Organizational Change Management

[David Laffineuse]

For this post I will borrow from an old posting from Tony Rizzo (circa 1996), itself borrowed from Eli Goldratt:

"Imagine that you are trapped on a riverbank, with the cutest,
tail wagging, face licking, unconditionally loving friend that
any man or woman ever had. You and your trusting pooch are stuck
on a narrow strip of sand, between a river full of crocodiles and
a very-hard-to-climb rock cliff. If you don't get off that
strip of sand, both of you may become a lizard's lunch. If ever
there was one, this is a situation that calls for significant
change.
So why aren't you scrambling up the cliff? Three reasons!
First, you don't know if you can succeed. Your salvation may be
within easy reach. But you don't know that it is, because you
can't see the top of the cliff from your restricted point of
view. Second, if you begin the climb, you could fall and hurt
much more than your ego. The climb is dangerous for you. Third,
there's your trusting pooch. He can't possibly make the climb.
If you leave him, he'll surely become an omnivore's hors d'oeuvre
- he's too small to make a real meal.
So, there you are, facing a real threat, stuck in a dreadful
situation that demands change, and yet you choose to take your
chances right where you are. You know why the situation calls
for change. You know what change you need to make. But, you
don't do it.
That's how most people feel, when they face the need for
significant change. For most, making a big change is like
climbing that rock cliff. Even if they can be assured of
success, they fear leaving behind what they know and love.
Therefore, they stay put, because they don't see a safe way to
make the right change happen, and they can't stand the thought of
leaving behind the pooch, or whatever else they love about their
current situation.
Now we know what we need to do, to persuade others to implement
any significant change. First, we need to show them that the
change can be successful and can improve their situation
significantly. Think of this as showing them that their
salvation is within reach, at the top of the cliff.
Second, we need to show them how to make the change happen in a
way that can't cause them harm. Think of this as building a
ladder for them.
Third, we need to ensure that they can keep what they know and
love about their current situation. Think of this as giving them
a safety line for the pooch."

As I deploy a system-wide critical chain approach within my company, the element that I seem to struggle the most with is the 'building of the ladder'. Basically, when you know what to change, and when you know what to change it to, the question is 'how to effect the change?". This is where I am looking for guidance.

[Adam Avitabile]

Hello David. Although this may not be the in depth answer you're looking for, hopefully it will get the wheels moving for others to contribute to the conversation.
The biggest challenge I find when implementing change is to get everyone to understand the need. You really have to build a case as to why the way they are doing it now is not better than the new way. For instance, it could be that you are losing market share, or are much slower at responding to customer demand than your competitors. Whatever the case, everyone has to understand that there is a problem. Once they understand the problem, the next step is to have them feel as if they contributed to the solution. Everyone's opinion counts and even though they may not have the best idea or the idea that gets used, everyone likes to know that they were heard and reasonably listened to. Also, if they do have a part in the new process, they feel as if the process is theirs and are more willing to change.
Again, I apologize if this is just common sense info, but I look forward to the contributions of others as I too would like to hear more about change management.

[David Laffineuse]

Adam,

As Voltaire once said "common sense is not so common", so believe me I truly appreciate your comment and contribution. First let’s talk about the “need”, in other words “why do I need to change?”. Here my experience is similar to yours. Usually we try to quantify the need by showing that we are losing market share, that our competition is delivering faster and better than we are, that we are losing credibility in the market place by being consistently late on our deliveries, etc. Coming back to Goldratt’s analogy we are basically sizing up the crocodiles, telling people how many we see in the river, how big they are, and how aggressive they are. In contrast we like to show them the pot of gold at the top of the cliff as well. We talk in terms of improvement potential, the amazing numbers that other companies have achieved in terms of throughput improvement, due-date performance, and project cycle-time – and the positive impact that all these improvements could have on their very survival. But even when you have done that, sometimes there is just no reaction. You find yourself in a situation where you are basically trying to justify to them why they need to change, why it’s good for them, why they can’t just be satisfied with where they are today. You find that your enthusiasm is met at best with opposition, at worse with complete inaction.

This makes me think about the now famous article entitled ‘Change or Die’ that was initially published in Fast Company. The gist of the article is that most people (9 out of 10) will not change even when they are faced with a life or death situation. Then it goes about recommending some approaches to spark the change by reframing the “need”. Instead on focusing on the negative (e.g. the fear of dying) we need to focus on the positive (e.g. the joy of living). “Joy is a more powerful motivator than fear”. So instead of telling them about the competitive pressures, the loss of market share, the loss of credibility, should we instead talk to them about improving the quality of work life, refocusing on the pride in our products and operations, meeting our customers’ needs faster and better? Do we need to make our message more positive and more emotional?

David.

[Adam Avitabile]

Interesting perspective. I have always been taught and through my experience seen that when shown a better road without a reason to take it, people assume that you are trying to fix something that isn't broken and are resistant. I guess to assume that everyone is the same is a poor assumption to begin with though. Everyone reacts differently. There are three basic categories of resistance that I like to classify people in to determine how to approach the change management:
a) you don't understand, b) you don't like it, c) you don't like me

I read about the three categories in a Harvard Business Review book and found it to be interesting and relevant to my situations.

[dennisstevens]

The behavior that was killing them served a purpose. Without addressing this purpose, the behavior won't change. Resistance is a very emotional thing.

[dennisstevens]

I disagree that its about getting people to understand the need. The story about the aligators makes it clear that people resist change even when they understand the need.The fear of failure is one reason why people resist change. There are two other important ones to understand. There is also the issue of perspective to consider.

Another source of resistance is that admitting that you have to change means admitting that somehow things got messed up. This sounds a lot like blaming and affects peoples self esteem. So they resist the conversation. You will hear things like... That's they was we do things around here. It's too complicated, you wouldn't understand. You had to be hear to understand. To overcome this change, you have to let people tell their story and you have to listen and understand that things are the way they are because the people in charge did the best they could.

Another one deals with how people feel when change is successfully implemented. People were skilled to survive or thrive before the change. If you reduce the chaos, or automate a process, or put in new tools, then the process might work better. But the skills to survive or thrive in the new world are likely different then the old skills. For example, you can teach an old Cobol programmer to program in .NET. But is is unlikely they will ever be the grand puhbah expert of .NET programming. Some 22 year-old kid is. Or a manager who thrives on slaying dragons is going to resist getting rid of all the dragons.

General change management practices don't really work. Establish the need, establish the plan, establish the benefit to the organization then communicate, communicate, and communicate some more. It's not about the benefits to the organization. It's about the sources of resistance to individuals. It doesn't matter if the manager shares the fear, embarrassment, or threat. It doesn't matter if it makes sense for the person to feel that way (sometimes it does). All that matters is the feelings are real to the person dealing with them. Resistance will come from any or all of these sources.

Dr. Hammer of BPR fame used to say 20% will go along with anything, 20% will resist, and 60% are waiting to see who wins. Organizations are social constructs. Spend a little time with the 20% resisting, they are your obstacles. If there is a key influencer who is resisting, work on the three sources of resistance with that nay-sayer. Give him three chances to come along. If he comes along, you have a powerful ally. If he continues to resist, then remove him from influence. The message will be clear to the 60%. Then spend some time working on addressing the sources of influence with the other 60%. They have a story to tell. They want to be recognized for their source of resistance. All you have to do is acknowledge it.

We have had tremendous success with this approach. While it seems that it is people intensive, I believe because change happens faster, the total amount of energy expended by the organization is far less with this approach then with approaches that prolong the time to benefit for the organziation.

[David Laffineuse]

Dennis,

Thanks. Where can I find more information about overcoming the three sources of resistance that you mention?

David.

[dennisstevens]

Chris Argyris is a great source to look at overcoming these sources of resitance. Check out http://www.actionscience.com/ for a description and a bibliography. I personally like Organizational Learning II: Theory, Method, and Practice

[dennisstevens]

Another resource you might want to check out is Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior by Jennifer M. George and Gareth R. Jones. This is on my Organizational Psychology and Development bookshelf.