|
|
Something like 4 million people have looked at this video http://tinyurl.com/2rzrn9. In case it takes more views than that to saturate the You Tube market I give you the link. It is about education, the future (told in 2006) and a whole bunch of fun and intriguing facts. You will also quickly see it is about how things around us change- our environment, our resources, our tools and our capabilities.
And, I have to give this plug, it is an awesome, simple, clear use of black and color.
This is one of the best media presentations I have seen in the way it rolls out information, is fun, has no fluff and uses all of the screen wisely (which to me means lots of space). It uses the space with movement, stillness, appearance of important items at the right time (and not too fast and not too glaring) and, again, color.
Now for the editorial comment-
Juxtapose this video with the way change management is presented and rolled out.
Certainly I will give up the black (not truly a color anyway) but not color in general. Color can be used to categorize communications, illustrate emotion (the whole red is fire, blue is cool strength thing), differentiate timelines, place things in an exact spot (with a relation to things around it) and just plain make things more interesting. Which introduces another aspect of the word color- the commentator kind. CM is typically colorless (maybe due to the automatic assumption that people say no before yes). Start out with a clean lack of color (white) or all color (black) slate and add or take away to build interest, increase attention and make business and change a little more like real life. Yes I mean that metaphorically, but as you can see in the video it works literally for presentations too.
Technorati Tags: Big Picture, change communications, communicate, Communications, engagement, Examples, Garrett Gitchell, vision to work
There is something very enjoyable about opportunities to “toot our own horns”. It feels good to hear yourself acknowledge your own success. If the toot elicits a welcome response all the better. Of course I am assuming here an accomplishment vetted in our own heads (not braggadocio).
And so you say, “what does this have to do with change management?”. I’m glad you asked. One up on hearing my own horn tooting is to encourage others to do the same. How often are we given genuine permission to lay out our tackled obstacles?
If you are guiding change as a leader or practitioner this is a tool in your belt- the ability to reveal pride in work. Use it. Use it to reaffirm success. Use it to increase future participation. Use it as an easy way to reward. Use it for dialogue. Cheat a little if you want and use it to possibly get a return platform to spread your feathers.
We need to language a term for this.
Objectives empathy… ? Invitational reward? An acronym? TYH?
I am taking the opportunity while I have your attention to toot my own horn. Here is my own favorite blog post from horizontal change- http://horizontalchange.com/2010/07/c-level-change-management-primer/ (no tiny URL’s for this one!).
It is my favorite because it actually helps me each time I look at it (I, of course, hope that is also true for my readers). It lays out the major areas and the major players in big change. I had fun with words and content alignment. It is one of those posts that begs more. Like a John Irving book kept on the nightstand for a year, closed (I have done that twice now) and ready, it waits to be read.
There my horn has stopped, thanks for the chance.
Technorati Tags: change management consultant, Communications, engagement, stakeholders
Change Management at its core is a process of describing something new and different and connecting it to time and work. People respond to explanations, descriptions and new learning in different ways. That may have to do with learning styles http://tinyurl.com/2fnseg2, with interest, with workload, with promise for the future, with selfishness or with altruism. Sometimes it just has to do with catching them at the right time or off guard.
As a change agent with a full tool belt you will need to be able to draw pictures, make sounds, fill in charts, collaborate, illustrate (in pictures and words) and interact. As a client I would not hire a change agent who did not have a respectable command of-
Adobe’s Master Collection or its equivalent. http://tinyurl.com/csn4sl
Microsoft Office or its equivalent. http://tinyurl.com/yexjp89
Captivate or other training design software.
A command of CSS and HTML (not tools, but skill)
A design sense and an understanding of how design influences, grabs attention and shows concepts and connection.
The above timeline is a simple example of drawing a picture to describe, show time, place and relationship. It could be stand alone, part of a training module, the basis for changing communications or a design piece to provide structure to a written description.
The line represents time, the colors passage of both time and task, brighter colors items of significance, larger dots to show current time and place, even a pallet of colors to show teams, functions or responsibility areas.
To put all this together as a framework for guiding change takes a surprising amount of technical and people skills…
and the right tools.
Technorati Tags: change communications, change management consultant, communicate, Communication, Communications, Context, Garrett Gitchell, vision to work
High level change management has two or three spots in the timeline/process where I always feel it is essential to call a conference room late-morning-into-lunch meeting to wrap our arms around the big picture. I do not take forcing the invite lightly. One of the reasons I can be bold enough to take a chunk of first or second horizontal executive time is that an interesting thing always happens…something new, something potentially “viral” (in a good way), something specific to the client organization appears. It appears in the form of a new word (languaging at its core) a diagram, chart or picture.
One of those meetings (4 hours long) at a Fortune 50 firm created all of the above- a chart, a diagram and a picture. It was a picture that bore a striking resemblance to a camel. “It looks like we drew a camel”, I said on our sandwich break… that connection, that potential analogy, that unique to that organization picture, was all it took to begin creating a model. You might call that the second step of languaging.
The third step, now I hear a year later, after an all hands presentation by the client, was a wildfire spread of the analogy to different parts of the company around the world. Which has since morphed into functional and regional interpretations of the camel analogy, chart, picture and model.
It is nice that a camel can go a long time without water, can stand extremes of heat and has a face that takes a little time getting used to. All great languaging leverage points. Those up and down humps are also helpful to illustrate passage of time, levels of effort and participation. Carry that a little farther and you could say certain parts of the camel are better at carrying a heavy load (and certain camels are stronger).
This type of analogy languaging has happened a couple of time with clients… Maybe we should count them as deliverables…
Technorati Tags: Big Picture, C level, change communications, change excercise, change management consultant, Communications, Executive, executive communications, External Consultant, Garrett Gitchell, Insights, Value, vision to work
Sometimes very little.
I have had three potential clients (admittedly the current environment has forced almost everything into task based mode and these were middle of the organization people- a question like this is usually not asked by an executive with a true budget) ask in the last month some version of, “what survey tool to you use and how do you leverage surveys?”. I should probably throw out a name they know (because a lot of money was spent on marketing) and then carry on with my change management explanation, educating and movement toward contracting.
It is just oh so hard to do this when client money and value is on the line.
If, and that should be capitalized, a survey makes sense, which one, despite the “soap-boxing’, does not really matter. What matters is the data that comes out the other end. That data must tie to business objectives and the specific change(s). The use of the survey is the ability to gauge approach, timing and implementation as a result of the numbers.
What does not make sense is to waste precious potential change management budget dollars on readiness surveys and questionnaires to help the team figure out how to proceed (or to pad the pockets of an intrusive middle agent).
I can easily meet with five or more individuals a day. Given the two weeks or more it would take to put together a survey and collate the date I will have talked, personally, to 50 people. But that survey may take the time of three or four people. So now the number approaches 200. In my experience many who were not part of the 160 come my way with their own questions- that also provide valuable information and perspective. If those 160 are chosen wisely the information (because in change management info. is usually much more powerful than data unless a gate keeper needs convincing) is much more usable than survey data. A brown bag lunch or two to replace the time it takes to put together the survey or contract with a sub can add 40 – 50 more. Now we are well into the 300’s of people touched personally.
We have not even touched the potential for ill will from a survey. Words disconnected from leadership even in questions on a page can have negative detrimental effects…
With huge initiatives, I admit, it is sometimes valuable to use a survey. I lean toward designing my own specific to the engagement. A survey can hit a lot of stakeholders all at once with a tallying delay. It can grease the motivation skids in that it shows interest if delivered correctly ( a different kind of genuine marketing). It can create great pictures and graphs that make everyone see how they were included. So the power of a survey is really for a sense of inclusion.
The reason for use however is usually because the survey, and typically a specific tool, is heavily pushed. I have learned that anything heavily pushed has a dollar stream attached to it. I have few of those dollar streams with my own work because I want to represent the client and the end state/business objectives with nothing in the way.
If you are a client follow my mantra in change management of always asking why. This is one of those areas where the question may have to be asked in multiple forms from the people and business side to justify cost and reward.
Technorati Tags: Buyer, change awareness, change management strategy, Communications, engagement, stakeholders, vision to work
The practice of Change Management (this is the “what I have seen” view) is missing a clear perspective of root causes. Admittedly finding the core of organizational difficulties, not just the work of CM practitioners but also day to day operations, is not easy, takes time and requires insight and empathy- a tall order. An order that should be filled though, because symptom chasing solves little, lays a bad path for the next go around and diminishes the ability of CM overall.
Here is an example-
A method focuses on resistance of stakeholders. It lays out a series of communications, surveys, assessments (readiness which strikes me as the silliest of terms if you are automatically expecting resistance) and pretty pictures to represent the data. The data is “interpreted” and then the practitioners follow their pattern of educating on “the change process”, “gaps” (CM methods love to include gaps), transitions (ditto for this) and the five stages (or 8 steps or 10 boxes) that stakeholders must and will adhere to/pass through to accomplish the change. Everything that is gathered and collected illustrates symptoms, results of the change difficulty.
To get anywhere and to truly be successful at the end state causes need to be addressed.
Short of me (and it is truly an uphill battle) I have never seen a practitioner who takes that information gathered (because despite its poor perspective and damaging assumptions does gather some good data- I love data as much as the next practitioner) and uses it to address the root causes that have created the symptoms that produce the “resistance” that live in the house that Jack built…(I couldn’t resist).
Very often (here’s where I would like to have some good data) strategy-poor or lack thereof-is a root cause. Equally powerful is a performance system that runs counter to the objectives of the change. Culture that has not been molded to be innovative or at least receptive to enhancement can be another stifling root cause.
Therefore the first step of any major horizontal, “transformational” (if you like that synonym) change is to look with a magnifying glass (at the first horizontal I might add- might as well start the real change from the get go) at strategy, the performance reward equation and the good and not so of the organizations culture. That view through the looking glass will illuminate symptoms before they even appear sans expensive, time consuming and often detrimental data gathering.
Technorati Tags: Big Picture, business objectives, C level, CCM, CEO, Change, change awareness, change communications, Change Design, change excercise, change management, change management consultant, change management strategy, Change Strategy, Communications, Context, corporate change management, corporate strategy, Executive, External Consultant, Garrett Gitchell, horizontal change management, stakeholders, strategy, vision, vision to work
I have touched on this before. The revisit is because one it is hitting me personally (stakeholders I feel your angst) and two it just hits home for what I think is the core problem in a lot of change initiatives- Assumptions.
There are so many things in life that to understand, follow through with or participate in require shared understanding. With the need for speed in shared understanding comes assumptions. If we start “from the same spot” we can move forward faster. If you already know something at a certain level I can then teach you the next step. The person or entity represented by that person that delivers must gauge the assumptive area. Two problems with that- One you must be aware of the fact that you have to gauge and two you must be good at it. Watch a good change practitioner and you will see expert in action in this area. I would venture to say it is THE core competency (I say competency because it usually requires a mix of specific skills) of a change management consultant.
So I will use CSS as my example.
I will not even try to explain this. Search “web design, float, relative, absolute” or “box model CSS” or “normal document flow” if you want to play with this example yourself. Normal Document Flow (in caps because it is apparently something really important and lets use NDF and make it something official) is our assumption. It has a lot to do with where something is supposed to be, things taking the place of that thing when you tell it to be somewhere else and people (and browsers) constantly changing the display parameters with their individual preference, software and hardware. Read that last sentence again. ‘Sound like a generic sentence for most business change?
If I am on the receiving end of this, the user, your NDF means absolutely nothing to me- by definition or importance.
If you have asked me to create this and I have always been quick with a pencil and napkin (or design software in this specific case) then not only is it hard to understand your NDF it seems a ridiculously slow way to get things done.
If the “you” person has helped in the design of this CSS thing- for many good reasons like SEO, cleaner code and that compatibility thing mentioned above- NDF is pretty important. It is the basis for a lot of the reasons the web is used. You get that.
Let’s say you are the leader in this grand NDF initiative, multiple year because it is complicated. If you do not clear the assumptions about flow (linear) and use (tactical) and creation (spatial and visual) George Washington, Lincoln and yes, many Wilson bills are going to change hands needlessly (for you, maybe not them- depending on who you chose as your consultants). You must be aware, or made aware, from the beginning ,that this assumption will be important. You must find a quiet place alone or with others to figure out how to gauge and then address knowledge, perspective and interest to learn (which then translates into participate and engage).
Here is an interesting tie to our analogy- When a demo online or a training video shows examples of “ways to position things” for CSS and somehow avoids the use of NDF as a term or assumption I get close to getting it. For the CSS person it has been “dumbed down”. For me it is using my languaging and learning style. Constantly refer to NDF and where something “would normally be” and you lose me. Another post right in this paragraph about how you move forward after you tackle the assumptions…
Technorati Tags: C level, change awareness, change communications, change excercise, change management, change management consultant, change management strategy, Change Strategy, communicate, Communication, Communications, engagement, Executive, External Consultant, Garrett Gitchell, horizontal change management, resistance, resistance to change, stakeholders, vision to work
I have reached a milestone for blogging. My first 100 posts. 100 tiny little blurbs of insight (I hope), knowledge, ideas, perspective, contrarianism (as I promised), practicality, practice, languaging, approach, push back, lightheartedness and voice. Thank you for turning on each of those little spots of light. I have an ongoing list of ideas that is now at 40 so the next 100 are waiting for the click of the switch.
A promise to myself was kept-no “top, pick your number, lists”. Despite the fact that they are notorious for sucking people into a blog. There was one post that had the number 3 but that is hardly a list. Well, in keeping with the change motif- promise about to be broken- for the top 100 things to keep in mind for change! …made even more obnoxious with numbering-
- 100 As I say with my kids for the word “hate”- resistance is such a strong word
- 99 The middle of the organization is a black hole for change
- 98 Horizontal has a better ring than vertical when it comes to organizational change
- 97 Talk to the last stakeholder first
- 96 Initiatives need to be led by the owner (the person with the wallet)
- 95 They can be guided by high level others
- 94 Operations and change can go hand in hand
- 93 With improvements in the first paying for the second
- 92 Smiles are the additive to the change gas tank
- 91 Laughter the petrol
- 90 End state trumps future state every time
- 89 Change curves make as much sense as bell curves
- 88 Organizational change is not the same as death
- 87 So leave DABDA for the grieving
- 86 On any given day there are a number of steps for change (hint not eight)
- 85 Change guiding (management if you like) works better when not controlled by a function
- 84 like HR
- 83 or IT
- 82 OD
- 81 and Finance
- 80 As much or more money should be spent at the front of change as the rest of the timeline
- 79 CM is an art, but artists have processes and methods they follow
- 78 A smooth change process can be repeated, but not if you think it is a science
- 77 Externals can move fast and predict people
- 76 Internals can predict their own people
- 75 That is not always a good thing (see external and fast above)
- 74 The bigger the consulting firm the more expensive and the more you will need them next time
- 73 Organic change, just like the groceries, is a lot more expensive (and not necessarily healthier)
- 72 Beware anything labeled “best practice” for change management
- 71 CM is not project management
- 70 With heavy front end investment (idea forward) CM has an effective project track with change weaved in
- 69 There is always a reason to change
- 68 There is always a reason not to change
- 67 Each stakeholder has one (at least) of each
- 66 A good change practitioner can pull out both
- 65 Just like a customer a stakeholder is always right (in their own mind)
- 64 Nine times out of ten (my stat) the stakeholder actually IS right
- 63 at least half (my stat the real one is probably higher) of change initiatives do not make sense
- 62 The 70% failure stat for change is just dumb
- 61 Beware any firm that uses only their patented approach to change
- 60 Cringe when another is using the licensed version
- 59 Change Management is not OD
- 58 OD is not Change Management
- 57 but there is a little of both in each
- 56 HR is not Change Management
- 55 Change Management is not HR
- 54 but…well you see the pattern
- 53 A CM practitioner must be smart
- 52 quick to survey the environment
- 51 great with and about people (yes obvious, but I have met a lot of them…)
- 50 good with process
- 49 clear about the effects of leadership
- 48 ego-less
- 47 full of ego (the kind that loves to guide people and business to success)
- 46 is a truly different kind of leader
- 45 must be systems oriented
- 43 must be holistic
- 42 must truly appreciate and admire technical ability
- 41 same for subject matter expertise (of others)
- 40 possesses keen intuition about people, culture and business
- 39 knows how to confront
- 38 knows how to use confrontation for compromise, to get perspective on the table and to include
- 37 CM and employee development can go hand in hand and save money in the process
- 36 Those external to the business are stakeholders too
- 35 Beware the use of the internal communications function for change (cool those jets I just said beware)
- 34 Have I said High and Horizontal yet? for the big stuff
- 33 Just like a home remodel everything becomes “big” quick
- 32 So, can I say High and Horizontal again?
- 31 CM is not a second career- beware the executive turned CM practitioner
- 30 if they have 10 years of true CM external experience I will cut them some slack
- 29 My favorite technique is “emergency” half day executive meetings
- 28 Surprisingly I can almost put them on my calendar ahead of time
- 27 It turns out there is a lot about CM that is pretty consistent
- 26 or is it the clients?
- 25 or is it just people?
- 24 Client interaction on large engagements has stages- 3,6,9 months and the 2 year mark
- 23 System implementations have a distinct “people side”
- 22 Ram something down my throat and I will spit it out
- 21 Spit out CM initiatives are ugly (and expensive)
- 20 CM is not a good environment for third parties for the lead role
- 19 Use a third party and you get 30+% less and pay the same
- 18 Is it me or is CM actually getting visibility these days?
- 17 Beware consultants carrying tools
- 16 A hammer does not build a house on its own
- 15 Org charts are revealing
- 14 don’t have one? give me a week and I will create it
- 13 you are dreaming if you think your organization is matrixed
- 12 and a little short sighted if you think that is a good thing
- 11 Authority and Responsibility can be powerful for CM
- 10 If you do not answer why in words that work for each stakeholder you will fail
- 9 If you jump to when before why you will probably fail
- 8 If you focus solely on how you will miss the big picture (see why above)
- 7 Where is good, especially if it has an “about people” component
- 6 because it can answer who
- 5 the right “who’s” not the pumped up, time and money wasting, include everyone kind
- 4 inclusion should be about skill for the initiative first
- 3 Change is FUN!
- 2 Change can suck
and finally, number one on the list
Did I miss anything?
Well, there is always 200…
Technorati Tags: Big Picture, business objectives, Buyer, C level, CCM, CEO, Change, change awareness, change communications, Change Design, change failure, change management, change management consultant, change management strategy, Change Strategy, Communications, End State, engagement, External Consultant, Garrett Gitchell, resistance to change, stakeholders, vision to work
Words are powerful tools in change management.
Change Management words can become tools for communication, horizontally in your organization.
Addressing semantics to gain shared meaning can create mini-detente’s.
One of my favorites is the word training. As in “let us know who needs to be trained for this change and what they need to be trained on”.
Trained or educated?
For me training is the development of specific skills. The closer to something one can do with their hands the purer the definition. It is rote and it is repetitious and it takes practice.
Educated, for me, is informed, made aware, engaged in dialogue, perhaps to the point where the educated can comfortably teach others.
Now what if the owner of change or the chosen implementer of the change sees the two as the same thing? By my definition each will require a different kind of commitment, possibly in a different environment or venue, facilitated in a different way. To make them the same removes the potential for stakeholders to dial in their level of participation at a given time.
Trying to “train” (my definition) information is one of the failures I see in many change approaches.
Those are two misunderstood words, there are many more.
I mentioned mini-detente. It is hard to agree to disagree (which often needs to happen to move toward shared goals) without a little semantic exchange. It is the job of the change agent to facilitate a standoff that can grow into a partnership. In fact many times you can see change management as the phases- standoff, semantics, mini-detente and finally languaging to feed the next initiative.
Technorati Tags: change awareness, change communications, change management, change management consultant, Communication, Communications, engagement, executive communications, External Consultant, Garrett Gitchell, vision to work
The short and long answer is no.
The rare occasion where the two perspectives magically mesh is when an expert speaks to a receptive audience. It does not take long for ego to show itself to undue the bind.
From my days as a presentation coach to now I have seen this, explained it, created exercises to address it and cringed when a model for communication or worse change management has the “speaker” perspective.
If you expect or hope for attention, understanding and dialogue you have to understand your issue or topic from the listeners perspective. And I am not talking about the kind of listening we do for TV or music or informational lectures. The listening I am thinking of is the kind that elicits questions, that goes through an interpretation in the listeners mind and that can lead to that person transferring the knowledge and learning to someone else.
What does this have to do with change management?
If you want something to happen- say you have vision for your organization that will become a change initiative- you will automatically have the speaker perspective. After all it is very important to you. But you will need the help and participation of others. Others who probably do not have the same interest in the implementation of your vision. In order to team with them you will have to translate your vision into words they understand. To borrow from yesterday’s post- you will need to EXPLAIN.
That won’t quite get you to a true listeners perspective, but no language translation is ever perfect. The act of explaining, trying to use someone else’s language to gain understanding, is powerful. Going to the next step of facilitating dialogue toward understanding is the key to successful change management communications.
Technorati Tags: Big Picture, change awareness, change communications, change management, change management consultant, communicate, Communication, Communications, Executive, executive communications, Garrett Gitchell, horizontal change management, resistance to change, stakeholders, vision to work
|
|
