Corporate Changes Are Sold, Not Imposed

“Change is the only constant.” ~Heraclitus

You have heard the adage before. It was true in 500 BC and more so now. However, if everyone in an organization could understand and, more importantly, live by Heraclitus’ words, changes would be within reach.

Many Change Programs, Few Successes

In 1996, Dr. John Kotter published the ground-breaking work, Leading Change. His research revealed that 70 percent of change efforts fail. Has anything changed? Unfortunately, very little. Despite thousands of articles, books, and videos on the same topic, recent research reveals that about 70 percent of all major transformations fail. Why? Most change efforts are imposed, not sold.

Create Buy-In

The most effective and fruitful way to get buy-in is leading employees to get involved in the transformation process. It provides change leaders with the benefits of employees’ insights, support, and a sense of ownership.

Yet, most transformations are formulated at the top of the company without much employee involvement. By the time senior executives and top managers secure employees’ participation, it is a case of ‘too little, too late.’ Ironically, these are the same workers who will have to execute the transformation plans, and who fully understand the day-to-day operations. Change leaders miss a wealth of insights and advice that these employees can offer.

Q: Isn’t involving employees in change just common sense?

A: Not exactly. It is more like uncommon common sense.

Often, well-intentioned professionals, who clearly see a transformation and the reasons for it, assume that notifying employees about it is just as good as implementing the change. They inform, but don’t engage. They focus on an event, but not on a change process. Focusing on an event rather than the entire change process is like concentrating on a single page instead of the entire book.

Regardless of the best possible conditions, there will be resistance — at least initially. Just examine human nature. As soon as someone alludes to a transformation, most of the employees will not embrace it. Many will resist it.

No matter what you call it—restructuring, reengineering, rightsizing, or other—successful changes are sold, not imposed.

Why does this happen? Typically, people think of what they must give up, rather than what they will gain.

Fear for the Future

People will always have concerns, fears, and anxieties. The change may expose unsafe practices or skill deficiencies hidden for years. In any case, expect stubborn resistance.

If you are thinking, “I don’t see it. That doesn’t happen around here,” I suggest that you look again. Frequently, change leaders assume that team members embrace the urgency for change.

Yes, they do, but when they have to follow the “official party line.” Secretly, their feelings are quite different. Some may say, “I don’t see the need for change…We are doing just fine…This equipment is old but effective…My people love what we have and know how to use it. We don’t need new stuff.” When you hear these comments, explore beyond the surface.

Many transformations fail because the key to executing the change – the employees – is often underestimated, misunderstood, or ignored. Changes are simply announced, without engaging employees in a compelling reason, an essential step in creating a sense of urgency. Employees are not led to actively participate in the transformation process and are not provided with a mechanism to express their concerns.

Change processes appear to render employees victims of change, rather than participants.

“You can buy a man’s time; you can buy his physical presence at a given place; you can even buy a measured number of his skilled muscular motions per hour.  But you cannot buy enthusiasm…You cannot buy loyalty…you cannot buy the devotion of hearts, minds or souls.  You must earn these.” ~Clarence Francis

We hear it all the time from those pushing the change, “This change is not rocket science…Just make it happen…Hey, the case for our transformation is rational, logical, and evident… They will get it…So, I want to get this going and I want it now.”

A few months later, change leaders look around and wonder why the transformation never took place or was not welcomed by team members. I am sure they knew what had to change and the reasons behind the change, yet they assumed that everyone else knew it as well.

Understandable? Yes. Excusable? Absolutely not.

A more fundamental reason for change failures is that those in charge focus on management, not leadership. At best, senior managers attempt to lead at the end of the change process. At worst, the leadership perspective is completely overlooked.

Q: Don’t these terms mean the same?

A: Absolutely not. Let’s define them.

Management is a combination of processes aimed at restructuring, reengineering, realigning, or controlling systems and organizations. Leadership is about people. It requires an understanding of human nature and, more importantly, a genuine interest in employees as individuals. It is about inspiring, directing, and influencing the workforce. Management approaches alone, however precise, will not suffice to motivate the workforce and obtain the aggressive cooperation required during transformations.

Only through leadership will people see and feel the reasons to change. Only through leadership will people get buy-in. And only through leadership will people be inspired, invigorated, and committed to make the change happen.

Management is important; leadership is indispensable.

Look around and identify the rare cases when substantial changes have gone well. What are the top characteristics that all have in common?

Leaders at all levels engaged employees early and throughout the change process. They guided, coached, and led employees to see and feel the need to change – leaders communicated a strong case for the change (a compelling why, addressing threats, challenges, and opportunities), generating a vital sense of urgency to blast through walls of resistance. Leaders went out of their way to get employee involvement, enabling them to be part of the change process. A clear, directional, and inspiring vision was communicated repeatedly via multiple forums, not just one.

Leaders communicated consistently, clearly, and candidly using multiple means, including frequent face-to-face forums. They acknowledged employees’ anxieties and concerns. They provided mechanisms to capture employees’ feedback. Leaders were also actively visible and supportive throughout the change effort.

Q: But don’t these managers learn these things in college?

A: No, they learn about management, but not necessarily leadership. Some colleges and universities are beginning to focus more on leadership.

Again, employee buy-in is not only important, but also paramount. To that end, trust and credibility in the change leaders and the change processes must be built. The intent is to lead, guide, and coach employees so everyone can think and feel, “Hey, I’m part of this process.”

Q: How can top executives and senior leaders get all employees involved in the general decisions regarding a transformation?

A: They can’t, but they can include employees in those significant decisions impacting their specific role in their unit.

Change Communication

“Didn’t you read my email?” “I sent you a comprehensive note. You read it – right?” Does this sound familiar?

As soon as we send the first email, we will assume that the communication process has been completed. Was it? Not even by a stretch of the imagination.

Consistency + Clarity + Candor = Credibility

There are numerous key elements in successful corporate transitions; yet, in terms of leading people through change, the single most crucial factor and common denominator throughout the process is communication. There is no way that you can communicate too much during a change process. Think about it. You send an email or deliver a short pitch on your change. That message, however eloquent and powerful, competes against numerous emails, briefings, and communication in general. It can easily get lost in the clutter. Normally, change messages, presentations, and discussions constitute a small fraction of all communication exchanges in the organization. So, what’s the solution? Constantly communicate and do it via multiple forums. Read on.

Critical Change Communication:

• Communicate or rumors will do it for you.
• Constantly communicate your “Compelling Why” until team members fully understand and feel the urgency to change.
• Engage employees early on; continue throughout the change process.
• Communicate from the receiver’s perspective, not yours.
• Do not underestimate informal messages and informal communication.
• What employees see and hear in hallways and parking lots is more powerful than the memos they read.
• An hour in the cafeteria, discussing the change with key influencers can truly shape the opinion of the rest of the team members.
• Employees do not want flamboyant speeches; they expect clear and straightforward answers to their basic change questions. They want to know why the company is changing and the ‘so what’ to them.
• Do not overpromise. Understand when and how to say “no.”

Above all, say what you mean and do what you say. Repeat your change vision and change messages until team members internalize them.

Consistency, clarity, and candor are your best friends. They will increase your credibility, which is the hallmark of change communication. Why? Because people listen more to credible leaders. Naysayers and other resisters will analyze every message and compare it to previous communications.

Imagine the following scenario.

A key manager delivers a presentation to a roomful of employees regarding a transformation. The meeting was scheduled for 45 minutes and is already taking about 90 minutes. The manager informs the employees that about 80 of the workers in the organization will be displaced by the future technology. After the presentation, he gets additional input and learns it is closer to 200 employees. Meanwhile, other managers say the total number of displaced employees will be close to 300.

Results? The “trust-o-meter” as well as the “credibility meter” dropped to the red sector. Aggravating matters, as trust and credibility decrease, scrutiny and cynicism increase – not good.

Q: Isn’t change leadership and change communication too demanding? It takes too much time and effort to ensure that all leaders communicate in an accurate fashion and with one voice.

A: You bet! But it takes even more time, money, and pains to clarify and fix inaccurate and inconsistent messages and then, recover trust and credibility.

Informal Change Agents

Here is a point that is frequently overlooked: Leaders often fail to identify and harness the power of informal change agents. You have them in your organization, and they can advance your innovation.

Have you identified them? Who are those influencers who are respected and known by team members? Identify who employees normally go to for advice. We are talking about those who are seen as “one of us” by their coworkers and, therefore, share the same “organizational DNA” as the rest of the department or division personnel.

I am sure there have been changes in the past, however big or small, led by these informal change leaders. Work with them. Maximize their creativity, experience, and ability to influence people. One of them can do more than 100 memos.

Who should communicate the change message?

Employees are more interested in getting change communication from two major levels in their chain of command. Formal or official messages regarding the change should be communicated by the most senior executive involved in the change, while more personalized messages should be communicated by the frontline leaders.

Similarly, I cannot emphasize enough how practical and critical frontline leaders are in their role as corporate translators. It is even more meaningful to employees, when the change vision, strategies, and messages from on high are translated into the “so what” to them by their frontline leaders. They are best suited to analyze from a broader perspective what the change means and how it impacts what employees do at work daily.

A Word of Caution

Beware of the “I’m just the messenger” attitude from direct reports. Leaders throughout the organizations need to believe in the transformation and promote it from the heart. Employees will quietly but surely be examining their bosses’ behavior and comments. Employees want to see that the entire chain of command genuinely believe in the change, not just checking the box because it is one more directive from “the main office.”

The Criticality of Feedback

You cannot lead change without real communication, and you cannot have real communication without feedback. Feedback opens the door to a wealth of untapped insights that employees can offer. Only the people who do the job day in and day out can tell you what is happening where the rubber meets the road. Critical feedback ensures that issues and mistakes are identified and fixed during the change process. Feedback also works as an excellent mechanism to solicit employees’ buy-in and their active participation.

Look around and ask:

• What processes do you have in place to capture feedback?
• Who is responsible for collecting team members’ questions and comments?
• Who is responsible for the answers?
• Who ensures that the answers are clear and consistent with the vision?

Final Thoughts

Is it easy? Hardly. But it shows that the organization cares, it meliorates frustrations and other negative emotions, and it maximizes your time and efforts. Many change leaders assume, “Well…my employees know that the change is going to happen, and we will move it forward.” Yet, the real questions are: Are the team members the ones who will move the change forward? What fears and frustrations are not surfacing? Finding out can make a difference.

Let’s face it. Most employees will not express their fears and frustrations in public. Give them options: confidential boxes, open-door hours, surveys — just to mention a few. You will not know where to focus your future efforts, time, and energy in the change process unless you get solid feedback. Establish a system to capture those views. You will be surprised by what you learn.

Don’t just communicate the change—lead the change.

—————————–

1 According to Gartner research, 80 percent of companies adapt a top-down change strategy which isolates the affected employees.

About the Author

Jose Marrero is the Director of Special Projects and teaches Applied Leadership and Critical Workplace Skills in the Economic Development Department, Columbus Technical College, Columbus, GA. The seminars that he designs, develops, and delivers focus on achieving long-term results in the workplace. In addition, Jose is referred to as a motivational speaker and life coach who is passionate about helping individuals thrive and reach their fullest potential.

Jose has taught countless customized seminars for several local, state, and international organizations – a few Fortune 500 companies — engaging audiences not only with valuable insights but also by challenging and inspiring them to grow personally and professionally.

His 47-year professional career, 31 of which were spent serving in the US Army, includes assignments such as:

• Teaching at the United States Military Academy, West Point, NY
• Commander at various levels
• Strategist at the Strategy, Policy, and War Plans Division, the Pentagon
• Operations Officer at various levels
• Chief of Staff
• Military Advisor to a US Ambassador
• Senior Analyst at the White House ONDCP, Washington, DC — among other regular and special assignments.

Above all, Jose has proudly led Soldiers to perform meritoriously under uniquely difficult and challenging conditions.

He has spearheaded various international negotiation efforts, culminating in agreements with foreign governments. In addition to drafting strategies, he has formulated and implemented strategic communication plans, and has prepared speeches and presentations for Executive Officials, General Officers, and Political Appointees.

He has authored over 19 articles. In addition, Jose is among the very few who have been awarded the Presidential Service Badge, for his service at the White House ONDCP.

Jose has been an avid athlete for most of his life. In addition to playing several sports, he taught martial arts, competed in boxing and wrestling, and completed three triathlons. He is a member of the International Foreign Language Honor Society (Phi Sigma Iota) and earned his postgraduate degree from Vanderbilt University.

*Image by Tung Lam from Pixabay