Why are we still talking about the difference between Project and Change Management?

 

The topic of change management is well written about and well debated and there is no end of resources that will help decipher the difference between change and project management.  It is not our intention to repeat what has gone before but to clarify why this topic remains important and outline where the differences can be suspended, and these two domains of expertise can work together for better outcomes.

So firstly, why are we still talking about this?  Recent events have seen a surge in change activity and a need to execute critical change, at pace, with intended outcomes – that combination is rare but in some circumstances is currently essential for survival.  The skills required to design and execute business change are not readily available in organisations that were not previously prepared for the scale and intensity of change now upon us, but these skills, methods and techniques are now in high demand.  They are also in increasingly high supply as people gravitate towards the opportunity and challenge that comes with change of all shapes and sizes.

So, it is a current topic and relevant for many businesses to define what change management really looks like for them and where project management fits to make these efforts effective.

What is change management?

Where project management provides the disciplined structure for crafting and implementing change, change management really focuses on the adoption of change, ensuring people engage with and embrace new practices.  A change managed in this context is singularly looking to ensure project outcomes are integrated into the organisation and that change lasts, using an understanding of human behaviour and the psychology of change to tackle cognitive, emotional, or behavioural barriers.  This brings with it a heavy focus on stakeholders and the operating context more than the content of what is being changed and is also concerned with the skills and capabilities of those impacted by change to be able to cope and ultimately thrive.  To a certain degree, whilst project managers are pre-occupied with project set-up, change managers are likely to assessing change readiness as the pre-cursor for change strategies and tactics.

What is project management?

In brief, project management involves the application of skills, techniques, and tools to a set of activities to ensure requirements or outcomes are met.  This usually involves some degree of project initiation (set-up) in the first instance – ensuring the project aims, scope and resource requirements are defined before planning starts.  Project management also encompasses the planning and delivery of effort to achieve the intended outcomes.  This would ordinarily be based on relevant project methodology or approach that is the specialism of the project team or the most fit for purpose.  In flight, project management ensures close monitoring of progress, output, and benefits to provide clear and accurate status reporting and adjustment of plans to ensure project requirements are met.

Where do change and project management co-exist?

Whether you are managing a project or managing change – both involve the management of relationships and the ability to influence the actions and behaviours of other people – either through a planned methodology or a with analysis and interpretation of human behaviour.  Projects and change do not happen unless people do something different.  Similarly, both require a keen identification and mitigation of risk.  In project management this usually manifests as tangible, technical complexity, process, or system related, whereas change management usually deals with the unpredictability of people and the related behavioural or conduct risk.

Another way of looking this is that project management has a greater emphasis on “transaction” or series of transactions as opposed to fundamental “transformation”.  Change management relies more heavily on the power of influence through enabling leadership styles rather than the command of line authority. These associations are not mutually exclusive but helps the thinking.  In certain scenarios team members that are involved in projects may perceive their activities as discrete or unconnected in a transactional way, particularly if they have a role with a narrow scope and they are providing functional support on multiple  projects.

This article – managing change through project management – was written in 1983 but is still housed on the Institute of Project Management’s website and provides a comprehensive discussion of this intersection for those that prefer further detail.

Aspire2BLean and Blackmore Four offer expertise in organisational change management that is context-rich and outcome-oriented. Our companies work in partnership where our combined perspectives work to integrate people and process solutions to deliver performance, growth, agility, productivity, and effectiveness.

How to work with Matrix Organisations to deliver the Best Results

In contrast to traditional, hierarchical organisation structures, the reporting relationships of a matrix organisation are set up as a grid, combining the direction provided by two or more axis of the organisation.  Typically, this combination is based on an operational line and a functional line but may try to incorporate a variety of market, product and competence-based perspectives to achieve the right balance in achieving specific outcomes.  They are therefore often complex to navigate and as a consequence, employees are expected to manage the inevitable ‘healthy tension’ to achieve the best outcome.

Why would a business use a matrix organisation?

A matrix organisation attempts to deal with the real-life complexity of business execution in industries where scale, standardisation and synergy co-exist as priorities with market responsiveness, competitiveness and autonomy.  Business might do this for several reasons, but the core objective is to break the barriers often seen in traditional hierarchical organisations.  Matrix organisations are intended to increase the exchange of information, fostering close collaboration between departments and developing lines of communication to enable timely and high-quality decision making.  It is also intended to motivate colleagues through a more democratic leadership approach, incorporating a broader range of input into decision making.

Continue reading “How to work with Matrix Organisations to deliver the Best Results”

The role of commitment and engagement in achieving sustained change

What is Commitment?

In the present tense commitment is either a process where we assign ourselves to deliver on something or in the past tense, we have demonstrated a level of application and accountability to get something done. One dictionary definition is “the state or quality of being dedicated to a cause or activity”. That should give us a flavour. In terms of the business environs this has a direct relationship to the outcome on the assumption that those delivering are aligned to the task and are competent.

What is engagement?

This is the process which we as leaders follow to connect with our staff in a way that will motivate them to deliver on the objective.  It has both a transactional element and an emotional element. Those who are considered good at engagement can use both the “left” and “right” sides of their brains to fully connect with their teams.  Those who are fully engaged go beyond a basic connection and have a trusting relationship with those who they relate to.

Why does engagement lead to commitment?

It may look as though there is an obvious answer to this question. How can you be committed to an organisation, cause, assignment or other without being engaged?  It is possible because some staff can be committed as they are driven by their own knowledge, values, and beliefs.  A better question might be, “Are your staff fully engaged to maximise their commitment”?

The reason we raise this is because quite often employees or team members are challenged rightly or wrongly on their levels of commitment to a piece of work when they perceive themselves as fully committed.  It will be a moot point on whether they are, or not, and will be down to the team leader or manager to make a judgment.  It could be related to the way we measure commitment and engagement, and we may be stifled by our own paradigms around the visual signs.

It is a common mistake to assume that commitment is just from the employees and that if you “Engage” as a leadership team you will illicit commitment automatically for the reasons mentioned above. In fact, it is more important that leaders are both committed and seen to be committed.

How can high levels of commitment and engagement be sustained?

There are several factors that influence sustainability in this area. Some of these may seem obvious, but most of them can be categorised under the auspices of classic change management models. If we take as an example the 8-Stage Model developed by John P Kotter[1] you will see that all these stages require both commitment and engagement, founded on strong and effective communication.

  • Establishing a Sense of Urgency
  • Creating a Guiding Coalition
  • Developing a Vision & Strategy
  • Communicating the Change Vision
  • Empowering Broad-Based Action
  • Generating Short-Term Wins
  • Consolidating Gains & Producing More Change
  • Anchoring New Approaches in the Culture

If we look at each of these 8-stages they all require both commitment and engagement to varying degrees or on a sliding scale. Put another way none of these will work without both engagement and commitment. If we pick out a few as examples, then a founder, entrepreneur, senior leader will have to engage effectively with his or her primary team to create a guiding coalition at the early stages.  That will be very much about engagement initially and getting the team commitment in a way that makes them advocates for the change. This will also be required for empowering broad-based action. You cannot delegate and empower without engaging and gaining commitment first.

All this is underpinned by effective communication. An easy thing to say, but less easy to do. This is an area where we have seen clients get it wrong.  Both the quality and cadence of communication is critical.  It is easy to fall into the trap of over communicating and run the risk of disengaging staff, and the natural corollary to that is the subsequent reduction in commitment.

Sustaining the Gains

Using a change management model will help sustain the gains as it provides structure. The key point here is about clarity. Following a defined model such as Jick, Kotter or ADKAR® helps because the structure provides clarity and framework for those involved in the change.  There is the adage about “eating the elephant”, it is easier when it is in steak size pieces. Many organisations initiate change programmes, but these fail early on for several reasons. Poor commitment and engagement are often cited as reasons for these failures. Commitment and engagement be both “enablers” and “accelerators” for change management success.

In our experience, one of the most important factors to sustaining the gains and maintaining the “change momentum” is authentic leadership. Authenticity goes deeper than building trust. It is about consistency of purpose and transparency. It is necessarily about consistent actions because they may have to change throughout the process. However, there is a difference between changing actions and tactical moves to meet the programme need and regular strategic shifts, which will have a negative effect.  Leaders who are not authentic can be easily noticed, and that will erode both commitment and engagement over time.

Aspire2BLean and Blackmore Four offer expertise in organisational change management that is context-rich and outcome-oriented.  Our companies work in partnership where our combined perspectives work to integrate people and process solutions to deliver performance, growth, agility, productivity and effectiveness.

[1] 8-Step Change Management Model as discussed in his book “Leading Change” 2012

 

What are the blocks stopping your organisation being efficient / effective?

Before we delve into the blocks that could be stopping your organising to its full potential, we need to understand the difference between organisational effectiveness and organisational efficiency. In simple terms the first, can be described as the “what” an organisation delivers Continue reading “What are the blocks stopping your organisation being efficient / effective?”

Scaling with Agile Thinking

 

We sometimes think that Lean & Agile is all about scaling back, in a context of removing “stuff” or unnecessary processes. However using Lean and Agile can help us grow. The leaner we are, the faster we can react to the market place, not just in terms of change, but in terms of growth. Industries such as digital tech, online food retail, takeaways, insurance, banking have increased significantly during the recent crisis.

This period of reflection has Continue reading “Scaling with Agile Thinking”

Applying Agile to Recruitment

I have been observing a lot of the dynamics around recruitment in the current circumstances. My reflections are not  around on how to recruit , or the overall process, as I will leave that to the experts. However I do wonder if there is an opportunity for some agile and risk based thinking. The current crisis is re-shaping Continue reading “Applying Agile to Recruitment”

Not Following the Herd.

.

There has been considerable discussion around the need for mental resilience as a consequence of the crisis as individuals  and businesses  have to deal with new challenges. Political Leaders are now talking about the “New Normal”. I have even heard some people talk about the “New Abnormal”. Either way it implies a different way of working. Businesses have been talking about potentially working  in different ways, particularly with respect to more localised supply chains and using Continue reading “Not Following the Herd.”

Critical (& Rapid) Thinking

This current crisis is not just challenging  humans, resources and well-being, but seems to be challenging our ability to think critically. The expression “more haste, less speed” comes to mind. As a large advocate of the 80/20 rule, I have been following this mantra for years. Regularly, I have been challenged around when using the 80/20  rule is truly applicable. I have always stated that its OK to be used  for a management process as a means for avoiding “postponed perfection” , but not necessarily for potentially  high consequence processes. In certain Continue reading “Critical (& Rapid) Thinking”

Unnecessary Complexity & Waste – Bin It

As we move into a difficult time are first thoughts are for our families and our livelihoods. We are correctly looking at the way we work and taking advantage of all the digital tools available. Others are rightly sharing their  knowledge and experience around the mental health aspects of remote working which is critical for performance. I have blogged about this before Continue reading “Unnecessary Complexity & Waste – Bin It”