"A key reason for the failure of implementation is that executive executives, managers and supervisors do not... well understand that implementation must be achieved through multiple factors that are simultaneously addressed." from
[Fevzi Okumus]
Change management is a chaotic business, full of complexity, and many things can and often go wrong. This is reflected in the 70% failure rate of all change initiatives.
Many of the things that can and do go wrong are based on many related factors:
#Overemphasis on the process, not the person
#Failed to fully consider the impact of changes on the people most affected by it
# Lack of direct solution to the process of human change
#无晰 clarity and lack of communication
#Lack of language and contextual framework to clarify and manage the necessary change processes
#Failed to address energy and emotions associated with change
#Failed to understand the difference between "new features" and "achievement benefits" [and its importance]
#Failed to understand and apply the "business as usual" test to determine if it is "incremental change" or "step change" [and can't understand why this is important]
To address these pitfalls and achieve successful change initiatives, there are three key areas to focus on:
[1] Leadership directly addresses the transitional and emotional dimensions of people affected by change and provides an inspiring motivation.
[2] Change models and methods covering "multiple factors that must be addressed"
[3] Action management, showing and asserting what people really need.
This is a short practitioner's master class highlighting key themes in these three areas.
leadership
There is a need to guide and manage change initiatives. In most change initiatives, the main failure of the leadership is that there is no change!
What is needed is that leaders can recognize the importance of the emotional dimension, especially the two dimensions of understanding the impact of change:
[1] Organizational change - new processes, procedures and structures
[2] Personal transition - emotions and psychology
Most change initiatives use a method that ignores the emotional dimension of individual transitions. Neglecting change is the main reason for the resistance to change and the failure of change. Guiding employees to complete this transformation is as important as managing organizational change
Leadership that addresses these factors requires a high level of emotional intelligence – which is often not apparent among senior managers.
So for any business leader reading this content, I would say: "The level of your emotional awareness – and the amount of emotional aspects you embrace and use – is directly related to the success of the change and ongoing organizational performance."
culture
Culture can be simply defined as how people behave in a group environment.
Organizational culture is the biggest determinant of how individuals are in an organic environment. Culture will transcend education, wisdom and common sense
Therefore, you can't successfully change the steps [and realize the benefits] without changing the organizational culture.
To change the culture you need:
[1] Identify and understand it
[2] Communicate its framework and language
[3] Tools and processes to change it
Change models and methods from
Trumpet
"Having a good understanding of the many factors that must be addressed" is achieved by changing models and methods that bridge the gap between the high-level "big picture" strategic vision and the successful implementation of the front line. There are many popular and frequently used change models, especially John Kotter's "8-step change model" and Prosci "ADKAR change model." These and other models have great advantages and provide a structured focus for the management of change plans.
The difficulty with these and the most mature models of change is that it is understandable that they tend to cover a major aspect or dimension of the whole involved. This does not invalidate any particular model and support methods, but it does leave a blank.
The main specific criticism that can be made for most of these models is that they are tactical and projectmatic; they are not strategic, they do not have sufficient holistic and broad scope to completely address the most common causes of failure.
Currently, there is no change model between the leadership and the strategic review process, and the project and task level management and implementation levels are low.
Plan level implementation
For this reason, I have adjusted some of the core concepts and program management processes, and combined the initial cultural analysis with the pre-project review and planning process using my EEMAP Process©, which I provide to you in a simple form. A program-based model designed to fill strategic-project gaps.
In short, my program-based model design:
# Promote the key thinking process needed to successfully change the plan
#Support Kotter, the leadership process outlined by the Bridges Transition Model, and provide a framework and context for the project/task-level ADKAR model
It has five main goals:
[1] Bridging the gap between vision and implementation
[2] Ensuring "cultural analysis" and "pre-project review and planning processes"
[3] About how and why things change after the change
[4] Identify, assess and mitigate the impact of changes on all those affected by it
[5] Ensuring the realization of the envisaged organizational benefits
Task level implementation
A common mistake many managers make is to assume that they will happen because they tell people what they want to happen. It won't!
While people will hear your opinions as they outline your vision and strategy, and may agree with you on a personal level, most people cannot turn it into productive, purposeful action.
There are big differences in how people process information, explain life, and how they be motivated. It's not because they are stupid, it doesn't necessarily mean they are resistant to your vision and strategy, but it often means that jumping from vision and strategy to actual implementation is too big for them - no support.
This means that managing changes at the task level requires specific operational detail management [sometimes micro-management], what to do and how to do it. This is especially necessary in the early stages.
As a leader in change, you should not make assumptions, "grind out" and communicate those feasible steps.
Normally this won't happen. Leaders don't lead, and managers don't manage. People think: "They have been told what to do, they will leave to do it." Error! Assuming no time, there is no need to spend time translating ideas and communicating those feasible steps. wrong again!
It's up to you to define and communicate these actionable steps and manage your employees by implementing and integrating these steps as a new way of working.
Orignal From: Change Management - Strategies for Managing Change - Master Practitioners
No comments:
Post a Comment