1 discussion question and 1 summary

4 The Role of Change Manager To function effectively as an HPI practitioner, you must be able to enact the role of change manager. But what is that role? What competencies and work outputs are associated with it? With what approaches for managing change should the change manager be familiar? How is the role of change manager enacted? This chapter addresses these questions. According to ASTD Models for Human Performance Improvement (Rothwell, 2000), the change manager is the role that “ensures that interventions are implemented in ways consistent with desired results and that they help individuals and groups achieve results.” Think of this role as akin to that of a project manager who follows through on performance improvement interventions to ensure that they are implemented in ways intended to achieve the desired results and impact. The change manager’s role is thus key to successful implementation. Without effective implementation, of course, grand designs falter in crude procedures. Competencies Associated with the Role of Change Manager According to ASTD Models for Human Performance Improvement (Rothwell, 2000), the following competencies are linked to the change manager role: Change implementation skills: Understanding the nature of individual and organizational change and applying that knowledge to effectively lead organizations successfully through change Change impetus skills: Determining what the organization should do to address the cause(s) of a human performance gap at present and in the future Communication channel, informal network, and alliance understanding: Knowing how communication moves through an organization by various channels, networks, and alliances; building such channels, networks, and alliances to achieve improvements in productivity and performance Group dynamics process understanding: Understanding how groups function; influencing people so that group, work, and individual needs are addressed (McLagan, 1989) Process consultation skills: Observing individuals and groups for their interactions and the effects of their interactions with others Facilitation skills: Helping performers, performers’ managers, process owners, and stakeholders to discover new insights Outputs Linked to the Role The outputs associated with the competencies are listed in Figure 4-1. Recall that an enabling output is associated with the demonstration of a competency, while a terminal output is the final outcome associated with the role. What It All Means Taken together, the role, competencies, and work outputs of the change manager are essentially descriptive of a project manager. Change managers thus facilitate, orchestrate, guide, and gently nudge along performance improvement interventions in much the same manner as a project manager works to achieve project results. In the words of one practitioner, “a good change manager will do anything it takes—within reason and ethical boundaries—to move a project along in keeping with the objectives established for results.” The operative phrase here is “move a project along.” That phrase encapsulates exactly what a good change manager does. Change managers may thus apply their competencies as illustrated by the following examples: With change implementation skills, change managers may:   Establish a change management plan and then manage its implementation.   Prepare the organization for the impending change by soliciting stakeholder involvement.   Balance organization and individual needs and resolve conflicts when they arise.   Help the organization deal with natural resistance by surfacing issues and creating an open-door approach to change initiatives. With change impetus skills, change managers may:   Monitor industry and organizational publications for key drivers that make a desired change more important, to communicate this information to interested stakeholders so as to reemphasize the “business case” for change.   Bring up the topic of the change effort as opportunity arises—with the goal being to reinforce the importance of the change effort to meeting business needs and achieving strategic objectives. With communication channel, informal network, and alliance understanding, change managers may:   Work through existing communication channels of peers, colleagues, and others to give presentations—both formal and informal—to emphasize the importance of a change effort, the direction of it, the objectives tied to it, and the results sought from it. This may involve giving talks to groups inside and outside the organization and arranging for influential stakeholders at all levels inside and outside the organization to hear those presentations.   Identify groups or individuals that have—or should have—a stake in a change effort and make them aware of it and garner their support to “make it happen.”   Build strategic alliances with key groups and influential individuals inside and outside the organization to serve as change champions and change supporters of the performance improvement strategy. With group dynamics process understanding, change managers may:   Pinpoint possible sources of resistance to a change effort and take proactive steps to address those problems so that they do not adversely affect the performance improvement strategy. (Note that a performance improvement strategy is a change effort.)   Emphasize the benefits or “what’s-in-it-for-me’s” (WIFMs) throughout the change effort to ensure that individuals and groups appreciate the need for the change effort and support it, as much as possible, based on their own self-interests.   Understand how to work with groups or teams to initiate, follow through on, and continuously assess group support (or opposition) to the direction of a change effort and take positive steps to address any issues that may serve to stall, derail, or otherwise adversely affect the performance improvement strategy. With process consultation skills, change managers may:   Watch group dynamics in meetings and in other group settings to identify issues in how the group(s) perform, as they may influence action in the direction of a performance improvement strategy.   Take action to address group process (that is, “how group members interact”) if group process issues negatively affect implementation of a performance improvement strategy. With facilitation skills, change managers may help group members to:   Formulate action plans and proposals to guide a performance improvement strategy.   Establish measurable objectives and milestones for a performance improvement strategy.   Track progress toward the objectives of the performance improvement strategy and take proactive steps for improvement when milestones are missed or when results do not match objectives or stakeholder expectations. Of all of these, perhaps facilitation skills are the most important of all, because those competencies help participants and stakeholders in performance improvement interventions achieve agreement or consensus about how well interventions are working. Change Manager Role Terminal Outputs Ensures that interventions are implemented in ways consistent with desired results and that they help individuals and groups achieve results. Performance improvement interventions effectively monitored with participants and stakeholders Effective interpersonal interactions among participants and stakeholders of interventions Tracking systems to compare actual and ideal performance and progress toward narrowing or closing performance gaps, or realizing performance opportunities as the intervention is implemented Oral and/or written agreements among most or all stakeholders about the results desired from the intervention Measurable financial or nonfinancial objective to be achieved during and after implementation of the intervention(s) Change Manager Competencies Enabling Outputs 1.  Change Implementation Skills**: Understanding the nature of individual and organizational change and applying that knowledge to effectively lead organizations successfully through change. Plans for managing the change Effect involvement of stakeholders Individual and organizational needs in balance Conflict resolution utilized to resolve differences Process for surfacing issues Management understanding the dynamics of change 2.  Change Impetus Skills: Determining what the organization should do to address the cause(s) of a human performance gap at present and in the future. A convincing case made for the need for change Organizational sponsorship identified and secured Evidence of support obtained through commitment of resources Designs/action plans for introducing and consolidating interventions Designs/plans for reducing resistance to interventions Recommendations to management about management’s role in introducing and consolidating change Recommendations to workers about their role in introducing and consolidating change 3.  Communication Channel, Informal Network, and Alliance Understanding: Knowing how communication moves through an organization by various channels, networks, and alliances; building such channels, networks, and alliances to achieve improvements in productivity and performance. Communication plans established to keep participants in change and stakeholders of change informed about the progress of the human performance improvement intervention 4.  Groups Dynamics Process Understanding: Understanding how groups function; influencing people so that group, work, and individual needs are addressed (McLagan, 1989). Groups successfully observed Plans for influencing groups based on Plans for influencing groups based on theory 5.  Process Consultation Skills: Observing individuals and groups for their interactions and the effects of their interactions with others. Group process observation forms Descriptions to group members and individuals about the effects of their behavior on a group or on individuals 6.  Facilitation Skills: Helping performers, performers’ managers, process owners, and stakeholders to discover new insights. Plans for facilitating group discussions Plans for facilitating individual or group decision making and problem solving **Additional competencies identified by the authors. Figure 4-1 Outputs associated with the change manager role. Source: Rothwell, W. (2000). ASTD Models for Human Performance Improvement: Roles, Competencies, and Outputs, 2nd ed. Alexandria, VA: The American Society for Training and Development. Used by permission of The American Society for Training and Development. Approaches for Managing Change There are three important approaches for managing any change effort. Those who enact the change manager role should be familiar with all three. They are: (1) the coercive approach, (2) the persuasive approach, and (3) the normative reeducative approach (Rothwell and Sullivan, 2005). Each deserves a brief review. The Coercive Approach The coercive approach to change is familiar to many people. It takes its name from the underlying driver for change that it uses—that is, coercion. People are told to “just do it.” The subtle—and sometimes not-so-subtle—threat is that “if you don’t do it, we will find someone who will.” Most everyone with experience in organizations has heard it said that some managers adopt a philosophy that “it’s my way or the highway.” This phrase is indicative of the coercive approach. The coercive approach follows this general model: Step 1: Order people to make a change. Step 2: Follow up to see if they made the change. Step 3: Take action if they did not make the change. These steps are depicted in Figure 4-2. The coercive approach to change is perhaps best embodied in the thinking of Scientific Management, which was founded early in the 20th century by writer-philosopher Frederick Taylor. Frederick Taylor’s views were often misinterpreted, and he is often blamed for purveying such ideas as these: Workers are generally lazy and require a “kick butt” approach to get them to act. People are generally untrustworthy and will do the wrong thing—or take the easy way out—unless their actions are closely observed, monitored, and scrutinized for the slightest error. The manager’s job requires “whipping people” to get results, and the best managers achieve results by “scaring people” more than others do. Figure 4-2 A model of the coercive approach to change. This approach is sometimes called the “whip-and-chair” view of management, since it casts the manager in the role of lion tamer. Of course, there are occasions when the coercive approach is quite appropriate to bring about change. Perhaps the best example is in case of an unexpected emergency or crisis. The captain of a ship does not take a vote to decide whether to abandon a sinking ship; rather, he or she orders people to do it. They are expected to act without questioning the orders or complaining about them. In any case, it is in their best interest to take action in that situation, and the dangers of not doing so are apparent to the crew. Note that the word unexpected preceded emergency or crisis in the paragraph above. While some managers in organizations may liken their situations to those of captains on sinking ships and rationalize that a coercive approach is appropriate in today’s superheated business environment, the reality is that very few crises or emergencies should exist if managers plan the work and communicate with workers. One case in which it might be appropriate is the case of an enterprisewide system implementation. It is, after all, a decision that encompasses the entire organization. Someone needs to exert leadership, make the call that it is necessary, and take action steps. Those who do HPI work should recognize this approach, because it is too commonly used. Managers may want to “force” people to cooperate with a performance improvement strategy. Their goal is to get quick results. Unfortunately, by using this approach, effectiveness (long-term results) is sacrificed for expediency (short-term results). Effectiveness stems from obtaining worker buyin and ownership for a change effort or a performance improvement strategy, and that requires taking the time to use another approach. The Persuasive Approach The persuasive approach to change should also be familiar to many people. It takes its name from the underlying driver for change that it uses—that is, persuasion. People are told to “do it because it is in your best interests to do it.” The subtle message underlying this approach is that “if you don’t do it, then you are acting against your own selfish interests.” At its best, the persuasive approach is sincere. At its worst, the persuasive approach is a disguised form of the coercive approach in which people are told to “cooperate for your own interests—or else be prepared to accept the negative consequences stemming from your unwillingness to cooperate.” The persuasive approach follows this general model: Step 1: Give people the background of a problem or situation. Step 2: Describe for them what needs to be done to solve the problem or address the situation. Step 3: Describe, in detail, exactly what benefits the organization—and individuals—will obtain from cooperating with the change effort. Step 4: Describe the likely consequences of not taking action on the problem or situation. Step 5: Ask for their support and help to make the change happen and to solve the problem or deal with the situation. Step 6: Establish specific, measurable, and traceable performance improvement objectives and establish milestones for those objectives. Step 7: Communicate about the value of the performance improvement effort on a continuing basis and provide continuing feedback to the organization, groups, and individuals about their contributions in achieving results. These steps are depicted in Figure 4-3. The persuasive approach to change is perhaps best embodied in the Human Relations School of Management, which was founded early in the 20th century as a reaction to Scientific Management. It is based on such key assumptions as these: Workers are social beings who seek support and recognition from their peers and organizational superiors. People are generally trustworthy and will do the right thing—as long as they understand what to do, why to do it, and how they benefit from it. The manager’s job requires recognizing how important social needs are in organizational settings and his or her role in “providing positive feedback” to actions by individuals or groups to achieve desired results. Figure 4-3 A model of the persuasive approach to change. The persuasive approach is frequently used in organizations today. Managers provide direction. They explain why that direction is important to the organization. They do not always, however, provide clear information about benefits— the “what’s-in-it-for-me’s” to workers. Nor do they always establish measurable performance targets or milestones for improvement or mount a continuing information campaign to provide feedback to workers and other stakeholders about the progress of improvement efforts. Those who do HPI work should recognize this approach and should be prepared to help managers, workers, and stakeholders establish: Clear messages about the need for change and how such change relates to organizational needs and desired performance Clear, measurable, and well-communicated performance targets or objectives to be achieved from a performance improvement strategy or effort A communication plan or informational campaign to match the performance improvement strategy so that workers and other key stakeholders are given continuing feedback on how well their actions (individually and/or collectively) are helping to achieve desired results and/or what corrective actions may be necessary Tracking systems that permit individuals and/or groups to assess how much and how well their efforts are helping to achieve the results desired from a performance improvement strategy Incentive and reward systems that are tied to the desired performance results so that there is a genuine link between “performance” and “rewards” The Normative Reeducative Approach The normative reeducative approach to change is new to many people. It takes its name from the underlying drivers for change that it uses—that is, norms (unspoken rules governing action) and education (change resulting from new information or skills). People are not “told” anything when this approach is used; rather, they are themselves the source of the change effort. Like any other approach, however, this approach can be misused, and that is the greatest potential danger in using it. The normative reeducative approach follows the framework of what is called the action research model (ARM): Step 1: Find individuals or groups who want to change or who want to improve. Step 2: Clarify the scope of the change effort. (Does this involve one or more individuals, an entire work group or team, the whole organization, the organization’s approach to dealing with its external environment, or some other frame of reference? Exactly what needs to be changed?) Step 3: Conduct background research on the setting to find possible sources of performance problems or opportunities for performance improvement. Step 4: Collect information from individuals, groups, and others inside the organization and stakeholders outside the organization (such as customers, suppliers, and/or distributors) familiar with the problem or opportunity facing the individual(s) or group(s) that are attempting to improve performance. Step 5: Feed the results of the data collection effort back to individuals inside the organization. Step 6: Use the feedback effort in Step 5 (where information is gathered from individuals or groups) to energize an impetus for change by giving people a sense of different perspectives about how well the organization is doing. Step 7: Help an organization, group, or individual recognize what change is needed and why it is needed by pinpointing performance problems or opportunities for improvement. Step 8: Achieve group consensus (or individual agreement) on the performance problem or opportunity, the need for change, and the priorities desired for change. Step 9: Help an organization, group, or individual identify the best way(s) to solve the performance problem(s) or improvement opportunity(-ies) by collecting information about perceived solutions to the problems or approaches to seizing performance improvement opportunities and feeding that information back to the group. Step 10: Achieve group consensus (or individual agreement) on the most appropriate performance improvement strategies. Step 11: Establish performance or change objectives that are clear, precise, and measurable so that, when the performance objectives are met, the gap will be closed between the actual (what is happening now) and the desirable (what should be happening). Step 12: Help an organization, group, or individual identify the best way(s) to implement the performance improvement strategy to achieve the desired performance results. Do that by polling the group, benchmarking best practices in other organizations, and researching the literature on approaches used by other organizations, and other approaches. Step 13: Feed the results of Step 12 back to the group and help group members establish a proposal for a performance improvement strategy that articulates the specific, measurable performance objectives (outcomes) and solves the performance problem(s) or realizes performance improvement opportunity(-ies). Step 14: Present the proposal, including resource requirements, to key decision makers and stakeholders to secure support. Step 15: Secure approval for the proposal and launch the performance improvement intervention or performance improvement strategy. Step 16: Implement the performance improvement strategy and monitor results of the performance improvement effort over time. Step 17: Provide continuing feedback to participants and stakeholders in the performance improvement effort so that they see how well the performance improvement effort is doing and can take corrective action if results are off-target. Step 18: Complete the performance improvement strategy when results match objectives. Step 19: Evaluate results against performance objectives and report results to all key stakeholders and all participants in the performance improvement strategy. These steps are depicted in Figure 4-4. Figure 4-4 A model of the normative reeducative approach to change. The normative reeducative approach—which is a key foundation for this book—is perhaps best embodied in the Systems School of Management. It is based on such key assumptions as these: Performance is best judged in the eyes of the customer or user. Most problems stem from management, not from individual workers. Workers, however, are well suited to advise management “what to do.” The people who are closest to performance are usually in the best position to judge “why things go wrong” and “what would work best to fix those problems”—or else “what could be done to make things go better” and “what would work to seize opportunities that exist.” The search for quick fixes is usually fruitless, and “the quality of the results obtained from performance improvement efforts is directly correlated to the amount of time devoted to them and the ownership in them that all key groups feel about them.” The normative reeducative approach is also known to organization development (OD) practitioners as the action research model (ARM) (Rothwell and Sullivan, 2005). It is one of several key models that should be in the toolkit of the workplace and learning and performance (WLP) practitioner (Rothwell, Sanders, and Soper, 1999). More recently, the ARM has been supplemented by appreciative inquiry, an approach that (appreciatively and nonjudgmentally) queries the parties concerning their beliefs about a problem situation. This is a good method for surfacing and addressing issues with regard to change initiatives in the organization as well as a way to gain support and buy-in for interventions requiring organizational change. Those who do HPI work should recognize this approach and be prepared to use it. The normative reeducative approach model, or ARM, is suitable for use with groups of any size. Enacting the Role of Change Manager Change managers focus their efforts primarily around Steps 15–17 of the model described in Figure 4-4. Enacting the role of change manager thus involves the steps appearing in Figure 4-5. Each step deserves more detailed attention in this chapter. Step 15: Securing Approval for the Proposal and Launching the Performance Improvement Intervention or Performance Improvement Strategy Most performance improvement interventions begin when a senior manager, who may also be championing the effort, grants approval for the use of organizational resources. That is usually done upon the acceptance of a proposal that describes: The exact nature of the problem or improvement opportunity A brief description of the cause of the problem—and how that information was obtained (through the work of the analyst role) A brief description of the proposed solution to the problem—that is, the performance improvement intervention—and how that solution was identified as appropriate to address the problem’s underlying cause and how that solution is expected to address the problem or achieve desired results A list of the specific, measurable objectives intended to be achieved by the performance improvement intervention A list of time-specific, measurable milestones, which are essentially measurable signposts to show progress toward achieving the final performance improvement objectives A step-by-step plan to implement the performance improvement intervention, describing what will happen, what results are expected from each step, who does what, and how information about the performance improvement intervention—at each key step—will be communicated to the participants and stakeholders in the intervention A timeline describing when what steps will be taken A budget for the performance improvement intervention, showing all costs associated with the intervention A cost-benefit analysis to show the financial gains that are expected to be realized from the project minus the costs A description of all individuals—both inside and outside the organization—who are needed to implement the performance improvement intervention and how their qualifications relate to achieving intended objectives Figure 4-5 A model of the normative reeducative approach to change—the change manager’s role. Use the worksheet appearing in Figure 4-6 to prepare such a proposal. A proposal organized like the one described above provides an excellent foundation by which to clarify: What results are expected from the performance improvement intervention Who should be involved directly in the implementation of the performance improvement intervention When results should be expected Why the performance improvement intervention is worth undertaking How the performance improvement intervention will be implemented How much the organization’s decision makers and stakeholders should expect to gain from the implementation effort The proposal also supplies a means by which to communicate to others inside and outside the organization about why the performance improvement intervention is being undertaken, what problem(s) it is intended to solve (or what opportunities are expected to result from it), and when results should be expected. It is thus as much a persuasive tool as it is a management document intended to guide implementation. Step 16: Implementing the Performance Improvement Strategy and Monitoring Results of the Performance Improvement Effort Over Time The implementation of a performance improvement strategy usually follows the acceptance of the proposal. There are three general ways by which a performance improvement strategy may be implemented: (1) by one person who is appointed leader; (2) by one or more teams, committees, or task forces charged with responsibility for planning, implementing, and evaluating the performance improvement intervention; or (3) by giving each manager and/or worker objectives linked to the project and asking someone to track results against objectives. Each approach is worthy of review. Directions: Use this worksheet for drafting a proposal for a performance improvement strategy or intervention. For each question posed in the left column below, facilitate group decision making to write an answer in the right column below. When you are finished, write up the answers in narrative format and present to key decision makers. Question Answer 1.  What is the exact nature of the problem or performance improvement opportunity?   2.  What is the cause of the problem–and how was that information obtained?   3.  What is the proposed solution to the problem–that is, the performance improvement intervention–and how was that the solution identified to be appropriate?   4.  What are the specific, measurable objectives that are intended to be achieved by the performance improvement intervention?   5.  What time-specific, measurable milestones have been (or can be) established to show progress toward achieving the final performance improvement objectives?   6.  What step-by-step plan can be established to implement the performance improvement intervention that will describe “what will happen,” “what results are expected from each step,” “who does what,” and how information about the performance improvement intervention–at each key step–will be communicated to the participants and stakeholders in the intervention”? 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 7.  What time-specific, measurable milestone have been (or can be) established to show progress toward achieving the final perfor-mance improvement objectives?   8.  What budget has been prepared for the performance improvement intervention to show all costs associated with the intervention?   9.  What financial gains are expected to be realized from the performance improvement intervention? (Benefits of project minus project costs.)   10. What people from inside and outside the organization will be needed to implement the intervention and how do their qualifications relate to achieving intended objectives?   Figure 4-6 A worksheet for preparing a proposal. Implementing a Performance Improvement Intervention with One Leader An individual appointed as leader to implement a performance improvement intervention may be given specific instructions about how to implement the intervention by senior executives, or else he may “invent” the role that he is to play. In either case, this person clearly serves as change manager. Often, a change manager acting in this role has authority, without additional approvals, to expend project budgetary resources. How the role is enacted depends, in large measure, on the nature of the performance improvement intervention that the individual has been charged to undertake. But one approach is to clarify: The size, scope, and nature of the problem to be solved The nature of the performance improvement intervention intended to achieve results The performance objectives and time-specific milestones intended to be achieved The results sought from each step in the performance improvement intervention The stakeholders who must be involved in and must support the effort The information that must be periodically communicated to stakeholders and the means by which that information is best conveyed to them While this information should have been assembled by those who acted as analysts and as intervention selection specialists—who may not be the same individual who is charged with serving as change manager—it is important for the change manager to be very clear about what is happening, what is desired, how wide is the performance gap that exists between the two, and what must be done to close or narrow the gap. Some change managers will find it helpful to visit the key stakeholders to secure their support for the effort and to gain their insights about what must be done to achieve those results. Paying such visits has the added benefit of building some ownership through the personal involvement of the key stakeholders. Implementing a Performance Improvement Intervention with a Team, Committee, or Task Force When implementing a performance improvement strategy, some decision makers in organizations will prefer to appoint a team, committee, task force, or other group. Members of this group should be selected for their interest in the performance improvement intervention and/or on their ability to contribute to successful implementation based on their individual knowledge, skills, and abilities. Of course, on occasion, members are selected on the basis of their availability —which is not always the best way, since available people may (or may not) be supportive of the intervention. The individual charged with facilitating or coordinating the team, committee, or task force actions is the change manager. The team is sometimes called a design team or an implementation team. The team members are expected to work together to achieve results on the performance improvement intervention. When a team is assembled to implement a performance improvement intervention, the change manager must help the team members progress through the predictable stages of any small group. These stages are (adapted from Tuckman, 1965): 1: Forming 2: Storming 3: Norming 4: Performing 5: Adjourning During the forming stage, team members may not be familiar with the background leading up to the performance improvement intervention, and they may not be familiar with each other. The change manager’s role during that stage should thus be to clarify the background and help members of the team become familiar with each other and the contributions they can make. During the storming stage, team members are likely to question the value of the performance improvement intervention, the value of the problem leading up to it, and other such issues. The change manager should thus assemble a briefing that addresses such questions. (It may also be necessary to modify the performance improvement intervention project plan at this step to accommodate new ideas or approaches that were previously not identified.) During the norming stage, team members will accept their responsibilities for the performance improvement intervention and will identify specific efforts to be achieved. The change manager’s role during this stage is to ensure that team members communicate and to periodically collect information that can be compared to the project milestones. Since team members may tend to fall into groupthink, the change manager can also play devil’s advocate to encourage team members to consider new ideas or approaches that might otherwise be overlooked. During the performing stage, team members carry out their project responsibilities. The change manager’s role during this stage is to track results against milestones and objectives and feed those back to interested stakeholders. During the adjourning stage of team development, team members go through a process of disbanding. This period represents a time to reflect on performance of the improvement project and asks questions such as: What went well? What barriers did we encounter? How did we work together as a team? What would we do differently next time? What did we learn? What value did we add through our efforts? The adjourning stage also represents a time to capture and document knowledge and learning that took place so that it can be used in the future and transmitted to other stakeholders. Knowledge management is a critical success factor in learning organizations. When HPI teams are able to capture and disseminate information about the problem and how it was solved, it’s useful to others in different parts of the organization and reduces the chances of people reinventing the wheel. During the adjournment phase, team members tie up loose ends of the project. This is a time to dot the I’s and cross the T’s. It is also a time to either transition back into their regular positions, if the project was a temporary assignment, or transition to a new performance improvement initiative. Adjournment is also a time for the team to celebrate success. This can help to reward and recognize individual as well as team efforts and contributions and to build momentum for future HPI work. The change manager should help guide team members through the adjournment stage by serving as a leader. He or she facilitates the knowledge, capture, and management process. The change manager might also be involved in reassigning team members to new positions and organizing the team celebration. Implementing a Performance Improvement Intervention with Objectives In some organizations, decision makers may resist appointing one leader to take charge of the implementation of a performance improvement intervention or resist appointing a team, committee, or task force for that purpose. A third option is to clarify the role that each manager and worker in the organization is expected to play in the implementation effort. Such an approach may be common in organizations that use management by objectives. This approach to implementing a performance improvement strategy is only appropriate when everyone in the organization has—or should have—a role to play in implementing the intervention and when that role can be clarified and made specific, timebound, and measurable. Lacking such information, it will be difficult to hold individuals accountable for contributing to results. In most cases, even when all or most members of the organization are given responsibility for implementing an intervention, someone will have to be appointed to track results against milestones and performance improvement intervention objectives and feed those results back to others in the organization. That individual is the change manager. A good example for an appropriate use of this method is the implementation of a performance management process. Since all employees are expected to play some part in the successful implementation, a reasonable plan would be to communicate guidelines and expectations to all parties, and to establish measures of success. The rest of the implementation would be up to each individual in the organization. Step 17: Providing Continuing Feedback to Participants and Stakeholders in the Performance Improvement Effort Feedback refers to information conveyed back to performers during and following performance to permit them to correct deficiencies and highlight and celebrate successes. Feedback is properly targeted to the final results (objectives) established for a performance improvement intervention and to the milestones (measurable markers) on the way to achievement of final objectives. One important contribution that change managers can make to the successful implementation of a performance improvement intervention is encapsulated in this step, since no system can correct problems unless some form of feedback is received that results are not matching intentions. A simple example should dramatize this point. Suppose that an organization has been experiencing an abnormally large number of customer complaints. That is the performance problem. Suppose further that analysts have examined the problem and have determined that customers are complaining because they are not reading the directions for the use of the product made by the company. (Assume, for the sake of this fictitious case, that the company manufactures computer inkjet printers.) Customers have been clogging technical support lines because their printers simply stop printing at some point because the customers do not regularly clean the products in conformity with instructions clearly provided to them in the manual accompanying the printer. The cause of the problem thus is that customers are not getting the message. The company takes decisive action by identifying all names of customers, obtained from product warranties, and sending them an e-mail or letter that reminds them of the need to clean their printers. How will company decision makers know whether this performance improvement strategy—geared to conveying important information to customers—was successful and worth the sizable expense of the mailing? The answer is that they must establish some way to gather feedback. Perhaps the best way in this case is for company technical support workers to log the number and type of calls they receive to determine if the problem has been corrected. While that information is useful, it does not become feedback until it is conveyed to those who wrote and mailed out the letter and to the decision makers who made the decision to send the letter. What might be expected from this performance improvement intervention? While it might seem that the problem would be corrected, the reality is that it is a short-term measure only. Printer customers change over time. Not everyone will have received the e-mail or letter. Consequently, additional steps must be taken to correct the problem. Such steps might include: Placing a sticker directly on the printer when it is manufactured to inform new users of equipment cleaning requirements Securing e-mail addresses from customers as they register their printers and automating an e-mail message to remind them of the product cleaning requirements and the dangers of ignoring those requirements Each approach is essentially a performance improvement strategy intended to reduce calls about the consequences of not cleaning printers. Again, the impact of each strategy cannot be determined unless a feedback system is created. In the future of human performance improvement, self-correcting systems are likely to become more important and more common. In a self-correcting system, measurable feedback is provided automatically to performers on a timely, specific, and concrete basis directly from participants in the change effort. Hence, if some way can be found to give the decision makers and workers in the above example information from customers as it is collected so that they can self-correct their actions, then a self-correcting system has been created. How should change managers establish a means by which to collect information about progress toward the objectives of the performance improvement strategy? To answer that question, change managers should: Clarify precisely from stakeholders what results are sought from the performance improvement intervention Ensure that the results can be made specific and measurable Identify who should receive feedback about performance to ensure that progress is being achieved toward the objectives Work with stakeholders—and performers themselves—to identify the most effective means by which to convey feedback Establish a tracking system to collect feedback and give it to performers It is not uncommon for these interim measurements of success to get lost in the hubbub of implementation. Therefore, it’s important that the change manager stay focused and ensure that these measures occur and that the data are fed back to the key stakeholders, as agreed on. Summary The change manager is the role that “ensures that interventions are implemented in ways consistent with desired results and that they help individuals and groups achieve results” (Rothwell, 2000). The key competencies associated with the role include: (1) change implementation skills; (2) change impetus skills; (3) communication channel, informal network, and alliance understanding; (4) group dynamics process understanding; (5) process consultation skills; and (6) facilitation skills. The terminal output associated with the role is that “performance improvement interventions [are] effectively monitored with participants and stakeholders” (Rothwell, 2000). Change managers should be familiar with three key approaches for managing change. The coercive approach “forces” people to change under threat of coercion. The persuasive approach “encourages” people to change by appeals to self-interest. The normative reeducative approach “teaches people a new way” and taps into their desire to be productive and useful. The change manager’s role is enacted by moving a project along, where “project” means performance improvement intervention or strategy. Change managers should focus attention particularly on securing approval for the proposal and launching the performance improvement intervention or performance improvement strategy, implementing the performance improvement strategy and monitoring results of the performance improvement effort over time, and providing continuing feedback to participants and stakeholders in the performance improvement effort so that they see how well the performance improvement effort is doing and can take corrective action if results are off-target. The next chapter focuses attention on the role of evaluator. That role takes up where the change manager’s role leaves off. Often, the two roles are closely related. References McLagan, P. (1989). Models for HRD Practice. 4 vols. Alexandria, VA: The American Society for Trainning and Development. Rothwell, W. (2000). ASTD Models for Human Performance Improvement,2nd ed. Alexandria, VA: The American Society for Training and Development. Rothwell, W., and Sullivan, R. (Eds.). (2005). Practicing Organization Development: A Guide for Consultants, 2nd ed. San Francisco: Pfeiffer. Tuckman, B. (1965). Development Sequence in Small Groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63, 284–399.

Rothwell, W. J. (2007). Human Performance Improvement, 2nd Edition. [Bookshelf Online]. Retrieved from  https ://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781136397370/