Results tagged “change” from Knowledge Jolt with Jack

The central point of this case study is that any significant change can only happen when the people involved trust the process. And that can only happen with effective communication.

A number of friends pointed to 50 reasons not to change and the accompanying graphic from the Biocultural Science & Management Blog.

Bill Brantley has clarified what he means by "microprojects." I'm not sure they are that different from "normal" projects. What about you?

The second unconference session was initiated by Aliza Sherman as a result of the communities panel from Friday, where there was not enough time to talk about how and why communities die / break-up / fade away.

Luke Niasmith has a nice pair of images, one from Robinson, and another that reverses the positive effect. They depect 7 Steps to Behavior Change.

There are two types of buy-in, but Eli Goldratt totally forgot about one after writing It's Not Luck.

A review of The Leader with Seven Faces by Leandro Herrero.

Shawn Callahan has an post on the importance of leadership defining senses of direction, discovery and destiny for change programs. I suggest that maybe change shouldn't be the focus.

Thingamy founder Sigurd Rinde has an interesting perspective on business and what to do about how we've always done things in his "thingamy manifesto."

Really. KM is only "hard" if the change from what is happening yesterday to what should be happening tomorrow is significant to the people expected to make the change.

Malcolm Ryder just posted an interesting piece on the difference between measurement, performance and management. I think this is relevant to the discussion of reinforcing desired behaviors within an organization.

Two of the Theory of Constraints mailing lists have been discussing (somewhat tediously) the importance of "change" and creating the right behaviors to make the change happen. A recent poster linked to Huthwaite's The Four Truths.

I don't usually quote the same article for different reasons, but Clay Shirky has done it. In his recent article on expertise, he hits on the interesting subject of change - how people change, why they might not want to.

Okay, I made a mistake, I admit it. The CEO example is not a good one for real What Good Looks Like discussions. Let me give some examples to clarify.

Bruce LaDuke suggests that IT KM are Boat Anchors because they don't have a connection to the true performance of the organization. He suggests it is the realm of HR performance management that provides much better connection to improvement. But what if people are performing the wrong things?

An interesting find from Dana Dolan on discussing productivity and whether collaboration projects require a leap of faith. I focus on the productity end of the question.

"Change" is difficult (for people being told to change) because they have no idea what the change means for them and their work. Give people a clear target and a reason for reaching it, and you will be amazed at the changes that simply happen in order to align to that target.

I had a discussion recently with someone who asked me, as a knowledge managment strategist, how I would address the issue of getting buy-in from several different division heads for a IT-based KM project. I've got some idea for an answer, and Martin Dugage helped me think about a different angle.

Malcolm Ryder has a recent piece that looks at Change that provides some steps to consider on the way to creating change within the organization. As I read his article, I saw some parallels to the Theory of Constraints' five focusing steps.

Dennis Reyes at ITtoolbox's writes "That Won't Work Here...It's too Transparent!" which suggests change management needs to be a critical aspect of business changes.

Olaf Brugman writes "Head and Heart: KM as an educational offer" in which he highlights a deeper conviction for his version of knowledge management.

A Kuro5hin article lays out the steps to passive-aggressively killing an organizational change project. People are funny critters. They can see through change programs, and they also ignore it when it's truly helpful.

Kevin Cookman, representing The Chalfont Project, spoke on The Human Element of Change from Traditional to e-Learning. This was ostensibly a case study, but Cookman had such fun discussing the psychology behind change programs that he did not have much opportunity to describe the case study. The topic applies to any change program, and it was interesting to hear Cookman's perspective and how he has worked with Chalfont clients.

This Management by Baseball* article reflects an idea I ran across when looking into the KM program at Novartis. If you are going to make a change, then you need to get the idea of the change in front of the people in your organization, through both internal and external communications.

The Satir Change Model, as explained by Dale H. Emery, is change in response to a foreign element that creates chaos while I figure out how to deal with the change. Ideally, the end state leaves me in a higher perfroming state than where I started.

The McKinsey Quarterly, "The psychology of change management" by Emily Lawson and Colin Price highlights interpersonal (transpersonal) psychology as applied to change management in organizations.