Culture eats change for breakfast, but should it?

By Isolde Kanikani, 31-8-21

The word "culture" derives from a French term, which in turn derives from the Latin "colere," which
means to tend to the earth and grow, or cultivation and nurture. "It shares its etymology with a number
of other words related to actively fostering growth," (Zimmermann). If this were to be believed, why is it
then that a company’s culture is so often named as one of the big reasons why change projects are less
successful? What then is the understanding of culture we all use when telling stories about companies
whose culture stopped real intrinsic adoption and ate change for breakfast? For me culture has been an
elusive beast, and why I am now engaging in an active search for some kind of understanding about it’s
true nature. I am on a search to find out what serves both culture and change synonymously, letting us
people side of change explorers delve a little deeper into this phenomenon we often underestimate. My
first step is to question if there is such a thing as healthy culture and properly managed change?

Company culture and the nature of the changes that we are often implementing could have a part to
play in this. If we used the premise that healthy culture is one of growth and prosperity through
development, specifically involving employees in the organisation's own defining values and behaviours
(Hampden-Turner). Companies want to be healthy to keep on existing and make a tidy profit if they can
at all help it. In this VUCA world we now live in, not adapting fast enough is a company’s greatest risk
(Kotter et al.). A healthy organisation is one that encourages, supports and even nurtures a culture of
continuous change in order to survive these quite extreme times. This would logically mean that a
culture that doesn’t allow growth is maybe unhealthy or another animal all together. If we are sick, do
we call ourselves a bit less than top of our health, or name it as we perceive it, being ill. Further
exploration is needed here to determine what a less than healthy culture might otherwise be called. If
we call all states of culture culture, then the beast certainly has a huge impact on change projects. But if
you name it unhealthy ‘...?’, then it becomes something change can begin to manage.

The same goes for change, in terms of changing a status quo we can do this well or not at all. Well
managed change can bring some surprisingly positive transformations and return on investment. But if a
change is left unmanaged or worse neglected, it would make sense that it fails. The maturity of the
Change profession also has an impact here. Some people call themselves some form of change manager
or consultant with experience going back more than 30 years. I do not doubt their experience and
knowledge, but alongside this, I would like to suggest that the change management we saw 30 years ago
is different to the form we know today. Then in some kind of infancy. Now we are in our adolescent
years, where we are forming and getting ever more informed about methods, theories and practice that
can really drive change in organisations. There is a 70% fail rate statistic that follows change around, this
has been traced back to a simple (and profound) opinion piece written approximately 20 years ago, and
it still appears in many articles today (Wilkinson). So the influence of yesterday and indeed maybe the
culture of change holds change back. Even if 70% were a real statistic based on 30 years of change
management, there are some questions. Would you ask a baby to do the same as an adolescent,
expecting the same results? A large percentage of this 70%, if taken to be true, is based on years where
change management is growing up. Of course the failure rate is higher in the beginning, and with further
evolution we become better at change. Last point to add here is that the parameters of what makes a
change project are pretty loose, and the ones used to define this 70% are not clear or talked about. This
would make this an extremely unreliable statistic. I can imagine there are new reports coming up which
might present some new light on this figure.

Another angle on the change management front is in regards to the people side of change. From my own
work, I see frequently that there are various degrees of working with people being understood. Some
think training and communication is enough to get a new change success story within the company.
Somehow company roles, abbreviated terminology, sometimes bureaucracy, sometimes not enough
structure or processes (the list goes on) get in the way of sitting at a table and seeing each person as an
individual who is driven by many different motivations and responsibilities. When we look at each other,
acknowledging these differences, we can also start to get in touch with the individual journeys people
will have to go through in order to make the desired change. Practicing what we preach by engaging in a
different mindset than the corporate colloquial language can often allow. This touches on concepts from
Neuroscience, Neuro Linguistic programming (Anderson), design thinking principles, and AI otherwise
known as appreciative inquiry. Some very interesting methods for engaging outside of right or wrong,
good or bad. Stepping into acknowledgement of what is and how we can work with it, allows for learning
and innovation.

Want to try it for yourself? A change often comes as a surprise for people, felt differently by each
individual. If you think back to a time when you were asked to do something that was completely not in
your comprehension, i.e. you never thought of it before. Added to this there was surprise, probably a
good dose of obscurity about what this actually entailed and come to think of it, WHY? Probably you
had some kind of choice in the matter, but if you didn’t (often the case in organisational change), it
becomes worse. SO like culture having a healthy state and another ‘ill’ state, change can be realised in a
way that makes people feel what you just felt (maybe), looking back at some memory that stays with
you. Or it can be started on time, people can be involved in the planning rather than surprised by its
sudden implementation. Put succinctly, properly managed change means taking the people with you and
nurturing their personal journeys through the what, the why, the decision to be part of it, the learning,
the believing you can and last but not least creating new healthy patterns by reinforcing and embracing
change (Prosci) (Rogers ).

By taking a deeper look at the intrinsic make-up of a particular culture, we can start to see that what was
once an invincible beast now has many more facets to be explored. Think on behaviour, values, norms,
goals and shared vision or lack thereof (Barsoux). Accepted and respected forms of leadership and
management influence a company's culture and change projects alike. Even the way teams, departments
and overall structure of an organisation influence how individuals interact with each other and the tasks
they need to do. Chosen governance and project frameworks influence both practical in terms of
deliverables and how people go about creating these. We aim to give attention to all these things as
managers of change, and as the need arises. One size doesn't fit all which pinpoints the need to check
our own biases in order to bring the best combination of change practice to our clients (DiLeonardo et
al.). Getting rid of the automatic 70% failure rate could help the culture of change get well again. If
culture is broken down into manageable parts, and change becomes managed and maybe even lead, we
have a chance to allow culture and change to work together. With the takeaway being getting out of the
right and wrong or fear of mistakes way of thinking into a mindset of ‘Stepping into acknowledgement of
what is and how we can work with it.’

Bibliography

Align Today. Align Today,

https://aligntoday.com/blog/top-five-reasons-change-management-programs-fail/.

Anderson, Dr. Linda Ackerman. “5 Reasons Why Organizational Change Fails.” Being First, 11 July 2018,

https://blog.beingfirst.com/5-reasons-why-organizational-change-fails.

Barsoux, Louis. “What Everyone Gets Wrong About Change Management.” Harvart Business review,

Harvart Business review, November 2017,

https://hbr.org/2017/11/what-everyone-gets-wrong-about-change-management.

DiLeonardo, Alexander, et al. “When one size doesn’t fit all: How to make change personal.” McKinsey,

McKinsey, 26 October 2020,

https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/organization/our-insights/the-organization-blog/

when-one-size-doesnt-fit-all-how-to-make-change-personal.

Gleeson, Brent. “1 Reason Why Most Change Management Efforts Fail.” Forbes, 25 July 2017,

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brentgleeson/2017/07/25/1-reason-why-most-change-managem

ent-efforts-fail/?sh=2721bf21546b.

Hampden-Turner, Charles. Corporate culture. Hutchinson Book's Limited., 1994.

Kotter, John, et al. Change. Wiley, 2021.

Prosci. “The Prosci ADKAR model.” Prosci, https://www.prosci.com/methodology/adkar.

Rogers, Everett. Diffusion of Innovations. Free Press, 2003.

Wilkinson, David. Common Myths of organisatonal change. 15 APril 2016. Youtube,

https://youtu.be/_xle0yoKYKM.

Zimmermann, Kim. “What is culture.” Live science, 13 July 2017,

https://www.livescience.com/21478-what-is-culture-definition-of-culture.html.