Change Management is an organisational and communicative Impulse

A Structured Process - thus to be planned?

Nothing is as constant as permanent change, that’s trivial. Finally, external changes (“VUCA”) hit onto those started internally – and the process is sped up in addition. Though the need for structuring change management processes isn’t new, but now it has become urgent.

John Kotter’s Change Management Model is pretty well known now. In fact, it’s meant as a recipe for planned change. But Kotter also points out that impulses for change may well come from shop floor or middle management. Nonetheless, in his concept he also points out that change processes happen in arguments and conflicts. Finally, he explains that different people may play very different roles thereafter.

My job in change management processes was and is the methods oriented und “psychological” monitoring. For the most part, Kotter’s concept is sheer obvious, and the headlines of his steps can easily be switched to well-known methods terms.

Lastly, it’s important to make those terms come to life. If they are taken seriously, no problem. Consequently, whoever thinks window dressing or lip service are enough is going to run into huge problems.

Kotter postulates 8 levels of change management processes:

#1 to #3 remind of Kurt Lewin: Unfreezing

“Establish a sense of Urgency”. While it is quite easy: competition, pressure on prices and thus cost, vanishing customer enthusiasm … Still: there may have been too many campaigns in the past. Furthermore, past success may compromise the view onto reality. But sense of urgency needs not mobilize everyone:
“Form a powerful guiding coalition”. Indeed it helps when in top management strong supporters set clear goals and shield the initiative. On the other hand, at least a strong minority has to do so. However, the following task split has proven itself, according to my experience. Firtsly, you form a Core Team of max five active people, recruited cross functionally. Moreover, you assemble a board of sponsors consisting of most relevant decision makers. Finally you form a barrier removal team of decision makers and high ranking specialists. At the same time you just need committed activists, but still one habitual sceptic can be useful: thus possible pleas will be raised! (Indeed, these also have their place in deBonos Six Hats…)

A vision: an attractive image

“Create a Vision” – firstly, this must be positive. But not a trivial business target (“The Nr. 1 in…”). Moreover, it has to provoke and guide own action. A Buzzword is absolutely sufficient in my experience: SCRUM, KAIZEN, Team work… Of course it’s about much more: “Agile Management and SCRUM in all development processes”. But who wants to repeat such long sentences permanently whenever she or he wants to address the change initiative?

#4 to #6 Moving

(4) “Communicate the Vision” – Townhall Meetings; Strategy Workshops, Methods Training for the pilot group, obviously. Accordingly, the message “In the beginning nothing’s gonna change for you” is the biggest mistake – all too often heard. Everyone has been shocked out of their comfort zone – why let them fall back there? Finally, the pilot group and the first pilot project have to be started quickly now. Furthermore, strange rumours will start.
(5) “Empower others to act on the vision” – after starting the pilot group, train, supervise, quickly finetune the concept based on first experience. All of this is not easy, though very straightforward. In contrast, further expanding is much more difficult. For instance, neighbouring teams may be much less open minded, even minor failures may lead to negative rumours, the number of sceptics automatically rises. Thus, factual or alleged victims will now step forward – what to do about them is all too often simply overlooked. One personal experience: the foreman level in production was to be eliminated as a layer. But when time came for practical implementation there was not an offer conceived for the real people in this function. Thus a solution was offered: a new job with the relevant technology team. Finally, what happened: they accepted the offer. In brief, half of the guys were happy to get rid of the disliked job of people management.

Low hanging fruits

(6) “Create short-term wins” – in other concepts “harvest low-hanging fruits” – tightly linked to the step before. Thus going ahead rapidly with help from all specialists and support teams: ergonomists, IT department, logistics, …). Even if initial ideas come across a little strange and even if those lead to some (bearable) investment or cost these should be tried out. It’s important to lead groups to worked out proposals; stacks of ideas and requests to others are not enough.

#7 to #8 Refreezing - but, please, not competely!

(7) “Consolidate improvements”. In fact, here comes the real litmus test: the expansion of the concept to all teams (also to underperformers, demotivated, declared opponents of the initiative). In the meantime, everyone may announce demands for changes in detail, especially to others. While they like to stay in their comfort zones. At the same time, all systems must be adapted: IT, office space, production flows, payment system. Finally, some investments are now due! Here the temptation is great to stop or to continue half-heartedly. It is tempting to tackle the next concept, because it freshly motivates again and promises new low-hangiung fruits. However, that means not really reaping the harvest – and possibly frustrating managers and employees. On the contrary, they simply do not recognize the lack of seriousness of this campaign policy.
(8) “Institutionalize new approaches”. Lastly, there is a risk of falling back into the comfort zone: “Finally working normally again!” In this case, it helps to set ambitious goals or bring in fresh ideas. This creates ever more valuable, experience based knowledge. At the same time, it is important to finally measure all changes in terms of real performance indicators. Finally it is important to identify, promote and install the next generation of banner bearers: a high level of “hit rate” is required here!

Non-Simultaneity in Change Management Processes

A very important impetus for change management was CIP = continuous improvement process. In the first place, this concept initially started in production; myself later also experienced that a transfer to neighbouring plant areas and even sales and service was very well possible. However, a simple transfer of these principles and tools to development and design, led to very bad results! I learned the hard way…

In the meantime, the R&D area (very broadly understood by now) has made a leap forward of its own: buzzwords are “agile” and SCRUM. Soon this concept was announced a transfer of CIP principles – but this is historically not the case and does not explain much.

However, I have acutely experienced that some CIP ideas in production have long been lost, especially where they were paid lip service and misused as masquerade of very traditional structures and cultures. In conclusion, there is a risk that changes will not happen in sync: “progressive” development vs. “conservative” production! But that doesn’t fit and further fires up the all too familiar friction when it comes to pushing prototypes and especially the introduction of new products to the assembly line.

Innovation in production must not stop – and the first concepts from the SCRUM method arsenal are already spilling over. Time boxed for example …

Industrial Production, Innovation, People Leadership – Interim Result and Outlook onto Change Management initiatives

Finally, concepts for the continuous improvement of production from the 1990s are receiving critical appraisal. Still, “critical” does not mean rejection, but rather disillusion. You “just can’t hear it anymore, sometimes”.

For this reason, I will show fresh experiences as consultant, trainer and process facilitator in various change manament projects around CIP in the electrical, automotive supplier and mechanical engineering industries.

CIP and Semi-Autonomous Group Work

To begin with, CIP / Kaizen and group work have always been closely interwoven – one leads to the other. Nonetheless, the context has always been the process orientation of production and neighbouring areas. Emphatically, this is the greatest change and success in work organisation. Finally, you can no longer talk about work processes without using the term “flow”.

Consequently, this demands great responsibility on the part of employees for process control and the provision of services. They have the greatest competence for their further development, instead of industrial engineers, business economists, executives or organizational specialists, after some training. For this purpose, Continuous Improvement Process as a concept has made a bundle of tools and methods available for this.

Target agreements

Therefore, the basis is real target agreements at group level – as a management task. In order to achieve the goals, the groups continue to pursue continuous improvement, being responsible for themselves. At the same time, they work on shaping their internal relations and resolve any conflicts on their own. For instance, methods for this are the group meetings or, to borrow from Scrum, daily stand ups, and the group speakers. In addition, they will receive support in this area through team training and coaching.

The realm of the groups’ responsibility is in the long run expanded to include functions such as control, time recording, incoming goods, and dispatch. However, the goals can become all the more complex: machine downtimes, ability to deliver divided by scope of storage, time for the intro of new products, etc.

Consequently, hierarchies remain or become as flat as possible. In fact, elected group speakers; department heads / group speakers for several groups with or without formal authority; the production or operations manager as part of the plant management, that’s it. Leadership means strategic concept development, creating the framework conditions, setting up the team, agreeing on goals, coaching, monitoring progress towards goals and feedback, decision making in the event of escalation, solving conflicts.

Change Management: making it happen!

The regular “shopfloor tour” of management is a simple, tried and tested leadership method. Thus, the groups present their current numbers, initiatives, successes and problems. Generally, the management gives straight feedback, makes decisions as quickly as possible and gives an outlook on support and practical help.

In addition, the groups do not do product innovation. However, mastering the innovation process – introduction of new products in their area of responsibility – is a basic skill of the groups.

... on a higher level!

However, key is the permanent further development of their own processes – on a higher level. Lastly, the groups have self administered funds at their disposal, e.g. for the construction of small devices. The groups determine their own topics, or they are brought up to them by management – as part of the target agreement discussions or “in between” according to topics. In summary, the implementation of the initiatives and possible solutions is being pursued are supported in a more structured manner than before.

Coupled to that, a support committee, or “barrier removal team” is formed from management, department heads, and specialists. In particular this helps to remove barriers, prepare topics, provides extended methods (e.g. from the Six Sigma spectrum) and evaluates improvements and translates them into bonuses, based on rules. Also, the committee starts initiatives for best practice sharing and turns improvements achieved to standards..

Change Management – A Structured Process?