Going onward and upward

By VICKI JAYNE

In the words of 17th century French moralist Francois de la Rochefoucauld, "The only constant in life is change."

Increased demands on organisations for more flexibility, responsiveness and output have meant the workplace is often one of constant flux.

Mergers, downsizing and outsourcing are commonplace - and managing those changes effectively is an important issue for managers and administrators.

Change, whether personal or professional, can bring about uncertainty and confusion.

But it doesn't have to be that way, says Keith McGregor, industrial psychologist and consultant with Gilmour McGregor and Associates.

The key is ownership of the change. Initiating change is part of a person's freedom - you choose to leave a workplace or change jobs.

But when someone else initiates the change, problems can occur.

McGregor says it is rare to see change handled well in New Zealand, and a lot of his work as a consultant is in "cleaning up the wreckage" after it all goes wrong.

For change to be successful, workers need to feel they have some control, are consulted, and have the issues explained beforehand.

McGregor says an example of a well-managed change in which he was involved was in the administration of a Government department.

The manager called everyone together and said: "Here's the budget, here's the redundancy package.

"You know what you are doing, I want you to work out the new structure."

Staff made their own decisions - the ones who wanted to stay did, and those who didn't, left.

Another example was a computer team which spent three years building a programme for a large corporation.

Management asked McGregor to be involved because the project was winding down. They intended to pay out the workers and take their passwords off them, for fear they would sabotage the programme.

"I said: 'Why? They have spent years building it; they are not about to destroy it'."

McGregor told the workers the project was winding up, something of which they were aware.

Some people would get ongoing work. He told them to have a think about the best way of handling things and suggested they meet again a week later.

"In the end, productivity shot up, and all of the team became involved in a new project."

Karthik Nilakant, a Canterbury University academic and author of Managing Organisation Change, says the days are gone when an organisation could rely on technology, markets and financial resources to stay ahead.

Today, knowledge is the only resource that can provide sustainable competitive advantage, he says.

The key task for managers and organisations is creating ideas and translating them into winning solutions. "This requires that the employees be orientated to constant learning and change," he says.

Managers need to accept they may not have all the answers.

It's therefore preferable, he says, to involve people in designing and implementing change.

Managers may not be able to keep everyone happy, but they can be honest, transparent and fair.

Managers should not give promises they cannot keep and, most importantly, should not restructure for the wrong reasons.

When contemplating change, three things need to be balanced: employees, customers and shareholders.

Preference towards one or two will lead to future problems, says Nilakant.

A manager should also be clear on the two factors that make his or her organisation successful.

The first is the economic logic - or what generates sales, cash and profits.

When that is no longer viable, it's time for a change. The other factor is the soul or spirit of an organisation. What gives it energy and vitality?

Positive change aims to re-energise, building on strength or tackling things in a new way.

Nilakant says these two factors have led to two ways of managing change.

The economic approach emphasises cost-cutting through downsizing and outsourcing, and stresses monitoring and control.

The developmental approach emphasises development and growth.

Ideally, he says, an organisation needs to balance the two approaches.

Nilakant says many New Zealanders have gone through organisational change in the past 15 years without creating too much fuss.

While we are entrepreneurial, resourceful and innovative, we can also downplay our strengths.

There can be a tendency for "unquestioning acceptance" of ideas from elsewhere - user-pays, treating patients and students as customers and the like - instead of coming up with our own solutions.

Jacqui Tizard, a consultant with organisational performance consultancy The Empower Group, says there are key considerations before, during and after a change to minimise negative effects.

First, have a clear and compelling business case, and properly plan the programme. Consider the impacts, particularly on people, and be aware of the legal obligations.

During the change, communicate.

Keep to commitments, meet timeframes, support morale and keep people busy while giving them an opportunity to digest the change.

Afterwards, support leaving staff. Pay attention to those who remain.

Give staff a chance to vent their emotions and review or debrief the change process.

Tizard says the most emotional situation is redundancy, because individuals question their self-worth and cannot easily distinguish between themselves and their role at work.

Change, she says, does not have to be negative.

"Organisations can proactively prepare individuals for change by providing skills in dealing with change, ensure that everyone within the organisation understands the business plan and strategic direction - and by valuing the contribution an individual makes."