The oft-quoted Dr John Kotter says up to 70% of change management programmes don't meet their stated objectives. Somewhat controversially, Change Logic executive head Bruce Turvey says this is not because companies fail to implement a change management programme, but rather because all too often, the project is simply just not set up to succeed.
Turvey explains: "There's no 10-step plan that you can follow to manage change in today's highly complex environments. It's vital to partner with the client to co-create a solution within their unique context. The client needs to co-own the change process and regard it as a business transformation."
He is a proponent of an agile approach to change management. One that favours outcomes and relationships over templates and tools. "The emphasis must always be on the business result, regardless of how you get there."
“I can’t handle this anymore, we have to change this….”
What exactly am I talking about? Standards. Stupid standards that make no sense.
Let’s back up a little. I want to start by talking about well-intentioned individuals. Never mind well intentioned, well studied and high qualified people that have made decisions and put process and procedures in place that very honestly are the most absolutely absurd things you have ever encountered. Ringing a bell?
So what happened? Why did these obviously very intelligent people do such stupid things? I hear myself and others asking this question all the time.
SAFe is an excellent framework for bringing more agility to teams as is breaks through the glass ceiling between development teams and the rest of the business. This leads to improved delivery and less frustration at all levels of the organisation. Sounds amazing, but unfortunately it’s not all as easy as it sounds on paper. You can easily end up cargo culting or having bad scrum practices. Let me explain why.