Have you ever sat through a speech by a CEO praising the successful introduction of a new change initiative, 12 months on, when the actual success of it is still uncertain? Having the underlying new system, processes or tools in place is already a big step, but if employees are not actively using them or merely pay lip service to them, the business cannot derive the expected economic benefits. This is called “ceremonial adoption”.
Ceremonial adoption accounts for about 50% of initiatives, rather than the desired “active adoption” – successful implementation of the functional benefits and commitment to change.
Ceremonial adopters often fail to commit fully to change as they are not (yet) convinced of the value of the initiative, they might not understand the associated demands or requirements, or they have not come to terms with the fear of loss of their current ways of working.
Managing change successfully requires leaders to: (1) have employees be convinced of the benefits of the inherent change, (2) understand that there are costs associated with failure to provide support for the change and (3) engage in capability building towards the adoption of new practices.
Achieving “affective commitment” – belief in the benefits of change which triggers new thinking and behaviors – requires the involvement of stakeholders through all phases of the change process. Here are five key success factors to successfully steer a change initiative towards affective commitment:
Although the hierarchy of the organization is usually reflected in an organizational chart, the organizational networks underpinning how work actually gets done are less obvious. Organizational networks represent relationships between people formed to complete tasks, ask for advice or socialize. They influence virtually everything organizations do and, if used effectively, they can help people adapt to change more quickly. Given that they are not transparent, however, it takes time to understand and map them.
At the start of any change initiative, it is important not only to map the key stakeholders in an organization, but also to understand the formal (work-related) and informal (social) relationships at play. We often overestimate the role of hierarchy and underestimate the role of networks.
In the early stages, segment the key stakeholders of the change effort. First, assess the key people and departments that will be affected. The ultimate goal is to understand which people can make an impact within the organization. Although some people are influential, e.g. opinion leaders, others may have formal power but little influence in persuading others to adopt their views.
Next, assess each of these stakeholders in terms of their support for the initiative and their capabilities in contributing to its success. Knowledge about their position and potential reaction to the initiative can help you decide how to influence or involve them. Then, understand and map the underlying relationships between people: Ttalking to or involving people central to a network with high influence will have greater impact than involving loners.
In the inception phase, proactively identify the group of people you want to involve. You will probably want to start with the change agents – those with influence and a positive attitude toward the change. Involve them in decisions related to the implementation.
Once the change agents increase their commitment, they will be more likely to convince others who are merely observers or are opposed to the initiative. Those who could support it, but who are not as influential or do not have the strongest capabilities are often ignored, so their cooperative potential may be overlooked.
This group should be developed, informed and involved in issues where they have the skills to help. Bystanders, who are often marginal stakeholders and whose potential to affect the implementation is low, should be part of the communication plan and monitored to avoid negative surprises. Their “wait and see” attitude often makes them followers in a change process. Non-supportive stakeholders, particularly defensive resistors, are initially best managed by making sure you don’t have to rely on their resources.
Sometimes this strategy is difficult; therefore, others argue that non-supportive stakeholders are best managed by keeping them busy. Active opposers are probably the most challenging group for managers to address as, potentially, they could sabotage the intended change. They may, however, also have valid points, and leaders should be prepared to listen and make changes to their plans. Change agents could help to convert these opposers and, if influential opposers are convinced, they could become your biggest supporters.
“If communication remains a one-off or rare event, most change processes are doomed to fail. ”- Bettina Büchel
Although there are many different ways to convince stakeholders of the benefits of the change, choosing their timing wisely overcomes the dip in performance that typically happens when introducing a new approach.change. Initially, you might want to map all the influencing tactics you could employ, e.g. workshops, top management meetings, training, meetings, CEO memo, benchmarking visits, etc. However, bear in mind that timing matters when it comes to deployment.
While change processes can typically be sequenced with, for instance, creating a sense of urgency in the earlier stages of change, there is equally a need to listen to stakeholders and their feedback and adjust as you go. Although there is often a sequence to change, the speed at which you can proceed and which influencing tactic you use and how often varies.
Leaders must constantly assess the readiness of key stakeholders to engage and adjust their tactics to the current situation and the stakeholder feedback. The main reason for taking the next action step should be the result of learning; that is, it depends on past experience, as well as the evolving context, that defines the plot in which actions will be taken.
For instance, if key stakeholders are not yet aware of or interested in an initiative, training them will have little impact. This makes the process of change iterative and the timing of using influencing tactics dependent on the level of commitment of stakeholders and their feedback.
During any change process, there is typically uncertainty, ambiguity or stress. This has a negative impact on commitment to change. The higher the stressors creating ambiguity or uncertainty and perceived job insecurity, the more likely it is that the initiative will receive minimal support.
Communicate with those impacted by the initiative, using clear, consistent and credible processes and messages. Use concise language and well-defined terms, and avoid the suppression of truth. Adapt the message for different audiences. Map out which stakeholders need to be informed and about what.
This will lead to a communication plan that ensures the initiative receives broad share-of-mind. Effective communication also nurtures knowledge about the initiative over time. By communicating the latest updates, you can build awareness and help to dispel rumors or misinformation.
How leaders communicate also matters. Showing personal and moral conviction, being consistent in choice of words, tone of voice and body language when delivering the message as well as using stories, metaphors and rhetorical questions all have a positive impact on achieving higher levels of commitment. But relying only on leaders to communicate is not enough.
Encourage individuals to share their experiences with leaders, as this creates collective ownership and often has a snowball effect through the organizational networks. This may best be accomplished by frequent sharing and exchange rather than one-directional reporting.
Communication is the key to change, so if communication remains a one-off (or rare) event, most change processes are doomed to fail. Communication must take place at regular intervals, informing different groups of the progress made.
The more complexity and uncertainty involved in a strategic initiative, the more important it is for executives to test the waters using a pilot approach. Piloting is a process through which a new practice is first tested and a routine or business model is created for subsequent scaling. With continuous planning and feedback, teams can start delivering business value from the beginning, thereby creating commitment to change as stakeholders see the benefits.
To help employees understand the demands and requirements associated with the change, plan for resources beyond the first six months and include training and development in the implementation plan. Training is often an afterthought and, unless budget and time are allocated for it, it may be cut as the “official” completion date approaches. Users of new processes and systems are more likely to grow frustrated if they do not receive training, and this can impede adoption.
The earlier you can demonstrate the benefits and help employees understand the demands and requirements of a change, the quicker the new practice will be adopted. Often, the adoption curve is not linear, so reaching “tipping point” creates a sense of inevitability that will influence others to adopt the new practice. Reaching this tipping point depends on a number of factors – the persuasiveness of change agents, the degree of opposition and the fear of loss.
The tipping point can, however, be reached faster than expected: Working with a group of change agents and convincing some influential opposers can already tip the scales in favor of the initiative. The “networked” change agents have the potential to convince bystanders and therefore shift the momentum. It is, therefore, vital to have developed a comprehensive stakeholder map and to understand the networks, as you will then know where to devote your time and energy.
By adopting these five steps, you can help your organization to escape the ceremonial adoption trap and achieve affective commitment to change.
Collaboration between humans and new forms of artificial intelligence (AI) are creating opportunities for considerable improvements in written communication. But to do so successfully, business executives must learn to strike a balance...
8 November 2023 • by Howard H. Yu in Strategy
Are you doing the right things to make your company future-ready? My research suggests you should be asking these four questions to find out. We studied companies that were more successful getting...
Li Shufu, CEO and founder of Chinese carmaker Geely, overcame a host of setbacks to become the billionaire owner of a multi-faceted business ...
The vast majority of plans are not worth the paper they are written on, recent research shows. A comprehensive path toward net zero should address Scope 3 emissions, incorporate carbon offsetting, and...
Explore first person business intelligence from top minds curated for a global executive audience