Mapping Projects Against Commitment. It takes a drawing to see how the roll-out plan of an ERP implementation and the stages of commitment go hand in hand. Building further on last week’s post about Daryl Conner’s 8 stages of commitment, I forgot to tell that there is another good use we can make of this model. Now that we have checked the phases and thresholds against the stages of social architecture, it’s time to see how they can be a guideline throughout our projects.
In the below drawing I have attempted to match the 8 stages of commitment on the typical project phases of an ERP roll-out. Some remarkable conclusions can be made when we look at that drawing: The phases of project setup and design are both below the disposition threshold and the level of commitment we can expect during those phases goes no further than contact or awareness (reality check: I have known this to be true in my world).
Implications for Practitioners Using the Burning-Platform Metaphor | Conner Partners. With the previous three posts as a foundation, the following implications may be helpful for change practitioners who wish to use the burning-platform metaphor in their work. 1. When real burning-platform urgency is at hand (due to either current or anticipated problems or opportunities), it means people believe the penalty for not realizing the intended outcomes is significantly higher than the investment for doing so. - Current problems attract attention more easily but they usually provide only limited options. When the flames are imminent, people will be highly motivated to change.
. - Anticipated opportunities are the hardest to convince people to accept because it often looks as if something is being fixed that isn’t broken. . - Timing is important. . - With true business imperatives, commitment is inevitable…the issue is whether the determination to take action will come forward in time to be meaningful. 2. . - Fear is a symptom, not a cause, of a status quo too expensive to maintain. 3. The Beliefs that Built a Global Brewer - James Allen. By James Allen | 11:52 AM April 27, 2012 Anheuser Busch InBev (AB InBev) announced its annual financial results this month and they are impressive, especially for a company with roots as a small brewer in Sao Paolo, Brazil.
Now the largest beer company in the world, AB InBev reported a double digit EBITDA growth rate and almost 30% growth in earnings per share. And yet, in announcing those numbers, management confessed: “We know we can do better. A fundamental part of our culture is never entirely being satisfied with our results: we always challenge ourselves to dream bigger and achieve more.” That’s AB InBev in a nutshell: a relentless focus on achieving bottom line results, coupled with a ‘desire to dream.’ Observers tend to overlook the “dream” talk and chalk up AB InBev’s extraordinary success to its relentless cost cutting culture. In 1989, a group of investors led by Marcel Telles purchased Brahma, then the number two brand of beer in Brazil.
Something was working at AmBev. Change Is Easy When People Like It, Right? | Change Thinking. In the previous post, I described resistance to change as a natural reaction to a disruption in expectations as well as feeling a loss of control. As such, resistance accompanies all major change. It doesn’t matter whether it is self-initiated or invoked by others, or if the change is perceived as positive or negative.
It’s beneficial for clients if practitioners can frame something that is inevitable in a way that can be leveraged into an advantage for realizing change objectives. In that regard, this series is devoted to focusing on how resistance can be used to foster commitment to intended outcomes rather than inhibit change progress. Three Frameworks for Understanding Resistance One way we can help clients leverage resistance to their advantage is to provide them with frameworks to understand what’s in play when people oppose major change initiatives.
There’s An Emotional Response to Positively Perceived Change Phase I—Uninformed Optimism Phase II—Informed Pessimism Phase V—Completion. Organization - Change Management articles from McKinsey Quarterl. Quantifying the cost of not changing | Improvement and Innovatio. The need for improvement and change in most organisations is apparent, and targets can be set. But what are the costs of not changing? This article investigates… As business leaders a large proportion of time these days is spent in assessing the need for change, costs associated with these changes and then deciding do we go or “no-go”. Because the cost of change is fairly easily determined by adding the foreseeable components to come up with a total, here we will discuss the costs of remaining in the current status quo, and as we will find this cost can be difficult to quantify in a spreadsheet and trade off diagrams.
The motivation for change arises when we observe our current results as no longer being sufficient to meet our needs. While this may seem obvious and simple do not believe for a moment that this means it is quick or easy. Take the time now to consider the change that your organisation is in the process of undertaking or considering. Why? Or worse still “quick, work harder.” Why HR Really Does Add Value - Brian Hults. In light of today’s economic volatility and uncertainty every aspect of business is being re-examined for its value in creating and sustaining profitable growth. I’ve worked in human resources for over 25 years, the past six with Newell Rubbermaid, and this is not a new endeavor for me. Throughout my career, I have consistently faced the question, “How does HR add value in a business?” In many cases, this question is not asked politely. Adding legitimacy to this skepticism are new technologies that enable automation of routine transactions, offshoring and shared service organizations that specialize in managing many tactical elements of HR.
In this world flush with cheaper ways to fulfill traditional HR tasks, is HR becoming obsolete? Early in my career I was fortunate to help a large manufacturer and distributor of construction and agricultural equipment change the way it went to market in North America. Five Questions That Should Shape Any Change Program - Scott Keller and Colin Price. By Scott Keller and Colin Price | 11:48 AM December 2, 2011 Most organizations will shrink or disappear in the long term: only a third of excellent companies remain excellent for decades, and when organizations try to transform themselves, even fewer succeed. But as economic, political, social, and technological change continue to accelerate, and competitive pressure grows more intense, leaders can’t afford those odds.
The likeliest way to overcome them, we found as we wrote Beyond Performance, is to address the underlying problem: organizations that focus too much on short-term financial performance, at the expense of organizational health, are those that most typically need transformational change; but, unfortunately, the change programs they create are similarly shortsighted. Change programs that succeed, we’ve seen, put an equal emphasis on both performance and health in answering five basic questions that should shape any change program. 1) Where do we want to go? 4. 5. Change Management Learning Center - Prosci. Organization and Change. Methods, Models and Theories.
What makes a good change agent? - Management Portal. What Makes a Good Change Agent? Dagmar Recklies Change processes and change projects have become major milestones in many organizations’ history. Due to the dynamics in the external environment, many organizations find themselves in nearly continuous change. The scope reaches from smaller change projects in particular sub business units up to corporation-wide transformation processes. Unfortunately, not every change process leads to the expected results.
In the light of the many problems and risks associated with change projects, the change agent has a very important function. The following article describes required capabilities of good change agents. Depending on these factors, change agents either may need good project management capabilities in order to guarantee timely progress, or they should be good leaders with the ability to motivate people. Jim Canterucci defines change leaders on five levels. Levels of Change Leadership Skills, derived from Jim Canterucci: Objectives 1. 2. 3. 4. Elisabeth Goodman's Blog | Enhancing team effectiveness through process improvement, knowledge management and change management.
Skate where the Organizational Change Puck will be. Atul Gawande: How Do Good Ideas Spread? Why do some innovations spread so swiftly and others so slowly? Consider the very different trajectories of surgical anesthesia and antiseptics, both of which were discovered in the nineteenth century. The first public demonstration of anesthesia was in 1846. The Boston surgeon Henry Jacob Bigelow was approached by a local dentist named William Morton, who insisted that he had found a gas that could render patients insensible to the pain of surgery. That was a dramatic claim. On October 16, 1846, at Massachusetts General Hospital, Morton administered his gas through an inhaler in the mouth of a young man undergoing the excision of a tumor in his jaw.
Four weeks later, on November 18th, Bigelow published his report on the discovery of “insensibility produced by inhalation” in the Boston Medical and Surgical Journal. There were forces of resistance, to be sure. Sepsis—infection—was the other great scourge of surgery. Far from it. But anesthesia was no easier.