260 Management, leadership, coaching & business change models

December 27, 2009

Many of our readers have asked for us to add more slides to our downloadable models – so there they are… new for 2010

Management, Leadership models

Welcome to our summary of management, leadership, coaching, training, learning, occupational psychology and business models. This extensive collection is available to look at free here on the web, or you can download a set of images suitable for presentations. Have a look at what is available: See set 1 and See set 2

Over the years as professionals we have used many of these in our practice. We have been asked for copies… and here they are.

Please note that these are provided for educational purposes only, and we strongly encourage you to research the origins and use them only in the way in which they were intended.

We currently have 2 sets, not in any particular order. This is historical, as our first set was a real mixed bag, so is the second. In time we may well group them, however what we do not want to do is upset our current customers and force them to have to buy a set which contains mostly duplicates. In any-case, one of the advantages of putting sets together in this way is that it may inspire you to explore models you would not otherwise been exposed to.

Models See set 1 and See set 2

In addition we now have a complete set of blanks for you to add your own text.

The models cover: leadership, management, learning, training, business, marketing, change,… etc

See them at http://rapidbi.com/management/models-theories/


Quick and Painless interventions and solutions

March 27, 2008

Quick and Painless?

In our fast and busy lives we are often looking for that ‘quick fix’ the ‘painless solution’ – but are they? Does it work?

All too often on professional forums and networking groups I hear people asking for quick and painless solutions. Do they really exist in the worlds of business, Human Resources (HR) and Organizational Development (OD)?

Just because a solution is quick does not mean it will work in the medium or long term, nor does it necessarily mean it will support the culture and direction of the business.

Short term pain = long term gain?
What is pain in a professional context? Hassle? difficulty, effort? All of the above? Are many of us now so much under pressure that we ignore the real problem and are happy to stick on a sticking plaster to all problems we face? Do we care about the medium term consequences? – will we still be in the role in 12-24 months to care?

With the current economic climate I believe so – more and more of us will have to face the facts that the interventions we started just did not work – works in many situations they exasperated the problems. Time for us to start slowing down and doing an effective job.

Proof in the pudding

In the 2007 survey Develop the developers – the results highlighted that many in HR and OD are involved in evaluating activity and intervention, and that this trend was increasing, however less than 50% were actively involved in structured diagnosis before launching an intervention – and while there appeared to be intent to do more this will still mean that in 5 years time less people will be using diagnostic techniques than currently evaluate. And we and our clients often wonder why interventions do not add the value expected…


As the old saying goes – if you always do what you have always done – you will always get what you have always got. Or as I prefer – the real sign of madness – doing the same things time and time again and expecting different results!

For us as professionals to help our clients we must start to employ a robust diagnostic process on all our activity before committing to an intervention.

———————————————————————————-

Mike Morrison is director of RapidBI, an organizational effectiveness consultancy. He has been involved in HR, OD and strategic development for over 20 years. He can be contacted via www.rapidbi.com/

© This article is copyright RapidBI 2008 – it may be copied providing the authors are credited, and direct links maintained


Strategic Organizational Development

March 14, 2008

OD professionals are the CEOs allies in creating a top performance culture for the organization.

Organizational Development professionals are specialists in Change Management and Culture Development. However many find themselves in positions that make it difficult to get a straight line of communication to the CEO. Mainly because of the Organizational structure and the fact that OD-Organization Development is located under HR. Ideally the OD Head would have a position on the same level as the HR Head according to Dr. William Rothwell from Pennstate University who is an authority in HR. However reality is that most OD professionals still work under the more traditional structure.

Some years ago I held an OD role that reported directly into the CEO – HR did not!! – so to some extent this is down to the CEO and their experience of what an OD professional can and cannot deliver in relation to their needs and vision for the organization.

OD as a discipline is getting is only recently starting to grow an a standalone profession. More so with the pangs of growth that many of the new organizations are now facing. Talent acquisition, retention, organizational culture and people development are now starting to hinge more on the OD professional more than the HR. Recognizing this aspect, many organizations are allocating independent structures for the OD function. However, in cases where the OD has to work under HR, whether he/she can connect to the CEO solely depends on what he/she is capable of taking to the table. If a OD professional can sparkle with out-of-the-box ideas which can directly contribute to the growth of organization, the CEO cannot turn a blind eye.

Back in the 60′s and 70′s OD focused on people, behaviours and their actions and interactions with each other, in those days the majority of organizations did not know how to look after or engage with their people –

Things have now changed, much is different

CEO’s are having their valuable time ever squeezed and as such will only be able to have people reporting directly in that can add directly and measurably to their primary objectives. They have to focus on the big picture or strategic matters.

Unfortunately it is not very often that OD practitioner can demonstrate primary change. If we want to be engaged at this level we need to re-evaluate what we do and what is classed as OD activity. For example, traditionally when undertaking diagnostic processes we seem to focus on people and behaviours, or on the culture, now we need to be more integrated and holistic. This means starting to look at factors which traditionally have not been the domain of OD practitioner. If we are to truly facilitate change then our diagnostic process need to map the PRIMO-F model – that is to cover:

  • People,
  • Resources,
  • Innovation,
  • Marketing,
  • Operations and
  • Finance elements,

For it is how these factors interact that provide the organization with either an advantage or disadvantage in the market place. When undertaking a SWOT analysis for your organization do you cover all of these elements appropriately? Sure we may not be in a position to solve any issues raised here but as OD facilitators our role is to identify any blocks in the organization, then help to facilitate a solution.

So if we really want to get noticed we need to really get strategic and start looking at interactions with people and systems in all elements of our respective organizations.

———————————————————————————-

Mike Morrison is director of RapidBI, an organizational effectiveness consultancy. He has been involved in HR, OD and strategic development for over 20 years. He can be contacted via www.rapidbi.com/

© This article is copyright RapidBI 2006, 2008 – it may be copied providing the authors are credited, and direct links maintained


Diagnosing Organizational Culture

February 21, 2008

Today I read a thread on Diagnosing Organizational Culture, where someone was asking for recommendations on tools to use to undertake this task.

If you are only looking for isolated culture tools then the following should be considered (in no particular order):

  • Diagnosing Organizational culture – Harrison
  • Denison Organizational Culture Survey – Denison
  • Corporate Culture Questionnaire – SHL
  • The Creatrix – Byrd (http://www.creatrix.com/ ) looks at the culture for innovation and effective leadership
  • Organizational Dynamics – Kotter (book with diagnostic)
  • Diagnosing & Changing Organizational Culture – Cameron, Quinn (book with diagnostic)
  • and many many more….

Many instruments will claim to be ‘normed’ – be careful of this – we know the difficulties in ‘norming’ personality psychometrics – well imaging that complication multiplied ten fold per person employed… each person acts and interacts with another in a different way – I would love to see the data to be verified for this – the psychometric publishers would love to have such technology!

Context based Cultural Review

There are many approaches to looking at culture and for each firm their will be an appropriate tool based upon:

  • Current culture (ironically)
  • Goals of undertaking the survey
  • Desired outputs

I have been part of a team looking at what makes an effective firm for over 10 years now and have used many, many instruments from around the world looking at organizational culture. To my mind they all have one fundamental flaw – they assume there is a right way to run a business.

While there may well be a preferred approach of empowerments, engagement etc, I have worked with many firms that use an autocratic style very effectively, and when changed often people feel less secure and over time those firms fail to perform to the level they once did.

Change the culture at your peril

Having worked with over 700 firms in the last 10+ years I have discovered that the best culture to have is the culture that best suits the owner/ CEO and their natural style, then it is about getting consistency across the organization.

To change the culture without the TOTAL commitment from the CEO (and the CEO having appropriate one-to-one support to change their own style first) is pure folly. Change of culture must be led from the top if it is to be sustained and add value to the organization.

It’s more than just culture change

In addition, looking at culture on its own is meaningless – the systems, structure and processes need to be congruent with the culture, and just looking at culture in isolation is folly for short term feel good but little long term added value.

Any diagnostic process as part of an organizational development intervention needs to be as holistic as practical to avoid duplication of effort at a slightly later stage (clients get diagnostic’ed out)

Going truly Holistic

Many OD practitioners talk about holistic reviews – but are they truly holistic? Do they look at the way Finance, Marketing and Operations are run in the organization? are these put in the context of the culture and the stated/ desired goals of stakeholders?

The BIR (Business Improvement Review) not only looks at culture, style and values but puts it in the context of operations and the goals of the organization. It does not assume there is a ‘right’ or a ‘wrong’ to run a firm, nor does it assume a single management model. The BIR provides the coach or consultant to start a meaningful discussion based upon a common understanding. This creates ownership in the key decision makers and as a result has a high proportion of participants take meaningful action post diagnostic. They own the results and the reason for change.

If you would like more information on the BIR please visit www.rapidbi.com/bir or email me for further details.

———————————————————————————-

Mike Morrison is director of RapidBI, an organizational effectiveness consultancy. He has been involved in HR, OD and strategic development for over 20 years. He can be contacted via www.rapidbi.com/

© This article is copyright RapidBI 2008 – it may be copied providing the authors are credited, and direct links maintained


Develop the Developer – who is the typical developer?

January 15, 2008
Develop the Developer was a survey run in the summer of 2007.
Slowly we are unpacking the results. The summary is nearly complete but in the mean time as we discover key elements they will be posted here.
The typical developer in 2007 is:
  • Female, aged 36-56 (mostly 36-46), employed in a developer role, a member of the CIPD. They have been in a development role for five or more years and to date completed at least 30 days of CPD – many over 100.
For more information and background on Develop the developer visit the project site – www.developthedeveloper.com
Mike Morrison – January 2008

————————————————————————————–
Mike Morrison is director of RapidBI, an organisational effectiveness consultancy. He has been involved in HR, OD and strategic development for over 20 years. He can be contacted via www.rapidbi.com © This article is copyright RapidBI 2006, 2008 – it may be copied providing the authors are credited, and direct links maintained


Creating an organisational wide innovation culture

January 7, 2008

Ever heard people say…

“What we need in this organisation is innovation”, “Creativity will give us the edge”.

Leaders often utter these words with little realisation of the difficulties of bringing about a fundamental shift in the behaviour necessary to create an innovation culture across the enterprise. “We can empower people to bring new ideas, we’ll run some workshops on creativity” if only it were that simple. But alas this Procrustean approach is unlikely to reap rich rewards.

You remember Procrustes of course, the famous innkeeper of greek mythology? According to legend he was single-minded in his approach to hospitality, he kept an inn on the road to Athens and what distinguished this inn from any other was that it had only one room containing only one bed. Procrustes believed that all travellers who stayed in his hostel should fit in the bed, and this is where he was single-minded, those who were too tall swiftly had their feet cut off whilst those too short were stretched to fit. An unfortunate side effect of this unwarranted attention to detail meant that by the time he had executed the necessary adjustments many of his guests were, well, dead!

A one size fits all approach denies the reality that people are different and in developing an approach towards encouraging innovation these differences need to be surfaced and reconciled.

One organisation has devised a more enlightened strategy. Recognising early on that building a culture of innovation requires some foresight and hard graft in building a critical mass of people who understand their own, and others innovation style they targeted successive intakes of graduates to build new ways of thinking and acting to realise their innovation potential.

Around 40 graduates a year participate in the graduate development programme, after successfully completing an assessment centre. Critical reasoning tests are part of the selection process but interestingly, so too is a creative thinking test that explores, fluency – the number of ideas generated, originality – how original are the ideas and lateral flexibility – how diverse these ideas are. Candidates are chosen according to their strengths either in critical reasoning or creativity – some even have strengths in both domains! Importantly, whatever their strengths each have a vital role in the innovation process.

At the very first module of their development programme they are introduced to two important topics – learning and innovation. Each individual learns about their own preferences for learning which involves a combination of thinking and action (after Kolb) and understand the strengths and limitations of each preference. Prior to the module they are asked to complete a Creatrix™ inventory and when attending are introduced to the underlying concepts that describe innovation capacity – creativity and risk taking. The blend of these constructs gives unique profiles that describe typical approaches and attitudes towards the behaviours associated with innovation. Through an understanding of their own approach and strengths towards innovation the groups develop awareness of the need to balance innovation teams, too many innovators and a surfeit of ideas but no action, too many sustainers and no ideas will see the light of day. Appreciating their own and others styles helps in several ways; they recognise their own unique contribution to the innovation process; they identify potential barriers and possible levers that can help navigate from ideas to action; they develop a language for describing and understanding innovation; they identify ways of making things happen by circumventing the organisational “permafrost” that kill possibilities prematurely; they develop individual action plans for switching on their own capacity for innovation; and build a network across the organisation to act on those thorny cross functional problems.

This fresh approach of seeding the organisation with new entrants untainted by the inevitable cynicism seasoned campaigners in the organisation is beginning to bear fruit. Hungry to make a mark many of the graduates are pushing new ideas and making a succession of small wins from streamlining processes to developing new products – and what’s more getting the support of the person at the top. As this population grows with each successive stream a critical mass of young innovators is being formed who want to push the boundaries even further.

For this group in the organisation, change and innovation is not a threat, they feel empowered to drive it and, for them, it is the opportunity for more learning.

With innovation, as in other aspects of life, diversity brings real advantages, a concept that was lost on poor Procrustes.

By Mike Morrison & Vince Whittle

———————————————————————————————————————————–

For more information on creating an innovative culture see: www.rapidbi.com/creatrix & www.rapidbi.com/bir

For more management articles see www.rapidbi.com/articles

© This article is copyright RapidBI 2006, 2008 – it may be copied providing the authors are credited, and links maintained


Managing Change in Organizations

December 31, 2007

Welcome to our page on change management. For organizational development to be effective, change needs to be managed. Many organizational focus on the project management aspects of change. While this is an important factor – it is not the critical factor. People are.

Often when undertaking change processes in organizations we focus on the process, the project management. Often when change fails it fails because we have not taken into account the impact change has on the individuals concerned from a psychological perspective.

Not all people react in a negative way and change agents must take this into account when using any of the psychlogical based change models.

Some Change Models

personal change modelKubler Ross change curveChange Management iceberg model

Change management continuumManaging multiple change modelChange magnitude breadth model

Change equation beckertSchamner Change model - loopsChange Area model

Change quadrant Managing successful change modelChange curve - loops

Kubler-ross Change curve - loops

To see more of these models visit www.rapidbi.com/created/managementmodels.html

Habits and the impact on Change
As people we learn habits. Habits are formed when we do repetitive tasks, they are formed to help us cope with the wide variety of data (information) presented to us on a daily basis. It is too much to cope with at a conscious level. To cope with the variety over time we form habits. These habits may be simple routines like the order we get dressed in the mornings, the first few minutes in the work place – coffee, tea etc. It may even be the order in which we talk to people. When this structure or order is changed – it impacts us in many ways. It is often the simple changes to routines like this that cause individuals them most problems. It is not the fact that a desk may be now facing a different direction or on another floor in the building that is the issue – it is the break in the pattern that has been enforced on an individual. It is the little things that take time to resolve. As humans we can often deal with the big changes easily – it is the little things that cause us more difficulty! When change is ‘imposed’ on people, that is they feel they have little ownership in the decision, they often feel out of control. As organizational development or change agents we need to help this process.

Please note that as humans we all have a choice – we can engage with the change or we can leave. As Organisational Development professionals we need to recognize this as a legitimate strategy.

We cannot and should not force change on people, our role should be to enable change and to encourage people to mage a choice or decision.

The models shown on this page can help individuals recognize that what they are experiencing is ‘normal’ and that this is often a process that they need to go through. Some people will go through the process quickly – others more slowly.

Many Change Models There are many change models, the most common one is the Kubler Ross transition (grief) cycle. Originally titled ‘The 5 Stages of Receiving Catastrophic News’ these stages are:

  • Denial
  • Anger
  • Bargaining
  • Depression

AcceptanceAs an example, apply the 5 stages to a traumatic event most all of us have experienced:

The Dead Battery!

You’re going to be late to work so you rush out to your car, place the key in the ignition and turn it on. You hear nothing; the battery is dead.
Denial – What’s the first thing you do? You try to start it again! And again. You may check to make sure the radio, heater, lights, etc. are off and then…, try again.
Anger – !$%&*@~$! car!, I should have junked you years ago. Did you slam your hand on the steering wheel?
Bargaining – (realizing that you’re going to be late for work)…, Oh please car, if you will just start one more time I promise I’ll buy you a brand new battery, get a tune up, new tires, clean you, and keep you in perfect working condition.
Depression – Oh God, what am I going to do. I’m going to be late for work. I give up. My job is at risk and I don’t really care any more. What’s the use.
Acceptance – Ok. It’s dead. Guess I had better call the breakdown service or find another way to work. Time to get on with things; I’ll deal with this later.This is not a trivial example. In fact, we all go through this process numerous times a day. A dead battery, the loss of a parking space, a wrong number, the loss of a pet, a job, a move to another city, an overdrawn bank account, etc.Most write ups of this model in recent years has focused on grief, while this is great for doctors and councilors, it is not helpful in business.In business I have found that while this is a valuable model, staff and managers find it ‘difficult’ to understand, so I use a simplified version:

  • Denial
  • Resistance
  • Exploration
  • Acceptance/ Commitment

The graphical version is listed below. I occasionally change the last one from acceptance to commitment depending on the ‘depth’ of change. I let the ‘users’ of the model create their own words. When they own the model they are more likely to use it.

Personal Change Model
Encouraging people to create their own labels for each of the four stages helps them to own the model. If they own the model they are more likely to use it.Remind them that these types of reactions to change are common. In fact we all react like this to a greater or lesser extent. It is normal. Understanding the fact that they are/ might be having an emotional reaction to a logical proposal is a big step for many people. Some times we will go through the stages quickly, other times more slowly. Sometimes we may be going through several change processes at one time, so will be in different places on the curve depending on the change. Often at the same time!

Other change management models include:
The ADKAR model for individual change management was developed by Prosci. This model describes five required building blocks for change to be realized successfully on an individual level. The building blocks of the ADKAR Model include:

  • Awareness – of why the change is needed
  • Desire – to support and participate in the change
  • Knowledge – of how to change
  • Ability – to implement new skills and behaviors
  • Reinforcement – to sustain the change

John Kotter has set out an eight-step strategy:

  1. Establish a sense of urgency.
  2. Create the guiding coalition.
  3. Develop a vision and strategy.
  4. Communicate the change vision.
  5. Empower employees for broad-based action.
  6. Generate short-term wins.
  7. Consolidate gains and produce more change.
  8. Anchor new approaches in the culture.

If you would like any more information on the use of the model or how we have integrated it into our organizational and culture change products please contact us or visit our diagnostics page.

Other change models and adaptations
There are many ways of graphically representing a ‘change curve’. below are a few variations.
When working with individuals and teams undergoing change, it is not the actual model used that is important, but that the individuals see it is relevant to them. The best change facilitators use the one which best matches the culture of the organization they are working with.

————————————————————————————————-
If you would like any more information on the use of the model or how we have integrated it into our organizational and culture change products please contact us or visit our diagnostics page.

Please note the models here are provided for educational purposes only. No copyright is assumed. © Mike Morrison, RapidBI 2007 http://www.rapidbi.com


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.