Change Management: Beyond Jargon

I've been talking to people involved in change initiatives lately, and I'm often struck by how fuzzy the descriptions are of what is going on.

"We have a four-tiered development model focusing on competencies, excellence in engineering, quality initiatives, and leadership development."

Asking for what "excellence in engineering" really means usually creates a look of anxiety and some additional vague description.

I'm all for philosophy.  In fact, I think that too often organizations jump to tactics (we're going to train everyone on customer service!) before talking about the philosophy for change, outcomes, and so on.  I recognize that any major organizational shift is going to be beset with periods of ambiguity, uncertainty, and high-level strategy discussion before getting down to the nitty gritty of "what will people actually *do*"

But I admit I wonder a bit at all of these organizational initiatives which are apparently so complex and lofty that no one can explain what they actually mean. I believe that we need change management practices that take those lofty ideals and ground them down to the earth in practical and manageable ways.

I am frankly baffled at the amount of time, money, and energy being spent in many organizations on initiatives which seem to have the consistency of marshmallow fluff.  It looks good, it may even feel good. But when it comes down to it, what is it really all about?

Okay, enough complaining.  Here is my thinking on moving beyond words, expressed in a four layer model for change:

Philosophy for change:  At the highest level, what is the meaning behind this change?  How do we believe this change will make a difference?  What is our philosophy behind creating this change?  How can we create this philosophy to maximize engagement and ownership?  Why is now "the right time"?

Outcomes & Measures:  If this initiative is successful, what will be different?  How will we know if we've succeeded?  What measures (qualitative as well as quantitative) can we use to help us track our outcomes?  How will things look and feel when we've finished?

Strategies:   Given our change philosophy and our vision for the future, how will we get there?

Tactics:  For (strategy) we will use the following methodology.....

The simplified version is:

1. Why will we change?
2. What will we change?
3. How will we change?
4. What is our action plan?

A bare bones example in use:

1. We're making this change for the survival of our organization.  We must harness the energy of all of our employees if we're going to pull this off.  If we don't take action now, we may not be in business five years from now.

2. At the conclusion of this change, we'll have a growing base of customers and much higher customer satisfaction.  Our competitors will be striving to copy us because they admire our innovative methods.  The industry will be taken aback at our "revival."  Our revenues will be growing and net income will be X.   We can assess our progress using the following measures: (insert)

3. Our change strategy will focus initially on four key areas - Product Innovation, Customer Needs Assessment, Employee Development, and Viral Marketing.  These areas were defined by a cross-section of the organization and reflect the collective wisdom of our organization.

4.  Our action plans within each of these areas are the following.....

In conclusion I believe that a well-thought out change initiative should start with philosophy and outcomes and get more specific from that.  Each step flows naturally from the prior area, with the overall philosophy/purpose guiding the rest.

In short, feel free to have an "engineering excellence initiative" or "quality circle"! I simply hope that everyone understands why they are formed and what they are trying to achieve.  Is that so much to ask?

If your company is spending time and money on a significant change effort, take a few moments and run through the four levels I described. Anything missing?  Just some food for thought.

Comments

[Prasad Kurian]

Yes,change initiatives need much more than philosophy/fuzzy ideas. Your four layer model for change is useful in developing a well-thought out change initiative. Having been at the receiving end of change management many times ( http://prasadokurian.blogspot.com/2007/02/at-receiving-end-of-change-management.html ), I would also hope to see specific attention being paid to the impact of the change on the psychological contract and also to create a 'what is in it for me' for the people impacted by the change.

[Cheri]

I'd love to hear more about what you mean by psychological contract!

[Prasad Kurian]

The psychological contract is formed by the mutual expectations between the employee and the employer that are over and above those stated in the formal/legal employment contract. The formation of the psychological contract is an ongoing process that happens (through explicit and implicit negotiations, actions & reactions etc.) throughout the period of the employment relationship though the initial interaction (e.g.. during the recruitment process and the first few months in the organization) plays a key role. Since the psychological contract also includes factors like opportunities for growth, continuity of the employment relationship, the kind of people one works with, communication/transparency, degree of involvement in decision making etc. it is often not expressed in a formal/precise manner. But the psychological contract is often more important than the employment contract in terms of the impact on job related outcomes like performance, satisfaction and decision to stay/leave.

When a major change happens in the organization, the impacted employees often feel that their the psychological contracts have been violated even if their employment contact remains unchanged (e.g. no reduction in pay/benefits). For example,if the organization outsources large amount of work, this could limit the career growth opportunities for existing employees. Also, if a restructuring happens the employee might need to move out of his/her current team and this might in turn mean loss of important relationships and/or working in a team with a different sub-culture that the employee is not comfortable with. Again, the impacted employees might feel that they were not involved in the decision making related to the change (though the change affects them greatly), that their interests were not taken into account or that the process was not transparent. In short, the impacted employees might feel that the organization has made unilateral changes to the 'total employee deal' and that they have been 'taken for granted'. This violation of psychological contract could be a key factor that leads to the perceived 'change resistance' that derails many change management efforts. Thus, I feel that change management efforts should pay adequate attention to the impact of the change on the psychological contract.

[Cheri]

Interesting. That all makes sense, I had never heard the term before. Thank you.