In the rapidly evolving landscape of financial services, organisations face significant challenges due to regulatory and technological changes. A large financial services corporation has recognised the need for an integrated approach to change management reporting, embedding it within general business reporting to enhance organisational agility and effectiveness. This case study outlines the firm’s journey, challenges faced, solutions implemented, and the resulting value derived from this strategic initiative.
Background
The corporation operates under a defederated model of change management, where change practitioners are distributed across various business units. This structure has led to inconsistent change management practices and reporting, complicating the ability to provide comprehensive insights into organisational change efforts. As regulatory demands and technological advancements have intensified, the need for cohesive change management reporting became paramount.
Challenges
The primary challenges encountered by the centralized change management team included:
Diverse Reporting Preferences: Different stakeholders and divisions within the organization exhibited varying preferences for reporting formats and metrics. This lack of consensus hindered the development of a standardized reporting framework.
Maturity Disparities: Business units displayed varying levels of maturity in their change management practices, with some units showing strong interest while others remained indifferent.
Feedback Variability: Initial attempts to socialize various reporting types received mixed feedback, complicating efforts to establish a unified approach.
Solution Implementation
To address these challenges, the change management team adopted a multi-faceted strategy:
Executive Engagement: The team actively engaged with senior executives to align on the direction for change management reporting. A senior executive cohort was formed to define essential reporting needs and establish a common vision.
Collaboration with Business Intelligence (BI) Team: The change management team partnered with the BI team to integrate change management metrics into existing general business reports. This collaboration ensured that change management insights were included in routine business tracking.
Data Integration: Utilising data from Change Compass facilitated the ongoing production of comprehensive reports that combined operational metrics with change management insights.
Value Realized
The integration of change management reporting into general business reporting yielded several significant benefits:
Increased Leadership Focus: By embedding change metrics within standard business reports, leaders began to prioritize change management as part of their strategic oversight. This shift is expected to enhance readiness and adoption of future changes across the organization.
Proactive Change Support: Business leaders increasingly requested support for change initiatives, indicating a transition from a push model (where support is offered) to a pull model (where support is actively sought).
Enhanced Reporting Consistency: The establishment of a standardized set of reports improved clarity and consistency in how change initiatives were tracked and communicated across business units.
Change management Maturity: Enhancing change management maturity within the business is general done through capability development and coaching. However, this case showcases that embedding change management within general business management is a strategic way to raise awareness, visibility, and through this enhance the business’ efforts to improve the management of change.
This case study illustrates how a large financial services corporation successfully embedded change management reporting into its general business reporting framework. By engaging senior leadership, collaborating with data teams, and standardising metrics, the organisation not only improved its reporting capabilities but also fostered a culture that values proactive engagement with change initiatives. As a result, the firm is better positioned to navigate future changes while ensuring that it meets regulatory demands and capitalizes on technological advancements.
In the world of change management, Go Lives are often seen as significant milestones. For many project teams, these events represent the culmination of months or even years of hard work, signaling that a new system, process, or initiative is officially being launched. It’s common for stakeholders to view Go Lives as a key indicator of the success of a change initiative. However, while Go Lives are undeniably important, relying on them as the primary measure of change impact can be misleading and potentially harmful to the overall change effort.
Go Lives are just one piece of the puzzle. Focusing too heavily on these milestones can lead to an incomplete understanding of the change process, neglecting crucial activities that occur both before and after Go Live. Let’s outline the risks associated with using Go Lives to report on change management impacts and offers best practices for a more holistic approach.
Go Lives: A Double-Edged Sword
Go Lives are naturally a focal point for project teams. They represent a clear, tangible goal, and the success of a Go Live can boost morale, validate the efforts of the team, and provide a sense of accomplishment. From a project delivery perspective, Go Lives are critical. They signal that the project has reached a level of maturity where it is ready to be released to the broader organization. In terms of resourcing and business readiness, Go Lives ensure that everything is in place for the new system or process to function as intended.
However, the very attributes that make Go Lives attractive can also make them problematic as indicators of change impact. The simplicity and clarity of a Go Live event can lead stakeholders to overestimate its significance, from a impacted business perspective. The focus on Go Lives can overshadow the complex and often subtle changes that occur before and after the event. While a successful Go Live is necessary for change, it is not sufficient to guarantee that the change will be successful in the long term.
The Pre-Go Live Journey: Laying the Foundation for Change
A significant portion of the change management journey occurs long before the Go Live date. During this pre-Go Live phase, various engagement and readiness activities take place that are critical to shaping the overall impact of the change. These activities include town hall meetings, where leaders communicate the vision and rationale behind the change, and briefing sessions that provide detailed information about what the change will entail.
Training and learning sessions are also a crucial component of the pre-Go Live phase. These sessions help employees acquire the necessary skills and knowledge to adapt to the new system or process. Discussions, feedback loops, and iterative improvements based on stakeholder input further refine the change initiative, ensuring it is better aligned with the needs of the organization.
These pre-Go Live activities are where much of the groundwork for successful change is laid. They build awareness, generate buy-in, and prepare employees for what is to come. Without these efforts, the Go Live event would likely be met with confusion, resistance, or outright failure. Therefore, it is essential to recognize that the impact of change is already being felt during this phase, even if it is not yet fully visible.
Post-Go Live Reality: The Real Work Begins
While the Go Live event marks a significant milestone, it is by no means the end of the change journey. In fact, for many employees, Go Live is just the beginning. It is in the post-Go Live phase that the true impact of the change becomes apparent. This is when employees start using the new system or process in their daily work, and the real test of the change’s effectiveness begins.
During this phase, the focus shifts from preparation to adoption. Employees must not only apply what they have learned but also adapt to any unforeseen challenges that arise. This period can be fraught with difficulties, as initial enthusiasm can give way to frustration if the change does not meet expectations or if adequate support is not provided.
Moreover, the post-Go Live phase is when the long-term sustainability of the change is determined. Continuous reinforcement, feedback, and support are needed to ensure that the change sticks and becomes embedded in the organization’s culture. Without these ongoing efforts, the change initiative may falter, even if the Go Live event was deemed a success.
The Risk of Misleading Stakeholders
One of the most significant dangers of focusing too heavily on Go Lives is the risk of misleading stakeholders. When stakeholders are led to believe that the Go Live event is the primary indicator of change impact, they may not fully appreciate the importance of the activities that occur before and after this milestone. This narrow focus can lead to a number of issues.
Firstly, stakeholders may prioritize the Go Live date to the exclusion of other critical activities. This can result in insufficient attention being paid to pre-Go Live engagement and readiness efforts or to post-Go Live adoption and support. As a consequence, the overall change initiative may suffer, as the necessary foundations for successful change have not been properly established.
Secondly, stakeholders may develop unrealistic expectations about the impact of the change. If they believe that the Go Live event will immediately deliver all the promised benefits, they may be disappointed when these benefits take longer to materialize. This can erode confidence in the change initiative and reduce support for future changes.
Finally, a narrow focus on Go Lives can create a false sense of security. If the Go Live event is successful, stakeholders may assume that the change is fully implemented and no further action is required. This can lead to complacency and a lack of ongoing support, which are essential for ensuring the long-term success of the change.
Best Practices for Reporting Change Management Impact
To avoid the pitfalls associated with relying on Go Lives as indicators of change impact, change management practitioners should adopt a more holistic approach to reporting. This involves considering the full scope of the change journey, from the earliest engagement activities to the ongoing support provided after Go Live. Here are some best practices for reporting on change management impact:
Integrate Pre-Go Live Metrics:
Track and report on engagement activities, such as attendance at town hall meetings, participation in training sessions, and feedback from employees.
Monitor changes in employee sentiment and readiness levels throughout the pre-Go Live phase.
Report on aggregate pan-initiative change initiative impost on business units, pre-Go Live
Emphasize Post-Go Live Support:
Develop metrics to measure the effectiveness of post-Go Live support, such as the number of help desk inquiries, employee satisfaction with the new system, and the rate of adoption.
Highlight the importance of continuous feedback loops to identify and address any issues that arise after Go Live.
Communicate the need for ongoing reinforcement and support to stakeholders, emphasizing that change is an ongoing process
Report on post-Go Live adoption time impost expected across initiatives
Provide a Balanced View of Change Impact:
Ensure that stakeholders understand that Go Live is just one part of the change journey and that significant impacts occur both before and after this event.
Use a combination of quantitative and qualitative data to provide a comprehensive view of change impact.
Regularly update stakeholders on progress throughout the entire change journey, not just at the time of Go Live.
Manage Expectations:
Clearly communicate to stakeholders that the full impact of the change may not be immediately visible at the time of Go Live.
Set realistic expectations about the timeline for realizing the benefits of the change.
Prepare stakeholders for potential challenges in the post-Go Live phase and emphasize the importance of ongoing support.
While Go Lives are important milestones in the change management process, they should not be used as the sole indicator of change impact. The journey to successful change is complex, involving critical activities before, during, and after the Go Live event. By adopting a more holistic approach to reporting on change management impact, practitioners can provide stakeholders with a more accurate understanding of the change journey, manage expectations more effectively, and ensure the long-term success of the change initiative.
The key takeaway is that change management is not just about delivering a project; it’s about guiding an organization through a journey of transformation. Go Lives are just one step in this journey, and it is the responsibility of leaders to ensure that every step is given the attention it deserves.
A lot of change practitioners are extremely comfortable with saying that change management is about attitudes, behaviours, and feelings and therefore we cannot measure them. This metaphor that change management is ‘soft’ extends into areas such as leadership and employee engagement whereby it may not be easy to measure and track things. However, is it really that because something is harder to measure and less black and white that there is less merit in measuring these?
“If you can’t measure it you can’t improve it” Peter Drucker
The ‘why’ behind a lot of industry change in our day and age comes from the fact that data is now dominating our world. Data is a central part of everything that is changing in our world. Since we are now more reliant on the internet for information, the data that can be collected through our digital interactions around our lives are now driving change. Home assistant Alexa from Amazon can recognize our voices and tell us what we want to know. We can be identified through street cameras. Our Google usage leads to better-targeted advertisements and product promotions. Our Facebook usage leads to a deep understanding of our preferences and lifestyles, and therefore we become targetted by advertisements for what we may find value in (according to Facebook data and algorithms).
So if our world is surrounded by data, why are we not measuring it in managing change? To answer this question let’s look at what we are or are not measuring.
These are some of the common ways in which change is often measured in projects:
1. Change readiness surveys
Change readiness surveys are usually online surveys sent by a project owner to understand how stakeholder groups are feeling about the change at different points in time throughout the project. It can be in the form on a Likert scale or free text. Most results are summarized into a quantitative scale of the degree in which the group is ready for change. A simple SurveyMonkey could be set up to measure stakeholder readiness for change. ChangeTracking (now part of Accenture) is a comprehensive online tool that measures the change journey and readiness of stakeholder groups throughout the initiative.
2. Training evaluation surveys
These evaluations are normally based on participant satisfaction across various categories such as content, instructor effectiveness, usefulness, etc. In a face-to-face training format, these surveys are normally paper-based so as to increase the completion rate. For online or virtual training, ratings may be completed by the user at the conclusion or after the session.
3. Communications metrics
One way in which communications may be measured is the ‘hit rate’ or the number of users/audience that views the article/material/page. This may be easily tracked using Google Analytics that not only tracks number of views per page but also viewership by the time of day/week as well as audience demographic information as such gender and geographical locations.
4. Employee sentiments/culture surveys
There are some organizations that measure employee sentiments or culture over the year and often there are questions that are linked to change. These surveys tend to be short and based on a Likert scale with less open-ended questions for qualitative feedback. Since these surveys are often sent across the entire organization they are a ‘catch-all’ yardstick and may not be specific to particular initiatives.
5. Change heatmaps
Some organizations devise change heatmaps on excel spreadsheets to try and map out the extent to which different business units are impacted by change. This artifact speaks to the amount of change and often leads to discussions concerning the capacity that the business has to ‘handle/digest’ change. The problem with most heatmaps is that they are usually categorized and rated by the creator of the artifact (or a limited number of people making judgments), and therefore subject to bias. Data that is based on 1 person’s opinions also tend not to have as much weight in a decision-making forum.
Change benefit tracking
In addition to typical change management measures, there are various initiatives-specific measures that focus on the actual outcome and benefit of the change with the goal of determining to what extent the change has taken place. Some example of this includes:
System usage rates
Cost reduction
Revenue increase
Transaction speed
Process efficiency
Speed of decision making
Customer satisfaction rate
Employee productivity rate
Incidents of process violation
Non-initiative based change management measures
There are two other measures that are used within an organizational vs. initiative-specific context, change leadership assessment and change maturity assessment. In the next section, we will discuss these two areas.
Change leadership assessment
David Miller from Changefirst wrote about 3 types of change leaders.:
1. The sponsor whose role is to drive the initiative to success from the beginning to the end. This involves possessing competencies in rallying and motivating people, building a strong network of sponsors and communicating clearly to various stakeholder groups.
2. The influencer whose role is to leverage their network and influence to market and garner the traction required to make the initiative successful. Four types of influencers as identified by Changefirst includes:
a) Advocates who are great at promoting and advocating the benefits of the change
b) Connectors who are able to link and leverage people across a part of the organization to support the change
c) Controllers who have control over access to information and people and these could include administrators and operations staff
d) Experts who are viewed by others in the organization as being technically credible
3. The change agent is someone who is tasked with supporting the overall change in various ways, including any promotional activities, gaging different parts of the organization on the change and be able to influence, up, down and sideways across the organization to drive a successful change outcome.
Whilst there isn’t one industry standard tool for assessing change leadership competencies and capabilities. There are various change leadership assessment tools offered by Changefirst as well as other various smaller consulting firms. One of the most comprehensive change leadership assessment tools is by ChangeTracking is the Change Capacity Assessment which is a self-assessment with the broad categories being Goal Attainment, Flexibility, Decision Making, and Relationship Building.
Some of the key competencies critical in change leadership have been called out by Pagon & Banutal (2008), and include:
Goal attainment
Assessing organizational culture and climate
Change implementation
Motivating and influencing others
Adaptability
Stakeholder management
Collaboration
Build organizational capacity and capability for change
Maneuvering around organizational politics
Change maturity assessment
Organisations are increasingly realising that managing change initiative by initiative is no longer going to cut it as it does not enable organizational learning and growth. Initiatives come and go and those who rely on contractor change managers often find that their ability to manage change as an organization does not mature much across initiatives.
Change maturity assessment is focused on building change capability across the organization across different dimensions, whether it be project change management or change leadership. The goal of conducting a change maturity assessment is to identify areas in which there may be a capability gap and therefore enable structured planning to close this gap.
There are 2 major change maturity assessment models available in the market. The first is by Prosci and the second is by the Change Management Institute. To read more about change maturity assessment read out article A New Guide for Improving Change Management Maturity, where we outline how to improve change maturity throughout different business units across the organization.
A comprehensive model of Change Management Measures
In this diagram various change management measures are represented along two axes, one being the different phases of the initiative lifecycle, and the other being different organizational levels of project, business and enterprise in which change management measures fall into.
Project level measures
‘Plan’ phase
In this phase of the project, the team is discovering and scoping what the project involves and what the change is. As a result, the details are not known clearly at the commencement of the phase. Later in the phase the scope becomes much clearer and the team starts to plan what activities are required to implement the change.
The change complexity assessment evaluates how complex the project is. It looks at how many people could be impacted, what the size of the impact could be, how many business units are impacted, whether multiple systems and processes are impacted, etc.
Change resourcing costing. At the planning phase of the project cost required for the change management stream of the work is required. This includes such as any contractors, communication campaigns, learning cost, travel, and administration cost, just to name a few.
Change readiness assessment is usually conducted prior to the change and during the change. Usually, the same set of questions is asked of various stakeholder groups to assess their readiness for change.
‘Execute’ phase
The execute phase is one of the most critical parts of the project. Activities are in full flight and the project is busy iterating and re-iterating changes to ensure successful execution to achieve project goals.
Communication and engagement tracking. Effective engagement of stakeholders in the change is absolutely critical. Stakeholder interviews, surveys, communication readership rates are all ways in which engagement may be tracked.
Learning tracking. Measuring learning is critical since it tracks to what extent the new competencies and skills have been acquired through learning interventions. Typical measurements include course tests or quizzes in addition to course evaluations. On the job performance may also be used to track learning outcomes and to what extent learning has been applied in the work setting.
Change readiness assessment continues to be critical to track during the execution phase of the project
‘Realise’ phase
In this phase of the project the change has ‘gone live’ and most project activities have been completed. It is anticipated in this phase that the ‘change’ occurs and that the benefits can then be tracked and measured.
Change benefit tracking measures and tracks the extent to which the targeted benefits and outcomes have been achieved. Some of these measures may be ‘hard’ quantitative measures whilst others may be ‘soft’ measures that are more behavioural.
Business level measures
Business level measures are those that measure to what extent the business has the right ability, capacity, and readiness for the change.
Change heatmaps can help to visualize which part of the business is most impacted by 1 project or multiple projects. The power of the change heatmap is in visualizing which part of the business is the most impacted, and to compare the relative impacts across businesses. As the number of change initiatives increase so would the complexity of the change. When facing this situation organisations need to graduate from relying on excel spreadsheets to using more sophisticated data visualization tools to aid data-based decision making. To read more about change heatmaps and why this is not the only way to understand business change impact, go to The Death of the Change Heatmap.
Sponsor readiness/capability assessment can be a critical tool to help identify any capability gaps in the sponsor so that effort may be taken to support the sponsor. A strong and effective sponsor can make or break a change initiative. Early engagement and support of the sponsor are critical. Both Prosci, as well as Changefirst, have sponsor competency assessment offerings.
Change champion capability assessment. Change champion or change agent are critical ‘nodes’ in which to drive and support change within the organizational network. A lot of change champions are appointed only for one particular initiative. Having a business-focus change champion network means that their capability can be developed over time, and they can support multiple initiatives and not just one. Assessing and supporting change champion capability would also directly translate to better change outcomes.
Change leadership and change maturity assessment – refer to the previous section
Change capacity assessment.
In an environment where there is significant change happening concurrently, careful planning and sequencing of change in balance with existing capacity are critical. There are several aspects of change capacity that should be called out in the measurement process:
Different parts of the business can have different capacity for change. Those parts of the business with better change capability, and perhaps with better change leadership, are often able to receive and digest more changes than other businesses that do not possess the same level of capability.
Some businesses are much more time-sensitive and therefore their change capacity needs to be measured with more granularity. For example, call centre staff capacity is often measured in terms of minutes. Therefore, to effectively plan for their change capacity, the impacts of change needs to be quantified and articulated in a precise, time-bound context so that effective resourcing can be planned in advance.
The change tolerance or change saturation level for business needs careful measurement in combination with operational feedback to determine. For example, it could be that last month a part of the business experienced significant change impact across several initiatives happening at the same time. The operational indicators were that there was some impact on customer satisfaction, productivity, and there were negative sentiments reported by staff that there was too much change to handle. This could mean that the change tolerance level may have been exceeded. With the right measurement of change impact levels for that part of the business, next time this level of change is seen, previous lessons may be utilized to plan for this volume of change. Utilise measurement and data visualization tools such as the Change Compass to track change capacity.
Enterprise level change measures
At an enterprise level, many of the business unit level measures are still applicable. However, the focus is comparing across different business units to sense-make what each part of the business is going through and if the overall picture is aligned with the intentions and the strategic direction of the organization. For example, typical questions include:
Is it surprising that one part of the business is undergoing significant change whilst another is not?
Is there a reason that one business unit is focused on a few very large changes whilst for other business units there is a larger set of changes each with smaller impacts?
Is the overall pace of change optimum according to strategic intent? Does it need to speed up or slow down?
What is the process to govern, report and make decisions on enterprise level change, prioritization, sequencing and benefit realization?
Is there one business unit that is able to manage change more effectively, faster with greater outcomes? How can other business units leverage any internal best practices?
As mentioned in the Change Management Measures diagram, some enterprise level change measures include:
Change capacity assessment – Does one business unit’s change capacity limits mean that we are not able to execute on a critical strategy within the allocated time? How do we create more capacity? Ways in which to create more capacity could include more resources such as staff, or initiative funding, more time is given, or more talent to lead initiatives
Change maturity assessment – At an enterprise level, the concern is with the overall change maturity of the organization. How do we implement enterprise level interventions to build change maturity through programs, networks, and exchanges, such as:
Enterprise change capability programs
Enterprise change analytics and measurement tools
Enterprise change methodology
Enterprise network of change champions
Strategy impact map – Change management need not be focused only on project execution or business unit capability. It can also demonstrate value at an enterprise level by focusing on strategy execution (which by definition is change). The way in which different strategies exert impact on various business units may be visualized to help stakeholder understand which initiatives within which strategic intent impact which business units. To illustrate this please refer to the below diagram which is an example of a strategy impact map. In this diagram, each of the organisation’s strategy is displayed with different initiatives branching out of each strategy. The width of each initiative correlates with the level of impact that the initiative has on the business over a pre-determined period of time. Therefore, the width of each strategy also indicates the overall relative impact on the business.
This data visualization artifact can be valuable for business leaders and strategic planning functions as it depicts visually how the implementation of various strategies is impacting business units. This helps planners to better understand strategy implementation impacts, potential risks and opportunities, and balancing change pace with strategy goals at various points in time.
Predictive indicators on business performance – We started this article talking about how data is all around us and we also need to better manage change using data. With quantitative data on change impact, it is possible to ascertain any correlations with operational business indicators such as customer satisfaction, service availability, etc. For those business indicators where there is a significant correlation, it is possible to hence use predictive reporting to forecast performance indicator trends, given planned change impacts.
In the below graph you can see an example of this whereby using historical data it is possible to establish correlations and therefore forecast future impact on business indicators. This example is focused on the customer contact centre (CCC) and key business indicator of average handling time (AHT) is utilized as an illustration.
This type of predictive performance forecasting is extremely valuable for organisations undergoing significant change and would like to understand how change may impact their business performance. By demonstrating the impact on business indicators, this puts the importance of managing change at the front and centre of the decision-making table. At The Change Compass, we are developing this type of measurement and reporting function. This is the frontier for change management – to be established as a key business-driving function (versus a standard back-office function).
Change can be measured and this article has outlined various operational and strategic ways in which change measurement can demonstrate significant value. Most corporate functions cannot exist without data and analytics. For example, Human Resources relies on people and pay data. Marketing cannot function without measurement of channel and campaign effectiveness. For Information Technology, pretty much everything is measured from system usage, to cost, to efficiency. It is time we start utilizing data to better visualize change to better plan and make business decisions.
References:
Miller, David (2011) Successful Change. How to implement change through people. Changefirst Ltd.
Pagon & Banutal (2008) Leadership Competencies for Successful Change Management. Study Report. University of Maribor.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
What are the most important change management metrics to track? Focus on adoption rates, readiness scores, communication engagement, and benefit realisation metrics tailored to project phases and business capacity.
How do you measure change readiness effectively? Combine pulse surveys with behavioural indicators and sponsor assessments. Balance frequency with depth for actionable insights. Read “Beyond the Survey: A Strategic Lens on Change Readiness Assessment.”
Why replace change heatmaps with other visuals? Heatmaps introduce subjectivity bias. Timeline charts and capacity dashboards provide clearer decision-making data. See “The Death of the Change Heatmap.”
What role does AI play in change measurement? AI enables real-time sentiment analysis, predictive capacity planning, and automated risk detection across initiatives. Platforms integrate natural language queries for instant insights.
How many change metrics should organisations track? Target 8-15 core metrics aligned with strategic objectives across project, business, and enterprise levels to maintain focus and actionability.
What enterprise-level change metrics matter most? Strategy impact mapping, cross-business capacity analysis, and predictive performance forecasting linking change volume to operational outcomes.
Change management is often seen as a ‘soft’ discipline that is more an ‘art’ than science. However, successful change management, like managing a business, relies on having the right data to understand if the journey is going in the right direction toward change adoption. The data can inform whether the objectives will be achieved or not.
Data science has emerged to be one of the most sought-after skills in the marketplace at the moment. This is not a surprise because data is what powers and drives our digital economy. Data has the power to make or break companies. Companies that leverages data can significant improve customer experiences, improve efficiency, improve revenue, etc. In fact all facets of how a company is run can benefit from data science. In this article, we explore practical data science techniques that organizations can use to improve change outcomes and achieve their goals more effectively.
Improved decision making
One of the significant benefits of using data science in change management is the ability to make informed decisions. Data science techniques, such as predictive analytics and statistical analysis, allow organizations to extract insights from data that would be almost impossible to detect or analyse manually. This enables organizations to make data-driven decisions that are supported by empirical evidence rather than intuition or guesswork.
Increased Efficiency
Data science can help streamline the change management process and make it more efficient. By automating repetitive tasks, such as data collection, cleaning, and analysis, organizations can free up resources and focus on more critical aspects of change management. Moreover, data science can provide real-time updates and feedback, making it easier for organizations to track progress, identify bottlenecks, and adjust the change management plan accordingly.
Improved Accuracy
Data science techniques can improve the accuracy of change management efforts by removing bias and subjectivity from decision-making processes. By relying on empirical evidence, data science enables organizations to make decisions based on objective facts rather than personal opinions or biases. This can help reduce the risk of errors and ensure that change management efforts are based on the most accurate and reliable data available.
Better Risk Management
Data science can help organizations identify potential risks and develop contingency plans to mitigate those risks. Predictive analytics can be used to forecast the impact of change management efforts and identify potential risks that may arise during the transition. For example, change impacts across multiple initiatives against seasonal operations workload peaks and troughs.
Enhanced Communication
Data science can help facilitate better communication and collaboration between stakeholders involved in the change management process. By presenting data in a visual format, such as graphs, charts, and maps, data science can make complex information more accessible and understandable to all stakeholders. This can help ensure that everyone involved in the change management process has a clear understanding of the goals, objectives, and progress of the transition.
Key data science approaches in change management
Conduct a Data Audit
Before embarking on any change management initiative, it’s essential to conduct a data audit to ensure that the data being used is accurate, complete, and consistent. For example, data related to the current status or the baseline, before change takes place. A data audit involves identifying data sources, reviewing data quality, and creating a data inventory. This can help organizations identify gaps in data and ensure that data is available to support the change management process. This includes any impacted stakeholder status or operational data.
During a data audit, change managers should ask themselves the following questions:
What data sources from change leaders and key stakeholders do we need to support the change management process?
Is the data we are using accurate and reliable?
Are there any gaps in our data inventory?
What data do we need to collect to support our change management initiatives, including measurable impact data?
Using Predictive Analytics
Predictive analytics is a valuable data science technique that can be used to forecast the impact of change management initiatives. Predictive analytics involves using historical data to build models that can predict the future impact of change management initiatives. This can help organizations identify potential risks and develop proactive strategies to mitigate those risks.
Change managers can use predictive analytics to answer the following questions:
What is the expected impact of our change management initiatives?
What are the potential risks associated with our change management initiatives?
What proactive strategies can we implement to mitigate those risks?
How can we use predictive analytics to optimize the change management process?
Leveraging Business Intelligence
Business intelligence is a data science technique that involves using tools and techniques to transform raw data into actionable insights. Business intelligence tools can help organizations identify trends, patterns, and insights that can inform the change management process. This can help organizations make informed decisions, improve communication, and increase the efficiency of change management initiatives.
Change managers can use business intelligence to answer the following questions:
What insights can we gain from our data?
What trends and patterns are emerging from our data?
How can we use business intelligence to improve communication and collaboration among stakeholders?
How can we use business intelligence to increase the efficiency of change management initiatives?
Using Data Visualization
Data visualization is a valuable data science technique that involves presenting data in a visual format such as graphs, charts, and maps. Data visualization can help organizations communicate complex information more effectively and make it easier for stakeholders to understand the goals, objectives, and progress of change management initiatives. This can improve communication and increase stakeholder engagement in the change management process.
Change managers can use data visualization to answer the following questions:
How can we present our data in a way that is easy to understand?
How can we use data visualization to communicate progress and results to stakeholders?
How can we use data visualization to identify trends and patterns in our data?
How can we use data visualization to increase stakeholder engagement in the change management process?
Monitoring and Evaluating Progress
Monitoring and evaluating progress is a critical part of the change management process. Data science techniques, such as statistical analysis and data mining, can be used to monitor progress and evaluate the effectiveness of change management initiatives. This can help organizations identify areas for improvement, adjust the change management plan, and ensure that change management initiatives are achieving the desired outcomes.
Change managers can use monitoring and evaluation techniques to answer the following questions:
How can we measure the effectiveness of our change management initiatives? (e.g. employee engagement, customer satisfaction, business outcomes, etc.) And what method do we use to collect the data? E.g. surveys or focus groups?
What data do we need to collect to evaluate the change initiative progress?
How can we use statistical analysis and data mining to identify areas for improvement?
How can we use monitoring of ongoing support or continuous improvement?
The outlined approaches are some of the key ways in which we can use data science to manage the change process. Change practitioners should invest in their data science capability and adopt data science techniques to drive effective change management success. Stakeholders will take more notice of change management status and they may also better understand the value of managing change. Most importantly, data helps to achieve change objectives.
