It is a
topic, which like many other management topics, has been discussed at length,
and has been in existence for decades, and yet it is the most favored topic for
any training. May be it is so, as it involves human emotions and behaviors, and
thereby bringing in the uncertainty.
Though
Prosci has advocated a well thought out model of ADKAR, i.e. Awareness, Desire,
Knowledge, Ability and Reinforcement, yet people and organizations fail on
their change management journey.
If we were
to interpret ADKAR, it could be as follows;
1)
Awareness
– It could be interpreted as one being aware of the ‘Need for change’, or ‘Why
is change required’. It addresses only part of the information, as one also
need to know, how to make or convert that ‘need’ into organizational vision.
Whether it is the CEO (read
it as “Figure Head”) of the company, or any other person or group pf people,
having respect and attention of the resources, and who they look up to, for any
organizational matter, message that information. The critical point is, they
provide clarity on change, such that people are able to reflect the vision with
clarity, and also able to resonate with organizational vision.
As John Kotter says, the
sense of urgency along with sense of vison, is what determines the success or
failure of a change. So, we should never let it die, and the communication has
to be continuous to keep people true to stated vision with unrelenting
commitment / momentum.
2)
DESIRE
– How to create willingness for change? Appreciating the need for change, and
creating willingness for change are two different things. As it is very seldom
that a change is beneficial to all. Had that been the case, we wouldn’t have had
any problem in implementing a change. The fact is, it is harsh on some, and
requires others to relinquish their comfort zone. It is tough, as the law of
physics says, it requires a greater push to move anything from state of inertia,
as compared to something already in motion.
One might say, even ‘Fear
of job losses’, or any negative consequence can also be the reason for
willingness to change. However, would that be self-sustaining? I fear not. A
negative consequence can certainly exert the required force to change the state
of inertia; however, it will have a better adoption and effectiveness, if
change is linked to vision.
It is only vision, which
has the power to propel a change to succeed, even if it has certain elements,
which impact a select group of individuals negatively. The vision provides the
required direction for everyone to follow, and be part of the change, to
achieve what lies ahead, at the end of the journey.
This is further
influenced through communication and as John Kotter mentioned, through creating
guiding coalitions, such that we do not lose intensity to change, and at the
same time remove obstacles to clear the path for change; be it persuasion,
guidance, support or if required, through authority.
3)
Knowledge
/ Ability – How to make one relevant in given context? That is, how can one
perform in the changed environment, and what does it take to enable a person to
be productive, contributing and hence being relevant post change.
It is about training,
re-skilling…in nutshell making the required information and skills available
for the “participants of change” to facilitate change.
Personally, I consider
these two as one, as the intent of knowledge is to make one being able to
perform in chosen field, i.e. make a person relevant. A knowledge gain without
being relevant is a sign of insufficient knowledge gain, or in other words, if
put to use, will result in failure.
The mode to let one
acquire those skills / knowledge could be training, workshops, mentoring,
coaching etc. However, the important aspect is as one needs direction with
vision, one also needs short-term triumphs / victories to reassure the
sustenance of initiative and progression on right path.
What it means, one has to
plan for workforce training / re-skilling and also ensure means to check
progress and completion, through short term gains / tollgates.
4)
Though
ADKAR may or may not reflect anything on this; however, short terms wins (as
John Kotter says) are of paramount importance to keep everyone true to vision /
objective, and see the progress and make course corrections (if any).
One has to have an
execution plan with short term wins / tollgates, leading to fulfillment of
overall objective. As they say, one that can’t be measured, can’t be improved.
Therefore, one has to place checkpoints to measure on ground gained as compared
to target and make course corrections, if required.
5)
Reinforcement
– It is a reassurance on committed path, as well as John Kotter says, anchoring
of changes in corporate culture. The steps that we have to take, to make it
‘way of working’ within organization and sustain it.
It may require changes in
processes, policies, procedures, readiness modules, recruitment, appraisals…whatever
it is, it has to sustain, and make people ready to work within changed
environment, without any additional effort; rather that should become the
natural way of working.
Therefore, we have to think about
change in those terms, i.e. how to make it, way of working.
ADKAR model
is good to adopt, if someone is new to change management, or is unable to put
structure around change. However, the success of initiative lies in aspects, as
detailed by John Kotter in his work ‘Accelerate’. I have quoted few aspects of
it above, i.e. having a sense of urgency, creating a vision, having guiding
coalitions, creating short term wins, not declaring the victory too soon, and
finally, a structure in parallel to hierarchical structure to support
innovation and change.
Few other
aspects, which I believe are deprived of attention, but can marred the impact
of a change are;
1)
Keeping
the discussions and participation at top layer; ignoring the grass-root
2)
Piling
on a single individual or group for successful change
3)
Failing
to acknowledge the cultural aspects (wherever applicable)
4)
Not
being able to visualize, plan or execute to convert ‘Change’ into
‘Transformation’
5)
Adjusting
the ‘Change’ to avoid hard discussions with power centers within an
organization, or accepting less than 100% as success
No comments:
Post a Comment