final paper

A CHANGE AGENT COMPASS FOR SYSTEM TRANSFORMATION

Harnessing the Use of Self Aremin Hacobian

The term change agent refers to those individuals whose work involves trans- forming a system from its present state to some desired future state in a sus- tainable manner. Although there are many theories and models for how systems—at the group, organization, and societal level—experience change and progress through the change cycle, in reality we are typically confronted with change that takes place on multiple levels and in multiple systems. The model presented in this chapter focuses specifically on change agents who work simultaneously with multiple systems, faced with the challenge of draw- ing from numerous and varied system theories, grounding those concepts in project-specific data and desired outcomes. Based on nearly two decades as a project manager and change agent in the biopharmaceutical industry, I often searched—without success—for direction, a compass if you will, to guide my actions, behaviors, intentions, and impact on the client system. In order to further my own effectiveness, I have developed a compass to guide such sys-

Consultation for Organizational Change Revisited, pages 171–183 Copyright © 2016 by Information Age Publishing All rights of reproduction in any form reserved. 171

EBSCOhost: eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) printed on 8/17/2024 1:39:57 AM UTC via UNIVERSITY OF CHARLESTON. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use.

172  A. HACOBIAN

tem transformation, with hope that this approach will resonate with change agents and support their day to day work, reflection, and personal growth.

The change process itself is often described in terms of a continuum, from the Gestalt Flow of Continuous Experience (Nevis, 1987) and Transitions Model (Bridges, 2004) to Theory U (Scharmer, 2007). These models are useful as a guide for change and transformation at a macro-level, but they also recognize that various people in an organization or societal system will often be at different places on the change curve. In fact, the same person can be on different parts of the change curve at the same time. An underly- ing challenge concerns how change agents can address such complexity and diversity of perspectives when managing a transformation project that involves multiple stakeholders, often across different groups, regions, and cultures. Moreover, the very presence of a change agent within the system can readily impact people’s attitudes, behaviors, and willingness to change. As a result, with so many factors to monitor and manage, it is easy to see why so many change efforts fall short of their desired outcomes.

Figure 9.1 is intended as a reference point for change agents—from project managers and OD practitioners, to HR partners and beyond—to assist their work within a client system while also providing guidance for managing one’s own presence and impact. Never intended to be static, the model represents an ongoing opportunity for self-reflection, learning, and growth. The chapter explores the challenge of transforming systems, draw- ing on examples from a project with a large global pharmaceutical com- pany to provide context and guidance for application.

The Change Agent Compass consists of four dimensions and three guid- ing principles. Chosen deliberately, the compass metaphor likens a change agent to a hiker who has set off in the wilderness for an adventure. Even with the best preparation and planning, the change agent often encoun- ters unexpected challenges, surprises, and risks that can result in a minor change of direction (e.g., slight refinements of a meeting agenda) or a major detour to a new destination (e.g., full revision of project scope and objectives). The compass seeks to organize foundational organization de- velopment (OD) theory and values into a framework that is practical and useful for those navigating the wilderness of system transformation. Con- tinuing with the compass metaphor, the guiding principles serve as the di- rectional needle that should always be top of mind for the change agent in every interaction with a client organization. The four dimensions of the model are similar to directional markers, which help guide the ideas, be- haviors, and actions of the change agent based on the situation. One will often have to operate in two or more dimensions at a time, and an artistic management of presence occurs when a change agent balances these key considerations within and across dimensions and achieves a desired impact in service of client objectives.

EBSCOhost: eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) printed on 8/17/2024 1:39:57 AM UTC via UNIVERSITY OF CHARLESTON. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use.

A Change Agent Compass for System Transformation  173

Figure 9.1 The Change Agent Compass.

EBSCOhost: eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) printed on 8/17/2024 1:39:57 AM UTC via UNIVERSITY OF CHARLESTON. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use.

174  A. HACOBIAN

USE OF SELF The Need for Authenticity

The Use of Self is a fundamental aspect of organization development. As Seashore, Mattare, Shawver, and Thompson (2004, p. 59) note, “Using one’s Self in creative ways to optimize one’s own growth can be coupled with effec- tive Use of Self in helping individuals, groups, and organizations move to- wards achieving their own potential.” One of the ways that change agents can achieve greater levels of awareness and understanding of Self in their interac- tion with the client, which is coupled with enhancing their awareness and un- derstanding of the client system, is the concept of presence. Positive presence is achieved when a change agent is able to be authentic and intentional in every client interaction, fully harnessing his or her Use of Self. A related con- cept is presencing, “a blend of the words ‘presence’ and sensing, presencing signifies a heightened state of attention that allows individuals and groups to shift the inner place from which they function” (Scharmer, 2007, p. l). Presencing impacts the way people perceive and imagine the future, as “the forces shaping a situation can shift from re-creating the past to manifesting or realizing an emerging future” (Senge, Scharmer, Jaworski, & Flowers, 2005, p. 7). The lesson for change agents is to understand, hone, and harness Use of Self in such a way that their presence within a system enables true presencing across the individuals and groups of that system.

As an example of this dynamic, working as an internal OD consultant within a division of a global pharmaceutical company, my Use of Self dur- ing a conversation with the Division General Manager served as a catalyst for the firm’s “Global One” project, which had three main objectives, to: (1) create a culture that enables the “Right Decision, Right People in the Right Positions, Empowerment, Trust and Accountability”; (2) anchor and inform decision making across the organization; and (3) optimize strategic deployment of global resources and capabilities. The Use of Self moment involved putting voice to something that had been bothering me for a few weeks. The term “Global One” had been used in various Town Hall pre- sentations and internal documents, and was increasingly being used as a tag line in every day conversation—but there seemed to be a lack of sub- stance beyond the tag line. I asked the GM for his definition of “Global One”? Although he provided a very thoughtful definition—one which in- volved an agile approach to managing resources and expertise across re- gions and sites—in that moment I decided to question him further, asking if his leadership team would have the same definition. He chuckled, and quickly acknowledged that the members of his leadership team—15 people spanning multiple regions and cultures—would likely have 15 different definitions. At that point we focused on the need for an aligned definition

EBSCOhost: eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) printed on 8/17/2024 1:39:57 AM UTC via UNIVERSITY OF CHARLESTON. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use.

A Change Agent Compass for System Transformation  175

for “Global One” across the leadership team, and how that aligned vision might be developed. From that five minute conversation, a change strategy for the “Global One” project was launched, with the potential to impact an 800-person division with the goal of transforming the organization’s culture, decision-making, and effectiveness in ways that could be sustained over time. This change strategy would first require alignment across the leadership team, but would then rapidly require engagement and account- ability from deeper levels of the Division.

As an internal OD consultant, I took some risks raising this point to the GM. The inquiries about him and his leadership team could have raised his defensiveness and may have come across as disrespectful if not articulated in the right way. He might not have seen the value in aligning the leadership team around the definition of “Global One,” and the work that would be required to instill a vision and key guiding principles across the Division. At worst, I could have come across as a non-scientist employee trying to drum up a project to justify my employment. Use of Self, in this case, required me to process these potential reactions and then act in an authentic and intentional manner to express an issue that I believed to be important for the organization. Reflecting on this experience, it is important to under- score that the manner in which the client is approached—introducing the topic and facilitating the conversation—is just as important to the outcome as the topic itself. It is important for change agents to manage their presence in ways that minimize client defensiveness and foster an environment con- ducive to presencing. In this way the client is better able to envision project outcomes that directly support business priorities. As suggested by this brief example, in order to fully harness Use of Self, it is necessary to build aware- ness outside of one’s Self and understand the perspectives, behaviors, and emotions of others within the client system.

The chapter now turns to the remaining three dimensions of the mod- el—planning the change, respecting the individual, and being aware of cli- ent focus—and how they can help to further build awareness and under- standing outside of one’s Self while supporting the stated objectives of a transformation project.

PLANNING THE CHANGE

Engaging Stakeholders and Defining the Desired Future State

Planning the change involves engaging key stakeholders in the design and implemention of the desired future state. Drawing on Kotter’s (1995, p. 59) eight step transformation processs (see Figure 9.2), this dimension

EBSCOhost: eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) printed on 8/17/2024 1:39:57 AM UTC via UNIVERSITY OF CHARLESTON. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use.

176  A. HACOBIAN

Figure 9.2 Adapted from Kotter’s (1995) Transformation Process. seeks to engage the right people throughout the change process while set-

ting realistic expectations of the path forward:

The change process goes through a series of phases that, in total, usually re- quire a considerable length of time. Skipping steps only creates the illusion of speed and never creates a satisfying result.

This dimension requires change agents to develop a solid understanding of the organization at an individual, function, and system level, enabling them to serve as a trusted advisor on the change process as the client begins to move toward its desired future state.

When facilitating conversations around the desired future state, an ap- preciative inquiry (AI) approach is recommended, in which the change agent invites dialogue around possibilities, even those perhaps not previ- ously imagined. As Watkins, Mohr, and Kelly (2011, p. 243) argue, “If or- ganizations are imagined and made by human beings, then they can be re-made and re-imagined. The constraints of scientific management theory that imagines organizations as machines are lifted and the possibility of new approaches and configurations emerges.” Throughout the process, the change agent can help the client evaluate emerging possibilities against the current reality of the system. The primary objective in this dimension is to define an appropriate desired future state that can be supported by a realistic implementation plan.

EBSCOhost: eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) printed on 8/17/2024 1:39:57 AM UTC via UNIVERSITY OF CHARLESTON. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use.

A Change Agent Compass for System Transformation  177

Turning back to the “Global One” intervention, the project was orga- nized into three distinct phases: planning, implementation, and evaluation. The planning phase focused on initial stakeholder orientation to the “Glob- al One” project and its objectives, as well as data gathering to understand the current organizational landscape and the various perspectives for how the desired future state for the Division might be defined. At this point, the primary stakeholders were the members of the 15-person leadership team, and I conducted interviews with each member and then gathered further data via survey. A planning team was then formed to help with analysis of the data and preparation for a two-day Leadership Offsite. The implementation phase kicked off with the Leadership Offsite, which delivered a leadership team charter, vision, and draft guiding principles for the desired future state. Four critical workstreams were created to involve and engage the broader organization: Extended Leadership; Sites/Functions Roles & Responsibili- ties; Project Team Member Assignments; and Prioritization of Divisional Resources/Activities. The Extended Leadership workstream called for the formation of an extended leadership group beyond the executive leader- ship team, in an effort to empower the next level of leadership and drive accountability for decisions to the right level of the organization. Implemen- tation was also supported by a communication plan to promote awareness and understanding of the vision and guiding principles, and to highlight objectives and milestones across each of the workstreams.

Finally, the evaluation phase reviewed progress to date, clarified roles and responsibilities of the leadership team and extended leadership group, and developed metrics to assess the ongoing health of the organization as it worked to realize its vision. The “Global One” project plan as described above spanned nearly 12 months across all phases, and was developed very early on in consultation with the leadership team. Kotter’s (1995) eight-step process served as a valuable reference for this planning phase. Too many change efforts start out with a good design but ultimately fail due to poor planning during the implementation phase and unrealistic expectations about the length of time necessary for real organizational transformation. In the “Global One” project, during the latter part of the evaluation phase the Division was between Kotter’s fifth and sixth steps—between the need to empower others to act on the vision and planning for and creating short- term wins. System transformation that can be sustained over time, transfor- mation that involves true shifts in behaviors, mindsets, and culture, requires much more time than typically realized: “Until changes sink deeply into a company’s culture, a process that can take five to ten years, new approaches are fragile and subject to regression” (Kotter, 1995, p. 66). This is where the change agent can play such a critical role, working with stakeholders to un- derstand and plan for the real pace of change, while maintaining the ability to build engagement and commitment throughout the process.

EBSCOhost: eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) printed on 8/17/2024 1:39:57 AM UTC via UNIVERSITY OF CHARLESTON. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use.

178  A. HACOBIAN

RESPECTING THE INDIVIDUAL Acknowledging What Is Changing and Where People Are

Respect for the individual asks the change agent to acknowledge that change is difficult and that individuals within an organization may be in different places on the change continuum. As Bridges’ Transitions Model (2004) emphasizes, the change process is not static but is rather fluid in nature (see Figure 9.3). An individual can be in multiple stages of the tran- sitions curve at any point in time, and different individuals can be in differ- ent stages at the same point in time. A key takeaway is that a one-size-fits-all change methodology is often not the wisest approach. The project plan de- veloped during the Plan the Change dimension should serve as a guidepost for the change agent, not to be rigidly followed to the point where valuable feedback and reactions at individual and collective levels are ignored.

Throughout the “Global One” project, I routinely encountered three distinct types of behaviors and mindsets, and would adjust my Use of Self based on my understanding of the experiences and perspectives of that individual or group. The first type is best described as those organizational members who fondly remembered the past, longing for the organization to return to a culture and working environment that no longer existed. The second type represented those people who are in what Bridges (2004, p. 80) would describe as the “Neutral Zone,” where they “are receiving sig- nals and cues as to what [they] need to become for the next stage of [their] work life.” As he continues, “And unless you disrupt it by trying to rush through the neutral zone quickly, you are slowly being transformed into the

Figure 9.3 Adapted from Bridges’ (2004) Transition model.

EBSCOhost: eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) printed on 8/17/2024 1:39:57 AM UTC via UNIVERSITY OF CHARLESTON. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use.

A CHANGE AGENT COMPASS FOR SYSTEM TRANSFORMATION

Harnessing the Use of Self Aremin Hacobian

The term change agent refers to those individuals whose work involves trans- forming a system from its present state to some desired future state in a sus- tainable manner. Although there are many theories and models for how systems—at the group, organization, and societal level—experience change and progress through the change cycle, in reality we are typically confronted with change that takes place on multiple levels and in multiple systems. The model presented in this chapter focuses specifically on change agents who work simultaneously with multiple systems, faced with the challenge of draw- ing from numerous and varied system theories, grounding those concepts in project-specific data and desired outcomes. Based on nearly two decades as a project manager and change agent in the biopharmaceutical industry, I often searched—without success—for direction, a compass if you will, to guide my actions, behaviors, intentions, and impact on the client system. In order to further my own effectiveness, I have developed a compass to guide such sys-

Consultation for Organizational Change Revisited, pages 171–183 Copyright © 2016 by Information Age Publishing All rights of reproduction in any form reserved. 171

EBSCOhost: eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) printed on 8/17/2024 1:39:57 AM UTC via UNIVERSITY OF CHARLESTON. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use.

172  A. HACOBIAN

tem transformation, with hope that this approach will resonate with change agents and support their day to day work, reflection, and personal growth.

The change process itself is often described in terms of a continuum, from the Gestalt Flow of Continuous Experience (Nevis, 1987) and Transitions Model (Bridges, 2004) to Theory U (Scharmer, 2007). These models are useful as a guide for change and transformation at a macro-level, but they also recognize that various people in an organization or societal system will often be at different places on the change curve. In fact, the same person can be on different parts of the change curve at the same time. An underly- ing challenge concerns how change agents can address such complexity and diversity of perspectives when managing a transformation project that involves multiple stakeholders, often across different groups, regions, and cultures. Moreover, the very presence of a change agent within the system can readily impact people’s attitudes, behaviors, and willingness to change. As a result, with so many factors to monitor and manage, it is easy to see why so many change efforts fall short of their desired outcomes.

Figure 9.1 is intended as a reference point for change agents—from project managers and OD practitioners, to HR partners and beyond—to assist their work within a client system while also providing guidance for managing one’s own presence and impact. Never intended to be static, the model represents an ongoing opportunity for self-reflection, learning, and growth. The chapter explores the challenge of transforming systems, draw- ing on examples from a project with a large global pharmaceutical com- pany to provide context and guidance for application.

The Change Agent Compass consists of four dimensions and three guid- ing principles. Chosen deliberately, the compass metaphor likens a change agent to a hiker who has set off in the wilderness for an adventure. Even with the best preparation and planning, the change agent often encoun- ters unexpected challenges, surprises, and risks that can result in a minor change of direction (e.g., slight refinements of a meeting agenda) or a major detour to a new destination (e.g., full revision of project scope and objectives). The compass seeks to organize foundational organization de- velopment (OD) theory and values into a framework that is practical and useful for those navigating the wilderness of system transformation. Con- tinuing with the compass metaphor, the guiding principles serve as the di- rectional needle that should always be top of mind for the change agent in every interaction with a client organization. The four dimensions of the model are similar to directional markers, which help guide the ideas, be- haviors, and actions of the change agent based on the situation. One will often have to operate in two or more dimensions at a time, and an artistic management of presence occurs when a change agent balances these key considerations within and across dimensions and achieves a desired impact in service of client objectives.

EBSCOhost: eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) printed on 8/17/2024 1:39:57 AM UTC via UNIVERSITY OF CHARLESTON. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use.

A Change Agent Compass for System Transformation  173

Figure 9.1 The Change Agent Compass.

EBSCOhost: eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) printed on 8/17/2024 1:39:57 AM UTC via UNIVERSITY OF CHARLESTON. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use.

174  A. HACOBIAN

USE OF SELF The Need for Authenticity

The Use of Self is a fundamental aspect of organization development. As Seashore, Mattare, Shawver, and Thompson (2004, p. 59) note, “Using one’s Self in creative ways to optimize one’s own growth can be coupled with effec- tive Use of Self in helping individuals, groups, and organizations move to- wards achieving their own potential.” One of the ways that change agents can achieve greater levels of awareness and understanding of Self in their interac- tion with the client, which is coupled with enhancing their awareness and un- derstanding of the client system, is the concept of presence. Positive presence is achieved when a change agent is able to be authentic and intentional in every client interaction, fully harnessing his or her Use of Self. A related con- cept is presencing, “a blend of the words ‘presence’ and sensing, presencing signifies a heightened state of attention that allows individuals and groups to shift the inner place from which they function” (Scharmer, 2007, p. l). Presencing impacts the way people perceive and imagine the future, as “the forces shaping a situation can shift from re-creating the past to manifesting or realizing an emerging future” (Senge, Scharmer, Jaworski, & Flowers, 2005, p. 7). The lesson for change agents is to understand, hone, and harness Use of Self in such a way that their presence within a system enables true presencing across the individuals and groups of that system.

As an example of this dynamic, working as an internal OD consultant within a division of a global pharmaceutical company, my Use of Self dur- ing a conversation with the Division General Manager served as a catalyst for the firm’s “Global One” project, which had three main objectives, to: (1) create a culture that enables the “Right Decision, Right People in the Right Positions, Empowerment, Trust and Accountability”; (2) anchor and inform decision making across the organization; and (3) optimize strategic deployment of global resources and capabilities. The Use of Self moment involved putting voice to something that had been bothering me for a few weeks. The term “Global One” had been used in various Town Hall pre- sentations and internal documents, and was increasingly being used as a tag line in every day conversation—but there seemed to be a lack of sub- stance beyond the tag line. I asked the GM for his definition of “Global One”? Although he provided a very thoughtful definition—one which in- volved an agile approach to managing resources and expertise across re- gions and sites—in that moment I decided to question him further, asking if his leadership team would have the same definition. He chuckled, and quickly acknowledged that the members of his leadership team—15 people spanning multiple regions and cultures—would likely have 15 different definitions. At that point we focused on the need for an aligned definition

EBSCOhost: eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) printed on 8/17/2024 1:39:57 AM UTC via UNIVERSITY OF CHARLESTON. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use.

A Change Agent Compass for System Transformation  175

for “Global One” across the leadership team, and how that aligned vision might be developed. From that five minute conversation, a change strategy for the “Global One” project was launched, with the potential to impact an 800-person division with the goal of transforming the organization’s culture, decision-making, and effectiveness in ways that could be sustained over time. This change strategy would first require alignment across the leadership team, but would then rapidly require engagement and account- ability from deeper levels of the Division.

As an internal OD consultant, I took some risks raising this point to the GM. The inquiries about him and his leadership team could have raised his defensiveness and may have come across as disrespectful if not articulated in the right way. He might not have seen the value in aligning the leadership team around the definition of “Global One,” and the work that would be required to instill a vision and key guiding principles across the Division. At worst, I could have come across as a non-scientist employee trying to drum up a project to justify my employment. Use of Self, in this case, required me to process these potential reactions and then act in an authentic and intentional manner to express an issue that I believed to be important for the organization. Reflecting on this experience, it is important to under- score that the manner in which the client is approached—introducing the topic and facilitating the conversation—is just as important to the outcome as the topic itself. It is important for change agents to manage their presence in ways that minimize client defensiveness and foster an environment con- ducive to presencing. In this way the client is better able to envision project outcomes that directly support business priorities. As suggested by this brief example, in order to fully harness Use of Self, it is necessary to build aware- ness outside of one’s Self and understand the perspectives, behaviors, and emotions of others within the client system.

The chapter now turns to the remaining three dimensions of the mod- el—planning the change, respecting the individual, and being aware of cli- ent focus—and how they can help to further build awareness and under- standing outside of one’s Self while supporting the stated objectives of a transformation project.

PLANNING THE CHANGE

Engaging Stakeholders and Defining the Desired Future State

Planning the change involves engaging key stakeholders in the design and implemention of the desired future state. Drawing on Kotter’s (1995, p. 59) eight step transformation processs (see Figure 9.2), this dimension

EBSCOhost: eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) printed on 8/17/2024 1:39:57 AM UTC via UNIVERSITY OF CHARLESTON. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use.

176  A. HACOBIAN

Figure 9.2 Adapted from Kotter’s (1995) Transformation Process. seeks to engage the right people throughout the change process while set-

ting realistic expectations of the path forward:

The change process goes through a series of phases that, in total, usually re- quire a considerable length of time. Skipping steps only creates the illusion of speed and never creates a satisfying result.

This dimension requires change agents to develop a solid understanding of the organization at an individual, function, and system level, enabling them to serve as a trusted advisor on the change process as the client begins to move toward its desired future state.

When facilitating conversations around the desired future state, an ap- preciative inquiry (AI) approach is recommended, in which the change agent invites dialogue around possibilities, even those perhaps not previ- ously imagined. As Watkins, Mohr, and Kelly (2011, p. 243) argue, “If or- ganizations are imagined and made by human beings, then they can be re-made and re-imagined. The constraints of scientific management theory that imagines organizations as machines are lifted and the possibility of new approaches and configurations emerges.” Throughout the process, the change agent can help the client evaluate emerging possibilities against the current reality of the system. The primary objective in this dimension is to define an appropriate desired future state that can be supported by a realistic implementation plan.

EBSCOhost: eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) printed on 8/17/2024 1:39:57 AM UTC via UNIVERSITY OF CHARLESTON. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use.

A Change Agent Compass for System Transformation  177

Turning back to the “Global One” intervention, the project was orga- nized into three distinct phases: planning, implementation, and evaluation. The planning phase focused on initial stakeholder orientation to the “Glob- al One” project and its objectives, as well as data gathering to understand the current organizational landscape and the various perspectives for how the desired future state for the Division might be defined. At this point, the primary stakeholders were the members of the 15-person leadership team, and I conducted interviews with each member and then gathered further data via survey. A planning team was then formed to help with analysis of the data and preparation for a two-day Leadership Offsite. The implementation phase kicked off with the Leadership Offsite, which delivered a leadership team charter, vision, and draft guiding principles for the desired future state. Four critical workstreams were created to involve and engage the broader organization: Extended Leadership; Sites/Functions Roles & Responsibili- ties; Project Team Member Assignments; and Prioritization of Divisional Resources/Activities. The Extended Leadership workstream called for the formation of an extended leadership group beyond the executive leader- ship team, in an effort to empower the next level of leadership and drive accountability for decisions to the right level of the organization. Implemen- tation was also supported by a communication plan to promote awareness and understanding of the vision and guiding principles, and to highlight objectives and milestones across each of the workstreams.

Finally, the evaluation phase reviewed progress to date, clarified roles and responsibilities of the leadership team and extended leadership group, and developed metrics to assess the ongoing health of the organization as it worked to realize its vision. The “Global One” project plan as described above spanned nearly 12 months across all phases, and was developed very early on in consultation with the leadership team. Kotter’s (1995) eight-step process served as a valuable reference for this planning phase. Too many change efforts start out with a good design but ultimately fail due to poor planning during the implementation phase and unrealistic expectations about the length of time necessary for real organizational transformation. In the “Global One” project, during the latter part of the evaluation phase the Division was between Kotter’s fifth and sixth steps—between the need to empower others to act on the vision and planning for and creating short- term wins. System transformation that can be sustained over time, transfor- mation that involves true shifts in behaviors, mindsets, and culture, requires much more time than typically realized: “Until changes sink deeply into a company’s culture, a process that can take five to ten years, new approaches are fragile and subject to regression” (Kotter, 1995, p. 66). This is where the change agent can play such a critical role, working with stakeholders to un- derstand and plan for the real pace of change, while maintaining the ability to build engagement and commitment throughout the process.

EBSCOhost: eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) printed on 8/17/2024 1:39:57 AM UTC via UNIVERSITY OF CHARLESTON. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use.

178  A. HACOBIAN

RESPECTING THE INDIVIDUAL Acknowledging What Is Changing and Where People Are

Respect for the individual asks the change agent to acknowledge that change is difficult and that individuals within an organization may be in different places on the change continuum. As Bridges’ Transitions Model (2004) emphasizes, the change process is not static but is rather fluid in nature (see Figure 9.3). An individual can be in multiple stages of the tran- sitions curve at any point in time, and different individuals can be in differ- ent stages at the same point in time. A key takeaway is that a one-size-fits-all change methodology is often not the wisest approach. The project plan de- veloped during the Plan the Change dimension should serve as a guidepost for the change agent, not to be rigidly followed to the point where valuable feedback and reactions at individual and collective levels are ignored.

Throughout the “Global One” project, I routinely encountered three distinct types of behaviors and mindsets, and would adjust my Use of Self based on my understanding of the experiences and perspectives of that individual or group. The first type is best described as those organizational members who fondly remembered the past, longing for the organization to return to a culture and working environment that no longer existed. The second type represented those people who are in what Bridges (2004, p. 80) would describe as the “Neutral Zone,” where they “are receiving sig- nals and cues as to what [they] need to become for the next stage of [their] work life.” As he continues, “And unless you disrupt it by trying to rush through the neutral zone quickly, you are slowly being transformed into the

Figure 9.3 Adapted from Bridges’ (2004) Transition model.

EBSCOhost: eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) printed on 8/17/2024 1:39:57 AM UTC via UNIVERSITY OF CHARLESTON. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use.