When Does Change Truly Start?

We have seen organizations go through several changes. Some seek continuous improvement. Others are force to change. But do you really know where change comes from and when it starts?

in every powerful religion, reform will come, if it comes, from within – Erasmus

Without entering the topic of religion Protestantism was one of the biggest changes that took place in the world.

logiCRM blog stated that change comes from the top! Ropers sports news stated that change comes from within! Stanford Social innovation review stated that change comes with a cost! But throughout those articles not a single one stated when does it start. Change is a difficult process for some. Other’s just do it. But till today nobody has taken the time to review when does it start. To answer the question we need to look within. Once the individual accepts to embark the process that is when change can truly happen.

The transtheoretical model describes it as an integrative, biopsychosocial model to conceptualize the process of intentional behavior change. Whereas other models of behavior change focus exclusively on certain dimensions of change (e.g. theories focusing mainly on social or biological influences), the TTM seeks to include and integrate key constructs from other theories into a comprehensive theory of change that can be applied to a variety of behaviors, populations, and settings—hence, the name Transtheoretical.

We all go through several stages before we can accept. It is the understanding of the individual that we need to address different forms of change practice. Change process is hybrid. We need to use various methodologies and theories to truly address change. While some are textbook cases. Others need to be able to grab from different techniques to guide change. We need to understand why some people do not want to change. Yes the first answer is fear. But fear can be addressed with conversation and helping the person understand what is the end goal. Fear might not go away but it will be put aside to transition into acceptance and complete the change.

The Stages of Change

Stages of Change lie at the heart of the TTM. Studies of change have found that people move through a series of stages when modifying behavior. While the time a person can stay in each stage is variable, the tasks required to move to the next stage are not. Certain principles and processes of change work best at each stage to reduce resistance, facilitate progress, and prevent relapse. Those principles include decisional balance, self-efficacy, and processes of change. Only a minority (usually less than 20%) of a population at risk is prepared to take action at any given time. Thus, action-oriented guidance miss serves individuals in the early stages. Guidance based on the TTM results in increased participation in the change process because it appeals to the whole population rather than the minority ready to take action.

The stage construct represents a temporal dimension. Change implies phenomena occurring over time. Surprisingly, none of the leading theories of therapy contained a core construct representing time. Traditionally, behavior change was often construed as an event, such as quitting smoking, drinking, or overeating. TTM recognizes change as a process that unfolds over time, involving progress through a series of stages. While progression through the Stages of Change can occur in a linear fashion, a nonlinear progression is common. Often, individuals recycle through the stages or regress to earlier stages from later ones.

• Precontemplation (Not Ready) dealing with the unknown
• Contemplation (Getting Ready) minimal information
• Preparation (Ready) – Full information - This is the stage of acceptance.
• Action - Change
• Maintenance – maintaining change 

Precontemplation (Not Ready) dealing with the unknown

People in the Precontemplation stage do not intend to take action in the foreseeable future. Lack of information is the cause of this stage. Being uninformed or under informed about the consequences of one’s behavior may cause a person to be in the Precontemplation stage. Multiple unsuccessful attempts at change can lead to demoralization about the ability to change. Precontemplators are often characterized in other theories as resistant, unmotivated, or unready for help. The fact is, traditional programs were not ready for such individuals and were not designed to meet their needs.

Contemplation (Getting Ready) minimal information

Contemplation is the stage in which people intend to change in the next six months. They are more aware of the pros of changing, but are also acutely aware of the cons. In a meta-analysis across 48 health risk behaviors, the pros and cons of changing were equal (Hall & Rossi, 2008). This weighting between the costs and benefits of changing can produce profound ambivalence that can cause people to remain in this stage for long periods of time. This phenomenon is often characterized as chronic contemplation or behavioral procrastination. Individuals in the Contemplation stage are not ready for traditional action-oriented programs that expect participants to act immediately.

Preparation (Ready) Full information - This is the stage of acceptance.

Preparation is the stage in which people intend to take action in the immediate future. Typically, they have already taken some significant action in the past year. These individuals have a plan of action, such as joining a gym, consulting a counselor, talking to their physician, or relying on a self-change approach.

Action - Change

Action is the stage in which people have made specific overt modifications in their lifestyles. Because action is observable, the overall process of behavior change often has been equated with action. But in the TTM, Action is only one of five stages. Typically, not all modifications of behavior count as Action in this Model. In most applications, people have to attain a criterion that scientists and professionals agree is sufficient to reduce risk of disease. For example, reduction in the number of cigarettes or switching to low-tar and low-nicotine cigarettes were formerly considered acceptable actions. Now the consensus is clear—only total abstinence counts.

Maintenance

Maintenance is the stage in which people have made specific overt modifications in their lifestyles and are working to prevent relapse; however, they do not apply change processes as frequently as do people in Action. While in the Maintenance stage, people are less tempted to relapse and grow increasingly more confident that they can continue their changes. Based on self-efficacy data, researchers have estimated that Maintenance lasts from six months to about five years. While this estimate may seem somewhat pessimistic, longitudinal data in the 1990 Surgeon General’s report support this temporal estimate. After 12 months of continuous abstinence, 43% of individuals returned to regular smoking. It was not until 5 years of continuous abstinence that the risk for relapse dropped to 7% (USDHHS).

Decisional Balance

Decision making was conceptualized by Janis and Mann (1977) as a decisional “balance sheet” of comparative potential gains and losses. Two components of decisional balance, the pros and the cons, have become core constructs in the Transtheoretical Model. As individuals progress through the Stages of Change, decisional balance shifts in critical ways. When an individual is in the Precontemplation stage, the pros in favor of behavior change are outweighed by the relative cons for change and in favor of maintaining the existing behavior. In the Contemplation stage, the pros and cons tend to carry equal weight, leaving the individual ambivalent toward change. If the decisional balance is tipped however, such that the pros in favor of changing outweigh the cons for maintaining the unhealthy behavior, many individuals move to the Preparation or even Action stage. As individuals enter the Maintenance stage, the pros in favor of maintaining the behavior change should outweigh the cons of maintaining the change in order to decrease the risk of relapse.

Self-Efficacy

The TTM integrates elements of Bandura’s self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1977, 1982). This construct reflects the degree of confidence individuals have in maintaining their desired behavior change in situations that often trigger relapse. It is also measured by the degree to which individuals feel tempted to return to their problem behavior in high-risk situations. In the Precontemplation and Contemplation stages, temptation to engage in the problem behavior is far greater than self-efficacy to abstain. As individuals move from Preparation to Action, the disparity between feelings of self-efficacy and temptation closes, and behavior change is attained. Relapse often occurs in situations where feelings of temptation trump individuals’ sense of self-efficacy to maintain the desired behavior change.

Processes of Change

While the Stages of Change are useful in explaining when changes in cognition, emotion, and behavior take place, the processes of change help to explain how those changes occur. These ten covert and overt processes need to be implemented to successfully progress through the stages of change and attain the desired behavior change. These ten processes can be divided into two groups: cognitive and affective experiential processes and behavioral processes.

To truly accept change organizations need to go individual by individual. Forcing the masses to change causes chaos and creates resistance. It is the how you get to address the individual it is a long process but interviewing each individual or having focus groups where they express their fears one can create the correct training to address the unknowns and make them knows.

There are two ways to change

Top-Down Approach

Looking at the top-down approach, you begin to write down what this process might look like. In your opinion, it is a great way to design the program because the decisions will be made by the executive team. You can quickly design and implement a program, which will allow your company to start solving problems almost immediately. However, in the top-down approach, you do not take the employees' opinions into consideration, and they are the ones who will be using the program.

So, this approach has both positives and negatives.

Pros of Top-Down

• Decisions are made by the executive team.
• Quickly design a program or change reform.
• The decision is exactly what you want it to be.

Cons of Top-Down

• Employees who use the program may not like it.
• The program may be implemented incorrectly.
• The program may not meet the needs that only employees would be aware of.

As you chew on this, you see that there are benefits to using a top-down approach. However, you will need to be sure that the objectives and plans are clear. This will help make sure that your staff understands your expectations. You will also want to make sure the program is meeting the need that you have developed it for.

In some situations, a top-down management style is simply impossible. There may be a large amount of brainpower among employees to draw upon, or executives may be unable to appear knowledgeable. Sometimes another path may be better. Enter bottom-up management.

   Bottom-Up

Bottom-up management as a process where “team members are invited to participate in every step of the management process.” This system allows managers to communicate goals through milestone planning, and team members are encouraged to come up with the steps needed to reach the milestones on their own. How tasks are performed is up to the teams, and they feel involved in project development.

   Advantages

Bottom-up management allows all levels of an organization to become a part of the process and helps make everyone feel a large part of the goal. This can help build morale and improve productivity. Employees are more open to work and strive harder to reach goals and objectives in the ways that work best for them.

Bottom-up management styles allow for the full talents of employees to be used. A lower-level employee may have unique insight on how to solve a common problem. Employees can share their solutions and perhaps pass them on to others in their team. This kind of collaboration can improve processes in new ways.

   Disadvantages

Allowing all employees to engage in decision-making does have possible pitfalls. Becoming engaged in the process can bog down employees and lead to too many unproven ideas being suggested. With too much input, managers may have a harder time finding an effective plan for reaching goals. This may lead to an inability to choose one plan and stick with it or constant altering of processes and goals.

In a highly competitive environment, employees may struggle to separate ego from the bigger goal. This could lead to significant divides between employees and teams as well as possible conflict that may have a negative effect on productivity.

   What Companies Use Bottom-up Management?

More and more companies are using the bottom-up management style in their daily work. Companies like The New York Times, Ernst & Young and IBM are implementing elements of the management style throughout their hierarchy. These companies each offer unique methods of including employees at all levels of the decision-making process. The popularity of the bottom-up approach is growing, but many organizations are still hesitant to adopt it.

Therefore the best advice is always

Start from the bottom and work your way up!