The Trouble with Change Programs

Have you ever experienced a significant change in your life that you welcomed as gospel from heaven? Have you ever been non-hesitant to a change that would significantly impact your set ways?

As the sayings go, "you can't teach an old dog new tricks," or "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." The truth is, no matter how change-ready you consider yourself to be when it gets close to your set ways, changes are not welcome. Not. Welcome. At. All.

Recently, I have been involved in several projects that involved major changes for my clients: New ways of working, new ways of approaching innovation, new ways of communicating strategy, new ways of interacting with customers, and so on. Usually, we get off to a great start, analysing the situation, uncovering potential gaps, and coming up with solid suggestions about how to proceed. And then the trouble starts.

It's not the budget. It's not fundamental disagreements about where the problems are. It's not the solution approach. Then what is it?

I think a lot of the trouble has to do with perceived resistance from the "old dogs," i.e., the people with power and influence in the area that needs change. I often hear, "I don't think X will approve of this..." When I explore such statements, it comes down to short-term losses anticipated by that person. Fear of failure combined with much power in an existing realm is one of the biggest obstacles to change.

My previous newsletter described the connection between methods, tactics, enablers, obstacles, and outcomes. You may read that newsletter here. Here's an overview of the model:

In the client projects I just mentioned, I have seen a lot of tactics and enablers, some methods, a truckload of obstacles, and not much support. And not much resolve to connect the dots. This made me think of this model, attributed to Lippitt-Knoster, about resistance to change:

You may find an excellent overview article of this change model here. Please note that consensus has been added, which was not part of the original model. In short, it states that all the elements at the top must be in place to succeed. If just one of them is missing, you get all sorts of unwanted outcomes.

Now, what happens if we combine these two models? It could look like this, for example:

In this combined model, I have designated all the 'lacks' as obstacles, e.g., lack of vision is an obstacle that manifests itself as confusion. All the different lacks will result in a different negative outcome. Only a complete deck of elements will lead to success. This is, of course, a gross simplification :-)

On top of the figure is the array of methods, tactics and enablers, improving the elements' clarity and mutual coherence.

The bottom of the figure indicates the importance of support. Support, in my book, is the human element: The colleague, manager or friend that supports you when you are low or when things do not go exactly as planned, which is more often the case than not.

So, the next time your innovation project seems to go south, you may consider using this model - or you may use it upfront before you start a project. I suggest that you use this flowchart to gain clarity around your project and to keep it on track:

As you will see, I have introduced two acronyms, VICARS and FRACTureS.

According to Merriam-Webster, one of the definitions of a vicar is this: an ecclesiastical agent, a member of the Episcopal clergy or laity who has charge of a mission or chapel. With a bit of imagination, the definition could look like this for our context:

Vicar

An element which is essential to achieving success in a change project.

Fractures are self-explanatory: the process of breaking or the state of being broken.

Need help?

My mission is to help innovation leaders to become excellent in their role so that they can deliver in terms of reduced cost and time to market for innovative products and services, with a substantial profit increase as a result:

I help innovation leaders in high-tech industries take their products and services to market faster, generate million-dollar profits, and save years in development time.

With more than 30 years of experience in research, management, and innovation, I’ve helped Roche, Novo Nordisk, Vestas, and hundreds of other companies develop innovative products and services.

With my giant toolkit of proven methods, I can help you and your teams overcome most of the common pitfalls in today’s high-tech innovation environments. Guaranteed.

If you struggle to deliver as an innovation manager, it may be because you are taking shortcuts, or because you have not realised the obstacles you are up against, or... In most of these cases, I can help - just reach out, and let's talk about it.

What do You Think?

Reflections and suggestions are much appreciated, either as a comment or by mailing me at [email protected].