May 14, 2013
I asked several practitioners whom I respect to write guest posts about how they related to two previously released series: Character/Presence and Cultivating Character. Marcelo Manucci, a seasoned change professional, is the third contributor to this series. Marcelo describes three traps that can impede the success of change practitioners (pride, hypocrisy, and deceit) when they fail to understand the impact of both “who we are” and “what we do” while managing change. Marcelo also poses two questions for keeping the principles of our “character” and “presence” actively engaged.
September 19, 2012
Many challenges and roadblocks hinder the successful execution of major change, but few rival the obstructive power unleashed when people act as—or allow themselves to be treated as—victims. Victimization is a disease that destroys the confidence a person needs to sustain a transformative journey, and it has reached epidemic proportions among not only targets, but sponsors and agents as well. In this series, I will discuss the basics of the disease, how it breeds in work environments, how change exacerbates the syndrome, and how we can limit victim tendencies in ourselves and others.
August 28, 2012
As I described earlier in this series of posts, what drove my original interest in the Piper Alpha event was my desire to find a metaphor to reflect the commitment needed to sustain movement away from unacceptable conditions. The burning-platform story is about the level of resolve it takes to break from the past and […]
August 21, 2012
Contrary to how some people relate to the term “burning platform,” I don’t see it as a story of disaster. To me it’s a tale of courage and tenacity that illustrates the commitment necessary to face the risk and uncertainty inherent in departing from the current state of affairs.
I never intended to give the impression that an emergency was always necessary to motivate sustained major change. If one word is associated with the story, I would prefer it be resolve rather than peril. People don’t have to face a life-threatening situation or organizational insolvency in order to support fundamental change. I’ll say more about that in this post.
June 5, 2012
I have been talking in this series about how to respond to a client who wants you to give him or her a big-picture view of what the organization will have to address to fully realize the goals of a large change initiative. In my first post, I shared some suggestions for answering the question, “What is a realistic set of expectations I should have about embarking on this change?” In the second post, I began answering a second question: “Can you give me some general DOs and DON’Ts that will likely apply to what we’re facing?” In this final post, I’ll finish answering that question.
February 7, 2012
The Emotional Side to Facilitating Change
A great deal of emotional investment is necessary to achieve the desired outcome of strategic initiatives, yet most change endeavors emphasize the intellectual components (data reviews, critical activities and milestones, logical presentations, rational decision-making, etc.). That’s understandable—intellectual commitment is easier to come by. People often grasp the implications of a change at a rational level quickly but then find that they need more time and effort to make the necessary emotional adjustments (such as changing relationships with co-workers or a shift in the political landscape).
When emotional accommodation is too far behind the logical acceptance of change, dual—often contradictory—signals are sent by the person facing the transition. This kind of split-level commitment can produce confusion, mixed signals, and ambiguous communication for all involved.
In this three-part series, I will talk about recognizing and responding to the deep emotion of transformational change.