|
|
Something like 4 million people have looked at this video http://tinyurl.com/2rzrn9. In case it takes more views than that to saturate the You Tube market I give you the link. It is about education, the future (told in 2006) and a whole bunch of fun and intriguing facts. You will also quickly see it is about how things around us change- our environment, our resources, our tools and our capabilities.
And, I have to give this plug, it is an awesome, simple, clear use of black and color.
This is one of the best media presentations I have seen in the way it rolls out information, is fun, has no fluff and uses all of the screen wisely (which to me means lots of space). It uses the space with movement, stillness, appearance of important items at the right time (and not too fast and not too glaring) and, again, color.
Now for the editorial comment-
Juxtapose this video with the way change management is presented and rolled out.
Certainly I will give up the black (not truly a color anyway) but not color in general. Color can be used to categorize communications, illustrate emotion (the whole red is fire, blue is cool strength thing), differentiate timelines, place things in an exact spot (with a relation to things around it) and just plain make things more interesting. Which introduces another aspect of the word color- the commentator kind. CM is typically colorless (maybe due to the automatic assumption that people say no before yes). Start out with a clean lack of color (white) or all color (black) slate and add or take away to build interest, increase attention and make business and change a little more like real life. Yes I mean that metaphorically, but as you can see in the video it works literally for presentations too.
Technorati Tags: Big Picture, change communications, communicate, Communications, engagement, Examples, Garrett Gitchell, vision to work
There is something very enjoyable about opportunities to “toot our own horns”. It feels good to hear yourself acknowledge your own success. If the toot elicits a welcome response all the better. Of course I am assuming here an accomplishment vetted in our own heads (not braggadocio).
And so you say, “what does this have to do with change management?”. I’m glad you asked. One up on hearing my own horn tooting is to encourage others to do the same. How often are we given genuine permission to lay out our tackled obstacles?
If you are guiding change as a leader or practitioner this is a tool in your belt- the ability to reveal pride in work. Use it. Use it to reaffirm success. Use it to increase future participation. Use it as an easy way to reward. Use it for dialogue. Cheat a little if you want and use it to possibly get a return platform to spread your feathers.
We need to language a term for this.
Objectives empathy… ? Invitational reward? An acronym? TYH?
I am taking the opportunity while I have your attention to toot my own horn. Here is my own favorite blog post from horizontal change- http://horizontalchange.com/2010/07/c-level-change-management-primer/ (no tiny URL’s for this one!).
It is my favorite because it actually helps me each time I look at it (I, of course, hope that is also true for my readers). It lays out the major areas and the major players in big change. I had fun with words and content alignment. It is one of those posts that begs more. Like a John Irving book kept on the nightstand for a year, closed (I have done that twice now) and ready, it waits to be read.
There my horn has stopped, thanks for the chance.
Technorati Tags: change management consultant, Communications, engagement, stakeholders
This is where all third party firms and most consulting firms believe you as a client should reside- in their stable. Once they weasel their way in to your inner circle or directly to you (disclosure- of course I also have to do this part) they want to “own” you like a Kentucky rancher. Any use of you for any reason that has to do with their connection, in their scheme, requires a fee. The more valuable you are to the other ranchers the higher the fee. This might work for raising horses. For consulting it makes no sense to you or to the consultants who can provide service (the actual solution) to you directly (note the ranchers were left out of this sentence).
Enter the non-compete clause.
This is the fear clause that staffing firms, employers and (IMHO) paranoid consulting firms put in their contracts. For an excellent post on this as an issue look here- http://tinyurl.com/4ddpd. Thankfully here in California that clause according to CA code 16600 is unenforceable and often illegal. In my dealings I choose to sign and ignore (although now I am reading of firms that use the court process to bleed/victimize the secondary party knowing full well they themselves are in the wrong).
Why is this important to you the client?
- A barrier (and a big one) has just been placed between you and your solution. If any continued work with you has a 40% fee cut included you will either have to increase your budget or lose the consultant to higher paid direct roles.
- Someone else is trying to screen your decision making process.
- Someone else is keeping resources at arms distance (or more) from you.
- You begin with a consultant who may not be too thrilled with the contracting arrangement.
- You build in a permanent “telephone game” with an unnecessary person(s) inserted into all of your communication with the consultant
- You add time. For interactions with clients that take a day or two I have often needed a week or more with third parties. How long do you want to wait to begin that engagement?
Time, money and control all taken away from you by the needless fear of non-competes. I am guessing those are three things you hold dear as a client and business person.
Technorati Tags: Buyer, External Consultant, Fees, Value, vision to work
Your stakeholders are most likely frozen with eyes wide open thanks to the last couple of turbulent and less than promising years.
Think of the deer transfixed by the headlights. They are not exactly scared; they do not seem to be curious; they are spell bound. Honk the horn and they do not move. Blink the lights, the same. Turn off the lights and they stand there wondering what to do, with their attention fixated as though by a spell (one of the definitions of transfixed- here are some others http://tinyurl.com/2cn5cmq).
As a C level leader what to do?
- Acknowledge
- Sum up your organizations recent past
- Leverage the good
- Own up to the bad
- Describe the future
- Create and manage a transition period
Acknowledge
Whether or not any given individual found themselves in the glaring lights does not matter. We have all seen, heard or been touched by the nasty spell of economic downturn. That must be acknowledged. Since you, as a leader, are part of the herd too, some of your own personal examples might help. Acknowledgement does not mean a continuation of negative and pessimistic perspectives. You must ease yourself out of the headlights and look ahead.
The Past
As in the last, let’s say, two years.
Odds are you tightened the purse strings, your are lean, maybe you even had some time for retrospection and introspection on an organizational level. If you were smart you took advantage of the slowdown. Put that all together in a message and sum it up in a tidy package as if you and the organization have already moved past that spot into a positive and more profitable future.
The Good
Is most likely represented in cold numbers to show smart consolidation. Tread lightly here since most stakeholders will not see the good in anything from the recent past (unless they owned it, then they will appreciate the connection). The best way to transition from difficult situations is to look at how the time was managed. If individually or collectively as an organization you did what you could then there will be good. If you are the deer or you have let the herd stand in the road for a long time…
Own up
There are plenty of times when we do what we can and what we think is right, practical and responsible only to find in hindsight we were on the wrong track. Use that hindsight to your advantage to illustrate not what could have been but why your process got you to where you are. Doing this well will give you a foundation for process and structure improvements to tag onto initiatives tomorrow.
New End States
Your first instinct in transitioning out of yesterday and into tomorrow is probably to illustrate a clear vision. Be careful here. You are likely to articulate a vision you wish for. In between is the one you want. Better to dig into the one you need. By you I mean literally you, but also the organization and its individuals. Think and communicate in terms of practical end states. Heavily load your change management front end to come up with clear, shorter length attainable end states that have easy participation points.
Transition
The headlights were particularly glaring for the deer in your herd this time around. The car has stopped; the herd is safe. Guide them off the road slowly and smoothly. Because of the participation and engagement needed with front end change management transition is built in. The addition of inordinately positive external resources (if they also have a full quiver of empathy) can help you to time the transition period. Do not with run blindly across the road at this point. The last thing you need is for fear to turn to panic.
Every difficult situation is a leverage point for the future. The deer in the headlights is not scared, just mildly stunned. Take advantage of the fact that in the headlights, for a brief moment all is calm, centered and in the moment. The perfect foundation for positive change.
Technorati Tags: C level, CEO, change management consultant, Change Strategy, executive communications, Garrett Gitchell, strategy, vision, vision to work
Companies have hoarded cash. They are lean and trim. The foot is on the throttle; the hand at the gearshift. Fear is about to switch to anticipation. Once the accelerator is pushed and the up shifting begins there will be BIG change.
Are you an executive in the drivers seat?
That little space there between the twitching fingers and the gearshift is the most appropriate place to insert high level change management. That space, from the stirrings I have seen in the last couple of months, is now.
What do you need to consider and act on to jump start the change process?
Readiness
Not my favorite term as you know if you have read previous posts. This time it fits. Because this time you will want to gauge the overall feeling of your culture. Are they ready for tires burning? Or have they been so ground down and made to be scared from the last year or so that you have some executive communicating to do? You want to look at readiness in general not for any specific initiative. And by readiness I mean the capacity to strap in for the ride. If it is not there then some core parts of the change process need to be done well and communicated to the individual level.
Strategy
If it was strong and well communicated throughout the economic turmoil then Kudos. Odds are it was a an exercise in trimming, reducing, stopping and stalling. Not a good foundation for the change process. And not a foundation for trust with new strategy to move forward. Make sure the redo makes sense, communicate and re-communicate with individual stakeholders in mind. This is the spot to build trust, calm the culture and transition from fear to anticipation.
End States
Leverage your strategy into clear, attainable, but innovative end states. Don’t apologize for the trimming, but don’t ignore it either. If the reason you have the cash stockpiles to change is your cost cutting strategy then let the change come from that. And make sure your organization knows you are moving forward because of the previous strategy.
Development
Who did you lose? Who did you keep? How much time and money do you need to now invest to build back competency and capability? You can use the change from first gear on to help with the development (a core ingredient to our approach at Vision to Work- change and develop at the same time).
Resources
Consulting will grow next year. Transitioning from fear to anticipation and action will require intense energy and motivation to get work done. That will come much faster from hungry consultants. Just make sure as the leader with the wallet you pick firms that enjoy and feel ethically that they should be teaching and developing your people for the eventual exit of the consultant (hint small firms to independent- NOT big firms).
Those consulting firms, or individuals who build a team, should be assessing your competency and leadership gaps, temporarily filling them in and guiding you to replacement (or using their peer network to actually find them for you).
You can’t gun the engine just yet. You must turn fear into action. In this environment you have change within change- call it recovery to change.
Technorati Tags: business objectives, C level, CEO, change awareness, change management consultant, stakeholders, strategy, vision to work
How often do you find yourself spending what you consider too much time installing or putting together the things in your life?
I found myself there today with the installation of a garage hoist (really cool to push a button and have your stuff just magically make its way up into the ceiling- nice end state). As a change manager I know a process made of steps to get to an ending should be clear, understandable and maybe even enjoyable. Thanks to some really weak and un-thought out directions I have found myself swearing through the opposite too many times- add today and it is waaaay too many.
Is it up or down? Do the two holes go on the left or the right? This bolt or that bolt? Is there anything I need to know before I start?
As it happened today I installed not one hoist but two.
A little like a second engagement with the same client. And in the same way the parts had been improved (lag screws instead of ridiculous hex head screws- 4” long and bendable like putty) but the process, and the directions, were still faulty.
What does all this have to do with change?
Directions
All change has at some point ,directions. They may be as literal as a guide to keystrokes or as vague as hidden expectations from a leader. Those directions worded (or pictured) and/or delivered poorly can create real obstacles to change. Real unnecessary obstacles. (There were a few times today when I thought, this is just dumb, I should have used cabinets). A little like, “whose dumb idea from corporate was this?”. Don’t let yourself have a good idea with a clear end state and then use a bad map on poor pavement.
So-
- Use pictures, graphs, images when they can really pinpoint something
- Put everything in context to the preceding and the following
- Put time (knowing it is both a deadline and a constraint) on things when you know it is possible
- If you can try out your directions first by all means do so (including those “marching orders”)
- If it is technical in nature please include someone with design sense
- Use space in pictures, for relationships on time lines and when you are presenting/communicating (because there are always directions built in to those interchanges)
- If there is something strange up ahead call it out early (and suggesting someone “read through the directions first” does not count- two reads of a bad explanation do not make clarity)
- Be careful how many bullet points you use- I had to stick that in there- a little like telling a kid No, you only get so many chances for effect
Look at your change process. See it as a journey with a series of steps. Make those steps clear. Be embarrassed when your stakeholders finish with “a pile of parts leftover”.
Technorati Tags: business objectives, change failure, Garrett Gitchell, vision to work
Communicating for Change Management serves three purposes- to motivate, to guide and to provide place.
Place
We are going backwards from my list to illustrate a point. Most change management methods, and the consultants who practice them, move forward in time with my list. Not so effective. Not so effective because place gets lost in the mix. “Place” is the work of an individual in relation to the whole. When communicated well each stakeholder can explain how their work fits in to the bigger picture, how it connects to the next person and how it leverages the work of the previous stakeholder. At any given time place could mean a lot of things with a lot of connections. It is up to the change team and its leaders to make those connections make sense.
Guide
Having done the job of placing work at a spot in time, communication must address how the whole process moves forward. Actually processes, because there is the list of things to do, the project management, and there is the transition from the now to the end state. That may mean behavior changes, new or different technology, additional or changed interactions, perspective that is not status quo etc. Change communication must help explain these two processes and connect people, individual stakeholders, to the events along the way both to get the work done and to ground a human connection to what may be overwhelming change.
Motivate
I am guessing the cheerleaders on the sideline have little to do with the effort put forth by the players in the last minutes of the game. Change works the same. Cheering, amping up a sense of urgency, creating tension may start the play (and our change) fast and furious. The shelf life for that effect is short. Motivation, the kind that moves people forward by choice and deep down commitment is the third purpose in line. With place and clear guidance (read reason and a measure of safety/assurance) motivation appears on its own. Communication within the change process then becomes an exercise in illustrating the good, the positive, the examples of overcoming, effectiveness, commitment and extra effort by individuals
As a stakeholder if I cannot explain my exact spot at any given time, if I am not aware of what is to come and what has passed and if I am not given a reason to connect to the change in my own way, change management has failed.
Technorati Tags: change communications, engagement, Garrett Gitchell, stakeholders, vision to work
Things begin to pick up for business (less fear, willingness to spend hoarded cash, new competition appearing from garages- not sure which is the cause, but things are picking up in the change arena) and the revisiting begins. Change anew. Except some of it is the programs that were cancelled a year or more ago. How is restarted change different?
History Doubled
The ability to move change forward is always effected by previous attempts (bad or good). To start something that did not finish on the first attempt is potentially tempting fate. If, in our current case, the economy can be blamed for the earlier stop, starting again just slots right into the business environment.
Care must be taken with communication for a restart because, excuses aside, a mistake was made. Sure, as a leader you do not think so – it was all part of the plan. The problem is to stakeholders it must not have been a good plan. Now the Pandora’s box of trust, faith in leaders (which is a specific kind of trust), I told you so’s and the appearance of mishaps is opened.
Address the double history issue with crystal clear as transparent as possible communications. You might want to recheck and possibly rethink the new plan- the last thing you want is two historical mishaps.
Second Chances
Everybody believes in second chances. You have one if you are restarting change. Some of your work may already be completed. Redo work can be done better. Mistakes can be corrected. And acknowledged. Which leads me to the “be careful”.
By necessity taking this second chance is assuming empathy. There is a difference between restarted change and any other- the empathy has to flow from the stakeholders to the leaders. Empathy should (I always hesitate to use this word, but it fits now) go from leaders to stakeholders, that is a given. To go both ways sets up an interesting dynamic. Maybe I should have said an effective dynamic because the core of relationships connected to accomplishments is shared empathy. Give it a double dose on your second chance restarts.
Rebuilding is impressive
Taking what you have, envisioning something different and better and then layering in additions is smart change. As with any remodel matching the old lines to the new can be difficult. Because that is an obvious component of rebuilding/remodeling everyone is impressed when the result is seamless. With your restart this is an opening for a view of the end state that includes overcoming and tackling obstacles.
For that to make sense as an explanation there must be honesty, transparency and camaraderie around stops and starts and the end states they can create.
With that you can restart and rebuild at the same time.
Technorati Tags: change communications, change failure, change management, End State, engagement, Garrett Gitchell, resistance to change, stakeholders, vision to work
As an external consultant there is always a fine line between honoring “the way we do things here” and pushing for and guiding change. Many, if not most, organizations have a tie to processes, structure and communication that is hard to break. Here are some areas to keep in mind in terms of the status quo of cultural loyalty:
Group Think
Group think helps people with consistency, clarity and sameness (which is comforting if you keep your viewpoint narrow). It homogenizes to the point where almost everything is predictable. The longer the tenure for an employee the greater the need to stick to the norms-cultural loyalty.
It is surprising how many times at an individual level cultural loyalty (CL) is questioned. The questioning typically (especially if drawn out by a CM practitioner) produces smart, viable alternatives. If that person does not have authority or leverage those alternatives die quickly.
Internal Politics
Patterns appear over time in organizations that are a direct result of the jostling and wrestling for position by individuals. That positioning tends to work the best when the jostler follows the path of least resistance. That path is the road to the way we do things here. So you end up with a structure that rewards and reinforces the status quo.
Functional Loyalty
The same patterns but much harder to break occur at a functional level. Certain functions tend to have more leverage than others (usually because they bring in revenue which, on the surface at least, makes sense). Those functions then match their group think against others. What you end up with is a secondary level of loyalty to culture-functional loyalty. Which is a synonym for a silo.
Founder(s) Influence
The majority of the time the patterns that replicate within the silos and cultural pods in an organization are the result of the founder(s) initial vision, values and business direction. Emulating that package tends to move individuals up the ladder. The more that spreads the more group think builds and the harder to break the way we do things becomes. Another secondary level exists here when the organization gets big enough for the functional leaders to steer their own vision and approach.
Guiding change at the transformational/horizontal level requires the ability to frame the “make sense” communication in order to replace the CL that is holding back change and growth. In my own practice I have found that I must take the difficult step of working with leaders to tweak structure and process before trying to touch cultural and functional loyalty. The same pattern happens with the change process itself. Often there are underlying structural and process weaknesses that will make complete fulfillment of the end state close to impossible.
The fine line approach is to draw out the CL that makes collaboration, negotiating and compromise possible.
Technorati Tags: Big Picture, CEO, change awareness, Change Design, change management, Change Strategy, External Consultant, Garrett Gitchell, horizontal change management, resistance to change, stakeholders, vision to work
When it exists is like a sponge. It pulls in until it fills to capacity.
This is something to consider, leverage and acknowledge for change management. It is not necessarily something to be fed and nurtured.
What is Loyalty in the context of change management?
Loyalty to the cause
This is a connection to the core purpose of the change that creates interest, motivation and action. A technologist may quickly be on board for an IT implementation (or not of course). Someone sitting in HR may jump right on board for a human capital initiative. A senior executive may pencil in more and more free space on their calendar for dialogue and exchange for a program that touches their function.
Loyalty to the company
This is the version we think of when we see the word loyalty tied to work or workplace. It might infer staying power in terms of retention, it might mean atmosphere and culture, it might mean the tenacity with which people stick to goals/strategy/plans. It might even be the level of evangelism from participants extending outside internal operations-social marketing.
Ongoing connection
Loyalty that is truly strong is ongoing. Loyalty has a distinct time connection and a measure of strength over that time frame. Ideally it is increasing strength-measured differently for each individual and/or stakeholder.
Which brings me to the sponge.
Loyalty has both a pull and a maximum limit. The expectation of loyalty in change management often creates that maximum limit quickly. This is the common pattern of project/change management- shove something in, assume loyalty and get-…wait for it…Resistance.
Thankfully loyalty has a rosy side too. The pull. The more things (our things being change) make sense and connect in some way the smoother and more powerful the pull. Loyalty tends to spread easily once the pull begins. Charismatic leaders can help with the pull- someone has to communicate the “make sense”. The pull tends to produce evangelists who can increase the speed and, at times, the capacity of the pull.
When it is strong loyalty should be acknowledged within the change process. The acknowledgement can be kudos in communications, illustrations of commitment, examples of time saved through dedication and collaboration, etc. This is the right approach for feeding/nurturing/leveraging loyalty.
What does not always makes sense is rewarding loyalty.
Think of the expectations airline miles have created. Think of the backlash about blackout periods. Rewarded loyalty has a scale of expectations that increases quickly which decreases loyalty if not continuously fed.
Loyalty’s dark side is group think, retention of the lowest common denominator and potentially reduced innovation. In terms of change management the dark side is models and approaches that make incorrect assumptions or are based on internal best practices. The way we do it, a form of cultural loyalty, may not always be the most efficient or effective (effective adding a human capital component).
Keeping all this in mind, change management can build loyalty by rewarding skill and showing how that skill connects to end states and the health of the change entity. If compensation structures do the same bonuses can be added that tie to change participation.
Kudos always work. They work because they are after the fact and specific. Incentives are the opposite, before and general. They do not work so well because of the expectations they create.
When it comes to loyalty, specifically reward rather than generally encourage.
Technorati Tags: Big Picture, change awareness, change communications, Change Design, change management, engagement, Garrett Gitchell, resistance to change, stakeholders, vision to work
|
|
