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.
Disruptions are all around us. First, the various disruptions with Covid on all aspects of people’s lives around the globe. Now we have the riots across the US as well as other countries about racial inequality. With these, we have the backdrop of constant technology changes that constantly challenge how we run our lives. What next you may ask?
Disruptions to how change initiatives are managed seem to never cease. You think you’ve been through the worst with Covid impacting the budget expenditure on projects and the implementation timeline thrown up in the air due to lack of business capacity. The racial riots are disruption normal business operations and it is back to business continuity plans for some organisations. How might we continue to manage our various change initiatives amongst these constant disruptions?
Strategic approaches
In being able to effectively respond to constant business disruptions on initiatives a set of routines and practices need to take place prior to the individual disruptions.
Use the three horizons of growth as a framework to focus efforts on initiatives
A brief description of the Mckinsey 3 horizons model
McKinsey’s three horizons of growth describe 3 horizons of which initiatives should be clustered. Each horizon forms a critical set of initiatives from which the organisation may continue to develop and grow. If all focus was placed on horizon 1 that are focused on the here and now shorter-term initiatives, then the organisation is not placed to deal with emerging challenges addressed under horizons 2 and 3. Vice versa if all the effort is placed on horizon 3 and not 1.
With business disruptions, the effort and expenditure placed on initiatives can be evaluated in light of which horizon they are in. For example, if the Covid disruption is so significant on the business that it’s a matter of survival, then all efforts should focus on horizon 1 initiatives that contribute to organisational survival in terms of revenue and cost management. If the disruption is significant but not debilitating then it may be wise to spend half of the effort on horizon 1 with the rest on horizons 2 and 3.
Adopt a portfolio approach to manage changes
When initiatives are treated in isolation it is very difficult to flex and adjust to changes compared to a portfolio approach to manage change initiatives. Individual initiatives have limited resource capacity and project activities will have limited impact compared to multiple initiatives.
Having a portfolio approach to manage changes means having established the following:
Data-based approach to manage change impacts with a view of change impacts across initiatives
Ability to visualize and plan the change impacts from a business-unit-centric and stakeholder group centric perspective
Ability to manage resourcing across initiatives so that as required resources may be flexed up or down across the overall portfolio based on prioritisation
Ability to guide and prepare each business for multiple changes across initiatives
Key stakeholder messages may be synchronised and packaged across initiatives versus an initiative by initiative approach
Improved ability to map out clearly the various skills and capabilities being implemented across initiatives to avoid duplication and improve synergies
What can change practitioners contribute in planning for disruptions?
Derive different change scenarios
Scenario planning as a technique is rarely used in a project planning context. However, it is especially critical and relevant within an agile environment. Agile project practices mean that changes keep iterating and therefore it may be hard to anticipate what the end solution or changes will look like. It may also be hard to anticipate how the business will respond to the changes being proposed if we don’t know what the changes will look like.
To allow adequate time to plan for changes it is very helpful to derive at least 2 scenarios. In an agile environment, change practitioners need to adopt a hypothesis-based approach to deriving change approaches. Let’s take an example of a standard system implementation project. In rolling out a new system these could be 2 likely scenarios based on the hypothesis being posed.
Hypothesis: The system being implemented is easy and intuitive for users and therefore the change approach will be sufficient with awareness raising and a 1 hour training session
Scenario 1: The hypothesis is true and all users have found it easy and intuitive to use and therefore the change approach proposed is sufficient to prepare the users for this change.
Scenario 2: The hypothesis is only partially true and there are some user groups who struggled to understand all features of the system and need additional help and guidance. Additional training sessions with coaches are proposed
A different way of contrasting different scenarios will be to derive different project expenditures and funding requirements and resulting change delivery work. For example, under the system implementation project, a ‘Toyota’ approach of delivery could involve minimum training and stakeholder awareness generation. For a ‘Rolls Royce’ approach of delivery which will cost significantly more could include tailored coaching sessions for each stakeholder group, 1:1 coaching for senior leaders, a long awareness campaign, and an extensive measurement system. This helps stakeholders understand the cost of delivery and will help them to select an appropriate delivery model.
The usefulness of planning ahead to anticipate for different scenarios mean that steps may be taken to be ready for either of the scenarios and so the project team will not be caught off guard in case the hypothesis proposed is proved false.
To be able to visualize different scenarios it is important to show the different impacts of the scenarios. This includes the impact of time, sequencing, and impact levels on stakeholder groups. With a different rollout approach will stakeholder groups have better bandwidth and ability to adopt the change or will the bandwidth be more limited?
Here is an example of a scenario planning visual where the user can simply drag the impact bars to different times and be able to save this as a scenario. After saving the scenario the next activity will be to analyse the scenario to make sense of the potential impacts of this scenario on the business and impacted stakeholders. Are there project dependencies that need to be taken into consideration? What is the overall change impact across initiatives as a result of the changes in this scenario? How does this impact the customer versus internal stakeholder groups?
A scenario planning example from The Change Compass
For scenarios to be used in a practical way it is important to be able to list any ‘proof points’ that outline how we can tell that the scenario is becoming true or not. These proof points can include anything ranging from stakeholder reactions, the timing of the implementation, the complexity of the features or solution, cost, and other tangible measurements such as system response time, time taken to perform the process, etc.
Agree on decision making principle with stakeholder
Prior to any disruptions, it is important to agree with stakeholders key decision-making principles. Having clear, agreed decision-making principles means that key decisions can be made without subjecting to personal opinions or preferences. During any times of disruption Decision-making principles can be organised as ‘trade-off’ principles with a prioritised order of importance. Below are some examples:
Cost
Time
People resource bandwidth
Benefit realisation
Stakeholder readiness and acceptance
External media implications
Factor in critical path in project planning
The critical path method is a way in which a project’s key interdependencies are linked and mapped out in a linear way so as to understand the key logical points along the project. From this any potential disruptions, slippages or delays in project deliverables and how they impact the remaining deliverables can be clearly understood and planned for.
A clear understanding of the critical path within a project means that with any disruptions to activities the impacts of this on the rest of the deliverables can easily be articulated. To deal with the disruptions to the project a longer implementation may need to be negotiated with the impacted businesses, or depending on the nature of the disruption, a different project approach with different deliverables may need to be derived.
An example of critical path planning
Here we discussed multiple ways in which the change practitioner can help the organisation get ready for various disruptions to change initiatives. During periods of disruptive change, it is even more critical for change practitioners to demonstrate their value to lead and maneuver around and plan for uncertainty. Agile organisations are well placed to deal with disruptions, however, an effective set of routines, practices, preparations, and capabilities are all critical to building overall organisational readiness.
Exploring Organisational Structures for Optimal Enterprise Change Management
Change is an inherent part of every organization’s journey towards growth and adaptability in an ever-evolving business landscape. In the realm of change management, one critical consideration is the structure or organizational design that best facilitates successful enterprise change management. There are plenty of different ways to structure change management practices. Like any type of organisational structures for organisations overall, there is not one way that is the most effective. It depends on the circumstances of the company in concern.
Understanding Change Management Structures
Centralized Change Management Structure
Centralized change management structures consolidate the authority, decision-making, and oversight of change initiatives within a single, dedicated team or department. In such a structure, the change management team sometimes reports directly to either Strategy or Office of the CEO. This approach provides the change practice significant influence due to its direct linkage with strategy.
Reporting Lines: HR, IT, Strategy, and More
In addition to the choice between centralized and federated structures, change management specialists (and the senior leaders that they report to) often grapple with determining the optimal reporting lines for their change teams. Several departments within an organization are typically considered for hosting the change management function:
1. Human Resources (HR or People & Culture)
Reporting to HR aligns change management with employee/organisational development and engagement. This can be particularly effective when change initiatives heavily impact the workforce, as HR possesses expertise in people-related matters.
2. Information Technology (IT)
With the increasing digitalization of business processes, reporting to IT can ensure that complex technology-driven changes are well led and managed across the enterprise. The remit for change practices reporting to IT can range from including just technology changes, to all strategic and funded initiatives, through to all of change management as a function.
3. Strategy or Transformation Office
Reporting to the strategy or transformation office closely ties change management to the organization’s overarching strategic goals. This alignment ensures that change initiatives are directly linked to long-term vision and objectives.
4. Operations
For a lot of organisations, the Operations function can determine a lot about how the organisation is run. This can include the change management function as well. The advantage of having the change practice reporting to Operation can mean that the operating rhythm of the organisation can be designed with the right change management approaches. The way employees are engaged, how they’re involved, and how BAU processes are run, measured, and reported can be designed with change management interventions.
Key benefits of a centralized structure include:
Consistency: Centralized control ensures consistent change management practices across the organization, reducing confusion and increasing effectiveness in terms of setting a common level of practice. Consistency in terms of language and concepts mean that it is easier for the business to adopt change management principles and practices.
Resource Allocation: Easier resource allocation, as the centralized team can prioritize and allocate resources based on organizational priorities. With better economy of scale for a larger centralised team, the change group has the opportunity to resource initiatives using different levels of involvement, from sessional, part-time to full-time.
Alignment: Enhanced alignment with the organization’s strategic objectives, as the change management team directly interfaces with top leadership. This means that effort and focus areas as more likely to be on that which is most strategic and can impact the organisation the most.
Change maturity. The change practice has the opportunity to focus on building organisation-wide change maturity due to its ability to interface and influence across the organisation. While other change management structures may also have the ability to focus on building business change maturity, a centralised function has the advantage of having a greater impact level due to its scale.
In contrast, federated change management structures distribute change management responsibilities throughout various business units or departments. Each business unit maintains its own change management team, and these teams collaborate to execute change initiatives. Typically, these teams report to their respective department heads. This means that there is no formal enterprise change management function.
The advantages of a federated structure include:
Local Expertise: Greater understanding of department-specific needs and challenges, leading to tailored change strategies and therefore better change outcomes. Different business units can have very different cultures and different business needs. Having change professionals who understand the various intricacies of the business unit means that they’re able to design change approaches that will better meet business requirements.
Ownership and relationship: There may be increased ownership and commitment among departmental staff, as the change teams sits in the same business unit and are ‘one of them’ versus someone sent from a centralised team. Others in the business unit may be more conducive to advice and support from a colleague in the same broader business unit. It is also easier to establish a closer working relationship if the change practitioner is always working with the same teams.
Flexibility: Greater adaptability to changes in individual departments, as they can independently address unique issues. Without any direction from a central team, the business-dedicated team can better flex their service offering to meet the business unit’s particular focus areas. Whilst, a central team may de-prioritise departmental-level initiatives to be less critical, for a departmental team it is much easier to flex toward their priorities.
Impact on Business Results
The choice of change management structure and reporting lines can significantly impact an organization’s overall business results. Here’s how different structures can yield varying outcomes:
Centralized Structure Outcomes
Efficiency: Centralized structures can excel in efficiency of delivery due to its scale of economy. Whereas small departmental change teams may structure to flex and resource projects efficiently, larger change practices can avoid this by leveraging its range of practitioners with different levels of skill sets and availability.
Consistency: They ensure a consistent approach to change management, reducing confusion among business stakeholders and employees. The consistency of standards also mean that there is less risk that initiatives may experienced a change intervention that is less effective due to the centralised capability standards reinforced.
Top-Down Control: Change initiatives are closely aligned with strategic objectives set by top leadership. This means that any ‘pet projects’ or less prioritised divisional initiatives may not be as likely to be granted change management support. This does not necessarily mean that those departments won’t focus on those initiatives, it just means that change management resources are more prioritised toward what top leadership deems to be most critical.
Federated Structure Outcomes
Local Engagement: Federated structures promote local ownership and engagement, fostering a sense of responsibility among departmental staff. Department-specific change practitioners will be more familiar with ‘what works’ at the department level. They are better able to leverage the right engagement channels and have the ability to access management and leadership roles at the department to garner support and drive overall initiative focus and success.
Adaptability: They allow for greater adaptability to unique departmental needs, which can be crucial in complex organizations. For example, the types of change management approaches and interventions that work for Sales organisations will be very different compared to that for call centres or processing centres. The ability for the change practitioner to adapt locally can make or break an initiative’s success.
Innovation: Different units can experiment with various change approaches, leading to innovative solutions. This can be done without the confines of what is the overarching ‘standards and guidelines’ from the centralised change team.
Choosing the Right Structure
The decision regarding the optimal change management structure should be rooted in the organization’s specific context, culture, and the nature of the changes it is undergoing. Experienced change management specialists understand that a “one-size-fits-all” approach does not exist. Instead, they carefully consider the organization’s goals, resources, and capacity for change.
Also, it may not need to be either centralised or federated model. It can be a combination of both. For examples:
A federated model by reporting lines, however with a strong community of practice that is centralised and that promotes sharing of practices, standards, and even resources. This ensures that the overall group is connected to each other and new innovative approaches can be shared and proliferated
A centralised model by reporting lines, however with dedicated business-specific change partners that are focused on particular business units so that they are delivering business-focused change solutions. At the same time, the team still maintains a lot of the advantages of a centralised team.
The organisational structure and reporting lines for a change practice may influence various aspects of its work, however, this may not be the most critical part of how it creates value for the organisation. Other aspects in which a change practice should focus on in its development include:
Resourcing model. How to fund change management resources and the service delivery model to support a range of different projects with different needs for seniority, skill set, and even organisational tenure
Change methodology/framework. Organisations should work on at least a change management framework to set a minimum standard for change delivery. Using a generic off-the-shelf methodology may be OK, however they may not cater for the particular language and business needs of the organisation.
Change capability and leadership. Outside of project change delivery, the team should also work on gradually building change capability within the organisation to enhance the ability to drive and support change. This may not need to be in the form of training, it can also be done through structured development through real change projects.
Change portfolio/Enterprise change management. Beyond individual change delivery, the change team should also focus on how to deliver and land multiple initiatives at the same time. Most organisations need to drive change at a faster speed than previously and there is no luxury to only focus on one change at a time. How the team measures, tracks, and ‘traffic controls’ the multiple initiatives is crucial for its success.
To read more about managing a change portfolio visit our Change Portfolio Management section for a range of articles.
Change management structures and reporting lines are not just administrative choices; they can, in some ways, have a profound impact on an organization’s ability to achieve successful change outcomes. Experienced change management specialists must weigh the benefits and drawbacks of centralized and federated structures and align them with the specific needs of their organization. By doing so, they can maximize their ability to navigate the complexities of change and drive the organization toward a more agile, resilient, and adaptive future.
Measuring change is no longer a nice to have. It’s a must-have for a lot of organisations. A lot of stakeholders are now demanding to see and understand what is happening in the world of change. With the enhanced volume of change and therefore the increased investment made by the organisations, it’s no wonder.
Why are stakeholders demanding to see change data?
When we look across the room amongst the various disciplines, data forms an integral part of any function. Finance – tick. HR – tick, yes pretty much all aspects of people are tracked and reported. Operations – tick, as we have all types of performance KPIs and efficiency indicators. Technology – tick, since every part of technology can easily be measured and reported. Marketing – tick, as marketing outcomes are tied to revenue and customer sentiments.
With Covid it is even more the case that data is integral. We can no longer ‘walk the factory’ to sense what is happening. To see what is happening and what is going to happen stakeholders revert to data. In our virtual working environment, stakeholders require a constant dashboard of data to track how things are progressing.
Why is measuring change not an activity?
In the past it used to be that measuring change is only something you do in a project when you want to see if stakeholders are ready for the change. No more. Most organisations have a multitude of changes running concurrently. There is no choice to select 1 or 2 changes to roll out. With significant business challenges, most organisations are finding that running with multiple changes is the norm.
With multiple changes, increased stakeholder demands and appetite, measuring change is no longer just an activity. Measuring change takes a set of structured routines. It requires effective governance design. It takes experience and analytical expertise. Most of all, it is not a once-off event, it is a continual building of organisational muscle and capability. We are heading into the world of change analytics capability.
What is change analytics capability and how do I attain this?
Here are 7 core components of building and maturing change analytics capability:
1. Establishing change data management procedures and practices
This is about setting up the right steps in place so that change data can be identified, collected, and documented. This includes identifying the types of change data you would like to collect and how to go about collecting them. It will be easier to start with the core set of data required and then build from these as needed. This will reduce the risk of overwhelming your stakeholders.
After the right metrics and collection channels have been identified then it’s about building the regular routines to collect and document the metrics.
2. Sponsorship and leadership of change analytics
To really reap the value of change analytics you will need to gain the blessing and sponsorship of your leaders. Well, at least in time. In the beginning, you may need some time to come up with compelling data that tell the story that you want them to before you show your leaders. Eventually, without strong leadership buy-in, change data will not be effectively leveraged to make business decisions.
Getting your leaders’ blessing isn’t just a verbal exercise. It means that they are signing-up to regularly review, discuss and utilise change data to realise business value.
3. Build talent and organisation to support change analytics
Think about the various stakeholders and what you need them to understand in terms of change data. The way you educate stakeholders will be different to how you educate operations managers or the PMO. Plot out how you plan to help them get familiar with change data. Do you need particular roles to support data analysis? Is it a Change Analyst who is focused on the regular upkeep and consolidation of change data? What roles do you need other team members to play?
4. Insight generation
With a full set of change data infront of you, it’s now time to dive into them to generate insights. What is the data telling you? How do they support other data sources to form a clear picture of what is happening in the workforce? Is the data accurate and updated? Generating insights from the data takes skills and experience. It takes the ability to integrate different sources of data outside of change data themselves.
5. Insight application
This is about setting up the right routines and processes so that any insights generated may be discussed and applied. It could be through various governance forums, leadership or planning meetings that insights are shared and socialised. An integral part of this step is applying the insight by making business decisions. For example, do we delay the initiative roll out or invest more to support leaders? Are there reasons for us to speed up roll out to support the workforce?
6. Change analytics capability development
Change analytics is a capability.
With good change data emerging, you also need to have the right people with the right skills to collect, process and interpret the data. You may also want to think about which teams need what analytical skills. Do you have people in the team who are sufficiently analytical and data-oriented? Do they know how to interpret the data to form trends and predictions?
You may want to think about organising capability sessions or training to strengthen data analysis skills. Are there members in the different governance bodies that need support to be more confident in using change data?
7. Realising business value through change analytics
The last part of the equation is realising business value through change analytics. This is about tracking and documenting the value realised through using change analytics. It could include incidents where the business decision made has lead to significant risk reduction or operations protection. It could be enhanced leadership confidence mitigating risks in negative customer experience. Tracking value generated is critical to make clear to stakeholders the value of the overall investment.
If you found this article useful please share.
Do you have questions on measuring change for your organisation? Ping us on our chat.
