|
|
Sometimes change management is an operational, analytical, label-less effort.
Here is a short list of situations where change management now exists without project, program or initiative labels. Each can be a prerequisite for transformational change:
- Change Entity
- End User Support
- Introducing Change Management
- Non-program Focused Organizations
Change Entity
Situation:
Client brings in single external consultant to review organization, or function, for skill, competency, talent, understanding of change management and an evaluation of current project process. There is no label for this effort. The budget likely comes straight from the executives own flexible pool of money.
There are deliverables built in (the analysis and assessment), but it is mostly a “rover” search with lots of dialogue and interaction.
It is operational in that current process is reviewed. It is analytical with an external eye. It is label-less, except that the organization now has a high level consultant who is making connections horizontally, vertically and collaboratively that do not officially exist in the organization.
End User Support
Situation:
Users (this is a broad definition meaning anyone who is using something in the organizations structure- software, process, procedure, etc.) can’t find what they need. Maybe users do not know how to do things (which is very common now with the almost complete elimination of real training). One common version, in big older organizations, is that no one knows who does what and there really is no way to find out.
This one could be loaded with deliverables. I find in these scenarios it helps to create something to illustrate things I am explaining. For process it may be a description of a much needed role that does not exist. For software it may be a quick video to teach something not used that could be, or being used, but incorrectly (OneNote in Office is a good example). For procedure it might be a list of places where too many steps exist or where steps are not clear (or do not make sense).
This is at it core operational. It is analytical, but on the people side- finding the spots where small change could make user work life easier, preferably instantly, is the key to a successful effort. This version of label-less change is about how people do the tasks that feed (or will feed after the label-less behavior change) into labeled change.
Introducing Change Management
Situation:
Change management does not exist in the organization and the wise executive client brings in a single external consultant to build understanding and perspective. (shameless plug- of CM that has an end state focused positive approach).
This one may have no deliverables. Really the consultant is the deliverable. (Paying for knowledge and experience and the ability to build connections in the organization, how novel [I think that used to be called “consulting”]). OR, it could have a ton of deliverables. If a change entity is in the works for the future, the introduction can be a chance to get a jump start on templates (yes there will be SOME templates) and design elements.
CM introduction has operational components if the consultant is smart enough to know that ease of regular work equals willingness to participate. It is analytical behind the introduction. Every organization is different. Integrating change management the first time around requires finesse. It helps to bring in the analytical element to consider various measurement aspects within the organization. Fight me on this, but measurement is the enemy of CM. Don’t fight me too hard, I realize your enemy can often become your most trusted partner with a little respect thrown in.
A CM introduction works better when it is label-less. Don’t tell that to those “get-all-over-the-organization-with-our process (and templates)” consulting firms this. They know a big bright sign that says, “we (insert company name) are HERE” can bring in a whole lot of dependent revenue. (The dependency quickly has two players- client and previously inserted company).
Non-program Focused Organizations
Situation:
To me the strangest of the bunch. Many organizations- well established, more or less monopolies, with no incentive or need for real big change- operate in a non-program focused format. So the situation is that the client WANTS some labels. The client wants to be able to separate some things out, name them and illuminate the possibility for change small or big.
This is analytical. Numbers must come into the mix somehow. This type of organization relies on numbers for “proof” of everything. This is operational. You may be looking at suggesting something that is absolutely not done in the organization (hint: strategy first, the naming, followed by tactics the work rather than what exists- the other way around). This is a label-less change initiative to put some labels on things. Sounds like fun!
Thanks to more visibility for change management, in understanding and presence, a good chunk of work for senior external consultants is now label-less CM. From the creation of change entities to end user support and simple introduction of change management, especially for organizations that do not have a project focus, label-less change is becoming much more common.
Technorati Tags: business objectives, Buyer, C level, CCM, CEO, change awareness, Change Design, change excercise, change management, change management consultant, change management strategy, Executive, External Consultant, Garrett Gitchell, vision to work
No cover letter, but link to Linkedin profile discussion thread- here.
Fascinating.
A little sad.
300+ comments to illuminate human nature and change.
As with most Linkedin group discussions this started with a simple question and morphed into a full on discussion- this one on recruiting and social media/the future.
The connection to change:
Linkedin
In this case is an example of an alternative to established practices (status quo). A profile is not a replacement for cover letters or resumes, but it could be. I, personally, have had a couple of roles due strictly to Linkedin as the forward facing entry to my background and experience.
Linkedin could become, and likely is in many cases (and also is behind the process when a recruiter or client looks at a profile on their own) an adjunct to other displays of a persons career record.
Cover Letters
Like cover letters.
In general does a cover letter seem strange to you now? Or does it make sense and those who question it seem strange?
A cover letter is a specific written document (yes it can and pretty much is now, paperless, but it is a little like a book- who knows how long those things will be around) that can place the candidate in the advertised role ahead of the competition. It is meant to be used to prove you are the right fit.
It is also a complete waste of valuable time for candidates since many of those fantastic, specific, time consuming CV’s are never even read by a real person.
It used to be a great tool to get attention- if you were a good writer… which may have NOTHING to do with the role you are applying for. Because there are alternatives it is worth looking, comparing and using both, all or the new stuff. Sticking with the old is risky though.
Dinosaurs
It was risky just to BE a dinosaur.
Not that they had any choice…
The Future
What if they did, those dinosaurs, have a choice?
What if those who risk losing a good candidate by adhering to their own or their organizations antiquated (maybe) procedures could tweak things a little to ensure survival?
That might just make for a future better than the inevitable.
People
When it comes to change we are not talking about dinosaurs who didn’t have a chance (or a choice). We are talking about people. People can change rules. People can make procedures grey until the grey becomes black and white in a new and better way (could be time to move to the grey thing, again, at this point if it took awhile to get there).
In our example individual people with very little control over their system could just go look at the profile. They could suggest the ad read differently (giving the profile a chance might be a consideration). They could just set aside any rigid discomfort they personally may feel and accept the application without a cover letter.
Or they could dig their feet in and intensely defend the need to follow directions (do what you are told, make my job easier….).
If everyone followed directions made by someone else, perfectly, with no questioning the world would be a very different place.
I will let you decide if that is good or not.
Technorati Tags: Change, change awareness, cover letter, HR, linkedin, recuriter
Coffee with a friend yesterday revealed the difficulties of translating perspective (could be theory if more developed) to application.
“That sounds great, but what would it look like?”.
Sounds Great
Change is about a spot in the future- the end state(s).
It is also about skill and competency (or lack thereof).
There is a path to get there.
My own perspective, I think crucial for translating to action, is that change needs to be future oriented. More and more I am emphasizing “End State Change Management” while at the same time explaining Horizontal Change Management.
Sounds great:
Seeing the goal, working backwards from there to imagine the path, determining what is needed as a result to compare to todays resources and assets (people and physical), beginning the list of missing pieces and, then, starting the project management process.
Sounds great and there is a clear distinction between this perspective and other present-to-future-gap-filling versions.
“But I am a client”, friend says, or “I am recommending you”, “What does this LOOK like?”.
Looks Like
Specifically it looks like a heavy emphasis on work with the owner and leaders at the very beginning of the change.
It is crucial for them to be able to articulate different forms of the end state that apply to different stakeholders. The first description, and usually the most difficult, is their own version. This looks like single sessions with the owner with many questions from me and/or sessions with other leaders with the questions and the dialogue that follows.
The Deliverable: End state descriptions (written and, hopefully, audio and video versions).
It looks like doing an assessment of the organization and its current processes toward change and project management to see to what extent future orientation is being practiced. That is the positive spin way to say this. What really happens is an assessment of all the status quo pieces that will slow down or do slow down change of any kind. Calling out this mindset (which instantly begins to tweak it for some) is worth its weight in results.
The Deliverable: A list of all the things, from easy to address to difficult, that will effect this change process.
Because I am a visual/spatial person a broader (in reach, time and effort) picture of the change needs to be created. One of those “hard to explain, what does this look like” talents that a good change practitioner brings, is the ability to look at your initiative big, wide and horizontal with nothing in the way of a web of collaborative connections.
The Deliverable(s): A map of all of the areas this change will touch is one deliverable. Your own org. chart a second that either exists (visually not textual) or can be created. The third comes later- the REAL org. chart that illustrates power levers, influence and (hate to say this) resistance areas (OK, and people).
A note on this particular deliverable: The map often develops into a hyperlinked visual and textual journey for the change. We are all used to hyperlinked explorations. All those little bounces around to understand connections can be built into this map. Those links can be enhanced and built on as the change process proceeds. This can make the change real and a shared effort for stakeholders.
With this core package of written, preferably genuine, descriptions; early executive media in the form of audio and video; status quo perspective and structure illuminated; and a picture that can be used to strategize, plan and “see” the change it looks like a solid start to any initiative.
What follows is more of the same at different levels, an overlap of some of the typical deliverables used with other approaches (stakeholder assessment, “readiness” assessment, training plan, communication plan, leadership development and communications plan, etc.).
An end state focus for change sounds great. It looks like an early process with three distinct deliverables that put individuals and the organization in context with this change. Perspective must change before application can begin.
Take a peek tomorrow for my take on why this all looks good on paper but is exceedingly difficult (dare I say doomed in many ways) to make happen. Many factors are practically impossible to address and control. Change is a challenge though- I love that part!
Technorati Tags: Big Picture, business objectives, Buyer, C level, CEO, change awareness, Change Design, change management, change management consultant, change management strategy, Change Strategy, Context, corporate change management, corporate strategy, End State, Executive, External Consultant, Garrett Gitchell, horizontal change management, organizational change, Value, vision to work
Google has a beta out- Insights for Search- that is a fantastic time-sucking view of whatever you choose.
As with most data you have to dig and you have to extrapolate (or just fudge to support your perspective- I am kidding, but of course that is what happens most of the time- to well gathered data).
Type in a search word or phrase (just like Adwords) and see the trending.
Let’s do a little stroll for “change management”:
The numbers on the right are not absolute, they are scaled and normalized in relation to all other searches on the web (there’s a monster algorithm). So 100 is very popular, 20 not so. Remember though this is in relation to everything.
Let’s play then with our term.
Was there more change in 2004 than 2011, and so therefore, more interest for our search term?
Is Change Management more important in up-cycles or down-cycles?
If up is the answer does the graph spike when the economy (in this case the world economy) improves?
Since Zimbabwe ranked 100 this term could be too broad for our taste.
How about “Change Management Process”?
Now you have the 2008 – 2011 timeframe illuminated and more specific. Seems understanding how to go through change had popularity.
What about increase in searches for other terms?
“When you see Breakout listed instead of an actual percentage, it means that the search term has experienced a change in growth greater than 5000%.” is Google’s explanation of number 1. Wiki seems to be short form for Wikipedia, but there are links to people using Wiki’s within change management.
Number 2 climate change. A little external environment fear for all those other changes (you might or might not be able to manage).
Number 3 PowerPoint slides. How quick can these searchers explain (Wiki link) and show (slides) change management?
Number 4. And find a job to do that with.
Number 5 and 6. With a quote, template and PDF’s.
Number 7. And then they take the course? (Actually unless it is a degree program that might be good).
Number 8. Gotta move on to the installation with some sort of framework…
Here is the chart for “project change management” (stop scratching that chalkboard…):
What is going on there? Started projects that got eliminated right about the middle of 2008?
A little jump on the competitors in 2011?
And finally my favorite “strategic change management”:
This is not a filtered search.
In relation to everything, strategic change management gets 20 to 60 and 100 in California. I can appreciate that as much as the 76 degree in February sun coming in my office window!
You can REALLY dig into these stats. I have been stuck in the tangle for the last couple of hours. This is better than the Wonder Wheel (which went away).
Take a look at Google Insight or Search. It is a time consuming chance to romp around statistics and search trends. You might be able to ride the wave of the next big change…
Technorati Tags: change awareness, change management, change management strategy, Garrett Gitchell, vision to work
I keep hearing about transition periods for change, the need for buy-in, the difficulty of altering status quo and I think of all the times that one thing can just replace another. Wait long enough to upgrade some technology and you can start from scratch. Get irritated enough with your processes and technology within your company and bringing in all new stuff is not much of a stretch.
As a leader decide if you, or your change practitioners, are spending too much time highlighting the thing, process, structure, even people that do not fit in to the end state. If you have a new picture in mind that does not include those things why keep calling them out? It gets to be a bad habit in the change timeline.
As a practitioner, craft that end state through your interactions with the owner, leaders and stakeholders without the present as baggage. Take the time for that. You may see that this is replacement rather than transitional change.
As a stakeholder maybe stop spending so much time trying to figure out how this new thing compares to what you have. Maybe they are really two different things? Maybe making them unconnected in time would make it easier to get to your end state version?
You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.
~ Richard Buckminster Fuller, American visionary, designer, architect, poet, author, and inventor
Look at the titles given Fuller:
Visionary to imagine.
Designer to craft.
Architect to build.
Poet to message.
Author to record.
Inventor to create.
Good skill set for replacement change!
Technorati Tags: change excercise, Executive, leader, resistance to change, stakeholders, vision, vision to work
Rather than, “how would my mechanic do this” – the I need it by this afternoon kind of change, think how NASA might approach this. I have no idea how NASA approaches the things they do, but I am guessing it is not by quickly (urgently?) taking a step before they talk or plan. Yet that is often how organizational change works- let’s just start, the energy will bring the stragglers along with us.
If you were the leader in charge of getting to Mars how might you go about it?
- What is Mars?
- What would be the reason to be there?
- Once there, what would that look like?
- How far away is it?
- In general how would you get there?
- What kind of special talent, approach or perspective is that going to take?
- Now divide the big-huge-long-term into pieces.
- Now put task within the pieces.
- Now look to see that is missing and needed.
What is Mars?
This thing you are going to needs to be defined. That way your explanations can be pinned to something. You can come up with what it is physically, with what it is metaphorically and with what it means (likely an emotional definition).
What would be the reason to be there?
Why go to Mars? Is this for scientific discovery? Is it to see if Mars might be habitable? Is it for the achievement? It could be all of the above. It will be important to know why and be able to justify and explain this end state.
Once there, what would that look like?
Having explained why, what exactly might this look like, being on Mars? Would this just be a probe? A person? People? Something else? Being able to think about what it would feel like and mean to actually get to that end state, then carry on, is important. This does not have to be pie in the sky dreaming. It can be based on what the end state means in terms of advancement, in corporate terms maybe profit, distinctness from the status quo etc.
How far away is it?
Not necessarily exact distance (corporate change is not going to have a “miles [or kilometers] equivalent) but how big is this? Dealing with the small is impossible until you understand the big. Sure many will just want to get started on some details, after all this is going to take a long time we need to start WORKING! Someone has to understand the big in order to break it up into parts. In our NASA scenario part of the measurement of distance might be by generations.
Imagine working on something at NASA that you will never see actually happen, because you will not live that long.
In general how would you get there?
There is the distance, there is the scale and there is the journey. What will carry you on this journey? In our NASA case it is some kind of spaceship (likely a huge change initiative just for that part). For a company that may be an internal vs. external discussion, a method discussion, a leadership discussion or a high level competency talk (don’t get into the weeds of specifics now!- you will never get to “Mars” if you do).
What kind of special talent, approach or perspective is that going to take?
So, in general, what is it going to take in terms of expertise to get to that end state? Will there be skill building? Will those skills need to be stacked up to create missing competencies? Are you, and your stakeholders, going to need to see things differently in some way? Will that mean you have to do things differently? Are you prepared to do those things together when necessary?
I have to give the external plug- do you really think you can see this on you own? What do you actually see when you look in the mirror?
Now divide the big-huge-long-term into pieces.
This “Mars trip” will have pieces- a spaceship, equipment, scientific tools (likely some not invented yet), fuel, operations, overhead etc. Those pieces likely fall into a general time frame with overlaps. How much of the work can be shared so as not to be duplicated. In the Mars case do you need duplication for safety?
For corporate change this may fall into your preferred approach to change- some project management framework. That may be fine, but jump back to the last paragraph first and look in the mirror, or ask your external consultant to interpret the reflection. It may be time to come up with a different set of big pieces.
Now put task within the pieces.
Either way you will then need to break these pieces down into smaller more manageable parts. Notice I have said nothing about time or dates. Please tell me you did not announce, “We will get to Mars on blank day”. Say good bye to your date right now- let alone your end state.
Now look to see what is missing and needed.
If you made it to this point you did a good job of imaging what that end state might be, even looking past it, then working back to the present. Mars is a great example because it is hard to make a current versus future approach for this journey. A lot of change is creating, inventing and growing NOT replacing.
What are you missing? As you looked at those big pieces and thought about some smaller pieces did you see that you might not have the talent to get the work done?
Can you build your own organization to fill those gaps? After all this is a really long journey, there is time to develop while some of the doable work happens.
While you are working on that competency filling, can you overlap your efforts and strengthen your everyday operations at the same time? Generations from now someone might want to go to Pluto or a place we have not found yet. You can make both the present and the future better by thinking both bigger and smaller.
As you look at your organizational change think how NASA might approach this. Big, expansive thought translated into small detail pieces, passing through the stages and the people needed to get there. Big back to small so the small can be shown to connect to the big.
Technorati Tags: Big Picture, business objectives, vision, vision to work
Viable:
1. vivid; real; stimulating, as to the intellect, imagination, or senses
2. practicable; workable: a viable alternative.
Viability:
the capacity to operate or be sustained: The viability of the company was guaranteed by the success of its new product.
Dictionary.com
Viable Change
Is change that can grab participation.
It is change that challenges, stimulates and helps individuals to grow.
Change that is viable stretches strategy, people, available tactics and leadership.
Viable change can be vivid, real or stimulating and it can be vivid, real AND stimulating. If it does so in connection with intellect and imagination then, just maybe, the end state itself will also be viable.
Change Viability
If so then that end state, that result of the change should be sustainable. The new environment should be able to operate for the benefit and profit of both individuals (all, not just leadership) and the organization of stakeholders, owners and shareholders.
An important component of Change Viability is operations. Viable Change to have Change Viability must entwine with operations. It must be so connected to imagination and a workable future that operations adapts and grows with it.
Viable change and change that is viable must be inextricably mixed with operations. Then it can be workable and practical (to the extent that grand change is practical in the moment) and stimulate at an individual level.
Technorati Tags: change management strategy, Change Strategy, vision to work
Honestly, when was the last time you let your fingers do the walking?
(and, if you are young do you have any idea what that reference means?).
My family arrived home late from a dinner with friends and there on the porch was the new phone book. It made me think of the Steve Martin line, “The new phone book’s here, the new phone book’s here. Do you realize what this means? Now I can BE somebody!”. I knew, like the phone book the line would have zero meaning for my kids.
They would think it quaint to look someone up in that silly yellow book. (although, admittedly they do use their school directory). Why do we still have phone books? I have thrown away at least the last 7 or 8 years worth without even opening the cover. Even my wife, the ultimate Luddite, says recycle it the instant she sees it.
Again why do we still have phone books?
My daughter got a net book from Santa. The first thing she wanted to do was load a CD she got from an older relative. A music CD. People still use those things?
I heard the other day that you cannot bring a camera that uses tapes through security. It has to have a hard drive or a small GB drive.
I taught my mom how to drive with her fingers on the freeway- each tap up or down makes the car move a mph. She loves it. Who would have thought you could ever do that? And what happened to all the crashes we were going to have when we changed to cruise control?
There are a lot of things that change for the better- I cannot imagine a drive without cruise control. And there are lot of things that just refuse to go away (change)- think phone books.
As an English major I would never wish books away, but my most well read friends are packing Kindles this year.
I think there is a lesson here. In your own life look at the things around you that have changed. Take a stroll back through your change journey. Why did you switch? What do you miss? Anything? What changes have been helpful? What would you like to bring back (real stuff not the pretend past of politics that never existed)?
Things have their place in time. Sometimes they lose their place to something else. Corporate change can be a lot like that. Savor the new, but don’t pine for the past. After all those phone books seem to keep arriving- something from the past to cling to.
Technorati Tags: Change, resistance to change
At some point things will really pick up (they are slowly moving now) in terms of change roles, strategy and innovation (which is the precursor for strategy and the need for strategic resources). I think late 2012, possibly after the US elections , will be that time.
- At least for senior change practitioners I think we will see demand quickly outstrip supply. Consultants are often on one year to two year engagements now. Each time one of those engagements starts someone is off the market. The supply can run out fast.
- At that point mid level consultants are going to begin to question the need for third parties and raise their rates. When clients feel their margins hit they will look to contract directly with consultants to slow that process. At the same time third parties will begin to get squeezed and consolidate or move on to the next vacuum.
- Negative, resistance fighting change will not be popular.
- Templated change will follow strategy (or clients will be talked out of the purchase and customize their own change).
- Change management will break out of its infancy and become more sophisticated. Understanding motivators and expectations will rank high on the CM competency list.
- Change management consultants, external and internal, will be expected to mentor others.
- The differences between strategic and tactical change will be called out by thought leaders and understood by organizational leaders.
Some signs that things are changing:
- Rates are rising quickly
- Clients are asking for ASAP availability (and actually speeding up their processes to make sure they get the right talent fast)
- Old roles from 2011 are reappearing (with rates 30 – 40% higher)
- Those same roles, even with the raised rates are going unfilled
- Clients are making contacts directly with consultants
- The big consulting firms are posting, and calling about, sub contracting roles (the step that occurs before they begin to fill their stable again)
- I can vouch for a big increase in blog traffic with longer average time per visit to posts that reflect approach, cost and internal/external discussions (that always means hiring will pick up)
I could make a list of things I hope will happen in 2012, all of which would be a return to client consultant direct relationships for both contracting and partnership. I think we have lost that.
Third party (and four and five) arrangements have squeezed client and consultant. When consultants must hustle roles the instant they finish a previous engagement (because they are barely compensated more than employees [who have also had a major hit to compensation in the last few years]) there is no time for the kind of thought, education and skill building that make them so valuable. When clients must refill roles (which rarely happens in direct relationships) they spend (for the right consultant who will now charge, if they are smart, a premium for the client mistake of bringing them in late) everything they saved and more.
Constriction, sometimes euphemistically called “cost savings” eventually has significant and costly (to steal the word) effects. We will see some of those surface in 2012. If the constriction lasts longer we will begin to see an erosion in competency, innovation and ability to change smoothly and “quickly”. I am rooting for the turnabout soon.
Technorati Tags: change management, change management consultant, organizational change, strategy
New years resolutions like change, especially establishing end state scenarios, are bound to disappoint.
That is no reason to avoid resolutions or end state planning.
I have found (thanks to a change management career, lots of listening and the chance to see results) it helps to have resolutions that enrich both you and your stakeholders.
Here are mine for the coming year:
For readers:
- A redesign of my site with an option to switch to a lighter design (you either like dark or not).
- More publishing, not just blogs but articles, white papers and, dare I say, “The Book”.
- Better organization of content so your interest is easier to find.
- A reach out for input, suggestions and interest from readers.
- Some regularly scheduled post topics (series, parts, “word” posts etc.).
- Flexibility if it turns out readers have different reasons for frequenting my site than I am assuming.
For me:
- All of the above repeated (I can see I would be equally enriched if I lived up to them- change is like that).
- Collateral for my use with clients and to increase revenue.
- Seminars, webinars, podcasts and, if I can go without sleep, video.
- A reach out beyond my blog to others with the end state focus message.
- Finding a senior executive who gets it and is willing to be an evangelist for the importance of seeing end states and working back from the descriptions.
If you are a regular reader (I never really thought about having readers. It just seemed important to speak up. Thank you for listening!) and want to add to my list for you, me or items of your own others can grab please speak up. I would love to have 2012 be more of an exchange and dialogue- with 450 posts and counting it appears there is a lot to talk about!
Technorati Tags: Garrett Gitchell, horizontal change management, stakeholders
|
|
