“. . .one noted voice cries, “It Doesn’t Work.” Lyndsey Layton wrote a fine article in this morning’s The Washington Post about Daniel Pink’s view on merit pay for teachers. (he is the author of Drive and other books.) The article is worth reading. Maybe it is worth reading because I agree with him. Merit pay for teachers does not appear to improve performance.

Photo of Daniel Pink (Linda Davidson)

While visiting the Post’s site I found a blog, The Answer Sheet written by Valeria Strauss. She provides an article rich in actual data about pay for performance. In an age of opinions then being justified by snippets of data, her writing is refreshing. I highly recommend both articles.

Related Blogs

I am preparing to work with a couple of teams that are facing a year full of challenging and some very risky changes. Here are some the key things I am going to say to them to get them thinking.

Let your team know what’s going on. May sound obvious, but it is amazing how often people below the top level are out of the loop. Those folks need to feel the same sense of urgency that you do. If things are keeping you awake at night, they need to feel that restlessness as well.

Assess how good you really are at change. Take a look at how well you’ve led and managed changes in the past. Many organizations don’t debrief how major projects worked. No sports team would go into the next game without looking at what was working for them and what was not. If you want to keep the debrief simple (and simple is far better than a lengthy report with lots of slides that no one will read), try this tried-and-true framework. What worked? What didn’t? What needs to be changed next time? And make it a conversation, not a report. Too many places to hide in a report.

Give people a common language for change. There are many good frameworks for leading change out there. If you’ve got one you like – use it. Don’t go looking for something new. But if you are searching for a way to talk about change, then consider my Change without Migraines™ approach. I suggest you start with the free e-book, Introduction to Change without Migraines™.

Engage your team in thinking. Let them help create the direction and the plans for the changes. Don’t wait to pull them in. Recently I was working with an organization that was trying unsuccessfully to implement major enterprise resource planning (ERP). Trouble was, this new ERP system felt like a missive from corporate. Some had no idea why this was critical. And many questioned why senior leaders expected ERP to work this time. And they bristled knowing that they were expected to salute and go along. Avoid all that hassle, and let people be part of the process. I have friends who routinely conduct active hands-on planning meeting for 300 to 500 people, who are all in the same room at the same time.

Be sloppy. Getting people involved and engaged won’t be tidy. it will be difficult to predict how long a portion of a meeting should last. You can never tell how much enthusiasm — or revulsion – people will have. Planning  meetings that ask people to sit quietly and watch endless slides presented by an endless array of speakers is not involvement. I’m rusty on this, but I think those death by PowerPoint meetings may have been in Dante’s sixth circle of hell. . . And if people are engaged they will let you know what’s needed next.

I welcome your comments and additions. Good luck with major change this year.

Related Blogs

Related Blogs

Here is a sample of her work from Volume 1 of Musing Along the Way

Watching the Process

Day One

Today

I found two parts of me sparring. “I don’t want to live,” was challenging.

“I do want to live.”

No one was winning.

Day Two

I called a friend. She let me cry. No more fighting,” she said.

Relax into living.

Day Three

In human beings

Doubts arise.

Allowing them is essential.

Choosing anew is available.

Friends are indispensable.

Martha Johnson

Related Blogs

With seconds to play in the 2012 Super Bowl, the New England Patriots decided to allow the NY Giants to score which would give them a 21 to 17 lead. But this would give New England the ball with enough time to run a few plays and perhaps win the game. However, if the Giants didn’t take the bait and just held onto the ball without attempting to score, they would eat up previous seconds making it almost impossible for New England to win.

NY Giants’ Ahmad Bradshaw got the ball, ran toward the goal line, turned around, and then just couldn’t stop himself. He flopped over the goal line. He had to make the touchdown. (See video of Bradshaw’s winning touchdown)

I was working with a client last week that has the opposite problem. They start a lot of projects, but then never get anywhere near the end zone. There were no Ahmad Bradshaw’s to take the ball over.

I think Bradshaw’s instinct was to score and it seemed like he just couldn’t stop himself. And I thought how great it would be if my client were able to create such momentum that people had to get the project across the goal line.Their projects tended to fade away well before they could even see the end zone, let along enter it.

Some years ago, I asked readers of my e-mail newsletter, Tools for a Change to tell me about times when they were able to keep change alive. 23 Great Ideas to Keep Change Alive is a collection of what they told me. Perhaps these ideas lack the excitement of the final minute of the Super Bowl, but I think these people offer some great advice.

Related Blogs

Last weekend, I called into a planning meeting of a non-profit where I volunteer. Although I appreciated being invited to this important meeting, I was dreading spending 3 1/2 hours on the phone. If my experience was a guide, this was going to be long and boring. I expected to drift in and out of attentiveness. I even placed a stack of “to do” items on my desk and had Angry Birds at the ready just in case. . .

It didn’t start well. The meeting started late, so the handful of us who had called in sat in limbo waiting for people to arrive. Then there were the obligatory technical glitches with the conference line – an echo when someone spoke, someone couldn’t hear, we couldn’t hear them, etc. – and partially overhearing informal chatter as people settled in. I felt like Woody Allen in Stardust Memories. He sits alone on an old and dirty passenger train.  He glances across the tracks and sees another train where an elegant party is taking place. Fun people having fun.  I wanted to be there.

But, then the meeting changed — just like that. Suddenly I was on the cool train. The chairperson went over the agenda. It looked good  and it  seemed like it was going to cover the issues that were essential for us to address. A board member posed a set of questions that grabbed me. These were important and, for my money, the right questions to be asking. I wanted to be talking about these things. We were told that we would be spending a good part of the meeting addressing those questions in smaller work groups. I was engaged. I even volunteered to take on some extra tasks. It was a great meeting.

I was amazed at how quickly my inertia turned into excitement. There was nothing fancy about the technology. No video hook-up. We easily could have used a traditional old-school conference call line and it would have worked just as well. We didn’t need glitz, we needed conversation. And I think there were only three slides for the entire meeting: the agenda, and the lists of questions. So simple.

I think three things made this a productive meeting:

1. The topic was critically important. And everyone in the meeting knew that before they entered the meeting.
2. We were expected to contribute to help create solutions.
3. And the format allowed us to talk. We were in small groups with clear tasks.

Since I expect that you probably have been the prisoner of mind-numbing conference calls, perhaps you might consider using this approach. And if I am ever in one of your meetings, I hope you do take these ideas to heart. I’ll try to return the favor.

Related Blogs

Making a compelling case for change is the most important point in the life of a change — and the most neglected. Making a case is not just an intellectual exercise. People also need to feel the importance in their bones, and they need to trust the people delivering the information. When any of those are absent, people are likely to mutter:

Here are a few of the resources you can use today to make a more compelling case for change.

How to Build Institutional Muscle This short article deals with ways to help expand the pool of leadership thinking throughout your organization.

Open Book Management This approach is exactly what it says it is. Open Book Management invites you to open the books so that people not only see the numbers that drive the business, but see how those numbers connect to their own work.

Making a Case for Change is a list of lots of options for letting people know that something new is needed.

Many other resources  A couple of podcasts, more articles, and related blog posts.

Hope these ideas help.

Related Blogs

Interesting post in the ASSIEM blog of 20 signs that signal unhappy workers. I wouldn’t take the list at face value (see my reply to that post below) but it sure is a good starting point for looking at your organization.

• Increase in conflict amongst team members
• Increase in conflict between manager and employees
• Rudeness or unruliness
• Lack of enthusiasm
• Lack of engagement
• De-motivation
• Avoidance of work and/or making decisions
• Emotional distress
• Disorganised work environment
• Decreased productivity
• Not reaching expected targets or project/task delays
• Customer complaints
• Manager morale is low
• Bullying (whether obvious or subtle) – between employees or manager to employee
• Complaints about boredom
• Constantly working through lunch or long hours in the office
• Gossip and grapevine discussions re redundancy, reduced hours, lack of promotion/remuneration etc
• Communication shut down towards the manager
• Negative attitude to new projects or any change required of them
• Increased staff turnover

Here was my reply to that post:

Thanks for a fine list of things to consider. But I do hope that your readers don’t assume that the presence of any of of these items signals unhappy workers. I am quite happy (I work for myself) but I am wildly disorganized and postpone some decisions. You could argue that I am not as organized as I would like, but I am happy and pretty productive. (i.e. in business since 1978, had a few books published, and clients still call me.) Nevertheless, I think the list is well worth our attention. Any one of the items could be the tip of a very big iceberg.

Related Blogs

You sticky note story reminded of when I attempted to learn to Telemark (it is a technique that allows cross-country skiers to sort of replicate the downhill moves of “real” skiers.)

When I saw that the cross country center taught lessons, I signed up for the next morning. And then I had a sleepless night. I wasn’t a skier. I was getting older. I’ll make a fool out of myself. And the list of things that kept me awake kept getting longer.

Morning came and I drove over to the ski center. I was told my teacher’s name was Chip. So I immediately pictured a rugged Olympian who had no time for beginners. That didn’t help.

It turns out he was a really nice guy and a fine teacher. For instance, he gave clear performance feedback. His performance coaching would make ASTD members drool with envy.

Whenever he wanted to give me feedback, he’s ski over to where I was lying down and tell me what I had done wrong.

But the first time I did it right, he yelled out, “Yea.” I wanted more “yeas.” And as the morning went on i started getting more yeas. I felt great and my skiing improved. That was my sticky.

Related Blogs

I was taking part in a conversation on LEAN. Someone posed the question about what incentives people needed in order to support LEAN (a waste reduction process). As I read through the thoughtful responses, I noticed there was little about why people might be motivated to support LEAN in the first place. The responses spoke of incentives, providing good direction, and so forth. Nothing alluding to the importance of understanding why a change was even needed. Basic, but often overlooked. here is how I responded.

like a lot of what’s been said especially those comments that encourage people to be part of the process and see the value of what LEAN can offer.  I agree with the comments that most people come to work wanting to do a good job.

One thing seems to be missing though, and I think it is missing in a lot of organizational change projects.  Leaders fail to make a compelling case that a change is needed. (Kotter refers to this as sense of urgency). I describe it as Why before How. People need to see WHY a change is needed before they are interested in what and HOW they are going to do it.

The WHY has nothing to do with LEAN itself, but everything to do with the conditions and pressures facing the organization today. WHY should get people to say, “Wow! How are we going to tackle that?”

In an effort to get the work started, well-meaning leaders often take WHY for granted and move right to HOW. I believe people need to see and feel the need to change.  PowerPoint usually does not put fire into people’s bellies. PowerPoint (the influence tool of choice in many organizations) is good at providing data, but falls short when it comes to the emotional wallop that lets people feel that a change is needed. I recall a company that lost a major contract that resulted in their losing over half of their revenues. Instead of the usual presentations and executive pronouncements, they started the planning meeting off with someone from the contracting office of their former customer. I was told that you could hear a pin drop as this person told them why they lost. The speaker didn’t need to be dynamic or have good stories. People in that company wanted to hear what she had to say.

Once a critical mass of stakeholders see WHY change is needed, then most can’t wait to 1. work with leaders to find a way to tackle the problem or seize the opportunity, and 2. do what it takes to make the change a success.

Related Blogs

My prediction for the new year: Your organization will initiate many major changes with considerable hope and fanfare. But, by the end of the year, most will have failed, gone way over time and budget, or only given you some low hanging fruit. Statistics show us that year after year only about 30 percent of changes in organizations are successful.

There is one thing you could do that just might increase your success rate tremendously.  (I know you may be thinking that I am going to suggest an expensive consulting intervention or complex technical solution, but my suggestion is actually quite simple.)

Set a single compelling goal. That’s it.

First, allow me to tell you a story about some stunning positive changes occurring in inner-cities.

In Don’t Shoot, researcher David Kennedy wondered why our approaches to dealing with gang violence were so ineffective. With some 25 years of research on the streets, he found that our assumptions about gang members and violence were wrong, consequently our approaches to improving conditions didn’t work. He found that the criminal justice system couldn’t just take a “massive one-size-fits-all” approach to problems. The strategy had to be highly focused.

“It was narrow – don’t shoot. The normal frame said, don’t be in gangs, don’t commit crimes, don’t sell drugs, don’t carry weapons, don’t violate your probation, don’t drink and drug. Turn your life around. . . . This cut to the chase: Don’t hurt people. Say any more – don’t carry guns, don’t sell drugs, don’t recruit kids into your gang – you couldn’t back it up. There was just too much of it, and too little of us.” (Don’t Shoot: One Man, A Street Fellowship, and the End of Violence in Inner-City America (David Kennedy. Bloomsbury USA. 2011)

Here’s what they did. Most of the offenders were either on parole or probation, so they had to come to meetings when asked. Leaders picked a gang leader. When he walked in (and it was almost always a he), the gang leader saw his family, church leaders, and neighbors. These people told him that they needed him – his family and his community needed him. The authorities said that they would put away their file on him provided that he and his gang didn’t kill anyone. If there was even a single fatal shooting, police and the justice system would come down hard and most likely send him and others away for a long time.

Kennedy said that the programs that worked used “focused deterrence” – focus on one problem and on the group of core offenders.  (The statistics suggest that this highly focused approach which includes law enforcement, family, community leaders and key offenders approach is amazingly effective.)  Some cities have seen violence decrease by as much as sixty-six percent.

I think the implications from Don’t Shoot could be profound for our work in organizations as well. Here are the connections that jump off the page at me. I imagine that you can think of others.

Effective programs focus on a single thing. Too many organizational changes bundle all manner of grandiose goals. This may sound good and touch on all the issues that various groups think are important, but these goals lack focus. It’s hard, maybe even impossible, to set priorities and develop plans when everything is considered a top priority.

In dealing with gang violence the focus was don’t shoot. If you do, the world will come crashing down around you. Instead of trying to tackle everything that needed to be corrected, they chose one big thing. And, they found that by reducing shootings, it made communities safer and other problems began to dissipate.

Often when people tried to reduce violence in their cities, they assumed that they needed to fix all of the things that they believed created it: racism, residents’ dislike of police, no jobs, crumbling schools, and so forth. When gang members (and others in the community) realized that law enforcement and social programs couldn’t possibly deliver, they continued business as usual.  And others in the community felt they had been lied to about the grand promises of a better community. Don’t shoot tells you what is expected in just two words. Don’t shoot tells everyone that this is where we are going to focus our attention.

Pick one thing to focus on that everyone can see is important. And that everyone can easily see if you are making progress. As Jack Stack says in The Great Game of Business, you need to identify the critical number. When Stack and a couple of business partners bought Springfield ReManufacturing, the debt to equity ratio was 89:1. They knew that paying interest on that massive debt every month was their critical number. If they didn’t meet it, the banks could take their company away from them.

Too often, our scorecards are filled with too much data and this dilutes the message. That’s why don’t shoot and Stack’s bring in $X to pay the interest this month are so clear and compelling.

The people with a stake in the outcome are engaged.  There’s lots of good research about the importance of engagement in the workplace. And yet, too many changes fail to involve people in planning or leading portions of the change. (By the way, a question and answer period at the end of a mind-numbing PowerPoint presentation is not engagement.) Efforts for better change  find ways to ensure that people are invited to roll-up-their-sleeves and make the changes successful.

Kennedy describes how all affected parties (police, the courts, social workers, educators, churches and the gang leaders) were working together to reduce violence. Jack Stack writes that everyone at Springfield ReManufacturing knew the critical and number and knew how their work contributed to servicing the debt.

Combine Reality, Hope, Support, and a Simple Plan

While the clear and simple goal is important, it rests within the context of reality and support.

Reality. Effective changes must address the status quo. People need to feel the need for change in their bones. That can be painful, sobering, or embarrassing, but it is essential. People need to face reality. In the Don’t Shoot approach, people in those communities desperately wanted the violence to end, and they realized that the usual way of trying to fix the problem didn’t work. And gang leaders needed to see why their behavior had to change. At Springfield ReManufacturing everyone was expected to act like an owner in finding ways to meet the critical number every month. (Once the company paid off its debt, the critical number changed. But, they always had a critical number.)

Hope. Reality without hope leads to depression. Hope comes from an inspiring goal that people believe can be attained. Focusing on reduction in violence seemed difficult but possible.

Support. People in organizations need all types of support (e.g. money, time, access to other key players) and they need to feel like people are rooting for them or maybe even have their backs. By asking family, clergy, and community leaders to speak about what they need from the gang leader is saying in effect, “We believe in you. We believe you are a leader. We want you to succeed so that our community can succeed.” That’s the makings of a lot of support.  When the owners of a small company said, “we want you to act like owners” they were demonstrating their belief in the people who worked with them.

As you start planning  for the new year, I hope that you’ll consider the simplicity and wisdom of Don’t Shoot. I wish you well. (And, as always, I welcome your comments.)

Related Blogs

In spite of my aversion to resolutions that must begin on January 1, I love this list written by Woody Guthrie in 1942. “Wash teeth, if any” being my favorite.

I just completed a survey asking about my experience buying a new car. I think I hated filling it out worse than I hated actually buying the car. The salesperson was very good. No complaints. But there were a few things about the dealership that I would have rated a little lower. But, the salesperson asked a favor. He said that I would be getting a survey from the manufacturer. “Would I please rate everything a 10?” He explained that his pay was directly linked to top scores.

I happen to believe in the potential value of feedback (I even wrote a book on the subject), but this process was a parody of good feedback. The only person to benefit was the salesperson. The company will learn nothing about the quality of this dealership. The dealership won’t learn anything about what this customer really thought about the entire sales process.  And, while the salesperson will make his commission, he will learn nothing about areas in which he might improve.

P.S. As I was writing this blog post, the salesperson called to say thanks for completing the survey. I told him I was glad to help him, and then told him about this blog post and that I did have feedback for the dealership. His response: “Thanks for filling it out. If I can do anything to serve you in the future. . .” Ah, feedback.

I am not big on resolutions. Exercise facilities will be jammed from January 2 until February 15 or thereabouts, and then only the regulars will remain. For most the resolutions to lose weight, etc. etc. will be forgotten. I figure if I need to do something different, I ought to try to start making a change whenever it occurs to me that some change might be a good idea. Nevertheless, I am always eager to find a planning/organizing system that can make following my plans a little bit easier.

Kaihan Krippendorff posted Hack Your Productivity: A Time Management Geek’s 10-Minute Solution on the Fast Company page. I like what he has to say. Here’s what hooked me: “First, let me tell you what it’s not. This is not a visioning method. In other words, this method does not imply that by envisioning an outcome–a new job, a successful fundraising meeting, winning a sale–you will realize the outcome. My first roommate, and first officemate when I joined McKinsey, was the coach of the U.S. National Rugby Team in a prior life. He shared with me that he, and many elite athletes, envision a game in minute detail before they get on the field. But just envisioning victory is not enough. You have to get on the field. This simple process stimulates both–the vision and turf, the dream and the action.”

He created a planning tool. Simple, huh? I hope you’ll take a look.  I’ve only been using for a few days, but I do seem to be getting more productive work done. And that’s unusual for me over the holidays. . . . Also, I think the tool might be very helpful on change management projects. I’ll let you know.

Majdi Alhman posed a fascinating question in the Lean Six Sigma Forum on LinkedIn: what is the ninth waste (in lean Six Sigma)? You might have thought that he would have received a few comments. But he received many. He summarized the list and I thought I’d share it with you.

While I like the simplicity of a list of eight, with so many contenders for 9th on the list, perhaps we should consider a longer list. At the very least, I think those of us who work in support of Lean Six Sigma ought to pull out Majdi’s list and seriously consider these items when periodically just to make sure we are on track. And we might pull out the list on any major change management project. Thanks, Majdi and Lean Six Sigma Forum.

Here is his list:

Thanks all for the overwhelming and interesting response on this question. I have summarized all comments chronologically so new readers can easily join this thread. Hope I didn’t miss any information.

1. Unused competence/Underutilized resources(Christer Wahlberg, Jim Pruitt, Vinod Kumar, Germán Gosalbez,diedria Preston, Bruce Dellaposta, Roosevelt Ratliff III , Kaye Woodard,Gerald Matson
2. Unused space – from a workshop perspective (Majdi Alhmah, Nirupama Palyam)
3. Unused Space – from a global perspective (Liviu Ibanescu)
4. Government (Steven Bonacorsi, chaitanya chowdary koduru)
5. Meetings (Eric Gemunder, Majdi Alhmah, Andrea Evans, David Xu Dong, Dan Willis, Cuneyt Harputluoglu, Navjot Singh Boparai)
6. Creating an additional waste (Alex MacPhie)
7. Unemployment (Ted Weiler, Paul Gundersen)
8. Complexity (Fred Levko)
9. Poor communication (Mutahir Hasan Khan)
10. Safety & Accidents (Mutahir Hasan Khan, David Reno, Fabio Verdinelli)
11. Inadequate methods/equipment (Mutahir Hasan Khan)
12. Poor planning (Mutahir Hasan Khan, Steve Phillips, Leon Smith)
13. Low employee engagement (John Harrison, Carlos A. Sanchez)
14. Performance appraisal (Venkat K)
15. Things to appease your manager not the organization (Venkat K)
16. Excess use of resources (Arun K Mishra)
17. Entropy (Andrea evans, Fabio Verdinelli)
18. Too much communication (James Thottan)
19. Excess and unnecessary information (Majdi Alhmah)
20. Motivation (Antony P, Cuneyt Harputluoglu)
21. Decision taking time (Vishwanathan C)
22. Inspection (Scott Thor, Vinod Kumar)
23. Uncertainty (Alexander Glazkov)
24. Expectation (Sateesh Muggalla)
25. Controls (Cesar A. Cartagena)
26. To have too many No. 1 priorities (Rolf Nitsche)
27. Excess costs including too much overhead (Divyang Joshi)
28. Rework (Vinod Kumar )
29. Powerpoint (James Richardson)
30. unfulfilled jobs (Paul Gundersen)
31. Harming environment (Stijn Schretlen)
32. Over management (Kevin Baldwin)
33. Inefficient communication (Srivatsa R, David Xu Dong, Edward Malek, Pooja Gaddh)
34. Lack of creativity (Carlos Young)
35. Working on the wrong thing (Gay Kheun (YiQian) Tan)
36. Risk/Unsafe practices (O. C. P)
37. Leadership (Daniel Walker)
38. Industrial politic (Shivagouda Patil)
39. ENERGY & WATER (Rodolfo Sanchez, Cynthia Martinez, Fabio Verdinelli)
40. Over-regulations (Sonia Tardajos)
41. Poor Management (Carolina Nuñez)
42. Politics (Peter Reynolds, Stephan Bals)
43. Audits and Standards like ISO…etc (Majdi Alhmah, Rodolfo Sanchez)
44. Supply Chain Management (Majdi Alhmah)
45. Searching for answer to the questions that have no value.(Lutfi Apiliogullari)
46. Excess job roles (Kartik Balasubramanian)
47. Lost Opportunity (Priyaa Gurunathan)
48. The waste of looking for other wastes (Glen Knight)
49. Written complicated procedures (Massimo Cinotti)
50. Mismanagement of natural resources (Rika Visser)
51. Paper (Roosevelt Ratliff III)
52. A product or service that does not meet customer needs. (Gregg Van Citters)
53. Emails (Pooja Gaddh)
54. The waste of “Just-In-Case…..” (Larry Bartlett)
55. Just to point out that some above mentioned the waste of human skills which is actually the 8th Waste)
56. Inefficient use of technology (Varun Bhatia)
57. Congested space (Nirupama Palyam)
58. WRONGFUL EMPOWERMENT (Carlos Tenorio)

Related Blogs

I don’t think it is the consultant’s job to bring change to our clients’ organizations. It’s their organizations, so they get to decide. The decision to change or not change is a leadership function. Once we start making those calls for them, then we are acting in a management role. And I think that’s inappropriate.

But giving advice on what and how they ought to change can be pretty tempting since we often have experience with similar changes that allows us to see possible train wrecks in the making. And giving advice can be a tempting for our clients as well. First, they don’t have to grapple with their own reluctance to change because they can push back at us. (By the way, I believe that whenever there is a strong want, there is a strong resistance trying to protect the status quo.) When they resist us, they fail to own their own resistance to change. Or,2.  if they do accept our advice, they’ve got some to blame if it all goes wrong.  I recall some managers telling me that they would always hire premier consulting firms, so that the risk of failure was carried by those outsiders. “I know the project failed, but we brought in Acme Consulting, so we had the best working on this. Nothing else we could have done.”

I have been greatly influenced by The Paradoxical Theory of Change by gestalt psychologist Arnold Beisser. (1970) He writes that we can’t make anyone change. He suggests that the therapist or the consultant in this case, “. . . rejects the role of “changer,” for his strategy is to encourage, even insist, that the patient be where and what he is. He believes change does not take place by “trying,” coercion, or persuasion, or by insight, interpretation, or any other such means. Rather, change can occur when the patient abandons, at least for the moment, what he would like to become and attempts to be what he is. The premise is that one must stand in one place in order to have firm footing to move and that it is difficult or impossible to move without that footing.”

So, if I follow his advice, I respond to my clients’ requests. They called me for a reason. As reluctant as they may be, they do want something. I use that vision/concern/whatever to begin to help them see all the forces at play vividly. I especially want to help my clients see the forces that maintain the status quo. I may “insist” that my clients pay attention to the data in front of them. I encourage them to look closely at the survey data, financial analyses, trends, and so forth. I may even offer my opinion, but it’s not my job to try to make them change.

The paradox is that this approach often allows clients to get excited about possibilities. Resistance diminishes since no one is trying to tell them that their view of the world is wrong (don’t we get angry when someone tries to tell us that they know better than we do? I do, at any rate).

I find the Paradoxical Theory to be liberating for me and my clients. Instead my trying to get them to do something, I can work at helping them see the situation with greater depth and clarity. When this happens, it is common to see clients get excited and start taking action on whatever prompted this conversation in the first place.

Rick

Related Blogs

(Photo of Matthew Lesko. Gawker.com)

Probably no surprise, but employees that identify with their organizations make more money.  OI (organizational identification) stems from corporate character. Not what the organization says it will do in its values statements and marketing materials, but in what it really does. Researchers found that many employees pick up their OI from their managers. It seems there is a direct link from managers’ OI to employees’ OI to customer spending.  (From a blog post by Donald R. Lichtenstein, James G. Maxham III, and Richard G. Netemeyer)

“Stephen Brown and Son Lam, two professors from the University
of Houston analyzed over 28 studies of employee engagement
and customer service quality (Journal of Retailing, 2008). They
conclude that ‘Managers should realize that satisfied, motivated, and
committed front-line employees constitute a powerful engine for the
delivery of service quality and customer satisfaction.’ ” (From Employee Engagement to What End?)

Related Blogs

I’m glad you learned some things from your old boss, but there are some big things missing. First, your boss or you don’t mention the importance of clear goals. Edwin Locke’s research found clear goals were the top motivator. 4. And I strong disagree wiht never criticize or correct. I think your point is to engage people in conversations about performance. I like that, but if your boss really asked: “Was that the best way to approach the problem? Why not? Have any ideas on what you could have done differently?” – is condescending. People don’t want to be humiliated, insulted or have their intelligven insulted, but people who care about their performance usually want guidance on ways to make things better. . . One last thing that motivates people and that’s work that makes a difference. Without clear goals, work that matters, and honest productive feedback, everything else may be nice but merely fluff.

Related Blogs

I doubt that anyone would argue with your four points. I’d like to add something to point three. Creating a culture where change is the norm is rare and I find that my clients need help in addressing that challenging issue. Here are some that seem to work:
1. Open the books so that people see the financial situation, trends, opportunities and threats. Any of the books on Open Book Management  should help you get started. I liked Jack Stack and John Case’s writing.
2. Evaluate changes that worked in your organization, compare them to those that failed. Then create a template so that everyone in the organization has a common language for for change. This template should be just that — a 10,000′ guide, and not manuals filled with worksheets, etc.
3. Build evaluate into the process. Expect that every major  change gets evaluated so people can learn what worked, what didn’t, and what we would change next time. Without this requirement, people often allow changes to just die and no one learns. And there is no chance to learn from mistakes or repeat successes.

Related Blogs

I won’t repeat what they say in their post, but here’s what I like about the five questions. They are the type of critical questions that should be asked but are often just taken for granted. It’s easy to say, “Sure, we’re ready for change” without slowing things down enough to find out if we really are ready.

My suggestion: ask the executive (or planning) team  is look at Keller and Price’s five questions and tell them that purpose of the next meeting is to discuss our responses to those critical questions. If you are serious about doing change right, I believe attention to these questions could make a big difference in how you plan your next new initiaitve.

I wish you well.  – Rick

Related Blogs

I like Kotter’s eight steps. He deserves a lot of credit for coming up with a practical and logical set of steps. Many of my own clients use his model when they think about change. In reading Kotter’s classic book, Leading Change, there is one thing implied in his model, but not addressed as deeply as I would like. And that’s resistance. I advise my clients who use Kotter’s model, to ask a single question at every step along the way: To what extent are various stakeholders supporting this change  and to what extent are they resisting? Too often leaders (and their consultants) go through the stages as if they were steps in a recipe. (Just add 22 PowerPoint slides, let the points seep, and then bake until done.) It doesn’t work that way. (And I am pretty certain Kotter would agree with me.) Each stage demands a feedback loop. For example, his first step is creating a sense of urgency. I agree completely with that. But, it is too easy for us to look at what we do to create this urgency and not ask ourselves, were we successful? What’s the data that tells us people feel fire in their bellies.  It’s like using driving instructions from your GPS without making sure that you really were supposed to turn left into that corn field.

Another issue that I believe is implied in his writing, but deserves more attention is engaging lots of people in the process. A guiding coalition can be a critically important step, but that often isn’t enough. Get lots of people involved. When high involvement is handled well it can be a significant force in making all the stages work more effectively because it increases the number of people who care about making the change a success. You have higher engagement, less resistance, and more leaders scattered throughout the organization.

Of course, everything I just said applies to any model of change you use, it just happens that Kotter’s is the most widely quoted and discussed.

For a refresher on Kotter’s steps from the man himself: The 8-Step Process for Leading Change

- Rick

Related Blogs

Here’s what he said: “It was narrow – don’t shoot. The normal frame said, don’t be in gangs, don’t commit crimes, don’t sell drugs, don’t carry weapons, don’t violate your probation, don’t drink and drug. Turn your life around. . . . This cut to the chase: Don’t hurt people. Say any more – don’t carry guns, don’t sell drugs, don’t recruit kids into your gang – you couldn’t back it up. There was just too much of it, and too little of us.” Once gang members (and others in the community) realized that law enforcement couldn’t possibly  deliver, people felt they had been lied to. Kennedy said that programs that worked used “focused deterrence” – focus on one problem and on the group of core offenders.

The statistics suggest that this highly focused approach which includes law enforcement, family, community leaders and key offenders approach are amazingly effective.

What are the implications for those of us who work in organizations?

Plenty. (And I have only begun to read and think about the lessons in this fine book.)

Effective programs focus on a single thing. In gang violence it was – don’t shoot. If you do, the world will come crashing down around you. Instead of trying to tackle everything that needs to be corrected, they chose one big thing. And, they found that by reducing shootings, it made communities safer and other problems began to dissipate.

The community was deeply involved. They held meetings with key gang leaders and told them that they had a file on them and were prepared to prosecute them, but if they cooperated, law enforcement would put the file away. Then parents, church leaders, and others told the gang leader how important he was to their community. His leadership could make a difference. They said that the community counted on him. They needed him. Some organizations take a “who moved my cheese” approach that softly threatens people. Mice: either change or you’ll die.

Some organizations focus too much on appreciative creation of visions. The Don’t Shoot approach links the realities of the situation (i.e. unless we change our doors could close, just look at these trends and numbers) along with the  strong message that you (employees, supervisors, managers) are critical to our success. )

On the radio program Fresh Air, Kennedy was asked about the “broken windows” approach that some communities take. If broken windows etc. are fixed it sends a signal and other things are ignored. That seems to be true, but some communities not only fix windows, they stop cars for the least offense. In short, they turn the neighborhoods into police states. Violence and drug use does appear to go down, but it destroys the community in the process. The lesson for leaders: there is a big cost to a command and control approach to change.

What are your thoughts?

Related Blogs

I agree with many of the comments that senior leadership needs to take the “leading” part of leading change seriously. It is easy to blame these people, but in my experience as an advisor to senior level men and women, most want to do things well. They certainly want their projects to be successful and they often believe that engaging people in the process might improve planning, implementation, and results. And yet, something goes wrong.
So, ignoring those leaders who come from the Attila school of management, here are some of things that stop otherwise good leaders from leading change effectively:

1. They know what to do, but don’t know how to do it. It’s the 10,000 hours thing. Where can budding leaders try things out and fail? Dust themselves off and try again? Sports teams would never send new athletes on the field without a lot of practice and opportunities to play against increasing levels of competition. Not so in management. We buy them a book, send them to training, and then assign them to a major project where failure is not an option.

Roger Bannister Breaking 4-Minute Mile Barrier

2. No role models. Adding to the first point, most of us need to see things done differently before we believe it can be done differently. Most know the story about Roger Bannister breaking the 4-minute mile mark in 1954, and how that event seemed to open the flood gates for more runners to achieve the same goal in fairly short order. (As an aside, it is less known that in 1948, Bannister declined the chance to be considered for a spot on the British Olympic Team because he felt that he wasn’t ready. How many leaders are allowed to say, “I’m not ready.”?)

3. The organization values heroic leaders who take charge and get things done. It’s an appealing and romantic notion of the lone hero standing tall on top of the hill, but it’s not how change happens in organizations. Most large changes demand the support of a host of people who have a skae in the process and the outcome. Unless the organization acknowledges and rewards leaders who take the time to build these relationships, then we’re going to suffer from a lot of junior John Wayne’s trying to make things happen.

Why do you think change fails so often?

Related Blogs

So, I was thinking, what if leaders were to find a few people who had the courage to tell them the truth about how they lead change and the guts to tell the leader where the pitfalls might be. It could make a huge difference.  Leaders could see the potential consequences of what they were planning before they left for the parade. In Hans Christian Andersen’s, story it was the child who could see that the emperor was suffering a wardrobe malfunction.

My suggestion. Do this informally. I think it is best if the leader picks his or her own mentors. Since it is so easy for us to blow off feedback (or try to kill the messenger), choosing the receive feedback from someone we are willing to listen to could make all the difference.

Here is a link to that blog: Reverse Mentoring – less used, but potent employee engagement tool

Related Blogs

I welcome your comments.

Related Blogs

It’s pretty common for a group to meet and someone asks, “Any ideas on how we should proceed?” This sounds like a good thing to do. It is inclusive. It shows that the boss wants to hear your ideas. And, we tend to believe that these open discussions encourage a wide range of ideas. Unfortunately, diversity of opinion is the very thing that suffers during these meetings. When groups try to generate ideas, they seem to “get stuck on each other’s ideas.”

In a recent study, researchers looked at the number and diversity of opinion when people were asked for ideas. Those who worked alone “outperformed the real chat groups, both with the number of ideas and the diversity of them.” A second group of people who received a few cues from others did less well. And groups that met to generate ideas did the worst.

The research indicates that people should think about ideas on their own and then get together to discuss them.

If my experience is any indication of what’s going on in many organizations, we seem to have forgotten the importance of Irving Janis’ Groupthink.  The timing of McGregor’s article (see link above) is great.  I am about to be part of a planning process for an organization I care deeply about. Thanks to that article, I am going to suggest that we all do some thinking alone before we meet to develop plans.

What are your ideas for addressing the dilemma of wanting to get people involved and avoiding the pitfalls of trying to make decisions in groups? Please comment. (operators are standing by)

Related Blogs

Related Blogs

The discipline of sound change management can be an important tool for small companies that want to grow. But, sadly, many smaller businesses act like the big kids and simply inflict change on others. The track record for that approach is painfully bad.

For example, many changes fail because people never got the message that this change was critical to the success of the organization. It is far easier to communicate that message in a smaller organizations. And in smaller businesses, it is easier to get people deeply involved in the changes that affect them.  (BTW, the research on employee engagement is stunning. Highly engaged employees are worth far more than what you pay them.)

Even though most of the books and articles on leading change tend to focus on large organizations, the principles and practices of getting people up-to-speed and engaged are no different in smaller businesses. But, because you lead a smaller organization, good change management should be easier to apply. (It is no wonder that the powerful concept of Open Book Management took hold in smaller companies.)

Introduction to Change without Migraines (a free e-book) is quick way to see if the practice of sound change management is a good fit for you.

Related Blogs

Late breaking news: communication requires giving – and receiving – information. The “and receiving” part of communications plans is often missing. Corporate communications departments salivate at the thought that they can create catchy phrases that will adorn walls and commemorative coffee cups at planning meetings. (Hey kids, collect the full set of failed-change mugs.) And they prepare documents and slides that walk people through each step of the change. Even though those PowerPoint presentations may be clearly written and include enticing clip art (and just who doesn’t love clip art and generic photos of happy teams?), they still can fail to communicate in one big way. The part about “receiving information” is absent. Shouldn’t people just suck it up and go along? Makes no difference what you think they should do. The truth is: they won’t go along. They need to be engaged. Your communication plan needs to address three areas: 1. Information. (That’s where the traditional communications plan comes in.) 2. Employee Engagement. People need to be able to influence changes that affect them. Oh, and talking at people for an hour and then asking, “Are there any questions?” is not all-that-engaging. The best communication comes when people are in the room helping shape thinking and making decisions. 3. Trust. The people you are communicating with need to believe that you (or who you represent) can be counted on to act in a trustworthy fashion. If you wander into Honest Ed’s Car Lot, no amount of information about a choice car, or engagement in selecting the options you want will convince most people to buy. They need to trust Honest Ed. And with a name like Honest Ed, he’s going to have a tough time getting your attention. Don’t be the Honest Ed of your organization.

Related Blogs

Note: This is a companion post to What’s Your Communication Plan About the Change Initiative?), I discuss the range of things that need to be covered as well as the need to make certain that communication is a conversation and not a presentation.

How to Prepare the Message You Want to Communicate Around Change

So, how do you prepare the message? Think of it in two distinct parts: Why? and How?.

The Why? message needs to address the reasons why a change is needed. The question “Why?” does not talk about a plan for addressing the challenge or opportunity facing you. All this stage covers is the reasons why something must be done now!

Making sure people see and feel why a change is needed today is perhaps the most important – and the most neglected stage in the life of a change. (See Making a Compelling Case for Change in my free e-book, Introduction to Change without Migraines . http://www.rickmaurer.com/wp/home/building-a-foundation-for-effective-change-ebook for what to cover when addressing Why.).

Since some projects last a long time, you may find that you need to remind people why this change is still critically important. And whenever new people join the team, they need to see Why? before How?.

The How? message is what we usually think of when we talk about communicating change. This step can only come after the Why? message has been delivered and believed. The How message comes directly out of Project Planning 101: what’s our vision (or goals), objectives, benchmarks, timelines, and so forth. It needs to include lots of opportunities for people to get questions answered. Just delivering the message isn’t enough. When we are faced with the prospect of massive change, our ability to take in information decreases. We may not want to be dense or resistant, but we simply can’t attend to fact and figures when we are worried about our future.

In a future post I will cover how to communicate after the initial Why? and How? messages have been delivered and understood.

Related Blogs

Here are some guidelines for holding a planning meeting.

Follow these Guidelines for Planning Meetings

Many of the tools for getting people involved have a few elements in common. Here is a tip sheet of things to consider when you plan a meeting that focuses on change. (These are pretty good ideas to use in other meetings as well.)  

• Invite representatives from all groups that have a stake in the outcome of this change. When possible, invite everyone. If that’s not possible, make sure all groups and interests are represented.
• Consider using a planning group made up of many diverse interests to help you plan the meeting.
• Pre-assign seats so that each table of eight to ten people is a maximum mixture of the whole. Every table should be a microcosm of the entire organization. Each table should include various departments, interests, and levels of the organization.
• Allow time for conversation. Don’t try to speed things up.
• Emphasize conversation, not presentation. Except for an introductory presentation that sets the stage (and even that might not be necessary), don’t make speeches.
• Before getting reactions to a presentation, make sure people are clear about what has just been presented. Ask for questions of clarification before you get people’s reactions. If you miss this step, people will be responding from their assumption about what they think they heard, rather than responding to the actual idea.
• Invite resistance. The Real Time Strategic Change and Whole Scale Change processes use a simple technique. After a proposal is made, each table is asked to respond to three questions: What makes you glad (about this proposal)? What makes you mad? What would you add (or change)?
• Tell people how you will use this information. And then keep your promises. If you say you’ll get back to them within three days, don’t miss that deadline.
• Stay awake. Meeting agendas are merely roadmaps. Actual driving conditions will vary. If it seems clear that people are resistant to something, take time to explore what’s in their hearts and on their minds. I have seen good meetings disintegrate simply because the leaders felt compelled to get through the agenda in spite of what was occurring in front of them.
• Be honest. If some items are not negotiable, tell people, and tell them why. Don’t pretend that everything is open for discussion if that’s not the case. You may take some heat for this, but that’s far better than misleading people.

© 2000 Rick Maurer. Adapted from Building Capacity for Change Source Book (Maurer & Assoicates)

Related Blogs

Last week I was working with all the senior leaders and middle managers for a large city government.  They were launching a number of challenging new programs for their city. They knew they needed an engaged staff if they wanted the changes to get up and running and to make a difference in their community. (Sustainability is the jargon term for that.) 

I started my time with them by asking half the group of 400 to think about a job that they had loved. It could be their current job or a part-time job they had way back in college.  Then list what made it such a great job.

I asked the other half the room to think about a job that they hated. (To illustrate my point, I told them about a good friend who once described his job as, “an acid bath.”)  Then I asked them to list what made the job so bad.

The people who described jobs they hated came up with a ghastly list. No need to depress you, so I won’t list those items here.

But the other group identified things like: the work mattered. I knew what to do. My work was respected. My boss knew when to lead and when to get out of the way.  I worked with great people. I had the tools to do the work.

Perhaps we should alert the media! I can picture cub reporter, Jimmy Olson, running into Perry White’s office yelling, “Boss, I’ve got a story here that will break this town wide open. Here’s what really motivates people.”  OK, so I know this is not late-breaking news. We’ve known that these are the things that motivate and engage people for decades, well before the term employee engagement ever entered our vocabulary.  And yet, that list holds the key, if we only looked down and saw that it had been in our hands all along.

My advice to my client was turn to what you know and use that as a guide. You don’t need a new incentive program, or motivational speakers, slogans, or posters of kittens grasping branches extolling you to “hang in there, baby.”  Let your experience be your guide when it comes to employee engagement

Related Blogs

…

Depending on the study you read, the failure rate of ERP projects can be somewhere between 60 and 90 percent. Although recent studies put the failure rate nearer 60 percent, but still. . .

Those are dreadful numbers. But, the good news is — it doesn’t have to be that way.

The 3 Big Myths about ERP

Getting the Right Software Makes All the Difference.

Yes, you should make sure that the software and the vendor can deliver what you need. But, getting the right software doesn’t address the biggest reason why ERP efforts fail.  ERP scares people. And when people are afraid, they resist change.  Again, it’s all about preparing for change.

It’s All Technical

A study of CIOs found that biggest reason for failure of IT projects was resistance to change. Technical know-how doesn’t address those issues. In fact, when people are overloaded with data, they tune out. Since they can’t follow the endless PowerPoint presentations, they begin to make up stories about what is really going on. And those stories seldom work in your favor.  This is why change readiness is so important to change implementation.

Because We Need ERP, People Will Go Along

It’s easy to assume that people will go along once they realize how important this new enterprise-wide software system will be. And maybe they will, but only after you’ve seen costs on the project soar and deadlines get trashed.

The common denominator in all of those myths is people.  ERP projects tend to be so big, so expensive, and so driven by technical details and plans, that it is easy to forget people. You need people to help plan the changes (through change readiness) that will affect them. (Too often major IT projects have a castor oil feel about them. “Drink it, it’s good for you.” Adults, just like kids, don’t like that.)

What It Takes (Beyond technical Know-How)

After you’ve found the right software for you – one that fits your unique organizational needs and found a vendor who has technical know-how as well as a proven track record for helping you plan and implement – then you need to:

Lead the Change

You can’t delegate the leadership of something as massive as ERP. (You can delegate tasks, but you can’t delegate enthusiasm and commitment.) Everyone needs to know that the most senior leaders are behind this effort. They need to know that ERP is a top priority. And that takes more than just giving a couple of speeches. It requires that leaders protect people’s time to plan and implement the new software system. (ERP is too big to assume people will be able to do it justice while continuing all the other tasks that fill their schedules.) Leaders need to ensure that people have the resources they need to get the job done. And, everyone must believe that your organization’s leaders are the ones in charge – not the consultants.

Address Resistance Before It Ever Becomes Resistance

Most leaders can pretty accurately predict if various stakeholders will support or oppose a change like ERP. But, sadly, they ignore what they know, and move ahead hoping that this time things will be different.

You need to know the extent to which your stakeholders are going to support or resist ERP.  There are three reasons why people could resist you. They might be thinking:

• I don’t get it
• I don’t like it
• I don’t like you

Maybe they don’t understand what this is all about, they are afraid of what it might do to them, and/or they don’t think that you’ve got what it takes to lead this change well. Any of these can kill a project.

The good news is that each of these is on a sliding scale. If they don’t get it, then find ways so that they do understand what you are talking about. If they are afraid of what this change might bring, then address those concerns openly and search for ways to engage people in the process. And if they don’t have trust and confidence in you, then you must find ways to demonstrate that you are worthy of their trust.

A warning:  The most common way of addressing these types of issues is to create a PowerPoint presentation. That might work if they don’t get it, but slides are a terrible way to try to get people engaged or build their trust in you.  Avoid these mind-numbing events.

Building support can be difficult. It may even take precious time. But, without support from stakeholders, you put your project at serious risk of failing. I wish you well.

© 2011 Rick Maurer. Rick is an adviser to change leaders in large organizations on ways to prepare for change readiness, build support and commitment to change. For ideas on ways to build support for ERP (as well as other major changes) take a look at Rick’s book, Beyond the Wall of Resistance (Bard Press 2010). www.rickmaurer.com

…

They do what most of the books fail to do — they look at the underlying reasons why customer service fails and succeeds. (Too often these books just focus on the poor schlub in the call center and miss the reasons why customer service is so bad.)

Recently I purchased a new horn. I play a valve trombone (an unusual instrument) and its hard to find one that plays like it should. People in some online chat rooms kept recommending Kanstul. I sent e-mails to two dealers who carried Kanstul horns with a couple of technical questions.

BTW, I was ready to buy.  When I didn’t get a response to my e-mails, I called one of the dealers. If they could answer the questions and if they had one in stock I was ready to fly 750 miles to try it out — and then buy it on the spot. (You get the picture. I was the type of customer that salespeople salivate to get.)

Customer service asked, “How do you spell Kanstul?” I knew this was not going to be a good call. The rep pulled up the same page as I was looking at and said, “It looks like  a really good horn.” Sorry, but you can’t tell a Stradivarius from a K-Mart violin based on a photo.  I asked, “Do you have one in stock. I will fly out and try the horn.”

He said, “Sorry, but we are located across the US from the retailer and they don’t give us their phone number.” Really!  They should have read Chip and John’s book.

I called the factory and talked to one of the head people. He answered my questions and then told me about a retailer that had customized their horn for a few people and had actually improved it.  Wow. So I called Steve Ferguson at Horn Guys (I had purchased a few smaller items from him over the years and liked him, although to this day I have never met him.) He told me about what he had done to the horn and offered to send me a prototype to try. I got it. Tried it. And ordered a horn. (It is a great horn, by the way.)

…

Digging Deep: Why People Support Your Brilliant Ideas and Why They Resist

My buddy Jacquie McLemore and I are conducting a free 60-minute Podcast through the Gestalt Institute of Cleveland on May 2. The topic: influencing others at work. We will explore the importance of support and resistance when we try to get others interested in our “brilliant” ideas. I hope you’ll take a look. If you like what you see, please join us. And then pass the word. Thanks.

…

You can also download the description of the program from this link as well.

Rick

…

Sue Shellenbarger wrote a fine article, Making Kids Work on Goals for the The Wall Street Journal (3/9/11).

Even though this article focuses on the power of asking children to set somewhat challenging (but not out-of-sight) goals can make a huge difference in performance.  I think you’ll see the mistakes that we make in organizations when it comes to setting goals and her article may give you some ideas on what to do encourage good goal setting.

…

…

BTW, working at the Gestalt Institute of Cleveland is a labor of love. I make no money for my work there. Even though I am using this blog to promote something, its not my mortgage payment that motivates me, it is the quality of what you can learn at the Institute.  Influence. Action. Change!™

I hope you’ll take a look. – Rick

…