Work Fit Analysis

Sports Coaching, Change Management & Business Coaching

What We Do...

Leadership

Innovation

Team Coaching

Sports Coaching

Executive Coaching

Mediation

Change Management

Article

Change Management

19-01-2009

“Change Management” is the most frequent phrase used by people accessing my website. The dominance of this as an issue is worth some thought. It has become a “buzz word” (or phrase) within the management lexicon.

It has a vaguely sinister flavour, which sounds a bit to me like, “get with the pace of change or be left behind in the rush”. The other parenthetic meaning seems to be “adapt to a less-desirable situation, whether you like it or not!” (eg. redundancy, decreasing market share, life following the global financial crisis).

I would suggest that merely being alive is an ongoing process of change. On a daily basis our level of consciousness varies from alertness and awareness of our surroundings to deep (level 4) sleep. Our biochemical systems convert food to useable energy forms, replace damaged tissue, fight threat from micro-organisms and learn and store information. All the while we are ageing ever so slightly.

So, the business of change is not a new phenomenon. As human animals this inexorable biological process has remained much the same for millennia.

Thoughts About Change by Toffler and Grayling

When we refer to dramatic changes in our current environment we are really referring to the increasing pace of technological change. “Future Shock” by Alvin Toffler addressed the repercussions of technological change in 1970. Toffler is a futurist and sociologist who worked in a steel factory for 5 years after completing university. He, with his wife, has co-authored several influential works on the business of change. He discussed the three major “waves” of change in the way human society has evolved. The first was when we learnt to grow food (the so called agrarian revolution), when many people ceased being hunter gatherers. Next was the industrial revolution with the evolution of the factory and the growth of cities to support industry. This occurred from somewhere from the 19th century onwards. The third wave (of which we are now a part) is the post industrial or technological wave. This began somewhere in the 1950’s.

A key feature of the industrial wave was a tendency towards a “one size fits all” approach; a natural consequence of production of goods on a large scale. Toffler posits that one of the features of the current wave (largely due to information, hence choice, facilitated by the internet) is a reversion to individually-tailored products. This recognises human diversity and individuality.

Toffler is also of the opinion that where there is major change there is conflict ie. opposition to change eg feudal lords and major religious institutions were reluctant to give up their power and wealth in the face of industrialisation and the growth of democracy.

A.C.Grayling addresses this “struggle” for change in the balance of how western society functioned in his book “Towards the Light” (2007). Grayling reviews the enormous human effort involved in our transition from a feudal society, dominated by a draconian church to one where most people have a kit bag of choices – where to live, which career to pursue, which government to elect, religion or not, immigration or not, marriage or not, children or not. His fear is that in the face of the threat of terrorism there has been a gradual erosion of these hardly-won human rights. Because people are not as aware as they should be of the struggle involved in attaining these precious choices they are too willing to give them up.

Climate Change

At this very moment in history our leaders (at least in the so-called advanced economies) are confronted with a major problem, which involves a change in approach and attitude. They must deal with the elephant in the room ie. climate change. Resisting the changes in attitude to this are very powerful forces, from the industries most effected by a change in our attitude to carbon emissions. The conflict is so far of a political nature, but has the potential to “get rough”. Recent violent conflicts in the forests of Brazil and the jungles of PNG exemplify the problem. Big business takes no prisoners. It may well be that the success with which we manage our change in attitude to global climate change will determine whether we survive as a species.

The Internet

The internet has facilitated the so-called “democratisation” of knowledge, technological and otherwise. In a post-modern world, the notion that “everyone’s opinion is no more or less valid than anyone else’s” finds a ready modality in the various chat rooms etc.

Barrack Obama harnessed the power of the internet to great political effect during the US Presidential elections.

The various search engines have become useable and rapid sources of reference material. In many cultures the internet is now a part of our everyday life. Any potential for personal or cultural harm seems to be dramatically outweighed by its benefits.

Early fears of technological change concerned its potential to induce our dependence upon, and thereby make us somehow less human (mainly in an interpersonal or cultural sense). These fears seem to be largely unfounded. Great music, art and literature still move people to tears. The profusion of self- help and relationship literature seems to indicate a market of people thinking and reading about matters psychological.

The Human Side

So, what about this “pace of change” stuff? Any innovation or invention is made by human beings. No doubt many are of a sinister nature (eg. more efficient weapons systems, more sophisticated scams). However, to get from the experimental stage to a point where a product enters the market, demands an expensive and carefully monitored process. In the final analysis, humans also make choices about whether a new product will or won’t be purchased.

Luckily, those choices are often coloured by considerations of whether a particular product is better for the planet. It is hard to imagine that this would have been the case at the height of the industrial revolution. This “evolution” has occurred at an individual level. It will, as Toffler says, inevitably be resisted and conflict will result.

So, how do we as individuals adapt to change, which we accept as inevitable. The first step is to be aware that change is part of the scheme of things. This does not mean we should be preoccupied with “where things are going”. The future is too unpredictable. Any review of any recent history would show that many major change events occur as a result of unique factors which no-one could have predicted eg. 9/11.

I will now consider some common and important change events confronted by us as individuals and in the work context.

1. The Death of a Loved One.
In the usual situation this would be the death of a parent. The
change here is to a world (emotionally, psychologically, physically) without the effect of that person ie. the loss of that person’s presence and influence. This results in conflict. How will I be without that person? How does that change my role? How will I support the surviving parent? How much closer does this make me to death? These conflicts usually resolve as the grieving process completes itself. There is a neurological adaptation to the absence of this person from our emotional and sensory world. This whole process is smoother if the person dies at a time when it is “acceptable”. “He/she had a good innings”, we say.

2. Marriage. (Defacto or Otherwise)
The major change here concerns the public acknowledgement of a
choice to be in a monogamous relationship, heterosexual or otherwise. The conflict lies around two main areas. The first is the sense of having “given something up” ie. the option to live without negotiation. Being in a committed relationship invariably involves conflict between individual and joint priorities. This conflict usually resolves itself by compromise. To some, this is an important matter, not taken lightly.

The next issue is “have I made the right choice?” This usually only answers itself with time, despite the optimism of infatuation. In fact, there is probably about a 50% chance that things will work out long-term. It is of interest that we can accept that the future is essentially unpredictable, but we find it harder to apply this notion to our own/partner’s personal development trajectory.

It may just be that our understanding of marriage is changing. It may be that at some level we accept that reality says we will probably be in a series of committed long-term relationships, each relevant to that particular developmental stage of our life. The statistics certainly hint at this. Our idea of marital “permanence” might parallel the situation regarding our notions of permanent employment. In 1960 the average number of employers a worker had by aged 65 was 3. Currently by aged 30 people have had an average of 8 employers.

There seems to be a change going on here. The resistance to this change will probably come from forces within our society which find changes in these areas threatening.

3. Parenthood
There could be no more potent “instinct” than that to propagate the species. Most animal species abandon their young at a relatively young age. They must then fend for themselves. The human species really needs looking after for much longer. This is the price we pay for our particular adaptive characteristic ie. our advanced cognitive capacity. So, the business of having children (for those who give it some thought) is a big deal. The main changes concern the notion of being directly responsible for the day to day needs of another human who is completely dependent upon its carers for survival.

Instincts (both parental and infant) foster a close emotional bond. However, at another level people are aware that this is no 6 week commitment. You will have this new role for at least 18 years, probably much longer. There is a natural demand upon time and emotions and a need to think more long-term financially. Once again, the change may result in some conflict. In practical terms, instinctive forces usually resolve the conflict.

4. The Restructure
The management consultants arrive bearing very sharp instruments. This process (no matter how it is dressed up) is usually driven by the bottom line. By definition it is short term thinking. “How can we do what we do and make more profit?” Answer: reduce the wages bill, do more with less.

Anxiety levels rise amongst those lower in the pecking order. The smell of redundancy is strong. Unfortunately, if your position is in the cross-hairs there is not much you can do about this fact. However, you can do a lot for yourself as an individual. Firstly, face the facts. Find out if you are going, when you are going and under what circumstances. Try to negotiate some reasonable settlement and try to make some training a part of this. Discuss the matter with your family and people you trust, early on. They are your main source of support. Carefully examine where you are in your life and career trajectory. Is this the time for a major change in direction anyway? Look at what you can do to increase your skill-set. Pay attention to your physical health and therefore your psychological wellbeing.

5. Managing a Change in Your Workplace.
Perhaps the word management could be replaced by the word leadership in this context. Your approach will depend to a degree on the context of change.

If change really involves reducing staff numbers as part of a restructure, don’t beat around the bush. The earlier people know precisely what’s going on, the better. This gives them the opportunity to begin their change responses. Clouding the truth by using linguistic trickery is usually about making the manager feel better. People see though this in an instant. There is no easy way to fire people who have been colleagues. What is important is to let people know that being fired is not about their worth as a person (provided that it isn’t).

A more long term view of leading change looks at ongoing innovation, with a view to constant improvement. In the current financial situation the people who do this best, will not only do better in the usual commercial ways. They will also retain staff because companies which use their people’s intellectual potential will also have more loyal and happy employees.

The first task is to rethink your ideas about traditional management hierarchies. The nature of this food chain approach is that the more important the idea, the fewer brains are working on it. Once decisions are made they are “handed down” for others to implement. This approach is a spin off from the early days of industrialisation. People were simply another commodity which helped produce something to make a profit and were treated as such. Gary Hammell in his book “The Future of Management”, looks at a different way of doing business. He uses the examples of Google, The Gore Corporation and Whole Foods. These are all successful, large organisations. They all appear with monotonous regularity in Fortune 500’s most popular 10 companies to work for.

They all have “flat” management structures, and have honed the art of tapping into the intellectual potential of employees at every level. When new ideas emerge, they are assessed, tested and rewarded when they are successful (with share arrangements etc.). Emphasis is on communication “laterally”, between the various parts of each business (in the case of The Gore Corporation, by placing worksites in close proximity to each other). Employees self select working groups. In the case of Whole Foods, each store department is run by a group of about 8 people who make all the decisions about stock purchase, marketing and recruitment.

In all these companies the intranet is an important means of posting ideas and encouraging criticism and discussion. There is also much more transparency about company finances eg. executive’s wages. They have managed to transmit a clear view of where each company is heading strategically, but this notion is open to everyone’s ideas and input.

On the surface this all has a slightly Utopian feel about it. However, these are successful, well known entities. What they have changed is the way they are able to capture people’s creative potential. It comes as no great surprise that the people who set up these structures do not come from a traditional “management” background.

Can you do this in your workplace? You bet you can. You can start by asking people to self select groups to come up with ideas about how better to run their part of the organisation, and arrange for their ideas to be presented in some way. You might also ask what they think about the direction of the organisation and whether it is working. These ideas are then reviewed by a group representative of various segments in the workplace. Feedback is given and recommendations for action are then passed on through the hierarchy.

Firstly, you will probably be surprised to find that people nearer the coalface have well formed ideas about big stuff, based on their day to day experience.

Secondly, you might find that people feel good about being asked for more than the usual perfunctory completion of their job description tasks.

The Place of Coaching in Change

Coaching deals mainly with individuals and how they effect and are effected by their work and its human and systemic environments.

We are usually presented with a particular issue and the commonest would be interpersonal problems or dealing with change. Using models of how humans manage change and the associated conflict we assist people to define clear goals. Once these are established we assist in the development of specific actions aimed at achieving them. A process of review and extension follows. All the while attention is directed to the personal meaning of this process.

Latest Articles

19-02-2010
Death in the Luge in Vancouver - Is This a Symptom of Something Else?

22-01-2010
Erwin Rommel - Lessons for Leadership and Management in the 21st Century

09-12-2009
Christmas Business

05-11-2009
Functional Foods, Fads or Pharmacy by Another Name

29-10-2009
Immigration: Populate and/or Perish

Work Fit Analysis

Archive

What We Do...

Article

Change Management

Latest Articles

Newsletter