1. Organizational Culture

Imagine a day when your leader announces a major change to take place on Monday. You had no prior knowledge, you received no further detail, you had not been involved in the discussions and decisions leading up to this moment. The desired outcome and indicators of success have not been mentioned. You have no access to the reasons why the change is happening, nor what will be required of you. Due to this reality, it is likely your confidence levels would decrease when it comes to leading others through the change.

Organizational Culture can be a great source of resistance if this description typifies the way a company operates, and seems beyond the sphere of influence of middle managers.

2. Lack of Awareness and Knowledge about the Change

Adults are babies in big bodies. We know that a child will always ask ‘why’; so too an adult, as this provides the reasons for the need to change and also the consequences of not changing. Through receiving that information, a middle manager would also understand more about the nature of the change. Yet, even with Awareness (the ‘why’ of change), there is still a need for greater depth to Knowledge (the ‘how to’ of change). 

• Imagine a Chef who has been told to change the pie menu, yet not given the recipe nor an understanding of why the prior item is ‘off the menu’.
• Imagine an Accountant who has been informed by the CFO the accounting system is currently outdated and must change, yet provided no insights into its failings and what is required to close the gaps.
• Imagine the IT Officer’s app has just been scrapped, with no reasons being shared, and no idea or direction as to how to evolve to a higher standard.
• Imagine the HR Officer receiving a directive to change the company’s uniform with no understanding of the what, why or new priorities.

The ‘why’ and ‘how to’ of change is imperative for a middle manager as it will fill in the blanks, opening the pathway to clarity, and further action.

Lack of Buy-In

We’re back to middle managers being real people, with real human needs first and foremost. You are a real person too, and consciously or unconsciously filter any change requests through your values, opinions, background experiences, history and credibility of the sender, and the list goes on. When something does not align to your realm of reality, why would you accept to adopt any change?

A middle manager is almost superhuman, stuck between those above (often out of touch with what’s really happening on the ground) and those below (who depend heavily on the one closest to them for support). Being there for both parties is a balancing act for any middle manager – how long could you continue to serve all those around you, compromising the very core of what matters most to yourself? 

Many moons ago, my mentor taught me to behold resistance, grab it and serve it; after all, it is only showing up to be heard. It simply wants attention, answers and opportunity for  alignment. 

If you lead a middle manager:

• Anticipate, and provide for the needs of the manager during change, before resistance shows up.
• Provide the what, why and how of change, so the puzzle is as complete as possible. 
• Allow time for the manager to process and explore the WIFM (What’s In It For Me) factor.
• Walk alongside the middle manager during change, providing consistent and relevant support.

The post The Top Three Reasons why Middle Managers struggle with Change @ Work appeared first on business en motion.

Leaders are always curios about the need for Change Management. To appreciate the below insights, it would help to have full understanding of what Change Management is. 

• According to Prosci®, on a project level, Change Management is the application of a structured process and set of tools to achieve a desired outcome. On an enterprise level, Change Management is a leadership competency and strategic enabler. 
• According to APMG®, Change Management is an emergent profession and organizational capability. It is a business discipline focused on navigating change by exploring key questions which will influence the adoption and acceptance of change.
• According to a mentor, Change Management is a business profession that impacts business as usual.

Why structured?

• Structure holds things together. It provides strength. It arranges positioning for all elements to excel. 

Why a set of tools?

• Tools build items which cannot otherwise exist. Tools enable action. 

Why desired outcomes?

• Desired outcomes are what we aim for. They provide direction and make us feel great once reached. Desired outcomes are best when tangible and measurable.

Why 'the people side of things'?

• People are not machines that can be programmed, but rather are bodies of emotions that will create willingness and desire against their own criteria.

Why a competency? 

• Competencies provide evidence of performance, with strong capability, belief and conviction.

Why a business discipline?

• Discipline maintains consistency, demonstrating a degree of conviction to action. Business disciplines provide efficiency and effectiveness. In the case of change, this translates into 'faster and better' adoption of usage.

Is the need now clear? Without structure to hold change up or connect its elements, without tools to enable change, without desired outcomes setting a clear set of priorities, without discipline and conviction, people can and will take different paths, hold different priorities, work in different ways and drive the organization towards different destinations.

Any and all successful change outcomes are linked to a dependency on people’s adoption and usage. How does your P&L line reflect your need and priority for Change Management? How can your leadership survive without its capability?

.

The post Why does my organization need Change Management? appeared first on business en motion.

introduction

The Business Planning Process is at the core of all business. Or is it?

Commonly, substitutes exist. Lists of prioritised action plans, documented reorganisations or a set of goals or highly-organised budgeted figures have been interpreted and submitted as Business Plans.

What has been missing is a commitment to a contextualisation process to which decisions may align, and will support the ‘red thread’ connectivity throughout the entire plan.

Common sense tells any intrepid traveller a plan will map out the way forward. Perhaps this may be where the confusion lies. A map will only be useful if we contextualise where we are standing right now, in relation to come where we have come from. The map will also help us ascertain which paths helped us to get to where we are now, and which we may never need to use again, given that they did not contribute to our destination.

So too, any successful business leader needs to be connected to the past. Taking a snapshot of where he’s been, what has happened in the past whilst incorporating beliefs of the future will help decide what to bring into the future and what to leave behind.

Has the intrepid traveller ever inquired as to the reason he is walking that path at all? Has he ever formalised which part of the map he wishes to ‘explore and conquer’?

So too, any successful business leader reflects on the reason for doing business, along with the business battle field and weapons to use.

This essential contextualisation process of any business plan, and the subsequent connection of its meaning into the forward action can often be judged as irrelevant, unimportant, as that itself will not produce the revenues!

So what sort of leader will see great value in the contextualisation element of a business plan?

• One who is connected! Connected, aware and present with the world around, the people around, the change happening around!
• One who believes that there is no right or wrong decision, yet forges business-promoting decisions upon past, present and beliefs for the future.
• One who doesn’t have the answers, yet knows the questions to ask, and is willing to gain input from those closest and those furthest from the issue.
• One who constantly pushes the boundaries, who takes insights and reflections from the changing world around
• One who is interested in sustainable results, and not the ‘quick buck’ rule
• One who may even look at the money as an enabler to find meaning! In this chaotic world, how much value can common sense add to a Business Plan?

Debbie Nicol, Managing Director of Dubai-based ‘business en motion‘, and creator and author of the ‘embers of the world‘ series, is passionate about change. She works with both traditional and contemporary toolkits that move businesses and executive leaders ahead, whilst working on leader and organizational development, strategic change and corporate cultures.

The post Just because it’s common sense, doesn’t mean it’s common practice! appeared first on business en motion.

introduction

Working in the arena of change is both challenging and rewarding. It is often said that during change, workplaces can feel as if it’s 3 steps forward, then 4 back. And in those ‘4 steps back’ times, sometimes referred to as the ‘knock-on effect’ from change, what are three suggested actions to take?

Changes in the workplace will result in a knock-on effect, thereby facilitating further impact from the change.

Take the example of BYOD, a dilemma that some organizations are facing currently. For those who live in a non-geek world, BYOD stands for ‘bring your own device’, which results in individuals using their own devices in workplaces. What a great idea; less company capital investment, more responsible ownership of technology by individuals, higher degree of happiness (just look at the faces of Apple users when this corporate decision is taken) and the list continues.

Yet with that one change of BYOD comes more change; the 4 steps back! Some of the knock-on effects will be anticipated and prepared for whilst others occupy the realm of the unknown or unexpected! For example, if the workplace culture is one of separating personal from corporate, how does one truly know when work is underway? How will the workplace represent only that which it agrees to or could a person’s social media choices place the organization at risk? Is that healthy? absolutely yes, because change should not be an activity or event but ongoing process for the business and the people! Change will always cascade, providing opportunity for ongoing further change.

How can one ensure that a resulting knock-on effect from a change is welcomed? In other words how can we build change as a competency in our organizations and people?

Talk and ‘be’ change at every possible opportunity. Challenge the people to find opportunities to change before having to react to change. Ask the team to anticipate ’cause and effect’ of change.

Build ‘change’ into your communication forums and techniques. For example, add the topic of change to the weekly or monthly agenda, and share the responsibility for all to apply that section to something they would like to see changed, and be willing to spearhead. Encourage them to present a business case for the change and to identify roles for which they’d like assistance. Add a new ‘award’ to those currently existing, possibly recognizing the individual who embraced or anticipated change in the best possible way that month.

At a special occasion eg the 20th anniversary of the company, challenge people to pictorially represent the company’s milestones of success and link them to changes that were taken.

When building change into an organization as a leadership competency and priority, not only does it allow us to cope with knock-on effects of change, but even design them in the name of continuous improvement.

The post a change that brings more change! appeared first on business en motion.