Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.
AIA

From reactive to proactive: Behaviours…. The process of change. By Robin Tidd

by
10th Jul 2007
Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.

Robin Tidd’s final article on how management can build a proactive organisation.

My previous article covered the ‘mechanisms’ necessary to systemize pro-activity. But, as we all know, its not enough just to have a system in place. To build a proactive organization, people will need to behave and think in a different way – both in their formal and informal relationships. This article covers what I think are the most important ‘soft’ issues and offers suggestions on how managers can brief stakeholders.

Change takes a while, even if your training and communication programmes are perfect. In moving from a reactive to a proactive culture, your change programme must take this into account. The diagram below illustrates how change takes place.

It is said that knowledge only enters through an open door and only if invited. The reason it took so long to discover that the earth was round, wrote Daniel J Boorstin, was not ignorance, but the illusion of knowledge. In other words, we were so convinced the world was flat that we failed to ask if it could any other way. In other words, people only learn if they want to learn

Only when we start to question, can we begin to learn and to accept change.

Physical

Logical

Emotional

The important point about the above diagram is the degree of internalization, or ‘buy-in’ that is necessary to trigger change. Managers need to believe in pro-activity, not act in a pro-active manner because they are told to do so.

Change involves three levels of acceptance.

  • Level one is when people are told to do things differently. Although they may do it, they are unlikely to understand the reason behind the order or may not agree with it. This is unlikely to lead to a cultural change.
  • Offering a logical explanation – for example through formal training - can move some people to some extent, but that doesn’t mean that they will continue to do things differently.
  • The third level is emotional acceptance. People who accept change to this degree don’t have to think about the logic, they know it works because they have seen it or done it before. If managers are passionate, they will be more able to ‘sell the concept’ to others. Getting people to this level of acceptance can take months, but it is vital to be patient. Seeing is believing; you may tell people that performance can be improved by 10% to 25% (and it probably can) but they will not believe you until they begin to see it happen. Structure a programme of communication accordingly; identify key messages consistently and repeatedly and deal in facts to overcome suspicion.

The key is to sell people the set of behaviours that you require, together with the rewards.

What behaviours do we need to encourage?

The ability to talk about errors, waste and failures without any hang-ups.

  • Criticism must highlight the wrongs of the past and the rewards from future behaviour. People who have ownership in a process have a vested interest in improving it. Managers must not feel that they are being criticized and become defensive, they must recognize that their job is to improve the process and therefore they need to know how this can be done.
  • When reaching decisions managers should choose the best option for the organization, whether it was their idea or someone else’s. Although a manager may feel responsible for his or her process working imperfectly, they need to set that aside and recognize that they will benefit from making it work.

All for one and one for all.

  • It is not a problem for someone to show ambition, but it must not be at the expense of the team. People are naturally motivated by being part of a winning team and take pride in their part in the process. The onus on top management is to communicate well and foster a team approach.

Create a consensus - whenever possible.

  • The team should consult across the organisation and consider all of viewpoints before arriving at an approach which all agree to adopt.
  • It should have no problem trailing potential solutions, and should recognize that it may not be possible to get everyone to agree but should be prepared to give it a shot. If the team’s solution does not work, nobody will lose credibility and they will all have no hang up about trying another way. The team will take longer to reach these ‘consensus decisions’ (as they are termed) but it has been proven many times over that more thorough decisions make for smoother implementation. Team decisions also commit the team to trying to make them work, because they will all benefit. This goes hand in hand with the next point.

Professionalism honesty, integrity and discipline as individuals

  • People must be prepared to take on tasks and carry them out as promised. This means being realistic in what they are able to commit to, and delivering on time - even if it means extra hours or effort. Time management becomes very important because the day-time job still has to be done. A team approach promotes this behaviour as people do not want to let their colleagues down and recognize that they too will reap the benefit of others’ extra effort.

Recognise and reward effort

  • Thank people when they put in the work.
  • Remember, people will usually act quicker to remove pain than to gain pleasure. Where it is difficult to get a group of front line people to improve processes, ask them about the things that frustrate them and stop them doing a good job - the pain - and it should be easier to mobilize them. Usually this will lead to performance improvements.

One thing is clear, to achieve lasting change, senior management have to take the lead and be clear about the behaviour they want to achieve.

Tags:

Replies (2)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

Dennis Howlett
By dahowlett
12th Jul 2007 00:54

Interested
Rob - I have grave doubts about much of what is done in this area but I'm always willing to be persuaded. I can be contacted at dahowlett [at] gmail [dot] com

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Rob Peddle
11th Jul 2007 16:56

But how can you measure behaviours???
Working to achieve the changes of behaviour mentioned are certainly a prime way of improving performance. Of course, behaviours are difficult to assess and even more difficult to measure. And how can the behaviours be linked to the objectives the business is trying to achieve??

Traditional auditing says it can do this, but it cannot. It requires a 360 degree view of what behaviours are being experienced - allowing a rounded picture of what is happening to be generated. And then, how do these behaviours either support or detract from the achievement of the objectives?? This all requires a level of analysis, understanding and knowledge that is beyond traditional auditing - internal or third-party.

Equally importantly, how can these be related to risk profiles that will inform the senior management about where their business risks are being generated? And how can they see the level of risk changing over time - reducing as a result of improvement, or not, as the case may be. This can only be achieved through consistent assessment over time.

There are tools now available to do this, working at the behavioural level to assess against the drivers of performance. With the focus on behavioural change, plus the method to assess if they are a positive influence, there is a real chance of progress. If anyone want to know about these, just let me know.

Thanks (0)