|
|
||
|
Put together (to continue the last two posts) the change management process and communications lay out a path to turn idea into work then into result/change/solution. With an understanding of what happens to people, process and connection during that journey the leaders and practitioners can help to connect task to big picture and big picture to competency. Successful change management communication informs stakeholders of the time and place for their work. Time- is the relationship of stakeholder work and participation to the total amount of time for the initiative, the time frame of the phase(s) they are included in and the period they will need to accomplish their tasks. Place- is the relationship of that work to participation and tasks that occur before and after their own (and possibly a connection of importance to the bigger picture). Well of course this is simple time and project management right? If we communicate what is happening then we are doing a good job. Historical approaches and a vertical perspectives are not working. The resulting trend is horizontal change management. Horizontal is the positions of equal "rank" within verticals- like VP sales to VP IT. So there are up eight horizontals depending on the size of the organization. The next trend is to place work in context with the whole. The whole being org. strategy, big picture, end state, direction of growth etc. Once a stakeholder knows how their work fits (which motivates them to participate) then they need to know when and with what effort that participation is needed. “Bring me your plans on Monday morning for a 10% reduction of cost in your function”. For many 2009 was the year of cutting costs. For most it was the year of skimming costs. From a practical external perspective this skimming makes little sense. From an empathetic perspective it does, but empathy must always be balanced against profit in business. Unless you, as the executive making the decision, thinks your whole organization is 10% (pick your number) heavy it seems taking away resources everywhere will not only reduce productivity but drag down moral at the same time. One of the things I look for with change engagements is whether or not plans, actions, behaviors and approaches are based on assumptions. Yes, of course, always. As a manager, how do you get your staff to buy-in to a senior management strategy when neither you nor your staff like the strategy?http://preview.tinyurl.com/melpbe This question on LinkedIn illustrates a common change obstacle. It has many mini obstacles, but we will take the main one. “Staff” will not support a strategy and their supervisors join in. The chosen “best” answer is classic. Facilitation, firing, but basically communication is at the core of the problem. Our neighbors knocked down their house to build from scratch. From across the street both watching and chatting I witnessed a change process. They saw a future state for the structure and for their family relationship. They made the calculations and had the discussion necessary to define their end state. The change was a result of difficulties in their current state. And they knew there would be a transition.
|
||
|
Copyright © 2010 Vision to Work, Inc. - All Rights Reserved Bad Behavior has blocked 10 access attempts in the last 7 days. |
||
