We spend so much time and money trying to make machines more
human. Yet, we spend an equal
amount of time trying to make humans more like machines. If you leave the human element out of
change initiatives, you will usually have a lower success rate.
In business, there is a belief that if you tell people they
have to change
it will happen, as though they are machines. There is also the
belief that if you provide incentives they will be persuaded to ‘just do it’.
Yet, companies and civilizations struggle to transform the way they think and
act, unless a catastrophic event occurs that forces people to behave
differently. When the catastrophe
is no longer present, people generally go back to old behaviors.
To remedy that, corporations spend millions of dollars
teaching new skills and competencies as well as product knowledge. With that
tactic, you can have lazy or unmotivated people who possess better skills and
knowledge. And transformation still lags.
The dilemma this strategy creates is an expectation that
people will make the leap on their own.
It does not include the fact that people have their own perspectives of
change, disruption, management and themselves. When people have to develop new perspectives, it can be
chaotic. In some cases, a person’s perspective could go against the
organization regardless of incentives and rewards. In other cases, they may possess the greatest skills and
product knowledge. And their perspective of the company’s values is negative.
If you do not address the perspective of each person, you will often see people
struggle when they are placed in bigger positions that require new thinking,
behaviors, skills and competencies.
To make matters worse, for decades, proponents of transformation
have advocated dissemination of information with the hope that better-informed
employees will transform. That is analogous to providing a child with an
informative book on how to ride a bike. When the child gets on the bike, they
still fall. Ask employees to transform the way the think and act can appear
just as dangerous as getting on a bicycle for the first time. How do you think
differently if you have thought the same way about yourself and the world your
entire life?
Therefore, if people do not go through some kind of formal
training where they can develop new perspectives, it will take longer for them
become effective in the job change. The training would be analogous to the
training of an athlete. For example, Tiger Woods changed his golf swing. In the
beginning, he underperformed. As he mastered the new swing, he became champion
again.
Tiger Woods is an example of someone who can transform in
his profession without a catastrophe. Instead of waiting for a catastrophic
event or imposing fire drills to orchestrate change, incorporate a method that
has the same impact without the negative side effects. For many people, a
simulated disruption can be done in a safe environment. Furthermore, people
have to be provided with tools to manage themselves with new behaviors and
attitudes. While it is not an overnight process, a highly skilled professional
that is a product of the method they employ can be an empowering catalyst for
transformation. That touch alone can remove the robotic expectations of change
and include the human element.
What do you think? I’m open to ideas. Or if you want to
write me about a specific topic, let me know.
No comments:
Post a Comment