of the overall strategic

business plan and objectives. The tactical HR representative is deeply knowledgeable about the

design of work systems in which people succeed and contribute. This strategic partnership

impacts HR services such as the design of work positions; hiring; reward, recognition and

strategic pay; performance development and appraisal systems; career and succession planning;

and employee development.

To be successful business partners, the HR staff members have to think like business people,

know finance and accounting, and be accountable and responsible for cost reductions and the

measurement of all HR programs and processes. It's not enough to ask for a seat at the executive

table; HR people will have to prove they have the business savvy necessary to sit there.

HR Role: Employee Advocate

As an employee sponsor or advocate, the HR manager plays an integral role in organisational

success via his knowledge about and advocacy of people. This advocacy includes expertise in

how to create a work environment in which people will choose to be motivated, contributing, and

happy.

Fostering effective methods of goal setting, communication and empowerment through

responsibility, builds employee ownership of the organisation. The HR professional helps

http://humanresources.about.com/od/recruiting/Recruiting_Employee_Recruitment_Recruiting_Talented_Employees.htm

http://humanresources.about.com/od/selectemployees/Employee_Selection_and_Employee_Hiring.htm

http://humanresources.about.com/od/training/Training_Development_and_Education_for_Employees.htm

http://humanresources.about.com/od/development/Change_Management_Organization_Development_Culture.htm

http://humanresources.about.com/od/interpersonalcommunication/Communication_Email_Newsletters_Meetings_Presentations.htm

http://humanresources.about.com/od/coachingmentoring/Coaching_Mentoring_Consulting_Learning_Organizations.htm

http://humanresources.about.com/od/policiesandsamples1/a/how_to_policy.htm

http://humanresources.about.com/od/salaryandbenefits/Salary_Benefits_Variable_Pay_Bonuses_Profit_Sharing.htm

http://humanresources.about.com/od/involvementteams/Team_Building_Employee_Empowerment_Employee_Involvement.htm

http://humanresources.about.com/od/legalissues/Policy_Samples_Job_Descriptions_Employment_Law_Employee_Relations.htm

http://humanresources.about.com/od/managementandleadership/Management_Leadership_Business_Strategy_Small_Business.htm

http://humanresources.about.com/cs/publications/tp/hrbooks.htm

http://humanresources.about.com/cs/strategichr/a/exec_success.htm

http://humanresources.about.com/cs/strategichr/a/exec_success.htm


60

establish the organisational culture and climate in which people have the competency, concern

and commitment to serve customers well.

In this role, the HR manager provides employee development opportunities, employee assistance

programs, gain sharing and profit-sharing strategies, organisation development interventions, due

process approaches to problem solving and regularly scheduled communication opportunities.

HR Role: Change Champion

The constant evaluation of the effectiveness of the organisation results in the need for the HR

professional to frequently champion change. Both knowledge about and the ability to execute

successful change strategies make the HR professional exceptionally valued.

Knowing how to link change to the strategic needs of the organisation will minimize employee

dissatisfaction and resistance to change.

The HR professional contributes to the organisation by constantly assessing the effectiveness of

the HR function. He also sponsors change in other departments and in work practices. To

promote the overall success of his organisation, he champions the identification of the

organisational mission, vision, values, goals and action plans. Finally, he helps determine the

measures that will tell his organisation how well it is succeeding in all of this.

Changing and overlapping responsibilities plus diminishing staff have placed a burden on HR

departments as they struggle to change with the times.

“The traditional role of HR in the 21st century is changing into integrating HR into organisational

business planning, which adds another dimension to the delivery of HR services,” says Frank

Abbott, a corporate trainer program manager for Houston Community College’s Corporate

College.

“In this new role, HR professionals who are managers and supervisors must take on the emerging

roles of business partner, change agent, and leader in new organisational structures different

from the past.”

This becomes more challenging, he says, as HR professionals try to meet this challenge while

continuing day-to-day operational and political management of HR.

These new expectations and demands, combined with a steady decrease in HR staff (one-third of

the HR community will be eligible to retire in the next five years, Abbott says), means a once-

stable occupation is entering uncharted territory.

On top of these changes, he says, many HR departments must do all of this with a downsized

staff that does not have the expertise needed to meet the demands.

“The question is: Are HR professionals capable of meeting those challenges and what must they

do to meet those challenges?” Abbott asks. “Another question is: How do you prepare existing

HR professionals for leadership roles when their current leaders are retiring or moving on?”


61

Among challenges faced in the 21st century for HR professionals are increased outsourcing,

downsizing of HR departments, a conflict of 20th century HR functions versus more forward-

looking responsibilities, a lack of understanding of “the business” among HR staff that keeps them

away from the decision-making table and an increased emphasis on improving efficiency of HR

services, among others.

“The major role of ‘strategic business partner’ for the HR professional is increasing substantially,”

Abbott says. “They are now identified as a member of the management team involved with HR

planning, organisation design and strategic change.”

He adds that HR execs are relying heavily on the Internet to educate managers about existing HR

responsibilities and procedures, which is taking them away from their key role of providing HR

services to employees and implementing policies and procedures.

There is also a growing concern among HR professionals on how to meet organisational needs

with fewer staff, he says.

“There seems to be a new ‘mindset’ of ‘try to do at least better, if not more, with less,’ ” he says.

“Narrowly focused specialists are being asked to grow into the new generalists’ roles in the

evolving workplace. The HR generalists of the 21st century will have to have all the competencies

necessary to have a place in the businesses of the future.”

Abbott offers the following ways to meet the challenges of the 21st century:

Obtain all of the skills necessary to play an active role in charting the strategic direction of

HR’s partnering within the company.

Develop new competency models that refocus and revitalize the HR workforce. Newly

developed competencies can offer HR practitioners an opportunity to define excellence

and, even more importantly, demonstrate what they can bring to their organisation. HR

professionals that can demonstrate their value to their company will inevitably be

rewarded with a “seat at the table.”

Show creativity and efficiency by adapting some of the existing competency models and

HR delivery systems and tailor them to fit individual organisational needs.

Identify improved technology that facilitates HR decision-making by managers and

reduces the workload for HR professionals. An effective and efficient on-line system, used

in conjunction with a computer-based long-distance learning system, has received positive

reactions from many managers. Check out the Air Force System, PERMISS, which is

currently being utilized efficiently by many organisations.

Make HR professionals aware of the competencies they must possess in order for them to

be successful in the 21st century world of HR.

Adopt new competencies, redefine roles focused on results and evolve into an HR

professional that makes a bottom-line difference for the organisation.

After putting into place your new systems and competencies, develop an in-house

marketing campaign that highlights the services HR can provide to the organisation.

Market this within the company and then market it outside of the company to HR

professional organisations in public presentations and on-line company Web sites

dedicated to this vision.


62

This can result in being asked to ‘sit at the table’ in a consultative role for HR departments in

other companies as well as serve as an add-on competency for the HR department. This has a

strong potential for generating revenue for the company and thus increase the value-added

function of HR function to the managers within the company.

“In order for the HR professional to be a leader in the 21st century, they will need to increasingly

embrace the challenge of serving in the role of ‘business strategists’ and ‘change agents’ for their

organisations,” Abbott says. “What is important is that many managers in companies are

desperate for such help from HR. In response to these opportunities or demands, the successful

HR professional of the 21st century must emerge their roles along with the identification of new

competencies needed to get the job done.”

2.12 Why change management often fails

"There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its

success than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things."

Have you experienced a failed change lately? Been a part of a team or an organisation that

attempted something different...and failed?

We've all seen attempts at change bomb. What happens to scuttle well-intentioned effort? The

following are some of the most common reasons I've identified why organisational change fails.

You can use the list for diagnostic purposes, or to prevent mistakes in future attempts at change.

Misstarts: A misstart occurs when a change is ill-advised, hastily implemented or attempted

without sufficient commitment. This is a leadership credibility killer.

Making change an option: When leadership commits to a change, the message must be that

the change is not an option. But the message that often comes across is "We'd like you to

change, we're asking you to change, we implore you to change, please change..." Whenever

people have the option not to change, they won't.

A focus only on process: Leaders can get so caught up on planning and managing the process

that they don't notice that no tangible results are being achieved. The activity becomes more

important than the results.

A focus only on results: This stems from a belief that the end justifies any means.

Organisations tend to fail miserably in this regard: they downplay or ignore the human pain of

change. It is this insensitivity to people's feelings that not only prevents the change but destroys

morale and loyalty in the process.

Not involving those expected to implement the change: A great deal of resentment is aroused

when management announces a change and then mandates the specifics of implementation.

Employees need to be involved in two ways. First, their input and suggestions should be solicited

when planning the change. Secondly, after a change has been committed to, they should be

involved in determining the means. Leadership needs to communicate, "Here's what must

happen. How do you think it can best be done?


63

Delegated to “outsiders”: Change is an inside job. Although outsiders like consultants might

provide valuable ideas and input, people inside the systems must accept responsibility for the

change. Scapegoating and passing the buck is not an option.

No change in reward system: If you keep rewarding employees for what they've always done,

you'll keep getting what you've always gotten. Make sure that rewards, recognition and

compensation are adjusted for the desired change.

Leadership doesn’t walk the talk: For change to happen, everybody involved must buy-in.

Leadership, however, must take the first steps. Change is aborted whenever leadership doesn't

demonstrate the same commitment they expect from others.

Wrong size: In this instance, the change is too massive to be achievable or too small to be

significant. Like a good goal, a change program should be neither too easy nor too impossible.

No follow-through: The best planning is worthless if not implemented, monitored and carried

out. Responsibility must be clearly defined for making sure that follow-through is timely and

intense.

There are 4 well know factors for failure - the “four factors for failure” in managing change can

help identify problems more rapidly, and can show where initial action should be concentrated:

1. Lack of consistent leadership

2. De-motivated staff kept in the dark

3. Lack of capacity: budget cuts, no spend-to-save policy, short-term approach to

investment, stressed out staff working hard just to stand still

4. Lack of initiative to “do something different”

These four factors for failure then lead to the “treadmill effect”:-

1. No time for reflection, planning and learning

2. No improvement in design and implementation

3. Increasing need to do something

4. Increasing failure and unplanned consequences

5. Go back to 1. and repeat

2.13 Measuring the impact of change processes

What advice would you give a friend or business associate if they said to you, "I just heard about

this great investment and I am really excited about it because it has so much potential. In order to

get involved, I have to put a lot of money down. And the only negative seems to be that the return

on investment (ROI) is zero." Seeing the absurdity of this potential opportunity, you would

probably tell them not to invest. This scenario, as preposterous as it might seem at first, actually

illustrates a common phenomenon or trend that is happening to companies worldwide.

What is this trend? Companies are spending millions for business improvement projects whose

costs will far outweigh their realized benefits. At first glance this might even seem difficult to

believe—much less be accurate. That is, until you begin to look at the evidence. In this article the

authors look at over ten years of independent studies that show the average rate of return on all


64

large project implementations is negative. The review of the studies begins with the McKinsey

study, in which the projects of over 40 companies were investigated. From the results of this and

the other studies, this article will begin an inquiry that will help to answer the following questions:

1. Why are so many companies making the same mistake?

2. What could companies who do not want to fall into this trap do differently?

The Common Project Success Denominator

The McKinsey study examined many project variables and in particular, the effect of an

Organisational Change Management (OCM) program on a project's ROI. The study showed the

ROI was:

143 per cent when an excellent OCM program was part of the initiative;

35 per cent when there was a poor OCM program or no program.

What do those these results mean? A 143 per cent ROI means that for every dollar spent on the

project the company is gaining 43 cents. On the other hand, a 35 per cent ROI means that for

every dollar spent they are losing 65 cents.

The 11 most unsuccessful companies in the McKinsey study had poor change management,

which showed up as the following:

Lack of commitment and follow through by senior executives;

Defective project management skills among middle managers;

Lack of training of and confusion among frontline employees.

The 11 most successful companies in the study had excellent OCM programs:

Senior and middle managers and frontline employees were all involved;

Everyone's responsibilities were clear;

Reasons for the project were understood and accepted throughout the organisation.

Measuring a Project's Return on Investment

For a project to get approved there has to be a compelling business case. A business case looks

at the cost of improvement project and weighs that against the benefits the company will gain. If

the benefits outweigh the costs, the ROI is positive and thus the project is approved.

The formula for calculating Return on Investment (ROI)[2] is:

The Benefit of Project is based on the project's purpose. The purpose could range from

increasing sales to reducing the cost of handling customers. One generally estimates that making

http://gbr.pepperdine.edu/063/change.html#_edn2


65

certain changes to the business, installing new software, making processes more efficient, etc.,

will yield a particular project benefit that has a dollar amount associated with it.

The Project Cost includes hard costs, such as hardware and software, as well as what is

sometimes termed soft costs. While the paradigm for many accounting systems has not shifted,

the research also shows that these so-called soft costs are actually as—or more important to—a

project's success than the hard costs. As a result, these costs should no longer be termed soft

costs because they have a defined, bottom-line effect.

Soft costs, for example, can include items such as the salaries for the time period people are on

the improvement project. Salaries are important to include because the time employees spend on

the improvement project should be seen as a cost to the organisation. The longer the project

takes, the longer employees will be away from their primary job—whether it is sales, marketing or

manufacturing. If they are working on an improvement project, they cannot spend the same

amount of time they normally would on their regular job.

If a project experiences delays due to politics, lack of planning, unforeseen issues, or other

reasons, as is often the case, the overall cost of the project increases because the time to

implement the project has gone beyond the original estimate. As the costs increase, any potential

benefit starts to be chipped away and in some cases more money is spent on the improvement

than the improvement ends up providing. An organisation that does not consider soft costs as

hard costs is putting the organisation at a huge financial risk because the project's scope,

timeline—and therefore budget—increase (Figure 1). Within this context of project ROI, the

following section will examine more studies that have evaluated the success or failure of project

implementations and their ROIs. Again, in this context ROI is taken to mean that the project

provides more financial benefit than it costs the organisation in a reasonable time period.

Figure above: Increased scope, timeline, and budget put an organisation at risk because they

erode the project's potential benefits.

No Change Management Means Poor Project Results

Disappointing implementation results are being reported in all kinds of projects: Customer

Relationship Management (CRM), Contact Centers, Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP), Share

Services, Supply Chain, mergers and acquisitions, new pricing strategies, cost reduction

initiatives, and including changes in a university's method of recording hourly wages. The


66

following examples show the trend that no project is immune to ROI failure, regardless of who

conducts the study.

Results of a study by Boston Consulting Group that examined 100 large companies found the

following:

52 per cent reported achieving their business goals

37 per cent could point to a tangible financial impact for their projects[3]

A study entitled Six Ways IT Projects Fail[4] published in Darwin (2001) revealed the reasons

were due to the following:

1. Lack of executive sponsorship

2. Lack of early stakeholder input

3. Poorly defined or changing specs

4. Unrealistic expectations

5. Uncooperative business partners

6. Poor or dishonest communication

A study published in DestinationCRM.com (August 2003) entitled Six Barriers to CRM Project

Success[5] showed that the failure of CRM projects was due to the following:

1. Lack of guidance

2. Integration woes

3. No long-term strategy

4. Dirty data

5. Lack of employee buy-in

6. No accountability

In 2004, a study entitled Software Disasters Are Often People Problems[6] was published on

CNN.com. This study showed that at that time serious, preventable errors were related to poor

management of the people part of the project. For example:

Passengers wait at McCarran International Airport in Las Vegas on September 14 for

flights delayed by a communications system failure.

New software at Hewlett-Packard Co. was supposed to get orders in and out the door

faster at the computer giant. Instead, a botched deployment cut into earnings in a big

way in August and executives got fired.

Retailer Ross Stores Inc.'s profits plummeted 40 per cent after a merchandise-tracking

system failed.


67

The study's conclusion was that even as systems grow more complicated, failures are related

less to technical malfunctions and more due to bad management, communication, or training

during project implementation.

Gartner's industry analysts report a staggering 55 to 70 per cent of CRM projects fail to meet their

objectives. In Bain and Company's survey of 400 executives, 20 per cent of respondents felt their

CRM initiatives actually damaged customer relationships.[7] When the objective is to build strong

relationships with customers, why is this goal eluding so many companies - especially when they

are spending millions and sometimes billions to reach it?

What Is Failing?

In contrast to these studies about the people part of business, a Forrester Research study

showed that companies implementing, for instance, a new technology like CRM, are satisfied with

the actual software application's functionality and capability.[8]

So, if the technology is not failing, what is? A study done by ProSci, a recognized leader in

change management research, again pointed to the ability of the organisation to efficiently and

effectively manage the changes the project was bringing about in the organisation.[9] The ProSci

results showed that a project's greatest success factors are the following:

1. Effective and strong executive sponsorship

2. Buy-in from front line managers and employees

3. Exceptional teams

4. Continuous and targeted communication

5. Planned and organized approach

The ProSci study results also showed that a project's greatest obstacle factors are:

1. Employee resistance at all levels (Surprisingly, the effectiveness or correctness of the

actual business solution, process, or system changes was cited only 5 times in over 200

responses.)

2. Middle-management resistance

3. Poor executive sponsorship

4. Limited time, budget, and resources

5. Corporate inertia and politics

Another study by AMR Research, a firm whose analysts focus on independent, leading-edge

research that bridges the gap between business and their technology solutions, found companies

that had successful software implementations spent 10 to 15 per cent of their project budget on

OCM.[10] All of the success criteria found in each of these studies is what comprises an OCM

program that increases a project's ROI.

The Results Chain – planning for and measuring impact of change projects

It’s worth focusing on the two foundational principles of results based management (RBM) before

looking at the results chain:

Projects cause results.

Results are more important than projects.

http://gbr.pepperdine.edu/063/change.html#_edn10

http://http/twogoats.wordpress.com/2008/02/19/results-based-management/


68

We’re going to unpack these a bit here and see how they form the backbone of ubiquitous RBM

charts.

The Simple Results Chain

The results chain expresses the cause-and-effect relationship between a project and results. It’s a

way of representing the statement: “Projects cause results.”

We use the arrow to show causality; that is, to show that something

causes something else. So whenever you see the arrow in the results

chain, you can insert the word “cause” or “lead to.” If you prefer, you

can express it using “if/then”: If we do this project, then we’ll see these

results.

The Expanded Results Chain

Of course, if you’ve seen or worked with RBM frameworks, you know that

things get a bit busier than the simple results chain. Each of the two

elements – projects and results – in the chain above gets expanded, giving

us different components to consider. Even so, the results chain remains a

way of expressing the concept that projects cause results.

Projects: Inputs and Activities

To begin, we expand the “projects” side of the results chain into two components: inputs and

activities.

Inputs are the resources that we will need to carry out the planned activities. They include things

like people, money, goods, materials, infrastructure, and technology.

Activities are the things that we do. Some familiar project activities include digging wells,

conducting training session, distributing seeds and tools, forming savings groups, and setting up

clinics.

In the results chain, and in RBM, projects include inputs and activities. According to the basic

principles of this management approach, the projects cause the results that are important.

Results: Outputs, Outcomes, and Impact

Now we expand the second half of the results chain: the results side. Results are divided into

three categories called outputs, outcomes, and impact.

Outputs are the immediate results of activities. For example, the output of digging wells would be

the number of functioning wells in a community. Or the output of a training session would be the

number of trained individuals.

http://twogoats.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/results-chain-simple.jpg

http://twogoats.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/results-chain-expanded.jpg


69

Outcomes are medium-term results caused by outputs. Examples of outcomes might be

households with access to clean drinking water or the percentage of trainees who start a

business or find a job.

The impact is the long-term, broad societal change that the outcomes lead to. For example,

improved longevity or decreased malnutrition might be the impact of a project.

Putting it all together

Our results chain now reads something like this:

Inputs lead to activities, which cause outputs, which cause outcomes, which cause the impact.

Another way of reading it would be:

If we have the inputs, then we can do the activities;

if we do the activities, then we will achieve the outputs;

if we achieve the outputs, then we will achieve the outcomes; and

if we achieve the outcomes, then we will contribute to the impact.

Illustrated below are the basic components of a results chain and the indicator/measure

terminology that is used to measure impact through the results chain.


70

The basic components of a results chain:

The terminology used in a results chain:


71

Section 3: Adapting to Change

3.1 Creating resilient organisations

What is a ‘Resilient Organisation’? The term resilience is used in several different fields of study,

and takes on slightly different definitions for each. However, a generic definition refers to

resilience as the ability of a material or system to absorb change gracefully whilst retaining core

properties or functions.

Organisations deal with uncertainties and unexpected events all the time, and managing these

presents both opportunities and risks for the organisation. Above a certain scale however, crisis

events differ from day-to-day management, in that organisations have to operate out of their

comfort zone, interact with organisations they do not normally work alongside, and have to make

and share strategic decisions quickly and effectively. Being able to respond effectively to crisis

events is a real test of what makes an organisation ‘tick’.

The economic implications of organisations being unprepared for crises are significant. In the

September 11th attacks, business interruption losses far exceeded the sum of all property losses.

In our increasingly interconnected business environment, consequences go well beyond the zone

of any physical damage, affecting businesses right along the supply chain.

An organisation’s ability to survive a major crisis depends on their organisational structure, the

management and operational systems they have in place, and the resilience of these.

Resilience is about ensuring that an organisation is still able to achieve its core objectives in the

face of adversity. This means not only reducing the size and frequency of crises (vulnerability),

but also improving the ability and speed of the organisation to manage crises effectively (adaptive

capacity). Awareness is a recent addition to this definition and reflects a growing appreciation of

the need to manage strategic risks as a process and not an event; by that we mean the ability of

the organisation to seek out new opportunities even in times of crisis. In highly dynamic

environments, such as the business world, an organisation is never a static entity. Some sectors

will be more stable than others, but nevertheless, an organisation that remains exactly the same

over time will eventually erode its potential. This means that to be truly resilient an organisation

should not seek to just recover back to exactly where it was before the crisis, but have the

reserves to continue looking for emerging risks and opportunities on the horizon. Severity and

duration of impact on performance as a measure of an organisation’s resilience, where resilience

is inversely proportional to the area under the curve.


72

Whilst risk management is being used more extensively today, there are few organisations that

apply risk management at a strategic level across the organisation. Uptake of business

continuity/emergency planning is increasing, but still only a small proportion of organisations have

any planning in place. Those organisations that do have plans often lack the depth required to

sustain a prolonged response capability. In our research we are also finding that although many

resilience issues cross organisational boundaries, much of the planning being done is very inward

looking. One of the biggest potentials for forward progress is to get organisations working

together to manage risks across this interface, and developing and practicing strategies for

working together during crises. This is particularly needed where outsourcing means that

contracted organisations are relied upon to deliver critical services or supplies.

We are also seeing that the key underlying resilience issues are often more about the softer, less

tangible aspects of an organisation that relate to its culture and leadership, and vision. For

example qualities such as good communication and relationships within the organisation and with

key customers and stakeholders, trust, and a shared vision and priorities across the organisation

are all fundamental to enabling different parts of the organisation to work together to achieve a

common objective. This is particularly true at times of crisis when it is often the informal networks

and relationships (who you know that you can call on for a favour…) that count. Building

resilience is therefore also about reviewing the culture of the organisation and recognising the

strengths and weaknesses that culture brings to the organisation in times of crisis. In order to

build resilience, a broad cross-section of the organisation (and not just the crisis management

team) need to be involved in regular ‘war-game’ type exercises to actually experience what and

how decisions will be made during crises and the role that they can play in facilitating the

response and recovery of the organisation. These crisis simulation exercises are critical for:

highlighting vulnerabilities (and creating the motivation for reducing them),

improving the adaptive capacity of the organisation by gaining experience in working

together to solve unique problems, and

enhancing awareness of critical dependencies and functions within the organisation, plus

giving the confidence to seek out opportunities even in times of crisis.

Unfortunately, there is no ‘silver bullet’; resilience is something that an organisation must

continually work at. But because it is so intrinsically related to the day-to-day ethos of the

organisation, it can also create significant payback in terms of helping to refocus on what is

important to the organisation and creating a shared understanding of the roles people play in

making those a reality. Most importantly, resilience needs to move from being a ‘back room’ issue

to being a strategic one and be regularly debated as part of strategic planning for any

organisation.

The Five Principles of Organisational Resilience

1. Leadership: Resilience begins with enterprise leadership setting the priorities, allocating the

resources and making the commitments to establish organisational resilience throughout the

enterprise. Leadership achieves a balance between risk taking and risk containment to ensure

ongoing innovation, but in the context of prudent risk minimization. These two apparently

conflicting objectives for leadership are framed in two.

2. Culture: The second component of organisational resilience is enterprise culture. A resilient

culture is built on principles of organisational empowerment, purpose, trust and accountability.

The RVO must evolve systematically into networks of employees who self-organize into


73

communities of practice for learning and mentoring, and who are empowered to participate, lead

and organize virtual teams (in which most of an enterprise's productive work is completed). It is

those networks of empowered and connected employees that form the bedrock of the RVO. The

resilient organisational culture has a strong sense of enterprise purpose that cascades down and

across the enterprise. It is that strong sense of purpose that glues the RVO together and aligns

individual, workgroup and enterprise goals as a continuum. A resilient culture is built on a strong

sense of trust between employees, management, suppliers and partners.

3. People: As mentioned above, the bedrock of organisational resilience is the enterprise

workforce. People who are properly selected, motivated, equipped and led will overcome almost

any obstacle or disruption. There are countless stories that emerged after Sept. 11 about

individual heroism, self-initiative and self-sacrifice. Yet, to harness people's incredible ability to

lead and respond during trying circumstances requires a systematic enterprise strategy for people

selection and people support.

4. Systems: The RVO is built on an infrastructure of extensive enterprise connectivity and

information robustness. That framework is set forth in "Workplace Agility Equals Workplace

Resilience: Here's How". The premise is that leading global organisations are achieving agility

and flexibility by combining a highly distributed workplace model with a highly robust and

collaborative IT infrastructure. These technology topics are covered in detail elsewhere in this

special report. Also in this Spotlight, we delve into the technology, systems and management

capabilities that must be built into a highly resilient global enterprise in "Globalization Enables

Resilience, Along With Challenges".

5. Settings: The final component is the physical deployment of the workplace. Workplace

resilience is achieved through the distribution of the workplace into multiple, dispersed settings.

Alternative workplace techniques such as office "hoteling," telecommuting and desk sharing

provide the level of workplace flexibility and agility that is essential for mitigating the risk of

catastrophic or disruptive incidents at an enterprise location. Enterprise resilience is the flip side

of organisational agility, as explained in "Workplace Resilience Equals Workplace Agility: Here's

How". However, it's not enough to create a highly distributed and connected environment. It is

essential as well to undertake a comprehensive assessment of workplace security and safety.

This workplace "triage" is the first step in identifying high-risk locations from people and

operational standpoints.

Do’s and Don’ts of change management

How do you manage change? The honest answer is that you manage it pretty much the same

way you’d manage anything else of a turbulent, messy, chaotic nature, that is, you don’t really

manage it, you grapple with it. It’s more a matter of leadership ability than management skill.

The first thing to do is jump in. You can’t do anything about it from the outside.

A clear sense of mission or purpose is essential. The simpler the mission statement the

better. “Kick ass in the marketplace” is a whole lot more meaningful than “Respond to

market needs with a range of products and services that have been carefully designed

and developed to compare so favourably in our customers’ eyes with the products and

services offered by our competitors that the majority of buying decisions will be made in

our favour.”

Build a team. “Lone wolves” have their uses, but managing change isn’t one of them. On

the other hand, the right kind of lone wolf makes an excellent temporary team leader.


74

Maintain a flat organisational team structure and rely on minimal and informal reporting

requirements.

Pick people with relevant skills and high energy levels. You’ll need both.

Toss out the rulebook. Change, by definition, calls for a configured response, not

adherence to prefigured routines.

Shift to an action-feedback model. Plan and act in short intervals. Do your analysis on the

fly. No lengthy up-front studies, please. Remember the hare and the tortoise.

Set flexible priorities. You must have the ability to drop what you’re doing and tend to

something more important.

Treat everything as a temporary measure. Don’t “lock in” until the last minute, and then

insist on the right to change your mind.

Ask for volunteers. You’ll be surprised at who shows up. You’ll be pleasantly surprised by

what they can do.

Find a good “straw boss” or team leader and stay out of his or her way.

Give the team members whatever they ask for — except authority. They’ll generally ask

only for what they really need in the way of resources. If they start asking for authority,

that’s a signal they’re headed toward some kind of power-based confrontation and that

spells trouble. Nip it in the bud!

Concentrate dispersed knowledge. Start and maintain an issues logbook. Let anyone go

anywhere and talk to anyone about anything. Keep the communications barriers low,

widely spaced, and easily hurdled. Initially, if things look chaotic, relax — they are.

Remember, the task of change management is to bring order to a messy situation, not pretend

that it’s already well organized and disciplined.

Consequences and mistakes in change management

Managers come from different walks of life, possess various characteristics, and have their own

philosophies regarding how to manage a business and employees. In a broad sense, there are

common mistakes made by managers at different levels and in various types of businesses. The

following are 10 of the most common management mistakes.

1. Putting policies ahead of people. The smaller the organisation, the larger the mistake

this is. Policies are made to be followed, within reason. Some flexibility with employees,

particularly in a small company, is important. An even bigger mistake is standing behind

policies at the expense of losing loyal customers. Weigh the significance of standing

behind your policy in each situation. If it is a matter of physical safety or security, policies

must be upheld. However, in many other instances, there are reasonable solutions that

will not alienate the customer or create a strained relationship with your employee(s).

2. Lack of communication. In any industry, at any level, communication is key to being a

successful manager. Employees need to know what is expected of them and when

specific projects or tasks need to be completed. Communication needs to be clear, and

any questions that arise need to be answered.

3. Failing to hear what your employees have to say. Managers make the mistake of

listening but not always hearing what their employees are saying. To manage effectively,

you need to understand the needs and concerns of your employees

4. Not acknowledging that you do not have all the answers. A good manager does not

make the mistake of trying to solve every problem. Seeking help from individuals with


75

expertise in specific areas is a sign of strength, not weakness. In addition, a good

manager must understand that his or her way is not the only way to do the job.

5. The glass is always half empty. Managers, who continually focus on the negatives,

without recognizing positive achievements or employee accomplishments, end up with

employees who are not motivated and often have one foot out the door looking for a more

positive work environment.

6. Not accepting responsibility. A common mistake made by managers is to either

delegate blame or simply not accept responsibility for that which happens under their

guidance. Eventually, avoiding responsibility will catch up with a manager and usually not

bode well for his or her future. Being in charge means taking responsibility for whatever

happens.

7. Favouritism. Once a manager has obvious favourites, he or she loses credibility and the

respect of the rest of the team.

8. Just do it. The Nike slogan does not work when employees are trying to gain an

understanding of the process or project. Rather than expecting your team to simply work

blindly on tasks they do not understand, a good manager takes the time to explain what

the project is all about and how the team's work is incorporated into the plan. Remember,

the more the team is invested in a project, the better the results will be.

9. Too much technology. New breeds of managers are more tech-savvy than they are

comfortable handling and managing people. Embracing technology is a key to success in

the modern office environment, but not at the risk of embracing people skills. Do not hide

behind e-mails and other technology.

10. Never change. In a rapidly changing business environment, not being open to change

can be a major mistake. While you may stick to tried-and-true methods in some areas, you

should consider and weigh the value of change in others. Above all, be flexible

Change Management, Process Improvement, New Directions - call it what you wish, but avoid

these common mistakes:

1. Fanfare

"Here we go again." "Another program to weather." "This too shall pass!" Sound familiar?

All too often organisations announce big changes and new programs with big events and fanfare,

but then very little actually happens. The initial energy and enthusiasm fades, specific changes

are never identified let alone implemented, results aren’t realized, managers don’t adjust, or

maybe something even better comes along leading to a new "launch" with new fanfare.

The easy part is the announcement. And the fanfare is fun and contagious. But if your staff isn’t

capable of the details, the follow-through, the implementation, then your program will die and the

cynics will reign supreme, ever bolder in their determination to out-last any new program.

Furthermore, while ostensibly trying to generate energy, the fanfare simply signals big change

and thus, raises anxiety. An impoverished understanding of the program purpose, path or impact

will leave most people uneasy.


76

2. Controlled Messages

If it tastes like manipulation, smells like manipulation and sounds like manipulation, it is

manipulation! Respect your employees enough to know they will recognize manipulation when

they are the victims of it.

I’ve seen organisations so determined to control messages that they plan every communication,

ration information, create concentric rings of need-to-know circles, and pretty much eliminate all

honest, straightforward, two-way communication. I can’t think of a better way to widen the Us vs.

Them gap within a company. Nor a better way to erode trust. Never mind the productivity

sacrificed to scheming and whispering on one side, guessing and fuming on the other.

3. Closed Door Planning

Who are you kidding? Do you really think you can mastermind a new way without involving the

people who know the situation best? Trying to "Do It To Them" is both arrogant and misguided.

4. Extensive Training

Extensive training is a cornerstone of many change programs. But many people return to their old

habits the minute they get back to their desks despite the excitement exhibited during training.

And if the training is filled with new acronyms, complicated techniques, and secret decoder rings,

people will either give up or become distracted by the means at the expense of the goal.

5. Big Hairy Audacious Change

More likely, Big Hairy Audacious Embarrassment. Part and parcel of the others – the boisterous

fanfare, dramatic unveiling of goal and plan, and massive training – add huge expectations.

Everything big. More "big" than substance. Almost like announcing that you intend to win

Wimbledon when you’ve yet to hit your first tennis ball.

The purpose of change management is to make change successful. The largest component of

many change management programs often involves managing people’s reactions. Unfortunately,

as the above list suggests, many change management efforts actually create anxiety, the exact

opposite of their intentions.

For a better chance of success, consider the flip side of each mistake:

1. Save the fanfare for celebrations of genuine success

Celebrate genuine success, even small steps, in order to build momentum. Success increases

energy, enthusiasm and the appetite for more success. It’s contagious. Start small and others will

line up to join the improvement process.

2. Think in terms of increasing communication rather than controlling it

First, be sincere. Maintaining trust is as important as ever. People can handle a lot if they trust

they are being treated honestly and fairly.


77

Help people understand the current situation, why improvement is important, and the reasons for

focusing on a particular area. Be clear about desired outcomes; be open to discussion about

methods of achieving those outcomes. Listen to concerns and try to understand how they see

things so that you can help them gain a greater understanding of the situation and implications.

Appeal to their self-interests by clarifying their contribution to and dependence on company

success. Tell employees what you know and admit what you don’t know. Express the desire to

work together to achieve the desired outcomes.

3. Open the doors

Change is most alarming when it is done to you and the destination is unknown. Be clear about

the destination and then involve employees in determining how to get there. Reveal the current

state fully, float alternatives or provide tools for developing alternatives, reiterate the goals,

particularly the reason they need to care, and let the improvement opportunities speak for

themselves.

Most of the time, you won’t make good choices without the help of your employees. You certainly

can’t succeed without the help of your employees. Partnership is critical when trying to make

substantial improvements.

4. Use Just-In-Time Training

Provide tools and techniques as they are needed so that employees are motivated to learn and

have immediate opportunities to apply what they have learned. Also, appeal to common principles

and familiar thought processes in order to leverage existing strengths. Cryptic techniques and

jargon intimidate. The most successful approaches are usually the simplest.

5. Leverage Success

You can and should leverage success every step of the way to significant improvement.

1. First of all, target specific, important, but manageable, areas that are ripe for improvement.

2. Develop a systematic, repeatable approach to improvement. One advantage of starting

small is that you have an opportunity to test drive an approach and tweak it to match your

company’s culture and skill level.

3. Build interest and commitment through a series of small successes.

4. 'Spread' the systematic approach to new projects, primarily to those eager to participate in

the success they have witnessed.

This leveraged approach lets your organisation learn how to change and helps to develop a

culture that seeks opportunities to improve.

Change Management, in capital letters, seems to have become a goal in and of itself, rather than

a means for achieving other goals. People can get so preoccupied with "Doing Change

Management" that they have become distracted from the real goals. Be clear about your reasons

and your destination. Then listen and you will know what to do.

Innovation practices to enhance change management sustainability

Innovation and organisational change play an important role in the business landscape. Whether

it is the formulation of a new product, the introduction of a new service, a technological invention


78

that changes business processes or a new administrative practice, innovation and organisational

change helps to shape a companies’ strategy and structure. Some industries spend a higher

percentage of their budget on innovation strategy than others. This can depend on the structural

factors that influence the industry and the degree of influence changing consumer preferences

and tastes can have on a company.

Industries and companies allocate funds for innovation and organisational change in response to

competitive pressures and the likely duration of the product life cycle. The software, health and

pharmaceutical industry typically invest a higher percentage into research and development for

new product creation. Competitive pressures to develop new solutions to meet the needs of

changing consumer preferences and the intense nature of the competition forces companies to

stay highly response to market needs or risk losing market share to competitors who differentiate

their products or offer superior solutions.

The automobile and airline industry are two industries that spend heavily on organisational

innovation research. This is to facilitate product and process improvement. Technological

advancements that contribute to product development also play an important part in innovation

and organisational change within a company’s manufacturing division. Changes to companies

production processes to increase productivity are a prime example of this. As automation

replaces manually skilled workers, companies respond by reducing the workforce or retraining

existing employees.

The challenge companies face with innovation and organisational change lies in the

implementation and workplace response to new initiatives. When new technology enters the

scene, companies are forced to evaluate and plan how to best implement it. This often involves a

high degree of anticipatory style planning because a lack of comparison studies exists. Operating

in 'unchartered waters' requires careful consideration of the likely effects on an organisations

strategy, structure and corresponding workplace implications.

Mandating, communicating and effectively managing innovative organisational change requires

strong leadership to embrace and implement the initiatives. This is best achieved by unifying

company resources and involving personnel who are most affected by the change. A consultative

approach encourages participation in the process and minimizes the chance that alienation,

anxiety and resistance will occur within company ranks. Having the vision to implement and

responding to practical real life feedback are important factors for the success of organisational

change and innovation.

Managing risks in the change management process

Risk is inevitable in all change management processes. There may be commonplace risks that

are almost inevitable, for example, the risk that a member of the team is sick for part of the

project. There may be some unlikely but high impact risks, for example, the risk that the solution

could cause the destruction of the organisation.

The good Change Manager will constantly assess the risks and take action as needed. There are

three possible outcomes for each risk:

take action now to avoid the risk, to reduce its likelihood, or to reduce its impact,

make contingency plans so that the team is ready to deal with the impact and mitigate the

risk should it occur,


79

agree that it is an acceptable business risk to take no action and hope that the risk does

not occur.

The process for managing risks is:

identify all realistic risks

analyse their probability and potential impact

decide whether action should be taken now to avoid or reduce the risk and to reduce the

impact if it does occur

where appropriate, make plans now so that the organisation is prepared to deal with the

risk should it occur

constantly monitor the situation to watch for risks occurring, new risks emerging, or

changes in the assessment of existing risks.

Assessing risks at the start of the project

During the planning of the change management process, the headline risks should be considered

as part of the overall benefit model. At this stage, you will not be dealing with a full catalogue of

risks, consequences and actions. You will focus on the main areas that affect either the

justification of the project or the manner in which it will be carried out.

It is unwise to rely solely on your own judgment. You would normally include some questions

about risk when talking to the various participants about the project's scope and objectives. You

might also instigate some specific activities to examine risk, for example additional interviews,

workshops and brainstorming sessions. Where there is a specialist area involved, you should

consult with an appropriate expert, eg web-server sizing, change management, etc.

A good technique for presenting these issues is to use a risk matrix showing the probability of

different headline risks in comparison with their relative impact on the project's goals.

http://www.epmbook.com/risk.htm#assessing

http://www.epmbook.com/benefit.htm

http://www.epmbook.com/resources/riskmanagement.ppt


80

This focuses attention on the areas where the project plan will need to address key issues and

where specific actions and techniques may be required. Note how this example suggests that the

biggest area of concern tends to be with the "people issues". The human element of a solution is

often the most overlooked aspect.

The other thing you should do early on in any change process is to decide upon the procedures

and technology for managing risk. The procedures should make it easy for all participants to

submit their thoughts and concerns. Always capture the thought. You may dismiss it later if

appropriate, but you should always consider and assess the input.

Managing resistance to change

When in your efforts to implement strategies and plans you experience resistance, the most

popular assumption is that you have a communication problem and the need is for greater clarity

regarding the vision or change management strategy. Perhaps you have not defined the problem

in dramatic enough terms, built a hot enough fire for the platform. Maybe you assume that you

have not been clear enough about the vision, or that that the strategy doesn’t go into enough

detail.

However when dealing with polarities, the clearer the communication, the greater the resistance

generated. Some people, seen as resisters, are unwilling to sacrifice the benefits of current ways

of doing business and only too clearly see the downside of the proposed strategy.



http://humanresources.about.com/od/changemanagement/a/change_wisdom.htm

http://www.epmbook.com/resources/riskmatrix.ppt


81

It’s not that people don’t understand your interests – it’s that every time you try explaining them

again, you confirm that you don’t understand theirs. And paradoxically, what you thought was

your best solution becomes your greatest problem.

Employee Resistance Case Study

Here’s an example: A global oil company was committed to redesigning its entire assessment

process to better assess and reward managers for promoting a culture that supported diversity.

Two key new measures in the assessment were that:

the manager demonstrate flexibility in working with people different from him/herself, and

the manager show respect toward those people.

At face value, these appear to be solid diversity-related criteria. However, the solution was met

with resistance from some managers who were willing to be politically incorrect. They wanted to

make sure that they could still be directive and clear when warranted, and were afraid that

everything would become participative and flexible in deference to diversity.

They were concerned that too much flexibility was going to lead to inconsistencies and unclear

direction in the company. Finally they worried that it would be unacceptable to address poor

performance as this would be interpreted as lack of respect for diversity.

The polarities at play in this situation are:

direction and participation,

clear and flexible, and

conditional and unconditional respect.

The paradoxical nature of polarities means that over-focusing on one pole will eventually result in

experiencing the downside of that same pole.

Over-focusing on participation, especially to the neglect of direction, results in slow

decision-making and unclear roles.

Over-focusing on direction, especially to the neglect of participation, leads to limited

options and low levels of ownership for decisions made.

Effective management means achieving more of the positive dimensions of direction and

participation, while minimizing their negative aspects. Similarly, over-emphasizing decentralization

to the exclusion of centralization leads to inefficiencies and lack of integration.

Highlighting quality targets "at any cost" can price you right out of your market. What Polarity

Management provides is tools for recognizing, understanding and managing these complexities

all the way from company strategy level right through to dealing with daily line issues.

Managing polarities, as well as solving problems, is a key to effective organisational change. Real

Time Strategic Change (RTSC) is a principle-based approach to achieving rapid, sustainable,

organisation-wide change that also helps manage polarities. 'Rapid' means thinking and acting as

if the future were now. 'Sustainable' means that an organisation is able to adapt and continue to

be successful as new realities emerge over time. The stability and consistency of the RTSC

principles provide a solid platform and a blueprint for an organisation’s change journey. Each of

the six RTSC principles supports organisations in better understanding the nature of key polarities

involved in any change management effort, and how to manage them effectively.


82

Change is natural and good. Reaction to change is unpredictable, but manageable.

Managing change means managing people's fear. Change is natural and good, but people's

reaction to change is unpredictable and irrational. It can be managed if done right.

Nothing is as upsetting to your people as change. Nothing has greater potential to cause failures,

loss of production, or falling quality. Yet nothing is as important to the survival of your organisation

as change. History is full of examples of organisations that failed to change and that are now

extinct. The secret to successfully managing change, from the perspective of the employees, is

definition and understanding.

Resistance to change comes from a fear of the unknown or an expectation of loss. The front-end

of an individual's resistance to change is how they perceive the change. The back-end is how well

they are equipped to deal with the change they expect.

An individual's degree of resistance to change is determined by whether they perceive the change

as good or bad, and how severe they expect the impact of the change to be on them. Their

ultimate acceptance of the change is a function of how much resistance the person has and the

quality of their coping skills and their support system.

Your job as a leader is to address their resistance from both ends to help the individual reduce it

to a minimal, manageable level. Your job is not to bulldoze their resistance so you can move

ahead.

Perception Does Matter

If you move an employee's desk six inches, they may not notice or care. Yet if the reason you

moved it those six inches was to fit in another worker in an adjacent desk, there may be high

resistance to the change. It depends on whether the original employee feels the hiring of an

additional employee is a threat to his job, or perceives the hiring as bringing in some needed

assistance.

A promotion is usually considered a good change. However an employee who doubts their

ability to handle the new job may strongly resist the promotion. They will give you all kinds

of reasons for not wanting the promotion, just not the real one.

You might expect a higher-level employee to be less concerned about being laid off,

because they have savings and investments to support them during a job search.

However, the individual may feel they are over extended and that a job search will be long

and complicated. Conversely, your concern for a low-income employee being laid off may

be unfounded if they have stashed a nest egg in anticipation of the cut.

Your best salesperson may balk at taking on new, high potential account because they

have an irrational feeling that they don't dress well enough.

If you try and bulldoze this resistance, you will fail. The employee whose desk you had to move

will develop production problems. The top worker who keeps declining the promotion may quit

rather than have to continue making up excuses for turning you down. And the top salesperson's

sales may drop to the point that you stop considering them for the new account. Instead, you

overcome the resistance by defining the change and by getting mutual understanding.


83

Definition

On the front end, you need to define the change for the employee in as much detail and as early

as you can. Provide updates as things develop and become more clear. In the case of the desk

that has to be moved, tell the employee what's going on. "We need to bring in more workers. Our

sales have increased by 40% and we can't meet that demand, even with lots of overtime. To

make room for them, we'll have to rearrange things a little." You could even ask the employees

how they think the space should be rearranged. You don't have to accept their suggestions, but

it's a start toward understanding.

Definition is a two-way street. In addition to defining the problem, you need to get the employees

to define the reasons behind their resistance.

Understanding

Understanding is also a two-way street. You want people to understand what is changing and

why. You also need to understand their reluctance.

You have to help your people understand. They want to know what the change will be and

when it will happen, but they also want to know why. Why is it happening now? Why can't

things stay like they have always been? Why is it happening to me?

It is also important that they understand what is not changing. Not only does this give them

one less thing to stress about, it also gives them an anchor, something to hold on to as

they face the winds of uncertainty and change.

You need to understand their specific fears. What are they concerned about? How

strongly do they feel about it? Do they perceive it as a good or a bad thing?

Manage This Issue

Don't try to rationalize things. Don't waste time wishing people were more predictable. Instead,

focus on opening and maintaining clear channels of communication with your employees so they

understand what is coming and what it means to them. They will appreciate you for it and will be

more productive both before and after the change.


84

References

"Appreciative Inquiry" http://www.new-paradigm.co.uk/Appreciative.htm. Retrieved from

"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appreciative_inquiry"

"Software Disasters Are Often People Problems." Retrieved Tuesday, October 5th, 2004,

CNN.com. Research study by Bain Consulting Group.Integrating, People, Process and

Technology. by Anton, Petouhoff and Schwartz, Santa Maria, CA: The Anton Press.

Argyris, Chris (Autumn 1982). (PDF)Organizational Dynamics,.

http://www.monitor.com/binary-data/MONITOR_ARTICLES/object/92.pdf. Retrieved 2006-12-

29.

Beckhard, R. 1969. Organization Development: Strategies and Models, Addison-Wesley,

Reading, MA.

Beckhard, R.F., and R.T. Harris. Organizational Transitions: Managing Complex Change.

Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1987.

Beitler, Michael 2006. "Strategic Organizational Change, Second Edition." Practitioner Press

International.

Boston Consulting Group. (2003). Research study. In Integrating, People, Process and

Technology. by Anton, Petouhoff and Schwartz, Santa Maria, CA: The Anton Press, 2003.

Bridges, W. Managing Transitions. Reading, MA: Perseus, 1991.

Bridges, W., and S. Mitchell. "Leading Transition: A New Model for Change." In On Leading

Change. F. Hesselbein and R. Johnston, eds. New York: Jossey-Bass, 2002.

Bullock, R.J., and D. Batten. "It's Just a Phase We're Going Through." Group and

Organizational Studies 10 (1985): 383–412.

Cameron, Esther, and Mike Green. Making Sense of Change Management: A Complete

Guide to the Models, Tools, and Techniques of Organizational Change. Sterling, VA: Kogan

Page, 2004.

Carnall, C.A. Managing Change in Organizations. London: Prentice Hall, 1990.

Carter, L. and Goldsmith, M. (2001) Best Practices in Organization Development and Change,

San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Change Management Case Studies, Hitachi Consulting

http://www.hitachiconsulting.com/page.cfm?SID=2andID=searchresultsandsearchString=chan

ge+management

Change Management That Pays," McKinsey Quarterly, 2002.

Clampitt,P. and Williams, M.(2007)Decision Downloading, MIT Sloan Management Review,

Jan 1

Clampitt,P. and Williams, M.(2007)Decision Downloading, MIT Sloan Management Review,

Jan 1 Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Change_management_(people)"

Complex Responsive Processes in Organizations: Learning and Knowledge Creation.

London: Routledge, 2001.

DuBrin, Andrew J. Essentials of Management. 7th ed. Cincinnati: Thomson South-Western,

2004.

Gibson, E., and Billings, A. (2003). Big Change at Best Buy, Davies-Black, Palo Alto, CA.

http://www.new-paradigm.co.uk/Appreciative.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appreciative_inquiry

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Argyris

http://www.monitor.com/binary-data/MONITOR_ARTICLES/object/92.pdf

http://www.hitachiconsulting.com/page.cfm?SID=2&ID=searchresults&searchString=change+management

http://www.hitachiconsulting.com/page.cfm?SID=2&ID=searchresults&searchString=change+management


85

Greenfield, A 2008. The 5 Forces of Change - A Blueprint for Leading Successful Change,

Management Books 2000, England.

Hiatt, J. 2003. Change Management: the people side of change. Learning Center

Publications, Loveland, CO.

Hiatt, J. 2006. ADKAR: A Model for Change in Business, Government and the Community,

Learning Center Publications, Loveland, CO.

Human Problem Solving. Allen Newell and Herbert A. Simon. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs:

1972.

Integrating, People, Process and Technology. by Anton, Petouhoff and Schwartz, Santa

Maria, CA: The Anton Press, 2003.

Kotter, John P. Leading Change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1996.

Kubler-Ross, E. 1970. On Death and Dying, Macmillan Company, England.

LaMarsh, J; Potts, R. 2004. Master Change, Maximize Success, Duncan Baird

Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Pr.. ISBN

0226476502. OCLC 2185305.

Lewin, Kurt. Field Theory in Social Science. New York: Harper and Row, 1951.

Luecke, Richard. Managing Change and Transition. Boston: Harvard Business School Press,

2003.

Myron, David. (2003). "6 Barriers to CRM Success And How to Overcome Them."

DestinationCRM.com, August.

http://www.destinationcrm.com/articles/default.asp?articleid=3316.

Nadler, David, Michael L. Tushman, and Mark B. Nadler. Competing by Design: The Power of

Organizational Architecture. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.

Nelson, K and Aaron, S (2005). The Change Management Pocket Guide, Change Guides

LLC.

Organizations in Action. James D. Thompson. McGraw-Hill, New York: 1967.

ProSci. (2003). "Best Practices in Change Management." AMR Research Report, 2003.

Ristino, Robert J. The Agile Manager's Guide to Managing Change. Bristol, VT: Velocity

Business Publishing, 2000.

Rogers, E. M., (2003). Diffusion Of Innovation, New York: Free Press

Rowley, Robin; Joseph Roevens (2007). Organize with chaos. Cirencester: Management

Books 2000. ISBN 1852525614. OCLC 170042193.

Schön, D. (1974). Beyond the Stable State. Public and private learning in a changing society.

Penguin.

Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books. ISBN 046506874X.

OCLC 223087924.

Schön, D. A. (1973) Beyond the Stable State. Public and private learning in a changing

society, Harmondsworth: Penguin

Senge, Peter M., et al. The Dance of Change: The Challenges to Sustaining Momentum in

Learning Organizations. New York: Doubleday, 1999.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Standard_Book_Number

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/0226476502

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Computer_Library_Center

http://worldcat.org/oclc/2185305






http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/046506874X




86

Senge, Peter. The Fifth Discipline. London: Century Business, 1993.

Senge, Peter; C. Otto Scharmer, Joseph Jaworski, Betty Sue Flowers (March 2004).

Presence. Cambridge, MA: SoL. ISBN 0974239011. OCLC 231987197.

Sims, Ronald R. Changing the Way We Manage Change. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2002.

Stacey, Ralph D. Strategic Management and Organisational Dynamics: The Challenge of

Complexity. London: Pitman Publishing, 1993.

Tabrizi, N. B., (2007). Rapid Transformation, Harvard Business School Press.

The Planning of Change (2nd Edition). Warren G. Bennis, Kenneth D. Benne, and Robert

Chin (Eds.). Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York: 1969.

The Power of Appreciative Inquiry defines AI as "the study and exploration of what gives life to

human systems, at their best" (Whitney and Trosten-Bloom, 2003)

Theodore Kinni, "The Art of Appreciative Inquiry", The Harvard Business School Working

Knowledge for Business Leaders Newsletter, September 22, 2003.

Tucker, Kate. "The Milan Approach To Family Therapy: A Critique". Psychiatry On-line (Priory

Lodge Education Ltd.).

Ulfelder, Steve. (2001). "Six Ways I.T. Projects Fail - And How You Can Avoid Them." Darwin

magazine. http://www.darwinmag.com/read/060101/dirty.html.

Williams, Chuck. Management. 3rd ed. Mason, Ohio: Thomson/South-Western, 2005.

Worren, N. A. M.; Ruddle, K.; and K. Moore. 1999. "From Organizational Development to

Change Management: The Emergence of a New Profession," The Journal of Applied

Behavioral Science. 35 (3): 273-286.





http://www.darwinmag.com/read/060101/dirty.html


87

Handy Resources

www.fasset.org.za

www.change-management-toolbook.com

http://www.businessballs.com/

http://www.changedesigns.co.za/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bG5na7JD7rE (video)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpuHUiy_xog (video)

http://www.bin95.com/change_management_plan.htm

http://www.fasset.org.za/

http://www.change-management-toolbook.com/

http://www.businessballs.com/

http://www.changedesigns.co.za/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bG5na7JD7rE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpuHUiy_xog

http://www.bin95.com/change_management_plan.htm


88

Useful links


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Change_management_(people)

http://www.organizational-change-management.com

http://www.change-management.com/

http://www.facilitation.co.za/case_studies.html

http://resources.bnet.com/topic/change+management.html


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Change_management_(people)

http://www.organizational-change-management.com/

http://www.change-management.com/

http://www.facilitation.co.za/case_studies.html

Managing Change Handbook April 2013 Faranani Facilitation ... Management Handboo… · Managing Change Handbook (2013) 4 3 A body of knowledge 4 A control mechanism The Task of Managing

Documents