CITI - partners in change » Communication

A major retailer had introduced a new, heavily computerised system

Paul Ashton — Fri, 15 Feb 2013 12:53:38 +0000

A major retailer had introduced a new, heavily computerised system for buying and distributing ambient temperature goods. The buyers were resisting the implementation, and constantly identifying shortcomings in the process, the coding and the operational capability of the system.

Research was undertaken with the buyers to establish what it was about the system that they saw as unacceptable, and sought for ways to restructure the implementation so that it delivered the benefits claimed.

It became clear that the implementation was regarded by the buyers as debasing their self-worth, as they saw themselves as relationship managers, experts in the ways of the suppliers they dealt with, and as negotiators, people who made deals; not – as they described it – as data entry clerks.

Working closely with HR and the business unit managers, the training and the remuneration packages were redesigned. The value of good MI was emphasised and motivated by performance-related pay being associated with good record keeping (a recognised weakness in the earlier systems) and a re-emphasis on the gaining and utilisation of business intelligence on the suppliers.

Focus on corporate behaviour was strengthened with the buyers becoming a vocal force in the use and deployment of business intelligence to further the ambitions of the retailer.

Director of wealth management in a bank was handed an unmanageable portfolio of work

Paul Ashton — Thu, 14 Feb 2013 17:27:04 +0000

A newly appointed director of wealth management in a bank was handed an unmanageable portfolio of work. He attempted to gain agreement from the management team on prioritising projects. This proved to be impossible because of conflicting agendas and very differing views as to what was ‘important’. Working with the management team, agreement was gained on the prioritisation criteria whilst ensuring all involved had a common understanding about what was being done and why. This allowed for a significant ‘cleansing’ of the portfolio and acceptance of where scarce resource needed to be deployed.

Improving clients capability in marketing

Paul Ashton — Thu, 14 Feb 2013 16:39:31 +0000

The exposure of our higher education institutions to a more competitive marketplace led a client to focus on improving its capability in marketing. The faculties were enthused by the potential influx of students, but this initial commitment tended to fade in the face of more immediate and pressing matters. Recognition that the faculties did not have a common view of the proposed changes prompted the adoption of a more sophisticated, targeted communications approach, and waning enthusiasm was rekindled.

We have helped many organisations identify and deal with the ‘people’ challenges of change

Paul Ashton — Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:17:15 +0000

A newly appointed director of wealth management in a bank was handed an unmanageable portfolio of work. He attempted to gain agreement from the management team on which projects to drop and confirm which were most important. This proved to be impossible because of conflicting agendas and very differing views as to what was ‘important’. CITI worked with the management team to clarify and gain agreement on the prioritisation criteria whist ensuring all involved had a common understanding about what was being done and why. This allowed for a significant ‘cleansing’ of the portfolio and acceptance of where scarce resource needed to be deployed.

Moving hearts and minds

Thomas Docker — Wed, 06 Feb 2013 16:57:10 +0000

If the numbers of people in the UK attending and watching the London 2012 Paralympics Games is a valid indicator, then prejudice against individuals with disabilities should be under increasing pressure. Hopefully, the Paralymics proves to be the tipping point.

It can be argued that there has been a paradigm shift in people’s attitude to disability – a moving of hearts and minds – as a consequence of the special circumstances provided by the Paralympics.

Does it always take special circumstances to achieve a paradigm shift? What is the value of difference?

Watch the video on Sue Austin, an artist who has changed hearts and minds through doing the extraordinary.

http://www.ted.com/talks/sue_austin_deep_sea_diving_in_a_wheelchair.html

What lessons can you identify for managing change, particularly for dealing with resistance in change?

Our stakeholders have potentially conflicting perspectives and priorities regarding the change – what should we do?

Paul Ashton — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 09:13:04 +0000

Individuals have their own motivations and agendas. This is not the result of malevolence or deliberate troublemaking – it’s just the way things are. In order for change to happen and stick, individuals need to be effectively supported in understanding the need for the change and how it will impact them, so that they can internalise the change and be committed to it. Identifying an individual’s perceptions of what is in their favour, their WIIFMs (“What’s in it for me?”), and what is against them, their WAMIs (“What’s against my interests?”) is extremely valuable, but not always easy to do, and helps to identify where potential resistance and conflicts may surface.
If it’s not wanted, the change will not be successful. Failing to understand and address the political and cultural environment is a common reason for change not succeeding in the way it should. Consistent and continuous engagement and clear communications are essential, as are allowing individuals to voice their concerns.

Things to consider

Is there a clear, shared change vision?
Have all the stakeholders, those impacted by the change, been consulted and actively engaged?
Have personal agendas been taken into account?
Don’t stifle healthy conflict, as this often identifies valid concerns as well as showing commitment.
Discourage unhealthy conflict through agreeing and publicising acceptable change behaviours.
Manage resistance to the change; don’t resist it.

Why has the great, early commitment faded?

Paul Ashton — Fri, 01 Feb 2013 16:04:01 +0000

Gaining commitment and maintaining impetus are fundamental to implementing successful and lasting change. After the initial surge of activity in creating the change vision there is a real risk that business-as-usual concerns will rapidly diminish our interest in, let alone commitment to, making the change. Continual reinforcement of what we want to achieve is required to make sure the individuals from the business stay engaged in the change. This requires a clear communications strategy translated into appropriate, localised directions for use by change leaders throughout the organisation, whether they are business managers or ‘people like us’ – local role models.

Things to consider

Have you established a clear, shared vision for the change among all interested parties?
Does the communications strategy cover the ‘breadth’ (involve all relevant areas) and the ‘depth’ (involve all relevant levels) necessary for long term commitment?
Are you looking out for previously unidentified individuals and groups who need to be ‘on board’?
Do you know how to communicate with each individual or group and how often?
Are those impacted by the change empowered to contribute to the change?
Does the communication feedback tell you what you need to know about how individuals and groups feel about the change? Is their commitment steady, rising or falling?

How can we know if the change is really on track to deliver its benefits?

Paul Ashton — Fri, 01 Feb 2013 14:44:02 +0000

There are two concerns that require resolution here: “Are we doing the right thing?” and “Are we doing it right?” Central to addressing the first of these is a compelling business case that is built on a strong benefits case. Even in the case of legislative change, there is a need to investigate available options to gaining compliance.

From the business case, we will have a clear set of business milestones that will shape the way we plan and monitor delivery of the change products (the deliverables). Additionally, we will have identified potential risks to the costs of making the change happen and the business benefits we expect to gain from making the change stick.

To know if we are doing it right requires us to link the desired benefits to the change products and the operational impacts they must make in the new business-as-usual. This mapping of benefits to operational impact to change products is developed from the benefits case. The mapping, along with the business milestones, provides the basis for planning for the realisation of benefits at the appropriate points in the change journey. It allows us to determine when each of the change products is needed, and what it must achieve, through highlighting the operational impacts the deliverable needs to make or contribute to. In this way, we can be confident throughout the change journey that we really are on track to deliver the benefits.

Things to consider

Have the benefits been mapped to impacts and products, so we can demonstrate how the benefits will be delivered?
Do we have achievable milestones against which we can plan the delivery of the change products (deliverables) to make the desired operating impacts?
Do we have a reception strategy in business-as-usual for the adoption of the change products, so that the right operating impacts will be made and the benefits will be realised?
Are we using product-based planning that focuses on achievement?
Are key performance indicators (KPIs) in place and being monitored for the change journey?

No-one in the business seems to be standing up to take ownership of the change

Paul Ashton — Wed, 23 Jan 2013 11:34:11 +0000

If change is to stick, the business must take ownership of the change products – make them their own. This means that the business must be engaged from the start in determining what those change products (deliverables) should be. When someone in the business (the ‘change owner’) commits resources by commissioning a change, they must also take accountability for successful implementation. That means embedding the change products into a modified business-as-usual to ensure the realisation of the benefits sought.

With significant change, where benefits will be realised across many functions, the change owner must be in the upper layers of the business, and have significant political influence. Where ownership responsibilities are delegated, these will probably mirror line management structures, and there will be a need for coordinated activities by the senior managers involved. Without careful attention, effective business ownership may not happen. Consequently, the ownership of each change must be clearly visible and communicated to all.

Things to consider

Is business ownership of each change product clear and accepted?
Is accountability for the benefits clear and accepted?
Is the change ownership role assigned to the appropriate individual?
Are the risks of any shared change ownership being appropriately addressed?
Is the ownership of the change apparent to the adopters of the change?

We are asking people to change their way of working day-to-day. How do we make that happen?

Paul Ashton — Mon, 21 Jan 2013 15:36:25 +0000

Directed change brings discomfort for most of those on the receiving end of the change – at least in the short term – and usually means their doing something wanted by someone else, rather than themselves. This discomfort typically translates into resistance. We, therefore, need to manage resistance by finding ways to motivate individuals to adopt the changes and adopt others’ desires and ambitions as their own.

An organisational-wide change arises from the sum of all the individuals’ change behaviours – and there lies a challenge. There is generally not a single, completely shared change journey, but multiple transformations, and so there is no single motivation or change process that will work.

It has been said that running a programme is like herding cats; shepherding individuals and groups and pushing them forward is difficult. Of course, if you want the cats to behave ‘rationally’, the best way is to put ‘treats’ where you want them to go, and wait. What then count as ‘treats’ for those who need to change?

Things to consider

Have you identified what counts as ‘achievement‘ in the vision of the new world and any ‘natural’ rewards in the outcomes?
Has the change initiative developed sign-post Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for use during the transition period?
Have you modelled rewards in terms of pay, promotion and praise (non-financial reward? (Each ‘p’ has a major contribution to play in developing and embedding behaviours)
Are the value systems of the groups that are to change identified and understood?

And are you considering

linking jobs and roles to recognisably valuable outcomes
replacing the KPIs for the change with operational ones after the transition – defining a profile over time that recognises the occurrence of learning?
involving the adopters in the design of any new processes.