Ten take-aways from this session:
- Commitment and support from the top
- Prioritisation matrix
- Alignment across all levels of the organisation
- Use the language of the future
- Milestone review (clock speed)
- Transparent tracking (KPIs)
- Quality training (resources and capability)
- People’s energy (staff morale, wellbeing, mental health)
- Clear accountability for all
- Creating a climate for change
***The following transcript has been automatically generated and is presented here unchecked***
LinkedIn Live How to implement and sustain successful org…
people, organization, change, sustain, talking, aligned, plan, build, bit, subtlety, agree, nadine, leadership, terms, steps, easy, energy, implement, language, communication
Nadine Powrie [00:01]
And here we are live. A very good afternoon to anybody who is listening to us from London. It’s, it’s four o’clock, and we’re ready to go in our LinkedIn live. So I’m Nadine Powrie, Executive and leadership coach, mediator and leadership trainer.
Thanks, Nadine. I’m Jenny Leung. I’m a facilitator. I’m a consultant, leadership developer. I’ve got lots of different different titles. I’m fairly flexible.
I’m John Danes. And, you know, I’m not sure quite how to describe what I do. Actually, if you’ve listened to previous broadcasts, you probably wouldn’t notice that, I suppose. Yeah, I don’t know. I describe myself as a coach last time, which was completely inaccurate. So I won’t do that. I suppose I’m just at a time in my career, when I’m finding, I’m finding a home for the experience that I’ve gathered over the, over the years and trying to support people it focuses on leadership largely, in a various way, I’ve I’m doing more things charitably than I am corporately at the moment. Not sure what that says. But anyway, there’s a garbled view of what I do.
I think that’s a great explanation. Because it’s, it’s we all do that, don’t we we find homes for our skills and expertise. That’s why we always say something slightly different each day. When we come on, we say things
make me feel better already.
That’s good. That’s good.
Nadine Powrie [01:41]
But it’s fair to say that last week, we got muddled up with with, with what we are doing because I got stuck on one word. And then everybody got stuck on one word. And actually, sometimes we do so many things that it might be a bit boring if we start, you know, giving the long list of things and activities and jobs that we aren’t doing. So I think we’ve summarized very well today, we’ve made progress today.
It’s only taken three minutes.
Nadine Powrie [02:14]
Okay, so last week, we talked about how we lead change in the workplace. And we came up with 10. take home messages that I published on LinkedIn, those 10, blue barrels, and actually, there’s been a lot of people looking at that document. So just to recap from last week, those 10 ideas about leading change, were having a risk assessment, to duty of care being important, doing a pestle analysis, doing a SWOT analysis, making sure that we are doing new things every day and different things as well. Being aware of the timings and the seasons, cycles, of course, communication playing a key role, particularly the style, the messages and the channels of communication. We talked about having a change team. And Jenny, you did a lot of work on that in your career. We talked about we talked about the importance of the relationship with people and making sure that we know who our people are when we work in an organization. And then we talked about giving people a voice. So this week, we’re going to be we’re going to be looking at implementing and sustaining change because actually, as I say a lot of a when I’m
when I’m talking
Nadine Powrie [03:43]
it’s easy to I mean, one could argue that it’s easy to do a change plan. You know, change strategic plan is easy to write. But it’s less easy to implement, and even less easy to sustain. So we thought we would have a conversation around implementation and sustaining the change. Now, Jenny, you said I want to come in first when we okay. Okay, go.
Yeah, it’s a really interesting topic. And as Nadine said, I have done quite a lot of change management. In my career. In fact, I was a change management consultant at one stage. And when we decided this year, this week to look at sustaining change, I looked back through my notes through my presentations, and I did not deliver a single session on sustaining it. So I, so I then looked at my sort of the books that I’ve been researching from, and there were no chapters. I mean, I’m not saying that I never covered it, but it wasn’t discrete. And the two books that I worked from primarily, there were no discrete chapters on sustaining change. So I thought that in itself is an indication why perhaps People aren’t putting that need to sustain it at the front, rather than when you get to the end. So I’ve been looking at various models of how to sustain change, because my instinct would tell me that the best way to sustain change is to start with the end in mind, and to just do everything that you would do that we’ve talked about, but do it really well. Because if you do it really well, and you do all the right things, then it’ll happen. But actually, I think that’s a bit of a superficial view of it. And I think that what I’ve been unpicking is the models of sustainable change, and what makes sustainable change. Effective, what works best. And I think that there are some pointers that we can use to, to drive it forward. And what I’d quite like to do, as we go through today is maybe give you the hooks, so that when we’re discussing things, I’ve got the letters of sustain, and I’ve got something that comes alongside each sustain each letter, and I’d like to kind of put those hooks around what we discussed. Yeah, so if I can start with
no, I was joking. I was joking.
I was gonna, I was gonna be much kinder than that, because I was just gonna let the conversation flow, but then put the hook on it.
Okay. Very good.
Okay, and the first thing I thought about in terms of the sustain is actually support from the top. So can I throw that open in in saying to you that I think that one of the key ingredients is about support from the top in its broadest sense. So I would say in terms of modeling in terms of communication, in terms of actually deploying resources towards it, in terms of appointing the change team, so that whatever happens within the organization, whatever the top is perceived as being that support need to be there. So that’s my startup startup.
Nadine Powrie [07:08]
Yeah, I would, I would agree, actually, with that journey. Because last week, we looked at McKinsey, McKinsey research, and we we know that 70% of change programs are failing. And so for 3% of that is due to management behavior, not supporting that change. So we know that it’s got to stop. Yeah, it’s got to start at the top, I would say. So I, I would agree with you. Yeah, I Yeah. I mean, why am I hesitating? I’m not sure what to add. Actually, I would just say that once, once the broad once the top team has decided about the change the once the plan has been signed off, then they actually need to model what that plans looks like in reality, and everything that is on the plan needs to be happening. It’s not a question of the top team, changing their mind, for example. So it’s about making sure that everybody knows who does what it’s about making sure that there is commitment, you know, 100% commitment and ownership from that plan to then start the implementation which will lead to sustainability. So clear accountability, yes, it starts at the top. But it’s not only driven by the top, it’s actually driven by everybody’s involved.
Do you think that should be a formalized process? So what you’re saying is that these strategic leaders at the top of making these decisions and deciding what the chain should be? Do you think that it would be more sustainable if you brought in a cross section of the workforce or the stakeholders at the beginning?
Nadine Powrie [09:10]
I actually think that for some dip depends on the nature of the change. And for some, for some changes. Yes. You know, for example, if it is about using artificial intelligence in the organization or more digital technology, I think, yes, by all means, but when it is about restructuration restructure program, for example, or what we call transformation program, I think it’s, you know, sometimes not possible to involve everybody because of procedures.
I don’t mean everybody I mean, I mean, I you know, I’m going back to what I was saying last week about the change team, and about top down, top driven change change rather than sort of corporate change. And from my experience, if people are involved, as early as is practicable, I mean, at some stage, you’re gonna have a top team that’s going to make a decision that we’re going to do something. But maybe what is that something going to look like? And if it is something like a restructuring, then representatives from different aspects can give a much clearer picture about what’s actually happening. And with that commitment that you were talking about 100% commitment. They’re the change agents through their own levels. So it’s not seen necessarily as top down because everybody has a stake in it.
Nadine Powrie [10:40]
John, do you want to say something? Because I’ve already spoke?
I feel I ought to as I’m sitting here. No, not at all. I’m very much enjoying your conversation. I, I was going to take us back. So this is this will pick up the point. But I was just going to take us back. So you mentioned McKinsey, Nadine. And of course, Cotter. The bits that really relate to sustaining are the last two bits, what a surprise in a consolidation and embedding. But then to pick up the conversation, so they’ve got something to say about that, but doesn’t have to be next. But to pick up what you were just saying with regard to involving this. The second link is the second isn’t it, of course, was the is for forming, forming a coalition, you know, a guy I think, isn’t afraid. Yeah. And, you know, I know, I know that we don’t all have to align with Kotter, but I think it’s generally accepted that he’s, what he’s come up with is something which is very useful, and the guiding coalition thing being, you know, almost at the very top, other than creating an urgency, it’s there, it’s there for a reason, and that is about ensuring that people are buying into you know, what’s going on? Understand it and supporting you need to go to your that’s it.
Nadine Powrie [12:09]
Yeah, yeah, you need to lift it up. Jenny autophagy.
Fire? Yeah. Yeah, exactly. And so, yeah, to me that it’s kind of, I noticed the times that I’ve implemented and system identified, implemented and sustained a change most successfully have been when I have remembered to follow the model steps of model, you know, because it’s, it’s ever so easy in the, you know, when the Hurly burly goings on, and all that stuff that you forget, you can just get mixed up and kind of lose sort of sight of where you’re going and forget that actually, when you’re leading something, then you are will fatten the one who’s leading it. So, you know, be sensitive to those sort of stages.
Nadine Powrie [13:00]
Yeah, yeah. I mean, I totally agree that it’s great to involve people, but I just know, as well, that, you know, in some type of changes, it’s almost impossible to apply that model. And, and the type of changes are quite critical to decide how to go about those change teams in, I also feel quite strongly that, you know, we should all in our job spec in our job role be given, to some extent, the role of change agent from the moment when you are leader or manager, you’re gonna have to drive that change anyway. So that should be in your job spec. And as a consequence of that, people ought to be given training for leading things, you know, because it’s not something you can do just just like that, I mean, you need to have very specific skills and demonstrate certain behavior actually to, to be able to, to do that successfully. And it’s not easy for everybody to do that, you know, some people will do it better than others. But training is a is an investment that I think is really critical to be for leaders and managers to be able to drive change because otherwise they just don’t quite know how to do eat and how to respond to people’s behavior attitude, conversations that people are having, you know, I mean, it’s it’s bad enough to have them at work you know, when you’re face to face it’s even worse actually on virtually so I think it depends on how we equip people.
Yes, lead it’s often the name It’s often the next thing, isn’t it? As in always the next thing. So I really liked your idea that it ought to be an embedded part of joining an organization or gaining a leadership position. But in it, well, in my experience, it hardly ever is. It’s always the next thing. And that next thing doesn’t ever come about because something’s got in the way that kind of the job has gotten in the way.
I think that’s probably why I mean, I’ve been involved in leadership programs for schools for 810 years. And every program, whoever I’ve done it for, whether it be an MP Q, M LDP, going back a while, and senior leadership programs headship programs, all of them have a change project. Yeah. And change project. I’ve worked for different programs that have different levels of structure. And I’ve worked for one particular program delivering one particular program, I have masses and masses of structure, but it plan to the nth degree. And I think that young teachers coming in to schools nowadays have have that ability to be taught how to manage a school improvement project from the beginning. But that’s not necessarily transferred across in terms of, of other industry. But I think that that industry is very often the Head of Education. But I think in this case that education has got it. But can I just pick up Back Kotter Jiang, because you’re talking about your your first two steps about creating the climate for change? And do you not think that within those two first steps you’ve got within that? It strikes me that those first two steps are the initial planning steps, but unless you’re planning for completion, and planning for sustaining beyond completion, you that’s when things start to get wishy washy and lost. And I think that if you’ve got a really I mean, I’m the last person to push project planning, and anybody who knows me will understand that pushed against that for so many years. But to have a robust plan, which takes the future steps much more into consideration, I think is the first step to sustainability which should come at those first two steps in Qatar.
Yeah, I think I agree. I agree. But it’s complex, isn’t it? Because because there’s a tension between lead leading a change which you have identified as a leader, and which you have a very clear understanding of and can see how it’s going to play out the tension between that, and actually, they’re also being open to influences from those who you work with and who work for you, and who let’s face it are going to be really important in the implementing, embedding, sustaining. One of the things that I learned, which I found really useful was, was when I came into an organization, and it wasn’t there weren’t clear messages about what what it was that I was wanting to do. Now, it seems a bit strange, but I’m sure that that is more common within within organizations. And what I did was I found help to, to write a leadership brief. And that leadership brief identified as a quite a lot of work feeding into this, but identified some where, where, where, as an organization, we were going, it’s a little bit like a blueprint, which you carry around in the, in your head, and then become very aware that the timing is right, yeah, a number of things feed into you realizing actually, I can capitalize on this, and the timing is right. So rather than coming and going, bam, this is what we’re going to do. This is how we’re going to do it, you know, stand there with a megaphone, this and this and this and this and just being a bit more sensitive to and we’ve talked about seasons of the organization to where and to find where it really needs to go rather than where you think it needs to go. And then building in all those things that you require. And if you don’t if you’ve got that, I suppose in some ways, it’s a framework or a framework of where you where you want to take the organization when you see people and opportunities and Well, that’s it people opportunities largely that fit in with that, as a leader that you can then you can then identify capitalize, resource and begin to then formulate those plans and cement them Really, maybe more cement than formulate, because you’ve already done the the embryonic formulation. As you as you develop your leadership brief, I don’t know, what do you think about that?
Nadine Powrie [20:12]
Are you talking about the vision?
Well, I’m talking, it’s the bit that sort of follows the vision. So you so you’ve spent time realizing what what the vision is, and and not necessarily realizing how you’re going to get there, but realizing that there is change needed in these areas to get there. So yes, I’m talking about the vision, but I’m kind of talking about the bit that then follows the period of of that.
Is it like an audit of the resources and the talents and what the organization has? Yes,
yes, yeah. So it’s a bit like an audit on the fly a continual audit on the fly.
Nadine Powrie [20:58]
So it’s a bit like what we discussed last week, actually, it could be a SWOT analysis or PESTEL analysis, you’re you’re you’re just having some reflective, you’re doing some reflective work on where the organization is and could be evolving. Yeah. And
I think what I think maybe we’ll get to something like the pestle analysis, I think it’s more an internal analysis rather than external. So I’m thinking you’ve done your external stuff, you’ve, you’ve, you’ve kind of realized that this is going to be coming up on the horizon in the next 510 years, I need to maneuver the organization so that it’s in the right shape, to be able to embrace that and to capitalize on those opportunities. So that’s kind of the, you know, the, the outside looking at what, and then you’ve got to go right now, within my organization, how we placed to do this? Where are the key people? Where are the blockages? I used to talk about stones in a river, you know, big, solid stones that were preventing the flow. You know, we need to move that. Yeah, it might be a person might be a process.
Nadine Powrie [22:07]
Yeah, but I don’t seem that I don’t think an organization should be I think we an organization needs to look at the resources and the kind of capabilities that it has. Yeah, but I think that it ought to go beyond that. You know, the change that needs to happen, because you shouldn’t design your change. Program, with the resources and capabilities that you currently have. It might be that actually, you know, bigger change needs to happen. And therefore, it’s it’s quite visionary plan is more visionary than, than the current plan. So it depends on the resources, the capabilities, you know, it also depends on the priorities, because when people are wanting to implement changes, it’s often quite tricky to say, well, which which one are we going to implement? I mean, there’s a nice plan, right, but in which all the other we do that we do every single time? Or do we pilot things, you know, and you and I, we piloted things in Dubai, for example, right? So do you pilot do you scale? A project so that you test it and see, you know, see how it’s going to react and respond to the plan that was originally devised? I think that’s really important to some time, be quite cautious as well about when we implement you know, because the danger at the moment that I am, I am, you know, seeing with some of my clients is the speed, you know, everything is going quite quick at the moment, because people are, there’s a lot of reactive kind of behavior. And it’s, you know, bombarded from everywhere, people are being asked to do many things at the same time. And we don’t always know why. And we don’t always know if actually, those at the same time, are all going to work together like the dynamic of the, you know, sub plans.
I think it’s about managing the weight for a lot of organizations at the moment. It’s about managing the way out of lockdown down and the way out of social distancing and all those things because as you say, Nadine, people have had to make decisions on a six months and they may not necessarily be the right sustainable ones and gone through the process. So it’s not too late now to stop doing what Jan was saying in terms of auditing where they are and where they need to go. And I think that that you were talking about bombarding the change because change you know in the literature It talks about changes, if it’s one thing that happens at one time. And, you know, everybody buys into it. But we all know the complexity of organizations, you’ve got literally hundreds of things. And when I used to work, I used to use the TDA, the teaching, training, training, development agency tools, change management tools. And one of the really effective ones I came across was a prioritization matrix, which basically, you would score all the changes, as what impact is that having within the organization or without your organization? And how easy is it to achieve? So you have you have your grid, and then you plot things on the grid. And basically, if they’re too hard and have little impact, really, you don’t prioritize those. So you end up with the ones that are really worth following through in the top right hand corner, which are easy to do and have greatest impact. And I think that certainly in schools, I used to find that you’ve got so many things that well, is that is that going to actually impact on outcomes for for pupils. And if it didn’t, then forget it. I mean, I have to stand up against authorities in saying that, but I think you’ve got to, you’ve got to take a stand, haven’t you really, it’s a really neat, ever so easy trick to do.
So at that, at that point, I one of the things i i wanted to say was about alignment. And I think it fits really nicely with what you’ve just been saying. But when you want to one of the things about sustaining rather than implementing a change is is is to then ensure that across the organization, there is an alignment because a misalignment is is is disruptive, misalignments are disruptive and undermine what you’re seeking to do whatever sort of level and what that just sort of came to mind there. So you were describing through that matrix, the identification of areas that effectively are quick wins, yes, yeah, things which are going to have an impact that are relatively easy, easy, easier to, to bring about, that the thing that I would then add to that, and all of these things leaders carrying in their head all the time, I mean, it’s really complex. But, but the other need is to ensure that the change is those quick wins, or, in fact, any, any part of the changes that you you identify and pursue is, is aligned ultimately, with the, with the bigger this is, this goes back to the sort of blueprint leadership brief that I was talking about. Because if you if you pick something that is completely misaligned, then you know, might bring you a quick fix, but you’re gonna have to, you’re gonna have to deconstruct it, or close it down in order to really get to where you want to. So part of that identification of the priorities is to ensure that they are aligned. I’m I think alignment is really important with regard to change.
Nadine Powrie [28:06]
Yeah, yeah. And the question is, how do you how do you do that?
How do you do that?
Nadine Powrie [28:12]
alignment in an organization where you’ve got, you know, 20,000 people working there? I mean, just an extent, it’s, one could argue it’s a little bit more easy. When you do it, you know, we used to be head teachers, right? It’s a little bit more easy when you do it with in a smaller size organization
Nadine Powrie [28:32]
organizations, so number of employees, and the organizational chart is probably going to play a huge role in the strategy of how do you align people? And, you know, one could argue that, well, communication is key. Yeah, okay. So the number one, you know, but for me, it’s not only about the comms team, it’s about everybody should be talking the same language. So how do you get everybody to talk the same language? Well, first, they have to accept it, isn’t it? I mean, to align people, you have to win them over, they have to see what’s in it for me. So they have to accept that. So how do you do that? Right? Because you’re gonna have to face a lot of resistance, depending on the change you want to make. Yes, yes. And communication takes time, you know, what are the channels of communication that you’re going to be using? Because, I mean, you know, at the moment, people have 200 300 emails a day. If you don’t talk and dominate? Yes, it’s. So I’m very interested in the alignment because I absolutely agree that this is key, but it’s the how well, it’s critical, particularly when you’ve got organizations that have you know, headquarter in London and then you know, In America, they’ve got workers there. They’ve got workers in Asia, you know, timezone and all of that kind of thing? Language different languages, you know?
Yes, I think that I think there’s a greater challenge about that since the world’s gone virtual. Because whatever organization you’ve worked in, there’s always been informal networks. And I think informal networks are a very powerful mover for change. Because it’s, it’s, it’s how it’s the sort of soft skill side of an organization, isn’t it when there’s these watercooler conversations, or whatever they’re called. And I think that, with us all being virtual, were much more to the point, you know, you’ve got a Zoom meeting at four o’clock. And that Zoom meeting will finish at five, and there’s not the same amount of time for that informal communication. So I think that communication now is much, much harder, I think you’ve got to be much smarter with it. And I think you’ve got going back to John’s point, it’s all got to be aligned with the vision. And I think that if the vision is clear enough, and bought into by the organization that makes it much, much easier for it all to be aligned. So your vision, or your vision statement, or your mission statement, or whatever you want to call it has to be really clear, and one that appeals across the organization. There’s no point having some highfalutin, we want to do X by y and do it this way. And that way, it’s gonna be really a really snappy thing. And I think that’s a strong argument for vision setting, with again, I will talk about a team within the organization because I’m a great believer in representative teams driving change and improvement.
Nadine Powrie [31:52]
But I agree with you, Jenny about the vision. But right now, I think people are tested on communication. All organizations have had to review a vision of what their plans are for the next two to five years. And some have navigated that very well, actually, because they are very agile. And you and you know, we have measured agility in one of the work that we did in the Middle East. So we know that that can happen. But actually, it’s it’s more about how people are communicating at the moment. It’s about the channel of communication. And it’s about the messages, you know, I mean, how many message Can you can you send to people every day, when people have back to back, you know, those leaders and managers they have back to back meetings. Sometimes actually, meetings are over running. It’s not because it’s online, that meetings are finishing on time, necessarily, they are over running, which is making it quite difficult for people because people are having to switch very quickly, you know, before you walked in the corridor, or you go to your meeting. So that’s kind of your bridge, right, you just just refresh a few seconds, but now. So people are moving from one year to room to another. And meetings are running late, because there’s lots of things to discuss. And people don’t have time to switch off at all. So they the amount of information that they have to process is huge. So when change, you know, when it comes come into that and no matter from whom it’s coming, it’s quite actually quite a challenge to to process that information.
I think I think there’s some important subtleties here. And I think the thing was subtleties is that they’re often underestimated big, big because they’re subtle, and not sledgehammer. I’m talking about communication here. And one of the one of the subtleties that I think is about is about the use of the careful use of language. I don’t mean Arabic, English, French German that sort of like the the careful use of words and terms. Now, educationalist will and will understand VA K vac, visual auditory or kinesthetic in terms of way of learning, you know when we watch a lesson, you know, we quite often look to identify those components with a lesson which are which are understood to be ways that people who are learning will will be able to interact better so people often feel that they’re better visual learners. Some people feel better Auditory and Kinesthetic means they need to be doing something or it needs to tap into some other And I think that there’s a subtlety of use of language. So if we’re trying to influence people with regard to change, you know, be saying things like. So for example, just off the top my head, did you see what you did? Then just Did you see how that really helped? There’s a visual link? Or you could say, Have you heard what people are saying about that change, you’re making that that’s tapping into an auditory thing? And and for subtlety with regard to kinesthetic, you could talk about how how’re you how people feel, you could say something like you can you imagine? How so and so is feeling about that change that you’re proposing. And that, that subtle use of those words, connected with seeing hearing, and doing? I think what that does is, is enabled people to feel that it it means something to them, what you’re saying means something to them, and therefore they are there, you know, immediately, well, maybe not immediately, but are more likely to align. And listen, except, and let’s face it comes down to learning rarely changes you make you want people to learn. And so if in in communicating, we can build in some phrases using your carefully chosen words that appeal to those three vac styles, then, what do you think of that?
I think there’s a bit more to it than that, because it’s also about the actual method that you’re using. So I agree with what you’re saying about using the language. But you know, there are numbers of ways of communications going out, it could be something for somebody to pick up and read, it could be some kind of mini podcast, or there needs to be different types of channels of communication within an organization. Because I, for instance, would relate to somebody talking to me face to face, or if somebody’s broken a document down into nice bite sized chunks. But if somebody sends me, you know, as sort of PhD, thesis type thing, I won’t, I won’t get the message.
Nadine Powrie [37:17]
Yeah. Good Practice recently, where a manager is actually doing a live video that the team can can watch. And it’s on the same day, every week, same time. And in his talk, he highlight the positive of last week. And he mentioned what’s going to happen this week, and always refers and always put back in the context of the plan to change the forever changing plan, actually, and it’s very nicely done. He’s very calm when he speaks, you know. And it’s hard to have training for that, because it’s not being used to speaking in front of a little green dots, as we are talking now. But that’s an example of, of good practice to keep change going and to keep going as well, you know, by celebrating what’s going very well, actually, completely. Jeremy has said something Jan, you’re picking up on
me, I do apologize, Jeremy?
Nadine Powrie [38:28]
Jeremy, Jeremy is in Dubai.
Jeremy thing, Jeremy is saying if HR isn’t right, you can’t retain the folks that you want to? Because you will you’re at such a consistent disadvantage from a hiring perspective. It’s hard to build a model built on ownership. Yeah, I absolutely agree with retaining, and how that’s difficult. I get I mean, I’ve only just read this for the first time. And I think what you’re saying, Jeremy is, is that if your HR function is is not aligned with your organization, then you can’t retain the people that you need to to see that, to see the change through which then puts you at a disadvantage. From a from a hiring perspective, so it’s difficult to then build on, on on the on the change when you don’t in your organization, because people people are leaving.
I’m not sure I agree with that hits me disagreeing again. I think that it depends how how you go about it. So if you’re hiring people, then you want to, I know this is this is this is sort of blue sky thinking you want to hire people who have the same core values and vision that you do within the organization. And if you’re successful in doing that, then part of that part of their induction is about bringing them on board. What’s happening in terms of change. So this is I’m saying it’s in an ideal world, you may have, you know, the applicants who don’t tick those boxes. And I totally get that in terms of ownership. But I think that part of sustaining change is to sustain people leaving and people coming on board. So that’s got to be in that that’s going back to those first two steps of Kata whereby you’ve got to plan within your change plan that people are going to go and people and new people are going to come and there’s got to be a process there that ensures that they that they have got ownership. And I think that what Jeremy saying is, is right, that’s why that’s why that’s, that’s why some of these change, change projects fail is because they don’t have the ownership because people are falling off. And people are coming in and they’re not inducted or brought into the change process. So I think that that’s a about
Nadine Powrie [40:56]
what users are saying is sometimes HR, it depends where HR fits within your organization, saying, So Jeremy, if you’re still listening to us, can you can you tell us whether we’re right or wrong? Because if if HR is at the core of the organization, then actually they will be able to talk to the right people. And the right decision to retain or to, you know, advertise or some posts will be will be the right decisions. But sometimes HR doesn’t sit doesn’t have a seat at the table. Right. And I think it’s more difficult actually, when they don’t have a seat at the table, it’s more difficult for them to understand how they can retain people and why, you know, they should retain people, or why they should go about recruiting certain types of individuals. Yeah, so I am of I mean, I feel very strongly that HR should have a place at the table. HR should be part of the management board. Because the change team, yeah, but even the management board, because actually, they’ll understand even better, why recruitment needs to be happening in certain ways, you know, selection needs to be happening in another way, I think, really, that that’s key for them to be, you know, doing the best possible job. If we don’t connect with HR, then I think that the misalignment will cost a lot to an organization, I think we’re back to the the alignment point that you will make,
I think we’re back to the alignment, I think was about the preparation. If I’ve read what Jeremy saying correctly, I completely agree. If you’ve got if you’re if there’s a key function within or within your organization that isn’t operating as you want as you need it to, then it might and if it’s of such significance, like for example, the HR function, then it might not be the moment to make a substantial change until you’ve applied some sort of fix to the to that particular problem. I think that’s probably what Jeremy is saying. And I completely agree with that. Of course, the problem is that in the time that we’re finding ourselves here, companies and organizations, in spite of themselves now is that they’ve had something imposed, which is thrown any sort of planning, if you like, I guess some people did plan for a pandemic, but I don’t know, necessarily that was all that widespread. The planning of the pandemic. You know, so I come at what I’m saying now, I think that maybe the importance of of being able to plan things as opposed to reacting to
it goes back, it goes back to that to planning for that for the end in mind, doesn’t it?
It does, I just couldn’t manage this for you guys, because I just wanted to say something. So the subtleties remember, the VA K thing came out of a subtlety. And I just wanted not not to lose that because I completely understand that finding different ways to communicate, you know, whether I think so I mentioned the podcast. Nadine, you were talking about a video thing done weekly or daily or wherever it was done. That’s absolutely fine. And And if those are aligned to the way people think and learn and, and sort of accept things, then then that’s great. There is still a subtlety of the words that are being used. You know that how did you say did you hear how does that make you feel, which need to be used within those different approaches? Yeah, that that has that if you like, accelerates their effect. Does that suit you in some way?
Nadine Powrie [44:57]
I absolutely agree. I Just something here when I was a head teacher, we decided with the staff to highlight keywords that we will we would all be using. So we had to attend keywords, right. And we all agreed what those keywords would, would be. And we started to do that with the students with the parents. And then what we realized is that the students were then using those words, and then the parents were those were using those words. So actually, you know, the power of the verbal language is words, is, is critical. So I really liked your idea, I’ve written it down on our take home, I would hope. So. I have another thing
about language that I’d like to talk about. And that’s being language in the future rather than in the past. So that when you’re talking about the way, the way we do things, it’s not about the way we did things. It’s about the way we will be doing things or the way we’re doing things now. And we’ll be doing so in the future. So it’s a futures language, not a past language. Just little things like that, like like building that within the Dean’s idea. And within yours, John about the VAX stuff, if all these little tricks and language being such a powerful, you know, the communication being so important the language that you’re using, if you get it right, and you’re using all these little tricks, and people start to think differently, and there’s a bit of a paradigm shift, because they start to see things differently. And it’s going back to what we were talking about weeks ago, about wellbeing, and about flipping the negatives to the positives, and how important it was to have that positive tag on all your messages. So I think all three of those things all fit together about the language of communication. There is
Nadine Powrie [46:54]
one thing we’ve not talked about is we’re talking about implementing change, but we’ve not talked about how do we know that actually change is effective and is working, and it’s having the impact that we wanted to have? So I think the idea of tracking change, like how do you measure the change? I mean, I find that fascinating, right? How do you make that change? How do you know that it’s actually working and making a difference in the right direction for an organization? So how do you how do you track it? I know that in, in some organizations, there are conversations more frequent conversation than you know, deal performance management, like once a year you meet up and now it’s kind of ongoing, right ongoing conversation. So that people can track that change constantly. And it’s not about being obsessed with it is just you know, conversations that are that are enabling people to perhaps respond quicker, support people better. And then tweak, you know, do it at the moment, not like six months after,
but there needs to be that review process built in all the way through, doesn’t it because it’s not about evaluating everything, once it’s all happened, it’s, it’s this, it’s this review, evaluate spiral that needs to be the stick of rock running through it. Because each change has many changes within it and each mini change, you need to be able to have some process whereby you’re saying does that work? Could we make it better? So I think it’s it’s, it’s, it’s a terrible thing to evaluate at the end if you’ve done no review and it needs to be caught it doesn’t really I don’t think he really covers that much. Which I think is perhaps a missing step there or a missing carpet going up the steps about constant review because he says at the end you know, don’t let up and make it stick but it’s not you know, the Make It Stick is what we’re talking about now really isn’t it is about how do you a know that it’s worked and be make sure but that becomes embedded in the organization. It’s easy, it’s much easier to change than it is to sustain it
I think I think there’s a neat little trick here that works really well which is about you know you know the idea that you you choose some milestone you build in some milestones along along your along your change journey. And and then you can celebrate when you’ve when you’ve got there Yeah. Now so that so that’s a that’s a double thing, because with careful choice, your your milestone is also your monitoring and evaluating. Point don’t mean point I didn’t mean point in time, but I’m really mean point in terms of focus. Yeah. So, you know, there are a number of stories aren’t there are people who lost sight of where they’re going and forgot? couldn’t actually tell when they got there? Because, I mean, do you, for example, know the story of the guy who built the Taj Mahal? Did you know about the Taj Mahal? Because it’s the Taj Mahal, if I, the Taj Mahal was, was designed as a as a as a, as, as a, as a more as a more mausoleum. A monument to particular guy’s wife. And it got to such a point that they’ve the people who are building it found this box in the middle of this thing that they were building this remarkable building, I thought, What’s this doing it, chopped it away. And it was actually, if I ever understood this was was this guy’s wife in her in her tomb, and completely lost sight of what the whole point of the was now, a bit of a dramatic story. And that’s true. Now, having told me, I’ve, but I think I think it is, you know, Mike, but it really illustrates, doesn’t it if we if we haven’t, if we’re not clear about what it is we’re going and how it fits into, you know, the steps along the way, then we can end up making a massive thing, and then we just don’t know when we got there.
Nadine Powrie [51:27]
Yeah, yeah. So So I have written down the review milestones, I think this is really good, because we’re back to our time. And I’ve written down the tracking, probably the KPIs, you know, we have about nine minutes left, and we’ve got four. So feel, and we’ve got four left. So if I just summarize, in terms of take home message for today, we’ve got support from the top, we’ve got prior prioritization, so the matrix alignment within the organization, and the language use, and that includes the language of the future, review with the milestone, tracking with the KPIs, anything else to help
training, I think investment in training. And this is part of the the baseline, I was talking to somebody today, who was saying that he didn’t feel that he had achieved enough was 26. And he didn’t feel that he received enough and he felt he should be moving on. And I just explained to him that, you know, it’s really important to build this really solid baseline. And I said, Think of it like a pyramid. You know, if you don’t build your solid baseline, you’re gonna wobble. I said, if you turn it around the other way, and you get up there too quick and younger, solid baseline, you use your terminal pool. And I think that for for, for change to be effective, your solid baseline is, is built on the skills, the expertise of the staff who you train, to incorporate change within, in their everyday role. So I think that that build a solid baseline through training and development would be,
Nadine Powrie [53:17]
yeah, interesting journey, because at the moment, everybody’s doing training online, I mean, the face to face is just not really existent. So many leaders and managers are just doing more online, work. And they’ve already got, I mean, I’m not defending that, right. But I was talking to a client today, and she said, I’m already in meetings all day, I then have to train, which is another thing to do on screen, there is also the fatigue at time, which I think is it’s why we must not lose sight of training online, but was actually somebody that is who’s speaking with you, not just press play on record. So the quality of the training, at the moment, the virtual training, that quality of training needs to be even better than before. Yeah, very much. So.
I’ve got a couple of I’ve got a couple of things which which you might consider adding in which is all which is about building sustainability or moving towards a sustainable situation, which are, which are the need to consider both energy and resources. And I don’t necessarily mean you know, oil, coal, electricity by energy. I mean, I mean, people, people’s energy, and resilience and resilience and ability, you know, to not just see it through but then to operate it. If you if you build a change which is dependent, and it’s just impossible from an from a from an energy perspective to test to sustain. You might as well not bother and of course if it’s if it Using other resources, which are just not sustainable then so some assessment of the impact, I think of in terms of energy and resources is, is probably a wise thing to do. But it is a wise thing to think. Okay,
Jenny did I have I think you know what, yeah, when I probably lost it now. Just Just tell me what you’ve just said.
I’ve said something about us assessing energy and resources before you before you embark or certainly as you embark on so once. Okay. Point of View at the end.
Nadine Powrie [55:49]
Yeah. So So energy, by energy, you mean the fatigue, people, fatigue, people morale, the morale
all of that? tangible and intangible sides of energy? Yeah. Yeah.
What I was going to say, and I’ve remembered now was to build in I’m going on about these plans, anybody think that’s project manager, but it’s about building those ideas in the beginning, so that you know that it’s going to take a toll on people’s resources, you know, it’s going to affect their well being or whatever I can remember, when I first got my head at the amount of change we had to do was just mind blowing. And yet, I had to bring everybody along with me. And it was simply beyond some people to be able to grasp that. So I think that to get that built in from the very beginning. So those first two steps creating a climate for change, has got to have in it, that recognition of negating the, the negative impact they get can indicate a negative impact. Yeah, I think you can have an enabling the impact to have a less negative,
you can promote a product.
Nadine Powrie [57:04]
So that’s okay. So I’ve obviously got my point across. I think we
can be seduced by that. I think there’s an energy in making change. I know it can be a destructive thing. But there can be a positive energy and making change. And I can I think that can be seductive. And I’m dangerous, because the check the process of change isn’t what you’re going to live with. Once Once you’ve got once the change is implemented, and to sustain it, there’s a there’s a different type of energy involved. That’s flawed. yagna. No, it hasn’t
Nadine Powrie [57:44]
bitten a customer through the night. It’s really interesting. Yeah. The other thing,
I’d like to pick up what you’ve just said about the energy and about people, some people, you know, some people thrive on change. I love change. Yeah, it’s under my control, I find it really quite exciting. My daughter, who is on the autistic spectrum can’t cope with change. And there are many, many neurotypical people who really struggle with change. And I think that being aware of the sort of the range of people that you have within your organization, and it’s how important it is to realize that some people simply cognitively with change. Yes. And
Nadine Powrie [58:35]
it goes back to what we were saying last week. No, the people who are who works in your organization?
Yes, no, absolutely. Absolutely. I’ll be very skilled in negotiating around it and getting so getting you the outcome. At the end of
- Well, you still know them. It’s an inescapable reality.
Absolutely. Yeah. But I think I think it’s about empathy as well, isn’t it? Because it’s very difficult. If you’re excited by change, and you think this is great, and you’re all enthusiastic, and then you get somebody who’s who’s a real blocker, you’re one of your boulders in the stream, and you get somebody like that, it can’t unless you have empathy, or you can put yourself in their shoes, or they are articulate enough to explain to you how they feel, then that can be a real Flashpoint. I think, in a really big organization, there may not be the same flexibility to know people that well, and to be able to plan for that.
Nadine Powrie [59:36]
Yeah, but it ultimately there are many teams like talent and development and HR and you know, managers and leaders, it’s their responsibility to actually make sure that they know that people have the duty of care actually, you know, okay, okay. Well, what we will do at always I will ensure that I’ve made my notes I can show everybody and I will turn those into my 10 Blue. And I will publish them so that we can share with the world. Great discussion was about genuine. Thank you very much. And thank
you, John. Thank you.
Good fun. Thank you. Nice to see you. Why