On this page,
I look at the scenario of change management, communication strategies and some examples of my application
of these, and the defence mechanisms that can be found and how
to combat these. Finally, I consider some change management techniques that fit in with this overall change
management framework.
Change happens in all
organisations and at every level in the organisation, whether that is a minor
change in the procedure for processing a sales order or whether it is the
strategic change that Westinghouse managed in taking itself from a manufacturer
of power stations to being an important media company (RCA). There are a number
of imperatives behind change management which determine the intervention
strategies that are necessary, depending on the level at which the change is
happening:
·
the
cause of the change
·
the
imperative behind it
·
the
strength and type of power in the organisation's structure
·
the
strength of the organisation's culture (the stronger, the harder it is to
change)
·
the
organisation's immediate and remote past history
It is a key change management
skill to work out these dynamics and to assess which change management program
is best suited for that particular scenario. Note that the term
"organisation" can be a group, team, department, division, company or
group of companies.
The basics of change
management involve a degree of leadership (where
there's a specific section on Leadership and Change Management). Its about the extent and magnititude of change, and that involves communication
and visioning. In making the assessment of the degree of change that is
required, there are a number of opposing forces that should be considered in
this context and these degrees determine the intervention strategy that is
required:
|
Instability Upheaval Unpredictability Threat Disorientation |
Opportunity Rejuvenation Growth Progress Innovation |
At the heart of the negative
aspects of this is a basic human instinct. Its fear, or more politely,
"small 'c' conservatism": a fear of those adjectives in the left hand
column, which is a feature that drives change management at all levels, even up
to company acquistions.
Note that these features listed could be seen as opposites and depending on the
change management scenario, either the negative points or the positive points
will be perceived by people as being the stronger. These negative feelings can
lead to defence mechanisms and again to combat these, there
are different intervention strategies that can be used, depending on the
situation encountered.
Back to the top
There is a continuum of
communication styles that range from the change manager being seen as a partner
across to the change manager enforcing a way. My view of the
different intervention strategies, and my application of them,
are:
·
Co-creation.
The new process (if that's what it is) is "co-created" by the change
manager and the employees directly effected.
Employees need a high degree of motivation and knowledge of not only the
process but all that surrounds it.
·
Consultation.
The change manager is a consultant or possibly a facilitator
·
Test.
The change manager devises a new process and ask for the employees for their
input and comment
·
Sell.
The change manager devises a new process and "sells" the idea to
employees. They can't change it, but are persuaded by it.
·
Tell.
The change manager devises a new process and "tells" the idea to
employees - they have to accept it whether they like it or not. Examples of
where this would work would be a turnaround situation or where there is an
authoritarian structure.
The decision as to the
communication intervention strategy to use depends on the circumstances of each
situation as well as the personal style of the change manager. Ideally, the
change manager should be able to over-ride a personal style in favour of
adapting their communication style for the given situation. Examples of different communication intervention strategies include:
·
At
Bookham Technology I used
"consult" and "test" with the ex-Marconi team that were
being made redundant: the "tell" regime that Bookham
had adopted to date had not worked and these chaps
were leaving with large payoffs. With the implementation of Impact, this turned
more towards sell/tell.
·
There
was a certain amount of resistance to the implementation of Oracle at the Olympic Delivery Authority where a
"co-create/consult" approach was taken. Again, a similar approach was
taken at Oxfordshire County Council, particularly with
regards to improving management reporting. This is a very common scenarios in public bodies where people work for more altrusitic reasons than just to earn money; note a slightly
different effect in the next point, another public body.
·
The
London Development Agency's problem with BVPI 8 was an
altogether more difficult scenario. Here, I would have limited time to complete
the process changes that were necessary and there was a considerable amount of
resistance from the business. However, the directors knew that they had to make
drastic changes to improve performance. A "sell" approach was taken,
offering different alternatives, but I knew that a "tell" solution
was the only one to take. The alternatives did not work and in the end (some
months after I had left) the directors accepted my change proposal and took a
"tell" approach in implementing it.
·
At Sainsburys, I adopted a "test" approach to
answering their needs for inventory management. This approach worked for the
manager most directly concerned, but the "sell" that was needed for
the senior managers of the IT function did not work - see below. Having said
that, it worked for the senior managers of the property directorate - they had
the same control issues and were persuaded of the system that I had devised in
the "test" phase.
·
There
were multiple approaches at SMF Displays, but
this time they were used for external stakeholders. Clearly, this was a turnaround situation where "sell" was the
approach for the bank and "tell" was the approach for securing an
unqualified audit report. Internally, when sorting out the commercial issues that
gave rise to the losses, given the ominous financial state, the
"sell" was much easier!
Personally, my style is
somewhere between "consult" and "test", although since
you're having to adapt styles to situations, like any actor, its hard to tell the real you:-).
In another dimension, there
are a number of different parts to "communication" to be considered
in any situation where this tool is needed. Key elements include the process,
barriers to communication, listening, feedback and non-verbal communication as
well as the continuum described above. These elements are covered in more
detail in the separate paper, Communication.
Back to the top
Not only are defence mechanisms
a feature of individuals (and depending on our personal circumstances, these
may value as to type as well as intensity), but they also depend on the history
of the organisation. That's not just recent history, the history that current staff remember, but can also be a more remote form of
history. All of this needs to be considered in determining the change
management intervention strategy required. These defence mechanisms (and their
answers) include:
|
Problem or history Distorted perception Dulled motivation Failed creative response Political deadlocks Action disconnects |
Solution for the future System thinking Personal mastery Mental models Shared vision Team learning |
Clearly, there is a
significant amount of learning and application behind all of these concepts and
again, depending on the circumstances of the organisation's change management
requirement, these scenarios (and their associated solutions) may not all be
relevant, although there may be links between some of these (action disconnects
and distorted perception, for example). The skill lies in both identifying the
problem and then applying the solution.
Examples of the "action
disconnects" scenario are abundant in post-acquisition
integration scenarios and sometimes, turnaround
situations require counters to dulled motivation and a failed creative
response. Political deadlocks and distorted perceptions can occur in many
situations and it is my view that this was part of the problem in identifying
the systems changes at Sainsburys (above).
In developing the solutions
for a given situation, the techniques used are called "structured problem
solving techniques". These techniques help people responsible for a
process to "think outside the box" to understand not only the problem
but also the solution as it is difficult to identify root causes and solutions
when someone is involved in the process on a day-to-day basis. Note that
visioning is an important part of change management; aside from showing people
how something will work, it is an example of a structured problem solving
technique. Note that I have prepared separate papers on motivation
and coaching and mentoring.
Back to the top
There are certain change
management strategies that managers use, almost in deference
to the points covered above. Generally, change management techniques fall into one
of four camps:
These techniques started to
emerge after 1945 with writings by the likes of Deming and Juran.
They include techniques such as the Systems Intervention
Strategy (which arose from implementing new computer systems) and perhaps
the only genuinely strategic "hard" system, Six
Sigma (which comes from total quality manufacturing but has been successfully
used in service businesses). They are so-called "hard" techniques
because of their process base and generally go through a series of set stages.
An interesting example of this type of technique is one devised by Mike Hammer
in 1975 called Business Process Engineering. The following year, the author
retracted the technique believing that it is unworkable, producing an
alternative that looks like SIS. As a result of the high profile of this
writing, the name has stuck to anything that relates to a business process that
needs to be changed.
Back to the techniques
Apart from different project
management techniques, there are a number of associated topics. The main
technique, PRINCE2, is applicable
to all projects whereas some other techniques, such as Agile, are
specialist in nature (Agile is particular to the software industry but adheres
to PRINCE2 principles). Associated with this is a version of PRINCE2 for
project management and a separate technique for handling risk.
Back to the techniques
These are non-process change
management techniques that focus on soft issues, such as culture; these take
longer to implement as their implications are more far reaching for the people
in the organisation as opposed to its systems and processes, although the
follow a similar series of rational activites. It's
possible for an interim manager to be involved in this type of technique to
some degree, but usually its initiated by outside
change management consultants and implemented by the Board using outside
facilitators. An example of the implementation of this type of change was being
carried out at Sainsburys
during my time there; this had a particularly strong focus on establishing a
set of values that Sainsbury's had always been known for as a way of returning
it to its former greatness.
Under the term "organisational development", there are a number of
change management techniques. Whereas the process-based techniques originate
from quality management and IT, these techniques originate from the behavioural
sciences and human resources. I have prepared some papers in using culture as
an agent for business transformational change using a sociological and a psychological
approach as well as summarising Organisational Development
itself.
Back to the techniques
Finally, this technique is
explored in a separate paper, turnaround.
Back to techniques
Back to the top