Change Management News

US Navy Capt. Owen Honors was relieved of his command. Adm. John C. Harvey Jr. said that the sexually charged videos “calls into question his character and completely undermines his credibility to continue to serve effectively in command.” (NYT 1/5/11) This is especially sad since sailors, in many ways, seem to respect Capt. Honors.

Just as the USS Enterprise is about to leave for Afghanistan, the Navy must find a new commanding officer. That’s not easy. And it leaves an impression that the Navy never learned from the Tailhook scandal. And it seems Capt Honors’ career is all but over.

It didn’t have to be that way. Sailors expressed their discomfort with these videos but apparently no one listened. As an executive from Harley Davidson once said about its declining reputation among bike riders back in the 70s, “the writing was on the wall but we thought it was a forgery.” (more…)

Question: Must we focus on why changes fail? (drum roll) Answer: Yes, we must.

Over the past couple of days, I was engaged in conversations about the emphasis on the failure of change in organizations. They believed that focusing on failure saps energy and spirit and gets people focusing on the wrong things.  And, that we keep trotting out the  very old tired statistic that 70 percent of changes fail.

I do agree with them in part. Too much emphasis on hand-wringing is harmful. It can sap our energy to do anything productive. We’ve all probably been in meetings where you could feel motivation ooze out of the room. Obviously, I am not a fan of that.

But I think focusing on failure (as well as success) is critically important. (more…)

My friend (and former teacher) Carolyn Lukensmeyer believes in democracy. She has dedicated her life to it. Fifteen years ago she founded AmericaSpeaks, a group dedicated to getting people from across the political and cultural spectrums together to talk about things that matter. She recently ran an event where 3500 participants in some 60 communities met (more…)

Tiger Woods statement to the press was the right thing to do and he did it well. Compare his comments to other political and busines leaders who give their obligatory mea culpas. The contrast is stunning. And there are lessons in what he wrote and how he delivered his message that leaders should take to heart.

He took complete responsibility for his actions. He didn’t say “mistakes were made” as many do, as if some grand anonymous force out there had made him sleep around.

He didn’t try to parse his way out of it (more…)

Two years ago, Washington, DC Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee’s popularity was 59 percent among District residents while 29 percent disapproved of her performance. Today, her approval rating is 43 percent (44 percent disapprove.) Parents of children in DC schools gave her 54 percent approval rating in 2008 and today 54 percent disapprove of her performance.  (The Washington Post. 2/1/10. Most facts included in this post come from that article.)

She was hired to bring about change in a troubled school system.  Leading change can be tough in most organizations, but in DC Schools it can be an especially tough assignment. (more…)

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.

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.

The US government should not be running GM. While the government can be capable of managing large programs effectively, running an auto company is not among them.

This is a good intention gone bad. While keeping General Motors afloat is a worthy goal, the plan won’t get us there.

You’ve got to ask yourself what’s really changed as a result of the bankruptcy. (more…)

I am still amazed at how infrequently organizational changes take context into account when they plan a major change. It’s like the idea itself – we’ll cut costs, we’ll move into new markets, we’ll introduce a new product, etc. – is so compelling that our brains don’t have room to even consider tough questions about the overall business/cultural environment. In my book, Why Don’t You Want What I Want?, I argue that considering the context is one of the most important things we should do.

And it’s hard to find good examples of organizations that do a great job of this. I found one in this morning’s The Washington Post. How Gays Won a Marriage Victory tells how activists prepared for and won the case that allows gay marriage. A few points:

Activists worked out of the spotlight.
They carefully screen couples to find the best candidates to be test cases.

As the article says, “When taking the legislative route, the activists first get to know the political dynamics to identify friendly and potentially friendly lawmakers. They find residents to call lawmakers to express support for same-sex marriage. They start phone banks and petition drives. And, as with court action, they wait until they think their chances are good.”

The strategies in Iowa are different than those pursued in other states. For example, in Rhode Island activists are waiting until 2011 when Governor Carcieri, an opponent of gay marriage, leaves office.
The article makes a fine case study for the importance of knowing the context you are working in.

The Change Management Open Source Project just held its first conference call to discuss the topic of How to Lead Change When You Don’t Know Where You’re Going. Seemed like an apt topic for this environment. I posted a Podcast of the hour long call. To listen you need to register for the open source project. Everything associated with the project is free, by the way. You can register at Change Management Open Source Project.

Bonuses for A.I.G. executives could be the downfall of the US, or so you might think to watch how politicians, pundits, and the public reacted.

Never mind that the bonuses amounted to chump change in the grand scheme of things. We acted like villagers in the movie Frankenstein who wanted to kill the monster. (more…)

Within days of taking office, President Obama began to reach out to both parties in Congress. He invited elected officials to the White House, and he personally went to Capitol Hill. As soon the $800 billion stimulus bill passed with only a handful of Republican votes, some mocked these outreach efforts as failures. But the skeptics got it wrong.  And I believe the President knows they got it wrong. (more…)

It was amazing to hear a President or any leader for that matter — say, “I screwed up”. Hearing leaders admit mistakes is rare. At best, we might hear mistakes were made, but that leaves us to wonder just made those mistakes. Another common reaction to a screw-up is to obfuscate with spin so that no one understands what is going on. And a final favorite is to parse the error so minutely that it appears that everything worked out just fine. But to hear someone say, “I screwed up” is as shocking as it is refreshing.

I can tell you, if I ever happen to personally screw up, I might just follow the President’s lead.