This article categorizes organization development approaches to change management into three strategies, explains their differences, and when each might be most appropriate. It focuses on the differences between two change strategies that utilize the same methods and are associated with a Dialogic OD mindset: high engagement and generative. Brief case examples follow descriptions of the high engagement and generative change strategies. The differences in roles and activities of leaders (sponsors), change agents, and those affected by the change are identified. Propositions about when each strategy is appropriate are offered. The generative change strategy is the newest and least discussed in the change literature, and we describe essential differences that make it the most rapid and transformational catalyst for change. However, generative approaches are of limited value when high levels of interdependence or significant capital outlays require central coordination of change. In such cases, one of the other strategies is a better choice.
How can we bring the benefits of Appreciative Inquiry to stuck change projects?
There are various signs that a change project has got stuck. One is that the senior managers are working all hours while everyone else is sort of waiting, not knowing what to do. Another is frustrated change agents pointing to the plans and diagrams all over their office walls while talking about their problems of ‘resistance to change’ and ‘lack of buy-in’. Yet another is a workforce that is demoralised, demotivated and rapidly losing hope of any improvement any time soon.
Using Lego in Appreciative Inquiry
I recently posted some pictures on Twitter and Linkedin of a leadership development session I ran with a colleague where we used Lego to conduct an Appreciative Inquiry. This stimulated some interest and requests for more information on what we did, so I thought I would explain in a little more detail.
Love the money, hate the job? The effect of bulls**t jobs on happiness
Many of us have noticed a strange paradox but been unable to put a name to it. We believe that a job that doesn’t demand too much of us should mean we have plenty of energy left over for our real interests. Furthermore, we anticipate that if that job not only doesn’t demand much of us but also pays us very well, then we should experience happiness: we have beaten the system! We are being paid for doing practically nothing, what could be a better arrangement?
And yet, after an initial sense of triumph, it can slowly become apparent that the logic - lots of money for little work equals happiness and a fulfilled life - doesn’t work out. Instead we feel, well, that something isn’t right. That despite the income we aren’t happy at work.
Strengths and the Imposter Syndrome: The generative power of world cafe
Last year I ran an evening event I called a Learning Network Event. The purpose of the evening was to provide a space for those interested in positive psychology to share and learn from each other in a gently facilitated way. We used a world café process to stimulate conversation and to ensure cross-pollination amongst those present.
Did you know? Build in Wellbeing from the beginning
Lots of people feel instinctively that happiness and wellbeing at work must be important. But are they a business necessity or a ‘nice to have’. Surely it makes more sense to ensure your business is profitable and thriving before you start worrying about how people feel?
Increasingly research suggests that investing in employee wellbeing by ensuring positive work relationships, an emphasis on strengths-based development, and worker happiness has productivity pay-offs. So why delay, start promoting positive psychology practices at work today!
How ‘Change Management’ Can Be A Hindrance To Achieving Organizational Change
Given this is it surprising the extent to which organizations struggle with the concept of change in organizations. Myths abound. Working with organizations I constantly hear the refrain ‘people don’t like change’ and ‘change is hard’. Neither of these statements are necessarily true, as we see below. What is true is that the way we understand organizations, understand change, and go about achieving change can make the job much harder than it need be.
What engaged employees want and how to find out if they're getting it - from a report by Roffey Park
Roffey Park research suggests that there are three key components to employee engagement: my job, my organization, my value. Their report ‘The human voice of employee engagement: understanding what lies beneath the surveys’ gives a full and readable account of the factors that make a difference. A key finding is that pride is at the heart of employee engagement.