Change fatigue, kissing frogs and eating elephants

You have to kiss a lot of frogs to find your prince (why is it never princess?). This is the same with change in a lot of organisations - you have to make a lot of changes to get to your optimal position, some will be successful and others won't. Sad really that we continually flog ourselves in our business lives to get to a position of 'optimality', but achieving this is often a meandering slog.

And worse, we're never sure when we've kissed enough frogs and found enough princes/princesses to achieve our goal - perhaps you can never have enough, perhaps we don't know what our goal is, or someone keeps moving the goalposts?

That's enough about frogs. The real point of this note is to try to write down the reasons why organisations experience perpetual change, and what can be done to minimise change if appropriate. I hope readers have their own ideas to add.

Change fatigue is experienced by most of us at points in our professional (and personal) lives. You can see it in other people when they roll their eyes, slump their shoulders, drag their feet, gossip and whinge etc upon announcement of another change - somewhat unexpectedly the small changes to things like organisational design often get the same reactions as more significant changes (shock, anger, etc). People are people - they have egos and personalities and whatever is changing around them they're looking at the following questions;

• what's in it for me?
• was I asked?
• when and how?
• how does it really affect the things I care about?
• why is it happening yet again?

Let's look at why perpetual change happens;

• because it can. Cynically it gives managers something to do. I don't really think this is common in the real world though, it is often about 'eating the elephant' - lots of changes ('bites') need to be made to enable the ultimate goal ('eating the whole elephant') to be achieved.
• Using the elephant analogy further, do we really know what the scale of the elephant is? Is there a corporate strategy that elaborates the desired end-state, and what the journey is to get there in terms of underlying operational strategies ? If this isn't clear, then there may be false starts, and false end, leading to the perception of piecemeal change and hence change fatigue.
• Will the elephant stand still? Clearly a lot of changes are foisted upon organisations by regulators, governments, local authorities, professional bodies etc, and these cannot always be planned for. Some of these changes will be planned, others will not. There are a number of other external factors that cause organisations to have to implement unscheduled change, such as competitive pressures, new products, business opportunities, M&A and the like.
• How many elephants do we have? Nursing a herd is harder than just one, particularly when the want to move at different rates, go off on diversions, sleep and eat at different times.... The elephants will always need a different degree of nursing too - how much management time does each project require, and can they be managed collectively?

I'm sure that I could continue talking about elephants further, but the point is that there are good and meaningful reasons often why there is perpetual change (sometimes there is not), and I'll list the things that can be done to minimise the change fatigue.

• Ensure that you have a strategy and a lucid desired end-state. And communicate it so that everyone knows where they are going and can learn to deal with it, and participate! If you tell a group of people that their roles are to be outsourced, then tell them everything (as far as you can), get them to meet their counterparts, understand the implications, get involved in the transaction and transition etc, as there will be a huge number of things that have to happen before the final transfer happens. It is in everyone's best interest that the change is a success.
• Have detailed operational plans and strategies that map into corporate level strategy. Makes sure that the managers responsible stick to agreed plans.
• Manage all change in one place - you should aim to get one view of all change across your organisation, and manage it as a cohesive whole at a macro-level. If anyone wants to change their plans, make an announcement or accelerate/decelerate, there is then a means of governance and ensuring that the implications of any adjustment are considered. This is a programme management or change director role.
• Ensure that there is clarity of sponsorship - knowing that there is a senior sponsor (or the Board for significant change programmes) overseeing what is happening helps calm nerves. But sponsorship must be earnest and visible, otherwise it will not help.
• Continue to communicate to all stakeholders throughout - once you've set along a path, keep coming back and telling stakeholders what is going on, and ensuring that there is two-way communication, websites, announcement plans and so on. This stops a lot of the worry, angst, gossip and wasted effort. If plans change, then communicate to people as soon as you can. If new things need to happen, communicate as soon as you can. You need to ensure that all key relationships are managed explicitly - if relationships fail, then you are more likely to fail.
• Design your plans such that there are 'islands of stability' - periods where nothing new happens, everyone has a rest, focusses on the job. This will pay dividends.

Of course, the list above is just a list of things to do for well-managed change initiatives, but that is what makes them well-managed and what helps prevent change fatigue. It is people that stop change, so if you don't deal with the people aspects of change there is the real risk that your change programme will fail.

The perils of not dealing wth the soft stuff - an IT perspective

John-Paul Kamath writing for Computer Weekly has laid down various opinions on the importance in managing stakeholders from an IT viewpoint.


I've blogged on this before, but the bottom line in the article is that if you fail to get people behind your development it will fail. There isn't a huge amount of further insight that anyone can give.

What isn't change management?

There's loads of confusion out there about what change management is (or isn't), so here's a summary;

It is;

- doing whatever needs to be done to make an event/change happen, with focus on getting all of the practical aspects and people aspects aligned. One needs to ensure that the change happens and sticks - it is people that stop change, not technology. Change management in this sense applies to cultural change, organisational design, behavioural change etc.

It is not;

- Change management in an ITIL, IT, project sense - this is better labelled change control and/or configuration management whereby the control is ensuring that all aspects of a change (to an IT component, a form, process etc) happens, rather than whether people buy into the change and it actually endures.

Rant over.

How important is being a 'trusted adviser' to clients?

I was asked this a few days ago, so thought I would quickly articulate my views here.

Without trust, it seems to me that relationships are ineffective. Individuals will never achieve optimum performance and the benefits from the relationship will not achieve their full potential.

As a consultant, one strives to become a 'trusted adviser' - as a professional person a consultant strives for client satisfaction as well as personal satisfaction - in a change environment one would gauge this as benefits delivered (exceeding those required if possible) along with the behavioural and process changes that ensure that those benefits endure. As a trusted adviser the consultant is taking the client relationship to the next level - not necessarily for mercenary reasons - endeavouring to use their skills and 'wise counsel' to support their client through whatever challenges faces them.

It seems to me that this is critical to development of a long-term professional relationship, with potential benefits to the consultant of further work and referrals.

Defining change management

I wrote on 4 January about the tensions between project and change management. The Change Management Learning Center have a great (short) paper aimed at giving a definition of change management.

Why do we deliver change...to create value

We deliver change to create value - that's it. I've written on this subject before but given one or two discussions I've had recently thought it worth reiterating the point.

Change is a difficult thing. But it must always have an ultimate goal - in corporate life we deliver change because it creates shareholder value (it is difficult to see any other reason), and in the social and governmental sectors we might go through a change programme to establish some social or environmental improvement. Why would you go through potentially gut-wrenching change for no good reason?

Facilitation for change - tools to support us through change

I've been along to a meeting today - these folks are all professional facilitators based in central England, and much of what they do is help groups of people achieve their change goals (as well as mediation, public policy and loads of other things). It is a long time since we could rely on things to 'just happen', and facilitated workshops, conferences, meetings etc help in ensuring that objectives are achieved.

This got me thinking - as change consultants/change managers what do we have in our armoury to help us through some really tricky people-related change activities. Here's my list off the top of my head...

• processes to support change analysis
• project and programme management approaches
• Communications expertise; and
• Professional facilitation of course

....but other than experience and common sense probably not a lot else.

If you want to get in contact with any of the UK Facilitators let me know.

Project Management and Change Management

There is a debate going on in another forum about the use of structured project management methodologies (eg; Prince 2) versus the management of change. We need to be clear that project management is not the same as change management - managing the project is part of managing the change, but it is a relatively mechanistic process, providing the assurance of technical delivery and to some extent the delivery of the benefits. Change management is about delivering the behavioural change that ensures that the benefits endure, that the technical changes are accepted, and that the expected outcomes are achieved.

Another way of looking at this is that there are many more people involved in delivering the change (the sponsor, Board, managers etc), whereas the project processes can be delivered by the Project Manager (who, if they are enlightened/experienced will be focussed on delivering the change as well as the technical delivery).

One thing that annoys me is where some third party suppliers/partners (in IT particularly) tend to come along after winning a contract and expect that they can simply implement their bit of technology and it will work and be accepted - they often get a shock and then cost overruns etc, and consequently relationships start to fail between supplier and customer....the real world is difficult!

Here's a link to a basic project/change role comparison from the change management learning center if you're interested.

Change training and development

I was asked today about change training and development.

I know there are a few public courses around, but in my view bespoke training related to a particular business sector is most helpful - different sectors tend to have different challenges, ways of operating, language etc, and all of these things are important in how people act and react to change. Probably the best course that I've run is a focussed 'advanced' training within the Financial Services sector, based on 'real-life' case studies and a little bit of role playing. This allowed participants to establish an approach to managing through change (at a very high-level inevitably) in a safe environment - and its loads of fun too!

If training can be supported by mentoring, so much the better.

The real world

I received the joke below in an email today - one of those things that go around at Christmas time. You can read the joke if you wish, but the sense of it is that the real world has changed so much that saying 'Happy Christmas' might upset someone. This is political correctness gone mad in my opinion, although there was an article in a national paper a few days ago that said managers are fearful of putting decorations up. Amazing. At the other extreme there are offices where you might see decorations for Diwali, Chinese New Year etc as well as Christmas of course, recognising a social and community approach to life.

The key point here for me is that in our professional lives we are impacted by whatever is happening in the real world, and it is sometimes difficult to separate the substance of an event or activity and the interpretation of the same. Any action will mean different things to different people, and will impact them in a variety of ways. We are all different, and will vary our mood and interpretation on different days. This is key in change management and transformation of business.

THE JOKE

I wanted to send out some sort of holiday greeting to my friends, but it
is so difficult in today's world to know exactly what to say without
offending someone. So I met with my lawyer yesterday, and on his advice
I wish to say the following:-

Please accept with no obligation, implied or implicit, my best wishes
for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low stress,
non-addictive, gender neutral celebration of the winter solstice
holiday, practiced within the most enjoyable traditions of the religious
persuasions or secular practices of your choice with respect for the
religious/secular persuasions and/or traditions of others, or their
choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all.
I also wish you a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling, and
medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally
accepted calendar year 2007, but not without due respect for the
calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society
have helped make the world a great place (not to imply that any country
is necessarily greater than any other country) and without regard to the
race, creed, colour, age, physical ability, religious faith, or sexual
preference of the wishee.

By accepting this greeting, you are accepting these terms:
This greeting is subject to clarification or withdrawal. It is freely
transferable with no alteration to the original greeting. It implies no
promise by the wisher to actually implement any of the wishes for
her/himself or others and is void where prohibited by law, and is
revocable at the sole discretion of the wisher. This wish is warranted
to perform as expected within the usual application of good tidings for
a period of one year or until the issuance of a subsequent holiday
greeting, whichever comes first, and warranty is limited to replacement
of this wish or issuance of a new wish at the sole discretion of the
wisher.

Disclaimer: no trees were harmed in the sending of this message however,
a significant number of electrons were slightly inconvenienced.

Cleaning out my sock drawer - let's be analytical

Ok, I haven't really been cleaning out my sock drawer - I'm not desperate for things to do! What I have been doing for the last hour was going through all of the masses of forms, analyses etc that I maintain in a folder on my laptop and making sure that they are all still relevant and useful. This is probably equivalent to folding socks, but it needed doing.

The point of course is that managing change (as for the remainder of project management-related activity) is an analytical process, that needs planning, monitoring and measuring just like any other activity. I know that is all about people, and people are fickle, have egos and desires, but whatever we do to address the needs of these people must be planned to ensure that we know what we need to do and when (and how much it will cost my accounting conscience annoyingly reminds me), and monitor and assess the success of our actions and then replan and so on.

The challenge of course is that monitoring is difficult -if we ask someone "How are you?", they will normally say "Fine!" rather than "My leg hurts and this new system will be rubbish!". But that is what makes it interesting...

If you need a document or process around any aspect of change management, please email me

Different ways of looking at things

A friend sent me a joke recently..something along the lines of;

Q: "Why do IT people confuse Christmas with Halloween"
A: "Because DEC25=OCT31"**

Whether the joke is funny is a matter for you, but it got me thinking about different peoples perceptions of the same situation and how it important it is for us all to think about our actions. I worked for a manager many years ago, and I dreamt up a great structure for the business, focus on sales and service etc - but it meant that there was only a role for him or his peer. I thought it was a great idea, would save a great deal of money, and ensure focus on what mattered - he thought it was not tenable and we went back to the drawing board! I learned a lot in that job.

A lot of the focus of change management analysis and communications planning is ensuring that the perceptions that the recipients of message will hold are positive (or can be dealt with if adverse). We need to recognise that people from differing personal and prfessional backgrounds will perceive the same piece of information differently. This is why being a change consultant is fun...

** Decimal 25 is the same as Octal (Base 8) 31 (3x8=24+1) - you can tell it is nearly Christmas

Big business - talking about the importance of people

Well, well, well. On today's BBC 'Working Lunch' programme (I do not spend all day watching television, honest), Ben Verwaayen CEO of BT spoke about the importance of people in this FTSE 100 company - watch the video. Mr Verwaayen was excellent, and tied BT's business strategies into the 100000 people globally who have to deliver them. He clearly has a grip on what makes companies tick, and the need to get BT's people behind him. What amazed me, was that it is rare that you hear a big-company CEO talking like this (and the interviewer's preamble outlines Mr Verwaayen's credentials from a people point of view).

Excellent interview if you're interested in change in the real world!

The whole point is to deliver value

I'm an accountant - but I'm not boring! I've admitted it, owned up to it. Done.

This admission is important - the reason that we implement projects and programmes is to deliver value......isn't it? So you would expect me to say nothing matters other than the financial impacts of the change activity. What will implementation expenses be, when and how are benefits realised, how can costs be capitalised, who has got the budget etc...

OK I would say all of those things - in the business world we have to deliver value to all our stakeholders, but we also have to think that there may not only be a financial business case that we need worry about, but all of the other impacts of our projects. Take the petrochemicals sector for instance - a project that develops relatively environmentally-friendly biofuels (see the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer's comments on this in yesterday's pre-budget report) deliver value in other ways, not just financial. This is important - selling the change on the basis of environmental benefit may be more relevant to some stakeholders than 'we save £xm over 10 years'. We need to determine all of the benefits and make sure that they're sufficiently developed to get people to accept the change. It may be possible to tweak a programme of work to (cheaply) gain additional benefits that make the change more palatable. Whichever way, it is critical that the benefits case is worked up in detail at the beginning of the project rather than the end!

Accelerating change

I had an email today about a global company that needed someone to help the finish a programme that had been running for two years - it sounded as if it had faltered and they need change consulting effort to move it to its conclusion.

Two years into the programme and they start worrying about the people impacts!! This reminded me of a great book I've read a couple of times - 'Five frogs on a log' by Mark L Feldman and Michael F Spratt. The book is about acceleration of change, particularly in an post-mergers and acquisitions situation. The title comes from the story about five frogs sitting on a log, one says 'shall we jump', and all agree that they should - of course they don't actually jump because saying you'll do something is differrent to actually doing it.

Back to the point, Feldman and Spratt use a great analogy for change - they liken it to removal of a sticking plaster; remove the plaster slowly and the pain lasts longer than pulling it off quickly - 'rip, sting, gone'.

Not all projects can be completed quickly, but you need to move those affected to an 'acceptance' position as quickly as possible. This is a measured process - in some situations you may not be able to talk to people as soon as you would like (eg; redundancy) - but that doesn't prevent detailed analysis and planning.

What normally happens in a change programme?

People talk to me about what I expect will happen in their change programme...the short answer is 'who knows?', but that isn't terribly professional or practical!

As it is people that stop change, make change happen, embrace change it is not very easy to say that one person, cadre of people, team etc will hold a specific view and will take a particular position. But if nothing is done to get people to support a change then, unremarkably, there is a real chance that nothing will happen. How many times in our professional careers have we seen that an IT system enhancement is delivered, but all the users do is carry on working in the 'old way'? How long did it take some colleagues to use email, rather than secretary-typed memos!

People have egos, issues, personal crises, work ethics, social, political and religious viewpoints, hangovers....they all need nurturing to work through a change. They will go through various stages dependent on their starting point (based on Elisabeth Kubler-Ross' work );

• denial ('this can't be happening');
• anger ('why me - I won't let it happen');
• bargaining ('if I do this, what will it mean for me')
• depression ('Ok, I suppose that we have to do this')
• acceptance ('Let's just get on with it')

We can talk about whether these are actually the stages another day, but the principles are appropriate.

The challenges do not stop with an understanding of where individuals are with respect to working through the stages - because teams, unions, 'coffee-machine cliques' all have different views, as do managers, boards, shareholders, customers - every individual stakeholder and stakeholder group will need to be managed through the change - and working out which individual or group can really prevent or delay or change and then dealing with it is really what makes managing change interesting. For some individuals or groups a simple website with a feedback mechanism might be sufficient, others might need weekly briefings and monthly reports, others might reasonably be totally ignored - it is the structured approach to this, with regular monitoring via a 'heatmap' or similar that will help ensure that your change is successful. Alongside all of this, you have to ensure that the practical aspects of the change on a time/cost/quality basis is delivered successfully too!

Organisational change - what does this mean?

I had a conversation with a chap a few days ago about organisational change - what he actually wanted was a change to the organisational design of his organisation (same people, different labels and responsibilities) along with a few remuneration and job role changes.

What he didn't want was organisational change, where there is a rethink of the way people work, inprovements to processes and systems, team and organisational culture and suchlike. This type of activity will drive out real financial value, whereas simply changing the organisational design is likely to incur costs, cause unnecessary turmoil and focus away from getting the job done.

Businesses are adept at changing the organisational design of their operations - how many places have we all worked where we see things changing every week, month, quarter in this respect - but these tweaks are rarely (never?) assessed in terms of the impacts that they will have, operationally and financially. If we accept that people don't like change, and they come to work to do a good job, we need managers to think about the impacts of their actions and not have a casual attitude to things that they can do with a swift memo. What organisations really need is strategic thinking- for instance, will this change actually deliver real financial value, what needs to happen to make the change accepted and effective, and are there other things that need to be done to ensure continued high-quality customer service etc.

Is email spam a tool in growing your business? Does email matter?

I have just been through my junk email. It caused me to stop and think for a moment whether spam is a business tool. If there is any substance behind the links in the junk mail that I receive (I've never felt the need to click on them...), obviously someone out there in cyber world thinks so.

But stopping and thinking for a minute, what were my reactions (without expletives);

• not more email
• how does it get through
• better check to make sure the junk filter hasn't captured anything I really want
• why do these people bother? Does Randy at Erogenous Pharmaceuticals really exist? (Actually, I might trademark that name.)

Email is really cheap. And it is the bane of our business and personal lives, particularly if we let it take over. I think it is really unacceptable to sit in a meeting reviewing your Blackberry/Smartphone messages rather than having the courtesy to follow the substance of the meeting and then asking for a summary or being unable to react to a question or critical point. In one organisation I worked with, it was de rigueur for colleagues to sit looking at their PDAs at the same time as holding one-to-one discussions. This happens because the speed of business lives has accelerated, and we don't have the collective presence of mind to accept that an email will wait a few hours.

Back to the spam question. It is the cheapness of email, messaging 1000s or more email addresses at the same time that makes it so attractive to these little online suppliers. If junk email were arriving from supposed reputable organisations, we would all want to know how they got our details, how we can stop the junk, and their reputation would suffer. The senders of junk mail don't have a reputation to worry about and if the get one 'sale' for every 1000 emails they send then they've probably done well (of course the 'sale' might be of details off of your PC rather than pills or potions).

Spam mail is not a legitimate business tool - I think I knew that before I started to rant, but constant communications are important in respectable business. It is getting the content and form of those communications right that is so important - an email is often harder to draft than a simple phone call or a chat around the coffe machine, and we've all seen email chains that start with a simple innocuous question that then ends up with a huge number of comments and replys, forwards, copies, blind copies etc. We're creating an unnecessary email industry, and all feeling the pressure of ensuring that we don't miss that one important email in amongst the day-to-day dross.

In managing change in the real world we always talk to people about getting the right messages, to the right people, in the right format at the right time. We need to bring people through the change, dealing with the emotions and challenges that appear - shame we don't do that in our 'normal' lives...

PS: Please let me have an email with any comments ;-)

Why change fails...People Stop Change

I thought (I know it is dangerous) that I would let you have a version of the article that I have published in the Association of Project Managers Yearbook. I figure that if this blog is going to be helpful to us all, I need to make it a bit of a magnum opus of change stuff, without the pithy slogans and ra-ra. This is real world stuff, that affects the professional and personal lives of real people. Anyway, enjoy...

Our business lives have become more pressured over recent years – computing and telecommunications have a lot to answer for in that the mobile phone has led to instantaneous communications wherever you are in the world, and email has lead to more interpersonal communications than ever. Computing power and complex software has lead to more questions being asked that would never have either mattered before or have been capable of being answered. A little test;

Rank the following 5 statements in the order that they apply to you;

1. I need more emails
2. I always have my mobile phone switched on
3. I prefer to send emails rather than pick up the phone
4. I’m being asked for ever more complex analyses
5. I work longer than ever hours

Depending on your role, 2-4 will be in the middle in any order, 5 will be at the top and 1 at the bottom. No empirical data of course, but we all know the realities. Whether this is right or wrong is the subject of a whole different essay!

Given all of this increasing pressure, managers are required to continuously improve productivity, grow or contract their operations, outsource or insource, new system here, manage the legacy system there, acquire and dispose. The working environment is continually changing inside organizations, and for our customers it isn’t any easier.

There isn’t always a willingness to accept the reality of change inside organizations, but since it’s a reality why do we always make it as hard as possible for ourselves. The key is that although we communicate more than ever, we aren’t good at managing the people-impacts of change. Picture the scene – you’ve been having sleepless nights since your boss asked you to install a new system. You’re no IT guru, but you know you are going to have to get new hardware, software, and train people. You’ll need consulting help to get it all done on time, select the software, implement, test, and make sure all the processes work.

Well, your sleepless nights are set to continue. Where did you think about the people affected? What do they think, feel? You recognize that you will have to train them, but have you thought about what they’ll be worrying about, how they make the current systems work with undocumented workarounds, how they’ll feel with a new flat screen monitor where their fluffy toys will fall off of the top! The people will be worrying about the ‘business case’ – new system = greater productivity = fewer jobs is the normal way these projects are justified isn’t it?

I could go on. Managers tend to think about processes, and good managers tend to think about people. There’s middle ground somewhere, but when you wonder during a sleepless night why your project is failing you’ll come to the following conclusions;

• The people are worrying about the business case, productivity has plummeted, and coffee consumption has increased.

• The people hate the new system, because the consultants you used didn’t ask them what they think (nor did you), how they use the current system and so on. Productivity has plummeted.

• The system doesn’t work – the old world has prevailed, the workarounds don’t work any more. Productivity has plummeted.

• Testing is inadequate, training is inadequate – no real consideration of the journey from current state to future state was given. Productivity has plummeted.

• Your peers are taking the opportunity to sneer and jibe – your productivity has plummeted.

• Your boss isn’t pleased…your productivity is ceasing…

Although the people think you don’t care, at least the flat screens leave more room for fluffy toys on the desk. Result!

People stop change. Systems are inanimate, buildings couldn’t care who occupies them, processes will operate if the right inputs are delivered….but people are a whole different matter. ‘Command and control’ regimes are not de rigueur and will not work in the modern business, so its no good expecting to ‘tell’ people what to do. They’ve got brains, personalities, and egos and all need nurturing.

People stop change. So what are you going to do about preventing them stopping your change programme? Talk, communicate, email – this is where we came in – use the technologies that you have available, involve people-affected in the decision processes, ask them what they think and believe.

Back to your sleepless night. If only I’d;

• Explained the business case up front. There will be job losses, but we’re going to transition people to new roles. The purpose of the system is to solve a long-standing MI problem, hence we’ll need more people doing more interesting jobs. There will be job losses, but this is what we’re doing to make it as easy as possible. If only you had explained this.

• Asked people what they do – what does and doesn’t work in the current state, what will make their working lives easier and more fulfilling in the future state.

• Been more visible – showed sponsorship and got the team behind me.

• Involved some of the key people in choosing the replacement system, building the revised processes, establishing the testing and training.

• Got my peers to buy-in and support the approach I was taking, involved them in the project, helped steer progress and maximize the benefits.

• Managed my boss better, and had them involved and visible in supporting me.

You need people to go through the whole process of shock and anger, denial, understanding, challenging and (eventually sometimes) commitment to the change, whether it’s a new system, location, process, PC or business acquisition. Getting over the questions of ‘what does the change mean to me’ or often ‘what’s in it for me?’ is often time consuming and painful, but getting it right is always worthwhile.

There’s huge debate amongst project management professionals about whether its rigorous project management practice and procedures that deliver successful projects, or whether its ‘change management’ that delivers success. People stop change, make change happen, deliver successful projects, and provide you with business results, so focusing your management effort here is likely to derive most value. It won’t always be easy.

So you want an easier life…focus on the people aspects of change – it will pay dividends in both your sanity and business results terms.

Blogging in the real world

This is all new to me - I thought that as a bit of a closet techie (OK World, you all now know) I would be able to see the point behind most changes in the internet world, but I'm pretty sure until Graham Jones enlightened me at a meeting yesterday I hadn't really got it. So here's my first ever, virginal, pristine, blog.

And then I need to ramble on confidently and enlighten the world about managing change and all that stuff, helping folks understand why change is a good thing and why professional change management is key to getting to wherever you need to go. And its not just about your business life.

But that's all for another day....