One of the things I find myself becoming increasingly intolerant of is people’s overselling of so-called “change programs” that promise to improve the culture or performance of the organization, or change the lives of individuals.
For a start, we all know that 70 percent of change programs fail. Well, actually we don’t know, and one should be wary of anyone who uncritically asserts this as some kind of empirical fact. A research paper published in the journal Change Management in 2011 found that there is no empirical support for this assumption, and indeed that people have indiscriminately cited an “unscientific” estimate published in an influential book that advocated a radical redesign in organizations.
Not letting facts get in the way of any good argument seems difficult for many consultants in all different types of change endeavors, whether institutional, professional or personal. To skip this nonsense, I offer a helpful list of seven evasive tactics to look out for.
So called “change programmes” promise to improve the culture or performance of the organization, or change the lives of individuals.attributed to him:shutter thorn
Perhaps the most common overselling – especially in chipsets, is the use of a two-column menu. The left column will present a series of supposedly exaggerated negatives – which are generally presented as current practice or practice of the oppressed. The right-hand column will present a list of “desirables” which represent ideal practice, or enlightened practice.
You’ll see examples like “From Profit to Purpose” or “From Control to Empowerment”. These are presented as polar opposites and ignore the more complex reality that is often important, generally dependent on context and a host of other things. It’s not that simple, and junk is often desirable or necessary.
Next, we have “thoughts,” and I enclose the term in spooky quotes, which are rendered within the seemingly benign Platonic forms of triangles, circles, and pyramids. Triangles are almost exclusively of the equilateral type, and the signs at each vertex strongly convey that three concepts are related to each other in a similar way. It is a way of raising three random concepts to suggest a causal relationship. In general, there is no evidence to support these.
It can be hard to work through the hype in change management.
When concepts are presented around a circle, it is hard to resist the apparent intent that we think of as steps in a process that is eventually repeated. If one of these pops up to you, ask to see evidence that the process always goes in the order as presented and that each step always happens. do not hold your breath.
The hierarchy, perhaps popularized by Maslow’s controversial Hierarchy of Needs, is often used to refer not only to hierarchy, but also to progress. Things at the top are seen as somewhat superior, hence the hierarchy. It is better not to look for convincing evidence in most cases, you may have more productive time searching for pots of gold at the end of rainbows.
Originally published at Melbourne News Vine
No comments:
Post a Comment