change management

Published: 07 Sep 2010

 E-Mail
 A
 AA
 AAA
 inShare2
 Facebook
 Twitter
 Share This
 RSS
 Reprints

ESSENTIAL GUIDE
WORKING WITH ENTERPRISE ALM: MOBILE, CLOUD AND MORE
 This article is part of an Essential Guide, our editor-selected collection of our best articles, videos and other
content on this topic. Explore more in this guide:

4. - ALM TERMS TO KNOW: READ MORE IN THIS SECTION

 application lifecycle management (ALM)
 application portfolio management (APM)
 DevOps (development-operations)

READ MORE IN THIS SECTION

 Explore other sections in this guide:

 1. - Cloud ALM: Tools and techniques

 2. - Mobile ALM strategies

 3. - ALM development, projects and processes

1) Change management is a systematic approach to dealing with change, both from the
perspective of an organization and on the individual level. A somewhat ambiguous term,
change management has at least three different aspects, including: adapting to change,
controlling change, and effecting change. A proactive approach to dealing with change is at the
core of all three aspects. For an organization, change management means defining and
implementing procedures and/or technologies to deal with changes in the business
environment and to profit from changing opportunities.

Successful adaptation to change is as crucial within an organization as it is in the natural world.

Just like plants and animals, organizations and the individuals in them inevitably encounter
changing conditions that they are powerless to control. The more effectively you deal with
change, the more likely you are to thrive. Adaptation might involve establishing a structured
methodology for responding to changes in the business environment (such as a fluctuation in
the economy, or a threat from a competitor) or establishing coping mechanisms for responding
to changes in the workplace (such as new policies, or technologies).

Terry Paulson, the author of Paulson on Change, quotes an uncle's advice: "It's easiest to ride a
horse in the direction it is going." In other words, don't struggle against change; learn to use it
to your advantage.

2) In a computer system environment, change management refers to a systematic approach to

keeping track of the details of the system (for example, what operating system release is
running on each computer and which fixes have been applied).

Change
Introduction
"Change is no longer an irregular outing, an inconvenient upheaval to be undertaken
once every ten years. Change is something we have to learn to live with, to structure
and to manage. Change is here to stay, and the winners will be the ones who cope
with it."
- (Bainbridge, 1996, p. 4)
Adaptation to change has become a common agenda for organizations of all types -
health care, business, social, governmental, educational, and cultural. The later
decades of the twentieth century will go down in history as an "era of perpetual
change." In all organizations, the effects of change are multifaceted. "New
competitors enter the marketplace and sweep away established customer bases,
technology changes the rules of how business can be undertaken, legislation demands
changes to the way in which products and services are delivered, and deregulation
throws up whole new trading blocks and industry sectors. Behind it all the
expectations of customers grow as they become ever more knowledgeable and
demanding," (Bainbridge, 1996, p. vii).
Traditional ways of doing business are quickly going out the window. Bureaucracy,
control, rigidity and functionalism have become outmoded, and are actual obstacles to
change management. Perhaps the biggest obstacle is people's attitude toward change,
which are often fixed and resistant. Yet, businesses must continue to function as new
capabilities and ways of dealing with change after change are cultivated. Capabilities
and resources are the heart of an organization, and are all susceptible to changes: the
people, the information technology (IT) systems, the procedures and the management
characteristics.
Change within organizations occurs on a myriad of levels. New international and
national legislation, aware and discerning customers, the global marketplace,
sophistication in IT development, new industries, markets and knowledge sectors, a
move towards a flexible, short-term workforce and uncertainty about the future all
impact on business and social organizations across the globe. The combination of
these widespread changes can create a pressure-cooker environment within
organizations struggling to adapt and prosper.
The Phenomenon of Change
Lewin (1951) produced the first viable model of change in his force field model. In
this model, change was characterized as a state of imbalance between driving forces
and restraining forces. If these forces were balanced or in equilibrium, no change
could take place. Change is inherent in every context and is a relative concept. "Every
phenomenon is subject to change, however apparently stable its nature," (Wilson,
1992, p. 8). That change exists is a predictable notion. "In every industry and
business, change ebbs and flows in recurring cycles that to at least some extent can be
charted and therefore anticipated and managed," (Nadler & Nadler, 1998, p. 45).
Change is disruptive, messy, and complicated. Even with the best laid plans, events
rarely occur exactly as they were predicted. "Real change in real organizations is
intensely personal and enormously political," (Nadler & Nadler, 1998). Change
processes entail not only structures and ways of doing tasks, but also the performance,
expectations and perceptions of all involved parties. Change has become widespread
and unpredictable, but is still manageable (Bainbridge, 1996). An inherent
characteristic of change is that it is risky, especially when it encompasses many
different sectors within an organization or society. Change can also be planned or
emergent. Wilson pointed out that a shift from emergent models of change to planned
ones has steadily occurred over the past two decades. A total shift is not advised
though, since the political and economic context of the surrounding environment can
not be ignored, and must also be adapted to. Strategies to deal with unplanned change
are just as necessary as planned ones.
Effects of Change on Organizations
To effectively adapt to change, most established organizations have a daunting task
ahead of them in a variety of operational and procedural areas. Business processes
must be redefined and redesigned and adapted to specific geographical and cultural
settings. The workforce needs to be retrained to be ready for changes in how work is
done, what skills and knowledge is needed, and how to relate to global collaborators
and customers. The very culture of an organization needs to be reshaped to properly
support the new processes introduced. Structures, reward systems, appraisal
measurements and roles need redefinition (Bainbridge, 1996). Leadership styles and
management procedures must shift and adapt, and ways of relating with customers,
suppliers, and other stakeholders need refining. Technological advances and
capabilities must be introduced, and preparation of the workforce to work with the
new IT structures is needed.

Successful adaptation to change necessitates "an understanding about how to convert

and rebuild from the complexities and legacies of the old, as well as generate designs
about the new," (Bainbridge, 1996, p. 12). Change necessitates that organizations
realistically move beyond antiquated processes, empower and retrain employees, and
incorporate advances in IT into the everyday work setting. No longer are
organizations reacting to sequential or occasional change. New changes now occur as
organizations are in the throes of initiating the change process. Change has become
perpetual. In order to cope, organizations need a design process with strategies and
guidelines for thriving amongst a multitude of changes. "Real change is an integrated
process that unfolds over time and touches every aspect of an organization," (Nadler
& Nadler, 1998, p. 6).
The Role and Issues of Leaders in Guiding Change
The creation and design of change processes within an organization is most often a
role of the leaders within it. Change processes which encompass human resources, IT
adoption and upgrades, tools and techniques, as well as the basic rules and controls
within the organization are the mandate of leaders engaged in the management of
change (Bainbridge, 1996). It is up to the leaders to make these change initiatives
tangible rather than abstract and to awaken enthusiasm and ownership of the proposed
changes within the corporate milieu. Leaders are responsible for bridging the gap
between strategy decisions and the reality of implementing the changes within the
structure and workforce of the organization. A myriad of details and effects must be
acknowledged and addressed for successful adaptation to change in all sectors of a
firm.

"Underlying this principle is the fact that almost everything in an organization's

infrastructure has an influence on some other part of it. Management style affects
culture, technology affects the way staff interact with customers, internal
communication methods affect how people work together," (Bainbridge, 1996, p. 37).
A holistic approach to change management encourages the redesign and adaptation to
change at all organizational levels. In essence, process itself can become the platform
for change to occur, as well as the protector of the existent daily operations.
A clear picture of how the business operates currently is afforded, as well as a picture
of how the business must plan, schedule, and undergo the change process.
Nadler and Nadler (1998) emphasized the importance of leaders in organizing and
maintaining a climate for change within organizations. Although participation of all
players is necessary, the role of the leader in the change process is crucial. Dubbed the
"champions of change" it is the leaders, - the top management players who keep the
change process moving while maintaining the operational integrity of the
organization. Adaptive leaders provide direction, protection, orientation, conflict
control, and the shaping of norms while overseeing the change process within the
corporate structure (Conger, Spreitzer & Lawler, 1999). Priorities need to be set
which encourage disciplined attention, while keeping a keen eye focused for signs of
distress within the company members.

Steps to transform an organization were identified by Conger et al (1999). The steps

included: a) establishing a sense of urgency; b) forming a powerful guiding coalition;
c) creating a vision; d) communicating the vision; e) empowering others to act on the
vision; f) planning for and creating short-term wins; g) consolidating improvements
and producing still more change and h) institutionalizing new approaches.
A new model of organizational learning is important for survival and adaptation in the
new century. Learning is a key requirement for both leaders and followers for any
effective and lasting change to occur. "Without learning, the attitudes, skills and
behaviors needed to formulate and implement a new strategic task will not develop,
nor will a new frame by which selection and promotion decisions are made," (Conger,
Spreitzer & Lawler, 1999, p. 127). The authors proposed an action learning process,
called Organizational Fitness Profiling to help leaders to learn how to skillfully
transform the particular business they are managing. Scheduled dialogues with
followers provide information on how leadership style and behaviors impact on
values, organizational design, strategies, and follower perceptions. Organizational
success is a process of mutual adaptation between leader values and behaviors,
existing people, culture, and organizational design amidst an environment of continual
and prolific change. This profiling process requires that leaders are courageous
enough to learn about their own assumptions and values about change, leadership and
management roles and tasks. In essence, "...a paradigm shift in management thinking
about leadership and organization development is needed," (Conger, Spreitzer &
Lawler, 1999, p. 158).
Types and Complexities of Change
According to Wilson (1992) technology has become the engine of change for many
organizations. Nadler and Nadler (1998) credited increased competition and
globalization as the most sweeping factors in the new global change environment.
Eccles (1994) outlined six contexts of change common to the corporate world.
Takeover change, injection change, succession change, renovation change, partnership
change, and catalytic change were all identified as inherent and challenging for most
modern organizations. Takeover change primarily entails a change in management
players. Injection change purports a change in CEO or the top senior manager.
Succession change is felt when the top management layer is succeeded by current
members who move up the ladder as the existent management retires or moves on.
Renovation change entails the planned change process set by management, while
partnership change occurs when the decisions for change is shared across the
spectrum of organizational players. "Finally, and in a different style to the other five
contexts, there is catalytic change in which an agency, typically a set of consultants or
advisors, intervenes on behalf of one or more stakeholders, usually the management,"
(Eccles, 1994, p. 88).
Lasting change must occur on many levels within an organization (Nadler and Nadler,
1998). The people, the work, and the formal as well as the informal organization are
all key factions to be considered and worked on. Nadler and Nadler (1998) identified
four different types of organizational change. Incremental or continuous change is the
orderly sequence of change that is expected as time and growth progress. Step by step
continuous improvement is the most logical reaction to incremental change.
Discontinuous or radical change is another matter. "Complex, wide-ranging changes
brought on by fundamental shifts in the external environment are radical, or
discontinuous, changes," (Nadler & Nadler, 1998, p. 50). Discontinuous change
requires radical departures in approach and strategy, often leading to a complete
overhaul of the organization.
Anticipatory change is done in the absence of threat, and in preparation for anticipated
environmental changes. Reactive changes represent the opposite of anticipatory
change, and are responses to threats and competition in the environment. Nadler,
Shaw and Walton (1995) warned that the present era is swiftly becoming one of
discontinuous change. "The core competency for business leaders in the twenty-first
century will be change management," (p. 273). Leaders will need both skill and the
motivation to become constant visionary change agents. Discontinuous change
profoundly affects three key areas of any organization: leadership capability,
organizational architecture, and corporate identity. Improvisation, innovation and
visionary awareness will be the name of the game for successful firms. Planned
spontaneity and deliberate opportunism will be the key to survival in a turbulent
global environment. Changes may occur in several different sectors of an organization
simultaneously. Strategic, structural, cultural, technological, merger and acquisition,
breakup and spin-off, downsizing, and expansive changes are all common, complex,
and challenging to incorporate into the organizational milieu (Nadler & Nadler, 1998).
Leadership Change Tools and Strategies
Bainbridge (1996) outlined a five step process of redesign for organizations
undergoing planned change. The five steps included:

a) the design stage to determine overall requirements;

b) the definition stage where the design is specified and documentation of the design
stage requirements occurs;

c) the development stage, where new capabilities are cultivated through training,
education and restructuring;

d) the dismantling stage, where redundant parts of the organization are removed or
converted into new capabilities;

and e) the deployment stage, where new capabilities are introduced into the new
organizational environment, both internally and externally.

This design process is accomplished within a carefully arranged change process

architecture. "This includes the link to strategic objectives, the definition of measures
and the production of the high-level design itself," (Bainbridge, 1996, p. 53). The
vision of change must be expressed as clearly as possible and used consistently to
spearhead every step of the change design process, including the specification of
design principles. Design principles reflect the context and also the content of both
internal and external desired change outcomes. Specification and communication of
these principles by leaders are necessary to facilitate adoption and adaptation within
the organizational culture. Pettigrew ( 1987) pointed out the wisdom of considering
the content, the context (inner and outer) and the process of change within
organizations. There is a need to "explore content, context and process linkages
through time," (p. 6).
Strategies of organizational change have become a viable vehicle for business success
and the creation of competitive performance. The ability to handle strategic change is
now a defining characteristic of successful post-industrial organizations. "The
leitmotiv of modern management theory is that of understanding, creating and coping
with change. The essence of the managerial task thus becomes one of establishing
some rationality, or some predictability, out of the seeming chaos that characterizes
change processes," (Wilson, 1992, p. 7).
An open systems approach can facilitate emergent change processes within an
organization (Wilson, 1992). The linkages and interdependencies between the
organization and the external environment can be used to create a pattern for emergent
change adaptation. Galpin (1996) described a process for implementing planned
change at a grassroots level, using the strengths and capabilities of the human
resources within an organization as the central hub for change. This process included
stages of a) setting goals; b) measuring performance; c) providing feedback and
coaching and d) instigating generous rewards and recognition. Galpin also outlined
the strategic steps leaders needed to employ in order to initiate the change process.
These steps were:
"a) defining the need to change; b) developing a vision of the result of change; c)
leveraging teams to design, test, and implement changes; d) addressing the cultural
aspects of the organization that will help and sustain change; and e) developing the
essential attributes and skills needed to lead the change effort," (p. 123).
Cognitive mapping and computer assistance for group decision support are alternative
change strategies that can help to cultivate group support for the planned initiatives
(Hendry, Johnson & Newton, 1993). The cognitive maps or strategic belief systems of
managers and employees can have a profound effect on how change is planned and
implemented. Cognitive maps become a practical tool "by acting as a device for
representing that part of a person's construct system they are able and willing to make
explicit," (p. 121). However, the cognitive map is "significantly biased by the
necessary social interaction, or social gaze, that is the basis of elicitation through
interview," (p. 122). Still, cognitive maps can be a strategic tool for negotiation and
decision making in the change planning and implementation process.
Flamholtz and Randle (1998) identified strategic transformational planning as a key
tool for change in an organization. This process describes the planning necessary to
transform an organization into what it needs to become to maximize the fit and reduce
the gaps between corporate size, environment, business concept and organizational
design. Flamholtz and Randle labeled these transformations as First, Second, and
Third kinds. A First kind transformation related to professional management
transformation. Planning revitalization or second kind transformation related to all
layers of the corporate pyramid, while business vision transformations (third kind)
focused on changes needed to address new markets and the firm's role in the existing
markets. All three of these transformations were addressed by using the
transformational planning process: a) assessing the environment; b) reviewing the
existing business; c) resolving core transformational issues and d) developing the
written strategic transformational plan. Organizational managers at the top must
exhibit leadership, commitment, and conviction to the change and transformation
process (Caravatta, 1998).
Incremental change, often the result of a carefully thought out analysis and planning
process, has been the most common form of planned change within organizations
(Quinn, 1996). A feeling of control is afforded, enough time and commitment are
present, and each step of the process can be trialed and adapted to. However, with the
advent of technology and globalization, a deep change is necessary. "Deep change
differs from incremental change in that it requires new ways of thinking and behaving.
It is change that is major in scope, discontinuous with the past and generally
irreversible. Deep change means surrendering control," (Quinn, 1996, p. 3). Deep
change on any level entails inherent risk. To adapt to the profound changes of our
times, leaders must be willing to go out on a limb, to take some big risks by stepping
outside of well-established boundaries.
Effects and Consequences of Change
Noer (1997) cautioned leaders to not rely too heavily on external tools for change.
"The futile quest for an external, objective tool is a dysfunctional heritage of the old
paradigm; the outgrowth of the erroneous attempt to graft the objectivity of the
scientific method onto the subjective phenomena of the human spirit. It is a
fundamental mismatch," (p. 15). According to Noer, the leader, as a person, is the
most important tool for change. The leader's spirit, insight, wisdom, compassion,
values, and learning skills are all important facets in the capabilities to lead others to
embrace change and redesign.
To be lasting, deep change must not only be made amidst organizational layers, but
within each of the players themselves. Deep personal change can be uncomfortable,
yet the need for each member of an organization to become empowered, and
internally driven is essential for success in this era of change and evolvement. Quinn
cautions that if players are not willing or able to make these deep personal changes,
then"slow death" is the alternative. Slow death, "a meaningless and frustrating
experience enmeshed in fear, anger, and helplessness, while moving surely toward
what is most feared" is the consequence of resistance to change. Burnout can occur if
this resistance to change persists, resulting in loss of employment or even destruction
of the organization as a whole.
The leader who instigates change within a firm is often subject to speculative
suspicion. "Because resistance is so common, learning to overcome it is crucial to
managing change at every level," (Nadler & Nadler, 1998, p. 84). The transition stage
where the change process is instigated must be handled expertly and with enthusiasm.
Leaders must own and align the proposed changes, setting expectations, and modeling
and communicating the rationale to all members of the organization. The processes of
engaging and rewarding help to motivate members, smoothing the transition period,
and attempting to win the hearts and minds of all involved to the change process.
Preparing for and Thriving in the Continuous Change of the Future
Quinn (1996) enthused that "We are all potential change agents. As we discipline our
talents, we deepen our perceptions about what is possible. Having experienced deep
change in ourselves, we are able to bring deep change to the systems around us," (p.
xiii). Leaders who have embraced deep change personally are able to design change
processes that reflect a heroic yet enlightened leader stance, one that imparts
enthusiasm and vitality into the other members and creates a new perspective of the
logic and wisdom of moving with the flow of change. Nadler and Nadler (1998)
described a four part matrix of responses to change: tuning, adapting, redirecting and
overhauling. "Tuning" represents an anticipatory change process in response to
incremental or continuous change, while "adapting" represents a reactive response.
"Redirecting" is an anticipatory response to discontinuous, radical change, while
"overhauling" represents a reactive response to discontinuous change.
To survive the effects of continuous change, leaders need to accomplish three major
tasks: a) to shape the political dynamics of the change process; b) to motivate change;
and c) to manage the transition period (Nadler & Nadler, 1998). Pasmore (1994)
identified flexibility as a key trait for successful change implementation. "Another
strategy must be employed, one that prepares the organization for continuous change
in a world that provides no stability and accepts no excuses for being unprepared; a
strategy based on flexibility. Being flexible means being able to change everything, all
at the same time," (p. 5). In today's world, this flexibility relates to people,
technology, ways of thinking, ways of leading, and to the actual organizational design.
The trick it seems, is to realize that once a change is achieved, change is not finished.
It is ongoing and perpetual (Hambrick, Nadler, & Tushman, 1998).
"Norms, values, and common operating principles rather than rules and direct
supervision will furnish the cohesion necessary to provide direction and
coordination," (Nadler, Shaw & Walton, 1995). The effective leader will shape the
vision and values of the organization, and spend considerable time in developing team
leaders and members. A strongly developed and integrated culture and network of
individuals who use their own sense of leadership will boost the organizational
capabilities for successful adaptation to changes of all kinds and magnitudes.
Conger, Spreitzer and Lawler, (1999) warned that old ways of shaping behaviors in
employees, namely rational persuasion and coercion are outmoded and will not work
in the future. In the past these have rarely been successful in perpetuating lasting
change. In the future, they could be deadly to any organization. Instead, a change style
reminiscent of the behaviors used by Martin Luther King, and M. Gandhi are
suggested: an empowering self-modification strategy.
This technique is based more on a moral-relational premise rather than a political-
technical paradigm, which "requires the change agent to employ a high level of
cognitive, behavioral, and moral complexity," (p. 164). To shake people out of
complacent stances, or from taking "the path of least resistance" true empowerment
must be experienced. Members must feel both challenged and supported for feelings
of empowerment to develop. In effect, this entails leaders who are willing to model
the desired behaviors: the ability to walk at the edge of chaos by stepping outside the
comfort zone and letting go of control. The internal discipline, vision, expectation and
sensitivity of the leader is enhanced, which is apparent to followers and peers alike.
"In freeing self from external sanctions through personal modification, the change
agent obtains increased understanding, enlightenment, or vision about direction and
strategy," (Conger, Spreitzer & Lawler, 1999, p. 170).
Summary
Today's fast-paced environment requires people and organizations to develop the
ability to adapt to pervasive change and upheaval (Conger, Spreitzer & Lawler, 1999).
"Cutting-edge technology, the triumph of capitalism over communism, a burgeoning
global economy, a billion new entrants to the global workforce, and a surplus of
products all feed into an environment that is highly competitive and fast-changing,"
(p. xxxi). The key to successful organizational change, is heroic and learned change
management by competent and visionary leaders. Change can be managed in a top-
down style or as a highly participative exercise from all levels of personnel. Change is
context specific, meaning that no single change process is appropriate for every
situation or corporate entity.
Leaders are responsible for setting the context for change within an organization. A
culture and vision must be cultivated that can support the planned changes, and deal
with unplanned change. Envisioning, energizing, and enabling are all important
strategies for rallying support for change initiatives. Leaders must be able to counsel,
teach, coach, and reward employees as they adopt and move through the change
process. For lasting change to occur, habits, attitudes, and values at all levels of an
organization must be congruent with the vision and goals inherent in the process.

Transformative leaders share fundamental characteristics that allow them to enable

organizational members in the change process (Conger, Spreitzer & Lawler, 1999).
They are able to generate the energy needed to undertake the change process; use
vision to lead; have a total system perspective; create a sustained process of
organizational learning embedded in a systemic change implementation process.
"They must create a transformative process architecture to orchestrate the passage
from current to vision state," (p. 225). As success in the transitional context of change
is experienced, comfort and preparedness is developed, equipping the organizational
members with capabilities to deal with even greater change. Change has become the
name of the game, and the wise leader embraces it with open arms. The success of the
corporate entity and the people within it depends on it.
References
Bainbridge, C. (1996). Designing for change: A practical guide for business
transformation. New York: John Wiley.

Caravatta, M. (1998). Let's work smarter, not harder: How to engage your entire
organization in the execution of change. Milwaukee, WI: ASQ Quality Press.

Conger, J.A., Spreitzer, G.M. & Lawler, III, E.E. (eds.) (1999). The leader's change
handbook: An essential guide to setting direction and taking action. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.

Eccles, T. (1994). Succeeding with change: Implementing action-driven strategies.

New York: McGraw-Hill.

Flamholtz, E. & Randle, Y. (1998). Changing the game: Organizational

transformations of the first, second, and third kinds. New York: Oxford University
Press.

Galpin, T. J. (1996). The human side of change: A practical guide to organization

redesign. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Hambrick, D.C., Nadler, D.A. & Tushman, M. L. (1998). Navigating change: How
CEOs, top teams, and boards steer transformation. Boston, MA: Harvard Business
School Press.

Hendry, J., Johnson, G. & Newton, J. (1993). Strategic thinking, leadership, and the
management of change. New York: J. Wiley.

Lewin, K. (1951). Field Theory in Social Science. New York: Harper & Row.

Nadler, D.A., Shaw, R.B. & Walton, A.E. (1995). Discontinuous change: Leading
organizational transformation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Nadler, D. A. (1998). Champions of change: How CEOs and their companies are
mastering the skills of radical change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Nevis, E.C., Lancourt, J., & Vassallo, H.G. (1996). Intentional revolutions: A seven-
point strategy for transforming organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Noer, D. M. (1997). Breaking free: A prescription for personal and organizational

change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Pasmore, W.A. (1994). Creating strategic change: Designing the flexible, high -
performing organization. New York: J. Wiley

Change
change management
organizational and personal change management,
process, plans, change management and business
development tips
Here are some rules for effective management of change. Managing
organizational change will be more successful if you apply these simple
principles. Achieving personal change will be more successful too if you use
the same approach where relevant. Change management entails thoughtful
planning and sensitive implementation, and above all, consultation with, and
involvement of, the people affected by the changes. If you force change on
people normally problems arise. Change must be realistic, achievable and
measurable. These aspects are especially relevant to managing personal
change. Before starting organizational change, ask yourself: What do we want
to achieve with this change, why, and how will we know that the change has
been achieved? Who is affected by this change, and how will they react to it?
How much of this change can we achieve ourselves, and what parts of the
change do we need help with? These aspects also relate strongly to the
management of personal as well as organizational change.
See also the modern principles which underpin successful change.
Refer also to Psychological Contract theory, which helps explain the complex
relationship between an organization and its employees.
Do not 'sell' change to people as a way of accelerating 'agreement' and
implementation. 'Selling' change to people is not a sustainable strategy for
success, unless your aim is to be bitten on the bum at some time in the future
when you least expect it. When people listen to a management high-up
'selling' them a change, decent diligent folk will generally smile and appear to
accede, but quietly to themselves, they're thinking, "No bloody chance mate,
if you think I'm standing for that load of old bollocks you've another think
coming…" (And that's just the amenable types - the other more recalcitrant
types will be well on the way to making their own particular transition from
gamekeepers to poachers.)
Instead, change needs to be understood and managed in a way that people
can cope effectively with it. Change can be unsettling, so the manager
logically needs to be a settling influence.
Check that people affected by the change agree with, or at least understand,
the need for change, and have a chance to decide how the change will be
managed, and to be involved in the planning and implementation of the
change. Use face-to-face communications to handle sensitive aspects of
organisational change management (see Mehrabian's research on conveying
meaning and understanding). Encourage your managers to communicate
face-to-face with their people too if they are helping you manage an
organizational change. Email and written notices are extremely weak at
conveying and developing understanding.
If you think that you need to make a change quickly, probe the reasons - is
the urgency real? Will the effects of agreeing a more sensible time-frame
really be more disastrous than presiding over a disastrous change? Quick
change prevents proper consultation and involvement, which leads to
difficulties that take time to resolve.
For complex changes, refer to the process of project management, and
ensure that you augment this with consultative communications to agree and
gain support for the reasons for the change. Involving and informing people
also creates opportunities for others to participate in planning and
implementing the changes, which lightens your burden, spreads the
organizational load, and creates a sense of ownership and familiarity among
the people affected.
See also the excellent free decision-making template, designed by Sharon
Drew Morgen, with facilitative questions for personal and organizational
innovation and change.
Dawn Stanley's excellent RISE Personal Change Model, a simple helpful 'how-
to' framework for personal change, is also a very useful reference model for
change of many other types.
To understand more about people's personalities, and how different people
react differently to change, see the personality styles section.
For organizational change that entails new actions, objectives and processes
for a group or team of people, use workshops to achieve understanding,
involvement, plans, measurable aims, actions and commitment. Encourage
your management team to use workshops with their people too if they are
helping you to manage the change.
You should even apply these principles to very tough change like making
people redundant, closures and integrating merged or acquired organizations.
Bad news needs even more careful management than routine change. Hiding
behind memos and middle managers will make matters worse. Consulting
with people, and helping them to understand does not weaken your position -
it strengthens it. Leaders who fail to consult and involve their people in
managing bad news are perceived as weak and lacking in integrity. Treat
people with humanity and respect and they will reciprocate.
Be mindful that the chief insecurity of most staff is change itself. See
the process of personal change theory to see how people react to change.
Senior managers and directors responsible for managing organizational
change do not, as a rule, fear change - they generally thrive on it. So
remember that your people do not relish change, they find it deeply
disturbing and threatening. Your people's fear of change is as great as your
own fear of failure.
responsibility for managing change

The employee does not have a responsibility to manage change - the

employee's responsibility is no other than to do their best, which is different
for every person and depends on a wide variety of factors (health, maturity,
stability, experience, personality, motivation, etc). Responsibility for managing
change is with management and executives of the organisation - they must
manage the change in a way that employees can cope with it. The manager
has a responsibility to facilitate and enable change, and all that is implied
within that statement, especially to understand the situation from an objective
standpoint (to 'step back', and be non-judgemental), and then to help people
understand reasons, aims, and ways of responding positively according to
employees' own situations and capabilities. Increasingly the manager's role is
to interpret, communicate and enable - not to instruct and impose, which
nobody really responds to well.
change must involve the people - change must not be imposed upon
the people

Be wary of expressions like 'mindset change', and 'changing people's

mindsets' or 'changing attitudes', because this language often indicates a
tendency towards imposed or enforced change (theory x), and it implies
strongly that the organization believes that its people currently have the
'wrong' mindset, which is never, ever, the case. If people are not approaching
their tasks or the organization effectively, then the organization has the
wrong mindset, not the people. Change such as new structures, policies,
targets, acquisitions, disposals, re-locations, etc., all create new systems and
environments, which need to be explained to people as early as possible, so
that people's involvement in validating and refining the changes themselves
can be obtained.
Whenever an organization imposes new things on people there will be
difficulties. Participation, involvement and open, early, full communication are
the important factors.
Workshops are very useful processes to develop collective understanding,
approaches, policies, methods, systems, ideas, etc. See the section
onworkshops on the website.
Staff surveys are a helpful way to repair damage and mistrust among staff -
provided you allow allow people to complete them anonymously, and
provided you publish and act on the findings.
Management training, empathy and facilitative capability are priority areas -
managers are crucial to the change process - they must enable and facilitate,
not merely convey and implement policy from above, which does not work.
You cannot impose change - people and teams need to be empowered to find
their own solutions and responses, with facilitation and support from
managers, and tolerance and compassion from the leaders and executives.
Management and leadership style and behaviour are more important than
clever process and policy. Employees need to be able to trust the
organization.
The leader must agree and work with these ideas, or change is likely to be
very painful, and the best people will be lost in the process.
change management principles

1. At all times involve and agree support from people within system
(system = environment, processes, culture, relationships, behaviours,
etc., whether personal or organisational).
2. Understand where you/the organisation is at the moment.
3. Understand where you want to be, when, why, and what the measures
will be for having got there.
4. Plan development towards above No.3 in appropriate achievable
measurable stages.
5. Communicate, involve, enable and facilitate involvement from people,
as early and openly and as fully as is possible.

John P Kotter's 'eight steps to successful change'

American John P Kotter (b 1947) is a Harvard Business School professor and

leading thinker and author on organizational change management. Kotter's
highly regarded books 'Leading Change' (1995) and the follow-up 'The Heart
Of Change' (2002) describe a helpful model for understanding and managing
change. Each stage acknowledges a key principle identified by Kotter relating
to people's response and approach to change, in which people see, feel and
then change.
Kotter's eight step change model can be summarised as:

1. Increase urgency - inspire people to move, make objectives real and

relevant.
2. Build the guiding team - get the right people in place with the right
emotional commitment, and the right mix of skills and levels.
 3. Get the vision right - get the team to establish a simple vision and
strategy, focus on emotional and creative aspects necessary to drive
service and efficiency.
4. Communicate for buy-in - Involve as many people as possible,
communicate the essentials, simply, and to appeal and respond to
people's needs. De-clutter communications - make technology work for
you rather than against.
5. Empower action - Remove obstacles, enable constructive feedback
and lots of support from leaders - reward and recognise progress and
achievements.
6. Create short-term wins - Set aims that are easy to achieve - in bite-
size chunks. Manageable numbers of initiatives. Finish current stages
before starting new ones.
7. Don't let up - Foster and encourage determination and persistence -
ongoing change - encourage ongoing progress reporting - highlight
achieved and future milestones.
8. Make change stick - Reinforce the value of successful change via
recruitment, promotion, new change leaders. Weave change into
culture.

Kotter's eight step model is explained more fully on his

website www.kotterinternational.com.
Related to Kotter's ideas, and particularly helpful in understanding the
pressures of change on people, and people's reactions to change, see a
detailed interpretation of the personal change process in John Fisher's model
of the process of personal change.

ideas on illustrating change management issues

When people are confronted with the need or opportunity to change,

especially when it's 'enforced', as they see it, by the organization, they can
become emotional. So can the managers who try to manage the change.
Diffusing the emotional feelings, taking a step back, encouraging objectivity,
are important to enabling sensible and constructive dialogue. To this end,
managers and trainers can find it helpful to use analogies to assist themselves
and other staff to look at change in a more detached way.
On this site there are several illustrations which can be used for this purpose,
depending on the type of change faced, and the aspect that is to be
addressed. Here are a few examples, useful for team meetings, presentations,
one-to-one counselling or self-reminder, particularly to help empathise with
others facing change:
On the Stories section look at 'Murphy's Plough' (negative thinking = obstacle
to change) and 'We've always done it that way' (not questioning need for
change). Both good aids for understanding and explaining why people - all of
us - find it difficult to change assumptions, conditioned thinking, habit,
routine, etc.
Look also at the Monkey Story, as to how policies, practices, attitudes and
even cultures can become established, and how the tendency is to accept
rather than question.
Just as the state of 'unconscious incompetence', needs to be developed into
'conscious competence' to provide a basis for training, so a
person'ssubjective emotion needs to be developed into objectivity before
beginning to help them handle change. None of us is immune from
subjectivity, ignorance or denial. The lessons and reminders found in stories
and analogies can help to show a new clear perspective.
Aesop's Fables section has other short and beautifully simple analogies useful
for illustrating aspects of causing or dealing with change, for example (all on
the Aesop's Fables section):
The Crow and the Pitcher (change being provoked by pressure or necessity)
The North Wind and the Sun (gentle persuasion rather than force)
The Lion and The Ass (enforced change - might is right)
The Crab and his Mother (lead by example and evidence - or you'll not change
people)
The Miller, his Son and the Ass (no single change is likely to please everyone -
everyone wants something different)
The Oak and the Reeds (the need for tolerance - changer or 'changees')
The Rich Man and the Tanner, (time softens change - given time people get
used to things)
The Ass and the Mule (agree to reasonable change now or you can risk far
worse enforced change in the future)

job reorganization, task analysis, job transfer due to IT development or

outsourcing etc

First see the modern principles which underpin successful change. It's not
always easy or perhaps even possible to consider matters at such depth, but
try to if you can, or try to persuade others above in their ivory towers to think
about the fundamental integrity of the situation, instead of short-term profit,
or satisfying greedy shareholders.
There are various approaches to task analysis and job reorganization, whether
prompted by outsourcing or IT development. Generally change process of this
sort is pragmatic, and it's difficult to identify transferable processes,
templates, etc. Examples of projects don't generally find their way into the
public domain, although the likelihood is increasing of government project
pdf's becoming available on the web as this sort of information is increasingly
required to be available to the public. IT vendor case studies and trade
journals of the IT and outsourcing sectors can also provide indicators of best
practice or transferable processes. There are some useful software tools now
available, which are helpful, especially if the change involves a high level of
complexity and a large scale.
As a broad guide when managing this sort of change, these aspects are
important for the process:
 Really understand and clarify mutual expectations about the level of detail
and cost that the project requires. Sometimes it's possible to see it what
you need on a table napkin. The organisational context, and other strategic
drivers, personalities and politics are often more significant influences than
the task analysis.
 If you are a consultant or project manager, agree expectations on a
pragmatic basis. Agree the templates and systems to be used and the the
level of report data required for the decisions to be made.
 Assume that the situation can be improved - it generally can be, so while
it's essential to capture all activities based on current jobs, many of these
can be absorbed, superseded, updated, etc., when you begin to look at the
ideal situation ('blank sheet of paper') possibilities, so;
 A new overview analysis enables fresh unencumbered look at the whole,
which suggests new and better ways of doing things. A flip chart and a few
creative minds are the main pre-requisites. It makes a
great workshop session and is good for creating ownership and buy-in for
major change. It's a good process also to cascade down to departments to
bring out ideas for improved processes and new ways of doing things.
 In terms of capturing all current processes and inputs, the individual job
analysis templates need to enable jobs to be broken down into sub-tasks,
and elements within sub-tasks.
 This is a tricky one, and not practicable in certain X-Theory cultures,
nevertheless, be aware of the high probability of upsetting people whose
jobs are threatened by change and try to develop a way of anticipating and
reducing damaging fall-out. Treat people at risk with the respect they
deserve and avoid keeping them in the dark - involve threatened people
wherever possible so they can see what's happening and why. If possible
encourage the executive team to take the same humane approach, and try
to establish counselling and support resources if none exist already.
 Analyses are more helpful if they identify critical vs essential task elements
- this will help you to help the decision-makers to be more pragmatic (not
least because by applying pressure to some of the 'essential' elements will
reveal them to be habitual dispensable or traditional replaceable elements).
 Flow diagrams identify subtask linkage (inter and intra), variation and
chronology.
 Behaviour needs identifying aside from processes.
 Standards, performance tolerance, % reliability, etc., should be indicated in
task analysis as applicable to the sub-task or activity concerned.

other points about people and change

Strong resistance to change is often rooted in deeply conditioned or

historically reinforced feelings. Patience and tolerance are required to help
people in these situations to see things differently. Bit by bit. There are
examples of this sort of gradual staged change everywhere in the living world.
The Psychological Contract is a significant aspect of change, and offers helpful
models and diagrams in understanding and managing change - potentially at
a very fundamental level.
Also, certain types of people - the
reliable/dependable/steady/habitual/process-oriented types - often find
change very unsettling.
People who welcome change are not generally the best at being able to work
reliably, dependably and follow processes. The reliability/dependability
capabilities are directly opposite character traits to mobility/adaptability
capabilities.
Certain industries and disciplines have a high concentration of staff who need
a strong reliability/dependability personality profile, for example, health
services and nursing, administration, public sector and government
departments, utilities and services; these sectors will tend to have many staff
with character profiles who find change difficult.
See the personality styles page to help understanding about different types of
people.
Age is another factor. Erik Erikson's fascinating Psychosocial Theory is helpful
for understanding that people's priorities and motivations are different
depending on their stage of life.
The more you understand people's needs, the better you will be able to
manage change.
Be mindful of people's strengths and weaknesses. Not everyone welcomes
change. Take the time to understand the people you are dealing with, and
how and why they feel like they do, before you take action.

business development driven change

Business development potentially includes everything involved with the quality

of the business or the organization. Business development planning first
requires establishing the business development aims, and then formulating a
business development strategy, which would comprise some or all of the
following methods of development.
 sales development
 new product development
 new market development
 business organization, shape, structure and processes development (eg,
outsourcing, e-business, etc)
 tools, equipment, plant, logistics and supply-chain development
 people, management and communications (capabilities and training)
development
 strategic partnerships and distribution routes development
 international development
 acquisitions and disposals

Generally business development is partly scientific, and partly subjective,

based on the feelings and wishes of the business owners or CEO. There are
so many ways to develop a business which achieve growth and improvement,
and rarely is just one of these a single best solution. Business development is
what some people call a 'black art', ie., difficult to analyse, and difficult to
apply a replicable process.

fast changing environments

Planning, implementing and managing change in a fast-changing environment

is increasingly the situation in which most organizations now work.
Dynamic environments such as these require dynamic processes, people,
systems and culture, especially for managing change successfully, notably
effectively optimising organizational response to market opportunities and
threats.
Key elements for success:
 Plan long-term broadly - a sound strategic vision, not a specific detailed
plan (the latter is impossible to predict reliably). Detailed five years plans
are out of date two weeks after they are written. Focus on detail for
establishing and measuring delivery of immediate actions, not medium-to-
long-term plans.
 Establish forums and communicating methods to enable immediate review
and decision-making. Participation of interested people is essential. This
 enables their input to be gained, their approval and commitment to be
secured, and automatically takes care of communicating the actions and
expectations.
 Empower people to make decisions at a local operating level - delegate
responsibility and power as much as possible (or at least encourage people
to make recommendations which can be quickly approved).
 Remove (as far as is possible) from strategic change and approval
processes and teams (or circumvent) any ultra-cautious, ultra-autocratic or
compulsively-interfering executives. Autocracy and interference are the
biggest obstacles to establishing a successful and sustainable dynamic
culture and capability.
 Encourage, enable and develop capable people to be active in other areas
of the organization via 'virtual teams' and 'matrix management'.
 Scrutinise and optimise ICT (information and communications technology)
systems to enable effective information management and key activity team-
working.
 Use workshops as a vehicle to review priorities, agree broad medium-to-
long-term vision and aims, and to agree short term action plans and
implementation method and accountabilities.
 Adjust recruitment, training and development to accelerate the
development of people who contribute positively to a culture of empowered
dynamism.

'troubleshooting' tips for investigating apparent poor performance

If you are ever give the job of 'troubleshooting' or investigating (apparent)

poor performance, perhaps in another location or business belonging to your
own organisation, or perhaps as a consultancy project, here are some simple
tips:
Actually 'troubleshooting' isn't a great word - it scares people. Use 'facilitator'
or 'helper' instead. It sets a more helpful and cooperative tone.
On which point, you could well find that the main issue will be people's
resistance and defensiveness to someone coming in to their organisation do
what you are doing. When you overcome that challenge, then you can start
comparing what's happening with what the organisation sets out to do
(mission, values, goals, priorities, targets, key performance indicators,
processes, measures); how the people feel about things (staff turnover,
retention, morale, attitudes); and how customers and suppliers feel about
things too (actually go out and visit customers, and ex-customers
particularly).
You must observe protocols very diligently - introduce yourself properly to
people and explain who you are and what you are doing. Don't assume that
your task gives you the right to be secretive, or to have access to anyone or
anything without permission. Ask for help. Ask for introductions. Ask for
permission. Be polite and courteous. Respect people more than you would do
normally, because they will be sensitive, understandably so.
Look at the Sharon Drew Morgen facilitation method, which helps with the
style and approach you should use. You must aim to help, enable and
facilitate discovery and clarity, not work in splendid isolation, as an outsider,
who's come to 'sort things out'.
And then be led by the people there as to what can be improved. You should
adopt the role of a researcher and enabler rather than a problem solver.
Plan lots of questions that will help people to tell you how they feel about
things - customers and staff and suppliers - and what they think can be done
to improve things.
Avoid asking 'why' unless they're really trusting you and working with you.
Used early, 'why' puts people on the defence and you'll not find out anything.
Look at the customer relationship materials as well - customers will tell you
what's best to focus on, and will give you an early opportunity to facilitate
some improvement responses. Also look at the employee motivation survey
material.
It's likely that you'll have to write a report and recommendations afterwards,
in which case try wherever possible to involve the people in what you say
about them. Let there be no surprises. Be constructive. Accentuate the
positive. Be straight and open with people.
Enjoy the experience. Be respectful and helpful to people and they'll be
respectful and helpful to you.