Organizations across the board[1] are hemmed in by heightened volatility, shifting economic and political realities, evolving competition and technology, and a world of increasing complexity, uncertainty, and rapid change – dynamics that collectively mean that organizations must adapt and restructure, and do so more frequently, more thoroughly, and faster than ever before[2]:[3]

“In today’s environment there are accelerated disruptions occurring in many industries as a result of new technologies,[4] new entrants, new business models, and globalization. Leaders must be able to adapt to the increasingly complex nature of the challenges to their industries – whether that be the legal industry,[5] healthcare,[6] or financial services,[7] etc.[8] – and to their organizations.”

Everything is changing again. But this time, it’s happening faster. 

– Vanessa Bates Ramirez[9]

Looking at the legal profession, new competitive forces and an unsustainable value proposition threaten the future landscape of BigLaw, the traditional law firm, and the conventional lawyer.[10] In the estimated trillion-dollar global legal industry[11] (one of the most profitable personal services businesses in the world[12]), the traditional law firm partnership business model[13] is being significantly impacted by a combination of competitive alternative legal service providers (including in-house legal departments and new model law firms), the expanding reach and efficiency of technology and innovation, globalization of the legal marketplace, modernization of the profession and delivery of legal services (outside of North America),[14] and the changing behaviour and expectations of the retail and corporate consumer of legal services.[15] The leading challenges facing most traditional law firms is that as corporate demand for legal services continues to grow the traditional law firm share continues to shrink[16] (i.e. generally flat or declining in most practice areas),[17] and the legal industry is on the cusp of disruption from technology and digitization (digitalization and digital transformation – confuse them at your peril),[18] consolidation,[19] and economies of scale.[20] Why? Traditional law firms, like many organizations, are moving into a new digital age and their outdated business model and organizational structure needs to catch up, modernize, and in many cases, be reinvented.[21]

Two years ago, law firms would laugh when we suggested putting AI on the agenda in our future strategy workshops. Today it seems to be pretty much the only thing they want to talk about. Why? Well they are beginning to acknowledge that AI has the potential to disrupt all industries and the legal sector in particular. 

– An Opportunity Rich Horizon: How AI could Shape the Exponential Future of Law Firms[22]

More broadly, there is no question that digital technologies have disrupted the models that customarily defined how industries and established companies across the world conducted business.[23]  As digital technologies (including connectivity, data analytics and AI,[24] digital platforms)[25] make it increasingly feasible for organizations, financial institutions, and professional service firms to address their strategic and operational challenges,[26] and facilitate much more complex coordination of expertise and activities with external assets and multidisciplinary resources they neither own nor control (through partnerships, networks, alliances, collaborations, and other ecosystem plays and new business models),[27] the “art of the possible”[28] is expanding rapidly:[29]

“[Again] looking at the traditional law firm for example, going forward a sustainable law firm business model will require working with an ecosystem of legal and non-legal partners to create best-in-class offerings, and take advantage of technology developments that make it more efficient and less expensive to reach legal consumers and provide services – which in turn will increase demand for those legal services. Like any organization or business looking to embrace this type of new business model, it must be supported by new capabilities, processes, and most importantly organizational structures.”

The world is changing – rapidly – and the only constant is change.

The pace of change is accelerating and so are the uncertainties. 

– Baker McKenzie[30]

To survive and thrive, every organization – from the legal industry to healthcare to financial services – must know how to navigate change and adapt. The problem, however, is that the concept of “managing change” is fast becoming an oxymoron.[31]  Despite the fact that change management (in respect to assisting organizations in implementing organizational strategy) is today considered to be a recognized discipline with tools, training and thousands of books and consultants,[32] there are multiple schools of thought and a bewildering array of conflicting or limited models and theories. And, predictably one may argue, it has become a subject with more than its fair share of management fads.[33]

Strategic management – addressed in more detail in my July 2018 article on Strategic Management and Leadership[34] – embraces strategy formulation, implementation and evaluation, and recognizes the value of emergent (entrepreneurial) thinking[35] to make sense of the rapidly changing environment that most, if not all, organization’s find themselves in today. While conceptual and analytical models of strategy formulation are mature, such coherent and aligned offerings in respect to the actual implementation of an organization’s strategy have been more limited (although they continue to develop). This is a concern because in a hypercompetitive world where the pace of change and the associated uncertainties are accelerating, strategy implementation, change management, and execution is critical:[36]

“Even today, [for example], a discussion on digital transformation generally focuses on technology aspect from IoT, Robotics, Blockchain, to AI. While all these advanced technologies are enablers of higher efficiencies, conducting business differently through the use of these technologies is what makes the results achievable. To create the machinery for this transformation, two critical gears need to be at the core: a solid strategy with a clear roadmap and transformation (or business change) capability.”

Hence, what is required is a more robust focus on strategy implementation and change management as a leadership and organizational core competency.[37] Operational excellence and management must be treated a crucial complement to strategy. After all, if an organization is unable to get its operational and management basics right, it really does not matter how brilliant its strategy.[38]

Not surprisingly, leaders who can successfully implement strategy, manage change and reshape their organizations are a respected and sought after commodity.

[S]trategy execution will emerge as one of the critical sources of sustainable advantage in the twenty-first century. 

– William Biglar[39]

Rethinking the Language of Change Management – towards an integrated approach to implementing strategy

There is no shortage of articles on change theory, change management, organizational development, strategy implementation, or any number of the other descriptors for this field of study. Different viewpoints have been explored, and multiple schools of thought defined, likely in response to the challenges of strategy implementation and execution in today’s turbulent and unpredictable environments.  Strategy implementation and change management has been discussed for over fifty years, when the world moved at a much slower pace than today (where many organizations are having difficulty keeping up with the rapidity of change), and unfortunately, the result is that many strategy implementation ‘change models’ have been based on old school thinking, tools and techniques.[40] Consider the following:

• There are change management frameworks that assume that the process of change is linear, many neglecting opportunities for revisiting strategies, action plans, and goals based on the learning that occurs from the process of implementing and evaluating the change itself. Today’s leaders that exercise the skillset of a strategic management approach – that embraces the value of emergent (entrepreneurial) thinking – to make sense of their rapidly changing environment, expect some form of feedback loops so their organization can adjust as needed based on what they, their managers and their personnel see and experience (as opposed to following a step by step approach with little flexibility). Like Design Thinking process, it may be useful to jump back to a previous step and re-evaluate the strategy and/or do it over based on what’s been learned.[41]
• There are traditional change management programs that focus on assessing the current state, looking at the organization’s formulated strategy (i.e. desired end state), and then bridging the gaps between the two by means of a gap analysis. Similarly, many change models also define “from-to” strategies (i.e. the organization needs to move from the current state to a pre-defined future state). Regardless of the language applied, the ideal future is defined in the formulated strategy (by the organization’s strategic leaders) and utilized in the strategy implementation (change management) process – “and everything done from that point on hammers it home”. Again, this does not account for continued change impacting the strategy. Change processes that “myopically focus on a pre-defined future, risk having that future disrupted before it arrives”.[42]
• Most corporate change management initiatives are just that: projects that last for a pre-defined period of time. Traditional strategy implementation concepts overemphasize structural aspects – a highly administrative, project management approach, focusing on the time, manpower, and sequence of activities necessary to enact change[43] – ignoring the inexorably intertwined elements of culture,[44] people,[45] and change (i.e. the “fact of change is that change never ends”). When change is approached as a project, program, or initiative, it may undermine the notion that the organization must continually address its culture and people, and adapt and respond to its continually changing external environment. Yes, there might be specific technology projects to implement or training programs to deliver, but successful sustainable organizations must accept and embrace a culture of continuous learning[46] and change.[47]
• Although the administrative approach may be effective in very specific contexts – when leadership wants only a modest amount and scope of change, when the competition and external environment is stable, or when a top-down, command-and-control approach is sufficient because the organization does not need to learn – such situations are rare today. But, unfortunately still attractive to many organizations with underdeveloped “heads down” leadership skillsets who see strategy implementation as a purely administrative activity[48] as opposed to an important leadership and change management activity with a balanced scorecard and KPI’s “that specify a clear line of sight” between the strategy implementation deliverables and the “desired strategic outcomes”.[49]
• A problem is that the scale and pace of change has accelerated, such that businesses and their leadership teams that have not embraced the fundamentals of strategic change management (as an essential leadership and management skillset) cannot react like they have in the past. As business leaders, academics, and practitioners acknowledge that the pace of change is accelerating at a precipitous rate for traditional organizations,[50] there is a recognition that a systematic and disciplined strategic management process and agile leadership driven change management structure is required for managing this tremendous (if not overwhelming) amount of change. To be effective at leading change, strategic and operational leaders must see change itself as natural and ongoing, and in the strategic management process leadership must develop the mindset and skillset to customize and scale their strategy implementation and change management efforts based on the unique characteristics of the strategic change initiative and the culture of the organization.[51]
• Each approach has its pros and cons, however no one strategy implementation and change management framework is ‘best’ in all situations. Indeed it is not so much the actual change management model that is important, but more that the appropriate approach should be continuous, incorporate an emergent approach as well as evaluation and learning, and is reviewed and determined by the organization’s leadership to be relevant to the circumstances of the organization (i.e. structure, history, culture and needs) and the strategic change initiative to be implemented (i.e. type, breadth, size, origin, etc.).[52]  
• The fundamentals of change management have not been appropriately embraced by leaders and managers as an essential leadership and management skillset, such that for most organizations there is a shallow and fragile leadership and managerial capacity to implement an organization’s strategy. 

But the fact of change is that change never ends. That’s the reality of life, and business is no exception. When change is approached as a project, program, or initiative, it undermines the notion that the organization must continually adapt and respond to its dynamic external environment. 

– Soren Kaplan, The Change Management Field Needs to Change, Before It’s Disrupted[53]

What we do know is that historically, academia and business have taken a fragmented and traditional approach to strategy implementation and change management, separating organizational and technical changes from people and cultural impacts. Consequently, strategy implementation and change management in many cases have been designed and run as separate, non-integrated initiatives (assuming all elements of change impacting the organization are even addressed):[54]

“[S]ome still look at organizational change from a mechanical (structural) viewpoint only; ‘new operating model design’, whereas others look at it from a humanistic perspective; ‘people-oriented models; so that employees will feel great’. Both approaches miss the dynamics of change management that it is an evolving practice, and that fluctuating back and forth between these two approaches has not proven successful.

While a common framework, language, and set of tools for managing change is important, the key is ‘to what extent are your frameworks, strategies and plans for change integrated into your overall business and project plans and not set separately or play in parallel’? Or even worse, ‘to what extent they just serve as an add-on and are managed interdependently’?”

Frankly, as noted, there is no universal model of the strategy implementation and change management process. Sad, but true, and at the end of the day, the one advocated in this article may be looked at as just one more version.  However, from a practitioners’ perspective, successful change management – in respect to strategy implementation for organizations in the 21^st century – cannot be fragmented and must encapsulate an integrated continuous learning framework that recognizes the value of emergent (entrepreneurial) thinking to make sense of and appropriately address the world’s rapidly changing environment. An effective change management methodology and framework in support of an organization’s strategy implementation must encompass the plan, design and tactical implantation and execution of the organizational structural change (i.e. structure, systems, processes, technology, work practices, training, etc.), as well the wider interconnected impacts of the change initiative on the organization’s culture (i.e. shared values, beliefs, assumptions, behavioural norms; how things are done), and personnel (i.e. the human side of change; performance, behaviours – commitment versus resistance, emotions – excitement versus fear).  

Strategy implementation must address the impact an organizational strategy will have on all the elements of change management – organizational structural change, control systems, corporate culture, and people – and must do so in the planning, designing and implementation of the organization’s strategic plan / change initiative. Organizational structural change, systems, culture and people change must be integrated into the strategy implementation process. 

As the old adage attributed to Peter Drucker goes … ‘culture eats strategy for breakfast’. 

– Why Directors should place Culture front and centre[55]

Strategy implementation and change management planning involve difficult issues, but good change management can and should be simplified (but not simplistic) – the key is that the framework or model assists to discipline thinking, planning, implementation, and evaluation. Different levels of change (i.e. developmental,[56] transitional,[57] or transformational)[58] will require different levels of effort, skill and leadership:[59]

“Developmental and transitional changes are the most familiar and are easier to lead. Developmental change is the improvement of something that currently exists [i.e. most common type of organizational change involving improvement of existing skills, processes, methods, performance standards, etc., such as a quality improvement program], while transitional change is the replacement of what ‘is’ with something entirely new, yet clearly known [i.e. reorganizations, implementing new technology and processes, new products or services, simple mergers and acquisitions, etc.]. Both developmental and transitional change possess common characteristics: (1) Their outcomes can be quantified and known in advance of implementation; (2) significant culture, behavior, or mindset change is not [generally] required; and (3) the change process, its resource requirements, and the timetable, for the most part, can be managed.

The third type of change, transformation, requires a completely different set of change leadership skills. Transformation is the … most complex type of organization change [i.e. implementing major strategic and cultural changes, significant operating changes, reforming product or service offerings, digital transformation and other large sweeping IT implementations, new business models, new operating models, etc.], possessing very different dynamics: (1) The future state cannot be completely known in advance; (2) significant transformations of the organization’s culture and of people’s behavior and mindsets are required; and (3) the change process itself cannot be tightly managed or controlled because the future is unknown and the human dynamics are too unpredictable.”

Change management frameworks and processes provide a structure – guidance if you will – on what to do to implement strategic change initiatives and generally in what order: a roadmap to follow for implementing an organization’s future state. This article focuses on effective, pragmatic, and comprehensive change management frameworks, methodologies, and concepts that address strategy implementation holistically, that are integrated, continuous, non-linear, and incorporate an emergent approach, evaluation, and learning[60] to effectively realize the organization’s formulated strategy (and any appropriate emergent strategy that may arise as a result of changing conditions on the ground) to achieve its vision, long term objectives and short term goals.

The key – from a leadership and management perspective – is an appropriate blending of rational analytical planning with an emergent approach of learning responsiveness within a changing environment, addressing new realities that may emerge, and determining what actually works for the organization.[61]

Traditional change management practices are insufficient. The next evolution of change leadership is already here, requiring the integration of organization and personal change into one unified effort. This is a key success factor in leading transformational change. 

– Beyond Change Management: Advanced Strategies for Today’s Transformational Leaders[62]

The Broad View

In the real world today, the fact of change is that change never ends. That’s the reality for organizations in the 21^st Century.  No exceptions. When change management is approached as a linear framework or process – as a set pre-defined project, program, or initiative – it undermines the notion that all organizations must continually adapt and respond to its dynamic external environment.[63]

Big picture, it must never be forgotten that an organization’s strategy, vision, long term objectives, and short term goals are not set in stone, but rather, should at all times be open to re-evaluation as circumstances unfold. Change management and progress toward strategic objectives must be constantly evaluated by leaders and managers (i.e. utilizing balanced scorecards; KPIs; etc.),[64] as should the strategy itself over time as it unfolds – not just at a formalized annual strategy review session.[65] In addition to the deliberately planned strategy, leaders must have the ability to recognize and judge the worth of “emergent” strategies as intentions collide with and accommodate a changing reality (i.e. a realized pattern that was not expressly intended in the original planning of the strategy; an evolution of the strategic planning process: although unintended, recognizing and adopting an emergent strategy may help a business adapt more flexibly to the practicalities of changing market conditions[66]). Strategy implementation and performance evaluation by leaders and managers makes sure that the organizational strategy as well as its ‘change management’ implementation tactics achieve the organizational objectives[67]:[68]

“Most change management frameworks assume that the process of change is linear. Models that … typically neglect opportunities for revisiting goals and strategies based on the learning that occurs from the process of implementing the change itself. Moving fast requires creating feedback loops so you can adjust as needed based on what you see and experience – not by following a step by step approach with little flexibility. Like Design Thinking process, it may be useful to jump back to a previous step and do it over based on what’s been learned. …

Most traditional change management programs focus on assessing the current state, defining a desired end state, and then bridging the gaps between the two via a gap analysis. Many change models define “from-to” strategies as well – the organization needs to move from the current state to a pre-defined future state. Regardless of what you call it, the ideal future is defined at the start of the change process and everything done from that point on hammers it home. But what if things change in the meantime? The world is changing at a mile a minute due to disruptive technology shifts, changing customer needs, and competitors arising out of nowhere. Change processes that myopically focus on a pre-defined future risk having that future disrupted before it arrives.”

Just creating a strategic plan is not enough. The changes indicated by the adopted strategies must be incorporated throughout the system for them to be brought to life and for real value to be created for the organization and its stakeholders. Thinking strategically about implementation and developing an effective implementation plan are important tasks on the road to realizing the strategies developed. 

–  John Bryson[69]

To steer through in today’s uncertain and rapidly changing world, all strategies and change management must be backed by effective leadership.[70] What does this mean? In short, organizations and their leadership teams must not view change as an occasional project and disruptor, but as the very essence of their roles as leaders and managers.[71]  In today’s world of constant and rapid change, for long term sustainable success, organizations and their leadership teams must embrace change management as a natural and routine part of their role as leaders and managers.[72]

A critical part of the evolution of successful strategy implementation, change management, and continuing improvement is for leaders and managers to be accountable.  For example, by setting expectations and holding operational leaders responsible and accountable, these leaders develop their capacity to lead continual change while their mangers, supervisors and/or frontline personnel develop the capacity to implement it. Certainly specialist experts can be used for support if required, but actual implementation and management of the changes must remain in the hands of the leaders and managers[73]:[74]

“Don’t just change. Create an agile [cross-functional, empowered, and productive[75]] organization. Reinforce the importance of continuous learning and adaptation through communication and storytelling. Make changes in the organization, but build people’s skills for change itself as part of the process.”

It’s unwise to teach leaders that strategy and basic management are unrelated. 

– Harvard Business Review[76]

Fundamentally, the basic goal of an integrated change management approach and framework is to appropriately plan the organization’s implementation strategy, secure buy-in to the strategy and change, align individual behaviour and skills with the change, and embrace a robust blending of the organization’s rational analytical planning with the important emergent approach of learning and responsiveness within a changing environment, addressing new realities that may emerge, and determining what actually works in the real world.[77]

However, the change management literature presents a complex body of academic work that provides a robust challenge to anyone attempting to understand it. This body of literature contains contributions from several academic disciplines, spanning a period of about six decades. Growing out of a need for greater repeatability and structure, the change management discipline began adding formal structure (models or frameworks) and discipline about three decades ago, while the recognition and formalization of the discipline took a marked step forward leading into the 21^st century.[78]

Esoteric debates about the ‘true’ nature of change management – often impenetrable to most practitioners – have emerged. Different viewpoints of change management have been explored, and multiple schools of thought defined – with different frameworks, models, evidence, and illustrations from a variety of theoretical and organizational contexts. While no framework or model of change management are particularly unique to business, the legal industry, or healthcare organizations for example, many different models are employed in the literature when analyzing change efforts for these type of organizations. Although in theory the different models are referenced as applicable in a variety of contexts, the academic literature and practical experience does not demonstrate or support their universal applicability.[79]

Change management involves complex issues, however, the way change is planned, implemented, managed, and evaluated by organizations should be simplified and structured. In this respect, it is fair to say that a core leadership capability and critical component of any organization’s strategy should be simplification[80] – “simplicity” being “the ultimate sophistication”.[81]

A change management skillset for leaders and managers is crucial for successful strategy implementation and the sustainable success of an organization – in today’s environment, a change management skillset is a basic leadership and management quality for managing organizations in a manner that maximizes the ability of achieving business strategy and objectives.

A change management model is not a panacea,[82] and like many important leadership and business practices, change management is not a trivial or off-the-cuff endeavour.  Studies and surveys suggest that one of the leading barriers to successful strategy implementation is lack of change management skills – and the 2018 Global Leadership Forecast noted that developing the ‘next generation’ leaders and ‘attracting and retaining top talent’ was a significant organizational challenge.[83] An effective leadership team must align its team to the organization’s strategic objectives and goals – balancing an appropriate breadth of experience and knowledge with an actual ability to lead and manage change. If an organization’s leadership and management team is weak in respect to strategy implementation and change management,[84] at minimum change management training should be incorporated into the organization’s normal leadership development program(s),[85] and future leadership hiring should include the skillset as a basic leadership quality and practice.

Leadership development and change management tend to be top priorities for many organizations. In spite of this, a majority of organizations tend to fall far short of their goals for both. One major reason organizations struggle is because they treat both leadership development and change management as separate rather than interrelated challenges. Cultural changes cannot happen without leadership, and efforts to change culture are the crucible in which leadership is developed. 

– Harvard Business Review[86]

Change management requires a great deal of coordination, initiative, logical skills, critical thinking, people management and communication, multidisciplinary leadership, and both operational and emergent (entrepreneurial) thinking. In short, it is about effective and skilled leaders and managers[87] exercising leadership, management, judgment and decision making, and who actually understand strategy implementation and change management. Not surprisingly, an effective change management framework is one that is actually understood and properly utilized by an organization’s leadership and management teams “in practice”, and that supports both the organization’s planned and emergent approaches of strategy formulation, strategy implementation and strategy evaluation. 

It is recommended that organization’s and their leadership resist the urge to make change management a separate work stream or a standalone activity.  Successful strategy implementation requires an engaged accountable leadership and an integrated change management framework that provides direction and embraces evaluation, learning and change (to adapt to the practicalities of rapidly changing conditions). 

Building an integrated change strategy fit for transformation is the first cornerstone of change leadership. Executives clearly understand their central role in creating new business strategy. However, announcing a new business strategy alone is not enough to accomplish it. It must be executed in a way that delivers its intended business results. This requires the creation of a fitting change strategy. 

– Linda Ackerman Anderson and Dean Anderson[88]

Strategy implementation and change management approached in this integrated, disciplined – but flexible – manner provides an important ‘strategic management tool’ for the achievement of the organization’s strategy, long-term objectives, and short-term goals. However, the key question for successful implementation is the answer to the following question: “What is the right change management framework, and the right mix of leadership and management skills?” C-level executive leaders have clearly recognized that “top talent and effective leaders will be needed to address the myriad current challenges and to position their organization for future success”,[89] but this cannot be achieved in isolation: organizations must ensure they develop and/or hire leadership and management talent with expanded 21^st century skills.[90]

The good news is that there is indeed a growing recognition of the need for change done right – for an integrated change management framework as a tool for appropriately talented and skilled leaders and managers to help organizations achieve sustainable and successful change (and meet their strategic objectives and goals).

CEOs are clearly awakening to the dangers of static processes, rigid roles, and outmoded thinking at a time when their most pressing challenges all demand leaders and workforces committed to openness, innovation, and agility. 

– CEO Challenge 2017: Leading Risk, Disruption, and Transformation[91]

Change Requires Significant Leadership and Management Skills and Effort

What has been referred to as “the insidious myth that change initiatives usually fail” is disturbingly widespread.[92] Many experts state that 70%[93] (or refer to a range of 50% to 75%[94]) of change efforts fail to achieve their goals. However, a study in the Journal of Change management, led by the University of Brighton researcher Mark Hughes, found that there is generally no empirical evidence to support this statistic:[95]

“In fact there is no credible evidence at all to support the notion that even half of organizational change efforts fail.

Hughes traces the mythical 70% failure rate back to the 1993 book Reengineering the Corporation, in which authors Michael Hammer and James Champy stated: ‘our unscientific estimate is that as many as 50 percent to 70 percent of the organizations that undertake a reengineering effort do not achieve the dramatic results they intended.’

From that point on, Hammer and Champy’s “unscientific estimate” took on a life of its own. A 1994 article in the peer-reviewed journal Information Systems Management presents Hammer and Champy’s estimate as a fact and changes ‘50 percent to 70 percent’ to just ‘70 percent.’

In Hammer’s 1995 book, The Reengineering Revolution, he attempts to set the record straight. ‘In Reengineering the Corporation, we estimated that between 50 and 70 percent of reengineering efforts were not successful in achieving the desired breakthrough performance. Unfortunately, this simple descriptive observation has been widely misrepresented and transmogrified and distorted into a normative statement…There is no inherent success or failure rate for reengineering.’

Despite Michael Hammer’s clarification, the 70 percent statistic has continued to be cited as fact, including in Harvard Business Review articles and books.

Granted, there is some ambiguity surrounding the success of change initiatives.”

During nearly every discussion about organizational change, someone makes the obvious assertion that “change is hard.” On the surface, this is true: change requires effort. But the problem with this attitude, which permeates all levels of our organizations, is that it equates “hard” with “failure,” and, by doing so, it hobbles our change initiatives, which have higher success rates than we lead ourselves to believe. 

– Stop Using the Excuse ‘Organizational Change is Hard’, Harvard Business Review[96]

So what does this all mean? Yes, change requires significant leadership and effort. But the fact that it requires effort doesn’t negate the fact that most organizations with strong leadership teams who commit to a change initiative will eventually succeed. To successfully lead change, it is important how leaders and managers think about, talk about, and model change:

“As leaders … we need to be aware that our team members are not entering change situations with a blank slate. Two decades of hearing about mythical failure rates has planted the seeds of bias against success in our minds. And every time we say “change is hard” we water those seeds.

The good news is that we can address this problem simply by flipping the script. In one of their studies, the University of Chicago researchers reminded study participants how most people do in fact successfully improve with a little bit of effort. In this study, the results were exactly opposite: study participants were quicker to notice changes for the better rather than changes for the worse. By priming people with a simple fact about the high probability of successful change, the researchers completely eliminated the negative bias. …

Instead of pouring more gas on our burning platforms, we could remind ourselves and our teams that we have been learning new skills and adapting to new environments literally since the day we [were born]. Every time we feel the impulse to say “change is hard,” we could make a different claim that is every bit as accurate: Adaptation is the rule of human existence, not the exception.”

In organizational change initiatives, negative biases can create a toxic self-fulfilling prophecy.[97] Change leadership is about the phases of change—and the emotions associated with those phases—that people must navigate when change is constant. Change leadership requires leaders and managers to lead change (vision, strategy, objectives, beliefs and mindsets), plan and implement change, and manage change (skillsets, toolsets, practices and behaviors).[98]

In organizational change initiatives, our negative biases can create a toxic self-fulfilling prophecy. 

– Stop Using the Excuse ‘Organizational Change is Hard’, Harvard Business Review[99]

The fundamentals of strategy implementation and change management have not been appropriately embraced by leaders and managers as a fundamental leadership and management skillset, such that for many organizations there is a superficial or tenuous managerial capacity to implement an organization’s strategy.  Instead of strengthening leaders and managers’ ability to manage and lead change, many organizations have “outsourced change management to HR specialists and consulting firms instead of taking accountability to cultivate the change management function and agenda within the organizational capabilities”.[100] 

Building internal leadership[101] – particularly change management leadership and capability – will serve as a key competitive advantage: helping organizations to be more agile,[102] be able to execute and implement strategy and change successfully, and increase future capacity for addressing day-to-day and long-term change and the probability of expected returns.[103]

[P]ointing to the McKinsey study as evidence for a 70% failure rate is like saying that every time a baseball player steps up to the plate and doesn’t hit a home run, that player has ‘failed.’ But that isn’t true in baseball any more than it is true in organizations. The McKinsey results show that around 60% of change initiatives are somewhere between a base-hit and a home run, and only 1 in 10 are strikeouts.  

– Harvard Business Review[104]

Change Management in the Strategy Implementation Process

Strategic Management

Today’s leaders must have the training and understanding to think and plan strategically, more systemically, they need to think in much bigger, more complex ways to ‘connect the dots’.[105] And, they require the skillset of a structured strategic management approach – that embraces strategy formulation, strategy implementation, and strategy evaluation, as well as assimilating the value of emergent or entrepreneurial thinking[106] – to make sense of an organization’s rapidly changing environment. Strategic management theory and practice supports a leadership team in determining and providing overall and purposeful strategic direction to an organization that is critical for long-term sustainable success.

Strategic management has been recognized as “the single clearest manifestation of effective leadership”.[107] My July 2018 article on strategic management – entitled Strategic Management and Leadership (From the Legal Industry to Financial Services to Healthcare: “what got you here won’t get you there”)[108]– specifically addresses strategic management, planning and thinking, initial assessment and situation analysis, and the central role of the following framework in shaping strategic management’s gaze: (a) strategy formulation, (b) strategy implementation, and (c) strategy evaluation / re-evaluation.[109]

Strategic management and planning involves complex issues and some fairly difficult analysis and thinking. For the purpose of this article, it is sufficient to note that strategic management offers an important set of interrelated touchstones for leaders to effectively and purposefully lead and manage organizations in this complex, uncertain and ever-changing world – irrespective of the size of the organization, ownership structure, type of sector and industry, nature scope and complexity of operations, risk profile, or the level of regulation.   The techniques of strategic management are applicable across the range of organizations – from large multi-business enterprises to small one person businesses, from manufacturing to professional service organizations, from hospitals to the home and community care sector, and from profit seeking to not-for-profit organizations.[110]

Not surprisingly, adept leadership and management are inherently tied to strategic management theory and practice – responding to change, determining and setting strategic direction, and implementing, evaluating, and actively managing the strategy and day-to-day activities required to achieve the organization’s vision, mission, long-term objectives and short-term goals.[111]

Turning strategy into a functioning reality is not easy.  Strategies must be translated into specific action plans (i.e. what and how it is to be implemented, who is to implement, when it has to be implemented) and management/evaluation/controls (i.e. “SMART”[112] organizationally aligned goals, timelines, milestones/outcomes, measureable performance metrics, budgets, balanced scorecard,[113] etc.) that will move the organization toward achieving its strategic objectives and goals (i.e. desired outcome and benefits), and fulfilling its mission and achieving its vision.[114]  Strategy implementation and change management “in practice” provides a robust framework for blending rational analytical planning with the emergent approach of learning and responsiveness within a rapidly changing environment, addressing new factors that may emerge, and determining what actually works[115]:[116]

“Mistakenly, change is not [universally] looked at [by most organizations] holistically nor managed in a homogeneous way, thus the business is unable to maximise competitive advantage, reduce risk or improve performance. Once it is recognised that “change” is continuous and should be linked to its strategy, then the business can move forward and create an effective change model to manage ongoing change for improvement, growth and transformation of the business.”

To run the organisation successfully it is essential to plan and implement an appropriate strategy to gain maximum benefit in discharging the organisation’s prime accountability – that is to say ‘to implement change to achieve the desired outcome and benefits’. 

– John Crawford[117]

This article will focus on strategy implementation and evaluation – in particular developing and executing an organization’s change plans while recognizing and embracing the value of emergent strategies and thinking.[118] The points set out will not be prescriptive (there is no one ideal, foolproof model for implementing an organization’s strategy effectively, but rather a series of requirements – that is why effective and skillful leaders and managers are important), but will specifically lay out an integrated framework for a leadership team to flesh out what is best suited for a particular organization in light of the particular strategy, environment (threats and opportunities), culture, size, organizational and decision making structure, type of sector and industry, nature scope and complexity of operations, risk profile, and level of regulation.   

An integrated model of strategy implementation – with appropriate models, processes and techniques of change management addressing structure, systems, leadership behaviour, human resources, policies and procedures, culture, values, management processes, etc.[119] – is generally applicable across the broad range of organizations: from large multi-business enterprises to small businesses, from manufacturing to professional service organizations, from hospitals to the home and community care sector, and from profit seeking to not-for-profit organizations.

Meeting milestones is not the primary determinant of the success of a change project. Successful change also involves ensuring employees’ capacity to adapt to and work effectively and efficiently in the new environment.  The underlying basis of change management is that people’s capacity to change can be influenced by how change is presented to them. 

– Why is Managing Change Important?[120]

Strategy Implementation – Putting the Organization’s Strategy into Action

Once the strategy for the organization has been formulated, implementation plans required to accomplish the organizational strategy are developed. “Strategy implementation” denotes making the strategy work as intended – putting the organization’s chosen strategy into action. It is the translation of the chosen strategy into action plans and goals,[121] and ultimately organizational action so as to achieve the strategic objectives.[122] In short, it is a series of steps and activities that are formulated to accomplish the organization’s strategic objectives and are developed in key areas that create value for an organization.

One frequent suggestion in this era of flattened organizations is that everyone has to be a strategist. But we’d suggest that everyone also needs to be a manager. Core management practices, established thoughtfully, can go a long way toward plugging the execution gap and ensuring that strategy gets the best possible chance to succeed. 

– Harvard Business Review[123]

Operational leadership and managers must translate the broader organizational-wide strategies and objectives to be achieved into specific implementation actions (i.e. referred to variously as action plans, or tactical plans, or business plans) that build and/or improve the organization’s structures, systems, etc., to support operational execution by the organization’s functional (operational) leaders, managers, supervisors,[124] and frontline personnel on a day-to-day basis:[125]

• Action plans are a clearer and more specific articulation of the organization’s strategy (strategies) tailored to the functions of individual departments or specific business functions. Operational leaders and managers will need a thorough understanding of the organization’s strategies.
• Action plans are crafted as operational leaders and managers commit resources to policies, programs, people, and facilities. A large multi-business organization may develop action plans at a number of levels – corporate,[126] business[127] (note: in a single industry company, the corporate and business levels are the same) and operational/functional.[128]
• An effective action plan, regardless of level, consists of (a) specific goals that specify how the business or functional department is going to contribute to the organization’s strategy, (b) what actions will be required to achieve the goals and (c) within what time period, (d) who is responsible for the actions, (e) the resources required to achieve the objectives, and (f) how the results will be measured and evaluated. (note: these elements are required for all organizations, whether a large multi-business enterprise or a small organization).

Less attention is given to implementation in most strategic management texts [and change management journals and articles] because it is so difficult to provide the specifics (there is no generic implementation strategy but, rather, a series of requirements: objectives, timelines, responsibilities, resources, and results measured). Implementation is specific to an organization, a strategy, a service area, and a culture. 

– Communicating Strategy and Developing Action Plans[129]

At this stage operational and managerial skills are extremely important[130] – effective and efficient operations make strategies work – but the organization’s leadership must be skilled in seeing how operational choices impact strategic outcomes.  The role of mid- and senior-level leaders in making change happen is critical. Operational leaders and managers of teams, departments, and functions are in a unique and powerful position. These are the leaders who must translate the vision of change from the organization’s executive leadership[131]:[132]

“Such leaders may ask, not only if they are tracking according to plan, but also whether what they are building looks like what the organization aspires to and whether any particular implementation choice will lead to the desired strategic outcomes. …

This requires the [strategic] leaders who devise the strategy to play expanded roles in implementation, from effectively influencing upstream strategic choices with a knowledge of the implied implementation challenges, to demonstrating judgment in when to engage senior executives for strategic input in key downstream implementation choices.”

Strategy implementation will require an evaluation and decision (i.e. maintain or change) on such matters as the organization’s structure, culture, distributing resources (financial, information systems, technologies, etc), decision making process, and managing human resources – it is the manner in which an organization will need to develop, utilize, and integrate organizational structure (i.e. decision making authority; task responsibility; operating model; governance; etc),[133] control systems (i.e. policies and procedures; incentives/intrinsic rewards; annual “SMART” – specific, measureable, attainable, relevant, time based –  action plans /business unit, business function, and individual personnel performance goals/KPIs – aligned with corresponding level of organizational objective;[134] operational execution on day-to-day basis; monitoring and feedback to personnel – performance management;[135] etc.), and culture (i.e. empowered personnel; shared values, assumptions, behavioural norms)[136] to follow strategies that lead to competitive advantage and a better performance. Different strategies and environments place different demands on an organization, and therefore will require different organizational change, structural responses and control systems.

Communication in strategy implementation (change management) is essential as new strategies, objectives, action plans and personnel annual goals must get support across the organization for effective implementation. For ease of reference, this may be said to consist of addressing – at minimum – the following steps:

• Action plans and setting annual personnel goals (i.e. specific, measureable, attainable, relevant, time based);
• People management (i.e. supporting change; managing resistance to change);
• Allocating resources to strategically important areas;
• Changing organizational structure to meet new strategy (if needed);
• Revising policies and procedures to meet the strategy objectives (if needed);
• Introducing new reward system for performance results (if needed);
• Measuring and evaluating performance and outcomes (not just milestones).

When working with organizations, we find some that have a basic understanding of change management (CM), some that only know about management of change (MOC), and others that have never heard of, or practice, either. In simplified terms, management of change is about dealing with the technical side of change … and change management is about dealing with the people side of change, or changing people’s behavior. Extremely successful organizations are able to effectively manage both. 

– Dave Berube, Management of Change vs. change management[137]

It should be noted that organizational strategies that involve significant change (i.e. appreciably impacts or changes current paradigm, business model, organizational structure, operations, culture, power/influence/career, financial incentives, etc.) will almost always be perceived as a ‘threat’ (concern) by at least some personnel in a given organization – including senior personnel (i.e. executives, managers, partners). With significant change, there are always some impacted personnel who may not support the overall strategy of the organization, and may take steps (by action or inaction) to undermine strategy implementation and/or even exhibit confrontational behaviour.[138] These type of issues must be anticipated and addressed in the implementation / change management plan.

Change Management – an important tool for Strategy Implementation

Change management is not a process for designing a business strategy,[139] rather it is an important tool in respect to ‘strategy implementation’ (and evaluation)[140] of an organization’s formulated strategy and “drawn up strategic plans”.[141] The purpose of change management is to determine and implement appropriate stratagems (or action plans) for effecting change, controlling and managing change, and helping the organization’s personnel to adapt to the change.[142] It is the process of managing a strategically determined change in an integrated, structured and thoughtful way in order to ‘operationalize the strategy’ to meet the organization’s vision and mission, long-term objectives and short-term goals.[143]

While no single change management methodology fits every organization, there are a set of practices, tools, and techniques that can be adapted to a variety of situations.[144] However, organizations and their leadership teams should not view change as an occasional project and disruptor that requires specialist consultants etc., but rather as the very essence of a leaders – and mangers – job. All leadership and management is the management of change.[145]  Setting long-term strategic objectives and tough short-term goals to reach them – establishing action plans and processes, carrying them out and carefully learning from them — these steps should characterize the unending daily life of the organization and its leaders and managers at every level:[146] 

“If a merger needs to be implemented, that’s change management. If a new personnel policy needs to be carried out, that’s change management. If the erosion of a market requires a new business model, that’s change management. Costs reduced? Productivity improved? New products developed? Change management.

The job of management always involves defining what changes need to be made and seeing that those changes take place. Even when the overall aim is stability, often there are still change goals: to reduce variability, [improve quality], cut costs, reduce the time required, or reduce turnover, for example. Once every job in a company is defined in terms of the changes to be made (both large and small), constant improvement can become the routine. Each innovation brings lessons that inform ongoing operations. The organization becomes a perpetual motion machine. Change never occurs as some sort of happening; it is part of everyday life.”

All Management is Change Management. 

– Harvard Business Review[147]

While strategy implementation may be generally seen as an operational leadership process – at this stage operational and managerial skills are extremely important[148] – for strategy implementation to be effective, organizations must treat it as a leadership activity and avoid structuring or delegating it as a purely administrative activity.[149] For an organization to make downstream implementation decisions that align with strategy, the leaders and managers (and key personnel) coordinating and guiding those decisions, the ability to think both strategically and operationally is an important skillset. They should be able to translate strategic conceptual ideas and intentions into practical, concrete decisions and choices, and be entrusted to make good judgment calls in response to what they learn along the way.[150]

A number of academics and business commentators have suggested that “traditional strategy implementation concepts overemphasize structural aspects” – a highly administrative, project management approach, focusing on the time, manpower, and sequence of activities necessary to enact change[151] – inappropriately “reducing the whole effort to an organizational exercise. Ideally, an implementation effort … doesn’t concentrate on implications of only one component, such as the organizational structure. When implementing a new strategy, it’s dangerous to ignore the other components because strategy implementation requires an integrative point of view. You need to consider not only the organizational structure but the soft facts as well — the cultural aspects and human resources perspective”.[152]

61% of CEOs report that they struggle to bridge the gap between strategic formulation and execution. … [I]t is essential to have a planning tool that … delivers. 

– Chris Scott, Is Strategic Execution Holding you back[153]

An integrated structured change management framework supports holistic and realistic action plans that account for an organization’s interconnected elements of culture, organization, people and systems,[154] and appropriately managing change to realize organizational results:[155] 

“[B]usiness decisions can be made more effectively, and executed far more smoothly, if human behavior is considered in equal measure with the strategy and operating model. … Simply put, in order to forge fundamental change in a complex organization, [leaders and] managers must focus on the human side of implementing change — what we call “change management” — as much as the hard analytics behind the change. …

Any transformation is brought to life by hundreds, even thousands, of frontline employees who deliver service to customers and perform other crucial jobs every day. A company can’t count on all of these professionals to envision what the organization will look like in the future, after the desire change has occurred. Management must instead supply the vision. … If management can use powerful imagery to provide a credible vision of a better company, show the benefits that will result, and alleviate the inevitable human fear, anxiety, and discouragement during the transition, then the chances of implementing successful change will be greatly increased.”

Using digital transformation as an example – it is estimated that worldwide 40% of all technology spending will be for digital transformation technology, with companies spending more than $2 trillion by 2019,[156] and that by 2020 60% of all enterprises will have fully articulated an organization-wide digital platform strategy[157] – an organization’s “expected improvements are based on the organization’s ability to move out of how things are currently done, through a transition state and, then to how things will be done in the future” (assuming the strategic change initiative is implemented successfully).[158] “During a major change, organizations need to continually challenge and fundamentally change how people operate and deliver value to customers. And depending on the type of transformation that is being deployed, employees may need to (a) learn new skills and behaviours; (b) step-up to fill new roles; and (c) adopt new processes and technology”. Realizing the desired outcome of a business transformation means also “managing the people side of change intently and intentionally”,[159] which must include strong attention to the organization’s culture,[160] personnel who may feel vulnerable and/or threatened,[161] and key personnel.[162]

Implementation of strategy can be treated as a process of maintaining harmony with changing environment through introducing organizational changes relating to the drawn up strategy. 

– Change Management in the Strategy Implementation Process[163]

The change management literature reflects two core modes of change management: “planned change management” (the analytical or rational approach) and “emergent change management” (the emergent approach).[164] The analytical or rational approaches to change management rely on a logical sequence of steps or processes (linear thinking) to develop a predetermined logical plan and carry it out without change. An emergent approach relies on intuitive (entrepreneurial) thinking, leadership, and learning with the understanding that because of external change, strategic plans evolve as implementation unfolds and the organization learns what works and what does not. Both approaches are valid and neither the planned approach nor the emergent view, by itself, is enough. It is difficult if not impossible to initiate and sustain organizational action without some predetermined logical plan – however, in a dynamic industry leaders and managers must expect to learn and establish new directions as they proceed.[165]

The best strategy for organizations to adequately manage change rests in understanding and utilizing both approaches in practice. Organizations and their leadership and management teams must recognize that in order to achieve successful strategy implementation and change, an interplay of factors will need to be considered, including the organizational (internal) and environmental (external) circumstances driving the change. As such, both approaches must be drawn upon for guidance:[166] along with the deliberately planned strategy, leaders and managers must have the ability to recognize and judge the worth of “emergent” strategies as intentional strategies collide with and accommodate a changing reality (i.e. although unintended, recognizing and adopting an emergent strategy may help a business adapt more flexibly to the practicalities of changing market conditions).[167] The analytical approach is similar to a ‘map’, whereas the emergent model is similar to a ‘compass’:[168]

“Both may be used to guide one to a destination. A map is a convenient metaphor for a predetermined plan, guideline, or method. Maps are better in known worlds – world that have been charted before. A compass serves as a useful metaphor for an intuitive sense of direction and leadership. Compasses are helpful when leaders are not sure where they are and have only a general sense of direction.[169]

[Leaders] may use the analytical approach to develop a strategy (map) as best they can from their understanding of the industry and by interpreting the capabilities of the organization. Once they begin pursuing the strategy, new understandings and strategies may emerge and old maps (plans) must be modified. … [Leaders] must remain flexible and responsive to new realities – they must learn. …

A model or map of how strategy may be developed will help organizations view their strategies in a cohesive, integrated, and systematic way. Without a model or map, [leaders and] managers run the risk of becoming totally incoherent, confused in perception, and muddled in practice.”[170]

In the real world, through the implementation and evaluation of the change management plan, new insights and perspectives will emerge – as leadership and managers implement the organization’s strategy through the change management plan, they must evaluate its success, learn more about what works, and – where appropriate – re-evaluate and incorporate new strategic thinking into the organization’s strategy.[171]

An intended strategy is the strategy that an organization hopes to execute. … An emergent strategy is an unplanned strategy that arises in response to unexpected opportunities and challenges. … A realized strategy is the strategy that an organization actually follows. Realized strategies are a product of a firm’s intended strategy (i.e., what the firm planned to do), the firm’s deliberate strategy (i.e., the parts of the intended strategy that the firm continues to pursue over time), and its emergent strategy (i.e., what the firm did in reaction to unexpected opportunities and challenges). 

–Intended, Emergent, and Realized Strategies[172]

In today’s world of constant and rapid change, for long term sustainable success organizations and their leadership and management teams must embrace strategy implementation, the change process and change management as a natural and routine part of a leader’s role – not some extraordinary “subspecialty of management” that is distinct from leadership and management.[173]

At this point in the 21^st Century, a decision by senior leaders of an organization to outsource strategy and change management may be seen as a warning sign – a reflection of a weak leadership team with missing skillsets, and a management team that has not been adequately trained and coached. Change is a fact of life today, and organizations to be sustainable and successful going forward must be accountable to cultivate the strategic implementation and “change management function and agenda within the organizational capabilities”.[174]  Organizations with leaders and managers that have such leadership and management capabilities have a competitive advantage.[175]

Why Manage Change? Managing change increases the probability of successful change within the business. There are two ways to view change management:  Organizational and Individual.  Organizational change is from the top-down (business leaders looking down into the organization), while Individual change is driven from the bottom-up (management of change from the employee’s perspective looking up). 

– Change Management: The People Side of Change[176]

Change Management Frameworks – systematic and agile structure required for today’s pace and scale of change

The ability to execute strategic, ambitious, and sustainable change is an organizational recipe for sustainable success. Alas, change management isn’t just writing a strategy document and communication plan that supports it, and – unhappily – it is a skillset subject to more than its fair share of bewildering management trends.[177]  

In this vein, there are numerous well-intentioned change management frameworks and approaches. Unfortunately, most change management frameworks assume that the process of change is linear – using ‘adoption curves’ or ‘step change models’ that appear to neglect opportunities for re-evaluating the organization’s strategy and goals based on the learning that occurs from the process of implementing the change itself.[178]  Strategy implementation and change management cannot be treated as a formula to blindly follow.[179] So what does it take to build a real change capability within an organization:[180]

“To be effective, you will need to customize and scale your change management efforts based on the unique characteristics of the change and the attributes of your organization. But to do this, you’ll need to understand why your change management process works and how it will interact with the reality of change at your organization.”

There are a number of recognized change management models and theories, largely developed from the various designers’ experiences with organizations either as consultants and/or researchers.[181] Popular approaches include the step by step methods exemplified by Kurt Lewin’s classic three-phase model of change[182] (unfreeze, move or change, and refreeze), John Kotter’s 8 step change model,[183] the McKinsey’s 7-S model[184], and the ADKAR model[185]. Other approaches such as Rosabeth Moss Kanter’s theories[186]  and change theories based on derivatives of the Kübler-Ross model[187] (i.e. William Bridges model,[188] Virginia Satir’s model[189] ) focus on the organization or corporate culture and people aspects of change:[190]

“There are a variety of ways of categorizing the majority of the change management models that provide prescriptive steps of what to do and what not to do …. These models have largely been developed from the authors’ experiences with companies either as consultants and/or researchers. Groupings of change management models are available that provide specific diagnostic tools and approaches to support key change management issues, such as resistance to change …, rates of adoption of change for individuals …, communications …, and organizational culture ….

Many authors, scholars, and researchers have described the steps involved in planning and managing change. Kotter … described eight steps to transforming an organization, including establishing a sense of urgency, forming a powerful guiding coalition, creating a vision, communicating the vision, empowering others to act on the vision, planning for and creating short-term wins, consolidating improvements and producing still more change, and institutionalizing new approaches. Ackerman-Anderson and Anderson … describe a change leadership process that is continuous and non-linear, and incorporates an evaluation component. Their steps include: preparing to lead the change, creating vision, commitment and capacity, assessing the situation and determining design requirements, designing the desired state, analyzing the impact, planning and organizing for implementation, implementing the change, celebrating and integrating the new state, and learning and course-correcting. …

Continual refinements in change theory will have strong parallel implications for implementation. Businesses are recognizing that change continues to build at an alarming rate, it is viewed as a continuous process, and that a systematic and disciplined structure is required for managing this tremendous amount of change. …

To be effective at leading change, companies need to customize and scale their change management efforts, based on the unique characteristics of the change and the culture of the organization experiencing a change.”

Each approach has its pros and cons, however no one framework is ‘best’ in all situations.[191] Indeed it is not so much the actual change management model or theory that is important, but more that the approach is relevant to the circumstances of the particular organization (i.e. structure, history, culture and needs) and change event (i.e. type, breadth, size, origin, etc.) in question.  In many cases the best change management approaches appear to use one strong model, and adopt important recognized techniques[192] as well as considering adapting aspects of various models to suit the culture of the organization and the context of the change.[193]

The field of organizational development and change is widely known for its large spectrum of theories that strive to understand and explain individual, group, and organizational change. … Historically, these diverse theories have haphazardly combined and crossed levels of abstraction and analysis … exemplify[ing] the ongoing tension between the theory of change and the practice of changing. 

– Kathy Cowan Sahadath, Integrating Organizational Change: Scholarship and Work Practice[194]

This article advocates for integrated change management frameworks and processes that address strategy implementation holistically, that are continuous, non-linear, and incorporate an emergent approach and evaluation[195] to effectively implement the organization’s apposite strategy required to achieve its vision and objectives. By way of example, lets look a little more closely at the Ackerman and Anderson change management framework that also addresses best practices for successful implementation of change[196] (note: each phase is expanded upon in the applicable footnotes for ease of reference):[197]

“The model is based on the hypothesis that a comprehensive change strategy consists of three areas:

• Content: the organizational and technical areas that require change;
• People: the mindset, behavioural and cultural changes that support the content changes;
• Process: actions necessary in order to plan, design and implement both the content and people changes, in an integrated and unified way.

As with many other authors in the field … Ackerman and Anderson stress the importance of the human dynamic element, considering it to be the linchpin of the change process. As such, the different aspects of this dynamic engagement, commitment, behaviour and mindset change are embedded in the change strategy from the beginning and not added as an afterthought.

The non-linear, 3-stage and 9-phase model promoted by Ackerman and Anderson (2010) consists of the following main activities and can be tailored according to the specific needs of the change process that is considered:

Stage 1. Upstream change: 

a. Phase 1. Preparing to lead the change: establishing a clear intent for change and the corresponding strategy for a successful change process. Phase 1 is considered to be of critical importance and includes approx. 60% of the decisions regarding the change strategy and plan. The main goals of this phase are: identifying the leadership roles necessary for the change, building the case for change, assessing the organizational readiness for change, building the individual and collective readiness for change, establishing the general strategy for change.[198]

b. Phase 2. Creating the organizational vision, commitment and capability: creating a collective intent for change and improving the capacity for change throughout the organization.[199]

c. Phase 3. Assessing the situation to determine design requirements: describing the desired state and the way to achieve the change to materialize the vision.[200]

Stage 2. Midstream change:

a. Phase 4. Designing the desired state: designing the organizational and cultural solutions for achieving the vision.[201]

b. Phase 5. Analyzing the impact: carrying out a detailed impact analysis intended to support a thorough understanding of the change process, both for leaders and employees, and securing the support of the people involved in the change.[202]

c. Phase 6. Planning and organizing for implementation: elaborating the implementation master plan, the detailed guide for achieving the desired state.[203]

Stage 3. Downstream change: 

a. Phase 7. Implementing the change: implementing the master plan and applying the necessary corrections for finalizing the change process and obtaining the desired results.[204]

b. Phase 8. Celebrating and integrating the new state: once the desired state is achieved and the results are obtained, the success [and best practices][205]should be widely communicated and the organization should celebrate it. This celebration reinforces the change and ensures that all the people in the organization have adopted the new behaviours.[206]

c. Phase 9. Learning and course correcting: evaluating and learning all the lessons regarding the change process and its results, continuously improving the new state, preparing the organization for future changes and successfully concluding the current change initiative.”[207]

The action plan is one of several widely used approaches to assist in the implementation of strategies. Another tool for focusing on implementation of strategy is the Balanced Scorecard that links the organization’s overall strategy to short-term actions including a financial perspective, customer perspective, internal perspective, and a learning/growth perspective. The primary benefit … is to focus the … organization on those aspects of its operations that most directly impact the accomplishment of its strategies. By identifying those factors that most directly influence successful outcomes and concentrating on accomplishing and improving them, resources of the organization can be uses most effectively and efficiently. 

– Focusing on Strategy through Implementation: A Balanced Scorecard Approach[208]

Evaluation (monitoring)[209]

The key element in monitoring and evaluating the strategy, implementation and change management process is to get the relevant and timely information on the organization’s performance and the environment and – if necessary – take corrective actions. Performance has to be measurable and comparable, and senior leaders and managers have to be able to compare the actual results with expected (i.e. estimated) results and see if they are successful in achieving their goals and objectives. With respect to the environment, due to its constantly changing nature, external and internal conditions must be continuously reviewed as new strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats may arise that must or should be addressed.^[210]

The key evaluation activities throughout the course of the year are: (a) appraising internal and external factors that are the root of present strategies, (b) measuring performance, and (c) taking remedial / corrective actions (note: in most cases, tactics/goals rather than strategies are changed to meet the particular challenge). Strategy and performance evaluation makes sure that the organizational strategy as well as its implementation tactics meet the organizational objectives.^[211]

Big picture, it must never be forgotten that an organization’s strategy, vision and long term objectives are not set in stone, but rather, should at all times be open to re-evaluation as circumstances unfold. It is not possible in this age of transformative change to predict five years into the future what the world will be like for a particular organization’s products or services, but this uncertainty should not deter leadership from visualizing a roadmap and desired outcomes. Progress toward strategic objectives must be constantly evaluated (i.e. balanced scorecard; KPIs),^[212] as should the organization’s vision, goals, long-term objectives, and the strategy itself over time – not just at a formalized annual strategy review session.^[213] Voted “one of the most influential business ideas ever presented in the Harvard Business Review the Balanced Scorecard enjoys global popularity”. There are some management tools that seem to have enduring appeal and the Balanced Scorecard is one of those. Over the past 20 years it has seen adoption rates soar. At the same time, this important tool is still widely misunderstood and misused by managers:^[214]

“A [Balanced Scorecard] BSC is a strategy execution tool that, at the most basic level, helps companies to:

1. Clarify strategy – articulate and communicate their business priorities and objectives
2. Monitor progress – measure to what extent the priorities and strategic objectives are being delivered
3. Define and manage action plans – ensure activities and initiatives are in place to deliver the priorities and strategic objectives.

… [C]ompanies … need a map of where they want to go and how they intent to get there. They need performance indicators to understand how well they are doing against their plan. And finally they need to manage the initiatives, projects and action plans that will help them achieve their plan. The BSC has been designed by Robert Kaplan and David Norton to do exactly that and contains the following three distinctive components:

1. The first and most important component of a BSC is a so-called ‘Strategy Map’ that visually maps the key strategic objectives of a company on a single page …. A Strategy Map shows the overall destination as well as the key objectives and priorities a company must deliver along the way. The strategic objectives are usually mapped along four perspectives, which support each other (see below):

• Financial Perspective – outlining the financial objectives.
• Customer Perspective – outlining the objectives related to customers and the market.
• Internal Process Perspective – outlining the internal business process objectives.
• Learning and Growth Perspective – outlining the objectives related to employees, culture and information system.

Mapping out how the objectives in each perspective support each other is one of the big benefits of a Strategy Map. Instead of listing strategic objectives in a seemingly unrelated manner, the Strategy Map depicts how each objective supports others and how they all help to reach the ultimate destination.

2. The second component of a BSC are Key Performance Indicators that allow companies to measure and monitor progress against their most important strategic objectives (outlined in their Strategy Map). Key Performance Indicators, or KPIs for short, are the vital navigation instruments for managers. Each KPI needs to be defined well and include targets or benchmarks.

3. The third component of a BSC is an Action Plan that ensures the right projects, programmes or initiatives are in place to deliver each of the strategic objectives on the Strategy Map.

If all three of these components (Strategy Map, KPIs and Action Plan) are in place then a BSC can transform an organisation. … [I]t allows organisation to depict and communicate their strategic plan in a very simple and graphical way as well as monitor and manage the delivery of the plan.”

If it becomes apparent at any time that the organization’s strategy and tactics are no longer useful and relevant, the organization is in a good position to identify and articulate new ways to work toward its mission and vision.^[215]

Environmental scanning (internal and external), situational analysis, and continuous learning never terminates. Strategic management’s components (strategy formulation, strategy implementation – which includes change management, and strategy evaluation) interact with each other such that the process becomes a fluid, collaborative, all-year-long process that facilitates input, cooperation and learning across all functions and levels. Essential changes are made as required. However, as a best practice, the strategic management framework should also be formally and specifically addressed annually.

[A Balanced Score Card] can transform an organisation. For me it is the No 1 strategy execution tool because it allows organisation to depict and communicate their strategic plan in a very simple and graphical way as well as monitor and manage the delivery of the plan. 

– Bernard Marr^[216]

Conclusion

For some organizations and leadership teams, implementation of a formulated strategy is too often considered a strategic afterthought. Unfortunately, until relatively recently, the fundamentals of strategy implementation and change management have not been appropriately embraced by many leaders and managers as a critical leadership and management skillset. The result is that for many organizations – until appropriate training is incorporated into their leadership development programs and leadership hiring practices are updated – there may only be a shallow leadership and managerial capacity to address today’s rapid pace of change and to implement and execute an organization’s formulated strategy. 

[O]perational excellence … should be treated as a crucial complementto strategy – and that this is true now more than ever. After all, if a firm can’t get the operational basics right, it doesn’t matter how brilliant its strategy is. 

– Harvard Business Review[217]

Successful organizations today require their leaders and managers to have (a) a conceptual understanding of the various integrated elements and processes of strategy implementation and change management, (b) a fundamental understanding of strategy implementation, change management, and emergent thinking, and (c) the ability to develop and properly align the implementation and change management plan to the overall strategy –  and therefor the skill to see how operational choices impact strategic outcomes (i.e. ensure “fit” among the organization’s strategy, structure, control systems, and/or culture).[218] For the largest enterprise, for example, an implementation / change management plan must address all levels – corporate, business, and operational or functional levels.  An overly-ambitious non-aligned implementation plan that outstrips the organization’s resources, competencies, or capabilities is unworkable.

The challenge for organizations is to align the talents of its leaders and managers to the organization’s strategic objectives and goals – balancing an appropriate breadth of experience and knowledge with an actual ability to lead, implement, and manage change. If an organization’s leadership and management team is weak in this respect – and many are – then what is required is a more robust focus on strategy implementation and change management as a leadership, management, and organizational core competency.

[I]n organisations that have become bureaucracies we typically find ‘political’ groupings and teams that are often in rivalry with one another, pushing or fighting their own agenda. In such organisations, groups are frequently found whose primary aim is to defend and apply the system, rules or bureaucracy, regardless of whether it helps to create a coherent and cohesive ‘organisation on the move’ or not. 

– Oxford Review[219]

Change management frameworks and processes provide a structure on what to do to operationally implement strategic change initiatives and generally in what order: a roadmap to follow for implementing an organization’s future state. Each approach has its pros and cons, and as discussed, no one framework is ‘best’ in all situations. Indeed it is not so much the actual change management model or theory that is important, but more that the approach is relevant to the circumstances of the particular organization and change event in question.  In many cases the best change management approach for a particular organization is to use one strong integrated model, and adopt other recognized techniques as may be required to suit the culture of the organization and the context of the change.

The key – from a leadership and management perspective – is an appropriate blending of rational analytical planning with an emergent approach of learning responsiveness within a changing environment, addressing new realities that may emerge, and determining what actually works for the organization.

An organization’s ability to evaluate and learn (or re-learn) may make the biggest difference – as strategies and implementation and change plans do not always work as intended, and most of the time managers, supervisors and personnel learn by doing. Where appropriate, organizations must be willing to forego implementation plans that are not working and learn from them.  An overall strategy (and values) that draws upon the organization’s strengths, fixes weaknesses, and encourages learning along the way reflects the quality of the leadership, and creates a strong culture of principled performance, adaptability, and agility for the organization.

Such organizations are able to operationally and strategically adapt as required in order to achieve its vision, objectives and goals.

The importance of leadership, strategy implementation and change management, operational excellence, and open communication cannot be underestimated (i.e. engage, engage, engage)[220] – but to be successful leaders and mangers must view change not as an occasional disrupter but as the essence of their leadership and management role.[221]

To inspire confidence and trust that is needed to succeed as an organization, leaders must not only be strategic thinkers, but must also know how to lead with purpose, navigate change, and operationalize strategy.

Eric Sigurdson

Endnotes:

[1] Note: Corporations, professional service firms, government agencies, non-profits.

[2] Perry Keenan, Kimberley Powell, Huib Kurstjens, Mike Shanahan, Mike Lewis, and Massimo Busetti, Changing Change Management: A Blueprint That Takes Hold, Boston Consulting Group (bcg.com), December 19, 2012; Barry Ritholtz, The World Is About to Change Even Faster: Having trouble keeping up? The pace of innovation and disruption is accelerating, Bloomberg.com, July 6, 2017; Global Employer Forum 2017: The pace and scale of change is unprecedented, Baker McKenzie.com, 2017.

[3] Eric Sigurdson, Strategic Management and Leadership – From the Legal Industry to Financial Services to Healthcare: “what got you here won’t get you there”, Sigurdson Post, July 30, 2018.

[4] Note: Digital disruption is the change that occurs when new digital technologies and business models affect the value proposition of existing goods and/or services. A disruptive technology is one that displaces an established technology and shakes up the industry or a ground-breaking product that creates a completely new industry. Harvard Business School professor Clayton M. Christensen coined the term disruptive technology.

[5] For example, see: Eric Sigurdson, The Evolving Legal Service Delivery Model: A 2018 Survival Guide for BigLaw and Traditional Law Firms – building a new business model, Sigurdson Post, January 14, 2018; Mario Cometti, The Evolving Litigation Marketplace Demands New Ways of Doing Business, New York Law Journal, July 13, 2018; Erin Hichman, Law Firms Need Artificial Intelligence to Stay in the Game, Law.com, July 17, 2018; Erin Hichman, ALM Intelligence Report: Law Firms Need Artificial Intelligence to Stay in the Game, ALM.com, July 2018; Eric Sigurdson, Legal Profession on the Precipice: Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, and Legal Technology, Sigurdson Post, July 31, 2017; Nicole Black, Law Firms, Artificial Intelligence, And the Fork in the Road, Above the Law, July 26, 2018; Heather Morse, Is the ‘game changer’ for the legal industry finally here?, The Legal Watercooler, July 25, 2018; Rod Henderson, Australia’s $200 Billion Services Sector Vulnerability to Disruption by AI, LinkedIn, July 25, 2018; William Henderson, Legal Market Landscape Report, Commissioned by the State Bar of California, July 2018; Bill Henderson, Legal Services Landscape Report (058), Legal Evolution.org, July 22, 2018; James Goodnow, Can Biglaw Go From Hoopty to Hot Rod?, Above the Law, July 27, 2018; Professor Dan Hunter, Legal Professionals need to adapt or they will be left behind, Swinburne.edu.au, July 26, 2018.

[6] For example, see: Peter Ginter, W. Jack Duncan, and Linda Swayne, Strategic Management of Health Care Organizations (8^th edition), John Wiley & Sons, 2018.

[7] Steve Slater, Banks face “Kodak moment” as fintech disruption builds, Business Insider, November 14, 2017; Michael King, Canada is woefully unprepared for the fintech tsunami, Financial Post, July 2018 (originally published February 4, 2018, Ivey Business Journal); Dennis Gada, Five ways fintech is disrupting the financial services industry, Finextra, March 5, 2018; Wael Salem, Banking and Fintech in 2018 – Disruption and technological evolution, Finance Feeds.com, February 9, 2018; Kimberly Connors, How Fintech Disruption is Blurring Industry Boundaries, CMC Canada, May 8, 2018; Financial Services Technology 2020 and Beyond: Embracing disruption, pwc.com, 2016; Julian Skan, James Dickerson, Samad Masood, The Future of Fintech and Banking: Digitally Disrupted or Reimagined?, Accenture, 2015.

[8] For example, Daniel Tencer, Canadian Grocery Retail ‘Bloodbath’ Is Here: Report, Huffington Post, July 26, 2018.

[9] Vanessa Bates Ramirez, How to Stay Innovative amid the Fastest Pace of Change in History, SingularityHub.com, May 19, 2017.

[10] Eric Sigurdson, The Evolving Legal Service Delivery Model: A 2018 Survival Guide for BigLaw and Traditional Law Firms – building a new business model, Sigurdson Post, January 14, 2018; BDO Law Firm Leadership Series 2017, Managing Rapid Change, BDO, May 2017; BDO Law Firm Leadership Series 2017, New Law Firm Structures and Models, BDO, September 2017; Trish Hennessy and Ricardo Tranjan, No Safe Harbour: Precarious Work and Economic Insecurity Among Skilled Professionals in Canada, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, August 2018; Jenny Roper, Tough gig: Making the gig economy work for everyone, HR Magazine.co.uk, December 13, 2016; Noam Scheiber, Growth in the ‘Gig Economy’ Fuels Work Force Anxieties, New York Times, July 12, 2015; Megan McArdle, When Law Is No Longer a Safe Bet: Lawyers discover the world of economic insecurity that their fellow citizens have inhabited for years, Bloomberg.com, July 22, 2013; Christopher Banks, The American Legal Profession: The Myths and Realities of Practicing Law, CQ Press (Sage Publishing), 2017. Also see, Steven Pulver, Interview with Karen and David Skinner of Gimbal Canada, Minute Box Blog, August 13, 2018:

“The only way [for traditional law firms] to get more business in this climate is to take it away from others. To do that, you’ve got to distinguish yourself from your competition by becoming some combination of better, faster, and/or cheaper. Improving productivity, quality, and profitability all ties back into efficiency and the value proposition for clients.”

[11] Mark Cohen, The Ascendancy of the Business of Law, The National (Canadian Bar Association), Spring 2018 (“Law, now a trillion-dollar global industry, is being re-engineered by business and tech professionals as well as entrepreneurs.”); Mark Cohen, It’s Time for a Digital Legal Marketplace, Forbes, January 7, 2017 (“… estimates peg legal service as a one trillion dollar – that’s ‘t’ as in ‘tons of money’ – annual global market.”); 2018 Report on the State of the Legal Market, Georgetown University Law Center and Thomson Reuters Legal Executive Institute, January 10, 2018 (“… estimated $700 billion in total legal spending …”); 2018 Legal Industry Outlook, Green Target.com, 2018 (“… estimated $700 billion total global legal spending …”); Jim Middlemiss, Let the law-tech wars begin, Canadian Lawyer, August 28, 2017 (“The legal industry is worth about $30 billion in Canada and $600 billion in the United States”.). 

[12] Weaker law firms unable to compete will lead to market consolidation, Global Legal Post, January 2, 2018

[13] Legal services in the United States and Canada (and historically in the UK and Australia) are essentially delivered to consumers today as they have been for the last Century – by lawyers (with limited exceptions for other licensed legal professionals such as paralegals), and then only through specific types of organizations that are owned and controlled by lawyers. In short, generally only licensed lawyers – in sole practice or in firms owned and controlled by lawyers – may provide legal services. These organizational forms or business structures are based on the “law firm partnership model” and may include general partnerships, limited liability partnerships, professional corporations, or limited liability companies. [see, Eric Sigurdson, Alternative Business Structures, Competition, and Legal Services Delivery: The Case for ABSs v. the Legal Profession’s Monopoly in North America, Sigurdson Post, November 7, 2017; Edward S. Adams, Rethinking the Law Firm Organizational Form and Capitalization Structure, 78 Mo. L. Rev. 777, 2013].

[14] Eric Sigurdson, Alternative Business Structures, Competition, and Legal Services Delivery: The Case for ABSs v. the Legal Profession’s Monopoly in North America, Sigurdson Post, November 7, 2017:

“Until relatively recently, throughout the world, legal services have by law only been delivered to the consumer by traditional law firms that are wholly owned and controlled by lawyers. With the goal of modernizing the delivery of legal services and encouraging competition, reducing prices, and spurring innovation, the UK, Australia and other countries have dropped the “lawyer only” prohibition, proactively initiating regulations allowing firms to adopt alternative business structures (ABS).

Nevertheless, the U.S. and Canada’s legal profession and self-regulators have tenaciously maintained opposition to non-lawyer ownership and investment –  even as the Canadian Bar Association has recommended “scrapping the current regime that prohibits non-lawyer ownership of law firms”, and the American Bar Association’s own investigations and committees have questioned the continued ban. …

The marketplace in North America is not aligned in respect to the interests of legal consumers (both retail and corporate) and the traditional law firm.  The legal profession is perceived as not fulfilling the expectations of the consumer, and the discontent runs deep: over 70% of individuals in Canada and the U.S. – including small business owners[14] – cannot afford legal representation due to its excessive cost. Furthermore, corporate clients are migrating legal work away from BigLaw and traditional law firms in favour of innovative, efficient, and cost effective alternative legal service providers – in particular their own legal departments (reportedly now handling approximately 73% of the corporation’s legal work). It is fair to say that the current “lawyer only” legal services delivery model has not been working well for consumers – nor the legal profession itself for at least the last decade (with the possible exception of the global elite of 10 or 20 BigLaw firms). Traditional law firms are no longer seen as a one-stop shop for corporate and retail consumers’ legal needs. …

Not surprisingly, retail and corporate consumers are looking for legal service providers that are ‘better, faster, cheaper’, and deliver ‘more-for-less’. The “reality on the ground” suggests that “change is badly needed”, particularly in light of the legal profession’s monopoly on the delivery of legal services – and its hostility to competition from innovative alternative legal service providers, and alternative business structures (ABS) to modernize the traditional law firm’s “lawyer only” business model.”

[15] Eric Sigurdson, The Evolving Legal Service Delivery Model: A 2018 Survival Guide for BigLaw and Traditional Law Firms – building a new business model, Sigurdson Post, January 14, 2018; Eric Sigurdson, Alternative Business Structures, Competition, and Legal Services Delivery: The Case for ABSs v. the Legal Profession’s Monopoly in North America, Sigurdson Post, November 7, 2017. Also see, for example, Mark Cohen, EY Acquires Riverview Law: A Different Perspective, Forbes, August 10, 2018; What the EY/Riverview Deal Means – The Bigger Picture, Artificial Lawyer, August 9, 2018; Thomas Connelly, Big Four giant EY buys NewLaw firm Riverview and pledges to ‘disrupt’ legal market: Watch out, traditional law firms, Legal Cheek.com, August 7, 2018; Judith McMorrow, UK Alternative Business Structures for Legal Practice: Emerging Models and Lessons for the US, 47 Georgetown Journal of International Law 665, 2016; Eric Chin, Future-proofing corporate legal departments, Conventus Leadership.com, July 8, 2018; Lucy Endel Bassli, The Legal Ecosystem: A Look at Tension Points for an Industry in Turmoil (Part 1), Thomson Reuters (Legal Executive Institute.com), June 19, 2018; Lucy Endel Bassli, The Legal Ecosystem: Alternative Providers are not Alternative Anymore (Part 5), Thomson Reuters (Legal Executive Institute.com), August 15, 2018; J. Stephen Poor, Big Four Blurring Lines of Legal Landscape, Bloomberg Law, August 23, 2018; Susan Kostal, Survey Reveals Disturbing Undercurrents Beneath the ‘New Normal’, Attorney at Work.com, July 31, 2018.

[16] Eric Sigurdson, The Evolving Legal Service Delivery Model: A 2018 Survival Guide for BigLaw and Traditional Law Firms – building a new business model, Sigurdson Post, January 14, 2018:

“Understanding which business models can succeed in these challenging times is critical. The macroeconomic statistics are sobering, and traditional law firms continue to have “trouble distinguishing year-to-year movement in metrics with underlying change in industry economics”. Corporate demand for legal services continues to grow – the legal industry remains one of the most profitable personal services businesses in the world – but the traditional law firm share continues to shrink.  Flat demand for law firm services, declining profit margins, falling productivity, loss of market share to alternative legal service providers, and price pressure, are gradually undermining the foundations of firm profitability. As the traditional law firm’s revenue growth is challenged by the modest demand growth environment, margin growth is challenged by expense pressures (i.e. infrastructure and technology investments, marketing and business development costs). It will be the law firms who can adapt and grow profitably (by increasing both revenues and margins) who will survive and distance themselves from the growing number of law firms who cannot meet these competitive and financial challenges. For those traditional law firms that fail or refuse to appropriately adapt their business and legal service delivery model, there is an expectation of “further consolidation and some law firm dissolutions as these weaker firms lose their ability to compete”.”

[17] Mike Abbott, State of the Legal Market Report: As world changes, most U.S. law firms stay the same, Thomson Reuters.com, January 11, 2018; 2018 Report on the State of the Legal Industry, The Center for the Study of the Legal Profession at Georgetown University Law Center and Thomson Reuters Legal Executive Institute, 2018; Legal Executive Institute, 2018 Report on the State of the Legal Market: Transformation of Legal Services Market is Accelerating – Are Law Firms Ready?, Legal Executive Institute.com (Thomson Reuters), January 10, 2018; Ken Grady, My Thoughts On 2018 Report on the State of the Legal Market, The Algorithmic Society, January 11, 2018; Gina Passarella Cipriani and Christine Simmons, A crack in the wall: how Wall Street’s elite firms are being put to the test, Legal Week.com, August 19, 2018; John Wilmouth and Gretta Rusanow, Law Firms Just Turned in their Best Half Since the Recession, American Lawyer, August 19, 2018 (“Looking at firms by geographic reach, revenue performance was strongest among global firms (8.1 percent), and was more modest as firms became more U.S.-centric”.); Elizabeth Olson, Law Firms Post Best Revenue Performance Since Recession, Bloomberg Law, August 22, 2018 (“Firms that have a dispersed geographic reach saw the strongest revenue performance, reaching 8.1 percent. Those firms have at least 25 percent of lawyers based outside the United States. Firms that had fewer lawyers outside the United States did less well, underscoring the strategy of the largest multinational firms which have numerous offices and a phalanx of lawyers spread around the globe”.)

[18] Digitization, digitalization and digital transformation: the differences, i-scoop.eu; Jason Bloomberg, Digitization, Digitalization, and Digital Transformation: Confuse them at your peril, Forbes, April 29, 2018; Jeanne Ross, Don’t Confuse Digital with Digitization, MIT Sloan Management Review, September 29, 2017:

“Digitization involves standardizing business processes and is associated with cost cutting and operational excellence. In essence, it imposes discipline on business processes that, over the years, were executed by individual heroes in a variety of creative (but not always optimal) ways. SAP, PeopleSoft, and other integrated software packages that burst onto the scene in the 1990s helped lead the way into more digitizing, but it remains a painful process.

Today, companies are confronting something new and different: digital. Digital, of course, is an adjective. It refers to a host of powerful, accessible, and potentially game-changing technologies like social, mobile, cloud, analytics, internet of things, cognitive computing, and biometrics. It also refers to the transformation that companies must undergo to take advantage of the opportunities these technologies create. A digital transformation involves rethinking the company’s value proposition, not just its operations. A digital company innovates to deliver enhanced products, services, and customer engagement. Digital is exciting, thrilling — and a bit unnerving!

The problem is this: We have found that many business leaders are thinking of digital as advanced digitization, such as enhancing the customer experience with mobile technologies or implementing internet of things capabilities to improve operations. But “becoming digital” is a totally different exercise from digitizing. Companies today must become digital to compete in a world in which both end consumers and business customers expect products and services to meet their needs on demand across channels. In most industries, digital is already a business imperative. Digitization is an important enabler of digital, but all the digitization in the world won’t, on its own, make a business a digital company. I would argue, in fact, that failing to distinguish increased digitization (even radically increased digitization) from a digital transformation could be a fatal mistake.”

[19] Emma Ryan, More law firm mergers on the horizon, Lawyers Weekly, August 14, 2018; Scott Flaherty, Firm Mergers Near Record Pace at Midyear Point, American Lawyer, July 2, 2018; Lizzy McLellan, Firms Find Fertile Ground for Growth in Smaller Markets, American Lawyer, July 30, 2018; Michael Rynowecer, New York Firm to Merge with a Magic Circle Firm?, BTI Consulting Group.com, August 15, 2018; Kelli Babinecz Fiore, Law Office Openings 2018: Who? Where? Why?, LinkedIn, July 24, 2018; Barney Thompson, UK legal megamerger highlights drive for consolidation, Financial Times, April 30, 2017; Roy Strom, After a Record 2017, No Signs of Law Firm Merger Mania Slowing, American Lawyer, January 3, 2018.; Lizzy McLellan, BigLaw Stays ‘Bullish’ on Small and Midsize Mergers, American Lawyer, August 22, 2018.

[20] Mark Cohen, Money Makes the World Go Around – Why Capital is Changing Law, Forbes, August 16, 2018; Jnana Settle, Why is the Legal Industry Ripe for Disruption?, Disruptor Daily.com, March 15, 2018; Objections overruled: The case for disruptive technology in the legal profession, Deloitte UK, 2017; Michael Sauber, The Many Facets of Legal Market Disruption, Ontario Bar Association (OBA.org), May 17, 2018; Ben Allgrove, The Legal Sector Must Prepare for Disruption, AI Business.com, November 30, 2017; Kevin Ryan, 5 Industries that are Ready to be Disrupted in 2018, Inc.com, January 31, 2018.

[21] BDO Law Firm Leadership Series 2017, New Law Firm Structures and Models, BDO, September 2017. Also see, Joshua Kubicki, Bending the BigLaw Business Model: Because intrapreneurship is the new disruption, Medium.com (Rethink the Practice, Seyfarth Shaw LLP), October 14, 2015; Joshua Kubicki, The Fundamental First Steps in Launching New Practice Models in Law Firms, LinkedIn, August 14, 2018; Andrew Sprogis and David Cowen, The Legal Workforce of the Future Working Group Highlights the Top 7 Emerging and Evolving Roles, LinkedIn, August 9, 2018; Joe Raczynski, How medium-sized law firms can use legal tech to compete with the big industry players, Thomson Reuters.com, August 10, 2018; Jake Heller, Is AI the Great Equalizer for Small Law?, Above the Law, August 15, 2018; Eric Sigurdson, The Evolving Legal Service Delivery Model: A 2018 Survival Guide for BigLaw and Traditional Law Firms – building a new business model, Sigurdson Post, January 14, 2018; Michele Destefano, Legal Upheaval: A Guide to Creativity, Collaboration, and Innovation in Law, ABA Book Publishing, 2018; Kimberly Leach Johnson and Audrey Rubin, To Bring BigLaw into the future, Professionalize Legal Ops, Bloomberg Law BigLaw Business, June 22, 2018; Stephen Embry, Lawyers and Innovation: Let’s Talk About the Elephant in the Room, TechLaw Crossroads, August 21, 2018 (“Most lawyers know only one business model. It’s simple and easy to use and master. And make no mistake, the billable hour model is ingrained in the culture of virtual every law firm of any size in this country [USA].”); Lucy Endel Bassli, The Legal Ecosystem: Law Firms – In Defense of the Institutions (Part 4), Thomson Reuters (Legal Executive Institute.com), July 23, 2018 (“…traditional business model of law firms, built on that dreadful billable hour, is often unwelcoming to … innovation…”); Markus Hartung and Arne Gartner, Game Over?: The global legal market in 2018, Managing Partner, Vol. 16, Issue 5, February 2014:

“… the outdated business models of most law firms. In fact, the pyramid model is older than 100 years and it is surprising that it has survived that long. In the long run, this business model will work only for a handful of law firms – the global elite. All other law firms will most likely have to reinvent their business models – and those who start today will be most likely to be there tomorrow.”

In addition, see: Karan Girotra and Serguei Netessine, The Risk-Driven Business Model: Four Questions That Will Define Your Company, Harvard Business Review Press, 2014 – “Innovating business models in established companies can be far more difficult than in new ones; established firms are often the captives of their industries’ entrenched ways of doing things, whereas new businesses tend to differentiate by breaking the mould of old practices.”

[22] Rohit Talwar and Alexandra Whittington, An Opportunity Rich Horizon – How AI could Shape the Exponential Future of Law Firms, Lawyer Monthly, April 28, 2017.

[23] Suketu Ganhi, Topple Your Monolith Before It Crumbles, Ivey Business Journal (improving the practice of management), November-December 2017.

[24] Jessica Twentyman, Intelligent Economies: AI’s Transformation of Industries and Society, The Economist Intelligence Unit, 2018:

“The research is based on a survey of more than 400 business executives at organisations in eight key markets: France, Germany, Mexico, Poland, South Africa, Thailand, the UK and the US. …

Key findings include:

Respondents are optimistic about the economic benefits that AI will bring. Over the next five years, survey respondents expect AI to have a positive impact on growth (90%), productivity (86%), innovation (84%) and job creation (69%) in their country and industry.

Both private- and public-sector organisations consider AI essential to business strategy. More than nine out of ten respondents (94%) describe AI as important to solving their organisations’ strategic challenges, with 57% saying that it is “somewhat” important and a further 37% characterising it as “very” important.

The race to adopt and implement AI in business processes has already begun. More than one in four respondents (27%) say their organisations have already incorporated the technology into key processes and services, while another 46% have one or more AI pilot projects under way.

[25] Arindam Bhattacharya, Martin Reeves, Nikolaus Lang, Rajah Augustinraj, New Business Models for a New Global Landscape, BCG Henderson Institute, November 14, 2017; Cognizant Reports, Blockchain in Europe: Closing the Strategy Gap, cognizant.com, January 2018; Jessica Twentyman, Intelligent Economies: AI’s Transformation of Industries and Society, The Economist Intelligence Unit, 2018, Sonal Khetarpal, Artificial Intelligence way to go for businesses? 90% executives believe so, Business Today, August 14, 2018; Digital Transformation Initiative: Unlocking $100 Trillion for Business and Society from Digital Transformation, World Economic Forum and Accenture, January 2017.

[26] For example, The New Physics of Financial Services: Understanding how artificial intelligence is transforming the financial ecosystem, World Economic Forum and Deloitte, August 2018; Digital Transformation Initiative: Unlocking $100 Trillion for Business and Society from Digital Transformation, World Economic Forum and Accenture, January 2017; Jessica Twentyman, Intelligent Economies: AI’s Transformation of Industries and Society, The Economist Intelligence Unit, 2018:

Key findings include: …Both private- and public-sector organisations consider AI essential to business strategy. More than nine out of ten respondents (94%) describe AI as important to solving their organisations’ strategic challenges, with 57% saying that it is “somewhat” important and a further 37% characterising it as “very” important.

[27] Eamonn Kelly, Introduction: Business ecosystems come of age, Deloitte Insights, April 15, 2015; Arindam Bhattacharya, Martin Reeves, Nikolaus Lang, Rajah Augustinraj, New Business Models for a New Global Landscape, BCG Henderson Institute, November 14, 2017; Michael Lyman, Ron Ref, and Oliver Wright, Corner Stone of Future Growth: Ecosystems, Accenture Strategy (Accenture.com), 2018; Digital Transformation Initiative: Unlocking $100 Trillion for Business and Society from Digital Transformation, World Economic Forum and Accenture, January 2017; Tanguy Catlin, Johannes-Tobias Lorenz, Jahnavi Nandan, Shirish Sharma, and Andreas Waschto, Insurance Beyond digital: The rise of ecosystems and platforms, McKinsey & Company, January 2018; Venkat Atluri, Miklos Dietz, and Nicholas Henke, Competing in a world of sectors without borders: Digitization is causing a radical reordering of traditional industry boundaries – what will it take to play offense and defense in tomorrow’s ecosystems?, McKinsey Quarterly, July 2017.

[28] Jorge Barba, How to Practice the Art of the Possible, Game Changer.net, March 21, 2017; J. Thomas Wren, Teaching Leadership: The Art of the Possible, Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, March 1, 1994.

[29] Eric Sigurdson, Strategic Management and Leadership – From the Legal Industry to Financial Services to Healthcare: “what got you here won’t get you there”, Sigurdson Post, July 30, 2018. Also see, For example, see Arindam Bhattacharya, Martin Reeves, Nikolaus Lang, Rajah Augustinraj, New Business Models for a New Global Landscape, BCG Henderson Institute, November 14, 2017; Jason Moyse and Aron Solomon, Remaking the law firm ecosystem, Canadian Lawyer, July 4, 2016; Ron Friedman, Will All Law Firms Eventually Corporatize?, LinkedIn, December 17, 2017; Eric Sigurdson, The Evolving Legal Service Delivery Model: A 2018 Survival Guide for BigLaw and Traditional Law Firms – building a new business model, Sigurdson Post, January 14, 2018; Heather Morse, Is the ‘game changer’ for the legal industry finally here?, The Legal Watercooler, July 25, 2018; Cognizant Reports, Blockchain in Europe: Closing the Strategy Gap, cognizant.com, January 2018; Jason Tashea, Law firms, tech companies partner to build new blockchain-based platform for smart contracts, ABA Journal, July 30, 2018; Professor Dan Hunter, Legal Professionals need to adapt or they will be left behind, Swinburne.edu.au, July 26, 2018; The New Physics of Financial Services: Understanding how artificial intelligence is transforming the financial ecosystem, World Economic Forum and Deloitte, August 2018.

[30] Global Employer Forum 2017: The pace and scale of change is unprecedented, Baker McKenzie.com, 2017.

[31] Soren Kaplan, The Change Management Field Needs to Change, Before It’s Disrupted, Inc., May 3, 2018.

[32] Hatem Shehab, When Change Management Needs Change Management, LinkedIn, July 31, 2018.

[33] D. Phelan, Change Management Best Practices Guide, National Health Service, Queensland Government, 2010.  Also see, Andrew Hill, The Management Revolution, Financial Times, June 12, 2013.

[34] Eric Sigurdson, Strategic Management and Leadership – From the Legal Industry to Financial Services to Healthcare: “what got you here won’t get you there”, Sigurdson Post, July 30, 2018.

[35] Emergent thinking (or ‘intelligent opportunism’) is the idea that, although strategic thinking is inherently concerned with shaping and reshaping strategic intent, there must be room for flexibility  – an integration of both strategic and entrepreneurial thinking (both based on the theory of ‘effectuation’) – thus allowing leadership and organizations to consider new opportunities. Emergent thinking is about entrepreneurial leadership, adopting a flexible approach to strategy in order to take advantage of emerging strategies and new opportunities (that may be arguably more relevant in a rapidly changing business environment) and, by being ‘intelligently opportunistic’, can positively influence strategic decision making for the benefit of the organization. See: Peter Ginter, W. Jack Duncan, and Linda Swayne, Strategic Management of Health Care Organizations (8^th edition), John Wiley & Sons, 2018; Sebastian Fixson and Jay Rao, Learning Emergent Strategies through Design Thinking, Design Management Review, Vol. 25, Issue 1, Spring 2014; Antonio Dottore and David Corkindale, Towards a Theory of Business Model Adaptation, Regional Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research 2009: 6^th International Australian Graduate School Entrepreneurship Research Exchange, Swinburne University of Technology, Australia, 2009; Walter Brenner and Falk Uebernickel, Design Thinking for Innovation: Research and Practice, Springer International Publishing, 2016; Marko Matalamaki, Effectuation, an emerging theory of entrepreneurship – towards a mature stage of the development, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, Vol. 24, Issue 4, 2017; Steven Pattinson, Strategic Thinking: intelligent opportunism and emergent strategy – the case of Strategic Engineering Services, International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, Volume 7, No. 1, 2016:

“The purpose of strategic thinking, it has been suggested, is to: ‘discover novel, imaginative strategies which can re-write the rules of the competitive game; and to envision potential futures significantly different from the present’ (Heracleous, 1998, p 485). Strategic thinking is an essential prerequisite to firms’ survival (Beaver and Ross, 2000). More recently, strategic thinking has been related to the innovative aspects of a firm’s strategic planning (Harrison and St John, 2013). However, Mintzberg and Waters (1985) recognize that not all strategy is consciously planned, referring to ‘emergent strategy’ that is often developed intuitively by entrepreneurs rather than as the result of rational planning (Hill et al, 2014). The notion of emergent strategy is closely linked to the theory of ‘effectuation’ (Sarasvathy, 2001): that is, the notion that entrepreneurship is a way of thinking, reasoning and acting that focuses on the identification and exploitation of business opportunities from a broad general perspective, which Sarasvathy (2004) describes as the ‘essential agent’ of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship is, therefore, associated with opportunity recognition and has been defined as the: ‘examination of how, by whom, and with what effects opportunities to create future goods and services are discovered, evaluated and exploited’ (Shane and Venkataraman, 2000, p 218), and the ability to recognize opportunities is widely viewed as a key step in the entrepreneurial process (Tang and Khan, 2007). The purpose of strategic thinking, on the other hand, is to clarify the future, allocate and manage resources and manage change (Thompson et al, 2014). However, to create the most value, entrepreneurial firms also need to act strategically, and this calls for an integration of both entrepreneurial and strategic thinking (Hitt et al, 2001), as Zahra and Nambisan (2012, p 219) explain: ‘Strategic thinking and the entrepreneurial activities … influence one another in a cycle that perpetuates and even sparks innovation’. The question is, how can these two concepts be successfully combined?

The concept of ‘intelligent opportunism’ refers to the idea that, although strategic thinking is inherently concerned with shaping and reshaping strategic intent, there must be room for flexibility (Hamel and Prahalad, 1989), thus allowing entrepreneurs to consider new opportunities. Intelligent opportunism involves entrepreneurs being open to new experiences that allow them to take advantage of emergent strategies that are, arguably, more relevant in a rapidly changing business environment and can be considered a form of ‘opportunistic’ strategy (Liedtka, 1998). … Intelligent opportunism is about adopting a flexible approach to strategy in order to take advantage of emerging strategies and new opportunities and, by being ‘intelligently opportunistic’, entrepreneurial leaders can influence strategic decision making (Haycock, 2012).”

Also see: Refilwe Mauda, The influence and causation strategies on corporate innovation in conditions of increased industry uncertainty, A research report re Master of Business Administration requirements, Gordon Institute of Business Science, University of Pretoria, January 13, 2015; Laura Paulina Mathiaszyk, Corporate Effectuation: Effectual Strategy for Corporate Management, Inaugural Dissertation for Doctor rerum oeconomicarum, Faculty of Economics, Schumpeter School of Business and Economics, University of Wuppertal, June 2017; Jeroen oude Luttikhuis, Effectuation and Causation: The Effect of “Entrepreneurial Experience” and “Market Uncertainty”: An Analysis of Causation and Effectuation in Business Plans, Master Thesis (MSc Business Administration), May 20, 2014;  Andre Hermes, Causation and effectuation vs. analysis and intuition: conceptual parallels in the context of entrepreneurial decision-making, 7^th IBA Bachelor Thesis Conference, July 1, 2016 (Faculty of Behavioural, Management, and Social Sciences).

[36] Arvind Sharma, In your Digital journey, digital is not the solution; it is your strategy and transformation capability, LinkedIn, August 9, 2018.

[37] Mildred Golden Pryor, Donna Anderson, Leslie Toombs, and John Humphreys, Strategic Implementation as a Core Competency, Journal of Management Research, Vol. 7, No. 1, April 2007.

[38] Raffaella Sadun, Nicholas Bloom, and John Van Reenen, Why Do We Undervalue Competent Management?, Harvard Business Review, September-November 2017; Mildred Golden Pryor, Donna Anderson, Leslie Toombs, and John Humphreys, Strategic Implementation as a Core Competency, Journal of Management Research, Vol. 7, No. 1, April 2007.

[39] William R. Biglar, The New Science of Strategy Execution: How Incumbents Become Fast, Sleek Wealth Creators, Strategy & Leadership, vol. 29, Issue 3, 2001.

[40] Soren Kaplan, The Change Management Field Needs to Change, Before It’s Disrupted, Inc., May 3, 2018.

[41] Soren Kaplan, The Change Management Field Needs to Change, Before It’s Disrupted, Inc., May 3, 2018.

[42] Soren Kaplan, The Change Management Field Needs to Change, Before It’s Disrupted, Inc., May 3, 2018.

[43] Amelia Dunlop, Vincent Firth, and Robert Lurie, Dynamic strategy implementation: Delivering on your strategic ambition, Deloitte University Press, 2013.

[44] Joseph Kindt, Leadership and organizational culture: Keys to navigating uncertainty, SpencerStuart.com, August 24, 2018.

[45] A. Raps, Implementing Strategy, Strategic Finance, June 2004; Mildred Golden Pryor, Donna Anderson, Leslie Toombs, and John Humphreys, Strategic Implementation as a Core Competency, Journal of Management Research, Vol. 7, No. 1, April 2007.

[46] 5 Benefits of Building a Learning Culture, Inc.com, April 24, 2018; Karmen Blackwood, Benefits of Creating an Organizational Learning Culture, Business Vancouver (biv.com), September 21, 2014; Mark Lintern, Creating a Learning Culture is a Must-Have to Gain Competitive Advantage, Oracle.com, March 14, 2014.

[47] Soren Kaplan, The Change Management Field Needs to Change, Before It’s Disrupted, Inc., May 3, 2018; Joseph Kindt, Leadership and organizational culture: Keys to navigating uncertainty, SpencerStuart.com, August 24, 2018.

[48] Note: easy to implement, mobilize quickly, offers certainty of clear timelines and milestones – as opposed to outcomes, may provide reassurance that a large and complex issue can be divided and conquered, certainty and clarity on roles and responsibilities, frees up strategic and operational leaders’ time as they delegate downstream to individual line and function leaders and managers, or consultants, etc.).

[49] Amelia Dunlop, Vincent Firth, and Robert Lurie, Dynamic strategy implementation: Delivering on your strategic ambition, Deloitte University Press, 2013.

[50] Barry Ritholtz, The World Is About to Change Even Faster: Having trouble keeping up? The pace of innovation and disruption is accelerating, Bloomberg.com, July 6, 2017; Torben Rick, Accelerating Pace of Change – Rethink Organizational Change Management, torbenrick.eu, May 13, 2018; Global Employer Forum 2017: The pace and scale of change is unprecedented, Baker McKenzie.com, 2017; Murray Newlands, The One Certainty about the Future is the Pace of Change will only Quicken, Entrepreneur.com, January 9, 2015; BDO Law Firm Leadership Series 2017, Managing Rapid Change, BDO, May 2017 (“Law firm leaders agree that the pace of change in the legal industry is accelerating…”); Global Employer Forum 2017: The pace and scale of change is unprecedented, Baker McKenzie.com, 2017.

[51] Kathy Cowan Sahadath, Integrating Organizational Change: Scholarship and Work Practice, IRC: Queens University (irc.queens.ca), March 2013.

[52] See generally, Jane Andrews, Helen Cameron, Margaret Harris, All change? Managers’ experience of organizational change in theory and practice, Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 21, Issue 3, 2008; Michael Antwi and Mruganka Kale, Change Management in Healthcare: Literature Review, The Monieson Centre for Business Research in Healthcare, Queen’s School of Business, January 2014; Soren Kaplan, The Change Management Field Needs to Change, Before It’s Disrupted, Inc., May 3, 2018; Hatem Shehab, When Change Management Needs Change Management, LinkedIn, July 31, 2018; Daniela Blomqvist, An examination of change management models for successful execution of a change initiative, Master’s Thesis, International Business Management, Arcada University (Helsinki, Finland), 2017 (commissioned by PricewaterhouseCoopers).

[53] Soren Kaplan, The Change Management Field Needs to Change, Before It’s Disrupted, Inc., May 3, 2018.

[54] Hatem Shehab, When Change Management Needs Change Management, LinkedIn, July 31, 2018;

[55] Douglas Chia and Gary Larkin, Why Directors Should Place Culture Front and Center, Corporate Board Member (boardmember.com).  Also see, David Brown, Veronica Melian, Marc Snow, Sonny Cheng, and Kathy Parker, Culture and engagement, Deloitte Insights, February 27, 2015.

[56] Developmental Change: The most frequent and least disruptive is a developmental change, which may be panned or emergent. This type of change is generally incremental, and either enhances or corrects existing aspects of an organization, often focusing on the improvement of a skill or process. This process occurs in organizations all the time and may go unnoticed by the majority of people. It is experienced as business optimization, changes to improve efficiency, responding to varying customer preferences, and corrections to problems uncovered by regular business operations. Developmental change can be thought of in terms of people doing their daily job functions while seeking opportunities for incremental improvement.  Additionally, it arises from organized efforts that seek improvements in existing processes or products as a response to changing market dynamics, customer preferences, or business conditions. Developmental change occurs when organizations continually scan their internal and external environments to create work settings that encourage and reward innovation, growth, and development. Leaders, or mangers with strong skillsets, may lead the implementation of such change initiatives.

[57] Transitional Change: Transitional change may be significant and disruptive to the organization, involving modification to an organization’s current state (department, division, or organization) in respect to people, structure, procedures or technology. This type of change seeks to achieve a known desired state that is different from the existing one. It is episodic and planned. For example, mergers, acquisitions, and the introduction of entirely different business processes will impact teams in very meaningful ways that disrupt current methods being used. This may be the goal of the transitional change as an organization seeks new opportunities or addresses fundamental challenges in the market. In response, productivity and effectiveness will improve or fall because of these types of changes. Transitional change does not occur as often as developmental changes, but it happens frequently enough that strategic and operational leadership (including managers) must be competent and capable of leading the organization through the process.  This is not the level of change that managers on their own will have success in bringing through their organization.  These are significant shifts in the organization, and a degree of resistance and obstacles should be expected.

[58] Transformational Change: The last form of change is transformational and does not occur frequently. Transformational change represents a fundamental shift from current paradigms or questions underlying assumptions and mindsets. It requires a shift in assumptions made by the organization’s leadership and personnel. Transformation can result in an organization that differs significantly in terms of structure, processes, culture and strategy. New or different markets, products, and services are potentially combined with a different mission, vision, values, and probably leadership to produce the transformational event.  Strong strategic and operational leadership and change management is needed to plan, implement, and guide the organization, personnel, and corporate culture through this level of strategy implementation and change. It may result in the creation of an organization that operates in developmental mode – one that continuously learns, adapts and improves.

[59] Dean Anderson and Linda Ackerman Anderson, Beyond Change Management: Advanced Strategies for Today’s Transformational Leaders, 2001; Michael Cruse, Three Types of Organizational Change, CruseIT.com, March 17, 2016; Michael Cruse, How Are Types of Organizational Change Different, CruseIT.com, March 22, 2016; Ann Gilley, Jerry Gilley, and Heather Mcmillan, Organizational Change and Characteristics of Leadership Effectiveness, Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, Vol. 16, No. 1, 2009; Valerie Iles and Kim Sutherland, Managing Change in the NHS: Organizational Change, National Coordinating Centre for the Service Delivery and Organisation (NCCSDO) research programme, 2001; Types of Change, Business Queensland (business.qld.gov.au); Neal Goodman, The Business Transformation Revolution, Trainingmag.com, Jan.-Feb. 2016.

[60] Kathy Cowan Sahadath, Integrating Organizational Change: Scholarship and Work Practice, IRC: Queens University (irc.queens.ca), March 2013. Also see, Dean Anderson and Linda Ackerman Anderson, Beyond Change Management: How to Achieve Breakthrough Results Through Conscious Change Leadership (second edition), Pfeiffer (an Imprint of Wiley), 2010; Linda Ackerman Anderson and Dean Anderson, The Change Leader’s Roadmap: How to Navigate Your Organization’s Transformation (second edition), Pfeiffer (an Imprint of Wiley), 2010; Linda Ackerman Anderson and Dean Anderson, Awake at the Wheel: Moving Beyond Change Management to Conscious Change Leadership (The Change Leader’s Roadmap Methodology), being first.com, 2009.

[61] Peter Ginter, W. Jack Duncan, and Linda Swayne, Strategic Management of Health Care Organizations (8^th edition), John Wiley & Sons, 2018.

[62] Dean Anderson and Linda Ackerman Anderson, Beyond Change Management: Advanced Strategies for Today’s Transformational Leaders, 2001. Also see, Dean Anderson and Linda Ackerman Anderson, Beyond Change Management: How to Achieve Breakthrough Results Through Conscious Change Leadership (second edition), Pfeiffer (an Imprint of Wiley), 2010; Linda Ackerman Anderson and Dean Anderson, The Change Leader’s Roadmap: How to Navigate Your Organization’s Transformation (second edition), Pfeiffer (an Imprint of Wiley), 2010; Linda Ackerman Anderson and Dean Anderson, Awake at the Wheel: Moving Beyond Change Management to Conscious Change Leadership (The Change Leader’s Roadmap Methodology), being first.com, 2009.

[63] Soren Kaplan, The Change Management Field Needs to Change, Before It’s Disrupted, Inc., May 3, 2018.

[64] Robert Kaplan and David Norton, The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action, Harvard Business School Press, 1996; Robert Kaplan and David Norton, The Balanced Scorecard – Measures that Drive Performance, Harvard Business Review, January-February 1992; Robert Kaplan and David Norton, The Execution Premium: Linking Strategy to Operations for Competitive Advantage, Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation, 2008; Joseph Lucco, A Full & Exhaustive Balanced Scorecard Example, Clear Point Strategy.com, September 12, 2017 (see examples for: airline, bank, manufacturing, software, city or municipal government, healthcare, non-profit social service organization); 5 of the Best Strategy Frameworks for your Organization, Cascade: Execute Strategy.net, April 17, 2017 (#4 The Balanced Scorecard); Bernard Marr, What the Heck is a … Balanced Scorecard?, LinkedIn.com, July 25, 2013; Bernard Marr, What is a Balanced Scorecard? A Quick Overview, Bernard Marr & Co.com.; Balanced Scorecard Basics, Balanced Scorecard.org; Balanced Scorecard, Investopedia.com; What is a Balanced Scorecard?, Balanced Score Cards.com. Also see, Aaron Smith, Jeff Mainland, and Irene Blais, Managing Strategy to Enhance Care for Children, Healthcare Quarterly, Vol. 14, Issue 3, October 2011.

[65] Devra Garenstein, Key Concepts for Strategic Management and Organizational Goals, Chron.com, June 29, 2018.

[66] Charles Hill and Gareth Jones, Strategic Management Theory: An Integrated Approach (10th Edition), Houghton Mifflin Company, South-Western Cengage Learning Publisher, 2013; Prachi Juneja, Some Pitfalls to be Avoided in Strategic Management, Management Study Guide.com; Emergent Strategy, business dictionary.com:

“A set of certain consistent actions that form an unintended pattern that was not initially anticipated or intended in the initial planning phase. For example, although unintended, adopting an emergent strategy might help a business adapt more flexibly to the practicalities of changing market conditions.”

[67] Prachi Juneja, Strategy Management Process – Meaning, Steps and Components, Management Study Guide.com; Robert Kaplan and David Norton, The Execution Premium: Linking Strategy to Operations for Competitive Advantage, Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation, 2008.

[68] Soren Kaplan, The Change Management Field Needs to Change, Before It’s Disrupted, Inc., May 3, 2018. Also see, Peter Ginter, W. Jack Duncan, and Linda Swayne, Strategic Management of Health Care Organizations (8^th edition), John Wiley & Sons, 2018.

[69] John Bryson, Strategic Planning for Public and Nonprofit Organizations: A Guide to Strengthening and Sustaining Organizational Achievement (5^th edition), John Wiley & Sons, 2018.

[70] Global Leadership Forecast 2018: 25 Research Insights to Fuel Your People Strategy, Development Dimensions International / The Conference Board / EY, ddiworld.com, 2018 (“More than 1,000 C-level executives worldwide identified the issues they expect to command their attention in the coming year. … their biggest concerns … top challenges vying for leaders’ action focused on their own leaders. Developing ‘Next Gen’ leaders and failure to attract/retain top talent were rated in the top five by 64 percent and 60 percent respectively”); CEO Challenge 2017: Leading through Risk, Disruption, and Transformation, The Conference Board (conference-board.org), 2017.

[71] Robert Schaffer, All Management is Change Management, Harvard Business Review, October 26, 2017.

[72] Robert Schaffer, All Management is Change Management, Harvard Business Review, October 26, 2017.

[73] Robert Schaffer, All Management is Change Management, Harvard Business Review, October 26, 2017.

[74] Soren Kaplan, The Change Management Field Needs to Change, Before It’s Disrupted, Inc., May 3, 2018.

[75] Ten Things Agile Teams Need to Know, Steelcase.com; Six Ways to Support Agile Teams, Steelcase.com.

[76] Raffaella Sadun, Nicholas Bloom, and John Van Reenen, Why Do We Undervalue Competent Management?, Harvard Business Review, September-November 2017.

[77] Peter Ginter, W. Jack Duncan, and Linda Swayne, Strategic Management of Health Care Organizations (8^th edition), John Wiley & Sons, 2018.

[78] Mike Raia, The New Rules for Change Management, Integrify, April 16, 2018; Stuart Levine, What can we learn from the history of change management?, CUInsight.com, April 18, 2016;

[79] Michael Antwi and Mruganka Kale, Change Management in Healthcare: Literature Review, The Monieson Centre for Business Research in Healthcare, Queen’s School of Business, January 2014; Soren Kaplan, The Change Management Field Needs to Change, Before It’s Disrupted, Inc., May 3, 2018; Hatem Shehab, When Change Management Needs Change Management, LinkedIn, July 31, 2018; Daniela Blomqvist, An examination of change management models for successful execution of a change initiative, Master’s Thesis, International Business Management, Arcada University (Helsinki, Finland), 2017 (commissioned by PricewaterhouseCoopers).

[80] Ron Ashkenas and Lisa Bodell, Seven Strategies for Simplifying Your Organization, Harvard Business Review, May 28, 2013;

[81] Carmine Gallo, Steve Jobs Followed 7 Unbreakable Laws of Success That Apply to Any Business, Inc.com, August 7, 2018; Mark McNeilly, Winning Through Simplicity, Fast Company, February 24, 2012; Lisa Ostrikoff, Keeping it simple is good for your small business, Globe and Mail, November 6, 2014; Melvin Greer Jr., 21^st Century Leadership: Harnessing Innovation, Accelerating Business Success, iUniverse LLC, 2013; Joe Calloway, Be the Best at What Matters Most: The Only Strategy You will ever need, John Wiley & Sons, 2013.

[82] Note: change management theory and models involve multifaceted issues, intricate processes, and demanding analysis and leadership. Not surprisingly, they do not provide an off the rack prescription for success nor do they promise instant solutions to all problems that an organization may face. Rather, change management processes take the organization through a journey that involves providing a framework for leadership to address questions, solve problems, and effectively implement change.

[83] Global Leadership Forecast 2018: 25 Research Insights to Fuel Your People Strategy, Development Dimensions International / The Conference Board / EY, ddiworld.com, 2018 (“More than 1,000 C-level executives worldwide identified the issues they expect to command their attention in the coming year. … their biggest concerns … top challenges vying for leaders’ action focused on their own leaders. Developing ‘Next Gen’ leaders and failure to attract/retain top talent were rated in the top five by 64 percent and 60 percent respectively”); CEO Challenge 2017: Leading through Risk, Disruption, and Transformation, The Conference Board (conference-board.org), 2017.

[84] Report: Why good strategies fail – Lessons for the C-suite, The Economist Intelligence Unit, 2013 (“… the leading barrier to successful implementation is a lack of change-management skills (45%).”); Rodger Dean Duncan, Leadership as Dialogue, Not Monologue, Forbes, August 7, 2018:

“You may have excellent technical skills. You may even be innovative and visionary. But if you don’t know how to engage people, you’re toast.

The best leaders (regardless of title or lack thereof) have good people skills. They talk well. They listen well. They offer feedback in ways that inspire improvement rather than resistance. They welcome feedback, and accept it without excuses.”

[85] Caludio Feser and Nicolai Nielsen, Unlocking leadership potential in turbulent times, McKinsey & Company (mckinsey.com), April 23, 2018; Claudio Feser, Nicolai Nielsen, and Michael Rennie, What’s missing in leadership development?, McKinsey Quarterly, August 2017; Derek Dean, A CEO’s guide to reenergizing the senior team, McKinsey Quarterly, September 2009; Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic, Michael Wade, and Jennifer Jordan, As AI Makes More Decisions, the Nature of Leadership will Change, Harvard Business Review, January 22, 2018; J.R. Flatter, Courageous Leadership: Leadership Development Return on Investment, LinkedIn, August 15, 2018.

[86] Ryan Quinn and Robert Quinn, Change Management and Leadership Development Have to Mesh, Harvard Business Review, January 7, 2016.

[87] Anthony Abbatiello, Marjorie Knight, Stacey Philpot, and Indranil Roy, Leadership disrupted: Pushing the Boundaries, Deloitte Insights, February 28, 2017; Dr. Mary Lippitt, Top Ten Leadership Skills for 2020, Biz Catalyst 360.com, 2016; Avil Beckford, The Skills You Need to Succeed in 2020, Forbes, August 6, 2018; Maureen Metcalf, Seven of the Top Leadership Skills for 2020, Forbes, March 30, 2017; Stephanie Mingardon, Meldon Wolfgang, Mike Lewis, Aaron Snyder, and Greg Meyding, Is Your Change Management Approach Keeping Pace with Digital? World class change management of 10 years ago won’t cut it today, Boston Consulting Group (bcg.com), July 19, 2018; Brent Gleeson, 3 Leadership Skills Critical to Driving Change, Forbes, August 16, 2016;

[88] Linda Ackerman and Dean Anderson, Awake at the Wheel: Moving Beyond Change Management to Conscious Change Leadership, Change Leadership Network.com. Also see, Dean Anderson and Linda Ackerman Anderson, Beyond Change Management: How to Achieve Breakthrough Results Through Conscious Change Leadership (second edition), Pfeiffer (an Imprint of Wiley), 2010; Linda Ackerman Anderson and Dean Anderson, The Change Leader’s Roadmap: How to Navigate Your Organization’s Transformation (second edition), Pfeiffer (an Imprint of Wiley), 2010.

[89] Global Leadership Forecast 2018: 25 Research Insights to Fuel Your People Strategy, Development Dimensions International / The Conference Board / EY, ddiworld.com, 2018.

[90] CEO Challenge 2017: Leading through Risk, Disruption, and Transformation, The Conference Board (conference-board.org), 2017.

[91] CEO Challenge 2017: Leading through Risk, Disruption, and Transformation, The Conference Board (conference-board.org), 2017; The Conference Board, Survey Finds CEOs Leaning on Talent and Organizational Culture to Survive and Thrive amid Global Volatility, prnews wire.com, January 31, 2017.

[92] Nick Tasler, Stop Using the Excuse ‘Organizational Change is Hard’, Harvard Business Review, July 19, 2017. Also see, David Wilkinson, Do 70% of Organizational Change Projects Really Fail?, Oxford Review, April 15, 2016.

[93] Nick Tasler, Stop Using the Excuse ‘Organizational Change is Hard’, Harvard Business Review, July 19, 2017 (“Most experts, for example, state that 70% of change efforts fail.”); Boris Ewenstein, Wesley Smith,and Ashvin Sologar, Changing change management, Mckinsey.com, July 2015 (“We know, for example, that 70 percent of change programs fail to achieve their goals …”); Hatem Shehab, When Change Management Needs Change Management, LinkedIn, July 31, 2018 (most “studies still show a 60-70% failure rate for organizational change initiatives – a statistic that has stayed constant from the 1970’s to the present”). Also see, Edith Onderick-Harvey, 5 Behaviours of Leaders Who Embrace Change, Harvard Business Review, May 18, 2018 (“At best, mergers and acquisitions (M&A’s) have a 50/50 chance of reaching their intended results. Study after study puts the failure rate closer to 70-90%.”).

[94] H. James Dallas, 4 must-have skills for leaders to manage change, Fortune, October 22, 2015: “75% of change initiatives will fail, according to a recent study by McKinsey & Co.”; Nick Tasler, Stop Using the Excuse ‘Organizational Change is Hard’, Harvard Business Review, July 19, 2017 (“Most experts, for example, state that 70% of change efforts fail.”); Boris Ewenstein, Wesley Smith,and Ashvin Sologar, Changing change management, Mckinsey.com, July 2015 (“We know, for example, that 70 percent of change programs fail to achieve their goals …”); Hatem Shehab, When Change Management Needs Change Management, LinkedIn, July 31, 2018 (most “studies still show a 60-70% failure rate for organizational change initiatives – a statistic that has stayed constant from the 1970’s to the present”). Also see, Edith Onderick-Harvey, 5 Behaviours of Leaders Who Embrace Change, Harvard Business Review, May 18, 2018 (“At best, mergers and acquisitions (M&A’s) have a 50/50 chance of reaching their intended results. Study after study puts the failure rate closer to 70-90%.”); Human Resources, Change Management Leadership Guide, Ryerson University, 2011  (“A 2006 study by Harvard Business Review found that 66% of change initiatives fail to achieve their desired business outcomes.”); DeAnne Aguirre and Michah Alpern, 10 Principles of Leading Change Management, Strategy & Business, June 6, 2014 (“… according to a 2013 Strategy&/Katzenbach Center survey of global senior executives on culture and change management, the success rate of major change initiatives is only 54 percent.”); David Dinwoodie, William Pasmore, Laura Quinn, and Ron Rabin, Navigating Change: A Leader’s Role, Centre for Creative Leadership (ccl.org), 2015 (“…studies consistently show between 50 and 70% of planned change efforts fail.”).

[95] Nick Tasler, Stop Using the Excuse ‘Organizational Change is Hard’, Harvard Business Review, July 19, 2017:

“Granted, there is some ambiguity surrounding the success of change initiatives. For example, when consultants at McKinsey surveyed 1,546 executives in 2009, 38% of respondents said “the transformation was ‘completely’ or ‘mostly’ successful at improving performance, compared with 30 percent similarly satisfied that it improved their organization’s health.”

Based on the numbers from the McKinsey study, it would be tempting to conclude that since only 30-38% of change initiatives are “completely/mostly successful,” then 62-70% must be failures. However, the McKinsey authors added that “around a third [of executives] declare that their organizations were ‘somewhat’ successful on both counts.”

In other words, a third of executives believed that their change initiatives were total successes, and another third believed that their change initiatives were more successful than unsuccessful. But only “about one in ten admit to having been involved in a transformation that was ‘completely’ or ‘mostly’ unsuccessful.” Therefore, pointing to the McKinsey study as evidence for a 70% failure rate is like saying that every time a baseball player steps up to the plate and doesn’t hit a home run, that player has “failed.” But that isn’t true in baseball any more than it is true in organizations. The McKinsey results show that around 60% of change initiatives are somewhere between a base-hit and a home run, and only 1 in 10 are strikeouts.”

Also see, David Wilkinson, Do 70% of Organizational Change Projects Really Fail?, Oxford Review, April 15, 2016.

[96] Nick Tasler, Stop Using the Excuse ‘Organizational Change is Hard’, Harvard Business Review, July 19, 2017.

[97] Nick Tasler, Stop Using the Excuse ‘Organizational Change is Hard’, Harvard Business Review, July 19, 2017.

[98] David Dinwoodie, William Pasmore, Laura Quinn, and Ron Rabin, Navigating Change: A Leader’s Role, Centre for Creative Leadership (ccl.org), 2015.

[99] Nick Tasler, Stop Using the Excuse ‘Organizational Change is Hard’, Harvard Business Review, July 19, 2017.

[100] Hatem Shehab, When Change Management Needs Change Management, LinkedIn, July 31, 2018; Soren Kaplan, The Change Management Field Needs to Change, Before It’s Disrupted, Inc., May 3, 2018.

[101] Claudio Feser and Nicolai Nielsen, Unlocking leadership potential in turbulent times, McKinsey & Company (mckinsey.com), April 23, 2018; Claudio Feser, Nicolai Nielsen, and Michael Rennie, What’s missing in leadership development?, McKinsey Quarterly, August 2017; Derek Dean, A CEO’s guide to reenergizing the senior team, McKinsey Quarterly, September 2009; Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic, Michael Wade, and Jennifer Jordan, As AI Makes More Decisions, the Nature of Leadership will Change, Harvard Business Review, January 22, 2018; J.R. Flatter, Courageous Leadership: Leadership Development Return on Investment, LinkedIn, August 15, 2018.

[102] Ten Things Agile Teams Need to Know, Steelcase.com; Six Ways to Support Agile Teams, Steelcase.com:

“Agile is a kind of manufacturing system for new ideas. It is the practice that enables organizations to act on their new ideas,” says Tim Brown, IDEO CEO. “It is important to emphasize, however, that Agile is not where the new ideas come from. It is how they are rapidly iterated, improved and deployed.”

[103] Hatem Shehab, When Change Management Needs Change Management, LinkedIn, July 31, 2018; Soren Kaplan, The Change Management Field Needs to Change, Before It’s Disrupted, Inc., May 3, 2018.

[104] Nick Tasler, Stop Using the Excuse ‘Organizational Change is Hard’, Harvard Business Review, July 19, 2017.

[105] Angela Wright, Resolving Complex Legal Issues is no Longer Enough – How will you step up in response to increasing demands?, LinkedIn, July 8, 2018.

[106] It is suggested by some business and academic leaders that a “lack of entrepreneurial spirit is a major reason for the decreasing competitiveness – and even the eventual collapse – of big enterprises”; that “the only way to survive was to pursue a path of constant improvement” [Art Kleiner, China’s Philosopher-CEO Zhang Ruimin, Strategy & Business, November 10, 2014]. 

[107] Peter Ginter, W. Jack Duncan, and Linda Swayne, Strategic Management of Health Care Organizations (8^th edition), John Wiley & Sons, 2018.

[108] Eric Sigurdson, Strategic Management and Leadership – From the Legal Industry to Financial Services to Healthcare: “what got you here won’t get you there”, Sigurdson Post, July 30, 2018.

[109] Note: This framework or format was utilized for the purpose of my July 30, 2018 strategic management article, and may be considered a traditional or classic format. However, it should be recognized that various academics over the years have addressed strategic management in similar but different parts, blocks, formats, or framework. For example: “strategic analysis, strategic formulation, strategic implementation”; or “strategic thinking, strategic planning, strategic momentum”; or “initial assessment, situation analysis, strategy formulation, strategy implementation, strategy monitoring”; or “analysis, formulation, implementation”; or “where are we?, where are we going?, how are we getting there?, how are we doing?”; etc.

[110] Charles Hill and Gareth Jones, Strategic Management Theory: An Integrated Approach (10th Edition), Houghton Mifflin Company, South-Western Cengage Learning Publisher, 2013.

[111] See, Charles Hill and Gareth Jones, Strategic Management Theory: An Integrated Approach (10th Edition), Houghton Mifflin Company, South-Western Cengage Learning Publisher, 2013; Henry Mintzberg, Joseph Lampel, and Bruce Ahlstrand, Strategy Safari: A Guided Tour Through the Wilds of Strategic Management (2^nd Edition), FT Press, 2009; Gerald Cole and Phil Kelly, Management Theory and Practice (8^th edition), Cengage, 2015; José Emilio, Navas López, and Luis Ángel Guerras-Martín, Fundamentals of Strategic Management, Thomson Reuters Civitas, 2013 (translation Ian Macnair); Gregory Dess, G.T. Lumpkin, Gerry McNamara, and Alan Eisner, Strategic Management: Text and Cases (7^th edition), McGraw-Hill Irwin Education, 2013; John Gamble, Margaret Peteraf, and Arthur Thompson Jr, Essentials of Strategic Management: The Quest for Competitive Advantage (4^th edition), McGraw-Hill Education, 2015; Jay Barney and William Hesterly, Strategic Management and Competitive Advantage: Concepts and Cases (6^th edition), Pearson Education, 2018; Peter Ginter, W. Jack Duncan, and Linda Swayne, Strategic Management of Health Care Organizations (8^th edition), John Wiley & Sons, 2018; Fred David and Forest David, Strategic Management: A Competitive Advantage Approach, Concepts and Cases (16^th edition), Pearson Education Limited, 2017; Robert Grant, Contemporary Strategy Analysis: Text and Cases (9^th edition), John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2016; Henry Mintzberg, Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning, Free Press, 2013; M. Hitt, E. Freeman, and J. Harrison (Editors), The Blackwell Handbook of Strategic Management, Blackwell Publishing, 2006.

[112] Note: SMART – specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, time based.

[113] A Balanced Scorecard is a strategy execution tool that, at the most basic level, helps organizations to: Clarify strategy – articulate and communicate their business priorities and objectives; Monitor progress – measure to what extent the priorities and strategic objectives are being delivered; and Define and manage action plans – ensure activities and initiatives are in place to deliver the priorities and strategic objectives.

[114] Peter Ginter, W. Jack Duncan, and Linda Swayne, Strategic Management of Health Care Organizations (8^th edition), John Wiley & Sons, 2018.

[115] Peter Ginter, W. Jack Duncan, and Linda Swayne, Strategic Management of Health Care Organizations (8^th edition), John Wiley & Sons, 2018.

[116] John Crawford, Whitepaper: Building an Effective Change Management Organization (2^nd edition), Project Smart.co.uk, April 2013.

[117] John Crawford, Whitepaper: Strategy for Change Management (2^nd edition), Project Smart.co.uk, April 2013. Also see, John Crawford, Whitepaper: Building an Effective Change Management Organization (2^nd edition), Project Smart.co.uk, April 2013.

[118] See, Eric Sigurdson, Strategic Management and Leadership – From the Legal Industry to Financial Services to Healthcare: “what got you here won’t get you there”, Sigurdson Post, July 30, 2018.

[119] Mildred Golden Pryor, Donna Anderson, Leslie Toombs, and John Humphreys, Strategic Implementation as a Core Competency, Journal of Management Research, Vol. 7, No. 1, April 2007.

[120] D. Phelan, Best Practice Change Management Guidelines, National Health Service, Queensland Government, 2010.

[121] Farhad Simyar and Joseph Lloyd-Jones, Strategic Management in the Health Care Sector: Toward the Year 2000, Prentice Hall Inc., 1988.

[122] Prachi Juneja, Strategy Implementation – Meaning and Steps in Implementing a Strategy, Management Study Guide.com. Generally see, Charles Hill and Gareth Jones, Strategic Management Theory: An Integrated Approach (10th Edition), Houghton Mifflin Company, South-Western Cengage Learning Publisher, 2013; Henry Mintzberg, Joseph Lampel, and Bruce Ahlstrand, Strategy Safari: A Guided Tour Through the Wilds of Strategic Management (2^nd Edition), FT Press, 2009; Gerald Cole and Phil Kelly, Management Theory and Practice (8^th edition), Cengage, 2015; José Emilio Navas López and Luis Ángel Guerras-Martín, Fundamentals of Strategic Management, Thomson Reuters Civitas, 2013 (translation Ian Macnair); Gregory Dess, G.T. Lumpkin, Gerry McNamara, and Alan Eisner, Strategic Management: Text and Cases (7^th edition), McGraw-Hill Irwin Education, 2013; John Gamble, Margaret Peteraf, and Arthur Thompson Jr, Essentials of Strategic Management: The Quest for Competitive Advantage (4^th edition), McGraw-Hill Education, 2015; Jay Barney and William Hesterly, Strategic Management and Competitive Advantage: Concepts and Cases (6^th edition), Pearson Education, 2018; Peter Ginter, W. Jack Duncan, and Linda Swayne, Strategic Management of Health Care Organizations (8^th edition), John Wiley & Sons, 2018; Fred David and Forest David, Strategic Management: A Competitive Advantage Approach, Concepts and Cases (16^th edition), Pearson Education Limited, 2017; Robert Grant, Contemporary Strategy Analysis: Text and Cases (9^th edition), John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2016; Henry Mintzberg, Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning, Free Press, 2013; M. Hitt, E. Freeman, and J. Harrison (Editors), The Blackwell Handbook of Strategic Management, Blackwell Publishing, 2006.

[123] Raffaella Sadun, Nicholas Bloom, and John Van Reenen, Why Do We Undervalue Competent Management?, Harvard Business Review, September-November 2017.

[124] For example, see: Beaufort B. Longest, Jr, Health Program Management: From Development Through Evaluation (2^nd edition), Jossey-Bass, 2015.

[125] Peter Ginter, W. Jack Duncan, and Linda Swayne, Strategic Management of Health Care Organizations (8^th edition), John Wiley & Sons, 2018.

[126] The corporate level of management consists of the CEO and senior executive leadership team, the Board of Directors, and corporate staff. These leaders occupy the apex of decision making within the organization, with the CEO being the main strategic manager at this level overseeing the development of strategies for the total organization. Typically this role involves defining the mission, vision and major goals of the organization – determining what businesses it should be in, allocating resources among the different business areas, and formulating and implementing strategies that span individual businesses.

[127] In a multi-business organization, the business level consists of heads of individual business units within the organization – who are the main strategic managers for the business – and their support staff. In a single industry company, the business and corporate levels are the same. A business unit is an organizational entity that operates in a distinct business area, and may, for example, be based on a federal model or be self-contained and have its own functional departments. Generally, the business unit leaders’ strategic role is to translate general statements of direction and intent from the corporate level into concrete strategies for individual businesses. While corporate level leaders are concerned with strategies that span individual businesses, business level strategic leaders are concerned with strategies that are specific to a particular business.

[128] Operational or functional leaders bear responsibility for specific business functions, such as – depending on the type of business – personnel, legal, customer service, claims, marketing, purchasing, quality, research, etc.  Historically these leaders are not positioned to look at the organization’s overall big picture, but nevertheless have an important strategic role to develop functional strategies that help fulfill the strategic objectives set by business and corporate level strategic leadership. However, in the ‘new normal’ innovative organizations and their leadership teams are empowering their functional leaders to think and operate more strategically than they did in the past.

[129] Peter Ginter, W. Jack Duncan, and Linda Swayne, Strategic Management of Health Care Organizations (8^th edition), John Wiley & Sons, 2018 (see, chapter 10: Communicating Strategy and Developing Action Plans).

[130] Prachi Juneja, Strategy Formulation vs Strategy Implementation, Management Study Guide.com; Peter Ginter, W. Jack Duncan, and Linda Swayne, Strategic Management of Health Care Organizations (8^th edition), John Wiley & Sons, 2018; Robert Kaplan and David Norton, The Execution Premium: Linking Strategy to Operations for Competitive Advantage, Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation, 2008.

[131] David Dinwoodie, William Pasmore, Laura Quinn, and Ron Rabin, Navigating Change: A Leader’s Role, Centre for Creative Leadership (ccl.org), 2015.

[132] Amelia Dunlop, Vincent Firth, and Robert Lurie, Dynamic strategy implementation: Delivering on your strategic ambition, Deloitte University Press, 2013.

[133] See, for example: Gary Neilson, Jaime Estupinan, and Bhushan Sethi, 10 Principles of Organizational Design, Strategy and Business, March 23, 2015:

“Organization design can seem unnecessarily complex; the right framework, however, can help you decode and prioritize the necessary elements. We have identified eight universal building blocks that are relevant to any company, regardless of industry, geography, or business model. These building blocks will be the elements you put together for your design (see Exhibit 1).

The blocks naturally fall into four complementary pairs, each made up of one tangible (or formal) and one intangible (or informal) element. Decisions are paired with norms (governing how people act), motivators with commitments (governing factors that affect people’s feelings about their work), information with mind-sets (governing how they process knowledge and meaning), and structure with networks (governing how they connect). By using these elements and considering changes needed across each complementary pair, you can create a design that will integrate your whole enterprise, instead of pulling it apart.

You may be tempted to make changes with all eight building blocks simultaneously. But too many interventions at once could interact in unexpected ways, leading to unfortunate side effects. Pick a small number of changes — five at most — that you believe will deliver the greatest initial impact. Even a few changes could involve many variations.”

Also see, for example: Adi Gaskell, Why We Need to Rethink Jobs To Get the Most From AI, Forbes, August 15, 2018:

“According to Ravin Jesuthasan and John Boudreau, the only way we will successfully integrate AI technologies into the workplace is if we go back to basics and begin to fully understand the tasks each job consists of.  In Reinventing Jobs, their latest book, they outline four steps to successfully apply automation to the workplace:

1. Deconstruct the job– This is the vital first step to make.  As mentioned in a recent post, jobs are made up of dozens of individual tasks, some of which will be suitable, some of which won’t be.  It’s only when you break down each job in this way however that you can make this kind of assessment.
2. Assess the relationship between job performance and strategic value – The next step is to then analyze each job to understand how important it is to the strategic outcomes of the business.  There are likely to be certain tasks that are hugely important, and certain tasks that are much less so.
3. What automation is possible?– From here, you can begin to explore the way technology can help improve processes, either fully automating them or augmenting the human being.  They break potential automation down into three categories: robotic process automation, cognitive automation and collaborative robotics, with each technology best suited to perform certain tasks.  They also highlight how tempting it is to jump to this point straight away, bypassing the first two steps that are so important.
4. Optimization of work – The final step then brings all of this together and implements automation based upon your findings about where technology can make a real benefit to the work your employees do.

Unfortunately, it’s a process that many organizations are not undertaking today, with many jumping ahead to the technology before they understand the work it could integrate into.

It’s perhaps not surprising therefore, that the latest Willis Towers Watson Global Future of Work survey identifies this as one of the main barriers to successful automation today.  It highlights the crucial role HR can play in deconstructing and reconstructing jobs, and defining reskilling pathways to take into account the way AI-driven technologies will change the roles we have today (note change, not destroy!).”

[134] Sabrin Chowdhury and Elizabeth Hioe, How effective goal-setting motivates employees, Mckinsey.com, December 27, 2017; Deborah Holstein, McKinsey Shares Their 3 Silver Bullets of Performance Management, Better Works.com, May 1, 2018; Raffael Carpi, John Douglas, and Frederic Gascon, Performance Management: Why keeping score is so important, and so hard, Mckinsey.com, October 2017; Kate Harrison, Employee Alignment: The Secret Sauce to Success, Forbes, October 2, 2014; Young Entrepreneur Council, 14 Smart Ways to Set and Track Department-Specific Goals, Forbes, February 27, 2018; Aaron Smith, Jeff Mainland, and Irene Blais, Managing Strategy to Enhance Care for Children, Healthcare Quarterly, Vol. 14, Issue 3, October 2011; Performance Management and KPIs: Linking Activities to Vision and Strategy, Mind Tools.com, 2018; Aligning and Cascading KPIs, staceybarr.com.

[135] Deborah Holstein, McKinsey Shares Their 3 Silver Bullets of Performance Management, Better Works.com, May 1, 2018; Raffael Carpi, John Douglas, and Frederic Gascon, Performance Management: Why keeping score is so important, and so hard, Mckinsey.com, October 2017; Bryan Hancock, Elizabeth Hioe, and Bill Schaninger, The fairness factor in performance management, McKinsey Quarterly, April 2018; Stacia Sherman Garr (lead author), Research Report: Continuous Performance Management, Deloitte.com, 2017; Performance Management and KPIs: Linking Activities to Vision and Strategy, Mind Tools.com, 2018.

[136] See, for example: Eric Sigurdson, Corporate Leadership and Culture: United Airlines & the ‘Re-accommodated’ Doctor – guiding principles for Boards, C-suite executives and General Counsel, Sigurdson Post, May 2, 2017; Peter Ginter, W. Jack Duncan, and Linda Swayne, Strategic Management of Health Care Organizations (8^th edition), John Wiley & Sons, 2018.

[137] Dave Berube, Management of Change vs. change management, Plant Services.com, November 7, 2012.

[138] Prachi Juneja, Strategy Implementation – Meaning and Steps in Implementing a Strategy, Management Study Guide.com; Chris Bradley, How biases, politics and egos trump good strategy: when creating a strategy for your organization there are many obstacles. It’s important to know what they are and how to get around them, McKinsey & Company (mckinsey.com), January 18, 2018. Also see, Scott Kirsner, The Biggest Obstacles to Innovation in Large Companies, Harvard Business Review, July 30, 2018; Ron Carucci, 3 Ways Senior Leaders Create a Toxic Culture, Harvard Business Review, May 1, 2018.

[139] NHS Improvement, Overview – Change Management – the Systems and Tools for Managing Change, England.nhs.uk, October 2011.

[140] Note: In particular, the important emergent approach of learning and responsiveness within a changing environment, addressing new realities that may emerge, and determining what actually works.

[141] Piotr Markiewicz, Change Management in the Strategy Implementation Process, Intellectual Economics, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2011.

[142] Definition: Change Management, CIO guide to project management basics, DevOps and Agile, serchcio.techtarget.com

[143] Bethany Davis, What is Strategic Change Management – Definition, Models, and Examples, Study.com

[144] John Jones, DeAnne Aguirre, and Matthew Calderone, 10 Principles of Change Management: Tools and Techniques to help companies transform quickly, Strategy & Business, April 15, 2004.

[145] Robert Schaffer, All Management is Change Management, Harvard Business Review, October 26, 2017.

[146] Robert Schaffer, All Management is Change Management, Harvard Business Review, October 26, 2017.

[147] Robert Schaffer, All Management is Change Management, Harvard Business Review, October 26, 2017.

[148] Prachi Juneja, Strategy Formulation vs Strategy Implementation, Management Study Guide.com; Peter Ginter, W. Jack Duncan, and Linda Swayne, Strategic Management of Health Care Organizations (8^th edition), John Wiley & Sons, 2018; Robert Kaplan and David Norton, The Execution Premium: Linking Strategy to Operations for Competitive Advantage, Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation, 2008.

[149] Amelia Dunlop, Vincent Firth, and Robert Lurie, Dynamic strategy implementation: Delivering on your strategic ambition, Deloitte University Press, 2013.

[150] Amelia Dunlop, Vincent Firth, and Robert Lurie, Dynamic strategy implementation: Delivering on your strategic ambition, Deloitte University Press, 2013; Peter Ginter, W. Jack Duncan, and Linda Swayne, Strategic Management of Health Care Organizations (8^th edition), John Wiley & Sons, 2018.

[151] Amelia Dunlop, Vincent Firth, and Robert Lurie, Dynamic strategy implementation: Delivering on your strategic ambition, Deloitte University Press, 2013.

[152] A. Raps, Implementing Strategy, Strategic Finance, June 2004; Mildred Golden Pryor, Donna Anderson, Leslie Toombs, and John Humphreys, Strategic Implementation as a Core Competency, Journal of Management Research, Vol. 7, No. 1, April 2007.

[153] Chris Scott, Is your Strategic Execution holding you back?, LinkedIn, August 5, 2018. Also see, Report: Why good strategies fail – Lessons for the C-suite, The Economist Intelligence Unit, 2013; Mike Roe, Bridging the gap between strategy and execution, CEO: The C-Suite (thecsuite.co.uk), October 25, 2017:

“In an intensely competitive business environment and with the increasing speed of technology-enabled change, the importance of strategy implementation has increased exponentially. Even the best-laid strategies are useless without proper implementation and according to a study published by the Project Management Institute 61% of companies struggle to bridge the gap between strategy and execution …”.

[154] A. Raps, Implementing Strategy, Strategic Finance, June 2004; Mildred Golden Pryor, Donna Anderson, Leslie Toombs, and John Humphreys, Strategic Implementation as a Core Competency, Journal of Management Research, Vol. 7, No. 1, April 2007.

[155] DeAnne Aguirre, Gary Neilson, Andrew Tipping, An overall approach to change management, Strategyand.pwc.com, May 1, 2004. Also see, Jamal Hamidu, People, Change & Business Transformations: how do we improve change outcomes through people?, LinkedIn, August 9, 2018; DeAnne Aguirre and Michah Alpern, 10 Principles of Leading Change Management, Strategy & Business, June 6, 2014.

[156] Joseph Pucciarelli, 4 things successful CIOs know about digital transformation, CIO.com, April 18, 2018; Why Digital Transformation is No Longer A Buzzword … But a Must, Workspace Digital, April 18, 2018; Jamal Hamidu, People, Change & Business Transformations: how do we improve change outcomes through people?, LinkedIn, August 9, 2018.

[157] IDC Reveals Worldwide Digital Transformation Predictions, idc.com, November 1, 2017.

[158] Jamal Hamidu, People, Change & Business Transformations: how do we improve change outcomes through people?, LinkedIn, August 9, 2018.

[159] Jamal Hamidu, People, Change & Business Transformations: how do we improve change outcomes through people?, LinkedIn, August 9, 2018; DeAnne Aguirre and Michah Alpern, 10 Principles of Leading Change Management, Strategy & Business, June 6, 2014; Alison Davis, The Worst Way to Launch Change? Hold a Big, Formal Meeting. Here’s What to Do Instead, Inc.com, August 13, 2018; Jan Poulsen, Change Management – It starts with WHO, LinkedIn, August 12, 2018.

[160] Steve Moss, When Change Comes from the Outside, LinkedIn, August 13, 2018:

“You may have a strategy, but in a 2013 Katzenbach Center study, it was shown that 64% of global senior executives saw culture as more critical to the success of change management than strategy or operating model.”

[161] The Twin Threats of Aging and Automation, March & McLennan Companies Global Risk Center, Mercer and Oliver Wyman, 2018; Bartleby, The robots coming for your job, The Economist, July 12, 2018; Paul Rawlinson, Will lawyers become extinct in the age of automation?, World Economic Forum (weforum.org), March 29, 2018; Prachi Juneja, Strategy Implementation – Meaning and Steps in Implementing a Strategy, Management Study Guide.com; Chris Bradley, How biases, politics and egos trump good strategy: when creating a strategy for your organization there are many obstacles. It’s important to know what they are and how to get around them, McKinsey & Company (mckinsey.com), January 18, 2018; Scott Kirsner, The Biggest Obstacles to Innovation in Large Companies, Harvard Business Review, July 30, 2018; Dan Cohen, The Heart of Change Field Guide: Tools and Tactics for Leading Change in Your Organization, Deloitte Development, 2005; John Kotter, Leading Change, Harvard Business Review Press, 1996 (new preface, 2012); John Kotter and Dan Cohen, The Heart of Change: Real-Life Stories of How People Change Their Organization, Deloitte Consulting, 2002; ; Charles Hill and Gareth Jones, Strategic Management Theory: An Integrated Approach (10th Edition), Houghton Mifflin Company, South-Western Cengage Learning Publisher, 2013; Fionnuala Courtney, 6 Steps to Effective Organizational Change Management, Pulse Learning.com, June 2016; Brent Gleeson, Tips for Managing Fear Through Organizational Change, Forbes, December 9, 2015; Robert Tanner, Five Strategies for Managing the Fear of Change, Management is a Journey.com, May 12, 2018; F. John Reh, Managing Change: Managing People’s Fear, The Balance Careers.com, October 13, 2017.

[162] DeAnne Aguirre and Michah Alpern, 10 Principles of Leading Change Management, Strategy & Business, June 6, 2014; David Wilkinson, How to prevent brain drain – lessons for every organisation, Oxford Review, June 29, 2018 (LinkedIn); Sabine Cosack, Matthew Guthridge, and Emily Lawson, Retaining key employees in times of change, Mckinsey Quarterly, August 2010; David Parnell, The Battle For Talent is Disrupting the Business of Law, Law.com, August 15, 2018.

[163] Piotr Markiewicz, Change Management in the Strategy Implementation Process, Intellectual Economics, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2011.

[164] Michael Antwi and Mruganka Kale, Change Management in Healthcare: Literature Review, The Monieson Centre for Business Research in Healthcare, Queen’s School of Business, January 2014. Also see, Henry Mintzberg, The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning: Reconceiving Roles for Planning, Plans, Planners, Free Press, 1994.

[165] See, for example: Henry Mintzberg, The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning: Reconceiving Roles for Planning, Plans, Planners, Free Press, 1994; Peter Ginter, W. Jack Duncan, and Linda Swayne, Strategic Management of Health Care Organizations (8^th edition), John Wiley & Sons, 2018; Henry Mintzberg, The Design School: Reconsidering the Basic Premises of Strategic Management, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 3, 1990; Charles Hill and Gareth Jones, Strategic Management Theory: An Integrated Approach (10th Edition), Houghton Mifflin Company, South-Western Cengage Learning Publisher, 2013; Prachi Juneja, Some Pitfalls to be Avoided in Strategic Management, Management Study Guide.com; Emergent Strategy, business dictionary.com.

[166] Michael Antwi and Mruganka Kale, Change Management in Healthcare: Literature Review, The Monieson Centre for Business Research in Healthcare, Queen’s School of Business, January 2014.

[167] See, for example: Peter Ginter, W. Jack Duncan, and Linda Swayne, Strategic Management of Health Care Organizations (8^th edition), John Wiley & Sons, 2018; Henry Mintzberg, The Design School: Reconsidering the Basic Premises of Strategic Management, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 3, 1990; Charles Hill and Gareth Jones, Strategic Management Theory: An Integrated Approach (10th Edition), Houghton Mifflin Company, South-Western Cengage Learning Publisher, 2013; Prachi Juneja, Some Pitfalls to be Avoided in Strategic Management, Management Study Guide.com; Emergent Strategy, business dictionary.com.

[168] Peter Ginter, W. Jack Duncan, and Linda Swayne, Strategic Management of Health Care Organizations (8^th edition), John Wiley & Sons, 2018; Henry Mintzberg, The Design School: Reconsidering the Basic Premises of Strategic Management, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 3, 1990.

[169] David Hurst, Crisis and Renewal: Meeting the Challenge of Organizational Change, Harvard Business School Press, 1995; Eric Dane and Michael Pratt, Exploring Intuition and Its Role in Managerial Decision Making, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 32, No. 1, 2007.

[170] Robert Kaplan and David Norton, Having Trouble with Your Strategy? Then Map It, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 78, No. 5, September-October 2000; David Hurst, Crisis and Renewal: Meeting the Challenge of Organizational Change, Harvard Business School Press, 1995; David Hurst, Crisis and Renewal: Meeting the Challenge of Organizational Change, Harvard Business School Press, 1995; Eric Dane and Michael Pratt, Exploring Intuition and Its Role in Managerial Decision Making, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 32, No. 1, 2007.

[171] Peter Ginter, W. Jack Duncan, and Linda Swayne, Strategic Management of Health Care Organizations (8^th edition), John Wiley & Sons, 2018.

[172] Mastering Strategic Management, 1.3 Intended, Emergent, and Realized Strategies, University of Minnesota Libraries (open.lib.unm.edu). Also see, Henry Mintzberg and James Waters, Of Strategies, Deliberate and Emergent, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 6, No. 3, July-September 1985.

[173] Robert Schaffer, All Management is Change Management, Harvard Business Review, October 26, 2017.

[174] Hatem Shehab, When Change Management Needs Change Management, LinkedIn, July 31, 2018; Soren Kaplan, The Change Management Field Needs to Change, Before It’s Disrupted, Inc., May 3, 2018.

[175] Mildred Golden Pryor, Donna Anderson, Leslie Toombs, and John Humphreys, Strategic Implementation as a Core Competency, Journal of Management Research, Vol. 7, No. 1, April 2007. Also see, Caludio Feser and Nicolai Nielsen, Unlocking leadership potential in turbulent times, McKinsey & Company (mckinsey.com), April 23, 2018; Claudio Feser, Nicolai Nielsen, and Michael Rennie, What’s missing in leadership development?, McKinsey Quarterly, August 2017; Derek Dean, A CEO’s guide to reenergizing the senior team, McKinsey Quarterly, September 2009; Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic, Michael Wade, and Jennifer Jordan, As AI Makes More Decisions, the Nature of Leadership will Change, Harvard Business Review, January 22, 2018; J.R. Flatter, Courageous Leadership: Leadership Development Return on Investment, LinkedIn, August 15, 2018.

[176] Jocelyn Higashide, Summary of Change Management: The People Side of Change, codot.gov, January 4, 2014; Jeffrey Hiatt and Timothy Creasey, Change Management: The People Side of Change, Prosci, 2003, 2012.

[177] D. Phelan, Change Management Best Practices Guide, National Health Service, Queensland Government, 2010.  Also see, Andrew Hill, The Management Revolution, Financial Times, June 12, 2013.

[178] Hatem Shehab, When Change Management Needs Change Management, LinkedIn, July 31, 2018; Soren Kaplan, The Change Management Field Needs to Change, Before It’s Disrupted, Inc., May 3, 2018; Daniela Blomqvist, An examination of change management models for successful execution of a change initiative, Master’s Thesis, International Business Management, Arcada University (Helsinki, Finland), 2017 (commissioned by PricewaterhouseCoopers). For example, see, Kotter’s 8 Step Process.com; Kotter’s 8 Step Change Model, mindtools.com; Alec Marsh, 8 steps for successful change management, Raconteur, April 9, 2015; Ben Mulholland, 8 Critical Change Management Models to Evolve and Survive, Process.st, July 24, 2017:

“…  8 main change management models, being: Lewin’s change management model; The McKinsey 7-S model; Kotter’s theory; Nudge theory; ADKAR; Bridges’ transition model; Kübler-Ross’ change curve; The Satir change management model.”

Lewin’s Change Management Model: Understanding the Three Stages of Change, MindTools.com; The McKinsey 7-S Framework, MindTools.com; Thomas Peters and Robert Waterman Jr., In Search of Excellence: Lessons from America’s Best Run Companies, Harper, 2006; Kotter’s 8 Step Process, Kotterinc.com; John Kotter, Leading Change, Harvard Business Review Press, 1996 (new preface, 2012); John Kotter, Accelerate, Harvard Business Review Press, 2014; John Kotter, Accelerate!, Harvard Business Review, November 2012; Richard Thaler and Cass Sustein, Nudge, Penguin Books, 2008 (note: this book brought nudge theory into prominence); ADKAR Change Management Model Overview, Prosci.com; Jeffery Hiatt, ADKAR: A Model For Change in Business, Government and our Community, Prosci Inc, 2006; Bridges’ Transition Model, MindTools.com; Anastasia, Understanding the Kubler-Ross Change Curve, Cleverism.com, June 24, 2015; Steven Smith, The Satir Change Model, Steven Smith.com, 2015.

[179] The Seven Concepts of Change, Prosci.com; Soren Kaplan, The Change Management Field Needs to Change, Before It’s Disrupted, Inc., May 3, 2018; Hatem Shehab, When Change Management Needs Change Management, LinkedIn, July 31, 2018.

[180] The Seven Concepts of Change, Prosci.com; Soren Kaplan, The Change Management Field Needs to Change, Before It’s Disrupted, Inc., May 3, 2018; Hatem Shehab, When Change Management Needs Change Management, LinkedIn, July 31, 2018.

[181] Kathy Cowan Sahadath, Integrating Organizational Change: Scholarship and Work Practice, IRC: Queens University (irc.queens.ca), March 2013. For example, see, Patrick Nolan, A Simple and Effective Organizational Change Management Methodology, LinkedIn, August 9, 2018.

[182] Lewin’s Three Phase Change Model: Kurt Lewin, Field Theory in Social Science, Dorwin Cartwright New York, Harper, 1951; Group Decisions and Social Change, Readings in Social Psychology, New York, Holt Rinehart & Winston, 1958; Lewin’s Change Management Model: Understanding the Three Stages of Change, MindTools.com; Ben Mulholland, 8 Critical Change Management Models to Evolve and Survive, Process.st, July 24, 2017:

The good: Lewin’s change management model is fantastic for when your business needs to drastically change in order to succeed. It also excels at uncovering hidden mistakes which were taken for granted, since you have to analyze every aspect of whatever you’re changing.

If you’re carrying out any business process reengineering … or know that you need to shake up some ingrained mistruths, use Lewin’s model.

The bad: Due to the scale of the unfreezing process, Lewin’s model can be difficult and time-consuming to enact. This isn’t necessarily a problem (since the changes highlighted are often massive and require a large time investment anyway), but it does mean that using the model for anything less than an in-depth analysis and overhaul isn’t worthwhile.

Lewin’s model also requires a great deal of care to be taken beyond the base instructions to support your team and consider their emotions through the turmoil.

Massive changes (which this model is suited to) run the risk of alienating employees, since their workflow will be drastically different than before. As such, you need to be especially careful when bringing them on board and keeping up their enthusiasm in the refreezing stage.

The verdict: If you know that your business requires in-depth analysis and improvements, Lewin’s model is a great way to start.

By digging up the roots of your methods and completely revamping processes and practices where needed, you can pivot your company at a critical time in its lifespan. Unfreezing and analyzing your model with this method can show you what you need to improve and highlight how to let your team adapt.

Just don’t try to “unfreeze” and change for every minor problem you find – it takes a lot of time and effort to do so, and if you’re not careful the disruption can alienate your employees.”

[183] Kotter’s 8 Step Change Model: John Kotter, Leading Change: Why Transformation Efforts Fail, Harvard Business Review, 1998; Kotter’s 8 Step Change Model, mindtools.com; Alec Marsh, 8 steps for successful change management, Raconteur, April 9, 2015; Kotter’s 8 Step Process, Kotterinc.com; John Kotter, Leading Change, Harvard Business Review Press, 1996 (new preface, 2012); John Kotter, Accelerate, Harvard Business Review Press, 2014; John Kotter, Accelerate!, Harvard Business Review, November 2012; Ben Mulholland, 8 Critical Change Management Models to Evolve and Survive, Process.st, July 24, 2017:

The good: The first few stages of Kotter’s theory are fantastic – they force you to set the foundation for success by creating a sense of urgency and convincing everyone why change is necessary. This gives your team the drive they need to enact the change, with enough people working on deploying it that it should quickly become standard practice.

The bad: While it focuses largely on widespread adoption of your changes, Kotter’s model is a top-down approach at heart. Without a little extra effort on your part it doesn’t take any feedback on board, and therefore runs the risk of alienating employees by just telling them what to do.

This is likely because the majority of Kotter’s experience came from working with large top-down companies, but still, it can be an issue for companies rely on a more collaborative setup. For anything other than a large corporation, having some kind of back-and-forth is vital for giving context on changes from varying points of view and skill sets, and for having employees adapt to the change at all.

Put it this way – if you’re small enough to know the name of almost everyone working for you, you need to go one step beyond Kotter and listen to your team. That way they will be more likely to adopt your changes, as they will at least have some say and direct connection to the changes.

The verdict: Kotter’s theory is great as a checklist, but lacks the necessary back-and-forth (and, to a degree, actionable instructions) to be taken as a step-by-step process. Smaller companies depend much more on cementing every employee as a champion of each change, meaning that you need to pay more attention to their feedback.

So, as with Lewin’s and the McKinsey change management models, Kotter should be supplemented with other approaches (or at least elements of them to make up for its shortcomings).”

[184] McKinsey’s 7-S Model: Thomas Peters and Robert Waterman Jr., In Search of Excellence: Lessons from America’s Best Run Companies, Harper, 2006; Developed by Tom Peters, Robert Waterman, Richard Pascale and Anthony Athos for McKinsey & Co. http://www.12manage.com/methods_7S.html; The McKinsey 7-S Framework, MindTools.com; Ben Mulholland, 8 Critical Change Management Models to Evolve and Survive, Process.st, July 24, 2017:

The good: The 7-S model shows the weaknesses in your company and highlights the areas that most require attention when deploying changes. Beyond that, it helps to make sure that every aspect of your company supports the others, giving you a formidable business plan which is both incredibly strong and yet flexible to further change.

The bad: Unless you run a small operation with very few employees, the McKinsey model is impossible to effectively carry out alone or in a short amount of time. You won’t have the required knowledge to assess every element of your company, and so extra time and resources must be dedicated to build the overview and assess viable changes.

The verdict: The McKinsey 7-S model is best suited for those who want to know how they can change for the better. By creating an overview of how coherent and effective the various elements of your company are, you can then go on to analyze your current situation and draft changes to tackle the problem.

In other words, this model is great if you don’t know where to start, but if you are just looking to assess the viability of a specific change, it might be best to use a model which has a smaller scope.”

[185] ADKAR Model: ADKAR Change Management Model Overview, Prosci.com; Jeffery Hiatt, ADKAR: A Model For Change in Business, Government and our Community, Prosci Inc, 2006; Note: Management research company Prosci first published the ADKAR model in 1998 after researching more than 300 companies undergoing major change. This model describes five required building blocks for change to be realized successfully. Also see: Ben Mulholland, 8 Critical Change Management Models to Evolve and Survive, Process.st, July 24, 2017:

The good: ADKAR is a bottom-up approach which focuses greatly on employees, in turn speeding up the rate at which changes can be reliably deployed. By giving you set goals to meet without a specific method, ADKAR provides a flexible framework which you can go on to apply to almost any situation.

This flexibility also makes ADKAR great for deploying incremental changes, since small frequent changes are less disruptive, and can be planned out to achieve a larger shift over several ADKAR cycles.

The added focus on the people and their needs rather than just the technical aspects also results in a higher success rate for changes you make.

The bad: While it’s suited to incremental change, ADKAR is left lacking what it comes to large-scale alterations. This is largely down to the style of ADKAR being bottom-up, since any macro management is either ignored or taken for granted.

In other words, ADKAR requires you to know what you’re going to change and have the drive to push for it.

The verdict: ADKAR is a great model for cutting through any complicated setups and getting straight to the point with how to improve your employees’ reaction to change. As long as you already know what you want to change and why it’s important to do so, you can deploy it using this model with a fair amount of confidence.

Remember, however, that this is severely lacking in terms of a high-level plan. If you don’t already have a set change in mind then it’s best to analyze your company with something like the McKinsey model first.”

[186] Rosabeth Moss Kanter, The Change Masters, New York Simon & Schuster, 1983.

[187] Kubler-Ross Model: Elizabeth Kubler-Ross, On Death and Dying, Routledge, 1973; Anastasia, Understanding the Kubler-Ross Change Curve, Cleverism.com, June 24, 2015; Note: The stages of Kubler-Ross’s model describe the personal and emotional states that a person typically encounters when dealing with loss. Derivatives of her model applied in the workplace show that similar emotional states are encountered as individuals are confronted with change; Ben Mulholland, 8 Critical Change Management Models to Evolve and Survive, Process.st, July 24, 2017:

“The good: The Kübler-Ross model excels at anticipating and managing the emotional reaction of your employees, and thus their productivity. The emotional take on the change process can also let you see in advance where the biggest problems will arise and who will put up the most resistance.

In turn, knowing how employees react to similar situations will let you limit the damage they do if they take their frustration out on their team or a part of your business.

The bad: The unpredictable nature of emotions means that not everyone will fit this model, and your team may jump between completely different steps at any given time, making it hard to manage your approach for each individual. Some employees may not even fit the model at all and react completely differently to your changes – such is the human mind.

The biggest drawback, however, is that Kübler-Ross doesn’t provide a method for guiding employees through each stage, meaning the steps you take are down to your own knowledge and experience.

However, even if you tried to create a universal actionable checklist for this model, the best approach for each employee will vary drastically, making your attempts next to impossible to succeed.

The verdict: In short, Kübler-Ross’ change management model is great for using in small meetings when you’re trying to connect with employees on an individual level and manage their complaints to any changes. However, much of this is vague and deals with concepts that highly depend on the employee themselves, so a little flexibility in your methods is a must.

Plus, there’s nothing here about how to figure out what you need to change or how to go about changing it on an organizational level. As such, a solid framework needs to be paired with this model to effectively manage your changes.”

[188] Bridges’ Model: Bridges’ Transition Model, MindTools.com; Ben Mulholland, 8 Critical Change Management Models to Evolve and Survive, Process.st, July 24, 2017:

“The good: The Bridges’ transition model closes the gap between management and rank-and-file employees. It takes a very personal approach to helping everyone adapt to changes by considering their emotions and reactions, which is rare (at least to this degree) in most management models.

The consideration for your team as people will also inherently encourage loyalty and better performance, making them feel a stronger bond with their work.

The bad: As with several other models here, Bridges’ contains no real actionable steps, and no set timeline or conditions for moving from one stage to another. It’s once again more of a transition checklist or guideline to help manage your employees than a step-by-step guide on implementing change.

The verdict: As the name suggests, Bridges’ transition model is fantastic for guiding your team through a period of slow improvement (transition). Unfortunately, this leaves it lacking the heavy management aspect that a large-scale change (or company) requires.

In other words, this model is fantastic to apply to your core employees (be they managers or your entire team if you’re a small company) in order to ensure your changes’ success with the core players in promoting it. Beyond that, Bridges’ model can be useful for predicting the general effect of changes in your workforce’s mood (and therefore productivity).”

[189] Satir Model: Steven Smith, The Satir Change Model, Steven Smith.com, 2015; Ben Mulholland, 8 Critical Change Management Models to Evolve and Survive, Process.st, July 24, 2017:

“The good: Like Kübler-Ross, the Satir change model can be good for anticipating the impact of a change before it happens, and even for justifying the change to employees as they go through the chaos phase. If they can be shown that the turmoil is only natural, they’ll be more willing to stick out the changes.

Unlike most other change management models, the Satir model also provides an easy way to analyze the impact of your changes at a glance (by producing a graph based on your ongoing performance). Not only that, but it makes it easy to compare the effects of various changes you have made and provide a measure of your business’ progression.

The bad: If you’re trying to predict a change’s outcome with the Satir model it’s easy to take for granted that a change will increase performance rather than measuring and checking it. There’s also very little to tell you exactly how to identify when the last three stages begin and end, and few actionable tips for guiding employees through the process.

Finally, the Satir model is only suited for measuring and predicting the affect of a change, and not for analyzing what changes need to be made (or how to make them).

The verdict: Like with most of the other change management methods mentioned above, Satir’s model is only truly effective when supported by an actionable, measurable framework. It’s fantastic for measuring your employees’ individual reactions to a change and to reassure them during the chaos phase, but it’s all too easy to become complacent and fail to measure and adapt to the hard stats of what the changes are doing.”

[190] Kathy Cowan Sahadath, Integrating Organizational Change: Scholarship and Work Practice, IRC: Queens University (irc.queens.ca), March 2013.

[191] Jane Andrews, Helen Cameron, Margaret Harris, All change? Managers’ experience of organizational change in theory and practice, Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 21, Issue 3, 2008; Michael Antwi and Mruganka Kale, Change Management in Healthcare: Literature Review, The Monieson Centre for Business Research in Healthcare, Queen’s School of Business, January 2014; Soren Kaplan, The Change Management Field Needs to Change, Before It’s Disrupted, Inc., May 3, 2018; Hatem Shehab, When Change Management Needs Change Management, LinkedIn, July 31, 2018; Daniela Blomqvist, An examination of change management models for successful execution of a change initiative, Master’s Thesis, International Business Management, Arcada University (Helsinki, Finland), 2017 (commissioned by PricewaterhouseCoopers).

[192] For example, see, DeAnne Aguirre and Michah Alpern, 10 Principles of Leading Change Management, Strategy & Business, June 6, 2014; David Wilkinson, 6 research based guidelines for achieving and sustaining organizational change, Oxford Review, December 10, 2016 (referencing Cameron David Willis, Jessie Saul, Helen Bevan, Mary Ann Scheirer, Allan Best, Trisha Greenhalgh, Russell Mannion, Evelyn Cornelissen, David Howland, Emily Jenkins, Jennifer Bitz, Sustaining organizational culture change in health systems, Journal of Health Organization and Management, Vol. 30 Issue: 1, 2016); Merlijn Venus, Daan Stam, and Daan van Knippenberg, Research: To Get People to Embrace Change, Emphasize What Will Stay the Same, Harvard Business Review, August 15, 2018.

[193] D. Phelan, Best Practice Change Management Guidelines, National Health Service, Queensland Government, 2010; Michael Antwi and Mruganka Kale, Change Management in Healthcare: Literature Review, The Monieson Centre for Business Research in Healthcare, Queen’s School of Business, January 2014; Kathy Cowan Sahadath, Integrating Organizational Change: Scholarship and Work Practice, IRC: Queens University (irc.queens.ca), March 2013; Ben Mulholland, 8 Critical Change Management Models to Evolve and Survive, Process.st, July 24, 2017; Mildred Golden Pryor, Donna Anderson, Leslie Toombs, and John Humphreys, Strategic Implementation as a Core Competency, Journal of Management Research, Vol. 7, No. 1, April 2007; Daniela Blomqvist, An examination of change management models for successful execution of a change initiative, Master’s Thesis, International Business Management, Arcada University (Helsinki, Finland), 2017 (commissioned by PricewaterhouseCoopers); Carlo D’Ortenzio, Understanding Change and Change Management Processes: A Case Study, Thesis submitted for degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the University of Canberra (Australia), August 9, 2012.

[194] Kathy Cowan Sahadath, Integrating Organizational Change: Scholarship and Work Practice, IRC: Queens University (irc.queens.ca), March 2013.

[195] Kathy Cowan Sahadath, Integrating Organizational Change: Scholarship and Work Practice, IRC: Queens University (irc.queens.ca), March 2013; Linda Ackerman Anderson and Dean Anderson, Awake at the Wheel: Moving Beyond Change Management to Conscious Change Leadership (The Change Leader’s Roadmap Methodology), being first.com, 2009;

[196] Kathy Cowan Sahadath, Integrating Organizational Change: Scholarship and Work Practice, IRC: Queens University (irc.queens.ca), March 2013. Also see, Dean Anderson and Linda Ackerman Anderson, Beyond Change Management: How to Achieve Breakthrough Results Through Conscious Change Leadership (second edition), Pfeiffer (an Imprint of Wiley), 2010; Linda Ackerman Anderson and Dean Anderson, The Change Leader’s Roadmap: How to Navigate Your Organization’s Transformation (second edition), Pfeiffer (an Imprint of Wiley), 2010; Linda Ackerman Anderson and Dean Anderson, Awake at the Wheel: Moving Beyond Change Management to Conscious Change Leadership (The Change Leader’s Roadmap Methodology), being first.com, 2009.

[197] Liviu Tudor, Change Management – Challenge and Opportunity For Sustainable Development of Romanian Companies, Proceedings of the 8^th International Management Conference: Management Challenges for Sustainable Development, November 6-7, 2014 (Bucharest, Romania). Also see, Dean Anderson and Linda Ackerman Anderson, Beyond Change Management: How to Achieve Breakthrough Results Through Conscious Change Leadership (second edition), Pfeiffer (an Imprint of Wiley), 2010; Linda Ackerman Anderson and Dean Anderson, The Change Leader’s Roadmap: How to Navigate Your Organization’s Transformation (second edition), Pfeiffer (an Imprint of Wiley), 2010; Carlo D’Ortenzio, Understanding Change and Change Management Processes: A Case Study, Thesis submitted for degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the University of Canberra (Australia), August 9, 2012; Prachi Juneja, Anderson & Anderson’s Change Model, Management Study Guide.com; Linda Ackerman Anderson and Dean Anderson, How to Implement a Common Change Methodology to Increase Your Organization’s Change Results and Skill, Being First.com, 2015.

[198] Phase 1: Prepare to Lead the Change – change initiatives are resultant of a ‘wake-up call’ that an employee in the organisation hears. There is consensus in the organisation that there is a need for change. It now becomes imperative to establish this shared intention, devise a strategy and/or strategies for successful change to occur and also to prepare employees for the change process by:

• Clarifying roles; explaining the status of the change effort; and choosing the most suited employees in relation to expertise and experience;
• Determining the reasons for change; stating the desired outcomes; and explicitly arguing a clear case for the change to be implemented. These actions will assist to motivate employees to embrace the change efforts;
• Assessing the organisation’s readiness and capacity to capacity to implement the change;
• Strengthening change initiators’ capacity to understand, commit to and model behaviour and approaches that are required to lead the change successfully;
• Designing optimal approaches, processes, conditions and structures for the successful achievement of change; and
• Clarifying the overall change strategy for achieving results and ways in which to engage all employees to accept the organisation’s values and guiding principles (Anderson and Anderson, 2001, p. 25).

[199] Phase 2: Create Organisational Vision, Commitment and Capability – is primarily concerned with building organisation-wide understanding, commitment, momentum, and capacity to succeed in the transformation (Anderson and Anderson, 2001, p. 129). This would be done by:

• Motivating all employees to embrace the change by building a strong case for the change and explaining to employees the ‘vision for the future’;
• Using communication techniques that deepen the understanding of the need for change;
• Organising traditional rites of passage that break away from the ‘old way’ of doing things; and providing training and related activities that will affect employee mindsets in a positive manner;
• Openly seeking employee inputs on key change issues that influence change initiators’ thinking; and
• Allocating responsibility for high-leverage action for key players throughout all levels of the organisation (Anderson and Anderson, 2001, p. 130).

[200] Phase 3: Assess the Situation to Determine Design Requirements – as Anderson and Anderson (2001, p. 147) explained, ‘surfaces information that defines what success means and what the organisation already has in place that supports this success’. The successful achievement of this phase is dependent upon:

• The creation of clear expectations required to achieve the change successfully;
• The creation of various design scenarios that might affect the change;
• The evaluation of design options that might impact the change;
• Assistance in corrections needed to keep the change on track during its implementation;
• Assistance in identifying those areas in the organisation that are need to be stopped or dismantled so as not to effect the change; and
• What is needed to create afresh in order to make the change a reality? (Anderson and Anderson, 2001, p. 148).

[201] Phase 4: Design the Desired State – the role of change initiators is to design the specific organisational and cultural solutions that will enable successful achievement of the ‘vision’ that change will encompass (Anderson and Anderson, 2001, p. 159). To achieve this ‘vision’, change initiators must:

• create the processes and structures that will facilitate achieving desired state;
• decide on how the four levels of design (vision, strategic, managerial and operational) will be managed; this includes giving nominated employees the power to approve each level of design per desired state scenario;
• decide on whether to use a pilot test or not; and
• decide on what communication modes to be used throughout the whole organization (Anderson and Anderson, 2001, p. 168).

[202] Phase 5: Analyse the Impact – focusses on an analysis of the magnitude of impact the future state design will have on the existing organisation; and ensuring that the desired state will function effectively as an integrated state (Anderson and Anderson, 2001, p. 171). Assessing the ‘magnitude of impact’ can be achieved by use of the ’Gap Analysis’ tool. This tool will highlight issues to be addressed to best plan a realistic implementation process. The technique of ‘projection’ could be used to examine how the variables built into the desired design state might interact over time (Anderson and Anderson, 2001, p. 172). In this phase, it is also important that change initiators focus on the following areas:

• The formal organisation (structures, management systems, business processes, skills, numbers of people, technology, and work practices);
• The human and cultural aspects of the organisation (mindsets, behaviour, relationships and other elements of culture); and
• The interconnections between the formal organisation and human and cultural aspects of the organisation (Anderson and Anderson, 2001, p. 178).

[203] Phase 6: Plan and Organise for Implementation – is concerned primarily with identifying the actions required to implement the desired state and developing the master plan. This particular action requires change initiators to create processes identifying the required actions; developing an implementation master plan; create plans resolve the individual impacts of the desired state; integrating the individual impact plans to identify actions for the detailed implementation master plan; designing strategies to sustain the energy for change throughout implementation and integrate them to the plan; and determining the pacing strategy and timeline and apply them to the implementation master plan (Anderson and Anderson, 2001, pp. 180-188). Change initiators must also be in a position to support the implementation of the plan. This can be achieved through refining and establishing the conditions, structure, systems and policies and resources supporting the implementation; initiating strategies for supporting employees to embrace the desired state and managing their reactions to the change; and communicating the implementation master plan to the organisation and all relevant stakeholders (Anderson and Anderson, 2001, pp. 191-196).

[204] Phase 7: Implement the Change Plan – as described previously, Phases 1 to 6 were primarily concerned with preparing the ground for implementation. These steps also involve the processes of checking and rechecking activities to ensure that nothing has been left to chance with regard to achieving successful change in the organisation. This phase is concerned with carrying out the implementation master plan to achieve the desired state and to implement any changes required in accordance to the needs of the organisation in its current state (Anderson and Anderson, 2001, p. 201). For this phase to be successful, change initiators must ensure that the following criteria are met:

• Rolling out of the implementation master plan with particular attention being paid to dealing with resistance; responding to employees’ reactions; and supporting employees’ internal changes (Anderson and Anderson, 2001, p. 202).
• Monitoring and correcting the implementation process by focusing on communication delivery, impact and rumour management; employees’ reactions; mindset and behaviour successes and failures; the need for training and coaching; and opportunities to celebrate success (Anderson and Anderson, 2001, p. 204).
• Monitoring and course correct the desired state by paying attention to fulfilment of design requirements; measurement of desired state; effectiveness of each aspect of the organization (structure, systems, policies, technology, facilities, culture, skills, and so on); and how well the ‘new’ organisation works as an integrated system (Anderson and Anderson, 2001, p. 206).

[Note: Dean Anderson and Linda Ackerman Anderson, Beyond Change Management: How to Achieve Breakthrough Results Through Conscious Change Leadership (second edition), Pfeiffer (an Imprint of Wiley), 2010; Linda Ackerman Anderson and Dean Anderson, The Change Leader’s Roadmap: How to Navigate Your Organization’s Transformation (second edition), Pfeiffer (an Imprint of Wiley), 2010; Linda Ackerman Anderson and Dean Anderson, Awake at the Wheel: Moving Beyond Change Management to Conscious Change Leadership (The Change Leader’s Roadmap Methodology), being first.com, 2009 – “The process and outcome are emergent … dynamics in the organization, marketplace and people are constantly in flux … ‘plan as best we can, then deal with whatever shows up’. … Learning and course correction is both a mindset and an operating practice’.“]

[205] Kathy Cowan Sahadath, Integrating Organizational Change: Scholarship and Work Practice, IRC: Queens University (irc.queens.ca), March 2013. Also see, Dean Anderson and Linda Ackerman Anderson, Beyond Change Management: How to Achieve Breakthrough Results Through Conscious Change Leadership (second edition), Pfeiffer (an Imprint of Wiley), 2010; Linda Ackerman Anderson and Dean Anderson, The Change Leader’s Roadmap: How to Navigate Your Organization’s Transformation (second edition), Pfeiffer (an Imprint of Wiley), 2010; Linda Ackerman Anderson and Dean Anderson, Awake at the Wheel: Moving Beyond Change Management to Conscious Change Leadership (The Change Leader’s Roadmap Methodology), being first.com, 2009.

[206] Phase 8: Celebrate and Integrate the New State – according to Anderson and Anderson (2001, p. 211), phase 8 is concerned with ‘celebrations’. The organisation must celebrate the milestone of achieving the desired state. These acts of celebration would serve to integrate employees; and support employees towards mastering the new mindsets, behaviours, skills and practices that make the new state successful. This phase serves to help employees to master their new way of working and relating in a way that energises them through celebration. Celebrations within the organisation can take the following forms: public addresses by executive management; special edition newsletters; a party or dinner; rewards such as bonuses, personalised appreciation letters, and so on; and media coverage (Anderson and Anderson, 2001, p. 212). The support of integration and mastery of the new state by supporting employees and could be achieved in the following ways, namely, in-house training and follow-up application meetings; coaching and mentoring; identifying and rewarding best practices; job, project and skills seminars/workshops; further benchmarking of similar organisations; and process improvement (Anderson and Anderson, 2001, p. 216). In addition, the supporting of integration and mastery of the new state to optimise its performance can take the following forms, namely, change initiators setting the expectation for strengthening any aspect of the new state so that it better supports the effectiveness of the whole; designing implementing a process that all key players understand as to how the organisation operates in the new state; and sensitising each part of the organisation to gain appreciation of how the whole system works and how it contributes towards the greater good of the organisation (Anderson and Anderson, 2001, p. 217).

[207] Phase 9: Learn and Course Correct – this final phase is also important in that it requires the organisation to have the following in place:

• mechanisms for continuous improvement of the new state;
• evaluation and learning strategies of how the change strategy and process were designed and implemented;
• the initiation of actions designed to improve the organisation’s readiness and ability to facilitate future changes successfully; and
• the closing down of the change process by dismantling temporary infrastructure and conditions that do not serve the needs of the ‘new’ organisation (Anderson and Anderson, 2001, p. 223).

In addition to the above, the organization has to design a system to refine and continuously improve the new state by stretching goals to seek opportunities for course correction; have in place a wake-up call recognition system; has an on-line information generation network; and engages in periodic visioning processes (Anderson and Anderson, 2001, p. 224).

[Note: Dean Anderson and Linda Ackerman Anderson, Beyond Change Management: How to Achieve Breakthrough Results Through Conscious Change Leadership (second edition), Pfeiffer (an Imprint of Wiley), 2010; Linda Ackerman Anderson and Dean Anderson, The Change Leader’s Roadmap: How to Navigate Your Organization’s Transformation (second edition), Pfeiffer (an Imprint of Wiley), 2010; Linda Ackerman Anderson and Dean Anderson, Awake at the Wheel: Moving Beyond Change Management to Conscious Change Leadership (The Change Leader’s Roadmap Methodology), being first.com, 2009 – “The process and outcome are emergent … dynamics in the organization, marketplace and people are constantly in flux … ‘plan as best we can, then deal with whatever shows up’. … Learning and course correction is both a mindset and an operating practice’.“]

[208] Peter Ginter, W. Jack Duncan, and Linda Swayne, Strategic Management of Health Care Organizations (8^th edition), John Wiley & Sons, 2018 (see, chapter 10: Communicating Strategy and Developing Action Plans).

[209] Note: this section on strategy evaluation is reprinted in whole or part from my article on Strategic Management – see, Eric Sigurdson, Strategic Management and Leadership – From the Legal Industry to Financial Services to Healthcare: “what got you here won’t get you there”, Sigurdson Post, July 30, 2018.

[210] Robert Kaplan and David Norton, The Execution Premium: Linking Strategy to Operations for Competitive Advantage, Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation, 2008; Ovidijus, Jurevicius, Strategic Management & Strategic Planning Process, Strategic Management Insight.com, February 13, 2013. Also see, Charles Hill and Gareth Jones, Strategic Management Theory: An Integrated Approach (10th Edition), Houghton Mifflin Company, South-Western Cengage Learning Publisher, 2013; Henry Mintzberg, Joseph Lampel, and Bruce Ahlstrand, Strategy Safari: A Guided Tour Through the Wilds of Strategic Management (2^nd Edition), FT Press, 2009; Gerald Cole and Phil Kelly, Management Theory and Practice (8^th edition), Cengage, 2015; José Emilio, Navas López, and Luis Ángel Guerras-Martín, Fundamentals of Strategic Management, Thomson Reuters Civitas, 2013 (translation Ian Macnair); Gregory Dess, G.T. Lumpkin, Gerry McNamara, and Alan Eisner, Strategic Management: Text and Cases (7^th edition), McGraw-Hill Irwin Education, 2013; John Gamble, Margaret Peteraf, and Arthur Thompson Jr, Essentials of Strategic Management: The Quest for Competitive Advantage (4^th edition), McGraw-Hill Education, 2015; Jay Barney and William Hesterly, Strategic Management and Competitive Advantage: Concepts and Cases (6^th edition), Pearson Education, 2018; Peter Ginter, W. Jack Duncan, and Linda Swayne, Strategic Management of Health Care Organizations (8^th edition), John Wiley & Sons, 2018; Fred David and Forest David, Strategic Management: A Competitive Advantage Approach, Concepts and Cases (16^th edition), Pearson Education Limited, 2017; Robert Grant, Contemporary Strategy Analysis: Text and Cases (9^th edition), John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2016; Henry Mintzberg, Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning, Free Press, 2013; M. Hitt, E. Freeman, and J. Harrison (Editors), The Blackwell Handbook of Strategic Management, Blackwell Publishing, 2006.

[211] Prachi Juneja, Strategy Management Process – Meaning, Steps and Components, Management Study Guide.com; Robert Kaplan and David Norton, The Execution Premium: Linking Strategy to Operations for Competitive Advantage, Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation, 2008.

[212] Robert Kaplan and David Norton, The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action, Harvard Business School Press, 1996; Robert Kaplan and David Norton, The Balanced Scorecard – Measures that Drive Performance, Harvard Business Review, January-February 1992; Robert Kaplan and David Norton, The Execution Premium: Linking Strategy to Operations for Competitive Advantage, Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation, 2008; Joseph Lucco, A Full & Exhaustive Balanced Scorecard Example, Clear Point Strategy.com, September 12, 2017 (see examples for: airline, bank, manufacturing, software, city or municipal government, healthcare, non-profit social service organization); 5 of the Best Strategy Frameworks for your Organization, Cascade: Execute Strategy.net, April 17, 2017 (#4 The Balanced Scorecard); Bernard Marr, What the Heck is a … Balanced Scorecard?, LinkedIn.com, July 25, 2013; Bernard Marr, What is a Balanced Scorecard? A Quick Overview, Bernard Marr & Co.com.; Balanced Scorecard Basics, Balanced Scorecard.org; Balanced Scorecard, Investopedia.com; What is a Balanced Scorecard?, Balanced Score Cards.com. Also see, Aaron Smith, Jeff Mainland, and Irene Blais, Managing Strategy to Enhance Care for Children, Healthcare Quarterly, Vol. 14, Issue 3, October 2011.

[213] Devra Garenstein, Key Concepts for Strategic Management and Organizational Goals, Chron.com, June 29, 2018.

[214] Bernard Marr, What the Heck is a … Balanced Scorecard?, LinkedIn.com, July 25, 2013; Bernard Marr, What is a Balanced Scorecard? A Quick Overview, Bernard Marr & Co.com. Also see, Robert Kaplan and David Norton, The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action, Harvard Business School Press, 1996; Robert Kaplan and David Norton, The Balanced Scorecard – Measures that Drive Performance, Harvard Business Review, January-February 1992; Balanced Scorecard, Investopedia.com; What is a Balanced Scorecard?, Balanced Score Cards.com:

“Overview

The Balanced Scorecard is a management system. It’s a way of looking at your organization that focuses on your big-picture strategic goals. It also helps you choose the right things to measure so that you can reach those goals. …

A balanced scorecard looks at your organization from four different perspectives to measure its health. Each of these perspectives focuses on a different side of your company, creating a balanced view of your organization.

Learning and Growth

The learning and growth perspective looks at your overall corporate culture. Are people aware of the latest industry trends? Is it easy for employees to collaborate and share knowledge, or is your company a mess of tangled bureaucracy? Does everyone have access to training and continuing education opportunities?

Technology plays a major role in learning and growth. Are people able to use the latest devices and software, or are your archaic systems stuck running yesterday’s tech? What are you doing to make sure your organization is staying ahead of your competition?

Internal Business Processes

The internal business processes perspective looks at how smoothly your business is running. Efficiency is important here. It’s all about reducing waste, speeding things up, and doing more with less. Are there unneeded obstacles standing between new ideas and execution? How quickly can you adapt to changing business conditions?

This perspective also encourages you to take a step back and get a little philosophical about your company. Are you providing what your customers actually want? What should you be best at?

Customer

The customer perspective focuses on the people who actually buy your products and services. Are you winning new business? How about keeping your existing customers happy? How are you viewed in your industry compared to your competitors?

Customer satisfaction is a great forward-looking indicator of success. The way you treat your customers today directly impacts how much money you’ll make tomorrow.

Financial

Just because we’re taking a balanced look at your organization doesn’t mean that we want to ignore traditional financial measures. Quite the contrary, the financial perspective is a major focus of the balanced scorecard.

Are you making money? Are your shareholders happy? The financial health of your organization may be a lagging indicator showing the result of past decisions, but it’s still incredibly important. Money keeps companies alive, and the financial perspective focuses solely on that.

Stacking the Perspectives

In the early years of the balanced scorecard, each of the four perspectives were shown as being independent of the others. Over time, however, people began to discover that these perspectives affect each other in surprising ways. It turns out that the way we order them matters.

Modern balanced scorecards show how each perspective builds on the previous one. If you train your employees and build a culture of information sharing (Learning and Growth), they’ll make your company run more smoothly (Internal Business Processes). A better running business takes better care of its customers (Customer), and happy customers buy more of what you’re selling (Financial).

Strategic Objectives

The next step in creating a balanced scorecard is choosing several strategic objectives for each perspective. Up until now we’ve dealt with large, vague concepts. This is where things get concrete. …

Strategy Map

If you already know a little about the balanced scorecard, that graphic showing your strategic objectives on top of the four perspectives may look familiar. It’s the start of something called a strategy map, and it’s a common way to show an organization’s strategy at a glance.

The final step in creating a strategy map is to draw arrows between your strategic objectives that show the cause and effect chain.

You can read your balanced scorecard’s strategic flow by starting at the bottom and following the paths to the top. Your strategy map tells the story of your organization’s strategy. …

Measures

The final building blocks of a balanced scorecard are measures. Every strategic objective should have one or two things that you measure to determine how it’s performing. These measures need goals and should be measured on a regular schedule.

Summary

Balanced scorecards can seem a little confusing at first, but they’re really not that complicated. To summarize:

Perspectives – A balanced scorecard is broken down into four Perspectives.

Strategic Objectives – Each perspective has several Strategic Objectives.

Strategy Map – A chart showing the relationships between strategic objectives is called a Strategy Map.

Measures – Each strategic objective has one or two Measures.”

[215] Devra Garenstein, Key Concepts for Strategic Management and Organizational Goals, Chron.com, June 29, 2018.

[216] Bernard Marr, What the Heck is a … Balanced Scorecard?, LinkedIn.com, July 25, 2013; Bernard Marr, What is a Balanced Scorecard? A Quick Overview, Bernard Marr & Co.com.  Note: Bernard Marr is a bestselling author, keynote speaker, and advisor to organizations. LinkedIn has ranked Bernard Marr as one of the top 10 Business Influencers in the world. He writes on the topics of intelligent business performance for various publications including Forbes, HuffPost, and LinkedIn Pulse.

[217] Raffaella Sadun, Nicholas Bloom, and John Van Reenen, Why Do We Undervalue Competent Management?, Harvard Business Review, September-November 2017.

[218] Charles Hill and Gareth Jones, Strategic Management Theory: An Integrated Approach (10th Edition), Houghton Mifflin Company, South-Western Cengage Learning Publisher, 2013; Prachi Juneja, Strategy Implementation – Meaning and Steps in Implementing a Strategy, Management Study Guide.com.

[219] David Wilkinson, How to change a bureaucracy into a dynamic organization, Oxford Review, 2016-2017. Also see, Chris Bradley, How biases, politics and egos trump good strategy: when creating a strategy for your organization there are many obstacles. It’s important to know what they are and how to get around them, McKinsey & Company (mckinsey.com), January 18, 2018; Ron Carucci, 3 Ways Senior Leaders Create a Toxic Culture, Harvard Business Review, May 1, 2018.

[220] DeAnne Aguirre and Michah Alpern, 10 Principles of Leading Change Management, Strategy & Business, June 6, 2014; Tanvir Haque, Decision making and information flow: The keys to powerful strategy execution, LinkedIn, August 7, 2018.

[221] Robert Schaffer, All Management is Change Management, Harvard Business Review, October 26, 2017; Nick Tasler, Stop Using the Excuse ‘Organizational Change is Hard’, Harvard Business Review, July 19, 2017.