Change and Performance - Business Psychology

The psychology of organisational change and business performance

  • Business Psychology
  • Change Capability
  • Change Management
You are here: Home / Archives for Business Psychology

Can Organizations Really Change Through Chaos?

February 22, 2012 by robertsrobson 1 Comment
Share on TwitterSubmit to StumbleUponDigg This

We’re seeing incredible societal change on a global basis. Much of this starts as ‘bottom up’ change and gathers pace. Political regimes can fall almost overnight.  This makes it seem like business organisations are incredibly ponderous and slow.

Should change be more chaotic? I’m not sure.

When a regime falls, the political and economical mechanisms may exist to minimise fallout. In some cases, a whole new infrastructure is required, and only once those are in place has the change been completed and all of the potential ‘benefits’ been realised. Look at Libya, for example. When will all aspects of life for most Libyans be better than it was? That’s not to suggest that Gadaffi’s regime was good for most. It simply means that in order to achieve regime change the Libyan people will have had to have made other sacrifices, largely economical, in the short to medium term.

In a large, complex organisation, the interdependencies between departments, countries and business units are, like a country’s economy, so numerous and so embedded in systems and processes that if change is allowed to happen without control then the short-term results could be catastrophic. If information fails to flow, customers are impacted, transactions will fail, or perhaps worse, subtle errors could be introduced that take time to fully emerge and do damage over a period of time.

I believe that change should be initiated, as societal change often is, at the grass roots, by employees. But what’s required is some sort of mechanism that allows ideas to be developed and explored, then implemented in a controlled way if necessary. Companies have to keep delivering to shareholders at the same time as creating new ways of working. Hospitals need to keep treating patients, local authorities need to keep the streets clean.

Organisations need some sort of structure, at some point, to make change work. As does society…

Share on TwitterSubmit to StumbleUponDigg This
Filed Under: Change Management, Social Change Tagged With: change, chaos, organisations, social change, structure

Objectives: Raising the Bar on Performance?

January 31, 2012 by robertsrobson 4 Comments
Share on TwitterSubmit to StumbleUponDigg This

I had a good chat with an old friend and ex-colleague, Scott McArthur, today, and one of the subjects that came up was breakthrough performance. He was asking what my thoughts were from a sport psychology perspective – how could he get a group of business people think about ‘personal bests’.

Raising the bar

Source: LibertyMarketingConsultants.com

My first response was that elite athletes tend to work in terms of process goals (the building blocks of performance) more than outcome goals (or at least they try to – difficult when you are in the Olympic final). How often do business people get caught in the trap of focusing on, for example, their sales target rather than the things they need to do to hit their target?

That led me to me next response. Generally speaking, elite athletes don’t have targets. They have goals. There’s a difference. Most employees of business organisations have targets or objectives, not goals. The biggest difference? Goals are mine. I own them (or my team owns them). Objectives may be negotiated, but they are largely set by the organisation to ensure that people are focused on the things that they need to meet their objectives. This is a subtle but important difference.

So, what would happen if your organisation stopped using objectives altogether?

Well, I guess some bad things might happen, but so might some good things.

You see, I believe that objectives are better at stopping bad performance than they are at creating great performance. Indeed, I think they might limit them. Isn’t that going against conventional wisdom, that when you want to ‘raise the bar’ you do so with more challenging objectives?

Why objectives help stop bad performance:

  • They provide focus for individuals and ensure that they are doing the things they need to do
  • They help management keep control and be confident that their ship is heading in the right direction
  • (Note that I have not mentioned that they provide motivation. That’s not by accident)
Why objectives might limit performance.
  • They narrow our focus, which may mean that we don’t do things that could really add value, or we fail to spot opportunities
  • They can actually inhibit important contributors to performance such as creativity and innovation, teamwork (particularly if set badly) and social support
Now, you might argue that only poorly set, non-SMART, objectives can limit performance. I say not so, because they are a tool that manipulate our motivational processes towards a future orientation, narrowing of focus, compliance and caution; and away from spontaneity, creativity, challenging the status quo and taking risks.
You might also argue that the research says that they help performance. Well, usually when this case is made people refer to research on goal-setting, which is very mixed in its results. It’s also about goals, not objectives. Not the same thing.
In summary, I think that objectives create ‘safe’ levels of performance. Middle of the road, if you like. Some organisations aspire to that. They need to get organised, to get focused. Others need to break through to new levels. Good to great, if you like. Raising the bar can’t always just be about setting tougher objectives. At some point you might just have to start thinking differently….
Share on TwitterSubmit to StumbleUponDigg This
Filed Under: Business Psychology, Organisational Development Tagged With: business, creativity, focus, goal setting, innovation, motivation, objectives, performance, raising the bar, risk, smart

Reversal Theory: The Structure of Motivation

January 30, 2012 by robertsrobson 2 Comments
Share on TwitterSubmit to StumbleUponDigg This

Building on my suggestion of Reversal Theory as an integrative theory for change practitioners, I’ve introduce the central tenets of the theory and will now set out the structure of motivation that influences our experience of the world and, therefore, our response to change.

Our emotional experience and behaviour is influenced by our motivational state and related variables (later). Think of these as lenses by which we see the world.

8 States, 4 Pairs or ‘Domains’

There are eight motivational states (show in the table below), organised into 4 oppositional pairs. One of these, and only one, state in each pair is always active. So we are always in 4 states from the 8, but these combinations are constantly changing. In that sense, our lives are like a dashboard of on/off switches.

Each of the states links to a core value or need, which is our link to culture, and indeed each brings something different in terms of performance or ‘contribution’ to the organisation (Apter International, 2003?) as well as responses to change. Aware that this is one of the things that sets this framework apart from most psychological theories at play in change today, I will follow up with a post specifically on the contributions and responses to change.

Finally, the oppositional pairs link to a common motivational theme or ‘domain’.

So what are these states? They are summarised in the table below (adapted from Apter International, 2007), and I will expand on each in further posts.

State Domain Concerned with  (core value/need) Characteristics
Playful Means & Ends Enjoyment, fun Sees actions as valuable for their own sake; In the moment, spontaneous, risk taking, sensation-seeking
Serious Progress, achievement Actions valuable if leading to a desired goal / outcome; Future focused, sensible, cautious, risk averse
Conforming Rules Fitting in, belonging Sees rules as supportive; compliant, conventional, accepting, traditional
Rebellious Freedom, independence Sees rules as restrictive; challenging, defiant, unconventional, stands out from crowd, mischievous
Mastery Transactions Power & control Seeks to gain power or control; Toughness, competitiveness, seeks status, competence
Sympathy Affection, relationships Seeks to develop personal relationships; Affectionate, friendly, caring or being cared for, senstive
Self-Oriented Relationships For yourself, individualism Experience is in terms of impact on self; selfish, takes personal responsibility
Other-Oriented For others, collectivism Experience is in terms of impact on others; team working, unselfish, giving, modest

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As you might imagine, these states can have significant implications for individual organisational change and performance. All states have their benefits and their potential drawbacks. The challenge for a change manager is to help people to a) match their state to the situation, b) be more ‘skillful’ in their current state (e.g. setting effective goals in the serious state) or c) adapt methods of communication and engagement to peoples’ states (the alternative to this in dealing with large audiences is being able to talk to all eight states – something that I will come back to).

Reference

Apter Motivational Style Profile: Consultant Guide, 2007, Apter International

Share on TwitterSubmit to StumbleUponDigg This
Filed Under: Business Psychology, Reversal Theory in Business Tagged With: behaviour, change, emotion, experience, motivation, needs, Reversal Theory, states, structure, values

Introduction to Reversal Theory

January 7, 2012 by robertsrobson 6 Comments
Share on TwitterSubmit to StumbleUponDigg This

Having made the argument for using Reversal Theory as an integrative theory for change management, this post introduces the theory, it’s history and it’s central tenets.

What is Reversal Theory?

Reversal Theory is a ‘general theory’ of human experience that is based around motivation, or specifically how people experience motivation. A general theory attempts not to explain human experience in parts (for example motivation, confidence, emotions), but as a whole.

Where does Reversal Theory come from?

Rather than being dreamt up in a business school, the initial studies that led to the development of Reversal Theory, by Dr. Ken Smith, and Dr. Michael Apter, a British psychiatrist and psychologist pairing, were done into truancy among school children in the 70′s.

At first it appeared that there were different types of children that skipped school. These were either children who were avoiding anxiety experienced at school, or those who wanted the fun and excitement of playing truant. One behaviour, two types of children. This is exactly what trait psychology would suggest.

With closer study, however, the researchers observed the ‘nervous’ children having fun and being excited in other situations, and those that seemed to seek excitement being anxious in other situations. In other words, the behaviour seemed to be better explained by states than traits. This started the development of the basic structure of Reversal Theory, and to the central observations of the theory.

Central Insights of Reversal Theory

Not only do individuals experience the world in different ways in different situations, but they also experience the same situation differently at different times. In other words, we are inherently inconsistent! Indeed, this inconsistency is not only inherent but necessary for fulfilment as it reflects a variety of psychological needs that we all have.

You cannot determine the motivations for behaviour simply by observation, and indeed behaviour is complex and often paradoxical. You may have found yourself shouting at your children because you care about them!

For the change professional or psychologist, this presents two major implications:

1)   If people are inconsistent, they are also changeable. So often we encounter trait explanations of behaviour that seem to suggest that people are fixed in their ways and change is difficult. So for those of us in change, it provides an optimistic perspecitive.

2)   Observation of behaviour is not the best indicator of intentions or motivations. Humans tend to be pretty good readers of behaviour, as we pick up on many different cues, but we often get it wrong. Only by asking can we actually infer motivations accurately. Of course, effective change managers already know that they have to talk to and listen to stakeholders!

By applying Reversal Theory, which maps motivations with emotional experience, we can better understand where people are coming from – and where we might want to get them. This requires taking the next step, which is to understand the structure of motivation in Reversal Theory (my next post).

Share on TwitterSubmit to StumbleUponDigg This
Filed Under: Business Psychology, Reversal Theory in Business Tagged With: Apter, behaviour, central insights, emotions, experience, introduction, motivation, Reversal Theory, structure

Reversal Theory as an Integrative Change Management Theory

December 26, 2011 by robertsrobson 4 Comments
Share on TwitterSubmit to StumbleUponDigg This

Over the last 10 years I’ve used Reversal Theory (e.g Apter, 2001) in my practice as a sport psychologist, organizational development consultant and change manager.  One of the things that I’d like to do with this blog is to develop a body of content that describes Reversal Theory as an integrative theory for change practitioners that will provide a common language and framework for dealing with individual

Apter's Motivational Styleschange, team interventions, change leadership, organizational and cultural change.

Reversal Theory is a general psychological theory that makes a connection betweenvalues, motivational states and emotions.  It has been developed over more than 30 years and has been researched and applied in a wide range of domains including management and leadership, psychotherapy and counseling, sports and exercise, health and religion.

The Value of Reversal Theory in Change Management

The practical value of Reversal Theory in change management is based on the following observations:

  • Individuals are operating in a more complex and dynamic organizational setting than ever before, and change is only increasing in pace
  • Management is increasingly focused on managing conflicting ideas or dilemmas (grey areas, rather than black and white)
  • Leadership is increasingly recognized as requiring the creation of the right conditions  (or climate) for performance
  • Different organizations, with different strategic ambitions and market conditions require very different capabilities, which in turn demand very different mindsets and behaviours from employees
  • Individuals, including leaders, can perform exceptionally in one organization (or set of conditions) yet appear quite ordinary in others

What’s Different About Reversal Theory?

Reversal Theory helps us to understand these kinds of complexities in ways that many of the psychological theories used in change management do not, because:

  • As a state based theory, it helps us to conceive of people as more changeable and less consistent than trait theories
  • As a general theory it can explain a wide range of phenomena, creating a common language rather than having a patchwork quilt of unrelated theories to work with
  • However, rather than being in competition with other frameworks, particularly in individual change, it can be used as a diagnostic ‘layer’ with cognitive, behavioural or humanistic interventions
  • It explains why certain situations appear to warrant opposing or conflicting, even paradoxical, explanations
  • It provides a map of motivations and emotional experience, which helps us to find ways to engage with people in more precise and compelling ways
  • It links the internal world of the individual to team dynamics, leadership (climate), and to organizational culture

Reversal Theory in Business and Change Management

Although Reversal Theory has been widely empirically researched, most of its use in the business world has been by practitioners behind the screen of client confidentiality. Apter Development / Apter International, for whom I used to work, has been one of the main users of the theory in Organisational Development, using it as the basis of their work in leadership and management development and employee research. Indeed although, Steve Carter outlined a new model of change agency / change leadership based on Reversal Theory (that I will refer to later) I will be attempting to weave together a wider range of aspects of change management using Reversal Theory, and indeed propose a number of ways in which existing frameworks can be further enhanced by the theory such as (to be further developed):

  • Creating individual change
  • Facilitating team change
  • Developing Change leadership
  • Understanding organisational culture
  • Integrating RT with models of organisational change
  • Assessing change readiness

In doing so, I’d appreciate any feedback either through comments, email or twitter (@robertsrobson).

Now, if you’ve come this far, I’m sure that you’ll be eager to learn what Reversal Theory actually is, so I’d better get writing!

References

M.J. Apter (Ed.) (2001). Motivational Styles in Everyday Life: A Guide to Reversal Theory. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association Press (*This is the ‘bible’ of RT research up to 2001*)

S. Carter (2003). Change is not what it used to be. Understanding the role of the change agent. Apter International Ltd (now Apter Development)

Next post:

Introduction to Reversal Theory

Share on TwitterSubmit to StumbleUponDigg This
Filed Under: Change Management, Reversal Theory in Business Tagged With: change, climate, complexity, culture, emotion, engagement, leadership, motivation, psychology, Reversal Theory

Lewin’s Three Step Model of Organizational Change

December 11, 2011 by robertsrobson 3 Comments
Share on TwitterSubmit to StumbleUponDigg This

Lewin’s Three Step Model was developed in 1951 and remains influential today, having been extended by Edgar Schien (1992). Also the founder of Field Force Analysis, Lewin suggested three steps to change; unfreezing, moving and refreezing.

Unfreezing

Lewin suggested that organizations tend to maintain their equilibrium in response to disturbance, a phenomenon known as homeostasis. In order to initiate change, therefore, it is important to create momentum by increasing driving forces for change and decreasing resisting forces (cf. Field Force Analysis). Schein extended this to emphasise the need to create the motivation to change through survival anxiety (or guilt) and the psychological safety to overcome learning anxiety, which can be characterised by fears relating to incompetence, punishment, loss of identity and loss of group membership.

Moving

Taking action requires involving people and bringing them with you. For the employee, according to Schein, this means learning new concepts and reinterpreting old concepts. At this stage it is particularly important for leaders to model desired behaviours.

(Re)freezing 

FreezingRefreezing (originally ‘freezing’) refers to the establishing of new ways of working as ‘normal’ in the organisation – making change stick. If this occurs, the organisation will tend to adjust itself back to this model, rather than the old. If not, it will tend to adjust itself back to the old. Among other thing, recognition and reward should be aligned to new ways of working.

Although a simple view of change, Lewin’s steps (and Schein’s elaboration) essentially underpin most organizational change today and the model appeals on the grounds of common sense. It resonates with the ideas of creating discomfort with change and the ‘burning’ platform, but also warns of the danger of celebrating success too soon, without bringing people along, as the organization may slide back into old ways.

Lewin ,K. (1951). Field Theory in Social Science. Harper and Row.

Schein, E. H. (1999). The corporate culture survival guide: Sense and nonsense about culture change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Share on TwitterSubmit to StumbleUponDigg This
Filed Under: Change Management Tagged With: change, field force, learning anxiety, lewin, motivation, moving, refreezing, satfety, survival anxiety, three step model, unfreezing

Bridges’ Transitions in Change

December 9, 2011 by robertsrobson 1 Comment
Share on TwitterSubmit to StumbleUponDigg This

Bridges (1991) emphasises the psychological transitions that employees need to make for change to be successful, rather than the change that is planned as part of the programme.

Transitions are more complex and less mechanistic than planned change, and require us to understand the emotional aspects of adapting to new ways of working. They are about ‘letting go’ of the past in order to be able to move on.

Three Phases of Transition

Initially counterintuitively, Bridges starts with ‘Endings’ and ends with ‘new Beginnings’. These phases sandwich the ‘Neutral Zone’. However, this should make sense as you read on.

Endings

Before moving on, there has to be a break with the past – an ‘Ending’. It is important for change managers and leaders to inform and appreciate who is losing what and to allow a degree of mourning – openly acknowledging these losses. There is also a symbolic aspect of endings, in that endings can be marked with some kind of event or ritual where the break from the past is recognised.

Neutral Zone

The Neutral Zone is a period of flux, where there can be conflict, anxiety and a decrease in motivation. Change managers and leaders should appreciate and communicate that this is a normal part of change and that it is OK, but at the same time create temporary structures and processes to ensure business as usual performance is maintained at the same time and change being delivered. It is important in the Neutral Zone to seek continual and honest feedback from the organisation.

New Beginning

Although the New Beginning is the aim of the change programme, it cannot be controlled. It can, however, be facilitated and encouraged by creating the right conditions. According to Bridges, for a new beginning to take place people need:

  • A clear purpose for changing
  • A picture of the new organisation after the change
  • A clear, step-by-step plan of how to get there
  • To understand their part to play in getting there.

These conditions foster the emotional commitment to change, but it may take some employees (especially further down the hierarchy) longer to get there. Leaders must be patient and appreciate this reality rather than being impatient at a perceived lag.

Share on TwitterSubmit to StumbleUponDigg This
Filed Under: Change Management Tagged With: bridges, change, commitment, emotion, endings, neutral zone, new beginning, phases, transitions

Making the Change – Learning from Post-MBA Transitions

November 20, 2011 by robertsrobson 2 Comments
Share on TwitterSubmit to StumbleUponDigg This

Research recently published in the Academy of Management Learning and Education journal, by Beth Benjamin and Charles O’Reilly of Stanford University, shares the experiences of MBA graduates as they transition into the business leadership roles that they have been working towards.Academy of Management

The research indicates a high degree of personal change is required to make this transition successfully and that programmes could do more to help their candidates prepare for life after an MBA.

The themes themselves are pretty consistent with the leadership transitions literature such as the Leadership Pipeline (Charan et al.) and ‘maturity’ themed leadership development models such as Torbert’s Leadership Development Framework; such as changing mind-set to value and skills to deal with the social dimension, managing people with a broader range of interests and motivations than ‘business excellence’ and being concerned with stewardship of something greater over one’s own personal achievement.

The implication of this is that perhaps MBAs might need to focus less on the intellectual and technical ‘what’ of business management and do more to prepare candidates for ‘how’ of business leadership.

 

Benjamin, B., & O’Reilly, C. (2011). Becoming a Leader: Early Career Challenges Faced by MBA Graduates The Academy of Management Learning and Education, 10 (3), 452-472

Charam, R., Drotter, S., and Noel, J. (2001). The Leadership Pipeline: How to Build the Leadership Powered Company. Jossey-Bass.

Torbert, W. (2004). ACTION INQUIRY The Secret of Timely and Transforming Leadership. Berrett-Koehler Publishers

Share on TwitterSubmit to StumbleUponDigg This
Filed Under: Business Psychology and Change Books, Leadership, Organisational Development Tagged With: change, charan, Development, leadership, leadership pipeling, management, MBA, research, torbert, transition

Engaging for Growth 2011 Forum – Reflections

November 20, 2011 by robertsrobson 3 Comments
Share on TwitterSubmit to StumbleUponDigg This

This week I had the pleasure of attending the Engaging for Growth 2011 Forum, organised by The Focus Group and hosted by KPMG. I say “pleasure” quite sincerely, as someone who has been to plenty of events that promise much and deliver little. This time my expectations were exceeded, and not just because they have become jaded.EFG Logo

Speakers covered a range of topics broadly relating to Employee Engagement, Organisational Effectiveness and EVP;  and included David MacLeod, author of the MacLeod Report, and Dr Martin Reddington providing the ‘expert’ view as well shared experiences from Virgin Active, Unilever, O2, KPMG and Metro Bank among others. Change was a theme running through much of the event, for clearly such issues come to the fore when an organisation needs to mobilise its employees!

For me there were a number of key themes arising:

  • Don’t get hung up on the constructs out there that overlap and as a result can appear to muddy the waters (e.g. employee engagement versus EVP versus culture)
  • It’s not rocket science. Although people can be complex, they also respond to simple things like trust, recognition, honesty…
  • Don’t over-rely on your employee survey. It’s useful as a marker of progress but look beyond it and use it as a stimulus for further discussion (about things that it doesn’t measure, as well as things that it does)
  • Don’t treat employee engagement as a peripheral activity (that’s about improving your survey score). It’s about matching your lived values to your corporate values, making clear your ‘deal’, and it should run through all that you do, such as how you make real decisions

 

Share on TwitterSubmit to StumbleUponDigg This
Filed Under: Employee Engagement, Organisational Development Tagged With: deal, employee engagement, employee value proposition, EVP, growth, macleod report, martin reddington, organisational effectiveness

Kotter’s Eight-Stage Process of Change

October 25, 2011 by robertsrobson 5 Comments
Share on TwitterSubmit to StumbleUponDigg This

Organisations have always changed, but the discipline of Change Management is one that has developed over the last couple of decades, as the pace of change has increased beyond recognition. Undoubtedly one of the leading figures of this ‘new’ discipline has been John Kotter of Harvard Business School.

Kotter’s seminal HBR  article, “Leading Change: Why Transformations Fail” first outlined his lessons from fifteen years of analysis, which were later developed into his Eight-Stage change framework. These eight stages have been a central influence in many of the change management methodologies used by corporates and consulting firms.

Kotter’s Eight Stage Process for Managing Change

Establishing a sense of urgency

Many people talk of creating a “burning platform”, and the need for discomfort with the

Leading Change

status quo. On the other hand, “if it ain’t broke, why fix it?”. Comfort and complacency are a barrier to change and it is imperative that change leaders establish a sense of urgency to overcome them.  This isn’t easy – your leadership team might instinctively seek to “soften the blow”, or they may themselves be in the denial for the change. The urgency may not be clear enough, or undercommunicated. People might simply not care…

Creating the Guiding Coalition

Leaders cannot deliver change on their own. They need to build ‘critical mass’.  Malcolm Gladwell’s “Tipping Point” provides some interesting reading on the phenomenon of ‘social epidemics’ and the importance of certain types of people. Credibility, coverage and the effectiveness of the coalition as a collective are all important.

Developing a Vision Strategy

Vision is essential, and often underdeveloped and undercommunicated during failed change. Vision is a core aspect of leaderships that creates the general direction of change, motivating (or “compelling”) people to act in that direction in a co-ordinated manner. A sound vision is, according to Kotter, Imaginable, Desirable (the attractive destination to go with the burning platform), Feasible, Focused, Flexible and Communicable.

Communicating the Change Vision

In his original article Kotter suggested that in failed change the vision is undercommunicated to the power of ten. In other words, a lot. Then do it again. Don’t just have a ‘roadshow’ with powerpoint slides, put the vision into the hands of your coalition and other leaders, in an easily communicated format. At my old consulting firm we used ‘Rich Pictures’ on the basis that ‘a picture is worth a thousand words’ – initially these were literally paintings before we moved into digital (and more interactive) formats.

Empowering Employees for Broad-Based Action

Simply put, people that feel powerless to act cannot make change happen. And you need them to help. Barriers to ‘empowerment’ (the ability of people to take responsibility) include structure, competence, processes and systems. Perhaps most of all, line managers can give or remove power from their reports. Identify those in your organisation that can have this influence (often supervisors) and target their behaviour.

Generating Short-Term Wins

One thing that I can vouch for is that as a change manager you can find that you can have to do a lot of work before anyone sees the fruits of your labour, and momentum can be easily lost.  Short-term wins help provide opportunities to reinforce momentum towards change, create confidence and give cause for celebration while undermining critics. When creating your plans, consider what short-term wins might be accomplished.

Consolidating Gains and Producing More Change

I guess I’d sum this one up as “keep the ball rolling”.  It may be tempting to let up at certain times, good or bad, but Kotter’s advice is to build on success by creating more change.  This requires leadership to be out of the detail, providing general direction and more people contributing to the change effort at lower levels.  Yes, people can become change-fatigued but that’s more to do with trying to manage multiple changes at once or because change initiatives are abandoned before the benefits can be realised. In reality, it may be best not to set out towards a fixed destination, but to make change a journey, updating the vision and keeping things moving.

Anchoring New Approaches in the Culture

This is about sustaining the change, or making it ‘sticky’. It’s easy for old ways to re-establish themselves when change is new. Kotter’s view is that it’s a mistake to try to fix the culture first, and that it should be done last. People need to see that the new ways work. Assuming they produce results, build on those with continued communication (informal as much as formal) and be prepared to reward, promote and hire based on the culture that you want to create.

Kotter’s Eight Stages in Practice

In summing up, there’s no doubt that Kotter’s Eight Stage Process has been one of the most important frameworks in shaping change management as a discipline. As always, however, it is not without its critics.

One of these is that it is described as a process, per se. You don’t necessarily move from one step to another, ticking each one off as you go. Ensure that you are constantly reviewing where you are, whether you have done enough, whether you need to go back and do more – and this becomes less of a problem, in my view.

Of course, neither is Kotter’s framework a complete change management methodology in its own right. There are more complete methodologies out there, such as Prosci, and indeed many consulting firms and corporates now have more fully developed toolkits with their own process and tools. That’s fine. If you are new to change management, you will still gain from reading Kotter’s work.

Finally, it’s easier to put down in words some guiding steps than to provide detailed instruction on how to carry them out effectively. There are, now more practical resources available that build on the original framework. Alternatively (or in parallel), combine Kotter’s framework (or others) with a good grounding in psychology to understand the human dynamics that will determine the success with which you apply these steps, and you will do so with more skill.

Share on TwitterSubmit to StumbleUponDigg This
Filed Under: Business Psychology and Change Books, Change Management, Leadership Tagged With: 8 stage, change framework, eight stage process, kotter, leading change, methodology
« Older Posts

Search Site

Categories

  • Business Psychology
  • Business Psychology and Change Books
  • Change Capability
  • Change Management
  • Employee Engagement
  • Leadership
  • Organisational Development
  • Reversal Theory in Business
  • Social Change
  • Uncategorized

Recent Posts

  • Change Capability Dimension #8: Connecting
  • Change Capability Dimension #7: Caring
  • Change Capability Dimension #6: Involving
  • Change Capability Dimension #5: Executing
  • Change Capability Dimension #4: Experimenting

Return to top of page

Copyright © 2013 · Delicious Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in