The business of change...

I just Googled 'change management'.  It turned up "about 273,000,000 results" according to Google Chrome.

Then I Googled 'leadership' and got "about 48,500,000.  Out of curiosity, I couldn't resist 'change leadership'... "about 134,000,000 results".

Good grief.

I attended a Marshall Goldsmith coaching masterclass is 2010.  http://www.marshallgoldsmithlibrary.com/

Similarly, Marshall had conducted a 'leadership' Google search and also commented on the number of guides and texts (never mind about the courses, programs and consultancies operating in this field) along with all the self-help publications on the topic.  He compared this with people trying to lose weight - always buying new products, trying new diets and exercise regimes, buying books on how to lose weight.

Tara Diversi http://taradiversi.com/ has also observed the millions made by the weight loss industry and the variable impact it has had on achieving successful weight loss.

Have the change management/change leadership books, resources, consultancies, courses (even entire qualifications) and programs resulted in better change management experiences?  I doubt it somehow.

John Kotter's HBR article, "Leading Change. Why transformational change efforts fail" is now listed as a classic and has been republished a number of times since it first appeared in 1995. It is still used and referred to by consultants and academics - I have earned money using the model myself.

I was recently introduced to Prochaska and DiClimente's "Stages of Change" model (1982), used in addiction counselling.  I don't have a direct link, but this will help http://www.agale.com.au/FiveStagesOfChange.htm

Joe Moore (at the time with Proactive Resolutions) now founding member of Kimber Moore & Associates http://au.linkedin.com/pub/joe-moore/12/150/27 tailored this to a model for managers and 'change agents' to use with individuals and teams to bring about behaviour change within an organisation.  Identifying the right intervention to use at the stage of readiness being critical.

Kevin Bourne (2009) has also looked at the stages of change and developed "The 7 Stages of Transformational Change. Coaching the "Journey" of Changing".  http://www.worklifeexpeditions.com/userfiles/403843/file/Coaching%20Process.pdf

OK, Kotter talked about this in 1995. Prochaska and DiClimente wrote up their model in 1982.  We are now in 2012!

Addiction counselling services largely use stages of change and the accompanying process "motivational interviewing".  An underlying principle is to 'roll with the resistance'.  A colleague and myself working on a major management development program added '...and maintain the momentum' to this, seeing that both working with people's readiness, rolling with rather than confronting their resistance AND keeping on keeping on was likely to bring better results than a big bang initiative.  It was working... we had hard evidence... and then senior management decided (despite the accolades and results) that they wanted to focus on something else and my colleague moved on to another project.

Which adds something else into the mix and now talked about in the change field - 'stickability', 'spreadability' and 'sustainability'.

Let's just remind ourselves of something - again.  A well researched and now evidence based model from 1982; an article widely used and respected from 1995.  And we are still looking for the holy grail of how to 'do change'.

Back to initial comment...

Good grief!

Change is hard.  Achieving behaviour change is not a simple or even complicated problem that can be reduced to task or action lists or replicable processes.  It is complex - a 'wicked problem' and one that seeing organisations as organic systems and webs of connectivity that operate despite the structure chart and formal hierarchies.

The Cynefin Framework is handy here - there's a YouTube guide here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5mqNcs8mp74 and Harold Jarche has also referred to this on a number of occasions - here's one of them http://www.jarche.com/2009/12/embracing-complexity-at-work/

My conclusion? I'm not sure I have one - this is a 'wicked problem'.

I do believe that until we address some core issues (maybe the equivalent of exercise, portion control and what is actually consumed) we will remain like those on the quest for permanent weight loss... caught up in an industry that promises it has the easy, quick fix solution, or that someone else can solve the problem for us.

Losing weight and overcoming addiction happens when someone is ready, motivated and supported to do it.  Not when huge amounts of cash are handed over and someone else assumes responsibility.

One thought at a time...

Postscript...

Read a great piece on my 'favourite' topic - performance appraisal and development today from Fistful of Talent  http://fistfuloftalent.com/2012/10/lawn-mowers-leverage-and-performance.html 5 October 2012.

Steve Boese quoted his father "Don't take anything out of the shed unless you intend to use it the right way".

He talks about what can be achieved by simply tweaking the current approach to performance appraisal and what happens when major software programs are purchased and/or 9 year organisation-wide cascade plans (I had to chuckle!)...

There is something to be said for leaving in the shed that which you are only going to fiddle with and not use for it's intended purpose...

Just one thought at a time!

Performance, motivation, testing and 'if-then'...and a whole lot more

I've had a few robust conversations recently about appraising performance and staff development... and in my usual way have been collecting an array of thoughts and writings on this and related topics.

Given my bower bird tendencies and previous post, I thought it worth the time to pause, take stock and reflect on a few.

The debate has been taking place for some time about the merits of various performance appraisal and development processes with my colleagues.

This piece probably best sums up my personal views - Motivational performance reviews (and other oxymorons) from Sonar6 at http://www.sonar6.com/colorpapers/motivation

There should be no surprises!

The cause of the tension comes from a particular group of people's practice that dictates someone must have completed a 12 month performance appraisal cycle before any formal performance improvement process can be initiated. Yes, seriously.

As a result, all performance appraisal and development processes are dreaded and avoided, or at best, delayed by all parties. Managers view them as a necessary evil and protection should they need to move into a disciplinary domain at some time. Employees see them as a moment in time where a manager might give some feedback, which has a reasonable chance of being negative and could be used against the employee in the future...

There is certainly very little genuine conversation in the whole experience.

And so the question... how to influence a changed approach when confronted with years of 'lived experience', custom and practice?

Enter 'evidence based practice' and recovery models.

You see, I work in a public health service. Evidence based medicine and evidence based practice are more than buzz words in health - they are meant to be the basis on which all treatment and care is provided.

Following a Twitter lead, I came to the Evidence Based HR website http://www.evidencebasedhr.com/ and have every intention of trawling my way through it to find what evidence I can relating to performance and development of employees. The only hope of influencing change will begin with evidence that supports the merits of doing things differently.

Recovery oriented practice is the preferred approach to the provision of mental health care - as opposed to a medically oriented model. I'm still working out what this really means when it comes to clinician/client interactions, but it is well espoused and enshrined in national and international policy. From what I can glean, it is strengths based, and 'hope' features heavily in the policy documents. Client driven/centered care/services are also key components. Bottom line from this non-clinical person's understanding - recovery is a journey of personal development and growth.

Now some of those I've had the most robust conversations with are also promoters of recovery approaches...and it dawned on me that the very people who are concerned that they identify and document all employee shortcomings in case they have to formally do something about it in the future, are the same people who are working to get clinicians work with clients from a strengths based, self directed, hopeful approach!

I did alert one colleague to this with an interesting reaction I can best describe as denial.

I stumbled across this piece today (and now realise the merits of LinkedIn's news feed)... 'How Finland became an education leader' http://www.salon.com/news/david_sirota/2011/07/18/tony_wagner_finland

I wonder what would happen if we raised the bar this way for our staff, including the way we supported them and developed them? What difference would it make for our client's health and well being? What difference would it make for the motivation and performance levels of our clinicians?

In among this, the latest round of pay rise negotiations are taking place and there are some groups of employees who have got particularly skilled in the process. They are all knowledge workers... on the quest of greater levels of financial reward in order to satisfy needs and expectations that remain otherwise unfilled. Yet each pay rise never quite seems to fix the concerns and issues it was hoped to... like an addict, it seems each hit needs to be bigger than the last and with shorter time lapses... Daniel Pink, what have we done to each other?

Drive; the surprising truth about what motivates us

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc

&

Be careful with an 'if-then' approach to reward and recognition

http://leaderchat.org/2011/09/15/be-careful-with-an-%E2%80%9Cif-then%E2%80%9D-approach-to-reward-and-recognition/

Another conversation with a professional colleague about the formal 'plan/6 month/12 month' approach to performance appraisal and development brought about the realisation that the policy requirement to complete the 'plan' for a new employee within 3 months could be viewed as unreasonable - a real plan requiring a greater length of time to develop a relationship and appreciation of the employees capabilities... further discussion revealed that some of what is intended in this conversation - clarification of role requirements, expectations and standards - are part of a classic induction and orientation process...

Could this be why we have got the performance development aspect of the employer/employee relationship so wrong? We failed to consistently clarify and confirm expectations in the early days and hence spend so much time subsequently fixing up things that should have been sorted out in the early days.

My thoughts then returned to the formal policy documents guiding this in our organisation and wonder the extent to which they are based on historical custom and practice, or on evidence of best practice? When people seek advice on the application of these policies, are they receiving words based on evidence or a personal interpretation and opinion? And I thank my adult daughter for her clarity about the difference between advice and opinion...

So where does this leave me?

Firstly, to always be clear about when advice is based on evidence and when I am speaking from personal interpretation and opinion.

Secondly, to shift from the status quo I will need evidence of a compelling reason for change... and I will need those in formal leadership positions to determine that this is a priority... and a whole lot more to boot, but that will do for a start!

I started this piece in June 2011 and it's now October 2012.  In the passing time, I've read more about why none of these traditional approaches works and the organisational debate has raged.  The organisation I work in has even changed the name - from Performance Appraisal and Development (PAD) to Performance & Development (P&D).  Don't laugh - this is my reality.

Finally, I heard Kim Seeling-Smith speak at a conference.  She had gathered much of the research and evidence about what does and doesn't work as far as career development and employee engagement is concerned and has shared this overall model of FFOCCUSED communication.  She used to have a great pdf visual which I can't locate, but the link will give you the idea.

http://www.kimseelingsmith.com/blog/2012/7/3/ffoccused-communication.html

When I talked with one of our managers about this his comment was "that's what PAD is meant to be about".  (Sigh of relief)

High time to post methinks!