IT Retrospectives

Creating an Agile Culture to Drive Organizational Change

In my last article (Agile Transition "Initiatives" - Just say no!), I talked about how Agile Transition Initiatives can fail because prescriptive processes are pushed on an organization through a program delivered as part of some named initiative and led by a process improvement group, Agile coaching group or external consulting firm. The work force appears to acquiesce with the initiative but in fact passively resists it because they believe t

Image by Diaper dad via Flickr

hat their unique situation isn't a fit for a standard process and the change is being forced on them sometimes without consultation or consensus.

via www.borland.com

An interesting article, by David Anderson, about making the "Agile Transition". At my workplace we're in the early stages of making this same transition.  As an executive sponsor, it's something that I've generally approached in systematic way as a formal initiative. David's article suggests an alternative approach focused on the organizational culture.  It's worth a read.  For me, the verdict is still out on the best approach. I'm inclined to marry both the encouragement of cultural changes along with a a bit of a prescriptive approach.

Organizational Change: Grass Root Initiatives

This is the third of five articles on organizational change that I'm planning -- well, maybe there will be a sixth article but I'm not sure anyone can stomach that much blathering on one topic. For reference here are links to the two prior articles

Organizational Change: Understanding the Beast!
Organizational Change: Covert Operations

“Grass Root Initiatives” are generally productive and if you’re an organization where these are prominent you’re probably in a pretty good place. To be successful, grass root initiatives must be sponsored by someone in the organizational with the resources and political clout to help the process improvement team reach their goals. Typically the sponsor will be a senior level manager or executive.

Grass root efforts generally enjoy the support of a fairly broad group of employee and are much more likely to be successfully adopted than purely top-down driven initiatives. It's something to be encouraged but does require a bit of oversight to ensure they don't run amuck -- or worse, get blown up by some moronic executive who doesn't understand what the team is attempting to achieve. There are also a few negatives that you will want to try and minimize:

• Similar to Covert Operations, grass roots type initiatives may not always be in clear alignment with the broader organizational goals. Want to get blown up? Being grossly out of alignment with the wishes of the senior executives, and it's just a matter of time until someone lobs a grenade.

• Progress is often slow and enterprise-wide adoption can be very challenging. Because there is very little stimulus for the entire organization to change, improvements are often isolated to specific departments or functional areas.

If you’re the executive sponsor of a grass root initiative, it is critical that you examine the organizational goals and ensure they are properly aligned with any changes the team is pursuing. Fail to do so and you’re likely to run into stiff resistance and some tough questions from senior level executives at some point – forcing you to go covert or abandoning your efforts. With a little storytelling and some good salesmanship, most types of organizational changes can be aligned with company goals. After all, most sane company encourages anything that will improve efficiency and profitability if properly explained.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Organizational Performance and Best Practice Analy (slideshare.net)

Organizational Change: Covert Operations

If you’ve been following this series of blog entries, you already know that I’m skimming the surface of what is a very broad topic. The initial blog can be found here - it’s a quick read and will give you a basic understanding of I’m about to discuss in more detail.

“Covert Operations” is merely one of the modes that Change Agents may find themselves operating under when it comes to organizational change. This is an environment in which there is no significa

Image via Wikipedia

nt pressure or stimulus being put on the organization and management generally has little interest in changing the status quo. In fact, in this state, you’ll probably find that some individuals are strongly resistant to changing anything. After all, why fix what doesn’t seem broken? It all sounds all well and good, except that it lulls organizations into a false sense of security and certainly doesn’t do anything to prepare folks for when things do get tough. In fact, it’s probably the best time to really take a close look at how things are running with minimal risk. Unfortunately, most organizations never seize this opportunity.

You will find individuals in such an organization that do see a need for change, often lower-level employees and junior managers. Without the direct support of more senior leadership, these individuals either become frustrated or secretly pursue their objectives regardless of senior management support. Often you’ll find a small team of like minded individuals working together who share the same goals.

In general, the risk of allowing the organization to wallow in this environment is low, though there are certainly some drawbacks and missed opportunities.

• Change that occurs “under the radar” of senior leadership may not be in alignment with the overall vision for the organization, reducing efficiency and potential wasting valuable resources.

• Change, even positive change, is extremely slow and any resulting value is likewise diminished.

• Employees pursuing these changes often become extremely frustrated at their inability to make any significant progress. Ironically, it’s often these very individuals who have the most to contribute to the organization in terms of innovation.

• The “under belly” of the organization can become soft and complacent – leaving the company further exposed to competitive threats.

So, what do you do?

The answer somewhat depends on your role in the organization. If you’re one of folks pushing change without much support, you primary objective is going to be to seek out a sponsor – preferable someone in the senior leadership ranks. You’re going to need to do some homework and really sell your idea. At the same time, you’re going to want to collect like minded individuals around you that share your goals. Ultimately, you want to start a Grass Roots effort with executive sponsorship. I won’t like to you – it’s a hard road and a lot of sloshing through the swamp but be persistent.

If you happen to be a senior level manager, then you’ll have a lot more control over the outcome. First of all, you want to seek out and encourage employees to bring forth their ideas. Proactively look for good ideas and put your weight behind them. Openly praise individuals and teams who make positive change -- to both their peers and your superiors. You’ll learn that successful change management involves a lot of marketing and salesmanship. In the final installment of this series on change management, I’ll also talk a bit about how to change the stimulus being applied to the organization – probably one of the most effective ways to move things along.

Organizational Change: Understanding the Beast!

There are plenty of professionals out there making a healthy living assisting companies through difficult organizational changes. The toughest changes typically involve transforming the culture of a company but even smaller changes can be a daunting task. While I’m certainly not advocating that companies avoid seeking outside expertise, having a basic understanding of what drives an organization to change can go a long ways when it comes to helping yourself.

Organizations, especially large ones, behave much in the same way as living organisms. They respond to both internal and external stimulus. There are many different types of stimulus but pain is probably the easiest to understand for the purpose of this analogy. Stimulus can be localized or broadly felt and the resulting behavior will vary accordingly. If you put your hand on something hot, you quickly yank your hand back. If a bus is about to run you over as you try crossing the street your entire body jumps back (or you suffer some terrible consequences). Similarly, areas of an organization will react to localized competitive threats or challenges that threaten their existence. If the entire company is seriously threatened (e.g., due to an economic down turn), you can expect to see sweeping changes ripple through the entire organization. The key point here is that organizations change primarily as a response to stimulus. Management and leaders within the organization can set policy or issue orders, but unless it’s backed up by some form of stimulus, don’t expect change to come quickly.

So, how do we predict how an organization is going to react when it is poked and prodded? And can we use that knowledge to help encourage positive change? Below you’ll see a diagram of a simple framework that I’ve successfully used for many years to help gauge how an organization will typically react based on the strength of the stimulus and the level of engagement by management.

In subsequent blogs, I talk in more detail about each of the quadrants above, including how you can leverage that knowledge to move your organization towards an optimal state. Here’s a brief description of each area:

Covert Operations – This is an environment in which there is no significant pressure or stimulus being put on the organization and management generally has little interest in changing the status quo. You’ll often find individuals or teams of folks quietly working “under the radar” attempting to pursue change.

Natural Section – This is a dangerous place to be for any organization. There is significant pressure being put on the organization’s survival but management has a poor understanding of the challenges. The changes that are made are often a knee jerk reaction by senior leadership. Poor performers who are able to successfully redirect their failures are often retained while strong employees can be terminated for failures outside of their control.

Grass Roots Initiatives – This is generally a positive state for most organizations, where the stimulus for change may be small but management has an interest in supporting improvements that will give them the edge when things do get tough. Often these improvements are driven by the lower-ranking employees with sponsorship by a specific executive manager. Change is often slow but the outcomes are generally positive.

Forced Evolution – This is state of rapid but controlled change, generally driven directly by top-level senior executives. The organization is often under a very significant external threat but leadership has a strong vision for how to move forward. There is no guarantee of success, but the organization is extremely focused and quickly moves as a whole towards a set of common goals.

Stay tuned for a more in-depth discussion in the weeks to come!

Related articles by Zemanta

• 10 DOs and DONTs of organizational change (rossdawsonblog.com)
• Marina Gorbis on organizational change (boingboing.net)