|
|
The nice thing about blogging is that you can dream.
Here is a list of Magic project prerequisites (before I wake up):
- An early date to start (within days of the idea for the change).
- The owner (where the money starts) as client.
- Peers of the owner interested in meeting you and discussing the change.
- A PMO looking for strategic assistance.
- A PMO that understands anything bigger than a project HAS to have a senior change management consultant.
- A PMO that realizes number 5 is even more effective when external.
- Middle of the organization leadership competencies.
- No Gatekeepers.
- One person review of communications (and not an internal communications person).
- Willingness to do an early talking heads video.
- Realistic compensation (not what procurement people call “market rate”) at least twice the salary this senior level of talent would get paid if an employee.
- A DIRECT relationship- no second, third and fourth party barriers (to compensation and contracting expectations- in both directions consultant and client).
- Budgeting for the roles of training, communications and tactical change management (for at least each program if not project).
- Willing and eager to learn internal resources.
- The right tools or at least the chance to use your own computer (loaded with the right tools).
- Aversion to the statement, “that’s the way we do things around here”.
- Comfort of, and curiosity for, the word, WHY.
- Empathy (from the owner down or from the line stakeholder up).
- Scheduling flexibility- this is a head role not a hand role, the consultant does not necessarily need to be on site all the time.
- Performance measured by the smooth flow of change (not hours put in- that was our high school job).
Twenty is a good start.
What this magic list is about is respect for a seasoned, reasoned external perspective. What this magic list is about are leaders who take responsibility for their roles as both visionaries and guides for change journeys. What this list is about is people doing work that connects to something important. It is a list about something important being the lever for shared work.
And then I wake up…
Technorati Tags: Buyer, C level, CCM, CEO, change failure, change management, change management consultant, change management strategy, Change Strategy, Context, corporate change management, engagement, executive communications, External Consultant, Fees, horizontal change management, PMO, Value, vision to work
To start a week long team meeting with a client we had categories of things to plan spread over a whiteboard. It became a doodle pad and a big giant area to cover. I was fascinated by the dance of filling out information. One by one ideas were put in the right place, things were expanded on, sentences were edited and languaging was clarified.
It could not have turned out better if it had been planned. It could not have turned out better facilitated. It was truly organic.
Now I am thinking… why not do that on purpose knowing how well the process plays out. A Whiteboard for Change.
Ingredients for the Whiteboard for Change
Time-
because it is the ability to dialogue, add in, expand and question that got the good stuff on the board.
Different expertise-
this mix of people happened to be technical, change management, leaders, operations, finance and project managers.
The sense that nothing is permanent-
the board did get erased and redone in spots for clarification (yet no one erased without consensus, which was cool).
A sense of permanence-
It was there the next morning, to question and to reaffirm.
Big space-
because big picture needs room and visuals have more effect when they are big.
Small text-
the level of detail (this is fascinating) was reflected in the size of the written font (the smaller the more detail).
Color-
once a color got used it acquired a meaning (typical things like red to stand out, heavy black to emphasize and lots of blue for comfort).
Erasure-
something as good as this has to have closure, so the board was scrubbed clean on Friday (after the cell phones clicked pictures, of course).
A blank whiteboard a week with your team, some color and an open but focused perspective are your ingredients for this effective exercise.
Technorati Tags: business objectives, Change Design, change excercise, Communication, excercise
When budgeting for change initiatives it is important to separate what used to be considered one role into three- the ACTUAL change management person, a dedicated training person and a communications/administration assistant. If you do not the the CM will be spending ALL of their time on training documentation, email lists and scheduling rooms. You will have a very expensive administrative assistant.
If you hamstring your CM into training and administration:
- Little time will be spent branding the initiative for visibility and to organize information
- Forget brown bag sessions (so you lose translation of vision to work, feedback for design, the chance to assuage fears, etc.)
- You will have little visibility for CM since that person will be locked to their computer creating low level deliverables
- Important connections to leadership and decision making will be nonexistent
- You will not be able to have the CM travel on a road show early in the initiative
- Since you really will not have change management there will be a big credibility hit for the next time around
- The training might not be that good (most of us came out of that background but have chosen to build to a different level)
- The scheduling will take longer than normal
As a leader think of the change management person as the expert external consultant. Consulting is guiding, mentoring, offering advice, steering in better directions, lots of connecting and relationship building, anticipation of roadblocks and human issues etc. That takes experience and skill. Both are wasted when you think the CM role is for training and communications.
Technorati Tags: budgeting, Buyer, Change Design, change management consultant, change management strategy, External Consultant, Fees
While digging through an endless list of available templates and “tools” at a large organization with an established PM/CM process it dawned on me that the whole system is geared toward those carrying out the change. Everything is about replacing the old with the new, transitioning, impact (worded in a way that sounds like resistance is inevitable and the “impact” will be the surge back at the project team).
Change does not happen if the stakeholders do not do something different. The plan should be looking at that- in other words the end state and the actions, learning and behavior needed to get there. Once that is determined then an honest look at the present can be made.
A perspective more like- here is the end, this is what we need, we have this but not that, this does not fit into that picture. By the time the “conversation” (mirrored by the change/project process) gets to the “this does not fit in” the stakeholders could be making the list for the team. In fact with this approach I have found the stakeholders well ahead of the project team in their movement to the end state, many times.
For 2011 and on a new conversation needs to be had around organizational change. (it is happening slowly but surely in a couple of LinkedIn forums). The current conversation and approach, grabbed from way back, usually unsubstantiated and visibly detrimental to true change is not working. Just switching from end to beginning instead of now to then would make a difference with any approach.
Technorati Tags: Big Picture, Buyer, C level, change awareness, Change Design, change failure, change management, change management strategy, corporate change management, End State, Garrett Gitchell, vision to work
Still this word impact is effecting me.
I think it is a business word. And that is where it seems to make sense and work.
If there is a project, program or initiative what can be impacted from a business perspective?
-
Resources
-
Budgets
-
Operations
-
Time
-
Bandwidth in General
Change requires commitments at different levels separate from the money coming from the owner. Someone at the project level with an operational focus that is a stakeholder in multiple initiatives my be asked to provide (or give up) at the project, program, initiative and operational level. There are some “buck stops here” spots when it comes to the hands on work. That has an impact.
The word works when you are talking about effect on day to day operations.
Resources
Many times work, in addition to operations, comes with the request, “ you will need to provide… fill in the blank FTE’s”. The resource requests also extend to administrative support (even though there is more administrative support at higher levels in the organization).
Budgets
When the project/program/initiative needs are known ahead of time (usually rare) there is an expectation that budgets will be adjusted accordingly. When there is less pre warning budgets must be adjusted mid stream, which is a huge hit to operations.
Time
Maybe specific resources are not asked for. Maybe there is no request for budget manipulation. Maybe there is just an expectation that time will be allotted to this effort. Time, of course, is money.
The second version of time hits is scope creep. We said you would be responsible for this, but things have changed. Now you are responsible for this… and that.
Operations
All of this means operations will take a hit. Smart project/program/initiative plans take this into consideration. Of course the performance measurement program never does. That is the toughest operational hit of all. People are often asked to do things that do not line up with the way they are compensated.
Bandwidth in General
A little like time, but more insidious. Bandwidth is that area in your mind that comes up with stuff. The place that produces bursts of energy to get things done. The area that has a finite measure of potential effort expenditure. Our previous categories all steal from that bandwidth storage.
All of this is part of the business side of things beyond operational interaction. Throw real change in there (which, unfortunately has the same type of requests that appear in different ways) and you have impact.
I am learning to make a translation from the business version to a change version.
We (the project and change team) can come close to measuring the effect our requests will have from a business operational perspective. Now as a change person I must ask the extra questions about what that will do to individuals, teams and functions in relation to this change. How much will that effect hinder the path to new behaviors and the end state?
Because no change agent wants to participate in an effort that is doomed not because of the change itself, but because of the IMPACT of everything else thrown around in the organization.
Technorati Tags: Big Picture, business objectives, corporate change management, engagement, resistance to change
With the assumption that strategy is formulating a plan and Tactics are making it happen- in the graphic above silver is strategy, green tactics and dark green heavy tactics. That is the mix across the whole change process. Smart effective strategy sets up the smooth roll out of a project plan, change tactics and tactical implementation.
Except that it NEVER works that way (if you are high level executive willing to do this right please prove me wrong). It looks a little more like this:
Tactics have bled into the strategic area, usually because of a project focused (versus program oriented) viewpoint. Execution, lists, getting things done (with little question for their necessity) stretches out the green band. It is elastic to the point where what is called strategy is actually the first tactical steps. Once you “start” strategy becomes high level tactics- call it strategic implementation.
Where does change management usually get dropped?
Right in the yellow danger circle. Danger because if that is where change management starts there will be fires to fight. When you fight fires you do not hesitate to destroy quick burning things in the way…
When asked this question what is my answer?
If change is front loaded (that is my client speak word for change starting where it should)
then 100% strategy soon supported by tactics to build the strategy, followed by an increase in tactics to almost 100%, with an increase of the strategy percentage and decrease in the tactical percentage to prepare for the next change as Adoption approaches.
The Adoption phase itself (post change management with my graphic) is a strange mix of strategy for the next thing, tactics to finish off the last and strategic implementation with is a certain kind of tactic.
Disclosure: I have a strategy perspective. Tactics are fantastic, but too often they are “lists too long”. You can have strategy without tactics (although nothing happens). Tactics without strategy are hit or miss- a little like my 10 year old insisting she can do something without ever having tried, let alone gathered any information. There are times when she gets it right though…
The correct balance of strategy and tactics needed for effective change is rare. Organizations tend to lean heavy on tactics to the detriment of change. Just what is the right percentage?
Technorati Tags: Big Picture, business objectives, Change Design, change failure, Garrett Gitchell, vision to work
I get this question from mid level managers, internal communication people, third paryt sourcing firms and other consultants. On the surface it seems like a reasonable request. In reality it is irrelevant. And if your consultant disagrees you might want to ask them a few questions to gauge their approach. If you are asking because you honestly do not understand what CM is and how it plays out I will cut you slack, but you still are asking the wrong question.
- Plans in general
- Change Management as a predetermined plan
- How CM is viewed
- What it really should be
- The answer
Plans in general
The ultimate in plans that could be shown to someone is the project plan- both a plan and a timeline. If someone showed you one of those plans though what would it tell you? Phases, tasks, expected (and completed if an old project) and completed timeframes maybe a few other nitpicky tidbits. Would you know whether it was theirs or someone else’s, straight off the web perhaps?
Maybe it will tell you a little about the consultants talent and expertise. But didn’t you get a resume or a bio?
Plans are interesting to look at, reading for curiosity, but not representative in any way of your initiative. And, frankly (if you had not thought of this) only worthwhile if they are one from your competitor. That would, of course, be scrubbed to invisible by the consultant.
Change Management as a predetermined plan
Digging deeper and getting sillier is to ask for a change management plan. These look a lot like the plans from above with CM components instead of Project Management components. Those who whip out their plans (and frankly the clients who think that will illustrate good, senior change management) are looking at this with blinders. It is impossible to have a predetermined plan that someone can pull out of a portfolio. This is not graphic arts.
In fairness there may be a version that illustrates phases of CM within project streams and there may be a generic high level version that illustrates CM components. If the question is out of curiosity then generic might satisfy.
If your consultant or firm is anxious to show you and oh so happy you asked (look at the gleam in their eyes) you might want to consider a little more screening.
How CM is viewed
As I have said before CM is not project management. A version of CM, the kind that falls under the bigger umbrella of Corporate Change Management and/or enterprise change management glides along with PM. Without the higher level support, especially with multiple programs running horizontal and transformational, that type of CM has a very high failure rate.
If you are only doing the layered kind of CM the question makes sense (a little bit). What would be better is to show them a sample timeline of yours and ask them to layer over change components and activities and heaven forbid deliverables too.
What it (CM) really should be
A lot of in and out within the timeline. A constant presence early, throughout, at the end and as a looping mechanism. A method for connecting ideas and the work of people. A way to make end states clear and accessible. A conduit for collaboration and communication.
So the “plan” has early interaction to define end states, gather resources and estimate competencies. It has early connection in the gathering of that information with leaders, subject matter experts, naysayers and cheerleaders. It has a big fat project timeline (with a lot of potential branching streams of work). The big fat timelines look a lot like PM except they are people focused. At the end it has measurement to be fed to the next change process.
Maybe that is the plan you are looking for with the question?
The answer
No. Because, as you can see, it really misses the point, it probably infringes on previous client confidentiality, it may be insulting (remember you have the resume and the bio) and instantly producing the answer misses the first/best chance to illustrate what change management SHOULD be about.
Since I get this question so much I have begun to put together a generic picture (although my Vision to Work site already has methodology and a model and a timeline) of what this might look like from the questioners eyes. With that I can make some translations…
The question, “do you have a sample change management plan you can show me” illustrates a certain perspective from the questioner (or, fairly, perhaps just curiosity) and is an excellent first chance to explain what CM should be. Hint: the explanation does not include a sample plan.
Technorati Tags: Big Picture, Buyer, CCM, change awareness, Change Design, change management, External Consultant, Insights
How often do you find yourself in your own life saying, “wow this is not how I thought it would turn out”?
How often do you get to a place in time and think,”I can’t remember what I thought this spot would look like”?
Or how often do you ask yourself if your current end state is the one you really planned for or expected?
Sometimes change is best understood by using a little hindsight
Take social media.
Is it turning out the way you expected? Is it being used the way you thought it would? Is it tweaking and changing culture in a predictable manner?
Take any service provider as an example.
With the advent of social media there was suddenly a way to introduce yourself to the world. If you got on the front end of each of the waves of blogging, Facebook pages and Twitter-ing you got instant access to huge numbers of people that had the time to check this new thing out. It was easy to represent what you did to lots of people and they willingly threw their contact information around like paper airplanes. It was not a stretch to monetize that connection.
With a little time though the space began to fill up; the novelty began to wear off; the time wasting began to be obvious and the pocket books began to shut tight.
In hindsight you could see that with the reduced number of people commenting on blogs, forums and discussion threads. You could see the reaction (if you paid attention) in the level of intensity that things, ideas, perspectives and opinions were laid out there. You could see the competition for attention increase. You could see the inevitable reaction to that with contact information being withheld (or at least held much closer). You could certainly have predicted the entrance of Spammers (not that you would have known what to call them- in hindsight think of the choice words we have now!). Now we have referrer spam which is just the vacuum of opportunity sucking the slippery in a little faster.
It would have been nice if the web and social media could have stayed a fantastic exchange of knowledge, know-how, information, facts and interaction without the negative. Ah, but life has its balances. For every fantastic there is always an unpleasant. In the case of service providers for every give away there really needs to be an equal dose of revenue.
…which leads to the baiting of info. that we have now. Teaser, give me your email, pay for the next one, but I will still throw teasers your way (for some, incessant teasers).
What’s this got to do with Change Management?
I am learning with my own approach to hash out with clients some “what if?” scenarios on the “it didn’t turn out as rosy as we thought” side. Adding some pretend hindsight by thinking back from the end state tends to reveal things that might happen to make end states less rosy. Those scenarios then help to address “inevitables” early or to prepare stakeholders for more practical versions of end states.
Looking at the way previous attempts at things have turned out gives you a little hindsight ammunition too. Were there predictable reactions that likely will be repeated with this new change? Is there a version of the change that will work better than another? Back to social media, it is puzzling that video phone calling has not taken off- until you think back on all those times you answered the phone in your jammies (or worse).
Some things are fairly easy to see with a little hindsight. Some of those things are tough to overcome no matter the happily drawn end state (and in our video case multiple false starts to make it happen).
Here is a little current hindsight for you
There is a lot of restlessness out there in the business environment. It is hard to see past the tension and, sometimes, bitterness. Wages the same as 1979 (I can give you countless examples), the appearance of no inflation while housing and medical skyrocketed (along with education which made for a triple hit) and an absolute tank of equity and retirement value. Hindsight from 2 years from now? Tons of churn in the job market.
EVERYONE wants to move to a new spot (who wouldn’t with the discomfort of the current). Unless there is a move internally to compensate for this- rebuilding career paths, raises, some stimulating forward movement, new people from new jobs- people will be looking elsewhere. Things change fast. As soon as companies begin to hire the floodgates of movement will begin.
EVERY change initiative at this point should be taking this into consideration. Every change initiative should always look backward from a year from now to get a sense of how things might turn out. And that has EVERTHING to do with change management.
Technorati Tags: Big Picture, change excercise, corporate change management, resistance to change, stakeholders, strategy, vision, vision to work
“Of the 288 senior executives surveyed this year from around the world, the top two objectives for change management initiatives were increasing revenue (55 percent) and preparing their organizations for the future (52 percent). Last year, 66 percent of respondents cited cost reduction as the primary goal.”
Leaders of Change study from The Economist & Celerant Consulting http://tinyurl.com/4g9ag4l
At least in the minds of executives, growth is right around the corner (and since the study was last year we are at the corner).
Here is my own graph of business past:
Think about that question mark.
If your revenue fell 70% over the last two years (at least in consulting that number seems to ring true) think of how easy it will be to make your numbers this year. That 20% growth rate is, as my daughters would say, “waaaaay” smaller than it was before. At what point does possibility overcome fear? At what point does possibility become possible?
And, of course, what does that mean for change management?
Revenue
The last couple of years organizations have had an inward focus- tighten, strip, consolidate. Gathering up revenue necessitates an outward focus.
- Outward focus is heavy on representation of something (product or service) so the end state description is geared toward the customer/client.
- There is an opportunity to illustrate CM’s ability to make the gathering up of resources easier (revenue tied to the CM expenditure that is not as direct as internal change).
- A light shines on the supply chain- the quicker the avenue to the end state, change (or sale) the more effective, productive and speedy.
- The four walls of the box of things to address just moved out farther (which has both potential and difficulty).
Preparing for the future
Change management that aims farther in to the future must tie tighter to strategy. It must be higher in the organization. It must be heavy on the front end (especially when there is still fear, hesitation and wallets in the front pocket).
- CM as an avenue for and driver of resource development both internal and external. This is not the time to come up with an idea, fill in the vacant positions and instantly act for the sake of action (urgency + simple quick wins= missteps).
- Now is the perfect time to consider how change will be guided and directed in the future- how each initiative will build on the next for capacity and capability.
- A corporate change entity? Now is the perfect time.
- Integrating a “best place to work” mentality and communication. The best places to work have effective feedback loops, are efficient, use the skill of individuals wisely (and proactively) and foster an environment of collaboration (which is the opposite of the everyone for themselves attitude of the last 5+ years).
Change Management for growth and revenue building is a forward thinking, strategic process. Loading the front end, thinking of organizational layers that can be addressed within the change process along with assessing and developing capability and capacity is the CM of 2011 and beyond.
Technorati Tags: Big Picture, business objectives, C level, CCM, CEO, Change, change management, change management consultant, change management strategy, Garrett Gitchell, horizontal change management, vision to work
Who says change management has to be simply about implementation, adoption and behavioral change?
Why can’t it also be about Possibilities.
There is finally talk, although whispered and overpowered by objections, about innovation. That type of change comes in a couple of forms- from scratch in a garage and out of a supporting foundation. The first is the light bulb idea with lots of passion (and time commitment). The second can come out of the question,
“What if…”
If you are not asking yourself what if at work and in your personal life you are too grounded, too held back or… unimaginative.
What if idea
What if always leads to an idea. Multiple what ifs leads to multiple ideas- or a better first idea. Change begins with what ifs. Change is enhanced by what ifs. Risk, even, can be supported by what ifs. Who says your first approach, perspective method has the best risk management? The opposite of asking what ifs to create new ideas is status quo. Status quo is typically unimaginative and risky.
What if process
Here is where I ask a lot of what ifs because as an external many of the processes I see make little sense. Process, in our global connected world, typically must branch out on sideways paths to include disparate stakeholders. As an external practitioner if I can’t guide to the what ifs I will have to ask why. Why do you do this?…when it does not make sense if you look at a bigger picture.
The “not make sense” often shows itself with many more steps and tasks than are needed to get to the goal.
What if… we did this? What if a different person/function/leader did this? What if less people were involved? What if more people were involved?
What if design
For true designers in any profession this is easy. It is deciding amongst all the ideas that is hard. For change, design can mean the overall picture (which would include process, procedures, communication, training, leadership etc.) or it can mean the specific design of each piece. I always think of the general term design as another question, “what does this look like?”. Specifically what graphically does this look like and generally how would this come together (usually shown with a white board or back of the napkin graphic).
What if collaboration
My favorite since I base my business on the idea of horizontal connections.
What if…
One function did a little of the work that usually falls on another function? Two leaders were equally responsible for a piece of change or the whole change process? Cross functional teams were set up at the beginning of the process? Cross functional team came together at specific spots on the change timeline? External influence was added? We did this differently than the past? (this what if thing is a continual process stimulated by action rather than stopped).
What if Devil’s Advocate
Not going away this resistance thing. Neither are the reasons or the people that put it there in the first place. Human nature has some immovable components. But what if…we let the Devil’s Advocates have the floor to use the same question to show us what might happen. Let them bring the storms, the earthquakes, the doom and gloom. Every tsunami has its high spot. Every crack from an earthquake has its edge. Doom and gloom is predictable, avoidable and very easy to just skip around with a different attitude/perspective.
Let those naysayers have their version of what if. It is the exchange that is the valuable part of the process.
High level change management, the kind that deals with the whole organization and all of its resources, MUST ask what if questions. While mid level change may not have much flexibility for big picture solutions it does have process and people. What if questions work there too.
Technorati Tags: Big Picture, change excercise, corporate change management, strategy, vision to work
|
Garrett’s Linkedin profile
|
