What one behaviour could you change…

Posted on November 29th, 2011 by Jen

in your business to make the biggest difference to achieving your organisational goals? Great question hey?

Today I attended a terrific Corporate Culture Roundtable led by Carolyn Taylor, founder of the Walking the Talk methodology and including three of the Walking the Talk accredited practitioners. Walking the Talk is an interesting methodology in that takes the theoretical concepts of organisational culture (for example Schein, Quinn & Rohrbaugh, Cameron and Quinn) and translates into a rigorous and practical methodology for changing corporate culture (hence, “walking” the talk).

Quinn and Roehbaugh developed the Competing Values Framework,  which measures an organisation’s effectiveness as defined by the values that are privileged, and therefore the dominant culture.

The values measured in the diagnostic include:

  • Flexibility v control
  • Internal v external focus
  • Adaptability & readiness v stability
  • Growth, acquisition, resource support v information management
  • Productivity & efficiency  v cohesion and morale
  • Goal setting and planning v human resources and training

In Cameron and Quinn’s later book on changing an organisational culture, four archetypes are produced based on the CVF diagnostic and can be used to describe organisations. The four cultural archetypes are:

  • Clan – people focused, employee relations
  • Adhocracy – innovation & entrepreneurship
  • Market – competitive, customer centric
  • Hierarchy – Bureaucratic, process driven

Taylor in her book “Walking the Talk” provides six archetypes to consider in measuring movement from an existing culture to a preferred culture.

  • Achievement
  • Customer centric
  • One team
  • Innovation
  • People first
  • Greater good.

I was particularly cheered to see the Greater Good cultural archetype emerge. Having earlier done work with organisational culture researcher Associate Professor Cameron Newton within The Australian Centre for Philanthropy and Nonprofit Studies we had observed that nonprofits do not always fit the CVF well, and we had started working on instruments that recognised the value sets that are manifested in the Greater Good culture.

I think the most inspiring or exciting aspect of this morning’s workshop was hearing the Walk the Talk practitioners discuss culture change differently to how I have heard it discussed over many years. There tends to be an assumption that organisations can or should shift from one culture to another with little consideration of the implications for subcultures within, or the blunt force required to enforce a new culture. Today I heard a more tempered discussion about bolstering elements of the preferred cultural mix, the importance of honouring the legacy of past cultural foundations, and the need for aligning with strategy and focusing on the one behaviour that will most represent the culture that will drive performance of the strategy.  It was a more nuanced discussion and one that provides confidence in the Walk the Talk practitioners.

A very big thank you to one of the Walking the Talk practitioners Grant Downie of Dynamic Strategies for the invitation to attend and your continued investment in the change management community.

So thinking about your organisation – what one behaviour could be changed that would make the biggest difference to achieving your organisation’s goals?

 

Strategy – is it becoming a lost art?

Posted on November 3rd, 2011 by Jen

This week we are lucky to have a guest post from one of our favourite conversationalists Renae Jones. Renae has a PhD in Management, is an experienced senior change manager and also the Head Coach of the Brisbane Run Squad. Thanks Renae!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

When did strategy become superfluous? When did we skip the strategy and go straight to the plan?

We all know the common cliché – ‘failing to plan is planning to fail’; but what about ‘What’s the use of running, if you are not on the right road’ (German Proverb)

“All men can see these tactics whereby I conquer, but what none can see is the strategy out of which victory is evolved.”  Sun Tzu  [Chinese General and Author, b.500 BC]

I was once exposed to a large program of work where the first, most pressing deliverable was a Change Management Plan?? How can one produce a plan without first having developed, obtained buy-in, and endorsement of the very goals, approach, and principles of the Change Management Strategy for the program?

I observed while the team attempted to construct a plan over many weeks, it was like watching mice in a maze, like people scrambling in the dark, like an under prepared marathon runner. In summary, it was brutal!

I was so disappointed that strategy 101 seemed to have become lost in the pursuit of short term gains around money, budgets, time, and resources. But without the strategy to guide the change management stream, in the long-term, these things will blow out – why? In the words of our famous strategy forefather, Michael Porter

  • Sound strategy starts with having the right goal (without a goal, how can we ensure the plan is on track?).
  • Strategy 101 is about choices: You can’t be all things to all people (without a strategy, how can we guide people’s thinking and demands?).
  • The essence of strategy is that you must set limits on what you’re trying to accomplish (without a strategy, how can we know we have been successful?)

To me it is obvious that without the strategy, you have to wonder how can one produce….

  • A communications plan – is our change strategy open or closed communications? are we able to delivery transparency or do we have industrial relations considerations?
  • An engagement plan – is our change strategy focused on senior management and cascaded engagement or is the organisation better suited to a ground up effort?
  • A training plan – is our strategy to train like for like or is the approach to stimulate learning, growth and new competencies?
  • Benefits realisation plan – if our change plan has no boundaries based on our strategy, how can we possibly predict and measure our benefits?

The principles of strategy can be found as far back as 500BC in the work of Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Sun Tzu and Hannibal and have served to guide us for centuries. So I urge that the next time you embark on a change management journey, that you have a change management strategy to ensure your adventure is a successful and fruitful one!

Your thoughts?

The Tribe Has Spoken

Posted on October 14th, 2011 by Jen

Wednesday evening, the Change Management Professionals Community of Practice met to discuss the impact that professional stereotypes have on how we approach change. Typical of the questions we were curious about were:

  • Do you do things differently with engineers?
  • Is a different style of engagement required for bankers?
  • Does your communication plan change with scientists?

SHK once again gracefully provided the venue and refreshments and we were delighted to have Jenny Vandyke and Janet Barton facilitate the conversation.

thanks to Pearl Sims for photos

I’m not sure we actually got down to the nitty-gritty of how the tactics and tools change per stereotype per se, (we’d have needed another hour) but there was some great insights.

Jenny started the discussion by having us break into small groups and note the common challenges faced when working with professional stereotypes in change.

  • Language & acronyms
  • Capacity to tolerate risk
  • Boundaries
  • Culture
  • Negotiating personal style versus professional style
  • The differing need for evidence or artefacts

All were agreed that the challenge for the person managing change within a unique professional stereotype was to align.

As Neil Middleton so eloquently put it:

We need to be similar enough so that they can trust us, but different enough to be able to encourage change.

At the end of the day, I see professional stereotypes as tribal. They view the ‘other’ with suspicion and in the first 30 days are working out “can I trust you, are you one of us, can we work together or do we need to eat you?”

Jenny then focused the small groups on articulating what it is we do to manage this. Typical of the tactics were matching techniques.

  • Changing voice
  • Adapting wardrobe
  • Being quick to pick up the cultural norms

We were also strong on clarification / translation activities such as reframing the vision.

Much of the real success in working with professional stereotypes came down to the emotional intelligence of the change manager. Those really successful are able to put ego aside, keep confidences when testes, demonstrate empathy and understanding.

As I said, we probably ran out of time on the details of how we work with individual stereotypes. It was noted that IT folk don’t like documentation, engineers handle change when it is presented as a problem to solve, and like direction and details. Perhaps we use the comments for further thoughts on the details. What have you noticed about working with the various stereotypes? Love to hear…

TEDxMelbourne – Innovation 101?

Posted on October 9th, 2011 by Jen

 

 

 

 

 

 

I’ve been processing TEDxMelbourne (I know, scary stuff).

Let me say from the outset it was a terrific day, great value,  most of the speakers were really high quality, the day ran smoothly, and the conversations in the break were rich and plentiful. The team from TEDxMelbourne not only curated some great content, but a really friendly, open and interesting crowd.  This definitely enhanced the experience for me.

The theme was Innovation.  Clearly, with a passion for making change happen this is a topic dear to my heart. But on reflection, I’m not sure there was a lot happening in the content that was innovative. Or provocative. There was a lot that reinforced old truisms of innovation and entrepreneurship.  There was a lot that looked like the content of the  Management, Innovation and Entrepreneurship subjects I was teaching 10 years ago. Perhaps polished up a bit with some fresh examples.  There was a lot that was 101 stuff.

Or was there? Maybe my immediate observation is simply an examples that what is defined as innovative is clearly a perception based definition. If it is new to you, then it will be exciting and innovative. If you have seen / heard it before than it is “101″ albeit well delivered “101″.

I say this at the risk of sounding overly dismissive. That’s not my intent. Within each presentation there was at least one nugget that could spark a seriously creative and innovation focused conversation! And that adds up to a whole lot more than Innovation 101!

There was only one standout for me in a TED-esque way  – the presentation by Simon Griffiths, founder of Shebeen and Who Gives A Crap. This for me represented  ideas worth spreading.

But in the break, I was talking with a friend who didn’t think there was anything particularly new about it. She had just completed studies in social enterprises. More 101.

So I guess the take-away at a meta level, when launching an innovative service or product, and newness matters, do your research. I know. All bit “101″ ; – )

The other presentation that is still niggling at me is Annalie Killian’s presentation. Annalie’s intent (as I understood it) was to provoke with a thesis that suggested that continuous and hyper connectivity reduces creativity. To bolster / re-engage creativity one needs to tap back into a ‘maker’ environment eg make things (craft, cooking, film, music, art, dinner parties).  Again, this is 101 for me. For me, when I am too much “in my head” (which continuous connection can be), I need to circuit break with something physical  and tactile. For me, cooking, and drawing is my creative expression.  And I said as much over drinks afterwards — “no, doesn’t relate to me. I know how to disconnect”.  But an insidious little thought kept creeping in. “That’s what you say, what would your family say? Your friends?”.

In the same way that innovation has an element of perceptual definition, does the hyperconnectivity / creativity paradox have one too? Is there a dimension of perceived creativity eg self measured v peer measured?

As I said, it’s niggling. So while I may not have found the initial thesis provocative — it’s had a slow burn for me. Kudos Annalie.

And what would you know. It’s 9.am on a Sunday morning. I am online and blogging.  Make of that what you will…

28 TEDxCanberra take-aways

Posted on September 26th, 2011 by Jen

for business and career change…

 

Last weekend I was proud to be one of the TEDxCanberra partners. Last year was my first experience of a TEDx and I was struck by the power of the format and the calibre of the speakers / presenters. I love that within one day you will get exposed to many ideas that make a difference and are worth spreading. They start really exciting Conversations of Change!

This weekend was no different to my first experience – crammed with snippets of wisdom, wisps of ideas, and threads of inspiration. What’s really cool is that everybody has a different take on what resonates and over the next few weeks you will see various posts and reviews on ideas that are worth spreading.

Without further ado – here are 28 take-aways I distilled from my post-TEDxCanberra debrief that can be applied to your business or career (and have been applied here).

Who: Pierre Johanneson

What: Assumption of shared values. Question what is it you are doing when you want to be doing more? Go simple, connect with community.

1)   Test the assumptions you have about your community

2)   You are living in the others world. It is not about you.

Who: Thomas Pogge

What: 10/90 ratio on funding of medical commercialisation. Fund on impact.

3)   Can you price on impact, rather than activity?

Who: Annette Zhou and Richard Dear

What: Multidisciplinary is cool to students. What is your catalyst for desired outcomes? Curiosity driven engagement

4)   What is old hat to you (e.g. multidisciplinary) might be new to others (e.g. students). What are you doing that you take for granted that might be exciting to a new audience

5)   Can you shift the focus on employee engagement to curiosity

6)   Think about adoption of change from a catalyst perspective (not just an enabler)

Who: Christopher McDougall

What: Pain in running is a modern day affliction.

7)   Who’s in my pack?

8)   Am I chasing the antelope alone?

Who: Emma Magenta / Phillipa Finch

What: Unencumbered self-expression, tapping into the state of the emotional state of the child.

9)   Do you need to take another “state” to be more expressive?

10)  Try writing / drawing with the non dominant hand to let stuff out

Who: Stephen Coleman

What:  Non-lethal weapons introduced to be used only in the situation where police would shoot a gun.  2226 cases of non-lethal weapon usage recorded in Queensland. Police are trained to de-escalate. What then would military do with the non-lethal weapons?

11)   Presentations need a call to action.  This was a really interesting presentation, but some of audience left with “so what”

Who: Rebecca Scott

What: the amplifying effect of little informed choices. Choice matters

12)         What little choices do we make as managers that could have an amplifying effect e.g. saying “Thank you”, or acknowledging

13)         Employees’ choice is currency. Spend it wisely

Who: Michael Engemann and Damien Tonkin

What: Energy, enthusiasm, and chutzpah

14)         How do you best use three minutes with customers, employees and managers?

Who: BoHo Interactive

What: Fantastic interactive explanation of game theory and complex systems

15)          Quit while you are ahead! ( This was an awesome presentation – however, the guys lost 5 minutes of content because the visual gimmick carried on too long – mind you that might have been an embedded cue re complex systems, eg too much input and you become overwhelmed and don’t understand!)

Who: Nick Ritar

What: two small things everyone can do every day to make a difference to Australian environment. We have disengaged from nature. The problem is in the solution. A call to policy makers, educators, and designers

16)         Great example of persuasive comms – a call to action with easy changes

17)          Start small to make big changes

18)         Give everyone a role in the change you wish to create

Who: Mary-Anne Waldron

What: If someone says you can’t you have to wonder what’s in it for them to be so interested. Tell me who you walk with and I’ll tell you who you are. Sometimes we need to do big things to get big change. The pendulum is about to swing back to collaboration

19)         Focus on your collaborators and who you need to collaborate with

20)          Ignore the naysayers

Who: Sam Perry

What: AIME success founded on 40 hours of university experience for the students, presenting old messages in new ways. Indigenous success = Australian success. Offering a touch point for non-indigenous Australians.

21)         Make the strange familiar

22)         Make change same but different

23)         Respect, humility and curiosity = a catalyst for possibility

Who: Rafe Morris

What: Great singer / songwriter

24)          Laugh at the mundane.

Who: Sam Prince

What: Expand your life to the limits of your mind. Understand what is a right and what is a responsibility. You can disempower by not knowing. Just because people are poor doesn’t mean they are good. Business is a race between times and will. Trust and relationships matter. If you have a dream, there are people around you who can help every day.  People are vicariously chasing their dreams and will do so through you.

25)          Share dreams

26)          Ask for help

27)          Trust matters

Who: Matt Noffs

What: Do not hide in the delusion that only special people make change. Does the welfare sector have a welfare mentality?  The discourse of sustainability implies plateau. Using the discourse of generative implies renewable resources and growth.

28) How do we produce a generative product?

Well there you go! As I said, these take-aways that resonated for me and that could be applied to business and career change.  A very big congratulations to all of those at TEDxCanberra who produced this fabulous day.

I’ll be heading to TEDxMelbourne – if the day is half as content rich as this one, we are a lucky country indeed.  Anyway, love to hear what resonated for you and how you would apply to your career / workplace? Do share…

PS — there are some great shots of the day from the Flickr pool  — once I work out how to embed a few I will!

Want to de-brief your TEDxCanberra experience?

Posted on September 22nd, 2011 by Jen

 

We do!

In the spirit of TEDxCanberra, Reflections, Predictions and Happenings, Conversations of Change is offering a mini post-event retreat to allow you to process the highlights of the day in context of the business and career challenges you are currently facing.

We will facilitate a debrief with a small group (up to eight) of TEDxCanberra participants and reflect on the highlights and emergent insights of the day before, help each other predict which ideas can make a difference, and develop immediate action plans to make these ideas and insights happen.

If available and interested you will need to bring:

  • a spirit of inquiry
  • an open mind
  • a willingness to engage in respectful conversations
  • a desire to consider a new course of action

Typically, Conversations of Change retreats involve participants revealing challenges within either business or career life that others can contribute observations, experiences and ideas to. For this reason Chatham House Rules apply.

Attendance is free, but spaces are limited to eight so if you’d like to come along please register. If you are from interstate and already organized travel on Sunday yet keen to so do similar in Melbourne, Sydney or Brisbane let us know – we can arrange similar there as well and extend your TEDxCanberra experience.

Date: Sunday 25th September, 2011

Time: 1.00 – 4.30

Venue: details provided on registration

Conversations of Change is a proud partner of TEDxCanberra

Perception is reality

Posted on September 13th, 2011 by Jen

Thought I would touch on the topic of perceived control this time.

Perceived control is a very important construct in acceptance of change.  So often you hear that people just don’t like change.  I take issue with that. People don’t mind change if managed or introduced well. But that often means ensuring that the employee involved has some perceived control.

So what is it and why does it matter?

Perceived control is your perception of your  ability to be effective in the world.  It reflects the degree to which you believe a situation is controllable and that you have necessary skills and ability to make a difference to the outcome of a situation.

The basic theories suggest that the higher the degree of perceived control, the better your physical and mental health and ability to adapt to change. Take away perceived control and people retreat to coping mechanism that are not as useful as others. If you perceive you have some control when faced with a stressful situation (like some organisational change) you move towards problem focused coping strategies 9as opposed to emotional coping strategies).  If you want avoid performance dips, consider the degree of perceived control.

Does the type of change matter?

The studies suggest so. High perceived control leads to higher performance and organisational commitment in survivors of layoffs ,  greater success in diffusion of innovations, and openness to change in reorganizations.

How can you boost perceived control?

  • Consult employees before making decisions or introducing change
  • Ask for their thoughts on how to introduce the change
  • Avoid random processes
  • Provide as much information as early as possible
  • Assist in bolstering skills and abilities to cope with the intended changes
  • Provide your teams with opportunities to make collective sense of the change

Of course perception is a tricky thing. It’s influenced by locus of control, negative / positive disposition, and past experience.  Your employees will have varying degrees of perceived control when faced with the same change. It’s why one-size-fits all processes rarely work.

Having said all this, caution is advised in trying to manipulate perceived control for an easier change outcome. Trying to control perception will reduce trust and commitment. As one friend sagely noted “you can’t control someone’s perception, but you can help to shape it”. Let’s just hope it’s not a case of shape up, or ship out!

 

 

Change is Hard

Posted on September 4th, 2011 by Jen

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Guest Post by Julieanne Dimitrios

I know why people don’t like change… it’s hard. It means you have to stop doing something you are familiar with, move to something that’s different; and in the process of changing, you have to make sure that everything is aligned with the new world.

I recently dropped a perfume bottle in my bathroom sink, leaving a nasty hole in my shiny, white porcelain. As I looked at it aghast, I thought, ‘this isn’t going to be easy to change’. I’ve got a double vanity, semi-recessed sink, cut out beautifully into a stone bench top. I was right, it wasn’t easy to change.

Here’s a few reasons I think change is hard:

1)    End-to-end thinking: In order to change, you need to understand the way the entire situation currently operates. This may mean you get distracted by analysing several ‘tentacles’ of the current situation – so you may have thought the change is isolated to one particular thing, but when you look at it, there are several other things that also need to be changed to effect the new situation.

In my bathroom renovation, I soon discovered that I couldn’t match the sink, so both sinks had to go. Then, the style of taps had changed; so while my old taps were on the bench, the new sinks had the taps on the sink itself. And then the taps could only be a certain height because there was limited clearance for the cupboard above.

Assessing the end-to-end situation meant new things needed to change that weren’t obvious at the outset. In many organisations, most staff may not understand the entire end-to-end situation, so it can be difficult for a change practitioner to find all the ‘tentacles’.

2)    Desire to change: Mostly, people don’t want to change. They like the familiar (because it’s easy), and don’t want to think about all the things that will need to change to effect the new situation.

In my bathroom renovation, I didn’t want to fix my sink; I still liked the old one. But I had no choice. The change was forced on me; so my desire to change was low.

This happens regularly in organisations where the change is forced on the organisation, for example as a result of a regulatory change. The organisation would prefer not to change, but they have no choice but to be compliant.

3)     Effort is needed to make the change work: To make the new situation take effect, there is work involved. In organisations, this may translate to recruiting new staff and training them; writing new policies, procedures, or work practices; communicating and more communicating; changing systems, reports, financials, or data storage; and generally just plain work!

In my bathroom renovation, it translated to five visits to my house, being ‘sink-less’ for a couple of weeks, and several tradesmen traipsing dust and water through my house. But am I happy with the change? Yes, I am.

Have you found change hard lately? 

Change Agents v Change Managers

Posted on August 17th, 2011 by Jen

Recently on the Change Management Professionals LinkedIn Group, Graeme Bowman asked the question (paraphrased) “what is the difference between a change agent and a change manager?”  It was a good question coming from Graham – he’s one of life’s ‘accidental’ change communicators. A hoax comedian and corporate comedian he is often brought in to introduce some of the C-suite’s key changes in an amusing and sometimes disarming way!

The answers from the group produced some interesting insights. The change manager is most often the person charged with introducing the change and made responsible for its success. I’ve provided a couple of posts previously on the definition of change managers.

The change agent however as the participants in the discussion saw it, is the initiator of change  — the person who introduces and champions the new idea. Additionally, the change agent is responsible for taking the activity into Business As Usual (e.g. post change activity).

Everett Rogers in his change bible The Diffusion of Innovations (1962) describes a change agent, as ‘an individual who influences client’s innovation –decisions in a direction deemed desirable by a change agency’. Critically, ‘the change agent not only seeks to obtain the adoption of new ideas, but may also attempt to slow down diffusion and prevent the adoption of undesirable innovations’. (p. 28). Further, in contrast to the ideas above of the change agent as part of the business, Rogers saw the change agent as being different to the client (eg. by experience, education and social system)

Charles Hardman provided a fascinating example of change capability building by distributed change agents in a previous organisation:

… We consciously made every employee an ‘agent of change’ and including ‘change’ as a key result area on everyone’s performance reviews. Our view was that every employee was responsible for solutions. 

I appreciate that this isn’t necessarily how it all worked in practice, but it did allow us to be very clear with our expectations; whilst providing the opportunity to every employee to make things better. i.e. employee engagement. 

Likewise, we had no long-term appointed change managers – rather we had people who had a ‘manage change’ key result area

It’s an interesting approach – one that would require significant change maturity within the business.

So what your thoughts? How do you define a change agent within your organisation?

Why I won’t be making the move to Google + just yet

Posted on July 12th, 2011 by Jen

googleplus.jpg

So at the end of June, I got my first invite to Google +. Actually I got three simultaneously.  I had heard about the new offering a little earlier and understood it was Google’s approach to world domination via social networking and was here to decimate Facebook, and possibly Twitter, maybe LinkedIn

So I logged on / in and had a bit of a play.  Not much, because I couldn’t see much to play with.  I asked my connections what should I do with it. Mel Pay kindly pointed me to her analytic post on the benefits. It’s going to be a corker because it integrates with Google Apps. That didn’t work for me – I find Google apps a bit difficult to use. Don’t ask me why, I’m normally good with these things!

Jason Berek Lewis told me he liked it as it meant he could partition his different interest groups and differentiate the messaging.

More contacts mean better use of Circles to segment messages you send out over the Google+ network. That’s what attracts me to Google+ – I can easily send different messages to Family, Professional Contacts, Healthcare Comms/Social Media contacts, etc.

That made me sad. What group would I be placed in? Would I still see his Proud Papa messages, his geeky comic references? I don’t work in health care but I quite enjoy occasional posts on health care. They make me think and educate me. Ring-fencing by interest seemed exclusionary and well, not social.  As some-one who works with organisations I borrow from biologists, neuropsychs, sociologists and economists to do the things I do. Would being segmented into other people’s perceptions of what circle I should be in reduce my access to multi-disciplinary ideas?

Robert Scoble posts on how Google + won’t take off with “normal” people. It’s for serious geeks. And as some-one who has always been kind of an outlier, it’s kinda cool to be in the average range.

But he is right. The switching costs are simply too high for the average person. Because we have invested so much on other platforms. I’ve already segmented – business colleagues / acquaintances and tailored status updates on LinkedIn. Interesting people on Twitter. Real friends and occasional family members on Facebook.

Social media apostasy requires a step change innovation / benefit.

And I just don’t see it with Google +. It is incremental at best – for the average user. At least at this stage.

And I’m not seeing as much social behavior on Google +, it’s all very broadcast. I have to say all of those people who I don’t know who are adding me to circles? Freaking me out. Nothing social going on there. Which is very odd I know, because I don’t get freaked out by people following me on Twitter. Once again I feel the need to yell, ” I am not a baseball card to be collected!!”

Of course the parallels to the early stage adoption of Twitter, and if I recall, Facebook are similar. You have to use it more to get it. People were tweeting what they had for breakfast before they engaged in real conversations with followers.  Of course conversation is not the only valid social behavior online – there’s always room for observation and lurking.

People need to trust you’ll be around long enough to engage with you in a social fashion. And it is only in Beta stage.

But you tell me, what am I missing. What do you see as the step change innovation that will bring an average user along? Bring a business along. Change social media faith. Help me see the light. Because G+ whizz I just don’t see it for now…