The dangers of changing without change management

December 4, 2012 11:59 am / Caroline

In an article published in The Project Manager magazine, Caroline Lowings explores the reasons why more leaders and sponsors
of change should be embracing the art and science of change management to achieve better results from their project
implementations.

Business leaders who’ve been hesitant to take on the change management role when it comes to the delivery of projects and
programmes may be unacquainted with the great benefits of change management, and unaware of the inherent dangers of poor
change adoption. It is also evident that the distinction between the change management role and the project management role may
not be sufficiently clear. If these issues are acceptably addressed and clarified, then a compelling case for the incorporation of
change management for successful change delivery is made.

A real danger of the ineffective co-ordination of people-side readiness is that stakeholders and employees can still be grappling
with and resisting the change long after the project has closed, leaving a bitter taste in the mouths of the leadership that were
hoping to speedily reap the promised benefits, to advance and progress the business. However, one of the significant advantages
of effective change management is the timely achievement of the business benefits. When stakeholders and employees
understand and support the change, through a series of strategies that occur throughout the change management lifecycle, then
their ability to readily sustain the change after the project has ended means that the business area achieves the desired benefits as
quickly and smoothly as possible. Timely benefits realisation is important for several reasons, such as getting ahead of the
competitive pack, justifying and sustaining the changed business landscape in terms of proven value-add, and readiness to handle
the next wave of change coming down the line.
People tend to fear the unknown, and workplace changes, delivered via many varying projects, such as new products, systems,
processes or other solutions, are unknowns until suitably understood, unpacked and talked about. No-one wants to be surprised by
a dramatic variation to the modus operandi that threatens to impact their job and performance. It is important to engage and
prepare people in advance, even before the project kicks off, as to why the change is imperative in the broader business context,
and to involve them in scoping the change requirements. Change-related questions should be transparently and sensitively solved
together with the key stakeholders such as:

 What are the reasons for the change?

 What is the threat of not changing?
 Why do we need this?
 What’s wrong with the way we are working now?
 What’s in it for me?

It is essential to spend focussed time on this early preparation so that people can feel part of the inside track, and ultimately be
motivated to get on-board, learn as much as they can and support the change. If the reasons for the change are not well-founded,
and the proposed change is unnecessary or inappropriate for the business, this proactive change planning with the right people at
the right time will highlight ideas and projects that have poor organisational fit. These initiatives can then be profitably discontinued
before investing valuable resources, time and money.

Another danger of changing without change management is change fatigue. Change fatigue is a symptom of too much disparate
and unmanaged change being flooded into the workplace, leaving employees feeling constantly bombarded and behind the change
wave. If employees are unable to keep up and perform optimally as a result of poorly integrated change, then normal business
operations and customer focus can be noticeably compromised.
However, when people are given the chance upfront to understand the impact of the change on their delivery and performance in
terms of normal running of the business, plans can be made in advance to properly embed the change, and so lessen the likelihood
of the change disrupting operations. Given enough care and consideration, people can prepare and get ready. The necessary up-
skilling, communication, dialogue and support can be pre-emptively identified and delivered, to ensure rapid integration of the
change by people into the workplace.

The danger of poor project communication can mean that key stakeholders are disappointed and disillusioned by the project
deliverables towards the end of the implementation phase. They may start to question the interpretation of their business
requirements, and may be dissatisfied with the usability of what is being delivered. The threat of project failure so late in the game
can translate into redesign, rework and more time, resources and money that weren’t originally budgeted for; and a dangerous
delay of the benefits realisation. On the other hand, with proper project communication and stakeholder management, people can
come to grips with exactly what is being delivered, and their expectations can be effectively managed and aligned.

It is also important to carefully analyse the broader change landscape and business environment to identify other parties,
departments, suppliers, processes and projects that may be directly or indirectly impacted by the change. The danger of
overlooking this wider lens analysis may result in an unexpected and unplanned-for crisis in another business area as a result of
the commissioned change, with unpredictable knock-on effects within the organisation.

With a clearer understanding of the great advantages of change management, leaders and sponsors of change may also be asking
why they need a specific change management role, and can change management not be thrown into the project manager’s
bucket? Well, although these roles are symbiotic and interrelated, complex programmes and projects demand both roles to be
fulfilled for optimal delivery, adoption and integration of the change solution. The project manager has their plate full managing the
resources, tasks and risks from a technical and tactical perspective, to deliver the scoped solution within quality, cost and time
parameters, and all the co-ordination, negotiation and planning that goes with it. The change management role has a specialist
focus that extends beyond the parameters of the scoped solution and project timeline, to figure out how the change can be
sustainably adopted and integrated back into the organisation. The change manager is intuitively, yet purposefully, making sense of
the mind-sets, philosophies, stances and influences of key stakeholders within the project boundaries and beyond.

The project manager, quite rightly, is too busy getting obstacles out of the way of solution delivery to worry about getting obstacles
out of the way of people’s readiness to change. The project manager drives tangible and explicit resources, tasks, deliverables and
goals, whereas the change manager plots a route through oftentimes intangible and tacit knowledge, assumptions, fears, gaps,
expectations and concerns that people have about the impending change, with the objective of gaining overall people-side
commitment.
 Project Management role Change Management role

Drive solution delivery Work towards change sustainability and integration

Communicate progress and impact on solution Communicate progress and impact on people readiness
deliverables and project goals

Implementation and technical risk management People-side risk management

Focusses on project time, cost, quality, scope Focusses on people-side strategies and planning for change
adoption and timely benefits realisation

Follows project management lifecycle Follows change management lifecycle

Steps and tools for managing the project from Steps and tools for managing and motivating people who are
start to end experiencing change

Delivering project solution Concerned with the optimal ownership, use and benefit of the
delivered solution

To be sure, the case for the inclusion of change management, to avoid the pitfalls of unmanaged transitioning and to achieve better
results from project implementations, is a compelling one. Firstly the great advantages, such as the timely achievement of the
business benefits and the minimising of disruptions to normal operations, are particularly persuasive. Secondly, the discernible
distinction between project management and change management helps the leaders and sponsors of change to better understand
the need for the specialist change management role to ensure optimal ownership, use and benefit of the delivered change.

Author Bio
Caroline Lowings is the principal consultant at Change Story, a Gauteng-based consultancy providing focused change
management and strategic planning services to clients. Caroline has over 14 years’ experience consulting and advising on complex
projects in complex change environments. For more information, go to http://changestory.co.za/consulting-overview/
 Project Management vs. Change Management
Contributed by Ron Leeman on December 28, 2014 in Organization, Change, & HR

I will probably incur the wrath of many a Project Manager with this post, but, hey, I have had that
happen to me many times when working with them on various change initiatives.

Anyway here we go …

It never ceases to amaze me how the words Project Management and Change Management can be used
in the same breath. In my experience (and this is not a criticism of PMs) Project Managers cannot
execute Change Management because the two disciplines require a whole different set of skills and
competencies. Unfortunately this seems to be something that is on the rise and it makes me wonder
whether this contributes to so many change failures. Both disciplines aim for totally different
outcomes:

 Project Management is about installation. It focuses on a plan built around events and timelines
with the aim of getting from a current state (no installation) to a future state (installation achieved).

 Change Management is about adoption. It focuses on the people aspects of the change with the
aim of getting a critical mass of people to be committed to the change involved, to learn new
behaviours and to sustain them willingly.

Project Managers want to deliver on time, to quality and within budget whilst Change Managers
ultimate aim is Adoption/Business Readiness … the two are sometimes in direct opposition e.g.:

Project Management role:

 Drive solution delivery.

 Communicate progress and impact on solution deliverables and project goals.
 Implementation and technical risk management.
 Focuses on project time, cost, quality, scope.
 Follows project management lifecycle.
 Steps and tools for managing the project from start to end.
 Delivering project solution.

Change Management role:

 Work towards change sustainability and integration.

 Communicate progress and impact on people readiness.
 People-side risk management.
 Focuses on people-side strategies and planning for change adoption and timely benefits realisation.
 Follows change management lifecycle.
 Steps and tools for managing and motivating people who are experiencing change.
 Concerned with the optimal ownership, use and benefit of the delivered solution

Reference: http://changestory.co.za/the-dangers-of-changing-without-change-management/

I believe what is needed is a collaborative effort between PMs and CMs where they both take
responsibility for their own activities but work together to ensure that these activities are fully aligned.
I started life as a PM and gained Fellowship of the Association for Project Management and then
metamorphosed into CM. While my PM skills are used to good effect when planning CM activities I
regard this as a secondary skill. For the most part planning CM activities is quite simple e.g.
Communication… messages to be communicated, channels to be communicated through, stakeholder
groups to be communicated to and frequency of communications. On the flip side I would argue that it
is nigh on impossible trying to plan activities such as culture change and managing employee
resistance especially the latter as this can crop up at any time and in any shape or form. Change
initiatives invariably throw you several “curved balls” during their life-cycle which will not be on any
plan and these have to be dealt with intuitively and in a timely manner to ensure thing do not go off
track.

In previous assignments I have worked in partnership with a PM to deliver the solution required …
each responsible for their own sections of the plan and deliverables but jointly responsible for the
delivery of the overall solution. Of course there can be problems regarding deliver e.g. as a CM my view
is that a project should not go live until the Adoption/Business Readiness tracking has achieved it’s
intended target which may be at odds with a PM’s deliverables and potentially delay a project. Having
said that if you can identify the “readiness” issue(s) that is/are causing the threat to go-live early
enough and then talk them through with the PM so both of you instigate actions to bring the
“readiness” back on track then this usually solves the problem.

For me CM and PM model of working in partnership is the way forward but unfortunately this is an
overhead a lot of organisations will not want to bear. The PM with a responsibility for change or
conversely the CM with a responsibility for PM just puts too much pressure on an individual and they
may not necessarily have the right experience and skill-set to manage both elements.

Some additional supporting information for you:

 A report published by ESI, a project management teaching provider, predicted that in 2013 many
organisations will hold on to the belief that their Project Managers lack key leadership skills such as
communications and negotiation skills. Yet companies will keep investing their training budgets in
cultivating “hard” skills, instead of instilling leadership capabilities.
 From Prosci:
o Top change management obstacles 2012 Edition of Best Practices in Change Management by Prosci
cites “Disconnect between project management and change management” being a major obstacle to
success” … study respondents noted conflicting priorities and misalignment between project
management and change management teams as a large obstacle to success. Respondents reported that
a lack of consensus on how to integrate the two practices became a large challenge throughout the life
of projects and often resulted in change management playing “second fiddle” to project management.
Specifically, study participants cited difficulty involving and getting assistance from project managers.
o 2012 benchmark study:
o Projects with poor Change Management stay on schedule or meet desired outcomes only 16% of the
time.
o A Project stood a 95% chance of success (defined as meeting or exceeding project objectives) when
using excellent Change Management.
o Projects with excellent Change Management are on or ahead of schedule 72% of the time.
 From a LinkedIn Survey by Beyond Strategy in 2012:
o How important is Project Management to Business Change success?
o Critical = 27%.
o Necessary = 68%.
o Nice to Have = 5%.
o How important is Change Management to Project success?
o Critical = 49%.
o Necessary = 46%.
o Nice to Have = 5%.

So there you have it. Don’t get me wrong I am all for some kind of alignment of both disciplines and
there has to be a focus on getting the solution implemented. If that means either integrating both roles
or having separate roles for a CM and PM then so be it. There is an old saying that goes “horses for
courses” and that’s the way it should be.