Change Management in Six Sigma Part-II

It seems that in today’s work world if we do not agree with authority or change,

we can challenge it through complaint or protest. Most can agree that in
leadership there is a provision of protection in exchange for submission to
authority. There is freedom in submission to the authority and bondage in our
rebellion to it. The rebellion in our example led to the extinction of the
entire training business. Careers were derailed or lost -- trust for all leaders
diminished at the worker level.

 

It seems there are many reasons for rebellion to authority and change. In our
example there was more than one vision, a lack of purpose driven focus, a demand
for compliance rather than commitment and little willingness to explain the
“what is in it for me” to stakeholders regarding where we were going and why.
Customers -- if considered -- were never mentioned.

It seems that managing change causes many of us to become “NUMB” – that is not
using my brain. Unfortunately this can be true for all involved – the managers
as well as the workers. It is up to the leadership to do things differently.

 

Breaking a wild horse is a tough process. If done properly the horse is not
weakened or devalued as a result. The horse is more useful and effective as a
result and generally respects authority if the spirit is not broken in the
process. With a heavy hand and lack of understanding the spirit of the animal
can be broken. What you then have is a broken down compliant animal not very
useful for anything.

 

The process of change is generally more than simply designing a process. It is
more than drafting procedures, policies or practices. It is more than training
stakeholders. It certainly should be a purpose driven focus with the customer
considered first and one that involves the well being of our people.

 

Managing the change process requires what we call a Stakeholder Analysis. This
early step in managing changes requires that we examine past history of
implementing change with a particular stakeholder group. It requires that we
provide champions or sponsors that “walk the talk”. 

 

We must also examine stress levels of the targeted group. How does the proposed
change fit the cultural? Surely we should communicate the WIIFM “what is in it
for me”. How about developing the skill sets of the change agents? Would it not
also be a wise move to communicate the timing of changes, the consequences of
failure and the rewards for success? 

 

Managing the challenges of change requires that motivational reasons are
provided to those expected to give up the status quo. Successful change requires
a clear vision of the desire future state.

In developing a powerful vision of change we should explain how things would
improve for the organization as a result. The stakeholders need a process to
achieve the desired future state. An understanding of economic reality and the
demands of the customer must be communicated. They need to understand how the
change fits into the organizations strategic plans and for that matter were they
fit as well.