Casevi Change

Communicating Change, Inside and Out CASE District VI Conference || Jan. 14, 2007 || Denver Andrew Careaga || Director of Communications Missouri University of Science and Technology

The only person who likes change is a wet baby.

Attributed to Mark Twain

Change is inevitable – except from a vending machine.

Author unknown

From smooth rowing…

… to ‘permanent white water’

What changes have you experienced in 2007…

In your own job?

In your area/department?

In your institution?

How do you react to change …

In your own job?

In your area/department?

In your institution?

In a sleepy little Ozarks town

Don’t change the name. Improve the branding.

The real need is marketing. UMR doesn't need a name change -- UMR needs to market itself for what it is -- a high quality technical university where a kid can get a premium education and find a good job on graduation. … This whole discussion on a name change is a diversion from addressing the real issues facing the university. Lets get out there and market UMR and stop wasting time and resources on organizational diversions.

Why not go back to Missouri School of Mines? It may not be as accurate anymore either, but at least is a tradition.

I think the new name should be UstaB! You know MUST UstaB UMR UstaB MSM. Missouri University of Science & Technology.

As an alumnus currently studying at the University of Oxford, I can certainly speak to the problem of the 'hyphen'. Many of my fellow researchers are familar with the good work being done by the Metallurgists and Ceramists of UMR. Unfortunately, they constantly refer to the 'University of Missouri', NOT the 'University of Missouri hyphen Rolla'.

Being a former UMR student I can attest to the fact that UMR automatically relegates us to branch status. When you tell people where you went to school the response is typically, "the University of Missouri Rolla". And the standard response is, "So that's another campus for Mizzou?"

It would make me happy to have an alma mater with a name that sounds like a real school rather than an extension campus, so I am in favor of a name change.

After the vote

The approved name change makes me nauseous! The new name sounds like a vocational school. If anyone needs an 8 month certificate for a future career in Paralegal, HVAC, or Office Administration, I'll be sure to direct them to Missouri S&T. Nice one!

Fantastic! The new name, Missouri S&T, sounds like a junior college trade school. For example, ITT

CSI: Denver

Change Style Indicator

Three preferences

Can help us understand our own reactions to change

Can help us understand how others react to change

No right or wrong, ‘better’ or ‘worse’ style

Adapted from “Leading Change,” University of Missouri Administrative Leadership Program

The three change styles Prefer expansive change Prefer functional change Prefer incremental change Challenge the structure Explore the structure Accept the structure Change agents Mediators Traditionalists Originators Pragmatists Conservers

Change and the Conserver

When facing change:

Appear deliberate, disciplined, organized

May operate from conventional assumptions

Enjoy predictability

May appear cautious and inflexible

Honor tradition and established practice

Change and the Conserver

In the work environment:

Prefer secure environment free from unexpected disruptions and surprises

Appear disciplined and organized

Skilled at attending to details and facts

Prefer tested, proven solutions

Prefer to involve groups in decision-making, problem-solving

Change and the Pragmatist

When facing change:

May appear practical, agreeable, flexible

Operate as mediators and catalysts for understanding

Open to both sides of an argument

May take more of a middle-of-the-road approach

Appear more team-oriented

Change and the Pragmatist

In the work environment:

The peacemakers, ‘middle-of-the-roaders’

Appear reasonable, practical

Agreeable, flexible

Appear more team-oriented

Less likely to have hidden agendas

Mediators

Like an action-oriented workplace that engages others in a harmonious, participative atmosphere

Change and the Originator

When facing change

Appear unorganized, undisciplined, unconventional, spontaneous

Prefer change that challenges current structure

Challenge accepted assumptions

Enjoy risk and uncertainty

May be impractical, miss important details

Appear visionary, systemic

Little regard for accepted policies and procedures

Change and the Originator

In the work environment

Prefer quick, expansive change

Often viewed as change agent

Tend to loathe repetitive tasks

May appear undisciplined, unconventional

Challenge existing assumptions, rules, regulations

Regarded as visionary, “out of the box” thinkers

Idea people

Perceptions: conservers and originators Dogmatic Bureaucratic Yielding to authority Having their head in the sand Preferring the status quo Lacking new ideas Divisive Impulsive Lacking appreciation of tested ways of getting things done Starting but not finishing projects Not interested in follow through Wanting change for the sake of change Not understanding how things get done Originators see conservers as: Conservers see originators as:

Perceptions of the pragmatists Compromising Mediating Indecisive Easily influenced Noncommittal Hiding behind team needs Conservers and originators see pragmatists as:

Collaboration: can we really all work together Encourage exploring new possibilities Encourage looking at the current circumstances Encourage building on what is already working Focus on the task Focus on shared objectives Focus on relationships Prefer to challenge accepted structure Prefer balanced inquiry Prefer to keep current structure operating smoothly Originators Pragmatists Conservers

Change and the creative process Incubation  Inspiration  Perspiration  Verification Roles in the creative process Initiate Implement Follow through Conceptualize Concretize Refine Inspiration Perspiration Verification Originators Pragmatists Conservers

Relating theory to reality

Think about a current or recent project during which people had difficulty working together. Write the name of each person involved and how you would describe his or her change style (conserver, pragmatist, originator)

What would have changed if…

How could communication among team members have been approved?

Advantages or limitations to communications approaches?

What ideas would have the best chance of succeeding?

Ready for change?

What is your institution’s or team’s:

History of change – track record

Culture – support of risk-taking

Resilience – ability to handle more

Rewards – benefits of change

Skill at managing change

Change means…

Conflict

Changing people

Team building

Working in the public realm

Transformation

Self-control

Education

Communicating the benefits of change

Change will occur if A <BCD

A = Benefit of status quo

B = Pain of maintaining status quo

C = Vision of something better

D = Small steps toward change

20-60-20

20%  want change no matter what

60%  waiting to see  focus here

20%  will fight you no matter what

Leadership and communication Clarify and change image, core values and programs – communicate internally and externally Alignment Making the most of opportunities to enhance the team’s skills and abilities Development Understand how organization works and the steps and actions required to implement the plan Implementation Clarify organization’s direction with a vision plan and translating it into a strategic plan Direction Leader-communicators’ role and skills Principle

Leadership and communication (continued) Monitoring outcomes and improving the delivery of service Evaluation Recognizing and communicating the importance of values, beliefs and traditions to the organization’s structure and applying them in reshaping vision Institutionalization Leader-communicators’ role and skills Principle

The cycle of change Cognitive domain Emotional domain Past orientation Future orientation GIVE INFORMATION GIVE ENCOURAGEMENT GIVE REINFORCEMENT GIVE SUPPORT Investigating III Reacting II IV Implementing I Acknowledging

Transition and typical reactions Various reactions – anger, depression, withdrawal, etc. People try to “bargain” to do things the old way People believe they can wait out the change People go back to stage 1 when their feelings are denied or ignored Stage 2 Reacting People are shocked, feel threatened Denial People appear distracted, forgetful Low productivity Stage 1 Acknowledging

Transition and typical reactions (continued) People appear ready to establish new routines, adapt to new systems, help others learn new ways Comfort with change engenders more flexibility, creativity and risk-taking The change is viewed as the way things are done Stage 4 Implementing People may display grief/sadness over loss but begin to explore future options Mix willingness to explore new options with reservation Emotions range from excitement to anxiety Stage 3 Investigating

Communication do’s and don’ts Hit people over the head with the truth Push for acknowledgement (can intensify reacting) Give visible support Provide information consistently and repeatedly Provide facts Acknowledging Give information Argue Attempt to convince Push investigation Listen Acknowledge feelings Provide time Be empathetic Reacting Give support Don’ts Do’s

Communication do’s and don’ts Push choices Rush choices Punish mistakes Overestimate or misrepresent future options Create opportunities to explore Employ participative decision-making Outline pros and cons Investigating Give encouragement Micromanage Control choices Limit participation Reward effective performance Support risk-taking and innovation Encourage communication Get out of the way Implementing Give reinforcement Don’ts Do’s

‘ The Middle Manager’s Dilemma’* Leading change imposed from above

Reflect before you act

Acknowledge your own feelings

Learn all you can before talking to your team

Be professional

Influence decision-makers

Use the type of data that is important to your boss

Offer ways to make the change successful

Use humor

Pick your battles

* Title of book by Rick Maurer

Leading change imposed from above

Get your team involved

Build trust (trust = integrity + competence)

Find ways to make the change your own

Establish common ground

Develop a strategy that attends to both people and the project

Build strategic alliances

Be yourself

Do things to prove reliability over time with stakeholders

A fable about change Our Iceberg Is Melting: Changing and Succeeding Under Any Conditions John Kotter, Harvard change management guru

Kotter’s 8-step change process

SET THE STAGE

Create a Sense of Urgency.

Help others see the need for change and the importance of acting immediately.

Pull Together the Guiding Team.

Make sure there is a powerful group guiding the change—one with leadership skills, bias for action, credibility, communications ability, authority, analytical skills.

DECIDE WHAT TO DO

Develop the Change Vision and Strategy.

Clarify how the future will be different from the past, and how you can make that future a reality.

MAKE IT HAPPEN

Communicate for Understanding and Buy-in.

Make sure as many others as possible understand and accept the vision and the strategy.

Empower Others to Act.

Remove as many barriers as possible so that those who want to make the vision a reality can do so.

Produce Short-Term Wins.

Create some visible, unambiguous successes as soon as possible.

Don’t Let Up.

Press harder and faster after the first successes. Be relentless with instituting change after change until the vision becomes a reality. Create a Sense of Urgency.