When we’re trying to make a change, it’s not just ourselves we need to think about. We are all part of many systems. Other people have an interest in what we do and are affected by our decisions. Which means they’ll also expect to have a say or be told about what you’re planning. And they can help or hinder whatever change you’re trying to make.
In organisations we talk about having stakeholders – a stakeholder is any person or group that has a vested interest in what you do and who can affect or be affected by it.
A useful exercise is to list all your stakeholders and identify what they want or need from you or your organisation. You might be surprised how long this list gets. For organisations the stakeholders will be internal (employees, executives) and external (eg customers, investors, suppliers, the government, the community etc).
But you can do this as an individual, too. Imagine you want to make a change – let’s say, switch careers. List all the people who are affected by that decision or who have a vested interest in what you do. It could be your partner and immediate or extended family who are directly affected. There’s also your current organisation, your manager and your colleagues. Then your friends and wider network as they are used to your current work routine and identity. And potentially more! These people might be happy with your career switch, or they might not and try to persuade you down a different road.
So knowing who your stakeholders are and what they want/need from you is the first step so you can engage with them over the change. But some stakeholders may be more affected by the change than others, so you need to focus your efforts in getting them on board with your change. I’ll talk about how in the next post…
There’s another handy model for seeing how easy or difficult your planned change is going to be. It’s this:
D x V x F > R
Let me explain. This equation was developed by Beckhard and Harris (1977, 1987) building on work from Gleicher. It summarises the three things they state are necessary for change to occur.
Dissatisfaction (D). There needs to be dissatisfaction with the current situation. Is it bad enough that people recognise that something has to change?
Vision (V). People need to have a clear vision of a different future which is better than the current situation.
First steps (F). People are able to see the practical actions they can take as first steps in the change journey. There’s no point having a clear vision without having feasible steps to get there.
The other side of the equation is Resistance (R). I’ve explained before that change is potentially threatening so it’s human and natural to resist change.
If the combined strength of the 3 factors on the left hand side of the equation is greater than the existing resistance to change, the change will happen.
The beauty of writing this as an equation is you can immediately see that all three elements are required for change to occur. If D or V or F are zero, the left hand side of the equation will be zero, and this tells you you’re unlikely to overcome the natural resistance to any change.
Being aware that these three factors are necessary for change can be very helpful. Just like Force Field Analysis, this can be used as a decision making tool. Is it worth trying to make the change if one or more of these factors is absent? It can also then highlight where you need to focus your attention. For example:
if you’re trying to introduce a change in an organisation or group and there is little dissatisfaction with the status quo, how can you create or increase this? Can you highlight what’s wrong or how it could be better, to create this dissatisfaction?
If people are dissatisfied with the current situation but don’t know how it could be better, do you need to focus on communicating the vision?
And if the issue is not being aware of the actions to take, how can you work with people to create feasible action plans?
So this simple equation can be very helpful to keep in mind when you’re trying to make a change. Or if you’re struggling to make a change, it might give you some insight as to why.
References
Beckhard, R. F. and Harris, R. T. (1987) Organizational Transitions: Managing complex change, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley
Whether you’re trying to make a change as an individual, or trying to lead a team or organisation through a change, you want to know what you’re up against. You want to know how easy or difficult it’s going to be, and how you can put the odds in favour of making the change.
There are a couple of tools that may be helpful here. The first is Force Field Analysis, which developed from Kurt Lewin’s work in the 1940s and ‘50s.
Lewin posited that our current situation (the status quo) is maintained by the forces acting on us, and any change in our behaviour stems from changes in these forces. Our environment is constantly changing, so the forces acting on us are constantly changing and we adapt.
Lewin suggested that if you could establish what these forces were, you could understand what forces needed to be diminished or strengthened to bring about change.
So a force field analysis is a way of visually representing the forces that support or act as obstacles to any proposed change.
Here’s what to do:
Identify the change you’re proposing. Then,
Brainstorm/list all forces that are pushing for the change (the driving forces) or preventing the change (the restraining forces)
Draw a diagram like the one above. On the left side side list the driving forces, on the right the restraining forces.
Consider the strength of each of the forces. You can either represent this visually, by drawing larger or smaller arrows (as above). Or another way is to give each force a value from 1 (low) to 5 (high)
Look at the balance for each side. If using scores, add up the score for each side to get a total.
You should have something like this:
If the forces for change are higher than the forces against the change, you are likely to be successful in making the change. The change above looks likely to succeed, as 16>12. However, if the forces against are higher, you’re likely to struggle.
So this tool is often used for decision making – is it worth trying to make the change at all? Are the forces against too strong to make the attempt?
Now comes the important part.
Brainstorm how you can either increase the driving forces, or decrease the restraining forces, so you have a better chance of the change being successful. (NB Focus on reducing the restraining forces. If you increase the driving forces, the restraining forces may also increase, thereby maintaining the equilibrium. The more you push someone to do something, the more they may resist!)
Now you have some practical actions to take before you make the change, to give you a better chance of making the change successfully.
So this is a handy tool before you start on any change journey to help you see the forces acting on you, and to give you ideas on how to push the odds in favour of the change. You’ve probably noticed that it’s not particularly scientific. Unless you’ve done some market research, you’re relying on brainstorming and guesswork. That said, like any tool, it makes you stop, think and plan, and for teams it helps stimulate discussion.
Give it a try when you’re next planning to make a change, and see what you think.
I’ve talked about change being hard and the brain being hardwired against change, but humans cope with change all the time – we are pretty good at adapting to change and learning new things.
But some things do seem to be more difficult. Losing weight, perhaps. Or getting up early.
I’ve recently read Michael Bungay-Stanier’s book “The Advice Trap” where he distinguishes between Easy Change and Hard Change. I love his flow diagrams for these so I’ll share them here.
Easy Change is straightforward. You start out not knowing something, understand what you need to learn, practise it, and improve. All you need is access to some knowledge (a book, a teacher, a YouTube video) and then you try it.
Hard change is much more of an effort. You think you know what you have to do, but you fail, try again, fail again, and keep coming back to it. Knowing how to do something is not enough. You need to shift your mindset and behaviour, but something’s stopping you from making progress.
What’s easy or hard depends on the individual and their previous experience. What is easy for you might be hard for me. Some people have no trouble losing weight or getting up early.
This idea of hard and easy change is actually based on what Heifetz and Linsky (2002) refer to as adaptive change vs technical change in organisations.
Technical problems, while challenging, can be solved by applying existing know-how.
Adaptive problems, however, require transformational change, with all individuals within the organisation shifting their behaviour. This is uncomfortable and will likely be met with resistance and difficulty.
The danger is that people may try to respond to an adaptive (hard) problem with a technical (easy) solution – doing what they’ve done before. Alternatively, you can waste a lot of time, money and effort thinking something is an adaptive challenge, when really it just requires a technical solution.
Knowing whether you’re dealing with a hard or easy change is an important step in making the change.
References:
Bungay-Stanier, M. (2020) The Advice Trap: Be Humble, Stay Curious and Change the Way you Lead Forever” Toronto: Box of Crayons Press
We all experience change all the time. Just think about all the change you’ve experienced in the last 12 months. Write everything down in a list. What kind of changes are on your list?
I’ve said before that not all changes are created equal. There could be major changes in your life that have a dramatic effect, like marriage, childbirth, or bereavement. Or there could be small changes, like buying a new pair of shoes. Things might change slowly, like losing weight; or they might be sudden, like the introduction of Covid 19 restrictions. The same change might be viewed positively or negatively, depending on whether you wanted it or not.
When we’re talking about organisational change, Ackerman (1997) divided change into 3 types:
Developmental – this is incremental change, where there is steady improvement made to the current organisation. This is either planned or emergent.
Transitional – this is where you want to achieve a desired new state that is different to the existing one. The change is planned and the transition is managed over time. It’s a fairly radical change.
Transformational – this is the emergence of a new state, which is unknown, following a crisis
For the purposes of the module I teach on Managing Change, we focus on transitional change, as this is what a lot of traditional change management literature refers to. In later posts I will outline some of the models used in planned, transitional change.
But it’s interesting to note we also use these terms and ideas when coaching individuals. We talk about having goals for improvement and we steadily work on improving skills (developmental). Or we ask people to think about their vision of a ‘future you’ to aim towards and we plan the best way to get there (transitional). We also talk about ‘transformational coaching’ where there is a shift in thinking and a different ‘new you’ emerges through the coaching.
Looking back, what types of change have you experienced?
References:
Ackerman, L. (1997) Development, transition or transformation: the question of change in organisations In: Van Eynde, D., Hoy, J. and Van Eynde, D. (eds) Organisation Development Classics. San Francisco:Jossey Bass
Image from:
Balogun, J. and Hope-Hailey, V. (2008) Exploring Strategic Change. Harlow, Essex: Pearson Education Ltd, 3rd ed.
I mentioned when talking about the brain that humans are constantly scanning the environment for changes to see whether they might indicate a threat or a reward.
However, on a day-to-day basis we often get on with our habitual routines of daily living, and we may fail to be aware of what’s going on in our wider environment. In the previous post I explained that things are constantly changing and so there is a need for us to be aware of these ‘big picture’ changes so we can adapt as individuals, teams or organisations.
One well-known tool that can help us is PEST analysis. PEST enables us to stop and consider in turn what’s happening in the Political, Economic, Socio-Cultural, and Technological aspects of our environment.
Doing a PEST Analysis
To do a PEST analysis, go through each of these areas in turn and brainstorm what’s happening that might be most relevant to you or your organisation. Doing this will also help you discover where you are lacking information and may need to do some research.
Here are some questions you might consider:
Political – eg What’s happening with government policy, regulations and laws? How stable is the political environment? What’s the likelihood of change in the next election?
Economic – eg What’s happening in the economy? Is it growing or declining? How stable is it? What is the exchange rate, wage levels, borrowing rate, cost of living, level of unemployment? How easy is it to access credit?
Socio-cultural – What are current social norms and expectations? Consider social attitudes, levels of education, health and lifestyle choices. What about demographics? Is the population increasing or decreasing? What proportion are young/old?
Technological – What new technologies are available? How is use of technology changing? (eg for remote working)
You can also go further by increasing PEST to PESTLE, which adds:
Legal – What are potential changes to legislation affecting you or your business?
Environmental – What’s happening with waste/recycling, energy consumption, renewable resources, pollution?
(NB It’s likely that you’ll find some overlap when you try to do this exercise as some items can fit into more than one area.)
So what?
Like any tool, doing this exercise won’t tell us directly what we need to do with the information we find. That’s the next step. Once you’ve done your PEST analysis, you should then consider how you might take advantage of any opportunities you discover, as well as overcome or avoid any potential threats.
At an individual level, you might use this to think about your next career move. What’s on the horizon that might make one job or career more attractive than another? At the organisational level you might consider what products or services you should develop or remove. So this helps with strategy and planning, or can be used as input into a SWOT analysis (see an upcoming post).
Of course, this analysis just gives us a snapshot of what’s happening in the environment now. You will need to re-do this regularly to make sure you’re keeping up with all the the constant change.
As humans we are constantly adapting to our environment. But it’s clear from what I’ve said about the brain that changing just one person (ourselves) can be scary and difficult. So what about if an entire team, organisation or society needs to change? That means every single person in that group needs to shift.
There’s a vast array of literature on ‘change management’ and a whole industry built on it. We’re regularly told that between 50 and 75% of organisational change initiatives fail. The cost of making changes and the cost of failure can be immense. No wonder, then, that companies spend a vast amount of money on change management consultancy (around $10 billion a year according to the Boston Consultancy Group).
So what’s going on? Why do we have to keep ‘changing’ and how do you decide what needs to change, if anything?
Change is inevitable
Like it or not, our environment is changing all the time. Managers talk about leading in a VUCA world – one that’s Volatile, Uncertain, Complex and Ambiguous – and there’s debate about whether the pace of change is increasing, but it certainly feels that way. We’ve all seen big changes in our lifetime.
Changes in Technology
Just think about how we listen to music. I grew up with vinyl records, then tapes and Walkmans and Ghetto blasters, then CDs and portable CDs, then mini-disks, now MP3 players, and now it’s on my mobile phone or tablet with wireless headphones. Social media didn’t exist 20 years ago and now it’s ubiquitous. How did we manage without it? The rate of technological change seems to be increasing and every time there’s a change, we have to adapt and learn something new.
Changes in Society
We’re living longer. Improvements in medicine and living conditions mean that half of babies born now will live to be over 100.
But many companies and governments are still working on a 3-stage life model. We get educated when we’re young, we work for 45 years, then we retire. But that’s unsustainable if we’re all living longer. We can’t afford to retire at 65 if we’re going to live to 100, and we will need to re-skill and shift careers more often. This is causing tension.
And the makeup of the workforce has changed. There are more women in work and dual-income couples with children. For many the Monday to Friday, 9 to 5 model doesn’t work well. Employees are demanding more flexibility, and a more educated workforce want more meaning in their work lives.
All this has a big influence on how we live and work. Lynda Gratton and Andrew Scott identify we are now shifting into a multi-stage life. This means more change, more transitions, more breaks, education across the lifespan and more flexibility:
Whole industries are being disrupted as new competitors emerge. Just think about Uber disrupting the taxi industry, or AirBnB disrupting the hotel industry. And AI is threatening to remove jobs currently done by humans. This has knock-on effects with people being pushed out of jobs and having to retrain.
Technological changes allow many of us to work from anywhere, anytime. The rise of the gig economy has brought flexibility and autonomy for many but also financial insecurity.
Even in a ‘stable’ career like medicine there is constant change, with a need for re-education and learning as new techniques and medicines appear.
Managing and Leading Change
So the need for change is clear as we have to adapt to the inevitable changes going on in our environment. The human brain is designed for survival – to avoid threats and seek rewards. And organisations and societies, too, need to constantly adapt in order to survive and thrive.
Managing or leading change in organisations has huge implications for the individuals working in those organisations. Over the next few posts I’ll introduce some tools and models used in managing planned change. But we should always remember that at a basic level, organisations and teams are made up of individual human beings and knowing how individual humans work will make all the difference.
Our brain is trying to protect us and it likes to be able to predict things. If it can predict what will happen, it can help us avoid harm.
Being able to predict things is also efficient – we can make decisions quicker without having to think every situation through. We can do things on autopilot and save mental energy.
In times of uncertainty, our brains cannot predict what will happen and we feel uncomfortable. Our brain uses energy trying to go through all the possible futures there may be. The Covid19 pandemic has raised the threat/stress levels for most people, not just because of the real physical dangers, but because of the uncertainty it brings. Will I still have a job next month? Can I survive financially? When can things get back to normal?
Studies have shown we feel better having a certain negative future than an uncertain one. For example, a study by Wiggins et al (1992) showed that people with parents who had Huntingdon’s disease, and who therefore might have inherited it themselves, were better off having the test and finding out for sure, one way or the other, rather than live with the uncertainty of not knowing.
And this is one of the main reasons organisational change can be so threatening. When a change is announced our expected future is disrupted, our brains become unable to predict, and this sends us into the threat response. In times of change you need people to be working at their best, making good decisions and finding the best way forward, but the threat response means their minds are distracted and their thinking is impaired. Scarlett (2019) describes it like this:
“The adult brain in a threat response is much like that of a teenager – quick to get angry and emotional, hard to reason with. So an organization going through change is like an organization being run by a group of teenagers.”
Organisations can counter this by creating as much certainty as possible. Give a clear timeline for what you’re planning to do and when, for example, and stick to it. And make the process quick, to lessen the time people are in this uncertain state.
So if you’re a leader, be empathetic to the problems uncertainty causes for the human brain and do what you can do to create more certainty for those around you.
Wiggins, S et al (1992) “The psychological consequence of predictive testing for Huntington’s disease”, New England Journal of Medicine, 327 (20), pp 1401–05
I teach a module on ‘Managing Change’ at a local university. I talk about the issues of dealing with change at the individual, team and organisation level. Over the past few months, the Covid19 pandemic has imposed radical changes on all of us: we’ve had to quickly adapt to new ways of working and living, workloads have massively increased or decreased, and the uncertainty and fear are increasing stress and anxiety levels.
Knowing about change doesn’t necessarily mean I can handle it any better that others, and I’ve certainly had my ups and downs. But the knowledge does allow me to look back and explain what’s happening, both in myself and in the organisation I’m working in, and perhaps be a bit kinder on myself when I realise that these reactions are perfectly normal and human.
And it also gives me a good understanding of what’s helpful and what’s not when it comes to working with and managing people in organisations going through change. I’ve observed people in leadership positions follow best practice and do things really well. I’ve also seen people show a lack of understanding and empathy, leading to really poor behaviour, making the situation even more difficult and stressful for others.
I find myself getting frustrated. I really wish more people knew some of this stuff and could put it into practice! So in the spirit of getting better people managers – those who understand how humans work when going through change – I’m going to write a series of blog posts covering some of the key ideas, research, tools and models that I cover in the module and that might be useful in these times.
