Managing the challenge of change.
One of the main attribute of
any professional is ability to manage change. Not only manage it, but
anticipate it, plan it and implement the changes that are necessary. Charles
Darwin many years ago said, “It's not the strongest of the species that will
survive, nor the most intelligent, but the ones most responsive to change.”
One of the ways that we can be
sure to be ready for that is to be able to handle the myths of change. Let's
look at the myths of change.
Number one, change equals
danger. Now that's a myth. It's true that change equals danger but if you know
the Chinese symbol for the crisis of change, it's the combination actually of
two symbols, one standing for danger which we know is always there with a
changing situation, but the other is opportunity. And that's where we need to key
in. Could there be a better time to live than today in terms of the
opportunities that are out there for us as individuals? If we're aiming to
implement the appropriate changes, to capitalize on the new trends that are
coming and the changes in those trends, what a tremendous opportunity for us.
The second myth of change,
present trends will continue.
Myth number three, if it ain't
broke, don't fix it. That used to be a great management philosophy. It no longer
is. It's changing too fast, if we wait until it's broke, it's too late and we
have missed the opportunity.
Myth number four. Yesterday's
solutions will solve today's problems
Myth number five, perhaps the
most important one for us as managers. Positive change will occur without
effort. No it will not. Whether it's individual change or organizational
change, it requires effort. Dr. Daryl Conner, one of the pioneers in the change
industry made this statement, he said, “Pain management drives change.” We must
help surface the pain that will be there either if we don't take advantage of
the opportunities that change presents, and it's a lost opportunity. Or we
don't change at all and the effects of the danger of that change take place on
us.
Actually there are three types
of change from a time standpoint. The first is physical change. That normally
can be done relatively quickly.
The second type of change, more
important is intellectual change.
The third form of change is
emotional change. And this takes much longer but it's often an important part
of any change process that we effect.
If we can put those three types
of change into our heads and think about them as we affect change, we can
understand that eventually we want to get to that emotional level so people
feel comfort with that change
People do not resist change by
nature. They resist not the change, but the disruption that's caused by the
change.
Let's think about why people
resist change. What are some of the reasons why people resist change? And as we
think about this, let's think about what then we as managers can do to tend to
lessen or reduce that resistance to change. What would be some of the reasons
that people might resist change? Fear of the unknown
Fear of losing control
The fear of failure.
Loss of income, profit,
Not enough warning, because of
poor communications.
Change of relationships or loss
of status
Concern about how it might
affect their personal live
Requires more work to change
How about a vested interest in
the status quo
How about a break in their
habit patterns
Let's look now at the major
players in the change process. There are really three major players, first the
target, the change target.
That's obviously the person
that we want to do the changing.
And people may play more than
one role in the change process but practically always people are playing that
target role.
Secondly there's the change
agent, and this is the person or the organization or the group who's
responsible for facilitating that change.
The third one becomes a very
important player in the change process and we call that the change sponsor. Now
the sponsor is the individual or group who can legitimize the change within the
organization.
There's a fourth player
sometimes who we call a change advocate. A change advocate is someone who
desires the change but they lack sponsorship. In other words they're not capable
of legitimizing that change. We might think of them as the cheerleaders, as the
supporters for that change process. And so they can be important in the
process. But let's concentrate primarily on the role of the sponsor. There are
five principles of sponsorship that we really should understand. Principle
number one, it's absolutely necessary, sponsorship is, for the success of any
organizational change. Absolutely necessary. Without it, the change process
will fail.
Number two, sponsorship cannot
be delegated. There's no way that the person who is responsible for
legitimizing the change can delegate that to the change agent.
Number three, cascading
sponsorship is necessary in large organizations.
Number four, initiating and
sustaining sponsors can't fulfill each other's responsibilities. They each need
to provide the legitimacy at the particular level that they're involved at and
they cannot switch responsibilities.
The fifth principle, if you
have a weak sponsor, what do you do? Actually there are just three things that
you might do if you have a weak sponsor. Number one, train that sponsor.
Sponsorship is trainable, Secondly, you can replace the sponsor.
The third thing is to fail.
Because without sufficient, appropriate, good sponsorship any organizational
change will fail.
Characteristics of organizations that do well
in a changing environment. There are at least 10 characteristics that are
practically always found in organizations who are very effective in the change process.
Characteristic number one, management by commitment versus management by
control.
Number two, we find
organizations that adjust well to change have jobs that have a broad design.
The third characteristic, jobs
to fit people rather than vice versa.
The fourth characteristic is
the flattening of the organizational structure. In other words we see, we tend
to see less levels of management in organizations that are very effective in
adjusting to change. And often as the change process occurs, you'll see the
elimination of some layers of management. And that can help greatly because of
the communication from the bottom level to the top level. If there's a lot of
change that communication can take a long time and can slow down that process.
Number five, employee participation at all levels in the organization. Whenever
you see an organization that adjusts well to change, you see participation at
all levels. Everybody feels a part of that change. They are totally involved in
that change and it becomes extremely important. Number six, organizations that
do well in a changing environment train more, there's more training available
because of that changing environment and that becomes particularly important.
Number seven, there's what we call a multidisciplinary approach. In other
words, experts across levels, there's actually less specialization or where
there is specialization the specialists are capable of working across
departments, across divisions, so that everyone sees the big picture of the
change within the organization. Number eight, a competitive environment no
longer works. We need a cooperative rather than a competitive environment. So
there's more emphasis in organizations that adjust well to change on a
cooperative environment than a competitive environment.
Number nine, there's more power
to mid and even perhaps lower levels of management at least
temporarily
during that change process. Again, because of the difficulty of the
communication. The closer the individual is to the change, the better they're
able to adjust to it. And most top level managers understand that in the change
process many times they'll delegate much more downward than they would in the
normal situation. The tenth and final point that we found that's a
characteristic of companies that adjust well to change is an emphasis on long
term goals as opposed to short term goals. In other words what we're saying is
sometimes we need to sacrifice some of the short term productivity goals to
make the changes necessary for the long term progress of the organization.
Remember, in implementing change within your organization, it is much easier to
prevent resistance to change than it is to remove the resistance to change. In
other words we need to do our planning ahead of time. We need to do our
preparation for that change ahead of time. We need to do our training for that
change ahead of time. And as you think about organizational change, any
organizational change comes down to individuals changing. Let's look for a
minute at an individual changing. There are basically three ways to motivate an
individual to change. The first way is through fear and that's through the use
of some type of a force, if we had a donkey here we might use the example of
having a 2 by 4 and using that force to get that donkey to change or to move.
And you know that works but there are limitations to it. That donkey eventually
begins building up a resistance and what you find if you use fear motivation,
if you use it too much and I'm not saying don't use it because there are times
when you need to. But if you use it too much, a resistance is built up to it.
And
so there's a second type of motivation, we'll call that incentive motivation
and that's of course providing some type of a reward. Some type of a positive
reward to get somebody to change. And that works well and it's good and it
should be used. But you know there's a limitation to incentive motivation,
because it's based on what? It's based on a person's appetite for the
particular reward. So whatever you're using as a reward, eventually if they
lose the appetite, for it, if they lose the desire for it, it loses it's
motivational force. The third type of change is the way that I would encourage
you to think about and use and we call that attitude motivation. And rather
than being based on a force or on a reward, it's based on the way people think.
If we can get people to change the way they think, the way they see themselves,
the way they react to the change, it becomes a much more permanent and lasting
change. I think as one of the best examples of that, I think of my children. I
have 10 children and stepchildren and that's quite a few. And I have one of
them particularly that's a very, very good student. Always got straight A's.
And I remember one time when Dawn got less than a straight A report card, and
how devastating that was to her. And then I think about how I am motivating my
other children to get good grades and I'm using reward, and I'm using
punishment, and I'm using everything that I can possibly think of. If I could
get them to think like Dawn thinks, “I'm a straight A student, I should get
straight A's.”
Think about that with your
people, how can you get them to think the way you want them to think in that
change process? And in getting them to change their thinking, they will automatically
and
Instinctively
because our nervous system allows us to adjust to that which we see ourselves
doing. Do any of you recognize the name Walter Russell? No one does in the
entire room? Well, then it was Jim Hennig who said, [laughter] no I won't do
that. Incidentally it was Walter Russell who was a genius. He made this simple
statement, “The mediocrity is self-inflicted, and genius is self-bestowed.” If
we can get our people to think as geniuses, to think the way we need them to think
to affect the changes, that change process will be a whole lot easier.
