My Change Management Maturity Model

Nice one Alan. Getting the culture right is vital, but so often overlooked. Cheers KWE

Alan this is a valuable contribution to our change knowledge, and I can imagine how it might be applied in ways such as rating current maturity of an organization and comparing that to the maturity needed to execute its changes in addition to assessing organizations so they can chart a course to be more effective at change. One area you might consider adding is something about who in the organization drives the change because in less mature organizations this tends to be centralized only and I feel like I've experienced more success when there is deep ownership and engagement throughout the enterprise. This may already be covered by box 5 in Culture, but I thought I would share in case its valuable to specifically call out where driving and owning the change occurs.

And one more thing - no maturity model discussion would be compete without a radar diagram. Here's one I prepared earlier where the maturity of "Transformation Delivery Capability" was the exam question... a little more hard nosed than Change Management.

Alan - I like this thinking and love the simplicity of the model. To misquote a great philosopher - I think Maturity Models are very much maligned and misunderstood. In 2008 at Hitachi we completed a maturity model amnesty - collected 20+ quality exhibits and concluded that no institution had truly nailed it - be it a Sales, Change Management, BPR or Transformation MM. Nearly 15 years later the models are niche (rightly so) and have developed into quality tools but are not adopted into any best practice for wide adoption. In 2015 AXELOS dropped out of the race to buy CMMI. In pure consulting terms - that was a shame. A few observations on your Change Management MM... if I may be so bold: 1. I think there's a commercial element to change management - minimal would be an awareness of cost, Leading would go beyond ROI and into moving the EBITDA valuation dial of the organisation. 2. I strongly disagree that waterfall is immature and agile is mature... the right dose of agility is applied to a change management project or programme depending on the certainty and ability to iterate. 3. I would always add Stakeholder Management to comms / engagement. But then I always did like MSP. ...Cont'd

Nice work, Alan. Reading through this, I had a couple of thoughts: 1. Will one ever be able to measure the return on Change Management investments? This is a trick question asked by so many clients and all you can give them are KPIs about failure, etc. for clients who have not applied decent OCM. Given that you don't have the situation with and without OCM, it's hard to quantify this. The most promising approach for that is to compare your program's outcome to programs without sufficient OCM support and see what was different from use adoption, engagement, etc. That is, for me, the best proxy that you can have have as a ROI 2. I suggest to add "reach" as a measure of maturity. Having your people trained in OCM is great, having all the best tools and tech in the world is also good, but if it is not applied for all your projects (large and small) or only applied selectively, you will not get good results nor be successful at OCM. 3. The governance piece for me also should also include that more mature OCM organizations have a federated CoE approach with a small group setting and controlling standards as the hub and some smaller team per LOB or any other assignment logic as spokes that execute OCM but adhere to the standards