-
Non-alignment with strategy. Our research
finds many change programs are more aligned with a best-selling book,
consultant brochure, or
motivational speaker than strategic advantage.
How will the change support strategy? Is there strategy
or just a tactical plan? Are the things being changed really what's
stopping progress? Having a relevant need for change is better
than a
trendy idea.
-
Thinking Change = Training. The
reason training companies don't have money-back guarantees is because
the failure rates are so high. Targeting the REAL trouble is the
challenge. Why train staff in communications skills when that's not the
problem? Why team-building when a more deeper issue exists?
-
Unclear goals and measures. Many programs have no
measures of success, or the wrong ones. One client needed help with a
stalled quality program and we were shocked to find out that the success
measure was the number of teams formed! No bottom-line impact had been
identified.
-
No pilot testing. Before inflicting change across
the organization, wouldn't it be better to see if it works? Not doing
this is why lingering culture damage is rampant in the wake of change
program experts; and why Dilbert has more than enough material to work
with.
-
Top-down approach: Too many times
change is planned in an upper-management meeting; which is why they fail.
Post-mortems show they worked with false assumptions. Research finds
successes involved ad-hoc, cross-functional steering teams where the various levels and departments allowed an accurate assessment of what the
real issues were.
-
Minimal executive commitment: People are too smart to be
motivated by posters, prizes, and kickoff celebration events. They watch
leader behavior. Start there. The rest will follow.
-
No course-correction: Great companies have a history
of breakdowns. And that's the point. We've found that how a company responds to being
off-course predicts success more than executing
a plan flawlessly; which never happens because no plan survives impact
with reality. But egos hide failure and politeness eats truth, so
companies stay off-course far too long.
-
Little investment of time and resources: Developing a
plan for change is a great idea, but the half-life of a good idea is 5
days. Better make sure cash, time, and other resources are engaged. The
problem is an ROI is never calculated and so change is often seen as a
low priority.
-
Off-the-shelf programs: No
matter what the brochures say, each situation is different. No packaged
intervention has ever been geared to accommodate the myriad of cultures,
strategies, structures, and growth phases of companies. Off-the-shelf
programs rarely produce lasting change so make sure your approach is
customized to address results via facilitating implementation.
-
Outside resources never guaranteed their
results. Sometimes you need outside support. Just make sure you've
identified the outcomes desired, and the professionals hired are good enough to guarantee
them - a money-back guarantee.
