This is the last post in my series on developing synergistic work teams. I have been describing a four-phase model that includes Interacting, Appreciative Understanding, Integrating, and Implementing.

Phase IV: Implementing

Finally, all the hard work of communicating, and appreciating and merging divergent views begins to pay off. The synergy process I’ve been describing has many benefits:

• Enhancing communication among sponsors, agents, and targets
• Developing work climates where different options about a change can be dealt with in an open, positive manner where diversity is valued
• Establishing a change environment that promotes creative problem solving and a willingness of individuals to modify their positions in order to merge various perspectives (although this also occurs)
• Providing a relationship framework between practitioner and client that fosters productive application and learning

As important as these advantages are, they are not enough. The bottom line for the synergy I’m describing is the successful execution of important organizational changes. All the previous synergistic activities must combine to produce a powerful force for implementing change-oriented action plans.

The last phase of the synergy process is intended to focus the momentum that has been generated in the preceding phases and channel it toward accomplishment of the initiative at hand. The necessary conditions in this phase are basically sound management practices. Their uniqueness lies not on the conditions themselves, but in what these “basics of management” are attempting to advance—1 + 1 > 2 working relationships dedicated to realizing important change.. It is important to manage this energy force as we would any other valuable resource…carefully and with forethought.

There are four basic conditions necessary for the Implementing Phase.

Establish specific, measurable goals and objectives regarding change implementation.

People working within synergistic relationships realize the necessity to plan action steps that are specific, measurable, and goal oriented. Without such direction, it is virtually impossible to manage resources, determine priorities, or ensure individual activities are compatible.

The “greater than” symbol (>) in the synergistic equation is in itself a statement of measurement. Without a baseline to judge progress, how can the effect of the change be verified? Production or delivery of services should be measured before and after the change implementation to indicate synergistic growth in output capabilities. Synergy can only be achieved by setting challenging, but attainable, realization-based goals. When reached, these goals establish new standards for subsequent efforts.

Monitor implementation progress and supply necessary reinforcement to ensure success.

When implementing action plans, synergistic relationships don’t rely solely on being definitive about change goals; they also maintain oversight on the progress or problems that develop. This follow-through behavior is important to task completion, and in its absence, many otherwise sound action plans tend to fail.

Poor tracking of change results is typically not the result of laziness. The lack of a monitoring posture by those implementing organizational change usually occurs because of a misunderstanding about how people relate to stated goals. Once a common goal has been established and declared as important to accomplish, many people operate as if all parties involved will continue to perceive that goal in the same way. They assume no new environmental factors will impact efforts toward goal achievement. To the contrary, if there is one constant that should be planned for, it is the ongoing modification of perceptions. Human beings have a vast capacity for shifting viewpoints, attitudes, or feelings regarding any event, and this is especially true during organizational change.

Today’s world, including our work environments, is a constantly shifting arena. New variables are introduced continuously. Such turbulence requires unending vigilance and an early-warning feedback system to identify and address new dangers or opportunities that could hinder realization of the intended outcomes. Far too many organizational change plans are defeated simply because of a lack of ability and/or willingness on the part of the sponsors to take a firm position on the necessity for task accomplishment. Equally true, positive reinforcement for appropriate behavior and progress is an absolute requirement for successful transformational change.

Implement change plans at a speed and in a manner that acknowledges the needs of all the key constituencies.

Working in a synergistic relationship requires that people remain sensitive to the needs represented by three domains or frames of reference—individuals, teams, and the organizational view of reality.

Often, individual members have varying perceptions or capacities related to a change event. It is not unusual for sponsors, agents, and targets to respond quite differently to an impending change. When this happens in non-synergistic climates, people sometimes begin to operate at their own speed, knowledge, and competency levels while decreasing their joint participation with other members. For example, agents may find it too frustrating or slow to work with targets, so they develop implementation plans on their own.

For most people, it seems only natural that those more competent at a task should move ahead faster than the others. This would be the case but for one thing: In determining that the change required a synergistic approach, the sponsors, agents, and targets have already acknowledged the need for “interdependent” activity among themselves (condition I-A).

What this means is that individuals may sometimes need to operate at less than their full potential so that the total implementation team can remain a unified work unit. Demonstration of advanced individual capabilities should be limited to tasks not requiring synergistic teamwork. Superstars operating primarily in their own best interest gain a lot of attention, but they don’t consistently win ball games.

The dynamics of this “individual versus group capability” struggle is also applicable when an entire team attempts to implement action plans within an organization. For example, if a work group involved in executing a specific change has a significantly higher understanding of and readiness for the shift than other groups being affected, particular care should be exercised. Choosing to proceed with the implementation at its own speed and ignoring signals of resistance from others in the system could prove fatal for the project. Many technically sound change plans have faltered because of the inability of the implementing team to understand the psychological reasons other impacted groups might resist, as well as how and at what speed to respond to such resistance.

Modify the implementation plan when necessary to ensure it is relevant to current reality.

Turbulent environments produce constantly shifting variables. Reacting to these shifts in a way that facilitates realization requires a constant updating of action plans. This includes administering positive or negative reinforcement (condition IV-B, described earlier in this post), but sometimes the people don’t need to change—the plans do.

A common error among architects of change is “falling in love” with their original plans. They identify so closely with the path they have formulated that they can’t distinguish between resistance to the plans and a personal attack. When this happens, they tend to invest more energy in defending their course of actions than they do working toward solving the problem or achieving the change’s true intent. When resistance to a change is surfaced, the synergistic relationships involved must be capable of either applying the appropriate reinforcement, redesigning the implementation plans, or both.

Another problem with becoming too attached or ego-invested in action plans is that such behavior tends to cause people to violate various conditions in the model. Critical to the entire synergistic process is an ongoing commitment to the four “necessary conditions” described in each of the phases. In a sense, the ultimate condition for success is to stay true to the conditions.

Summary

When people combine their efforts on a task, the capacity to operate together effectively can be characterized as either self-destructive (1 + 1 < 2), static (1 + 1 = 2), or synergistic (1 + 1 > 2). Synergistic relationships have many advantages over the self-destructive and static types of working relationships. The most important benefit is the optimal use of resources needed to adapt successfully to ongoing change. Synergy, though often difficult to achieve, is worth the investment of time and effort when applied to critically important change endeavors.

The process by which people can develop and utilize synergistic relationships includes meeting certain prerequisites and applying a four-phase model.

Prerequisites

• Sobering Implications: There are significant consequences associated with succeeding or failing to realize the change’s intended outcomes.
• Common goal: People focus on relevant, shared activities and minimize or eliminate time spent on nonessential concerns and issues.
• Interdependence: This sets the stage for unified action to maximize the participation of each key player.

The Four-Phase Synergy Process

The phases of the synergistic process are interdependent in nature, with each presupposed by the others.

Phase I: Interacting

• Provides the necessary conditions to enable people to communicate effectively
• Develops a facilitating climate in which negative judgments are delayed, active empathy is demonstrated, and divergent perspectives are legitimized and valued
• Allows for the merging of individual viewpoints into a common perspective that can be supported by all
• Channels synergistic energy into goal-directed, measurable action plans that reflect sensitivity toward individual members, the team, and the organization
• Establishes a vehicle for the culmination of the earlier stages

Phase II: Appreciative Understanding

Phase III: Integrating

Phase IV: Implementing

Choose the appropriate time to build synergistic relationships.

In this series, I have described how I think synergy works and provided a model for developing it among key players in the change process. Since the early ’80s, when the dynamics supporting synergy became clear for me and the four-phase model was developed, it has been applied to countless people in numerous  organizations throughout the world. It has proven useful at virtually every point in the change process:

• When the practitioner and client are first embarking on a particular endeavor, to create a solid foundation during early contracting about their expectations for a working relationship
• While organizational change is being considered or during initial planning, to provide early identification of potential areas of  target resistance to synergy
• Before the change has been announced, to determine discrepancies between sponsors’ and targets’ expectations regarding the change and one another’s roles
• Any time after the announcement has been made, to identify specific areas of opposition between sponsor and target frames of reference and to provide corrective measures
• After project implementation is complete, to assess if a  synergistic advantage was achieved once the implementation process is finished

As professional change facilitators, we play a vital role in enabling the synergistic advantage to materialize for our clients.

It has been my experience that non-synergistic interactions are prevalent within many implementation efforts. Much of the time, what is missing is a model to better understand and provide guidance for developing 1+1>2 relationships.

It is my belief that weak synergy among sponsors, agents, and targets or between practitioners and their clients is usually the result of human habit, not human nature. The difference is that habits can be modified. My hope is that sharing this synergy framework might serve other practitioners who are trying to foster this kind of interaction with their clients.

There are many ways our profession encourages synergistic relationships during change. This series reflects only one. I urge you to share what your experience has shown as helpful in this area as well.

Go to the beginning of the series.

In the next series, I will talk about recognizing and responding to the deep emotion of transformational change.