A discussion popped up today in a LinkedIn group about the “owner” of the change. I always find these discussions interesting for their range of perspective and for the consistency that many hold to assumptions and narrow methods. As a client that would make me a little nervous since I would hope my external change management consultant sees through common change foibles.
Some answers-
- The executive responsible for the change
- The change agent
- The passed to leader (usually a director)
- All the stakeholders
- The CEO
- The change management consultants
My take? It depends on the size and nature of the change initiative. The bigger and more horizontal the higher up ownership MUST go. The more specific and functional the closer ownership gets to the change management consultants (because it becomes more project and less change, management).
It would be nice if there was always ownership at the stakeholder level (the executives being part of that group). But to use the “own” analogy most often those stakeholders are renters. If you can get them to sign a short or, better, long term lease you can build a neighborhood.
As an external contracting high in an organization my answer would be the spot where the money comes from. Selfishly that makes my role easier by eliminating gate keepers and shining a light high for the significance of change management.
It is rare though to genuinely have one owner. Even when the money/budget is taken into consideration. Success comes easier with shared ownership. I personally measure that with my clients with a right time, right place, right amount of motivation gauge. Especially for long term initiatives an ebb and flow of ownership can be powerful. It is very hard even for the financier, actually especially for them, to go the distance with pride of ownership.
Finally, some change consultants/agents feel they are the owners of the change. They feel their tools and templates have the power to carry the initiative to its conclusion (actually that happens it is just not the conclusion they planned). They are confusing implementation with the change as a whole and they are falling prey to wanting to be a cultural piece of the change. The loss of arms distance (admittedly hands distance for engagements approaching the two year threshold) sands down an external change management consultants influence.
I feel it is my responsibility to own the nature of change. I am the portal for interpretation, knowledge, mediation and exchange. I do not know it all, but I should try hard to know of all. I am the landlord who takes pride in the tenants enjoyment of the property.