WHAT IS CHANGE MANAGEMENT?

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.

change management

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).

Most Common Change Management Mistakes Companies Make

We are occasionally asked about mistakes that we see companies make related to organizational change management. In reflecting back over several years and many client engagements, below are the most common mistakes that we have seen.

1) Not Seeking Outside Expertise

Rarely do companies have deep change management expertise, though some are seeking to build this capability inhouse. Typically companies expect their leaders and employees to foster stability, eliminate process deviation, and minimize risk in business operations—and are rewarded for doing so. Expecting these same people to introduce change and “rock the boat” is somewhat unnatural and runs counter to the normal, expected behaviors. What is usually the primary benefit of in-house employees—they know the company intimately—can be a drawback in large-scale change initiatives and create conflicts of interest. On the other hand, change consultants work with many companies day in and day out, which gives them a broader perspective.

Many people think of good change consultants as expensive. However, a good consultant can save money. First, because hiring someone in-house with that expertise could cost much more (think fixed expense vs. variable expense), and second, because the consultants have highly specialized knowledge difficult to find in an employee, consultants can identify areas of vulnerability—such as organizational misalignment, team inefficiencies, or counterproductive leadership behaviors—which, if not addressed, could cause a financial problems down the road.

Finally, change consultants are able to get things done quickly. Consultants’ highly specialized knowledge makes them extremely efficient. In contrast, in-house employees have “day jobs” and often many different projects competing for their attention. There is no substitute for the expertise, independence, and objectivity that an experienced change management consultant can bring to bear on the business initiative.

2) Short-Cutting the Change Process

Change is a process, not a single event. Organizational change does not happen instantaneously as the result of a kick-off meeting, announcement memo, or go-live date. Individuals do not change simply because they received an email or attended a training program. When people experience change, they move from what they had known and done, through a period of transition to arrive at a desired new way of behaving and doing their jobs.

In Bridges’ 1991 seminal book Managing Transitions, he explains how “transition” is different from change and why it takes longer. Bridges’ model highlights three stages of transition that people go through when they experience change: 1) Ending, Losing, and Letting Go. 2) The Neutral Zone. 3) The New Beginning. People will go through each stage at their own pace. For example, those who are comfortable with the change will likely move ahead to stage three quickly, while others will linger at stages one or two.

By short-cutting the change process, companies mistakenly believing that all of the that all of their people have made the transition and are onboard. As a result, leaders disband the change management effort prematurely, cease to communicate, and stop engaging stakeholders too soon. Consequently, unexpected problems and resistance crop up but are not dealt with. Left unattended, these can undermine the value of the business initiatives and its benefits. The greater the degree of change that has been introduced into the organization, the longer the organizational change “sustainability” phase that is required.

change management

3) Executive Delegating Change Leadership Responsibility

Successful change initiatives require strong committed executive sponsorship through the entire project. When proactive executive sponsorship is lacking, the risks are manifold, such as stakeholders believing the “wrong” people are leading the effort. We have witnessed instances where executive sponsors have kicked off initiatives and were not seen or heard from again; sponsors who were uninformed of their initiative’s progress and unsure how to help; and sponsors not clear about what priority an initiative had among multiple business objectives.

At a minimum, there should be at least one senior executive designated as the overall sponsor and clearly accountable for the initiative. This executive should provide active and visible support for the project, including:

•     Supporting the program team by removing barriers and obstacles
•     Sharing the vision of the future in clear and compelling terms
•     Highlighting the many benefits of the business initiative
•     Gaining buy-in from other senior executives who are his/her peers

4) Under-Funding the Change Management Effort

We see this mistake often and it’s pennywise and pound foolish. Companies need to budget specifically for organizational change activities. A 2011 Gartner survey found that companies under-invest in organizational change management. Companies allocate, on average, only 5% of the overall system implementation budget to the change management effort. Gartner recommends that companies allocate an average of 15% of the program budget to organizational change management, inclusive of training — but more, if changes are significant or the corporate culture is more change-averse.

5) Not Integrating Change Management with Program Management

Organizational change management executed well is a critical component of the program’s success. Therefore change management activities should be integrated into the program structure. Practically speaking, this can be a separate plan, with the critical milestones listed on the master program or project plan. The likelihood of program success is greatly diminished when the change management activities are “bolted on” as an afterthought or the change management experts are not given a seat at the table alongside the rest of the program team members. Treat organizational change management as being of equal importance as the technical aspects of the implementation.

The Importance of Change Management in Deploying A Strategy, Lets Learn From The Past!

An interesting article written by Susan Hall was posted yesterday at ITBusinessEdge.com about how ERP implementation specialists are in high demand.  The article says that even though things have improved, many companies continue to struggle with ERP implementations.  Later in this blog I will talk about why ERP and many Talent Management deployments are similar.

Referencing a Panorama Consulting study that was released back in February 2011, the Hall notes that 54 percent of companies said their ERP projects took longer than expected and 56 percent spent more than expected.  Half the companies derived fewer business benefits than expected.

On the bright side, this is an improvement over the 2010 study that found 70 percent of ERP projects took longer than expected.  The percentage of those who said their implementation cost more than expected was about the same in 2010, 56 percent.

So there is no slowdown in the demand for ERP specialists, with SAP skills in particular high demand.  At the same time, SAP skills ranked No. 6 on Dice’s most recent list of the hardest jobs to fill, according to the article.

The folks at Panorama, analyzing the results, cited lack of project controls and unrealistic expectations as reason ERP projects go over budget, but believe the main reason is the tendency of organizations to focus on software-related costs, while neglecting the costs associated with organizational change management, which – in their words – “bring tremendous pain to the company.”


ERP implementation failure is something we hear often about because when they go bad they not only result in lawsuits, the pain is really felt throughout the entire organization.  People lose their jobs.

Interestingly, talent management systems and HR point solutions often suffer many of the same failures in budget and time overruns, as well as limited (real or perceived) business value… they just do it in on a slightly smaller stage.  Whether you’re deploying, not implementing a new goal tracking system, a talent management suite, or a full blown ERP, you must understand that your are betting all your chips on being able to garner user adoption – this is a fancy way of saying  you need to get employees to do something different.

It seems simple enough.  After all, you spent all this money trying to make their lives easier, right?  Why wouldn’t they change their behavior?  Why wouldn’t they click a few more buttons, or enter a few more bits of data, or spend a few more minutes to get all those juicy benefits?  Well guess what, the best technology without a “whats in it for me”; the me being the employee, makes the best technology as bad as the worst technology.

Why do organizations continue to make this mistake? I can’t answer that.  If I could, I would bottle and sell the solution and retire a very wealthy man.  What I can tell you is that at Knowledge Infusion we work with clients everyday doing technology deployments of all types and sizes, and no matter what, nobody is prepared for managing the post “go-live” changes – unless they have a strategy. 

What we have learned is that a proactive, comprehensive change management strategy helps organizations not only prepare for deploying their workforce solutions, it also helps key stakeholder groups adapt to new ways of doing things.  We do this by assessing organizational readiness as well as driving awareness and engagement and infusing some “marketing”, which is sometimes a bad word, but a sorely needed skill when deploying any strategy.

Having a solid change management strategy also helps extend the success of your implementation well beyond “go-live” but by building a sustainment plan to support ongoing changes – and you will have ongoing changes.

So, I have to ask: Is your organization prepared for the changes associated with implementing new behaviors, processes and technologies?  Well, have you…

•     Identified what key stakeholder groups inside HR need to effectively adopt and adapt to changes associated with your deployment?
•     Heard the ‘voice of the customer’ from the workforce?  Can you respond in a way that shows the customer you’re listening?
•     Identified change champions to help drive the value proposition and “WIIFM” message to reduce the level of resistance and anxiety across the workforce?
•     Defined how you will measure success both before and after go-live? How about how you will collect feedback to make ongoing improvements?
•     Developed a thorough change plan that outlines the marketing, communications, training and support mechanisms to keep the workforce engaged?
•     Considered how branding can enhance awareness and engagement throughout this process?
•     Taken into consideration the generational (both demographics and technographic) variances across your workforce and how process changes will impact them differently?

If your answer to any of these questions is not an unequivocal “YES,” then your organization is not prepared for change, and you definitely need a change management strategy.

C.S. Lewis is quoted as saying, “It may be hard for an egg to turn into a bird: it would be a jolly sight harder for it to learn to fly while remaining an egg.  We are like eggs at present. And you cannot go on indefinitely being just an ordinary, decent egg.  We must be hatched or go bad.”

Lets not waste an era of great technology by doing things the way we have in the past.  Systems of the past were designed for the HR department, technologies of today are designed for the workforce.  What does this mean, somethings got to change!

Change management?

Instilling supportive behaviours

Effective change management is much more than introducing a new set of processes or practices. Its about getting to grips with how the new environment will look and feel and what behaviours will enable your organisation to thrive. Instilling a set of supportive behaviours to underpin your organisation is essential to achieve your goals.

Change comes from doing things and behaving differently. Built from the top, your leaders need to understand the crucial role they play, and be coached to practice the new way of working and behaving, so that it spreads virally.

Change management agents, often the “opinion leaders”, should be mobilised within your organisation to really drive and embed the desired culture. People listen to people, and the best way to encourage change is through the trusted and respected people that form the bedrock of your organisation.

Change Management

Effective Communication

Bland progress updates contribute very little towards the success of a project. Employees will probably be inundated with various communications all vying for attention – so yours will need to stand out.

Your approach to communications and engagement should deliver effective, targeted communications which are on time, on brand and on message.

Youll need to identify and prioritise your stakeholders, analyse and segment your audience and then build a key message framework to form the bedrock of your messaging. This means that therell be a familiarity and consistency to your communications, which is essential considering the complexity of change management programmes nowadays.

Think about what communication channels you have available by conducting an in-depth channel analysis. Therell often be gaps to fill, thats when you get creative, but often you should be able to work with what you have. This will help ensure the most appropriate and effective channel is used for each message.

Finally, and probably the most neglected part of a communications strategy, is measurement. A useful trick of the trade is to begin with the end in mind, which will help you learn and make changes along the way. Capture what success look like, and develop ways to check the pulse of the organisation as your change management programme develops, then act on the insight and put the end user at the heart of your approach.

Embedding Change

Delivering a change management  programme doesnt end on its immediate completion. Change needs to stand the test of time and be fit for the future. Your new way of working will need be sufficiently embedded within your organisation to ensure it really sticks when challenged.

Recognising the symptoms of change fatigue can be key in ensuring the success of your programme. By its very nature, change can be unwieldy and unstable. No amount of advanced planning can absolutely guarantee success. Its often what happens after completion that determines whether youve achieved your goals or not.

There are a number of ways to demonstrate that the change is actually the way we do things now:

provide a steady stream of evidence proving that the new way of working is happening and being successful reward alignment with the new way of working and evidence the required behaviours

build it into the fabric of your organisations systems, standards and process, and refer to it in your business strategy measure your progress by aligning personal development plans to recognise the new way of working

Making Change Stick is a tricky business, and while most companies are able to make change happen its those that understand that the process doesnt stop when the final milestone is delivered, that can really thrive.

Change Management- Primer

The purpose of this paper is to provide a broad overview of the concept of “change management.” It was written primarily for people who are coming to grips with change management problems for the first time and for more experienced people who wish to reflect upon their experience in a structured way.

Four Basic Definitions

In thinking about what is meant by “change management,” at least four basic definitions come to mind:

1. The task of managing change.

2. An area of professional practice.

3. A body of knowledge.

4. A control mechanism.

Change Management