Only 41% of organizational changes are successful
41% of changes are successful? At least that is what IBM says. How do they know? They carried out a major survey of 1500 change leaders and produced a report, which you can get here.
Among the highlights:
Most CEOs consider themselves and their organizations to be executing change poorly
Achieving project success does not hinge primarily on technology – instead, success depends largely on people.
Nothing new there, really. But IBM then say
Four common factors helped these practitioners address their greatest project challenges and when used in combination, they provide a synergistic benefit that was even greater than the sum of their individual impacts.
So what are the four factors? According to IBM they are
- Real Insights, Real Actions. Strive for a full, realistic awareness and understanding of the upcoming challenges and complexities, then follow with actions to address them.
- Solid Methods, Solid Benefits. Use a systematic approach to change is focused on outcomes and closely aligned with formal project management methodology.
- Better Skills, Better Change. Leverage resources appropriately to demonstrate top management
sponsorship, assign dedicated change managers and empower employees to enact change. - Right Investment, Right Impact. Allocate the right amount for change management by understanding which types of investments can offer the best returns, in terms of greater project success.
Again, not much new. But remember – successful change management does not ignore the basics.
Organizational Change and Football
Football is a business, but different from other businesses in that the heart can play more of a role than the head. Mike Ashley, the chairman of Newcastle United is a successful businessman. But he made many mistakes when he bought the club.
Ashley would never have expanded his Sports Direct empire without exerting due diligence on a takeover, yet he bought Newcastle without properly studying it, only to be shocked by the masses of debt. He would never have installed executives that were incompatible, but this is what he did by employing an old-fashioned manager and then grafting on a continental technical structure, with third parties in charge of development and scouting.
The result? Relegation last season.
What we can learn form this is that when there is a takeover, the resulting organizational change must be carefully and thoughtfully planned.
Detroit and its problems
One of the basic points about managing organization change is that organizations must change before it becomes too late to change. A good example of how not to manage change is provided by the car companies of Detroit. They made the wrong products in the wrong way.
This video from the Economist looks at Detroit today – what people are doing for themselves…
Twitter used for business communication
As I have already said, social networking tools can be very useful – if used appropriately.
Here is a very good video that discusses how Twitter has been used successfully by one company to market its products.
Tiger Woods and lessons for corporate communications
I don’t wish on the personal difficulties of Tiger Woods and his family, but it strikes me that the way his advisers have handled the whole affair have made several mistakes. And I am not only one to think so.
For example, the Guardian says,
…the decision to remain hidden from public view since the accident may have been his biggest public relations mistake – and, perhaps most humiliatingly for such a proud man, it has become a running joke.
So what should he have done? Well, the basics of dealing with various kinds of disaster are fairly clear cut:
- Communicate: Admit there is problem
- Communicate: Apologize
- Communicate: Say what you are going to do about it
- Do it
- Communicate: Say what you did
The key thing is to be open. A classic case study is Johnson & Johnson whose product Tylenol was tampered with. A good summary is provided on Mallen Baker’s website. As he concludes:
The features that made Johnson & Johnson’s handling of the crisis a success included the following:
- They acted quickly, with complete openness about what had happened, and immediately sought to remove any source of danger based on the worst case scenario – not waiting for evidence to see whether the contamination might be more widespread
- Having acted quickly, they then sought to ensure that measures were taken which would prevent as far as possible a recurrence of the problem
- They showed themselves to be prepared to bear the short term cost in the name of consumer safety. That more than anything else established a basis for trust with their customers
