Understanding Change Management
Stanley A. Marash, Ph.D.
smarash@qualitydigest.com
Alphonse Karr, a French journalist,
once said that the more things change, the more they remain
the same. To a certain extent, that's been true of many
aspects of the quality and perfor-mance excellence movement
during the past half-century. However, the future does bring
change, and our ability to manage in a changing world is
essential to survival. So the question is: Why do the same
tools keep getting reinvented under different names? The
answer is that internal and external forces change--leadership,
technology, market demands, world situations, competition
and the economy--and we fail to manage for change.
It's generally agreed that management commitment is key
to a successful change-management process, and all performance
excellence models include leadership or management commitment
as primary criteria. Most executives, however, are convinced
that they've always had a "performance excellence focus"
and that it's their subordinates who must pay more attention
to improving product or service quality. Such an attitude
demonstrates that these executives don't comprehend the
true meaning of commitment.
For an organization to truly commit itself to the change
process, its entire management team must be able to answer
the following questions:
Why do we need to change?
What are the financial implications of change, and how do
we measure them?
What do we expect the change to accomplish?
What must we do to achieve change?
What are the barriers to change, and how do we overcome
them?
What resources are required?
What priorities should we set?
What process will we apply?
Each of these items is essential to an organization's
strategic plan. Let's examine the first: Why do we need
to change?
One of the overriding motivations for change is competition.
The globalization of markets has made it imperative for
companies to continually improve. It's no longer enough
to say, "Our performance, quality, productivity or
cost is equal to, or better than, the rest of our industry."
We must also look at how well we're satisfying the wants
and needs of our customers, then seek ways to exceed their
expectations. This imperative requires a better understanding
of our customers and benchmarking against the best in class,
regardless of industry.
Let's review some definitions. To satisfy a customer's
needs, a product must provide some essential requirements.
A want is something nice to have but not usually included
with a particular product or service. An expectation is
something the customer previously received or knows that
other people received. A delight is some feature the customer
didn't need or expect but makes the product more desirable--that
makes it exceed expectations.
Consider, for example, an automobile. You need a vehicle
to get you from point A to point B reliably and efficiently.
You may want it to have a CD player, but if it's not available
or is too expensive, you might be willing to settle for
a radio. Undoubtedly, you expect the car to have windshield
wipers. If yours doesn't, you'll be upset. But if it has
windshield wipers that turn on automatically when it starts
raining, you have a feature that exceeds your expectations,
one that might delight you. The next time you buy a car,
automatic windshield wipers might be a want or even an expectation.
Now, if a competitor's automobile, in addition to everything
else, includes a CD player at the same price, you might
be tempted to purchase that vehicle. Customers are drawn
to products that satisfy wants as well as needs. In fact,
they may even switch to an auto that satisfies wants but
costs more. Eventually, as we know, wants become needs and
even expectations. Years ago, an automatic transmission
was a want for most drivers; today, it's a need or even
an expectation.
The concept of benchmarking as a change-management driver
is another idea that many don't fully understand. Traditional
thinking about benchmarking focuses on how we rate against
competitors within our industry. This thinking often gives
us a false sense of security: If we're operating at a high
level compared to our competition, there's no reason to
improve. Such complacency enables nontraditional competitors
to overtake and surpass established providers, resulting
in loss of market share and, in many cases, the demise of
a profitable business.
The concept of benchmarking against the best in class
leads us to look outside our own industries to improve our
business operations. For example, we can identify companies,
irrespective of industry, that are the leaders in such activities
as financial services, customer follow-up, distribution,
human resources management and information technology.
Because no single organization is the best in every category,
the key is to learn what each one does best and how it does
it.
Why change? Because we must continually improve until
we match or exceed the best in each and every category.
Stanley A. Marash, Ph.D., is chairman and CEO of The SAM
Group, which includes STAT-A-MATRIX Inc. and Oriel Inc.
This article is adapted from Marash's upcoming book, Fusion
Management. Note: Fusion Management is a trademark of STAT-A-MATRIX
Inc. ©2002 STAT-A-MATRIX Inc. All rights reserved.
Letters to the editor regarding this column can be e-mailed
to letters@qualitydigest.com.
|