Change Management Plan for RI Mike Lucas

¶ … Change Management Plan For RI Mike Lucas The role of change "Change is so pervasive in our lives that it almost defeats description and analysis" -- (Mortensen, 2008) Change at any level, individual or collective (communal/familial, societal, or organizational), is a complex and challenging process that requires time, energy, commitment, and often some level of distinct intention and sacrifice, on both the front and back ends of the process.

Change describes both the action(s) and the result(s) of any type of alteration, modification, transformation, or exchange of one behavior/idea for another from smaller-scale individual changes to large-scale organizational (or social systems) changes. At any level, the process of change needs to be managed to some degree. Generally, individuals can manage their own processes of change and in many individual cases, change may happen more spontaneously.

Change that occurs in systems, like organizational change, requires a more strategic (or structured) approach to move through the transformation/modification process both efficiently and effectively and ultimately achieve the desired result. It is this approach that leadership is necessary to keep the process on track and moving forward no matter how slowly or quickly. The speed of the process may change at different times, and it may appear to move backwards, which is fine, as long as everyone stays engaged and work is done to get back on track.

Underestimating the significance and challenging nature of change for any individual or organization is generally a mistake. Change is about implementing new ideas, processes, and/or behaviors. Change can happen without preparation in the lives of individuals and some collectives (i.e. families, communities) as part of a larger developmental/evolutionary reality but healthy (positive) change at the organizational level rarely happens without intention, preparation, and management. A variety of theories and models exist for creating change management strategies, each with its own set of strengths and weaknesses.

The following change management plan has been created specifically for RI, as a result of the preparation process undertaken over the last several months. The three lead facilitators of this charistmatic transformation plan for RI, as nominated and confirmed by the team, are Jaelyn, Kent, and Carson. In Section II, a brief summary will be presented, followed by a survey of the current landscape of the RI organization in Section III.

Section IV contains an explanation for the choice of a charistmatic transformation and a description of this specific model of change, followed by a clarification of the specific goals for RI in Section V. Section VI clarifies the roles of individuals and the team in the implementation process, followed by a discussion of anticipated challenges and expectations in Section VII. Section VIII presents the timeline for implementation and evaluation followed by a discussion of evaluation strategies in Section IX. II.

Summary of preparation "Change is challenging because people generally misinterpret the value and safety of the status quo and often find it too difficult to accurately project/assess the value of what they stand to gain with any such transformation." -- (Melissa Anderson-Hinn, 2011) In the beginning of our consulting process, we talked about the way things (generally) change and the specific goals for transformation for RI.

As a small organization, your early conceptions were as follows: (1) That change would be easy to plan; and (2) That change would happen instantly once the goals were established. In the early weeks of our preparation; however, you realized that commitment to the process was equally as important as commitment to the goals.

Further, you also realized that within smaller organizations, there is a greater need for everyone to take ownership of the new direction; thus, it was important to build a much higher level of trust for each other and for engaging the process together than in larger organizations where leadership is far more hierarchical and decisions are may occur much differently. From the beginning, as Founder and CEO of your organization, you made it clear that you did not want to hand down decisions or micro-manage your personnel.

First, we built the process around your own personal leadership and management goals. Second, we engaged a team process of trust building, goal setting, and outcome predictions. Third, we talked about processes of integrating the new ideas for direction and purpose with each person's role in the organization and with the organization as a whole. Fourth, we created and signed contracts as a sign of commitment to one another. Finally, we are ready to launch into the transformation process with this change management plan created as your reference.

The decision to pursue an entirely new direction is one that evolved from structured processes of discernment and planning among all stakeholders in the RI organization, which includes Mike, Founder and CEO, as well as all 12 employees, and all 7 members of the Board of Directors. The seeds of this process were planted more than a year ago (per your assessment) with pursuance of an outside consultant to provide substantial leadership shortly after those seed were planted.

In our first meeting together, we discussed the purpose of consulting as well as your earliest thoughts on the type of transformation you hoped could come to pass for RI as an organization. You told me the story of the organization and your desire to move into more of a team leadership structure with less micromanagement and more ownership for your team. Moreover, you expressed your desire to see the entire focus, purpose, and direction of the RI organization change at the same time.

We discussed the nature of such charismatic transformation and the significance of such a process as well as the resources required to make it both actionable and sustainable. We discussed this model of change as a radical type of change. Even with a small organization, organizational change requires an intentional, strategic, and highly energized management process. At the end of our first meeting, we agreed to pursue this process.

We established a timeline as represented in Section IX that began with 6 months of leadership and management development that involved working with you, as Founder and CEO, as well as the Board of Directors, followed by almost 6 months of team development and planning for change. Any change process first requires a foundational understanding of your story, where you have been and where you are right now. III.

Current organizational condition of RI "We are chameleons, and our partialities and prejudices change place with an easy and blesses facility, and we are soon wonted to the change and happy in it." -- Mark Twain RI is a small organization with 1 Founder/CEO, 12 employees, and 7 Board members. It is a faith-based nonprofit organization based in an urban location in the United States. RI was incorporated nearly 12 years ago as an organization with a community focus.

In its present condition, RI is the largest it has ever been with 20 stakeholders in the organization and a community of about 50 participants and a larger-community of about 150 supporters plus a newly forming community layer of readers (of Mike's new book). For the last 12 years, Mike, as Founder and CEO of RI has been heavily involved in the ongoing direction and management of the organization. For some time, Mike (along with his wife) was the only "employee" of RI.

Slowly it evolved to incorporate more staff leaders and eventually into the structure that exists today. Over time, the nature of the organization has been one of constant incremental change. In fact, upon founding the organization, Mike intended for this to be the case. Existing literature suggests that incremental change is often integrated in the startup phase or when an organization is in its most mature and stable condition. Mike always wanted to remain open to the evolutionary processes and the consistent ebb-and-flow of new ideas and creativity.

Incremental change; however, still requires some consistency of leadership and management development, or more accurately, a willingness and ability to evolve at the same pace in leadership and management. In the last 4-6 years, RI has attracted a different type of leader and participant than Mike ever intended or than he was prepared to manage. For a while, the founding principles of Mike's organization were somewhat unique but over the last decade these same principles have become more mainstream in faith-based culture and have been advanced far passed RI.

Thus, for a while Mike attracted young "intern types" who helped him implement his agenda, which still evolved incrementally, but the larger cultural and global contexts changed radically, and continue to do so (it seems). More recently, Mike started attracting emerging leaders with their own unique and innovative ideas and potential and a willingness/ability to pursue their own funding as well as manage part-time jobs to supplement this fundraising (as everyone, including Mike, at RI is self-funded through fundraising).

Mike consistently met with his Board of Directors, which evolved from 3 members in the first 7 years to 5 members in the 10th year and more recently reached 7 members last year. In the last few years, these meetings often became stressful and tense as well as the ongoing operation of RI.

In our early meetings, Mike and I realized that this had a lot to do with Mike's lack of development as a leader and manager, particularly with the nature and number of his newest employees who need his approach to evolve and advance. In other words, Mike does not have the natural ability or the formal training to lead at the level to which his organization has grown and empower the types of leaders he has attracted and employed.

We also realized that Mike's own personal goals have changed and need to be reflected in the larger RI operational model. Further, we realized that Mike's tendency to micromanage under stress as well as the lack of communication channels in the organization is causing a significant amount of unhealthy tension in the organization for everyone. It is not the way Mike wants to lead/manage or the way that his employees need to be led.

In meetings with the Board of Directors, they feel that Mike has engaged an appropriate discernment process to move forward with a new direction, new ideas, etc.…. And offer their full support in the transformation. The employees are equally energized by the transformation process and will provide their full support as well. After a thorough discussion of the current conditions, Mike's hopes and expectations, and meetings with the Board of Directors, we decided on a strategic change model in the category of charismatic transformation. IV.

Selection of Charismatic Transformation "Whosoever desires constant success must change his conduct with the times." -- Niccolo Machiavelli Charismatic transformation is a category of change in the Stace and Dunphy (1994) strategic change model. Per our conversations, it was clear that Mike and the Board (and later the staff) desired revolutionary change. Stace and Dunphy (1994, p. 98+) differentiate between 4 categories of change in their strategic model with charismatic transformation representing revolutionary change that consists of new direction, new structures, new behaviors, and new systems.

Further, they suggest that this category of transformation is good for organizations with the level of support necessary for such "radical re-positioning" (Stace and Dunphy, 1994). This category is distinct from a turnaround in that turnarounds do not necessarily involve the level of support that is available in RI. In this case, the transformation is not going to be coercive or threatening to anyone.

In fact, after a substantial amount of time with RI, I would say that this category of transformation is the one thing that gets everyone what they want and allows everyone a chance to thrive in the organization; thus, allowing the organization to once again begin thriving as a whole. This transformation could create a beautiful model of leadership and change management for other organizations to follow. V. Clarification of goals "All is connected ..

no one thing can change by itself." -- Paul Hawken The process of clarifying goals happened in four parts as follows (and under my facilitation): A. Goal setting with Mike B. Goal setting with Mike and the Board of Directors C. Goal setting with Mike and the Team D.

Team presentation to the Board of Directors The clarification of goals in this 3-part process was completed by a presentation to the Board of Directors, led by Mike and the 3 selected facilitators, which evolved from the goal setting process with the team. In the first session, we focused on Mike's personal goals as a leader, manager, and in the process of his evolving (personal) contributions to society. A1. Mike ascertains his need for intensive leadership development, mentored by at least 2 well-established organizational leaders with emphasis on flat organizational structure. A2.

Mike ascertains his need for intensive management development to become a more effective team manager that focuses more on equipping and empowering his team to pursue their own goals and lead the organization forward (rather than the previous model of one-man-show with an entourage). A3. Mike ascertains his desire to be more of facilitator of greatness rather than a person of greatness. He acknowledges the depth and potential of his current team and wants to be a part of making all of their goals happen. A4.

Mike wants to free up more time to continue writing as his ongoing personal contribution to society A5. Mike wants to be completely removed from administrative processes in the organization and establish roles/job descriptions for his employees that accurately reflect the new direction, new structures, new behaviors, new roles, and new systems, ensuring that everyone has the opportunity to communicate their expectations and understand what is expected of them. A6. Mike emphasizes the need for improving communication and insists upon everyone having equal ownership of the future.

In the second session, we focused on the role (and approval of support) of the Board of Directors primarily in Mike's personal goals but with separate focus on the plan for goal setting with the team. B1. The Board of Directors agrees to hold Mike accountable to a leadership and management development plan as established in ongoing meetings. B2.

The Board of Directors approves and supports Mike's goals and the new direction of RI so long as the development of effective evaluation strategies and accountability structures are established as part of the change management plan. B3. The Board of Directors establishes that the team must select 3 facilitators to lead the change management plan with regular evaluation meetings where they make presentations to both Mike and the BoD. B4. The Board of Directors wants Mike to oversee this 3-member facilitation team, practicing his newly established leadership/management model. B5.

The Board of Directors suggests that they also be involved in a process of clarifying roles so that each member is providing the expertise and support that he/she has been commissioned to provide. In the third segment, we focused on an in-depth critique and evaluation of the present condition of the organization from the perspective of the team in the first 2 sessions and thorough investigation and innovation of the new direction, new structures, new behaviors and roles and systems to be implemented for the organizational future. C1.

The team ascertains that their collective desire is to make the RI organization more like a team of social entrepreneurs C2. The team establishes 2 categories of functioning, which consist of 5 employees in each category as follows: 1. Community Impact i. Jaelyn ii. Chad iii. Bronwyn iv. Cade v. Jeff 2. Global Impact i. Maya ii. Leo iii. Kent iv. Kaylee v. Price C3. The team agrees on the creation of 2 formal administrative roles as follows with Mike's role continuing as Founder/CEO: 1. Director of Operations (Carson) 2. Director of Development (Via) 3.

Founder and CEO (Mike) C4. The team agrees that once the transformation is complete, the re-commitment to an organization that values incremental change, as the landscape of culture and the world evolves/changes, is important. In fact, the clarification of goals in this plan is more broad than specific as the team would like the opportunity to work together and build a presence together. C5.

The team agrees upon a definition of social entrepreneurship as follows: society's change agents; creators and innovators that disrupt the status quo and transform the world around them for the better (influenced by The Skoll Foundation, 2011). C6. The team selects Jaelyn, Kent, and Carson, to present to the Board and facilitate the transformative process. The Board's response to their presentation: D1. The Board offers their full support D2.

The Board insists on the thorough development of job descriptions and roles/expectations as quickly as possible, emphasizing the need for each person to be primary author of their own descriptions. D3. The Board insists upon the development of effective and rigorous evaluation strategies and accountability structures. VI. Clarification of roles "Culture does not change because we desire to change it.

Culture changes when the organization is transformed; the culture reflects the realities of people working together every day." - Frances Hesselbein In an intense 18-week process, the team and Mike met with me to discuss the current conditions, the hopes for the future, and participate in trust building and team development as well as the development of this change management plan. The first operational activity upon implementing this change management plan is to cultivate the foundations for the new direction in a weeklong team retreat.

Emerging from this retreat will be finalized job descriptions and expectations for self and one another. The structure is as follows with greater description: 1. Community Impact -- to provide ongoing assessment of needs, human rights education, and transformative learning labs in local contexts and encourage the development of grassroots efforts. i. Jaelyn -- CI Team Manager ii. Chad -- focus on research and mobilization iii. Bronwyn -- Co-manage creative development and social media iv. Cade -- Co-manage creative development and social media v. Jeff -- focus on curriculum 2.

Global Impact -- to transfer what they do locally to the world and build a stronger global presence i. Maya -- GI Team manager ii. Leo -- focus on research and mobilization iii. Kent -- focus on curriculum iv. Kaylee -- field operations and mobilization v. Price -- creative development and social media 2 formal administrative roles as follows: 4. Director of Operations (Carson) -- for the purpose of ensuring.