Managing Change Study by ProSci
ProSci’s Change Management Best Practices study involved more than 100 organizations from 22
countries on six continents. The objective of the study was to uncover best practices for managing the
human side of change and for creating great executive sponsorship.
Most change projects in this study impacted business processes as well as systems and organizational structure. The
top business processes being changed include:
· Information (computer) services
· Manufacturing
· Health care services
· Product development
· Finance/banking
· Human resources
More than 50% of the participants implemented dramatic process change. More than 90% implemented process
changes that crossed departmental boundaries. Almost 50% expect the change to impact their entire enterprise.
The size of the staff impacted by these changes averages around several hundred employees, with approximately
one third of the projects impacting more than 500 employees. Cost reduction was the strongest reason for change,
followed by customer service and competitive pressures.
Overwhelmingly, participants cited executive-sponsor involvement as the single greatest contributor to success of
their change management program. Other contributors included:
· Participation in the change by all management levels in the organization
· Physical change – a new tool or system, or movement to a new facility
· Extreme pressure to change coming from outside the organization
Three change obstacles were cited most frequently:
1. Employees resistant to change
2. Management behaviors not supportive of the change
3. Inadequate resources or budget
With more than 70% of projects, an executive manager initiated the change; however, in nearly half the projects,
accountability for the change was passed on to a lower-level manager, and the executive manager was not the
visible sponsor.
This delegation of sponsorship was cited as the number one mistake made by executive managers. Overall, the top-
five biggest mistakes top-management sponsors made during a major change were:
1. Not being directly involved with the project
2. Not engaging all management levels in the change
3. Sending inconsistent signals or not communicating enough
4. Shifting focus or changing priorities too soon
5. Not providing adequate resources
Participants outlined nine distinct activities that good executive sponsors do to support a major change, including
communication, involvement with the project team, and interactions with operational managers and other senior
managers. This report describes these activities according to the phase of the project (planning, design,
implementation).
Teams also outlined their change management methodology, and listed those change management activities that
should be completed during each phase of the project. This report describes those activities cited by teams who
rated their change program successful or very successful.
Change management activities that had the greatest impact on project success included:
· Open and consistent communications
· Personnel changes to support the new organization
· Support from all levels of management
· Pre-implementation training of employees
When asked what they would do differently next time, many project teams would have started their change
management activities earlier in the project, attended change management training, and increased the involvement
of managers at all levels in both change management planning and on-going activities.
Teams used a variety of communication media and methods to manage change. Effective methods included face-to-
face communications, email updates, management-team updates by the project team, and CEO or senior-manager
presentations. The most frequently used communication tools, by a wide margin, were email and intra-company mail.
In nearly all cases, teams would have communicated with employees more frequently, with three-quarters stating a
preference for communicating information about the project at least weekly.
A majority of respondents felt that the change management team was the most appropriate group to generate
training requirements for employees. However, the training organization was, by far, considered the most
appropriate organization to develop and deliver training.
Recognizing desirable behavior and managing individuals who were viewed as obstacles to the project were difficult
tasks for most teams. The most successful methods cited were:
· Personal recognition (by direct supervisor or top-level manager)
· Bonuses (tied to project completion or the completion of phases of the project)
Over 50% of teams used one or more consultants. For nearly 75% of teams, the consultant was either a facilitator or
advisor to the change process, and in most cases the consultant was a change management expert, with some
consultants bringing both technical and change management experience to the team.
While most teams had unique needs, in general they expected their consultants to contribute in three areas. They
were looking for project and process experience, help with communications, and meeting facilitation.
When asked what to look for in consultants, teams cited:
· relevant experience
· adequate breadth
· a successful track record
· a willingness to transfer knowledge
· training and facilitation skills
· integrity
More than 80% of teams reported that they would use consultants again on their next project.
The detailed findings from the study include:
· Factors that influence successful change
· Actions that good executive sponsors take
· How to form an effective team
· Change strategies and practices that are most effective
· Communication tools that work the best
· How to create an effective training plan
· Roles of consultants
AllenWeb Site - since 1995
Managing Change Study by ProSci - May 1998
| Change Management |
| Disclaimer: This is Paul Allen's personal business library. Articles and papers contained therein are for his use and reference. While this information is being made public by being published on the internet, any use of any material or guidance contained herein is at one's own risk. Neither the author Paul Allen nor Project Executive Group have any responsibility if anything is taken from this website and utilized. While we believe these articles and papers make a significant contribution to learning, beware that anyone who uses this information does so at their own risk. We make no representations to accuracy or completeness. |
| Return |
