Luc's Thoughts On Organizational Change - Latest Comments

Re: Teaching versus Learning

Dan Steer — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 04:52:49 -0000

Isabel Raemdonck from UCL talking about why much training doesn't actually lead to change:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

... thought of this when reading point 1

Re: What about Chris Argyris?

Colvmishra — Sat, 07 Jan 2012 08:35:59 -0000

I appreciate difficulties mentioned by Jacob and Luc. Yet the stakes may be so high that a consultant cannot afford to give up attempts to bring about the desired change!

Re: Skate where the Organizational Change Puck will be

Rowan Hetherington — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 05:20:56 -0000

Hi Luc, exciting times indeed! The post I mentioned in my comment is: http://rowan.typepad.com/watts...

V keen to hear your thoughts / feedback on this approach.

I agree your question "how can we make organizations better equiped for an environment that is constantly in flux" must be at the heart of change. Some thoughts on this, in the context of progress, collaboration and co-creation are in my latest post (titled 'Agile Progress'). Would love any comments / feedback on this too.

I'm relatively new to change, so I don't know what I don't know yet!

Rowan

Re: Skate where the Organizational Change Puck will be

Luc Galoppin — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 01:59:26 -0000

Hi Rowan,

Thanks for your comments. Building further on your last remark regarding the internal transformation, I think this is where the heart of our profession must be: how can we make organizations better equiped for an environment that is constantly in flux.

It's never the same river twice - but then again, hasen't it always been that way? These are exciting times for organizational change practitioners!

Luc

PS: please share the link to your article that you mentioned above.

Re: Skate where the Organizational Change Puck will be

Rowan Hetherington — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 22:01:35 -0000

Luc, excellent post, thanks for writing it! My background is digital (social, mobile, web) as part of integrated marketing & communications. I'm relatively new to change management (studying post grad). I'm lucky enough to be working at the intersection of these fields, as part of the Digital Strategy & Transformation team within IBM Corporate. I find this area fascinating - and your analysis of how digital/social is transforming organizations incl. your 'new puck of Organisational Change' rings very true to me.

I grouped your 'new puck' sections into two sets of two below and added my perspectives / observations:

COMMUNICATION: listen and trust the process (‘Story & Community’)
PERFORMANCE: balance push and pull (‘Trust & Co-creation’)

Internally and externally, I see a decrease in one-way 'crafted' communications designed to be 'pushed' to broad
channels/audiences - and increasing focus on listening and engaging in two way, (online and offline) social dialogue with niche networks/constituencies (or Tribes, to use Seth Godin's term). I recently wrote a blog post on this titled 'Building Constituency', but I think the key points here are:
a. being able to define key constituencies, listen to and deeply understand the shared interests, ambitions, beliefs of each, as well as understanding their digital/social media usage habits, who the influencers are etc then
b. engaging with each constituency - contributing highly relevant content or experiences via the right tools/tactics/media, at the right time, in a way that provides high value to them, on their terms - while also linking back to the uniform consistencies across all (for external the consistencies might include corporate strategy, products/ services/ offerings and high level targets. For internal change management, the consistencies might include the change vision and high level intended outcomes).

The process of co-creation with constituencies is likely to go a long way to building trust.
Value can also be added by curating information (providing context/sensemaking).

LEARNING: learning is in the network (‘Context & Connection’)
ORGANIZATION: become a platform for change (‘Social Architecture & Roles’)

I like the way you expressed 'Organization: become a platform for change' - a powerful idea. I see roles and role definitions tying in with new skills for learning. New roles will emerge (for example we created cross functional Digital Leader role in each country), but existing roles will need to update skills (skills related to communication, performance - and leadership, including driving increased integration between silos). In terms of learning networks, I see a lot of self organising networks springing up which facilitate open, peer to peer learning and collaboration. I created a global Digital Community of Practice which acts as a platform for cross-functional, self-identified members to present their best practices, learnings and accelerate learning through participation. To relate back to your point on communication and community - the most active of these communications networks are those formed based on a shared community passion/interest (as opposed to networks created by leaders with hierachical authority, to serve the needs of their silo or function managment system). Web 2.0 has made many forms of power more ubiquitous, especially information power.

Re. relationships, Luc, I generally agree that we'll see movement away from hierachical power, but I also agree with Dave Roitman's comment below that there will still be a time and a place for most leadership styles. I'd argue the future favors leaders with genuine expertise, credability, integrity, imagination and the ability to build constituency - to consult and collaborate effectively - as well as the flexibility and mastery to use the right leadership styles and skills at the appropriate time.

I see one other significant change taking place as a result of the external technology and communications revolution we're experiencing - and the internal transformation organizations must go
through to keep pace: that is a shift towards continous measurement and optimisation cycles. This relates to 'failing fast', A/B testing, agile methods etc. Digital metrics allow us to measure and test virtually in real time. For example, if we have sufficient web page traffic, it is possible to test multiple messages in a day to determine which is most effective. The longer we allow between testing cycles, the less optimised our efforts will be. To leverage this opportunity, a lot of business processes must change.

Very keen to hear others thoughts / observations - and Luc, I look forward to continuing to learn from your posts!

Re: Skate where the Organizational Change Puck will be

Faith Fuqua-Purvis — Thu, 03 Nov 2011 16:52:11 -0000

Luc - Rather than thinking of you as flying into unknown territory, I think of you as the brave test Pilot, out there seeing how the equipment operates, testing it out, helping make improvements and enhancements. Cheers

Re: Skate where the Organizational Change Puck will be

Luc Galoppin — Thu, 03 Nov 2011 16:39:34 -0000

Thanks Faith - please keep in mind that the number one reason why I am writing these articles is out of a need to make sense of it all. So in a sense these articles are observations of a satellite flying into unknown territory.
Looking forward to your own blogs.
Luc

Re: Skate where the Organizational Change Puck will be

Faith Fuqua-Purvis — Thu, 03 Nov 2011 16:30:42 -0000

Hi Dave - Read your response after writing my own. I think that we are leaning towards the same thoughts - I described it as having both pucks in play at once.

I'm not convinced it will ever truly move to just the puck on the right. Most organizations will always have some level of the left in play. I think you are spot on regarding helping clients deal with the "current" puck and it still being there.

To me, at this point it is less of an either or and more of an and. I think that the heart of the issue that Luc is getting at is that many don't recognize that a second Puck has hit the ice! They are only focusing on the first one.

Re: Skate where the Organizational Change Puck will be

Faith Fuqua-Purvis — Thu, 03 Nov 2011 16:24:14 -0000

Hi Luc - Interesting article. Love the pictures you drew. Reinforces your message about the different types of literacy - text, image, speech, and screen literacy. I am drawing upon multiple of them as I process (aka read) your article. It truly is more than simply reading. I interpret your diagrams, apply a reference and filter to the article, juggle other activities (and articles) which influence how I percieve what you are posted. I also interpret based on my understanding of your metaphors - both hockey and the Trojan horse.

For me, it was less about the change in the pucks and more about that you need to deal with BOTH. Unlike in hockey, both of these pucks are often in play at the same time, in the same organizations. Various individuals in the organization are focusing on and "playing with" the different pucks. Some highly skilled individuals might be playing with both simultaneously. I think skilled change practitioners need to know how to play with both - how they move across the ice differently.

Whether social media is the new Trojan horse or not...I think time will only show that. Regardless, I fully agree that companies need to be prepared to bring down the walls between customer care, marketing and communications. To do so requires changes in both trust and the organizational culture.

As with all good articles (or rather my view of good articles) you've given me something to think about. Thanks. Suspect my own follow-on blog will appear at some point. :-)

Re: Gamers Will Save Our Economy (Part 7)

Pj Milano — Mon, 17 Oct 2011 07:19:48 -0000

An excellent discussion thread as they say its a very fine line between madness and genius in the same way its a fine line between achievers and killers to stay on the right track you have to be in the achievers quadrant facing the world sometimes dipping down into the explorer quadrant then back again once knowlege has been refreshed I think that should be a continous process as economic and pollitical issues fluctuate its like a long distance swimmer he has the final destination in mind but to get there he has to keep dipping his head in water and then comingup to breath!!

Re: What about Chris Argyris?

Luc Galoppin — Sun, 16 Oct 2011 04:34:57 -0000

Hi Jacob,

That's true. There are always limits to double-loop learning for an organization, i.e.: the boundaries of an organization. In the end it al comes down to how narrow or how broad you an organization defines its boundaries (for example: are contractors or interim employees part of your organization or not? Do you consider suppliers and vendors as part of your organization or not?).

This perception will eventually determine the added value you can get out of learning. If you define your organization as a narrow environment, learning will very likely only result in compliance (single-loop). On the other hand, if you define your boundaries broader and include third parties for example, learning may also result in co-creation (in other words: double-loop)

Thanks for bringing this up.

Luc

Re: What about Chris Argyris?

JAcob Andrews — Sun, 16 Oct 2011 03:50:34 -0000

When we talk about Argyris we must not forget Schon as well.

In a single-loop learning situation, individuals needs to adjust their behaviour in relation to fixed goals, norms and assumptions. This organization will not be very much in innovation and maintain its status quo. In single loop, the learning opportunities are less and employees are work under limited freedom for innovation.

Double looping learning will help change everything from top to bottom. This will even challenge the existing norms and approaches. However the bureaucratic structure prevents double loop learning. It also recognises that these ideas remain difficult to put into practice.

Re: The Clash of Authority and Influence

Luc Galoppin — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 05:34:05 -0000

Wow Peter - could you elaborate on this?

Re: The Clash of Authority and Influence

Peter Maeseele — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 05:27:44 -0000

Straf dat dat nu pas onderzocht is. Wij noemen dat al eeuwen het WC-madammensyndroom.

Re: Don’t Fence Me In (Book Review)

Gail Severini — Mon, 03 Oct 2011 19:01:58 -0000

Fantastic! I have two teenagers and I shudder to think how they are "being educated"! We spend a lot of time teaching them how to think but it is like teaching them to swim upstream.

Then I go to work where employees operate like robots at their desks then become animated at lunch!

This is good work. Bravo. Gail

Re: Unleash the Red Monkey (A Twitter Tale)

Nova Franklin — Sat, 01 Oct 2011 22:33:22 -0000

Ok. So in less than 140 characters please tell me how to launch a brainstorm amongst the community of Organisational Change Practitioners via twitter? Nova

Re: Skate where the Organizational Change Puck will be

Luc Galoppin — Tue, 13 Sep 2011 10:01:51 -0000

Hi Dave,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
I am in alignment with the fact that customers will need to play two games at tha samee time / defense and offense.
This is why - in a previous post - I have referred to that new puck as an UPGRADE and NOT a replacement.
Here is the link to that post: http://www.reply-mc.com/2011/0...

Best regards,
Luc.

Re: Skate where the Organizational Change Puck will be

Dave Roitman — Tue, 13 Sep 2011 08:54:55 -0000

Luc – you present a provocative and inspiring vision in your post on “skating where the puck will be.” Yet I’m seeing my clients still making the journey to the new reality you describe. Maybe the Googles of the world are already largely there, but many companies and the people “in” them aren’t yet. One example: Your statement that “the truth is that relationships are no longer hierarchical, they have become tribal.” This thought: relationships have always been tribal, and perhaps into the foreseeable future we will continue strong vestiges of the hierarchies we’ve had since somewhat before the Roman legions. The art is to know when and how which set of rules is appropriate for which interactions. Just last Friday I witnessed a client’s decision-making team relying on hierarchy power when it should have been relying on knowledge power. Yet hierarchy power still has its place. You also juxtapose trust and co-creation with control and compliance. Yet control and compliance also still has its place, e.g. when dealing with stringent regulations. While maintaining compliance capability, we can still , at the same time we increase our use of trust and co-creation to, in your words, “balance push and pull” in performance. So: in addition to skating to where the puck will be, we need to help our clients play two games at once shifting nimbly from one to the other. Maybe the hockey metaphor is the rapid shifts between defense and offense. In sum our change management work in 2012 will continue to increase emphasis on “social architecture and roles;” yet we’ll continue to help clients deal with the “current” puck e.g. hierarchy & position, and control & compliance – certainly no longer as dominant as they were, yet still on the ice. But this is just adding some color commentary to your accurate description of the game.

Re: How to Suffer as a Consultant

Luc Galoppin — Mon, 12 Sep 2011 14:36:37 -0000

Thanks Pim!

Re: How to Suffer as a Consultant

Pim — Thu, 08 Sep 2011 04:33:59 -0000

luc, thank you for posting this blognews. As a start-up consultant this is very interesting info. I'll keep it in mind for the rest of my career and share it with all people I meet and want to start a consulting business themself.

thanks
Pim

Re: How to Suffer as a Consultant

Luc Galoppin — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 17:11:25 -0000

Thanks - Peter Block is one of my favorites, along with Edgar Schein. Both of them make a great analysis of role ambiguity and the helping relationship.
Luc.

Re: How to Suffer as a Consultant

Carmen Liimatta — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 11:19:17 -0000

I recommend, Peter Block's, "Flawless Consulting" a classic in the consulting industry. It talks about these very issues. Block says it is not the consultant's job to do the work for the client but to present the information impartially. The information may cause the client some anxiety which is exactly the point. The consultant should not try to alleviate the client's anxiety because the client needs to expereience and own that anxiety: as well as the decision and the solution.

Re: How to Suffer as a Consultant

Luc Galoppin — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 15:41:44 -0000

Wow, thanks for sharing!
Luc.

Re: How to Suffer as a Consultant

Wmaltman — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 15:30:31 -0000

I learnt this lesson the hard way on my second day in consulting 13 years ago. I returned frustrated from a meeting with the firm's largest client when I had behaved as an actor would. The owner of the firm challenged me about it and illustrated the difference between the two positions. She made it clear to me that unless I recognised this, accepted it and learnt to work with it, then I had no future in consulting. I got the message quickly and never looked back. Good advice.

Re: Learning Heaps from Hypes

Luc Galoppin — Mon, 29 Aug 2011 03:48:51 -0000

Thanks Sander.
With regards to the 'how people migrate between platforms' => IMO Facebook's and Twitter's leadership is already visible in the way one can login ('login with Twitter / Facebook)
Also: each platform that is successful is responding to a specific market need.