|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy. Page 101 D
|
||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
Page 101 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 101
Page 101
D
Key Guides to Successful Change
Beyond the leader's role there are some key guides to or
elements of successful change. The guides synthesize lessons
learned from previous (successful and unsuccessful) changes in the
private sector and from many investigations of the way leaders
intuitively go about instituting change. The guides summarize these
intuitions and enable leaders to explain their reasoning processes.
The guides also provide a framework for thinking about how to
effect change and a set of checkpoints for any leader initiating a
change process within a system. These guides will be useful to the
senior leadership as they undertake the necessary process of change
within the U.S. Navy.
The basic concept is that there must be overall change of an
organization. Starting at the top is by far the best way to achieve
major systemic change. Many people think that change
“happens” from the top, when in fact it must be
carefully “managed” from the top. Significant changes
at any level should be considered desirable and should be sought
even as overall organizational change is pursued. Overall
organizational change very often starts in the trenches. That is,
successes with change at a more local level, such as in the San
Diego and Hampton Roads regions, are often motivations to accept
larger changes in the system.
Everyone and every level of a system has to create its own
innovations and changes in the way it works and conducts its
activities, rather than waiting for
NOTE: For further reading on this subject, see Troxel, James P.,
ed. 1995. Government Works: Profiles of People Making a
Difference, Miles River Press, Alexandria, Va., and Troxel,
James P., ed. 1993. Business Cases from Around the World,
Miles River Press, Alexandria, Va.
OCR for page 102
Page 102
someone else to do it. The guides can be applied at each level
of the organization, regardless of size. These guides form a basis
for inculcating change as a common thread in all activities of the
U.S. Navy, rather than responding only to the crises generated by
reduced budgets.
Guide 1—Make a Compelling Case
for Change
Significant reductions in the budgets available for
modernization of the Navy are a very real basis for change. The
reasons for the budget reductions, and the negative impact on the
Navy if changes are not made to deal with these reductions, must be
communicated to the whole organization. All personnel must
understand the dire consequences of continuing business as usual.
In the reduced budget environment, weapons systems will not be
upgraded, platforms and bases will not be maintained properly, and
modernization of the forces with information systems, such as
IT-21, and new platforms, such as DD-21 and JSF, will not
materialize.
The magnitude of the changes required to achieve the strategic
objectives of the Navy within the expected budgets must be
conveyed. For example, the fiscal reductions that are required in
the infrastructure to fund the desired modernization goals of the
Navy in a flat overall budget situation must be made clear. The CNO
must identify a plausible, quantitative set of target reductions
across the Navy that will achieve the strategic objectives. Once
established, these targets must be communicated to the entire
organization and a compelling case made that every element in the
organization must do its part to make the required changes for the
good of the Navy.
Opportunities for change should be identified continuously
throughout the organization as a way of stimulating innovation and
motivation for improvements. Successful systems and best practices
in the Navy and from elsewhere can be communicated continuously to
stimulate considerations of a “change climate.” A
continuing referral to the significant and continual change in the
global business world is also a form of emphasizing the compelling
need for continual change. The many and rapidly changing
technological innovations that impact the Navy are another
compelling case for embracing a continual need for creativity,
innovation, and change.
The organization can be restructured to foster a compelling and
continuing need for change. It can be made relatively flat to
reduce bureaucracy. It can use cross-hierarchical and
cross-functional teams to stimulate enterprise-wide behavior. The
organization can reduce formalism to a minimum by reducing policies
and procedures. It can foster communication and cooperation by
providing a comprehensive and easily accessible information
network. The organization should encourage more participative
decision making and should use matrix assignments for people to
introduce innovation.
OCR for page 103
Page 103
Guide 2—Treat Each Situation
Initially as Unique
One of the major barriers in achieving change at all levels of
an organization is the belief that once a process, organization,
technology, or new system is developed, others in similar
situations will know that they should use it. This belief has
caused huge difficulties in transferring change in all
organizations because it fails to recognize the uniqueness of each
location. The details of the Southwest Region solution, as good as
they may be, should not be considered “the” solution
for the Hampton Roads region or vice versa. Local people must in
most ways create and buy into their own change process and
solutions. The differences in people and culture do not mean that
ideas and technologies from the first situation will not be used.
Good ideas and technologies will be drawn, when identified as
needed, from previous solutions and the best practices of
others.
Guide 3—Put All Change in a
Context of Larger Purposes and Missions
Even when a clearly stated purpose or mission is available,
recognize that every purpose or mission must exist in a context of
larger purposes or missions. Individuals make many minute decisions
as time goes on in the change process, based on their
unstated assumptions and the meanings associated with words and
phrases. Focusing only on what may be considered a well-stated
purpose leaves open for each individual the interpretation in his
or her own way of the larger purposes that really ought to govern
these minute decisions.
The operating concept for expanding the purposes is to reexamine
the assumptions that are hidden in each person's mind. Discussing
the larger purposes lets everyone understand in a nonthreatening
way the different thinking of others so that group acceptance
occurs. It assures all that the real question is being addressed
rather than accepting the problem as stated. It focuses first on
doing the right things rather than on doing things right.
Guide 4—Develop a Vision of the
Future System to Guide Today's Actions
In effect, plan backwards from the future. The first part of
implementing this guide is generating several alternative scenarios
or options that satisfy the focus and larger purpose. Play with the
scenarios, search for the operating dynamics, maximize the flow
(remodel your mind, suspend judgment, use unusual media, seek the
greatest value for the purposes, go back to zero, be absurd, and
seek ways to eliminate the focus purposes by asking how to achieve
the larger purposes).
From these major alternatives, it is possible to select a future
state solution that should be sought, in say, 5 years. Focusing on
this future state identifies the changes and revisions needed today
to achieve the target. At this point, it is
OCR for page 104
Page 104
possible to determine if solutions are available elsewhere to
save time and not “reinvent the wheel.” The
consideration of many options will provide some degree of assurance
that changes needed in the future will not be blocked by what is
done today. Having options available also provides a basis for
contingency planning as external conditions change.
Being able to articulate the major alternative options from
which the future solution target was selected is also very useful
in making the recommendation for change to decision makers at all
levels. The usual presentation to such decision makers puts them in
the uncomfortable position of having to accept or reject the
recommendation. Providing the options permits them to become part
of the process of developing the solution and even to improve the
recommendation and make it more workable.
Guide 5—Take a Systems Approach
to the Change Process
Every recommended change, however big it may be, is always part
of a larger system. As indicated previously, the CNO should lead
the change process for the whole Navy, the largest system entity.
Doing so will then allow the subsystem organizations to place their
changes in the context of the larger system. Being able to show how
the change will fit into and impact the larger system will produce
a much greater probability that the change will be accepted. Any
recommendation should include specific enough systems detail to
show that it is workable (i.e., the users that are affected, the
interfaces required, and so on).
Understanding this guide helps put changes in infrastructure
into terms of specific system elements. The elements of the force
operations can be related to force modernization and to the
infrastructure to provide insight into the interactions of all,
thus providing greater assurance that the complexities of the whole
are appropriately considered and interrelated. Within this context,
the committee views the Navy as an overall system, with fleet
operations as the primary customer and shore installations and
systems commands as major suppliers. Firmly establishing the
real requirements of the fleet up front (i.e., what the
customer is willing to pay for in the constrained budget
environment) in any discussions of change will have a profound
impact on what the shore installations and systems commands should
be providing. The overall goal is to optimize the system.
Guide 6—Understand the Impact of
Change on the People in the Organization
Change impacts people in an organization in the following ways:
possible loss of self-image, disruption of emotional involvement
and role relationships, and negative impact on the employee's sense
of importance. Even an employee
OCR for page 105
Page 105
or person who suggests the idea for change recognizes there may
be a negative impact on the role that he or she plays in the future
system.
Psychologists have studied the stressful effects of change on
people in a wide variety of circumstances. They define a stress
curve that people go through when change in their
“normal” activities occurs. The progressive stress
stages that must be recognized and managed by leaders include (1)
initial turmoil, (2) recoil against the change, (3) depression, (4)
mourning about the change, (5) reacting to the change, and (6)
reconstitution of the person's mental state to the new conditions.
The degree to which each element of the stress curve is managed
will determine the depth and duration of the stress curve. Even
those who want and suggest change go through this cycle, although
they usually experience a lesser degree of and time in depression,
for example. These guides to successful change provide a framework
for minimizing the effects of each part of the stress curve. The
guides focus on generating early buy-in to and acceptance of change
rather than on overcoming resistance to change, an activity that
has a negative connotation, takes much longer and has higher costs,
and too often leaves a bitter residue in the minds of the people
involved.
The conventional approach to the development of a change tends
to foster defensiveness (turmoil, recoil against change) rather
than the openness and less stressful conditions needed. For
example, starting a change effort by asking questions about what is
wrong, whose fault it is, what measurements can be obtained to
“show how bad things are,” and who should be blamed for
the poor performance creates a negative attitude almost
immediately. A far more positive reaction can be obtained with
different questions. Consider, as an illustration, the reaction of
people to questions such as, How would you do it if you started all
over again? The questions raised by these guides provide a way to
get people to be comfortable with a situation so that change can
proceed effectively. They also encourage a culture of continuous
change because they show that there is never only one answer to the
way we do things.
Change is always about people. Leveraging their core
competencies in the organization is the crucial element in
successful change. People are the critical factor in any specific
system or subsystem (i.e., a ship, a submarine, or a weapon system)
for it to operate effectively. Therefore, skilled sailors should
spend a maximum of their time assigned to systems for which they
were highly trained. The current practice of assigning new but
highly trained sailors to mess duty aboard ship for extended
periods creates a great deal of stress and adversely affects
performance and reenlistment. Rather, a system perspective would
strongly suggest that the galley (food delivery system) should be
redesigned to require fewer people in order to deal with the
shortage of younger personnel aboard ships.
OCR for page 106
Page 106
Guide 7—Involve All the
Stakeholders
This principle provides a basis for people with different
interests and backgrounds who have a stake in the outcome to come
together, work together, and change together. Involving all the
stakeholders will provide a positive probing framework with
different perspectives. This guide honors people and their
ideas.
A comprehensive process or methodology for engaging all of the
stakeholders in the creation of a shared vision and in the
implementation of an action plan is required to accomplish enduring
change in any organization. A successful process is one in which
the participants contribute to and buy into the products and
actions created. The process itself must include a proper sequence
of meetings, topics, and events that have been shown to produce
results. The critical elements of one such successful process are
described in the following sections.
To have the maximum impact, the change process to be described
should be initiated at the most senior leadership level of the
organization and then repeated down through successive levels of
leadership until the entire organization has been engaged. In the
case of the Navy, the process should be initiated at the CNO level
and should involve the fleet commanders, systems commands, and CNO
staff. After this, fleet commanders should conduct similar
processes with their fleet operators, the regional base commanders,
the next level of systems commanders, and any other stakeholders
critical to the organization. Following this, each command element,
(e.g., each regional base commander) should conduct the process for
his or her organization, carrying forward the work previously
accomplished. Continuing this process down to the lowest level is
the most efficient and lasting way to transform the overall
organization.
The first step in the change process is to conduct a conference
involving all of the stakeholders for the purpose of planning for
the subsequent meetings. This is often referred to as the design
conference. The objective is to identify critical issues, to
articulate what the key focus is, and to design a process that will
deal with the focus issue.
The next step in the process is for the stakeholders to create
the vision of the future state discussed in detail in Guide 4.
Following this would be the development of a set of strategic
proposals or goals. These are creative proposals to move the
organization in the new direction. The time for completing these
major proposals may be many years, but significant segments with a
scale of a few years should be identified. Within this shorter time
frame, milestones can be set, measurements of progress can be made,
and successes can be celebrated.
For example, a strategic proposal might be to design all future
ships with the minimum number of personnel on board. Sailors drive
many of the support requirements aboard ship and heavily impact the
size and cost of shore installations. This strategic proposal would
have a major cost reduction impact on future operations. This
proposal would trigger one or more tactical proposals for
OCR for page 107
Page 107
accomplishing the goal such as increased use of automation,
modification of onboard processes, and so on.
The stakeholders must also deal with the issues, blocks,
deterrents, irritants, and so forth, that are obstacles in the path
of accomplishing the vision. These contradictions may be
structures, procedures, or attitudes that when clearly stated
indicate the steps to be taken for their resolution. The team must
deal with the root causes of these contradictions, not the
superficial problems that often receive the greatest attention. The
lack of money, personnel, or other resources is never the root
obstacle impeding the path to the vision.
Many of the strategic proposals will address elimination of the
obstacles lying in the path toward the vision. For example,
although the Navy would like to change many processes, it currently
cannot identify an accurate cost of these processes because the
present accounting system does not provide sufficient details. A
strategic proposal might be to obtain a new Navy-wide cost
accounting system that would provide sufficient details to evaluate
the cost of alternative processes.
The strategic proposals will be too numerous for any
organization to tackle simultaneously. A prioritization must
therefore be made. The highest-priority proposals should be
implemented first. Task forces involving a cross section of the
organization are then formed and charged with the responsibility
for developing charters and tactics to actualize the selected
strategic proposals on behalf of the entire organization.
The task forces should be charged with developing implementation
calendars that identify the issues of where, when, and how key
tactics will be implemented and by whom. The calendar should
operate on a 90-day cycle, with major milestones identified at
frequent intervals. The leadership team should review and approve
the task force calendars.
Progress reviews should be conducted every 30 days to keep
pressure on producing results and to ensure that all members are
contributing. Peer pressure during these reviews can be a powerful
motivator. If a task force successfully completes its objectives in
the 90-day period to the satisfaction of the leadership team,
victory is declared and a celebration should ensue. The task force
would then create a new tactical proposal to address one of the
strategic issues identified earlier, and the cycle would be
repeated. If the proposal is not completed, an extension may be
granted or a new task force assigned.
Progress toward the future state is accomplished in continuous
improvement steps. Key quantitative metrics should be derived that
will indicate the rate of progress. The quantitative goals to be
accomplished over a period of time (e.g., annually) should be
published and made highly visible to all members of the
organization. Actual accomplishments as measured against the goals
should be reported at frequent intervals so that the entire
organization can judge progress.
The leadership must demand results in a timely manner. Groups
and individuals must be held accountable for moving the
organization forward toward
OCR for page 108
Page 108
the future state. Rewards for accomplishing goals and completing
tasks should be used widely and frequently to create positive
motivation for change. Experience has shown that large rewards are
not necessary to motivate people. Small rewards and especially
recognition carry great impact. Negative motivators in the form of
punishment for failure to participate or cooperate are necessary
but should be used sparingly and judiciously.
The teams and the organization should celebrate all significant
victories in their path toward the future state. Celebrations build
confidence, a sense of accomplishment, and motivation for tackling
and succeeding in subsequent proposals.
The involvement of all stakeholders requires, in addition to the
champions of change, facilitators or change agents using these
guides to set up a basis for productive results from groups of
people. However significant the champions of change may be, such
skilled facilitators or change agents are necessary to obtain
innovative results as well as successful change among all the
smaller groups, task forces, and teams that the plan of action for
change would set up.
Guide 8—Collect Only Essential
Information
System performance measures are essential in the operation,
management, and change of all organizations, but the term
“essential” requires clarification. Suggesting, for
example, that complete information collection about and
measurements of existing conditions must start any change effort is
a conventional approach that almost always exceeds what is
essential. In addition, it leads to people's defensiveness, caused
by the probing of analysts. Trying to collect all the data is
impossible. Asking the stakeholders and related people about the
purpose of any information or measurement collection and then
placing that purpose into a context of larger ends should help
determine if the data are worth collecting. Collecting information
and obtaining measurements are not cost-free. Following this guide
will limit the amount to be collected and will make what is
collected much more relevant.
Guide 9—Recognize That Change Is
Never Finished
Continuous improvement and betterment are necessary in making
progress toward the target, maintaining the target when achieved,
and using the target as the benchmark for future improvements. This
guide even includes the scheduling of time to revise the future
solution target. A critical aspect in this guide is to develop a
change-resilient work force. People should look forward to change
without the pressures of external forces. Any concept of having the
“best” solutions now is the enemy of
“better.” Any change now is really a choice of what is
considered the better alternative from among the options.
Recognizing that change is never finished encourages the need to
rethink day-to-day activities
OCR for page 109
Page 109
and to challenge (with these guides, not in a confrontational
way) conventional wisdom about the purposes of doing things and the
way needed things are done now.
Guide 10—Persevere in Seeking
Change; It Takes a Long Time
The necessary cultural change in the Navy can take 5 to 7 years
or longer. Installation of smaller system changes may also take
many months to 1 to 2 years. Persevere, persevere, persevere should
be the motto. It is critical to seek continuous,
evolutionary—rather than only revolutionary—changes.
“Communicate” is a secondary mantra in this guide.
Upward communication of needs and issues to higher levels of the
Navy is often as important as the constant motivational and
substantive messages to those below.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
future state