Sunday, July 7, 2019

MLSD 521 Module 6 - Sustained Change



Sustained Change



Burning Platform”, a term created in the 80s by Daryl Conner (2010), is a tool, a psychological formula to sustain change. Conner says that good ideas do not go as far as business imperative. The leader’s behavior towards change is what will define the position of the organization in the market, no matter if it is already at risk, or if the leader is preventing a coming issue through taking a current opportunity.

The psychological formula, mentioned by Conner, is founded when the price of the status quo is higher than the price of the transition. The author defends the idea that when the risk of complacency is higher than the risks of a change, one is moved towards change putting fear aside and moving forward. When a platform is already burnt there is no choice and the leader along with the team do not consider looking back, as there is nothing to look at.

Anthony (2012) says the ideal is preventing the platform to burn. He goes along with Conner’s perspective, with the same ideal, however his focus is on prevention. At the other edge, Gilbert et al (2012), defend a more cautious idea, where they believe a change can be led with a regrouping strategy, sharing the transformation in two separate projects. “Transformation A should reposition the core business, adapting its current business model to the altered marketplace, and Transformation B should create a separate, disruptive business to develop the innovations that will become the source of future growth, this way, avoiding the risks of an aggressive transformation.

Independent of perspective, it is important that the change is well communicated. What leads the change, the way a leader chooses to sustain it and the business imperatives are crucial, but if the vision, goals and directions are not well communicated, the change burns along with the platform, and the transformation gets stalled (Kotter, 1996). According to Kotter, there are two cases of communication failure: inconsistency with the vision of the change, and frequent but poor communication.

There was a time, around three years ago, that I have found myself in a group with my colleagues (all onboard leaders), waiting for cabin crew managers to roll out an important  "change initiative to support a vision”. The company wanted the seniors onboard to be more supportive and decided to use a new performance review platform as a tool. The previous developed platform was being misused, and some of designed features was leading to misunderstand. This way, they spend more than a year developing a new performance review design, with restructuring of words and approach. The management team delivered the message, included the vision and the goal of the platform, and clarified all the doubts.

It was a full day of training on the new features and how to use each of them. Managers included some media to the presentation with curiosities about the company’s numbers, differences between generations and their common expectations, as we range between 21 to 60 years old in our department. The presentation was interactive, with role play, funny videos, different managers to talk about each topic, jump in of leadership training department, and coffee breaks to allow interaction and the information to be absorbed and discussed informally.

Because of the issues faces with the previous review platform, we were more than a year with no performance review at all, and this was causing some issues with careless attitude from the staff, and onboard leaders only documenting major behavioral issues through other communication channels. This issue made us all get excited about the introduction of the new platform, so getting me and my colleagues’ attention was not an issue from the beginning. As mentioned, the design of the presentation was well developed so the presentation ran smoothly with a great interaction. There were times when numbers and lack of deep information about the change (as the developing team was not present) distracted us from the main vision, but overall the message was well delivered.

The change has been technically sustained, along with other initiatives, as new requirements for promotions for instance. There was no way back, the consequences of the lack of a system was unsustainable and a performance review was necessary, as it is crucial in large organizations. The goal was achieved, the vision is maintained, but the values behind the vision is hindered. Team members are being supported by positive but general comments, often not discussed or not detailed. Feedbacks are not being given, and when it is delivered, it is done once, usually at the end of the journey, when nothing can be done to corrected and no impact can be anymore created. Often leaders give the virtually documented performance review to the crew member to read in a tablet, and after been read the review is submitted, without discussion, dialogue or any personal interaction, whatsoever.

The system is being misused again, but in opposite direction. Before was used as a tool to punish the reviewed staff, and now is used to motivate them (although I do not believe it is truly motivating anyone), as the management required. The vision was clear, and well communicated, but apart from not being sustained, is not used for the prior purpose. A performance review platform is to be used to evaluate and follow up a performance, not to motivate team members. This is partly the reason why the change could not be entirely sustained. Another reason I can think of, is that there is no innovation, or a team tracking how the system is been used. The change was defined, communicated and that was over, as if the project is finalized on its first step. A change to be sustained needs to be frequently communicated (Kotter, 2015) and it is not happening in my organization, on this specific change.

The way I am using this “burnt platform” to gain the support of my followers, in order to achieve sustained change, is by using the system with its first purpose (review a performance), focusing on behavioral traits, and when possible using it as a motivational tool (as required by the company), but in a customized way. I deliver feedback constantly throughout the journey, not only to the ones the system assigned to be reviewed, but to all my team members. After that, I document my observations on the review platform and have a discussion (two ways communication) with the crew member whom I was required to evaluate. Independently if the follower was assigned or not to be reviewed, I document the performance in a separate report which goes directly to the management, in case they show an outstanding performance. At the end of any conversation, I ask feedback from followers, on how I can improve as a leader.

These are few steps I take in order to sustain the change implemented by the company. I believe as leaders we are responsible to apply the required change the best way possible. I also believe to achieve this goal we are empowered to put our own twist in order implement transformation. I keep in mind the vision, the goal and the values behind, but how I act upon them is what makes me a leader. Burning platform, whether dealing a high risk or taking an opportunity, needs to be an emotional move (Conner, 2010). By taking every spare time to have dialogue with my followers, by observing them in unexpected circumstances, by asking their opinions, and by providing constructive and uplifting feedback to all followers independent if requirements, I believe it shows how valued they are and how I respected their job and efforts to accomplish the organization’s mission. Touching on core human values, ultimately a leader touches on emotions, and that is the way I lead my team.



  

References

Anthony, S. D. (2012, December 11). How to anticipate a burning platform. Retrieved from  https://hbr.org/2012/12/how-to-anticipate-a-burning-platform

Conner, D. (2010, November 24). Burning Platform: Misunderstanding. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwRB0sHpN9E&feature=youtu.be

Gilbert, C., Eyring, M. Foster, R. N. (2012, December). Two routes to resilience. Retrieved from  https://hbr.org/2012/12/two-routes-to-resilience

Kotter, J. (1996). Leading change. Boston, MA: HBS Press

Kotter, J. (2013, August 2015). Leading change: establish a sense of urgency. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Yfrj2Y9IlI.

No comments:

Post a Comment