Change Management- Leadership support

Leadership Is Key in Change Management

Successful change management requires a large commitment from executives and senior managers, whether the change is occurring in a department or in a complete organization. One recent survey respondent said, “a change effort cannot be optional for senior staff. They must lead or get out of the way. The new system will ultimately have to stand on its own feet, but every new system needs support and nurture.”

Senior leaders can do the following for successful change management.

• Establish a clear vision for the change management process. Paint a picture of where the organization will end up and the anticipated outcomes. Make certain the picture is one of reality and not what people “wish” would occur.


• Appoint an executive champion who “owns” the change management process and makes certain other senior managers, as well as other appropriate people in the organization, are involved.


• Pay attention to the changes occurring. Ask how things are going. Focus on progress and barriers for change management. One of the worst possible scenarios is to have the leaders ignore the process.


• Sponsor portions of the change or the change management process, as an involved participant, to increase active involvement and interaction with other organization members.


• If personal or managerial actions or behaviors require change for the changes to take hold in the organization, “model” the new behaviors and actions. (Walk the talk.)


• Establish a structure which will support the change. This may take the form of a Steering Committee, Leadership Group, or Guiding Coalition.


• Change the measurement, reward, and recognition systems to measure and reward the accomplishment of new expectations.


• Solicit and act upon feedback from other members of the organization.


• Recognize the human element in the change. People have different needs and different ways of reacting to change. They need time to deal with and adjust to change.


• Senior leaders must participate in the training that other organization members attend, but, even more importantly, they must exhibit their “learning” from the sessions, readings, interactions, tapes, books or research.


• Be honest and worthy of trust. Treat people with the same respect you expect from them.

Reference: Susan Heathfield is a Human Resources expert. She is a management and organization development consultant who specializes in human resources issues and in management development to create forward thinking workplaces. Susan is also a professional facilitator, speaker, trainer, and writer.

Organisational Change - HR Practices

Best practices in managing organisational transformation.

Key learnings:

• Organisational change aimed at improving work methods, productivity and business profits must be coherent


• Enthusiastic leadership, flow of creativity and stability in procedure helps in reaching the goals
  

Jargons like organisational change and organisational transformation are often used theoretically and in management talk. The term organisational change is used in the context of companies that are undergoing or have just undergone a transformation.

However, organisational change management is not a 'one-month ordeal'. It is a process that involves rearticulating managerial, technical, financial and business aspects.

A McKinsey Quarterly online survey shows that only 38 percent of the global employees consider change as a positive effect on performance. And, 10 percent believe that most of such transformations are unproductive.

Change management

According to change management experts, two factors are critical for any transformation to click. One is vision or goal-the changes the company aspires to bring about. The second is sustainability. The sustainability factor refers to the unwavering energy, commitment and persuasiveness to reach the goal.

Defining the objective

A well-defined and comprehensive objective spells out the goal clearly for all the employees of the organisation. While different departments may have different approaches, the core aim of transformation remains unchanged. This distinctly clear system ensures an upbeat journey that promotes organisational health, participation of every employee and bottom-line profits.

Defining the role and time frame

A well articulated strategy ensures that there is no overlap of roles. It also rules out misinterpretation. Each employee has his defined role that is personal and challenging. Moreover, since the focus is on 'strengths', the definitive goal of 'effectual transformation' is accomplished.

When the time frame is set over a few months, the employees will be enthusiastic. Goals set over three or five years fall prey to dwindling employee interest. In such cases, the leadership of the organisation plays a very important part. For effective articulation of long term goals, involvement of employees and applying fair and apt metrics to track developments, it is important for employees to remain clued in to developments.

Sustaining energy and flow of ideas

Creativity and ideas are advantages that help sustain organisational change. Many a time, organisations discard ideas doubting their practicality. However, innovation is the key to reach people and bring about desired changes.

Most often, ideas from employees or leaders are considered deeply. Mutually inspiring organisations initiate creativity, responsibility and accountability. To encourage an 'idea sharing' work environment, leaders must espouse innovation and sharing thoughts that can bring about radical transformations.

Channelising energies

When leaders of an organisation announce transformation to employees, two extreme reactions are bound to happen. There will be employee totally gung-ho about the transformations and those who will be cynical. It is important to generate positive stimulation and help employees channelise their dynamism. Some companies reward 'ideas champions', while some appoint 'the master blaster'. Such steps energise the staff towards transformation.

"A smaller set of high-impact, briskly moving initiatives is more energising-and thus more sustainable- than a broader set of initiatives moving at a stately pace."

Seeing is believing

Any results of the transformation, however small, must be highlighted to ensure greater participation. Employees usually remain mute spectators to the brainstorming sessions and meetings that are part of the organisational change. The worth of such sessions is usually taken too lightly. However, even a small success during the transformation reaffirms employee faith in the process and the overall vision.

Learning curve

The transformational process is a learning process for leaders, management and employees. Open communication channels, suitable rewards and discipline are extremely important to understand the change. While the transformation aims at bringing about success in the organisation, individual growth and learning cannot be ignored. Experts rightly suggest that organisational transformations which focus on individual strengths create a more involved staff.
In today's highly dynamic market, being a flexible, employee centric and practical organisation is a plus. An organisational transformation is a dynamic process with multiple levels of planning and execution. However, the reengineering and rebuilding process can be an exhilarating expedition if the leadership has commitment and clarity.

Reference: TheManageMentor.

Include Employees in Leadership Transition Conversations

"Uncertainty" is a common word these days, used to describe everything from the economy to the future for America's businesses and workers. Having a succession plan for key management positions is one of the most valuable HR initiatives a company can leverage. During uncertain times, it's imperative for businesses to make sure employees have as much job certainty as possible, but succession planning often is neglected for more immediate concerns.

Just as the country had two and a half months to transition into Barack Obama's administration after eight years of Bush leadership, companies benefit greatly from a planned transition between incoming and outgoing top-level management.

But it's not always that easy. Generally, there are three kinds of transition:

1. An internal candidate's successful transition. This is only possible when a company knows the executive is leaving and has identified a likely successor. It eliminates surprise and enables a smooth, transition with the least amount of distraction and lost productivity.

2. An executive leaves unexpectedly. This is a good opportunity for companies to promote from within, but the news can lead to power jockeying and interpersonal struggles.

3. A company brings in an external candidate. When companies go outside for a new leader, they are implicitly saying to current employees: "You're not good enough to lead," or "Whatever you have been doing in the past, it is not what we need you to do in the future."

Planning is the lynchpin to ensure organizational stability during a change of power. For example, Hilton Hotel Corp. identified succession planning as a top company priority and emphasized this by creating a separate, dedicated succession planning department within the company's corporate structure. Hilton is able to identify different competencies for the most critical management positions company-wide, while highlighting employees with the appropriate competencies who are on track to succeed in different divisions. The company can identify successors for every executive position and ensure minimal confusion and uncertainty in the midst of change.

People likely do not fear change as much as they fear uncertainty. Uncertainty over leadership creates anxiety which leads to decreased productivity and increased turnover. Further, the more uncertain people are about the potential actions of a new leader, the more they may view that person as a threat.

Further, when there is change at top, employees naturally wonder what's next. Defining roles in advance of succession can set employees' expectations and allow them see where they fit into the organizational picture. Transparency and communication before, during and after transition reduce uncertainty and keep performance high.

The fewer surprises a company has, the better it is for employees and the organization as a whole. Creating a robust and active succession plan not only safeguards against surprise, it can contribute to higher productivity and employee satisfaction. Successful succession plans are the byproduct of a smart performance and talent management program that gives companies a clear window into its workforce's skills, strengths, competencies and goals.

Strategic succession plans engage employees at all levels in a dialogue about their company and the future of its workforce. They also empower executives to build the company's bench strength, improve individual employees' career development plans and save time and money.

Nothing communicates the employee's value in a company more than programs that actively seek to develop and advance careers within the organization. The key to succession planning is not to go into the process blind. Using the right tools, including a performance and talent management system, companies can plan for most contingencies in C-level exits. All they need is a little planning.

[About the Author: Steven T. Hunt, Ph.D., SPHR, is the chief scientist at Kronos Inc., a company that empowers organizations to effectively manage their workforce.]

Performance Appraisal - Management by Objectives

Once an employee has been selected, trained and embarked on his duties, it is time for performance appraisal. What is performance appraisal? Why do companies need to take up this task?

According to Heyel, “it is the process of evaluating the performance and qualifications of the employees in terms of job requirements, for administrative purposes such as placement, selection and promotions, to provide financial rewards and other actions which require differential treatment among the members of a group as distinguished from actions affecting all members equally”.

This concept dates back to the First World War and was then called “Merit rating programme”. Over a period of time, this concept has been through an ocean of change. The areas of evaluation have also changed.

Importance and objectives: Performance appraisals have been considered to be the most significant and indispensable tool for the management as it,

1. Provides useful information for decision making in areas of promotion and merit rating and compensation reviews.
2. Links information gathering and decision making process, which are the basis for judging the effectiveness of personnel subfunctions such as recruiting, selecting and compensation.
3. Helps pinpoint areas of concerns in the primary systems like marketing, finance and production.
4. Enhances understanding for training and counselling needs.
   

Methods of performance appraisal

There are several methods for evaluating performance. Management by objectives is the most popular one.

Management by objectives is primarily to change the behaviour and attitude towards getting an activity or assignment completed in a manner that it is beneficial for the organisation. Management by objectives is a result-oriented process. In this system, emphasis is on results and goals rather than a prescribed method.

For instance, the number of quality articles to be churned out in a week, at a publishing house is, let’s say, five. This is the goal of the organisation. This goal has to be set in coordination with the writers. The emphasis here again would be on accomplishing this task flawlessly over the week rather than the setting of a method to accomplish the same. You are giving them a free hand to decide as to how they want to work in order to accomplish target. This gives the employee both responsibility as well as authority to do a job. The employees are now responsible for its success and failure and it is their baby. It is a VERY SMART MANAGEMENT TOOL where the employee is involved in the decision making process.

The fives magic sutras

The mystery of management of objectives has the following basic steps.

Set organisational goals. This envisages that organisational goals and business strategies are expressed clearly, concisely and accurately. They are periodically reviewed. They should be challenging enough to motivate the employee. Clear and attainable goals help channel energies towards desired behaviour and let the employee know the basis on which he will be rewarded.

Joint goal setting. This step establishes short-term goals, which are performance oriented, between the management and the employee. The responsibilities are clarified to the employees through organisational charts and job description. The goals decided by the employee need to complement the goals of the management. They also need to be flexible to accommodate new ideas without losing individual responsibilities. Moreover they should be easily quantifiable. For example,

To prepare, process and transfer to the office superintended, all account payable vouchers within three working days from the receipt of the voucher.

To hold weekly meetings with all employee.To use program evaluation and review technique (pert) for all new plant layouts.

Performance reviews. This step suggests frequent performance review between the manager and the employees. During the initial stages the meetings be held once a month and later could be quarterly. For maximum benefit these meetings should be scheduled for more than once a year.

Set check posts: Establishment of major check posts to measure progress. This is merely to check that the employee surges towards his premeditated goal without any disruptions. These check levels should be higher in the initial stages and then gradually reduce. This demands that the manager should be on constant alert and exercise sound judgment.

Feedback: The employees who receive frequent feedback about their performance are highly motivated than those who do not. However, one has to ensure that the feedback is relevant and specific. This helps the employee and the manager understand where they stand.

The five-sutra process of management by objectives ensures that the manager and the employee define and establish goals and objectives for an employee to be achieved within a prescribed period of time. The employee is to be supervised and evaluated, periodically. To this extent, a frequent feedback and superior-employee interaction model must be evolved.

Reference: TheManageMentor

Give Feedback; Get Performance

Employees now have an increased role in developing strong customer relationships that inspire loyalty and performance. Therefore, employees need to have the best skills, use sound judgment and feel competent in their jobs. They need information about the quality of their decisions. Managers should monitor employees and provide positive feedback to sustain their performance.

Effective performance feedback shouldn’t damage the manager/employee relationship. So how do guarantee all feedback will focus on behaviors and performance? Follow these five steps:

Step 1: Start with a positive comment. No one likes to hear about something that needs improving with a strong or reprimanding statement. Feedback is about people, behavior and emotions. So start each performance feedback with a positive comment that shows respect and understanding to your employee. It will draw that person into the discussion about how he or she can improve.

Step 2: Describe what’s currently happening, the behavior you want to reinforce and the specific situations where you observed that the behavior needed feedback. It’s important to be specific, brief and direct.

Step 3: Describe the impact and consequences of the current behavior, noting the effect it had on results, customers or employees. The more detailed and accurate the information, the more meaningful the feedback will be. Realize that no adult changes his or her behavior unless he or she sees a personal reason to change.

Step 4: Create a plan with your employee to continue positive behavior or change negative behavior. Work with the employee to suggest options and make sure they have a voice in the process. The more the employee invents his or her responses, the more he or she owns the results.

Step 5: Regardless of the nature of the performance feedback (negative or positive), employees will process the message better when it starts and ends on a positive and personal tone. Be sure to reassure the employee of the value of the discussion in the feedback. It’ll set the stage for an open and honest relationship.

Feedback is one of the most significant tools that managers have to help guide, coach and instruct employees to continually grow, make extra effort and improve performance. Managers catch employees doing great things and applaud them. Managers catch employee performance problems and use them to improve performance and win employees back. Employees want feedback – so be sure to provide the right kind of feedback that builds their skills, confidence and commitment to perform at their best.

Ref: http://www.hr.com/

Obama's Seven Lessons for Radical Innovators

Barack Obama is one of the most radical management innovators in the world today. Obama's team built something truly world-changing: a new kind of political organization for the 21st century. It differs from yesterday's political organizations as much as Google and Threadless differ from yesterday's corporations: all are a tiny handful of truly new, 21st century institutions in the world today.

Obama presidential bid succeeded, through the power of new DNA; new rules for new kinds of institutions.So let's discuss the new DNA Obama brought to the table, by outlining seven rules for tomorrow's radical innovators.

1. Have a self-organization design. What was really different about Obama's organization? We're used to thinking about organizations in 20th century terms: do we design them to be tall, or flat? But tall and flat are concepts built for an industrial era. They force us to think - spatially and literally - in two dimensions: tall organizations command unresponsively, and flat organizations respond uncontrollably.

Obama's organization blew past these orthodoxies: it was able to combine the virtues of both tall and flat organizations. How? By tapping the game-changing power of self-organization. Obama's organization was less tall or flat than spherical - a tightly controlled core, surrounded by self-organizing cells of volunteers, donors, contributors, and other participants at the fuzzy edges. The result? Obama's organization was able to reverse tremendous asymmetries in finance, marketing, and distribution - while McCain's organization was left trapped by a stifling command-and-control paradigm.

2. Seek elasticity of resilience. Obama's 21st century organization was built for a 21st century goal - not to maximize outputs, or minimize inputs, but to, remain resilient to turbulence. What happened when McCain attacked Obama with negative ads in September? Such attacks would have depleted the coffers of a 20th century organization, who would have been forced to retaliate quickly and decisively in kind. Yet, Obama's organization responded furiously in exactly the opposite way: with record-breaking fundraising. That's resilience: reflexively bouncing back to an existential threat by growing, augmenting, or strengthening resources.

3. Minimize strategy. Obama's campaign dispensed almost entirely with strategy in its most naïve sense: strategy as gamesmanship or positioning. They didn't waste resources trying to dominate the news cycle, game the system, strong-arm the party, or out-triangulate competitors' positions. Rather, Obama's campaign took a scalpel to strategy - because they realized that strategy, too often, kills a deeply-lived sense of purpose, destroys credibility, and corrupts meaning.

4. Maximize purpose. Change the game? That's 20th century thinking at its finest - and narrowest. The 21st century is about changing the world. What does "Yes We Can" really mean? Obama's goal wasn't simply to win an election, garner votes, or run a great campaign. It was larger and more urgent: to change the world.

Bigness of purpose is what separates 20th century and 21st century organizations: yesterday, we built huge corporations to do tiny, incremental things - tomorrow, we must build small organizations that can do tremendously massive things. And to do that, you must strive to change the world radically for the better - and always believe that yes, you can. You must maximize, stretch, and utterly explode your sense of purpose.

5. Broaden unity. What do marketers traditionally do? Segment and target, slice and dice. We've become great at dividing markets into tinier and tinier bits. But we're terrible at unifying them. Yet Obama succeeded not through division, but through unification: we are, he contended, "not a collection of Red States and Blue States -- We are the United States of America".

Obama intuitively understands a larger truth of next-generation economics. Unified markets are what a world driven to collapse by hyperconsumption is desperately going to need. We're going to need not a hundred different kinds of razors - and their spiralling costs of complexity and waste - but a single razor that everybody, from the slums of Rio to the lofts of Tribeca, is overjoyed to use.

6. Thicken power. The power many corporations wield is thin power: the power to instill fear and inculcate greed. True power is what Obama has learned wield: the power to inspire, lead, and engender belief. You can beat people into subjugation - but you can never command their loyalty, creativity, or passion. Thick power is true power: it's radically more durable, less costly, and more intense.

7. Remember that there is nothing more asymmetrical than an ideal. Obama ended his last speech before the election by saying: "let's go change the world" Why are those words important? Because the world needs changing. A world riven by economic meltdown, religious conflict, resource scarcity, and intractable poverty and violence - such a world demands fresh ideals. We must mold and shape a better world - or we will surely all suffer together. As Obama said: "We rise or fall...as one people". In such a world, forget about a short-lived, often meaningless "competitive advantage". It's a concept built for the 20th century. In the 21st century, there is nothing more asymmetrical - more disruptive, more revolutionary, or more innovative -- than the world-changing power of an ideal.

Where are the ideals in your organization? What ideals are missing - absent, bankrupt, stolen - from your economy, industry, or market? What ideals will you fight and struggle for - and live? Because the ultimate problem with industrial-era business was, as Wall Street has so convincingly demonstrated, this: there weren't any.

That seventh lesson is the starting point for tomorrow's radical innovators - because it's the thread that knits the others together. And it's where you should start if you want to use these seven rules to start building 21st century institutions - whether businesses, non-profits, social enterprises, or political campaigns.

*Ref:HarvardBusiness.org.

Leadership Vs Management

Management and leadership are different but complementary, and that in a changing world, one cannot function without the other. Managers promote stability while leaders press for change, and only organizations that embrace both sides of that contradiction can thrive in turbulent times.

As per John Kotter- Leaders don't make plans; they don't solve problems; they don't even organize people. What leaders really do is prepare organizations for change and help them cope as they struggle through it

Leadership isn't mystical and mysterious. It has nothing to do with having "charisma" or other exotic personality traits. It is not the province of a chosen few. Nor is leadership necessarily better than management or a replacement for it. Rather, leadership and management are two distinctive and complementary systems of action. Each has its own function and characteristic activities. Both are necessary for success in an increasingly complex and volatile business environment.

Most corporations today are over managed or under led. They need to develop their capacity to exercise leadership. Successful corporations don’t wait for leaders to come along. They actively seek out people with leadership potential and expose them to career experiences designed to develop that

With careful selection, nurturing, and encouragement, dozens of people can play important leadership roles in a business organization. But while improving leadership ability to lead, companies should remember that strong leadership with weak management is no better, and is sometimes actually worse, than the reverse. The real challenge is to combine strong leadership and strong management and use each to balance the other.

Of course, not everyone can be good at both leading and managing. Some people have the capacity to become excellent managers but not strong leaders. Others have great leadership potential but, for a variety of reasons, have great difficulty becoming strong managers. Smart companies value both kinds of people and work hard to make them a part of the team.

But when it comes to preparing people for executive jobs, such companies rightly ignore the recent literature that says people cannot manage and lead. They try to develop leader-managers. Once companies understand the difference between leadership and management, they can begin to groom their top people to provide both The Difference between Management and Leadership Management is about coping with complexity. Its practices and procedures are largely a response to one of the most significant developments of the twentieth century: the emergence of large organizations. Without good management, complex enterprises tend to become chaotic in ways that threaten their very existence. Management is about coping with Complexity. Leadership, by contrast, is about coping with change.

These two different functions–coping with complexity and coping with change, shape the characteristic activities of management and leadership. Each system of action involves deciding what needs to be done, creating networks of people and relationships that can accomplish an agenda, and then trying to ensure that those people actually do the job. But each accomplishes these three tasks in different ways.

Companies manage complexity first by planning and budgeting-settmg targets or goals for the future (typically for the next month or year), establishing detailed steps for achieving those targets, and then allocating resources to accomplish those plans. By contrast, leading an organization to constructive change begins by setting a direction, developing a vision of the future (often the distant future) along with strategies for producing the changes needed to achieve that vision. Management develops the capacity to achieve its plan by organizing and-creating an organizational structure and set of jobs for accomplishing plan requirements, staffing the jobs with qualified individuals, communicating the plan to those people, delegating responsibility for carrying out the plan, and devising systems to monitor implementation. The equivalent leadership activity, however, is aligning people. This means communicating the new direction to those who can create coalitions that understand the vision and are committed to its achievement. Finally, management ensures plan accomplishment by controlling and problem solving, monitoring results versus the plan in some detail, both formally and informally, by means of reports, meetings, and other tools; identifying deviations; and then planning and organizing to solve the problems. But for leadership, achieving a vision requires motivating and inspiring-keeping people moving in the right direction, despite major obstacles to change, by appealing to basic but often untapped human needs, values, and emotions.

A closer examination of each of these activities will help clarify the skills leaders need.

*John Kotter