Don't blame technology in systems implementation failures... BLAME CHANGE MANAGEMENT!

We have all failed to implement a system ... I do not speak of failure in the DEVELOPMENT of a system, or in the sale of it, or in the management of the equipment that compose a project for the development of a system ... I speak of failing in implementation.

We had everything ready, the system tested, even adopted by advanced user teams ... we wanted it, we were proud, it was properly built, as a remodeled and perfect hotel for its first day ... and guests never arrived.

At some point in my career, with several hits and several failures, I stopped thinking that "maybe" the error was our team ... I stopped thinking over the years that the "user interface was unattractive", "that the site I did not invite users to visit it "," it was not sexy enough "... I left to justify the unjustifiable ... we are not talking about mass-selling systems, or APPS (which name more able to look like peanuts rather than Has taken thousands of hours of work) ... we are talking about systems that are built to improve the productivity of equipment or allow significant savings in companies. In these systems, and in their adoption, failure stems from very few factors: corporate leadership and organizational change management.

Nothing of that has to do with technology.

It is not that technology is not important ... but it is a STARTING POINT. If the application works, if the tests are done, if the design was considering the key users ... if everything technical works, come MUCH MORE IMPORTANT points. Do you know why? Because the technological one is easily solved, the other is not.

I will not stop in this column to talk about corporate leadership; I find it much more interesting and complex to talk about change management. Corporate leadership, in flat terms, has to do with a leader who effectively transmits his company because you have to follow a certain course, and in this case, adopt a certain style of work and a tool.

Change Management is the key.

And it is the key for information professionals because it is usually something that is not present in our departments. It is in the corporate culture and today it should be present in the human resources management, although these departments, many times, have no idea what it is.

But let's go to the bottom, what is change management... and what factors are key to implementing it?

What are we talking about?

The concept of change is known to all, and if we assume that nothing in the universe is immutable, no one can escape in a sustainable way. Among the topics in the news, may, for example, include aging, what we cannot escape, climate change, genetic changes (GMO, cloning), technology changes (IT, energy), political ("the change Is now", according to Fran?ois Hollande), economic changes (financial crisis, euro crisis), and the list is by far not exhaustive ... but let us explore something attaining to our theme: how the organizational changes that occur In business when it attempts, in some way, to improve or implement its information systems to ensure its sustainability in a constantly changing environment.

In the field of economics and business, the pace of change has accelerated during the twentieth century; Technological opportunities, the liberalization of markets in the world, shorter product life cycles are the most cited reasons for explaining this phenomenon. In the field of technology, many authors have demonstrated that innovation and novelty are not enough to generate organizational change. In fact, and it is sometimes impressive, that if people do not give meaning to innovations, inventions are kept in a useless state. Therefore, a new technology that generates a change requires people to find meaning and use it to serve their purpose. In today's world, change is closely linked to individuals, their interpretation, their will and purpose.

The surroundings of the implementation of a new computer system, therefore cannot be limited to a technical and mechanical description of the substitution of a tool by a more recent one. In fact, the new tensions generated by an information system (for example, ERP) force users to change their practices, their skills and their social links in the company; Technology becomes a pretext to change the organization. These changes directly related to actors require them, and once, acceptance and adaptation, and at least, as the case may be, before the company can fully benefit from the characteristics of the new tool.

An old boss told me that in front of the actors (users in the context of the implementation of a new information system) there were only 3 alternatives: if he did not know, to teach; If they cannot, help, and if they do not want, dismiss ... surprisingly the theory of change management picks up the same thing:

Based on this finding - or consensus I would like to call it - the issue of management and management is to minimize the impacts of the adaptation and acceptance phases of ongoing operations, so that the company can continue without problems. To this end, change management provides methodologies and tools for achieving this goal, or even goes beyond, by building a culture of change. According to Kansal (2006), the limitations of an information system change project can come in five categories: technical, organizational, human, financial and temporary.

But what are the levers from which we must pull to achieve change in organizations?

The Levers of Change Management

The corporate culture: to form and to work the corporate culture in a constant way, in order to establish a clean and smooth path for the changes.

Actors, roles and meanings: to clearly establish these points and to update them when renovations so require, defining for example that elements are fundamental in the role of an actor and are REQUIRED for the purposes of adopting new tools and technologies.

Training: having a continuous plan for the training of employees of the company that has the necessary flexibility to incorporate the new "ways of doing" and thus operate as transformers and facilitators of adoption.

Communication and group dynamics: establishing these flows and ensuring their continuity, which will allow them not to be stoppers from adopting a new platform.

How to manage change in three phases

Preparing for change: it should include a sincere assessment, a checklist of "levers of change", and a previous leveling plan. All of this in addition to the change plan itself.

The implementation of change

The evaluation of the change: that eventually generates a new cycle, from the preparation.

And finally

Change should never be considered as a one-dimensional phenomenon, it is always housed in the complex and interactions between the different aggregates considered: environment, organization, culture, actors and work habits are few examples of factors Consider before starting a process of change. Often our expressions carry out a solution of change that seems fair, but over time is insufficient.

Ultimately, it is always the context will dictate the conditions for success. Therefore, while it is always possible to look at companies that have succeeded, it is completely absurd to make a copy. In fact, the human factor, which is essential for success, is a particular aspect that needs to be specifically addressed.

According to Bernoux (2010), the organization is the result of compromises between the different people that compose it. Based on this statement, the installation of a new system is not the only source of change. The latter is also involved because it generates new ways of seeing and doing things that sometimes challenge the compromise accepted TODAY. This is the main reason that change driven by systems implementation inevitably involves one or more phases of management by part of the HR team. The human dimension is the most important thing in a change project, nothing can be done without the participation of employees and the acceptance of the new system by the users. In fact, humans always have the option of accepting, denying or sabotaging the project. Keeping your opinion in mind is important throughout the process, but it is a function of the organization to "manage" it.

And now really the last

I started this article blaming the Change Management ... the truth is that many times the technology is to blame, but in the current state of the art of adopting technologies in corporations is a STARTING POINT ... a basic condition, it’s something that experts should be able to handle with relative ease (especially in administrative systems). The great obstacle and reason for failure, and that is my argument, is the change management.. and that SHOULD BE DIRECTLY ATTACKED  with even more passion than the technological challenge.