If the planning and practicing for this event by the panelists is any indicator of interest and energy, this short hour should be a lively, engaging and informative exchange.
With the recent emergence of formalized internal change management teams, a number of implications must be considered about the perks, perils and success factors of practicing change management internally and externally. Leveraging decades of internal and external – and global – experience, this panel of five seasoned practitioners will explore how internal practitioners and external consultants can be most effective at executing successful change. For business change leaders, internal practitioners and external advisors, our panelists will offer a stimulating comparison of the nature and success of internal vs. external change management teams. As with most things in life, there are multiple perspectives. Join us as our panelists share their thoughts on the pros, cons and implications of the trend.
1. Understand the trend of in-house change management teams and why it is occurring.
2. Gain perspective on the nature of internal change management teams being built-in leading, global organizations.
3. Realize the pros and cons – and thus, success factors – of working as an internal or an external change practitioner.
4.Explore scenarios for optimizing internal and external change management practitioners for project, program, initiative and functional success.
As we move closer to the speaking date I will be posting new thoughts, giving you links to previous relevant postings, grabbing the words of the panelists (and mine) to explain and socializing my readers for the actual event. Rich has already begun a discussion on LinkedIn to stir the pot and compare our groups thoughts to those of the broader community.
As with my practice and my writing I am, at times (ok, most of the time) the black sheep contrarian. You can expect some of that from my panel comments. A hint to my thinking (which will be fleshed out here on my blog previous to the conference): we, as a profession, suffer from groupthink; many practitioners are inexperienced (internal and external) or at least one company practitioners; organizations are not structured for change; the models and methodology being used are old, tired and misguided.