benefitsdrivenchange

Monthly Archives: March 2013

You are browsing the site archives by month.

Addressing the ‘what’s in it for me?’ factor

In my capacity as a practicing Change Manager I have been looking closely at the subject of Benefits Management. I was drawn to it because it was clear to me that, appropriately managed, this was an approach with enormous potential as a vehicle for achieving effective organizational change. For me, the most striking feature of Benefits Management is the opportunities it presents, across the entire change lifecycle, to engage and implicate personnel from the whole organisation. The approach negates many of the issues surrounding stakeholder management and in particular change resistance, which can be completely mitigated.

However, I feel that to date, Benefits Management, by being promoted in the main by the Project Management fraternity, has not been exploited sufficiently for Change Management worth and utility. In the author’s opinion, organisational Change Management, a management discipline in its own right, must be able to call upon the capabilities of all other related disciplines to contribute to the delivery of its goals; in this case benefits and project management.

By their very nature, projects and programmes are both objective and temporal in nature whilst Change Management with its unique pan-organizational positional influence, is more subjective and, with the interests of the whole organization in its scope, provides for a continuum that personnel, being able to move between projects and programmes, are able to embrace the organization’s Change Management ethos.

FacebookTwitterGoogle+LinkedInEmail Share

Left to right; is it simply a matter of choice?

When it comes to models and methods it can be seen that those that conform to natural norms are easier to relate to e.g. in the Western hemisphere we fairly consistently read, write and depict process flows in a ‘left to right manner’ (L2R). In fact, generally speaking, we only use alternative representations if we want to depict something that is travelling or looking backwards.

This is the main reason why benefitsdrivenchange.com conforms to the left to right norm. All of its objective and development flows are evolutionary ‘Left to Right’ representations. This does not of course mean that other representations are wrong; it just means that they are different.

Left to Right (L2R) advantages:

  • the most left hand element within a L2R flow represent the vision and strategic objectives of the organisation which means that all stakeholders can immediately assimilate to the rationale for the changes in which they are engaged
  • the L2R representation infers that all things that emanate from the Left (from which ever point you are at within a flow) are in the higher order interests of the organisation
  • the rigour behind the benefits management approach means that everything emanating from the left has been validated and both accountability and ownership for its function and management has been allocated
  • where occurrences of ‘unconnected’ downstream elements occur they ‘must’ be connected and reconciled with the L2R flow
  • where mandated solutions are to be implemented effort must be expended to ‘connect’ them within a L2R flow
  • although focussed on the ultimate realisation of change benefits at each stage of the evolutionary flow attention is given to the identification and reconciliation of the disbenefits associated with an upstream objective or benefit. Disbenefits are best managed at the point they are identified within the evolutionary flow. Late identification of disbenefits can result in considerable rework and otherwise unnecessary disruption

Note: although the process described above is referred to as an evolutionary flow, in the main this representation is used to model transformational or discontinuous change.

benefitsdriven recommends