Learning Leader

Transition Planning and Leadership: the Cinderella of #Change?

Over the last couple of weeks I have been delivering a modular MSP Practitioner course ("Managing Successful Programmes") for our partner, Cardiff University, at their premises in Cardiff.

I was pleasantly delighted on a couple of counts. First, the delegates were a great group, from different backgrounds. It made for some fascinating discussions. Second, I realised it had been awhile since I had myself led our MSP course, and I really loved it! I enjoy the fact that this framework really can get its arms around adaptive change.

One of the core concepts in MSP is the idea of catering for transition, behaviour changes following what the projects deliver. And the model is pretty robust. I realised again that it is so powerful a concept that it pops up in a number of other places - behind some of the change management models we take people through on our Change Management Practitioner, in the newly-published Managing Benefits, and, of course, in Management of Portfolios.

So I've put what I have rehearsed many times with clients onto this video.

 

It seems to me, like Cinderella in the Fairy Tale, far too often the whole transition piece gets forgotten and isn't invited to the Ball. And this is a tragedy - for all concerned.

So it seemed to me appropriate, at this Christmas season, when Pantomimes, including Cinderella, are very much in people's minds, that I remind everyone of transition, the need to plan for it, resource it, and lead it.

Transparent Change Leadership uses the Rumour Mill

One the delegates on our recent Change Management Practitioner course shared with us a remarkable initiative within her organisation, Cambridgeshire Constabulary, the regional police force for that part of England. 

What follows is with the kind permission of the Constabulary. 

Rumour Mill is, in essence, very simple. It is an intranet discussion board, where anyone can post any question or comment about current happenings within the force ... anonymously.

Let the radical transparency of this sink in for a moment ... anyone ... anonymously ... on anything! 

Could your organisation cope with that? Would your leaders be courageous enough to provide and promote such a forum?

So, if someone, anyone, posts a comment such as, "This initiative will mean the loss of twenty jobs at HQ", within a couple of hours at most a response is posted by the change team, correcting any wrong assumptions or clarifying any confusion where appropriate.

People following the thread can see the openness of leadership here and the abiding trust grows that everyone is being heard.

I must say, that after reading the emphasis on radical transparency in Stephen Denning's latest book, I can see how courageous and powerful this is. Well done, Cambridgeshire!

Communicating with punch beyond delivery #PMOT

When I was a pimply, thin adolescent I took up karate. In terms of self-esteem, self-protection and street-cred it worked: I didn't see the school bully for dust!

One of the things that fascinated me about Karate in those days was how experts were able to chop, punch or kick through wood or concrete with their bare hands or feet. The trick, I was told, was to focus the strike to a point beyond the thing you were trying to break and to carry the strike through.

A crucial aspect to achieving high performance through communications in projects is this: we must break out of the silo that we describe as the life cycle. As the karate black belt aims for a point beyond the block of concrete, we must communicate beyond delivery. That is to say, talk about life beyond the project. Our clients are often not the least bit interested in what we deliver. Rather they are more concerned about how they will use the stuff we give them, how it will change their working patterns, how it might make their lives better or worse.

Even during our life cycle, we will gain much more engagement with our clients if we discuss what we do in terms of how it will effect them beyond the end of the project.

So communicate with punch, aiming for a point beyond the end of the project. (But try not to yell when you do it ... I've found the analogy with karate breaks down there...)

The Leadership Deficit: Why the UK Economy wastes £50bn annually

I thought it appropriate,with the UK Government about to announce in a few days its Comprehensive Spending Review, a less obvious area where we are wasting huge sums annually ... in the real economy.

pearcemayfield now has its own YouTube channel and we've just posted a recording of a presentation I recently gave, both in Brisbane one evening for Yellowhouse, whilst delivering our Change Management Practitioner course, and last week in London, at SQS's iqnite Conference.

It's a five minute video, the first of a series, exploring the concept of the Benefits Value Chain and how we can reduce this huge waste by attending to each point in the chain. It requires a switch of mindset, from the manager's to the leader's. Our argument is that we do not think and act enough like leaders in this change arena. Management techniques alone will not help us.

 

 

Let me know what you think....

Stress makes you stupid: why this matters to public agency decisions

A few years ago I co-presented with Helen Whitten of positiveworks to the title 'Stress Makes You Stupid'. We used a piece of technology called 'biodots', little circular stickers which we gave out to delegates. If you stick a biodot onto the back of your wrist you can watch it change colour according to your skin temperature; and skin temperature, I was told, is a good indicator of your stress level. When you are stressed, your body diverts oxygen from the brain to your muscle groups to aid the 'fight or flight' response. However, the depletion of oxygen levels in your brain impairs your ability to think deeply, reflectively and wisely - not that you need to do in a moment of threat!

However,the point it that chronic stress reduces our analytical and conceptual abilities to almost habitual thinking patterns. We miss opportunities because we are always living in stress, and lack of oxygen doesn't allow us to see possibilities.

Right now executives teams of public bodies all across the UK are under great stress. They will have to live with unprecedented budgetary challenges for the foreseeable future,and the future they foresee is not very far ahead at all. Just getting through the next financial year seems like a huge achievement. These decision-makers are asking themselves, "How can we maintain services whilst making 25% cuts in budget?"

My concern is that stress is shaping their approach with, shall we say, less-than-smart thinking. This quality of thinking will not allow them to conceive that this is an opportunity for positive transformational change, and that maintaining service levels is even a possibility.

Stressed public executives will miss opportunities for transformational change - radical changes to the way services are delivered, such as rationalising and sharing delivery with other local agencies. They will slash services, because their thinking abilities in this climate of stress will funnel them into limited EITHER-OR thinking.

Jim Collins and Jerry Porras found in their research that all organisations of outstanding performance reject this 'Tyranny of the OR', and instead adopt the 'Genius of the AND', insisted on more creative BOTH-AND thinking. Where are our public leaders who can do this now, who can achieve necessary budget cuts AND maintain service levels?

Today there is an opportunity to transform positively the delivery of public services in the UK. But will the stress that these chief executives live under allow them to believe this is even possible?

Switching Mindsets

 As early as last August I heard Dan and Chip Heath, authors of the excellent Made to Stick: Why Some Ideas Take Hold and Others Come Unstuck , speak at a leadership conference in Chicago about their forthcoming book, Switch: How to Change Things When Change is Hard . Their first book was about effective communication, and this next work would be about influencing people, organisations and societies to make a switch in their behaviours. I was eagerly looking forward to this book.

I was not disappointed. As a leader of an organisation and also as someone who leads change management courses and workshops, I greatly appreciated the insights and stories. There are a range of established change management models out there, but what the Heath brothers present us with is a simple, accessible model, a model leaders and change agents can get to grips with quickly, not matter what their level or experience.

I particularly enjoyed the story of the aid worker from Save the Children challenged with making a national change in post-war Vietnam with virtually no budget and pulling it off, of how abusive parents were coached to a different pattern with their children, of the Brazilian rail company ALL that was able to achieve a dramatic turnaround with a simple operational script, of the woman physician who achieved the realisation of a breast care centre with a shift from weeks of waiting for results to results being given before the patient leaves the building on her first visit. All these vivid stories are interleaved with helpful 'clinics' where the reader is invited to work through a real change challenge using the model.

Most helpfully the authors make the case that apparent resistance to a change is often not out of stakeholders' negative attitudes, but rather because the means to effect the change are often unclear or badly shaped by the leaders themselves.

We have already begun to use this model in our consulting assignments with our clients and within our own company, and we will include it on some of our courses.

Switch is certainly the best business book I have read so far this year and a valuable addition to the canon of change management books.

My Said Business School Seminar on OGC's Programme Management Guidance

I mentioned last October that I was speaking at Said Business School, Oxford as part of their BT Centre for Major Programme's series on Complexity and Escalation. I decided that I couldn't be 'academic' but I had simply to tell the story of my involvement. This I did, and Iit seemed to be well received.

If you are interested I see that my slides and an MP3 (caution - the sound quality is not great) are available on the Centre's site for download.

Business Change Manager, leading transition, programme management, project management, transition

How was 2008 for you?

Looking back over the last twelve months, how has the world of programmes, project and change management played out for you? What were the

major events that had an impact upon you? What were the main lessons you gained that you take with you into the New Year? What trends have you seen emerging?

I've been asking myself these questions.

Programme Management

One of the salient trends I've seen in pearcemayfield this year has been the rise and rise of programme management. I find that this is particularly so as more people discover the power within the MSP framework. It seems to me that many of our client organisations have now 'got it'. If you belong to such an organisation, you have a clear understanding of the difference between programmes and projects, and you can see how programmes can power the performance of your organisation into the future.

So would I say 2008 is the year of programme management?

Not quite.

Business Change Management

I think we are seeing another emerging 'buzz', and this one is around change management. I see a new maturity of understanding, particularly within the traditional IT and project management communities. If you are an IT professional, for example, it is likely that you are no longer satisfied with delivering good outputs. Your own clients are demanding beneficial outcomes. You now appreciate that this is only achieved by well-led transitions, which you see evidenced by different behaviours in operatives.

I'm seeing a real surge in the popularity of our change management courses, to an extent that I've never witnessed before.

The 'Crib Sheet' Project

Then we touched a nerve.

Our own research into the 'mental crib sheets' of project and programme managers began. As we presented the early findings across different conferences and forums, I saw how the findings resonated with these different audiences. People told me things like, "This is the way I really work."

I find this poses difficult some questions for methodologies like PRINCE2. But I am encouraged that maybe we can find a way of coaching people into what really makes a high performance manager.

P3O(r) - the Missing Link?

Finally, I was a reluctant guinea pig trainer for a new OGC Guide on Portfolio, Programme and Project Office ('P3O'), and came away a raving convert. I have to say again, "This is good stuff."

I have found others we have been kicking around the portfolio, programme and project management space for a number of year, and perhaps, as I have, have set up project offices. This is for me the 'missing link', providing sensible 'joined-up thinking' for organisations of any size and maturity.

In fact, the P3O, whatever its incarnation in a particular organisation - and it can take many forms - can become a real powerhouse for effective change through programmes and projects.

So the, what has 2008 meant for me? Well, its not been a quiet year! But it has, for me, shown some very encouraging trends in the profession. How was it for you?

Business Change Manager, P3O, Portfolio Management, programme, programme management

When a great project is just not enough

A while back, just before it opened (and I stress that), I eulogised about the new Terminal 5 building at Heathrow. What happened after that became an embarrassment of national proportions. My embarrassment was as of nothing to the pain people in the centre of it went through in the first couple of weeks after opening.

So I've been thinking about the original business case for the darned thing.

Let's say you are the CEO of an organisation and the business case for a strategically important project crosses your desk. It looks good. One of your best project managers has signed up to deliver it. Everything seems to check out.

You sign it off.

What do you think the odds are of realising the full benefits from this project? Better than average? Evens?

You are probably wrong.

You may be shocked to know that less than one in five such projects realise any of their benefits at all. And if your project realises as much as 80% of the expected benefit, then you are doing very well indeed.

Why is this return rate so poor?

Part of the reason is that most of the management focus goes on the project itself. Traditionally business thinking has emphasised management of the project; focusing on delivering the required solution within time, cost and quality. Business schools and consultants across the West have stressed this for years, like some mantra. This has achieved some improvement to the project success rate; organisations are getting better at project management.

Something is still fundamentally wrong. So what is the problem?

Mainly this: we manage to the stuff (the deliverable) and ease up too soon. Small project investments right up to very large, public ones, like Terminal 5, make the same basic blunder: they overlook the engagement of key people, neglect leading the transition to new operations, and fail to persist until their target values of measurable benefit are realised. Terminal 5, as a project, was a magnificent success. I can testify to that, having used it. But the switch to the new capability was an unmitigated disaster with significant damage to British Airways and BAA.

There is a growing realisation that when it comes to business transformation, projects and their timely delivery are necessary, but not sufficient.

There is a value chain of realisation that goes beyond the canon of traditional project management thinking. This value chain builds upon what the project delivers, and involves cumulatively:

1. Engaging stakeholders - influencing those outside, or on the periphery of, the project; reducing resistance to change by negotiation, influencing and collaboration; helping all involved to understand the need and purpose of the project’s outputs.

2. Leading transition - where operational leaders prepare people, handle the transition from the old regime to the new. This involves the challenging chemistry of engaging hearts and minds, planning and managing tasks to achieve an operational outcome, and then keeping on until old ways are forever abandoned and new behaviours and skills are the now embedded change.

3. Realising benefits - the focus of it all, where measures are set, benefits mapped, owned and tracked to full realisation.

Working back from strategic goals and the realisation of the benefits that would achieve them, we soon realise that we need more than the outputs projects can deliver. We need to ensure that operations are not disrupted but are enhanced. This requires a tactical leadership of operations that can take people through the trauma of change, identifying and adding the necessary operational initiatives that the project would be unlikely either to identify or do. Benefits are most often not realised simply because there are missing links of business changes beyond projects, such as setting up the temporary support that operational teams need in order to make the radical switch from old to new.

In turn, working back from these operational changes, the co-operation of people who would otherwise see themselves as ‘victims’ becomes vital. We could have operatives positive and enthusiastic about the change, contributing creative ideas to improve the outcomes, but only if operational leaders have the courage to engage them early enough in the right manner. Traditionally, the culture of projects has been such that they have appeared ‘silos of communication’, inward-looking, with operational people regarded more as an interference. The reason one major European programme in a manufacturing company was still-born is best illustrated by how the French pilot site described the UK-based project: “Fortress ….” (where you can fill in the dots with the town’s name). What does that say about the need for earlier stakeholder engagement?

Moreover, if such value is added after the project, then why are 60% of project business cases never reviewed after they gain approval? In fact, research shows 70% are never reviewed after project implementation. The practice seems to be that business cases are simply a mechanism to gain approval and funding; after that you can forget them. Could your business case improve during and after a project? Of course it could! Strategy changes; the business environment is volatile. For example, rising energy costs can have interesting effects on your project portfolio and the way projects are prioritised. But how would you know?

On a recent BBC Radio 4 interview a senior manager from the UK high street banks’ clearing system was asked about a major performance transformation, where the time to transfer monies between accounts will be shortened from two days to two hours. The interviewer asked why the whole system didn’t go over to it immediately, rather than going through a phased implementation. The answer was something like this: “We don’t want another T5.”

That’s interesting. The story of Terminal 5’s operational meltdown from day one is now becoming a catchphrase for this fundamental business lesson.

Maybe one of the longer term benefits of Terminal 5 for the UK economy is that we will now all have a care to think beyond project delivery. “We don’t want a T5.”

So, next time you are asked to write a project business case or approve one, what will you do?

Technorati Tags: stakeholder engagement,stakeholder management,transition,leading transition,benefits management,benefits realisation management,business Case,project management,programme management,project,programme,project failure