A Burning Platform – Thrive under Change

Over the past 40 plus years we have seen hundreds of “change” efforts in dozens of different industries. Some addressed organizational structure, some culture and others both. Some were successful while many were not. McKinsey & Co. claims that 70% of all organizational change initiatives fail. The failures seldom reverted to the previous structure or culture, they usually resulted in another attempt at the desired change or in failure of the business. Here I want to focus on the successful efforts we have seen and been an integral part of. First let us acknowledge the obvious, change is hard, and it is hard for a number of reasons:

• fear of the unknown
• acceptance of the status quo
• loss of status, position, or power
• the belief that the change will simply result in less people and more work
• previous attempts at change have failed
• perceptions that the proposed change is ill-advised
• the organization waited too long to make the needed changes and now is a “burning platform”

All of this can be overcome, particularly when we look at what the successful companies did to ensure success. Here I want to focus on one of the earliest and most successful organizational change efforts we were involved in. It was a refinery in the Midwest. The previous years’ Soloman Report ranked this refinery next to last in virtually every category. An example, their Total Recordable Incident Rate was 16.1. Throughput, quality, efficiency and cost were all just as bad or worse. Five years later this refinery was now one of the best within the company. Let’s look at how they did it.

1) Develop a Comprehensive Detailed Plan

First, they identified the members of the organization who most understood the critical need for change. These individuals started by developing a highly specific plan and 10-year timeline. This plan set out the specific action items for each year, who was responsible for those actions, and how each would be measured. It also included a highly precise and detailed projections of what the new organization would become 10 years in the future. When you first read the plan, many were struck by two thoughts. First, the future state organization seemed too good to be true and secondly, there was no way this was possible.

2) Identify Stakeholders and the Effects the Change Will Have on Them

The committee then identified all stakeholders and gave serious thought as to the effect the proposed change would have on them. Highly specific role documents were developed for Managers, Supervisors and Hourly Employees. They were also developed for Technical Staff, Administrative Staff, Contractors and Consultants. The Refinery Manager knew the biggest concern of all involved would be “What does this mean for me”.

3) Name the Initiative

The Committee spent what seemed like an inordinate amount of time trying to develop a name for the initiative and developing slogans for different phases of the effort. I then thought this was an enormous waste of time. Later I realized how wrong I was. As Daniel Coyle writes in the Culture Code: “Slogans and catchphrases matter.” They help make large concepts simple and easy to remember. For 30+ years I’ve seen it happen over and over again: The facilities who to the time to develop a catchy name and corresponding catchphrases did far better than those who did not.

4) Convey the Plan and Attendant Benefits to All stakeholders

Next the Refinery Leadership Team (RLT) was trained in effective organizational change management. The RLT then developed a detailed description of what life would be like in the new organization and what benefits there would be for each group of the more than 1,600 employees. They basically turn it into a stump speech that would be given hundreds of times. Now it was time to inform the rest of the personnel. Starting with labor leadership and working in small groups the Refinery Manager and the Organizational Effectiveness Director explained the reasons change was needed, what was about to happen, and what would be the effects and benefits for each group or person. Then they explained in detail the vision of future state, what working at the refinery would be like, and the positive aspects of the new culture.

5) Use the Same Structure for all Critical Systems and Processes

I have seen any number of clients who would manage production one way, quality in another, preventive maintenance and reliability in another and safety in yet another. This creates additional work for all involved, causes inefficiency and waste time. Managing all the systems in a similar manner was a big miss in the original change initiative’s plan. After being exposed to SRI’s Structured Safety Process™ (SSP) both the RLT and the OE Implementation Committee realized the benefit a similar approach to work across all significant processes and systems. We took the framework of SSP and developed a Structured Quality Process, a Structured Reliability Process, A Structured Preventative Maintenance Process and Structured Processes for Operation and Technical Support. This common approach to work created synergy and made the entire initiative more connected and efficient.