Purpose
– The purpose of this paper is to illustrate what would happen if we were to ignore relationships when leading change. Many believe that project management, change management, and related fields, are a matter of marshalling stuff: working the right processes and tasks, writing the correct documents, having good governance mechanisms in place, etc. People just distract and get in the way. Some tend to concentrate on these technicalities working their computer tools, rather than leaning towards people. The result is huge waste. Organisational change will always cut across different business functions, boundaries and across silos of working. This is where stakeholder engagement leads to successful outcomes.
Design/methodology/approach
– It is a surprise to many, but listening is probably the most powerful influencing strategy of all. The key is to ask the person you seek to influence, first for their thoughts, fears, and aspirations. If you can show you are genuinely interested, you begin to break down any barriers to change. This helps focus on the need for change rather than present the solution first. Yes, time is money, but often we can let this get in the way of engaging successfully. Conversations like this do take time. It feels counter-intuitive.
Findings
– There is growing evidence that people who make better leaders have a leaning towards action, they are never victims of “paralysis by analysis”. The self-aware, pro-active manager leading change understands that relationships are central to success and are thinking about their relationships in a real and active way. They think about their mental landscape and on that landscape they see the vital importance of stakeholders and are prepared to spend a far higher proportion of their discretionary time devoted to engaging with other people, quite apart from the structured meetings and emails that we usually describe as “communicating”.
Originality/value
– Most management books are written with the assumption that the business world is rational, but when it comes to change, it appears this is far from the case. We are taught to put a reasonable proposition to people, the business case, the plan, and so on, then expect people to mull it over for a while, then jump into action – reason – analyse – act. But nearly always the actual sequence is – see – feel – act. There is little doubt that people engage with their stakeholders better if there is some kind of emotional connection.
TDF (Theoretical Domain Framework): how inclusive are TDF domains and constructs compared to other tools for assessing barriers to change?