Just because everything is different doesn’t mean that anything has changed.
IRENE PETER, AMERICAN WRITER
Successful new beginnings are based on a clear and appropriate purpose. Without one, there may be lots of starts but no real beginnings. In fact, there may be one start after another in a sequence of changes that tires out everyone without solving the underlying problems. Without a beginning, the transition is incomplete. And without transition, the change changes nothing.
AFTER A PURPOSE, A PICTURE
Purposes are critical to beginnings, but they are rather abstract. They are ideas, and most people are not ready to throw themselves into a difficult and risky undertaking simply on the basis of an idea.1 They need something they can see, at least in their imaginations. They need a picture of how the outcome will look, and they need to be able to imagine how it will feel to be a participant in it.
A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral.
ANTOINE DE SAINT-EXUPÉRY, FRENCH NOVELIST
This picture in people’s heads is the reality they live in, and one of the losses that takes place during the ending phase of a transition is that the old picture—the mental image of how and why things are the way they are—falls apart. Much of the pain of the neutral zone comes from the fact that it is a time without a viable organizational picture. (Part of the task of neutral zone management is to create a “temporary wilderness” picture in people’s minds, a picture that explains and validates what they are experiencing.) It is the new organizational picture that refocuses people’s energies and brings them out of the neutral zone with a new sense of their collective identity and a new meaning for their efforts.
So your second task is to create this picture.2 There is nothing mystical or artistic about this process. Moses, who was so self-doubting about his ability to inspire others that he tried to turn down Jehovah’s call to lead the Jewish people, did it very effectively. He translated the idea of a Promised Land into the picture of a Land of Milk and Honey. He did not stop with creating an understanding of the destination; he portrayed the destination in a way that engaged the Israelites’ imaginations.
What will the outcome of the change you’re trying to manage look like and sound like? How will people get their work done and interact with each other? What will the spatial layout of the place be like? How will a day at this place be organized? When people first encounter the new way of doing things, what impression will it make on them? What feeling will they get just from being there? In other words, what will people experience that is different?
Use visuals to convey the picture of the new way things will be. A floor plan of the new office layout, a video of the new automated packaging line, a map showing the expanded area served by the branches of the merged banks—these will help people to imagine what the new way will be like. Another way to paint a picture is to arrange for people to tour another organization where things are already done in the new way. As they see and talk with people working successfully under the new conditions, they can begin to visualize and feel comfortable with the new way.
TWO THINGS TO WATCH OUT FOR
A couple of warnings about helping your people visualize the new way. First, don’t expect the picture to have its effect prematurely—that is, before your people have made an ending and let go of the past. There is no harm (and there is actual gain) in showing the picture to people as soon as the change is announced. Doing so will plant the picture of the future in their imaginations, where it will reassure them. But it does not make the transition happen. It was not just the image of the Promised Land that got the people out of Egypt or through the wilderness—it was Moses’ skill as a transition leader.
Hope is generally a wrong guide, though it is very good company by the way.
CHARLES MONTAGU, EARL OF HALIFAX, BRITISH STATESMAN
Misplaced faith in the picture’s power to make a transition happen is encouraged by a misunderstanding that is common among people who design change projects. Such people typically go through their transitions before they launch the changes, while they’re still struggling with the problems and searching for solutions. By the time they are ready to announce the change, they have long since put their endings and their neutral zone behind them, and now they’re ready for a new beginning. But they forget that middle management is probably just entering the neutral zone and that most workers have not even made their endings yet.
This situation might be called “the Marathon Effect”—it is similar to what happens in road races with thousands of runners. The front runners take off like rabbits, then the second wave (which is a little slower anyway) starts running, and then the middle waves (which are nowhere near as fast) get under way. By the time the leaders are well out on the course, the Sunday runners in the rear, who were too far back even to hear the starting gun (and who only hope to be able to finish the race) are beginning to stir. A rumor comes back through the crowd: the race has started. The Sunday runners move their feet a little to loosen up, but they can’t really run yet. They shuffle a little, then begin taking small steps.
About the time the Sunday runners have speeded up to a slow jog, some of the front runners are nearing the finish line and thinking, Well, this is about over. Good race. What’ll I do next week? So it is with the company executives. They went through their transitions long ago when they started grappling with the problems. They forget that their followers are still struggling.
The second warning is not to overwhelm people with a picture that is so hard for them to identify with that they become intimidated rather than excited by it. One of our clients presented a video of a new state-of-the-art automated fulfillment center like the one they were planning to install. The video, which featured stirring music from inspiring films, was made by a high-tech studio in Hollywood. The workers watched dramatic scenes of robots assisting their product speeding through a space-age setting. They saw people peering at computer screens that they could not even imagine being able to understand. The result was that most of the employees left thinking they couldn’t do the work or that they would lose their jobs in the end.
NOW CREATE A PLAN
Some people really respond to the picture. Once they get it in their heads, they find a way to reach the destination that has captured their imagination. Many executives and planners fall into this group, and because they don’t feel as much of a personal need for a plan that spells out the details of the route from here to there, they underestimate how much others need such a plan. For many operationally minded people, the picture is interesting, but the real question is, “What do we do on Monday?”
The plan we are talking about is not the large-scale outline of stages and dates—which explains when, for example, the new automated machinery will be ordered, when it will arrive, when it will be installed, and when the first shipment of products will go out. That is the plan for the changes, not the transitions. The plan we are talking about outlines the steps and schedule in which people will receive the information, training, and support they need to make the transition. It lays out the nature and timing of key events that mark the phases of the transition: a ceremony marking the disbanding of a group, the formation of a transition monitoring team, the scheduling of a visit to another site, an all-hands question-and-answer session with the site manager, and the start of a training program. The transition management plan differs from the change management plan in several ways. First, it is much more detailed, addressing the change on the personal rather than the collective level. It is much more person-oriented because it tells José, Stella, and Ray how and when their worlds are going to change. Second, it is oriented to the process and not just the outcome. It lays out the details of what’s going to be done to help those individuals deal with the effects of the changes. It tells them when they can expect to receive information and training, and how and when they can have input into the planning process.
/>
A third difference is less evident in the final product but important in its creation. A change management plan starts with the outcome and then works backward, step by step, to create the necessary preconditions for that outcome. A transition management plan, on the other hand, starts with where people are and works forward, step by step, through the process of leaving the past behind, getting through the wilderness and profiting from it, and emerging with new attitudes, behaviors, and identity. A transition management plan can be put together by selecting, designing, and scheduling events, actions, and projects from the possibilities that are listed in chapters 3, 4, and 5.
FINALLY, A PART TO PLAY
Plans are immensely reassuring to most people, not just because they contain information but because they exist. As is noted in the Book of Exodus, in the wilderness of the neutral zone people “murmured.” One of the things they must have murmured was, “Do you think Moses has any plan, or do you think he’s making this up as he goes along?” The existence of the plan sends a message: somebody is looking after us, taking our needs seriously, and watching out so we don’t get lost along the way.
But even the best-laid plans leave a troubling doubt in the minds of some people. They don’t see their names on the org chart. No one has told them how they fit into the new scheme of things. No one has given them any role to play in the journey itself. The purpose, the picture, and the plan all omit something: a part for them to play. Until that is provided, many people will feel left out and will find it difficult to make a new beginning.
You’ll usually need to give people two parts to play. First, they need to see the role and their relationship to others in the new scheme of things. If their name appears on the new organization chart, they may not like where you have put them, but it beats not seeing their name at all. Until people know the parts they are to play, they can’t begin the slow process of adjusting their hopes and fears to the new reality. Until they know their parts, speculations dictate their actions and can lead them far from the new realities they will be facing.
But that is only the part people will play in the outcome. You also need to give people a role in dealing effectively with the transition process itself. The easiest way to do this is to be sure that everyone has some role on one of the planning task forces, climate survey groups, problem-solving circles, or transition monitoring teams. If this is not possible, set up formal input systems for such groupings so that each person has at least an indirect part to play in the transition management process. This is particularly important for people who have lost some significant part that they played in the old order (see Chapter 3, “Compensate for the Losses”).
Giving people a significant part to play in the transition management process facilitates the new beginning in five ways:
1.It gives people new insight into the real problems being faced by the organization as it comes out of the neutral zone and redefines itself. When people understand problems, they are in the market for solutions.
2.By sharing these problems, you align yourself and your people on one side and the problems on the other. The polarity is not between you and them; you are allies, not adversaries. If relationships have been frayed by change, this is a chance to rebuild them.
3.Giving people a part brings their firsthand knowledge to bear on solving problems. Joint decisions are not necessarily better than unilateral ones, but including people makes their knowledge available to the decision-maker, whoever that may be.
4.The knowledge thus provided is more than the facts about the problem—it also includes the facts about the self-interest of the various parties affected by the situation. Outcomes work best if they serve (or at least don’t violate) the self-interest of the participants. Without that knowledge, the results are likely to be solutions that, however technically or economically satisfactory, run afoul of human issues.
5.Finally, everyone who plays a part is, tacitly at least, implicated in the outcome. That is, after all, how democracy works: you vote, and your vote is an implicit promise to abide by the results. Although actual votes are rare in the organizational world, this essential strength of democracy is still attainable and advantageous. In most cases, excellence is about seven parts commitment and three parts strategy.
REINFORCING THE NEW BEGINNING
All of these tactics help people to leave the disturbing and creative chaos of the neutral zone and refocus their energies in new directions. They help people to shape new identities to replace the ones they gave up when they let go of how things used to be. But that refocusing needs to be reinforced if it is to keep its new shape and not revert to chaos when the initial focus is impacted by the continuing stream of changes that will surely come along.3
Rule 1: Be Consistent
The first form of reinforcement is consistency of message. Every policy, procedure, and list of priorities sends a message, but if you aren’t careful, your messages will be conflicting ones.
If you tell people that a budget crunch requires them to buy office supplies with their own money, while the organization’s executives are still flying first class, you’re sending conflicting messages.
If you tell people they need to do five new things but don’t remove anything from their list of tasks, you’re sending conflicting messages. (Telling them to do more with less is simply telling them to cut corners in what may be very dangerous ways. Telling them to work smarter is telling them to do more with less.)
Example is not the main thing in influencing others, it’s the only thing.
ALBERT SCHWEITZER, FRENCH PHILOSOPHER-PHYSICIAN
Conflicting messages are confusing in their own right and also provide people with excuses to argue that the new beginning isn’t for real.
The second form of reinforcement is a particular kind of consistency: the consistency of your own actions. Regardless of the confusions surrounding a new beginning—and you’re sure to have your own share—you have one reliable point of leverage in moving people out of the neutral zone: the example of your own behavior.
An example used in Chapter 2 illustrates the problem. In that case a leader who didn’t realize how much louder actions speak than words imperiled a promising new beginning. Anxious to reorganize his people into service teams that integrated formerly separate layers of service techs, that leader ceaselessly preached the benefits of teamwork and collective decision-making. But the direct reports on his own staff, each of whom was being told to transform his group into a team, was run as a set of one-on-one relationships between the executive and the person who reported to him.
The third form of reinforcement is another kind of consistency. It is common (and always disastrous) to tell people to act and react in new ways—and then to reward them acting and reacting in the old ways. You won’t manage to hold a new beginning for long:
•If you talk about teamwork and then reward individual contributions
•If you advocate customer service and then reward “following the rules”
•If you encourage risk-taking and then reward “no mistakes”
•If you request feedback and then reward “no criticism”
•If you champion entrepreneurship and then reward “doing your job”
•If you preach decentralized authority and then reward hands-on management
The rewards in question are not just financial ones, and that is good news because the financial rewards may not be possible at this time. But many of the most important rewards were not, including all the “strokes” that people receive: their boss’s time and attention, feedback and praise, additional training, and exciting development opportunities. People have to feel that they are better off for having changed their attitudes and behavior. If they don’t, you’d better look at your reward system.
Rule 2: Ensure Quick Successes
The neutral zone takes a heavy toll on most people’s self-confidence because it is a period of lowered productivity and diminished feelings of competence. It may also
, if it resonates with past difficulties in a person’s life, activate serious problems of low self-esteem. For that reason people are likely to need some fairly quick successes if they are to return to their former effectiveness.
These successes can come from small tasks, which can be accomplished, even in spite of the diminished self-confidence of transition survivors. They can come from sure wins—situations with little risk of failure. They can even come from ongoing efforts where success was pretty well in the bag before the new people took over.
A benefit of quick successes is that when changes are deep and far-reaching, new beginnings take a long time to be fully realized. Believers may begin to doubt, and doubters turn into critics. Critics then have a field day. Quick successes reassure the believers, convince the doubters, and confound the critics.
Rule 3: Symbolize the New Identity
People are not merely logical beings; they are full of feeling too. They are not just literal-minded; they also react symbolically to events. That is why apparently small things can take on enormous importance as individuals and their organization struggle to make new beginnings work. One merger that we worked on provides an example of this.
A serious conflict arose over whether identification badges at the newly integrated company would be blue (like the old ones at the larger company) or white (like those at the smaller but more successful company). It was decided to make them gold to mirror the new identity. The result: no more conflict and a successful merger. The point is not that such symbolism contributes to success, but simply that it conveys a message that reinforces the new identity being established in the new organizational beginning. During highly charged times of transition, everything takes on a symbolic hue—everything means something. That can trip you up because you don’t intend to mean something with everything you do. At the same time, you can use it to your advantage by viewing everything symbolically and looking for opportunities to symbolize the new beginning you are trying to make.
Managing Transitions Page 9
