The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman (1903) "Maxims for Revolutionists" Irish dramatist & socialist (1856 - 1950)
SYSTEMS OR GROUP APPROACH TO CHANGE
It’s fair to say that people effect change: but it is also reasonable to suggest that people are conditioned, constrained or motivated by the systems that surround them. People are (in part) a product of their schools, their parents, their friends, their education, their laws, values and beliefs as well as their job and other experiences.
SYSTEMS THAT EFFECT CHANGE
I am reading “Changing Organizational Culture - Cultural change work in progress” and highly recommend it (See source below). In the early chapters there is some text about Open Systems and it got me thinking: what are the systems that effect change in an organisation?
In an organisation the systems that effect change (or not) might include…
• The management systems – how people are talked to, directed, tasked, managed (score 1-5)
• The HR systems – how people are recognised, rewarded, supported (score 1-5)
• The leadership systems – how people are communicated with, motivated, engaged (score 1-5)
• The finance systems – how performance is monitored, measured and reported (score 1-5)
• There may be many others, depending on the organisation and the external context
If these systems are like interconnecting cogs then success comes from them working together, rather than in opposition or at conflicting speeds.
Another perspective suggests three mutually dependent systems…
• the technological (production)
• political (allocation of power and resources)
• cultural (normative glue)
An organization is effective to the extent that there is alignment within and across the sub-systems
What is interesting about this as a model is that no amount of “team building” or “task forces” are likely to deliver change, or overcome resistance to change if the creative talent and commitment of that band of brothers (and sisters) is constrained by the “systems”. The answer is, of course, to change the systems. However that may not be suitable, feasible or acceptable depending on the metaphor for change.
If the intent is fix and maintain, then that suggests no change to the systems
If the intent is build and development, then that suggests only tweaks at best
If the intent is liberate and re-create then there appears to be scope to challenge and change
The problem is that evolutionary, incremental or “safe” change favours the first two whereas the “liberate and re-create” approach may be perceived as high risk, revolutionary and de-stabilising.
WHAT IS THE SOLUTION?
I think it is useful to look at the 7S model and the Cultural Web, noting that systems are both “hard” and “soft”, as well as “formal” and “informal” and generally run alongside each other often in parallel.
I think successful change comes from changing the system(s), rather than the people.
I think rather than empower people to “go out there and deliver change” it might be better to identify the systems that need changing and focus efforts on those. This is because the former approach is likely to pander to personal interests and politics, whereas the latter sets the agenda and the intended outcomes, without being too restrictive of the creative process.
The reason I think this (until I change my mind!) is that any approach which suggests “go out there and deliver change” will either create paralysis (Oh gosh what should I do?) or quick wins (Here is an easy success, with my name on it!). You don’t generally get people prepared to tackle the “elephant in the room”, the big, difficult issue that we all recognise as the barrier to change, but never speak its name.
I think leadership is about tackling the difficult stuff, and creative challenge should be focussed on changing the systems rather than the people, because if the systems are right then the environment will encourage and support the right behaviours.
This has to be better than appointing an A-Team who seek to deliver change in the face of, and in spite of difficult systems. Whereas the efforts of the A-Team may be heroic, and possibly inspirational they are unlikely to be embraced by the vast majority who inevitably “go with the flow” of the systems.
LINKS
7s Model https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newSTR_91.htm
Cultural Webhttps://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newSTR_90.htm
SOURCE
Changing Organizational Culture - Cultural change work in progress
Mats Alvesson and Stefan Sveningsson
First published 2008 by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
ISBN 0-203-93596-9 Master e-book ISBN
THE AUTHOR
Tim Rogers is an experienced Project and Change Leader. He is founder of www.ciChange.org and curator for www.TEDxStHelier.Com . Past roles have included Operations Change & Sales Support for RBSI/NatWest, and Project Manager for the Incorporation of Jersey Post. He is also Commonwealth Triathlete and World Championships Rower with a passion for teaching and learning and is a Tutor/Mentor on the Chartered Management Institute courses. He is a Chartered Member of the British Computer Society, has an MBA (Management Consultancy) and is both a PRINCE2 and Change Management Practitioner.
Tim HJ Rogers
PRINCE2 - MBA (Consultancy) - APMG Change Practitioner
www.timhjrogers.com | Twitter @timhjrogers | Skype @timhjrogers | Mobile: 07797762051
Curator TEDxStHelier www.TEDxStHelier.com
Founder ciChange www.ciChange.org
No comments:
Post a Comment