There will be occasions when resistance starts to stall change. All consultants will have war stories of the time they spent battling with a group or individual that refused to change. If this happens, it can help to segment the target audience to ensure that energy is applied in the right places. The worst thing that a client or consultant can do is to spend time and resource trying to change someone if they don’t really contribute to the end transformation process.
The change process can be considered along two specific lines of interest. First, the extent to which people are actively involved in the change. For a retail organization about to implement a new stock control system, it might be that certain groups of people are critical and need to be introduced to new ways of working at the outset. However, there will be people that might need to know about the system but whose training can take place at a later date. Second, consider the level of resistance to change. This is high (where there is a real blockage to the change), down to low (where the people are really quite happy to take on board the new ways of working). The end result of combining these four approaches is seen in Figure 31
Change Segmentation model
The ‘leaders quadrant’ includes those people who are viewed as the early adopters, people who will respond to the change initiative in a proactive and visible way. They have a critical role in the final change outcome and have a low resistance to change. Hooking in these people early gives a clear signal that the project is serious, people are buying into the new ways of working and the new model is socially acceptable.
As a example, consider the cable TV company that has merged with another similar group and needs to re-locate to a site over 100 miles away. Resistance to this shift is likely to be fierce and could lead to protracted negotiations and conflict. However, it will be useful to identify one or two people who are happy with the change and are willing to support the strategic need for relocation. Their visible support sends a positive signal and other people will be more amenable to the change.
The ‘supporters’ quadrant includes those people who have limited involvement in the change but are committed to its success. They are people that enthuse about the change but in reality it makes little difference if they decide to change or not. In the case of an IT upgrade, the small customer services team may be enthusiastic about the proposed shift to a new platform. However, the shift has actually been proposed to reduce the product delivery time. So their gain is only a limited by-product of a shift elsewhere. However, if this team is committed then it makes sense to use their enthusiasm. You could use them as internal communicators, trainers or facilitators. Although their involvement might add little to the formal engagement, it might have a substantial impact on helping others to see the need for a system upgrade.
The people who fall into the ‘focus’ quadrant will resist the change but must be converted to ensure success. They are the key players. If you don’t identify these people early on then there is a chance that valuable resources will be deployed elsewhere. As a result, you will not be able to spend time and energy working with them to help them make the necessary change. This is seen in the case of a project to implement a new financial package within a local government office. It might be that the government has mandated a system change to deliver the necessary data to the Treasury. However, if the chief executive does not accept that the system will add value in her domain then she will have the capability to put every possible obstacle in the way. You must put every available effort into working with the individual and her team to convince them of the benefits. Failure to shift their viewpoint will turn the project into a nightmare and might result in a loss of your future income.
Lastly, the ‘laggards’ segment highlights those people who will fiercely resist the change but have little involvement in the outcome. In many cases it is better to say, ‘fine, we will make the change in your absence and when the time is right you can make the shift in your own way’. An example is a technical department that refuses to accept the need to attend customer skills training. While the chief executive has decreed that everyone should attend a two-day event, this group has little contact with other people. While the consultant could force the situation, the end result will be a great deal of game playing by the unit manager and a disruptive crowd of people at the change workshop. By giving them the option to adopt the new techniques at their own rate, they are able to do so in a way that suits their needs. As a result, they might become leading exponents of the need to adopt a more customer-focused approach within their work and actively start to promote this ethos to their suppliers.
(c) Mick Cope