Radical face the road to nowhere5/29/2023 ![]() Success under this approach is typically measured by increases in compliance (“40 percent of staff have logged on to the new ERP system”) and decreases in resistance (“the number of employees indicating the new ERP system will help make their work more effective has increased by 30 percent since last quarter”). Or they assume that a lack of feedback reflects agreement and acceptance among their constituents. The process can feel forced people are engaged solely to be converted to the leader’s “side,” rather than to participate in a dialogue about the potential implications of the plan. Yet when leaders assume their answer is the answer, they tend to approach change as they would a political campaign - heavy on slogans and focused on numerical targets akin to contributions and votes. But the use of advanced analytics now allows companies to make real-time decisions that are data-driven. For instance, companies used to choose either slow, costly, data-driven decisions or fast, intuitive judgment calls. ![]() By both/and, we mean identifying a solution that moves beyond the historical limits of an either/or trade-off, an idea advanced by the polarity management methodology of management thinker and author Barry Johnson. When leaders launch an initiative, their ability to achieve “both/and” is not yet proven. For many of the hard questions these leaders are asking, there are no good answers. We are living in a historic moment, one in which trade-offs are central to many of our discussions: Leaders in the public and private sector are weighing the potential costs (economic, medical, and psychological) of opening institutions while COVID-19 is still spreading against the potential costs of staying closed. These leaders ask hard questions and engage in trade-offs as early as possible, talking with those who raise concerns not to gain their compliance, but to improve, refine, and pressure test the proposed change. Yet we have found that the most enduring change initiatives - those that drive real results - are based on leaders’ assumption that they are seeing only part of the picture and thus need to learn more. With this stance, the work of change becomes convincing people and overcoming their resistance, and all too often, box-checking exercises take the place of frank discussion. Its merits are not in question, they believe at most, it might need minor tweaks. Traditionally, leaders have started with the belief that the change they have launched is patently right. Instead, these dialogues reflected a departure from many of the current norms for change management. These were not your typical “socializing” conversations, intended to make people feel included in decisions that have already been made. In the end, the new methodology and practices were adopted in half the time recommended to achieve the goal, embedded in the company’s culture, and recognized for their contributions to customer satisfaction and project quality.īy Jon Katzenbach, Chad Gomes, and Carolyn Black These discussions helped build support and diminish the likelihood that people would retrench when challenged by the inevitable costs, frustrations, and hard work of change. They brainstormed solutions to potential project roadblocks. ![]() To address these concerns, the CIO asked a cross-functional group to consider two questions: If the division adopted the new framework, what would the organization gain? And equally important, what would it lose? Participants were invited to weigh the proposed change for themselves and to consider it from every angle - including the reasons the initiative might not work. Coders would have to make similar sacrifices, as well as face increased oversight through peer reviews. Because they would no longer have the license to customize process and standards, project managers would need to give up independence and creativity. The intended benefits of this shift - higher quality and reliability - were attractive, but the trade-offs were daunting. ![]() In response to these unsettling trends, the chief information officer (CIO) decided to adopt a standard software development methodology and replicable project management practices. At one Fortune 500 insurance company, the IT team had noticed an uptick in quality issues, delays, and dissatisfaction among project sponsors. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |