IFSM 380 DISC 7&8

Change Management

Effective strategies can help organizations and individuals adapt more readily

to the changing environment and reduce disruption to productivity.

Understanding the nature of change and implementing effective change

management strategies will also enable organizations to increase their

capacity to absorb changes.

Leadership must provide a strong, consistent vision and guide the

organization through the execution of its strategic plan. Effective project

management practices will provide more consistent delivery of successful

projects on time and within budget. Although little can be done to stem the

rate or amount of change within organizations, effective strategies can help

organizations and individuals adapt more readily to the changing environment

and reduce disruption to productivity.

What Is Change?

You can find a variety of definitions, but typically they contain elements

related to becoming different, replacing something, or altering the way things

are done. In today's business environment, more changes are coming at a

faster rate than ever before. In 1970, Alvin Toffler, a sociologist, published his

book Future Shock, in which he defined the concept of future shock as a

Learning Resource

personal perception of "too much change in too short a period of time" (p. 4).

He predicted that as technology and society change, the increased change

rate will create a level of stress and information overload.

In the twenty-first century, we see the reality of Toffler's (1970/1990)

prediction. The impacts of increased computing power, the internet and the

World Wide Web, wireless connectivity, corporate mergers and acquisitions,

and global commerce are seen daily in news headlines. Strong, effective

leadership is critical to helping to guide organizations through turbulent times

to achieve business strategy and increase competitive advantage.

Let's look at the graphic below that illustrates a typical change model

showing the process of change.

The Process of Change

In the current state, employees know the norms, or written and unwritten

rules; they are comfortable (even if the situation isn't ideal). The future state

is unknown and could be the result of implementing a new invoice-processing

system, migrating to the next release of Windows and Office, or introducing a

new management structure and reporting relationships. The transition state is

murky and nebulous, and it is understandable that employees have concerns

and don't want to venture there, even if the other side sounds promising.

Resistance

The reality is that human beings resist change, and it is unrealistic to think

that we can eliminate resistance. The appropriate strategy is to anticipate

resistance to change, recognize its characteristics, and seek to effectively lead

and guide employees through a change while minimizing disruptions to

productivity. So what happens during resistance, especially when employees

don't want the change and feel they have no control over the situation?

Reaction to Change

Source: Adapted from Conner (1992, p. 133)

The graphic above shows the common emotional response to change where

users go through the following typical stages: immobilization, denial, anger,

bargaining, depression, testing and acceptance . The degree to which

individuals display these responses ranges from mild loss of productivity to

major dysfunction. Also, the longer an employee has been in the current

state, the more dramatic his or her response to change may be. Many of you

have been in workplace situations in which a change was announced.

Employees spend a great deal of time debating the impact of the change,

trying to guess management's ulterior motive, and asking, "What does this

mean to me?" Very little of the organization's work is being accomplished

during this time.

A key factor in resistance is feeling that we have lost control over a situation.

Also, change has a cumulative effect. Few of us are in the enviable position of

being able to process one change at a time, get used to the new thing, and

relax before tackling the next change. The reality is that individuals

experience ongoing change at work, at home, at school, and in society at

large. We each have our own capacity to assimilate change, and when we

reach a saturation point, we have little energy to take on more changes.

Darryl Conner (1992), founder of ODR, Inc., an organizational consulting firm,

has spent a significant portion of his career researching the human response

to organizational change. He has identified five characteristics

of resilient people. His research shows that people who excel in these five

areas are able to move more quickly through the change cycle, maintain

higher levels of productivity, and apply lessons learned from one change

initiative to the next.

Characteristic Description

positive sees opportunities and has a sense of self-assurance

focused has a clear vision of what he or she wants to achieve

flexible demonstrates the ability to be more fluid and less rigid when

responding to uncertainty

organized is able to develop structured approaches to ambiguous or unclear

situations

(Note: This use of the word organized focuses on making sense

out of chaos rather than on being a "neat freak.")

proactive is able to embrace or engage change rather than defend against it

Source: Conner (1992, p. 239)

Although some individuals may be more innately resilient than others, it is

possible to increase one's capacity for change by focusing on these

characteristics. Those who already have a high capacity for resilience will

have an easier time increasing their capacity. Although those with a lower

initial capacity may never reach high levels of resilience, they can improve.

We can increase our resilience by learning from more resilient individuals, as

well as learning from our own past experiences. When confronted with a

difficult situation, drawing on what helped in the past better positions us to

move through the current change. When leaders demonstrate vision,

commitment, and management, they create a culture and environment in

which employees can more quickly move through the transition state to the

future state. This reduces anxiety and decreases the loss of productivity and

dysfunctional behavior that organizational change can instigate.

Earlier, we mentioned that resistance stems, in part, from a sense of loss of

control. In reviewing the characteristics of resilience, you will note that they

can relate to regaining one's sense of control. For example, providing a sense

of organization in ambiguous or vague situations can help restore a sense of

control. Being proactive and looking for the opportunities a change may

provide can also bring back a sense of control over one's future. Think about

the implementation of a new system to automate the invoice creation

process. Suppose you are a clerk in the order-taking department, and this

new, automated system is going to redefine the way orders are received. You

will no longer have to type invoices. A resilient person would see the

opportunity to learn a new software tool and increase his or her value to the

department by organizing a plan to learn the new system. A less resilient

person would see only the loss of a known job function, fear of not knowing

to use the new system and appearing “stupid,” while missing the possibility of

future advancement this change could provide.

Roles of Change

Resilient people also recognize that there are different roles within a change

initiative and understand the dynamics and interrelationship of these roles.

Less resilient people lack an understanding of these roles and are often

perplexed about who is filling what role. Conner (1992) described these roles

below.

Organizational Change Roles

Although each of these four roles, Sponsor, Agent, Advocate and Target, plays

a critical part in the effective implementation of organizational change, the

sponsorship role is the key. Particularly in times of change, it is critical that

the organization's leadership provides this essential sponsorship role.

Sponsorship requires more than an all-hands email notice announcing a new

initiative; it requires sustained sponsorship throughout the life of the change.

Without a consistent, ongoing message about the importance of the

initiative, the benefits, the progress, and rewards for success and

accountabilities for failures, the initiative is likely to fail. The employees are

very comfortable in their known environment and resistant to venturing into

the murky unknown or ill-defined future state. Without sustained

sponsorship, employees will quickly revert to their comfort level.

Another element of sponsorship is cascading sponsorship. The corporate

CEO may launch a new initiative and stress its importance to his or her

executive team. The CEO expects that (1) progress will continue, and (2) the

executive team knows what to do, and he or she moves on to the next critical

business priority. A weak link or links in the executive team's sponsorship

quickly dilutes the message as it cascades through the organization. The next

thing we know, part of the organization has fallen into the "black hole"—no

information is passed along, no accountabilities are in place to ensure

compliance, and six months later, the change has not been implemented.

Leadership is a set of processes that creates organizations in the first place or

adapts them to significantly changing circumstances. Leadership defines what

the future should look like, aligns people with that vision, and inspires them

to make it happen despite the obstacles (Kotter, 1996, p. 25).

Senior executives tend to move more quickly through the change process

because of their position in the organization. William Bridges, a management

consultant and author of Managing Transitions, calls this the marathon effect.

Leadership can see the ultimate goal before others in the organization may

even know that the race is on (Bridges & Bridges, 2000, p. 30). Moreover, the

change process may have been in their thoughts for some time, so instituting

the change does not seem so precipitous to them. Therefore, senior

management should be reminded that others in the organization have less

information, will be resistant to letting go of the status quo, may lack a sense

of the "big picture," and will need time to transition to the future state.

Change Management for Systems Implementation

One of the common reasons systems fail is not the technical aspects, but

rather the failure to properly communicate, prepare, and support users. A key

component of this is addressing change management in the implementation

plan. Just as a new driver needs experience actually driving a car, a

knowledge of how to operate a car, and an understanding of the laws, system

users should be prepared to be successful when a new technology solution is

introduced. This starts with the concept of sponsorship—communicating why

this change is important to the organization or why this system is being

implemented. Users want to know what impact it will have on their jobs, how

they will be trained, and whether they will be able to do their jobs as well

with the new system as they did before. Earlier we discussed resistance to

change and fear of the unknown. If employees know how to do their work

using an old technology or even manual processes, they have adapted and get

things done one way or another, and this provides a certain level of comfort

and confidence. When faced with a new technology or system, there is a

natural fear of the unknown. Senior leadership can help reduce employee

resistance by explaining its vision and its importance to the organization's

success, and by providing assurances that employees will have access to the

appropriate communication, training, and ongoing support to help them

succeed in their jobs.

This is why the concept of cascading sponsorship is important—there cannot

be a one-time large town-hall meeting after which employees never hear

anything more. Ongoing communication, status updates, training plans and

schedules, etc. are needed to gain the employees' confidence that they will

be supported and can be successful.

Often when a system is implemented, the business process changes as well. It

is important that users understand how the business process is changing in

addition to how to navigate and use the new technology. A simple analogy—

think of driving to a new location you’ve never been to before in a new

vehicle you’ve never driven before. You receive training on how to use the

new car, but no directions or information on how to get to the new location.

Both are equally important for success.

Unfortunately, it is not uncommon that communication and training are

short-changed at the end of a project. Time is running short, and the team is

trying to hit the planned implementation date. This can cause major issues.

The communication and training steps are equally important milestones in

the project plan. The project manager should monitor these activities along

with the more technical aspects of the project.

As we recognize that the rate or amount of change within organizations

continues to accelerate, the strategies presented here can help organizations

and individuals more readily adapt to the changing environment and reduce

disruption to productivity. Three critical areas are:

• Leadership must demonstrate vision, commitment, and management to

guide the organization and show sustained sponsorship for change

initiatives.

• Project management practices with a focus on the people aspects will

provide more consistent delivery of successful projects on time and

within budget.

• Change management strategies to address the natural resistance to

change and fostering resilience characteristics in the corporate culture

can increase the organization's capacity to assimilate change more

quickly.

The focus on the human aspects we have discussed in this section will help

the organization as a whole and help ensure the effective implementation of

technology solutions to support the business strategy. Ignoring the human

aspects will cause even the best technology solution to fail in meeting its

objectives.

References

Bridges, W., & Bridges, S. (2000, April). Leading transition: A new model for

change. Leader to Leader, 2000(16), 30-36.

Conner, D. (1992). Managing at the speed of change. New York, NY: Random

House, Inc.

Kotter, J. (1996). Leading change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School

Press.

Toffler, A. J. (1990). Future shock. New York, NY: Bantam Books. (Original

work published 1970.)

© 2019 University of Maryland University College

All links to external sites were verified at the time of publication. UMUC is not responsible for the

validity or integrity of information located at external sites.