Project Management

A change management primer for IT consultants

Determining the ability of the client organization to cope with a major IT project can help consultants find the most appropriate solution. Learn how evaluating the client's roles, resistance, and resilience can help you gauge their capacity for change.
 Editor's note: This article was originally published January 17, 2002.

Up until the 1990s, when an IT project failed, you could always blame the technology, according to Daryl Conner, chairman and cofounder of Conner Partners. Today, your client's ability to accept and best utilize the IT projects you bring to the table is the best indicator of success.

For a project to be beneficial, employees must embrace the new systems and actually use them. Realization, then, is the new measure of project success, as even projects that are successfully installed may still fail to produce their intended benefits unless attention is paid to your client's workplace.

In this article, we'll give you some tools to assess your client's ability to cope with the change brought about by a major IT project. The assessment should include three "Rs": roles, resistance, and resilience.

Roles: Why sponsorship is critical

Sometimes the web of informal relationships in a company is more significant than the official organization chart in determining how a change is adopted. In his book Managing at the Speed of Change: How Resilient Managers Succeed and Prosper Where Others Fail, Conner identifies the following roles that people play during a change project:

  • Targets are those who are being asked to change. People at every level are affected by change -- even top management, who may not realize that they, too, will have to change their behavior due to a project they initiated.
  • Sponsors have the power to influence people to change, both by communicating the reasons for the project and by setting consequences for adopting or failing to adopt it. But beware: The sponsor may be someone other than the boss. A union representative or respected coworker may have more influence over people's actual behavior than management rhetoric.
  • Change agents are charged with actually implementing the change on behalf of the sponsors. This is the most common role for a consultant.
  • Advocates want to see a change occur, but they lack the ability to sponsor it.

These roles may change as the project progresses. A manager who is the target of a change initiated by the CEO may become the sponsor of that change to those who report to him or her. When a consultant initially proposes a change, he or she takes on the advocate role. If the proposal is accepted and the consultant is asked to implement it, the consultant becomes the change agent.

In an interview with TechRepublic, Conner suggested identifying who is playing which roles in the project. Speaking about the advocate role, he advised consultants to beware of advocates with checkbooks. He cautions that although advocates may want a change badly enough to start a project, without real influence over the behavior of those who have to do the changing, their projects will fizzle. "It's not hard to start a change; it's just hard to sustain it," Conner said.

Resistance: It's inevitable, so make it open

All changes disrupt people's expectations. Even desirable changes, such as getting a promotion or getting married, bring with them unintended consequences. Conner argues that workplace changes are no different than major changes in one's personal life: We expect to live in equilibrium, so when change disrupts that equilibrium, we resist the change to minimize the disruption.

With this in mind, you can assume that resistance to implementing a project is inevitable. The key question is whether that resistance will be overt or hidden. Overt resistance, in the form of complaints or criticism, is much easier to work through and provides valuable feedback to the project team. Hidden resistance, such as spreading rumors or outright sabotage, is difficult to detect until it's already done significant damage.

Ask yourself if your client's organization encourages dissent or if its culture tends to drive dissent underground. A lack of open resistance is a danger signal. If you don't see any signs of resistance, work to draw it out into the open. If people have a constructive way to express their concerns, you will more likely be able to respond to such resistance.

Resilience: Gauge the organization's capacity to change

Resilience is the ability to absorb major change without showing dysfunctional behavior. Just as a sponge can only hold a certain amount of water, people have limits as to the amount of change they can process. ODR, Inc. (which is now Conner Partners) tracks 29 different attributes that resilient people possess, which fall into the following five categories:

  • Positive: They believe they can succeed, even when faced with the ambiguity that accompanies change.
  • Focused: They keep the end goal in mind and let it drive their decisions.
  • Creative: They stay flexible when the landscape shifts under their feet.
  • Organized: They are able to impose structure on the chaos surrounding them.
  • Proactive: They embrace ambiguity as part of the process instead of wasting energy running away from it.

In extreme cases, consider turning down projects for which the capacity for change just isn't there.

Conner argues that there's nothing wrong with taking on installation-only projects, for example, as long as that expectation is set up front. The problem comes when a client is ready to write the check, expecting to realize a certain benefit, but the organization can't support more than installation.

According to Conner, consultants who work on developing their own ability to absorb change will be more valuable to their clients. "Consultants are at a disadvantage if they're trying to help other people through change if they're not resilient themselves," Conner said.

As you work with a client, try to get a feel for the capacity for change of the organization's people. If they're facing multiple major changes already, it's not likely that they will be able to appropriately process the change associated with this additional project.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Get weekly consulting tips in your inbox TechRepublic's IT Consultant newsletter, delivered each Monday, offers tips on how to attract customers, build your business, and increase your technical skills in order to get the job done. Automatically sign up today!
9 comments
vdheerik
vdheerik

I certainly agree with Connor but would like to add that one of the most important factors of managing a succesfull change project is Communication. As change usually goes together with confussion or disorientation commynicating the what, where, when, why and how is crucial. Jack Van Den Heerik

bwatkins
bwatkins

I'm glad to see my old article getting responses again. In addition to Connor's books, another resource that I have found helpful is "Managing Transitions: Making the Most of Change," by William Bridges. http://www.amazon.com/Managing-Transitions-Making-Most-Change/dp/0738208248 In it, he says it's not the change that gets people; many changes, like getting married or starting a new project, are positive ones. But the transition is what people find unpleasant, because it means saying goodbye to current reality and enduring an intermediate period before the new reality is solid. It's that in between that must be managed. And yes, communication is key to making it through that middle ground. BobW

mothershelper
mothershelper

last year I had a client who wanted new servers, software and remake of the network - their turnover isn't high so most of the employees had been there a long time I took it easy and moved them into position slow - some new procedures, more efficient network shares, deploy demos of the software to fool with without hurting anybody, etcetera. When all was ready, and the owner and mgmt figured they were as ready as they would ever be, I brought the new stuff online for real. About the only department manager who didn't jump my case were the landscapers with half their staffs chasing behind them. People shot down that back hall and were beatin on the server room door within ten minutes. Then a couple more showed up to join the chorus of indignity and for a while I thought it might become a mob scene. Despite having gone personally to each and every person and letting them know it was coming AND typing up a memo that everybody got with clear explanations AND I even made instruction manuals for each department so they could cope. The griping only lasted about three days but there's still some folks up there that should buy me a steak&lobster dinner. Point being that you can communicate like mad but that moment of truth so to speak sometimes requires riot gear, a sense of humor, and really really solid self esteem.

Sterling chip Camden
Sterling chip Camden

... lots of times I've seen that people will be informed of a coming change and still not realize what it really means for them. Until it hits, and then all hell breaks loose.

Sterling chip Camden
Sterling chip Camden

Nothing is certain except change -- and the easier you can manage it the better. This six and a half year old article still rings pretty true to me. What do you think?

tuomo
tuomo

Very true! In other words, know the players. This is even more true for consultants, used to be the same also in IT departments when you carried many hats but then the world did go to specialized roles? As you say - change is inevitable and it was negotiated to job description or contract upfront, don't see that much today? I have seen some poor(?) consultants who executed their tasks perfectly but didn't get anywhere because of resistance from inside, left very frustrated - get sponsors before starting, know the players and politics!

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

I've certainly seen examples of all those behaviours, some more than others... Poor target identification is endemic in my experience, particularly in terms of concentrating only on those who benefit from the change and categorising those who don't as recalcitrant. One of my favourite examples is some sort of MIS System, where the data to be analysed must be collected by another group who get nothing out of it. Always a disastrous recipe that one.

Editor's Picks