Change Management

This term has so many shades of meaning and interpretations. Occasionally, I stumble when trying to explain what it means. I find that many business expressions that generalize experiences result in varied understanding. Therefore, I will attempt to write a rambling post to get some clarity.

Sources of data:

As I cull over job listings for change management positions, it seems the job market is similarly confused. At times it looks like project manager, a person implementing technology, one who helps others use a new technology, etc.

Here is a friendly Wikipedia definition:

Change management is the process during which the changes of a system are implemented in a controlled manner by following a pre-defined framework/model with, to some extent, reasonable modifications ^[1].

This definition helped add the concept of using a model or process. Unfortunately that too is pretty generic. This definition does not mention two primary components I find on the job boards - people and technology.

My personal understanding is that change management is the experience of working with the people in an organization through a transition or change process. This implies that there is a structure or framework to change. Since we live in a technology age, often I would assume that a change would impact existing or require a new tech system.

Here is what I found after looking at some colleagues' blogs (from Garrett Gitchell's blog on Vision Work).

He suggest that when doing Change Management - begin with the end in mind. This is similar to any team process, one needs to be clear on their purpose or goal. In doing so, keep in mind the final state any project or piece of work has in mind. Then similar to project management map back the process. Garrett emphasizes the difference between Change Management and Project Management (PM). PM is a necessary component of Change Management, but Change Management is more strategic in nature.

Therefore, change managers need to be involved in the formulation of a widespread process and its change implications on a larger system. For example a new technology often has change impacts on more than just the people who use the platform. Organizations are systems and therefore, should one implement a new technology in one department or office its impact goes beyond that entity. A change manager would be aware of this and ideally raise it as a consideration to clients, versus a PM would may be more tactical for that office/department.

In the end we are talking about a change agent that is a partner and support function to the existing system. This person's role is to help facilitate the change and improve the system towards healthier and more efficient states. The bottom line is fundamental component driving decisions. Why go through change? What is the purpose of it? Who can help you devise a system and process? Is it worth slowing down to stratagize and consider the various impacts of a change? I say yes - this can make all the difference to future change efforts.

And still in the end organizations are dynamic and ever changing. Therefore, a long term consideration would be for organizations to invest in build change capabilities. That is what ultimately will make the organization last and adapt to the ever changing environment and unforeseen variables. So how does one do such a thing? One starting point that has been a nice guide for me is to reference Chris Worley's book, "Built to Change.

In the end there are various understandings and interpretations of the concept of change management. One thing seems certain this term is about change from one state to another - and organizations are constantly involved in this process.

Reflections from M. Scott Peck's "The Road Less Traveled"

Here are some of the salient points that surfaced for me in the reading of this classic psychology book.

Responsibility

• Discipline = delayed gratification
• Confronting problems
• Dedication to Truth - white lie (tell someone something small that is not true), Black lie (neglect to share something that is important or relevant to the truth)

"This is my problem and it is up to me to resolve" - owning responsibility for self

Three types of psychological disorders:

1. Neurotic - it is all my fault. In speech these people tend to say "I should", "I ought to"
2. Character Disorder - Everyone else is at fault. These people are tougher to work with psycho-dynamically speaking. They tend to say - "I can't", "I couldn't", " I have to", "I had to". They have no power of choice. From their view everything is out of their control. They often do not trust others and see the world as a dangerous place.
3. Blend of the two Neurotic and Character disorder

Worldview

Our view of the world is like a map (aka worldview).

We create this worldview and are constantly getting new information. Many can't handle this new information and ignore it. This results in out dated maps and or views. It is important to constantly revise your maps as new information arrives.

Transference is the active clinging to outdated views. It occurs when a set of ways of perceiving the world from a child reference creeps into views of adult life.

On Love

"Love is as love does:

Love takes attention - through the work of listening.

Falling in love is not real love. Love is a commitment beyond the object, beyond ourselves.

"Love is the will to extend one's self for the purpose of nurturing one's own or another spiritual growth... Love is as love does. Love is an act of will -- namely, both an intention and an action. Will also implies choice. We do not have to love. We choose to love."

"The will to extend one's self for the purpose of nurturing one's own or another' spiritual growth" p. 85

When we fully love beyond ourselves and extend our ego boundaries there is a connection to the rest of the world. One merges beyond self with others. This is a mystical experience. Kind of like the Buddhist concept of oneness.

Laziness is loves opposite enemy. Laziness is fear.

Happiness

Simply seek happiness, and you are not likely to find it. Seek to create and love without regard to your happiness, and you will likely be happy much of the time.

Grace

The definition of grace - the g-d within us. Listening is taking the more difficult path.

Here is a wordle representing some Identity work

http://www.wordle.net/gallery/wrdl/982171/My_footprint

What is healthy?

Recently I posed a question to some fellow organization development colleagues about what Healthy means in the context of organizations - since that is a goal of the work I and others in the field help promote, I thought having clarity around the goal would be helpful. Here is the question I posed:

My Email:
I have had a bunch of thoughts lately about the meaning of a healthy organization/team. With this topic on mind here are some general questions. I am curious about your thoughts.

1. Have you worked or been a member in a healthy organization?

2. What makes that (or a place) a healthy organization?

As an OD practitioner my goal is to help, individuals, teams, and organizations improve their health. In fact one of the many definitions of OD states:

Organization Development is concerned with the deliberate, reasoned, introduction, establishment, reinforcement, and spread of change for the purpose of improving an organization's effectiveness and health.
- From Huse, E.F. (1980) Organization Development and Change (not APA format)

He goes on to define both effectiveness and health - but I will stop here in order to hear your ideas...

Here are the responses shared:
A healthy organization...
-Is realistic – sees its market position, resources and strategic options realistically
-Has a management team that is suited to the job, functions well together and models honesty and accountability at the top
-Is progressive in its people practices (values employees and shows it, invests in ongoing development of its people)
-Allows diversity of opinion, encourages debate ideas and individual contribution while keeping focused on day-to-day delivery
-Values performance and accountability and demonstrates this through its policies and practices
-Resources both short and long term bets appropriately
-Is able to make changes as its environment changes

Another response:
Description developed by Jack Fordyce and Ray Weil.
Characteristics of Healthy and Unhealthy Organizations

1. Objectives are widely shared and there is a strong flow of energy toward them. Versus There is little personal investment in organizational objectives except at the top.
2. People feel free to signal their awareness of difficulties because they expect problems to be dealt with and are optimistic they can be solved. Versus People see things going wrong and do nothing. Problems are avoided. People talk about office trouble at home, in the hall, but not with those involved.
3. Problem solving is highly pragmatic. In attacking problems, people work informally and are not preoccupied with status, territory, or second-guessing. Versus Status and boxes on the organization chart are more important than solving problems. There is excessive concern with management as the customer, instead of the real customer.
4. The boss is frequently challenged. A great deal of nonconforming behavior is tolerated. Versus People treat each other in a formal, polite manner that masks issues and controls behavior.
5. There is noticeable sense of team play in planning performance and discipline; a shared responsibility. Versus Managers feel alone in trying to get things done. Somehow orders don’t get carried out as intended.
6. Decision making is determined by such factors as ability, sense of responsibility, availability of information, work load, timing and individual development. Versus People at the top try to control as many decisions as possible. They become bottlenecks, and make decisions with inadequate information and advice.
7. The judgment of people lower down people throughout the organization is listened to and valued. Versus The judgment of is not respected outside the narrow limits of their jobs.
8. The range of problems tackled includes personal needs and human relationships. Versus Personal needs and feelings are side issues.
9. Collaboration is freely entered into. Ways of helping are highly developed. Versus People compete when they need to collaborate. They protect their turf.
10. When there is a crisis, people band together. Versus When there is a crisis, people withdraw or start blaming.
11. Conflicts are considered important to decision making and growth. They are dealt with in the open. People are candid. Versus Conflict is mostly covert and managed by office politics and other games. There are interminable and irreconcilable arguments.
12. Risk is accepted as a condition of growth. Versus Minimizing risk has a very high value.
13. Relationships are honest. People do care about one another and do not feel alone. Versus Relationships are contaminated by “maskmanship.” People feel alone. There is an undercurrent of fear.
14. Learning is easy. There is a willingness to give, seek and use feedback and advice. People see themselves and others as capable of development and growth. Versus Learning is difficult. People don’t approach their peers to learn from them, but learn from their own mistakes. What feedback they get is not helpful.
15. Joint critique is routine. Versus Feedback is avoided.
16. People are stimulated and highly involved by choice. They are optimistic. The work place is important and fun. (Why not?) Versus People feel locked into jobs, stale and bored, constrained by the need for security. They find excitement elsewhere.
17. Leadership is flexible, shifting in style and person to suit the need. Versus Managers are prescribing parents to the to the organization.
18. There is a high degree of trust, sense of freedom and mutual responsibility. People generally know what is important and not. Versus Managers tightly control small expenditures and demand excessive justification. They allow little freedom for making mistakes.
19. "What can we learn from that?" Versus "One mistake and you're out."
20. Poor performance is confronted and a joint resolution sought. Versus Poor performance is glossed over or handled arbitrarily.
21. Organization structure, policies, and procedures help people get the job done and protect long-term organization health. Versus Organizational structure, policies and procedures encumber the organization. People take refuge procedures and play games.
22. Old methods are questioned often and give way to new ideas. Versus Tradition!
23. The organization adapts swiftly to changes and opportunities because all eyes are watching and anticipating the future. Versus Innovation is in the hands of a few.
24. Frustrations are a call to action: “It’s my/our responsibility to save the ship.” Versus People swallow their frustrations: “I can do nothing. It's their responsibility.”
25. Managers look at their organization in terms of how they think it should run, and when it doesn’t’ run as desired, they consider it a "work problem,” not "find the culprit." Versus Managers look at their organization in terms of how it does run and when it doesn’t run as desired they look for someone to blame.

Adapted from Managing with People, Jack K. Fordyce and Ray Weil, Addison-Wesley, 2^nd edition, by McCarthy & Company, Organization Consultants, Inc. www.mccarthyconsultants.com

Reflections on life's transitions...

I am reading an excellent book called "Transitions" by William Bridges. Here is an expert and some of my thoughts...

How to deal with the neutral state in between the phases of transitions:

"Chaos is not a mess, but rather it is the primal state of pure energy to which the person returns for every true new beginning." (p.119)

Wisdom is the accrual of time spent in this neutral space. Being in the unknown.

Now that we are no longer tribal communities here is what we can focus on doing when lost in transition...

How to surrender to the Neutral Zone:

1. Find a regular time to be alone. This is not reading a book, but rather going for a walk, going to nature, sitting, meditating.

2. Log your experiences of being in the neutral zone. Where you ask:
What is really going on?,
What was your mood?,
What were you thinking about?,
What puzzling or unusual things happened?
What decisions do you wish you had made?
What dreams do you wish you could have made?

3. Write an autobiography. From your current vantage point the stories of the past change. We make new sense of the past as we have more experiences in life. It is the wisdom of now that gives us a new lens of the past. In doing so, it is easy to realize that we are simply bound by our reality. Therefore, our present and future view are similarly bounded. Letting go is truly freeing and can allow for possibilities.

4. Discover what you really want now. When circumstances box us in, we know how we would live if we only had the time. As soon as we have the time, we are lost to figure out exactly what we want.

5. What would be unlived in your life if it ended today? Write your obituary...include things you did and did not do. The goal is to simulate an ending for yourself. Since new beginnings start with endings.

What do you think and feel about the past?
What was unlived in the past, what dreams, what convictions, what talents, what ideas, what qualities in you went unrealized?

6. Take a few days to go on your own version of a passage journey. Spend a few days alone to reflect upon the current transition process. Go somewhere unknown and without familiar comforts. Keep the food simple and small. Don't get distracted with entertainment. Bring a journal. Consider keeping a vigil one night. Note the dreams that come up and/or crazy things that happen. Especially during the morning. Go with what is coming up in the moment, happy, bored, whatever - there is no right outcome.

This neutral zone can happen at any point even after a new beginning. It is when you are unplugged emotionally. Running on autopilot.

"The way out is the way in"