Response to discussion quesitons

Implementing an access database as the answer for the ultimate analytical tool which would be utilized by all program offices in NAVAIR was and still is a dramatic and deeply rooted change effort. The effort started when people I work with identified a database that was being used in a program office. This database which I will refer to as ILSMS or Integrated Logistics Support Management System was the pet project of a program office and deserving of awards. Once leadership saw this tool it was decided that every program office should be using it. Today we find this tool in each of the program offices, which fit the mold, and plans to take it to the web. Management had to go through many hurdles to get this incredible tool to where it is today.

In applying Lewin’s three stage framework of unfreezing, change and refreezing I will address what things management did well and what was done poorly. In the beginning management needed to get everyone on board with this dramatic change so they started by studying the database and getting a lot of people involved in it. Classes were taught on how the software worked, what benefits could be recognized and when it would be made available to everyone. This unfreezing process made everyone aware that change was coming.

Management made some mistakes in the unfreezing process one of which was they were not prepared for the high demand of people that wanted to be educated. The questions that arose and people wanting to understand the details of how information was collected and compiled were essential aspects that were ignored. Program offices wanted the database now and wanted training now. While the unfreezing process were ready and receptive to the change they soon became uneasy because of delays and inadequate information.

Management did do some things right with the training and education aspect which paid huge dividends. Once the software was accepted there were a lot of ideas that were collected that might be implemented in future releases. The important part was that management listened to the feedback both positive and negative.

Change was the next stage in Lewin’s framework. Change was implemented incrementally, one program office at a time. Each program office that received the database wanted changes and tailoring needed to be done to fit how their office functioned. Changes needed to be made and issues worked out for each implementation. Management took the time to work through these issues and completed many installations. Each implementation brought with it a new dimension to complexity.

Management was successful in the change process by successfully implementing the ILSMS tool in the program offices but they continue to battle the logistics of the updates. In the urgency of the change process there were support issues that were not thought through. The training has stopped because changes are happening so fast that the curriculum cannot keep up. Hiring people to work the software has also proven difficult. These issues could have been prevented just by initiating change at a slower pace.

The final stage is refreezing and in regards to the ISLMS tool this refreezing process was completed successfully. Management has managed to secure the funding, personnel, and training. Although there are still logistics issues of changes and updates the tool has been fully implemented in the program offices. Management now has the challenge of keeping the program alive. A common problem where I work is in the supportability of such software implementations. Once in place management tends to forget about it. In this case, as of today, management is still fully engaged in the support effort.