Replying to LO24866 --
>I have been wrestling with Ian's questions (reiterated by Roy Benford
>asking, "Does this just apply to the UK?") for the last twenty plus
>years. I will share a few brief comments based on my experiences.
First, cultural differences probably exist in the way we talk to those
three questions, but I have not perceived any significant difference in
the degree of seriousness of the issues from country to country.
Differences also exist in talking to those three questions on an
organization's situation. Where are they in their life cycle (high
growth, mature market, many new entrants into the market, etc.)? What
level are you talking to (senior management, people who do real
work...i.e., closer to customers and actual creation of the product or
service..., support staff, etc.)? So please take the few things I express
below with a healthy dose of skepticism and openness.
>Q. "How to overcome resistance from sponsors, champions and clients --
>before you really even start?">
If they don't own it, it ain't gonna happen. Exceptions occur but if
people at that level don't really want it, I move on elsewhere. I wasted
much time earlier years trying to persuade people to things that I thought
were good for them. Maybe I was right, maybe I was wrong (probably not).
What I have finally learned to do is to listen. What do the sponsors,
champs.....find important. I then ask myself, "How can I mold this good
thing (process improvement, Kaizen teams, strategy development, etc.) to
fit with what they already want to do. If I am incapable of finding of
fit, I try to resist the temptation to convert. It is still to do!
>Q. "How to get clients to understand the importance of the people 'stuff'
>in change programmes?">
Again, this is situation dependent. I often ask, "How important is
employee (people) buy-in to what you want to do?" ......"How many times
have you tried doing something like this, implemented a significant
change.....only to find the gains slip away over time?" If the answer to
buy-in is yes, or if they have experienced slippages in the past, that
provides energy for further discussions about the importance of people
stuff. A friend of mine, Bob Shaffer, wrote a book called "Break Through
Strategies" several years ago. Bob talks about the ZEST FACTORS. They
include: a sense of urgency, a challenge, success is near and clear,
people collaborate, pride of accomplishment (after the fact), fear of
failure, it's exciting, red-tape/bureaucracy is ignored. We use these as
guides in our work.
Think about situations you may have seen in the past where people simply
step up to the plate and make phenomenal things happen. Utility crews do
this routinely after storms. At Johnson & Johnson after the Tylenol
problem (which happened in my native Chicago) a group of engineers,
marketing and production folks met and designed new packaging, purchased
new equipment, developed new procedures for a high speed, high volume
production environment and implemented it within a sixty day period. All
without the benefit of any change program, team building or training
consultants. A phenomenal accomplishment. It happens all of the time.
People self organized after the floods in North Dakota a couple of years
ago. People step up to the plate (baseball term) and do what needs to be
done when the Zest Factors are there.
So often companies and organizations drive the ZEST out of work, by over
controlling, working on nits and providing little clarity. If the Zest is
there, the people will lead what needs to get done, with little formal
orchestration by management.
>Q. "Why are senior managers so willing to spend millions on technology and
>very little on the people who have to make it work?"
My thoughts here are probably overly simplistic, but I think it boils down
to, "The concrete and sexy vs the soft and difficult to perceive." People
are complex., Communication is complex, just look at the myriad of voices,
perspectives writing styles of people on this list......and we all
participate on this list because we like it....not because any one of us
has to be here. In an organization to a degree (boundaries again) you do
have to be there. It is much simpler in the short term to focus on a
piece of equipment, a piece of software and not worry about what do we
need to do to really make this work. Someone spoke in a recent earlier
comment about finding the easiest way to get something done, that is not
necessarily the best way to get something done. If my time horizon is the
next week, the next thirty days vs. the next 12 months, the next 18
months, the next 5 years my decisions will be different.
Longer response then I thought I was going to do. I was thinking one
sentence for each question. Oh well.....best wishes to all.
Michael Bremer
Cumberland Group/Flow-Works
http://www.thecumberlandgroup.com
http://www.flow-works.com (still under construction)
630-789-8262
--Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.