Executing Transformation: A Holistic Approach to Change Management

By Joel Bigley and Kent Rhodes

With the competitive landscape changing faster than ever before, leaders understandably favor what has worked for them in the past.

But that kind of approach doesn’t give anyone the motivation to develop new and better strategies to execute and navigate change. As a result, change leaders and practitioners find themselves asking the same-old questions:

• With no time for failure, how can initiatives be moved forward?
• How do you fit the right change method to the change objective?
• How do you create a roadmap that is designed for success?
• Why do some organizations succeed with change while others struggle?

The authors share the insights of change management thought leaders that have stood the test of time within the scope of organization-wide change. Change managers today can review the work of these thought leaders to better understand and implement effective change in their organizations.

The authors also propose a holistic meta-framework to create a path for enterprise-wide change. With the insights from case studies, you’ll learn how to create a customized and robust transformation plan for your own organizational change initiatives.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Archway Publishing
• Release date: Feb 1, 2019
• ISBN: 9781480869325

Joel Bigley

Joel Bigley and Kent Rhodes have been working in high stakes change management for more than twenty-five years in a variety of businesses and organization types. In this book, they combine their experiences and reveal a method that any person involved in organizational change can use to get better results. Their experience includes turnarounds, integrations, start-ups, green/brown field initiatives, as well as overall organization recalibration around new expectations.

Book preview

Copyright © 2019 Joel Bigley.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced by any means, graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping or by any information storage retrieval system without the written permission of the author except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews.

Archway Publishing

1663 Liberty Drive

Bloomington, IN 47403

www.archwaypublishing.com

1 [phone]

Because of the dynamic nature of the Internet, any web addresses or links contained in this book may have changed since publication and may no longer be valid. The views expressed in this work are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher, and the publisher hereby disclaims any responsibility for them.

Any people depicted in stock imagery provided by Getty Images are models, and such images are being used for illustrative purposes only.

Certain stock imagery © Getty Images.

ISBN: 978-1-4808-6933-2 (sc)

ISBN: 978-1-4808-6934-9 (hc)

ISBN: 978-1-4808-6932-5 (e)

Library of Congress Control Number: 2018914656

Archway Publishing rev. date: 01/31/2019

CONTENTS

Foreword

Preface

Introduction

Success Rate

Megatrends

Incomplete Theory

The Five Sections

Failure Cost

Part I: Change Leadership Trends

Introduction

Hydroptère: A Case Study And An Analogy

The Design

The Leader

Some Probing Questions

Summary

Part Ii: Holistic Change

The Ausm Meta-Framework

Summary

Part 1 - Phase 1: Assemble

Part 1 - Phase 2: Understand

Part 2 – Phase 3: Solve

Part 2 – Phase 4: Maintain

Summary

PArt Iii: Assembling A Change Framework

Case 1: Multi-Division Cost Optimization Plan

Case 2: Support Vendor Deployment

Case 3: Very Large Volume Surge In A New Workflow

PART IV: Historical Change Approaches

1. Lewin: Force Field Theory, 1939

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

2. Shewhart and Deming: PDCA and PDSA, 1939

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

3. Lewin: Field Theory, 1943

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

4. Lewin: Group Dynamics Method of Change, 1944

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

5. Lewin: Action Research, 1946

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

6. Lewin: Three Step Model, 1947

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

7. Lewin: Planned Approach, 1947

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

8. Sarasohn and Protzman: TWI-Kaizen, 1949

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

9. Lindblom: Muddling Through, 1959

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

10. Bennis: Leadership and Planned Change, 1961

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

11. Toyota: A3, 1960s

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

12.Schein: Organizational Culture and Leadership, 1970

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

13. Huse: Organizational Development, 1975

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

14. Graen: Leader-Member Exchange Model, 1976

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

15. Beckhard and Harris: The Change Equation, 1977

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

16. Kotter and Schlesinger: The Six Change Approach, 1979

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

17. Beer: Framework of Leading Learning, 1980

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

18. Peters and Waterman: 8-S Model for Successful Change, 1982

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

19. Argyris: Action Science, 1982

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

20. Quinn and Rohrbaugh: Competing Values Model, 1983

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

21. Handy: Organization Cultures and Leadership, 1986

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

22. Tichy and Devanna: Transformation Drama Theory, 1986

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

23. Pettigrew: Context and Action, 1987

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

24. Harry and Smith: Six Sigma Change Strategy, 1987

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

25. Taguchi: Design for Six Sigma Change Strategy, 1960

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

26. Cooperrider, Srivastva and Whitney: Appreciative Inquiry, 1987

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

27. Welch: Workout Strategy for Change, 1988

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

28. Krafcik: Lean, 1988

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

29. Nadler and Tushman: Organizational Frame Bending, 1989

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

30. Senge: The Fifth Discipline Model, 1990

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

31. Brown and Duguid: Communities of Practice, 1991

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

32. Bridges: Managing Transitions, 1991

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

33. Judson: Five Phase Change Model, 1991

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

34. Wheatley: Complexity Theory, 1992

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

35. Burke/Litwin: Understanding Drivers for Change Model, 1992

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

36. Kanter: Model of Change, 1992

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

37. Kanter, Stein, and Jick: Big Three model, 1992

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

38. Hammer and Champy: Re-engineering the Corporation Model, 1993

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

39. Cummings and Worley: Five Step Transformation Plan, 1993

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

40. Hiatt: The ADKAR Model, 1994

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

41. Krüger: Iceberg Model of Change Management, 1994

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

42. Mitroff: Five Stages of Crisis Management, 1994

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

43. Schulmeyer: Change Agent Program, 1994

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

44. Gail and Reichheld: Linking Customer Value to Business Process, 1994

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

45. Lukensmeyer: The 21st Century Town Meeting, 1995

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

46. Weisbord and Janoff: Large Change, 1995

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

47. Simons: Levers of Control - Management Control Framework, 1995

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

48. Galpin: Nine Wedges Change Model, 1996

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

49. Vollmann: The Transformation Imperative, 1996

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

50. Sutherland: Scrum as a Change Model, 1996

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

51. Hendry: Whole Change through Learning Theory, 1996

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

52. Kotter: Eight Step Change Model, 1996

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

53. Norton and Kaplan: The Balanced Scorecard, 1996

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

54. Robinson and Stern: Organizational Alignment Strategy, 1997

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

55. Trompenaars: Change Across Cultures, 1998

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

56. Pettigrew and Whipp: Dimensions of Change Model, 1999

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

57. Quinn, Spreitzer, and Brown: Advanced Change Theory, 2000

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

SUMMARY

PART V: Modern Organizational Change Approaches

58. Higgs and Rowland: Leadership and Change, 2000

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

59. Beer and Nohria: Theory E & Theory O, 2001

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

60. Luecke: Seven Step Change Model, 2003

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

61. Woodward: Leading and Coping with Change Model, 2004

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

62. Higgins and McAllaster: Cultural Artifact Change Strategy, 2004

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

63. Voelpel et al.: The Organizational Fitness and Readiness for Change Model, 2004

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

64. Keenan, Conlon and Jackson: DICE Framework for Change, 2005

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

65. Marshak: Covert Processes at Work - The Five Hidden Dimensions, 2006

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

66. Pink: A Whole New Mind, 2006

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

67. Karp and Helgø: Loose Control, 2008

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

68. Grayson: Baldrige Performance Excellence Program, 2010

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

69. O’Callaghan: Turnaround Leadership, 2010

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

70. Connors and Smith: Culture Driven Change, 2011

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

71. DiBenedetto, Hoerl, & Snee: Large, Complex, Unstructured Problem Framework, 2014

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

72. Machado: Managing Project Anatomy, 2014

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

73. Hoerl and Snee: Statistical Engineering Projects, 2015

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

74. Ramsay: LSSRIM, 2015

History and publications

A visual of the theory

Theory basis

Discussion of robustness

Summary

Conclusion

Epilogue

Acronyms And Initialisms

References

TABLE OF FIGURES

Figure 1. The AUSM Transformational Change Meta-Framework.

Figure 2. Links to change models for Assemble

Figure 3. Links to change models for Understand

Figure 4. Links to change models for Solve

Figure 5. Links to change models for Maintain

Figure 6. Ideal sequence of Incremental (I) and Transformational (T) changes in a roadmap.

Figure 7. An environmental scan with forces for and against including relative strength

Figure 8. The second half of the scan that describes the action plan

Figure 9. Perceived vs Actual Residual Risk

Figure 10. Pareto chart

Figure 11. Workplace Motivations and Generational Differences

Figure 12. Case 1—Multi-division cost optimization plan transformation roadmap

Figure 13. Case 2— Support vendor deployment transition roadmap

Figure 14. Case 3—Very large volume surge in a new workflow transformation roadmap

Figure 15. Lewin’s Forcefield Diagram.

Figure 16. The Japanese interpretation of the Deming cycle led to the PDCA cycle.

Figure 17. Field Theory series of spaces.

Figure 18. Lewin’s three leadership types

Figure 19. Lewin’s Action Research process.

Figure 20. Lewin’s Three Step model integrated into Planned change.

Figure 21. The Kaizen continuous improvement cycle.

Figure 22. Lindblom’s incremental decision-making model.

Figure 23. An A3 template.

Figure 24. Schein’s model of organizational culture.

Figure 25. Edgar Huse’s seven-step model for change.

Figure 26. Graen’s stages of development in LMX theory.

Figure 27. The Kotter Schlesinger Six Change Approach to resistance.

Figure 28. The Peters and Waterman 8s Approach to change.

Figure 29. Argyris Theories in Action and Learning.

Figure 30. Competing values framework: the Quinn Rohrbaugh model

Figure 31. Cameron Quinn Values Framework

Figure 32. Handy’s four change cultures.

Figure 33. Tichy and Devanna’s Transformational Leadership three-act drama.

Figure 34. The transformation of a firm.

Figure 35. Smith and Harry’s Six Sigma cycle.

Figure 36. Taguchi Design for Six Sigma.

Figure 37. Appreciative Inquiry and the 4 D’s.

Figure 38. The Work Out process.

Figure 39. House of Lean.

Figure 40. Organizational frame bending diagram.

Figure 41. The learning organization.

Figure 42. Value created by Communities of Practice.

Figure 43. William Bridges change transitions.

Figure 44. Judson’s five phase change model.

Figure 45. Wheatley complexity theory.

Figure 46. The Burke – Litwin change model.

Figure 47. Kanter, Stein, and Jick. Ten Commandments of Change.

Figure 48. The Three Box model.

Figure 49. Hammer and Champy’s business process re-engineering model.

Figure 50. Cummings and Worley’s five step change model.

Figure 51. The ADKAR change management model.

Figure 52. Krüger’s Iceberg Model of Change Management

Figure 53. Mitroff’s crisis management phases.

Figure 54. Schulmeyer’s change agent program.

Figure 55. Gail and Reichheld’s Linking Customer Value to Business Process model.

Figure 56. Townhall workflow.

Figure 57. Weisbord and Janoff’s Six Box Model

Figure 58. Future Search Difference Matrix

Figure 59. Robert Simons Levers of Control

Figure 60. Galpin’s Cycle of Organizational Design

Figure 61. Vollman’s change considerations model.

Figure 62. Scrum workflow.

Figure 63. Scrum Board

Figure 64. Hendry’s Whole Change model.

Figure 65. Kotter’s 8 step change method.

Figure 66. Norton and Kaplan’s Balanced Scorecard with metrics example.

Figure 67. Managing creative systems.

Figure 68. Trompanaars’ seven dimensions of culture.

Figure 69. Trompenaars’s Four Diversity Cultures

Figure 70. Pettigrew and Whipp’s Dimensions of Change model.

Figure 71. Change strategy maturity levels.

Figure 72. Advanced Change Theories.

Figure 73. Higgs and Rowlands Leadership and Change model.

Figure 74. Dimensions of Change model.

Figure 75. Luecke’s seven step change process.

Figure 76. The four phases of change through coping.

Figure 77. Cultural artifact change strategy.

Figure 78. Organizational Fitness Profile Management.

Figure 79. The Organizational Fitness Model

Figure 80. Barriers to change using OFP.

Figure 81. The dimensions of the integrated scorecard

Figure 82. Project success prediction zones

Figure 83. Covert and overt processes.

Figure 84. The six right brain senses needed in modern times for success.

Figure 85. Loose control for change leadership.

Figure 86. Malcom Baldridge Award framework.

Figure 87. O’Callaghan’s turnaround strategy flow.

Figure 88. Connors and Smith Results Pyramid

Figure 89. Large, complex, unstructured problem framework.

Figure 90. Planning and Managing the project.

Figure 91. Statistical engineering projects workflow.

Figure 92. Lean Six Sigma Rapid Improvement Method framework.

A journey of a thousand miles must begin with a single step.

—Lao Tzu, 600 BC-531 BC

I don’t think even those who would nod and agree that change is coming is appreciating the consequence of the velocity of that change… the speed of everything is going up and up, and this is now demanding that we run organizations in a different way.

—Kotter, 2012

FOREWORD

This book was born out of the dual and simultaneous experiences of both Joel Bigley and myself in learning/teaching change theory while working in and with organizations around the world to implement them. In that consistently yawning gap between theory and reality, the idea of an implementation manual was created, Executing Transformation.

Both Joel and I have spent significant parts of our professional lives as executives in organizations. And while we each enjoy teaching graduate business students, we understand that in order for change to work, it must be executable in the trenches rather than simply talked about in the classroom. Thus we approached the compilation of this text as experienced practitioners rather than academics.

So, this book was created to provide a sort of one-stop resource that highlights major change management theories – a resource that we discovered was sorely lacking in the popular management literature.

Our goal is to provide managers in all kinds of organizations an actual roadmap that helps them facilitate and animate established change theories into day-to-day practice. Designed as a sort of reference manual, each chapter in the text summarizes major change theories and approaches developed over the decades, starting with Kurt Lewin’s seminal Force Field Theory in 1939. The chapters then outline and discuss what that theory might look like when put into practice in any organization to bring about actual change.

This work has been in process for years. While we worked to write the text for ease of use, we found that translating our actual experience in implementing these theories was not as easy to articulate when considering the additional detail needed to be helpful to the reader. We knew what we each had done to be successful in bringing about large scale change, but writing this book required us to recreate something akin to field notes in retrospect. And we recognize that most managers are like us: Running at top speed with little space to think and reflect on what successful change might mean in their organizations, what unanticipated impacts might occur, and how to measure the success of the change outside of the overly simplistic and obvious bottom line measurements.

We hope this text helps provide these necessary solutions for busy managers and leaders.

Kent Rhodes, Ed.D.

PREFACE

The competitive business landscape is changing faster than ever before. Plenty of hard data supports this statement, and the average smart phone user can find it by searching innumerable patents, publications, databases, portals, and browsers. These rapid and disruptive changes lead to some hard-hitting questions:

• How are change leaders and practitioners supposed to keep up?

• With no time for failure, how can they move initiatives forward successfully?

• How do they fit the right change method to the change objective?

• What if they need to develop a change theory of their own?

• How do they create a roadmap that is designed for success?

• Why is it that some organizations can make momentous changes and succeed, while others struggle endlessly?

This book offers answers to these questions. As the number of change approaches and methods continues to grow, leaders understandably favor what has worked for them in the past. Sadly, when they choose change recipes that worked in a similar situation, they have little motivation to develop new and better strategies that better fit specific scenarios. Generally, these self-reinforcing loops do not work well for managers or the organizations they lead.

Change management, a recognized discipline, has been around for more than 50 years. Even though companies have invested significantly in change, most studies show that 60 to 70% of change initiatives have consistently failed to meet expectations (Ashkenas, 2013).

So how does this book bring value to the discussion of how to find effective, transformational, and holistic change approaches and models? First, by examining history. The ideas of many thought leaders have stood the test of time within the scope of organization-wide change. Because they continue to be referenced and built upon, they remain relevant and have credibility. Over time, we tend to throw out what doesn’t work. Change managers today can review the work of these thought leaders to better understand and implement effective change in their organizations.

Secondly, although not in this order, this book proposes a holistic meta-framework for enterprise-wide change: a blend of ideas from various historical and successful thought leaders. This tool is called a meta-framework because it can be used to create a framework. In this book, we describe this meta-framework and present three cases studies to show how the reader can use it to create a customized plan for themselves. The meta-framework provides an optimal balance between structure and customization to the situation. The user can tap into the unique thoughts of relevant classic historical change theorists and build a more complete and situation-specific roadmap.

Change is often difficult, and the change environment is growing more complex. How do you know a change-related plan is inherently weak? Its execution falters. The change you wanted was destined to fail from the start. What happened? The plan was not complete. The plan was not executed well. It didn’t cover everything that it should have. A change leader should know what the situation calls for, but how do you find out what that is?

This book gives you the meta-framework for building a plan as comprehensive as you need while exposing how well it is working. It draws on 74 change theories that have stood the test of time. If you are a change leader, you will likely be able to find what you need, design a suitable change plan, and be successful.

This book has five sections. Part I is an introduction to change leadership trends from a performance perspective. It includes a case study about an organization that has successfully implemented change with transformative results. Part II presents the holistic meta-framework. It was created from the authors’ experience and linked to the theories in this book. This meta-framework can be used to create a customized framework or roadmap for a change scenario. In Part III, three such customized plans are discussed as examples. The varied situations demonstrate a wide scope of applications. Part IV is a review of 57 transformational change theories that originated before the end of 2000. Part V presents 17 additional transformational change models that emerged between 2000 and 2015, representing the latest information available on the subject. The references provided for each change model will enable the reader to learn more about each one. These models build on each other in many cases and provide insight into modern change methods with proven success.

In the end, the authors want the reader to be familiar with a considerable number of change methods they could use to create a unique transformational framework to fit the situation. The discussion is not exclusively about a comprehensive list of change methods, but rather the reader’s ability to make the best plan for the situation. Why is this critical? Because most initiatives fail due to a one-size-fits-all approach. If a change roadmap is slightly off target, the initiative can fail. A change leader must have both the historical wisdom of successful change theorists and local knowledge within the scope of the initiative in order to apply the best transformation plan. Consequently, a light critique of each change method is offered along with case studies from a variety of situations. The authors expect that the reader will continue to investigate change leaders based on interests.

This book is intended for anyone that has a desire to explore and exploit organizational change opportunities. It exposes a number of concepts, some of which are explained. To go into detail on all the concepts mentioned would challenge the page count, however, sources of information are readily available on the internet. Additionally, an Acronym and Initialism table is provided toward the end of the book. Undergraduate students may find the book particularly helpful with the development of critical thinking skills. MBA students may be in an employment situation that requires a practitioner’s approach to change. The deployment of a meaningful plan may assist them in advancing in their careers. Practicing middle and senior managers who are confronted with the continuous need to enact change will benefit from scanning their situation and mapping a path to meeting or exceeding expectations. Ultimately, readers will benefit from a knowledge of proven change theory, a detailed awareness of the mechanical function of the AUSM meta-framework, studying several case studies, and the ability to plot a critical path of their own.

High levels of involvement from participants is doomed if the approach is off target. Involvement and effort don’t matter when they are misguided. When a plan is not well thought out, the facial expressions of participants betray their attempts at enthusiasm. Failure is on the way, and they know it. A good plan, well made and explained to the people involved, takes on a rational context. Buy-in is possible, and so is engagement. So be informed, be inspired, and be effective (and be rewarded for your success). Then repeat.

INTRODUCTION

Several recent articles have indicated that the success rate of change management efforts is surprisingly low, given the amount of information available on the topic. In fact, as reported in the Journal of Change Management (Hughes, 2011), most studies indicate that 60 to 70 percent of change initiatives for organization-wide projects fail to meet expectations. Other sources consistently suggest that the failure rate to meet expectations is likely to be closer to 70 percent. It might be surprising that this failure rate occurs even though the discipline of change management has been in existence for more than fifty years. Moreover, even though an Amazon search yields over 100,000 books about this topic, the success rate has remained constant since the 1970’s. Confusion continues through the proliferation of more than 2,000 known management methods. Given the current change management success rate, why would anyone try to make a living as a change agent? If the dismal success rate could be a significant driver for leadership turnover among change agents, might mediocrity or status quo be safer? Even though change leaders constantly look for strategies to make things better, this failure rate is frustrating because change leaders know that they will take the blame if expectations are not met on time and under budget. Stakeholders feel it too. When initiatives and leaders fail, collateral financial damage occurs to the organization and to each stakeholder. Taking the organizational damage into consideration, it is no wonder that stakeholders in change activities tend to resist transformation initiatives, preferring instead to continue with their familiar routines. They choose to avoid the familiar pain of short-term failure in favor of the longer-term status quo.

Change leadership literature is complex, fragmented, and characterized by diverse approaches and opinions. No single universal change model or best practice to successfully implement change exists. However, organizational change theory does exist, and we can derive various useful approaches from that. Some significant factors required for successful change leadership include the following:

• A clear sense of oneself

• Awareness of a changing environment

• Readiness for change

• Understanding the drivers of change

• Knowing how to enhance organizational learning

• Origins and mitigation of resistance

• Recognizing what constitutes organizational transformation

Many companies unable to see change leadership as a process—as well as an art—have gone on one cost reduction initiative after another without sustained success. Participants become frustrated and over-taxed. Lacking the internal capability to effect change, leaders turn to consultants. The consultants are typically paid to assess the situation, but then nothing happens because nothing is changed until the recommendations have been leveraged. To make matters worse, companies often resort to reckless, reactive, and dramatic cost reduction actions that lead to reduced service or quality resulting in negative consequences to the top line. Clients generally do not see this as positive change and look elsewhere to meet their needs.

Internally, a series of deployed fads create change fatigue due to a lack of impact. Companies give the transformational activity a pithy name, put it on T-shirts, and distribute the shirts to stakeholders. Organizations are kept from experiencing profitable growth when they don’t deal with the root causes of their performance issues. Adding to the resistance, stakeholders might decide that they will incur less risk by simply leaving the situation alone and seeing where the current path takes them. Maybe circumstances will change, and the organization will get lucky. A hero might appear on the scene and save the day. This may feel like skiing down a steep slope with your eyes closed. An operational posture like this can easily turn unrealized opportunities into unmitigated threats. While your organization is trying to cut its way to success, are competitors dealing with the issues at hand? At what point in an organization’s life cycle does the rate of change become meaningful for survival?

Navigating the competitive landscape is probably not as difficult as it seems. Hope exists because a few companies in every industry show consistently superior profitability relative to their peers. They are nimble. Their employees are engaged. Service is good, very few mistakes occur, and when they do happen they are corrected quickly never to reoccur. A common theme among these companies is their ability to adapt their businesses to change continuously, quickly, and consistently over long periods of time (Williams, Worley, & Lawler, 2013). When the competitive environment changes, these companies are already poised to exploit the opportunities in their markets. In order to have a long run of success in a global setting where the competitive environment requires significant business change, a company needs a culture of agility. This culture must enable organizational transformation as a matter of routine. Drastic change should be an expected event, not a surprise. Stakeholders should expect or demand it as transformation supports their own prospects of success. For organizations embedded in a culture of routine and slow incremental change in response to their environment, this is a paradigm shift. Successful companies can make change happen more quickly and reliably than their competitors. Agility confers a competitive advantage. In some cases, resilient companies can survive a major disaster and emerge stronger and better, rather than bankrupt. For example, a company might diversify or shed ancillary businesses that are unprofitable with little hope of recovery. A company might restructure to reduce overhead. It could move its headquarters. It could move athletically into new markets with its core products. Any number of combined strategies could emerge as part of a dynamic and flexible recovery or renewal plan.

External or internal upheavals can happen at any time. The environment, competitors, and technology can be disruptive. A company that can gather and interpret intelligence, learn from failure, adapt, innovate, and change, all while maintaining a clear purpose, has a greater likelihood of achieving profitability than a company that is stuck in a routine of patching and holding on to hope. Companies that change consistently and rapidly can execute organization-wide change plans effectively while maintaining their hold on excellence. Changing course, pivoting, to increase competitive advantage is not a problem, or even a struggle. Companies with a track record of profitability have the dynamic capability to grow into new markets because they can approach opportunities from a position of strength. They change predictively, solving problems along the way. They implement change holistically better than their peers. They have a systematic approach to change that actually works and is expected by employees. All stakeholders trust and are encouraged by a track record of success. Even so, hundred-year-old companies have failed and collapsed when they strayed strategically from the path they should have taken. As an example, Ringling Bros & Barnum and Bailey Circus, an iconic piece of Americana, shut down after 146 years of existence (Nir & Schweber, 2017). This form of entertainment has had challenges and has lost relevancy against trends in its markets.

The burning platform (a crisis situation that forces change) for revolutionary change is driven significantly by megatrends. These changes can destroy any company. They force change to happen, or else the organization disappears. Nowadays, it is hard to find a VHS tape player or a typewriter. What is going to disappear next? What about paper or ink? How long will they last? Frost and Sullivan published a Mega Trend Matrix (Jawad, 2014) that provides some insight into the implications of key megatrends on the global economy between now and 2025. These trends will have a high impact on the global economy, including new business models, infrastructure development, connectivity, convergence, and urbanization. Several of these mega trends are already emerging, including social trends; health, wellness, and well-being; e-commerce; and the use of alternative energy sources. Consumers are changing the way they choose products and what they choose. Competitors are emerging from previously unknown parts of the world. Startups are taking only the aspects of the supply chain that they want, thereby disrupting existing vertically integrated companies.

Change leaders have the choice to either understand the change around us and engage with it effectively or become obsolete. However, choosing obsolescence would be a disservice to all members of the organizations we belong to and depend on. So, to begin our journey toward understanding change management, we refer to and learn from influential leaders in the past. Their work is still studied and held in great esteem because it has been tested over time and shown to be valid.

Several historical figures have put forward frameworks and approaches for change. But when viewed holistically, these and other models miss out on some key critical plan execution steps. We highlight below three well known theorists as examples and discuss them more thoroughly later.

Hersey and Blanchard (1969) advanced the concept of Situational Leadership. These principles are influential but do not answer holistic change questions. Even though Situational Leadership was developed more than twent-five years ago, and Hersey and Blanchard’s book is a top seller (it sold more than a million copies through its sixth edition), changes were still being made to the theory, adding new dimensions while relabeling existing ones to close the gaps in the theory. It is expected that a theory evolves as we understand more about change, and as complexity and new generational perspectives influence the environment. Even so, when changes occur we also doubt the robustness of the original model.

In Kotter’s eight-step change framework, for example, no step provides for collecting data or analysis to understand the problem before considering solutions. Most change practitioners know that if they do not thoroughly understand the problem before determining what the solutions or change actions should be, the effectiveness of the implemented solution is at risk. Even so, not all data collection is perfect in finding the truth. And, the analysis can be biased and misleading. As a result, many process owners have seen solutions implemented—to no avail—because they didn’t clearly understand the problem. They might have applied a good solution to something other than the root cause, and the problem persisted. Some people prefer to use their gut to solve a problem, and others prefer a fact-based approach. This conflict-dilemma is most pronounced in a complex interdependent organization with a significant number of related functions.

Here is an explanation: You resolve an issue in one part of the organization. But that resolved issue might also be a contributing factor to failure or conflict in other parts of the organization. If you leave the situation unresolved elsewhere, the chance of failure continues. Failure potential might even grow due to residual risk, that is unresolved risk after mitigating actions are taken. Alternatively, a change leader might transfer the risk of failure elsewhere due to a poorly designed action or patch. The residual risk might be tolerable or not, but in either case, a repeat failure is an increasing possibility. In this example, if leaders misunderstand the connectedness of organizational units in a supply chain, they risk underestimating the significance of the issue.

Similarly, a change action that is oversimplified in its scope of influence, or that does not have all the needed components, is inherently incomplete. The silver bullet approach, the idea that one solution will fix a risk-loss scenario completely, is the lazy way to approach a problem. It usually produces unsatisfactory results often associated with short-cutting. This single solution might have its roots in a misinterpreted, oversimplified historical precedent. We did this at my last job and it worked as far as I know. It could have originated from personal bias entrenched in an area of familiarity. This worked in my R&D department and so it should work with your production team. It worked before, but that does not mean it will work again in a different local situation. The lack of a complete and fully executed change action plan enhances failure risk.

A third example is the significantly successful Six Sigma process. Even successful change models, depending on where they are deployed, can produce negative side effects. They can be viewed as treatments to a company culture deficiency with side effects that might or might not be tolerable. For example, when James McNerny deployed Six Sigma in 3M, it achieved short-term benefits to the stock price because it eliminated waste and improved productivity. But the systematization of the processes hurt breakthrough creativity, a primary and fundamental cultural norm at 3M. The culture was torn apart and McNerny left 3M and went to Boeing (Huang, 2013). The cycle of an optimistic beginning, tumultuous middle, and controversial conclusion has been repeated in other leadership cases. Any change process is challenged by its ability to be situational and then evolve with the organization, thereby contributing to the company’s success. Many change theories have come and gone, at least in significance, just as change theorists have. Even so, each has left its mark on organizational effectiveness.

Following the introduction, in Part I there is discussion about change leadership and a true story of a company that changed within a competitive environment leading to record-setting performance. The authors’ holistic change meta-framework, described in Part II, is presented in detail as a flexible yet thorough construct. It suggests a much more complete and actionable structure for organization-wide transformational change. This meta-framework was assembled by the authors following twenty-five years of global transformational change experience. To minimize the residual risk so common in change activities, it covers the gaps in theories that have been in play for many years. Each step in the meta-framework has a side bar that illustrates the theme in that step. The authors assert that the reason for the high failure rate in large-scale organizational change is the impact of unknown or unmitigated residual issues in change plans. Incomplete and inappropriate change frameworks allow the resisters in the system to gain momentum. Residual issues that undermine the change activity, and the subsequent results, fuel their resistance. The failure potential of any change activity increases with impatient desire for quick results, an executive bias that oversimplifies the root cause, the oversimplified remediation plan, and incomplete execution. It makes sense, then, that if we continue to use the same incomplete tools, we will continue to see the same failure rate.

To follow this thought pattern of executing organizational transformation, the authors have exposed the theories of a number of significant change theorists located in Part IV and V of this book. These are listed in chronological order. The theorists’ ideas are briefly presented with comments about potential shortcomings from a holistic change viewpoint. In some cases, these shortcomings were identified by the theorists themselves in expressing the need for enhancements over time. Some of the more modern change concepts are put forward and discussed in Part V. The contemporary models in Part V include several change processes and frameworks that have recently emerged. They might not be used widely, nor have they survived the test of time, but Part V describes these contemporary models along with their associated shortcomings. Both Part IV and V can be used as a reference during the reading of the rest of the book.

The AUSM change meta-framework discussed in Part II, is used as a template for localized framework applications. Part III includes a discussion of three diverse, instructional case studies and provides change leaders with the knowledge to apply the holistic meta-framework to any situation and plan a successful transformation roadmap.

It is expected that the reader will experience change failure within an organization. Those who have already experienced organization-wide change failures have some understanding of the impact to morale and the well-being of the organization. The overall cost of change failure, in the form of financial and personal fulfillment that would have been realized, is incalculable. In his Harvard Business Review article, The Fall and Rise of Strategic Planning, Henry Mintzberg (1994) argued that strategic planning didn’t work because the form (the rationality of planning) did not follow the function (the need for planning). Many other fad-like theories and techniques have come and gone, perhaps driven by the silver bullet mentality, but some success stories have been highlighted. For example, two well-known leaders reinvigorated their companies by going back to old values and dormant cultural practices: Lou Gerstner Jr., who reinvigorated IBM in 1993, and Howard Schultz, who restored Starbucks after a dive in 2007 (Groth, 2011; Lagace, 2002). Straying away from what made a company great can disrupt focus and compromise success, while hanging on to inept practices can cause crippling inertia. For example, the three countries in the world that still hold on to the British system of measurement are Myanmar, Liberia, and the United States. Even though all federal agencies in the U.S. were ordered to convert to the metric system in 1996, the lack of official adoption has led to confusion and inertia regarding international commerce. Even the British have abandoned the British system and formally adopted the metric system. The values that an organization embraces will relate to successful outcomes.

Attrition is another form of cost. The careers of capable employees often disintegrate because organizational change failures are blamed on change leaders and other stakeholders. The churn of capable people continues as stakeholders lose the opportunity to shine and thrive in their organizations. Failure, along with its subsequent collateral damage, crushes the succession opportunities of potentially influential employees. Capable people are no longer able to apply their talents in a needy market, and the standard of living of all stakeholders is affected. This form of talent waste can be remedied with a more thorough understanding of organization-wide transformational change. This understanding is critical for those engaged in transformational change to avoid unrecoverable waste and lost organizational positioning and rapidly changing environment. In order to stay relevant, organizations need to understand and execute the mechanics of effective change management.

This book introduces many approaches to change management, including a holistic organization-wide approach, and the skills to build a framework that can be successful in the readers own context. All change leaders need to develop the right change leadership skills to manage their overall career potential. The reader can advance their career by becoming an effective change leader in the organization they influence. In the next section, the authors will look at some of the business trends that are relevant to the conversation of holistic change management.

PART I:

CHANGE LEADERSHIP TRENDS

We have all seen the sign in the window that reads, Going out of business—everything must go. Or we read in the paper that thousands of people are being laid off due to the closure of a hundred stores, or several manufacturing plants. What happened? Hasn’t this company been around for fifty years? Shouldn’t they have known their market and business model better? Shouldn’t they have been able to predict that when they eliminated their sales commission model, their best sales people would go to their competitor? This is a specific example as a proxy for many other possibilities. Many factors account for the closing of more than 90,000 U.S. manufacturing establishments between 1996 and 2012 (United States Department of Labor/Bureau of Labor Statistics, retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/bdm/). As we look back on the situation, we might be able to piece together the reasons why misfortune has now visited the employees of these companies: the recession, inefficiency, bureaucratic inertia, poor or late decision-making, and failed M&A strategies. Again, could we not have anticipated failed transformation attempts and mitigated the impact on so many employees? Perhaps a transformation attempt didn’t happen, and it should have. Change or die, say some who see the effects of leadership complacency.

Change leaders make things different; in the right places, at the right time, in the right way, in the right order, with the right talent. Organizations can be reshaped, self-organized, decentralized, reorganized, or even de-organized; but only in a way that is appropriate at a rate that is linked to the stakeholders’ ability to cope. The required rate of change might be dependent on megatrends in the global marketplace and the necessary positioning of any organization in relation to its competitors. To illustrate further, many business environmental changes are happening at the same time. These changes affect all stakeholders. In some cases, the environment changes the stakeholders and in other cases the business environment is changing because people are changing. Demographic shifting is affecting the global economy. Millennials are emerging as an economic force and are going to be the dominant demographic in the workforce. Gen Z’s are right behind them. The elderly live longer, and they have special needs. Urbanization is a significant demographic trend that is linked to infrastructure development, connectivity, and media convergence. New business models are emerging as more e-commerce takes place. And globality is a new term that refers to everyone’s ability to compete and complete tasks from anywhere (Holstein, 2008). Yes, the world is changing and the rate of change that an organization must absorb continues to accelerate. To what extent, then, can an organization not only keep pace, but thrive?

The pace of transformation that an organization can tolerate is sometimes referred to as absorptive capacity. A change agent must consider whether the possible rate of change, given that there will be resistance, is sufficient to ensure competitive advantage or even relevance in the marketplace. The change agent must also take into consideration that it is difficult to find stable environments where demand is predictable, competitors do not change, technology changes are not revolutionary or disruptive, and regulations do not change. Perhaps the agility of the organizational structure needs to promote efficiencies while matching the rate of change in the market.

Internally, and to understand the change opportunity, the change agent must also know the starting point, or as is state. Is the organization mechanistic, adhering to the chain of command, specialized, or departmentalized? Are duties segregated with a high level of centralized governance, or organic with self-directed decision-making? Does the organization have a boundaryless work environment, networked relationships, and a high commitment to the success of the organization? Are employees engaged and are talents utilized? Many organizations have a vision of what they want the organization to be like in the future. With the base or current state of the organization and the desired state in mind, a suitable approach must be taken to close the gap while assuring the sustained overall health of the organization. Sources of change inertia are well documented, but tactics for dealing with environments situationally to increase responsiveness and innovation are not. This lack of capability to meet the challenges of the environment is especially salient to the conversation about global transformational change. The added complexity of a global scope might be influenced by a cultural perception about whether stakeholders can control their environment. For example, if members of a culture do not believe they can influence their environment, but rather that the environment controls them, the approach to change might need to be altered.

Another factor might relate to the time needed to achieve a new equilibrium along with the allotted patience to achieve the desired outcomes. Is the transformation happening fast enough? Corporate leaders might consider how they can support their operations to achieve their goals on time through supportive organizational structures, systems, policies, leadership skills, collaborative networks, and approval streamlining. This support influences the rate of change. Furthermore, the tolerance for risk might be a significant source of change inertia and might also influence the accumulation of work stress. For example, some cultures might be seen as ‘working to live’, whereas others ‘live to work’. Consequently, work stress might in some cases be a source of work dissatisfaction and contribute significantly to change fatigue. Additionally, a culture of fear might encourage stakeholders with great ideas to suppress exposure, or they might be encouraged to take their ideas to a competitor though a job transition. The same outcome may be achieved by cultures that are risk averse. A final factor relates to knowledge, that is, to what extent knowledge is available and appropriately applied, and at what rate it accumulates. The layers of complexity in play at any given time can be exploited for success in a turbulent and chaotic environment or be ignored and result in transformation failure.

We will now examine a case study of success. This next section describes an organization that has achieved paradigmatic performance over an evolutionary time period that is relatively short. The reader might want to research this case further to get more detail. At a high level, we will look at an organization that not only successfully changed across a paradigm, but beyond their success have inspired the use of their technology on other platforms by other companies. This organization is worth review, considering their accomplishments across a short time frame. Organizations can benefit from the knowledge gained from their transformation and the innovation that enabled it. Organizations can also benefit from the analogies in the account. The organization balanced the contribution of stakeholders against an aggressive paradigmatic rate of change that resulted in significant success in a complex and competitive environment. Their efforts changed the way many look at their environment. More importantly, they are an analogy for change that can be used to explain aspects of transformative change.

As a quick diversion, and a living example of a paradigmatic organizational transformation, we now turn the reader’s attention to Hydroptère. This word comes from the Greek hydros (water) and ptère (wing) and is the name of a record-setting trimaran that rides on underwater wings while being pushed by the wind. These wings elevate the boat’s hulls from the water when it reaches a certain speed, allowing it to skim across rough ocean waters at record speeds. This design allows the vessel to travel very fast because it considerably reduces the boat’s hydrodynamic drag that would otherwise be experienced if the hull were touching the choppy water. The hull is suspended five meters above the ocean waves. More significantly, it is fast because the team that designed it also makes it perform.

The diverse team that makes this boat fly across the water consists of a skipper; a co-skipper; two record-setting sailors; an expert in electronics and measurement systems; a manager of logistics, strategy, administration, and finance; a manager of marketing and communications; an expert in hydraulics; a sail maker; a pilot; and a head of safety. The team possesses these accomplishments: speed record holders for being the fastest sailboat in the world and a long list of race course-related accomplishments. Some of the team’s attributes include resourcefulness, respect in their fields, experience in crashing a variety of vehicles, longtime friendships, well established reputations, ability to feel the wind, comfort with high speeds, ability to stabilize the boat, versatility, high energy, love of speed, passion, knowledge of the structure of the boat, and experience with diverse challenges. This team pilots what became the world’s fastest sailing trimaran and the team has transformed boat design from being constrained by hydrodynamics to being designed around aerodynamics. The team used design thinking to creatively change the constraints of the problem. Their success has driven their competitors to change the way they design their equipment; a revolutionary and necessary move to stay in the game. The same principles employed by the design of this vessel can be seen on other waterborne craft from sailboats to surf boards.

The organization performs through a designed process and a physical structure. They refer to their performance instrument as a technological dream machine. It is an optimized balance of human and machine interaction. This boat has gone through the cycle of design optimization repeatedly. It has been built, destroyed, repaired, tweaked, pulled apart, broken, tweaked again, and reassembled, all for the purpose of studying its performance and making it more adaptable to the challenges of its environment. The design has been tested and improved repeatedly. The behavior of the boat’s structure is thoroughly understood. Constant review of the design allows for stress points to be discovered. The team then either strengthens these points or diverts the stress to better allow the overall structure to carry the load. The crew who run the boat see it