Follow Us Twitter Link | Email Us email us | 1.888.745.2520

Posts Tagged ‘business’

The Science of Change Management

Tuesday, June 29th, 2010

Until  recently, there wasn’t really any reason to think about a distinction between a craft view of change and a scientific model of change. Change management had for so long consisted of a set of conventional “craft” wisdoms that few questioned the approach, even if the accepted wisdoms were minimally effective.

Now, recent advances in four areas of research and the emergence of a new technology are changing this perspective. By combining work on positive deviance, fair process, neuroscience and mass customization into a single change model, and delivering change guidance through persuasive technology, it is possible to ensure that 98% of personnel in an organization embrace a change initiative.

Here is the model that has evolved from the science:

Set-the-Bar
In order to manage change effectively, the organization has to develop a compelling image of the desired end result of the change. Research on positive deviance tells us that the people who consistently and systematically outperform others (the organization’s “positive deviants”):
• Always have these compelling images
• Are easily identified
• Exist in all job categories in all organizations
• Can be interviewed using simple, reliable techniques that gather their “wisdom” quickly and effectively
The science on positive deviant is extremely consistent. By leveraging their positive deviants, all organizations can always, and easily develop the powerful images required to drive change.

Motivate Change
People must be motivated to change. The science of fair process and the neuroscience of positive visualization make motivation highly predictable too. More specifically, by presenting the positive deviant’s powerful images of success in a way that generates a sense of respect and dignity in the organization (fair process), people tend to embrace the change. In fact, they feel deeply honored that the organization so completely believes in their ability. In turn, when people visualize themselves as functioning at the same levels of positive deviants, neuroscience research has shown that there is a release of neurotransmitters that drive a consistent increase in their willingness and ability to learn something new.

Motivation, once more of an art form than a predictable process, is now highly predictable. By creating the right conditions, almost all participants show significantly increased motivation.

Sustain Change
The craft of change management is particularly ineffective at sustaining a performance improvement. Because so much of craft change management is about personal relationships, when the person is no longer present, change efforts consistently falter.

In contrast, the neuroscience principle of “neurons that fire together wire together” and the emergence of persuasive technology provide capabilities that consistently and systematically sustain a change effort. The key to getting neurons to permanently wire together in support of a new business capability is intensive, repetitive practice. The positive deviants tell us the nature and frequency of this practice. Persuasive technology ensures that people actually practice.

Persuasive technology, which is defined as technology that ”changes what people believe and do,” is specifically designed to provide people with the prompts and support required to achieve the levels of practice required for complete internalization of a change. Features like weekly prompts, continuous status reporting to management and other standard features in persuasive technology drive participants to practice enough to achieve the positive deviant level of performance. Thus, sustainability of a change is now grounded in science and technology and is completely predictable.

Scaling Change
The craft of change management problems with sustainability become significantly more acute when hundreds or thousands of people must change to improve performance. How can a crafts person possibly touch these large numbers since change is all due to the individual contact?

Here too recent scientific advances solve the scaling problem. In particular, the integration of the principles of mass customization into persuasive technology provides a scientific methodology for touching many more people, more efficiently than previously thought possible. Mass customization is an organizing system that enables a central organization to mass produce the energy and materials for a change, while treating each person uniquely, thereby increasing personal motivation.

When embedded in persuasive technology, mass customization guides large numbers of users to consistently and systematically embrace the positive deviant images of extraordinary performance.

Comfort with the Craft
If the science of change management is so advanced, why are so few companies using it? The obvious answer is that the people responsible for change management either don’t know about the scientific advances or are themselves practitioners of the craft and are hesitant to acknowledge that their methods are no longereffective. In either case, organizations are put at competitive risk because they are not keeping up with some of the capabilities others are beginning to use.

The Retiring Knowledge Worker Problem and the Loss of Critical Knowledge

Saturday, August 9th, 2008

By William Seidman

Are a lot of your company’s best people approaching retirement? The prospect of losing expertise at a high rate can be more than a little frightening. We get numerous inquiries about this.

Not many organizations take this seriously enough to fund programs or change daily routine sufficiently to prepare for this. Why? I think because it’s seen as a future problem, and not big or bad enough to tackle now. The executives who make the funding and priority decisions don’t want to plan around it – after all, they’ll be retired themselves before it hits, and they don’t want to rock the boat. It’s not a sudden crisis, but rather a slow loss of capability – sometimes so slow as to be barely noticeable.

An alternative way of framing this problem is to state it as a crisis in the protection of critical knowlege. This is what’s lost when great people retire, and what’s so important to preserve. David DeLong has said that “This is a huge problem for the nuclear industry, because it goes without saying that it can’t afford to make a single mistake.”

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.

When is Organizational Change Sustainable?

Tuesday, July 29th, 2008

By William Seidman

We get asked if our solution is “sustainable.” Organizational change is sustainable if the people in the organization are committed to taking responsibility for their success. That commitment to change has incredible energy in it. Wisdom transfer isn’t magic – it takes hard work and a degree of diligence. Sustaining the changes is the organization’s charge. We give the tools and the support, but the group must use them well, and over time.

Keeping the Big Picture in Mind When You’re Swamped by the Daily Pressures

Sunday, July 27th, 2008

By William Seidman

I’m in Malaysia now, working with a great team that’s under incredible pressure. Each member recognizes that they should be thinking bigger and longer-term, but need someone – a catalyst if not a leader – to make it all happen. As Michael Gerber wrote in his now-classic book ( the updated version is “The E-Myth Revisited: Why Most Small Businesses Don’t Work”), sometimes you must “work on the business, not just in the business.” But working on the business requires commitment and strength of organizational character that’s hard to find. As in any important relationship, the organization must make a commitment to its own future to have the energy and the discipline required to make real and lasting change.

Neuroscience and Change in Malaysia, Hong Kong, Japan

Wednesday, July 23rd, 2008

By William Seidman

Can the science we use to effect organizational change be used in other cultures and in other languages? Do differences in negotiating styles, teams and hierarchies, and verbal and nonverbal ways of communicating influence a company’s ability to do things differently, and have the changes “stick”?

I’m working on a change initiative for a large multinational in Malaysia, Hong Kong, and Japan this summer. It’a a great way to test the mettle of positive deviance, fair process, and knowledge transfer – based on neuroscience – in translation and with some cultural barriers that we’ll be working with. In Hong Kong there are language differences between Cantonese and Mandarin.

Fair process has three principles: Engagement, Explanation, and Expectation Clarity. There seems to be a universal sense of honor and dignity created when a change process relies on the science of fair process. This has been especially powerful in work I’ve done with Japanese and Chinese companies previously.

A foundation of neuroscience, that “neurons that fire together, wire together,” would seem to predict that the approach will work.

Sharing Expertise within Organizations

Monday, July 21st, 2008

By William Seidman

How can you find expertise and, then, assure that it will be shared? Alden Hayashi’s “The World Might be Small, But Not for Everyone” describes research by a team led by Morten Hansen from INSEAD. Are the results surprising or could you have guessed what tends to happen? Significant groups within an organization are consistently and systematically excluded from critical knowledge. This exclusion decreases individual productivity and organizational success. Morten suggests that mentoring might solve this problem.

But we have found that many designated mentors don’t know how to mentor, and that the best people often don’t like it. Cerebyte’s research has found that reliance on human-to-human ad hoc mentoring does not solve this problem, which is often universal within the organization.

Use the research on positive deviance to define the content you want to gather and transfer, the research on fair process and positive visualization to motivate acceptance of the desired change, and the research on neuroplasticity to ensure that the learning will “stick.” Recent science offers some really great answers to these challenging problems of knowledge transfer – whether it’s called “sharing expertise,” “wisdom transfer” or “knowledge management.” We’re incredibly excited about it, because it can transform people and organizations.

About this blog

Friday, July 11th, 2008

Welcome to Cerebyte’s Blog, our ” Wisdom Journal.” This site was created to provide a source of web-based information and conversation on current ideas on organizational and personal change. How does it happen? What makes it so difficult? The hard parts, the fun parts – it’s all grist for our mill. Have you had an experience with change in your organization that was less than positive? We like to freely exchange ideas and look forward to exploring with you. We are William Seidman, Michael McCauley, and Rick Grbavac, and we’ll be sharing our blog with guests sometimes, too.

Do you remember some of the companies that couldn’t change? I do. They’re gone now. Some were even the “late, great,” and I was sad to see them go. Best practices which were, in fact, static may have done them in. Organizations transform themselves by changing the people in them. Either you hire new people or get the ones you have to change. But what about “doing things the old way”? When those ways work, they must be transmitted to people coming in. “Positive deviants” are the people in your organization or group who, somehow, and maybe quirkily, manage to get it right – with the same tools as everyone else. The tricky thing to figure out is how to utilize those valuable people to teach and transmit their wisdom to the rest of us. We at Cerebyte love this stuff and hope you’ll join the conversation! – Bill

 
Better Tag Cloud