Change with people

Excuse the the stutters, stumbles, and stammers: here’s a one-take recording of this edition if you prefer to listen: Spotify link

///

I hosted one of those "change" meetings recently where the entire thing was wrong from the jump. People were anxious to get a peek at the new technology. Lots of questions. With increasing intensity. We had some answers. Some answers were insufficient. Folks pounced. Protests. Problems. Audible sighs.

And it was all so predictable! 

What this group did is what gets labeled resistance ... when it was exactly the response I should have expected.

The why of the change was real—it would benefit the organization and eventually the meeting attendees who will be doing the work. But we didn't make that clear or relatable. We needed their partnership to get to the good stuff, but presented it as if decisions were already made … well, because they had.

I know better. I've been doing this for a career. Yet sometimes it feels like the pressure to move fast overrides the desire to do things right. 

As Niels Pflaeging has written, "The more resistance to change you observe, the more likely it is that your methods suck."

The people in that room weren't difficult. My approach was. I'd arrived as an overzealous junior salesperson with a solution.

I Zoomed right into the trap—you know the one because all of us have experienced from the other side. The meeting where decisions have already been made, but they're calling for our input. The presentation where they're discussing implementation, not whether this direction makes sense. They tell themselves they're being collaborative, but really they're just looking for compliance and supportive attitudes.

The challenge of selling change in an organization is right there in the metaphor we use when we ask the question: "Alright, great work everyone, now how do we get employees to buy-in?"

You're (probably) doomed!

Take a (pro) salesperson you know for a cup of coffee. Preferably someone who sells professional services or technology to enterprise customers. Ask them to explain their sales process to you.

Without a doubt, somewhere early in their description, they'll describe the process they use to understand a prospect's problem or need. If they're really good at their job, they'll tell you stories of how they've helped prospective customers uncover problems or needs the customer didn't even know they had!

The lesson here is no one can sell a thing to someone if they don't know they have a problem. The same goes for the colleagues you're now trying to convince to adopt your change initiative.

If there's time for a second cup, ask them about their success rate on cold sales pitches. They'll have one of two reactions: 1) an uncomfortable chuckle followed by a number close to zero or 2) a puzzled look accompanied with a question like, "What do you mean?"

Here's what they're telling you: cold sales pitches don't work.

The act of selling works when buyers and sellers participate in a sales process together. When it's done effectively, in partnership, in a trustworthy manner, it doesn't feel like you're being sold.

The same can be said about the change process. When it's done effectively, in partnership, in a trustworthy manner, it doesn't feel like you're being changed because you're an active participant.

John Kotter and his iceberg taught us this lesson. We've just gotten a little too linear and process-oriented on the implementation. It's, unfortunately, what we do.

Refocus your change "selling" efforts to helping the folks around you get engaged in the change process at the beginning. Understand the problem together. Then work on the solution together. It's that simple. And that difficult.

But so much easier than getting buy-in to any change initiative you're peddling after the work has been completed.

"Communication of ideas helps people see the need for and the logic of a change," wrote Kotter, "The education process can involve one-on-one discussions, presentations to groups, or memos and reports."

It's a message that probably sounds like what you'll hear from your salesperson friend over coffee: You don't need buy-in at the end, you need enrollment from the start.

Seth Godin describes enrollment this way: "Enrollment is a commitment to change. Enrollment in the process means we're willing to push through the difficult parts because the outcome is part of our goal." That distinction matters. Enrollment isn't just getting people to say yes—it's helping them to invest in the outcome.

Here's what enrollment can look like in practice: Instead of asking "any questions?" after your next presentation, try 1-2-4-All: give everyone one minute of silent reflection on a real question, then two minutes to share ideas in pairs, then four minutes in groups of four, before the whole group shares key insights. This simple structure provides space to allow everyone to contribute. Most importantly, participants own the ideas that emerge, so you don't need elaborate buy-in strategies later.

The gold standard for facilitating change is involving everyone impacted by the change to be part of the process from the absolute beginning. But most organizations use methods closer to what we might call participation theater: change designed in isolation and implemented absent input.

It's not malicious. But that doesn't make it okay. It happens because of budget commitments, board pressure, timeline commitments, the persistent need for progress … all of which are symptoms above and beyond the problems they create. And recognizing why it happens doesn't make it work any better. We've been doing change to people instead of, well, what works: change with people.

So we should do it differently when we can. And often we have options. Even within constrained systems. We can use better methods, of which there are many … 

Like identifying shared objectives. Chances are you know what they are without even having to ask, though the act of asking is likely beneficial. "When you're collaborating with anyone," writes Dr. David Rock, "Start with a shared goal, and everything after will be easier." So understand what success is for everyone involved before jumping into how you'll implement the change.

Another: Try what executive coach Joe Hudson suggests in the context of marriages: don't compromise. Find a third, better way. Instead of your solution versus their rightful resistance, what emerges when everyone knows what everyone else knows? What can you design together that none of you would have thought of alone? How can others' points of view bring value to a solution? That requires time, yes. And so does "resistance management."

Or: Change by invitation. Daniel Mezick's idea is such a simple one, it's radical in the context of the status quo: Make the invitation to your change truly an invitation; meaning: people don't have to show up and participate if they don't want to. As Mezick puts it, "An invitation is a kind of test, a test of the receiver's willingness." It has to be okay for people to decline. But the invitation to participate remains open. And the direction remains the reality.

No matter your title or role, change is your job … and, as evidenced from my experience above, it's much easier when you have enrollment. 

And reflecting on my botched meeting, I should have started with individual conversations. 1:1s aren't possible in every situation—here they were: conversations where I asked people about their current frustrations, where we explored together what good would look like, where the new technology became a possible solution to problems they already knew they had, or opportunities we could create together, rather than a solution in search of a problem.

That, is what we call, enrollment.

Around The Water Cooler ⛲

“It may appear that the ‘lean movement’ failed, by and large. With hindsight, it’s wiser to conclude that Lean was hardly ever attempted.” Did Lean fail? by Niels Pflaeging

Kevin Kelly: Artificial Intelligences, So Far; Noah Brier: Things I think about AI; Bud Caddell: “Almost everything I believe about AI right now”

Kevin Kelly: No Limit for Better (more AI)

Thanks for reading. Hit reply and let me know your thoughts.

How To Work is healthcare-focused work design inspiration (from the experts!) to nudge your perspectives and practices into better alignment with the world of work as it is, and away from what it was. Here’s my take on what we’re working through.