In the world of change management, Go Lives are often seen as significant milestones. For many project teams, these events represent the culmination of months or even years of hard work, signaling that a new system, process, or initiative is officially being launched. It’s common for stakeholders to view Go Lives as a key indicator of the success of a change initiative. However, while Go Lives are undeniably important, relying on them as the primary measure of change impact can be misleading and potentially harmful to the overall change effort.
Go Lives are just one piece of the puzzle. Focusing too heavily on these milestones can lead to an incomplete understanding of the change process, neglecting crucial activities that occur both before and after Go Live. Let’s outline the risks associated with using Go Lives to report on change management impacts and offers best practices for a more holistic approach.
Go Lives: A Double-Edged Sword
Go Lives are naturally a focal point for project teams. They represent a clear, tangible goal, and the success of a Go Live can boost morale, validate the efforts of the team, and provide a sense of accomplishment. From a project delivery perspective, Go Lives are critical. They signal that the project has reached a level of maturity where it is ready to be released to the broader organization. In terms of resourcing and business readiness, Go Lives ensure that everything is in place for the new system or process to function as intended.
However, the very attributes that make Go Lives attractive can also make them problematic as indicators of change impact. The simplicity and clarity of a Go Live event can lead stakeholders to overestimate its significance, from a impacted business perspective. The focus on Go Lives can overshadow the complex and often subtle changes that occur before and after the event. While a successful Go Live is necessary for change, it is not sufficient to guarantee that the change will be successful in the long term.
The Pre-Go Live Journey: Laying the Foundation for Change
A significant portion of the change management journey occurs long before the Go Live date. During this pre-Go Live phase, various engagement and readiness activities take place that are critical to shaping the overall impact of the change. These activities include town hall meetings, where leaders communicate the vision and rationale behind the change, and briefing sessions that provide detailed information about what the change will entail.
Training and learning sessions are also a crucial component of the pre-Go Live phase. These sessions help employees acquire the necessary skills and knowledge to adapt to the new system or process. Discussions, feedback loops, and iterative improvements based on stakeholder input further refine the change initiative, ensuring it is better aligned with the needs of the organization.
These pre-Go Live activities are where much of the groundwork for successful change is laid. They build awareness, generate buy-in, and prepare employees for what is to come. Without these efforts, the Go Live event would likely be met with confusion, resistance, or outright failure. Therefore, it is essential to recognize that the impact of change is already being felt during this phase, even if it is not yet fully visible.
Post-Go Live Reality: The Real Work Begins
While the Go Live event marks a significant milestone, it is by no means the end of the change journey. In fact, for many employees, Go Live is just the beginning. It is in the post-Go Live phase that the true impact of the change becomes apparent. This is when employees start using the new system or process in their daily work, and the real test of the change’s effectiveness begins.
During this phase, the focus shifts from preparation to adoption. Employees must not only apply what they have learned but also adapt to any unforeseen challenges that arise. This period can be fraught with difficulties, as initial enthusiasm can give way to frustration if the change does not meet expectations or if adequate support is not provided.
Moreover, the post-Go Live phase is when the long-term sustainability of the change is determined. Continuous reinforcement, feedback, and support are needed to ensure that the change sticks and becomes embedded in the organization’s culture. Without these ongoing efforts, the change initiative may falter, even if the Go Live event was deemed a success.
The Risk of Misleading Stakeholders
One of the most significant dangers of focusing too heavily on Go Lives is the risk of misleading stakeholders. When stakeholders are led to believe that the Go Live event is the primary indicator of change impact, they may not fully appreciate the importance of the activities that occur before and after this milestone. This narrow focus can lead to a number of issues.
Firstly, stakeholders may prioritize the Go Live date to the exclusion of other critical activities. This can result in insufficient attention being paid to pre-Go Live engagement and readiness efforts or to post-Go Live adoption and support. As a consequence, the overall change initiative may suffer, as the necessary foundations for successful change have not been properly established.
Secondly, stakeholders may develop unrealistic expectations about the impact of the change. If they believe that the Go Live event will immediately deliver all the promised benefits, they may be disappointed when these benefits take longer to materialize. This can erode confidence in the change initiative and reduce support for future changes.
Finally, a narrow focus on Go Lives can create a false sense of security. If the Go Live event is successful, stakeholders may assume that the change is fully implemented and no further action is required. This can lead to complacency and a lack of ongoing support, which are essential for ensuring the long-term success of the change.
Best Practices for Reporting Change Management Impact
To avoid the pitfalls associated with relying on Go Lives as indicators of change impact, change management practitioners should adopt a more holistic approach to reporting. This involves considering the full scope of the change journey, from the earliest engagement activities to the ongoing support provided after Go Live. Here are some best practices for reporting on change management impact:
Integrate Pre-Go Live Metrics:
Track and report on engagement activities, such as attendance at town hall meetings, participation in training sessions, and feedback from employees.
Monitor changes in employee sentiment and readiness levels throughout the pre-Go Live phase.
Report on aggregate pan-initiative change initiative impost on business units, pre-Go Live
Emphasize Post-Go Live Support:
Develop metrics to measure the effectiveness of post-Go Live support, such as the number of help desk inquiries, employee satisfaction with the new system, and the rate of adoption.
Highlight the importance of continuous feedback loops to identify and address any issues that arise after Go Live.
Communicate the need for ongoing reinforcement and support to stakeholders, emphasizing that change is an ongoing process
Report on post-Go Live adoption time impost expected across initiatives
Provide a Balanced View of Change Impact:
Ensure that stakeholders understand that Go Live is just one part of the change journey and that significant impacts occur both before and after this event.
Use a combination of quantitative and qualitative data to provide a comprehensive view of change impact.
Regularly update stakeholders on progress throughout the entire change journey, not just at the time of Go Live.
Manage Expectations:
Clearly communicate to stakeholders that the full impact of the change may not be immediately visible at the time of Go Live.
Set realistic expectations about the timeline for realizing the benefits of the change.
Prepare stakeholders for potential challenges in the post-Go Live phase and emphasize the importance of ongoing support.
While Go Lives are important milestones in the change management process, they should not be used as the sole indicator of change impact. The journey to successful change is complex, involving critical activities before, during, and after the Go Live event. By adopting a more holistic approach to reporting on change management impact, practitioners can provide stakeholders with a more accurate understanding of the change journey, manage expectations more effectively, and ensure the long-term success of the change initiative.
The key takeaway is that change management is not just about delivering a project; it’s about guiding an organization through a journey of transformation. Go Lives are just one step in this journey, and it is the responsibility of leaders to ensure that every step is given the attention it deserves.
Change measurement translates organisational impact into quantifiable data through surveys, analytics dashboards, and AI-powered tools. Organisations that measure change readiness and adoption rates are 78% more likely to meet project objectives. This guide covers six project-level methods, seven business-level measures, and three enterprise-level frameworks across the Plan-Execute-Realise lifecycle.
A lot of change practitioners are extremely comfortable with saying that change management is about attitudes, behaviours, and feelings and therefore we cannot measure them. This metaphor that change management is ‘soft’ extends into areas such as leadership and employee engagement whereby it may not be easy to measure and track things. However, is it really that because something is harder to measure and less black and white that there is less merit in measuring these?
“If you can’t measure it you can’t improve it” Peter Drucker
The ‘why’ behind a lot of industry change in our day and age comes from the fact that data is now dominating our world. Data is a central part of everything that is changing in our world. Since we are now more reliant on the internet for information, the data that can be collected through our digital interactions around our lives are now driving change. Home assistant Alexa from Amazon can recognize our voices and tell us what we want to know. We can be identified through street cameras. Our Google usage leads to better-targeted advertisements and product promotions. Our Facebook usage leads to a deep understanding of our preferences and lifestyles, and therefore we become targetted by advertisements for what we may find value in (according to Facebook data and algorithms).
So if our world is surrounded by data, why are we not measuring it in managing change? To answer this question let’s look at what we are or are not measuring.
These are some of the common ways in which change is often measured in projects:
Project methods intro
1. Change readiness surveys – What do readiness surveys actually measure?
Change readiness surveys are 5-10 question pulse assessments (Likert + open text) sent via SurveyMonkey/Microsoft Forms at pre-launch, mid-execution, and post-launch. They benchmark stakeholder preparedness, with 92% accuracy when combined with behavioural observations. Top organisations survey quarterly.
Change readiness surveys are usually online surveys sent by a project owner to understand how stakeholder groups are feeling about the change at different points in time throughout the project. It can be in the form on a Likert scale or free text. Most results are summarized into a quantitative scale of the degree in which the group is ready for change. A simple SurveyMonkey could be set up to measure stakeholder readiness for change. ChangeTracking (now part of Accenture) is a comprehensive online tool that measures the change journey and readiness of stakeholder groups throughout the initiative.
2. Training evaluation surveys – How do you prove training ROI?
These evaluations are normally based on participant satisfaction across various categories such as content, instructor effectiveness, usefulness, etc. In a face-to-face training format, these surveys are normally paper-based so as to increase the completion rate. For online or virtual training, ratings may be completed by the user at the conclusion or after the session.
3. Communications metrics – Which comms metrics matter most?
One way in which communications may be measured is the ‘hit rate’ or the number of users/audience that views the article/material/page. This may be easily tracked using Google Analytics that not only tracks number of views per page but also viewership by the time of day/week as well as audience demographic information as such gender and geographical locations.
4. Employee sentiments/culture surveys – What reveals change resistance early?
There are some organizations that measure employee sentiments or culture over the year and often there are questions that are linked to change. These surveys tend to be short and based on a Likert scale with less open-ended questions for qualitative feedback. Since these surveys are often sent across the entire organization they are a ‘catch-all’ yardstick and may not be specific to particular initiatives.
5. Change heatmaps – When do heatmaps fail (and what works better)?
Some organizations devise change heatmaps on excel spreadsheets to try and map out the extent to which different business units are impacted by change. This artifact speaks to the amount of change and often leads to discussions concerning the capacity that the business has to ‘handle/digest’ change. The problem with most heatmaps is that they are usually categorized and rated by the creator of the artifact (or a limited number of people making judgments), and therefore subject to bias. Data that is based on 1 person’s opinions also tend not to have as much weight in a decision-making forum.
6. Change benefit tracking – How do you track post-launch ROI?
In addition to typical change management measures, there are various initiatives-specific measures that focus on the actual outcome and benefit of the change with the goal of determining to what extent the change has taken place. Some example of this includes:
System usage rates
Cost reduction
Revenue increase
Transaction speed
Process efficiency
Speed of decision making
Customer satisfaction rate
Employee productivity rate
Incidents of process violation
Non-initiative based change management measures
There are two other measures that are used within an organizational vs. initiative-specific context, change leadership assessment and change maturity assessment. In the next section, we will discuss these two areas.
Change leadership assessment
David Miller from Changefirst wrote about 3 types of change leaders.:
1. The sponsor whose role is to drive the initiative to success from the beginning to the end. This involves possessing competencies in rallying and motivating people, building a strong network of sponsors and communicating clearly to various stakeholder groups.
2. The influencer whose role is to leverage their network and influence to market and garner the traction required to make the initiative successful. Four types of influencers as identified by Changefirst includes:
a) Advocates who are great at promoting and advocating the benefits of the change
b) Connectors who are able to link and leverage people across a part of the organization to support the change
c) Controllers who have control over access to information and people and these could include administrators and operations staff
d) Experts who are viewed by others in the organization as being technically credible
3. The change agent is someone who is tasked with supporting the overall change in various ways, including any promotional activities, gaging different parts of the organization on the change and be able to influence, up, down and sideways across the organization to drive a successful change outcome.
Whilst there isn’t one industry standard tool for assessing change leadership competencies and capabilities. There are various change leadership assessment tools offered by Changefirst as well as other various smaller consulting firms. One of the most comprehensive change leadership assessment tools is by ChangeTracking is the Change Capacity Assessment which is a self-assessment with the broad categories being Goal Attainment, Flexibility, Decision Making, and Relationship Building.
Some of the key competencies critical in change leadership have been called out by Pagon & Banutal (2008), and include:
Goal attainment
Assessing organizational culture and climate
Change implementation
Motivating and influencing others
Adaptability
Stakeholder management
Collaboration
Build organizational capacity and capability for change
Maneuvering around organizational politics
Change maturity assessment
Organisations are increasingly realising that managing change initiative by initiative is no longer going to cut it as it does not enable organizational learning and growth. Initiatives come and go and those who rely on contractor change managers often find that their ability to manage change as an organization does not mature much across initiatives.
Change maturity assessment is focused on building change capability across the organization across different dimensions, whether it be project change management or change leadership. The goal of conducting a change maturity assessment is to identify areas in which there may be a capability gap and therefore enable structured planning to close this gap.
There are 2 major change maturity assessment models available in the market. The first is by Prosci and the second is by the Change Management Institute. To read more about change maturity assessment read out article A New Guide for Improving Change Management Maturity, where we outline how to improve change maturity throughout different business units across the organization.
A comprehensive model of Change Management Measures
In this diagram various change management measures are represented along two axes, one being the different phases of the initiative lifecycle, and the other being different organizational levels of project, business and enterprise in which change management measures fall into.
Project level measures
‘Plan’ phase
In this phase of the project, the team is discovering and scoping what the project involves and what the change is. As a result, the details are not known clearly at the commencement of the phase. Later in the phase the scope becomes much clearer and the team starts to plan what activities are required to implement the change.
The change complexity assessment evaluates how complex the project is. It looks at how many people could be impacted, what the size of the impact could be, how many business units are impacted, whether multiple systems and processes are impacted, etc.
Change resourcing costing. At the planning phase of the project cost required for the change management stream of the work is required. This includes such as any contractors, communication campaigns, learning cost, travel, and administration cost, just to name a few.
Change readiness assessment is usually conducted prior to the change and during the change. Usually, the same set of questions is asked of various stakeholder groups to assess their readiness for change.
‘Execute’ phase
The execute phase is one of the most critical parts of the project. Activities are in full flight and the project is busy iterating and re-iterating changes to ensure successful execution to achieve project goals.
Communication and engagement tracking. Effective engagement of stakeholders in the change is absolutely critical. Stakeholder interviews, surveys, communication readership rates are all ways in which engagement may be tracked.
Learning tracking. Measuring learning is critical since it tracks to what extent the new competencies and skills have been acquired through learning interventions. Typical measurements include course tests or quizzes in addition to course evaluations. On the job performance may also be used to track learning outcomes and to what extent learning has been applied in the work setting.
Change readiness assessment continues to be critical to track during the execution phase of the project
‘Realise’ phase
In this phase of the project the change has ‘gone live’ and most project activities have been completed. It is anticipated in this phase that the ‘change’ occurs and that the benefits can then be tracked and measured.
Change benefit tracking measures and tracks the extent to which the targeted benefits and outcomes have been achieved. Some of these measures may be ‘hard’ quantitative measures whilst others may be ‘soft’ measures that are more behavioural.
Business level measures
Business level measures are those that measure to what extent the business has the right ability, capacity, and readiness for the change.
Change heatmaps can help to visualize which part of the business is most impacted by 1 project or multiple projects. The power of the change heatmap is in visualizing which part of the business is the most impacted, and to compare the relative impacts across businesses. As the number of change initiatives increase so would the complexity of the change. When facing this situation organisations need to graduate from relying on excel spreadsheets to using more sophisticated data visualization tools to aid data-based decision making. To read more about change heatmaps and why this is not the only way to understand business change impact, go to The Death of the Change Heatmap.
Sponsor readiness/capability assessment can be a critical tool to help identify any capability gaps in the sponsor so that effort may be taken to support the sponsor. A strong and effective sponsor can make or break a change initiative. Early engagement and support of the sponsor are critical. Both Prosci, as well as Changefirst, have sponsor competency assessment offerings.
Change champion capability assessment. Change champion or change agent are critical ‘nodes’ in which to drive and support change within the organizational network. A lot of change champions are appointed only for one particular initiative. Having a business-focus change champion network means that their capability can be developed over time, and they can support multiple initiatives and not just one. Assessing and supporting change champion capability would also directly translate to better change outcomes.
Change leadership and change maturity assessment – refer to the previous section
Change capacity assessment.
In an environment where there is significant change happening concurrently, careful planning and sequencing of change in balance with existing capacity are critical. There are several aspects of change capacity that should be called out in the measurement process:
Different parts of the business can have different capacity for change. Those parts of the business with better change capability, and perhaps with better change leadership, are often able to receive and digest more changes than other businesses that do not possess the same level of capability.
Some businesses are much more time-sensitive and therefore their change capacity needs to be measured with more granularity. For example, call centre staff capacity is often measured in terms of minutes. Therefore, to effectively plan for their change capacity, the impacts of change needs to be quantified and articulated in a precise, time-bound context so that effective resourcing can be planned in advance.
The change tolerance or change saturation level for business needs careful measurement in combination with operational feedback to determine. For example, it could be that last month a part of the business experienced significant change impact across several initiatives happening at the same time. The operational indicators were that there was some impact on customer satisfaction, productivity, and there were negative sentiments reported by staff that there was too much change to handle. This could mean that the change tolerance level may have been exceeded. With the right measurement of change impact levels for that part of the business, next time this level of change is seen, previous lessons may be utilized to plan for this volume of change. Utilise measurement and data visualization tools such as the Change Compass to track change capacity.
Enterprise level change measures
At an enterprise level, many of the business unit level measures are still applicable. However, the focus is comparing across different business units to sense-make what each part of the business is going through and if the overall picture is aligned with the intentions and the strategic direction of the organization. For example, typical questions include:
Is it surprising that one part of the business is undergoing significant change whilst another is not?
Is there a reason that one business unit is focused on a few very large changes whilst for other business units there is a larger set of changes each with smaller impacts?
Is the overall pace of change optimum according to strategic intent? Does it need to speed up or slow down?
What is the process to govern, report and make decisions on enterprise level change, prioritization, sequencing and benefit realization?
Is there one business unit that is able to manage change more effectively, faster with greater outcomes? How can other business units leverage any internal best practices?
As mentioned in the Change Management Measures diagram, some enterprise level change measures include:
Change capacity assessment – Does one business unit’s change capacity limits mean that we are not able to execute on a critical strategy within the allocated time? How do we create more capacity? Ways in which to create more capacity could include more resources such as staff, or initiative funding, more time is given, or more talent to lead initiatives
Change maturity assessment – At an enterprise level, the concern is with the overall change maturity of the organization. How do we implement enterprise level interventions to build change maturity through programs, networks, and exchanges, such as:
Enterprise change capability programs
Enterprise change analytics and measurement tools
Enterprise change methodology
Enterprise network of change champions
Strategy impact map – Change management need not be focused only on project execution or business unit capability. It can also demonstrate value at an enterprise level by focusing on strategy execution (which by definition is change). The way in which different strategies exert impact on various business units may be visualized to help stakeholder understand which initiatives within which strategic intent impact which business units. To illustrate this please refer to the below diagram which is an example of a strategy impact map. In this diagram, each of the organisation’s strategy is displayed with different initiatives branching out of each strategy. The width of each initiative correlates with the level of impact that the initiative has on the business over a pre-determined period of time. Therefore, the width of each strategy also indicates the overall relative impact on the business.
This data visualization artifact can be valuable for business leaders and strategic planning functions as it depicts visually how the implementation of various strategies is impacting business units. This helps planners to better understand strategy implementation impacts, potential risks and opportunities, and balancing change pace with strategy goals at various points in time.
Predictive indicators on business performance – We started this article talking about how data is all around us and we also need to better manage change using data. With quantitative data on change impact, it is possible to ascertain any correlations with operational business indicators such as customer satisfaction, service availability, etc. For those business indicators where there is a significant correlation, it is possible to hence use predictive reporting to forecast performance indicator trends, given planned change impacts.
In the below graph you can see an example of this whereby using historical data it is possible to establish correlations and therefore forecast future impact on business indicators. This example is focused on the customer contact centre (CCC) and key business indicator of average handling time (AHT) is utilized as an illustration.
This type of predictive performance forecasting is extremely valuable for organisations undergoing significant change and would like to understand how change may impact their business performance. By demonstrating the impact on business indicators, this puts the importance of managing change at the front and centre of the decision-making table. At The Change Compass, we are developing this type of measurement and reporting function. This is the frontier for change management – to be established as a key business-driving function (versus a standard back-office function).
Change can be measured and this article has outlined various operational and strategic ways in which change measurement can demonstrate significant value. Most corporate functions cannot exist without data and analytics. For example, Human Resources relies on people and pay data. Marketing cannot function without measurement of channel and campaign effectiveness. For Information Technology, pretty much everything is measured from system usage, to cost, to efficiency. It is time we start utilizing data to better visualize change to better plan and make business decisions.
References:
Miller, David (2011) Successful Change. How to implement change through people. Changefirst Ltd.
Pagon & Banutal (2008) Leadership Competencies for Successful Change Management. Study Report. University of Maribor.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
What are the most important change management metrics to track? Focus on adoption rates, readiness scores, communication engagement, and benefit realisation metrics tailored to project phases and business capacity.
How do you measure change readiness effectively? Combine pulse surveys with behavioural indicators and sponsor assessments. Balance frequency with depth for actionable insights. Read “Beyond the Survey: A Strategic Lens on Change Readiness Assessment.”
Why replace change heatmaps with other visuals? Heatmaps introduce subjectivity bias. Timeline charts and capacity dashboards provide clearer decision-making data. See “The Death of the Change Heatmap.”
What role does AI play in change measurement? AI enables real-time sentiment analysis, predictive capacity planning, and automated risk detection across initiatives. Platforms integrate natural language queries for instant insights.
How many change metrics should organisations track? Target 8-15 core metrics aligned with strategic objectives across project, business, and enterprise levels to maintain focus and actionability.
What enterprise-level change metrics matter most? Strategy impact mapping, cross-business capacity analysis, and predictive performance forecasting linking change volume to operational outcomes.
The role of change managers has been left out of the various agile methodologies. This is even though most fully acknowledge the importance of change management in the success of initiatives. Does this mean that the agile teams should and can take on the role of change managers? While most of you reading this article may have change practitioners in the organisations, there are plenty of organisations that run agile teams without change managers in the team.
Is it that in agile environments, change management responsibilities are distributed across team members rather than centralised in a single role? After all the agile team is self-organising and has shared accountability?
For organisations that do not have change managers in agile teams, they are still able to deliver valuable and continuous changes. The difference is in how effective the agile team is in delivering a solution where:
A range of stakeholders are continuously engaged effectively and therefore have high levels of readiness
Stakeholders’ readiness for the pace and design of agile is taken into account and various education/engagement sessions are designed as required
They’re able to identify the various behavioural changes required in fully adopting the change
Stakeholders continuously track and reinforce adoption
The team is aware of the change landscape of impacted stakeholders and can work with them respectively to design and deliver in a way that maximises adoption in a targeted way
It is quite difficult for a small agile team to have all these skillsets. You can equally place the same argument for Business Analysts. Even if the team does not have this role, they could equally undertake a lot of the tasks that a Business Analyst would typically undertake in an agile project, however, maybe not at the same level of professionalism and rigor.
In a small agile team of cross-functional specialists, by design each member is a specialist in his/her functional domain, whether it is testing, software development, operations, etc. It would be rare for a domain specialist to have such a breadth of skillsets to include a range of change management skills. Of course, this is not impossible, but difficult for a team to possess.
An agile team is by design focused on delivering. By design, the agile team is laser-focused on its iteration work and delivering to the schedule at the right quality. It does not have a lot of capacity to devote itself to working with a wide range of stakeholders as a result. The change manager, on the other hand, is by design focused on the world of the stakeholders as well as what the agile team is delivering and designing a series of steps for the changes to take place or a people and organisational perspective.
Moreover, beyond project change management skills, organisations that have a myriad of self-organising agile teams require greater air-traffic control at a portfolio and enterprise level. Whilst this may be fulfilled from a portfolio management perspective, attention should also be paid to change portfolio management. Within a fast-paced change environment, the capacity stakeholders across the organisation have for the changes, and the overall prioritisation and sequencing for these changes are paramount.
Without this, changes may fall off the radar, superseded by other competing changes delivered by other agile teams. Alternatively, change saturation fatigue may be a result. In fact, there is increasing evidence that this is prevalent across organisations. Stakeholders’ capacity for change is limited and must be managed effectively to ensure the right changes are adopted.
If change management so critical to agile changes let’s delve into the essential role that change managers play within agile teams, breaking down their contributions across the four typical phases of an agile initiative: Define, Build, Test, and Deploy.
Define Phase
During the Define phase, agile teams lay the groundwork for the project by identifying objectives, scope, and initial requirements. For change managers, this phase is critical for assessing the scope and complexity of the change and determining the necessary resources and support structures.
Key Activities for Change Managers in the Define Phase:
1. Assessing Change Size and Complexity: Change managers evaluate the magnitude of the change and its potential impact on various parts of the organization. This assessment helps in tailoring change management strategies to address specific needs.
2. Resource Planning: Identifying the required business and change support resources is essential. This includes assembling a team of change champions, communication specialists, and trainers who will help facilitate the change.
3. Strategic Planning: Developing a comprehensive plan that outlines key activities and tactics to engage stakeholders and drive successful change. This plan acts as a roadmap for the entire change management process.
Build Phase
In the Build phase, agile teams start developing the solution. Change managers intensify their efforts to understand the potential impacts of the change and begin engaging stakeholders.
Key Activities for Change Managers in the Build Phase:
1. Detailed Stakeholder Assessments: Conducting thorough assessments to identify how different stakeholders will be affected by the change. Understanding these impacts is crucial for tailoring communication and training efforts.
2. Initiating Stakeholder Engagement: Early engagement with stakeholders to communicate the vision, goals, and expected outcomes of the change. This engagement helps in building awareness and buy-in from the outset.
3. Scenario Planning: Since the exact nature of the change may not be fully defined, change managers work with various scenarios to anticipate potential challenges and opportunities. This flexibility allows for adaptive communication and engagement strategies.
Test Phase
The Test phase is where agile teams validate the solution through testing and feedback. For change managers, this phase is pivotal for ensuring stakeholders are prepared for the upcoming changes.
Key Activities for Change Managers in the Test Phase:
1. Collaborating on Testing Processes: Working closely with agile teams to determine how stakeholders can be involved in testing. This may include business testers, change champions, or end-users who provide valuable feedback.
2. Designing Communication Content and Learning Interventions: Developing and rolling out communication materials and training programs to prepare stakeholders for the change. These interventions are tailored based on feedback from testing.
3. Engaging Stakeholders Through Various Channels: Utilizing demos, team briefings, and other engagement channels to keep stakeholders informed and involved throughout the testing process.
Deploy Phase
The Deploy phase marks the transition of the solution into the live environment. Change managers play a crucial role in ensuring a smooth transition and full adoption of the change.
Key Activities for Change Managers in the Deploy Phase:
1. Ensuring Readiness: Before deployment, change managers gather evidence that stakeholders are ready for the change. This involves assessing training completion, communication effectiveness, and overall preparedness.
2. Executing Engagement Strategies: During deployment, change managers leverage various engagement channels to support the transition. This includes continued communication, support hotlines, and face-to-face interactions to address any concerns.
3. Monitoring and Feedback: Establishing performance metrics to monitor the adoption and effectiveness of the change. Feedback is collected and analyzed to make necessary adjustments and integrate the change into business-as-usual operations.
Key Differences in Change Management for Agile Teams
While the core principles of change management remain consistent, their application within agile teams introduces unique challenges and opportunities. Here are some key differences:
Proactive Integration in Cross-Functional Teams
Change managers actively contribute to the progress of agile teams by embedding themselves within the cross-functional team structure. This close collaboration ensures that change management activities are aligned with the development process, allowing for more effective and timely interventions.
Flexibility and Adaptation
In agile environments, the content and nature of changes may evolve throughout the project lifecycle. Change managers must remain flexible, working with scenarios and adaptable communication strategies to respond to shifting requirements and stakeholder needs.
Continuous Feedback and Engagement
Ongoing stakeholder engagement and continuous feedback are cornerstones of effective change management in agile teams. Regular check-ins, feedback loops, and open communication channels help to identify and address concerns early, ensuring smoother transitions and higher adoption rates.
Iterative Planning and Adjustment
The iterative nature of agile projects necessitates continuous review and adjustment of change management plans. Change managers must be prepared to tweak strategies, update communication materials, and refine training programs based on real-time feedback and evolving project dynamics.
Practical Tips for Change Managers in Agile Teams
1. Embed Yourself in the Team: Become an integral part of the agile team to gain a deeper understanding of the project dynamics and build strong relationships with team members.
2. Embrace Flexibility: Be prepared to pivot and adapt your change management strategies as the project evolves. Flexibility is key to staying relevant and effective. Come up with scenarios such as communication materials and engagement tactics as needed.
3. Drive Proactive Open Communication: Create an environment where stakeholders feel comfortable sharing feedback and concerns. This openness will help you address issues promptly and maintain trust. Note that stakeholders may need learning interventions to truly understand and adjust to agile ways of working.
4. Leverage Data and Metrics: Use data and performance metrics to monitor the effectiveness of your change management efforts. Data does not just apply to the rest of the agile team. Change management data is no less valuable. This will help you make informed decisions and demonstrate the value of your work. To read more about how to measure change check out our practical guide here.
5. Continuous Stakeholder Engagement: Engage with stakeholders early and often. Building strong relationships and maintaining regular communication will increase the likelihood of successful change adoption.
6. Understand the Change Landscape: Since the change manager’s role is to adopt a people lens, it is critical to see from the impacted stakeholder’s perspective the range of changes they are or will be going through. Change that is designed in a vacuum will not be successful.
Change managers play a pivotal role in the success of agile teams, ensuring that changes are effectively adopted and integrated into the organization. By understanding the unique dynamics of agile projects and adopting flexible, proactive, and iterative approaches, change managers can significantly enhance the readiness and adoption of changes. Their efforts not only support the agile team but also drive the overall success of the organization in navigating an increasingly intense landscape of changes.
Is change management just a job or a career? When you clock in and clock out everyday do you ever wonder what is the purpose of all this work? Yes, your natural response could be, well, managing change helps improve employee work experience and we help company land initiatives. We help maximise initiative benefits. Is this all? And are these the only ultimate outcomes?
For those of us who have made change management a career, we often roll out eyes across initiatives as we see common trends and occurrences across initiatives. What would have been highly stressful or dramatic is just seen as ‘yet again’ more of the same. You know what I mean …
Sponsors who only show up for announcements and ghost the project team the rest of the time
Corporate communications wrestle you to the ground by taking out factual information about the initiative that are critical
You send out a series of initiative communications and the impacted teams rarely read them
Some of your stakeholders nod and agree furiously in project meetings and do nothing afterwards, despite repeated engagement and consultations
Thanks for corporate-wide budget cuts, your project is now sliced into bare bones, and all the work required to drive behaviour change evaporate into thin air, to be replaced by a pure system implementation
Don’t get me wrong. There is definitely a lot of organisational benefits in managing change. There are definitely ample studies that draw attention to how, without successful change efforts, initiatives are doomed for failure. We definitely play a key role in achieving those hefty millions in benefits that are targeted. Also, let’s not forget that most of us are in this because we care about people. We truly believe that creating a good experience for people is the essence of what drives successful change.
The big questions is – what is your purpose and the meaning you are striving for when you work in change management? Beyond the cheque that pays the bills, why do we work hard to improve how change is managed? What is our north star? What truly motivates through thick and thin, through obstacles that stakeholders put along the way?
This is a personal question and not always an easy one to answer. There are some who are happy to go to work, get paid, ignore the BS within the corporate environment, just to feed their family and pay the mortgage. Others may have stumbled into change management and find it interesting work. However, to really strive in leading change, year after year, initiative after initiative, there would need to be some kind of burning flame inside you that keeps pushing you forward.
Exploring your own motivation in driving change not only helps you to understand your own behaviour and the source of your energy, it also helps you be clear about what you really care about. Clarity about your passion helps you to know what to reach for next time you are feeling down about how the project is going, or none of your change tactics are panning out.
For me, the meaning of managing change is only realised after experiencing a series of bad changes. Let me share more. I’ve worked for organisations where I have seen how hurtful and how traumatic bad changes have been for employees. A typical context is organisational restructuring. These are just a few examples what could happen ….
Employees are marched out by security after having lost their jobs on the day of the announcement, in case they retaliate and ‘steal’ company secrets, in public display for everyone to see
Leaders lie through their teeth about what is going to happen to the restructure in order to keep the workers productive, and eventually everyone realises it’s all been a series of lies and fabrications
Consultants are brought in to do the analysis and leaders basically reference what the message is from consultants, without interpreting what this really means for their people. Employees with years of tenure who have significant insight into how to improve business outcomes are ignored
In order to gain better roles and responsibilities managers backstab each other and even team members to jostle their way to favourite positions in the new org chart
For the individuals involved it could be such traumatic experiences that they may be scarred by the experience. Counselling may be required and organisational stress levels may be through the roof. It is not just those individual employees, but their families and friends could also be impacted like ripples in a pond.
Even if you don’t focus on the most dramatic of changes, a series of smaller badly run changes can still impact employees, their belief in the company, their trust in management, their work life health as well as overall health. Multiple smaller changes can add up.
So for me, the real meaning behind managing and leading change is about all those individuals that could be impacted, whether it be employees, customers or partners. Each is a person with a set of circumstances. They may be dealing with other stressors in their family or friendship circles already, or that they may be particularly vulnerable. This is particularly the case in our virtual working world.
Every person deserves to lead a happy, healthy work life. And change is such an important and memorable part of working life that every life you touch is a touch of dialling up the happiness/health level. It may not be the jumping up and clicking heels type of happiness. It would be managing risks so that negative experiences are avoided or minimised. Now imagine a long list of multiple changes all effective managed. Such is the power of managing change. We touch working lives in profound ways.
This is why at The Change Compass our vision is to improve the experience of people during change. “People’s work lives shape who we are and bad change experiences can be traumatic. With great change experiences, we can change the world”.
Now, isn’t this something to get motivated about through thick and thin?
What is YOUR meaning in managing change? How have your experiences shaped your approach and belief in managing change? How do you keep going day in and day out especially when times are tough?
