|
|
If I asked you this question: “If you could change anything what would it be”? Could you answer it?
You could and in many different ways.
And I bet you could get pretty enthused about change.
You could change the world. You could change yourself in some way. You could change the environment or your environment. You could change your friends a little. You could do some little changes on your parents. You could change your career. You could go on forever with all the exciting changes you could make.
So why is change so hard then?
There is the imagining and there is the doing.
Imagining
If you can’t imagine something I can’t imagine how you could do it. If you did not imagine it how would you know when you arrived?
Yet this happens for people- “I am going to lose weight”. It seems like a smart thing so just reach for it.
And it happens for organizations- “We need a 50% reduction in, fill in the blank.” If we focus on that number and the need we can make the change.
Being the change, like Bill Braun’s “165 pound man” is a crucial first step to getting any of those “if I could change ‘somethings’” to happen.
Doing
Sometimes doing is a plan.
You make a list. You use a project plan. You get wild filling in the cells of a spreadsheet. In a way this is part of the doing (and in a way it is part of the imagining). The planning is the transitioning to the doing.
But…
The 240 pound man did not have a plan.
He just started doing. Because he imagined the pieces necessary for the end state were clear (healthy eating, a friend and ally, meditation, exercise). Because he went beyond imaging what this this was to actually being the end state, the doing began instinctively.
For the organization this is a quick win scenario. Start to do the things that make sense and have little effect on the path to get there, the process or the other things that will be on the gathering list.
Theoretically you could start doing without imaging. It turns out that is not the same as starting and then creating a plan. Believe me I see this all the time. Start doing without imagining and you will never get to the imagining. Without the imagining there will be no end state. And really doing is the easy part…
Technorati Tags: Big Picture, change awareness, End State, future state, vision, vision to work
One of my previous clients is in a major shakeup- tanked stock price, intense scrutiny of a council structure that did not work , disgruntled employees from the third horizontal down leading to the obvious and ultimate- Attrition. This is on the grandest scale that I have seen in my career. My best clients, examples of true leadership, are now scurrying away like mice in the attic.
(I have a book of I told you so notes from my time there…)
What this maelstrom illustrates to me is the path of individual change. It will, in fact, produce many paths of change. Think of the possibilities: retirement, a new position somewhere else, career switches, travel preceding anything on the list etc. These are talented people who now have verifiable change experience. How will or could they approach this change?
The answer is much like change in the organization should be approached- End state back, filled in with missing pieces, “take stock of the current” to feed the end state and discard any baggage.
- End State
- A look at the present
- Acknowledging the pieces
- Coming to terms with the past
- Coming to terms with the present?
End State
In the case of individual change sometimes ideas must be spun to be able to start the process of defining a new end state. What though do you think is the first thing those individuals will do? Answer: Get real intense about the present. Maybe good in the sense that watching the budget is usually a good first step when in employment transition. Still an end state description makes this evaluation easier.
A look at the present
With a sense of the end state looking at the present makes sense. With individual change it helps to evaluate needs and wants. At this point in time where would you like to go? How would the end state be different from today (or yesterday in the case of loss of employment)?
With organizational change this is usually not a good step since it focuses the change on the present and transitions which just repeats patterns. Individual change has this step since reinventing and doing things better the second time around works at the individual level.
Acknowledging the pieces
What do you have that ties in well with this end state? This is a nice question, and exercise, to pat yourself on the back and make the list of all the positives, all your accomplishments, all the things to carry forward.
What is missing for that end state? Education? Exposure? Connections? Filling in these missing pieces (as with some organizational change- learning can be fun) can be a real boost and positive push toward the end state.
Coming to terms with the past
Individual change requires, after a good path is set, looking back to see the path to the present. This is a little like looking at organizational history to gauge its effects on the path to the end state. The same view back on patterns, perspectives and use of opportunity is needed to break free of anything that might slow forward progress. Begrudging anything would be one of those slowing mechanisms. Take stock, acknowledge the good and bad and move on.
Coming to terms with the present?
Which will bring you to the present. Goals, listing the pieces attained, also listing the missing pieces and creating a path to put the puzzle together can help to frame the present. The present, at any given time, may have some regrets, but it also has opportunity. Regret is like a stop sign. Opportunity is like a long green light.
You can approach individual change in much the same way I have illustrated for organizational change. The green light is longer and the road more open when the process is an end state back approach. At the individual level there may be more looking back from the present to guide the future. Still there will be patterns, perspectives and approaches- some good some bad.
Technorati Tags: Change, change awareness, change excercise, early retirement, future state, individual change, layoff
A butterfly is nothing like a caterpillar.
There are all kinds of reasons to want to be a butterfly- they fly, they are better looking, they can avoid prey easier and everyone likes them. Most would pick butterfly over caterpillar any day. The butterfly is an end state that makes sense.
Why would you ever assume, since being a butterfly makes so much sense, that the caterpillar would not like the change?
And yet that is exactly what most change methods do.
How different would change management be if more approaches used the assumption that make-sense-change is about getting to the end state?
Or, to think of this from a different perspective, change is about working end state back to determine steps and then moving forward to accomplish them.
The End State
Is the place where all stakeholders (or at least a large enough majority for the change to be beneficial for people and business) are using the change and are behaving in a way that facilitates this new way, approach, technology etc. This is the spot that holds all the ultimate goals- behavior change, business objectives, and upswing in the applicable benefit measurement (efficiency, profit, sales, exposure etc.). This is the spot where the caterpillar flies!
The End State Approach
The change management process works like it should when the path to success is clear, shared and reinforced. Spending time up front (front loading digs a little deeper into this) to define and describe the end state on stakeholder and business terms fills in these three needs. By comparison other methods do the same with a big heavy grey cloud over the process (assumption of resistance post)- and the “clear” part is debatable.
So all that assessing, surveying and “data” gathering (the data spits out the other end weak and subjective- subjective works if you actually speak to stakeholders and can translate into something more objective) that most methods (especially the ones who make money on all the time needed for this) thrive on, does not really build toward the solution. What it does is define the current spot. And so the change work is a process that always connects in some way to this view of the present.
The end state approach always connects to that spot of convergence at the end of the change process. Everything said and done is in relation to that. All of the information gathering (data is factual, it takes a lot of the exact same opinion to create a fact therefore this questioning of perspective, this assessing of potential risk is information- the two need to be treated differently). With this approach and its assumptions and description of success the timeline of work makes sense, is accepted easier by stakeholders and is a forward positive process.
If surveys are to be used, If assessments are to be created, if data is to be gathered (real data, as in numbers connected to the business side of the equation- people being the other side) it must all be to develop the description of the end state so the timeline of work and communication can be created. No gaps. No change curves. Only paths, speed bumps with signs ahead for plenty of warning and the kind of curve you get on a road (banked and fast).
As I said yesterday, http://horizontalchange.com/2011/02/end-state-or-future-state/, this is not simple semantics. The assumptions made with most change approaches (and this includes the theories and models of everyone’s favorite gurus from the past) completely change and effect the process itself. Or to put this in a more positive light:
Starting change with an end state approach completely changes our change processes.
Technorati Tags: Big Picture, business objectives, change awareness, change management, Change Strategy, Context, corporate change management, End State, engagement, future state, resistance to change, stakeholders
The most important competency for a change practitioner is sense of time.
“…understanding current change capability and capacity requires the horizon of a CM to extend back into the past.
And ensuring sustainability requires a perspective further into the future.” Gail Severini from blog post.
Thanks Gail. This is pulled out of a longer post focused on the difference between CM and PM practitioners, but may be the key to a lot of what change management is about.
The Present
In a way does not exist. It is gone at the speed of thought. A Change practitioner must understand the concept of present. For it is in those spots, those frozen moments where change happens and where it gets recorded. The present is a moving line that represents completion and transition. The present IS status quo. Present is a reality that exists in each stakeholders head. It is something to be acknowledged. It is a grounding spot to illustrate before, transition and after.
The Past
Very much exists- even though it shouldn’t. Because after all it is gone. Where is does exist is within each stakeholders realm of comfort. The past is predictable, immovable- like a concrete foundation. The past is visible to everyone, even futurists. Its negative is the difficulty of erasal. Its positive is as measurement. Numbers and facts come from the past. Predictions and plans arise from those numbers.
The Future
May or may not happen. It will arrive in some way, but like the present is quickly gone. What is interesting about the future is that it is the past transitioned through the present to again be the past. The typical mistake here for CM is to see the future as a transition from the present (think current and future state). Remember the past does not go away. So the future in terms of change should be the end state arrived at through the lens of the past, the capacity of the present and an eye to the next future.
Where does this “most important competency” come in then?
A CM practitioner must be able to recognize and articulate the past (in all its glory and stranglehold), put it in perspective and then feed that assimilation into a dialogue and description of the end state. They must not let the past or the present hold the future hostage.
They leverage that with their innate sense of what happens when you tweak these three views of time in any given direction. Clients should expect change agents to quickly recognize what will happen when different levers are pulled, or pushed. Change agents will know the relative resistance power of timing, demands, resources, communication, collaboration etc.
CM’s, if they are good, know there will be stakeholders living in the past (sounds bad, but not necessarily), intent on checking things off in the present (even if the list is twice as long as it needs to be) or travelling at the speed of dreams (thanks Jimmy Buffet for that one). They all stand on the timeline of change.
You might say the Change Management Practitioner is the driver of the DeLorean, with the capability to travel back and forth in time and across the future, separate from the stakeholders and the initiative.
…and wouldn’t you know I saw a DeLorean for sale the other day…
Technorati Tags: Big Picture, change awareness, change management consultant, End State, future state, Garrett Gitchell, vision, vision to work
I predict, thanks to reduction of employees, belt tightening and the effects of the economy a new obstacle for change- Apathy.
We are creeping up on an interesting flux period for organizations. Those who remain have lived in fear of losing their positions, have seen their work loads increase geometrically and are now years into seeing career paths disappear in front of their eyes. If they were “lucky” enough to remain they may also harbor guilt over “surviving”.
Those who were laid off, furloughed, trimmed, hacked (pick your synonym) are carrying bitterness over plans delayed (or destroyed). They have also had time to look at their situations and perhaps question the value of the “security” (I always say false- this environment supports my point) of full time employment.
Sometime soon the economy will pick up (and there are signs now).
We will have a mix of worn out and therefore apathetic current and incoming employees. Because many of the potential incoming individuals may well have gone their own way the pool might just be diminished. Which opens a window for those who stayed. Quitting is an instant fix for apathy. Finding a better position is a solution to that apathy. Demanding more to compensate for lack of security another.
Take heart though leaders of change. The step after this flux is a healthy energy partly from relief and partly to ensure individual survival the next time around.
Technorati Tags: Big Picture, change management, engagement, future state, Garrett Gitchell, horizontal change management, resistance, stakeholders, vision to work
To get a better understanding of change that runs horizontal think of a spider web.
At the core of the web is the Corporate Strategy. For this to work we must assume (and a big assumption it is) that the strategy makes sense and can be described, communicated and measured. Radiating out- each with a bigger spread, more influence and more scope, from the core, are projects, programs, initiatives and transformation. The gossamer threads of connection between the four are the functional units of the organization. Spun off from the edge of the web are the external entities (partners, suppliers, customers, the business community etc).
Everything is connected. The sensitive nature of the web means that all movement will be felt, both good and not so.
A change catalyst group made up of internal and external resources rests near the center, near the strategy, near the leaders who control spending, end state visioning and initial leadership. If you were to insist on laying this web over your org. chart the first circle off the hub of the web would be the first horizontal; the precise center, the CEO and the board.
Some observations-
An experienced and intuitive Change practitioner is used to spinning informal versions of this web- they will sense and know the effect of every movement.
Internal consultants rarely are empowered to do so, but are exceptional at managing the web after it is built.
I have not played with this much, but there is no reason this web cannot have a smaller version within functions (or geography or units…?).
While the CCG (or your own crafty acronym) sits near strategy it runs out along all of the threads and circles the web in each of the four change areas, radiating out to make external connections and working with leaders to build and repair connections (see the upper left corner of our diagram).
With dots throughout the web this could actually be THE org. chart.
Technorati Tags: Big Picture, C level, CCM, Change Design, change management, change management consultant, Change Strategy, corporate change management, corporate strategy, Examples, Executive, External Consultant, future state, Garrett Gitchell, horizontal change management, PMO, vision to work
I have been doing some web work redesign and am officially feeling the pain that many of the stakeholders I work with go through. Web pages are now designed around CSS which is a linear process. I do mockups and graphic design work with Fireworks which works on a spatial/visual platform. I can mock up a web site in a couple of hours. I have spent days (Ok actually more than that) trying to figure out and understand CSS. System oriented focus that I have I wonder why the process can not be WSIWYG. And I feel for you stakeholders. My feet are dug in the sand for this new learning which is making getting to my end state exceedingly difficult.
Lets look at this like a mini behavior change problem.
Because of a “new” technology I am forced to do things differently which slows me down and eventually frustrates me. The new technology approaches work in a linear way. I am a visual spatial learner so even if an expert were to help me I would have serious difficulties understanding and using the needed approach. To get to what I do well and enjoy more (writing and making that available through the website) I must pass this gate. Just like many of the stakeholders out there passing through their own gates of change.
Here is the connection though. The ultimate end state, visibility and availability for my knowledge and prose, is crucial to my future and my work. The change facilitator in me must find a way to place significance on the CSS phase in relation to my end state. That is the context to Big Picture loop I constantly reinforce here. The connection is search optimization. CSS works much better than the image versions I create in Fireworks.
So perhaps the change facilitator in me finds a way to see the reasoning behind SEO to loop back to CSS. The “got you to participate” link for me with behavioral change is the Why of my 5 W’s. The why now makes sense and might just be powerful enough to overcome my resistance.
Technorati Tags: Big Picture, Change, change awareness, change excercise, change management, End State, future state, Garrett Gitchell, resistance, resistance to change, vision to work
Have you every done the kid safety drill?
You know, the one where you get down on the ground and crawl around looking for potential danger? Of course, kid that I am at heart, I rolled, slid and somersaulted too…
The world is entirely different down there.
That, for awhile anyway, is the world of a toddler.
The people side of change has danger (real or imagined), hidden obstacles, an intense right in front focus, movement similar to a crawl (for its snail like pace) and an overall obliviousness to the presence of anything on this list. A good change agent does multiple versions of the hidden danger exercise. He/she must look from the perspective of a distracted and singularly focused child and from the adult who sees clearly the danger. Somewhere in between is the positive, practical, realistic description of the environment. There could very well be a different description for each person/stakeholder. The exercise might even change for a group of stakeholders. Think about a group of children crawling on that floor-different environment, especially if a few get ahead and stand up…
In keeping with our analogy-
If you think you will be able to corral that kid/stakeholder away from the danger (distract, keep busy, drag, pull, push, order…) then you are either very confident in your abilities or opening yourself up for the result. In the change process that result is projects that get delayed (should have fixed that outlet first), quality that deteriorates, stubbornness (which either increases the danger or leads to apathy-yes even with that kid on the ground) and rebellion (obvious with the kid, subtle and detrimental to the organization and culture for the stakeholder).
As the executive for an initiative you would do well to run this exercise of perspective through you head on your own before and after expecting it of your change agents. Get good at it and you will be able to fix danger early if it is real or call it out for what it often is- fear of the unknown. Right back to your role of describing end states and the journey/environment to get there.
Technorati Tags: CEO, change awareness, change excercise, change management, change management consultant, Communication, Communications, End State, Executive, executive communications, future state, Garrett Gitchell, resistance, resistance to change, stakeholders, vision to work
There is a theory in quantum mechanics that it is possible the future influences the present (and possibly the past). I dug into it in a recent Discover Magazine article.
And did my best to understand the true meaning for quantum mechanics, but big picture mentality that I have…
I got to wondering how that might look for the change process.
It could mean there are multiple versions of result and effect. Basically versions of success and failure. Successful establishment of process and an adaptation of culture to speed change if the future has anything to do with it should be the hand that pulls in the present.
Less success would be fed by a status quo that requires to much time to adapt and therefore guides a less powerful approach to change.
Or look at it this way- in any large change initiative during the design of the end state imagine how the future would look if the present path was smooth. Do what it takes to not just progress toward and get to the end state but create a path to the future (that in this perfect world is feeding back in the moment).
From experience I would say there is a feeling of inevitability, a magic carpet of forward progress, on smooth exciting change initiatives that might just be guided by a different hand of time (or lack of time as a dimension).
Technorati Tags: Big Picture, Change, change awareness, Change Design, change excercise, change management, change management strategy, End State, future state, Garrett Gitchell, organizational change, status quo, strategy, vision, vision to work
Let’s say you are the executive that is in tune with both people and business.
You have had corporate initiatives that have been successful and a few not so. Because you are wise you see that that the successful initiatives were those where corporate strategy somehow tied neatly into individual and team motivation. And those not so successful were the ones where change was forced and resistance was almost guaranteed.
Success managed motivation. Un-success battled resistance.
Knowing the difference between clarifying the goal and then defining the path versus focusing on the process to change to a future state, you look for a consultant or firm to help with the next success. You look in a few forums, some LinkedIn questions and answers, a few websites, maybe you read a few change management books. And they all seem to have the second of our two perspectives. Why is that?
Internal politics tends tends to tug at change as revenue needs tend to tug at consulting firms. Process and task win out in both cases.
Most change management practitioners are enamored with process. They love to guide stakeholders toward their future state. They love models, theories and their own approaches. Secondary to process they love guiding people. They are not necessarily “people persons” (those lean toward training and communications) but they like the energy of collaboration. These are excellent qualities for the middle of change management. The middle of the organization, the middle of the change process itself and in terms of expertise the middle of the change practitioner skill set.
But you are an executive interested in high level usually transformational change. The type of change that is tied to strategy. That type of change is not typically seeded in the middle of the organization.
For high level strategic change management you need a consultant, yes initially you will benefit from the relationship with a single trusted individual, who is drawn toward business equal to people. Someone who is focused on goals, end states, results before process and task. You realize process and task are learnable while strategic skill is practiced and intuitive. And you have seen initiatives fail because they were wrapped up in the approach of the consulting firm rather than the culture of your organization.
Keep searching.
You are a knowledgeable, astute, ahead of the curve executive. Hold your ground and approach change as a business + people = results equation. Successful change management for the future is the alignment of resources and energy toward a goal. It is not managing the process of changing minds. Like you stakeholders have matured past that. They understand change is inevitable and often beneficial. They do not like it when you force change and they do not like it when you assume change is forced (overcoming resistance). What they do like are leaders who are clear about direction, choose the right path and articulate the goal. Getting there is actually the easy part.
But you knew all that right?
Technorati Tags: CEO, Change, change management consultant, End State, executive change, External Consultant, future state, Insights, internal politics, resistance, Value
|
Garrett’s Linkedin profile
|
