Once upon a time, an engineering consulting company hit a speed bump. Revenue was falling so fast that staff attrition couldn't keep up with the contraction. So management leapt into action, declaring a salary freeze.
But there was a carrot — if the company met its revenue target, everyone would get a bonus. In consulting, revenue equates roughly to billable hours, so the engineers did their best to help Marketing find business. Trouble was, there wasn't enough business.
With less than a month to go before the CEO's annual state-of-the-company address, Management announced a buy-out for people close to retirement. After his address, in Q&A, a bright engineer asked him, "Since so many are taking the buy-out, we won't have enough billable hours left to meet the bonus target. Does this mean there's no bonus?"
Jacques, the CEO, was blind-sided, but he was no dummy. He knew that if he said yes, he could expect an exodus of his best engineers. So he replied, "I'll have to get back to you on that." Back in the calm of his office, Jacques and his team worked out the right answer: "We'll lower the bonus target proportionately."
So they issued a memo, and everyone relaxed some. But Jacques had been embarrassed at a time when he needed to show strong leadership. He probably wasn't ready for that question because it involved an intersection of two unrelated policies. Since there are so many policies in any company of even moderate size, the number of such intersections is large, and it's difficult to anticipate which intersections cause problems.
The executive team goofed, as most do now and then. Yet, even though we test our products thoroughly, we rarely test organizational changes before we "roll them out." It's a high-risk practice, because we end up testing our change plans using the company itself. To limit that risk, we must discover defects in change efforts before we execute them, and one approach that works well is the simulation.
Even though we test
our products thoroughly,
we rarely test organizational
changes before we
"roll them out"Simulations — sometimes called "games" — parallel reality. They're especially valuable when the event being simulated is high-risk. That's why the military runs war games, and why US presidential candidates run mock debates.
Simulations do require planning to ensure that they're faithful to reality, and you do need a skilled facilitator. But you can use simulations to test almost any organizational effort — process designs, project plans, test plans, reorganizations, mergers and acquisitions, marriage proposals — anything. Simulations can be off-site and small-scale, and you can use stand-ins for the actual players if security is an issue.
Is your organization embroiled in Change? Are you managing a change effort that faces rampant cynicism, passive non-cooperation, or maybe even outright revolt? Read 101 Tips for Managing Change to learn how to survive, how to plan and how to execute change efforts to inspire real, passionate support. Order Now!
Your comments are welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenrDUDwWaUxOAJtKFRner@ChaclWPJpPZohNvtYLEJoCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.
About Point Lookout
Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.
Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.
Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.
More articles on Organizational Change:
- Conventional Foolishness
- Every specialization has a set of beliefs, often called "conventional wisdom." When these
beliefs are so obvious that they're unquestioned and even unnoticed, there's an opportunity to leap
ahead of the pack — by questioning the conventional wisdom.
- He's No Longer Here
- Sometimes we adopt inappropriate technologies, or we deploy unworkable processes, largely because of
the political power of their advocates, and despite widespread doubts about the wisdom of the moves.
Strangely, though, the decisions often stick long after the advocates move on. Why? And what can we
do about it?
- Outsourcing Each Other's Kids
- Outsourcing is now so widespread that it has achieved status as a full-fledged management fad. But many
outsourcing decisions lack the justification that a full financial model provides. Here are some of
the factors that such a model should include.
- Good Change, Bad Change: II
- When we distinguish good change from bad, we often get it wrong: we favor things that would harm us,
and shun things that would help. When we do get it wrong, we're sometimes misled by social factors.
- Patching Up the Cracks
- When things repeatedly "fall through the cracks," we're not doing the best we can. How can
we deal with the problem of repeatedly failing to do what we need to do? How can we patch up the cracks?
See also Organizational Change for more related articles.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming December 11: The Rhyme-as-Reason Effect
- When we speak or write, the phrases we use have both form and meaning. Although we usually think of form and meaning as distinct, we tend to assess as more meaningful and valid those phrases that are more beautifully formed. The rhyme-as-reason effect causes us to confuse the validity of a phrase with its aesthetics. Available here and by RSS on December 11.
- And on December 18: The Trap of Beautiful Language
- As we assess the validity of others' statements, we risk making a characteristically human error — we confuse the beauty of their language with the reliability of its meaning. We're easily thrown off by alliteration, anaphora, epistrophe, and chiasmus. Available here and by RSS on December 18.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenrDUDwWaUxOAJtKFRner@ChaclWPJpPZohNvtYLEJoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
- Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )
Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
- The Power Affect: How We Express Our Personal Power
Many people who possess real organizational power have a characteristic demeanor. It's the way they project their presence. I call this the power affect. Some people — call them power pretenders — adopt the power affect well before they attain significant organizational power. Unfortunately for their colleagues, and for their organizations, power pretenders can attain organizational power out of proportion to their merit or abilities. Understanding the power affect is therefore important for anyone who aims to attain power, or anyone who works with power pretenders. Read more about this program.
- Your stuff is brilliant! Thank you!
- You and Scott Adams both secretly work here, right?
- I really enjoy my weekly newsletters. I appreciate the quick read.
- A sort of Dr. Phil for Management!
- …extremely accurate, inspiring and applicable to day-to-day … invaluable.