16 pm | November 2015

management focus

Traditional approaches to changestruggle given the speed andcomplexity of business today.New technology, new distribu-

tion channels and new competitors areforcing clients to respond more quicklythan ever.

Professional service firms not onlyneed to adapt to support clients but alsoto respond themselves as new businessmodels disrupt their landscape. Cloudbased services are replacing traditionalaccountants, associate models providelower cost consulting and technology-enabled legal services disrupt the legalprofession.

How is it possible to manage changein this environment? Our models rely onthe basic assumptions that trends can beidentified, causality can be defined andplans developed and monitored. Butaccording to McKinsey three and fiveyear plans are a thing of the past. Thisarticle outlines some conversationalapproaches to change that may be morerelevant in these times.

Transformation or transition?In the last 20 years the number of mobilephone subscriptions has grown to 7billion – one for each of us on the planet– while the value of the top 15 internetcompanies has grown from $17 billion to$2.4 trillion.

Spotify with no CDs, Uber with notaxis, and Alibaba with no inventory arethree high profile examples of how areassuch as music sales, personal transportand retailing have transformed. We can

Mike Pounsford describes ways in whichfirms and their clients can navigate throughturbulent times.

Transformationand transition

climate changes will transform busi-nesses and our lives over the next 10 to20 years.

Navigating change Conversational approaches to change areincreasingly important in order to enablefirms to build their capability to respondto complexity. Three approaches areoutlined below.

Polarity management: The polaritymanagement framework developed byBarry Johnson helps address thedilemmas inherent in all change. Classicpolarities are: • Do we centralise or decentralise deci-sion-making?

• Do we recognise individual or teameffort?

• Do we focus on client service or finan-cial performance?

The challenge facing firms now is theplanned versus emergent changedilemma.

The table opposite – one group’sview – illustrates that the upsides of onepolarity tend to be the downsides of theother. Firms typically flip from one to theother. For example: “We tried empow-ering people but they failed to grasp theproblem so we took back control; now noone is buying in to the change”.

Johnson’s key insight is that there isno right answer. The objectives on bothpolarities are ‘good’ objectives, but theyare interdependent. The tool helpsleaders aim for the upsides of both polari-

Winning hearts andminds, quickly, intransformation effortsis key in theprofessions.

now assemble our own online musiccollections, design our cars, checkourselves onto flights, and managebanking transactions on our phones. Inthe last three years the numbers of usgoing into bank branches has fallen by30%, and our ability to manage routinetransactions change the role of thebranch and the skills and capabilitiesneeded to meet our needs.

What appears like dramatic changeover the last five to six years is just thebeginning. The Internet of Things,growing connectivity, the changing popu-lation profile, increasingly internationalcompetition, political challenges and

This article originallyappeared in PM magazine.

For further details go towww.pmforum.co.uk

pm | November 2015 17

management focus

ties. There is no ideal solution at either‘end’ of the polarity and the solution forone firm depends upon the personalities,politics, skills and constraints relevant intheir situation.

Large group interventions: Largegroup interventions were developed inthe 1980s to accelerate change andminimise resistance. As an approach theymay hold the key to longterm success inturbulent times. In essence they involvebringing together different stakeholderswithin an organisational system in orderto find common ground and plan rapidlyfor the future.

Different approaches (eg. open space,future search, whole scale change, searchconference) share important principles:

• Get the whole system in the room (eg.span hierarchies, practice areas, geog-raphies and firms – include suppliersand clients) to work on systemicchange

• Seek active participation and learningfrom representatives of all players inthe system to develop effective plans

• Identify common ground in order todevelop common purpose and avision/s for the future.

Over recent years these approaches havebeen used to help the BBC, NHS, GeneralElectric, Boeing and others plan for theirfutures.

Big conversations: Big conversations

and strategic dialogues enable teams totranslate strategic plans to their role insupporting them, in real time. They avoidPowerPoint and talking at people, insteadusing visual or other approaches that arememorable, accessible and relevant tostimulate debate.

Big conversations help engage leader-ship groups in the development of ashared strategic narrative and then trans-late this visually to keep people focusedon the bigger picture. They help bringtogether different teams under a commonpurpose and link a number of initiatives,including some of the uncertainties andambiguities inherent in planning today.

These kinds of conversations enableservice firms to discuss client issues andneeds in the context of the firm’s strategyand link local marketing and businessplans to the bigger picture. The use ofvisuals makes the process more memo-rable, engaging and productive.

Implications for marketers The most important driver for effectivemarketing in professional service firms isthe engagement of the partners, consult-ants and other client facing and supportstaff. This is particularly critical becauseprofessional service firms are charac-terised by:

• People who have high levels of loyaltyto their trade often above loyalty totheir firms or partnerships

• Large numbers of highly intelligent and

highly qualified people who want towork in democratic cultures withconsensual decision-making

• High levels of client contact throughoutthe business

• Simultaneous consumption andproduction – the ‘product’ is the timeof 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 servicesector.

Winning hearts and minds, quickly, intransformation efforts is therefore key inthis sector, and expertise in facilitationand group processes a key enabler.

What are the tangible outputs fromthese kinds of processes? Each firm willdiffer but one group of marketers andglobal relationship partners emergedwith an agenda to support clientsincluding:

• Action learning (not just knowledgesharing; deep discussions aboutindustry trends and active workshopsand meetings within the firm’snetworks)

• Strategy workshops for the clients withscenario planning and outside experts

• Leadership surveys within industrysectors to analyse drivers of change andreadiness to change

• Numerous internal conversations abouthow we can bring strategy to life drivenby self-directed teams

• Thinking ahead of the curve so thatpartners could be seen to be providingadvance insights and knowledge onindustry trends and developments.

Conclusions Conversational based approaches tochange will become more important inthe next two decades because theyachieve the dual goals of developing theplans for change while developing thecapability of the business to continuouslyupdate these plans. Service firms willincreasingly help their clients in thismore facilitative approach to changewhere planning is managed in partner-ship, and marketers will need to designthese conversations and support themusing the new social technologies that arebecoming ever-more prevalent.

Mike Pounsford is thefounder of Couravel, anorganisational change andcommunication consultancyfounded in 2001. Contact:07860 196343 or visitwww.couravel.com

Do we plan change?

• People naturally look to top fordirection

• Start with clear need and tableissues early

• Easier to manage workloads; clearmilestones gives sense of progress

• Feels safe

• Process hinders innovation andslows down change

• Inefficient: need to ‘sell’ implemen-tation rather than co-creation

• Seeking consensus dumbs down;leads to a vanilla model that’s notas useful.

Do we support emergent change?

• Flexible and responsive • Generates energy, more creative • Creates and maintains ownmomentum

• Fits/mirrors organizations –sprawling, complex, fast changing,etc.

• Encourages volunteering and empow-erment

• People deal with symptoms, not mainissues

• Empowerment, liberation, etc. can beuncomfortable

• Disproportionate impact of a vocalminority

• Lack of sense of achievement or mile-stones, etc.

Down

side

Up

side