People resist change. That has been well established. Scores of papers, blogs, and books have addressed this topic, along with executive coaches, TED-talks, and now even yours truly. When people believe they will lose something of value, or if they fear they will not be able to adapt to new ways, they resist. Sadly, there are no exceptions for information technology-driven change. The downsides? Stakeholders resist new processes and new systems. Adoption is low. Sometimes the projects fail.
When things do not go as planned, people seem surprised. Even when they knew they were introducing change and knew that people resist change, they failed to prepare for it…again! IT is hard.
In our experience, organizations may talk a good game when it comes to Organizational Change Management (OCM), but too often they fail to act with the vigor and completeness that is merited. In this post, the authors will explore why this may be the case.
When organizations begin transformation projects (or even simple improvements), they tend to focus on the solution: process changes, policy changes, organizational changes, or system changes. They spend less time considering how people must adapt to the change. The authors typically find that project teams are aware of and good at completing the core design and build steps of projects (e.g., requirements definition, vendor selection, and project planning). On the people side (the OCM side), however, we see insufficient time and energy being applied.
THE CHANGE PARADOX
A common project approach is to plow the lion’s share of limited human resources into building a change. Experienced delivery professionals would concede that they should also allocate sufficient resources to ensuring adoption of the change. But the prevailing sentiment is often one of, “We’ll cross that bridge (adoption) when we get there,” – as if every project were a journey of one peril after the next. Only after conquering the first peril (building a viable solution) will the team dare to worry about the subsequent peril of change adoption. Paradoxically, the adoption of a solution will be at risk without OCM, and common thinking says that the buildout of the solution will be at risk with OCM. Which is correct?
The perceived risk is that every resource allocated to OCM is one that is not invested in developing the solution. The thinking is that if the balance of resources shifts too heavily away from the development of the change, the solution will not get built. If there is no solution, then there is no change to “worry about.”
Both the solution build and OCM are needed. Leaders must allocate time and money not only for building a solution but to promote, engage, and enable solution adoption. They must assume they will conquer all perils and ultimately complete their journey!
HOW TO FIX IT?
Start right away. OCM should be core to any change journey, beginning on Day One of the initiative (don’t wait until later!). OCM does not require extra resources or special certifications. OCM should be an integral part of any initiative that changes systems, processes, or the operational behaviors of an organization. By ensuring engagement, communicating “the Why,” encouraging participation, and driving adoption, organizations will be better able to achieve their goals. Without this concentrated focus on bringing people along on the journey of change, organizations may find their projects broken.
Be emotionally intelligent. Before the turn of the century, Dr. Spencer Johnson published the short, easy-to-read Who Moved My Cheese. The parable illustrates why “moving cheese” (in this context: within the frame of a maze for mice) is difficult. Behaviors must change to attain the same goals. Methods of work need to change. Attitudes need to change. Change is an emotional journey, and our change initiatives must reflect that reality. OCM helps to focus on the people journey.
Assess change readiness. Transformation projects are typically not easy. Modern technology can be hard; new processes may be difficult; and training is time-consuming. To get at the root of what may be in the way of people changing, organizations can conduct readiness assessments. These simple inquiries can help to establish how ready, capable, and aligned (or not!) an organization is to take on the project and do not require a lot of additional effort. Assessments help to gauge the temperature of the organization: ready or not ready. Once we understand where we are at (by gauging the temperature), we can act appropriately.
Measure the value of OCM the right way. While the full cost of OCM is incurred during the project, much of the value comes over time. Calculating meaningful ROI in the short term based on hard costs alone can, therefore, be misleading. Instead, the authors suggest any attempt at traditional ROI calculations to prove out OCM should be deferred to a future date, after benefits (e.g., lowered operating costs, quicker throughput, improved quality) have had time to aggregate. In the shorter term, the authors recommend focusing on how well the change has been adopted by stakeholders. Measuring stakeholder adoption can be achieved quickly after a change is rolled out by applying various techniques to capture user sentiment, engagement, and enablement.
CONCLUSION
The desire of any organization implementing a change is that the adjustment is fully adopted, and the value is fully realized. That is easier said than done though. However, we must persevere to move forward. A former U.S. president noted, “The price of doing the same old thing is far higher than the price of change.” Plan for your change, engage your stakeholders, assess where you are at and adjust. These techniques will make you an effective organizational change manager.
