Assignment Prompt & Instructions
I need your help
– ## JWI556Week6LectureNotes.pdf
– Week6YaraResponseJWMI556.jpeg
– ShanquishaWeek6JWMI556Response.jpeg
**## JWI556Week6LectureNotes.pdf**
© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not
be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University.
JWI 556 (1196) Page 1 of 9
JWI 556
Leading Change by Putting People First
Week Six Lecture Notes
© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not
be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University.
JWI 556 (1196) Page 2 of 9
SCALING UP
What It Means
Many of the forces that impact change are common to both smaller and larger change
initiatives. However, as the size and complexity of the change increases, additional factors enter
the mix that must be addressed. These include the challenges of dealing with diverse teams
that may have competing interests, cultural norms that may be difficult to identify and reconcile,
and communication challenges that undermine the messaging needed to make sure everyone
in the larger organization understands why they are changing.
Why It Matters
• The larger and more complex the change initiative, the more that can go wrong.
• Understanding the differences inherent to leading large-scale change initiatives is
important when evaluating the pros and cons of different change tools you may consider.
• Communicating effectively during large-scale change requires more structure than
communication during team-based change.
“Every time you have a success and pass a milestone along the way of a change
process, stop and celebrate so people can see it’s worth it.”
Jack Welch
© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not
be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University.
JWI 556 (1196) Page 3 of 9
SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES OF LEADING CHANGE IN TEAMS
AND LEADING ENTERPRISE-WIDE CHANGE
“Firms that try to juggle twenty change projects today by using the methods that
successful companies applied to the same problem three decades ago always seem to
fail…
The process fails for two interrelated sets of reasons. First, the management approach
back then was usually too centralized to handle twenty complex change projects. If a few
senior managers try to get involved in all the details, as was often the practice then,
everything slows to a crawl. Second, without the guiding vision and alignment that only
leadership can provide, the people in charge of each of the projects wind up spending
endless hours trying to coordinate their efforts so that they aren’t constantly stepping on
each other’s toes.
Running twenty change projects simultaneously is possible if (a) senior executives focus
mostly on the overall leadership tasks and (b) senior executives delegate responsibility
for management and more detailed leadership as low as possible in the
organization…More important, the leadership provided by senior executives helps give
those other people the information they need to help coordinate their activities without
endless planning and meetings.”
Leading Change, pp. 147-148
Despite numerous common threads, there are a number of additional complexities that come into play
when dealing with an enterprise-wide change initiative. Some of these are obvious, and others are a bit
subtler. First, let’s clarify what we mean by enterprise-wide change. When we use the term, we typically
mean a change initiative that meets one or more of the following criteria:
• Is undertaken in a large organization
• Involves multiple business units or geographical locations
• Redefines or significantly reorganizes the business
This brings us to the challenge of interdependencies.
“Now and in the foreseeable future, most organizations need to be faster, less costly, and
more customer focused. As a result, internal interdependencies will grow. Firms are
finding that without big inventories, the various parts of a plant need to be much more
carefully coordinated, that with pressure to bring out new products faster, the elements of
product development need much closer integration, and so on. But these new
interconnections greatly complicate transformation efforts, because change happens
much more easily in a system of independent parts.”
Leading Change, pp. 140-141
© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not
be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University.
JWI 556 (1196) Page 4 of 9
“Few if any of us grew up learning how to introduce major change in highly
interdependent systems. That, in turn, makes the challenge in organizations today more
difficult.
Without much experience, we often don’t adequately appreciate a crucial fact: that
changing highly interdependent settings is extremely difficult because, ultimately, you
have to change nearly everything…Because of all the interconnections, you can rarely
move just one element by itself. You have to move dozens or hundreds or thousands of
elements, which is difficult and time consuming and can rarely if ever be accomplished by
just a few people.”
Leading Change, p. 142
Despite the challenges of interdependencies, large-scale change can deliver large-scale wins. Kotter
summarizes what a successful large-scale change initiative looks like:
• More change, not less
The guiding coalition uses the credibility afforded by short-term wins to tackle additional and
bigger change projects.
• More help
Additional people are brought in, promoted, and developed to help with all the changes.
• Leadership from senior management
Senior people focus on maintaining clarity of shared purpose for the overall effort and
keeping urgency levels up.
• Project management and leadership from below
Lower ranks in the hierarchy both provide leadership for specific projects and manage those
projects.
• Reduction of unnecessary interdependencies
To make change easier in both the short and long term, managers identify unnecessary
interdependencies and eliminate them.
Leading Change, p. 150
He offers further guidance on the leveraging opportunities in a large-scale change initiative to set
the stage for more effective future change initiatives.
Cleaning up historical artifacts does create an even longer change agenda, which an
exhausted organization will not like. But the purging of unnecessary interconnections can
ultimately make a transformation much easier. And in a world where change is
increasingly the norm rather than the exception, cleaning house can also make all future
reorganizing efforts or strategic shifts less difficult.”
Leading Change, pp. 149-150
© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not
be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University.
JWI 556 (1196) Page 5 of 9
MODELS FOR LEADING LARGE-SCALE ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE
As explained previously, we have chosen to focus on John Kotter’s model not because it is the only viable
perspective on change, but because it is among the most widely used and has a track record of research
supporting it. In fact, it has become such a mainstay of modern change management, many alternative
models draw heavily on it.
GE, for example, developed a model called the Change Acceleration Process (CAP). It shares many
elements with Kotter’s model, but just as they did with Six Sigma, Jack worked with GE leaders to adapt
the model and make it their own. CAP has seven stages to it:
1. Leading Change
Establish a committed leadership team that will champion and guide the change process through
to completion.
2. Creating a Shared Need
Address the inertia and complacency that resists the change, and build a broad base of support
that accepts that change is needed to make the organization stronger.
3. Shaping a Vision
Create a clear and compelling vision of the future state that is easily understood and shared, and
that presents a roadmap for how the organization will get there.
4. Mobilizing Commitment
Begin the rollout by leveraging early adopters or a targeted subgroup of the organization; identify
pockets of resistance and make improvements based on early feedback.
5. Making Change Last
As the change takes hold, identify the threats that could cause business to revert to the old ways,
and implement safeguards to defend against this.
6. Monitoring Progress
Track the effectiveness of the change using specific, quantifiable metrics that can be evaluated,
shared, and used to make further refinements.
7. Changing Systems and Structures
Change the systems, workflows, and other structures to support the new way of doing business
and further anchor the change.
In your readings this week, you will find an article by Robert Miles called “Accelerating Corporate
Transformations” (2010). One obvious connection between this and the Change Acceleration Process is
the focus on speed. This is a helpful counterpoint to what is, somewhat unfairly, a takeaway from Kotter
that change must be undertaken slowly. What is occasionally lost in Kotter’s focus on a methodical
approach is the importance of keeping momentum going. Miles argues, “The biggest barrier to corporate
transformation was getting organizations to execute their bold new ideas quickly.” He identifies six
barriers to speed that most organizational transformation efforts encounter.
© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not
be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University.
JWI 556 (1196) Page 6 of 9
1. Being overly cautious and placing too much emphasis on not making mistakes rather than on
taking bold action.
2. Allowing business-as-usual to extend the time frame to get work done. He advocates a no-slack
approach focused on tightening the timeline.
3. Initiative gridlock that comes from trying to tackle too many initiatives at once, and not being
willing to abandon initiatives that show signs of going down the wrong path.
4. Recalcitrant executives who are not confronted about their behaviors.
5. Disengaged employees who aren’t brought into the loop. He suggests a “rapid-high-engagement-
all-employee-cascade” not unlike a Work-Out.
6. Loss of focus during execution.
This model is not wholly different from Kotter’s, but the focus on speed and the willingness to make some
mistakes is a bit different. As you consider his arguments, think about how the two models balance, and
which elements of each can be best leveraged to drive people-first change initiatives.
STAKEHOLDER MAPPING
The stakeholder map is an effective tool for understanding who will be impacted by a large-scale change
initiative, and how that can influence both process and communication.
1. Identify your key stakeholders. The first step is to develop a list of all the players who will
participate in or influence the outcome of the change initiative. Who may need to lead parts of the
effort? Who will it affect most? Whose expertise is critical to success? Your list may include
executive team members and other managers, board members, specific individuals or employee
groups, key customers, regulators, and so on.
2. Create a map that depicts the relationship among the stakeholders. A map is not a
traditional organization chart. It is a picture of how the key stakeholders are positioned with
respect to each other and the work to be done, and how they interact with each other.
3. Analyze relationships. The third step is to discuss the implications of your map. What does it tell
you about where support is most needed, possible sources of resistance or conflict, current
involvement in the change effort, and lines of communication? A map helps you decide where to
focus your mobilization efforts and who must be engaged.
While stakeholder maps may be created by one person, when you design them with other members of
the guiding coalition, they become powerful tools for building a shared understanding of the change
initiative and ensuring its success.
Stakeholder mapping will not only help you identify key people or groups who must be mobilized in
support of the change initiative. It can also help you clarify their current level of support, their reasons for
resistance, where to focus your mobilization efforts, and who might be available to help you. Its real
power lies in the discussion that it can generate among members of the guiding coalition.
© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not
be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University.
JWI 556 (1196) Page 7 of 9
This is important for ensuring that you are able to work quickly by not getting bogged down in the wrong
sorts of communication. This is less of an issue in team-based change projects, but it becomes critical in
larger-scale initiatives. A popular way to categorize stakeholders has become known as RACI.
• Responsible
The individuals or groups that are entrusted with executing certain activities
• Accountable
The person or group which is ultimately in charge of the activities
• Consulted
Those who have a say in how the initiative is executed – for example, because of their expertise
or their vested interest in the initiative
• Informed
Individuals and groups that should be kept abreast of the developments, but are not actively
participating in managing the initiative
Using consistent terminology, like RACI, is important in supporting clear communication. If everyone
understands and uses common language, it reduces the likelihood that key steps or people will be
missed, or that there will be misinterpretations of expectations.
CHALLENGES OF EFFECTIVELY COMMUNICATING CHANGE IN LARGE,
DISTRIBUTED ORGANIZATIONS
In a large and complex organization, some people or divisions will be motivated and able to change
before others. The wise change leader takes advantage of these pockets of readiness to get started with
the change effort while others are still making up their minds. When these early movers are successful
and that success is publicly recognized, it will act as a powerful motivator for the slower movers. Frequent
and clear communication is essential.
“…most human beings, especially well-educated ones, buy into something only after they
have had a chance to wrestle with it. Wrestling means asking questions, challenging, and
arguing. This, of course, is precisely what happens when the vision is first created by the
guiding coalition.”
Leading Change, p. 102
Consistency in messaging is critical. If one groups hears one thing (whether you intend it that way or not)
and another group hears something different, the change will be undermined. The takeaway will be that
there is a lack of focus and leadership. Perhaps resisters will say that someone knows what’s going on,
but it’s not them, so they’ll just check out.
© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not
be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University.
JWI 556 (1196) Page 8 of 9
Another risk is that if there are tensions among the different groups impacted by the change, an
inconsistent message may be taken as “spin” where one group is being told something to make them
happy, whereas a different group is told something different.
Kotter leaves us with the following advice on the role of leadership around communication during large-
scale change initiatives:
…good leadership from above helps everyone understand the big picture, the overall
vision and strategies, and the way each project fits into the whole. Here the people
working on different activities all aim for the same long-term goal without ever having to
meet…With good leadership from above, these lower-level managers will also be
committed to the overall transformation and will thus do what is right with a minimum of
parochial political silliness.
Leading Change, pp. 148-149
© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not
be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University.
JWI 556 (1196) Page 9 of 9
GETTING THE MOST OUT OF THIS WEEK’S CLASS
As you read the materials and participate in class activities, stay focused on the key learning outcomes
for the week:
• Examine the similarities and differences between leading change in teams and leading
enterprise-wide change
As you explore what it takes to lead more complex change initiatives, it is helpful to examine your
own place of work in order to identify real-life examples of the challenges that scale brings with it.
Identify a change initiative the HR team could lead that would impact the entire organization, or at
least several different functional and/or geographical units. This could be a change in
compensation models, retooling the way performance reviews are conducted, or revising policies
on working remotely. Map out the interdependencies that need to be addressed to implement the
new way of doing things. What other changes need to be made either simultaneously or in quick
succession to allow the change to be rolled out? What communication or other challenges do
these changes bring to the surface?
• Review additional models for leading large-scale organizational change
Spend some time doing a web search for other change models. Some will be proprietary and be
marketing tools for consulting or training firms. Others will be models developed by academics or
authors. Download the literature and map out the similarities and differences between these
models and what we have covered in this course. Which ones bring something useful to the
process? If you are launching a change initiative at work, share the different models with your
colleagues and get their feedback on what they like/dislike about each.
• Analyze the challenges of effectively communicating change in large, distributed
organizations
Develop a stakeholder map for a large-scale or complex change initiative you are considering at
work. Use the RACI categories to group stakeholders and add additional information on what you
know about the level of support and resistance these people/groups have for the initiative. In what
ways do your communication processes need to be the same for all groups, and in what ways do
they need to be different? Why?
**Week6YaraResponseJWMI556.jpeg**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/week6yararesponsejwmi556-jpeg-10376013)
**ShanquishaWeek6JWMI556Response.jpeg**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/shanquishaweek6jwmi556response-jpeg-10376015)
**ShanquishaWeek6JWMI556Response.jpeg**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/shanquishaweek6jwmi556response-jpeg-10376015)
**## JWI556Week6LectureNotes.pdf**
© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not
be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University.
JWI 556 (1196) Page 1 of 9
JWI 556
Leading Change by Putting People First
Week Six Lecture Notes
© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not
be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University.
JWI 556 (1196) Page 2 of 9
SCALING UP
What It Means
Many of the forces that impact change are common to both smaller and larger change
initiatives. However, as the size and complexity of the change increases, additional factors enter
the mix that must be addressed. These include the challenges of dealing with diverse teams
that may have competing interests, cultural norms that may be difficult to identify and reconcile,
and communication challenges that undermine the messaging needed to make sure everyone
in the larger organization understands why they are changing.
Why It Matters
• The larger and more complex the change initiative, the more that can go wrong.
• Understanding the differences inherent to leading large-scale change initiatives is
important when evaluating the pros and cons of different change tools you may consider.
• Communicating effectively during large-scale change requires more structure than
communication during team-based change.
“Every time you have a success and pass a milestone along the way of a change
process, stop and celebrate so people can see it’s worth it.”
Jack Welch
© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not
be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University.
JWI 556 (1196) Page 3 of 9
SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES OF LEADING CHANGE IN TEAMS
AND LEADING ENTERPRISE-WIDE CHANGE
“Firms that try to juggle twenty change projects today by using the methods that
successful companies applied to the same problem three decades ago always seem to
fail…
The process fails for two interrelated sets of reasons. First, the management approach
back then was usually too centralized to handle twenty complex change projects. If a few
senior managers try to get involved in all the details, as was often the practice then,
everything slows to a crawl. Second, without the guiding vision and alignment that only
leadership can provide, the people in charge of each of the projects wind up spending
endless hours trying to coordinate their efforts so that they aren’t constantly stepping on
each other’s toes.
Running twenty change projects simultaneously is possible if (a) senior executives focus
mostly on the overall leadership tasks and (b) senior executives delegate responsibility
for management and more detailed leadership as low as possible in the
organization…More important, the leadership provided by senior executives helps give
those other people the information they need to help coordinate their activities without
endless planning and meetings.”
Leading Change, pp. 147-148
Despite numerous common threads, there are a number of additional complexities that come into play
when dealing with an enterprise-wide change initiative. Some of these are obvious, and others are a bit
subtler. First, let’s clarify what we mean by enterprise-wide change. When we use the term, we typically
mean a change initiative that meets one or more of the following criteria:
• Is undertaken in a large organization
• Involves multiple business units or geographical locations
• Redefines or significantly reorganizes the business
This brings us to the challenge of interdependencies.
“Now and in the foreseeable future, most organizations need to be faster, less costly, and
more customer focused. As a result, internal interdependencies will grow. Firms are
finding that without big inventories, the various parts of a plant need to be much more
carefully coordinated, that with pressure to bring out new products faster, the elements of
product development need much closer integration, and so on. But these new
interconnections greatly complicate transformation efforts, because change happens
much more easily in a system of independent parts.”
Leading Change, pp. 140-141
© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not
be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University.
JWI 556 (1196) Page 4 of 9
“Few if any of us grew up learning how to introduce major change in highly
interdependent systems. That, in turn, makes the challenge in organizations today more
difficult.
Without much experience, we often don’t adequately appreciate a crucial fact: that
changing highly interdependent settings is extremely difficult because, ultimately, you
have to change nearly everything…Because of all the interconnections, you can rarely
move just one element by itself. You have to move dozens or hundreds or thousands of
elements, which is difficult and time consuming and can rarely if ever be accomplished by
just a few people.”
Leading Change, p. 142
Despite the challenges of interdependencies, large-scale change can deliver large-scale wins. Kotter
summarizes what a successful large-scale change initiative looks like:
• More change, not less
The guiding coalition uses the credibility afforded by short-term wins to tackle additional and
bigger change projects.
• More help
Additional people are brought in, promoted, and developed to help with all the changes.
• Leadership from senior management
Senior people focus on maintaining clarity of shared purpose for the overall effort and
keeping urgency levels up.
• Project management and leadership from below
Lower ranks in the hierarchy both provide leadership for specific projects and manage those
projects.
• Reduction of unnecessary interdependencies
To make change easier in both the short and long term, managers identify unnecessary
interdependencies and eliminate them.
Leading Change, p. 150
He offers further guidance on the leveraging opportunities in a large-scale change initiative to set
the stage for more effective future change initiatives.
Cleaning up historical artifacts does create an even longer change agenda, which an
exhausted organization will not like. But the purging of unnecessary interconnections can
ultimately make a transformation much easier. And in a world where change is
increasingly the norm rather than the exception, cleaning house can also make all future
reorganizing efforts or strategic shifts less difficult.”
Leading Change, pp. 149-150
© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not
be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University.
JWI 556 (1196) Page 5 of 9
MODELS FOR LEADING LARGE-SCALE ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE
As explained previously, we have chosen to focus on John Kotter’s model not because it is the only viable
perspective on change, but because it is among the most widely used and has a track record of research
supporting it. In fact, it has become such a mainstay of modern change management, many alternative
models draw heavily on it.
GE, for example, developed a model called the Change Acceleration Process (CAP). It shares many
elements with Kotter’s model, but just as they did with Six Sigma, Jack worked with GE leaders to adapt
the model and make it their own. CAP has seven stages to it:
1. Leading Change
Establish a committed leadership team that will champion and guide the change process through
to completion.
2. Creating a Shared Need
Address the inertia and complacency that resists the change, and build a broad base of support
that accepts that change is needed to make the organization stronger.
3. Shaping a Vision
Create a clear and compelling vision of the future state that is easily understood and shared, and
that presents a roadmap for how the organization will get there.
4. Mobilizing Commitment
Begin the rollout by leveraging early adopters or a targeted subgroup of the organization; identify
pockets of resistance and make improvements based on early feedback.
5. Making Change Last
As the change takes hold, identify the threats that could cause business to revert to the old ways,
and implement safeguards to defend against this.
6. Monitoring Progress
Track the effectiveness of the change using specific, quantifiable metrics that can be evaluated,
shared, and used to make further refinements.
7. Changing Systems and Structures
Change the systems, workflows, and other structures to support the new way of doing business
and further anchor the change.
In your readings this week, you will find an article by Robert Miles called “Accelerating Corporate
Transformations” (2010). One obvious connection between this and the Change Acceleration Process is
the focus on speed. This is a helpful counterpoint to what is, somewhat unfairly, a takeaway from Kotter
that change must be undertaken slowly. What is occasionally lost in Kotter’s focus on a methodical
approach is the importance of keeping momentum going. Miles argues, “The biggest barrier to corporate
transformation was getting organizations to execute their bold new ideas quickly.” He identifies six
barriers to speed that most organizational transformation efforts encounter.
© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not
be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University.
JWI 556 (1196) Page 6 of 9
1. Being overly cautious and placing too much emphasis on not making mistakes rather than on
taking bold action.
2. Allowing business-as-usual to extend the time frame to get work done. He advocates a no-slack
approach focused on tightening the timeline.
3. Initiative gridlock that comes from trying to tackle too many initiatives at once, and not being
willing to abandon initiatives that show signs of going down the wrong path.
4. Recalcitrant executives who are not confronted about their behaviors.
5. Disengaged employees who aren’t brought into the loop. He suggests a “rapid-high-engagement-
all-employee-cascade” not unlike a Work-Out.
6. Loss of focus during execution.
This model is not wholly different from Kotter’s, but the focus on speed and the willingness to make some
mistakes is a bit different. As you consider his arguments, think about how the two models balance, and
which elements of each can be best leveraged to drive people-first change initiatives.
STAKEHOLDER MAPPING
The stakeholder map is an effective tool for understanding who will be impacted by a large-scale change
initiative, and how that can influence both process and communication.
1. Identify your key stakeholders. The first step is to develop a list of all the players who will
participate in or influence the outcome of the change initiative. Who may need to lead parts of the
effort? Who will it affect most? Whose expertise is critical to success? Your list may include
executive team members and other managers, board members, specific individuals or employee
groups, key customers, regulators, and so on.
2. Create a map that depicts the relationship among the stakeholders. A map is not a
traditional organization chart. It is a picture of how the key stakeholders are positioned with
respect to each other and the work to be done, and how they interact with each other.
3. Analyze relationships. The third step is to discuss the implications of your map. What does it tell
you about where support is most needed, possible sources of resistance or conflict, current
involvement in the change effort, and lines of communication? A map helps you decide where to
focus your mobilization efforts and who must be engaged.
While stakeholder maps may be created by one person, when you design them with other members of
the guiding coalition, they become powerful tools for building a shared understanding of the change
initiative and ensuring its success.
Stakeholder mapping will not only help you identify key people or groups who must be mobilized in
support of the change initiative. It can also help you clarify their current level of support, their reasons for
resistance, where to focus your mobilization efforts, and who might be available to help you. Its real
power lies in the discussion that it can generate among members of the guiding coalition.
© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not
be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University.
JWI 556 (1196) Page 7 of 9
This is important for ensuring that you are able to work quickly by not getting bogged down in the wrong
sorts of communication. This is less of an issue in team-based change projects, but it becomes critical in
larger-scale initiatives. A popular way to categorize stakeholders has become known as RACI.
• Responsible
The individuals or groups that are entrusted with executing certain activities
• Accountable
The person or group which is ultimately in charge of the activities
• Consulted
Those who have a say in how the initiative is executed – for example, because of their expertise
or their vested interest in the initiative
• Informed
Individuals and groups that should be kept abreast of the developments, but are not actively
participating in managing the initiative
Using consistent terminology, like RACI, is important in supporting clear communication. If everyone
understands and uses common language, it reduces the likelihood that key steps or people will be
missed, or that there will be misinterpretations of expectations.
CHALLENGES OF EFFECTIVELY COMMUNICATING CHANGE IN LARGE,
DISTRIBUTED ORGANIZATIONS
In a large and complex organization, some people or divisions will be motivated and able to change
before others. The wise change leader takes advantage of these pockets of readiness to get started with
the change effort while others are still making up their minds. When these early movers are successful
and that success is publicly recognized, it will act as a powerful motivator for the slower movers. Frequent
and clear communication is essential.
“…most human beings, especially well-educated ones, buy into something only after they
have had a chance to wrestle with it. Wrestling means asking questions, challenging, and
arguing. This, of course, is precisely what happens when the vision is first created by the
guiding coalition.”
Leading Change, p. 102
Consistency in messaging is critical. If one groups hears one thing (whether you intend it that way or not)
and another group hears something different, the change will be undermined. The takeaway will be that
there is a lack of focus and leadership. Perhaps resisters will say that someone knows what’s going on,
but it’s not them, so they’ll just check out.
© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not
be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University.
JWI 556 (1196) Page 8 of 9
Another risk is that if there are tensions among the different groups impacted by the change, an
inconsistent message may be taken as “spin” where one group is being told something to make them
happy, whereas a different group is told something different.
Kotter leaves us with the following advice on the role of leadership around communication during large-
scale change initiatives:
…good leadership from above helps everyone understand the big picture, the overall
vision and strategies, and the way each project fits into the whole. Here the people
working on different activities all aim for the same long-term goal without ever having to
meet…With good leadership from above, these lower-level managers will also be
committed to the overall transformation and will thus do what is right with a minimum of
parochial political silliness.
Leading Change, pp. 148-149
© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not
be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University.
JWI 556 (1196) Page 9 of 9
GETTING THE MOST OUT OF THIS WEEK’S CLASS
As you read the materials and participate in class activities, stay focused on the key learning outcomes
for the week:
• Examine the similarities and differences between leading change in teams and leading
enterprise-wide change
As you explore what it takes to lead more complex change initiatives, it is helpful to examine your
own place of work in order to identify real-life examples of the challenges that scale brings with it.
Identify a change initiative the HR team could lead that would impact the entire organization, or at
least several different functional and/or geographical units. This could be a change in
compensation models, retooling the way performance reviews are conducted, or revising policies
on working remotely. Map out the interdependencies that need to be addressed to implement the
new way of doing things. What other changes need to be made either simultaneously or in quick
succession to allow the change to be rolled out? What communication or other challenges do
these changes bring to the surface?
• Review additional models for leading large-scale organizational change
Spend some time doing a web search for other change models. Some will be proprietary and be
marketing tools for consulting or training firms. Others will be models developed by academics or
authors. Download the literature and map out the similarities and differences between these
models and what we have covered in this course. Which ones bring something useful to the
process? If you are launching a change initiative at work, share the different models with your
colleagues and get their feedback on what they like/dislike about each.
• Analyze the challenges of effectively communicating change in large, distributed
organizations
Develop a stakeholder map for a large-scale or complex change initiative you are considering at
work. Use the RACI categories to group stakeholders and add additional information on what you
know about the level of support and resistance these people/groups have for the initiative. In what
ways do your communication processes need to be the same for all groups, and in what ways do
they need to be different? Why?
**Week6YaraResponseJWMI556.jpeg**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/week6yararesponsejwmi556-jpeg-10376013)
**ShanquishaWeek6JWMI556Response.jpeg**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/shanquishaweek6jwmi556response-jpeg-10376015)
**## JWI556Week6LectureNotes.pdf**
© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not
be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University.
JWI 556 (1196) Page 1 of 9
JWI 556
Leading Change by Putting People First
Week Six Lecture Notes
© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not
be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University.
JWI 556 (1196) Page 2 of 9
SCALING UP
What It Means
Many of the forces that impact change are common to both smaller and larger change
initiatives. However, as the size and complexity of the change increases, additional factors enter
the mix that must be addressed. These include the challenges of dealing with diverse teams
that may have competing interests, cultural norms that may be difficult to identify and reconcile,
and communication challenges that undermine the messaging needed to make sure everyone
in the larger organization understands why they are changing.
Why It Matters
• The larger and more complex the change initiative, the more that can go wrong.
• Understanding the differences inherent to leading large-scale change initiatives is
important when evaluating the pros and cons of different change tools you may consider.
• Communicating effectively during large-scale change requires more structure than
communication during team-based change.
“Every time you have a success and pass a milestone along the way of a change
process, stop and celebrate so people can see it’s worth it.”
Jack Welch
© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not
be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University.
JWI 556 (1196) Page 3 of 9
SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES OF LEADING CHANGE IN TEAMS
AND LEADING ENTERPRISE-WIDE CHANGE
“Firms that try to juggle twenty change projects today by using the methods that
successful companies applied to the same problem three decades ago always seem to
fail…
The process fails for two interrelated sets of reasons. First, the management approach
back then was usually too centralized to handle twenty complex change projects. If a few
senior managers try to get involved in all the details, as was often the practice then,
everything slows to a crawl. Second, without the guiding vision and alignment that only
leadership can provide, the people in charge of each of the projects wind up spending
endless hours trying to coordinate their efforts so that they aren’t constantly stepping on
each other’s toes.
Running twenty change projects simultaneously is possible if (a) senior executives focus
mostly on the overall leadership tasks and (b) senior executives delegate responsibility
for management and more detailed leadership as low as possible in the
organization…More important, the leadership provided by senior executives helps give
those other people the information they need to help coordinate their activities without
endless planning and meetings.”
Leading Change, pp. 147-148
Despite numerous common threads, there are a number of additional complexities that come into play
when dealing with an enterprise-wide change initiative. Some of these are obvious, and others are a bit
subtler. First, let’s clarify what we mean by enterprise-wide change. When we use the term, we typically
mean a change initiative that meets one or more of the following criteria:
• Is undertaken in a large organization
• Involves multiple business units or geographical locations
• Redefines or significantly reorganizes the business
This brings us to the challenge of interdependencies.
“Now and in the foreseeable future, most organizations need to be faster, less costly, and
more customer focused. As a result, internal interdependencies will grow. Firms are
finding that without big inventories, the various parts of a plant need to be much more
carefully coordinated, that with pressure to bring out new products faster, the elements of
product development need much closer integration, and so on. But these new
interconnections greatly complicate transformation efforts, because change happens
much more easily in a system of independent parts.”
Leading Change, pp. 140-141
© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not
be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University.
JWI 556 (1196) Page 4 of 9
“Few if any of us grew up learning how to introduce major change in highly
interdependent systems. That, in turn, makes the challenge in organizations today more
difficult.
Without much experience, we often don’t adequately appreciate a crucial fact: that
changing highly interdependent settings is extremely difficult because, ultimately, you
have to change nearly everything…Because of all the interconnections, you can rarely
move just one element by itself. You have to move dozens or hundreds or thousands of
elements, which is difficult and time consuming and can rarely if ever be accomplished by
just a few people.”
Leading Change, p. 142
Despite the challenges of interdependencies, large-scale change can deliver large-scale wins. Kotter
summarizes what a successful large-scale change initiative looks like:
• More change, not less
The guiding coalition uses the credibility afforded by short-term wins to tackle additional and
bigger change projects.
• More help
Additional people are brought in, promoted, and developed to help with all the changes.
• Leadership from senior management
Senior people focus on maintaining clarity of shared purpose for the overall effort and
keeping urgency levels up.
• Project management and leadership from below
Lower ranks in the hierarchy both provide leadership for specific projects and manage those
projects.
• Reduction of unnecessary interdependencies
To make change easier in both the short and long term, managers identify unnecessary
interdependencies and eliminate them.
Leading Change, p. 150
He offers further guidance on the leveraging opportunities in a large-scale change initiative to set
the stage for more effective future change initiatives.
Cleaning up historical artifacts does create an even longer change agenda, which an
exhausted organization will not like. But the purging of unnecessary interconnections can
ultimately make a transformation much easier. And in a world where change is
increasingly the norm rather than the exception, cleaning house can also make all future
reorganizing efforts or strategic shifts less difficult.”
Leading Change, pp. 149-150
© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not
be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University.
JWI 556 (1196) Page 5 of 9
MODELS FOR LEADING LARGE-SCALE ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE
As explained previously, we have chosen to focus on John Kotter’s model not because it is the only viable
perspective on change, but because it is among the most widely used and has a track record of research
supporting it. In fact, it has become such a mainstay of modern change management, many alternative
models draw heavily on it.
GE, for example, developed a model called the Change Acceleration Process (CAP). It shares many
elements with Kotter’s model, but just as they did with Six Sigma, Jack worked with GE leaders to adapt
the model and make it their own. CAP has seven stages to it:
1. Leading Change
Establish a committed leadership team that will champion and guide the change process through
to completion.
2. Creating a Shared Need
Address the inertia and complacency that resists the change, and build a broad base of support
that accepts that change is needed to make the organization stronger.
3. Shaping a Vision
Create a clear and compelling vision of the future state that is easily understood and shared, and
that presents a roadmap for how the organization will get there.
4. Mobilizing Commitment
Begin the rollout by leveraging early adopters or a targeted subgroup of the organization; identify
pockets of resistance and make improvements based on early feedback.
5. Making Change Last
As the change takes hold, identify the threats that could cause business to revert to the old ways,
and implement safeguards to defend against this.
6. Monitoring Progress
Track the effectiveness of the change using specific, quantifiable metrics that can be evaluated,
shared, and used to make further refinements.
7. Changing Systems and Structures
Change the systems, workflows, and other structures to support the new way of doing business
and further anchor the change.
In your readings this week, you will find an article by Robert Miles called “Accelerating Corporate
Transformations” (2010). One obvious connection between this and the Change Acceleration Process is
the focus on speed. This is a helpful counterpoint to what is, somewhat unfairly, a takeaway from Kotter
that change must be undertaken slowly. What is occasionally lost in Kotter’s focus on a methodical
approach is the importance of keeping momentum going. Miles argues, “The biggest barrier to corporate
transformation was getting organizations to execute their bold new ideas quickly.” He identifies six
barriers to speed that most organizational transformation efforts encounter.
© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not
be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University.
JWI 556 (1196) Page 6 of 9
1. Being overly cautious and placing too much emphasis on not making mistakes rather than on
taking bold action.
2. Allowing business-as-usual to extend the time frame to get work done. He advocates a no-slack
approach focused on tightening the timeline.
3. Initiative gridlock that comes from trying to tackle too many initiatives at once, and not being
willing to abandon initiatives that show signs of going down the wrong path.
4. Recalcitrant executives who are not confronted about their behaviors.
5. Disengaged employees who aren’t brought into the loop. He suggests a “rapid-high-engagement-
all-employee-cascade” not unlike a Work-Out.
6. Loss of focus during execution.
This model is not wholly different from Kotter’s, but the focus on speed and the willingness to make some
mistakes is a bit different. As you consider his arguments, think about how the two models balance, and
which elements of each can be best leveraged to drive people-first change initiatives.
STAKEHOLDER MAPPING
The stakeholder map is an effective tool for understanding who will be impacted by a large-scale change
initiative, and how that can influence both process and communication.
1. Identify your key stakeholders. The first step is to develop a list of all the players who will
participate in or influence the outcome of the change initiative. Who may need to lead parts of the
effort? Who will it affect most? Whose expertise is critical to success? Your list may include
executive team members and other managers, board members, specific individuals or employee
groups, key customers, regulators, and so on.
2. Create a map that depicts the relationship among the stakeholders. A map is not a
traditional organization chart. It is a picture of how the key stakeholders are positioned with
respect to each other and the work to be done, and how they interact with each other.
3. Analyze relationships. The third step is to discuss the implications of your map. What does it tell
you about where support is most needed, possible sources of resistance or conflict, current
involvement in the change effort, and lines of communication? A map helps you decide where to
focus your mobilization efforts and who must be engaged.
While stakeholder maps may be created by one person, when you design them with other members of
the guiding coalition, they become powerful tools for building a shared understanding of the change
initiative and ensuring its success.
Stakeholder mapping will not only help you identify key people or groups who must be mobilized in
support of the change initiative. It can also help you clarify their current level of support, their reasons for
resistance, where to focus your mobilization efforts, and who might be available to help you. Its real
power lies in the discussion that it can generate among members of the guiding coalition.
© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not
be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University.
JWI 556 (1196) Page 7 of 9
This is important for ensuring that you are able to work quickly by not getting bogged down in the wrong
sorts of communication. This is less of an issue in team-based change projects, but it becomes critical in
larger-scale initiatives. A popular way to categorize stakeholders has become known as RACI.
• Responsible
The individuals or groups that are entrusted with executing certain activities
• Accountable
The person or group which is ultimately in charge of the activities
• Consulted
Those who have a say in how the initiative is executed – for example, because of their expertise
or their vested interest in the initiative
• Informed
Individuals and groups that should be kept abreast of the developments, but are not actively
participating in managing the initiative
Using consistent terminology, like RACI, is important in supporting clear communication. If everyone
understands and uses common language, it reduces the likelihood that key steps or people will be
missed, or that there will be misinterpretations of expectations.
CHALLENGES OF EFFECTIVELY COMMUNICATING CHANGE IN LARGE,
DISTRIBUTED ORGANIZATIONS
In a large and complex organization, some people or divisions will be motivated and able to change
before others. The wise change leader takes advantage of these pockets of readiness to get started with
the change effort while others are still making up their minds. When these early movers are successful
and that success is publicly recognized, it will act as a powerful motivator for the slower movers. Frequent
and clear communication is essential.
“…most human beings, especially well-educated ones, buy into something only after they
have had a chance to wrestle with it. Wrestling means asking questions, challenging, and
arguing. This, of course, is precisely what happens when the vision is first created by the
guiding coalition.”
Leading Change, p. 102
Consistency in messaging is critical. If one groups hears one thing (whether you intend it that way or not)
and another group hears something different, the change will be undermined. The takeaway will be that
there is a lack of focus and leadership. Perhaps resisters will say that someone knows what’s going on,
but it’s not them, so they’ll just check out.
© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not
be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University.
JWI 556 (1196) Page 8 of 9
Another risk is that if there are tensions among the different groups impacted by the change, an
inconsistent message may be taken as “spin” where one group is being told something to make them
happy, whereas a different group is told something different.
Kotter leaves us with the following advice on the role of leadership around communication during large-
scale change initiatives:
…good leadership from above helps everyone understand the big picture, the overall
vision and strategies, and the way each project fits into the whole. Here the people
working on different activities all aim for the same long-term goal without ever having to
meet…With good leadership from above, these lower-level managers will also be
committed to the overall transformation and will thus do what is right with a minimum of
parochial political silliness.
Leading Change, pp. 148-149
© Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not
be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University.
JWI 556 (1196) Page 9 of 9
GETTING THE MOST OUT OF THIS WEEK’S CLASS
As you read the materials and participate in class activities, stay focused on the key learning outcomes
for the week:
• Examine the similarities and differences between leading change in teams and leading
enterprise-wide change
As you explore what it takes to lead more complex change initiatives, it is helpful to examine your
own place of work in order to identify real-life examples of the challenges that scale brings with it.
Identify a change initiative the HR team could lead that would impact the entire organization, or at
least several different functional and/or geographical units. This could be a change in
compensation models, retooling the way performance reviews are conducted, or revising policies
on working remotely. Map out the interdependencies that need to be addressed to implement the
new way of doing things. What other changes need to be made either simultaneously or in quick
succession to allow the change to be rolled out? What communication or other challenges do
these changes bring to the surface?
• Review additional models for leading large-scale organizational change
Spend some time doing a web search for other change models. Some will be proprietary and be
marketing tools for consulting or training firms. Others will be models developed by academics or
authors. Download the literature and map out the similarities and differences between these
models and what we have covered in this course. Which ones bring something useful to the
process? If you are launching a change initiative at work, share the different models with your
colleagues and get their feedback on what they like/dislike about each.
• Analyze the challenges of effectively communicating change in large, distributed
organizations
Develop a stakeholder map for a large-scale or complex change initiative you are considering at
work. Use the RACI categories to group stakeholders and add additional information on what you
know about the level of support and resistance these people/groups have for the initiative. In what
ways do your communication processes need to be the same for all groups, and in what ways do
they need to be different? Why?
**Week6YaraResponseJWMI556.jpeg**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/week6yararesponsejwmi556-jpeg-10376013)
**ShanquishaWeek6JWMI556Response.jpeg**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/shanquishaweek6jwmi556response-jpeg-10376015)
– 1
– 2
– 3