In the world of scaled agile, “Release on Demand” is a concept that has profound implications for agile teams and their project approaches. It guides teams on how to release and deliver value when stakeholders and customers are truly ready to receive it. However, a crucial, often-overlooked factor in this concept is the role of change management. While Release on Demand has primarily been framed as a technical approach within the Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe), the readiness of people—including end-users, stakeholders, customers, and partners—forms an equally vital part of determining the demand for release.
As change management practitioners, understanding and actively shaping “Release on Demand” can significantly impact project outcomes. In this article, we’ll explore how change management can enhance this core SAFe concept through strategic timing, prioritisation, and thoughtful execution of each release. We’ll also discuss how to structure governance cadences to ensure operational and people readiness, going beyond the technical lens.
Understanding Release on Demand in SAFe
Within SAFe, Release on Demand means that project outputs or new functionality are delivered when the organisation, teams, and stakeholders are ready to adopt and benefit from it. It enables flexible delivery rather than a rigid release schedule. The four key activities for Release on Demand are:
Release – Delivering the product or change to users.
Stabilise and Operate – Ensuring the release is operationally sound and running smoothly.
Measure and Learn – Assessing the release’s impact and learning from the results.
Adjust – Making necessary improvements based on insights gained.
The goal of these activities is to minimise risk, gather user feedback, and optimise the release to maximise impact. While these steps seem straightforward, they demand thoughtful change management to ensure all stakeholders are prepared to support, use, and benefit from the release. Let’s delve deeper into how a change management approach can strengthen each of these activities.
People Readiness as the Core Demand Factor
The “demand” for a release is often misunderstood as being purely about project or market readiness. However, the reality is that it depends on multiple factors, including how ready people are to adopt the change. For any release to succeed, people readiness is crucial and requires focus on:
End-User Readiness: Ensuring that end-users are prepared for the new tools, processes, or functionalities. This could mean conducting user training, crafting support resources, and managing expectations.
Stakeholder Readiness: Stakeholders at all levels need to understand the change, its rationale, and its anticipated impact. This may involve regular briefings, updates, and even individual consultations.
Customer and Partner Readiness: For customer-facing or partner-facing releases, it’s essential to gauge external readiness as well. A clear communication plan and alignment of goals with partners or clients can smooth the path for a successful launch.
These readiness efforts form a significant part of the “demand” in Release on Demand and reflect the reality that people’s capacity to adapt often determines when a release will be genuinely effective.
The Broader Change Landscape
People readiness isn’t only determined by a single project or team but by the broader change landscape within an organisation. Multiple changes or ongoing initiatives can either enhance or inhibit readiness for a new release. For instance, if an organisation is already undergoing a significant digital transformation, adding another change may lead to overload and resistance.
Change practitioners should map the change landscape to identify concurrent changes and evaluate how these may impact readiness for Release on Demand. By assessing the timing and impact of other changes, change managers can:
Avoid change fatigue by spacing out initiatives.
Synchronize related changes to reduce redundancy.
Communicate the overall strategic direction to help stakeholders and users understand how individual changes fit into the bigger picture.
By accounting for these interdependencies, change management can improve people readiness and ensure the Release on Demand aligns with the organisation’s capacity to handle it.
Applying the Four Key Steps in Release on Demand
Let’s explore how change management activities can amplify each of the four Release on Demand steps:
1. Release: The release phase requires both technical and people preparation. Beyond deploying the technical elements, change management practitioners should:
Develop targeted communication plans to inform all affected stakeholders.
Offer targeted training sessions or resources that build users’ confidence and competence.
Ensure adequate support is in place for the transition, including help desks or peer mentoring.
2. Stabilise and Operate: After a release, it’s crucial to monitor adoption and support operational stability. The change team can:
Collect feedback from end-users and support staff on initial challenges and address these promptly.
Identify and celebrate quick wins that demonstrate the release’s value.
Work closely with operations teams to resolve any unforeseen issues that may inhibit adoption or cause frustration.
3. Measure and Learn: This step goes beyond tracking technical metrics and should also capture change-specific insights. Change management can contribute by:
Conducting surveys, interviews, or focus groups to gauge user and stakeholder sentiment.
Monitoring adoption rates and identifying any training gaps or knowledge shortfalls.
Collaborating with product or project teams to share insights that may refine or prioritisation subsequent releases.
4. Adjust: Based on insights gained from the Measure and Learn phase, change managers can advise on necessary adjustments. These might include:
Refining future communication and training plans based on user feedback.
Addressing any gaps in stakeholder support or sponsorship.
Adjusting the timing of subsequent releases to better align with people readiness.
The iterative nature of these four steps aligns well with agile methodologies, allowing change managers to continuously refine and enhance their approach.
The Critical Role of Sequencing, Prioritisation, and Timing
For change management practitioners, Release on Demand isn’t just about executing steps—it’s about doing so in the right sequence and at the right time. The impact of a release depends significantly on when it occurs, who is prepared for it, and how well each group’s readiness aligns with the release cadence.
Here are some tips to help change managers get the timing right:
Analyze stakeholder engagement levels: Regularly assess how engaged and ready stakeholders are, tailoring messaging and interventions based on their feedback and sentiment.
Prioritisation change activities based on impact: Not all releases will have the same impact, so change teams should focus resources on those that require the most user readiness efforts.
Create phased rollouts: If full-scale readiness across the board isn’t achievable, a phased rollout can provide users with time to adapt, while allowing the change team to address any emergent issues in stages.
By managing the release cadence thoughtfully, change managers can avoid the disruptions caused by hasty releases and ensure the deployment feels both manageable and meaningful for users.
Release governance in SAFe is often perceived as a predominantly technical or project-focused process. However, effective governance should encompass business operations and people readiness as well. Change management plays a pivotal role in designing governance cadences that account for these critical aspects.
To integrate change governance within release governance, change practitioners should:
Establish clear communication channels with project teams and product owners to ensure people readiness factors are consistently part of release discussions.
Implement a readiness checklist that includes technical, operational, and people readiness criteria. This checklist should be reviewed and signed off by relevant stakeholders before any release.
Maintain a cadence of review and feedback sessions where project teams, change managers, and stakeholders discuss readiness progress, key risks, and post-release outcomes.
This approach ensures that each release is evaluated from multiple perspectives, minimising disruption and maximising its potential for success.
The above is from Scaledagileframework.com
Developing a Change Cadence that Complements Agile Delivery
SAFe’s principle of “develop on cadence; release on demand” is central to effective agile delivery. For change management practitioners, developing a strong change cadence is equally important. This cadence, or rhythm of activities, aligns with the agile teams’ development cadence and helps build stakeholder momentum, maintain engagement, and reduce surprises.
Here’s how to develop a cadence that works in tandem with agile teams:
Planning Cadence: Hold regular planning sessions to align change activities with upcoming releases and identify readiness gaps. This could be quarterly for major releases or bi-weekly for smaller, iterative releases.
Execution Cadence: Establish a reliable cycle for change interventions, such as training, communication, and stakeholder meetings. This cadence helps stakeholders build expectations and fosters a predictable rhythm in change activities.
Feedback Cadence: Collect feedback at consistent intervals, aligning it with release intervals or sprint reviews. Consistent feedback keeps the change process agile and responsive to evolving needs.
A well-defined change cadence not only prepares users effectively but also reinforces trust and transparency in the change process.
Release on Demand may have originated as a technical concept within SAFe, but its success is deeply tied to how well people, stakeholders, and users are prepared for each release. For change management practitioners, Release on Demand is an opportunity to enhance the broader release process by prioritizing people readiness, orchestrating thoughtful sequencing, and establishing governance that prioritisations user success as much as project outcomes.
By proactively engaging in each of the four stages of Release on Demand—Release, Stabilise and Operate, Measure and Learn, and Adjust—change management can ensure releases are not just technically ready but fully integrated into the people and business context they serve. Embracing this role allows change managers to become essential partners in agile delivery, maximising the impact of each release for end-users, the organisation, and the overall success of the project.
Change management practitioners are often tasked with ensuring that transitions are smooth and successful. However, to truly excel in this role, it’s crucial to embrace a systems thinking approach—an understanding that organisations are complex, interconnected systems where every change can create ripple effects throughout. One of the most potent tools for fostering systems thinking is the use of change data within change portfolio management. Here, we will focus on how change data can build interconnectedness across the organisation, enhance the management of change initiatives, and ultimately improve business results.
Understanding Systems Thinking
The below are some of the core principles in Systems Thinking and how they may be applied to change portfolio management through data and analysis.
Principle 1: Interconnectedness
At the core of systems thinking is the principle of interconnectedness. Organisations are not merely a collection of individual parts; rather, they consist of various components that interact in complex ways. When change is initiated in one area, it can have unintended consequences in another. For instance, a change in the sales strategy might impact customer service processes, employee motivation, and even supply chain operations. By recognising these interconnected relationships, practitioners can make more informed decisions that take the broader organisational context into account.
In fact, change impact assessment is the process of identifying and ascertaining the linkages across the system. With each change, the various impacts across different processes, people working to support those processes and the systems involved in the processes.
Principle 2: Feedback Loops
Another fundamental aspect of systems thinking is the identification and understanding of feedback loops. These loops can be either reinforcing (positive) or balancing (negative). A reinforcing feedback loop occurs when a change in one part of the system leads to further changes in the same direction, creating a cycle of growth or enhancement. For example, an increase in employee training may lead to improved performance, which in turn boosts morale and reduces turnover, further enhancing overall productivity.
Conversely, balancing feedback loops act to stabilize the system. They can dampen the effects of change, preventing extremes from occurring. Recognising these feedback mechanisms allows practitioners to leverage positive feedback loops to enhance desired outcomes while being vigilant against the negative loops that may emerge, which could undermine the change initiatives.
Here is an example of a feedback loop –
Goal: Prevent stagnation or failure by adjusting strategies based on real-time feedback.
Use case: Ensuring that deviations or resistance are managed effectively to keep the change on track.
How it works:
Collect data from employee surveys, performance metrics, and feedback sessions to understand what’s working or not.
Identify points of resistance and take corrective actions (e.g., additional training or clarifying leadership vision).
Example: If employees express frustration with new tools, gather input and refine the rollout to address concerns.
What are key benefits of feedback loops?
Increased adaptability: Ensures the organisation can react to unforeseen challenges during implementation.
Engaged workforce: Employees feel more involved when they see their feedback incorporated into the process.
Sustainable change: Continuous feedback ensures that change efforts stay relevant, preventing them from losing momentum or being abandoned.
Principle 3: Causality
Systems thinking also emphasizes understanding causality—how different components of the organisation influence one another. This perspective is vital in change management, as it shifts the focus from merely addressing symptoms of problems to exploring their root causes. This can be applied throughout the change lifecycle ranging from understanding the impacts across the organisation, through to anticipating resistance and motivation levels to support the change.
Here is an example of applying the principle of causality in systems thinking
Change Initiative: Implementing a New KPI-Based Evaluation System
Initial Cause: Leaders decide to replace the existing subjective performance reviews with measurable KPIs to improve accountability.
Direct Effect: Employees shift their focus to achieving their KPIs.
This change seems positive—employees now have clear, measurable targets to meet.
Ripple Effects Across the System:
Short-term unintended outcome: Employees may begin to focus only on achieving their KPIs, ignoring tasks that are not directly rewarded, such as collaboration or innovation.
Behavioural impact: Some employees might feel micromanaged or disengaged if they view the new system as rigid or unfair.
Team dynamics: Competitive behaviour between employees could increase, reducing collaboration and creating silos.
Long-term Causal Feedback:
Lower collaboration can negatively affect innovation and employee morale, leading to attrition of high performers.
A balancing feedback loop emerges when HR notices a decline in collaboration scores and recommends revising KPIs to include teamwork-related metrics.
Principle 4: Holistic Perspective
Adopting a holistic perspective is crucial in systems thinking. Instead of viewing the organisation as a set of isolated parts, practitioners should consider the organisation as a dynamic whole. This approach enables better problem-solving and decision-making by considering all relevant factors and their interactions. A holistic view facilitates a deeper understanding of how changes in one area may impact others, ultimately leading to more sustainable and effective change initiatives.
For example, An organisation is running several parallel initiatives under a broader digital transformation effort, including:
CRM System Implementation
Agile Ways of Working Initiative
Cloud Migration for Core IT Systems
Employee Upskilling Program on Digital Tools
Application of Holistic Perspective
Identifying Interdependencies
The CRM system needs to integrate with both legacy IT infrastructure and future cloud platforms.
The agile transformation affects how teams work, influencing the success of the CRM project and cloud migration by demanding faster collaboration cycles.
The upskilling program needs to ensure employees are trained not only in new digital tools but also on agile practices and cloud-based platforms.
Avoiding Initiative Silos
Without a holistic view, each project might focus only on its own goals, causing schedule conflicts (e.g., IT resources are overbooked for the cloud migration and CRM deployment).
Teams might experience change fatigue if initiatives are rolled out simultaneously without coordination. For example, employees may struggle to participate in the upskilling program while also meeting deadlines for the agile rollout.
Portfolio-Level Governance and Prioritization
Using a holistic lens, the portfolio management team can sequence projects logically. For example:
First: Migrate critical systems to the cloud to ensure the CRM implementation has a stable foundation.
Second: Begin the agile transformation to align working methods before launching cross-functional CRM initiatives.
Third: Schedule employee upskilling to ensure readiness before key milestones in the CRM and cloud projects.
Optimizing Resources and Reducing Risks
Viewing the portfolio holistically allows management to optimize resource allocation (e.g., sharing skilled IT personnel across cloud and CRM projects efficiently).
By aligning initiatives, the company mitigates the risk of conflicting efforts and reduces change fatigue through coordinated communication and engagement plans.
Principle 4: Emergence
Finally, the concept of emergence in systems thinking highlights how complex behaviours can arise from simple interactions among components. The principle of emergence in systems thinking refers to the idea that when individual elements interact, new patterns or behaviours emerge that were not predictable by examining the parts alone. In change portfolio management, this means that the outcomes of managing multiple change initiatives may be different—often more complex or unexpected—than the sum of each individual change project. Emergent behaviours can create both opportunities and risks.
Scenario: Managing a Sustainability Transformation Portfolio
A large organisation launches several interconnected initiatives to become a more sustainable enterprise:
Carbon Reduction Initiative – Shift to renewable energy and reduce emissions.
Sustainable Supply Chain Project – Engage suppliers on environmental standards.
Green Product Innovation Program – Develop eco-friendly products.
Employee Engagement Initiative – Promote green behaviours among employees.
Application of Emergence
Unexpected Synergies Emerge
Employees participating in the engagement initiative start identifying operational inefficiencies, such as excess waste, leading to additional cost savings.
The green product innovation program creates a culture of experimentation that spills over into other departments, resulting in improved collaboration and faster innovation cycles across the organisation, beyond sustainability-focused efforts.
Emergent Risks and Complex Interactions
Suppliers struggling to meet new sustainability requirements may delay the sustainable supply chain project, impacting both product launches and company operations.
Employees feel overwhelmed by the number of sustainability programs and resist further change, creating unexpected resistance that spreads to unrelated initiatives, such as digital transformation efforts.
New Opportunities Emerge from Interactions
As cross-functional teams work together, new business models emerge. For example, sales and product teams discover that green products appeal to a new customer segment, leading to revenue growth opportunities not originally anticipated in the change portfolio plan.
Collaborations with suppliers in the supply chain project uncover the potential for joint ventures focused on sustainable technology.
It may not be possible to forecast or anticipate all types of employee behaviours and reactions to new changes introduced. However, engaging your stakeholders and involving them in the change process may help you identify these in advance.
The Role of Change Data in Building Systems-Thinking Within Change Portfolio Management
Change portfolio management involves overseeing a collection of change initiatives and ensuring that they align with the organisation’s strategic objectives. The integration of change data into this process can significantly enhance systems thinking capabilities.
Creating a Data-Driven Culture
One of the first steps in leveraging change data is to establish a data-driven culture. Practitioners should promote the importance of data in decision-making processes across the organisation. By providing visibility of the changes that are upcoming, they can empower employees at all levels to utilize change data in their daily work. This cultural shift fosters an environment where data becomes a common language, allowing for clearer communication about changes and their potential impacts. However, do note that different type of employees may require different type of data.
Mapping Change Initiatives
Using change data, organisations can create visual maps of their change initiatives. These maps can illustrate how different initiatives are interconnected and highlight the dependencies between them. For example, a visual representation can show how a new software implementation relies on training programs or how changes in one department may impact others. By visualizing these relationships, practitioners can better assess the potential ripple effects of changes and make more informed decisions.
Monitoring and Analysing Feedback Loops
By actively monitoring change data, organisations can identify and analyse feedback loops in real-time. This ongoing analysis allows practitioners to quickly respond to emerging trends or unintended consequences. For instance, if data shows a decline in employee productivity following a process change, practitioners can investigate and implement corrective actions before the situation worsens. By understanding these feedback loops, organisations can not only react to changes but also proactively shape their outcomes.
Causal Analysis
Incorporating change data into causal analysis enables organisations to identify the root causes of issues. Practitioners can use data analytics to explore the relationships between different components of the organisation, leading to a clearer understanding of how changes impact various outcomes. This data-driven approach allows for more targeted interventions, ensuring that efforts are directed towards addressing the underlying issues rather than merely treating surface-level symptoms.
Holistic Change Portfolio Assessment
When practitioners evaluate their change portfolio, they should adopt a holistic approach that considers the interplay between various initiatives. By analysing change data in aggregate, organisations can identify patterns and trends that may not be visible when examining initiatives in isolation. This holistic assessment allows practitioners to prioritise initiatives that align with broader organisational goals, ultimately leading to more effective change management.
Fostering Collaborative Environments
Change data can also be a catalyst for fostering collaborative environments. By sharing insights and findings from change initiatives, organisations can create a culture of collaboration where teams learn from one another’s experiences. This exchange of information can lead to emergent solutions that drive innovation and improve change outcomes. Additionally, collaborative tools and platforms can be leveraged to facilitate communication and knowledge sharing across departments.
Building Connectedness Across the Organisation
The integration of change data into change portfolio management fosters interconnectedness within the organisation. By emphasising the importance of data and encouraging collaboration, practitioners can create a more cohesive organisational culture that embraces change.
Enhancing Communication
Clear communication is essential for effective change management. Change data provides a foundation for transparent communication about initiatives and their impacts. Practitioners can use data visualizations and reports to communicate progress, challenges, and successes, fostering a sense of shared understanding across the organisation.
Breaking Down Silos
Change data can also help break down silos within the organisation. By sharing data and insights across departments, practitioners can encourage collaboration and foster a sense of unity. This interconnectedness enhances problem-solving capabilities, as diverse teams bring different perspectives to the table, leading to more innovative solutions. Issues may be pre-empted if stakeholders can pick up on impacts that may be missed for example.
Aligning Goals and Objectives
When change initiatives are informed by change data, it becomes easier to align goals and objectives across the organisation. Practitioners can use data to ensure that all initiatives are working towards the same strategic objectives, reducing the likelihood of conflicting priorities. This alignment creates a more focused approach to change management, ultimately leading to improved business results.
Improving Business Results Through Systems Thinking
The application of systems thinking through change data in change portfolio management can lead to substantial improvements in business results. By fostering interconnectedness, enhancing communication, and breaking down silos, organisations can create a more agile and responsive environment.
Increased Agility
Organisations that embrace systems thinking and utilize change data are better equipped to respond to changes in the external environment. By understanding the interconnectedness of their initiatives, practitioners can pivot quickly in response to emerging trends or challenges. This agility is essential in today’s fast-paced business landscape.
Enhanced Employee Engagement
When employees see their work as part of a larger, interconnected system, they are more likely to feel engaged and motivated. By involving employees in the change process and using data to demonstrate the impact of their contributions, organisations can foster a sense of ownership and commitment to change initiatives.
Improved Decision-Making
Systems thinking promotes better decision-making by encouraging practitioners to consider the broader context of their actions. When decisions are informed by change data, organisations can identify potential consequences and make choices that align with their strategic goals. This improved decision-making ultimately leads to more successful change outcomes.
Sustainable Change Initiatives
Finally, the application of systems thinking and change data can lead to more sustainable change initiatives. By focusing on root causes, leveraging feedback loops, and fostering collaboration, organisations can implement changes that are not only effective in the short term but also sustainable over time. This sustainability is crucial for long-term business success.
Change data is a powerful lever that change management practitioners can use to foster systems thinking within their organisations. By recognising the interconnectedness of change initiatives, understanding feedback loops, exploring causality, adopting a holistic perspective, and nurturing environments for emergence, organisations can improve their approach to change management. Through these efforts, practitioners can build connectedness across the organisation, ultimately enhancing how change is managed and driving improved business results. Embracing systems thinking in change portfolio management is not just a best practice; it’s a necessity for organisations seeking to thrive in an ever-evolving business landscape.
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.
As a change management practitioner, your mission is to guide organisations through change, building their ability to manage transitions effectively and sustainably. A major part of this work often involves helping organisations develop their “change maturity” — the capacity to continuously and successfully deliver change. Many experienced change practitioners focus on moving organisations along this maturity curve, seeing it as a vital part of creating a culture that embraces and sustains transformation.
However, in this pursuit, there’s a potential risk: becoming too fixated on achieving “change maturity” can cloud your judgment about what the organisation really needs. You may find yourself caught up in the desire to build structured change processes, educate stakeholders on every change theory, or create complex frameworks to assess and elevate change capability. While these elements are important, an over-reliance on them can impede progress. In some cases, your organisation might be more capable of managing change than you think, but your approach could be holding them back.
There are several common areas where change practitioners may become too focused on change maturity — and how this focus can actually hinder their ability to support successful, meaningful change. We’ll delve into how overemphasising change terminology, processes, structures, and risk-averse approaches can become obstacles to progress. By understanding and addressing these potential pitfalls, you can better align your support with the unique needs and readiness of your organisation, enabling a smoother, more effective path to support successful change.
Are You Too Quick to Label Your Organisation as Change Immature?
One of the first traps experienced change practitioners might fall into is quickly labeling their organisation as “change immature.” It’s tempting to assess an organisation’s change capability through the lens of formal change frameworks and models, but by doing so, you may be discounting their informal ability to adapt to change.
In other words, is your ‘label’ placed on the organisation a potential self-fulfilling prophecy? For example, if you see the organisation as mildly change mature, your approach and lens may all be geared around this label and expectation.
Organisations that have not formally defined their change management processes or have not made concerted efforts to assess their change maturity might seem “immature” on the surface. But that doesn’t mean they lack the inherent capacity to change. In many cases, businesses have evolved and navigated transitions without formal change models in place, relying on their leadership, adaptability, and problem-solving capabilities.
Example: Mislabeling the Organisation’s Maturity
Consider a large, successful organisation with a history of navigating mergers, market shifts, and product innovation. While this company may have never formalised a change management function or assessed its change maturity, its survival and success prove that it has navigated complex changes in the past. You, as the change practitioner, might arrive and see that the business lacks a formal change methodology like Prosci or Kotter, so you label them as immature. As a result, you might start recommending a highly cautious, structured approach to “bring them up to speed.”
However, this label can lead to unnecessary delays. Rather than imposing new structures or over-engineering the process, it could be more effective to build on the organisation’s existing ways of working. The business may already have the right instincts, and simply needs to refine its approach to handle more formalised, larger-scale change efforts.
This cautious approach of assuming immaturity often leads to missed opportunities for progress. It slows down the pace of change and leaves businesses feeling that they are incapable of handling large-scale change without significant external help.
Change Terminology and Concepts: Over-Education vs. Practical Implementation
Another common pitfall is becoming too focused on educating stakeholders about change management concepts and frameworks, rather than focusing on practical implementation. It’s easy for experienced change practitioners to get caught up in explaining the intricacies of change theories, but the reality is that many stakeholders may not need or want this level of detail.
Stakeholders, especially those in senior leadership positions, are often more interested in results than in the underlying change management theories. Spending too much time educating them on ADKAR, Kotter’s 8-step process, or Lewin’s model can divert attention from the critical issue: how to implement the change in their specific organisational context.
Using and coaching your stakeholders on implementing change without change methodology is a skill, but one that can be critical.
Example: Change Concepts vs. Actionable Strategies
Imagine working on a digital transformation project where the leadership team is eager to see results. Instead of diving straight into how the change will be implemented, you spend the first few weeks educating the leaders on the theory behind change management, explaining why each stage of the ADKAR model is important and why a structured approach is necessary. While these concepts are valuable, the leadership team is left feeling overwhelmed by jargon and disconnected from the practicalities of the change they need to deliver.
A more effective approach in this situation might be to focus on practical, actionable strategies that are action-based learning. Instead of over-explaining change concepts, walk stakeholders through the steps they need to take, provide them with tools to manage resistance, and give them clear, real-time metrics on progress. In many cases, stakeholders don’t need an in-depth lesson on change theory—they need guidance on how to lead change within their teams, how to prepare and engage effectively, and how to overcome resistance.
Even if you don’t focus on education, and instead label them as change immature. This in itself can be dangerous and unhelpful. As a result you don’t implement the right approaches to support the change required to achieve their business goals.
While it’s essential to help stakeholders understand the principles behind change, overemphasis on theoretical knowledge can take the focus away from delivering the change itself.
Processes and Structures: Building New or Leveraging Existing?
One of the hallmarks of a maturing change organisation is the establishment of formal structures and processes to support change. Communities of practice, change champion networks, formalised governance bodies, and change management offices all play vital roles in building long-term change capability. However, there’s a risk of becoming too focused on building these structures rather than finding ways to work within the current framework of the organisation.
When faced with the task of improving change capability, many practitioners instinctively begin to build new structures from scratch. However, this can add complexity and create parallel processes that the business may not be equipped to handle. Sometimes, rather than introducing new structures, the better approach is to refine and optimise existing business processes and forums to embed change more naturally.
Example: Building New Structures vs. Leveraging Existing Ones
Consider an organisation that already has strong cross-functional governance in place for operational projects. Instead of introducing a new change champion network, you could work with the existing project governance structures to ensure change management principles are integrated into these meetings. By adapting existing forums to include change discussions, you avoid creating extra layers of complexity and leverage routines that are already familiar to the business.
The challenge is to balance the need for formal change structures with the desire to minimise disruption to current workflows. Often, the most effective approach is to enhance existing structures rather than building entirely new ones. This also helps to prevent the perception that change management is an “additional burden” rather than an integrated part of business operations.
‘Babying’ Your Stakeholders: Are You Doing the Change for Them?
As a change practitioner, it’s natural to want to help stakeholders navigate the complexities of change. But there’s a fine line between supporting your stakeholders and doing the change for them. When you step in to handle every aspect of the change process, you risk undermining your stakeholders’ ability to build their own change capability.
The goal of change management is to empower the business to manage change independently. If you are too involved in managing the change, you can inadvertently create dependency, where stakeholders rely on you to handle resistance, communications, or decision-making. This not only stifles their growth but also prevents the organisation from building a sustainable, internal capacity for change.
Example: Over-Involvement vs. Coaching for Capability Building
Suppose you’re leading a change initiative in a large organisation, and you find yourself handling most of the communications, solving problems that arise, and managing resistance from teams. While you may feel that you’re helping, the reality is that your stakeholders are becoming overly dependent on you to manage the change.
A more effective approach is to take a coaching stance. Rather than doing the change for them, help your stakeholders learn how to anticipate resistance, communicate effectively, and manage change within their teams. Offer guidance and support, but resist the temptation to take over. When you empower stakeholders to lead the change themselves, you help them build the confidence and skills they need to manage future changes more independently.
The key is to recognise when your involvement is crossing the line from support into doing the change for them. The more you can coach and mentor your stakeholders, the more resilient and capable the organisation will become.
Setting the Bar Too Low for Your Organisation
The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated something profound about people and organisations: they are capable of changing far more quickly than we might have thought. Practically overnight, organisations adapted to remote working, adopted new technologies, and restructured their operations. This rapid adaptation showed that many organisations have far more resilience and capacity for change than we often give them credit for.
But in the post-pandemic world, are you still setting the bar too low for your organisation? Are you approaching change cautiously because you assume the business is not capable of rapid adaptation? If so, you may be underestimating their ability to handle larger-scale change or more ambitious transformation initiatives.
Example: Underestimating Organisational Capacity
Imagine working with an organisation that wants to implement a large-scale digital transformation. You might assume that because the business has not undertaken such a significant change before, they will need to move cautiously, taking small steps toward change maturity. However, given the right leadership support, clear communication, and resources, the organisation might be able to implement the transformation far more quickly and effectively than anticipated.
The key is to challenge your assumptions about the organisation’s capacity for change. Instead of setting the bar too low and taking overly cautious steps, consider where you can stretch the organisation’s potential. Businesses often have far more adaptability and resilience than we might assume, and by aiming higher, you can help them achieve more ambitious outcomes. Again, COVID was a clear demonstration of what can be possible.
Caution vs. Progress: Finding the Right Balance
One of the biggest challenges for change practitioners is finding the right balance between caution and progress. In many cases, particularly with organisations that are newer to structured change management, a cautious approach may feel like the safest route. But taking overly cautious steps can prevent the organisation from achieving the level of change it needs to succeed.
The other side of the equation is pushing too hard, too fast. While organisations may have a greater capacity for change than we give them credit for, they also need time to adapt and build their change capability. The trick is to strike the right balance between ambitious progress and thoughtful pacing, especially iterative paced learning.
Example: Caution vs. Ambition in Portfolio-Level Change
Consider an organisation that is managing a portfolio of change initiatives. One approach is to take small, incremental steps to build change capability, slowly rolling out new processes and frameworks. While this approach may feel safe, it can prevent the business from keeping up with the volume and pace of change it needs to manage.
A more ambitious approach might involve embedding change management principles directly into business planning, governance, and decision-making. By integrating change management into existing processes, the organisation can manage a high volume of change more effectively without creating new silos or delays. This approach pushes the organisation to operate at a higher level, while still allowing time for adaptation and learning.
Adjusting Your Lens on Change Maturity
While change maturity is an important goal for any organisation, becoming too fixated on achieving it can inadvertently cloud your judgment and therefore negatively impact outcomes. Overemphasising change models, frameworks, and cautious steps can slow down the pace of change and underestimate the organisation’s capacity to evolve. As a change management practitioner, your role is not just to assess change maturity but to empower the organisation to grow and adapt.
By adjusting your lens and focusing on the organisation’s immediate needs and strengths, you can support more effective, sustainable change. This means balancing formal change processes with practical implementation, empowering stakeholders to lead the change themselves, and setting higher expectations for what the organisation can achieve.
The goal is not just to build change maturity, but to help the organisation experience navigating change in a way gives them confidence and meets their business goals.
Managing a set of change initiatives through a portfolio management approach is relatively new for some organizations. This approach is drawn from the portfolio project management approach by dividing a set of initiatives into different groups and by viewing various initiatives in unison. By doing this things then become more manageable from the perspective of planning how to organise the planning and sequencing of these changes.
Portfolio project managers are focused on investment funding, program management, governance, project execution, and resource management. 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 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 change portfolio management? 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. 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. 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
Project portfolio managers manage the slate of projects using a structured process of funding, prioritization, analysis, and review based on data. In a similar vein, so should change portfolio managers. 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. The challenge is how to collect, analyze, present, and leverage the power of these data.
The Change Compass is a digital tool that quantifies and packages change impacts into data that can be easily analyzed and presented in a visual format to decision-makers. Initiative owners who own the source of the information update change impact data. Up-to-date change impact 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 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.
