The Discipline of Project Justification - Part 6

By Tom DeVroy
VP of Sales

Change Management is the process and communication necessary to get your organization prepared for a change and necessary activities to make it happen. Managers usually have a pretty good idea of what they want to accomplish with a new system. They either want to automate processes, become more efficient, make their people more productive, grow the business, improve customer satisfaction, or just attain some other tangible and measureable benchmark that improves business operations and performance. I’m not sure they always communicate this clearly to the troops. The end user community really is interested in one thing, and that is how it will improve their work. How is this new software going to make their life easier?

I always say that to an end user the worst system in the world is the one they currently have....the best system in the world is the one they are looking at...until...it’s time to replace the old one, where it instantly becomes the best system and they usually work hard to make the new one look like the old one. This drives me crazy, but it happens all of the time. Why? Because the lack of vision, and a fear of the unknown.

The great chasm needs a bridge - a good change management plan builds the bridge. They can’t envision how they are going to get from where they are today to where they will be. Panic and fear sets in, and then the only fall back is to a comfort zone of what they are familiar with. See how that old system all of a sudden becomes too attractive. To make matters worse I’ve seen some customers engineer a new contemporary system with best practices and make it look and feel just like the old one they are replacing. What’s the point?

I worked at a consulting company by the name of Bentley Consulting which was later acquired by Technology Solutions. Bill Bentley was an acknowledged leader in Service Management operations. We used a variant of the following graphic to describe the process of change, which still applies today. It looks like this:


Senior management usually has a vision, and it drives overall business goals. This could be new operating methods, improved financials, competitive posturing or whatever, it is going to drive how the business will change to achieve these goals. So the next logical step is to look at the way things are done today and determine if the way you are structured today will facilitate the execution on the vision.

If it can’t, there is a process of re-engineering. This starts by defining the new model. This is usually when people start to inquire into vendors like Metrix. They realize that their existing system(s), for whatever reason, fits the old model, but that model won’t work going forward, so they need a new system that will accommodate the new model. This whole change needs to be communicated to the company, making sure they understand the following:

1. What are we trying to achieve and why?
2. What’s wrong with the way we do it today?
3. How are we going to change and what will it accomplish?
4. What parts of my job are going to change and how do I fit it to the new model?
5. How do I fit it to the new model?
   
6. What’s the timeframe and expectation of an outcome?
7. What role will I play in making this happen?
   
8. How do we sustain the change?
9. Can I provide feedback for future improvement?
   

This step is usually not addressed until after a system and implementation is underway, but if you have some of this information in your hip pocket when you ask for funding you will look like a very prepared project manager.

Just for grins I pinged Wikipedia for their definition of Change Management. I thought this might be useful as it has a few methodology references. I think their definition supports my arguments:

Individual Change Management
An early model of change developed by Kurt Lewin described change as a three-stage process[1]. The first stage he called "unfreezing". It involved overcoming inertia and dismantling the existing "mind set". Defense mechanisms have to be bypassed. In the second stage the change occurs. This is typically a period of confusion and transition. We are aware that the old ways are being challenged but we do not have a clear picture to replace them with yet. The third and final stage he called "refreezing". The new mindset is crystallizing and one's comfort level is returning to previous levels.

Some change theories are based on derivatives of the Kübler-Ross model from Elizabeth Kubler-Ross's book, "On Death and Dying." The stages of Kubler-Ross's model describe the personal and emotional states that a person typically encounters when dealing with loss of a loved one. Derivatives of her model applied in other settings such as the workplace show that similar emotional states are encountered as individuals are confronted with change.

A Formula for Change was developed by Richard Beckhard and David Gleicher and is sometimes referred to as Gleicher's Formula. The Formula illustrates that the combination of organisational dissatisfaction, vision for the future and the possibility of immediate, tactical action must be stronger than the resistance within the organisation in order for meaningful changes to occur.

The ADKAR model for individual change management was developed by Prosci with input from more than 1000 organizations from 59 countries. This model describes five required building blocks for change to be realized successfully on an individual level. The building blocks of the ADKAR Model include:

1. Awareness – of why the change is needed
2. Desire – to support and participate in the change
   
3. Knowledge – of how to change
4. Ability – to implement new skills and behaviors
   
5. Reinforcement – to sustain the change
   

Organizational Change Management
Organizational change management includes processes and tools for managing the people side of the change at an organizational level. These tools include a structured approach that can be used to effectively transition groups or organizations through change. When combined with an understanding of individual change management, these tools provide a framework for managing the people side of change.

Other Discipline of Project Justification Posts:

View Part 1 Here
View Part 2 Here
View Part 3 Here
View Part 4 Here
View Part 5 Here