Follow Us Twitter Link | Email Us email us | 1.888.745.2520

Archive for the ‘getting change to "stick"’ Category

Sustaining Organizational Change and Change Initiatives

Wednesday, August 5th, 2009

By William Seidman

Sustaining the organizational change that your company or group has spent a lot of time and money to implement can be really tough. Many years ago at HP, a first-level manager talked to me about how hard it was to keep the business running while learning a new business process. He was echoing the complaints from his group.

His manager, who was also my manager,  sat him down and asked him a question: “Are you a manager?”

My colleague answered, “Yes.”

Our manager then had a very simple response: “Then manage it!”

The first thing the organization needs to do, from the top executive down, is to actually expect people to find a way to manage the situation. The second thing is to give people some training in how to lead an organization through a change.

This training usually has two parts:

Authentic Commitment,  a belief in the usefulness and validity of the change 

Continuous Demonstration of Tangible Support, in which the manager is taught how to walk the talk of the change

Additionally, managers need to be held explicitly accountable, with both rewards for effectively managing and penalties for focusing merely on keeping the business running.

Obviously, if the executive team is less than actively supportive of the change and of the ways and means to sustain it,  the organization cannot improve.

Sustaining Change When Your Managers and Supervisors are Pedaling as Fast as They Can

Tuesday, August 4th, 2009

 By William Seidman

Sustaining a change to a large organization can be difficult.

At Cerebyte we’ve made great progress in getting the end-user (the sales person, service person, etc.) to buy into and want the change. The problems arise with immediate and second-level supervisors. Without their active support, changes can’t “stick.” So what’s their problem? I see two factors:

1.  Managers are so focused on keeping the business running that looking ahead at the several weeks — or, more often,  the several months — often required for a substantive change is not something they do.  Nearly all of their resources, and most of the resources they supervise,  are just about daily survival.

2. They’re usually untrained in balancing the demands of running the business each day with developing their organization for the future.

Change initiatives only rarely survive these persistent obstacles.

The Obama Administration and the Science of Change

Wednesday, April 15th, 2009

By Michael McCauley

I read a fascinating article recently by Michael Grunwald in Time magazine. It details how the Obama administration is using the science of change and behavioral economics to move the country in the desired direction. They base their approach on the latest behavioral research, including the findings behind recent best sellers Influence by psychologist Robert Cialdini, Predictably Irrational by Dan Ariely, and Nudge by Nobel laureate Daniel Kahneman. The approach can be summarized in 4 steps:

Step 1: Make it Clear. Recent studies suggest that better information - in this case information about energy use, diet, our mortgages and credit card rates - helps people make better choices. For example, what if every public company was required to provide a standardized one-page summary of financial information,  rather than the voluminous annual reports they provide now? Average people would then be able to compare one company against another and make informed investment choices.

Step 2: Make it Easy. Life is complicated and, given the opportunity, most people tend to take the easy path. For example, in one study, only 36% of women joined a 401(k) plan when they had to sign up for it, but when they were automatically enrolled and had to specifically opt out in order to decline,  86% participated.

Step 3: Make it Popular. Behavioral studies show that nothing drives personal choice quite like the power of conformity. Research shows that homeowners are most likely to save energy and recycle when they think everyone else is doing it, too. The Obama campaign’s ”Get Out The Vote” drive last summer was able to mobilize millions of people with a simple message - “a record turnout is expected.”

Step 4: Make it Mandatory. If all else fails, pass laws that mandate the desired behavior. Laws requiring efficient appliances, health insurance or limits on carbon emissions are examples. Notice that this is seen as a last resort, not the first line of defense. Numerous studies show that mandatory “command and control systems” that require certain behaviors are often vigorously resisted. It is useful only when the all other options (i.e., steps 1-3) fail to result in the desired transformation.

This behavioral approach to change is significantly different from the approaches taken by previous administrations. It will be interesting to watch the results.

Change Has to be Wanted for it to “Stick”

Tuesday, February 10th, 2009

By William Seidman

Yesterday I led a webinar for the Ohio Heartland Chapter of the International Society for Performance Improvement. Julie Snyder and Tom Roach of “Leadership Beyond Limits” helped make it happen, and Suki McIntosh of OHISPI hosted.

Our use of the science of positive deviance, best practices research, and change initiatives inspired a key question: Does our scientific approach to change frighten people who are reluctant to change? 

My answer: Of course it does! People who don’t want to change resist any method that promises to help them to change.

Our change process - any change process -  works only when people want to do something differently and are willing to work to make it happen. Training, videos, digital coaching technology, webinars, binders … none of this drives change with organizations and people who want to stay the same and work in the same old ways. Cerebyte’s  success comes from working with organizations, companies, and people who want to change  - and want to know how to do it and make it “stick.”

Getting Change to Stick: Reinforce Training

Friday, January 16th, 2009

By William Seidman

Professor of Management and Labor Dr. Harry J. Martin has a good article, “Lessons Learned,” in the Wall Street Journal/MIT Sloan Review. His message is cogent and important: “The key to effective training isn’t necessarily what happens in the classroom. It’s what you do afterward.”

The benefits of change are clear: increased productivity, higher morale, cost savings, and improved communication. Enhanced problem-solving is an added plus.

Once the training is ended, though, and work resumes, several vitally important aspects of change must be in play in order for things to not backslide. According to Martin it’s essential to:

  • Put It on Paper - write down the action plan, make an outline or a list.
  • Measure Results - the all-important follow-up. Performance assessment is so important.
  • Get Help from Peers - especially important in settings where management support for the training  is deemed to be weak.
  • Have Supportive Superiors - when a boss assumes the role of coach or mentor, employees are much more likely to apply what they learned in training. The leader sets the bar!
  • Gain Access to Experts - trainees might need additional information. Companies can help, and reinforce change, by helping to provide technical support such as reference materials and access to experts. When good information is shared and promoted, organizations’ training programs gain from it.

Organizational change initiatives cost time and money. It’s great that there are measurable and predictable roads to successful change that “sticks.”

Captology: Organizational Transformation and Persuasive Technology

Thursday, January 8th, 2009

By Michael McCauley

Captology - the discipline of  ”Computers As Persuasive Technology”

Changing an organization can be incredibly difficult. To create lasting transformation, many people must change their beliefs, values, and actions quickly and completely. How hard is that? Very!

But these types of changes are exactly what persuasive technologies are designed to drive, although they have rarely been systematically applied to organizational transformations. Why is that?

We believe that it’s because persuasive technology, which can be great, is not enough by itself. A compehensive change process is required. For 12 years, Cerebyte has worked to develop a proven methodology for organizational transformation that uses persuasive technology to accomplish change faster, more thoroughly, and with more predictability than previously thought possible.

Find out more - read the entire article here, on the Cerebyte website.

New Behaviors Take More than 6 Weeks to “Stick”

Sunday, August 3rd, 2008

By RG

Bill Seidman and I were working with IT people inside a large corporation. The told us upfront that IT had a bad reputation in the company and was held in poor regard by the business units. How to solve this?

Background: the IT department’s policy was to implement the company’s proscribed changes and to be available for up to six weeks afterwards, to help. So what could be wrong with this model? We talked about the importance of sustaining new behaviors and how at 6-8 weeks, a person going through a change process will have a crisis in which the new neural pathways are not yet the only pathways, an inner struggle ensues, and -more often than not - they regress to the old habits. It’s for just this reason that IT groups must stick around to help people at the critical juncture. We need them more, not less, after the 6-week mark. Once people are over the hump, the IT people can move on.

 
Better Tag Cloud