The world hates change, yet it is the only thing that has brought progress — Charles Kettering

IN Part 1 of this three-part series on Change Management, we briefly looked at some of the inherent challenges, and then outlined two popular, useful change methodologies. Managers should no longer display apathy or ignorance about this important concept. There are several change management models available and well suited for use – but to simplify your choice, the MBA Forum recommends the 8-Step model developed by Kotter for you to study and follow. This was summarised in Part 1. In Part 2, we spent a little time reviewing resistance to change and the necessity to plan for and preempt its manifestations. We realised then that resistance to change is psychological, and practically a default response by humans when confronted by change. Change will be resisted even if the person will benefit, or grow, or profit! However, even though resistance should be expected as inevitable — the manager should treat it as feedback, or a communication mechanism – and listen up!

What is so elusive about managing change?

In this final article on change, we want to step back and look at some practical realities. As indicated in the previous articles there is a plethora of information easily available on the subject. The good news is that more MBA programmes are now including change management as one of their courses, and also nearly every manager is now familiar with the tired cliché that “change is the only constant”. Yet still the statistics about the results of transformative efforts stubbornly cling to a 70 per cent failure rate. What is wrong?

There is a very interesting article on Change Management (The Inconvenient Truth about Change Management by Keller and Aiken) that I believe every manager interested in improved success in this area should read. The article reviews a change model and looks at the overlooked pitfalls, referring to them as “inconvenient truths”. I will outline the four steps in the change model, and review each of the inconvenient truths as set out in the article.

Create a compelling story

Persons being required to change must understand the rationale for the change so that even if they do not fully agree with it, at least they are willing to give it a try.

Inconvenient Truth: Typically the leader creates a compelling story that would motivate the leader himself/herself, but not the employees. It is better to let the employees “write the story themselves”. Sometimes the leader may very well know that the change to be undertaken is the single, only possible option available. Even then, the leader needs to be skilful enough to be able to guide the employees down the pathway to discover this fact for themselves. When we as humans choose for ourselves, we are much more committed to the choice! Also, I have come to realise that if you are able somehow to get employees to own the change, they will also be committed to it. You will hardly find people resisting themselves!

Provide role modeling

When leaders and role models in the organisation display the desired behaviour towards the change, then it is easier for others to fall in.

Inconvenient Truth: To get leaders to display the desired change may be anti-intuitive since they would have to admit to the presumption that they were “a part of the problem”. This in itself demonstrates that in practicality, the role modelling is a non-starter. According to Keller and Aiken: “Many well-intentioned and hardworking people believe they are doing the right thing, or they would not be doing it.” Consequently, “Persons have unwarranted optimism about their own behaviour.” Let me invite you to try this exercise. Ask any executive the question “are you good at communicating,” and tell me how many you asked, and how many said “no.”

Reinforcement systems

The required behaviours must be reinforced by implementing the appropriate enabling structures and processes. Additionally, many organisations seek to tie successful change to employee compensation.

Inconvenient Truth: Linking change only to monetary rewards may not only be expensive, but it may not even work! This may be tricky to understand, but it boils down to the psychological difference between a social transaction and a monetary transaction. The article gives a great example. A daycare centre is trying to introduce a change to get the parents to stop coming late for their kids. So they levied a US$3 fine for when parents picked up their children late. The result? The parents came even later! This is because previously there was an understanding (a “social norm”) in place, and parents rushed when they were late and felt guilty about being late. When the fine was imposed – some parents chose to come even later, paid the fine, and had a guilt-free conscience!

The skills required to change

Typically, training is necessary to facilitate the change. Sometimes it will only take some psychological tuning since the new task may be doable, but fear is inhibiting the ability to perform.

Inconvenient Truth: The underlying mindsets of employees are regularly ignored by leaders. Suppose the change involves new behaviour that takes the employee outside of his/her comfort level, or even outside of the realm for which he or she is “wired”. Then however much training is done, the employee will not budge. There may be other issues, like if there is a time gap between the training and when the change is implemented, like for example, if you are trained to use a computer system three months before its deployment. Another issue is if training only utilises a classroom setting, research indicates that there may only be a 10 per cent retention!

Dr Kenroy Wedderburn, JP, is a part-time lecturer on the MBA programme at the University of Technology, Jamaica. Send your e-mails todrjwedderburn@gmail.

com