Managing Change Successfully – a case study #cipd11

Managing Change Successfully

One of the sessions at this year’s #cipd11 annual conference was led by GSK, looking at the approach they took to transforming their organisation.

As many people know, the pharmaceutical industry (like many others) has over the last few years had to radically change some of their working practices and approaches. GSK was no exception.

Like many industries the culture and business climate that GSK is/ was operating within was changing. Customers and purchasers were changing their expectations.

For change to be effective, the team knew that it was not the launch of any change that was critical, but how to embed and ensure the initiatives around change actually “landed” fully in the business units.

Three Key Levers

To help drive the change, GSK identified three key levers:

1. Talent agenda
2. Change framework
3. Leadership framework

All of these were to be supported through the development of resilience in the business, developing HR capability and identifying appropriate measures. Not just end point, but transitional ones.

Change at multiple levels

For the change to happen, the leadership recognised that not only was the environment in which they were operating having to change (i.e. new markets, changing existing ones), but the way the organisation responded and adapted was vital. The metaphor they used was they described themselves as an “oil tanker” operating in a stormy sea, what they needs to do was transform from an oil tanker to an agile yacht, and be able to cope with both a rough and stormy environment as well as calm seas.

Agility is key

To achieve the organisational goals it was recognised that the monolithic approach was no longer sustainable. The organization at all levels needs to become more agile. To help achieve this, a program with the aim of “building change capability” was developed. This was a fusion of Organizational Development OD, LEAN and Project management. The goal was to streamline the “lab to Industrial scale process.

Renewing the senior talent pool

Part of this process involved looking at the top 200. The managed to create near to 100% movement in the top 200 population. This was achieved through a blend of internal transitions and external appointments. Retention was an important driver. Development of this and other key groups was fundamental and the GSK leadership development framework, was one of the development tools to support the transition

GSK Leadership Development Framework

This framework comprised: Managing self, Leading others, Leading managers, leading leaders to lead the enterprise.

This development program was said to be

• 70% on-the-job development through:
• “challenging self”
• 360 feedback
• expanded job responsibilities
• projects and
• job rotations/ assignments
•  20% developmental relationships:
• Mentoring
• Coaching
• Associations, networks and advisory positions
•  10% Formal development
• Self directed learning
• Course and programmes

Measures

Using the “keep it short & simple” approach measures initially in the transition were quantitative rather than qualitative. For example “Do you hole quarterly talent reviews?” and “Do you have ‘ready now’ successors?”. These and other simple dashboard indicators were used to measure “embedding” the process rather than more complex and time consuming measures.

HR Development

As part of the change, HR teams also needed to be developed to accommodate many of the changes. Much of this was driven through a survey of 300+ senior leaders which provided a focus on three themes:

1. Improve HR effectiveness in building capacity, talent mgt, change mgt, leadership development and strategic recruitment
2. Evolve the operating model to simplify and improve the service
3. Upgrade and enhance HR capabilities

Summary of learning from the process

HR and senior leaders all gained a lot from the changes to these processes, some of the key learning points the organization is looking to embed further include:

• The importance of moving away from projects to sustainable change
• Execution is the new strategic and embedded is the new ‘sexy’
• Everything is an OD intervention – it’s important to leverage the whole not the part
• Create agitators – enterprise leaders, and leaders developing leaders
• HR needs to be a courageous leader

This is one in a series of articles outlining some of the talks at this years #cipd annual conferenec for HR professionals in the UK and internationally.

If you are a CIPD member

Organizational Change & Traffic Management & Flow

Managing change – the hidden factors of flow

Recently while thinking about how change is implemented and impacts organizations, I can across an interesting article on traffic flow.

In the UK on our motorways we now have “active traffic management” systems where lanes are closed & opened by control staff, and often used in conjunction with variable speed limits. Most drivers hate these as they usually slow the traffic up by 10 mph. Does this really work to manage traffic jams? and more importantly can we learn anything from this approach to help us manage change more effectively?

The article shows clearly how “fluid dynamics” can help to explain traffic jams and flow – and using the traffic metaphor and applying it to change I think we can better understand organizational change too.

Below is a summary of the article (use with permission):

The Physics Behind Traffic Jams

by William Beaty

Have you ever been driving on a highway/ motorway when traffic suddenly slows to a crawl? You inch along for many minutes while waiting to see the accident which must have caused the jam. At the same time you also curse the “rubberneckers” who are causing the whole problem. But then all the cars ahead of you take off at high speed.

The jam is over, but no accident, no police cars, nothing. WHAT THE HECK WAS THAT!

A traffic jam with no cause? In the rear-view mirror you see all the poor saps behind you still stuck in the jam. But why? If all those people could just speed up at the same time, the whole traffic jam would evaporate. Why don’t they ever do that? What caused the mysterious slowdown in the first place?

After experiencing many of these “invisible accidents”, I came up with the following explanation. To best understand this, imagine that you look down on traffic from an aerial view point. Pretend you’re in a Traffic Reporter’s helicopter looking downwards.

Fig 1: Cars lining up behind an accident

Above in fig. 1 I’ve drawn a one-lane road, an accident, and a row of cars stuck behind the wreck. Other cars are approaching from the left and stopping too. Suppose that the “wrecked” car (the red one) has simply become temporarily stuck. Maybe it spun out on ice. What will happen when the red car moves and unplugs the flow?

Fig 2: A wave of ‘condensed’ traffic creeps backwards

In the top row (fig. 2A) the flow is suddenly unplugged. But not all the cars can move, since most cars are stuck behind drivers who are stopped.

Figure 2B shows the traffic a few moments later, and figure 2C shows it a few moments after that. Notice the orange car in 2A, and see how it eventually becomes unjammed in 2D and begins moving. At the same time the red car in 2A approaches the jam and is swallowed up.

A MOVING WAVE OF “JAM”

After the wreck is removed, there seems to be no reason for the traffic jam to persist. Yet it does. The reason for this is sensible: if I am stuck behind a car that is stopped, then I have to stop too, and so does the car behind me. All the cars in the jam are in this situation. Even though the wreck is gone, they remain locked at standstill because if they want to move, they ALL have to move at once. They never do, because each driver is waiting for the car ahead to move. If I am in the traffic jam, I’m not going to move forward because I have no room to do so. I’d bump the car ahead of me. We all think like this, so none of us can move.

When the car in front of me leaves, I still cannot accelerate instantly, so I will remain stopped for a moment. I must delay leaving for a moment. If I started up instantly, I’d stay too close to the car ahead of me, and that would not be safe. Each departing car must delay in the same way, and this causes the jam to “evaporate” starting from the forward downstream end. It evaporates in a wave which begins at the forward end of the jam, (near the wreck/ incident). The wave eats into the jam from right to left.

Starting at figure 2A, the cars depart from the jam in sequence. In 2B the wave of “evaporation” has moved away from the wreck site, and in 2C and 2D it is far from the wreck. But notice an interesting thing: even though the CARS THEMSELVES are moving from left to right, the “wave of evaporation” moves in the opposite direction. It moves leftwards as it eats into the traffic jam.

There is a second important thing to notice. While some cars are still jammed, more cars are piling up behind them at the trailing end of the jam. Even after the wreck is removed, more cars are still “condensing” onto the back of the jam. The traffic jam is like a solid object whose front end is evaporating and whose back end is growing like a crystal. Cars move left to right, yet watch the group of stopped cars. The stoppage is creeping slowly upstream, in the opposite direction to the moving cars. The accident is gone, but a moving wave of stopped cars remains behind. It’s not a traffic jam, it’s a shock wave which propagates through the “automotive material”. It’s a traveling wave of traffic-condensation.

NOT CAUSED BY ACCIDENTS

These sorts of traveling waves are common during heavy traffic conditions. An accident isn’t needed to create them, sometimes they are caused by near-misses, by people cutting each other off, by merging lanes at a construction site, or simply by extra cars entering from an on-ramp. In traffic engineering lingo, they can be caused by “incidents” on the highway. A single “rubbernecker” could cause one by momentarily stopping to look at something interesting. Whenever you slow way down in order to merge across a lane to get to your upcoming exit, YOU could create one.

Sometimes they have no cause at all. They are like sand ripples and sand dunes, and they just appear for no clear reason. They are like ocean waves caused by the steady breeze, or like the waves which move along a flapping flag. They just “emerge” spontaneously from the writhing lines of traffic. In the science of Nonlinear Dynamics this is called an “EMERGENT PHENOMENON.”

How long will the “traffic wave” last after the accident is cleared? Its lifetime depends upon the amount of traffic, and on the number of cars trapped in the jam, but sometimes these things can persist for many hours. When traffic is slight, the traffic jam might shrink rapidly to nothing. But if traffic remains heavy, then there’s no reason for the traveling wave to ever dissipate at all. Also, if the conditions are just right (if the “condensation” happens faster than the “evaporation”,) then even a tiny wave could grow large and larger. Sort of like dropping a tiny seed crystal into a supersaturated solution. When traffic is heavy and unstable, a single driver can cause the traffic to freeze into a gigantic crystal.

So, next time you are commuting and you approach a stoppage, don’t think of it as a stupid f@#$% traffic jam. Think of it as a pressure wave which has approached your car and engulfed it. Think of it as a simple living thing which is made of cars rather than molecules. Stay hopeful that the crystalline amoeba poops your car out soon. Take an aerial viewpoint, and visualize the wave which is moving backwards as you move forwards.

—————————————-END——————————————-

Is this not like how change is experienced in organizations? With the “cars” at the front of the queue like senior leaders & those towards the back operational staff?

The accident or incident being a change requirement in or to an organization.

So the next time you are managing change – or driving in heavy traffic… be aware your behaviour will impact those around you more than you may first realise!

London Marathon Change or Transition Model

When looking to lead change: The Marathon Effect

The Marathon Effect or Model is taken from William Bridges, author of Managing Transitions, Making the Most of Change. It is often known as Bridges three stage model.

Bridges focus for success to manage the ending and to help people to let go.

Bridges three stage model:

• Change is external
• Transition is internal

 

Change -v- Transition

• Transition is what affects us, not change.
• A transition starts with an ending.
• You have to let go to grab something new.
• Once you let go, you enter a neutral zone.
• Step out of the neutral zone and into the new beginning.

Think of transition & change like a marathon, not a sprint

The model or effect mimics what you may see in the London Marathon or a long distance road race with many thousands of participants.

The more experienced faster runners line up at the start, and the rest of the participants are spread out behind them, with the causal joggers towards the end.

As the race begins the fastest and most experienced begin first. As these first runners or “early adopters” take off, those behind them can start moving up to the ‘official start line’ and begin their race. While these followers start the process at a different time to the early adopters. The journey or route is basically the same – although both have and require a different journey to the start.

This starting process creates waves of individuals and populations as they begin their journey.

While many are starting on their journey 9race) others (laggards” have barely moved – in fact it may be some time before they have even realized that the race or journey has actually started.

They eventually get to the ‘official start’ but much time has elapsed between now and when the first runners took off.

So much like organizational Change

This view of change, much like to 100′s of runners starting the London Marathon  makes an easy analogy to an organization going through change.

More often than not the senior managers or leaders of the organization who have been working on the change have had a chance to think through the change, talk about it, and get used to it. These leaders typically go through personal changes and transitions before they launch the changes, while they’re still struggling with the problems and searching for solutions. By the time they have announced the change, they have long since put their personal losses and the transition stages behind them and are ready for the new beginning. The next level of managers are probably just entering the transition stage, and the rest of the rank and file have not yet even made their endings.

In business much like long distance running, keep the marathon model in mind when planning and implementing your next change. While you’re having a nice cold refreshment, there are many others who have not even crossed the starting line yet. Have patience and allow the walkers to complete the same race (journey) you did.

 

Bridges three stage model:

Letting go

Bridges focus for success to to manage the ending and to help people to let go by:

• Clearly define what is over and what is not
• Officially mark the ending
• Honor the past
• Make it possible for people to take a piece of the past with them
• Remind people that change is occurring in the context of continually renewing and sustaining the organization

Navigating the neutral zone

• Try to normalize it – acknowledge that it can be uncomfortable, but it can also be used to peoples advantage
• Provide on going training, policy changes and rewards & recognition
• Protect people from other changes
• Create temporary policies, procedures, roles etc as needed
• Define short term goals & objectives
• Encourage risk taking & experimenting
• Step back and take stock – encourage others to do the same
• Don’t push for closure – and certainly no too soon

Help people commit to the new beginning

• “Starts” can happen “on-time” – the beginning may not!
• Clarify and communicate the purpose of the change.. and again, and again, and again!
• Help people understand as soon as possible what part they play in the new world
• Help people identify their skills and contributions
• Walk the talk!
• Hold people accountable for making changes, and recognize & reward them for it
• Build opportunities for quick success to build confidence
• Ask for commitment
• Celebrate!

Time is an important factor in enabling successful change and transition.

* Inspired by an article by Dan McCarthy

 

Change Management Project Template

Change Management Templates

Many people are looking for a template on which to base their change management project. While the team at RapidBI do not believe that these are successful or complete tools, many people are not sure where to start.

Therefore we provide the template below to act as an aid memoir providing the structure of the project at its initial stages.

Remember each change management project is different, and managing the process parts of a change project is only the tip of the iceberg of a successful change project.

One of the problem for professionals looking for “change management templates” on the internet is the fact that this phrase means many things to different audiences. To the project management and quality worlds for example, a change template refers to managing changes or deviations from the schedules plan or standard. In HR a change plan is the plan to manage change in an organisation. These are very different things, and require very different approaches.

Potential Template Structure

Change Management Project Title

Change Project leader/ manager

Date

Introduction to change project

Project Sponsor(s)

Change Project objectives

Change Project Budget – direct and indirect change costs

Change Project success measures

Change objectives & principles

Change plan elements

Rationale for the change pragram

Key stakeholder analysis for the change program

Assessment & readiness to change

Key change messages

Identify change elements

Develop change management plan

Develop change psychology & communications plan for the project

Consolidation – back to “business”

Evaluation

Change Management Project Close

 

There are many change management “templates” on the web, however they tend only to look at the processes of change and not the psychology of change. this is much harder to manage and “template” as it is often dynamic, and while resistance at various project phases may be predictable, and some of the strategies for managing this pre0-determined, there is nothing to beat the excellent change manager 2on the ground” reading the dynamic situation and working with line managers to form short term strategies to help smooth any transitional chanllenges.

The basic framework of any template or framework should cover:

1. The concept of change management in the project
2. Forecasting and planning changes proposed
3. Arranging and controlling changes/ variations in the project as they occur
4. Analyzing and adjusting changes as required
5. Monitoring & evaluating

Change Management Models

Supporting Change in Organisations

How do we support change in organizations?

How do HR support change and change management in organisations? This is a HUGE subject. As this question is being asked of HR people more and more in the current climate, this is the first of a series of articles looking at not just change management, but the supporting role that HR, OD and training professionals can make.

Lets start out by understanding what the phrase “Support organisations going through change”. Now by this I am assuming that we are not driving the change – that is happening elsewhere, nor are we managing it, our role is to provide support to the organisation as the change process is unravelled.

Supporting change could include the:

• Project management of change
• People psychology aspects of change
• Communications in change
• The importance of clarity in change
• HR issues attached to change
  • Redeployment
  • Attitudes
  • Policy changes
  • Individual development needs
  • Development – Skills change
  • Behaviours/ attitudes
  • Staffing levels required (up or down)
  • Relocation
  • Mergers

And much of this will depend on the context and nature of the proposed change compared to the status quo:

• Organic change
• Transformational change
• Developmental change
• Transitional change

and the purpose of change:

• Structural change
• Cost cutting
• Process change
• Cultural change

How can we support change & change management in organizations?

So what can we as HR do to support change…. lots – but only what the project lead needs us to do.

If we go off all maverick, solving problems that actually do not exist yet, we can add to the pain and difficulty of the change for the organisation. We need to be in a position to deliver the objectives of the change programme at the time the change programme requires them. this means us having a clear relationship with both the change leader and the key stakeholder.

For me one of the most important things we can do is once we know the goals and strategy of the change, we need to carry out a diagnostic process to find out “where we are”. now depending on the nature and scope of change, this could result in different actions even though we are starting in the same place. appropriate diagnosis in the context of the goals and culture are critical for cost effective and timely success.

 

What are our goals in supporting organisations in change?

The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) require practitioners in this area to be capable of:

• Understanding why organisations need to change and how change affects organisations
• Understanding  the key factors involved in the change process and different approaches to managing change
• Understanding the impact of change on employees and the role of human resources (HR)

So this is a good a place to start as any other. Success criteria in supporting change in organizations requires practitioners to be able to:

1.1 Explain why organisations need to change with reference to internal and external factors

1.2 Explain how change can impact an organisation’s business

2 Understand the key factors involved in the change process and different approaches to managing change

2.1 Explain the main factors involved in the change process

2.2 Compare and contrast different approaches to managing change

3 Understand the impact of change on employees and the role of human resources (HR)

3.1 Compare and contrast the different behavioural responses people may demonstrate when an organisation is experiencing change

3.2 Explain the role of HR in supporting individuals during organisational change

 

In this introductory article we will start with the top level questions:

Why do organisations need to change? –

Because their customers, the technology and environment are changing – and lets be honest the market for arga black or coal buckets is much less than it was 100 years ago – it is all about business survival at some stage. This is one of the reasons why conducting a PESTLE analysis is critical. And for HR, HRD & OD professionals understanding the results from a PESTLE analysis and its impact on the people, skills and attitudes elements are critical for both business sustainability and success.

What key factors are involved in the change process?

Until we know the nature and scope of the change being considered this is a difficult one. Consider using the PRIMO-F framework to identify some areas and potential factors to consider. In addition think about, people, their sense of security, any feelings or sense of loss, relationships with peers, productivity etc.

What are the different approaches to managing and supporting change?

There are many approaches, one of the most common series is based on project management principles. While this is OK in theory, it carries the risk of being too process based and not people orientated. Often if the project is managed rather then led (i.e. management rather than leadership) it can fail to spot the unseen issues which can have a significant impact on people engagement and productivity for some considerable time into the future.

What is the impact of change on employees and the role of human resources (HR)

This may be as little as re-skills some of the workforce, right through to relocation, redundancy, job change, merger and a raft of other significant HR based impacts. Relationships between the workforce and management may breakdown due to loss of trust. each change program will have widely different impacts, and each ones cannot be managed against any template or check-list. we need to be “on the ground” being proactive and aligning any subtle changes back to the project leader and designing appropriate interventions to minimise any impacts.

How does change impact on an organisations business? -

How long is a piece of string – it depends if the change is wanted in the org, by who and how this is communicated and managed. many changes are not noticed – generally only the badly managed ones are remembered!

What sort of behaviours do people demonstrate when going through change? -

Again – I could list all of the human emotions here as they may all be applicable depending on the change, the impact on the individuals, what they thought of the “old way” – not all change is negative! see our Change management models page for some of the behaviours we may expect in a change situation.

Change is not all bad. Often we approach change and change management as dangerous – disliked. this is not true, and in many situations the employees are the first to cry – thank you.. at last – we have been saying this for a long time but no one was listening! Often change is welcomed – it is how it is communicated cam make all the difference.

HR, HRD and other allied functions have a key role in supporting the people, the business and the change management processes.

 

 

 

 

Change House Model

The Change House Model

There are many change management models, one that is becoming increasingly popular is one often referred to as:  ”the Change House“, “The House of Change” or the “Four Rooms of Change” model.

 

History of the Change House Model

Originally developed in the early 1970′s by Claes F Janssen, its origional or proper name is The Four Rooms of Change or the 4-Room Apartment.

In Janssen’s work it first represents this as:

The Four Rooms of Change matrix

NO+ CONTENTMENT  Adjustment. My present situation feels good enough as it is. Relaxed, effortless self-control, as when riding a bicycle. Attention focused on the here & now, no marked self-reflection. »I am OK, you are OK«. Feeling »average« in the sense of not special. Being there.

YES+ RENEWAL  Creative change. Integration. A sense of »getting it all together«. Insights, aha-experiences. Feelings freely felt and expressed. Intense experience of the here & now, with self-reflection: I participate and observe that I am participating. Strong feelings of community. Self-confidence. Energy. Radical ideas, a desire to make things happen.

NO– DENIAL  Pseudo-adjustment. Self-discipline with focus on completing a certain task or defending a certain pattern or status quo. No clear feelings. I am in control but uptight. The here & now (if experienced at all) feels empty and mechanical. Irritation. Attention concentrated on the task felt to be necessary, on the rules and/or my image in others’ eyes, on not to lose face, on tactical considerations, etc.

YES- CONFUSION  Maladjustment. Something is or feels wrong here & now, but I do not know what, or what to do to make things right. Tense, negative self- consciousness with feelings of inferiority and doubts; »self-centred«. Chaos. Dialectical YES/NO-conflicts within and/or without. Feelings in a clinch. A sense of unreality.

Janssen says “Personal Dialectics (1975), it (the model) turns up at the end, as the answer to a particular scientific question, namely how to integrate what I called the 0utsider’s experience. I had worked with this question for ten years. The book was my Ph.D. thesis.“

 

Later additions to the change rooms:

It is believed that the ‘Sun Lounge’, ‘Dungeon of Denial’ ( or Cellar of Despair) and ‘Pit of Paralysis’ were added by Ashridge Business School who borrowed Claes’ model and renamed it as the ‘Change House’. This work may well have been done in association with Ander & Lindstrom Partners and Claes Janssen as they were consultants to Ashridge at the time.

The model is sometimes accredited to Kilbride and Durkins – where this reference is from is not known.

On Janssens site is a wonderful explanation of how to apply the model in a section taken from one of his books.

Much like the early work of  Elisabeth Kubler-Ross, who created an awareness of the psychlogical impact of change, this model looks at the “states” we like to inhabit and have to transition through as a natural part of a change process.

 

To find out more about the model visit the copyright holders web site

But we are different

In our industry we’re unique

I read an interesting post yesterday entitled “We’re Unique“. the full title of the piece was “We’re Unique” (Sure You Are)” and the intro that led me to read this was interesting, however when I went to the blog I was disapointed that the actual article was no much longer than the initial introduction.

In itself the article stated the obvious but did not give any hints tips or ideas on how to change the situation.

There was me expecting to read some interesting piece (ok – my error not the authors) on why some sectors think they are unique or different – but all I got was two paragraphas basically saying:

“…All organizations have a mission, goals, objectives and work to do.  Solving problems is a common process whether at a hospital, a software company or a government agency.

No matter where we work, we need a mission that we can all rally around, clear goals and the tools to get the job done.  We also need a supportive management that cheers us on especially in times like this.  No, saying that “We’re unique” is only an excuse for not solving the problem.”

While this may be true, I am not sure that is what a client or person wants to hear. Early in my career I came across the three fundamental  ”rules” to understanding people when you are looking to lead or manage them….

Rule #1 – People are different

Rule #2 – people Are different

Rule #3 – people are Different

What works for one person (you) may not work for another person… your client!

Lessons from NLP

In NLP terms, most people are operate in one of two modes “same” or “different” – they either look for similarities to their experiences and situation or they look for differences. As a “herd type animal” the majority of people see “sameness” as a strength and “difference” as a weakness. The simple reason why people at conferences seem to gravitate towards people from their own sector or specialism.  As consultants and change agents we need to understand this and work with it not against it. Most of us (employees) are risk averse at work rather than risk takers – so selecting a solution to a problem that is familiar and trusted by people we trust is really important. Trying to push a solution on a person just increases any existing resistance to change that already existed.

Showing you are like them

Peter Landau in his book Intelligent Dressing looks at the psychology of personal image, and how using sartorial skills can help show that “we”are like “them”.  Its about us moving to their map of the world – in order to initiate change and action – not for us to drag them kicking and screaming to our map of the world to show them the solution is easy. Change as we all know is one of the biggest barriers to performance improvement and problem solving. Hitting people with sticks does not change the beliefs – it may change the superficial behaviour 9duck the stick) but if anything it re-enforces the belief that we are not to be trusted.

Are they unique?

A twist on that saying by Henry Ford – if you think you are different… you are, if you are the same… you are.

Our roles as change agents must be to recognise when the culture of an organization is like this, and learn to adapt and communicate in a different way.

My wife works in a sector that traditionally thinks that it is very different from others – to the point that to get employed in the sector you must have sector experience first (for most jobs) what is the sector… healthcare. Interestingly when you look at what they do in terms of change management they tend to copy other sectors. Earlier this week she attended a launch event at the hospital – with a big fanfair they announced that they were launching a new initiative LEAN. Now this approach has been used in sectors as diverse as manufacturing, call centres and retail, so why has a sector as “unique” as healthcare now adopted it? – of course they will argue that they are a “special case” and need to do things differently. Making changes to such systems is the main reason why change programmes often fail – they dilute the bits that actually make the difference!

Lets make sure that we understand a few fundamental points about “business and organizations”:

1. They are managed by people
2. The work is done by people
3. People carry out processes

One hopes that all people are humans and have the same basic evolutionary path, innate skills and abilities (generally speaking). That at its most simple level all (most) humans can pick objects up in their hands, manipulate them and put them in a different place. The fundamental building blocks of the ability to work.

So the only real difference between organizations are the cultures we as humans generate to “protect” our “tribe”. so if we want to work with a “tribe” that is not our own we need to adapt.

Clean Sheet Review Tool

What is a Clean Sheet Review?

With an increasing need for organizations to review their effectiveness and costing, more and more managers and organizational development practitioners have to undertake “Clean Sheet Reviews”.

What is a “Clean Sheet Review” and how do you do one?

It is in essence a process of collective (or organizational) forgetting or wiping the slate clean and starting with a blank sheet of paper. Starting again from scratch.

Within the context of Business Process Improvement, a clean sheet review looks at the organizations requirements of the “as-is” or current organization and reinvents business processes to meet those business requirements free of the constraints of the existing organization. Ideally a clean sheet review ignores the constraints of policy and law as though there is no “as-is” organization and the review team is creating business processes from scratch to meet the business requirements.

History

The Clean Sheet Review as a business tool appears to have been first documented as a business process in a publication in 1981.

The methodology is believed to have been developed from a process called “Clean Sheet Redesign” where existing products or solutions were ignored and the problem re appraised without the constraints of the existing solution. One of the earliest documented formalized approaches was in the second world war when the Russian army tanks issued such destruction to German medium tanks early in the war that Hitler called for a clean-sheet redesign. This led to the agreement to produce what would become the Panther. In this approach rather than just look at continuous improvement, all previous designs of armament and firepower were ignored and the concept looked at with a fresh perspective without any existing constraints.

The transfer from using “clean sheet” as an engineering solution to a business one started in 1981 at the Annual International Industrial Engineering conference, Institute of Industrial Engineers (1981- ). Twin Cities Chapter, American Institute of Industrial Engineers

Where they “…suggest a business strategy based on a total clean sheet redesign of business processes without a corresponding total redesign to other concomitant organizational activities is like walking into the future facing the past”.

The kaizen or Total Quality Management movement in the 1980’s was the key driver for the methodology to be widely popularized and communicated.

Hammer & Champy were the final people to fully popularize the approach in their book “Re-engineering the Corporation” in 1993. This led to many organizations implementing ill-conceived processes as they took the “Clean Sheet” approach without thinking through all the complex relationships and inter-relationships of process and peoples reactions to process.

Several of the “big” consulting firms started their own version of this which they called “Brown Paper” activities.

Latterly this process has been included within many Six Sigma methodologies

Process

Typically the process starts with a requirement or scope from the senior leadership of the business, stating what requirements need to be met by the processes the review will create, along with a deadline for delivery.

The review team (better for a team to look at this than an individual) starts with a clean sheet of paper and defines their own method and schedule for delivering business processes to meet the requirements of the business.

Direction of the team is kept to a minimum to encourage creative solutions unavailable to other methods that are constrained to developing from the “as-is” processes. This method therefore protects the opportunity to capture and exploit the creativity in the team.

Dangers & Organizational Risks

One of the risks or dangers associated with a Clean Sheet Review, is that many organizations are resistant to give a truly clean sheet to the process development team. Constraints are put in place which in reality means that the review is just that – a review looking for small step improvements.

The reality is in most businesses it takes a lot of guts, confidence and “bottle” to truly develop a process from a blank or clean sheet. This in turn leads to many in the profession using the term as a process but actually just making small changes and adaptations rather than the whole sale review and development of processes from scratch to ensure an effective and efficient process.

For the process to work it requires the team devising such a process to be both familiar with the outputs required and then isolated from the process on a day to day basis whilst developed and implemented. The design process also needs to take into account the impact of change on the people involved in the “new” process.

Tools of Change Management

Introduction to change, change management and change tools & models

For any organizational development (OD) intervention to be effective, change needs to be lead or at the very least managed from a people perspective.

Many organizations focus on the project management aspects of change. While this is an important factor – it is not the critical factor. People are. Having said that, it is about balancing the development or change of both at the same time – see our business growth model. It is time to tip the balance from “process2 based project management to people focused project management.Often when undertaking change processes in organizations we focus on the process, the project management.  Usually when change fails, it fails because we have not taken into account the impact change has on the individuals concerned from a psychological perspective.When you are researching or talking to others about change remember the three important leadership rules:

Rule #1 – People are different

Rule #2 – People are different

Rule #3 – people are different

Each person will react in their unique way. Some will embrace change, others will accept and some will reject.  It is down to Paretos 80:20 – the question is – what is it for you and the change you are expecting to manage?Generally every piece of change management activity we undertake, we work on a change framework – 20:60:20 (yes a wild assumption but a great place to start.

20% Supportive & positive towards change

60% On the fence – need leadership in the context of change

20% Negative towards change

Where 20% will be positive and supportive of the proposed change, 20% will reject the change out of hand, and we need to worth with the 60%.  In most organizations we spend our time with the ‘bottom’ 20% – well they will sap the time and energy from you – so chose your strategy carefully! Of course this is only a crude rule of thumb and not scientific in any way – but a good hypothesis to start from. Any change intervention needs to be owned at the top but implemented in an appropriate way throughout the organisation – sometime top down, other times bottom up, depending on the structure and existing culture of the organisation. In some structures you will use verticals or horizontals to deliver the message effectively.

Habits and the impact on change and change managementAs 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. Any change management intervention need to take this into account.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 human beings 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 organizational development (OD) 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.

Why change management fails (Kotter)

In his book “Force for Change: How Leadership Differs from Management“, Kotter lists the following as the main reasons why change fails:

• Allowing to much complexity
• Failing to build a substantial coalition
• Understanding the need for a clear vision
• Failing to clearly communicate the vision
• Permitting roadblocks against the vision
• Not planning and getting short-term wins
• Declaring victory too soon
• Not anchoring changes in corporate culture

So the real reason why change fails – people… see the three rules at the top of this page.

Many change management models

There are many change management 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
• Acceptance

The Kubler Ross change theory is well grounded in academic research within clinical environments, however little research has been undertaken in the business change management environment. As an example, apply the 5 stages to a ‘traumatic’ event most all of us have experienced:

The Dead Car Battery.

Its winter and a cold morning. Its dark outside with a crisp frost under foot. You’re going to be late to work so you rush out to your car, open the door and you place the key in the ignition and turn it on. You hear nothing; the battery is dead. What happens next neatly demonstrates transition phases:

• 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 as trivial an example, although at first glance it may appear so. In fact, we all go through this (or a similar) 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.

I am not suggesting for one minute that we need to provide grief counselors for all changes – but to be aware that as a human being we have a mechanism and we do use it to varying extents in our day to day life. If we as change agents know this we can make sure that people that do experience some of these stages have the information readily available to enable them to progress at a pace that is right for them.

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. Any theory or model needs to be used in a similar context to the one in which it was first identified or developed for maximum effectiveness.

Business use of Change Management Models
In business I have found that while the Kubler Ross grief model is a valuable change management model, staff and managers find it ‘difficult’ to understand and relate to… so I often use a simplified version with only four stages:

• Denial
• Resistance
• Exploration
• Acceptance or Commitment

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

A Simple Personal Change Management ModelEncouraging people to create their own labels for each of the four stages in the change model helps them to own the change 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! Remember this is only a model – not reality of change and the psychological impacts on a give individual.  The change management model provides a vehicle for use to engage a conversation – no more. If you would like any more information on the use of the change management model or how we have integrated it into our organizational and culture change products please contact us or visit our diagnostics page.

Other change management models and theories 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:

1. Awareness – of why the change is needed
2. Desire – to support and participate in the change
3. Knowledge – of how to change
4. Ability – to implement new skills and behaviors
5. Reinforcement – to sustain the change

John Kotter has set out an eight-step strategy for change management:

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.

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 at the time.

Kubler Ross Change or Transition Curve – Grief based

Variation of the Kubler Ross Change or Transition Curve

Variation of the Kubler Ross Change or Transition Curve

Change Management Continuum

Lewin Change Model – Unfreeze – Change – Freeze

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

Please note the change management models and theories here are provided for educational purposes only. No copyright is assumed.

Hidden Dangers of 25% budget cuts

In tough times we need to make tough decisions

How to cut 25% budget without spiting your face.

With public sector organisations all over the UK (and others) facing mandatory cuts of 25% budget cuts across the board, many are going to make mistakes they will live to regret.

Whether we like it or not the target has been set. The goal for leaders now is to make appropriate cuts.

A couple of weeks ago I ran a leadership and change management programme for a group of senior leaders in Dubai from the Central Bank of Nigeria (don’t ask!) and while discussing change I heard a phrase from my past which struck fear in my heart – “Project EAGLE”.

What is “Project EAGLE”?

Project EAGLE was a change project which was led by a major consulting firm which resulted in losses of jobs – many inappropriately and in an ill conceived way. Now I had come across this approach “Project EAGLE” many years ago in the private health-care sector, now in the banking industry in Nigeria, and research has shown that there are many other such projects around the world. I cannot be sure if they are all from the same stable – but it looks like it.

Project EAGLE was said to stand for:

• Efficiency
• Accountable
• Goal orientation
• Leadership
• Effectiveness

And note the total lack of focus on ordinary people!  No wonder why that so many times when people talk about change management or change strategy, they do so with dread. Indeed, in the health-care company it took many years and a dedicated (people based) change strategy just to recover from the “trauma” that was left behind.

Managing change is more than project management

If less than 50% of you plan is about people, the impact on people and the psychological changes individuals are expected to make – then your change programme is bound to failure.

Shortly after running this leadership programme I was facilitating a Train the Trainer course for the NHS and found out that due to cuts they were closing a dedicated meeting and training venue. NUTS! This venue was close to running at cost recovery with less than 20% of its activity from outside the NHS, with just a small about of growth this could have been an income generator. Unfortunately the managers saw this as an easy cut in spend – without looking at the whole picture. Worse – they were planning to put the resources and furniture in storage costing many £100s a months for the foreseeable future.

Making cuts in budgets is one thing, but looking at this in a holistic way must happen if UK PLC is not to throw lost of time, effort and money down the drains. Who are these incompetent managers that lack vision and basic business abilities? I hope that they are the first to go in any cuts. Services which can stand on their own are potential income generators, while they may not make private sector style margins, they should be at cost recovery plus – so that the facilities are available but without the cost.

Threat or Opportunity?

I honestly hope that all senior managers don’t just get the accountants in, but actually use people with good solid business/ entrepreneurship experience to help identify the real short and medium term threats and opportunities, and build on internal strengths – not just further develop weaknesses.

Organizational Diagnostic Reviews

What is a Diagnostic Review?

Before exploring the function and content of a Diagnostic Review lets understand what we mean.

Diagnostic – Refers to something that is used to determine the cause or disorder in a function/ organization.

Review – A commentary, often with criticism or correction. Also a report providing a critical consideration of a work or activity.
A diagnostic review examines an organizations management and financial systems and practices. Diagnostic reviews are generally at a strategic level and not audits and do not track individual items of expenditure or process actions. Nor do they provide a pass or fail assessment of an organizations management system. Rather, they provide leaders and stakeholders with information to act upon.

The review process should consist of a measurable assessment of key elements of your organization. It uses proven criteria for assessment and a full report that highlights current situation, progress to date, improvement opportunities and proposed action plans.

A holistic Diagnostic Review will cover all of the PRIMO-F areas of your organization or business, including the systems and controls in each.

The Diagnostic Review process should involve four groups of people:

• Board or Owners
• Managers
• Staff
• Other strategic stakeholders

In addition it should include information from two external groups:

• Customers
• Suppliers

The objective being to establish a 360 view of the current status at a given point (snapshot) in time.  Many diagnostic reviews fail as they neglect to capture wide enough perceptions on what is occurring withing an organization.

Know where you are before taking your first step

When beginning any Organizational Development (OD) or change process it is vital to know where you are, before embarking on a journey to your destination.

If you plan to go to New Zealand or Australia, your first step will be very different if starting from the UK or the US. While this analogy may seem obvious when in the context of travel, it is less so in the context of organizational change. But the situation is the same. Your route to your destination , vision or goal, will vary Dependant on your current position, from a skill and a cultural point of view.

Every organizational change intervention has improvement as it’s ambition some where along the line. We know from research that change is best perceived as something that people have already achieved, and that they have learned from their experiences. By positioning change as the norm rather than a feared future uncertainty, we can help people prepare for ‘the stability of continuous change’.

Using organizational diagnostic reviews as a tool for identifying “where are we now” can enable us to identify strengths and weaknesses that need to be addressed as part of our change journey.

Get Specific

One of the reasons that change and improvement initiatives fail is that the aims and objectives are either too vague or poorly communicated. Having definitions for all the elements we are looking to address is critical. These may be scores or indicators as part of a commercial organizational diagnostic review tool, or they may be KPIs or CSFs

The Business Improvement Review is a holistic diagnostic review tool which takes into account the vision/ mission, measure the culture and explores the strengths & weaknesses of the management and systems in which the business operates. the BIR is like a GPS for your organization. It will tell you where you are now, and with the right implementation strategy it can help you plot a route to your desired destination.

• The strengths and weaknesses of its People
• The strengths and weaknesses of its Resources
• The strengths and weaknesses of its Innovation
•  The strengths and weaknesses of its Marketing & Sales
• The strengths and weaknesses of its Operations (Products & Processes)
• The strengths and weaknesses of its Finance systems and cash-flow

 

A Diagnostic Review Case Study

Case Study Ltd is based in Feltham, the company designs, manufactures and supplies XXXXXX and associated equipment. It operates in a niche, yet growing market. Clients are first-class names, principally major corporate’s and international organizations.

Business is competitive. Larger rivals are often able to compete successfully in terms of price through their associations with raw material suppliers.

The company experienced losses five years ago as a result of losing a significant contract. Sales have subsequently been rebuilt from £1.2m to £2.5m for the year ended March 19xx. T/o fye March 19xx is projected at £2.8m.

There are fifty five staff at Feltham, led by Managing Director and supported by company accountant. The remaining management team comprises the chief engineer, quality and purchasing managers, the production planner and shop-floor supervisor.

1.     Business Issues arising from the Diagnostic Review

The following key business issues have been established through the process of questionnaires and interviews:

• The company overall has a sound level of knowledge of the industry. It believes it has good products, a customer focused outlook and good relations with suppliers and key existing clients.
• The three-year decline in gross profit margin (a key financial measure) has been arrested, albeit that it remains at a low level of 15%. The lack of profitability inhibits future options available to the Managing Director without the continued support of the parent company.
• Financial controls are in place and costs are controlled. Cash-flow issues dictate that there is a reliance of support from the parent company.
• There is no expressed long-term vision to guide the company  -  “why are we doing this……what are we in business for ?”
• The company is reactive. Business and marketing strategies are neither clear or cohesive among the management team. There needs to be detailed plans and priorities for achievement of the company’s broad aim of expansion.
• At times, communication is inconsistent, both at a management and operational level. The full team has few meetings and, as a result, lacks cohesion. There are contrasting views within the team that need to be reconciled   – see the range of views presented in Chart A.
• Management’s view of their management style is not shared by staff. There are significant gaps in opinions on involvement of staff, recognition and praise, leadership of people, openness, levels of teamwork and respect for people.
• Overall, this appears to indicate that collective leadership is not as effective as perceived by the management team. Do staff really understand what is expected of them? Is this symptomatic of an overall communication issue?
• Senior management perceive a level of freedom and involvement in decision-making that is not shared by the remaining team. This is not totally surprising, given the lack of accountability evidenced by the absence of performance management i.e. employees do not appear to be set measurable goals, performance standards, or receive regular feedback of performance.
• This, in turn, makes it difficult to evaluate individual performance and identify areas where performance and efficiency can be improved. A formal appraisal process may be beneficial, with an emphasis on how their performance impacts upon, for example, bottom line, company goals, customer service.
• There is general concern that the manufacturing process needs to be improved. There appears to be consistent  -  and persistent  -  problems across the production operation. These include:
  • Limited space resulting in poor production flow
  • Lack of coherent planning and scheduling
  • Inadequate stock planning and control
  • The company struggles to turn around work quickly enough; deliveries frequently fail to meet deadlines; and there is a lack of knowledge generally about the proposed new  information system. On this latter point, collective ownership of the system would be appropriate to obtain “buy-in”, rather than impose by edict.
• It is apparent that there is no one single individual within the company with direct responsibility for co-ordinating the manufacturing process.

People	Resources	Innovation	Marketing	Operations	Finance
Communications poor. Every effort is made but it does not have the desired effect. Some weaknesses in specific management techniques. Poor in some areas due to lack of training. Motivation seems to mean more hours spent at work. Fairly motivated workforce…..show commitment to the company. Casual approach; a Monday morning works meeting. Resistance  by individuals in certain departments. Too much fire-fighting; not enough time or co-ordination.	Premises too small. Shortage of space, no room for expansion. The staff are good; premises, equipment, IT and funding are a problem. More modern plant, machinery and tooling is required if production is to increase.	Respond well to customer-led demand but are not innovating ahead of the game. The team needs training in modern company techniques. The ideas are there but resources and time stop it happening. Ideas are translated quickly. R&D constrained by need to monitor overheads. Long term plans not known.	Could be better. Efforts from MD and one other, but lacking a sales force…… only one salesman plus agents. Good relationships with key clients. Reliant on existing contacts. Unable to penetrate new markets.	Slow in all areas. Need to speed up the flow of production from design to delivery. Information flow at all stages of production needs to improve. Lead times too short; never enough time from the customer. Deliveries are consistently late. R&D ad-hoc. No planning; lack of co-ordination; fire-fighting. Not enough stock is carried. Too many variations on small batches. Management info system being developed.	Turnover growing. Cash-flow issues. Weak balance sheet. Management accounts good. Appears to be o.k., but no in-depth knowledge of performance. Not aware of the finances. Not aware unless sales target not met.

To complete a Diagnostic Review on your organization (large or small) look at http://rapidbi.com/bir/ and buy the BIR diagnostic tool or contact a certified consultant user.

 

 

What is Best Practice?

What is Best Practice and Good Practice

Introduction to best practice

Often in business we hear about Best Practice and Good Practice, but what does it mean? Where and when should we use it?

To help us out lets look at some definitions:

• Definitions – Practice
  To do or perform habitually or customarily; make a habit of: practices courtesy in social situations.
  To do or perform (something) repeatedly in order to acquire or polish a skill: practice a dance step.
  To give lessons or repeated instructions to; drill: practiced the students in handwriting.
  To carry out in action; observe

 

• Definition – GoodBeing positive or desirable in nature; not bad or poor: a good experience;
  Having the qualities that are desirable or distinguishing in a particular thing
  Serving the desired purpose or end;
  Superior to the average

 

• Definition – Best
  Surpassing all others in excellence, achievement, or quality; most excellent: the best performer
  Most satisfactory, suitable, or useful; most desirable: the best solution
  Most highly skilled

 

• Definitions – Best Practice

A technique or methodology that, through experience and research, has proven to reliably lead to a desired result
A technique, method, process, activity, incentive, or reward that is believed to be more effective at delivering a particular outcome than any other technique, method, process, etc. when applied to a particular condition or circumstance.

What is Best Practice?

Best Practice suggests that there is a technique, method, process, activity, incentive or reward that is more effective at delivering a particular outcome than any other.

The idea is that with proper processes, checks, and testing, a desired outcome can be delivered with fewer problems and unforeseen complications.

Best practices can also be defined as the most efficient (least amount of effort) and effective (best results) way of accomplishing a task, based on repeatable procedures that have proven themselves over time for large numbers of people.

Best Practice is considered by some as a business buzzword used to describe the process of developing and following a standard way of doing things that multiple organizations can use for management, policy, and especially software systems. This is often true within the public sector.

What are the benefits of Best Practice?

A best practice strategy is one where the organization strives to copy those deemed to be proficient in a given activity. This can help your organization to:

• Respond more quickly to changes or innovations in your market space
• Become more competitive
• Increase sales and develop in new markets
• Manage and reduce costs and become more efficient
• Improve the skills of your people
• Use appropriate technology more effectively
• Reduce waste and improve quality

Tools to improve Best Practice

There are several business tools that you can use to achieve management best practice, including:

• Networking
• External benchmarking
• Quality and other external awards
• Strategic planning
• Performance management

Achieving Best Practice

We know that Best Practice means finding – and using – the best ways of working to achieve your organizations objectives. It involves keeping up to date with the ways that successful organizations operate and measuring your ways of working against those used by the market leaders.

Methods of Best Practice include:

• Benchmarking – learning from and through the experience of others
• Standards – Best practice through achievement of standards

 

But does this really stack up?

Does “BEST PRACTICE” actually exist?

In business, HR and consulting we through around the term “Best Practice” without considering the context or the goals required. What is “Best” in one situation is not “Best” in another.

And then there is “Good” practice – or more what is expected of people in a given situation. how can we measure the difference between “Good” and “Best” practice? if we cannot then do either actually exist?

What makes the situation even more confusing is when organisations say that something is “best practice” when all they are doing is confirming with the rules of the sector or profession – sorry folks but that is not Best Practice just “Practice!”.

Often what is quoted as “Best Practice” is in fact “current thinking”, which may or may not actually be “Best”.

Domains of Best Practice

Often the term “Best Practice” is used in Change management, Transformation, HR, HRD,  Government/ Public sector, not-for profit, Professions – accounting, consultancy, health-care etc.

Summary

The sooner we as professionals start saying what something is… rather than justifying why we do something in a particular way as “Best Practice” the sooner we can move away from meaningless jargon and say “This is the best way for us…”

“Best” implies that research has been carried out and a full investigation and analysis has taken place – if this it true lets start seeing references in all documents that claim to espouse “Current Thinking”, “Good” or “Best” practice

Managing Change in Organizations

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

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 de

pending 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

© RapidBI.com 2008

http://www.rapidbi.com

This material may be put on your Blog or website – however please keep this copyright statement

Change Curve Debunked?

Today I read an interesting post by Rob Robson on the change curve at his blog (http://preview.tinyurl.com/2rywg5) .

This sparked some thoughts which I share below.

Change Curve debunked… really?

Rob asks is the Kubler Ross change curve an over simplification – yes of course… all models are over simplifications of reality – isn’t that what they were created for, to take a complex theory and enable the PRINCIPLES to be more easily understood?

He raises some interesting points that many authors do ignore that fact that many people welcome change. This is so very true, in OD and HRM we seem to assume the worst in people – when this is just not true. Sure people will reach different under change, and that is to be expected – our role is to ease that process – not offer therapy for change interaction!

We all need to remember that these are just models and not reality.

As a framework and common language they do have a value – indeed as he says

“By all means, keep the five-stage model in our armoury, but let’s not get carried away with it. Let’s not present it as an unequivocal truth. And let’s not let it get in the way of attempting to truly understand how people really experience change.”

As is said in the change management article there are 3 rules to leadership (or change):

• Rule# 1 – people are different
• Rule# 2 – people are different
• Rule# 3 – people are different
  

And we need to treat each individual in the way that is appropriate for them.
Rob’s headline is to Debunk the Change Curve … which one there are many? Rob focus’s is on the Kubler Ross curve – which as he points out was actually developed for use in a clinical environment, and users need to be aware of that.

Many practitioners will use a simplified model for use in a general business environment business environment.

What we do need to be careful of is people search the web (or a library), finding a model and using it without understanding what it is, where it come from or indeed its limitations.

All models have a place – the question we all need to ask is – is it here and now?

Mike

————————————————————————————–

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

© RapidBI.com 2008

http://www.rapidbi.com

This material may be put on your Blog or website – however please keep this copyright statement

Useful Links

Recently I have noticed a number of trends on many professional forums. There appear to be increasing numbers of people in HRD roles or studying for HRD roles that lack some of the ‘basics’. To meet this need I have written a number of guides and introductory articles, their purpose is to act as a beginner 101. I hope you find them of value.

http://www.rapidbi.com/articles

Management Models – 100+ Management Models – a page full of graphical management models
The PESTLE Analysis Tool – The PESTLE analysis – a powerful tool for exploring the external environment of an organzation
SWOT analysis – The SWOT analysis – a powerful tool for exploring the strengths of an organzation
PRIMOF_- Business_Growth_Model – The PRIMO-F business growth model
Write SMART objectives – Description on how to write SMART objectives for individual and business performance
Critical Success Factors – What are Critical Success Factors and how to use them
Corporate Social Responsibility CSR – How does Corporate Social Responsibility impact smaller businesses

 

 

The pages below contain free articles on management, leadership and HR issues: