It seems that my behaviour change entry sparked off the most interest from what I can see in the Google statistics about my blog. Reason enough to elaborate a little bit about the fact that behaviour change is not some mufty-flufty stuff, but has to be taken seriously when being in the process of change.
Whenever I want to write down an actual process in a company which is ISO certified I get the remark "Hold on, I will bring the ISO files". I would then reply, "There is no need for that, as I want the real process, not the written down one" and with that remark I usually bump into a brick wall, which in return, I will bring to fall most of the time.
There is this perception out there, especially amongst people who believe in structure, process, order and organisation (let me call them technocrats) that once a process is written down and communicated it is also lived and effective! I am afraid to say, but this is the biggest reason for downfall after major change projects.
In the very most cases I can prove that real processes are almost always different from ISO ones, especially when processes and steps in those processes are depending on people rather than machines. This means, a process "manufacturing steps of a metal tool" is more likely to be ISO-true than a process "the daily planning and review meeting". The first is a mechanical process with lots of machine and computer based activities, the latter is solely depending on people's behaviours.
So, why do particularly people based processes vary so greatly from the agreed ones which one can find in ISO books and any other official process documents? The reason is that behaviour change did not take place!
Let's refer back to the "daily planning and review meeting"; I am sure, when it was installed, an agenda has been designed, a room planned, the participants chosen, and the chairperson has also agreed on running the show. "Fine", we think (we as in technocrats or junior consultants like me back in the 90s then), "they all agreed, we explained the layout of the meeting, it should run smoothly. And in the end, it is a very simple tool in the management system anyway; it's only a meeting".
But what one forgets when doing so is:
- Have the chairperson and participants bought into the meeting?
- Did we train the chairperson in running an effective and efficient review meeting?
- Have we ensured the agenda is widely understood?
- Is the chairperson able to confront all participants in case they miss deadlines?
- Has the meeting time and location been agreed and communicated?
- etc, etc, etc....
Whenever a new process is installed, it needs following up! This is mostly forgotten. Whenever people are involved, one needs to ask oneself whether they have received sufficient training and coaching in performing these tasks, even if those are only basic ones. Regular follow-up after sufficient training is also important. Think about the 3 phases of learning (please look it up again on my previous blog about behaviour change), mechanical compliance is by far a stage in the process of change a company wants to find itself in.
And now sit back, take out your ISO book and review its contents! Have fun!
