There is much talk, from the softer side of change management (usually those with a heavy OD or coaching background) about inclusion. I will step lightly, but let’s look at this with practicality and finesse. The extreme is the inclusion of all in everything. The other extreme is a directive approach where participation is forced or by invitation only. Finesse (for speed, effect and cost/time savings) calls for the inclusion of the right people at the right time. Practicality forces that number into the smallest possible fit.
How do you decide what (who) is necessary and who (what) is an unnecessary distraction?
My gauge under my own framework (a synonym for model with more flexibility built in) is expertise. All along the change timeline there are chances for and the need for expertise. That continuous feed of knowledge, information and input is the easy part. The project stream tends to dictate certain kinds of participation. It is the early stages of change that are less clear cut in terms of inclusion even as defined through expertise.
Expertise at the Engagement stage
This is the spot where inclusion tends to run rampant. The reasoning is that the more people included, the more energy, the more (buy-in I relegate this term to parenthesis). Change is not a cocktail party where everyone gets to have a chance to connect, at least not in a business context. It is to get something done. The more cooks in the kitchen the harder it is to serve the food on time.
So it is at this stage that a mix of expertise from the right levels (not just the leaders and decision makers) is helpful. The expertise may be skill, it may be knowledge of technology or it may be insight into culture and the willingness of the employees to listen. This expertise is not included in order to plan the roll out of the change- it is much too early for that at this point. It is to begin to pull in the pieces needed to craft the end state description.
These experts will likely be very helpful later. They will also likely become champions on their own (versus the organized cheerleading force of some models).
The Expertise stage
The “later” being the true expertise stage. This is the point where the end state is either completely crafted or close. Now is the time to add expertise on how implementation might roll out- still with a strategic viewpoint. When it comes to CM there is always tweaking to be done; any early strategizing is helpful in guiding those adjustments. Here you have then a mix of knowledge, perspective and skill expertise. Putting that together with a plan for facilitating the description of the end state takes you into socialization.
Now you get to include lots of people. In fact, potentially, everyone- for the right reasons. Inclusion for understanding, for connection, for the chance to participate (the best kind of inclusion) and to move change forward. The inclusion is to be involved in the path to change not to question the idea or the end state description (which is what you will get if you include everyone early).
Use expertise as your guide to inclusion not the status quo structure of your organization.
(the word committee is ringing in my ears…).
