Jack --
Thanks for the two rules.
I would agree that WIFM is the key. Unfortunately, sometimes the benefits
of change (to senior management) are distributed differently than the pains
(to the front line), so meeting this rule can be a challenge. Nonetheless,
it serves as a good place to start.
Part of the challenge to rule 2 is how to consistently identify the "early
adopters" who can exert the kind of influence necessary for success.
Frequently, unfortunately, they are not the designated leaders of the
organization. Any thoughts on what the characteristics are of those early
adopters?
I was also interested in your comments about ERP. While it is true that
there are spectacular failures in that field (a 60% failure rate in
implementations), it is also true that, for some companies, the integration
that has come with ERP systems has helped them solve significant
operational and strategic problems. Examples of the problems are:
1) No single "source of truth". One client I worked with recently had two
different systems (merchandising and general ledger) that both reported
Inventory value. Unfortunately the values could be up to $200,000
different in any given month. Neither the direction of difference nor the
magnitude were consistent month-to-month. For a $30M company, this was a
very significant problem. The problem vanished when they installed a new
integrated system that handled all of the business requirements.
2) Consistent accuracy of data. Frequently there is a small, but
non-negligible error rate when data is re-entered into multiple systems.
This also frequently leads to significant staff time put into
reconciliation activity.
3) Faster flow of information. Electrons flow faster than paper, and
modern ERP systems provide organizations with the capability of managing
larger information flows in a much more efficient and effective fashion.
4) Automation of manual processes. One client I called on recently tried
to manage a 17-site company through faxing PO's, Invoices, and other
documents all over the place. The result was that they needed 2-3 clerks
at each site simply to shuffle the paper!
I could go on for a while, but, in the interests of brevity, will simply
state that, like any organizational change initiative, technological change
can be done right or it can be done wrong. The ones that are done wrong
end up sitting on a shelf somewhere -- with lots of press! The ones that
are successful get less public visibility. (My experience has been similar
in relationship to more general management consulting.)
Steve
=================================
PRAGMATEK Consulting Group, Ltd.
Web:
www.PRAGMATEK.com
Email:
Steve.Harper@pragmatek.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Many are stubborn in pursuit of the path
they have chosen, few in pursuit of the goal."
-- Friedrich Nietzsche
================================
-----Original Message-----
From: Jack Ring [SMTP:
jring@AMUG.ORG]
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2000 9:33 AM
To:
MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU
Subject: Re: Technology-driven change
Rule 1. WIFM. What's In It For ME? People will accept the pain of
transitioning to a new situation when they see the new situtation (not the
transitioning) has something in it for them.
Rule 2. Transition requires learning. People learn fastest from someone
who has direct influence over their future.
In the example cited by Dick Montgomery, the people learned directly from
the CEO (fast). And they learned a new pattern to which to conform. Being
already trained conformists, this was not too much of a transition.
Turning them into non-conformists would have taken lots more time.
Apparently, however, the new pattern smelled like freedom and the smell of
freedom is unmistakable. It remains to be seen how long it took (or takes)
for them to learn that "freedom from" is not the real freedom and how well
they leverage "freedom to.".
Now the bad news.
There is little demonstratable benefit in ERP but there is a decade of
horror strories from those who have undergone such trauma.
Be careful to discern whether you are talking technology in general or
talking specific, perhaps even toxic, forms of technology.
On Thu, 24 Feb 2000 Steve Harper wrote RE: public sector organizations --
and/or our expectations?
[...]
>I would like to pose the following questions to the list:
>
>1) In times of rapid technological change, what, if anything, can external
>people (consultants) do to help organizations prepare for and absorb that
>change? [...]
>
>2) What types of education and training can future managers (both
technical
>and non-technical) be provided that would help in this process? [...]
>
>3) Is there/should there be a role for "change management" consultants
>(OD?) in technical consulting organizations [...]?
>
>I am interested in the academic, practitioner, and consulting perspectives
>on these questions. Replies will be most welcome.
Jack Ring, 32712 N. 70th St., Snottsdale, AZ 85262-7143
480-488-4615, Cell) 602.369.4615
A system must be designed not for the existing situation but for the
situation that will exist after the system is activated.