Transformational Change- Part 1- A beginning conversation

Organisational Change Transformation A Beginning Conversation- Part 1

The notions of Transformational Change and incremental change are challenges for leaders and managers.

Often people claim transformation but merely deliver incrementation. This causes huge losses and waste of resources because often it has to be done again; and the cumulative complex effects occur as the requirement for more changes continues in the dynamically ever evolving institutional milieu.

How can we ensure we establish real Transformational Change?

Transformation means often groundbreaking, radical and complex change. I am indebted to Don Harrison for his clarity and implementation focus on transformation in my discussions below.

As Don writes: “Transformation,” does not merely mean deliver “better, faster, and cheaper.” We have to question what he calls the existing frame of reference (FOR). We need to go back to basics and ask difficult questions about why, what, how...the operating model. Incremental changes do not address this basic core of organisations. Transformational Change is much deeper, wider and larger and addresses the core operating model.

We often say transformation and do incremental. This is done everyday in organisations. Minor disruptive influences which do not transform much in reality. We change in order to stay the same.

Think back to the numerous initiatives you have embarked upon. Did anything substantial change? Maybe minor disruptions- policy procedures, minor changes, minimal resistances...everyday changes. We could note these changes as continuous improvements.

But there is another order of magnitude. When we talk about "transformation" the old core order, the old frames of reference for the business, the organisation are no longer sufficient.

A new way of thinking, a new business paradigm and frame of reference (FOR) is required to move forwards "transformationally" rather than " incrementally" in terms of organisational changes. As Don Harrison again, notes: "A new FOR must be created resulting in maximum disruption and resistance - it requires the old FOR to be broken down. The organization must “forget what we are doing now” and re-build processes from the ground-up.

This is quite challenging for many leaders and managers. They hesitate to give commitment to change. They hesitate to do different things, in different ways. They do not have the courage to enable real transformational culture change!

Sponsors need to be courageous, bold and tenacious for years in a sustained approach over a long duration to ensure transformation change takes place. And, furthermore, it needs to be continuously built into our business objectives, daily.

The Big Four consultants or others in this country who organisations invite to do evaluative reports and recommendations about "changing culture" with their resulting 400 or so slide decks and snappy presentations with so-called "strategic pillars" and "workstreams" and "solution pathways" etc will not make transformation happen. How many times are these millions of dollars wasted? Yet CEOs and sponsors keep signing off huge expenses on such.

Further to this, communications via so-called "cultural events" like Town Hall meetings, and expositions where we express what's going on in our organisations and tell people that our sponsors and executives "really mean it" etc...does not budge the culture much at all. Again, as Harrison says:

Leaders have to "change their own behavior in noticeable ways".

Leaders have to "model" the transformative behaviours otherwise resistance will multiply and slow down potential transformation.

It is all about showing and modelling and reinforcing the behaviours and mindsets- what you preach - and building leadership trust.

I note in Australia how we get excited over re-writing and reviewing the operating models. Yet we map it with new people in the same ways as before. Nothing really changes. Everyone's mindsets stay the same. The core business does not change any ways of operating differently. We map the end-to-end processes and even reduce staff to be "lean" and "mean" and often cut into the human "muscle" and intellectual history and capital knowledge and expertise of the organisation. That 's not good. Nothing really transforms at all.

I notice too organisations re-branding. As if a new logo will transform the ways of behaving and thinking and enacting a new way of business!! No one's behaviour changes from a logo!

Marketing does not bring about transformational change.

And then, re-structuring our organisation charts and moving the leaders around is like shifting chairs on the Titanic. Nothing changes- we are going down! Structural solutions to cultural issues are the wrong solution to the problem; people get sacked and somehow we are supposed to see a transformation???

Real cultural change...transformation... happens by active reinforcement of both positive and negative consequences on a daily interactive, on the shop floor, grassroots basis by managers and leaders. 

Cultural transformative change will not occur from an executive board room or executive suite espousing edicts.

Signing up external consultants (usually from some prestigious firm or from "more than 30 kms away" ) will not bring about Transformational Change. To be fair to consultants (like myself on occasions) we can, they can, only provide a framework and maybe executive leading change through complexity type coaching regularly applied to real on the ground project changes.

Only the real leaders in the organisation can really transform the organisation.

It is their own mindsets and their ownership of the changes and their ongoing reinforcements of the changes that really counts for transformation. 

Then, further to the above points-how many times in Australia do we notice "downsizing" as a solution for transformation. Incorrect medicine for the problem, usually. If we downsize, it is not transformation, just saving money. If we say "downsizing" is about transformation, well then we need to put in a transformative change action roadmap to show how downsizing adds and helps it to happen. Downsizing per see is a structural "solution" purporting to be "solving" a "cultural change" issue. Again, often, incorrect prescription.

We seem to follow old pathways as "solutions" but need to re-think more effective ways to cultural change and real transformation.

My next article will look at effective ways to facilitate transformation.