Organizational Change And Transformation Planning
Definition: Transformation planning is the process of creating a [strategic] plan for changing an organization’s business processes by changing policies, procedures, and processes to shift it from a “as is” to a “to be” state.
Change Management is the process of gathering enterprise (or business) intelligence in order to perform transformation planning by assessing an organization’s people and cultures in order to determine how changes in business strategies, organizational design, organizational structures, processes, and technology systems will affect the enterprise.
Roles & Expectations: Leaders are expected to be able to assist in formulating the strategy and the plans for transforming a customer’s organization, structure, and processes, including support to that organization. They are expected to recommend interfaces and interactions with other organizations, lead change, collaborate, build consensus across the firm and other stakeholders for the transformation, and to assist in communicating the changes. To execute these roles and meet these expectations, leaders are expected to understand the complex, open-systems nature of how organizations change, and the importance of developing the workforce transformation strategies as a critical, fundamental, and essential activity in framing a project plan. They must understand the social processes and other factors (e.g., leadership, culture, structure, strategy, competencies, and psychological contracts) that affect the successful transformation of a complex organizational system.
The objective of organizational change management is to enable organization members and other stakeholders to adapt to a sponsor’s new vision, mission, and systems, as well as to identify sources of resistance to the changes and minimize resistance to them. Organizations are almost always in a state of change, whether the change is continuous or episodic. Change creates tension and strain in a sponsor’s social system that the sponsor must adapt to so that it can evolve. Transformational planning and organizational change is the coordinated management of change activities affecting users, as imposed by new or altered business processes, policies, or procedures and related systems implemented by the sponsor. The objectives are to effectively transfer knowledge and skills that enable users to adopt the sponsor’s new vision, mission, and systems and to identify and minimize sources of resistance to the sponsor’s changes.
Best Practices and Lessons Learned
Implementation of a large-scale transformation project affects the entire organization. In a technology-based transformation project, an organization often focuses solely on acquiring and installing the right hardware and software. But the people who are going to use the new technologies—and the processes that will guide their use—are even more important. As critical as the new technologies may be, they are only tools for people to use in carrying out the agency’s work.
Figure 1. Organizational Transition Model
As shown in Figure 1, the discipline of organizational change management (OCM) is intended to help move an organization’s people, processes, and technology from the current “as is” state to a desired future “to be” state. To ensure effective, long-term, and sustainable results, there must be a transition during which the required changes are introduced, tested, understood, and accepted. People have to let go of existing behaviors and attitudes and move to new behaviors and attitudes that achieve and sustain the desired business outcomes. That is why OCM is a critical component of any enterprise transformation program: It provides a systematic approach that supports both the organization and the individuals within it as they plan, accept, implement, and transition from the present state to the future state.
Studies have found that the lack of effective OCM in an IT modernization project leads to a higher percentage of failure. According to a 2005 Gartner survey on “The User’s View of Why IT Projects Fail,” the findings pinned the failure in 31 percent of the cases on an OCM deficiency. This demonstrates the importance of integrating OCM principles into every aspect of an IT modernization or business transformation program.
Navigating the Change Process
Organization leaders need to assess change as a process and work in partnership with our sponsors to develop appraisals and recommendations to identify and resolve complex organizational issues. The change process depicted in Figure 2 is designed to help assess where an organization is in the change process and to determine what it needs to do as it moves through the process.
Figure 2. An Organizational Change Process
By defining and completing a change process, an organization can better define and document the activities that must be managed during the transition phase. Moving through these stages will help ensure effective, long-term, and sustainable results. These stages unfold as an organization moves through the transition phase in which the required transformational changes are introduced, tested, understood, and accepted in a manner that enables individuals to let go of their existing behaviors and attitudes and develop any new skills needed to sustain desired business outcomes.
It is very common for organizations to lose focus or create new initiatives without ever completing the change process for a specific program or project. It is critical to the success of a transformation program that the organization recognizes this fact and is prepared to continue through the process and not lose focus as the organizational change initiative is implemented. Commitment to completing the change process is vital to a successful outcome.
Framework for Change
In any enterprise transformation effort, there are a number of variables that exist simultaneously and affect the acceptance of change by an organization. These variables range from Congressional mandates to the organization’s culture and leadership to the attitude and behavior of the lowest-ranking employee. Social scientists use the Burke-Litwin Model of Organizational Performance and Change, or other approaches in line with the sponsor’s environment and culture, to assess readiness and plan to implement change. The Burke-Litwin Model identifies critical transformational and transactional factors that may impact the successful adoption of the planned change. In most government transformation efforts, the external environment (such as Congressional mandates), strategy, leadership, and culture can be the most powerful drivers for creating organizational change.
Most organizations will ultimately follow one of three approaches to transformation. The type of approach is related to the culture and type of organization (e.g., loosely coupled [relaxed bureaucratic organizational cultures] or tightly coupled [strong bureaucratic organizational cultures]):
• Data-driven change strategies emphasize reasoning as a tactic for bringing about a change in a social system. Experts, either internal or external to the sponsor, are contracted to analyze the system with the goal of making it more efficient (leveling costs vs. benefits). Systems science theories are employed to view the social system from a wide-angle perspective and to account for inputs, outputs, and transformation processes.
The effectiveness of a sponsor’s data driven change strategy will be dependent upon (a) a well-researched analysis that the transformation is feasible, (b) a demonstration that illustrates how the transformation has been successful in similar situations, and (c) a clear description of the results of the transformation. People will adopt the transform when they understand the results of the transformation and the rationale behind it.
• Participative change strategies assume that change will occur if impacted units and individuals modify their perspective from old behavior patterns in favor of new behaviors and business/work practices. Participative change typically involves not just changes in rationales for action, but changes in the attitudes, values, skills, and percepts of the organization.
For this change strategy to be successful, it is dependent on all impacted organizational units and individuals participating both in the change (including system design, development, and implementation of the change) and their change “re-education.” The degree of success is dependent on the extent to which the organizational units, impacted users, and stakeholders are involved in the participative change transition plan.
• Compliance-based change strategies are based on the “leveraging” of power coming from the sponsor’s position within the organization to implement the change. The sponsor assumes that the unit or individual will change because they are dependent on those with authority. Typically, the change agent does not attempt to gain insight into possible resistance to the change and does not consult with impacted units or individuals. Change agents simply announce the change and specify what organizational units and impacted personnel must do to implement the change.
The effectiveness of a sponsor’s compliance-based change strategy is dependent on the discipline within the sponsor’s chain of command, processes, and culture and the capability of directly and indirectly impacted stakeholders to impact sponsor executives. Research demonstrates that compliance-based strategies are the least effective.
Regardless of the extent of the organizational change, it is critical that organizational impact and risk assessments be performed to allow sponsor executives to identify the resources necessary to successfully implement the change effort and to determine the impact of the change on the organization. Further information on change strategies and organizational assessments is found in the SEG article “Performing Organizational Assessments,” and in those listed above.
Leadership & Stakeholders
Leaders need to be cognizant of the distinction between sponsor executives, change agents/leaders, and stakeholders:
• Sponsor executives: Typically, sponsor executives are the individuals within an organization that are accountable to the government. Sponsor executives may or may not be change leaders.
• Change leaders: Typically, the change leader is the sponsor’s executive or committee of executives assigned to manage and implement the prescribed change. Change leaders must be empowered to make sponsor business process change decisions, to formulate and transmit the vision for the change, and to resolve resistance issues and concerns.
• Stakeholders: Typically, stakeholders are internal and external entities that may be directly (such as participants) or indirectly impacted by the change. A business unit’s dependence on a technology application to meet critical mission requirements is an example of a directly impacted stakeholder. An external (public/private, civil, or federal) entity’s dependence on a data interface without direct participation in the change is an example of an indirect stakeholder.
Note: Both directly and indirectly impacted stakeholders can be sources of resistance to a sponsor’s transformation plan.
Resistance is a critical element of organizational change activities. Resistance may be a unifying organizational force that resolves the tension between conflicts that are occurring as the result of organizational change. Resistance feedback occurs in three dimensions:
• Cognitive resistance occurs as the unit or individual perceives how the change will affect its likelihood of voicing ideas about organizational change. Signals of cognitive resistance may include limited or no willingness to communicate about or participate in change activities (such as those involving planning, resources, or implementation).
• Emotional resistance occurs as the unit or individuals balance emotions during change. Emotions about change are entrenched in an organization’s values, beliefs, and symbols of culture. Emotional histories hinder change. Signals of emotional resistance include a low emotional commitment to change leading to inertia or a high emotional commitment leading to chaos.
• Behavior resistance is an integration of cognitive and emotional resistance that is manifested by less visible and more covert actions toward the organizational change. Signals of behavioral resistance are the development of rumors and other informal or routine forms of resistance by units or individuals.
Resistance is often seen as a negative force during transformation projects. However, properly understood, it is a positive and integrative force to be leveraged. It is the catalyst for resolving the converging and diverging currents between change leaders and respondents and creates agreement within an organizational system.
Creating the Organizational Transition Plan
As discussed in the beginning of this section (see Figure 1), successful support of individuals and organizations through a major transformation effort requires a transition from the current to the future state. Conducting an organizational assessment based on the Burke-Litwin Model provides strategic insights into the complexity of the impact of the change on the organization. Once the nature and the impact of the organizational transformation are understood, the transformation owner or champion will have the critical data needed to create an organizational transition plan.
Typically, the content or focus of the transition plan comes from the insights gained by conducting a “gap” analysis between the current state of the organization (based on the Burke-Litwin assessment) and the future state (defined through the strategy and vision for the transformation program). The transition plan should define how the organization will close the transformational and transactional gaps that are bound to occur during implementation of a transformation project. Change does not occur in a linear manner, but in a series of dynamic but predictable phases that require preparation and planning if they are to be navigated successfully. The transition plan provides the information and activities that allow the organization to manage this “non-linearity” in a timely manner.
It should be noted that large organizational change programs, which affect not only the headquarters location but also geographically dispersed sites, will require site-level transition plans. These plans take into account the specific needs and requirements of each site. Most importantly, they will help “mobilize” the organizational change team at the site and engage the local workforce and leaders in planning for the upcoming transition.
Strategic Organizational Change Communications
Figure 3. The Strategic Organizational Communications Process
A key component of the transition plan should address the strategic communications (see Figure 3) required to support the implementation of the transformation. Open and frequent communication is essential to effective change management. When impacted individuals receive the information (directly and indirectly) they need about the benefits and impact of the change, they will more readily accept and support it. The approach to communication planning needs to be integrated, multi-layered, and iterative.
Are You Certain You Have A Plan In Place?
Consider the following declarations of strategy gathered from genuine company documents and announcements:
“Our goal is to be the most cost-effective service.” “We’re pursuing a global approach”. “The company’s objective is to integrate a series of regional acquisitions”. “Unparalleled customer service is our strategy.” “Our strategy goal is to always be first to market.” “Our objective is to transition from defence to industrial applications,” .
What are the similarities and differences between these great declarations? The only difference is that none of them is a strategy. They are merely aspects of strategies, strategic strands. However, they are no more tactics than Dell Computer’s strategy of selling directly to customers, or Hannibal’s plan of crossing the Alps with elephants. And their use illustrates a growing trend: strategy fragmentation as a catchall term. Consultants and researchers have offered executives with a plethora of frameworks for understanding strategic problems after more than 30 years of rigorous thinking about strategy.
We now have five-forces analysis, core competencies, hypercompetition, a resource-based view of the organization, value chains, and a slew of other useful, if not always powerful, analytic tools.’ However, there has been little advice on what should be the end output of these tools—or what actually constitutes a plan. Indeed, the use of certain strategic instruments tends to lead to restricted, fragmented views of strategy, which correspond to the tools’ limited reach. Strategists who are drawn to Porter’s five-forces approach, for example, tend to think of strategy as a question of picking industries and sectors within them.
Executives who focus on “co-opetition” or other game-theoretic frameworks perceive their world as a series of decisions about how to interact with friends and foes. This issue of strategic fragmentation has gotten worse in recent years, as narrowly specialized academics and consultants have begun to practice strategy using their instruments. However, strategy is not the same as price. It isn’t a matter of capacity decisions. It is not responsible for determining R&D funding. These are strategy components that cannot be decided — or even considered — in isolation. Consider an aspiring painter who has been taught that the beauty of a painting is determined by its colors and hues. But, in reality, what can be done with such advice? After all, wonderful paintings necessitate much more than color selection: attention to shapes and figures, brush technique, and post-production processes. Above all, excellent paintings rely on the skillful integration of all of these aspects.
Some pairings are tried-and-true, while others are innovative and fresh. Many combinations, especially in avant-garde art, indicate disaster. Strategy has become a catchall term that can be used to imply anything. Regular portions of business journals are increasingly devoted to strategy, usually detailing how featured companies are coping with specific difficulties like customer service, joint ventures, branding, or e-commerce. Executives, in turn, discuss their “service plan,” “joint venture strategy,” “branding strategy,” or whatever other strategy is on their thoughts at the time. Executives then transmit these strategic threads to their enterprises, erroneously believing that this will assist managers in making difficult decisions.
However, how does understanding that their company is pursuing a “acquisition strategy” or a “first-mover strategy” assist the vast majority of managers in doing their jobs or setting priorities? How useful is it to have new initiatives publicized on a regular basis, with the word strategy thrown in for good measure? When executives refer to everything as a strategy and end up with a collection of strategies, they confuse the public and jeopardize their own credibility. They reveal, in particular, that they do not have a holistic view of the business. When executives refer to anything as a strategy, they create confusion and undercut their own credibility. Many readers of literature on the subject are aware that ‘strategy’ comes from the Greek ‘strategos’, which means “the art of the general.”
However, few people have given this essential origin much thought. What distinguishes the job of a general from that of a field commander, for example? Over time, the general is in charge of various units on multiple fronts and multiple conflicts. Orchestration and comprehensiveness are the general’s challenge—and the value-added of generalship. Great generals consider the big picture. They have a plan; it is made up of bits, or aspects, that come together to form a cohesive whole. Whether they are CEOs of established companies, division presidents, or entrepreneurs, business generals must have a strategy—a coherent, integrated, externally directed notion of how the company will achieve its goals.
Without a strategy, time and resources are easily wasted on ad hoc, unrelated operations; mid-level managers will fill the hole with their own, often parochial, interpretations of what the company should be doing; and the outcome will be a jumble of ineffective efforts. There are numerous examples of businesses that have suffered as a result of a lack of a cohesive strategy. Once a dominant power in the retail industry. Sears spent ten bleak years vacillating between a hard-goods and a soft-goods focus, dabbling in and out of ill-advised industries, unable to differentiate itself in any of them, and failing to develop a convincing economic logic.
Similarly, the formerly untouchable Xerox is attempting to resurrect itself, despite internal criticism that the corporation lacks a strategy. “I hear about asset sales, about refinancing, but I don’t hear anyone saying convincingly, ‘Here is your future.”- A strategy is a collection of choices, but it isn’t a catch-all for every essential decision an executive must make.
The company’s mission and objectives, for example, stand distinct from and govern strategy, as seen in Figure 1. As a result, we wouldn’t mention the New York Times’ dedication to being America’s newspaper of record as part of its strategy. GE’s strategy is driven by its goal of being number one or two in all of its markets, but it is not strategy in and of itself. A strategy would not include a goal of achieving a specific sales or earnings target. Similarly, while strategy is concerned with how a company intends to interact with its surroundings, internal organizational arrangements are not included. As a result, remuneration policies, information systems, and training programs should not be considered strategies. These are key decisions that should reinforce and support the strategy, but they do not constitute the strategy.
When everything significant is tossed into the strategy bucket, this crucial concept soon loses its meaning. We don’t want to portray strategy creation as a straightforward, sequential procedure. Figure 1 omits feedback arrows and other indicators that outstanding strategists think in repeating loops. The aim is to achieve a durable, reinforced consistency among the pieces of the strategy itself, rather than following a sequential approach.
The Building Blocks of Strategy
If a company must have a plan, that strategy must have components. What exactly are those components? A strategy, as shown in Figure 2, consists of five aspects that provide answers to real-world questions:
• Are there any arenas where we’ll be active?
• Transportation: how will we get there?
• Differentiators: What will make us stand out in the marketplace?
• Staging: What will our movement speed and sequence be?
• Logic of economics: how will we get our money back?
The first question a company must answer on the Strategy Diamond is “where will we be active?” Organizations frequently make the mistake of being overly generic, such as when they state, “We want to be the number one consulting business.” However, rather than a strategy, this is a vision statement. To avoid falling into this trap, be as explicit as possible when describing arenas. You can do so by answering the questions below: Which product categories will we compete in?
• What channels are we going to use?
• Which market sectors are we going to focus on?
• Which geographical areas should we concentrate our efforts on?
• What essential technologies are we going to use?
• Which stages of value generation will we emphasize?
It is critical to underline the relevance of these domains when describing them. Assume your plan is to concentrate on a specific geography. You sell in other countries as well. However, you do so because it is logistically simple, and your fundamental goal is to concentrate on a single market.
Now that you know where you’ll be competing, you’ll need to figure out how you’ll get there. This is where we choose the vehicle that will take us from where we are to where we want to go. Here are some examples of responses:
• Create in-house
Once again, be as explicit as possible. Assume you’ve decided to branch out into a new product category. You should specify if you’ll purchase or construct this capacity in-house. Don’t make this decision on an ad-hoc basis. Instead, focus on developing a reasonable strategy. If you’ve only ever built in-house, then be honest, accept acquisition isn’t suitable for you.
What sets you apart from the competition? What are your products’ USPs (Unique Selling Propositions)? What is it about what you do that allows you to succeed in business?
Differentiation must be at the core of your plan. How can you win if you can’t find a method to set yourself apart? You can’t do it.
Differentiation can be done in a variety of ways, including:
• Reliability and Durability
• Time to market
• Time to upgrade products
• Customer service
It’s critical to identify your differentiators as soon as possible. This is due to the fact that differentiation does not arise by accident. If you want to provide the best customer service, you’ll have to invest time and money to do it. Similarly, if you want the best-designed goods, you’ll have to invest on that as well.
For a moment, let’s return to our general. A general does not move all forces on all fronts at the same time when fighting a war. Instead, some people go first, then others, and then still others. In business, staging is just as critical as it is in conflict. There are numerous examples of businesses that grew too quickly and before they were ready. The majority of these businesses are no longer in operation.
From one stage to the next, your plan must progress. You run the risk of getting ahead of yourself if you don’t. You run the risk of taking on more than you’re capable of. You’re in danger of going out of business.
During this step, ask yourself the following questions:
• What is the best sequence of steps to take?
• How quickly should we take these steps?
5. Economic Logic
The diamond’s last section brings everything together with one goal in mind: profit.
In a nutshell, this section is about deciding whether to compete on a low or high cost basis. Because you have economies of scale, you might be able to compete on price. Or because your replication costs are lower. Because you have a brilliant design or unique product features, you may be able to compete on price.
To demonstrate this, consider the following two examples of economic logic:
• Low-cost: Ryanair offers customers a cheaper cost per mile than any other European airline.
• Expensive: Apple may charge more because its customers are prepared to pay more for their distinctive design.
The five elements of the diamond must not only align, but also reinforce one another in order to have a solid plan. Let’s look at an example to help clarify this.
Chapter 1: Breakthrough Value
Breakthrough Value Is Unlocked Through Business Transformation
Every company comes to a point where it’s time to make a change. As a leader, you are the one who stands at the crossroads and must make a decision. Should you increase your size? Or take a step to the side? Is it possible to create new products or services? Or do you want to keep laser-focused on your best-selling book? The decisions required for effective Business Transformation (BT) can be plagued with painful self-doubt, even for superstar entrepreneurs.
The first stage is to choose a problem to tackle, but after that, you’ll need a solid approach that will allow you to go forward while being flexible. Will you make blunders? Yes. However, proper Transformation planning can assist your small business in getting back on track after a setback.
• Leverage the power and potential of digital technologies—in particular, AI/machine learning, IoT, and robotics—to drive business transformation and create value
• Apply advanced Design-Thinking techniques to create breakthrough innovations
• Conceive new user experiences in areas where there is no prior solution to leverage
• Overcome organizational obstacles
Chapter 2: Strategic Analysis
Process Improvement Through Analysis
Identifying and resolving inefficiencies that waste resources and increase expense is the goal of process improvement. Analyses are conducted to establish which processes and process stages create value and which do not, as well as to determine how much non-value-adding activities may be decreased or eliminated. Using a planned strategy can help you get better results.
Methodologies for Strategic Planning
When management commits to using formal techniques, defining explicit goals, and offering employee training, process improvement initiatives will be more likely to succeed. Lean and Six Sigma are two popular approaches. Lean aims to continuously improve processes in order to increase efficiency. Six Sigma is a statistical control methodology that focuses on getting processes to an ideal level of statistical control. Employees must be properly guided and instructed in order to use any methodology effectively. To assure success, consulting services might be used.
Mapping Value Streams
Value Stream Mapping (VSM) gives you a snapshot of how things are right now. Before improvement efforts can begin to establish future-state expectations, it is important to understand current-state conditions. VSM is used by businesses to define all of the business, engineering, and manufacturing processes that go into delivering a finished product (or service) to a consumer. The value stream of the company is made up of several processes. The efficiency of each process has a direct relationship with profit levels.
VSM helps firms focus on each individual process and activity in the value stream by creating Value-Add vs. Non-Value-Add Process Maps. Assessing inputs, outputs, and process linkages can assist improvement teams in determining which activities contribute value and which do not. In the eyes of the customer, value-adding means that the activity adds to the item’s value. Non-value-adding signifies that it adds no direct value to the item but does affect the price customers must pay.
It’s possible that some non-value-adding operations will be required. Others may just contribute to resource waste. Toyota, which is widely regarded as a leader in continuous improvement, first implemented Lean principles in the early 1960s as part of a quest for increased efficiency. Toyota’s “Lean” strategy focused on removing waste from processes. The seven forms of waste, also referred to as fat, have been discovered. Overproduction, delay, unnecessary conveyance, over-processing, excess inventory, superfluous motion, and rectification are all things that improvement teams should be on the watch for.
Some method of measurement must be defined to permit a valid assessment of processes under present and future state conditions. What kind of evidence can be used to show whether a process is efficient or has been improved? Quantifiable process measures must be established. Numbers are objective and can inform management about whether or not goals have been met. The number of customer complaints received, the quantity of defective products produced, and the amount of time spent fixing mistakes are all instances of quantitative measures.
Chapter 3: Change Framework
Many businesses have undergone significant change in recent years, and the value of organizational culture in organizational analysis and change management is becoming increasingly apparent. Change implementation, on the other hand, is a difficult process that is not always successful for a variety of reasons.
Poor communication and an underestimation of the amount of retraining required are at the root of most change failures. The major goal of this study is to determine the important actions that could help with change management. To build a theoretical foundation for the research, literature on organizational culture, the need for change, forms of change, and resistance to change was consulted.
Case studies and exploratory interviews on organizational change management were utilized to chronicle organizational change experiences and establish a strategic framework for change management. Acceptance and adoption of the designed method within a construction-based organization served as validation. The research has shown that well-planned change aids in the successful implementation of change. Not only is the development of more efficient and effective procedures important for successful change, but so is the alignment of corporate culture to support these new processes.
Chapter 4: Navigating Change
What Is Change Management And How Does It Work?
The actions a business takes to change or adjust a significant component of its organization are referred to as organizational change. this could encompass things like company culture, internal processes, underlying technology or infrastructure, corporate hierarchy, or something else.
Adaptive or transformational change can occur in an organization:
• Adaptive changes are tiny, incremental adjustments that a company makes over time to improve its products, processes, workflows, and strategies. Adaptive changes include hiring a new team member to meet rising demand or introducing a new work-from-home policy to attract more competent job applicants.
• Transformational changes are of a wider scale and scope, and they frequently imply a drastic and, at times, unexpected departure from the status quo. Transformational change might include the introduction of a new product or business division, as well as the decision to grow worldwide.
Transformation management is the process of directing organizational change from its inception and planning stages through implementation and resolution.
A set of starting conditions (point A) and a functional endpoint (point B) define change processes. The transition is a dynamic process that develops in stages. The major steps in the change management process are summarized here.
5 Steps In The Change Management Process
1. Get The Organization Ready For Change
An organization must be prepared both logistically and culturally in order to successfully pursue and implement change. Prior to going into logistics, cultural preparation is required.
During the planning phase, the manager focuses on assisting employees in recognizing and comprehending the need for change. They create awareness of the organization’s different challenges or problems, which operate as change agents and cause unhappiness with the status quo. Obtaining early buy-in from employees who will assist in the implementation of the change might help reduce friction and resistance later on.
2. Create A Vision And A Change Strategy
Managers must design a thorough and realistic plan for bringing about change once the organization is ready to embrace it. The strategy should include the following information:
• What strategic goals will this adjustment aid the organization in achieving?
• Key performance indicators: What will be used to assess success? What metrics must be shifted? What is the current state of affairs’ baseline?
• Project team and stakeholders: Who will be in charge of the task of change implementation? At each important point, who needs to sign off? Who will be in charge of the implementation?
• Project scope: What are the specific processes and actions that the project will entail? What isn’t included in the project’s scope?
Any unknowns or bottlenecks that may develop during the implementation process should be factored into the plan, which will necessitate agility and flexibility to overcome.
3. Changes Must Be Implemented
Following the procedures described in the plan to implement the desired change is all that remains after it has been created. The specifics of the program will determine whether or not modifications to the company’s structure, strategy, systems, procedures, employee habits, or other components are required.
Change managers must focus on empowering their workers to take the necessary measures to achieve the initiative’s goals during the implementation process. They should also try to anticipate bottlenecks and, once detected, prevent, remove, or reduce them. Throughout the implementation process, it is vital to communicate the organization’s vision to remind team members why change is being pursued.
4. Changes In Company Culture And Practices Should Be Embedded
Change managers must prevent a reversion to the previous state or status quo once the change endeavor is concluded. This is especially true when it comes to process, workflow, culture, and strategy changes within an organization. Employees may revert to the “old way” of doing things if they don’t have a strategy in place, especially during the transition time.
Backsliding is more difficult to achieve when reforms are embedded in the company’s culture and processes. Change management tools such as new organizational structures, controls, and reward systems should all be considered.
5. Analyze the Results and Evaluate the Progress
A change initiative’s completion does not imply that it was successful. A “project post mortem,” or analysis and assessment, can help company leaders determine whether a change initiative was a success, failure, or mixed result. It can also provide useful information and lessons that can be applied to future transformation attempts.
Ask yourself questions like, “Did the project’s objectives get met?” Is it possible to replicate this success elsewhere if it is? What went wrong if not?
Chapter 5: Transformation Strategies
If you’re in charge of a company, you’re undoubtedly considering drastic change. Your world is evolving due to new industrial platforms, geopolitical developments, global rivalry, and shifting consumer demand. You have upstart competitors encroaching on your firm with high valuations, as well as activist investors hunting for targets. Meanwhile, you have your own goals for your business: to be a profitable innovator, to exploit opportunities, to lead and dominate your market, to recruit highly motivated individuals, and to carve out a socially responsible role where your firm makes a difference. You should also get rid of any deadwood in your legacy system, such as procedures, structures, technologies, and cultural traditions that are holding your firm back.
A transformation program — a top-down restructure accompanied by cost-cutting across the board, a technical reboot, and some reengineering — is the traditional answer. Perhaps you’ve participated in a handful of these activities. If that’s the case, you’re well aware of how difficult it is for them to succeed. These initiatives are frequently late and over budget, leaving the company exhausted, demoralized, and little altered. They ignore the fundamentally new types of leverage accessible to firms in the recent decade: new networks, new data collection and analytical resources, and new means of codifying knowledge (see Miles Everson, John Sviokla, and Kelly Barnes’ “Leading a Bionic Transformation”).
Successful transformations are uncommon, but they do happen — and yours could be one of them. In this sense, a transformation is a significant change in an organization’s skills and identity that allows it to generate useful results that are relevant to its mission that it previously couldn’t achieve. It may or may not require a single large project, but the organization develops a continuing mastery of change in which executives and people feel comfortable adapting.
Changing economic times, as well as the increase of political and consumer turmoil, can put a company’s future in jeopardy. Consumers may start tightening their purse strings or switching to competitors’ products. In these cases, a company may choose to pursue a transformative strategy in order to position itself for long-term profitability.
Transformational strategy is implementing major and drastic changes within a company to alter its short- and long-term viability. A change in course of action is usually necessitated by an external event, such as a downturn in the economy or the rise of a competitor, which forces the company’s owner and managers to reconsider their policies and processes. As a result, transformational strategy aims to increase revenue and market share, improve customer satisfaction and retention, and lower expenses in order to reinvest in other areas of the organization.
Enacting radical change inside a company necessitates the use of purposeful tools by the business owner and managers to ensure that the tactics they implement are useful and effective. Examining employee and management performance, evaluating financial data, redesigning technology and service programs, and refining project management plans are just a few of the tools available. A combination of tools and strategies is frequently used to help transform a business. A company losing market share to a competitor, for example, might change its customer service strategy, lower its price, and increase its marketing efforts.
Engagement of Stakeholders
Transformational strategy necessitates the involvement of the organization’s core personnel. The transformation process should include employees, board members, managers, and essential third parties such as vendors and core customers. Opening lines of communication between business owners and stakeholders can highlight flaws in the firm’s policies and procedures, as well as provide vital information into what needs to change within the company. Involving stakeholders in transformational strategy also helps to broaden and deepen the business’s resources and tools. The old adage “two heads are better than one” applies here: having additional individuals on board to strategize and implement solutions aids in the timely and effective transformation of the organization.
Setting goals and objectives is a crucial aspect of a transformational approach. Setting business transformation goals provides owners and management with a defined plan of action. Recognizing the need for change is the first stage, followed by agreement with stakeholders on the steps necessary to accomplish the change. This is frequently based on a vision for how the company should ideally look — should it broaden its market reach, strictly focus on a few items, or expand its public relations efforts into social media? Questions like this aid in the testing and implementation of improvements. Leadership must, above all, support the transformational strategy. Managers and business owners must regularly re-evaluate change plans to verify that they are on track to achieve the stated objectives.
Chapter 6: Transition Plan
A company’s ability to grow depends on its ability to welcome change. Change management, on the other hand, is one of the most difficult business ideas to grasp.
It is undervalued by businesses; changing employee attitudes and behaviors takes time. Others are unsure how to put a change management strategy into action.
Others are having trouble completely comprehending the business implications of changes; the company is dealing with something new, which is challenging.
With a few ideas and pointers, you’ll be prepared to take on change management in your firm.
All efforts and interim needs for implementing the new organization design are documented in the Organization Transition Plan. It serves as a central location for gathering, scheduling, and organizing all tasks related to the transition from the old to the new organization. The breadth and complexity of the change program will decide the overall approach – ‘big bang’ versus ‘phased’, for example. Communication, establishing and publishing new employment positions, and generating staff discussion guides that illustrate how responsibilities are evolving are all examples of typical tasks.