Leadership
The restructuring process can create considerable turbulence within an organization, its managers and its staff. In the box is a copy of a note to a chief executive shortly after a restructuring process had begun. It clearly identifies the state of confusion that people throughout the organization were experiencing.
MEMO TO CEO DESCRIBING THE EFFECT OF CHANGE ON STAFF
People were still very much in the throes of the changes – many clearly still affected on an emotional level by the restructuring process and all highlighting areas that need clarifying going forward.
People thought that there was a tremendous energy surrounding the changes – seeing lots of activity and lots of change being managed at a rapid pace. The downside to this was the sense that it was too fast and out of control, certainly outside of their control.
The majority of people felt positive at the ideas introduced at a high level by the strategy. Some saw it as new and exciting, others as providing one clear direction and having a certain theoretical clarity. However the overwhelming feeling was a sense that whilst the Vision was fine, there was a real lack of clarity around how it would be translated into a living workable strategy. They needed something not only motivating to aim for but also something quite specific.
Coupled with people’s sense of the pace of change, many reported that not only was the direction somewhat hazy, but they saw different managers going off in different directions.
There was a certain resignation to the fact that the organization was going round and round – a ‘here we go again’ attitude – a sense that they had been here before and wondering whether this time would be any different.
They recognized that the direction might be clearer from the top; perhaps they were not in the right place to be seeing the bigger picture. Some people complained of having too little information, whilst others complained of having too much information. Although one could say that staff going through change may never be satisfied – or that management will always get it wrong (damned if you do, damned if you don’t) – the key question is ‘How do we deliver the right message, at the right time, to the right people, through the right medium?’
Coupled with this theme of communication was the perceived need to provide answers to the many questions people have when they are experiencing (psychologically) the chaos of change. Often people were left with no one to ask, or asking questions of managers who either didn’t know or were themselves preoccupied with their own reactions to changes they were going through.
In summary, and from an emotional perspective, the effect of combining the various themes described above is quite a heady one. People have reported feelings of being lost and confused, anxious and worried, degrees of uncertainty and puzzlement, an inability to piece the jigsaw together and, to some, the tremendous strain of having to wait whilst the changes were revealed. Points to note here include the feeling of having no control over their destiny and also watching as others (often their managers) were suffering the traumatic effects of the changes which they themselves might have to suffer at some stage.
This is often at the very time that ‘business as usual’ efforts need to be redoubled. The tasks of those leading the restructure are to ensure that business as usual continues; that people are readied for operating within the new structure; and that the transition from the one structure to the new structure is smooth and timely.
Attention to both the task and people sides of the process is imperative. Depending on people’s predisposition, normally one will take precedence over the other. There is a need to ensure that plans are in place for all the necessary processes that are part of the change:
- Communication plans: what, to whom, when and how.
- Selection/recruitment plans: clear guidelines for both those undergoing selection, their managers and interested onlookers. These should include criteria for selection, information about the process, timescales and rationale behind the process.
- Contingency plans: necessary if key people are unavailable at critical times or if timescales look like slipping.
Future direction and strategy
For many people the strategy and future direction behind a restructure is hazy. This is very often a case of too much vision and not enough pragmatism, but sometimes a case of too much pragmatism and not enough vision! A balance is needed.
In any restructure it is imperative to describe a positive future as well as to explain fully the rationale behind it, how it links to the strategy, how it will work in practice, how it differs from what went before, how it is better than what went before and what the benefits will be from it.
Communication
Communication in any change is absolutely essential. However communications are often variable. There is sometimes too much communication, but more often too little too late. An added problem is communication by e-mail. This is such a useful mechanism when managers need large numbers of people to receive the same information at the same time, but it is so impersonal and so heartless when delivering messages of an emotional and potentially threatening nature.
A more tailored or personalized approach is better. The greater the access to people who know the answers to the important questions, the better. FAQs (frequently asked questions) are useful to compile and communicate, but do not expect this to be the end of the story. Just because you think you have told someone something it does not mean to say he or she has heard it or assimilated it or believed. People do strange things under stress, like not listen. And they need to see the whites of your eyes when you respond!
Key questions in people’s minds will be:
- What is the purpose of the restructure?
- How will it operate in practice?
- Who will be affected and how?
- What are the steps along the way, including milestones and timescales?
- How will new posts be filled and people selected?
- What happens to the others?
- Where do you go to get help and how do you get involved?
- What is the new structure and what are the new roles?
- What new behaviours be required?
- Will training and development be provided?
Communication needs to be well planned, and these plans need to be clear about how to get the right information to the right people at the right time through the right medium (for the recipient). This includes well-presented briefing notes for managers if they are to be the channel for further communication. It is also worth checking for understanding before these messengers are required to communicate the message.
Change in any form can trigger a number of emotional responses. If the messages can be personalized the recipient is more likely to receive them in a positive frame of mind. Personalized messages such as face-to-face and one-to-one communications are especially relevant when an individual may be adversely affected by the change.
Different communities of interest have different needs when it comes to communications. Some people will need to be involved, some consulted and some told. It is important that the right people get the appropriate level of communication. It is important for them and it is important for those around them. If your manager is seen to be ignored, what does it say about the value of your work section?
Thought needs to be given to the recipients of the communication. Those responsible for communicating need to ask:
- What are their needs for information?
- What is their preferred form of communication?
- When is the best time for them to be communicated with?
For example, people in a contact centre just may not have the time to read endlessly long e-mails informing them of changes in other parts of the business. However, they would probably like to be told face to face of events that will involve changes to their management structure, or the introduction of a new way of working.
To prevent the rumour mill growing it is important that communication is timely, and reaches each of the chosen communities at the agreed time. Start–stop–start again communications do not help either. A continuing flow of communication will engender more confidence in the change process.
Implementation process
The complexity of the restructuring task is often underestimated. Timescales are often not met. Staff directly affected by the change and potentially facing redundancy are subjected to undue stress because the whole process takes too long to complete.
Managing people’s expectations is key. If you announce a plan, it needs to be adhered to, or changes to plan clearly communicated.
Supporting mechanisms
In order to make the restructuring as smooth as possible and ensure that the new structure gets up and running quickly, a number of support mechanisms need to be in place.
Visible managerial support
A key response of people going through the process is that their management was often ineffectual at managing change during this period. This is not necessarily the manager’s fault. Many experience having to go through a selection process for themselves, many do not seem to get adequately briefed as to the nature of the changes, and some either lose their jobs or get appointed new into new positions and so do not or cannot provide the necessary support through change.
Management styles across an organization can also be variable. Often there is a reduced management visibility at these times rather than an increased visibility.
People can see a restructure as just that – a change in structure, rather than an internal realignment that would help them and the business focus on, for example, their customers and with a different way of doing things. It is the role of the manager to translate the purpose of the restructure into an understandable and viable way of doing things differently.
Continued communication of the purpose
There needs to be an ongoing planned and ‘personalized’ communication programme to ensure the right people get the right information at the right time in the right format for them. People need to be told and involved in how the organization will be operating differently in the future. In these two-way communications staff and managers’ perspectives need to be listened to, and where valid, need to be addressed.
Clear selection process
During any selection process certain things need to be in place: first, a selection process plan that is agreed, is sensible, has an inner integrity, is consistent, equitable and scheduled; and second, clear guidelines for those undergoing selection, their managers and interested onlookers. These should include criteria for selection, information about the process, timescales, and rationale behind the process.
Senior management attention
In most instances where senior management are involved their presence is generally appreciated, even if the restructure is perceived as a negative change. The more people see the commitment of senior management the better, be it attending meetings, visiting departments, branches or contact centres to explain rationale, and face the staff.
Constructive consultation
Different organizations will have different ways of involving staff in changes. We believe that if middle managers and staff have a say in the planning of change, some of the inconsistencies and incongruities emerging from the change are picked up and addressed at a much earlier stage. If there is more input and involvement at an earlier stage from those managers who have a responsibility to manage the changes, this too has an impact on the success of the change.