Managing multiple change initiatives is not a new concept nor is it new to organizations. What is perhaps ‘newer’ is how change practitioners are using data to manage multiple changes. Change practitioners that manage a portfolio of initiatives used to focus on building capability in various arenas from employee capability, leadership capability, through to the effectiveness of engagement and learning channels. However, using business and change management data to help companies is just as critical.
Is change management becoming more important?
Yes, change management is increasingly vital in today’s fast-paced business environment. Organizations face constant shifts in technology, market demands, and workforce dynamics, which impact their business processes. Effectively managing these changes helps minimize resistance, enhances employee engagement, and ensures smoother transitions, ultimately leading to improved performance and sustainability in a competitive landscape.
In this article, we will explore the top five challenges associated with the current approaches to managing multiple change initiatives, including the implementation of the change due to lack of resources and insufficient resources. We explore these common approaches and critique key challenges, along with alternatives.
Change heatmaps have become a popular tool for classifying departments based on the impact of a change initiative. However, two key issues often arise with this approach: the oversimplification of the traffic light classification system and the lack of granularity at the department level.
One of the most common ways to visually depict the impact of multiple changes is to use the heatmap. This is normally using a 3-point rating system (high, medium, low) to determine the level of impact across the various departments across the organisation. Whilst the rating process is an easy exercise, there are some very serious challenges:
Even for the 3 level rating system the change practitioner may be challenged with how this rating is determined and what it is based on. Not every team within the same department may be equally impacted
There may be different impacts for different roles within the same team and department
The impact may be different depending on whether the focus is on employees, customers, process, system or partner
Typically most use a monthly rating scale. However, for busy organisations with lots of changes, the change volume may go up and down within the same month. With one rating it oversimplifies what actually happens throughout the month
With only 3 levels of ratings, a lot of departments end up having the same rating level for months, meaning there is not much they can do with this data.
In Summary, the summarised monthly rating for one department indicates medium-level change. But at what time of the month, for what role, for what team, and for what type of impact?
The below is an example of a change heatmap from the University of California, Berkeley.
a. Traffic Light Classification Too Simplistic:
The traditional red, yellow, and green traffic light system used in change heatmaps is a simple way to communicate the status of a department’s readiness for change. However, this simplicity can be misleading. Red may indicate a problem, but it does not provide insights into the nature or severity of the issue. Likewise, green may suggest readiness, but it might hide underlying complexities or dependencies.
Even for the 3 level rating system the change practitioner may be challenged with how this rating is determined and what fact it is based on. Also, the impact may be different depending on whether the focus is on employees, customers, process, system or partner. Typically most use a monthly rating scale. However, for busy organisations with lots of changes, the change volume may go up and down within the same month. With one rating it oversimplifies what actually happens throughout the month. Even if the singular departmental rating is split into rating by initiative, this does not provide an aggregate department-level rating that is aggregated based on logic.
To overcome this challenge, organizations need a more nuanced classification system that takes into account the specific issues within each category. This could involve incorporating additional colours or using a numerical scale to better represent the diversity and complexity of challenges within each department.
b. Department Level Not Granular Enough:
While change heatmaps provide a high-level overview, they often lack the granularity required to understand the specific challenges within each department. Different teams within a department may be impacted differently, and a broad classification may not capture these variations.
To address this issue, organizations should consider adopting a more detailed classification system that breaks down each department into its constituent parts. This granular approach allows for a more targeted and effective change management strategy, addressing specific issues at the team and role levels.
In Summary, the singular monthly rating for one department indicates medium-level change. But at what time of the month, for what role, for what team, and for what type of impact?
2) Using Project Milestone Roadmap to Sequence Impacts
Project milestone roadmaps are commonly used to sequence the impacts of change initiatives. However, this approach faces challenges in terms of the sufficiency of milestones and the difficulty of overlaying multiple capacity considerations.
Below is an example from Praxis Framework.
a. Milestones Are Not Sufficient vs Overall Aggregate Impact Levels:
While project milestones provide a structured timeline for change initiatives, they may not capture the full scope of the impact on the organization. Engaging key stakeholders is essential during this process, as milestones often focus on project-specific tasks and may overlook broader organizational changes that occur concurrently. For example, adoption may require months and is not a single point-in-time milestone per se.
To overcome this limitation, organizations should supplement milestone roadmaps with an overall aggregate impact assessment. This holistic view ensures that the sequence of milestones aligns with the broader organizational objectives and minimizes conflicts between concurrent initiatives.
b. Difficulty of Overlaying Multiple Capacity Considerations:
Managing multiple change initiatives requires a delicate balance of resources, and overlaying capacity considerations can be challenging due to the scope of the change. Project milestone roadmaps may not adequately address the interdependencies and additional resources needed due to the resource constraints that arise when multiple initiatives are in progress simultaneously.
To enhance capacity planning, organizations should invest in advanced project management tools that allow for the dynamic adjustment of timelines based on resource availability. This ensures a realistic and achievable sequencing of impacts, taking into account the organization’s overall capacity.
3) Relying Purely on Excel and PowerPoint to Manage Multiple Change Initiatives
While Excel and PowerPoint are ubiquitous tools in the business world, relying solely on them to manage multiple change initiatives presents challenges related to the agile nature of changes and the difficulty of having interactive data-based conversations. This is especially the case that most change initiatives are digital changes, and yet they are been managed using non-digital means? How can change practitioners ‘be the change’ when they are using dated ways of driving digital change?
a. Agile Nature of Changes Means Ongoing Updates Are Required:
Change initiatives are inherently dynamic, and their requirements can evolve rapidly, especially in response to market shifts. Excel and PowerPoint, while useful for static reporting, lack the real-time collaborative capabilities needed to accommodate the agile nature of changes while maintaining the status quo.
To address this challenge, organizations should consider adopting change management and collaboration tools that enable real-time updates and collaboration. Cloud-based platforms provide the flexibility to make ongoing adjustments, ensuring that stakeholders are always working with the latest information.
b. Difficulty of Having Interactive Data-Based Conversations and Federated Model of Change Data:
Excel and PowerPoint may struggle to facilitate interactive discussions around change data. As organizations increasingly operate in a federated model, with dispersed teams working on different aspects of change initiatives, a more collaborative and integrated approach is essential.
Implementing dedicated change management platforms that support interactive data-based discussions can enhance collaboration and provide a centralized repository for change-related information. This ensures that all stakeholders have access to the latest data, fostering a more transparent and collaborative change management process.
4) Preparing Business Operations Readiness for the Amount of Change
Preparing business operations for a significant amount of change requires a strategic approach that incorporates capacity and time considerations while maintaining granularity in data.
a. Using Business Operations Speak: Capacity, resources, time.
Business operations readiness is often discussed in terms of capacity and time. However, the challenge lies in translating these concepts into actionable plans. Capacity planning involves understanding the organization’s ability to absorb change without compromising existing operations, while time considerations are crucial for ensuring a smooth transition without disruptions.
Change practitioners need to distill the ‘ask of the business’ in business speak. Business stakeholders may not be interested in the various classifications of change or the varying degrees of cultural changes involved. What they are interested in is what you want from my team, how much time you need them to dedicate, and for what team members, so that they can plan accordingly.
b. Granularity of Data:
The granularity of data is essential for effective business operations readiness. Generic metrics may not capture the specific needs and challenges of individual departments or teams, leading to oversights that can impact the success of change initiatives.
Implementing a comprehensive data collection and analysis strategy that considers the unique requirements of each business unit ensures a more accurate understanding of operational readiness. This granularity allows organizations to tailor change management strategies to specific needs, enhancing the likelihood of successful implementation.
5) Getting Executive Engagement and Decision Making
Ensuring executive engagement and decision-making is critical for the success of change initiatives. However, achieving this engagement poses its own set of challenges.
To overcome this challenge, organizations should:
Establish Clear Governance and Engagement Channels:
Ensure that there is in place a clear governance bodies making decisions on the overall control of successful change initiatives across the organisation, focusing on the success of the change. A robust communication strategy ensures that communication channels between change management teams and executives are also well-defined and effective. Regular updates and transparent reporting on the progress and challenges of change initiatives build trust and encourage executive engagement.
Align Change Initiatives with Strategic Objectives:
Demonstrate the alignment of change initiatives with key performance indicators related to the organization’s strategic goals and objectives. Executives are more likely to engage when they see how a particular change contributes to the overall success of the organization and its growth.
Provide Decision-Making Frameworks:
Equip executives with decision-making frameworks that guide them through the complexities of change initiatives. Clearly defined criteria for evaluating the success of a change, along with potential risks and mitigation strategies, empower executives to make informed decisions.
Highlight the Business Impact:
Clearly articulate the business impact of change initiatives. Executives are more likely to engage when they understand the tangible benefits and potential risks associated with a particular change. Use data and analytics to support the business case for change.
Offer Ongoing Support and Education:
Ensure that executives have the necessary support and training to navigate the complexities of change management at all levels of the organization. This includes providing relevant information, resources, and sufficient time to help them make informed decisions and actively participate in the change process, especially regarding new processes. Creating ‘bite-sized’ and summarised insights is key for executives.
Effectively managing multiple change initiatives is a complex task that requires a holistic and adaptive approach. By addressing the challenges of change management, including change management obstacles associated with classification, sequencing, tool reliance, business operations readiness, and executive engagement, organizations can enhance their change management strategies and increase the likelihood of successful outcomes, ultimately maintaining a competitive edge. Embracing innovative tools, fostering collaboration, and maintaining a strategic focus on organizational goals are key elements in overcoming these challenges and navigating the ever-evolving landscape of change.
In this article, we’ve stressed the importance of data. You may wonder about the amount of time and effort required to establish all the various points mentioned in the article and if this is even doable. Well, using Excel and other static non-digital ways of managing change data will mean a significant volume of work, and even then it may not provide a clear picture that gives you the various cuts of data required to drive meaningful conversations. Resort to automation provided by change management software such as The Change Compass to assist in data capture, data analysis, and dashboard generation.
So what is the role that change managers play in managing product changes during the agile product delivery process? What are the actions, approaches, deliverables and considerations required for change professionals in an agile environment?
So what is the role that change managers play in managing product changes during the agile product delivery process? What are the actions, approaches, deliverables and considerations required for change professionals in an agile environment?
We will address these in this article.
What is agile product delivery?
According to Scaled Agile, agile product delivery is a “customer-centric approach to defining, building, and releasing a continuous flow of valuable products and services to customers and users”.
Agile product delivery forms a core part of agile project delivery. Each project is delivering a particular product and this is concerned about delivering innovative products and services with the right solutions at the right time.
The mechanics within each product delivery add up to determine the overall project outcome. Therefore, the design of agile product delivery practices is absolutely crucial in achieving overall project goals. Let’s now examine some of these practices in detail.
Customer centricity vs project centricity
In agile methodology the end customer is the number one focus. In various organisations ‘customer’ may be used for various internal stakeholder groups. Yes, often projects may be delivering solutions that are only benefiting internal employee groups. However, the end goal for agile is focused on the end external customer.
This means, whatever solutions or benefits that the project is bringing to the internal stakeholder group, ideally these would support the organisation’s work in benefiting the end customer. In all aspects of prioritisation and discussions of solution design, the focus must always be on the end customer.
The role of the change manager in customer-centricity is to plan out and execute on the change process according to what supports the end customer and enhances customer satisfaction. If the change has a direct impact on the customer, this means engaging the customer (as needed through marketing groups) and considering customer feedback. And if the impact is more on internal stakeholders, thinking still needs to be applied to facilitate the engagement, readiness, and adoption of the change so as to benefit the end customer.
Even when you’re working on internal stakeholders, being customer-centric means:
Putting yourself into the customers’ shoes – Using customer insights, analytics, and data to inform insights about customer preferences
Focusing on the whole product vs individual features – Taking a holistic view of what is in the interest of customers, the design of the overall change should take into account how customers interact with the overall service or product
Designing change to the customer lifetime value – Most organisations would have a mapping of the value delivered to the customer across different phases across time.
Develop on cadence in agile change management
Agile teams have ongoing, structured routines that help them develop solutions on a regular basis. Within each iteration (a standard, fixed timebox where the team delivers incremental value) the team aims to deliver according to plan.
The Change Manager needs to understand the broader plan and milestones of key outcomes delivered by the project, as well as when each iteration will occur. From this project plan, a clear change management team plan detailing the overall approach in engaging stakeholders based on the impact of the change that will be delivered and the frequency and nature of communication should be formed.
Careful attention needs to be placed on setting the expectation with stakeholders on the clarity of readiness of developed solutions. A lot of stakeholders may not be comfortable with how fast solutions may be iterated and that the solution outcome may not be known until, often, closer to the release date. Addressing the stakeholder expectations of release cadence is critical to ensure that there is no misalignment.
Program Increments (PIs) informed the larger timebox of what will be delivered, whilst each iteration delivers a smaller set of solutions. From a stakeholder engagement perspective, there needs to be a balance of painting a clear overall story of what will be delivered within the overall PI, balanced by particular details contained within each iteration.
Working in program increments
To add value as a change manager across a program increment it is critical that you examine the overall program as a whole system. By addressing potential friction points across the work of each agile team and each iteration, the overall program solution starts to take shape. Your job is to interpret what this means to stakeholders and decipher this into engagement and readiness activities.
Sequencing and planning
The schedule of agile releases is mainly determined based on agile team resourcing and delivery deadlines.
Throughout the iterations, how do the release timings impact stakeholders against their existing business-as-usual demands as well as potential releases from other projects? This is a key contribution of the Change Manager in ensuring that change impact release plans are optimised from the perspective of the receiving business. How frequently should communication updates be undertaken for various stakeholder groups given the pace of the releases? Again, the design of this forms a critical part of the overall change plan.
Change delivery also forms a central part of agile team delivery. Change deliverables are often dependent on other agile team members. For example, to deliver change impact assessment you need the finalised solution to be defined by the Business Analyst. In order to deliver the right level of communication briefing to business stakeholders, you need to set the expectation of the timing and minimum information required.
Overall vision and narrative
Is there a clear overall vision and narrative from which individual release communications can build on top of? It’s critical to paint a clear picture of what the end state looks like without the nuances of the mechanics of the solution (as these will not be known at the beginning of the program).
Release on demand
Release on demand is a practice and a process whereby new functionality is deployed as needed based on stakeholder needs. Depending on the change impact of the feature the change manager needs to be ready to send communications and updates as needed, sometimes within a short notice period.
Note that not all releases necessarily require communications for users. And depending on the type of change being released different formats of communication may be leveraged. For example, system changes may benefit from within-app notifications versus emails or other forms of update.
Communications and engagement may also be bundled as necessary to provide a packet of updates to stakeholder groups versus constant and continuous updates. The change manager needs to examine the nature of change impacts and stakeholder needs to determine the right tactic to be used.
Release design
Change impact sizing and design is a critical role taken by the change manager. From change impact assessment, the change manager needs to consider the impact of the overall size of the change impact from a business stakeholder perspective. Where possible, a packet of change may need to be de-scoped to be broken into smaller pieces of change if this is going to be easier for adoption in consultation with stakeholders. On the other hand, many changes may also be bundled together into a larger change release, again based on optimal stakeholder adoption considerations. This form a critical part of lean flow design.
Bugs in agile change management
The change manager has a role to play in setting expectations with stakeholders that with agile system releases that go fast and constant, there should be an expectation that bugs are probably unavoidable. Ensure that users are clear in terms of how to highlight bugs, the documentation process for these issues, and how they will be kept in the loop as each bug is addressed.
On the other hand, bugs may be so disruptive that an effective roll-back approach must be in place in case the change did not land well, particularly when adding new tools. Effective communication content and processes, including discussions about implementing job security, need to be in place to manage this risk. This is a critical part of ongoing agile change management.
BAU integration
With frequent releases, care needs to be given to how the change projects will be adopted and embedded within the impacted business as a part of business-as-usual workflows. For smaller changes, such as hiring a new team member or launching a new product, this may not be critical, but for larger change impacts, the change manager needs to weave each change into a coherent, overall change approach that minimizes disruptions and includes post-release adoption strategies. This includes embedding roles and responsibilities, tracking, and reporting mechanisms.
Automation in agile change management
A part of agile is about delivering fast as frequently as possible. To support this automation of any part of the development process is encouraged where possible. For the change manager in product teams, various digital tools, including change management software, should be leveraged by product managers to support the continuous improvement and deployment of their communication skills. This includes scheduled digital communication, tracking of audience responses, knowledge article views, and digital versions of the single view of change.
Measurement in agile change management
Measurement is a critical part of agile change management. Without the right key performance indicators (KPIs) and metrics to indicate how the change is progressing, it is difficult to know if the trajectory is heading in the right direction towards the end state. A clear set of measurements needs to be in place to measure constant, and continuous change releases.
For ambitious organisations undergoing constant transformations, effective change management is no longer a “nice-to-have” function; it’s a critical enabler for organisational success. As organisations face increasing complexity, digital transformation, and shifting market demands, the need for high-performing change management teams has never been greater. We see this not only in the increasing number of change management professionals hired year after year, but also in the number of organisations that have established change teams. Yet, building and leading such teams requires thoughtful planning, strategic alignment, and continuous development.
What is the role of a change management team within an organization?
A change management team plays a crucial role in guiding organizations through transitions. They assess the impact of changes, develop strategies for implementation, and support employees throughout the process. By ensuring effective communication and training, they help minimize resistance and foster a smoother adaptation to new systems or practices.
Let’s explores how senior change leaders can pragmatically approach the challenge of creating and sustaining high-performing change teams. We will address the critical components: delivering foundational value, aligning services with business priorities, assembling the right skills mix, demonstrating value to senior leaders, and nurturing the team’s growth and adaptability.
For any change management team, delivering on core responsibilities—what we might call “bread-and-butter” work—is non-negotiable. This foundational layer includes supporting initiatives through roles such as doer, advisor, and coach.
Why It Matters
Without effective delivery of these baseline change activities, a change team risks being perceived as ineffectual, which can undermine its ability to gain organisational trust and expand its remit. For example, if a team fails to facilitate smooth transitions for a large ERP implementation, it will struggle to advocate for strategic roles like change portfolio management.
Best Practices
Role Fluidity: Team members should be adept at switching between executor, advisor, and coach, depending on project needs. For example:
Doer: Crafting communication plans or conducting impact assessments to achieve the desired future state.
Advisor: Guiding project leaders on resistance management strategies.
Coach: Equipping sponsors with the skills to champion change.
Add Measurable Value: Clearly articulate the impact of core activities. Metrics such as adoption rates, speed-to-productivity as a starting point post-change, and stakeholder satisfaction can demonstrate the team’s contribution to project success.
Collaborative Engagement: Build strong relationships with project managers, sponsors, and functional leaders. Their endorsement is crucial for long-term credibility.
2. Getting the Service Mix Right
While core delivery is essential, the broader range of services a change team offers can set it apart. However, not all services are equally valued by senior leaders, nor are they always aligned with organisational priorities.
Key Service Areas
Change Champion Network Development: Empowering a distributed group of change agents to reinforce change locally.
Change Project Delivery: Executing change management tasks within specific initiatives.
Change Deployment Coaching: Guiding teams during go-live phases to sustain momentum.
Change Leadership Development: Coaching leaders to embed leadership skills and change management as a core capability.
Communication Support: Ensuring timely, targeted, and transparent messaging.
Change Portfolio Management: Overseeing change impacts across initiatives to manage saturation and optimize benefits.
Governance Design: Establishing structures and processes to guide change effectively.
Aligning Services with Business Priorities
Change Saturation Management: In a heavily loaded initiative environment, prioritizing the types of changes in change portfolio management helps mitigate operational risks and ensures benefit realization.
Agile Transformation: If agility is the organisational focus, the change team should specialize in scaled agile practices, supporting iterative delivery models and coaching on agile mindsets.
Change Saturation Management: In a heavily loaded initiative environment, prioritizing change portfolio management helps mitigate operational risks and ensures benefit realization.
Engage senior leaders to identify which services align most closely with the organisation’s strategic goals. This alignment ensures that the team’s contributions are recognized as essential rather than discretionary.
The Challenge of Over-Focusing on Methodology in Change Teams
Change management methodologies provide an essential foundation for developing a shared understanding of new processes, tools, and best practices. They enable consistency, structure, and a degree of predictability in how change initiatives are supported. However, when change teams become overly focused on methodology, it can result in a rigid and insular approach that diminishes their ability to address the business’s most pressing challenges.
The Risks of Methodology-Driven Approaches
An excessive emphasis on methodology often shifts the team’s focus inward, prioritizing process perfection over business impact. This can manifest as an overuse of templates, theoretical frameworks, and “one-size-fits-all” solutions that fail to account for the nuances of the organisation or the unique demands of specific initiatives. For example, insisting on completing a detailed change impact assessment for every project, regardless of scale, can delay progress and frustrate stakeholders who need swift, actionable insights.
This insularity can also lead to a disconnect between the change team and business stakeholders. Leaders and teams on the ground may perceive the change team as out of touch with operational realities, focusing on delivering “change management artifacts” rather than practical solutions that align with a shared vision of the real-world challenges. In fast-paced or high-pressure environments, this misalignment risks eroding trust and marginalizing the change team’s role.
A Pragmatic Alternative: Stakeholder-Focused, Evidence-Driven Change
Rather than being bound by methodology, high-performing change teams adopt a business stakeholder-focused approach combined with evidence and data-driven practices. This pragmatic mindset places business needs at the centre, using methodology as a flexible guide rather than a rigid framework.
Stakeholder Focus: Engage directly with business leaders and teams to understand their priorities, pain points, and desired outcomes. For example, a senior leader driving a rapid digital transformation may value quick wins and adaptability over comprehensive documentation. Tailoring the approach to these needs ensures the change team delivers value where it matters most.
Evidence and Data-Driven Approaches: Leverage data to identify what works and where to focus efforts. For instance, analysing adoption metrics, employee feedback, and performance KPIs can guide targeted interventions that yield measurable benefits. This approach also reinforces credibility with data-driven executives who prioritize ROI and tangible outcomes.
Dynamic Flexibility: Treat methodologies as a toolkit rather than a blueprint. Select and adapt tools to fit the specific context, whether it’s a cultural shift requiring storytelling and leadership coaching or a technology rollout needing structured training and communication plans.
The Payoff
By balancing methodological discipline with a pragmatic, stakeholder-cantered approach, change teams can position themselves as indispensable partners to the business. They demonstrate agility, relevance, and an unwavering focus on delivering outcomes that matter most. This approach not only strengthens the team’s impact but also enhances its reputation as a value-adding function critical to organisational success.
3. Assembling the Right Skills Mix
High-performing change teams require a blend of tactical expertise and strategic acumen.
Skill Types and Their Roles
Doers: Strong executors who thrive on delivering tangible outputs such as plans, training materials, or stakeholder maps.
Strategists: Analytical thinkers who assess organisational readiness, map interdependencies, and develop long-term approaches.
Connectors: Relationship builders who excel in stakeholder engagement and influence.
Coaches: Practitioners skilled in developing leadership capabilities and fostering cultural shifts.
Team Composition Tips
Balance Is Key: A team overly focused on execution may miss strategic opportunities, while one that’s too strategic risks losing touch with operational realities.
Flexible Hiring Models: Use a mix of permanent staff and contractors to adjust capacity based on demand. For example, during a merger, bring in experienced change contractors to handle the surge in activity.
Cross-Skilling: Encourage team members to develop multiple capabilities. For instance, a project-focused doer can learn coaching techniques to support leadership development.
4. Demonstrating Value to Senior Leaders
A change management team’s success is often assessed by its ability to demonstrate value in ways that resonate with executives.
Why This Is Crucial
Senior leaders control the budget and influence the perception of the function. If the team’s impact is not clearly tied to organisational success, it risks being deprioritised, particularly in times of financial pressure.
Strategies for Executive Engagement
Speak Their Language: Frame the team’s contributions in terms of business outcomes—cost savings, faster time-to-market, or improved employee retention.
Example: Instead of stating, “We conducted 20 training sessions,” say, “Our training program resulted in a 30% reduction in time-to-productivity for new systems.”
Prioritize Strategic Contributions: Focus on high-impact services like change portfolio management, which directly affect operational resilience and benefit optimization. Ensure that support resources are readily available during this process to enhance effectiveness.
Visualize Success: Use dashboards or scorecards to track and communicate metrics such as initiative adoption rates, change saturation levels, and benefit realization.
5. Nurturing, Motivating, and Developing the Team
Building a high-performing team is not a one-time effort; it requires ongoing attention to culture, engagement, and professional growth.
Key Practices
Measurement and Feedback: Regularly assess team performance through metrics, stakeholder feedback, and self-assessments. Use these insights to identify strengths and improvement areas.
Situational Leadership: Tailor your leadership style to the needs of individual team members.
Example: A novice practitioner may require hands-on guidance, while a seasoned professional benefits more from empowerment and strategic challenges.
Recognition and Reward: Celebrate successes—both individual and collective. Recognize achievements in team meetings, emails to leadership, or formal awards.
Development Opportunities: Invest in training, and cross-functional assignments. For example, a team member focused on project delivery could benefit from a course in portfolio management.
Foster Psychological Safety: Encourage open dialogue, idea-sharing, and risk-taking without fear of blame. This is critical for innovation and resilience during challenging periods.
6. Overcoming Common Challenges
Building and leading high-performing change teams is fraught with obstacles, but proactive strategies can mitigate these risks.
Challenge: Balancing Demand and Capacity
When multiple initiatives demand simultaneous support, the team can become overstretched.
Solution: Implement a tiered support model, where high-priority projects receive full support, and lower-priority ones get advisory services.
Challenge: Gaining Buy-In for Strategic Services
Executives may undervalue strategic offerings like change portfolio management.
Solution: Pilot a portfolio management framework for a specific division, demonstrate its benefits, and then scale.
Challenge: Retaining Talent in a Competitive Market
Experienced change practitioners are in high demand.
Solution: Foster a compelling employee value proposition, including career progression, meaningful work, and a supportive culture.
Case Study: Building a High-Performance Change Team During a Merger
Scenario: A global manufacturing company underwent a merger, leading to significant cultural and operational integration challenges.
Approach:
Core Delivery First: The team focused on ensuring smooth transitions for critical systems (ERP, payroll) to build credibility.
Strategic Pivot: As the merger progressed, they introduced a change portfolio management framework to coordinate initiatives and avoid saturation.
Tailored Skill Development: Team members received targeted training in M&A-specific change management, enhancing their ability to address unique challenges.
Executive Engagement: The team provided a dashboard linking adoption metrics to merger goals, securing ongoing leadership support.
Outcome: The team was recognised as a critical enabler of the merger, with their scope expanded to include leadership development for post-merger integration.
Building and leading a high-performance change management team is as much about strategy and alignment as it is about delivery and culture. By focusing on the foundational “bread-and-butter” work, aligning services with business priorities, fostering a balanced skills mix, demonstrating measurable value, and nurturing team growth, senior practitioners can create teams that are not only effective but indispensable to organisational success.
For those leading change teams, remember: your success is ultimately reflected in the impact you create for the business. Ensure your contributions are visible, valuable, and aligned with what matters most to your stakeholders.
When I was a kid, I used to love my Walkman. I’d create mixed tapes of my favorite songs and share them with friends, spending hours discussing our favorite tracks. The rewind button on my Walkman got a lot of use, and I couldn’t imagine anything ever replacing it. But, of course, it did. Several times over. First, Walkman models with higher fidelity came out, followed by slimmer versions, and then tapes gave way to mini-disc players. Eventually, CD players emerged as the new standard. After a few generations of iPods, we now have phones and watches that have made the Walkman nearly obsolete.
Change is inevitable and, in today’s world, business leaders must recognize that it’s happening at an unprecedented pace. Technological advancements, innovation, and globalization are driving this accelerated rate of change. Companies, no matter the industry, must continually adapt to remain competitive. For instance, Apple, once a small player in the mobile phone industry, has now become the world’s largest smartphone manufacturer, displacing giants like Motorola, Nokia, and RIM. Utilities are grappling with changes due to grid modernization, fluctuating commodity prices, and the shift toward renewable energy sources. Financial services companies, including those involved in financial accounting, are dealing with a myriad of challenges, from regulatory changes to the cost of maintaining IT infrastructure and growing competition in the digital banking sphere.
This wave of change isn’t confined to a few industries but extends to telecommunications, certain government departments, and healthcare, among others. Companies across the board are facing an array of transformative initiatives.
In today’s dynamic business environment, change managers must focus on managing multiple successful change management initiatives, particularly at an enterprise-wide scale, as it is a complex challenge. Organizations must ensure that these changes engage the entire team, are well-coordinated, align with overall business goals, and positively impact employee performance and customer experience.
Change initiatives are essentially projects that require employees—and in some cases, customers—to adapt to new processes, tools, or behaviors through a systematic approach as part of the strategic plan for successful change initiatives. Whether it involves adopting a new system interface, understanding a new product, or adhering to a revised company policy, these initiatives necessitate behavioral changes. However, the challenge lies in the fact that these initiatives often cut across multiple departments within an organization.
For instance, a new IT system rollout impacts not only the IT department but also influences how other departments operate. Similarly, a new HR policy affects the entire organization, while changes to a product’s features can impact marketing, sales, and customer support teams. The ripple effect of these changes means that rarely does an initiative impact just one department—it often affects many areas of the organization, sometimes leading to conflicting priorities and confusion.
However, here’s the challenge: these change initiatives often affect multiple departments within an organization. For example, a new IT system rollout impacts the IT department but also influences how other departments work. A new HR policy influences the entire organization, while changes in a product’s features affect the marketing, sales, and customer support teams.
The consequence is that change initiatives rarely affect just one department; they have a ripple effect across the organization. In some cases, an initiative might even contradict another department’s efforts, leading to confusion and inefficiency.
To manage these changes effectively, organizations must gain a holistic view of all ongoing initiatives, including the company culture and corporate culture as well as organizational culture. This means understanding what changes are happening, when they’re happening, and how they’ll impact different employee and customer groups, which will ultimately improve the chances of success.
A Unified View of Change
The challenge for large organizations is to create an integrated view of all change initiatives, particularly during the implementation process, to sustain outcomes for the long term. For smaller companies or industries with relatively stable environments, spreadsheets might suffice. But for larger, more complex organizations, including senior executives, with operations spanning different regions and functions, a more rigorous approach is necessary, as constant transformation has become a top priority.
Sadly, many large organizations still rely on standalone spreadsheets that require extensive manual effort for data collection, verification, analysis, and reporting. These spreadsheets often focus on cost, timeline, and resource data but tend to overlook a crucial piece of the puzzle: change impact data, which reveals how employees and customers are affected by an initiative.
Imagine the sheer volume of changes a sizable financial services company may face in a year. There could be over 10 legislative changes, countless business improvement initiatives, multiple restructuring efforts, numerous technology updates, and various divisional policy changes. And this is just the beginning. The overall list of change initiatives can be overwhelming.
When I talked to colleagues in divisional operations, they often expressed their difficulties in keeping track of changes. They struggled to understand what changes were happening, which department was driving them, which teams were affected, the timing of these changes, the nature of the impact, and the size of the impact.
With each department maintaining separate spreadsheets or, worse, not having any centralized system, the result was continuous disruptions to employee performance and operational efficiency. Imagine a scenario where one department pushes its call center to sell a product, while another department sends out notices stating that the same product is nearing end-of-life. The resulting confusion affects not only employee performance but also the customer experience.
For organizations dealing with a multitude of changes, how can they create an integrated view of all change initiatives, regardless of whether they involve legislative, technological, policy, strategic, or product changes?
Utilizing Technology for Change Management
To effectively manage the complexity of numerous change initiatives, organizations can benefit from an online tool. The tool should help reduce complexity, enhance communication, and improve risk management. Here are the key characteristics such a tool should have:
Ease of Administration: The tool should be simple for both those driving change and key stakeholders receiving it. It should efficiently capture essential data related to people’s change impacts, including key performance indicators relevant to the project’s success.
Focused on Impact Data: While the tool should cover essential project and business data, its primary focus should be on collecting key impact data. This data complements existing data, enhancing the overall change management strategy.
Effective Reporting Tools: The tool should offer effective and flexible reporting tools. These help operational managers, project management offices (PMOs), and senior managers plan for people’s readiness for change initiatives.
Analysis Capabilities: The tool should include analysis features to identify change risks. These analyses could include change loading and timing issues, which might necessitate reprioritization of initiatives.
Customization: Each organization is unique in terms of its departments, types of changes, and reporting requirements. The tool should be adaptable to accommodate these differences.
However, the effectiveness of any tool depends on how well people use it. An effective tool for presenting a sequence of changes the company is undertaking should be complemented by two crucial aspects:
1. Establishing Processes and Governance to Embed the Tool
Successfully embedding a portfolio management tool across an organization requires establishing a clear operating rhythm and consistent processes for its use. Each division should have defined roles and responsibilities to ensure that the tool is effectively utilized and that data is accurately entered and maintained.
For instance, in the digital marketing department, specific roles should be designated to coordinate product changes, ensuring that every relevant update is promptly entered into the tool. These roles might also include responsibilities for analyzing the data provided by the tool to optimize product launch strategies, aligning them with other ongoing initiatives, and avoiding conflicts.
As organizations adopt an integrated view of change initiatives, it becomes increasingly important to establish an enterprise-level governance body or committee. This governance body should oversee the ongoing development, deployment, and usage of the tool, ensuring it continues to meet the evolving needs of the organization.
The committee should be composed of representatives from various departments, including IT, marketing, HR, and operations, to address the diverse needs of stakeholders across the organization. This body would regularly review the strategic implications of the tool’s data, discuss risks associated with change delivery, and prioritize initiatives based on their potential impact.
By maintaining this operating rhythm, organizations can ensure that the tool becomes an integral part of their change management processes and the company’s culture, driving better coordination, reducing risks, and enhancing decision-making at both the strategic and operational levels.
Once an organization has established an integrated view of its change initiatives through a robust portfolio management tool, the focus shifts to leveraging this data to inform critical business decisions. The data generated by the tool can be instrumental in guiding decisions related to various aspects of change management, such as enhancing the organization’s competitive advantage.
Employee Capacity Management: The tool provides visibility into the number and scale of ongoing initiatives, enabling leaders to assess whether employees have the capacity to absorb additional changes without experiencing burnout or a decline in productivity. By understanding the cumulative impact of these initiatives, the organization can plan and stagger changes to ensure sustainable workload levels.
Resource Allocation: With a comprehensive view of all change initiatives, organizations can make more informed decisions about how to allocate resources effectively in their organizational leadership. The tool allows leaders to prioritize initiatives that align with strategic goals and allocate resources to those with the greatest potential impact.
Customer Experience Management: The data can also help anticipate the potential effects of various initiatives on customer experience. By identifying and mitigating risks early, organizations can ensure that changes do not negatively impact customer satisfaction or loyalty.
Timing and Sequencing of Initiatives: The tool enables organizations to analyze the timing and sequencing of change initiatives to minimize disruptions and conflicts. This strategic approach ensures that initiatives are rolled out in a manner that optimizes their impact while minimizing operational risks.
Strategic Alignment: By providing real-time insights into how ongoing initiatives align with the overall business strategy, the tool supports decision-making that engages team members and ensures every change initiative contributes to the organization’s long-term objectives.
Moreover, the tool’s ability to capture and analyze historical data is invaluable. By examining past initiatives, organizations can gain insights into optimal change capacity and identify patterns or trends that inform future decision-making. This historical perspective enables organizations to predict and plan for change more effectively.
Implementing an enterprise-level change management tool not only provides a comprehensive view of all change initiatives but also significantly enhances the organization’s overall change management capability. As processes and internal processes are refined to support the tool, the organization becomes more agile, resilient, and capable of managing change effectively, ultimately driving better business outcomes.
In this article, we’ve emphasized the importance of understanding what is changing and having an integrated view of initiatives. To experience the transformative power of The Change Compass, join our Weekly Demo every Tuesday to enhance your business performance.
Change management methodologies are designed to facilitate the process of implementing organizational changes effectively. However, a lot of traditional change management approaches tend to be too rigid and waterfall-like, hindering organizations from embracing agility and adapting to a required change. Despite the fact that most organisations are using agile methodology to implement change, methodologies have not kept up to date.
Waterfall vs. Agile: The Need for Change
The waterfall model, characterized by a sequential and linear approach to project management, has long been the dominant framework for managing change in organizations. It follows a structured path, where each phase is completed before moving on to the next. While this approach has its merits, it often falls short when it comes to change management, which requires flexibility and adaptability.
Agile methodologies, on the other hand, emphasize a strategic approach to iterative and incremental development, promoting collaboration, continuous improvement, and rapid response to change. Agile has gained significant popularity in software development, but its principles can be applied to change management as well. By embracing agility, organizations can navigate the complexities of change more effectively, fostering innovation and resilience.
Most change management methodologies, despite the need for agility and adaptability, often retain a waterfall-like structure. Let’s delve into each phase to understand how this traditional approach persists.
Scoping: In the scoping phase, the change management team typically focuses on defining the scope of the change initiative. However, this phase tends to follow a waterfall approach, where the scope is predetermined and set at the beginning of the project. There is limited room for flexibility or adjustments based on evolving requirements or stakeholder feedback.
Stakeholder analysis: In traditional change management methodologies, stakeholder analysis is often conducted early on in the process. However, this analysis is frequently treated as a one-time activity, with limited opportunities for ongoing engagement and collaboration with stakeholders. This lack of continuous involvement hampers the ability to incorporate diverse perspectives and adapt the change strategy accordingly.
Impact analysis: Impact analysis aims to assess the potential consequences of the proposed change on various aspects of the organization. While this phase acknowledges the need to consider impacts, it often relies on linear and predictable assumptions. The waterfall nature of impact analysis fails to account for the dynamic nature of change and the potential for unforeseen effects or emergent patterns.
Change planning: Change planning in traditional methodologies tends to be highly detailed and extensive, often resulting in voluminous documentation. These plans are typically developed early in the process and are expected to remain static throughout the execution phase. This rigidity can be problematic, as change initiatives require adaptability and the ability to respond to emerging challenges and opportunities.
Execution: The execution phase in waterfall-like change management methodologies is often characterized by a linear sequence of tasks and activities. This sequential approach assumes that each step can be completed before moving on to the next. However, in reality, change initiatives can encounter unexpected roadblocks or require course corrections, rendering this rigid execution process inadequate for effectively managing change in dynamic environments.
Overall, these traditional phases demonstrate how most change management methodologies are still designed with a waterfall mindset, focusing on sequential processes, rigid planning, and limited opportunities for flexibility and adaptation. To truly embrace agility in change management, organizations must shift towards iterative and collaborative approaches that prioritize stakeholder engagement, continuous learning, and the ability to adjust course based on evolving needs and circumstances.
Paying lip service to ‘agile-fy’
To pay lip service to make the methodology more ‘agile friendly’ a lot of proponents of change management methodologies have come up with ways to do this.
Matching the phases to agile work phases
Some have matched the change management methodology to agile work phases to try and make it more agile. This includes matching the planning activities done by change managers to those done by the rest of the agile team, and matching the change management approach to agile delivery phases.
Mapping a waterfall style change management methodology to an agile project does not make your approach agile. Your project change activities may be in synch with the rest of the team, but it does not mean that your approach is more agile.
2. Over-focus on agile ‘capability’
Agile project approaches are about the mindset and a way of operating. Yes, ideally we want to be able to educate and improve the agile mindset and capabilities of everyone across the organisation. However, we know that in reality we may be lucky if a pocketful of stakeholders understand agile ways of working.
The same also applies to change management capability. We can invest heavily on change management capability and try and uplift this across several years. However, the most critical parts of learning is learning through ‘doing’. Learning agile ways of implementing initiatives is best through being involved.
Your stakeholders will related to the experience of being in agile initiatives and remember this a lot more than any training sessions that they go on.
3. Doing more
Some have taken the approach that with agile, there are certain activities we need to do more of, and that doing more of these activities will somehow help us to be more agile in our approach.
More communication about agile approaches. More training. More sponsor alignment. More reinforcement of agile outcomes and phases.
Doing more of these activities may be somewhat beneficial depending on your organisation, again it does not make your change approach more agile. This approach is focused on providing ‘support’ for the organisation. It is also you acting as a side-party from the rest of the agile project team, helping the organisation to accept agile. In some situations this may be needed, but again it detracts from what makes your methodology and approach more agile.
How to change your change methodology to be more agile
The “Get One Piece Done” principle from the book ‘Shape Up’ by Ryan Singer is an excellent concept that describes one of the core practices of agile. If there is one core agile principle in which to remember to get the biggest impact, this is it. It offers several advantages over traditional waterfall-like approaches:
Focus on outcomes: Instead of getting stuck in lengthy planning and documentation phases, this principle encourages organizations to focus on delivering tangible results. By setting a clear goal for each bet, teams can align their efforts toward achieving specific outcomes.
Embrace flexibility: Change is unpredictable, and rigid plans can quickly become outdated. By working in short cycles, organizations can adapt to evolving circumstances more effectively. If circumstances change, teams can adjust their course and priorities accordingly during the subsequent bets.
Foster collaboration and autonomy: The “Get One Piece Done” principle promotes collaboration and empowers teams to take ownership of their work. Teams have the autonomy to decide how to approach and complete their bets, fostering creativity and engagement.
Learn and iterate: Agile approaches emphasize learning and continuous improvement. After completing a bet, teams reflect on their experience and incorporate feedback into subsequent bets. This iterative process allows for rapid adaptation and refinement of change initiatives.
The following diagram (adapted from the book) illustrates how to use the ‘Get one piece done’ principle in ‘shipping’ change work. In agile software development, the term ‘ship’ means to deliver an output to the customer. This does not include any work internal to the project team such as planning, testing, and technical development. It is only when a piece of software is ready to be shown with working functions, that it is said to be ‘shipped’.
Change practitioners should also adopt the same agile approach in their work. Rather than relying on a series of project work phases and only ‘ship’ at the end of the project, is much more ‘waterfall’ in approach than agile. Agile teams ‘ship’ solutions throughout the project. Likewise, change practitioners can also ‘ship’ a range of change outcomes throughout the project.
Don’t wait until we have more clarity. The solution is evolving so the ‘clarity’ will also continue to evolve.
Continue to pulse and experiment as the solution continues to evolve. Just like how the agile team is showcasing features continuously as the solution is being developed, change managers should also showcase the change approach and findings through experiments.
For change management, this means testing different pieces of the change approach throughout the project.
Testing engagement channels/medium
Testing messages
Testing training content
Testing town hall design
Testing team briefing design
Testing impact assessment
Testing implementation loading/capacity
Testing speed of adoption
Testing level of engagement
Testing continuation of adoption
What key features should each test incorporate?
Each test should be small enough to be released quickly without too much work, buy-in and time.
Ideally each test should also be ‘new’ and not have been tested before. Note that even if it had been tested by another project, the context could be different.
The number one focus for each experiment is to learn something that will help you form the overall change approach.
So unlike most methodologies where the tracking, measurement and adaptation of the change approach happens at the end after the release, in an agile approach it should happen as early as possible. The eventual change management approach should be an aggregation of a series of tests and small ‘change releases’ that result in the eventual change approach.
The Importance of Change Models
Change models play a critical role in the change management framework as they provide structured methodologies to navigate the complexities of change projects and organizational change. By employing a change model, organizations can streamline the change implementation process, ensuring that everyone is on the same page and that potential pitfalls are addressed proactively. Change models not only guide leaders in formulating a strategic vision but also help in managing the emotional and psychological aspects of change, which are often overlooked. This structured approach is essential in minimizing resistance and fostering acceptance among stakeholders, ultimately leading to a more successful transition.
Understanding the fundamental principles of various change models equips organizations with the tools necessary to tailor their change management strategies effectively. The right change model can serve as a compass, guiding teams through the intricacies of change while promoting alignment across different levels of the organization. As businesses increasingly recognize the need for agility, embracing these models becomes crucial in cultivating a resilient organizational culture that can thrive in the face of continuous change.
Several organizational change management models stand out for their effectiveness in guiding change initiatives. The ADKAR model focuses on individual level transitions, ensuring that each level of resistance is addressed. Lewin’s change management model emphasizes unfreezing, transitioning, and refreezing to ensure lasting change. Kotter’s theory provides a structured eight-step approach, crucial for fostering a culture that embraces change. Lastly, the Burke-Litwin model integrates both hard and soft elements, highlighting the importance of alignment with the company’s structure for successful change implementation.
Lewin’s Change Management Model (from Blog Outline 1 & 2)
Adapting the Burke-Litwin Change Model fosters a deeper understanding of organizational dynamics. This model emphasizes the interplay between hard elements, such as structures and systems, and soft elements, like culture and leadership. By effectively addressing these layers, change managers can identify levers for meaningful transformation. Utilizing tools like the ADKAR model alongside Burke-Litwin enhances communication and minimizes resistance during transitions. Overall, a strategic approach ensures that change initiatives are aligned with the company’s hard elements and structure, facilitating a smoother progression towards successful implementation.
McKinsey 7-S Model (from Blog Outline 1 & 2)
Integrating the Burke-Litwin Change Model can significantly enhance adaptability within organizations. This framework emphasizes the interplay between soft elements, such as company culture and motivation, alongside hard elements like organizational structure. By identifying key drivers behind change initiatives, leaders can effectively navigate the transition model. The Burke-Litwin model guides change managers through the complexities of change management processes, ensuring alignment with overall strategic objectives. Utilizing this approach enables a deeper understanding of resistance levels and fosters successful change implementation.
The Burke-Litwin Change Model
The Burke-Litwin Change Model is a comprehensive framework that examines the intricate relationships between various organizational elements during change initiatives. This model identifies 12 interconnected factors, such as external environment, leadership, and detailed change management plan, which influence how change is perceived and implemented. By recognizing these interdependencies, organizations can better anticipate levels of resistance and tailor their change strategies accordingly.
A key aspect of this model is its focus on the distinction between transformational and transactional changes. Transformational changes often require shifts in organizational culture and values, while transactional changes may involve adjustments to processes or systems. By understanding these levels of change, leaders can apply Kotter’s Theory for change management to address resistance effectively, ensuring that employees are supported throughout the transition. This holistic approach empowers organizations to create sustainable change that is aligned with their strategic goals while minimizing disruption and resistance in the process.
Measurement
Measurement plays a crucial role in agile change management experiments, enabling organizations to assess the effectiveness and impact of their initiatives. Here are a few key reasons why measurement is essential in the context of agile change management:
Assessing Progress: Measurement allows organizations to track the progress and outcomes of their change management experiments. By establishing clear metrics, including change management metrics and key performance indicators (KPIs), teams can objectively assess how well they are progressing towards their goals. This provides visibility into the effectiveness of different strategies and helps identify areas that require adjustments or improvements.
Data-Driven Decision Making: Agile change management emphasizes making decisions based on empirical evidence rather than assumptions or guesswork. Measurement provides valuable data and insights that inform decision-making processes. By collecting and analyzing relevant data, organizations can apply nudge theory to make informed choices about adjusting their approaches, reallocating resources, or prioritizing specific actions.
Learning and Continuous Improvement: Measurement is instrumental in facilitating learning and continuous improvement. Through regular measurement and evaluation, organizations gain insights into what works and what doesn’t. By analyzing the data, teams can identify patterns, uncover root causes of challenges, and discover opportunities for optimization. This iterative process enables organizations to adapt their strategies, refine their approaches, and enhance the effectiveness of future change management experiments.
Demonstrating Value: Measurement helps organizations demonstrate the value and impact of their change management initiatives. By quantifying the outcomes and benefits achieved through the experiments, organizations can communicate the success and value of their efforts to stakeholders, leadership, and other teams. This not only fosters transparency but also builds credibility and support for future change initiatives.
Alignment with Strategic Objectives: Measurement allows organizations to align their change management experiments with strategic objectives and desired outcomes. By establishing relevant metrics and aligning them with organizational goals, teams can ensure that their efforts are contributing to the overall strategic direction. Measurement provides a means to assess whether the experiments are moving the organization closer to its desired state and achieving the intended benefits.
Accountability and Transparency: Measurement promotes accountability and transparency within change management initiatives. By setting measurable targets and regularly reporting on progress, teams can ensure that they are accountable for the outcomes of their experiments. This transparency also enables stakeholders and leadership to understand the impact of the change initiatives and make informed decisions based on the results.
In conclusion, while many change management methodologies still adhere to a rigid waterfall approach, there is a growing recognition of the need for agility in navigating change. By embracing the power of change management experiments, organizations can transform their change approach into a more agile and adaptive one, similar to the Deming Wheel.
Change management experiments provide a structured and iterative framework for testing and refining different strategies, interventions, and processes. They enable organizations to learn from real-world experiences, gather empirical data, and make evidence-based decisions.
By treating change as an ongoing series of experiments, organizations can continuously adapt and improve their approach, leveraging the power of agility to navigate the complexities and uncertainties of the ever-evolving business landscape, including the implementation of new processes. With a mindset rooted in experimentation and a commitment to measurement and learning, organizations can truly transform their change management practices and achieve more successful and sustainable outcomes.
To read up more about agile change management, visit our Agile Knowledge section for a range of articles on managing agile changes.
Agile methodology is fast becoming the ‘norm’ when it comes to project methodology. There are strong benefits promised of faster development time, the ability to morph with changing requirements, less time required to implement the solution, and a better ability to meet project objectives through continuous improvement. There aren’t too many organisations that do not use some form of agile project methodology in how they manage initiatives.
What started out as a way of developing software has evolved into the accepted methodology for managing projects. A scan of literature available on the internet shows a significant outline of the various roles, including the product owner and the development team, and their importance to stakeholders, including end users, in the agile project methodology process. Most roles are clearly outlined and accounted for. There are clear roles established for the business owner, the project manager, the scrum master, developers, testing and quality, product manager, architect, human-centred designer, and even IT operations.
However, there is a glaring gap. What about the role of the change manager?
A review of literature available through project management organisations such as APM (Association of Project Management) and PMI (Project Management Institute) showed glaring omission of the role of the change manager or change management practitioners from agile methodology. The same is also true for Scaled Agile Frameworks where there is a brief mention of the importance of change management in the agile approach, but no mention of the role of the change manager/practitioner.
Is it that there are less projects requiring change managers?
The evidence is against this hypothesis. Jobs in change management are plentiful, with data on ‘Indeed’ online employment portals pulling up over 38,000 job postings. On top of this, there is an increasing number of jobs posted. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, “management analytics” which includes change management, is projected to have a 14% growth rate between 2018 and 2028. In Australia, the ‘Seek’ employment platform projected change management job growth to be at 15% growth in the next 5 years.
Is it that agile methodology is more for technical projects and therefore the omission of change managers?
The agile approach and agile manifesto can be used for a range of different projects, but not all projects. There is certainly evidence of agile project methodology used by software developers in a wide range of industries from financial services, government, non-profit, pharmaceuticals, utilities, and retail industries. The agile methodology is commonly cited for being better for projects where the outcome is not clearly known and where the end change has a level of uniqueness. There are times, though, when waterfall methodology is more appropriate, depending on the situation.
However, it is not true that agile methodology is only used for more technical projects. Even for projects where the focus is not on technical development, agile approaches are used widely. Agile changes have been used for re-organisation exercises. Here is an example from the Business Agility Institute. Executive teams also use agile means to manage various strategic initiatives that are not technical. Agile approaches are even applied to managing church initiatives.
What is the likely reason for the clear omission of change management in the agile methodology?
Organisations in charge of documenting agile methodology are mainly focused on project management and software development. If we take the examples of PMI and APMG, both are project management associations, and both are focused on the project management perspectives of agile, particularly in complex environments. The portion on organizational change management is a specialism of project management. It could be that these organisations have not sufficiently developed agile change management methodology to integrate with agile project management.
Organisations in charge of documenting agile methodology are mainly focused on project management and software development, and not include the agile change management process. If we take the examples of PMI and APMG, both are project management associations, and both are focused on the project management perspectives of agile. The portion on organizational change management is a specialism of project management. It could be that these organisations have not sufficiently developed agile change management methodology to integrate with agile project management.
Even at Scaled Agile, which is about applying agile across the organisation, the omission of the role of change managers is still the case. Frameworks from Scaled Agile are quite detailed and rigorous. All aspects of the roles of various organisational members, including scrum teams, are clearly outlined. Even the role of IT departments in DevOps are clearly spelled out to support agile. But not the role of change managers. Again, this could be due to those at Scaled Agile not having a change management background, and therefore not being able to articulate the various role detail.
However, there are some very critical roles that change practitioners play not only at project level, but at program, epic, and organisational levels. Without the right change management support the following are key risks when organisations are working at SaFe (scaled agile) level:
Change sequencing to maximise adoption across the change portfolio
Packaging change to achieve optimal change adoption, e.g. in terms of integrating communications and learning interventions across projects
Establishing business unit based change champions that can support multiple projects and can help piece together different changes for impacted employees
There are some attempts at closing the gap to document agile change management approaches as a part of the change management process. However, most are conceptual, high level, and not sufficiently detailed to provide clear guidance and practical application for the change practitioner. On the other hand, the work of change management in agile projects should not only be clear for the change practitioner but also be clear for the project manager and other project members.
What’s the problem of omitting the role of change managers from agile methodologies?
1. The role of change management could easily be omitted. Particularly for less experienced project managers who are starting out in agile. The risk could be that change management is omitted from the project altogether since it is not called out as a clear role
2. Change practitioners and agile practitioners are not clear with the roles they play and therefore are not sufficiently involved in driving and supporting the project in the right way. Since there is not a clear set of guidelines and agile principles methodology for change practitioners, it is common to see varying approaches in how change managers support agile projects within the current business environment, with some still using a similar approach as to supporting traditional change management and waterfall projects which may not be appropriate.
3. Agile projects are not successful because change management work is not sufficiently incorporated into agile processes, particularly in the context of digital transformation. With change management roles not spelt out, the project executes the change without critical change management foundations, and therefore, by embracing agile thinking, it is at the risk of not achieving the adoption, adaptation, and benefit realisation targeted.
What should we do about this?
1. Encourage change management associations such as CMI and ACMP to invest in detailing agile change management methodology in a way that sets standards and guidelines for change management skills practitioners to follow.
2. Influence and work with APMG, PMI and Scaled Agile to include explicitly the role of change managers and agile change management methodology.
Change management is emerging to be a strong discipline that executives are starting to recognise as critical to successful change. The role of change practitioners should be stated explicitly and recognised clearly. Change managers should not have to tip-toe in maneuvering their place in supporting agile change projects, nor should they need to convince other project team members of their place throughout various agile routines and methodology phases. It is now time for the change community to drive this and achieve the recognition that it deserves.
Managing a set of change initiatives through a systematic approach in the project intake process and portfolio management process, often outlined in a table of contents, is relatively new for some organizations. This strategic approach is drawn from the portfolio project management method by dividing a set of initiatives into different teams and viewing various project ideas and initiatives in unison. By doing this, organizations can make more informed decisions, allowing things to become more manageable from the perspective of planning how to organize the strategic objectives and business goals of the planning and sequencing of these changes.
Project portfolio managers are focused on investment funding, program management, governance, project execution, project selection, and resource allocation, including selecting the best individual projects related to the best projects and those related projects endeavors. For portfolio change managers, there are similar focus areas such as change program management, change initiative execution, resource management, and quality assurance. However, there are also several marked differences, including a focus on business change governance, business change capability, change leadership, and change tools and methodology.
In practice, there is often a wide range of practices in the service delivery and model of portfolio change management. Some focus purely on supporting project delivery and provide valuable insights, and in the process fail to uplift business change capability. Others tend to focus on general change capability through training and development and very little on change governance and supporting strategy implementation.
So, what are some of the best practices in strategic portfolio management that align with strategic organizational goals and change portfolio management by coordinating with individual project managers in achieving a strategic portfolio of projects that support strategic goals and overall business strategy? How does the change portfolio management function position itself to be strategic, value-adding, and seen as a driver of business results? Here are 10 best practices.
1. Use hard data.
A lot of change professionals often shy away from data. We prefer to focus on behavior, leadership, mindsets, norms, and culture. Whilst the ‘soft’ things may matter we need to be comfortable in working with data. Peter Drucker’s famous saying goes ‘What gets measured gets done’.
Disciplines with a strong focus on data usually have a strong seat at the business table. For example, Finance, Operations, and Sales. Even Marketing is not just about creative ideas and concepts, but there is a strong focus on cost, revenue forecast, and customer responses. Armed with data that drives business decisions you get a strong seat at the decision-making table.
What types of data should portfolio change managers focus on? The standard change measures include training attendance, stakeholder ratings, and arbitrary business readiness ratings. To really demonstrate value, portfolio change managers need to turn change management into a science and be able to quantify change to inform investment decisions effectively. Change Impacts is one great example. By quantifying change impacts into discrete units one can start to measure and understand what changes are and how they move over time and across different parts of the business.
2. Link change practices with business outcomes
Continuing from the previous point – armed with quantitative change impact data, the portfolio change manager is able to analyze the data to find any correlations between change impact data and business performance data. This can become a very powerful picture to take to the senior management team – drawing out the impact of changes on business performance.
Based on data from The Change Compass. An organization has been able to draw significant correlations between change impacts and customer satisfaction levels. This has since raised meaningful discussions regarding the approach of implementing changes and how to mitigate any potential negative impacts on the customer experience. It does not necessarily mean minimize on change impacts on the customer. Instead, it challenges the group to think through how to better engage and prepare for the customer to transition through changes. This is a great example of demonstrating the importance of linking change impacts with business outcomes.
3. Focus on building change capability more than just execution
A lot of organizations treat change management as only discrete pieces of work that need to be carried out as a part of a project. With this approach, these organizations have hired mainly contractors with some permanent change managers purely focused on project execution. Whilst this work is absolutely required to successfully land initiatives, these resources come and go and in the end, the organization is often no better off in managing change.
Instead, there needs to be a continual focus on developing business change capability. This may be carried out in different ways. With each project implementation, the change manager may focus on uplifting change management capabilities in the business within its leaders. Effective engagement and learning channels can be established to better aid the deployment of change initiatives. These include self-paced training systems, know-how regarding establishing and measuring various learning interventions, and different types of employee engagement channels, both face-to-face and digital.
As change portfolio managers, a concerted focus on embedding business change capability can ensure that the business becomes more mature at undergoing change. A strategic plan can be developed that includes different ways of targeting capability uplift and change maturity. This requires business sponsorship and focus. It is also a critical part of effective operational management.
4. Design and manage change governance
Establishing effective change governance does not mean complicated multi-level governance with lots of documentation, policies, and procedures and lots of headcounts to manage the processes. Change governance means having the right processes to ensure there is sufficient oversight and visibility on what changes are going to happen and the effectiveness of change delivery.
Different organizations will establish different governance processes to suit the particular cultural and business environment. However, at the most basic level, there should be a regular cadence where managers can see and visualize the changes that are going to happen, and discuss any risks and issues with the picture they are seeing. At the same cadence, there should also be a review of the previous changes and how they’ve been rolled out, with a view to identifying opportunities for improvement.
There should also be different levels of change governance for larger organizations. For a business unit, there should be a change governance focusing on changes within the business unit. There should also be an enterprise-level change governance focused on changes across the organization. At the enterprise level, the discussion will be on strategic initiatives that run across the company. There should also be discussions on any risks and issues with business readiness and the progress of the change.
A standard meeting agenda for change governance would include the following:
Review the previous month’s changes including callouts of highlights, challenges, employee engagement, results, and overall progress
Examining metrics around the amount of change and to what extent the level of changes can be digested by the business appropriately
Identifying potential contentions of concurrent changes within the plan. If concurrent changes are being released into the business, discussions should zoom in on the quantum and nature of change contention, rationale as to why the business may not be able to handle the volume of changes, and implications if the releases were to proceed
Examining the data to ensure that all changes are captured and there is nothing missing. Change data should contain key projects being implemented, BAU changes, and other corporate programs from groups such as IT or HR
Examining the overall upcoming change slate and identify upcoming risks and opportunities as a part of risk management. Opportunities may include potential gaps where there is very little change, and where there may be opportunities for initiatives to land
5. Leverage digital tools
Change portfolio managers manage the slate of projects using a structured process of funding, prioritization, analysis, and review based on data, ensuring strategic alignment with business objectives and maximizing business value. In a similar vein, so should change portfolio managers, particularly when considering insights from project proposals and a project management office. The power that change managers have is not around cost or schedule data; it is on change impact and change readiness as discrete data points, including the crucial role of the contributions of team members. The challenge is how to collect, analyze, present, and leverage the power of these data.
The Change Compass is a change portfolio management software that quantifies and packages change impacts into data that can be easily analyzed and presented in various visual formats to decision-makers in real time, as a part of effective portfolio management. Visuals are specifically designed to make people change decisions, and are not just simple headlamps or Gantt charts. Initiative owners who own the source of the information update change impact data. Up-to-date change impact project data can be accessed at any time with reporting generated automatically. The portfolio change manager can easily dissect, drill down, and cut data to find out the change health of the portfolio:
Is there too much change?
How is our staffing resource impacted by change activities (especially for resource-sensitive areas such as call centres)
What’s the change tolerance level for the business?
How are various stakeholder groups impacted by the changes?
How are initiatives under particular strategic themes impacting the business?
How are customers and their respective experiences impacted by our initiatives?
6. Examine customer impacts
At a portfolio level, it is not sufficient to just focus on internal employee and stakeholder impacts. The change portfolio management team manager also needs to place focus on how are customers impacted by the planned changes. This drives at the core of the focus of a lot of the organizations on the customer.
One large financial services organization that was focused on customer experiences started analyzing data on customer change impacts across initiatives. Through this, there was a significant realization that the same group of customers was impacted by 6 significant initiatives at the same time. Across each of these initiatives, there was no coordination and the silo approach meant that poor synchronization and coordination could lead to a very poor customer experience. Subsequently, new roles and remits were created to manage this customer experience through facilitating a coordinated approach to planning and implementing initiative rollout.
7. Iterative planning
Iterative planning is a core of agile ways of working. At the core of iterative planning is the belief that we don’t always know the solution that we are striving for at the beginning of the change initiative. It is when we start testing and getting feedback from users that we are able to refine our proposal and be able to come up with a solution that suits the organization.
To truly support agile ways of working, change management needs to be able to develop prototypes of the change approach, and be able to morph or tweak the approach as required based on feedback. For example, a change approach can be tested on a particular team, the change champion group, or a selected trial group. Communication and engagement approaches as well as learning approaches can be tested in these groups.
Want to learn more about managing change portfolios?
If you’re ready to start to manage a portfolio of change initiatives using data and insights, have a chat to us about how to leverage The Change Compass capabilities to help you pinpoint key risks and opportunities in managing across initiatives. To book a demo click here.
Enterprise change management reporting is changing. In today’s dynamic business environment, it no longer consists of general updates on organisational change management efforts, change leaders, streams of project progress, or updates on various change capability training session volumes and satisfaction rates. Executives are demanding more value from enterprise change functions that incorporate change management practices and digital transformation, leveraging new tools. The pace of change since Covid has not slowed down. For many, it has increased in pace and volume. To gain better insight into how the change management function is supporting the success of organisations, reports and dashboards have often become a visible linchpin of what value enterprise change management delivers.
What is enterprise change management and why is it important?
Enterprise change management refers to the structured approach organizations use to manage the people side of change in organizational change management, including the types of organizational change in processes, systems, and personnel across an entire organization, while integrating risk management principles. It’s crucial for minimizing disruption, ensuring smooth transitions, and enhancing employee engagement. Effective change management fosters resilience, boosts productivity, and aligns teams with organizational goals for sustained success.
What is enterprise change management and why is it important?
Enterprise change management refers to the structured approach organizations use to manage changes in processes, technologies, and organizational structures, including various type of change efforts that relate to the levels of change management. It’s crucial for minimizing resistance and ensuring smooth transitions. Effective change management enhances employee engagement, drives project success, and fosters a culture of adaptability within the organization.
Having the right content and format for your enterprise reports can make or break your reputation in the realm of information technology. Do it right and you could start a ripple of high-impact and strategic conversations across senior stakeholders that drive focus on improving change. You can be in the spotlight in influencing change leadership and the achievement of change and transformation goals. Do it wrong and you may never have another opportunity to have the room to talk about change management to senior leaders. You may be associated with not providing much value and too ‘operational’.
At its core, enterprise change management reporting goes beyond merely tracking progress. It encompasses a holistic approach that considers various factors crucial to the success of organizational initiatives. While monitoring progress, readiness, and the amount of work done may be interesting components, true impact comes from focusing on impacts, adoption and predictors for benefit realization.
Executives and stakeholders are not just interested in receiving progress updates; they seek insights into the likelihood of initiative success and the potential risks that may impede desired outcomes. These risks extend beyond project timelines and budget constraints to encompass broader business implications such as performance impacts, capacity constraints, prioritization effectiveness, and the sustainability of behavioural change.
Impacts of change:
Quantifying and visualising impacts are not new to change practitioners. The key is how the data is presented over time. A lot of change practitioners would settle with a standard heatmap based on personal ratings. This does not deliver much value as the data cannot be easily substantiated by evidence (since it is more of a finger in the air estimation). Standard heatmaps also are too high level and does not really support key decision making.
Decision making requires specific data points such as:
Change saturation or change tolerance levels (these levels need to be substantiated based on business indicator reference to justify the levels, and not be someone’s personal opinion)
What division, team, role and which week the saturation points are forecasted
Corresponding data on what initiatives, and their respective impact activities that contribute to the saturation risk, and therefore proposed options
A key part of representing change impacts should not just be at an operational level, which is more concerned about capacity and bandwidth. Impact should also be tied to strategic levers, portfolio types, benefit types and readiness.
Predictive Indicators for Success:
To create impactful change management reports, organizations must incorporate predictive indicators that go beyond change volume and risk assessment. These indicators should provide insights into business performance, strategy achievement, and the realization of intended benefits.
These are some of the ways you can incorporate predictive indicators:
Forecast lines. With sufficient data you can forecast such as impact or capacity levels (which may be seasonal), or even readiness levels across the initiative lifecycle historically across initiatives.
The types of factors that can be included as predictive indicators can include readiness. It could be that readiness levels only get lifted just before go live or at go live. Adoption levels can also be forecasted if you have trend data across initiatives
Change tolerance levels across different parts of the business can also be seen as a predictive way of forecasting how much capacity there is for change beyond which saturation may be a key risk
Adoption and Behaviour Tracking:
Central to successful change management is the adoption and sustained implementation of new processes or technologies. Tracking adoption rates, user engagement, and behavioural changes are crucial indicators of initiative success. However, it’s essential to strike a balance between capturing relevant metrics and overwhelming stakeholders with unnecessary data.
Capturing behaviour change data can be key for larger initiatives or transformations. Behavioural change can be central in a range of changes such as customer centricity, efficiency, team collaboration or effectiveness. Measuring key behaviour changes that drive the initiative outcome the most is critical. For example, having effective conversations with customers to improve customer experience is a behaviour that can be rated, tracked and reported. Depending on the change, there may also be system features that can aid the tracking of these behaviours.
Effective change management goes hand in hand with strategic alignment, strategic goals, and necessary resources for strategic objectives. Reports should assess how initiatives contribute to overarching business objectives and whether they align with the rest of the organization’s strategic direction in the first place. Business leaders can utilize metrics related to revenue growth, cost savings, customer satisfaction, and employee productivity to provide valuable insights into the impact of change initiatives on business performance.
You can also link your change impacts to each strategic lever. In this way you can visually show the size of the impact per strategic lever. This will give your executives a way to examine whether the right level of impacts in the right areas of business are planned as a part of the course of each strategic lever.
The other angle is to visually show the pace of change against the strategic levers. Are certain key initiatives being driven at the right pace at the right time? Will the velocity of change exceed the ability of the business to absorb the changes? Or is the velocity not sufficiently meeting leadership expectations?
Benefit Realization:
Ultimately, the success of change initiatives is measured by their ability to deliver tangible benefits and assess the impact of the change. Change management reports should include key performance indicators (KPIs) and metrics that track the progress of change initiatives and the realization of expected benefits, whether they are financial gains, process efficiencies, or competitive advantages. By monitoring benefit realization, organizations can course-correct as needed and ensure that investments in change deliver the intended outcomes.
A key responsibility for change is to focus on those foreward looking measures that predict eventual benefit realisation, including readiness, adoption, engagement and behaviour change. Be sure to link these specifically to high benefit initiatives to provide strategic oversight.
Balancing Complexity and Clarity:
While incorporating a diverse range of metrics is essential for comprehensive reporting, it’s equally important to maintain clarity and focus. Reports should be structured in a way that highlights key insights and trends without overwhelming stakeholders with excessive detail. Visualizations such as charts, graphs, and dashboards can help distill complex data into actionable insights, facilitating informed decision-making at all levels of the organization.
All aspects of chart and dashboard designs are critical. These range from colour scheme chosen, number of charts, commentary, titles, legends, sequencing of charts, and type of charts chosen all act to either contribute to simplicity and clarity or complexity and confusion. Your narrative as you talk through the charts also plays a key role in building the story-line, and simplifying the key messages and actions you would like to impart to the audience.
Charts and dashboards tell a story and in presenting them you should always incorporate any actions required from the audience. If this is not done then it will always remain a FYI. FYI content will be deemed lower in the value curve over time and your stakeholders will lose interest. Instead, you should work on crafting a continual story that ebbs and flows. The following are key questions you should be asking when crafting you ongoing charts and dashboards:
Is there an emerging risk or opportunity that warrants specific focus for this month?
How are we tracking the effectiveness of stakeholder actions through data? This feedback loop is critical and gives your stakeholders a reference point for their own effectiveness
Is your data-based story uni-dimensional? Are there other dimensions beyond what you have been presenting that stakeholder should be aware of?
Are you giving stakeholders what they are most interested in? Whether it be strategic success progress, or benefit realisation?
Are you presenting change data in a holistic way in terms of how the business is run? Vs. just focused on standard change management function-specific metrics such as training sessions, or number of workshops completed?
Enterprise change management reporting is a critical tool for navigating the complexities of organizational change. By focusing on predictive indicators, including adoption and behavior tracking, business performance alignment, and benefit realization, organizations can unlock the full potential of their change management initiatives. However, achieving impactful reporting requires a careful balance between complexity and clarity, ensuring that stakeholders receive actionable insights without being inundated with unnecessary information. Ultimately, by harnessing the power of enterprise change management reporting, organizations can drive successful outcomes and thrive in an ever-evolving business landscape.
To find out more about enterprise change management reporting leveraging digital automation and analytics chat to us here.
Change readiness is one of the most critical, yet often misunderstood, concepts in organizational change management. For many practitioners, it’s been reduced to a series of surveys or assessments — a simple gauge of how “ready” stakeholders feel. But this oversimplification often leads to missed risks, unforeseen barriers, and ultimately, failed initiatives.
What is a change readiness assessment and why is it important?
A change readiness assessment evaluates an organization’s preparedness for implementing changes, including aspects of organizational culture. It identifies potential obstacles, gauges employee attitudes, and measures overall alignment with new initiatives. This assessment is crucial as it helps leaders strategize effectively, ensuring smoother transitions and higher acceptance rates among employees during the change process.
True readiness requires more than checking a box on perceptions; it’s about strategically evaluating whether the organisation, at every level, is equipped to embrace, execute, and sustain the change. Let’s explore what it takes to reimagine change readiness as a multi-dimensional, evidence-based approach that ties people, processes, and technology into a cohesive readiness framework.
The Myth of the Readiness Survey
Surveys are not inherently bad tools, but they have their limits. Let’s start by looking at why they’ve become synonymous with readiness assessments and the pitfalls they often present.
Why Surveys Dominate
Surveys are appealing because they are quick, scalable, and easy to analyse. A single survey can provide insights into stakeholder sentiment across a large audience, giving change managers a sense of where resistance might lie.
The problem is that surveys capture perceptions, not reality. Stakeholders might report high awareness of a change but lack the detailed understanding required to implement it effectively. Most survey ask if a stakeholder is aware of certain aspects about the project. However, it doesn’t go into the depth in which the level of awareness is what is expected at that phase of the project (to do this a ‘test’ may be required). Similarly, they might feel optimistic about a change initiative but underestimate the challenges involved.
Example of Survey Pitfalls
Consider a large retail chain rolling out a new inventory management system. A readiness survey revealed that 85% of employees were aware of the change, and 75% felt confident they could adapt. However, post-implementation data told a different story:
Less than 50% of employees were actually using the new system correctly.
Misaligned processes between stores caused delays in inventory updates.
Leadership was disengaged, leading to inconsistent enforcement of new practices.
This misalignment occurred because the survey captured what employees thought, not what they could actually do. This just shows knowing may not equate to doing. Being aware, and understanding something does not necessarily translate into behaviour change.
Change readiness is not a one-dimensional measure of sentiment or awareness; it is the alignment of key elements—people, processes, technology, and leadership—toward the successful delivery of a change initiative.
Depending on the initiative the dimensions may also be different since different initiatives may require more or less of the various elements to be successful. For example, if there is a strong behavioural compliance element to the change, then tracking the change readiness process from understanding the why, strong leadership reinforcement, and operational reporting process setup may all critical elements of readiness.
Key Dimensions of Readiness
Leadership ReadinessAre leaders aligned on the vision and goals of the change? Are there different levels of readiness of different leadership levels?
Do they have the skills to lead their teams through uncertainty? What parts of the leadership skills are lacking? Coaching? Communication?
Are they modelling the behaviours required for change adoption?
Employee Capacity and CapabilityDo employees have the skills to adopt new processes or tools?
Can the organisation absorb the change given competing priorities and the context of change efforts? What does the change landscape look like? What about the operational capacity constraints?
Process ReadinessAre operational processes aligned with the new ways of working? Are new processes required being worked on so that the change may be sustained as business-as-usual after Go-Live? Are accountabilities clear for the new or changed processes?
Are dependencies between departments or systems resolved?
Technological ReadinessAre systems and tools tested and reliable?
Are integrations with existing technology functioning as expected?
Sponsorship and GovernanceAre sponsors actively engaged, providing oversight, and removing roadblocks? Or does the sponsor delegate all tasks and not really visible?
Is there a governance structure to monitor progress and address risks? For example, if risks need to be addressed would that decision be made or would the project just continue along?
Cultural/Behavioural ReadinessIs the organisational culture supportive of innovation and adaptability? In a lot of cases the organisation may not be ready, but the assessment needs to be on to what the extent the departments impacted have the capacity to change and adapt. This of course also depends on the quantum of the change.
Are there underlying resistance patterns that need addressing? If so, are they valid feedback regarding how previous changes were planned and executed, or is the negative behaviour inherent in the culture?
Are leaders aligned on the vision and goals of the change? Are there different levels of readiness of different leadership levels?
Do they have the skills to lead their teams through uncertainty? What parts of the leadership skills are lacking? Coaching? Communication?
Are they modelling the behaviours required for change adoption?
Do employees have the skills to adopt new processes or tools?
Can the organisation absorb the change given competing priorities? What does the change landscape look like? What about the operational capacity constraints?
Are operational processes aligned with the new ways of working? Are new processes required being worked on so that the change may be sustained as business-as-usual after Go-Live? Are accountabilities clear for the new or changed processes?
Are dependencies between departments or systems resolved?
Are systems and tools tested and reliable?
Are integrations with existing technology functioning as expected?
Are sponsors actively engaged, providing oversight, and removing roadblocks? Or does the sponsor delegate all tasks and not really visible?
Is there a governance structure to monitor progress and address risks? For example, if risks need to be addressed would that decision be made or would the project just continue along?
Is the organisational culture supportive of innovation and adaptability? In a lot of cases the organisation may not be ready, but the assessment needs to be on to what the extent the departments impacted have the capacity to change and adapt. This of course also depends on the quantum of the change.
Are there underlying resistance patterns that need addressing? If so, are they valid feedback regarding how previous changes were planned and executed, or is the negative behaviour inherent in the culture?
Example of a Strategic Approach
A financial services firm implementing a new risk management framework took a holistic approach to readiness. Instead of relying solely on stakeholder feedback, they:
Conducted leadership alignment workshops to ensure consistency in messaging.
Assessed employee capacity through workload analysis, adjusting timelines to reduce burnout risk. Given the significant focus on risk with multiple initiative items all targeting risk, managing capacity and prioritisation is important.
Simulated new risk-reporting processes to identify and address bottlenecks.
Used tools to analyse training completion rates and correlate them with system usage data.
This approach ensured readiness across all dimensions, reducing post-implementation issues.
Who Determines Readiness? Not Just Stakeholders
Stakeholders play an important role in assessing readiness, but they are not the sole authority. Their feedback is valuable, but it must be balanced with input from project teams, leadership, and objective data sources.
You can take the doctor-patient analogy here. The patient may tell you they are feeling well, however the trained physician may see symptoms that things may not be what they seem. Of course, the patient will need to understand why things may not be as they appear and want the treatment for it to go ahead. However, the physician has the accountability to form a diagnosis and subscribe the treatment. A trained change practitioner is no different and needs to cast a lens taking into account a range of evidence to form an assessment.
Mapping the Required vs. Observed Levels of Readiness
To truly determine readiness, it’s essential to compare the required level of readiness at each phase of a project with the observed level.
Define Required ReadinessWhat specific outcomes must be achieved at this stage? E.g. Awareness level, discussions and briefings about the change at impacted business units, town hall sessions, coaching sessions, etc.
What capabilities, processes, and systems need to be in place?
Assess Observed ReadinessUse surveys, interviews, and observations to gather qualitative data.
Analyse quantitative data from project reports, metrics, and tools.
Identify Gaps and RisksWhere do observed levels fall short of required levels?
What are the risks of proceeding with these gaps?
Develop a Mitigation PlanCollaborate with stakeholders to address critical gaps.
Adjust timelines, allocate resources, gain more leadership presence or provide additional training, refreshers as needed.
What specific outcomes must be achieved at this stage? E.g. Awareness level, discussions and briefings about the change at impacted business units, town hall sessions, coaching sessions, etc.
What capabilities, processes, and systems need to be in place?
Use surveys, interviews, and observations to gather qualitative data.
Analyse quantitative data from project reports, metrics, and tools.
Where do observed levels fall short of required levels?
What are the risks of proceeding with these gaps?
Collaborate with stakeholders to address critical gaps.
Adjust timelines, allocate resources, gain more leadership presence or provide additional training, refreshers as needed.
Example
In a healthcare organisation transitioning to electronic medical records (EMR), required readiness included:
Leadership capable of driving adoption across departments.
Staff proficient in using the new system.
IT support ready to address technical issues.
Observed readiness showed gaps in staff proficiency and IT capacity. The organisation postponed the rollout to provide targeted training and hire additional contract IT staff, avoiding potential disruptions to patient care.
What to Do With Readiness Outcomes
A readiness assessment is only as valuable as the actions it informs. Once gaps are identified, they must drive decisions and interventions to keep the initiative on track.
Turning Insights Into Action
Engage Stakeholders in Decision-Making
Share readiness findings with key stakeholders, including project teams, sponsors, and impacted groups. Align on priorities for closing gaps.
Tailor Interventions to Critical Needs
Focus efforts on the most significant gaps that could derail the initiative. This is a key point since there may be a long list of desirable elements that should be there but are not. Most projects have limited time and resources so you should always focus on the most critical gaps that need addressing.
Monitor Progress Continuously
Readiness is not static. Reassess periodically to ensure interventions are effective. In this way you can also track the ongoing shifts in readiness, hopefully demonstrating that the readiness is increasing closer to the Go-Live.
A manufacturing company preparing to launch a new product line used readiness outcomes to guide their actions:
Leadership Readiness Gap: Conducted intensive coaching sessions with plant managers to align messaging and prepare for likely employee questions and responses.
Process Gap: Piloted the production process in a single plant to refine workflows prior to broader roll out.
Technological Gap: Added two weeks to testing cycles to address system bugs.
These targeted interventions ensured a smoother launch with minimal disruption.
Evidence-Based Readiness: A Balanced Approach
Stakeholder perceptions are important, but they must be balanced with objective evidence. An evidence-based approach combines multiple data sources to provide a more accurate and actionable view of readiness. Prior to Covid, it would be typical to ‘walk the floor’ to get a sense what is happening and actual sentiments on the floor for employees. With a virtual workforce, there are digital means to gage engagement and sentiments.
Key Sources of Evidence
Surveys and InterviewsCapture stakeholder sentiments, concerns, and insights.
Use open-ended questions to uncover nuanced perspectives.
ObservationMonitor real-world behaviours, such as system usage or meeting participation.
Identify gaps between what people say and what they do.
Metrics and ReportsAnalyse training completion rates, system performance, and project milestones. Other metrics may also include operational indicators and reporting.
Leverage digital tools to uncover trends and correlations.
Digital ToolsLeverage corporate social channels such as Yammer to gain overall understanding of potential sentiments and engagement levels.
Project website pages may also be created, with viewership tracked to assess if viewership levels are as anticipated
Use digital survey tools to manage and analyse data
Capture stakeholder sentiments, concerns, and insights.
Use open-ended questions to uncover nuanced perspectives.
Monitor real-world behaviours, such as system usage or meeting participation.
Identify gaps between what people say and what they do.
Analyse training completion rates, system performance, and project milestones. Other metrics may also include operational indicators and reporting.
Leverage digital tools to uncover trends and correlations.
Leverage corporate social channels such as Yammer to gain overall understanding of potential sentiments and engagement levels.
Project website pages may also be created, with viewership tracked to assess if viewership levels are as anticipated
Use digital survey tools to manage and analyse data
Application of Evidence-Based Readiness
A global telecom company implementing an AI-driven customer support platform combined data sources to assess readiness:
Surveys revealed high awareness but low confidence in AI capabilities.
Metrics showed that only 40% of staff had completed required training.
Observations identified resistance among middle managers who feared job displacement.
Using this evidence, the company developed a tailored plan to address resistance, enhance training, and engage leaders as champions of the change.
Overcoming Methodology Constraints
Many change practitioners fall into the trap of rigidly following methodologies, even when they don’t fit the context. While frameworks provide valuable structure, they must be adapted to the unique needs of each initiative.
Guiding Principles for Flexibility
Start with the End in Mind
Focus on the outcomes you need to achieve, not the steps prescribed by a methodology.
Adapt to Organisational Context
Tailor your approach to fit the size, complexity, and culture of the organisation.
Leverage Technology
Use digital tools to enhance traditional methodologies with real-time data and insights.
Example: Adapting Methodologies
A technology company scaling its agile transformation initially followed a rigid methodology that required readiness surveys every six weeks. When resistance from regional teams emerged, the change team shifted to weekly check-ins and introduced agile workshops tailored to each team’s needs.
The Future of Change Readiness
As change initiatives become more complex, traditional readiness assessments will no longer suffice. The future lies in leveraging new technologies, data, and continuous improvement to create a dynamic, real-time view of readiness.
Emerging Trends
Real-Time Dashboards
Track readiness across dimensions in real time, using digital tools to visualize progress. This is especially valuable when the change is complex and helps establish a baseline for future evaluations.
AI-Driven Insights
Use AI to analyse large datasets, uncover patterns, and predict risks. Tools such as Change Automator can help to link different data sources from different systems, run your change readiness surveys, so that you get an integrated holistic lens across the evidence. AI-generated insights can help you uncover trends in the data, especially critical when you have a complex change program with different data sets. You can then easily create and share live dashboards with your stakeholders.
Continuous Assessments
Move from one-time assessments to iterative readiness evaluations throughout the project lifecycle. As you learn more about readiness of your stakeholders, there may be areas that you would want to probe further into subsequently.
Change readiness is not a survey, an assessment, or a methodology step. It’s a strategic, evidence-based process that ensures organisations are truly prepared for change at every level. Especially with complex change, readiness levels may evolve throughout the journey. With each evolution, particular interventions may be required depending on what the evidence is telling us.
By adopting a holistic approach, engaging stakeholders, and leveraging data, change practitioners can move beyond perceptions and drive meaningful, sustainable transformation that will successfully achieve targets.
To read more about using change data to maximise results check out our articles:
Digitisation, competition and changing industry conditions have amongst other things brought on an accelerated change agenda for a lot of organisations. What were previously thought to be 1 to 5 year horizons of change suddenly became an immediate change. Not only is working from home a norm for a lot of organisations but the struggle for enterprises to survive and stay relevant in the new norm means more changes. The normal equilibrium for a lot of these organisations is one that consumes a smaller number of changes at any one time. Suddenly, with the increased number of changes this leads to change saturation.
In change management, think of change saturation as a cup that fills up. The size of the cup is the change capacity. With limited capacity, there is only so much volume that is inherent. As the amount of change or the pace of change increases and the cup overflows the changes don’t stick and simply fall by the waist side and may result in change fatigue. This is when the negative impact of changes can occur.
What impacts an organisation’s change capacity?
1.Change leadership
Leaders can have significant influence on the organisation. Also, change leadership is a significant part of how change is managed and delivered. Effective change leadership can build on the capability of teams to be more agile and capable of absorbing more changes. Effective change leadership can also help to maximise how optimal the change is socialised and implemented, and therefore how it lands.
2. Change capability
The organisation’s change capability is one of the most important factors in determining their change capacity. Think of agile startup organisations that are constantly pivoting, introducing new operating models, products and services. This is part of their cultural norm. Other organisations that maybe less agile can also develop some of these capabilities through experience and development.
3. Nature of change
Not all types of changes are the same. Typically, a lot of the changes driven by senior leaders are about improving the bottom line or top line, improving customer experience or improving efficiency. Some are more complex changes requiring significant change journeys. Others may even be inherently ‘negatively perceived’ such as organisational restructuring and layoffs. However, there are also changes that are inherently seen as benefiting the work of employees (such as process improvement leading to less red tape).
4. Number of changes
The number of changes also impact the change capacity. Obviously more changes mean more capacity consumed, within an extent.
5. Impact of each change
The impact level of each change is also critical. Some initiatives have significant impact that requires a long period of time to embed the changes, e.g. culture change and complex system and process changes. On the other hand, simple process changes may not require much capacity and simple communication is all that is needed.
6. Overall change landscape
The overall change landscape of the organisation also affects perception and therefore in some ways the capacity for change. If competitors within the industry are all undergoing significant transformations then it sets the tone for what’s to come. In the same way, if all our friends are used to virtual ways of working then we become more open to it.
What’s the benefits of measuring change saturation?
Measuring change saturation can be significantly beneficial for the organisation. Understanding the tipping point means that PMO and change teams can work to avoid this from a planning perspective. Finding out during or after the releases that there is too much change saturation is an expensive exercise that diminishes the planned initiative benefits. It also leads to loss of productivity and operational disruptions. Moreover, employees lose faith in the ability of the organisation to manage change.
With greater clarity of the change saturation points organisations can work to monitor, track and manage the risk of over saturation. Measures can then be put in place to ensure minimal business disruption and protection of initiative benefits. This should be a key focus for risk in change.
How to measure change saturation?
Firstly, there is not one change saturation point for the whole organisation. Each department or even team may have different change saturation points. This is because they have different leaders, different cultural norms and different change capabilities.
So how do we measure the change saturation at a department or division level? Look historically at how changes have been received, starting with the past few months.
1. Monitor operational indicators
Depending on what the department is in charge of, understanding the change saturation point means closely monitoring the operational indicators. During change saturation operational indicators are usually also negatively impacted, depending on the nature of the changes.
For a call centre this could be average handling time, customer satisfaction rate, absenteeism, etc. For a back office department it could be efficiency or effectiveness measures, case completion rate, case quality rating, etc. You don’t need to be the expert in all the various operational measures of each department as you can tap on the operations representatives of these departments.
2. Get feedback from leaders
Interview or conduct surveys with departmental leaders to understand their perception of how changes have been implemented and any potential disruptions on the business. Understand how their teams have experienced change. Ask them whether it has been challenging to balance operational needs with change-induced activities. For example, were there challenges in employees attending initiative training sessions, and completing their role delivery obligations?
3. Be aware of potential biases
Be careful of opinions and feedback from leaders and employees. There may be a tendency to over-state and complain that there is constantly too much change. This happens because some over-state the risk of change saturation hoping that this may lead to less change and therefore easier to manage the operations of a business. Take care to avoid this bias.
4. Identify points of change saturation
If the department has undergone periods with multiple change initiatives that has resulted in negative impact on operational indicators and leaders have also provided feedback of similar change disruptions then measure this level of change. Record this specifically.
This requires a portfolio-level view of all the changes that have occurred and the various impacts of each initiative. With this change portfolio measurement you are able to then identify this level as perhaps just exceeding the change saturation point for that department. With this identified you can then plot this change saturation line. You should also closely monitor this level and adjust as needed.
Using The Change Compass change impact can be expressed in terms of hours of impact per week. The change saturation line can the plotted against the change impact levels. From this, you’re able to easily visualise to what extent there could be risk in exceeding the change saturation line.
It is important to note that measuring change impacts and therefore change saturation should ideally be at a weekly level. Measuring change impact at a monthly level may not be sufficiently detailed enough since there could be changes in impact levels within each month. For example, for Finance the quarter-end consolidation cycle could start mid-month and therefore the change impact indication may show up as less than it actually should be simply because the data is rolled-up by month.
Deriving a monthly dashboard in which to inform not just the change volume, but types of changes, risks, and impacted areas will do wonders to provide clear visibility for the business to get ready for and to track changes.
Other disciplines such as HR, Marketing or Operations rely on data to make critical business decisions. The Change function and change leaders should also follow best practices. Being armed with the right change impact data means that you can help the business to precisely pin-point change saturation points. This can provide tremendous value to the business in terms of business, initiative and risk protection.
If you’re keen to chat more about how you are managing change saturation and to find out more about our solutions feel free to contact us here to organise a chat.
