I have been avidly following a discussion on an Organisational Change dicussison forum (it is at http://tinyurl.com/35pn2pw although it is a membership only group so you will need to ask to be able to read the very interesting thread)

One post, in particular, took my eye and I reproduce it here with the permission of the author, Dean Anderson (read his profile at http://www.linkedin.com/in/deanandersonbeingfirst )

I offer what is a primary perspective in the world of conscious change leadership that might inform what is happening here. From my worldview, this persepctive is a key ingredient of succeeding in our profession. First, a couple key universal truths, then application to this discussion.

1. Mindset is causative: my worldview, beliefs, and values determine how I perceive and interpret circumstances, behave, and act in the world. Consequently, my mindset generates the results I achieve, or don’t, in any situation.
2. Wherever I go, I show up. I am in every moment of my life. No exceptions. It’s always me.
3. Every moment is then a mirror reflecting back to me my self, in particular, how I am showing up in that moment, revealing an aspect of my multi-dimensional self.
4. If I am consciously aware and able to step out of my ego and into my higher self, or being, then I can reflect on the moment and see my self in action. I can learn about myself, becoming more self aware. This empowers me to respond differently, see other interpretations of the situation, and make positive change in myself if I choose.

In situations that generate more “heat” – emotional responses that carry a fair bit of judgment, reactivity, and positionality – it can be both more difficult and easier to operate consciously and see myself. If I get caught in my reactivity, then I project onto the situation as “the problem that needs fixing.” But if I can remain objective and not get subjectively activated and caught in my triggered emotions, then I have a better chance of “witnessing” my self, learning, and course correcting. In essence, I see the situation as a problem that “I am creating.”

The ego in each of us has various core needs that, when triggered, create “heat.” This is true for everyone.

If your issue is inclusion and connection, then you may have reacted to the splits occurring in the discussion with anxiety and wanted to patch things back together. If your triggered issue is power, then you might have thought there was a power play occurring and you wanted to fight against it (exercise your own power). If control is your issue, then you might not have liked what you felt was an act of unwarranted control over you or the group. Or perhaps your control issue manifested in the other polarity: you actually liked the idea of more control being placed on the group. If it is competence, then perhaps you were glad there was someone demonstrating some competence, or maybe you perceived lack of competence and that pissed you off, or made you think, “what a jerk.” If your issue is justice and fairness, then you might have felt that an injustice was being made and you wanted to right it, or rather, that finally someone stepped in with a method to ensure things in the group were going to be fair and just.

None of these ways of perceiving and reacting are better or worse than the others, and we all have a bit of them all, with a couple being more dominant for each of us. And because we all have them to some degree, my point is not to argue or take a position about whose reaction or position is right and wrong, but rather, to simply look into the mirror of the discussion and inquire, “How did I show up? What can I see and learn about myself, human dynamics, change.

And that, my friends, just might generate a chuckle, and certainly, greater wisdom, and that is a good thing. It will definitely add a bit of self awareness and broaden your foundation for being a conscious change leader, which in the end, will make you a more successful change agent.

Thank you Dean – brilliant!

I have been working today with a very challenging change that very significantly affects one key player in the organisation. After a very difficult session I was reflecting on the importance of de-personalising change, Yes, it does affect individuals, and sometimes it may even lead to questions about the capabilities of the individual in the new scenario, but it is really important to recognise that what is driving change is external and that any capability shortfalls are a consequence of the change not a driver.

It can be too easy to ‘take it personally’ and to fight back on a personal level, when what is more helpful for everyone’s sanity and self-respect is to recognise that the world changes, that sometimes mismatches occur and to deal with those mismatches on a personal basis in a compassionate way.

I have just realised that it is now 3 days since I posted anything in my (various) blogs. Does this bother me? Is there any reason why it should?

Well, no and no. I am reminded that every now and again the appropriate thing to do is ‘nothing’. Oh, if doing nothing is an act of avoidance then get the proverbial finger out…but sometimes what our brains, and those of those with whom we work, needs is space…peace…quietness. It can be all too easy to get on the treadmill of “I must do ….”, well I ask “According to whom?”. Who made that rule “I must do” or, more likely, “I must always be doing”. We all need to just “be” sometimes in order that we can be refreshed for the times we need to do.

Running a car 24 hours a day it will need refuelling occasionally and will wear out a lot quicker than running it for the few hours a day for which it was designed. Well, you are the same – you need refuelling, and not just with food, and you need to rest occasionally.

So, this week’s challenge is to take time out to ‘just be’ occasionally – maybe it’s actually getting away from the desk for a walk, for a sit in the park; maybe it’s a ten minute relaxation session, maybe it’s just stiing in that chair tonight with the television off. Go on, do it for yourself – you know it will make a difference.

Over the next few months we are developing a web-enabled personal coaching programme and this blog is where we will be providing updates, seeking feedback and asking for help.
Meanwhile, do bear with us, let us know what you think of the basic idea (of web-enabled personal coaching/development) or generally just chat away.

I recently posted this age-old piece of wisdom on Twitter and found myself challenged by someone who wrote:

I disagree Geoff. There are many times when we’ve been lost but by looking at what is around us and comparing it to what is shown on the map, we are able to ascertain where we are. This holds true for both physical and emotional contexts.

This really got me thinking…and my initial response was:

OK then…Where you ARE is independent of any map.
Reference to physical (or emotional!) objects and translating them to an appropriate (and that’s important) map will help locate yourself on a map, then you can use a map to plan out a way …to get somewhere else.

There are all sorts of maps – physical and virtual – and we constantly create and update our own maps of the world. None of these are true – remember that Korsybski said that “The map is not the territory” – yet they generally prove helpful. The map of the London Underground is nothing like a physical geographical representation of the locations of lines and stations, yet it is successfully used daily by millions of travellers. You can drop a traveller in any station and they can very quickly, by reference to where the trains in that station are going to/from and without looking at the station name on the platform, figure out where they are and then how to get to their destination. And of course, that map alone is of limited use if I am on Green Park station wanting to find out how to get to Birmingham. Birmingham is not on the Tube map! I need another map, one in my head that says “go North young man” or some knowledge that trains to Birmingham depart from Euston, or some other way of knowing that I can only get part of my route planned form the tube map.

When we think of organisational change, what maps do we use to understand the current state of the organisation? What maps do we use to define our destination, and is that destination necessarily on the same map as we used for diagnosis – or even any map at all!? What maps and other tools (e.g. an Oyster Card or ticket for the Tube) do we need to plan the journey?
Are you sure that your map is up-to-date? Using an Underground map from 25 years ago before the Jubilee Line was built will significantly extend my journey times. Using an organisational map based on 14th Century theological principles or early 20th Century behaviourism would be of little use in an early 21st Century organisation.

I was listening to the radio this morning and heard this quotation from Will Fyffe, an early/mid 20th century music hall entertainer “You are about to see something wonderful – a Scotsman doing something for free”. He was performing for the troops in the 2nd World War.
It left me wondering about what I do that is wonderful, the things that I do (or would do) for free because they inspire me so much; the things that bring joy into my life; the things that really feed my core values.
When we are doing these things we come alive, we can focus for hours on end, we just know that we are making a difference, we do not need any external motivation it’s all coming from inside ourselves.
So – what is it that YOU do that is wonderful?
How can you find ways to do more of these things?
How would life be if your ‘job’ was about doing the stuff that was wonderful?

A recent incident at home reminded me of the sometimes extreme challenges of change. I won’t go into the incident but it helped me to recollect that individuals change at their own pace.

The business case my be compelling, the organisational rationale all-encompassing etc but at the end of the day individuals have emotional attachments to what currently IS. It is those emotional attachments that we ultimately have to address – the pain of changing has to be lower than the pain of staying put, otherwise what does the rational person do but stay put!
Remember also that sometimes it is the pain of the process, rather than the end-point, that is the challenge. This is an arena not for rational dialogue but for comfort, support and belief that the individual will find their own way through their own pain.

Always remember that effective change leadership is more about the people than the process!

There is a really interesting discussion in a forum to which I subscribe about organisational change, under the general title of “What is missing”. It got my juices flowing, so here are some of my thoughts on the topic…

I find myself yawning at those change practitioners who go on about Change Project Management, Business Cases, n-Step Processes and anything to do with the hard/systems/processes/procedures/models aspects of change. This stuff is at the easy end of the spectrum – it’s essentially a technical issue and in the arena of ‘puzzles’, ultimately solveable.
I label proponents of such programmed approaches the “it’s Thursday, so it must be Module 17b” merchants.

Conversely, my juices flow when anyone considers the people involved (do you know, I almost used the phrase ‘wetware’ but that soooo… degrades the people to an abstract concept and misses the point!). It’s the people that are the real, and un-programmable, challenge. We all have our different motivations, propensities towards change, desires for involvement, abilities/desires to learn, etc and any change wallah (let’s not get back into manager or leader!) who fails to address the different needs of every single individual involved in or associated with the change faces an uphill and potentially disastrous challenge. I vividly remember upsetting a newish MD who spouted to the workforce about the changes he was going to make before being challenged along the lines of “Well, that is what you want, what you will get is what the 4500 employees are prepared to give you” (I said it and we never really saw eye-to-eye thereafter!).

So, I would like to see MUCH more attention paid to how to work effectively with the humans in the system – they can and will deliver the change when they understand and feel the imperative for change, when they understand and feel what is in it for them and when they have a real change to be involved in designing and delivering the parts of the change that interest and/or affect them.
I have learned to ‘do what I can, where I can, when I can’, working with whoever is willing and able at the time to move the agenda forward. One willing partner is worth a hundred unwillingly donkeys.

Change is not a linear process, progress very rarely follows a predeterminable plan, it often runs across rocky territory, meeting unexpected obstacles along the way. It’s fairly straightforward to produce a Work Breakdown Structure and a Gantt Chart for designing a piece of software (which, BTW is NOT change management despite what many IT guys woudl claim!)or even redesigning a business process. What is a lot more difficult (dare I say impossible?) is anticipating and planning for the many different people issues that will emerge at different times throughout the process. Yes, there will be some resistance, but I cannot say it will appear in Week 17 and be handled using Process #27 with a duration of 3 weeks; it will appear when it appears, at different times from different people (even in respect of the same technical change). Which is not to say that planning is not important – it’s the plan that isn’t.

The easiest way to get a lorry to roll downhill is to remove the chocks under the wheels, take off the brakes and make sure it is out of gear – you need all three otherwise it will stay where it is. Someone on the steering wheel helps, but I promise you that if the first three conditions are met, the lorry WILL go downhill. The ‘someone on the steering wheel’ needs to be very conscious of the dynamics (culture?) of the vehicle; you can no more turn a 30 tonne lorry on a sixpence than change a multimillion organisation in a week. I remember learning to drive and making BIG turns of the steering wheel, now I know that a gentle adjustment will get me what I want much more efficiently and smoothly.

My experience is that the more attention, and resource, is given to helping the people in the system understand and work in the change, the more effective the change.