Is "Change Management" an Oxymoron?
Peter de Jager is a provocative Speaker, Writer and Consultant. His primary focus in on how we manage change, technology and the future.
In addition to speaking at conferences worldwide, he's also writen monthly columns for CIO Magazine and Computerworld Canada.
His goal is always to question what we think is so, and in so doing perhaps open up new opportunities.
If you'd like permission to reprint any of Peter's articles, please contact him directly.
You can contact him at
pdejager@technobility.com
Or sign the Guest Book and he'll get back to you.
Many people believe the notion we can "Manage" change with any noticeable positive effect, is a myth perpetrated on naïve organizations by greedy, unscrupulous consultants.
In general, that's a tad overstated, but I've heard people describe "Change Management" in even less complimentary terms.
Part of Change Management's image problems relate to the very label we've attached to the process, and prevailing fuzzy thinking on the subject. Here are some possible terms we might use as replacements; Problem Solving, Leadership, Innovation, Making Progress, Implementation, Transition Management and Process Improvement.
We might also take the approach that 'Managing Change' is what managers
do, and is therefore too fundamental a topic to discuss on it's own.
Unfortunately, while each of those terms addresses some legitimate aspects of Change Management (CM), they each involve their own problems of perception and suitability;
Problem Solving :- The task of managing change does indeed involve a large
amount of problem solving, but CM is a very specific type of problem. CM
is a category of problems with a unique set of patterns and solutions. If we dump change management into the larger bucket of problems, then it becomes more difficult to focus on, and benefit from, those
unique patterns.
Leadership :- Great concept. Making change happen smoothly, quickly and with a minimum of pain, definitely requires leadership ability. Unfortunately the term "Leadership" suggests the need for abilities beyond the reach of the majority of employees. Most people don’t consider themselves leaders, and placing
CM into that category means that we place the responsibility for CM into the hands of "THEM"... Hardly the best approach when an organization is attempting to undergo large scale
Change and requires active participation from all stake holders.
Innovation :- A good start, but Managing Change is more than just coming up with a new idea, it's mostly about preparing people for the Change brought about when we attempt to implement that new idea.
Making Progress/Process Improvement: - Also a great start. But not all Change involves "Making Progress" or "Improvement". A lot of CM is about getting used to a situation that is a step backward from what went before.
Implementation/Transition Management :- Like "Innovation" above, this is only part of the process. Implementation without preparation doesn't get the job done.
As mentioned at the start, the term "Change Management" has its own problems, at the very least it causes the eyes of most managers to glaze over. That said it is still the most common way to refer to the task of managing the change process from start to finish.
To clarify what is involved in Managing Change we can break the process into six stages.
I – Awareness that the Status Quo is no longer sufficient/appropriate/desirable.
II – Accepting that a change is necessary, even if we don't know
exactly what shape it will take.
III – Selection of a specific change from a host of alternatives.
IV – Experiencing the Change ‘event’.
V – The transition period as we acquire new skills and comfort levels
VI – Achievement of the new Status Quo
Stage one, is less one of management and more of being observant of what is happening around us. Management's role is to notice the early indicators and weak signals hinting that a change is called for, and then communicating that to staff.
Stage two, draws on all our management and leadership
abilities. The more people who come to believe that the change is necessary, the easier the change process. "Telling" them what to believe isn't the answer. Describing the problem, creating a vision of the future, allowing them to contribute to the details of what the solution might be. These all combine to create a ground swell of demand, support and commitment to the Change.
Stage three, is where we select a specific ‘change’ from the world of possible alternatives.
Stage four, is an event in time. The move takes place, the layoffs happen, the new system is made live. Getting the operational details to go as smoothly as possible, through good management practices, adds to the ease with which the change is assimilated.
Stage five, is where we provide a support structure to facilitate the acquisition of new skills. Without this support structure in place, change becomes unnecessarily difficult.
Stage six? Three words - Time to Celebrate.
So? Does the concept of Change Management make sense? If these six stages are ignored or mismanaged then change is naturally difficult... if attention is paid, if management is competent in discharging the above duties and responsibilities, then Change can occur with
less pain. Change Management, done properly, does far more than result in a positive outcome, it enables your organization to thrive in the face of adversity.
© 2005 Peter de Jager – Peter is interested in all things related to Management, but especially Change Management.
Contact him at
Pdejager@technobility.com
For
reprint permissions click here.
I'd appreciate reading your comments
regarding this article... please take the time to respond.
Resources: