Making Change Happen

Who’s going to lead the charge? Why, the person in charge, of course. That’s why we pay them the big bucks.
Does the same thing apply when we substitute “change” for “charge”? Who’s going to lead the change? The person in charge is going to be responsible for making the necessary changes, but is this person going to be the change leader?

Organizations with entrenched hierarchies often stumble when trying to implement change because they automatically turn to the line managers, those “in charge”. It’s worth noting, however, that the attributes that make good line managers—knowledge of and conformation with established routines and procedures—may make them less than ideal change leaders. Good line managers are often territorial and very protective of their turf—their compensation and place in the pecking order is usually tied to the number of people who work for them and the resources they control, after all. Asking them to put all of that on the table for possible redistribution or rework may be asking too much. Many organizations find that forming teams specifically to consider alternative approaches is a good way to affect change.

So depending on the personality of your organization, asking a group of line managers to make some fundamental changes on their own may be dooming the project from the beginning. The skills and attitudes that you want in a change leader are similar to what make a good entrepreneur, not those of a production manager in a large manufacturing operation or a hospital staff. Knowledge of process and adherence to procedure are the linchpins of efficient production or patient safety, but are part of what may need to be discarded or drastically altered when the old ways of doing business are obsolete or obsolescent. Entrepreneurs—and particularly the younger generation–are attracted by opening up new markets or finding new ways to accomplish required tasks.

Rather than take a hierarchical approach to change management, it may be worth considering a different approach: Do we have people in the organization who have the attitudes and skills we need to effect a particular change? Do we have an environment that is conducive to team problem solving or do we need time to create such a culture? Can we train for the skills we lack or find new hires to fill the gaps?

Surveys are helpful for giving individuals an idea of how they can best interact with others. The Craft Personality Questionnaire tests suitability for different types of jobs. Myers-Briggs is a popular instrument for categorizing personality types. One of our clients has used the copyrighted People Map assessment and training to give the organization a better idea of how employees will react to each other and to varying work requirements. People Map characterizes people into four categories—Leader, Task, People, and Free Spirit—and people are assigned a primary and secondary category after taking the People Map assessment.

The Communications workshop lets you know both your own communication style and how those you work with are apt to react to your style. We recommend that groups share their results with each other so communication can be as efficient as possible. Unnecessary conflicts and misunderstandings are also minimized in this environment.

This skills and attitudes approach doesn’t mandate the use of teams when changes are necessary or rule out using line supervisors or others as change leaders, it just shifts the focus from immediately assigning those in charge of day-to-day activities to change management. This approach suggests looking at exactly what needs to be done, what the most critical activities centers likely will be, and who will embrace the need for change and make it happen. Gaps in skills can be addressed ahead of time through either training or acquiring outside help, and a plan for letting all of those in the organization know what needs to be done, why is must be done, and who’s going to do it can be crafted and executed.