• July 2006 - Tip #6 Warren Buffet's Homespun Wisdom
• June 2006 - Tip #5 What We Can Learn From Churchill and Roosevelt >>
• May 2006 - Tip #4 Don't Change >>
• April 2006 - Tip #3 The Power of an Image
• March 2006 - Tips #2 Call Your Plan a Draft
• March 2006 - Tips #1 for Leading Change
• September 2005 - Taking Stock
• May 2005 - Nearly 129 Change Management Tools - and They Are Free >>
• March 2005 - 7 Ways to Sustain Committment to Change >>
• February 2005 - A New Toy >>
• January 2005 - An Anti-Resolution New Year's Resolution >>
• June 2004 - Why do some changes succeed? >>
• February 2004 - Results of Change Survey >>
• #22 - Loyalty is Alive - Sort Of >>
• #21 - What's A Manager To Do? >>
• #20 - Back Pain and Organization Change >>
• #19 - Another Free Teleseminar >>
• #18 - Tired of Strategic Planning >>
• #17 - Interview in Fortune >>
• #16 - Bigger Isn't Better >>
• #15 - Morale and Downsizing >>
• #14 - Influence >>
• #13 - Stop me before I Downsize Again >>
• #12 - Human Resources Tool >>
• #11 - The Keys to Success: Humility and Luck >>
• #10 - A Sorry Bunch of Bureaucratic Jackasses >>
• #9 - Tools From GE >>
• #8 - Appreciative Inquiry >>
• #7 - Why Resistance Matters >>
• #6 - The Art of Focused Conversation >>
• #5 - The Power of Employee Involvement >>
• #4 - When Conventional Wisdom Fails >>
• #3 - Employee Involvement Yields High Benefits >>
• #2 - STOP! Downsizing Doesn't Work >>
• #1 - Appreciative Inquiry Builds Support for Change >>

Tools for a Change
September 2005
Taking Stock

I just read an impressive study on change management titled “Taking Stock: a Survey on the Practice and Future of Change Management.” I think the study will be of particular interest to people who (in Yogi Berra’s terms) go for “deep depth.” I know some managers and executives who like to explore the theory and practice of change management, but the primary audience will be consultants who spend a significant amount of time working on change management projects.

One section explores survey results. People responded from around the world. A few items:

• Even though change leaders often trumpet the transformational possibilities of thee major projects, only 15 percent of respondents saw any lasting transformational change.
• Ownership and support of top-level management is the single most important factor in the success of change. (In my experience, change projects get delegated down a level or two very quickly, and they die. When the top person is a real champion, the success rate goes up.)
• Senior level leaders believe that people understand the practice of sound change management. People below them don’t have a clue.
• 51 percent said they “had seen many change management initiatives” fail.
• 94 percent of respondents said they personally benefited from learning change management methods.
• Change management has moved from being just the work of organization development practitioners, and out into line operations. (That suggests to me that technical and financial professionals are beginning to see the benefits of managing change well. It’s not just the consultants who are promoting change management these days.)
• Sound change management theory and practice seems to cross cultural boundaries. Although the practice of change management initially developed in the US and Western Europe, it seems to have broad applicability around the globe.

Another section gives pithy one-page descriptions of a range of change management methods used by people who responded to the survey. These short descriptions range from personality theories to complex large system interventions to theoretical models that help explain the dynamics of change. These short descriptions give a fine overview of the range of thinking and practice in the area.

The final section explores a number of possible scenarios that could influence how we approach change management.

Prior to receiving a copy of the report, I had no knowledge of the firm that put it together and I have no financial stake in their success. However, I do feel I have a stake in helping people learn about managing change in organizations, and this report significantly adds to our knowledge of the field. Bravo to the authors.

For more information, you can visit: http://www.change-management-toolbook.com/res/Reports.html -- Rick Maurer
To Top

We’ve just redone our website so that you can access tools quickly. We’ve added many new articles, assessment tools, and tips from readers as well. The site provides these free resources in five major categories:

• Leading change
• Making a compelling case for change
• Getting started on the right foot
• Keeping the change alive
• Getting back on track

In addition, we offer readers the complete archive of the Tools for a Change Newsletter.

Please visit and make copies of anything you like for personal use.

But Wait There’s More – And It’s Even Better Than Ginzu Knives

When you visit our "new" site and look at the tools, think about what's missing. If you submit an idea that we use, we will send you a copy of one of my books as a thank you. (You can choose among Beyond the Wall of Resistance, Why Don't You Want What I Want? and Making a Compelling Case for Change.) All you need to do is write, "Rick, why don’t you write an article on X?" "Hey, why don't you create a simple assessment tool that focuses on Y." That's all you need to do. If I write something based on your suggestion, we'll send you the book of your choice. -- Rick Maurer
To Top

The last phase in the life of a change is making sure that you get the results you intended. Too often, major new initiatives die after months – sometimes years – of work without ever achieving any significant benefit.

How do you sustain commitment for a major change? I asked readers of Tools for a Change for their suggestions, and you responded with some great ideas. I divided those suggestions into seven major categories. Here’s a taste of what’s in the article:

Under Strong Leadership people said that leaders needed to be champions for the change throughout the life of the project. They can’t move on to other “top priority” items until they are certain this change is going to stick. They must support the creation of symbolic acts that capture people’s attention. Find places to embed the change in the business plan. Protect the process to ensure that this project remains a high priority. Make sure that the people responsible for making this happen have a clear contract so that they know what is required of them. . . . and they gave lots of specific examples to illustrate these points.

Under communication, one person referred to the importance of “vision painting.” That is, creating a compelling and attractive picture of where you are headed. Another suggested giving updates frequently and in digestible forms. . . . Leaders of the change need to allow themselves to take in information: communication is two way. . . Find ways to celebrate wins along the way.

Each section includes a lot of examples – and there are seven major categories in all. Click here to read the full article (and make copies at no cost).

Keeping the change alive is all-but-ignored in many books on change. That’s why I think the ideas you sent in are so valuable to us all. I hope you find the article useful. And, as I said before, feel free to make copies. I’d like to see people use these ideas. -- Rick Maurer
To Top

I’ve succumbed and become a blogger. Please forgive me. It’s called Change Management News. It gives me an opportunity to respond to events in the news or toss out quick comments regarding change without worrying about all those niceties like spelling and coherence. I can just rant.

I invite you to take a look. Today’s post is titled, My Door is Always Open and It Leads to the Exit.

Here’s how to read it: http://changemanagementnews.blogspot.com. -- Rick Maurer
To Top

I’m not big on resolutions. They’re just itching to be broken. Besides, they always seem to be built on the belief that I am doing something wrong. I’m eating too much, not exercising enough, yada yada, yada. Why start the year feeling inadequate? But I do find reminders helpful as I start the year. As in, “I want to make sure I pay attention to my health.” And I like to keep it simple. I don’t want a list of 10 things I need to do. One or two will do nicely.

Since change is such a big part of most of our lives, I thought you might appreciate a single reminder on ways to get your ideas across.

Here it is — Why before How. People are not interested in our “brilliant” plans until they can see why a change is even needed in the first place. Simple, yes, but most new ideas fail because people moved into the “how we are going to do it” phase way before anyone else was given a chance to see why anything new was needed.

I’ve seen clients increase their success rate significantly simple by adhering to why before how. And when I have actually listened to my own advice, its worked for me.

Yes, there is more to change than why before how, but my research shows that companies that handle the why phase well, tend to manage the rest of the change effectively too.

Best wishes for a successful new year. -- Rick Maurer
To Top

In a study conducted of 40 companies by McKinsey, only 42 percent met or exceeded their business goals, whereas the most successful often exceeded their intended goals by over 100 percent.

There was a marked difference in how the "winners" handled change versus those who were far less successful. Here are a few of things that stand out among those who succeeded:

• All levels of the organization - executives, middle managers, and frontline troops - were critical to the success of the changes.
• Direction and responsibilities were clear.
• All levels saw why change was needed. The 11 most successful companies that adhered to this inclusive approach saw returns of 143 percent.
• They showed good change management practices at all levels of the organization.

Over the past couple of years, I have seen a "been there, done that" attitude regarding change management begin to crop up in organizations. My experience shows that superficial understanding of change management often guarantees failure. That's why I find the McKinsey study to be a good reminder of what's important. (www.mckinseyquarterly.com "Helping Employees Embrace Change" Laclair, J. and Rao, R.) -- Rick Maurer
To Top

In over 95 percent of most successful changes people saw a compelling need for a change. These organizational changes include such things as mergers, reorganizations, and major new software systems. This is one of the things we learned in the Change Effectiveness Survey we just completed.

In changes that "made matters significantly worse" few stakeholders saw a need for a change. So forget about how brilliant your idea is. If people don't see a compelling need to do something different they won't get behind you. People need to feel a sense of urgency before they are willing to listen to your "brilliant" idea.

An additional benefit: over 40 percent of the changes that made a compelling case right from the beginning never had to deal with any major resistance. Giving people critical information about the state of the business makes planning and implementation easier - and increases the chances of success. -- Rick Maurer
To Top

In spite of reports to the contrary, loyalty in organizations doesn't appear to be dead. People are not leaving at a faster rate. The rate has remained pretty constant for the past twenty years. Even the historic tenure gap between men and women is narrowing as more women stay with their jobs during childbearing years.

However, workers 35 and older are moving out at a higher rate. (Source: Business 2.0 12/02-1/03 issue, from Bureau of Labor Statistics information)

This could be a problem. This older pool (I hate to think that 35 is older, but alas it is!) is where much of an organization's experience lies. Couple an increase in moving from job to job with many baby boomers hitting retirement age and your organization could be in a world of hurt. One government agency anticipates a loss of one-third of its work force due to retirement in the few years.

You need to ask: What's the impact on productivity, innovation, quality, and corporate knowledge if we lose a significant number of so-called older workers? For many of my clients, the answer could be devastating. If you don't like the answer you come up with, I  urge you to look seriously at ways you could increase loyalty inside your organization.-- Rick Maurer
To Top

I'm coming across a problem that I suspect many of you face. Supervisors and managers are told to lead major corporate initiatives within their units. For example, sometimes they need to become the champions of a major new program such as a performance management system, or they need to ensure that a new software system gets implemented and used throughout their office. The problem: they have had no input into planning this new initiative. In some instances they are not even convinced that this is a good way to go. However, it is their job to get themselves and others committed to the change.

Of course there are any number of things all of us could suggest to corporate leadership to change these conditions. But for now, I want to focus on the supervisors and middle managers whose careers sometimes rest on the success of these changes. What can they do?

What do the more successful supervisors and managers do when faced with a similar challenge? I'd appreciate hearing practical real-life examples from you. Just reply to this e-mail and once I get your responses, I will prepare a short paper and get it out to all of you. I hope this will be a helpful resource for you or for those you work with. -- Rick Maurer
To Top

In my work on resistance, I have been interested in brain research that focuses on fear, stress, pain, etc. Here is a recent article that I found fascinating.

In "A Comforting Spouse Could Turn Out to Be a Real Pain," Robert Lee Hotz, writes, "By eavesdropping on electrical activity in the most private precincts of the mind, researchers investigating the effects of chronic pain discovered that a husband or wife can make the ache feel three times worse simply by being in the room. (Los Angeles Times 11/4/02.)

Researchers found that the pain subsided when the spouse left the room!

"Surprisingly, perhaps, it was the most solicitous husbands and wives -- those who clucked most lovingly over the spouses' discomfort -- who triggered the pain. The more the husbands or wives dwelt on their partner's pain, the worse it felt, the neural monitors showed."

Herta Flor, University of Heidelberg's Central Institute of Mental Health, who led the study team said, "We found basically that when their spouses were in the room, they had an almost three-fold increase in their response to pain. These patients also showed more overt signs of feeling pain, such as moaning." 
Spouses who stayed in the room but offered distractions or not focusing too heavily on the pain helped alieviate pain.

So what's this got to do with our work in organizations? Well, I'm not sure. A single study on back pain may or may not have relevance to the workplace, but here's what piqued my interest.

Perhaps when people are in pain due to major changes in the organization, spending time just listening and expressing sympathy, may make matters worse. Have you ever been in one of those team building activities where people just spilled their guts and others sat around acting as if they cared? My experience has been that they are pretty dreadful and often make matters worse.

However, I think that listening for the purpose of getting at what's wrong so you can try to do something to help the situation (like get medical attention), is far different than just being solicitous with comments like, "I feel your pain."

I believe that listening just to demonstrate empathy has a short shelf life. However listening with a willingness to be influenced by what we hear and do something based on that information is a very different type of listening. -- Rick Maurer
To Top

Recently I conducted a series of teleseminars based on my new book, Why Don't You Want What I Want? People told me they got a lot out of these calls. In fact, some people gathered their entire team around a speakerphone so that everyone could hear these ideas.

If you missed out, here's another chance to attend. I will hold a teleseminar on Friday, July 19 at 3 PM Eastern. The seminar is free but you will need to pay your own long distance charges. The class will last 50 minutes.

We will explore the three major reasons why people accept or reject our ideas and how to use this information to increase your ability to get people interested and committed to your ideas.

If this sounds valuable, please send this message to friends and colleagues who might enjoy it.

To reserve your slot, just send Sandy a note (june@beyondresistance.com). She will send you information on how to call in and how to access materials on the web that we will use during the call. It's very simple. I look forward to this live version of Tools for a Change.-- Rick Maurer
To Top

I just read an article that I think is valuable. In "Tired of Strategic Planning," Eric D. Beinhocker And Sarah Kaplan (McKinsey Quarterly) found that "Yet the extraordinary reality is that few executives think this time-consuming process pays off, and many CEOs complain that their strategic-planning process yields few new ideas and is often fraught with politics."

They agree with Henry Mintzberg that real strategic thinking happens informally and seldom in paneled rooms. Therefore the strategic planning process is really an oxymoron. However, the process can be valuable if the meetings focus on two major goals. "The first is to build 'prepared minds'-that is, to make sure that decision makers have a solid understanding of the business, its strategy, and the assumptions behind that strategy, thereby making it possible for executives to respond swiftly to challenges and opportunities as they occur in real time." The second is to ensure that strategies are carried out in an innovative manner.

Their research includes some 80 companies. You can get a copy of this article at no charge from: www.mckinseyquarterly.com -- Rick Maurer
To Top

For those of you who just can't get enough of me. . . (I can only imagine the comments I'm going to get in response to that straight line.)

Fortune columnist, Anne Fisher, interviewed me for her response to this reader's question. "Help! A couple of months ago, I was recruited from outside the company to run this small (28-person) department of really smart, experienced people. Top management wants me to make some major improvements in the way we do things, but I am running into a lot of passive resistance. I've had all-staff meetings and explained what we need to be doing, and the reaction has been, "Oh, yes, sure, no problem," and then everyone just goes on doing everything the same way as before. I think this is because morale is low, as a result of a lot of layoffs that happened right before I arrived, and because a couple of people in the department were passed over for promotion when I got this job. How can I get people lined up behind the changes we need to make?" Her response appears in the April 22 edition of Fortune.com. (or you can go to Fortune.com and search under my name).

"Leader Talk" on www.VoiceAmerica.com will interview me May 1 at 9 AM EDT for an hour. (It will be rebroadcast at 9 PM). You'll need RealAudio to hear it, but the software is free.

It's not too late to sign up for one of our free teleseminars to introduce you to my new book, Why Don't You Want What I Want? the dates are May 1, May 9 and May 28 (3:00 - 3:45 pm Eastern time). Contact Sandy at june@beyondresistance.com to register. -- Rick Maurer
To Top

The Gallup organization looked at how engaged people were at work. 33 % in small companies (fewer than 50 people) felt fully engaged. The number drops to 22% in companies with 1000 to 5000 employees. In those larger companies 19% of the workers feel actively disengaged compared to 12% in the small companies. (Gallup Management Journal. Fall 2001)

Gallup links engagement to productivity and they calculate that the larger companies could increase annual productivity by $3.5M a year by increasing the level of engagement to 33%.

Gallup researchers trace the higher engagement of small-company employees to their greater sense of local control, the feeling of connection to, and accountability for, company output. But at large companies, hierarchy and bureaucracy can make employees feel their contributions don't matter.

I agree those things are important, but it begs an important question: Why are only 33% of us engaged at work? What's wrong? That statistic is abysmal. I have a guess. People aren't engaged because their work doesn't matter; it lacks much intrinsic value. It is boring, mindless and mundane. You could give me lots of control and connections and accountability, but if the job is a dog, I won't be satisfied. I believe we need to search for ways to do all the things they suggest while finding ways to make work itself worth our time. -- Rick Maurer
To Top

I just came across an article that has caused me to examine my thinking regarding downsizing. I'm still opposed to it most of the time, but I'm beginning to believe that it is a needed tool and can be handled well.

The article is "Preserving Employee Morale During Downsizing" by Karen Mishra (Sloan Management Review, Winter, 1998). Like other authors before her, she cites research that shows
that most downsizing simply doesn't work. (My writing on the subject is based on much of this same research.)

Mishra takes the issue a step further. She studied successful and unsuccessful downsizing to see if there was a difference in how it was implemented. She found some interesting differences. She covers:

• How to avoid the loss of the most talented when the decision to downsize is announced.
• Why downsizing should be part of a long-term strategy and not a quick response to crisis. She even quotes Aaron Feuerstein, CEO of Malden Mills, the current poster child for treating employees well, on why he thinks downsizing is a necessary strategy. Feuerstein goes on to say that the key is growing at a pace so the business can absorb people whose positions are threatened by changes in technology.
• Who should craft the downsizing plan and what the task of this team should be.
• The type of training and information that should be provided to managers and all staff.

If you ever need to consider downsizing, I can think of no finer place to start your planning than this article. You can print it for free from www.findarticles.com. Search on "Karen Mishra." (If you're interested in my article "Alternatives to Downsizing," you can print it off our website) -- Rick Maurer
To Top

I believe that the ability to get other individuals excited about our ideas is a critical skill for most people working in organizations. Do you agree?

In preparation for my new book on the subject, I'd like to ask readers of Tools for a Change a few questions. I think the results of this brief survey could be helpful to all of us. As a thank you I will send you a report with the results of this survey. I need your results by May 18. (A suggestion: Highlight the text of this message and hit reply. In that way you can see the questions while you type your reply.)

1. To what extent is it important for you to get other individuals excited and committed to your ideas?

5 = Extremely important. This is a critical part of my job.
4 = Important. I need to get individuals interested in my ideas frequently.
3 = Somewhat important. Occasionally need to do this.
2 = Not very important.
1 = I never need to get others excited about my ideas.

If you responded with a 5, 4, or 3 please answer the following questions. (If you answered 2 or 1, you have just completed the survey. Thanks for your time.)

2. Why is getting others excited and committed to your ideas so important to you?

3. During the past year, what ideas have you tried to build support for?

4. What are the greatest challenges you face getting others interested (excited and committed) in your ideas?

5. Think about a time, in spite of the challenges, when you were successful in getting someone else excited and committed to an idea. What was different about that time? Here are some prompts that might help you answer that questions.

• In what way were the circumstances different or similar to previous times?
• What, if anything, did you do differently to prepare?
• Did you engage the other person in a different manner?
• Was your ability to be influenced by his or her thoughts and feelings any different this time? If so, what impact did this seem to have?

6. What is your role in your organization? (i.e. executive, manager project leader, professional with no management responsibilities, line staff, consultant, salesperson, independent business person)

Note: I'd like your permission to use comments verbatim in the report. I agree to keep your name and organization anonymous. If you have objections to that, please indicate.

Thanks for responding. -- Rick Maurer
To Top

Daimler-Chrysler's announcement to cut 26,000 jobs over the next three years is just the latest in a massive wave of downsizing. A few years ago, when downsizing seemed to be management's answer to everything, the research was stunning: not only didn't it work much of the time, but it often made matters worse. Surprisingly, downsizing seldom was a last resort, but the first strategy management tried when costs got out of hand. I fear that the lessons that weren't learned then, won't be heeded today either.

Based on research conducted by the US Department of Labor, I wrote an article that described thirteen alternatives to downsizing. Fortunately, my article's been lying dormant for the past few years, but, given recent trends, it may be of interest to you.

If you'd like a copy, you can print it without charge at: www.beyondresistance.com and click on Articles. Feel free to make as many copies as you'd like. I'd like to think that some decision maker somewhere might actually try one of these alternatives before resorting to downsizing. -- Rick Maurer
To Top

I just came across a fairly new website that I thought might interest you. www.hr.com includes articles and resources in many areas related to Human Resources: Compensation and Benefits, HR Information Systems, HR Management, Labor Relations, Legal, Organizational Development, Staffing, Training & Development.

This month, the site features an interview with Jay Galbraith talking about HR's role in creating a global organization. In the archives is an interview with Jeffrey Pfeffer whose work linking sound HR practices to bottom-line results is the strongest argument I have ever seen on why organizations should pay attention to the human equation.

The article search feature is good and provides a rich archive of material. (In fact, I was pleased to see that the site included a number of articles I had written. Ah, the wonders of the Internet.) -- Rick Maurer
To Top

Lester Thurow (professor of management and economics at MIT) wrote a fascinating article in this morning's Boston Globe (10/3/00).

Leaders at Nokia told him the reasons they dominate the cellular telephone market. Number one on the list was speed, but that's not uncommon these days. Number six was humbleness and ten was luck. Thurow writes, "Humbleness means that no matter how good you are, you recognize that you have a long way to go before you're really good and that you recognize that no matter how good you are, a lot of your success is traceable to good luck. Arrogance - 'We make no mistakes' and 'We're on top because we are good' - is the opposite of humbleness and always leads to disaster. And in the late 1980s, no one was more arrogant about their quality control than the Japanese.

He looks at the recent Bridgestone-Firestone tragedy, Mitsubishi's covering up auto defects for years, and the milk company, Snow Brand, poisoning people by recycling returned milk, as examples. Thurow says, "Arrogance does not just make you sloppy. It also means when you find a mistake you can't admit it."

When's the last time you saw humbleness or luck listed as major reasons why a company was successful? Thurow believes that humbleness is the most important of Nokia's core values, since it is the antidote to the sin of arrogance. -- Rick Maurer
To Top

Some say that major change in government is impossible or very slow at best. And they would be wrong. In 1989 Sen. Ernest Hollings called FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) "the sorriest bunch of bureaucratic jackasses I've ever known." That's changed. Through a comprehensive reinvention effort led by Director James Lee Witt, over 90 percent of aid victims rate FEMA favorably on ease of access, clarity of information, promptness, compassion, and overall quality of service. Sen. Bob Graham saw "a 180 degree turnaround" compared to the way FEMA handled Hurricane Andrew. The list goes on.

Through Witt's strong and inclusive leadership, FEMA's attention to clearly defining its mission, and listening to customers and employees, provides a textbook example of what's possible.

The Mercatus Center at George Mason University just published a report that describes how FEMA made this dramatic transformation. If you care about change in government or in any large organization, you should read this study. You can receive a free copy of the report from the Mercatus Center online at www.mercatus.org or by calling Kirstin Lindsey at 703-993-4918. -- Rick Maurer
To Top

We just published a new book. Building Capacity for Change Sourcebook is a collection of practical tools you can use to get a major change started or get a derailed project back on track.

I've included two tools from the book on our website. I hope you'll take them for a test drive. You may use both at no cost.

• Conditions for Change. This assessment tool is designed for people just about to begin a major change. Most plans focus on technical and financial concerns; the fifteen questions in Conditions for Change address the human part of change. As most of you know, inattention to human concerns is the primary reason why major changes fail. www.beyondresistance.com/source
• Guidelines for Holding a Planning Meeting. This is a simple one-page checklist of things to include if you want to get real involvement and input from people during a meeting. www.beyondresistance.com/source

Once you reach the website, click on Test Drive. -- Rick Maurer
To Top

My interest in resistance to change runs deep, and I am especially interested in strategies that avoid (or at least reduce) resistance before it occurs. You probably know that I am a fan of Appreciative Inquiry. It gets people involved in planning change in a unique way. It focuses on what's going right as a way to build a foundation for moving toward something new. While the approach doesn't dismiss problems, it spends far more time learning from what's already working well. When people move toward something compelling in a way that respects past accomplishments, the chance for commitment and sustainability is far greater than approaches that demand people give up the old ways and build from scratch.

Locating the Energy for Change: An Introduction to Appreciative Inquiry, by Charles Elliott, (IISD. Winnipeg. 1999.) is a very good book on the subject. Part I explores the theoretical underpinning, part II shows how to run the process, and Part III offers case studies. The cases run from its use in African villages to one written by John Carter and Pam Johnson involving one of the world's largest accounting firms. Highly recommended. -- Rick Maurer
To Top

My article on using resistance as a force for change, just appeared in OD Practitioner. It includes my most recent thinking on levels of resistance. (If you'd like a copy, click on the Articles section of our website and print Why Resistance Matters.)

In brief, I explore three levels of resistance to change. Level 1 is based on information. People don't know the details, are confused, or disagree with us based on interpretation of the facts. Level 2 is an emotional reaction to the proposed change. Their bodies react. Blood pressure, pulse, and adrenaline rises. The ability to listen diminishes. This is a flight-flight response. Level 3 is bigger than the change at hand. People react to their history with us or who we represent, i.e. racial, cultural, union-management differences.

Most major changes in organizations evoke Level 2 and sometimes Level 3 issues. But, leaders tend to limit their response to Level 1 issues. They bombard people with information. (PowerPoint was invented for Level 1!) These tactics never address deeper issues. The article explores these levels and discusses ways to work most effectively when facing even the deepest levels of resistance.

Tools for a Change is a resource for people interested in the ideas covered in Rick's book, Beyond the Wall of Resistance. For more information about the book or ways in which we can assist you in building capacity for change in your organization, visit www.beyondresistance.com. or call 703 525-7074. -- Rick Maurer
To Top

I found a rather obscure book that I thought might interest you. The Art of Focused Conversation (R. Brian Stanford, editor, Canadian Institute of Cultural Affairs. Toronto. 1997)

We waste lots of time because we don't address the right issues. The authors suggest that there are four levels of questions that need to be asked in meetings.

• Objective Level - these questions focus on facts and data.
• Reflective Level - these focus on personal reaction to what is being presented
• Interpretative Level - focuses on the implications
• Decisional Level -- focus on what next steps.

I find that the Reflective and Interpretive Levels are often glossed over, robbing groups of valuable personal reactions and insight as well as sound analysis. By structuring a meeting around the four levels of questions, each gets full attention.

The first third of the book provides the rationale and description of the levels. This is solid. The rest of the book offers ways to apply these questions in 100 different types of meetings. For example, reviewing a major report, mediating a difficult situation, and interviewing a job applicant. Although these examples are sound, I really didn't need to see 100 examples.

You can only purchase the book from the Institute for Cultural Affairs. It is not sold on Amazon.com or in bookstores in the states. US number: 773 769-6363 ext. 272. $25.35 plus shipping. In Canada: 416 691-2316. $34.95 (CA) plus shipping.

Tools for a Change is a resource for people interested in the ideas covered in Rick's book, Beyond the Wall of Resistance. For more information about the book or ways in which we can assist you in building capacity for change in your organization, visit www.beyondresistance.com. or contact him directly at rick@beyondresistance.com. -- Rick Maurer
To Top

The "Baldrige Index," a fictitious stock fund comprised of U.S. companies that have received the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award, has once again outperformed the Standard & Poor's 500 for a fifth year by more than 200 percent.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) "invested" a hypothetical $1,000 in each of the six whole company winners - ADAC Laboratories, Eastman Chemical Co., Federal Express Corp., Motorola Inc. and Solectron Corp. (1991 and 1997 winner.) The investments were tracked from the month following the announcement through December 1998.

Thanks to the Association for Quality and Participation's e-zine for this piece. By the way, AQP's Spring conference will be in Las Vegas the end of this month. If you're interested in seeing how the power of employee involvement can build strong quality processes in organizations, I urge you to attend. I go just about every year. I'll be glad to make sure you get details if you're interested. -- Rick Maurer
To Top

In The Human Equation (HBR Press. 1998), Jeffrey Pfeffer argues that "high performance management practices" make good business sense.  He cites studies that cut across many  industries.

The results are impressive: one study showed a $41,000 increase in stock market value per employee. . . Another showed a decrease in turnover of 7 percent and $27K more in sales per employee. . .  Productivity gains of 33 percent in auto assembly. . . 65 percent increase in operating profits in the apparel industry. . . A study of IPOs showed a significant difference in the survival rates of those using these  practices   a 42 percent higher survival rate among those that included all employees in financial rewards.

Criteria for high performance management systems include: 1. employment security, 2. selective hiring of new  personnel, 3. self-managed teams and decentralization of decision making, 4. comparatively high compensation contingent on organizational performance, 5. extensive training, 6. reduced status distinction, 7. extensive  sharing of financial and performance information throughout the organization.

Sadly, he finds that organizations are actually moving away from these high performance practices. He demonstrates why conventional wisdom  on management practices such as downsizing is not all that wise. I highly recommend Pfeffer's book for anyone who wants data and practical advice on how to turn these values into action. -- Rick Maurer
To Top

In a recent study of Fortune 1000 companies, Edward Lawler at USC found that employee involvement yielded higher benefits to organizations than Total Quality Management (TQM) or  reengineering.

TQM had a return on investment of about 15 percent, about the same as companies that did not use TQM. Reengineering had a return on investment of 15.4 percent in contrast to 13.4 in those who  didn't apply this form of restructuring. Companies that used employee involvement had a return of 19.1 percent versus 15.2 for those who didn't use it to any great extent.

The value of employee involvement over  reengineering is that the organization continues to build capacity as people learn more and develop their ability to solve problems and make decisions. According to Lawler, reengineering often offers a one-time benefit.  (And, in my view, the fallout from the almost inevitable downsizing that accompanies most reengineering, works against the promise of "lean and mean" efficiency.)

Since only 12 percent of the  organizations studied use employee involvement to any significant degree, this approach offers an almost unlimited range of possibilities for organizations to find areas for improvement. (Source: Reuters News Service.)-- Rick Maurer
To Top

I had hoped that the tidal wave of downsizing had passed. But, during the past two months there has been a resurgence in its popularity. Most studies confirm that downsizing  leaves people bruised and far less productive. It works against the gains leaders often anticipate. In fact, it often does not pay off financially. 

If the wolf is at your door, say the Asian crisis has  killed your exports, then there may be no alternative. But, for those of you who are still relatively healthy, this may be the right time to begin considering some "what if?" alternatives. What could we begin  doing today that might save us from downsizing sometime in the future?

In my article "Alternatives to Downsizing," building on work done by the US Department of Labor, I suggest thirteen proven things  you can do instead of downsizing. (I also include references to studies on the actual costs and benefits of downsizing.) I urge you to read and distribute it before its too late. (You can download "Alternatives. .  ." from our website or ask us for a print copy.) -- Rick Maurer
To Top

Appreciative Inquiry is a unique approach to major change. Instead of focusing solely on what's wrong and what problems need to be solved, it pays more attention to what's working  well and how that can be enhanced. It makes sense. People are more excited about working toward something good than trying just to dig themselves out of a hole. Expanding what's already working well meets less  resistance than trying to eliminate programs that are broken.

Until now, the only published material I've seen has been fairly academic and not geared to the working executive and manager. There are two new books  that fill that gap. The Thin Book of Appreciative Inquiry. (Sue A. Hammond) is short. It won't make you an expert, but will give you enough so that you can decide if you want to explore it further. Think of this as the  Cliff Notes

version of Appreciative Inquiry. Lessons From the Field: Applying Appreciative Inquiry, (Hammond and Royal) describes the process through the use of case studies ranging from corporations to hospitals to  communities. (You can order the book through amazon.com or by calling Practical Press at 1-888316-9544.)

I've worked some with Appreciative Inquiry and think that it holds a lot of promise as a way to build  support for major changes. -- Rick Maurer
To Top