The document discusses the high failure rates of change initiatives and emphasizes the importance of capability maturity management in organizations. It presents the causes of failure, including lack of shared vision and poor investment, and advocates for a structured approach to improve organizational maturity and agility. Furthermore, it highlights the need for a comprehensive understanding of human systems through an integrated maturity model to enhance performance and facilitate successful change.

1. Change Management:
“Failing to Prepare is Preparing to Fail”,
so don’t be one of the guilty 75%,
and avail of the latest methodologies
Myles Sweeney BA (Psychol.), Dip. (Mgt.), MBS (Finance), Ph.D
(Business/Economic Psychol.)

2. • What we mean by Change/Transformation?
• Change initiative failure rates
• Maturity of Organisation system (Linear v Agile)
• The Agility Premium
• Root cause of failure rates
• The critical dimension of Trust
• Why Capability Maturity Management is important
• Dynamic Systems Maturity Theory
• A Practical Maturity Framework (OrgCMF)
• How OrgCMF complements lean
• Conclusions
Agenda

3. What we mean by Change?
Value PyramidLevers Outcome
• Performance
• Growth
• Satisfaction
• Advantage
• Compliance
• Survival
• etc
DeliveringApplied to

4. • Lean, Continuous Improvement, Productivity all relate to
Change/Development initiatives
• Research on high level of failures for transformation & change
initiatives:
• Failure Rates – Ec. Dev. (100%), CM (75%), M&A (50%), Mental Health (50%),
Criminal Rehab. (50%), Education (??), etc.
• Productivity Levels – Historically low across the world, especially Linear
Cultures
• Boom-and-Bust Cyclicality, etc.
• Calls for better modelling based on Human Nature across the
Economics Paradigm (e.g., Sachs, Merkel, etc.)
Background

5. • 25% Success rates in OD/CM is related to Preparedness in terms of the
existing Agility/Maturity of Organizations (McKinsey, 2017);
• 22% are operating at Agile, 88% at Disintegrative, Linear Levels (2019)
• 300% Premium for Returns from Agile Levels of Organization (Hamel)
• 500% Discount for Organizations under Linear-Leadership Style (Kiel)
• All Lean, CI and Productivity Interventions are affected
• What is needed is modelling that diagnoses re. the divide and builds
Capacity for Complexity on top of the foundations of controlled Process
and Procedure
• Summary NB. – 75% of organizations Fail in Change and same 75% miss
Premium Returns through lacking Capability Maturity
The Outcome Divide – Linearity/Agility

6. Real cause of failure rates
Presented causes (Symptoms)
• Lack of shared Vision & realistic plan
• Lack of Talent, Understanding & Skill
• Legacy Systems inertia
• Poor Investment and success
measurement
• Lack of Customer focus,
understanding and data leverage
• Resistance to Change and poor
Change Management
• Inappropriate Culture & insufficient
Collaboration
Real causes (Researched)
• The Organisation’s
change/transformation ambition(s) were
beyond its capability maturity level
overall (System) or in key Dynamics (Sub-
systems). They must be in alignment.
• Building/Improving Capability is a
sequential and cumulative process as it’s
a learning process.
• Integrative Maturity level has learning
capacity and development actions can
start as guided for that level
• Disintegrative Maturity levels lack
system foundations and development
sequence must star as guided from
maturity level 1

7. NB Level of Critical Dimension
TRUST

8. “The ability to mobilise resources to achieve an aim”
Why Capability Maturity Management is important?
A means;
to measure and improve Ability
to simplify the complexity of
organisation systems
to address interdependencies e.g.
Process, Skills, Tools, Management,
explain what is happening, practices
and performance.
to identify and set priorities to achieve
aims for any change.
To calibrate actions to the
organisations learning level.
Current Capability maturities determine
Current
Performance
Rate of Change
Improve Capability maturity
Add New Capabilities
Improves Performance
Improves Agility (Rate)
Enables greater ambition
The key is knowing which
capabilities to focus/invest on/in
to achieve target aims (Ambition)

9. • Integrating from across Psychology, Org. Science, Economics, etc.:
• 7 Levels of Maturity for all types of human systems as and activities with 15
discrete Stages based mostly on existing research and practice
• People, Organizations and Economies as Micro, Meso and Macro Socio-Economic
Systems
• Diagnose Capabilities against Maturity to gain Starting-Point TRACTION and avoid
Overshooting
• Develop along Stages to maximise SUSTAINABILITY
• Newly defined Levels of both Inverted and Agile Organization so we always know
what exactly we are dealing with unlike Greiner (?), CMMI (Initial), etc.
• “Management through Human Nature” to benefit everyone
• Operationalizable online for involved diagnostics and automated prescriptive
reporting with Graphic
New Modelling re. Added-Value Capability:
Dynamic Systems Maturity Theory

10. Body of Knowledge
Scientific Maturity
Model
Assessment Tool
www.orgcmf.com
Models
• Full OMI (Image)
• Selected Dynamics
• Collaboration Index
• M & A Index
• Culture Index

13. Linear versus Agile

14. https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/leadership/five-fifty-agility-at-the-top?cid=fivefifty-eml-alt-mkq-
mck&hlkid=b0c3dd1a989e4d839a59a17ab51e7055&hctky=1649573&hdpid=653743b8-37e8-431c-b190-bb7cba5309df
76% said that
the most
difficult part of
transformation
was changing
culture; next on
46% was
Leadership and
Talent; on 34%,
Establishing a
clear Vision &
Implementation
Plan.

15. Lean, like TQM, etc., benefits organizations to the degree it changes behavior
• Facilitating Organization-Development beyond the Operational Level and avoiding
Habituation in the Procedural Stage
• Avoiding the Chaotic Level of Critical Singularities – Cases of Toyota, Schweinfurt
• Avoiding Negative Hysteresis that can lead to Corporate Anorexia
• Facilitating Dynamic Structures
• Facilitating Value Network > Hierarchy or Lean as abused in top-down “Lean &
Mean”
• Enables Multiple Workflows > “Value Stream” and “Value Chains” more inclusive
of multiple stakeholders in added-value activities e.g., Collaboration
• Raise Kaizen from gradual linear process improvement that can Habituate
• Addresses recognised Social-Complexity issues with Lean
1) Complementing Lean

16. • Integrating Psychology, Organizational Science, Economics, etc. for
comprehensive modelling of Development in Socio-Economic Systems
• Target preparedness of specific Capabilities for specific interventions
• Full-System Capability Maturity Development for Agile Organizations
• Continuous Improvement as natural Learning process rather than
disjunctive interventions, and Inversion-proof
• Productivity enabler through prescriptive normative process to
achieve 300% premium Agility
• Operationalised for fullest participation and normative guidance
across all types of sub-system and activities
Summary

17. Thanks for your attention! Any Questions?
myless@orgcmf.com

18. Boddy, C. (2011). Corporate Psychopaths: Organizational Destroyers. NY: Palgrave.
Kiel, F. (2015). Return on Character: The Real Reason Leaders and their Companies
Win. Harvard Business Review Press.
Hamel, G. and Zanini, M. (2016). The $3 Trillion Prize for Busting Bureaucracy.
MLab. http://www.managementexchange.com/blog/bureaucracy%E2%80%99s-3-trillion-price-
tag?utm_source=MIX+Fix&utm_campaign=528f0fc28e-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2016_12_08&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_f438b7f975-
528f0fc28e-16732637
Spain, S., Harms, P., and Wood, D. (2016). Stress, Well-Being, and the Dark Side of
Leadership. Research in Occupational Stress and Well-being, 14, 33-59.
Womack, J. (2010). Toyota’s overstretched supply chain – The machine that ran too
hot: The woes of the world’s biggest carmaker are a warning for rivals. The
Economist, Feb 25th https://www.economist.com/business/2010/02/25/the-
machine-that-ran-too-hot
References