We Have Always Done It That Way

When associations realize that they need to do things differently in order to get different (hopefully better) results, they too often turn to the field of “change management” to ensure that their staff and/or members do not ruin progress by resisting the positive change. We need to stop calling these activities “change management” and refer to them instead by a more accurate name: “change enforcement.”

Much of the advice in change management books is focused on compelling other people to do what you want them to do. It presumes that you know better than they do, and it seeks a benevolent way to “get them on board”””because firing everyone and simply orienting your new recruits to your plan seems a bit rash.

The advice in these books is not wrong””knowledge of how fear and the comfort of routine play into behavior patterns is well documented and relevant in organizations. My problem with these books is that they tend to imply that the first time you engage people in the change is when you are enforcing it. While this may happen frequently in large organizations seeking consistency across a global enterprise, this is rarely necessary in associations with significantly smaller staffs. When you only have ten people on staff, there really isn’t an excuse for not engaging them earlier on in the change process.

Tradition, however, dictates that exclusion. Tradition says issues of “change” are relegated to the strategic conversations, which, of course, take place only among the Board and most senior management, so we’ve built organizational routines that reinforce those assumptions.

The good news is, this is easy to change. Simply build new routines. Specifically, build the topic of “change” into your routine at a lower level. Don’t leave the “what are we going to do differently” conversation to the once-every-two-years strategic planning conversation (or to the “everyone get on board” change management processes). Create space on a specific meeting agenda (at least once per quarter, but more often is better) about what is changing or needs to change in the organization.

Let staff develop the agenda and facilitate the meeting. This does not mean they are in charge””decisions about what to change can still rest at the top of the hierarchy (if that’s what you want). But think about it: if you are really interested in change, then it makes sense to get someone other than the person who is most invested in the way things are (the leader) to lead that discussion.

Be open to where the conversation leads you, and use these interactions as a chance to discuss major decisions about change you are going to make. And if you are not going to change (despite the staff’s call for change), then you can use these meetings to make your rationale crystal clear. With these conversations more the routine in organizations, we will have less need for the psychology-based coercion techniques from the “change enforcement” field.

Tags: The Way We Manage, Innovation //