A monarch butterfly flys above a light gray surface where its shadow is revealed as an eagle with its wings spread, symbolizing the transformational possibilities of organizational change.
Editorial

Building a Culture of Organizational Change Acceptance

5 minute read
Myles Suer avatar
By
SAVED
CMOs are often at the roots of change by driving the business case for better CX and for getting the data to transform the customer lifecycle.

The Gist

  • Barriers to successful organizational change. Organizational change is impeded by factors such as fixed mindsets, "not invented here" syndrome, inadequate leadership, and poor execution of change plans.
  • The role of authenticity and trust. Trust and authentic leadership are paramount in overcoming organizational change obstructions.
  • Engaging change agents and tailoring change efforts. CIOs should identify early influencers, including non-management figures, to lead and champion the change process.

Professors David A. Garvin and Michael Roberto writing for the Harvard Business Review highlight the challenges of change. They assert organizational change is hard for many reasons.

Garvin and Roberto claim, “Most people are reluctant to alter their habits. What worked in the past is good enough; in the absence of a dire threat, employees will keep doing what they’ve always done. And when an organization has had a succession of leaders, resistance to change is even stronger. A legacy of disappointment and distrust creates an environment in which employees automatically condemn the next turnaround champion to failure, assuming that he or she is just like all the others. Calls for sacrifice and self-discipline are met with cynicism, skepticism and knee-jerk resistance.”

How, then, do leaders — especially CIOs — craft organizations that not only embrace change but view it as an integral component of sustainable organizations? How do they foster what Jeff Bezos terms a "Day 1 Organization" — one that emphasizes long-term vision, prioritizes customer obsession and champions bold innovation? This perspective is crucial for CMOs, as they frequently anchor the impetus for change, advocating for enhanced customer experiences and harnessing data to transform the customer lifecycle.

What Factors Hold Organizations Back From Getting Behind Change?

Undoubtedly, the idea that change can be stifled is unsettling. This very scenario unfolded at Kodak, where mid-level management resisted pivotal shifts. Ian Mittroff of UC Berkeley's Center for Catastrophic Risk Management observes that “the seeds of failure are actually embedded in past success.”

Decision-making styles can vary greatly, and the manner in which decisions are made can influence an organization's ability to adapt and change. In "Creating the Corporate Future," Russell Ackoff identifies three distinct planning styles: reactivism, inactivism and preactivism. Ackoff characterizes inactivists as those who prioritize survival and stability, noting, “Caught in a tide of change, they try to anchor themselves in a fixed position. They go in for gathering facts, an endless process; all the facts are never in; and until they are there is no reason to decide.” This perspective is echoed by New Zealand CIO Antony McMahon, who observes, “Analysis paralysis holds organizations back that I know from getting behind change. These folks don't want to get behind change until they decide, but they won’t decide till they have all the data.”

Drawing from his expertise, Constellation Research VP Dion Hinchcliffe identifies the primary barriers to effecting change as:

  • Fixed mindsets.
  • Not invented here.
  • Limited worker bandwidth.
  • Insufficient leadership.
  • Worker roles in helping with the change unclear.
  • Inadequate change plan.
  • Poor execution of plan.

According to Jay Ferro, EVP and CIO at Clario, “One of these triggers occur every damn time.” Hinchcliffe agrees with Jay by saying, “The pitfalls happen over and over again, since few leaders have much actual experience with successful, large-scale change.”

Former CIO Martin Davis adds that “Change fails because of management trust and communications.” He goes on to say, “To overcome the fear of change, people need to understand the new direction, understanding what’s in it for them, and receive consistent messaging about the future. If the organizations do not understand and trust the leadership team, then they will resist change.”

Related Article:  Better Customer Experience: Embracing Vulnerability and Breaking Molds

The Role of Authenticity in Overcoming Organizational Change Obstructions?

Trust, as emphasized by Davis, is paramount. To navigate barriers, leaders must distinctly demonstrate how their strategies diverge from those of past leaders. They need to persuade their teams that the organization is either on the brink of demise or, at a minimum, in dire need of transformative changes to flourish. Hinchcliffe asserts, “Leaders must have a clearly perceived sense of authenticity.” With such authenticity, organizations can:

  • Convey organizational commitment to change.
  • Make a convincing case for the change.
  • Elicit worker buy-in.
  • Sustain engagement in change process.

The previously mentioned insights pertain mainly to top-down organizational change. Interestingly, I am also seeing an increase in bottom-up change. When this happens, it may be the leaders themselves resisting grassroots initiatives for reasons similar to those mentioned earlier.

Simply put, successful change demands a receptivity to novel ideas, and this requires "shared trust and mutual respect. However, as a balanced perspective, McMahon adds, “Changing course every time an issue arises is going to break the change faster more than anything. Taking the time at the start to identify all the risks and map out mitigants is critical.”

Related Article: Communicating Change: Overcoming Resistance Through Empathy

How Can CIOs Better Engage Change Influencers? And Create an Agency for Change?

According to Garvin and Roberto, “For change to stick, leaders must design and run an effective persuasion campaign — one that begins weeks or months before the actual turnaround plan is set in concrete. Managers must perform significant work up front to ensure that employees will listen to tough messages, question old assumptions, and consider new ways of working.” The CIOs I know agree, but it would be great if their CMOs could help.

Even more important, Davis states, “Being a CIO is more about change management than it is about technology.” He further emphasizes, “Any successful change needs a combination of top-down and bottom-up together." Additionally, this integration is critical to achieving meaningful organizational change. The path to realizing this involves identifying the influencers who buy into the direction and utilizing them as early adopters. Finding those individuals whom others seek advice from and getting them on board is key to spreading the word and garnering support.

To do this, says UC Santa Barbara Associate CIO, Joe Sabado, “It is important to understand who the early influencers are. It is not always the ones in management positions. CIOs should spend time with them and get them to go through the process before everyone else, so they are leading the change.” McMahon adds, “The easiest way is to ensure the people impacted by the change are involved in the conversations around it. The influencers and detractors will start to show themselves very early.”

Hinchcliffe concludes by saying, “Change agents are critical to driving change. They have the local vantage point. They have additional resources plus the ability to catalyze real change. If you cultivate and support them, they can do it sustainably. By engaging change agents, they can rally the troops and get them focused on what needs to be done.”

How Do CIOs Couple Change to Known Needs That Are Obtainable?

In the book Rewired, the authors emphasize that making a significant change should lead to noticeable and valuable outcomes. Clearly CIOs need to walk a tightrope here. They need to keep changes achievable and meaningful, but also experiment and innovate. Hinchcliffe says, “The sizing of change is vital. Change leaders need to ensure change is achievable and meaningful. If change is too big, it will likely fail, but if it is too small, then it won't really matter.”

For this reason, Davis says, “Successful change has sufficient ambition. Without this people will not bother getting behind the change. So, it needs to big enough to be achievable, but have a goal people can really embrace.” McMahon claims that part of doing this involves establishing effective business and enterprise architecture that pinpoints the parts of the organization that should be part of a change strategy.”

Learning Opportunities

Sabado adds, “Effective change has sponsorship, change management, project management proportional to the scope and complexity so the change will be obtainable. Additionally, change management must answer why the change, why now, what’s the risk of not changing, what’s not changing, and what’s changing.”

Parting Words on Organizational Change Leadership

Without question, organizational change is difficult. It requires leadership to not be extinguished by the forces described above. As important, it needs sufficient ambition and a change management program that involves leaders and the troops. It is time for well-executed change and leadership that drives it. Otherwise, companies will fall behind in digital transformation and customer experience.

fa-solid fa-hand-paper Learn how you can join our contributor community.

About the Author
Myles Suer

Myles Suer is an industry analyst, tech journalist and top CIO influencer (Leadtail). He is the emeritus leader of #CIOChat and a research director at Dresner Advisory Services. Connect with Myles Suer:

Main image: freshidea on Adobe Stock Photo
Featured Research