When
implementing
change,
managers
often
overlook
the most
important
factor -
people!
"He's
a really
great
guy but
I just
hate the
way he
dresses/drinks
his
coffee/leaves
the cap
off the
toothpaste
etc. But
I can
change
all
that."
Ever
heard
this
before?
And
does he
(or she)
change?
Rarely.
It's the
same
with
organizations.
Whether
you're
trying
to
improve
your
customer
service,
re-engineer
your
business
systems,
restructure
a
department
or
outsource
a
function,
very few
organisations
achieve
the
results
they
want -
especially
if focus
on
changing
attitudes
and
behaviours
after
the
process,
system
or
structural
change
is made.
In a
1998
Report
on
Change
Management
in both
the
public
and
private
sector
over the
last
year,
KPMG
revealed
that
only 22%
of the
change
initiatives
fully
delivered
the
intended
benefits
on
budget
and on
time.
And
other
surveys
support
this.
They
show us
that
outsourcing
has
failed
to
deliver
in many
cases
and that
downsizing
has
mostly
been a
disaster
- the
best
people
have
gone
taking
their
corporate
knowledge
with
them.
Morale
(and
often
the
health)
of those
who are
left is
in
tatters
and
productivity
has
declined.
Cashflow
is
precarious
not
least
because
of the
high
cost of
retrenchment
packages
and the
need to
re-hire
expertise
at
increased
rates.
So
what's
the
problem?
A recent
headline
in the
Jan 25
`99 BRW
said it
all:
"I.T.
Overhaul
founders
on
the
Human
Factor".
Ask
anyone
who has
tried to
change
the way
their
organizations
do
business
why it
hasn't
worked.
There's
almost
no doubt
they
will say
- the
people
factor.
Even
Michael
Hammer,
the
father
of the
re-engineering
movement,
acknowledged
that 70%
of re-
engineering
activities
have
failed.
He told
The Wall
Street
Journal:
"I
wasn't
smart
enough
about
that. I
was
reflecting
my
engineering
background
and was
insufficiently
appreciative
of the
human
dimension.
"
"Put
people
first,
profit
will
follow"
So
what's
to be
done?
Think of
it this
way:
Would
you ever
acquire
or merge
with
another
business
without
first
doing
your
financial
due
diligence?
Would
you ever
plan to
build a
power
station
without
doing
your
environmental
due
diligence?
Of
course
not - so
why do
many
organizations
try to
introduce
change
of any
kind
without
doing
human
due
diligence?
Many
managers
don't
understand
that
increasingly
human
capacity
to
absorb
and
implement
change
is
the
major
risk
management
factor
whether
you want
to
introduce
a new
strategic
vision,
improve
customer
satisfaction,
restructure
or
deliver
a new
product
or
service.
So
what can
you do
to
decrease
the
people
risk
factor
in your
change
initiatives?
Put
another
way, how
can you
build
change
resilience
and
adaptability
in your
workplace?
Successful
change
implementers
take the
time to
plan
every
facet of
the
change
project
especially
the
people
strategy.
Nothing
is left
to
chance.
The
"she'll
be right
on the
day,
mate"
attitude
has no
place
unless
you have
money to
burn.
Successful
change
implementers
start
with
these
threshold
questions:
-
Why
are
we
doing
this?
-
Why
now?
What
if
we
don't
do
this
now?
-
What
is
our
destination?
Precisely.
-
How
will
we
get
there?
-
What's
in
it
for
our
people?
How
will
the
gains
outweigh
the
losses?
-
How
will
we
bring
our
people
along
with
us?
-
How
will
we
consolidate
the
changes?
Until
these
questions
are
clearly
and
fully
addressed,
don't
even
think
about
implementing
the
change.
I
guarantee
that
Murphy
will
visit
and
he'll be
the
least of
your
troubles.
When
you've
got the
answers,
there
are two
major
strategies
that
need to
run in
parallel.
One is
to plan
the
change
and its
implementation.
The
other is
to
prepare
your
people
for the
changes
that are
about to
happen.
In
both
strategies,
communication
is the
number
one
issue.
This
seems
like a
statement
of the
blinding
obvious
yet
communication
is still
reported
as the
major
problem
in
implementing
change.
Internal
communication
is
highly
sensitive
and
crucial
in
building
trust,
maintaining
loyalty
and
productivity.
It
involves
many
layers
and many
levels
depending
on the
type and
degree
of
change
you want
to make.
But
telling
them
once by
memo is
never
enough.
Another
major
challenge,
especially
for
managers,
is to
commit
enough
time and
resources
to the
project.
This
means
going
beyond
the
basics:
eg what
skills
do we
need?
How will
we put
them in
place?
What
sort of
training
does
this
entail?
What
have we
got now?
How will
we
address
the gap?
It
includes
allowing
time and
resources
for the
transition
itself -
that
in-between
stage
when
people
are in
the
process
are
letting
go of
the old
and
embracing
the new.
Rarely
does
everyone
come on
board at
the same
time, so
different
plans
have to
be
devised
for
early
adopters,
laggers
or
resistors.
Reluctance
and
resistance
are
direct
and
predictable
responses
to the
feeling
of loss
of
control,
the main
reason
why
people
react
negatively
to
change.
Workshops
focussed
on
understanding
the
impact
of
change
can help
with
this.
This is
a
significant
component
of the
preparation
strategy.
We know
that
people
seem to
move
along
the
change
adaptability
curve
faster
if they
know
what's
happening
to them.
The
third
major
issue is
to
ensure
organization-wide
congruency
or
consistency.
This is
especially
important
when you
are
trying
to
change
the
culture
or
behaviour,
the way
we do
things
around
here.
For
example,
if you
are
moving
to a
team
based
way of
working,
then
review
all your
recruitment,
remuneration
and
performance
management
systems
to make
sure
they
too, are
team
based.
Don't
reward
or
recognise
someone
who
makes
their
budget
or goals
but
climbs
over
anyone
and
everyone
to get
there.
Train,
counsel,
warn -
but take
all the
steps
you need
to. Your
people
want to
see that
you're
serious
and mean
business.
The
management
of
organizational
change
is never
to be
underestimated.
It can
be time
consuming
and
hair-pulling
at
times.
But as
Charles
Darwin
said:
"It's
not
the
strongest
species
that
survive,
nor
the
most
intelligent,
but
the
most
responsive
to
change".
Managers
who
invest
time and
resources
in
planning
and
thinking
through
the
human
factor
in their
change
initiatives
recognize
that
their
people
are the
only key
difference
that
they
have.
They and
their
organizations
will not
only
survive,
they'll
thrive
against
the
competition.
|