“Change is inevitable,” – Oscar Richardson said back in 1912. And after so many years, the phrase of this American scientist still works like an engine booster for organizations worldwide. No matter how the organizations think, all organizations are changing in a world that constantly changes. Change looks small and insignificant in some, while in others, it is a well-adapted process and framework to help win the race to stay at the top of the industry and in line with the competition.
Change has different faces – from the new mouse you get from your IT department to the structural change that moves your department into another structure or offshores some of the functions somewhere. Small, medium, large, and strategic are often used for changes, but doing it right differs from thinking about it.
The best way to execute a change is how the organization sees it as an acceptable transformation of the current status quo. Often, changes that fail miss the basics in this first step – to assess the level of readiness for the organization to change.
In the last several years, educational companies, coaches, trainers, and leadership teams have started looking here instead of boosting change initiatives.
Defining the readiness for change in one organization is half the work of executing the change most appropriately toward the organization’s structure, culture, and people.
The change needs to be viewed as a positive action and aligned with the organization’s and people’s readiness to absorb that change.
In this first part, we will focus on recognizing the organization’s readiness for change. To do that, an analysis must be conducted in different areas of the organization. The analysis must cover various topics and answer several questions. Here is the list of the most common questions an organization must ask themselves to define it’s readiness for change:
What is the nature of the change?
Change may be seen as different sets of actions and have other impacts, depending on what has to be done. It defines the beginning of a change initiative as more operational and direct or strategic. The long-term is crucial for the subsequent phases, when the change is connected to resources, allowing it to happen.
What is the expected duration?
Change is a constant process, but all organizational changes are time-limited. Defining the duration of the change process allows the change initiator to get an idea of the people and resources involved and the exhaustion of the change initiative.
What are the critical milestones associated with the change?
Every change has different internal steps, and clearing the results after each step allows the executor to see the progress clearly and work in small portions of time and effort toward the bigger goal.
Where is the organization in the change process?
In many cases, organizations have unconscionably started the change but didn’t realize that until analyses were made. The change agent or the sponsor of the change needs to have information on the level at which the change has happened until its official announcement within the organization. Answering that question may add or remove some steps and duplicate work, making the process smoother and more balanced regarding time, people, and physical and psychological resources.
Who will have primary responsibility for implementing the change?
“Change is about everyone, and each person in the organization is responsible for making it happen” were the words of a well-known CEO of a Fortune Top 100 company some years ago. While this is a harmonized utopia, the hard truth is that the change must be explained to everyone. However, it is still happening not because of everyone in the organization but because of a team of chosen people who invest efforts to bring it to life. Defining that list of change creators for a current change helps the organization balance resources better and allocate workforce, skill, and knowledge to support the change correctly.
What language and cultural factors will impact the change?
Changes have always had an impact on company culture and language. Depending on the type of the change and the scope of the transformation, those can be easily spotted or remain hidden in the background. No matter the case, if the change initiative cannot recognize the impact on basic cultural and language prepositions, it may be needed to stop it and reevaluate again. Changing the culture in the organization may lead to a dramatic shift in the environmental climate and affect relationships and dependencies between departments and particular people. And being positioned in a new agenda, the new behaviors may turn a relatively favorable environment and engagements into negatively connotated cases and situations.
What role will each department play in implementing the change?
There may be a robust agenda involved in the change in the core team of people, but at the same time, a more comprehensive analysis of the contribution of each team in the organization may be needed. Defining the role or lack of a role for each team or function is crucial to supporting the change and creating involvement and engagement. Leaving people, teams, or functions excluded may have a negative impact not only on the change initiative but also on the engagement toward the organization.
IN CONCLUSION:
Organizational change is not an easy task. No matter the organization’s size, many factors can support, delay, or even stop the change. Looking at the organization’s details can boost change and help execute it in the best possible ways for the organization, the surrounding environment, and the people working in the organization and on the change.
The Human place - a path from you to yourself 