Can we learn from the typical problems that occur in change to approach change in a way that mitigates the problems?
David Nadler¹ identifies three problems that are inherent in change and the resulting implications for change management:
Each of the implications in the figure above can be viewed as a countermeasure to the associated problem that occurs.
Do lean / growth / learning / pdca approaches to change mitigate the identified problems of resistance, control, and power?
1. The problem of resistance with the countermeasure to motivate change.
2. The problem of control with the countermeasure to manage the transition.
The problem of control derives from:
• That change disrupts existing management control.
• The assumption that the current state and the desired future state are both stable while the transition state between the two is not thus requiring a different management system and structure to effectively coordinate the work.
Which leads to the questions:
• Does a mindset that management’s role is to support rather than to control remove the problem of control?
• If the desired future state was to support rather than to control could the support mindset be used for managing the transition state? Can we learn our way forward with a learning / growth mindset?
• With a lean / growth / learning / pdca mindset are we always in transition as we are continuously improving and thus managing the transition is the way we work and not a countermeasure to a problem to be overcome?
3. The problem of power with the countermeasure to shape the political dynamics of change.
The supposition is that though there is always political behavior within organizations it intensifies during the transition state as the uncertainty of change creates ambiguity leading to greater political activity for what will emerge in the future state.
If we acknowledge that uncertainty is the reality of the world in which we live and use a consistent / stable approach of a lean / growth / learning / pdca mindset to learn through it does that provide the stability needed to minimize political activity?
The problems and implications noted in Figure 5 above were identified by David Nadler in the following article:
¹Nadler, D. A. (1981). "Managing Organizational Change: An Integrative Perspective." Journal of Applied Behavioral Science. 17: 191-211.
For your reference the theoretical frameworks Nadler used to identify the problems and implications are included below:
Nadler identified these problems through the Beckhard & Harris change management model:
Beckhard, R. & Harris, R. (1977) Organizational Transitions. Reading, MA, Addison-Wesley.
And the Nadler and Tushman Congruence Model of Organizational Behavior:
“This perspective is thus a contingency approach. There is not one best organization design, or style of management, or method of working. Rather, different patterns of organization and management will be most appropriate in different situations. The model recognizes the fact that individuals, tasks, strategies, and environments may differ greatly from organization to organization”.
Nadler notes that the problems occur in the transition state moving between the current state and the desired future state.