Imagine If is an organization that focuses on strategy research that leads to the transformation of companies and organizations of any size. This mainly includes projects that entail introducing new business models, creating new products or segmenting the target market in a new way— or completely changing corporate direction altogether. While most organizations appreciate having data and insights, not all organizations are ready to embrace the subsequent change in their behavior. In fact, change is often hard in any industry.
Last week, Susan Petoyan, our CEO, and Raffi Arslanian, Psy.D., an organizational psychology practitioner, sat down with a team of clients for an internal “meeting of the minds” and discussion on how companies can deal with change more effectively.
We’re super excited to bring some of the notes we took from this meeting on the topic of change and change management in organizations.
The first point in the discussion dealt with the premise that change is a big deal. Why is it important to talk about smarter ways to inspire and lead change in 2019?
Susan: I think we universally agree today that rapid change is endemic to business. New technologies affect markets and market trends, from consumer behavior to existing business models. How companies prepare for effectively predicting or appropriately responding to changing market conditions is where the rubber meets the road. We often run into situations where leaders and teams intellectually understand that they need to change, but for a variety of reasons they avoid or even resist change. We all know the notable examples such as Kodak, TRU, Blockbuster, etc.
Being able to do change well is a business success driver. But it’s also important that the capacity for agility, or the ability to change quickly and effectively, be developed as a core competence for today’s companies, just like any other quality that makes up their unique value proposition.
Raffi: Many companies may not state this, but people are their biggest asset. I think change is also more relevant now in 2019 than perhaps ever before because of the people side of technologies. Companies are now made up of a variety of generations, and the gap between the differences in those generations makes dealing with change not only a necessity but also a difficult challenge on its own. By the way, this is on top of companies having to serve a market full of different generations with constantly proliferating choices, options, and behavior patterns.
The task of managing and leading a very diverse workforce towards aggressive business goals and successfully thriving in this ever-changing market requires knowing how to deal with change on every level, especially with your people.
Next came another simple but important question that most of us have observed or asked in our careers: Why is change so hard for leaders, teams and companies? What about organizational structures or culture makes change so difficult?
Susan: When a leadership is faced with a significant level of change, what we have observed is that things often regress back to some kind of fear. Fear of loss of personal/professional relevance or decision-making power, fear of financial impact and responsibility or simply the fear of the unknown often emerge based on not fully understanding the nature of change. Working with leaders both as a team and on an individual basis to co-create the change and demystify the process or the outcome can address these fears. By co-creating the change, I mean helping people have a say in the process so they feel ownership over it and its success.
For example, participating in the research and insights process that is supposed to lead to change often helps them truly understand why that change is necessary, which proactively eliminates concerns before they develop into fears.
Raffi: Lack of communication or poor communication is often the leading cause of fear associated with making big changes. Specifically, lack of clarity on goals or existence of hidden goals can lead to fear or organizational distress. On this front, organizations need to make sure they have a clear, well-designed communication plan before a change is implemented. Being proactive with communication or even erring on the side of over-communicating can go a long way to curtail potential fear.
Given how often change projects fail, investing in a strong internal communication seems like a no brainer. In other words, your change and communication plans should go hand-in-hand.
Next let’s talk about the personal side of corporate or workplace change. Employees often feel that change is imposed upon them and they have no real say.
Why would any employee be the best change agent for herself/himself? How can companies support employees or smaller teams to become owners of change?
Susan: In our work, what we see is that to achieve change on a bigger scale you have to first achieve change in the hearts and minds of every individual moving from a current to a future state. Companies often don’t think about the individual level. And I think there is an opportunity here. Individuals can and often do have a role that can be played effectively in sometimes instigating or at least contributing to change.
Traditional wisdom says that “laying low” is a good bet for surviving adverse times associated with change such as failed marketing campaigns or product launches or when departments are merging, etc. However, we also see that when individuals rise to the occasion they often become change agents— ultimately determining the direction and the success of change. The challenge then becomes determining how we best inspire more employees or teams to become change agents.
Raffie: We should probably mention here that there are different levels of change. In the corporate context, change can be functional or technical on one hand and people-based on the other. Some companies excel at either one or the other, and managing excellent change on both levels is hard. But planning and managing change for people and the technical front at the same time is most effective. When it comes to people, I recommend individuals seeking clarity, asking what will affect them personally during this new change, and aiming for the growth that may come from that change.
For example, instead of saying “I’m scared of the merger of the two departments,” you may look for what new skills or areas that merger may expose you to. Or instead of resisting changing how you operate in a more digitally oriented world, you could it as an opportunity to learn, expand your capabilities and prepare yourself for the future. Research shows that change starts in pockets and then spreads to our neighbors and beyond, which opens up room for individuals to feel empowered. This may not be feasible in most cultures or cases, and individuals often need encouragement or guidance when transitioning.
Lastly, going back to how outside partners like research and strategy agents such as Imagine If can help in dealing with change.
What are some key take-aways when it comes to making a change-starting data project successful for brands?
Susan: This is obviously a big question, but I can share some practices that have worked for us. When we do strategic research projects such as brand repositioning, market segmentation, or new product development, we almost often act like change whisperers. Some of this comes with the territory.
First, take an inclusive horizontal approach and include as many area leads or department representatives in the process as possible. For example, applying a new segmentation scheme involves all parts of a company, so a cross section of people in all parts of the company should be driving or at least influencing decisions.
Another critical one is to conduct some kind of evaluation of organizational change readiness early on. If a company is not properly prepared to embrace and act on a huge new initiative like the launch of a new sub-brand or a new pricing strategy, there is a big risk failure of a large initiative due to internal misalignments or even conflict.
The last point deals with data. Because not all parts of an organization have the same level of data orientation or comfort, we recommend translating results into a common language that everyone in the organization will understand. This means not showing a lot of data but rather sharing a log of insights or, better yet, a clear story. The idea is that if people understand the language of what’s driving change (and the ‘why’ of it, too) they will be much better prepared to act and change their own behavior.
Raffi: In addition to assessing organizational readiness, the way change is introduced and driven is also critical. Having an actual plan for communication, not only before or after a major change-initiating project but during its course, is absolutely critical for success. Change is done well when it’s a ‘pull’ rather than a ‘push’ methodology, to speak the language of marketers. Lastly, I’d say that data alone is not enough. Organizations are made of out of people who are flesh and blood. In order to create change, hearts need to be won over, minds need to be inspired and behaviors have to be matched. This means that having the right combination of leadership styles in the team leading the change is essential.
~~~
Who is Imagine If brief
For more ideas and tips for how to lead change in your organization with data-driven decisions, please drop us a note.
Recent Comments