Organizational Effectiveness Tools:
Organizational Change Management

Balanced Scorecard | > Change Management | Customer Surveys
Employee Surveys | Process Management

One of the most difficult parts of leadership is fostering and managing organizational change. It seems that only a small number of change efforts actually succeed.

There are many reasons for this which have been explored by social and organizational psychologists. Indeed, the entire practice of organizational development is based on change management.

This page is a brief description of some of the principles of successful change efforts. Though we do not have footnotes or references, we are basing this page on solid research.

Change Management and Clarity of Direction

One advantage of gaining the support of other people in a change effort is the way it focuses your own attention and helps you to formulate your thoughts. In gathering the information that supports your case for a change effort, and in discussing it with those who will be affected by it, you can clarify your vision, anticipate and resolve potential problems, and sometimes even realize that the change is misguided, or that there are far better alternative solutions. (Hence the term "two heads are better than one.")

Measurement as an Organizational Change Tool

Measurement (including employee and customer surveys) can actually be used as a change tool:

The numbers (or interview content) provide evidence that change is needed
It can help to clarify the purpose and direction of the change effort, by forcing people to consider its specific impact in unambiguous terms
Measurement is a form of communication - it tells people what you care about.
Tracking the effectiveness of the change effort both tells people that it is important and provides a way to judge how well it is being implemented, or how well it was designed.
The results can be used as a justification for future projects.
The measurement effort can be set up as a framework for expecting and anticipating change, making it seem more controllable and less threatening.

Surveys are a good way to build buy-in because:

if you involve people in design and feedback/action planning, it shows your intent more than words
they provide a way to get everyone, including nay-sayers, involved
the data usually provide an impetus for change
the feedback meetings may break the resistance of individuals who are afraid to speak as others chime in

A traditional top down approach doesn't work as well - you need to train people to cascade it (or cascade it yourself) so that people at all levels get their individual results along with corporate results, and have an opportunity to work with the data and implement solutions.

When done right, surveys are a good way to overcome resistance to change. Think about some of the areas where resistance comes from:

Loss of trust due to past problems

With the survey you can show who you are and that you are trustworthy, by deeds rather than words, helping to overcome this

Belief there is no need to change

The survey results will show the need

No way to overcome the inertia of day-to-day events - "this can wait"

The survey event brings some immediacy to change efforts and makes them top of mind, in the same way that a political demonstration gets the attention of journalists who normally wouldn't find a continuing problem to be newsworthy.

We have developed a special change preparation survey to help in laying the groundwork for change efforts. This survey is designed to find obstacles to change before they imperil the success of the change effort. It is also ideal as a communication vehicle, from leaders to employees - it shows that this initiative is important, and also that employee support is needed.

Resistance and Change Management

Many managers complain that their people resist change. Generally, though, resistance to change is a matter of not gaining consensus at the start of a project.

The best ways to avoid resistance to change are, oddly enough, also the best ways to assure that people are motivated to support the change effort. Involving people from the beginning, clearly explaining the reasons for the change, having a clear strategy, direction, and vision, and respecting the viewpoints of other people are all parts of the process. Using strategic measurement can also be a way of building support.

Starting out with a problem, and working with other people to come up with a solution, can be far more effective than proposing a specific solution and trying to rationalize it. The quality movement has refined many problem-solving techniques which can be used. Often, cross-functional and multi-level teams (to cross both functional and level-of-management boundaries) are used to both solve problems and implement solutions, with minimal involvement by top management. This brings more involvement and dramatically cuts resistance to change, while magically giving top managers more free time.

People often do not like change they cannot control. However, if they lead or have a substantial influence on change, they are more likely to embrace it. This is one reason why Toyota's system at NUMMI - of giving people who make suggestions the power and responsibility to carry them out (if they are approved) - works so well. Many nonprofits use the same system.

Process consulting can be very helpful in ensuring that the contributors to the change effort are fully involved and committed, and also in avoiding groupthink issues that can "turn off" other parts of the organization.

Timing is often a reason for resistance to change. Organizations tend to have many initiatives going on at the same time, which diffuses the importance of any particular program while stretching resources too thin. Most organizations can only deal with one or two major initiatives at a time.

A follow-through survey can be very helpful in finding pockets where changes have not been implemented, or not implemented well. Follow-through surveys should be used to help managers, not to club them! We have found the follow-through survey to be a fast, inexpensive way to ensure the success of changes.

The Other Side

While we've gone over mainly issues that contribute to making change work, the other side is preventing change from getting sandbagged. One major barrier is the people who have seen change efforts fail in the past, either at this or at other organizations, and assume if they keep their head down, everything will return to normal. Getting the active involvement of these people is essential. Finding them is of course another story. Measurement systems and surveys are both also useful for tracking the effects of change throughout the organization for effective follow-through - including finding pockets of passive or active resistance. These should be addressed through persuasion and "co-opting" rather than force. Many successful change efforts can boast of higher productivity and quality, with reduced costs, and no "lost jobs."

Technology and People

Nearly all of the issues in change efforts revolve around people. You can change technologies, but unless people support the new systems, problems are bound to crop up. It is much less expensive to anticipate and work with the social issues than to blindly throw money into systems, then clean up the mess afterwards.

There are many documented cases where companies tried to install new technologies or systems of working without considering the impact on social systems (the way people work and interact with each other), or without giving thought to how the people who actually do the work feel about the changes. The result is usually an expensive failure, with employee reactions ranging from simple misunderstandings (resulting in lost productivity or damage) to outright sabotage and organized labor actions.

Because of this, the best way to bring about change is to first gain the support of the people who will be affected by it, and the people whose support you need to implement it. No matter how good a change seems on paper, if nobody will support it, it's probably not a good idea.

Back to Top