The StrategicPay Blog would like to welcome two new guest bloggers: Robert Spencer has worked on change programs achieving more than $1B in savings for clients.  The information in this blog is based on a book he is writing, Change Made Simple; he can be reached at r.spencer@comcast.net.  He is joined in this series by Christy Martin who is a compensation consultant in Seattle, Washington.  She can be reached at christymartin@mindspring.com.

Be More Successful Making Changes to HR Programs

Two underlying factors cause change programs to fail:
•    Too much stress or
•    Too little attention to internal politics, or
•    Both.  

While the mistakes can differ, organizations with failed changes often end up generating significant stress for those who need to change their behaviors. 

At other times, organizations ignore the social networks that exist, and serve to articulate and promulgate the real values of the organization. 

Together, stress and social networks serve to empower the anti-change agenda and undermine the desired change.

The reason why these factors (and several of the mistakes) are so difficult to manage is that they are often counter-intuitive, driven by the fact that the reality of the person driving the change is usually very different from that of the people expected to change.  But importantly, together they also constitute both a practical and moral imperative for any change agent or sponsor.

Figure 1, below, illustrates the change process as it is experienced by most project and change managers.  For them, change will unfold in a logical manner as the project is begun, then user capabilities go through a transition, and ultimately the change is completed.  There is nothing surprising about this … except that it is wrong!

Figure 1 Logical Model of the Change Process

Why is the logical model wrong?  It is wrong because change is an emotional, not a logical process that is not complete until emotional adjustments have been made.  Figure 2 below provides a view of this.  The process becomes emotional as people who are expected to change experience a loss of the way things used to be and wrestle with all of the insecurities or concerns that arise as they attempt to master something very different.  Figure 2 clarifies this process.

Figure 2 Emotional Model of the Change Process

How does this insight about emotions relate to the issues of stress and social networks?  First, the change process itself is very stressful and intensifies the emotional impacts experienced by those expected to change.  And as stress increases, the power and influence of informal social networks in the organization are increased.  Importantly, since these social networks define how work is actually accomplished within the organization, they can easily undermine the change and thwart expected results, especially over time.   Figure 3 illustrates some of the common factors that come to play and how they undermine productivity.

Figure 3 Factors that Erode Productivity

The implications?  HR professionals who make controlling stress and engaging social networks a priority in their organizations will contribute significantly to improved performance.  This is something that will otherwise be difficult for project managers and executives to master on their own, and points to a important strategic role HR professionals have to play in the creation of high performing organizations.

Robert Spencer has identified 6 mistakes organizations need to avoid for more successful change.  He will share 2 of the 6 mistakes in upcoming guest posts with his collaborator, Christy Martin, for this StrategicPay Series.