1. 16 pm | November 2015
management focus
T
raditional approaches to change
struggle given the speed and
complexity of business today.
New technology, new distribu-
tion channels and new competitors are
forcing clients to respond more quickly
than ever.
Professional service firms not only
need to adapt to support clients but also
to respond themselves as new business
models disrupt their landscape. Cloud
based services are replacing traditional
accountants, associate models provide
lower cost consulting and technology-
enabled legal services disrupt the legal
profession.
How is it possible to manage change
in this environment? Our models rely on
the basic assumptions that trends can be
identified, causality can be defined and
plans developed and monitored. But
according to McKinsey three and five
year plans are a thing of the past. This
article outlines some conversational
approaches to change that may be more
relevant in these times.
Transformation or transition?
In the last 20 years the number of mobile
phone subscriptions has grown to 7
billion – one for each of us on the planet
– while the value of the top 15 internet
companies has grown from $17 billion to
$2.4 trillion.
Spotify with no CDs, Uber with no
taxis, and Alibaba with no inventory are
three high profile examples of how areas
such as music sales, personal transport
and retailing have transformed. We can
Mike Pounsford describes ways in which
firms and their clients can navigate through
turbulent times.
Transformation
and transition
climate changes will transform busi-
nesses and our lives over the next 10 to
20 years.
Navigating change
Conversational approaches to change are
increasingly important in order to enable
firms to build their capability to respond
to complexity. Three approaches are
outlined below.
Polarity management: The polarity
management framework developed by
Barry Johnson helps address the
dilemmas inherent in all change. Classic
polarities are:
• Do we centralise or decentralise deci-
sion-making?
• Do we recognise individual or team
effort?
• Do we focus on client service or finan-
cial performance?
The challenge facing firms now is the
planned versus emergent change
dilemma.
The table opposite – one group’s
view – illustrates that the upsides of one
polarity tend to be the downsides of the
other. Firms typically flip from one to the
other. For example: “We tried empow-
ering people but they failed to grasp the
problem so we took back control; now no
one is buying in to the change”.
Johnson’s key insight is that there is
no right answer. The objectives on both
polarities are ‘good’ objectives, but they
are interdependent. The tool helps
leaders aim for the upsides of both polari-
Winning hearts and
minds, quickly, in
transformation efforts
is key in the
professions.
now assemble our own online music
collections, design our cars, check
ourselves onto flights, and manage
banking transactions on our phones. In
the last three years the numbers of us
going into bank branches has fallen by
30%, and our ability to manage routine
transactions change the role of the
branch and the skills and capabilities
needed to meet our needs.
What appears like dramatic change
over the last five to six years is just the
beginning. The Internet of Things,
growing connectivity, the changing popu-
lation profile, increasingly international
competition, political challenges and
This article originally
appeared in PM magazine.
For further details go to
www.pmforum.co.uk

2. pm | November 2015 17
management focus
ties. There is no ideal solution at either
‘end’ of the polarity and the solution for
one firm depends upon the personalities,
politics, skills and constraints relevant in
their situation.
Large group interventions: Large
group interventions were developed in
the 1980s to accelerate change and
minimise resistance. As an approach they
may hold the key to longterm success in
turbulent times. In essence they involve
bringing together different stakeholders
within an organisational system in order
to find common ground and plan rapidly
for the future.
Different approaches (eg. open space,
future search, whole scale change, search
conference) share important principles:
• Get the whole system in the room (eg.
span hierarchies, practice areas, geog-
raphies and firms – include suppliers
and clients) to work on systemic
change
• Seek active participation and learning
from representatives of all players in
the system to develop effective plans
• Identify common ground in order to
develop common purpose and a
vision/s for the future.
Over recent years these approaches have
been used to help the BBC, NHS, General
Electric, Boeing and others plan for their
futures.
Big conversations: Big conversations
and strategic dialogues enable teams to
translate strategic plans to their role in
supporting them, in real time. They avoid
PowerPoint and talking at people, instead
using visual or other approaches that are
memorable, accessible and relevant to
stimulate debate.
Big conversations help engage leader-
ship groups in the development of a
shared strategic narrative and then trans-
late this visually to keep people focused
on the bigger picture. They help bring
together different teams under a common
purpose and link a number of initiatives,
including some of the uncertainties and
ambiguities inherent in planning today.
These kinds of conversations enable
service firms to discuss client issues and
needs in the context of the firm’s strategy
and link local marketing and business
plans to the bigger picture. The use of
visuals makes the process more memo-
rable, engaging and productive.
Implications for marketers
The most important driver for effective
marketing in professional service firms is
the engagement of the partners, consult-
ants and other client facing and support
staff. This is particularly critical because
professional service firms are charac-
terised by:
• People who have high levels of loyalty
to their trade often above loyalty to
their firms or partnerships
• Large numbers of highly intelligent and
highly qualified people who want to
work in democratic cultures with
consensual decision-making
• High levels of client contact throughout
the business
• Simultaneous consumption and
production – the ‘product’ is the time
of the people and therefore the people,
and the way they work with clients,
shape the way the firm is perceived –
perhaps more than in any other service
sector.
Winning hearts and minds, quickly, in
transformation efforts is therefore key in
this sector, and expertise in facilitation
and group processes a key enabler.
What are the tangible outputs from
these kinds of processes? Each firm will
differ but one group of marketers and
global relationship partners emerged
with an agenda to support clients
including:
• Action learning (not just knowledge
sharing; deep discussions about
industry trends and active workshops
and meetings within the firm’s
networks)
• Strategy workshops for the clients with
scenario planning and outside experts
• Leadership surveys within industry
sectors to analyse drivers of change and
readiness to change
• Numerous internal conversations about
how we can bring strategy to life driven
by self-directed teams
• Thinking ahead of the curve so that
partners could be seen to be providing
advance insights and knowledge on
industry trends and developments.
Conclusions
Conversational based approaches to
change will become more important in
the next two decades because they
achieve the dual goals of developing the
plans for change while developing the
capability of the business to continuously
update these plans. Service firms will
increasingly help their clients in this
more facilitative approach to change
where planning is managed in partner-
ship, and marketers will need to design
these conversations and support them
using the new social technologies that are
becoming ever-more prevalent.
Mike Pounsford is the
founder of Couravel, an
organisational change and
communication consultancy
founded in 2001. Contact:
07860 196343 or visit
www.couravel.com
Do we plan change?
• People naturally look to top for
direction
• Start with clear need and table
issues early
• Easier to manage workloads; clear
milestones gives sense of progress
• Feels safe
• Process hinders innovation and
slows down change
• Inefficient: need to ‘sell’ implemen-
tation rather than co-creation
• Seeking consensus dumbs down;
leads to a vanilla model that’s not
as useful.
Do we support emergent change?
• Flexible and responsive
• Generates energy, more creative
• Creates and maintains own
momentum
• Fits/mirrors organizations –
sprawling, complex, fast changing,
etc.
• Encourages volunteering and empow-
erment
• People deal with symptoms, not main
issues
• Empowerment, liberation, etc. can be
uncomfortable
• Disproportionate impact of a vocal
minority
• Lack of sense of achievement or mile-
stones, etc.
DownsideUpside