Research on aversion to loss can explain why people don’t want to change. I spoke with Senior Fellow, anthropologist and ex-Inteller Tony Salvador.
It sounds completely illogical but true ….
This plays out in various facets of how people make decisions about choices … including in a change transformations context.
This is just one of the many things I spoke with Tony Salvador about.
Change aversion is a powerful psychological concept rooted in loss aversion, where individuals tend to fear losing what they have more than they value gaining something of equal magnitude. This phenomenon plays a significant role in why many people resist new changes, whether in their personal lives or within organizations, and particularly affects how product managers, leaders, and customer-facing teams approach change initiatives. It impacts their decision-making processes heavily, especially when they perceive potential losses that could overshadow a gain of equal magnitude.
At the individual level, the degree of change aversion varies depending on personal circumstances and perceptions. Original research grounded in Prospect Theory explains that people evaluate potential changes not just by the prospective benefits but by the risks of losing familiar routines, status, or comfort. For example, individuals are often more concerned about losing $2 than they are motivated by the prospect of gaining $5, because the psychological impact of loss outweighs that of an equivalent gain. This loss aversion creates an emotional barrier that can prevent even well-intentioned changes from being embraced.
The effects of change aversion can be observed in many contexts, including business transformations and customer satisfaction. For product managers, understanding this aversion is crucial when introducing new features or product updates. Despite best intentions customers might resist changes that disrupt their habitual usage or create uncertainty – even when these changes offer clear improvements or potential benefits. This reluctance can negatively impact customer feedback and satisfaction because the change is perceived as a threat rather than an opportunity, despite significant change efforts.
One helpful point of reference for managing change aversion is recognizing that the degree of aversion is not uniform. Organizational change studies show that people feel more averse to changes imposed upon them (such as being assigned new tasks) than to changes they self-initiate (like managing their own time differently). This highlights the importance of agency in the change process. When employees or customers feel involved or have some control, their resistance diminishes.
The potential benefits of understanding and addressing change aversion are profound. Company leaders who communicate transparently about what changes mean, acknowledge possible losses, and provide support and resources can create an environment where people feel safer to engage with change. This approach can be extended to personal lives, for example, in maintaining new year’s resolutions where individuals face their own internal resistance rooted in loss aversion to giving up old habits or comforts.
Moreover, energetic speeches or inspirational messaging via emails can sometimes fail to overcome change aversion if they neglect the underlying psychological resistance. Instead, effective change management embraces empathy and addresses the emotional loss individuals perceive. This understanding is particularly vital for product managers relying on customer feedback to refine changes, as they must balance the introduction of innovation with the human tendency to resist disruption.
In summary, loss aversion explains why change feels threatening and why resistance often arises despite good intentions and clear advantages of the new change. By acknowledging the psychological concept of change aversion and its individual variability, organizations and individuals can better design, communicate, and implement changes that minimize resistance and maximize acceptance and satisfaction.
This nuanced understanding provides a valuable toolkit for navigating change in both organizational settings and personal lives, helping transform resistance into openness and enabling progress despite the natural human tendency toward aversion to loss.
Lots of golden nuggets of wisdom takeaways for change practitioners from the man who spent 30+ years working for Intel researching about people behaviour and how they operate in social and technological environments.
Stay tuned for the full recording.
Why do people oppose change?
People often oppose change due to change aversion, a psychological tendency where individuals fear losing what they already possess. This resistance is rooted in the discomfort of uncertainty and potential negative outcomes. Understanding this can help leaders implement strategies to ease transitions and foster acceptance within teams.
Traditionally in change management, there are key ‘events’ that we pin our change strategy on when it comes to getting users to use a new system. These include town halls, leader-led team sessions, and training sessions. We anticipate that after these events that users will come onboard and that all is well. After this we can leave the user and our job is completed.
Unfortunately this is not the case.
User communication and training are only a few steps along a process where many other steps need to occur to achieve the ultimate outcome of full user adoption. We need to look holistically at the whole system and the various players that contribute to the users’ full adoption.
These include:
User capability
User motivation
User capacity
Senior manager buy-in
Manager buy-in
Communication and awareness
Measurement and reinforcement
Strategic alignment
So you can see that all of these are examples of potential levers that need to be pulled to get the outcome.
Here is an example of the initial onboarding journey for The Change Compass. What onboarding journey do you use?
As a first step in understand the change, change management practitioners usually classify different change impacts into people, process, technology, and customer. There is a great effort and focus placed on describing exactly what the impact of change is from a project or program perspective as a part of the change management plan. The impact analysis can include the processes changes, critical behaviours, as well as how different the new technology and new process is going to be compared to the current process.
However, adopting a user-centric view of change impact (versus a project team’s view) is critical in driving successful change.
Often what is seen as impact as felt by various job roles can be very very different from what is experienced by the end-user as a part of the current state. In order to drive towards the benefits of the change, we need to take into consideration any negative thoughts, support system, employee morale, mindset, and performance review processes for those stakeholders impacted by the change. Let’s take a few examples.
When a project is ‘rolled out’. There are can be a lot of different impacted audience factors to consider. These can include:
Location
Role
Gender
Digital fluency
Age
Length of service
Team size
Availability of support staff
Availability of effective 2-way communication platforms
Effective learning and development processes in place
Functional skill sets
So depending on how these organizational change factors determine the impact of the change initiative on groups of individuals, identified specific impacts can be different. In the change impact assessment process, these should be carefully teased out and identified explicitly. Even how we express the names of the impacts should consider how the changes are perceived.
For example, is an impact ‘Team Leader briefing team members about the new process’ or ‘Weekly team meeting to discuss new process changes’? The initial wording is more focused on the new process, whereas the latter one illustrates that there can be various changes discussed in the meeting. So as a result, practitioners need to be open to the environment in which their messages will be delivered and through this better position and clarify the meaning of the change from the team’s perspective. E.g. can this change be delivered as a bundle with other process changes?
In a recent example, a person is understood by the organisation to be undergoing 6 separate initiatives each with their various impacts. Each initiative has fleshed out the various project impacts and these are listed and planned explicitly. However, this is from the organisation’s perspective. In fact, what the individual is undergoing is quite different.
There are changes that the team or division is undergoing that are not always taken into consideration such as people or team changes. On top of this there are also seasonal workload impacts from the likes of end of financial year, audits or pre-holiday season workload. On top of this, there are also various Covid considerations to take into account – the mother of all changes at the moment. Lockdown and social distancing have profound impacts on individuals leading to physical and psychological health impacts.
In the beginning, most users of The Change Compass think it’s about using data to inform business understanding and aid decision making. Whilst this is correct, it is much more than this.
A major global financial services provider has within 1 year achieved quite an extraordinary milestone in being able to exert significant influence to build the strategic change capability of the firm. What this means is that the change practice has been able to exert significant influence and enhanced the ability of leaders to make strategic change decisions. Business leaders also now have a much clearer view of their change complexity and the resulting impact on their business capacity and performance.
Think of it as a mini Oracle/SAP/Salesforce rollout. It’s not just about the system, it is about the changes in people, process, governance and capability that helps you achieve significant business performance uplift.
Specifically, there are 4 key areas that the firm has grown to reap the value of The Change Compass.
1. Optimise performance through change portfolio management
2. Powering change governance with change insights
On Google,, the 2nd most searched term in change management is ‘change management process’. Users are keen to understand a standard formula that they can apply to manage any change. Most users are looking for something simple, and clear, and lay out a step-by-step process that describes what they need to do to manage change.
Managing change is no longer the arena for change practitioners. The field of change management has grown in such leaps and bounds in the past 20 years that most leadership concepts now have a section on change management. Nearly all large 1st and 2nd tier consulting firms have a change management practice, even the likes of McKinsey, BCG,, and Bain.
Around us, we frequently see change management being mentioned. Change is even a visible tagline for the marketing campaign for lots of organizations. Accenture’s marketing tagline in 2021 is “Let there be change”. The Motto for The University of Technology Sydney is “Think. Change. Do”.
What are the common change management processes?
Prosci is one of the most known change processes, especially for those located in the United States. Change First has a ‘PCI’ (People-Centered Implementation) model. Then there is John Kotter’s 8 steps for leading change. What all the models have in common is the initial engagement and planning, followed by change implementation, ending with a transition and sustaining phase.
Companies like having one change process to follow.
Most organizations with a change management practice will have, as part of their offering, one change management process for all practitioners/managers to follow.
Why is that?
A common language to talk about managing change so that different stakeholders can refer to the same language, especially those who are not changing practitioners. Creating terms that are easily understood by stakeholders within the company makes sense.
Ensure new change contractors adhere to “the way of doing things” in managing change within the organization. This is often a big complaint, that a new contractor will bring with him/her new ways of doing things, many of which may not gel well within the particular organization.
Create a minimum level of expected quality in managing change so that at least the ‘minimum’ is carried out and that there isn’t anything obvious that is left out. This is especially important for project teams who may not know what change managers do and what outputs they should be working on.
Prosci’s ADKAR model, a framework focusing on five key elements—Awareness, Desire, Knowledge, Ability, and Reinforcement—that individuals need to successfully navigate change.
John Kotter’s 8 steps model for leading change, providing a roadmap for organizations to effectively manage change, from creating a sense of urgency to anchoring changes in the company culture.
So what is wrong with using a change management process?
Not one change process may be relevant for all cases Change management processes and concepts are good as general references to guide the change practitioner in baselining and learning the key steps that are critical in establishing a good change outcome. No change management process can suit every company and every type of change. This is why it is a good idea to leverage a diverse range of change processes for change managers who are starting out in the industry. Different change processes may cover different areas, therefore provide a synergistic range of references.
For example, John Kotter’s 8 steps of leading change are great for all levels of leaders and team managers as the model is focused on managers leading groups of people through change. On the other hand, Prosci’s ADKAR model is more suitable for a project context where there are a series of activities over several project phases to lead impacted stakeholders through the change.
Also, some change processes may not be applicable for all change scenarios. For example, the famous ‘change curve’ or the Kubler-Ross model of grief and loss. For some reason, this model has been applied so much within a change context that a lot of business people expect that the ‘change curve’ will always occur.
This is absolutely false. In the change curve, there is a prescribed process of shock, denial, frustration, and depression. There are not many change scenarios in which large groups of people go through these emotions. Examples include large-scale restructuring involving retrenchments. However, for standard process changes, technology upgrades, or new product launches, it is very rare that you will see this process being applicable at all.
Blindly following the process One of the biggest dangers and risks of following a change process is not to know when to deviate from the process. This may especially be the case for less experienced change practitioners. The outcome of blindly following the process can mean that the change actually does not happen and the change dial is not moved at the end.
What I often see from change managers who blindly follow the process is a change plan that contains a series of generic activities such as stakeholder engagement, communication, and then launch. Often in these cases, there isn’t a deep understanding of what the change involves from the perspectives of impacted employees. What it means to them may be more than just meeting informational needs. There could be subconscious attachments or preferences/habits that are hard to break.
An analysis of the perceptions and history of changes experienced by those impacted by change is critical. What you may uncover is potential anxieties, expectations, habits, and misunderstanding of what the change involves. This may be ignored by popular change processes.
Change processes may not be linear Experienced change practitioners have seen this. Often what is planned on paper does not actually pan out to be the case. Most change processes follow a scenario where everything goes well. But for complex changes, there are often mishaps or obstacles.
For example:
Key stakeholder groups were not identified upfront and the delay in engaging with them causes overall project delays and stakeholder complications.
Feedback from stakeholders is that the initial messaging was not clear enough and did not reach all groups. Another round of communications and engagement campaign is required to reset expectations.
Learning content was too long and did not sufficiently match employee expectations, thereby resulting in lower completion rates.
After the project rollout, as soon as resources were pulled out of the project team after go-live, adoption rates dived, resulting in little benefits achieved.
In many of these cases described above, the change practitioner needs to repeat certain processes, go back to previous steps, or even split stakeholders with some progressing further in the change process than others.
Following a process may inhibit experimentation One of the core aspects of agile ways of working in implementing change is experimentation. We see teams from development and marketing constantly experiment and learn to evolve into a solution that meets business objectives. In change management, there is little practice in experimentation, even though this is such a core part of agile.
Blindly following the process
One of the reasons could be that change practitioners are used to following a prescribed change process and not used to experimenting with their change approach. Instead, most rely on previous experience or what others have done in other change initiatives. Despite this, there are many good reasons for experimenting change approaches, especially for large/complex change initiatives.
Potential experiments can include:
Communication positioning
Leader storyline for the rationale of the change
Training content
Change measurement
Impact assessment design
Townhall design
Behavior reinforcement and incentives
Not sufficiently emphasizing the importance of measurement Measurement is one of the most important aspects of managing change. Without knowing exactly the outcome of each of the activities we are executing how do we know that we are in the right trajectory? Also, measuring our change intervention ensures that we have the exact gauge on how effective the interventions are, and also where the stakeholders are along the journey. If we’ve not had any complaints or ‘noise’ does not mean that all is well and that the change will take place.
How are you measuring your changes so that you understand where your stakeholders are transitioning to?
Future Trends: Discuss emerging trends and innovations in the field of change management, such as the integration of artificial intelligence, agile methodologies, or digital transformation initiatives. Providing insights into future directions can help readers stay ahead of the curve and adapt their change management strategies accordingly.
In addition to established methodologies, the future of change management is being shaped by cutting-edge technologies and innovative approaches that are revolutionizing how organizations navigate transitions. One of the most exciting developments is the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into change management processes. AI-powered analytics can provide deep insights into organizational dynamics, predicting potential challenges and offering personalized interventions to drive successful change outcomes.
Furthermore, the rise of agile methodologies is transforming traditional change management practices. Agile principles emphasize adaptability, collaboration, and iterative progress, enabling organizations to respond rapidly to evolving market conditions and stakeholder needs. By embracing agile frameworks, change leaders can foster a culture of continuous improvement and empower teams to embrace change as a catalyst for innovation.
Moreover, digital transformation initiatives are reshaping the landscape of change management. As businesses undergo digital transformations to stay competitive in today’s rapidly evolving digital economy, change management becomes increasingly intertwined with technology adoption and organizational agility. Leaders must navigate complex ecosystems of interconnected systems, processes, and stakeholders, leveraging digital tools and platforms to drive seamless transitions and sustainable change.
Incorporating these emerging trends into their change management strategies, organizations can position themselves at the forefront of innovation, driving successful transformations that propel them toward future growth and success.
Ever since the epidemic began people have started to suffer mental health issues. In fact, according to Harvard Business Review, recent studies have shown that 42% of employees globally have experienced a decline in mental health since the commencement of Covid. This is not a surprise given that governments have routinely locked-down populations to ensure safety and contain the spread of the virus. For change practitioners driving change initiatives within this context, it is hard to ignore these facts.
However, a lot of change practitioners are advised to steer clear of any mental health issues since they are not health practitioners and not qualified to deal with mental health issues. This may be true. However, just because change practitioners cannot advise on dealing with individuals with mental health issues, this does not mean that their approaches cannot take mental health into consideration. In fact, if a significant portion of the employee population have experienced reduced mental health, this needs to be taken into account and not ignored. Ignoring the facts can mean unsuccessful change outcomes.
So how can change practitioners take into account mental health issues affecting employees so that they are still able to drive successful initiatives?
Common mental health issues
Firstly, let’s look closer at common mental health issues impacting employees during the pandemic.
Anxiety and Depression
A recent report found that a quarter of 10-24-year-olds in the United States (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) said that they had seriously considered suicide. Other surveys consistently show significant increases in anxiety and depressive disorders and correspond with pandemic trends.
Symptoms of anxiety can range from insomnia, panic attacks, feeling of apprehension, or impending doom, and breathlessness. Anxiety symptoms can also be less physically pronounced such as sweating, dry mouth, dizziness, nausea, difficulty concentrating, and irritability. Symptoms of depression can include difficulty finding joy and difficulty in engaging in normal activities, low energy, declined appetite, hopelessness, and that everything seems an effort.
Languishing
For a section of the population, it may be that they are not feeling severe enough to be diagnosed as being depressed or anxious in a clinical sense. However, it does not mean that their mental health states are optimal. The New York Times labelled this ‘feeling blah’ as ‘languishing’ and that it could be the dominant emotion of 2021. Languishing is the in-between level of the optimal level of mental health and suffering from mental health illness.
People were not feeling burnt out of depressed per se. However, there’s less of the usual excitement, hope and joy in their usual daily lives. Recently I visited my medical practitioner and he commented that of his patients most are suffering various medical conditions and that there are definitely a lot more reports of mental health concerns. People who experience this may not even report it nor even notice it. First comes fewer social interactions, then comes increasing solitude and even isolation.
Incorporating mental health concerns in change delivery tactics
Acknowledgement
The first step to take in incorporating people’s mental health concerns in change delivery is to openly acknowledge this. A lot of corporate communications functions would much prefer to not touch anything that is even remotely negative. However, acknowledging what people are going through builds trust and connection. Ignoring the elephant in the room will not help to engage employees. It is not that this needs to be the front-and-centre of the communication messaging. However, mentioning that there may be employees suffering from mental health issues can be the first step in building improved connections and confront the stigma.
This is especially important if you are driving an initiative that will have a significant impact on employees. If you are requiring employees to undergo significant impact whilst they may be battling with mental health issues, then addressing it head-on is critical.
Role model and sharing of experiences
The initiative sponsor and various change champions can be leveraged to share their personal experiences in dealing with mental health concerns. This helps to de-stigmatize mental health in the workplace and open up the discussion of people’s challenges. During forums, town halls, or even in articles or newsletters, the sponsor can share his/her own experiences in dealing with mental health issues. The trick is to be candid and open. This helps to foster trust with the employees.
Picking up on cues when engaging with individual stakeholders
When working with various stakeholders it helps to establish routine of ‘checking-in’ to sense-check the mental status of everyone prior to starting the meeting. This helps to level-set everyone’s mental status prior to diving into work discussions and helps everyone to understand how others are doing, thereby creating connectivity and inclusiveness.
If you pick up particular cues that the stakeholder may be suffering from mental health issues check-in individually with them to see if they are doing ok. Then, connect them to any company resources available such as employee assistance programs.
Map out the initiatives that impact them – prioritise and sequence.
Mapping out the various initiatives that impact the stakeholder group is one of the most strategic tactics in this list. It means taking an end-user perspective and plotting out all the various initiatives and changes that impact them. Taking this end-user, and design thinking approach, we are not just concerned about the particular initiative that we are driving, but all the various initiatives that the person is/will be experiencing.
During times of change fatigue, it may be that proactive intervention may be required to better prioritise and sequence the change rollout to manage the capacity of the impacted stakeholders. To read up on how to do this refer to the following article:
Different employee groups may be experiencing different needs and challenges. Those with children and that are dealing with childcare challenges during the working day may be experiencing different mental health challenges than those who are singles. Singles may be more inclined to feel isolated and disconnected with limited social support.
By creating different segments, you can position communication messages to better target those audience groups. These are some ideas of potential change tactics for different employee groups:
Employees with children and/or dependents – Offering flexibility in selecting time slots for training sessions, or record any town hall sessions in case they were interrupted during the session
Fully remote workers – Scheduling engagement sessions that involve facilitated discussions on personal experiences in the broader sense beyond just the initiative itself
Non-remote workers – Organising virtual sessions for non-remote workers to connect with remote workers to foster greater connection
Managers – Organise engagement sessions with managers that include content on dealing with employees on mental health issues as a part of the overall manager engagement session content
Measure
As a part of the overall change tactic of successfully implementing the initiative, it makes sense to measure and track employee sentiments. A typical change readiness assessment survey may be supplemented by items on employee mental health. This will help to proactively assess the extent of the mental health challenge for employees and how they may impact the extent to which the initiative could be successful. Survey findings may be socialised with leaders to derive subsequent strategies to tackle the issues.
Surveys do not need to be long and exhaustive. A common digital practice for applications is short, and sharp pulse ratings that only have a few items. Having frequent pulse surveys also helps to assess the development of the issues at hand and to what extent employee sentiments are as anticipated.
You know the drill …. having been around the blocks and worked on many projects you’ve seen these many times over. Change managers often go through similar experiences as we progress through each phase of the project.
What has been your experiences across the various project that you’ve worked on? What are some of these typical ‘defining moments’ for change managers?
These are 10 signs that you’ve been around long enough to see as a change manager 🙂
1. The project brings you in after the project approach has already been set and you are supposed to ‘fix’ bad stakeholder engagement
2. Your project team and/or stakeholders give you funny looks when you start talking about change activities other than comms and training
3. You constantly feel like you’re the go-between with the project and the difficult stakeholders
4. You dread having to manually fill in rows and rows of xls data about who’s who in your stakeholder matrix and detailed change impact assessment
5. Corporate comms persistently changes most of the messages you’ve written for project comms and you just want to tear your hair out because the content becomes incorrect
6. You sit in project update meetings where everyone goes through data points such as defects and performance updates, and you feel inadequate not using hard data all the time, or you get skipped entirely in the round-robin
7. You feel that you’re often the ‘dumming down’ translator who needs to constantly translate project messages for 5-year-olds otherwise you get confused responses
8. You find it a struggle to get time with your project sponsor, and he/she ends up delegating meeting attendance most of the time. You wonder why they’re the sponsor in the first place
9. You suddenly find out that there are other project changes that impact your stakeholders very late in the picture and it’s a scramble to ensure your project remains the key focus
10. You have nightmares about dealing with a difficult stakeholder who is showing all the signs of resistance and is blocking everything you’ve planned
What are the different approaches in deriving a single view of change? And what business impact do they have?
A single view of change is often mentioned as the ‘nirvana’ for change practitioners. Having a clear view of all changes impacting people helps to better plan and execute on the changes.
In our experience there are 3 key approaches:
1) ‘Estimate the pulse’ – A quick and easy way of coming up with a simple heatmap or chart where impacts are estimated overall.
2) ”Periodic pulse checking’ – Periodic work, usually monthly, in documenting change impacts. Some governance and reporting operating rhythms setup. Some element of charting tools used.
3) ‘Hand on the pulse’ – An operating system where the data capture and analysis is embedded within regular business process. Data is utilised by various parts of governance and business planning routines. Fully digital in sustaining data maturity and insight generation.
Organisations may start out in the first or second approach in building on their change maturity and ability to generate change-related insights.
However, to reap the required business impact and to support an agile organisation where change is fast and constant, the first approach is best.
Effective communication is the lifeblood of any successful change endeavour within an organization. It serves as the conduit through which ideas are conveyed, strategies are articulated, and employees are engaged. However, the delicate balance between providing sufficient information and avoiding overload is often difficult to strike. Moreover, how communication is crafted can significantly impact its effectiveness in driving change.
Exploring the Elements of Failure
Delving into the nuances of change communication reveals several common pitfalls that can impede its effectiveness:
Maintaining a Positive or Neutral Tone: In many corporate settings, there is a pervasive tendency to maintain a positive or neutral tone in communication. While this may seem prudent to foster optimism and prevent undue concern, it can inadvertently obscure the gravity of the situation necessitating change. Employees may fail to grasp the urgency or magnitude of the challenges at hand if they are shielded from the realities driving the need for change. Striking the right balance requires a nuanced approach that acknowledges both the imperative for change and the potential benefits it offers. By providing a candid assessment of the current state while articulating a compelling vision for the future, organizations can inspire action and commitment among their workforce.
Impersonal Corporate Speak: The language employed in corporate communications often reflects a detached, impersonal demeanor. This formality, while intended to convey professionalism, can alienate employees and hinder their ability to connect with the message. Particularly in the context of change initiatives, where emotions and uncertainties abound, a more humanized approach is essential.Leaders must endeavor to communicate in a manner that resonates with their audience, conveying authenticity and empathy. By infusing their messages with personal anecdotes, genuine concerns, and relatable language, they can establish rapport and engender trust among employees.
Focus on Reason Over Emotions: Traditional corporate communication tends to prioritize logic and reason over emotional appeal. While facts and figures are undoubtedly important, they often fail to evoke the deeper emotional responses necessary to galvanize action. Employees are more likely to embrace change when they are emotionally invested in its success.Leaders should not shy away from tapping into the emotional dimension of change, sharing personal stories, aspirations, and concerns. By fostering a sense of shared purpose and rallying around common values, organizations can cultivate a culture of resilience and adaptability.
I hear you nod. So what is wrong with these practices if they have been the norm for decades and is adopted as common practice by most organisations?
OK let’s go through these one by one.
Illustrating the Importance of Emotional Engagement:
Drawing from personal experiences underscores the profound impact that emotional engagement can have on driving change: Recalling my tenure at Intel, a pivotal moment arose when rival AMD posed a significant threat to our market dominance. Leaders initiated candid discussions, rallying employees around the emotional stakes of the challenge. This emotional appeal galvanized teams across functions, leading to a remarkable turnaround in our fortunes.
Reimagining Change Communications
In light of the evolving organizational landscape, characterized by rapid technological advancements and shifting cultural norms, there is a pressing need to reimagine change communications: John Kotter, in his book “Change: How Organizations Achieve Hard-to-Imagine Results in Uncertain and Volatile Times,” highlights the imperative for organizations to adapt their communication strategies to meet the demands of the modern era. This entails embracing a more dynamic, inclusive approach that values authenticity, transparency, and emotional resonance.
Change communication is not a static endeavor but rather an ongoing evolution that must adapt to the ever-changing needs and expectations of employees. By challenging conventional norms and embracing innovative approaches, organizations can foster a culture of open dialogue, trust, and collaboration that fuels meaningful change and sustainable growth.
Change is akin to navigating through the skies; it requires careful planning, clear communication, and the ability to adapt to shifting conditions. In the same way that a well-orchestrated airport ensures the safe and efficient movement of passengers and cargo, organizations must design a robust system for change management to achieve success in today’s dynamic business environment. As we explore the intricacies of designing such a system, we’ll draw parallels to the meticulous planning and execution required in airport operations.
Data Currency: Reinforced by System Reminders
Imagine an airport where flight schedules are constantly updated to reflect changes in departure times, gate assignments, and weather conditions. Similarly, our change management system employs reminders to ensure that change initiatives are regularly updated by initiative representatives. This emphasis on data currency mirrors the real-time updates necessary for smooth operations in an airport, enhancing agility and equipping stakeholders with the latest insights to drive informed decision-making.
Source of Truth for Both Change Drivers & Receivers
Just as an air traffic control tower serves as the central hub for coordinating flight information, our change dashboard serves as a centralized source of truth for all stakeholders. This dashboard provides change drivers and receivers with comprehensive insights into ongoing initiatives, fostering transparency and alignment across the organization. Much like how clear communication among air traffic controllers, pilots, and ground staff is essential to avoid chaos in an airport, our centralized repository facilitates collaboration and empowers stakeholders to navigate the change journey with confidence.
Data-Enabled Early Detection on Impacts
Modern aircraft are equipped with advanced sensors to detect potential issues early and prevent disruptions during flights. Similarly, our change management system leverages data to anticipate and mitigate impacts before they escalate. By providing stakeholders with the tools to self-assess and identify potential disruptions, surprises are minimized, and proactive measures can be taken to ensure a seamless transition. This proactive approach mirrors the preventive measures taken in aviation to maintain safety and efficiency in flight operations.
Assigning Business Reps as “Change Custodians”
In an airport, ground staff play a crucial role in ensuring the smooth flow of operations and addressing potential issues as they arise. Similarly, designating business representatives as change custodians facilitates the exchange of critical information and ensures that potential impacts are identified and addressed in a timely manner. By acting as the frontline support for change initiatives, these representatives serve as the linchpin of change maturity, fostering a culture of accountability and ownership throughout the organization.
Continual Access to Change Success Metrics
Much like pilots rely on instruments to gauge their progress and make informed decisions during flights, stakeholders require access to real-time metrics to assess change readiness and adoption. Pulse checks and regular tracking throughout the change journey provide stakeholders with the insights needed to course-correct and adapt as necessary. Additionally, change governance routines, akin to strategic planning meetings in aviation, provide a forum for reviewing upcoming changes and fostering alignment with organizational goals.
Designing a system for change maturity requires careful planning, clear communication, and a commitment to continuous improvement, much like orchestrating the intricate operations of an airport. By embracing the airport analogy and drawing inspiration from its principles, organizations can navigate the complexities of change with confidence and achieve sustainable success in today’s ever-evolving business landscape.
Please click the below to download the infographic.
