I had to stop myself laughing when I read Steve Tobak’s blog, Its the Strategy Stupid not because its particularly funny that organisations spend millions on Change management and still don’t always deliver results, but because it was refreshing to find someone else giving voice to issues that seem so obvious and frustrating for many of us in corporate life. Large investment programmes can take on a life of thier own and span many years. Ensuring original objectives are being achieved and monitoring strategy alignment is essential. It made me think of Danny Kaye’s poem “The kings new clothes”. 
In the same way that it was obvious to everyone except the king, that he was naked, it sometimes if feels like that in many of our businesses. Everyone seems to be walking around blissfully naked. When one points out that a few clothes in the right place would cover a lot of future embarrassment there is often little response. Steve Tobak seems highly frustrated with this situation and comments:-
“I’m a little tired of big consultants making big bucks off the backs of shareholders and employees on the flawed principal that it’s all about the change process and they’ve got a better one than the other guy”
Well he may have a point about one change methodology versus another. Chris Dale in his article on Why PRINCEII fails, goes specifically a little further and states “that whilst we do not contend that all project problems Generic Viagra Online can be laid at the door of these kind of methodologies, we do contend that it is time to question the faith placed in them…to acknowledge that there are serious underlying, fatal structural problems to Prince II and related methodologies. Our analysis shows that they (eg. Prince II) will generally increase project costs and lead to lengthy phases (each of many months) during which only costs accrue. Lengthy project phases also means that it is difficult to incorporate changes to requirements. The probability of requirements changing is of course, increased when project phases are each of many months or years.”
Well whilst Chris has the facts, I certainly have a growing number of anecdotes and case studies showing a growing consensus that methodology increases bureaucracy and delays, rather than driving change effectively. Now, it is hard shift the focus from methodology alone, when everyone is so delighted with the “new clothes” there are wearing. The reality is though, a reliance on one golf club in the bag, is not going to deliver results. With an increasing shift in economic power to China and India, well established global companies need to be aware of the lessons of history and the many previous corporate failures resulting from a failure of management to react or change fast enough. There does not have to be a “burning platform” before you change the way you manage your business or change its model. It is easy to be complacent if your particular industry is supported by a legacy business book that may yield good revenue and margin for a few more years. It may not lead to embarrassment now or even in the 2010 reporting. But the business will look very naked in 2-3 years time when other competitors are taking a more aggressive and pragmatic approach to strategy execution. Theywill be encroaching on your market perhaps without you even really knowing, rapidly competing for the same business, clients and customers. What will it look like in two years time to face competitors with a leaner management team, simpler order management process, efficient paperless office and low cost multi-source infrastructure.
Change is complex but execution can be a lot simpler when you get on the front foot, lead the competition, leverage experience and adopt a few key change management principles.
Thanks and permission for use of original artwork to Ashley A Smith at www.ashleyasmith.com