CHOOSE

 
 
 

I have read about and used many different change management models, but nowhere have I found a guide for which model is best suited for a certain type of change project ...

I do not think there is a conclusion on how to set up a certain change work, but here I still dare to formulate my recommendation, based on my and my colleagues' experiences of successful change.

 
 
Step 1 - Increase the sense of urgency
Many change projects are stillborn in an environment of satisfied employees. Without an understanding that change is necessary, the attention and sacrifices needed will not be made. Step one is therefore to increase the feeling of impending danger. That change from the present is necessary and urgent.
 
Step 1 - Increase the sense of urgency
Harvard professor Dr. John P Kotter is one of the world's foremost in organizational change. As early as 1996, he wrote the book "Leading Change", which became an international bestseller. In the book, he describes eight critical steps to succeed in large-scale organizational change. The follow-up book "The Heart of Change" contains the results of a follow-up study that confirms the strength and importance of the eight steps. Feel free to read both books for a deeper understanding of the meaning of the eight steps.

In addition, it turned out that successful change work is more about making people feel and act differently rather than making them think in a new way. Commitment to the new comes through emotional aha experiences rather than logical analysis.
 
Here is a summary of John P. Kotter's eight steps to successful change
 
 

My preference for a change management strategy based on the nature of the change

To start discussing the recommendation or preference for one particular change management model over another, I would like to start with a categorization of the various change projects I have encountered. What I rather intuitively than analytically realize has influenced my choices in the change work is both the type of change that has been relevant, as well as the possible degree of co-creation and / or involvement in the project.

Because in my world, there are two overarching approaches to conducting qualified change work:
  • to sell a change or
  • to invite change.

Selling ​​change - In many cases, much of the change is already decided and given from the beginning. This may involve a uniform introduction ("roll-out") of new financial or HR systems and accompanying working methods, where uniform processes and implementations are part of the goal of the change. Then much of the focus in the change management work will be on selling the change and the new systems and working methods and equipping the employees so that they feel motivated and competent to enter the new world, once the systems are in place.

Inviting to change - In some wonderful cases, the ambition is instead to invite to co-create the new desired situation. When you want to combine the best of both worlds, or when the new direction requires a greater degree of co-ownership and commitment, the focus is more on creating arenas for collaboration and co-creation, than selling something already packaged. Both business development and mergers between complementary organizations are often major change projects with a high degree of involvement, by both customers, management, managers and selected employee groups and suppliers. Those projects often take much longer and become more extensive to organize, but if the involvement is done with the right framework and conditions, the feeling of having been involved in the development work can create a much greater ownership, than you normally get in a typical "rollout project".
 
The second way I categorize change projects is if the focus is on
  • change of behaviors (working methods / processes / tools),
  • change of culture (values / attitudes), or
  • a bit of both.
In this way, we can now place our different types of change projects in a matrix that looks like this:
© New2Change.com - Categorization of change projects based on degree of involvement and type of change
 

My preference for a change management strategy based on the nature of the change

The overall change management strategy that I keep coming back to are
  • the organizational consulting company INDEA's "8 steps of involvement and change",
  • John P. Kotter's "8 Steps of Change" and
  • Prosci's comprehensive Change Management Methodology, which is based on the ADKAR model.
One of these change management strategies often forms the backbone of my change projects. In addition to these, a colleague of mine has become very attached to change work based on
  • Claes Janssen's "Four Rooms of Change",
and has above all had great success with it in a project that concerned an authority that was to be relocated, but everything else was to be preserved as before. For that reason, I also include this model in my recommendations.

In addition to these change management models, I use two different models to look at the change on an individual level:
  • Prosci's ADKAR model and
  • the six-strategy model described in the Sloan Management Review article "How to have Influence".
Those models function more as checklists during the implementation work, to ensure that we have taken care of everything that contributes to the individual transfer.

Finally, I have been involved in change projects where there has been a need to strengthen the organization's ability to pursue successful change, where
  • strategies from the MIT article "Silent killers for Strategy Implementation and Learning"
has been the safe pillar to lean against. It becomes especially important to consider when the change work concerns culture and values, as the ability of many organizations to follow up and provide regular feedback on values ​​is generally weak.

I have described all the above change management models here on New2Change.com (just click on the links above and you will come to each page), so as not to elaborate on it further:

Here are my most personal preferences (and recommendations) for the type of change management model that is suitable for the type of change work ..!
 
© New2Change.com - Preference / Recommendation of change management strategy based on the type of change
 
 

INDEAs 8 steps... + How to have Influence...

  • Overall change strategy:
    The organizational consulting company INDEA's "8 steps of involvement and change"

  • Checklist / change model for the implementation step:
    The six-strategy model described in the Sloan Management Review article "How to have Influence"
INDEA's 8 steps for change is a pedagogical model for conducting change work with a high degree of involvement. Change where the involvement, joint processing and anchoring of all managers and employees is important, and must take time. When merging organizations or departments that need to find a new common identity and direction / working method going forward, where both organizations' managers and employees need to "own" the new, where the involvement is not only desirable but also necessary for the new to be sustainable over time . The six-strategy model from "How to have influence" is a suitable model in the implementation step in INDEA's step 6, to ensure that you have all the necessary components in place for the managers and employees to be able to enter the new together.

At the same time, this way of building a change project can be directly inappropriate if the possibility of influence is small, for example in a system rollout where the working methods are already given, or where the time for real involvement is lacking. Another example of when INDEA's 8 steps are not applicable is in rationalization projects. Not because rationalization projects could not contain elements of involvement, but because cuts often arouse such strong emotions that the entire involvement work is made more difficult. Then there are more suitable models for conducting the rationalization work.
 
 

Kotter's 8 steps...+ How to have Influence

  • Overall change strategy
    John P. Kotters "8 Steps of Change"

  • Checklist / change model for the implementation step
    The six-strategy model described in the Sloan Management Review article "How to have Influence"
Kotter's 8 steps for change is a way of structuring extensive change work so that the focus is on building up a strong management force before the actual implementation takes place. The implementation focuses on conveying both the urgent reasons for the change and the overall vision and direction and then work actively to remove all the obstacles that stand in the way of managers and employees to move forward towards the vision / goal. It is a change model that involves a certain amount of involvement, in that you work with the organization to identify obstacles and develop solutions in the future, but the model is still partly based on the goal of change being set. The six-strategy model from "How to have influence" is also a suitable model in the implementation step (Kotter's step 5), to ensure that you have all the necessary components in place for the managers and employees to enter the new together .

Kotter together with the "how to have influence" strategies is very versatile and is suitable for both change projects with a need for involvement / co-creation and projects where a lot is given and the change work is more about selling than co-creation. Therefore, the model works well for both business development and the development of new working methods (co-creation) and for the roll-out of predetermined systems and centrally controlled processes (which are rather about selling in).

An example of when Kotter's 8 steps are not suitable, however, is in rationalization projects. Not because rationalization projects could not be planned on the basis of a Kotter structure, but because cuts often arouse such strong feelings that the entire implementation work is made more difficult. There are other models that are more suitable for conducting rationalization work, with a higher degree of prepared change.
 
 

The Prosci's Change Methodology + ADKAR

  • Overall change strategy
    Prosci's comprehensive Change Management Methodology

  • Checklist / change model for the implementation step
    Prosci's ADKAR model
Prosci's change methodology has been developed and further developed through decades of research on change work. The methodology contains an analysis and planning phase, where the change and the organization are analyzed from the overall strategic level down to the change at the employee level. Based on this, an implementation plan is then drawn up that is based on well-functioning sponsorship and leadership, clear and active communication, active coaching of managers and employees, education and training and management of resistance in a structured way. The method allows for some involvement and adaptation at the local level, in that the progress of the change work is adapted to the employees' readiness and that the implementation work contains a clear component of active coaching from each manager, but is even better suited for changes where the path from current to desired location is more predictable and thus planable. The implementation is controlled based on the imagined individual process described by the ADKAR model (that I first need to understand the reason for the change (Awareness), then be motivated to want to change myself (Desire) and get the skills development I need to be able to change (Knownledge ), and through active leadership start making changes in everyday life (Ability) and get reinforcing feedback so that I stick to (Reinforcement)

Prosci's change methodology together with the ADKAR model is mainly suitable for change projects with a moderate need for involvement / co-creation, where much is given and the change work is more about selling in than co-creating. Therefore, the model works well for rolling out new systems and work processes (which need to be sold in order to be used by the organization), but with the right adaptation, it can also be used for certain business development and development of new ways of working (with a higher degree of co-creation).

Prosci's change methodology can also be tailored for use in rationalization projects. Cuts often arouse such strong feelings that the entire implementation work needs to be prepared methodically. Through a high degree of analysis and preparation, it is possible to implement the rationalisations in a clear and efficient way and in such a way that both employees who are affected by dismissal and those who are allowed to stay, can experience the journey of change as as clear and safe as it is now. can do it.
 
 

The Four Rooms of Change

  • Overall change strategy
    Claes Janssen's "Four Rooms of Change"

  • Checklist / change model for the implementation step
    Claes Janssen's "Four Rooms of Change"
The organization behind "Four Rooms of Change" has developed a way of working with employee groups in change that is based on leading a process over time, where the group themselves can identify where they are in the change curve and then develop appropriate measures to move forward in the change. The work involves a large degree of involvement, where the feeling of being seen and confirmed in the change process is often perceived as high.
 
 

Strategies against "Silent killers"

  • Overall change strategy:
    Optional

  • Checklist / change model for the implementation step:
    Optional

  • Model for strengthening the organization's ability to drive successful change
    The strategies from the MIT article "Silent killers for Strategy Implementation and Learning"
This part is not about an alternative model for setting up a change work, but about working actively to strengthen an organization's ability to succeed with change / implementation, in parallel with the regular change work. This thus complements all the above change strategies ...

In some feasibility studies, we have seen implementation problems in an organization, which is shown by a long history of failed change projects. Change projects that may start in a good way, where everyone seems to agree on the new strategy and the work seems to run on without major protests, but where you later discover that the implementations just "run out into the sand". In the MIT article "Silent killers for Strategy Implementation and Learning", several organizations with similar types of problems have been analyzed and a number of strategies to strengthen the organization's ability to succeed with implementation have been identified.

Precisely in projects that are about developing an organization's culture, I have seen it as critical to the steering or management group to lift up and then work actively to strengthen the organization's ability to succeed with implementation, in parallel with the regular change work. The reason for this is that cultural transfer is very much based on comprehensive feedback on behavior in everyday life, at all levels and at all units, which requires a clear focus, consensus, commitment and collaboration throughout the organization - which is often only achieved by working through all strategies in "Silent killers" article.