Skip to main content

Change Management or Change Leadership?

I don't like the the term "Change Management." I think it is an oxymoron. Management implies control. Change implies chaos. These are diametric opposites. Change is unpredictable. I think this implicit conflict between wanting change and wanting to stay in control is the reason that changing an organization is so difficult.

I believe you can lead change, inspire change or unleash change. IMHO, trying to manage change means you will fail. ( See also The Deadliest Sin of Change Leadership ).

What does this difference mean for change managers?

I was once recommended a video on change management, and the essential message was understanding how people react to change based on the Kübler-Ross Model, better know as the five phases of grief. My first reaction was WTF!? But then I realized this kind of reaction is a) probably quite widespread, and b) a consequence of one group people doing the thinking ("managers"), and another group having to execute and/or suffer the consequences of that decision.

Why is change so difficult to do? Because the way most people go about it provokes a series of responses that begin with denial and anger and end most likely with resigned acceptance. Unless the change initiative dies first. Can this be a promising strategy?

When teaching and coaching change, I draw primarily on three sources:
  1. Steve Denning's Leadership Storytelling: First get people's attention, then create desire, then reinforce with reasons. He uses 'Springboard Stories' to encourage people to think about a problem and imagine the potential of that problem solved; he uses 'the Story of the Future' to help people understand what that solution could mean for them; and finally 'Remembering the future' is a story telling approach approach to envisioning and planning the transformation, based on the assumption that it has already happened. (see also Remembering Heaven)
  2. Siraj Sirajuddin's Temenos: Create deep mutual understanding within the leadership team -- this also creates strong mutual trust in the team. They then can create a compelling shared vision that they can and want to carry forward. (see also My Experience Building Deep Trust)
  3. Simon Sinek's talk at the TEDx PugetSound on how great leaders inspire action: Great leaders have a compelling answer to the question why? I am just discovering the power of this one, but so far it resonates deeply with me.
If you want to lead a change in your organization, check out my Master Class Workshop: Scrum, Vision and Team Performance. You learn to apply these approaches while improving the effectiveness of your Scrum and Kanban Teams.
What is the role of management? To lead change. To inspire change. To bring problems to the people who can solve them. I like the phase change leadership much better than change management, because leadership implies inspiration. Inspired leadership catalyzes lasting change all the time.


Popular posts from this blog

Scaling Scrum: SAFe, DAD, or LeSS?

Participants in last week's Scrum MasterClass wanted to evaluate approaches to scaling Scrum and Agile for their large enterprise. So I set out to review the available frameworks. Which one is best for your situation?

Recently a number of approaches have started gaining attention, including the Scaled Agile Framework ("SAFe") by Dean Leffingwell, Disciplined Agile Development (DAD), by Scott Ambler, and Large Scale Scrum (LeSS), by Craig Larman and Bas Vodde. (Follow the links for white papers or overviews of each approach).

How to compare these approaches? My starting point is Scrum in the team. Scrum has proven very effective at helping teams perform, even though it does not directly address the issues surrounding larger organizations and teams. An approach to scaling Scrum should not be inconsistent with Scrum itself.

Scrum implements a small number of principles and constraints: Inspect and Adapt. An interdisciplinary Team solves the problem. Deliver something of va…

Sample Definition of Done

Why does Scrum have a Definition of Done? Simple, everyone involved in the project needs to know and understand what Done means. Furthermore, Done should be really done, as in, 'there is nothing stopping us from earning value with this function, except maybe the go-ahead from the Product Owner. Consider the alternative:
Project Manager: Is this function done?
Developer: Yes
Project Manager: So we can ship it?
Developer: Well, No. It needs to be tested, and I need to write some documentation, but the code works, really. I tested it... (pause) ...on my machine. What's wrong with this exchange? To the developer and to the project manager, "done" means something rather different. To the developer in this case, done means: "I don't have to work on this piece of code any more (unless the tester tells me something is wrong)." The project leader is looking for a statement that the code is ready to ship.

At its most basic level, a definition of Done creates a sh…

10 Warning Signs, that your team is not self-organizing

How do you know that self-organization is working? The Bern Chapter of Scrum Breakfast Club looked into this questions, and identified the following warning signs (which I have taken the liberty of translating).

The team reports to the Scrum Master at the Daily ScrumPeople wait for instructions from the Scrum MasterTeam members don't hold each other responsible [for their commitments]The same impediment comes up twice"That's the way it is" => resignation"I" instead of "We"Flip charts are lonelyCulture of conflict-avoidanceDecisions processes are unclear, nor are they discussedPersonal goals are more important than team goals
To this list I would add my a couple of my favorites:
you don't see a triangle on the task board (not working according prioritization of stories)after the daily Scrum, people return directly to their desks (no collaboration)there are a least as many stories in progress as team members (no pairing)
P.S. You can join the …