Why Implementing Change Fails

We’ve all experienced it at one point in our professional career, especially in any organization larger than 5 guys and a coffee pot. A massive top-down initiative is launched within an organization, millions of dollars are spent and already strained resources are re-directed and re-purposed, only to have the initiative fail or be minimized within a matter of a few months to a year.  With all the time and money spent, how does this continue to happen? 

There is an interesting article written by John P. Kotter and published in the Harvard Business Review that discusses the adoption of a second operating system to complement the traditional hierarchical operating system which must focus on the day-to-day business. The author’s reasoning is that the mounting complexity of today’s business environment requires the ability to quickly shift at a strategic level which is difficult under the traditional hierarchical model.  While many companies have complemented their current operating systems with project teams, task forces and even change-management departments, the article states this may still not be enough.  The article then goes on to explain the building of a complementary operating system which is based on the utilization of eight accelerators that enable the strategy network to function.

What is very interesting is that there is a common theme evident within all of these accelerators that centers around the buy-in of employees. Concepts of creating a volunteer army, creating a network, sharing a vision, empowering employees and celebrating wins all speak to the necessity of having the employees of the organization on board with any strategic shift taking place.  Now look back to the statement made earlier that all of us have experienced failed change in our professional careers and the likelihood is high that one of the things missing in that failed initiative was employee buy-in.

Once you’ve read the cited article, you will probably agree that the theory is sound and implementing a secondary operating system makes sense. However, it doesn’t appear easy and it may not be feasible for many organizations to do so. Rather than dealing with the risk of failed initiatives in the future, it may make sense to engage a third party that has experience with empowering employees  to generate buy-in.  Additionally, implementing change in manageable chunks that minimize disruption will likely result in greater employee support, so it may be wise to assess what small changes will bring the greatest return on investment before embarking on that next big initiative.