The following pages will show you how to do those things.5
1. See Paul Hochman, “The Brand Killer,” in Fortune Small Business (May 2002): 59ff.
2. Appeared in “The Idea Generator,” in HR Reporter 5.2 (February 1988): 3.
3. Such usage is not wrong, of course—just not helpful. In fact, “transition” is used in many settings to refer to drastic changes such as losing your job.
4. “Ending,” “letting go,” and “loss” are related concepts that we’ll be using more or less interchangeably. “Ending” refers to the thing that ceases. “Letting go” is what we have to do when that thing ceases. And “loss” is what we feel when we have to let go.
5. The appendices provide more detailed information about managing transitions. Appendix A is about assessing an organization’s readiness for transition. (It helps to know what you are in for before you find yourself knee-deep in trouble.) Appendix B lays out a ten-step process for planning a transition. Appendices C, D, and E deal with the leader’s role in getting an organization through transition, monitoring the transition process, and finding out what trouble people may be having in it, and adjusting your career thinking and action to the reality of frequent change.
CHAPTER
2
We think in generalities, but we live in detail.
—ALFRED NORTH WHITEHEAD, BRITISH PHILOSOPHER
A Test Case
Chapter 1 was fairly theoretical. Unless you understand the basic transition model, you won’t be able to use it. But only in actual situations can you use it, so let’s look at a situation that I encountered at a software company. I was brought in because the service manager wanted to make some changes, and his staff was telling him it wasn’t going to be as easy as he thought.
He told me that he didn’t see why that should be so. The change made perfect sense, and it was also necessary for the firm’s continued leadership in the field of business software for banks. “Besides,” he said, “no one’s going to lose a job or anything like that.”
Bearing in mind what you read in Chapter 1, see what you think.
The company’s service unit did most of its business over the telephone. Individual technicians located in separate cubicles fielded callers’ questions. The company culture was very individualistic. Not only were employees referred to as “individual contributors,” but also each was evaluated based on the number of calls he or she disposed of in a week. At the start of each year a career evaluation plan was put together for each employee in which a target (a little higher than the total of the previous year’s weekly numbers) was set. To hit the target brought you a bonus. To miss it cost you that bonus.
Purchasers of the company’s big, custom software packages called to report various kinds of operating difficulties, and people at three different levels handled the calls. First, the calls went to relatively inexperienced individuals, who could answer basic questions. They took the calls on an availability basis. If the problem was too difficult for the first level, it went to the second tier. Technicians at that level had more training and experience and could field most of the calls, but if they couldn’t take care of a problem, they passed it on to someone on the third level. The “thirds” were programmers who knew the system from the ground up and could, if necessary, tell the client how to reprogram the software to deal with the problem.
Each tier of the service unit was a skill-based group with its own manager, who was responsible for managing the workload and evaluating the performance of the individual contributors. Not surprisingly, there was some rivalry and mistrust among the different levels, as each felt that its task was the pivotal one and that the others didn’t pull their weight.
As you may have surmised, there were several inherent difficulties with this system. First, customers never got the same person twice unless they remembered to ask. Worse yet, there was poor coordination among the three levels. A level-one technician never knew to whom he was referring a customer—or sometimes even whether anyone at the next level actually took over the customers when he passed them on. Customers were often angry at being passed around rather than being helped.
Managers were very turf-conscious, and this didn’t improve coordination. Sometimes the second-tier manager announced that all the “seconds” were busy—although this was hard to ascertain because each technician was hidden in a cubicle—and then the service would go on hold for a day (or even a week) while the seconds caught up with their workload. In the meantime, the frustrated customer might have called back and found that he had to start over again and explain the problem to a different first-tier worker.
Not only were customers passed along from one part of the service unit to another, but sometimes they were “mislaid” entirely. The mediocre (at best) level of customer satisfaction hadn’t been as damaging when the company had no real competition, but when another company launched an excellent new product earlier that year, it spelled trouble.
The general manager of the service unit brought in a service consultant, who studied the situation and recommended that the unit be reorganized into teams of people drawn from all three of the levels. (This reorganization is what in the last chapter I called the change.) A customer would be assigned to a team, and the team would have the collective responsibility of solving the customer’s problem. Each team would have a coordinator responsible for steering the customer through the system of resources. Everyone agreed: the change ought to solve the problem.
The change was explained at a unit-wide meeting, where large organization charts and team diagrams lined the walls. Policy manuals were rewritten, and the team coordinators—some of whom had been level managers and some of whom were former programmers—went through a two-day training seminar. The date for the reorganization was announced, and each team met with the general manager, who told them how important the change was and how important their part was in making it work.
Although there were problems when the reorganization occurred, no one worried too much because there are always problems with change. But a month or so later it became clear that the new system not only wasn’t working but also didn’t even exist except on paper. The old levels were still entrenched in everyone’s mind, and customers were still being tossed back and forth (and often dropped) without any system of coordination. The coordinators maintained their old ties with people from their former groups and tended to try to get things done with the help of their old people (even when those people belonged to another team) rather than by their team as a whole.
Imagine that you’re brought in to help them straighten out this tangle. What would you do? Because we can’t discuss the possibilities face to face, I will give you a list of actions that might be taken in such a situation. Scan them and see which sound like good ideas to you. Then go back through the list slowly and put a number by each item, assigning it to one of the following five categories:
1 = Very important. Do this at once.
2 = Worth doing but takes more time. Start planning it.
3 = Yes and no. Depends on how it’s done.
4 = Not very important. May even be a waste of effort.
5 = No! Don’t do this.
Fill in those numbers before you read further, and take your time. This is not a simple situation, and solving it is a complicated undertaking.
1 = Very important. Do this at once.
2 = Worth doing but takes more time. Start planning it.
3 = Yes and no. Depends on how it’s done.
4 = Not very important. May even be a waste of effort.
5 = No! Don’t do this.
Possible Actions to Take
_____
Explain the changes again in a carefully written memo.
_____
Figure out exactly how individuals’ behavior and attitudes will have to change to make teams work.
_____
Analyze who stands to lose something under the new system.
_____
&nbs
p; Redo the compensation system to reward compliance with the changes.
_____
“Sell” the problem that is the reason for the change.
_____
Bring in a motivational speaker to give employees a powerful talk about teamwork.
_____
Design temporary systems to contain the confusion during the cutover from the old way to the new.
_____
Use the interim between the old system and the new to improve the way in which services are delivered by the unit—and, where appropriate, create new services.
_____
Change the spatial arrangements so that the cubicles are separated only by glass or low partitions.
_____
Put team members in contact with disgruntled clients, either by phone or in person. Let them see the problem firsthand.
_____
Appoint a “change manager” to be responsible for seeing that the changes go smoothly.
_____
Give everyone a T-shirt with a new “teamwork” logo on it.
_____
Break the change into smaller stages. Combine the firsts and seconds, then add the thirds later. Change the managers into coordinators last.
_____
Talk to individuals. Ask what kinds of problems they have with “teaming.”
_____
Change the spatial arrangements from individual cubicles to group spaces.
_____
Pull the best people in the unit together as a model team to show everyone else how to do it.
_____
Give everyone a training seminar on how to work as a team.
_____
Reorganize the general manager’s staff as a team and reconceive the GM’s job as that of a coordinator.
_____
Send team representatives to visit other organizations where service teams operate successfully.
_____
Turn the whole thing over to the individual contributors as a group and ask them to come up with a plan to change over to teams.
_____
Scrap the plan and find one that is less disruptive. If that one doesn’t work, try another. Even if it takes a dozen plans, don’t give up.
_____
Tell them to stop dragging their feet or they’ll face disciplinary action.
_____
Give bonuses to the first team to process one hundred client calls in the new way.
_____
Give everyone a copy of the new organization chart.
_____
Start holding regular team meetings.
_____
Change the annual individual targets to team targets, and adjust bonuses to reward team performance.
_____
Talk about transition and what it does to people. Give coordinators a seminar on how to manage people in transition.
Category 1: Very important. Do this at once.
Figure out exactly how individuals’ behavior and attitudes will have to change to make teams work. To deal successfully with transition, you need to determine precisely what changes in their existing behavior and attitudes people will have to make. It isn’t enough to tell them that they have to work as a team. They need to know how teamwork differs behaviorally and attitudinally from the way they are working now. What must they stop doing? And what are they going to have to start doing? Be specific. Until these changes are spelled out, people won’t be able to understand what you tell them.
Analyze who stands to lose something under the new system. This step follows the previous one. Remember, transition starts with an ending. You can’t grasp the new thing until you’ve let go of the old thing. It’s this process of letting go that people resist, not the change itself. Their resistance can take the form of foot-dragging or sabotage, and you have to understand the pattern of loss to be ready to deal with the resistance and keep it from getting out of hand.
“Sell” the problem that is the reason for the change. Most managers and leaders put 10 percent of their energy into selling the problem and 90 percent into selling the solution to the problem. People aren’t in the market for solutions to problems they don’t see, acknowledge, and understand. They might even come up with a better solution than yours, and then you won’t have to sell it—it will be theirs.
Put team members in contact with disgruntled clients, either by phone or in person. Let them see the problem firsthand. This is part of selling the problem. As long as you are the only one fielding complaints, poor service is going to be your problem, no matter how much you try to get your subordinates to acknowledge its importance. To engage their energies, you must make poor service their problem. Client visits are the best opportunity for people to see how its customers perceive their operation. DuPont has used this program very successfully in a number of its plants. Under its “Adopt a Customer” program, blue-collar workers are sent to visit customers once a month and bring what they learn back to the factory floor.
Talk to individuals. Ask what kinds of problems they have with “teaming.” When an organization is having trouble with change, managers usually say they know what is wrong. But the truth is that often they don’t. They imagine that everyone sees things as they do, or they make assumptions about others that are untrue. You need to ask the right questions. If you ask, “Why aren’t you doing this?” you’ve set up an adversarial relation and will probably get a defensive answer. If, on the other hand, you ask, “What problems are you having with this?” you’re likelier to learn why it isn’t happening.
Talk about transition and what it does to people. Give coordinators a seminar on how to manage people in transition. Everyone can benefit from understanding transition. A coordinator will deal with subordinates better if he or she understands what they are going through. If they understand what transition feels like, team members will feel more confident that they haven’t taken a wrong turn. They’ll also see that some of their problems come from the transition process and not from the details of the change. If they don’t understand transition, they’ll blame the change for what they are feeling.
Start holding regular team meetings. Even before you can change the space to fit the new teams, you can start building the new identity by having those groups meet regularly. In this particular organization, the plan had been to hold meetings every two weeks. We changed that immediately: the teams met every morning for ten minutes for the first two months. Only such frequent clustering can override the old habits and the old self-images and build the new relations that teamwork requires. And you can give no stronger message about a new priority than to give it a visible place on everyone’s calendar.
Category 2: Worth doing but takes more time. Start planning it.
Redo the compensation system to reward compliance with the changes. This is important because you need to stop rewarding the old behavior. But do it carefully. A reward system that comes off the top of someone’s head is likely to introduce new problems faster than it clears up old ones.
Design temporary systems to contain the confusion during the cutover from the old way to the new. The time between the end of old ways and the beginning of new ones is a dangerous period. Things fall through the cracks. You’ll learn more about this when we talk about the neutral zone, but for now, suffice to say that you may have to create temporary policies, procedures, reporting relationships, roles, and even technologies to get you through this chaotic time.
Use the interim between the old system and the new to improve the ways in which services are delivered by the unit—and, where appropriate, create new services. This is the flip side of the chaotic “in-between” time: when everything is up for grabs anyway, innovations can be introduced more easily than during stable times. It’s a time to try doing things in new ways—especially new ways that people have long wanted to try but that conflicted with the old ways.
Change the spatial arrangements from individual cubicles to group spaces. Until this is done, the
new human configuration has no connection with the physical reality of the place. Space is symbolic. If they’re all together physically, people are more likely to feel together mentally and emotionally.
Reorganize the general manager’s staff as a team and reconceive the GM’s job as that of a coordinator. Leaders send many more messages than they realize or intend to. Unless the leader is modeling the behavior that he or she is seeking to develop in others, things aren’t likely to change very much. As Ralph Waldo Emerson said, “What you are speaks so loudly, I can’t hear what you say.”1
Send team representatives to visit other organizations where service teams operate successfully. People need to see, hear, and touch to learn effectively. Talking to someone who’s actually doing something carries more weight with a doubtful person than even the best seminar or the most impressive pep talk. If you can’t take people to another location, invite a representative to your location and get a videotape that shows how work is done there.
Change the annual individual targets to team targets, and adjust bonuses to reward team performance. It’s hard to get people who are used to going it alone to play on a team, and you’ll never succeed until the game is redefined as a team sport. Annual performance schedules are part of what defines the game. Make this important change as soon as you can.
Category 3: Yes and no. Depends on how it’s done.
Bring in a motivational speaker to give employees a powerful talk about teamwork. The problem is that, by itself, this solution accomplishes nothing. And too often it is done by itself, as though, once “motivated,” people will make the change they are supposed to. This method should be integrated into a comprehensive transition management plan to be effective.
Managing Transitions Page 3
