|
"What type of Change are you trying to implement?" To
most people that's a nonsensical question. A typical response
is, "Type? What do you mean type of change? We're implementing
a change! Change is change!" Or, they might have some sense
that they can distinguish different types of change, and that
some changes are "easy", and others are “difficult”...or
that it is an organizational change vs. a technological one. Fundamental challenges
There are fundamental challenges with the distinctions of easy
vs. difficult, or technological vs. organizational. They either
fail to cover the entire spectrum of possible changes, or the
lines separating the categories are too fuzzy.
At what point along the spectrum of change does a project shift
from easy to difficult? Where do we place the change "Learning
to play the bagpipes"? Is it organizational? Or is it technological?
Or do we need another category - Painful?
Another failing is that the distinctions between one category
and another do not provide us any real benefit. How is organizational
change fundamentally different from technological change? Unless
the scheme we use adds value to the process, creating these kinds
of distinctions only adds confusion. What is required is a division
that makes sense.
Perhaps worse than choosing inappropriate categories, is using
no categories. This strategy leads to confusing assertions such
as "People resist change" - often spoken by people
who have willingly embraced huge personal changes such as marriage,
having children, moving homes, learning a new language etc. etc.
By continuing to think of change as "one thing" we
ignore the consequent contradictions.
However, there is a way to split change up into three distinct
and useful categories. Consider the following division based
on the "source" of the change relative to us as individuals:
Type I – That which is done to us.
Type II – That which we do to ourselves.
Type III – That which we do to others.
(Note: These could be broken down into further sub-categories,
which deserve a discussion all of their own and will be the subject
of future articles.)
Type I Change
As a rule, nobody likes Type I Change. We dislike being told what
to do. Why? Because it interferes with our definition of "self" – it
interferes with our sense of independence, freedom and control
over our own destiny. This is the type of change we're most likely
to resist within the context of organizational change. Type II Change
Type II Change is different, very different. We're in control.
We're deciding for ourselves that doing something different is
necessary. Because it's our decision, we don't resist it. This
does not mean Type II Change is easy. Learning to play those bagpipes
or to speak Chinese, and losing weight, moving to a new city or
starting a new job are all difficult tasks, but we don't resist
these changes in the same way we resist when someone else tells
us we have to do them.
Type III Change
Type III Change is Type I Change from the other side of the fence.
If we're implementing Type III Change, then someone else is likely
to be experiencing Type I Change.
Relocating the factory
Take, for example, an organization that has decided, for a variety of reasons,
to relocate its factory. This change falls into all three categories depending
on who's looking at the relocation.
For management, the relocation is obviously a Type II Change.
It's their idea; they're in control. While relocating is difficult,
it is something they've embraced by deciding it is necessary.
Coping with this “self inflicted” Change is relatively
easy.
For management, it's also a Type III Change. It is one they
are going to assert to their employees.
But for the Employees, this is a Type I Change. A change that
is required of them by someone else.
In the management of organizational change, what is often
overlooked, and where change becomes difficult, is that a Type
II Change for the organization is a Type I Change for employees.
If we take into account how we, as individuals, react to Type
I Change and accept that our employees see organizational change
as a Type I Change, then the relocation of the factory, or
any other organizational change, will be easier to implement.
|
