Change Management News

This relates to my recent post on layoffs.

My web sleuth found my Alternatives to Downsizing article from 1996 just tucked away on my website.

If you want to learn how to work with resistance, watch a video clip of President Obama speaking to and with Republican House leaders today. It’s hard to imagine anyone in recent US history of either party who 1. would engage in a give and take with a room filled with only his or her opponents, and 2. could engage in a give and take with clarity, strength and sometimes humor. I can think of no better practical lesson on working with those who are on the other side of issues. You may not want to watch the entire hour, but here is a link to part of  the presentation itself. And here is a link that covers part of the question and answer session. There is something about a face-to-face meeting between people who disagree with one another conducted with mutual civility that is a joy to witness.

If President Obama were to ask me for advice on his State of the Union message tonight, I’d tell him to keep it simple. Limit yourself to one critical issue that you want the US Congress and the American public to support over the next year. Give two points if you really must. And if you get to three or more points, you’ll lose your audience.

The problem is that Presidents, for as long as I can remember, have delivered veritable shopping lists of things of things they want to accomplish over the coming year. There is usually something in the list for everyone. “And for little Billy, a new bicycle.”  State of the Union night is the one night of the year that insomniacs can get a good night’s sleep. Just turn on the TV and let the President (any president) lull you into dreamland.

As a leader of change, listen to the speech tonight and see if it grabs you and makes you want to do something (other than reaching for the remote.) Corporate leaders, like Presidents, cover too many things when they are trying to influence their audiences. The ancient Roman orator, Cato the Censor, said, “Stick to the point and the words will take care of themselves.” And, you’ll note that Cato said point – not points.

Two reasons for this post. 1. It might help those who wish to help during the crisis in Haiti, and 2. it is a good reminder about what it may take to manage a major change effectively.  Nathanial Whittemore’s post “What Go Wrongs with Rebuilding Efforts (and How to Do Better This Time)” offers have problems when outsiders try to do good in situations like the Earthquake in Haiti.

1. Lack of local knowledge. The need to understand the complexities and uniqueness of the culture you want to help.

2. One-dimensional victim-centric view of impacted populations.

3. Lack of respect for local economic systems.

4. Lack of appreciation for the importance of politcal power. he suggests looking for organizations that understand the political forces in the country.

4. Lack of commitment.  Focusing on just the immediate disaster and leaving during the rebuilding process.

Other posts warn people to avoid just going to the country thinking they can help, or from sending their own “care” packages. They claim that these just clog the ports and don’t take into account the transportation and other logistical challenges of getting these donations to people.

Rod Collins wrote a good post in his wiki-management blog on this topic. I urge you to read it.

Too bad. Town hall meetings are part of the history and myth of what America is.  The town hall meetings we saw this past summer were a disgrace to what that forum could be. As Carolyn Lukensmeyer, founder of AmericaSpeaks said to The Washington Post, ” “faux town hall meetings that aren’t anything about deliberation. . . . People are coming in advocating the answer, they’re not coming in to learn anything about the options”  (WP 8/15/09)

Oddly enough, corporate town hall meetings tend to be the bizarro mirror images of those finger-pointing town halls of August. These meetings are often polite — way too polite — where little of substance is talked about. Or, when a real issue does get mentioned, some executive gives a 15 minute response filled with platitudes , run-on sentences and paragraphs until most listens cry uncle and tune out.

We can do much better. Carolyn’s group holds meetings for hundreds, sometimes thousands of people, where they can engage in dialogue (that means the structure allows and encourages listening, and building on the ideas of others).

Creators of large systems change processes have developed ingenious ways to encourage dialogue and collaboration. (Take FutureSearch or Real Time Strategic Change as just two examples.)

So proven models for civil discourse are already out there, and all we have to do is use them.

I was quoted in Lin Grensing-Pophal’s online article Getting Even in Human Resource Executive Online. The foucs of the article  Anecdotal evidence seems to indicate that employees are increasingly reacting to their layoffs and terminations with varying degrees of revenge. HR leaders need to create processes and procedures that minimize that risk. I hope you’ll take a look.

I just posted an interview with Patricia Husband, a librarian who was in a class I gave a few years ago. She sent me an e-mail telling me how she was using the ideas I presented. My curiosity (or perhaps my ego) compelled me to call her and set up an interview. Members of the free Change Management Open Source Project can hear this Podcast and access a lot of other free resources, including the e-book Introduction to Change without Migraines.

Changing a company is tough: only about 40% of transformation programs succeed, according to McKinsey research. But some change programs have a better chance than others: defensive transformations (those undertaken to stem trouble) have lower success rates than progressive ones (launched, for instance, to boost growth or to move from good to great performance). Trigger events matter, too. Some change programs are initiated proactively, while others are undertaken in reaction to external shocks, market pressure, or poor financial performance. Our research finds that most successful transformations are those that are both offensive and proactive — we call them “progressive” — which have a 47% success rate. Defensive transformations have a 34% rate of success.

Source: Creating Organizational Transformations: McKinsey Global Survey Results

by way of the Daily Stat, Harvard Business Publishing

I am not a big fan of Twitter. To date, I hadn’t seen what all the fuss was about. And then news came out from Iran. The government blocked the Internet so that word could not get out about reactions to the elections. But they forgot about Twitter. People tweeted, telling the world about their reactions.

So, what does this have to do with change management, you might ask.  You can try to keep things quiet, under wraps, etc. but people will find a way to let others know what’s up even in the most oppresive environments.

A press release that we just sent out:

A new online survey, by leading change management firm Maurer & Associates Inc., of the challenge of change in organizations today found 33 percent of leaders were more successful at implementing major change during the last 12 months than in the last 5 years. This contrasts with 14 percent who stated they were less successful and 31 percent who experienced no change.
Survey responses also revealed that 48 percent of organizations have experienced rapid major change during this recession, and 29 percent of respondents believe the economic recession has positively impacted their employee’s readiness to change. At the same time, only 20 percent of the respondents believed they were highly skilled at leading or managing these rapid changes while 55 percent believed they were somewhat skilled. (more…)

I love the comic strip Frank adn Ernest. On 4/30/09 A guy is attaching an additional sign to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms which reads “. . . and Trans Fats.” Frank or Ernest (I can never tell who is who)  says, “I worry that we’re losing our focus.”

I have seen too many vision and mission statements that are just a hodgepodge of well-meaning phrases. I’ll be they started off fine, with a clear focus, but then barnacles started attaching to the hull, and soon it was hard to tell where the ship was heading in the first place.

Here is a Podcast of an interview I conducted with Lean/Six Sigma expert, J.R. McGee.  You can access it here or using iTunes.  As  you will probably be able to tell, J.R. and I enjoy our conversations together. Hope you enjoy it.  HINT: when you click on the link, then cliock on “media file” at the bottom of the page. You’ll see the iTunes icon.

I just posted a survey on change in organizations today. Given all that is going on, and is in the air, I thought it might be interesting to see how people are handling change. If you’d like to participate, please click here:    Change Survey Thanks. – Rick

I just made some small revisions to my free e-book, Introduction to Change without Migraines. I hope you’ll take a look.