|
|
Tactics definition: any mode of procedure for gaining advantage or success. Dictionary.com
Following these tips will DEFINITLY give you an advantage. Your competitors are not paying attention to this:
- Decrease the distance between leaders and individual stakeholders
- Base steps toward the end state on expertise
- Use change to build competencies
- Adapt your PM system to reflect the end state
- Spend more time talking and less time writing things down
Leadership distance
Any procedure, system or approach that connects stakeholders more directly with leadership will give you an advantage. A regular update from executives in a newsletter or on the project website is the easiest, lowest level tactic. The same regularity in person, or at least with an interactive virtual session is second. Most effective is presence, in person, throughout the initiative in a variety of places for a variety of reasons (connecting the change to the end state and operations).
Expertise
Think expertise for all of the steps of your plan.
Each task in a plan requires a person with skill. Leverage, build and acknowledge both skill and the use of skill (competency) in any way you can.
Competencies
Same as expertise, but the extension- knowing and using capability and capacity. Competencies, and the individuals that carry them, need to be tactically spread onto the change management chessboard. Since business is ultimately a competition you may need tactical moves to protect lack of competency. Enter external consultants for helping you figure that out and contractors to temporarily add missing competencies.
Performance Management
Your performance management system is the record of how well you are doing with tactics. Each suggestions/goal/reward connects with an overall strategy. Those little tactical pieces, developed and accomplished by individuals, should be recorded, monitored and adjusted through the PM system.
Look in hindsight back when you finish change. Did your PM roadmaps build to the end state or just reinforce a subjective status quo?
Dialogue/Communication
Tactical Change Management relies heavily on templates and deliverables (and staying parked in a cubicle filling them out). Change tactics (whether with that form of CM or as part of a broader strategy) should focus on spending the right amount of time in person connecting, explaining end states to and guiding stakeholders. You are looking to address all of the learning styles and to have people hear, see, read, and, in a perfect world, feel and touch your end state, your plan and the steps to get there.
Gaining advantage with change and successfully getting to end states requires a long series of tactical moves, determined through a strong strategic plan with an early and throughout change process. Decreasing the distance between leaders and stakeholders; using expertise; building competencies; keeping track of and rewarding those skills and communicating in multiple ways as close to in person as possible will give you advantage and speed your change.
Technorati Tags: business objectives, CEO, change awareness, change communications, Change Design, change management consultant, change management strategy, Garrett Gitchell, stakeholders, vision to work
A recent McKinsey article, “Finding the Right Place to Change” illustrates a well thought out approach to directing efforts to the place in the organization that will adapt for the end state (of course not the way the authors worded it). What is interesting is that the approach focuses on finding the spot (people) where change will be the greatest and directing extra efforts there. That gets points on its own.
In the particular case they mentioned they switched from “communication” and “road shows” (in quotes because both look good on paper but tend to come across as sales pitches) to training and competency development. Again excellent stand alone.
Admittedly it is hard to pull the whole thought process out of one article, but there does not seem to have been a real leadership component to this change. As is typical it took an organic approach. A “starting in the middle” (the authors words) tactical perspective right after an organizational redesign that eliminated a middle layer of supervision and leadership.
With that restructure change blocking was not there anymore (or eliminated, out of the way, non-existent). The connection between senior leaders and line stakeholders should then have been an easy exercise (to set up anyway, getting it to work is a different exercise). Yet there is little (actually no) mention in the article of executive ownership, engagement and participation.
So even a big, successful firm like a McKinsey caters to leadership deferral…
(There is certainly revenue there).
Technorati Tags: change awareness, change communications, Change Design, change excercise, leadership
Most initiatives now are global. Many initiatives, and organizations, have some form of work at home option. At the initiative level extra pieces are now added (I have been on initiatives that had space moves, software upgrades, business process design and organizational redesign all at once) which increase the spread- increased spread equals some sort of virtual connection. To be all in one place, meeting together and talking face to face is not only rare now it is almost impossible.
How has this helped?
Work at home makes it much easier for stakeholders and team members to manage work and family. My own kids soccer games seem to fall at the same time as conference calls (unless my parents are talking to themselves).
The global nature of organizations and the change that creates brings in many different perspectives and tweaks to process. In the past we had to wait for those perspectives to arrive- now we are in the moment with exchange.
Since meetings do not apply to each individual at every moment (but to some at certain times) other work gets done at the same time. Taking notes was the extent of the multitasking when we met in the same room.
How has this hindered?
Virtual has created avenues for deferral. “Out of sight, out of mind” certainly applies.
Misinterpretation abounds. Without the ability to match voice to facial expressions meaning gets confused (and motive gets hidden). Tone of voice is easier to disguise than a look in the eye.
Collaboration on deliverables is clunky. Although I must admit the tools available are helping us catch up. (Now understanding the ways we absorb information needs to be added to the mix- Excel rules while drawing programs remain with the graphics people).
Here are some tips:
- Leverage Awareness Sessions- Answering questions is the change management of our times. Interactive sessions organized with clear content and knowledgeable subject matter experts, along with the participation of the leader owner, are the best way to connect when you cannot be there in person. Using video can help at least give a sense of presence.
- Use the phone- I personally believe in the efficiency of instant messaging, but at the point you begin to feel like a typing student you might want to just call. Most organizations have a pattern of setting up a meeting before any phone calling occurs. This is good for efficiency, but bad for spontaneity and one to one connection. Voice to voice unscripted is one step down from in person (and one step up from other virtual communication).
- Go back in time- Use personal notes. They obviously work best for things that are timeless like Thank You’s and Kudos. They can also be effective if you have something to say to a senior leader that is not being heard.
- Rotate team meetings- Plan on travel from team members to outlying work groups and conduct regular meetings from those locations. This is incredibly powerful. You get connection from face to face and you get empathy within the core team as they see the difficulties of communicating without close proximity.
- Use regular updates and tailor them to groups- Regular updates (not too regular though- I have been sucked in to daily updates that take a lot of time away without much extra benefit) are fantastic. Regular updates tailored to the recipients even better. If communication is being repurposed or cascaded why not add a couple of paragraphs from the functional leader to add Voice to the connection?
- Meet in person (for crying out loud)- Am I the only one that thinks five or six people on the phone within visual distance (headsets echoing every time one of them talks) is ridiculous?
- Go outside!- Your environment is virtual. I assume you have a noise cancelling headset (with a special bird, blower, car honk setting)? Get outside. The extra vitamin D will keep you around for many more meetings and the fresh air will go straight to your voice and, just maybe, your tone of voice.
Virtual environments are here to stay. It takes a little adapting but there are distinct advantages to non-collocated work.
Technorati Tags: C level, change communications, change management, communicate, Communication, Communications, engagement, Executive, executive communications
Change management consultant suggests an executive communication. Executive agrees and say, “Send a draft 90% complete to my assistant”.
What is wrong with this picture?
- We are not employees (I am including internal CM’s in this mix).
- Voice is essential to change success
- Change Management is not Internal Communications
- This is a meal best cooked with few chefs
We are not employees
Change management begins to fail when the consultant acts like an employee.
Everywhere the practice of change management is about getting around status quo.
Employees send drafts and wait for endless rounds of “approval” (really filtering to flavorless).
Consultants might send a list of bullets points to put a wrapper around a communication. They might even write a few words to give ideas. They are not practicing good CM if they are writing the message.
If you are a consultant do not let this happen. If you are an executive client stop passing the buck and avoiding a connection between you and your change initiative.
Voice is essential to change success
Voice is the tone, the wording, the way in which one person represents something. Voice can illustrate charisma (which can be compelling for change). Voice can make things scary less so. Voice can reinforce confidence- both in the speaker and for something (the change we hope). Multiple voices can put a different “sound”, a different take on vision, change and end states.
People respond to voice.
When voice is not present people usually do the opposite- no response (some practitioners call that resistance).
The 90% communication has no voice. It comes out bland, layered with steps and selling points, dry to the bone.
Change Management is not Internal Communications
Which brings me to Internal Communications. While many of those messages are content filled and informative they rarely have much voice. They are delivered by people who love to write things down and have others read them. That is fantastic for the role of an Internal Communicator.
Not so for a change management consultant.
They should be helping to deliver messages that have the perspective of the stakeholder and/or leaders. Both in some communications, both in separate, together for the same initiative is the best mix. 90% communications do not do that. Or they do that so well it is obvious to the stakeholders the CM wrote all of the messages and the leader signed it- just like they did before the change management person was brought in.
This is a meal best cooked with few chefs
I haven’t mentioned that assistant.
Executives have actually called them “my BCM assistant”. LinkedIn is close enough to be able to disprove that every time. Those assistants NEVER have a BCM background. Even if they did, their job, as an employee with the title of assistant, is to make little if no waves for that leader. The more they sand down the messages the safer things will be. In the CM world that equals weak, ineffectual leadership and change that does not happen.
Every one of the layers that are placed on process equals one more step back toward status quo and one more cook in the kitchen adding their own spice.
One review from someone I trust for different reasons depending on the communication- that is the approach I take.
Although I must admit I have had a few “holiday” type communications where I ask for lots of advice and input (to get to my own version of 90%).
I bring this little post to you because I keep getting versions of “bring something to me, my people will touch it up and we can check it off” from senior executives. Not the way change management works. And in fact one of the reasons we have CM in the first place. Executives: This is YOUR change initiative not mine. They want to hear from YOU not me. They want to see and hear and read YOUR commitment not anyone else’s. Change Management consultants: If you are letting the 90% exchange happen then you are acting like an employee. They, by necessity, must follow status quo. That’s not change management.
Technorati Tags: C level, change communications, executive communications, External Consultant
The change management arena has changed, morphed, matured (in a way) over the last couple of years. Because of austerity everywhere CM is needed more than ever (and that is acknowledged by leaders= yes finally). There is also the typical push to try to keep things inside- internal change management practitioners. (and there is the strange compromise of contractors who are treated like employees and only rarely get away with consulting).
Thanks to this switch of environment I find myself getting into more thorough explanations of what change management actually is (and does).
My quick answer is that good, knowledgeable consultants not under the influence of any particular CM Kool Aid facilitate “the little extra”.
By contrast the less experienced, and often the internal consultants (who are first less experienced and second employees, which is an impossible combination for any high level change) go crazy with process and deliverables and templates and measuring. The Little Extra takes time, resources and experience.
The Little Extra
An example.
One of the most helpful CM deliverables (yes one I agree with!) is a video of stakeholders from various groups discussing and commenting on the change. Picture any form of “talking heads” video. Maybe its edgy, maybe it reflective, maybe its energetic. Go to town over your love of the deliverable (in this case I am with you).
Keep in mind though: This may just be another level of noise.
And really anyone these days can produce a video.
The Little Extra is the interaction that can take place as a result of the production. See for a CM the production is not the creation of the video. The production is leveraging all the connections made during the filming (do not sub this out). My current version will include a third horizontal leader (Fortune 10), GM’s, users, team members and implementary leaders within functions. When, if ever, does one person talk to all of those people in a period of less than a month?
A bee comes to mind, racing from flower to flower to gather the nectar for some awesome honey.
First getting something like this to happen is full on CM at a high level. But someone internal might (big big might) be able to pull this off. Leveraging the pollination to create cross functional activity is the little extra. If you pay attention to the order you can carry information from one function, across, to another. That is not only a little extra but a big one.
The production/deliverable is one element; the effect/result another (requiring a “little extra”).
Technorati Tags: Big Picture, business objectives, C level, change communications, change excercise, change management consultant, engagement, External Consultant
One hundred projects, six programs, multiple initiatives and one major multi-year transformation (not necessarily including all the previous). That is one sample function. Yes I did say function rather than company. One user at the end of the line could potentially be receiving communication from 150+ different sources. This is typical of Fortune 50 firms (and scalable for smaller companies).
Wow. The noise is (must be) deafening.
What to do about this as a leader, a change management consultant or a communications person?
- High level strategic change management
- Communication correctness
- Interactivity
- Media/Medium
High level Strategic Change Management
It seems, lately, to have fallen on the senior change management consultants to call out the silliness of upwards of 100 projects in EACH vertical. As an outsider I see this as a glaring example of the weakness of strategy in most organizations. The amount of projects seems to correlate with the amount of “inclusion” and “collaboration” (two words that mean no one makes decisions because everyone has to agree) within the organization.
A couple of good decisions could cut the number in half.
That would be in a perfect non-existent world. Plan B is to work at the highest levels to clearly understand the difference between a project, a program, an initiative and transformation. Then combine, rename and reduce duplication of effort.
By doing so you have at least begun to remove the Structural Noise.
Communication correctness
Even without the high level fix communication that is going out can be looked at for timing, amount and kind of content, and frequency.
Timing
Announce early how you will communicate and how often. Address leadership communication and broad messages early in your timeline. Separate tracks of communication that are project oriented. Deliver the right communication to the right people at the right time.
Content
Label it with templates (remember the announce how you will communicate- they will know which type of content by the template).
Separate it into categories, bullets or items for easier reception and deeper understanding.
Mix it up. We see, hear, talk, listen, watch. All of those things help us to be aware and understand. Use them advantageously.
Frequency
Don’t let anyone tell you the more communication the better. Even perfect comms. delivered endlessly fall on deaf ears (or blind eyes).
The frequency should be enough to get the point across- always introductions to phases, kudos for closure of a milestone and important updates. There are even times when daily updates make sense- say during testing or in situations where there is constant and heavy interaction.
Interactivity
When there is too much noise we have to ignore it. If the noise moves from one spot to another though we suddenly pay attention (however fleeting that attention may be). Make your noise more interesting than others. Use video, use links, use feedback mechanisms, have comment sections, use forums, even relay back in some way water cooler information that would be helpful to all.
Keep in mind this motto (my own). If it moves there has to be a reason (other than beating out the communication competition). We are not talking about PowerPoint animation overload.
Media/Medium
How does it get there? Do these listeners use that medium? I rarely look at videos unless I need to learn something (even then it might be faster to read since videos often have a whole lot of intro and summary fluff). Someone else may choose to never read and always want to watch. Make sure we both can get to your content.
Then there is the media within the medium. Your internet may be the medium and SharePoint your media. If you have used SharePoint you know how quickly the noise gets cranked up. If you create a folder to try to organize the link addresses get miles long. Just make sure once at the landing spot people can find the content.
I consider all of these areas when I am trying to figure out how to conquer client noise. Communication- right amount, to the right place, from the right sender, easy to find, easy to absorb.
Here is a hint though: Develop a voice to voice plan that can spread to add a little insurance.
Socializing is one version. Using champions that people listen to is another. Getting as high up the ladder of leadership for senders is another.
Don’t crank up the noise. That will just irritate your listeners..
Technorati Tags: change communications, change failure, Change Strategy, Communications, corporate change management, corporate strategy, engagement, organizational change
When explaining change management to stakeholders, especially those tasked with implementing the change, I find myself using these three words:
- Expectations
- Promises
- Consistency
Expectations
Those fearful, or simply apprehensive, about change don’t know what to expect. They tend to focus on all of the things they have no control over rather than the positives to come. In order to have them listen, so they can be aware and then participate, it helps to set some expectations up front. Expectations that have to do with the project process, the interaction and the collaboration for the change are a nice balance to the ambiguity of the future.
In this category falls an explanation of how communication will roll out. When will it be in person? Where will supporting information be stored? What is the timing for announcements and updates. Anything that can be done to both set expectations and address confusion will help to calm nerves.
Promises
So make some promises.
You can promise a certain level of interaction or availability.
Promise specifics around training.
Illustrate how you will support the change- both getting there and maintaining the new.
Promises build connection and trust.
Both are valuable commodities for change.
Consistency
If expectations are set and promises are made, consistency will be established. The first thing you should do when change is imminent is develop some pattern of consistency to transition into the change.
Regular meetings help.
Regular communication helps.
Aligned voices and vision (still keep some individuality though) are comforting and supportive.
Regular patterns within the project stream (say a process the organization has used before or tools that are familiar) also help.
Change is fluid, often confusing and usually unpredictable. That needs to be balanced by trust and inclusion. Set expectations, make promises and keep them, while being conscious of the things you can do (that do not effect the move to the change) that are consistent. Your stakeholders will thank you for it by participating.
Technorati Tags: change communications, Communications, engagement
On big initiatives and in hierarchical organizations (which is all of them- a lot of needed changes are because of this) change management, and project management more so, relies on others. Obviously change management is about getting things to happen through people. It has another level though.
Second (and third) levels of Change Management
Typically there is a broad version of change management that occurs at the leadership and project level. That covers everything up to the distinct project track. That part is a direct connection between the CM and stakeholders. The stakeholder group up to the project track is manageable and can be connected to in some way.
The next level, the second level, is when the change needs to be communicated and socialized within functional units. It is difficult to make a connection to those stakeholders. That is usually because of the cascading process most organizations have for communication (cascade works well down and up silos- not so well out and broad cross functionally).
To make that connection requires reliance on stakeholders within the silos.
So some tips:
1. Don’t assume those leaders understand change management. If they do it is likely a “no one ever wants to change” perspective.
2. Don’t assume they know how their silo communicates (ask a lot of questions of them and maybe a few of their end stakeholders).
3. Don’t assume the messages they send actually hit home in the way intended. Seeing things from a stakeholders’ perspective is a learned competency.
4. Don’t assume their senior leaders are on board (or understand the first 3 tips).
5. Don’t assume the silo project leaders know their senior leaders should be on board.
6. Don’t assume.
Don’t assume. And yet for a lot of things you have to. And you have to trust those leaders to do the right thing for their functions. The key to both might be making sure they understand the big picture, the picture from the end stakeholders’ viewpoint and the connection between the two. Call that the 80% and cross your fingers approach.
Technorati Tags: assumptions, cascading communications, change communications, Communications, hierarchy
Here is an interesting problem I have noticed in our virtual, global world- genuinely connecting to the farthest stakeholder. The would be the line user/employee likely parked in India, Malaysia or Africa. Distance, lack of broadband and the simple fact that they are literally and figuratively the greatest distance away from the change make it difficult to communicate. Add to that the fact that large organizations typically frown on blanket emails (say you have 10,000 people involved in the change- these stakeholders are in the last 1,000).
What you get (or are forced to use) is cascading communications, reliance on middle level leader/implementers, functional translation (we were trying to break those very silos weren’t we?).
My own work a rounds?
- “Pull” landing spots- wikis, web sites, help centers, SharePoint, collaboration sites.
- Power Point decks, PDF’s, videos, audio, Forums, FAQ’s all placed on those landing sites.
- Leadership virtual presence- “corners”, monthly updates (those are sometimes OK for mass mailings depending on how high the leader is), guest posts on other project sites, announcements at various company portals.
- Road shows- still always popular, still “expensive” though.
- Virtual brown bags- another pull (invitations can often be sent in mass).
- Open mike virtual sessions with leaders- held in a room so at least some stakeholders get collocation.
- Open mike virtual session with leader participation in different locations- a town hall multi-webinar.
- The phone- not very efficient or effective en masse, but pinpoint connection to one individual.
You can certainly leverage a cascading message approach to develop leaders, to utilize leaders who get it and can communicate that knowledge. You will always lose something in the translation though. It is best to create as many leader to end stakeholder connections as possible. This strengthens the end state description. It also builds trust. Hint: High level leader add a promise you know you can keep and stick to it. Then that direct connection is worth is weight in gold- for this initiative AND the next.
Technorati Tags: change communications, change excercise, Communications, Context, engagement, horizontal change management
You can communicate every possible thing through every possible formal channel you have and not get behavioral change.
“We’ve said that a million times… there are five or six places to go to get that information…”.
How many times have I heard that refrain (and taken the heat for the appearance of ineffectiveness).
The Next Layer
Behavioral change management (BCM) is the next layer. Think of communications as the things you say. BCM is the things you DO. It is also the things you SHOW. Third it is your ability to paint a picture of the end state (and NO you can’t do that with just communication- you’ll have the picture but no one will buy it).
Some things to consider:
· Are you informing as early as possible?
· Are you socializing (preferably in person) before formal communications?
· How about after?
· Are you using this pattern both for owner (the highest leader tied to this change) to end stakeholder and with a cascade through middle leaders?
· Do you have a landing spot for communication and do your leaders go there, appear there and use that information as a reference?
· Do your middle leaders (the implementers) also have a version of a landing spot for business unit specific information (and to help the visibility of the team lead)?
· Are you mixing in sound, sight and movement (video, text, audio, interactive presentations) to compensate for lack of in person exchange?
· Are you doing any kind of an in person road show when your organization is corporate location focused?
· Did you do that very early in the project?
· And to the same people when they were responsible for work and change?
All of this zooms in on the process of informing and making aware to get to understanding and action. It will not happen on the strength of your message or the number of times you say it. It will happen because the change makes sense and your leaders know how to explain and demonstrate getting there (PS that’s change management).
Technorati Tags: change awareness, change communications, change management, horizontal change management
|
Garrett’s Linkedin profile
|
