The truth about management of change. The good, the less good and the old assumptions about communications.
Reading Time: 4minutes
by Dr. Leandro Herrero, The Chalfont Project:
Communications, and internal communications in particular, are a crucial piece in organizational life.
Its power resides in its obvious role. So obvious that it usually goes without explanation. Then, after the no-explanation, we tend to attribute to that ‘obvious thing’ a disproportionate power, which comes with additional disproportionate expectations.
Part of the problem with ‘the obvious’ (a word which literally means standing in the way, that is obstructing) is that it’s mainly based on imagining ‘the lack of it’ or a bad example. Everybody agrees that bad communication is at the root of many ills, and those can be easily described. When asked to describe the benefits of good communication, people often provide a good list of (obvious) platitudes.
Communications need to be understood in the context of a broader set of pillars in organizational life. Then, in that context, the role of communications, not just as a messaging vehicle but as the real oil of organizational life, starts to be better understood. If communication functions or divisions are seen as a form of Traffic Management, then your frame is limited. I prefer to zoom in and out from communications to understand how that oil of the formal and informal organization can play a key role.
People sometimes get stressed when I say that the problem with (internal or external) communications is not that we do not communicate, or we don’t communicate well, but that we communicate too much. Channels get saturated, attention goes down and one can no longer distinguish between noise and signal.
I’d like to provide here a set of principles that we use in the context of Viral Change™ Projects (where communications play a key role, but not the only role) as a broad reference set. You can make your own judgment as to ‘where’ in this set the role of communications needs to be re-thought, perhaps re-set.
Communication, per se, is not change. There is no change unless there is behavioural change.
Culture change is a behavioural epidemic, not an information tsunami. Bombard the organization with campaign messages if you wish, but there will be no change unless there is behavioural change.
Change does not start with ‘changing mindsets’. Mindsets are not a ghost inside the brain directing behaviours. Focus on behaviours or you’ll be running in circles all the time (in search of the mindset).
Behaviours create culture. Change behaviours, get culture. The Mindset Cult doesn’t like this. Start with behaviours.
Behaviours are an input in culture change. Culture (‘where things grow’) is the output. Imagine culture as a Petri dish. Trust, ownership, accountability etc, are outputs, not inputs.
Large scale is not small scale repeated several times. The laws of large scale (culture) change have little to do with the laws of individual, group, or team change. Change at scale or there is no culture change.
Individual change interventions, from coaching to team development, are not scalable. You can’t tackle broad organizational change with them.
Behaviours scale up by social copying, by imitation. Good or bad, they will scale up. We copy what is around us.
Cultures are not created by training. No revolution ever started in a classroom.
Culture change does not usually start at the top. ‘The individual (or top leaders) needs to change first’ is an alibi for not starting a transformation.
‘Change yourself first’ is an entrenched social belief. As entrenched as wrong. Very often social change is first, individual change follows.
Culture is not a destination, it’s the journey. On this journey, the hardest part is sustaining. Triggering new behaviours and habits is the easy part.
Individual or top leaders’ role modelling is welcome but not enough. It needs scale. Leadership development does not completely ‘solve culture’.
Peer-to-peer, not top-down hierarchy is the strongest engine of culture shaping, beating hierarchy by 2:1.
Employee engagement is an outcome, not an input, certainly not a score. You don’t inject engagement; you create cultural (behavioural) conditions.
Grassroots, bottom-up change needs a mobilizing platform. This is what Viral Change™ is. ‘Bottom-up’ is not the same as more workshops at the bottom.
‘Readiness to Change’ is a red herring. No revolution started when everybody was ready.
Passion (as an all-things solution) per se, is overrated. It’s incredible how much damage a group of highly passionate people can do.
People are not resistant to change. Managers are resistant to accepting that people are not resistant to change.
New processes, systems or technology will not create lasting cultural change. Put behaviours in place first, then bring in the systems.
The formal and the informal organization are twin sisters. Both shape culture (sometimes they fight).
The informal organization is the culture oxygen. Suffocating it is a bad idea. The whole Management Theory is, however, largely focused on the formal organization.
Storytelling drives and accelerates change. Bottom-up storytelling spreads like fire. Top-down storytelling stops when the campfire ends, or when a strong wind blows, whatever is first.
Today there is no way to understand large scale behavioural and cultural change without the lenses of a social movement. Social movements are the model, not business school PowerPoints.
The laws of company culture change, social change, institutional change, or social movements are the same. Misunderstanding this has created HR bubbles, Big Consulting profits, and an alibi for slow and painful change.
Now we can zoom in and out to search for the impact on communications. Most principles here, possibly all of them, have either an explicit or hidden implication that a communications professional will view through their own specific lenses. But it will require a bit of resetting perhaps. For example, if this is so, what would I change in my communication strategy? If you were to look at these principles with your own ‘communications function’ glasses, what would change?
+++
Dr Leandro Herrero is the CEO of The Chalfont Project, a pioneering international firm of Organizational Architects specializing in large-scale behavioural and cultural transformation. With a distinct fusion of expertise in psychiatry and leadership, Dr Herrero has authored several influential books on mobilizing change, including Viral Change™, Homo Imitans, and The Flipping Point. His work has consistently shaped the landscape of leadership and organizational dynamics across sectors. He is a #WeLeadComms honoree.
One thought on “The truth about management of change. The good, the less good and the old assumptions about communications.”
Dr. Herrero, probably better than anyone, really gets the relationship between formal communication, informal communication, and tangible change. This piece delivers that understanding with an amazing degree of efficiency.
Dr. Herrero, probably better than anyone, really gets the relationship between formal communication, informal communication, and tangible change. This piece delivers that understanding with an amazing degree of efficiency.
MK