Change Management is full of concepts and frameworks that are outdated and not based on empirical research. It seems that in the business world, we are very comfortable with concepts that sound like they make sense intuitively. If the concept is simple and interesting then we’re in. We don’t require them to have any scientific proof and research is often not required.
Let’s take one example. The Kubler-Ross model is one of the most popular models that outlines the 5 stages of grief a psychiatrist in the book ‘On Death and Dying’. The 5 stages are denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance. However, there is a lack of empirical research supporting these 5 stages, and in fact, research suggests other expressions of grief.
Moreover, we’ve somehow applied this model to change management assuming that it is relevant. Whilst dying is a change process, this context cannot be generalised across all other changes such as implementing a new system, a new product, or a new policy. Moreover, there is no research supporting this. We all know that there are lots of people who do not go through these phases during lots of change processes. And certainly, it would be hard to imagine someone going through these phases after buying a new desirable iPhone from a previous older model.
Now, if there are so many popular concepts that are not backed up by research what should we use that is based on proven evidence? Self-determination theory (SDT) by Edward Deci and Richard Bryan should be one that the change management community adopts. It is a broad-based theory about human motivation that focuses on people’s inherent growth tendencies and innate psychological needs. There has been significant research supporting this theory since the 1970s and more research is underway.
What is the self-determination theory about motivation?
The theory states that there are 3 innate human needs that if met will provide motivation, motivation to undertake tasks, to develop, and to undergo change. These 3 elements are:
1) Competence
The experience of mastery and being effective at one’s activity. When people feel that they have the skills required to be successful they are much more likely to take on tasks that will help them achieve their goals
2) Relatedness
The need to feel belonging and connectedness to others.
3) Autonomy
The feeling of choice and control over one’s focus.
Each of the three elements contributes to motivation, by having the right level of skills and confidence, by wanting to be connected to others, and by feeling in control over one’s focus or task.
Some implications of these 3 elements on how we manage change include:
1) Simply conducting training may not address someone’s level of competence. The outcome is that they need to feel confident. This means that there should be a holistic focus on a range of learning interventions to promote and support confidence, such as managerial acknowledgment, catering to individual learning styles, supportive learning environment/community after training sessions, etc.
2) Change activities should not be implemented for individuals in isolation from others. For example, if learning is utilized, the change approach should be designed to provide visibility on how others are undergoing the change process, and where they are sharing their experiences. This is why change champions are so important since effective champions promote and build a supportive community
3) Especially for more significant changes, it is important to design into the change process a sense of autonomy for those impacted. This may seem contradictory to how most companies implement change, i.e. one that is characterized by one common set of activities for all employees. What this important to emphasise according to SDT is to build in employee involvement so that they feel that they are shaping and developing the change versus being negatively impacted by it with no choice whatsoever.
There are 2 types of motivations:
1) Controlled Motivation
• “The carrot and the stick” approach to motivating someone • Seduced into the behaviour • Coerced into the behavior, often with the threat of punishment • Experience of tension and anxiety
Employees who work in a controlled motivation environment usually have negative emotions and their confidence and well-being also suffer. Also, in this environment, employees usually take the shortest path to reach the desired outcome. This may or may not have the best consequences for the company. If the company is trying to stipulate a set of behaviors, these may be avoided or blind-sighted to get to the ultimate ‘measure’.
2) Autonomous motivation:
• Experience of volition and choice about the work that one is doing • If the person enjoys the work and finds it interesting, then the autonomous motivation level increases • If the values of the work are consistent with the values of the individual this also increases motivation • If the person endorses the work, then he or she will also be more motivated to undertake the work
Organisations want more autonomous individuals that are aligned their work. Why?
Because research has found that autonomous workers are:
• More creative • Better problem solvers and be able to think outside of the box • Better performance • More positive emotions • Better psychological and physical wellbeing
So how do we promote a change environment that develops autonomous workers?
• Take the perspectives of the workers and their mindset, and be clear about what moves them, what bugs them, what they get excited or bored about, their core values and interests, etc.
• Providing them with choice and the ability to participate in the change and the decision-making process where possible. This will encourage their buy-in and engagement.
• Support them with exploring different ideas and trying new ways of approaching the work differently. This approach is also very consistent with agile ways of working, encouraging innovation, and a ‘safe to fail’ environment.
• Encouraging them to be self-starters and self-initiated.
• Provide them with a strong and meaningful rationale of the ‘why’ of the purpose of the change so that they understand the reasons behind the change.
Edward Deci goes on further to state “Don’t ask how you can motivate others, ask how you can create the conditions for them to motivate themselves”.
From activity-driven to design-driven
One of the biggest implications of SDT is that next time you design your change intervention you should focus away from key standard change management activities such as communications and training. Instead, focus on creating and designing an environment from which people can motivate themselves.
This is a fundamental shift for a lot of change practitioners and requires a depth of understanding about how the organisation functions and what will move its dial. It is not about implementing 1 or 2 core activities, it is about implementing a range of interventions to shape the environment to support change.
Some practical ways in which you can design an environment to promote change motivation:
1) Workshops for participants to brainstorm and discuss ways in which they can undergo the change journey;
2) Share stories of how other employees have experienced change personally; Use different mediums in which to communicate the change, to appeal to different people preferences (e.g. video, online, face-to-face, posters, etc.);
3) Leverage key influencers to influence the community. Provide a sandbox or other platforms (such as an online platform, showcase room, etc.) from which employees may experience and play with the new environment;
4) Break up the change journey into small steps and milestones and acknowledge each progression;
5) Encourage community discussions about the change;
The challenge in building change environments
When we start to design a holistic environment for change, more often than not we are designing this for a set of changes and not just one initiative. In this complex, continuously changing environment, we need to be able to keep tabs on what the changing environment looks like and how it is evolving amongst the various change initiatives.
As different change environment interventions ramp up, we need to be able to visualise how these interventions and activities are impacting the employees and their environment. This includes being able to visualise the pace, scale, nature, and multiplicity of the changes across various parts of the organisation. Using data visualisation tools such as The Change Compass is valuable for organisations within agile environments.
Using the insights and core concepts from the self-determination theory will serve significant value for the change management community. Not only are its concepts well-researched and proven by research but there is a range of directly applicable implications for the change practitioner. No longer do we have to work with frameworks that are fashionable but lack the rigor of empirical research. The challenge now is how we adopt this within our change approach and ‘change the way we approach to change’.
Elevate Your Change Management with The Change Compass: Weekly Demo
Embark on a transformative journey towards unparalleled change management insights and performance enhancement with The Change Compass. Join our weekly demo and discover how a single view of change can revolutionize your approach to business performance.
There are many facets of driving agile changes. Agile changes are featured by such as developing minimum viable product and not investing too much initially, developing a series of iterations to gradually improve the product, engaging stakeholders early and frequently to ensure the outcomes meet business needs, developing working product/solutions from which feedback may be sought to feed iterative improvements prior to final release.
With so many facets of implementing agile changes, what is
the most important part of driving agile changes? What is the core concept that must be done right
without which the change would not be considered ‘agile’?
One of the most critical parts of agile change is the
concept of developing a hypothesis that can be tested. The outcome must be clear in terms of whether
the solution developed meets the business needs or not.
Why hypothesis?
In waterfall methods of delivering projects, the focus is on
spending significant focus understanding and detailing features and ‘requirements’
from the business. From these, the
solution is then designed and developed.
The problem with this approach is:
Significant resources and investment may be
required to sufficiently develop the solution depending on the complexity
involved
It may also take a long period of time to
involve various stakeholders and investigate solution design options before a final
product can be developed. A series of
design decisions also need to be made, each step taking time to undergo
The business may not know what they want and
they would need to provide ‘requirement’s that may or may not meet their
needs. For example, prior to the launch
of iphones, touch screen phones were not popular and were not seen as the
design of future phones
The risk can be significant if the solution developed
does not meet business needs. Millions
of dollars of project investment could have been wasted if this is the case.
On the other hand, what is the advantage of a hypothesis based approach?
Does not spend a lot of time creating a
sophisticated solution or product.
Instead, a simplified version is developed which captures the core of
business need. This is then tested, and then
the results can then feed into further improvements required. In this way, the process allows organisations
to fail early and cheaply in order to eventually come up with the winning
solution
Instead of focusing on detailed planning which
is based on a series of assumptions which may not have been tested to be valid,
the focus is on deriving a solution that CAN be tested and validated or
invalidated. This is especially important
when the solution is new and has not been implemented previously in the
organisation
The hypothesis approach is a scientific approach
where the focus is on proven results based on data. In the same way a laboratory technician would
conduct a series of experiments to test the properties of a chemical solution to
further understand it, in the same way the project team would conduct a series
of ‘experiments’ (or iterations) to gradually test and from testing results,
improve the solution
Tests are always based on ‘real’ data and real
scenarios therefore there is a much greater chance that the final solution will
meet business needs
The importance of a hypothesis-approach for organisational agility
The survival and growth of a company are dependent on its ability to go into different products, different territories or different customer groups to expand its offering. In order to do this, the company needs to ultimately launch various products or services that do not exist currently or that have not been launched in certain new areas/segments.
Therefore, the ability of the organisation to continuously develop, launch and learn from new products and services is critical for its success. Each product launch is a new hypothesis that is to be tested. And with each testing, a set of learning is achieved which will improve its next product launch. In this way, this is how companies become agile and develop the ability to flex and change based on its ability to generate hypotheses.
For digital businesses developing hypothesis is a core way of operating. A hypothesis can be as small as testing the wording of the website using A/B Testing to see which wording is more engaging for website visitors. A/B Testing is where a certain number of visitor traffic is channeled into one version of the website versus another version. And the results of visitor interactions can be used to validate which version is more engaging.
Change management hypothesis testing
To truly adopt a hypothesis-based approach to change management one needs to adopt change hypothesis testing. What is change hypothesis testing I hear you ask? It is basically developing a series of small change experiments to test assumptions. Change experiments are important because they help to inform what change tactics or approaches work or do not work.
Some examples of change experiments include:
Wording of campaign phrases or positioning
Email click-through rate based on details such
as who email is from, time of delivery, etc.
Effectiveness of training exercises
Employee awareness after town hall messages
Website effectiveness
Impact assessment approach effectiveness
Campaign medium effectiveness such as freebies,
posters, etc.
However, it is critical to ensure that hypothesis to be tested is not time nor resource intensive. The experiment must also be tested using feedback data. The hypothesis cannot be proven or disproved unless it is backed by hard data and not just opinions.
Change management is a broad and diverse discipline with many facets. Just like other essential business domains such as Finance, Marketing, Human Resources, or Management, it encompasses a variety of sub-components. In Finance, for instance, there are sub-disciplines like accounting, tax, budgeting, and investment. Similarly, Human Resources boasts sub-disciplines like employee relations, remuneration, organizational development, business partnering, and learning and development.
Within the vast landscape of change management, various sub-disciplines unfold, each playing a crucial role in orchestrating successful transformations. These include change leadership, learning and development, change impact assessment, organizational design, communications, and change portfolio management. Furthermore, multiple functions across the organizational spectrum claim proficiency in change management, including Human Resources, Project Management, Strategy, and Operations Management.
Navigating this complexity requires a keen understanding of the interconnected nature of these sub-disciplines and the functions that contribute to change management. It’s akin to the intricate workings of Finance, Marketing, and Human Resources, where each component plays a vital role in the overall success of the discipline.
So, where do we begin in this expansive landscape? Let’s unveil the secrets to understanding the core of change management, starting with the often-overlooked, yet crucial, aspect of change impact. To delve deeper into this topic, access our infographic ‘Why lots of functions think they are all experts in managing change’.
Change impact
With so many components to grasp, where does one start in the expansive landscape of change management? And which component holds greater significance? While it’s tempting to label all components as important depending on the nature and context of the change, effective change management begins with a crystal-clear understanding of what is changing. To achieve this understanding, one must unravel the intricate web of change impact on various stakeholder groups, both internal and external to the organization. It is only after a deep understanding of the impact that planning for effective change management can take place.
In many instances, generic change approaches such as training and communications are employed without a detailed understanding of the nature of the change’s impact on stakeholders. The result? Change interventions that miss the mark, leading to resistance and a lack of support.
But how do we gauge this elusive concept of change ‘impact’? How do we understand change ‘impact’? There are many ways to do this.
1. Perception of the change
How does the impacted stakeholder group perceive the change’s impact on them? For example, if implementing a new system in an environment where users are comfortable with the existing one, the perception may be one of skepticism and negativity. Imagine introducing a new project management tool to a team accustomed to their existing system. If the current tool meets their needs seamlessly, the perception of the new system may be met with skepticism, especially if the ‘why’ behind the change isn’t effectively communicated.
The perception of the change is about the mindsets, attitudes, and expectations of people. These are not easily quantifiable and will require a deep understanding of that particular stakeholder group and the history of how they have transitioned through different changes.
The perception of the change can also be positive or negative. Positive perceptions of change could be the result of a perception or expectation of benefit, for example, the system may be easier to use, saves time, or accomplish significant tasks that are not possible with the existing system. Negative perception could result if the benefit case is not clear or, worse, perceived to be adding more time, more complexity, and providing less value.
Typical ways to understand the perception of stakeholders may involve surveys, interviews, and focus groups.
2. Severity of impact
Another dimension crucial in understanding change is the severity of its impact. Does the change demand significant investment and resources, akin to a major restructuring exercise? Or is the impact more modest, involving minor process tweaks and requiring only email notifications for those affected?
Measuring the severity of impact is often done using a Likert scale, with 1 denoting a small impact, 3 indicating a medium impact, and 5 signifying a very high impact.
It’s important to note that when employing a scale to assess change impact, a 5-point scale is recommended over a 10-point or 3-point scale. A 10-point scale might be too intricate for individuals to navigate, leading to challenges in distinguishing between, for instance, 6/10 and 7/10, where the material difference may be minimal. Conversely, a 3-point scale tends to oversimplify the analysis, as organizations typically contend with multiple changes, and categorizing all impacts into three broad categories may lack the necessary granularity to differentiate impact levels meaningfully.
3. Capacity of impact
Another crucial aspect of understanding change is assessing how it impacts the capacity of stakeholders to digest and transition through the change. Consider, for instance, the effort and activities required for managers of a business unit to be sufficiently briefed about a new system, enabling them to guide their teams through the process. What are the learning requirements, and what support is necessary?
For changes that are more complex, and demanding significant effort and involvement in the change process, it’s essential to identify these activities and evaluate their impact on the stakeholder group. Common change and transition activities influencing stakeholder capacity include:
Town halls or briefing sessions
Workshops and focus groups
Involvement of subject-matter-experts
Watching videos or reading emails about the initiative
Team meetings to discuss the change
Learning and development sessions
Practice and gradual familiarity required
Providing feedback about the change
Attending any celebration or other events related to the initiative
Additionally, assessing the capacity of impacted stakeholders involves considering what else is happening during the change implementation period. Are there other changes or notable work tasks occurring concurrently? For example, is the change happening during a peak customer period or a major annual work cycle, such as the end of the financial year or audit? Understanding these contextual factors is crucial, as they can significantly impact the capacity of stakeholders.
In large organizations, where multiple changes are often underway simultaneously, navigating these capacity and bandwidth challenges is a skill in itself. Anticipating these challenges ahead of time and planning strategically is key. Explore our suite of articles on change portfolio management to gain insights into effectively managing multiple changes.
4. Time Impact
Considering the impact of change on stakeholder capacity extends to the element of time. Every aspect of change, from shifts in mindset to learning a new system, digesting emails and information packs, attending sessions and meetings, to practicing how to operate the new system, contributes to the temporal dimension of change impact.
Quantifying the time impact of various change aspects on different stakeholder groups allows for estimating the time ranges of impact. This quantification is especially valuable for teams that are highly time-sensitive, such as call centre teams or Finance teams during month-end or year-end periods, when they are deeply engaged in consolidating finances. Similarly, teams like Customer Complaints and Resolutions may experience heightened activity during end-of-year periods with increased customer volumes.
How do we put these into use?
How do we translate these insights into action? Change impact assessment is the critical process of evaluating the nature of change impacts on various stakeholder groups. By utilizing the methods outlined above to assess the impact of change, the change impact assessment generates a detailed set of information from which we can formulate the change approach. It is only after understanding the ‘what’ of the change that we can design the ‘how’ to transition stakeholders through the change.
The completed change impact assessment should be socialized and verified with those impacted. Without this verification process, there’s a risk that those affected may not agree with the captured change impacts, or there could be other impacts missed in the assessment.
At The Change Compass, we offer a cloud-based tool where organizations can input and visualize change impact information. By visualizing the data, we can assess risks and opportunities, including:
Identifying groups that may need additional support due to the complexity or volume of the change
Comparing different stakeholder groups to determine the most critical to the initiative’s success and the extent of their capacity impact, especially in terms of time
Plotting change saturation points for different parts of the business, assessing the extent to which changes exceed these points. Based on this assessment, we determine risk mitigation strategies such as re-prioritization, providing additional resources, or adjusting the change implementation timeline
Evaluating the extent to which impacts (across initiatives) on different parts of the business align with strategic goals. Are the largest impacts on parts of the business as expected according to the strategy? Is the organization’s implementation more focused on operational efficiency or growth, and does this align with the strategic intent?
In conclusion, understanding the core of change management requires a nuanced exploration of change impact, encompassing perception, severity, capacity, and time. By delving into these facets, organizations can chart a path to successful change, avoiding generic approaches that lead to resistance. The Change Compass provides the tools to unlock the full potential of change, ensuring that initiatives align with strategic goals and receive the support they need.
The various types of change data available is like an iceberg. Most people only see the small part of the surface of data types such as training completion rate or change heatmap. There is a lot more beneath the surface. Download our Change Data Iceberg diagram to find out more …
