Esoteric Change Management

Just as a new house owner likes to change the paint col­our, new man­agers like to intro­duce change. The lit­er­at­ure shows that most change pro­cesses do not achieve the object­ives they seek and a whole lib­rary of books has been writ­ten about the best ways to cre­ate and sus­tain change.

Man­aging change is more often than not about chan­ging the beha­viour of people. Man­age­ment speak uses words such as align­ment, cre­at­ing buy-in and other bend­able learn­ings. How­ever, as soon as the word ‘change’ is men­tioned in a work­place, people will raise their defens­ive shut­ters and try hard to keep doing what they have always been doing.

One aspect of man­age­ment where attempts to change beha­viour is very suc­cess­ful is mar­ket­ing. Good com­pan­ies are able to manip­u­late the atti­tudes and beha­viour of con­sumers so that they buy their product. Why does it work in mar­ket­ing but not so much in management?

Change man­age­ment strategy is more often than not exo­teric. This means that all details of the approach are revealed to the sub­jects of the change. Change man­agers, and more often than not con­sult­ants, openly explain how they will change behaviour.

Mar­ket­ing man­agers are a bit more devi­ous about their motives and use eso­teric tech­niques to change the beha­viour of con­sumers. Some adds openly admit to the tech­niques they use to change the beha­viour of con­sumers — best example is a Molson beer ad from some years ago:

Maybe change man­agers should take a leaf from the book of mar­ket­ing and use the soph­ist­ic­ated soci­olo­gical and psy­cho­lo­gical tech­niques employed to con­vince people to change their buy­ing behaviour.

This might raise the ques­tion whether it is eth­ical to change people’s beha­viour eso­ter­ic­ally. But all I have to say to that is that we change our beha­viour based on our inter­ac­tion with other people all the time. The anti-marketing crowd often under­es­tim­ate the intel­li­gence of con­sumers, which they por­tray as will-less vic­tims. Cre­at­ing change, whether in mar­ket­ing or man­age­ment is about cre­at­ing an envir­on­ment in which people feel com­fort­able to change, can identify with the pro­posed changes and feel that the change will provide them with benefits.

Share on TwitterSubmit to StumbleUponSubmit to reddit

Not another bloody process!

How often have you been in a meet­ing and when dis­cus­sions reach a sticky issue someone, who I’ll call the ‘pro­ces­si­fec­ator’, chills you to the core by saying:

We obvi­ously need to develop a pro­cess for this”

You let out a sigh of dis­be­lief, know­ing that the momentum of your team is in jeop­ardy and you need to break this impend­ing dead­lock before the pro­ject stalls. For­tu­nately you know how to deal with situ­ations like this because you know the seven wrong reas­ons for devel­op­ing a pro­cess.

A pro­cess is an instruc­tion on how to per­form a routine task to reduce the risk of trip­ping over prob­lems that have been anti­cip­ated or encountered in the past. Pro­cesses often form part of a busi­ness man­age­ment sys­tem, such as ISO9001). Pro­cesses are use­ful, however …

A pro­cess is a pre­ci­sion weapon that should only be used when it adds value. Wrong pro­cesses leads to toxic pro­ces­si­fec­a­tion, which grinds innov­a­tion and cre­at­ive think­ing to a halt. Here are seven good reas­ons not to have a process.

1. Pun­ish­ment

You’ve made some­body angry and now they want to exert some power over you. Under these cir­cum­stances it is import­ant to deal with the under­ly­ing reas­ons that the pro­ces­si­fec­ator is pun­ish­ing you and move on.

2. Lazi­ness

The pro­ces­si­fec­ator doesn’t want to do the work and rather play Mine­sweeper or check Face­book. A pro­cess can provide an excuse not to think about an issue and just tick the boxes as you pro­gress. Lazi­ness is def­in­itely going to have an impact on innov­a­tion as a pro­cess can stop free think­ing in its tracks.

3. Ignor­ance

There is already a pro­cess that is avail­able and doc­u­mented that is appro­pri­ate — maybe with some minor modi­fic­a­tion. Provide a copy of it and move on.

4. Secur­ity Blanket

The pro­ces­si­fec­ator doesn’t want to be blamed for a decision and hopes to avoid this by ensur­ing that all of the stake­hold­ers are “on board”. While com­mu­nic­a­tion with stake­hold­ers should not be ignored, you should not dis­reg­ard the money you’re pay­ing someone for their expert­ise, rather than slav­ishly fol­low­ing a process.

5. One-off Activity

Almost uni­ver­sally, one-off activ­it­ies should not be doc­u­mented — unless health, the envir­on­ment or large amounts of money are at stake. In most cases it will be enough to dis­cuss the task first, do it, then move on.

6. Per­form­ance Management

Pro­cesses are some­times developed because an indi­vidual is not com­pet­ent and requires guid­ance in per­form­ing a task. Cre­at­ing a pro­cess to man­age per­form­ance is risky because some­body is per­form­ing a task that is bey­ond their level of competence.

7. It’s a trap!

The final and worst reason for cre­at­ing a pro­cess is to delib­er­ately spring a trap so that someone (the ‘tar­get’) will fail to fol­low that pro­cess, jus­ti­fy­ing the sub­sequent dis­cip­lin­ary action or dis­missal. This is one of the worst reas­ons for devel­op­ing a pro­cess because you’ll be left with a flawed pro­cess and team mem­bers who will shift from per­form­ance beha­viour to risk avoid­ance beha­viour. This will have a fun­da­mental impact on trust between team mem­bers and per­form­ance of the team.

When it’s all said and done …

There are good reas­ons to cre­ate a doc­u­mented pro­cess. The most appro­pri­ate occa­sion to write a pro­cess is when doc­u­ment­a­tion leads to sig­ni­fic­ant improve­ments in pro­duc­tion effi­ciency or cus­tomer exper­i­ence and, more broadly, when the risk of not doc­u­ment­ing the task is greater than the risk of doc­u­ment­ing the task.

If the reason for a doc­u­mented pro­cess is not clear when the pro­ces­si­fic­ator speaks up, it is likely that you’d be bet­ter off without one.

Share on TwitterSubmit to StumbleUponSubmit to reddit