Accelerating Change Management at CEB - Case Study Example

Accelerating change management at CEB Table of Contents Table of Contents Executive Summary 2 Company background 3 Driver forces for change 4 Change strategy and process 5 Successful and Failed Efforts 6 Recommendations 8 Conclusion 9 References 10 Executive Summary This discussion seeks to show the process of change management acceleration at CEB and how it has managed to ensure steady growth over the years. The paper argues that among the most important drivers for change at CEB is the recognition that the traditional structure of companies has become a hindrance to their further development in the current competitive environment. Moreover, CEB has operations in a world where it has become adapted to different market environments because of globalization, because change has become a necessary aspect of survival. Furthermore, there is a discussion of this company’s most important strategies, which follow Kotter’s 8-step strategy. The successes and failures of the change acceleration process have also been discussed and recommendations of how to improve the process made. Company background CEB is one of the most prominent companies in the world and this is mainly as a result of its providing consultant services to a wide range of among the most successful companies today (Florent-Treacy, Kets de Vries & del Amo, 2010). Its success has been made possible through its ability to cater for the needs of the different corporations that seek its services and this has included a wide range of issues ranging from administration to the provision of advice concerning what to invest in and how to go through the process. A result has been that there has developed a wide variety of teams within the company that have enabled it to provide the services that are necessary to satisfy its clientele. Not only has CEB managed to expand globally, but it has also brought a unique style of management and consultancy into the market that has been sought after by a significant number of companies in the globe. CEB’s success has been attributed to its evolutionary attitude and actions, which have made it indispensable in the provision of services to its clients; all of which are based in different countries and environments. That these companies are based in different countries means that CEB has to ensure that it studies the new environments and make them a priority in the development of strategies that its clients can use to attain success. Through its efforts on behalf of its clients, CEB has managed to develop a unique position in the global market where it is able to adapt to different environments and advise its clients accordingly. The ever-evolving attitude that it has developed has made possible its success because this company has undergone many changes since its founding and as a young company, it has remained flexible to diverse situations to such an extent that it has become indispensable in its field of specialization. However, as a company of CEB’s size and clientele continues to grow, over time, it is likely to face many hurdles, which are mainly based on not only its size, but also in its increasing hierarchical structure. This might bring about a situation where managers and employees at lower levels are not in constant touch as was the case when the company was smaller (Minkes, et al, 1999). CEB has to ensure that as it grows, it does not leave behind most of the characteristics that made it achieve the success that it has enjoyed for many years, meaning that this company has to develop newer strategies to accelerate its change management during a period where its growth is taking place at an extremely fast rate. It should be noted that as a company grows, it becomes harder for the change process to take place, meaning that it has to develop newer strategies that will accelerate change so that it can go hand in hand with its growth. Without the change, it is likely that CEB will end up being unable to fulfill the needs of its clients, and this might make it possible for its rivals to take away the clients whom it has served for many years. Therefore, the acceleration of the change management process at CEB is essential in making sure that this company remains relevant in a highly competitive world where it has many rivals while at the same time having to change constantly. Driver forces for change The world of business has changed a lot over the years and this process has continued to accelerate to such an extent that it has become essential for firms within it to change accordingly or become irrelevant. A result of this change has been that firms have had to devote themselves to ensuring that they adapt to the new and highly competitive environment because this is the only way through which they can be able to not only survive it, but also be able to tap into new markets. The ability of a company to adapt to a new environment as swiftly as possible is what sets it apart from its rivals and this is a characteristic, which has come to be extremely valued and at times emulated in the world today. However, it is essential to note that there are a diverse number of drivers that motivate companies to change and this has mainly been as a result of a need to ensure that they retain their competitive edge over their rivals. One of the biggest drivers for change at CEB is the recognition that the traditional structure of companies has become a hindrance to their further development in the current competitive environment. Within a traditional hierarchical structure, as a company grows, the close interaction between its management and employees becomes less, it creates a situation where decision-making, and its implementation becomes more difficult because it has to go through many levels within the hierarchy before it reaches the implementation stage. This issue might become a problem for a fast growing firm like CEB, especially when one considers that it is a company that needs constant change to ensure that it remains relevant. Without open lines of communication between management and employees, the implementation of change becomes more difficult and this might jeopardize the company’s operations (Florent-Treacy, Kets de Vries & del Amo, 2010). In a world where it has become essential for companies to adapt to different market environments because of globalization, change has become a necessary aspect of survival. Change makes business sense because it allows for the creation of better means of doing business in countries that are away from a company’s home base. Not only do laws concerning business practices vary in different countries, but also the regulations and conditions which companies need to comply with to ensure that they conduct their business smoothly. The need to adapt to these environments has made it essential for change to take place, so that companies can not only be able to comply with regulations, but also take advantage of any opportunities that they might find that give them an edge over local entities that have deeper connections. Change strategy and process The most notable change strategy and process employed at the CEB is to implement pilot change; whereby planned change is implemented in selected franchises (USA) and then it is rolled over to other franchises like the UK. This process is important as it enhances stability and a smooth changeover; instead of the overhaul of the entire CEB process, which would be characterized by instability. In addition, this strategy is important as it provides a platform to first assess relevance, challenges, advantages and demerits of the planned changes (Florent-Treacy, Kets de Vries & del Amo, 2010). The other strategy employed direct involvement of the heads of the affected CEB franchises in fostering and implementing the planned change. In addition, CEB management identifies when intending to implement change often identifies lead team, which outperforms the rest and is respected to lead the planned change. This enhances the acceptability of the intended changes among the members, creating little or no resistances to change. CEB though to a small degree has tried to foster and create channels for effective communication within the company, which is a vital process and strategy in implementing change. Change acceptance is enhanced through effective two-way communication that helps team leaders and staffs to anticipate changes. This is evident through the one-to-one interviews, conversations between top leaders in anticipation of the change, Monday emails. These communication channels are also a better strategy for people affected by changes to air up their causes leading to change resistance, e.g. career progression for the management to iron them out creating a smooth change transition (Florent-Treacy, Kets de Vries & del Amo, 2010). Successful and Failed Efforts Since its founding, CEB has faced many changes and many of these changes have been as a result of its swift growth from a small company in the United States to a large and highly influential one within two decades. Its swift growth through the effective management of change has created a situation where the management of the company has shifted from one where there was constant interaction with the chief executive officer, to a traditional structure where the system of management has become more institutionalized and matrixed (Gold, et al, 2010). The management of change has largely become much slower, where the change process is gradual and well thought out, although this step is useful, it might be a hindrance to the change process. As it has become larger, CEB’s change process has become much slower, a situation that might be detrimental to its future growth. It should be noted that CEB takes the initiative to provide training and support for all of its employees to ensure that they comply with all of the changes that are intended for the success of the company. The company also provides training in a bid to make sure that there is minimal resistance to these new changes because if there is serious resistance, it might be a hindrance to its operations (Richtnér and Åhlström, 2010). In this way, CEB has ensured that there is an environment of optimism as well as confidence in how the members of this company deal their market and provides them with more options of how to navigate it so that they can be able to give the best services possible to its clients. Comparison of change process adopted with Kotter’s 8 steps Briefly, Kotter 8 steps change model encompasses the creation of a sense of urgency, forming groups to lead change, creating a vision for change, communicating this vision, empowering stakeholders to act on the vision, celebrating short term success and leading by example. When compared to Kotter’s 8 steps, CEB managed to create and identify a sense of urgency in its change process, following the market situation whereby their client firms were restructuring by merging their strategy, finance and business service functions. In addition, from the Fatima case CEB change process is comparable to the Kotter 8 steps as it identified the FINsters group and its leader Fatima to lead the planned change effort (Florent-Treacy, Kets de Vries & del Amo, 2010). This shows that CEB understands that to implement the changes it need to identify a lead team to drive changes. But in spite of the evidence of teams in the company, these teams seem not cohesive, individualistic and to be in competition, apart from FINsters team, which is a challenge in implementing changes. In addition, apart from Fatima initiatives to create a vision for change and strategies necessary to ensure its smooth implementation. However, the company seems to lack clear stipulated strategies and vision for change, but only communicates the needed changes to the top heads of different practices like Fatima in Finance. Unlike the Kotter 8-steps requirement, CEB planned change vision and process has not been effectively communicated to all the stakeholders to be affected by the it. This is seen when Fatima goes out of the way to hold interviews, have lunch with new team members in order to communicate her change strategy and vision, which the company should have facilitated through seminars and joint meetings (Florent-Treacy, Kets de Vries & del Amo, 2010). Further, as evidenced by the groups Friday “Warrior meetings” in which they celebrated the success of outstanding members over a week. This is similar to the proposition of Kotter 8 steps celebrating short term wins by rewarding and recognizing employees. Nevertheless, this points to CEB weaknesses as it has no laid strategy to recognize and reward employees in the short term, who have achieved their targets in apart from the usual promotion and bonuses. However, despite the company failures, this match between CEB “Fatima” change strategy and the Kotter 8 process strategy has been the key in ensuring successful implementation in the company. Recommendations CEB’s management should take cognizance of Fatima change efforts and success and implement the change strategies and process adopted by her in all its practices. Some of the recommendations that CEB management should undertake to ensure future success in its change implementation include: CEB firstly should transform from its chameleon way of operation and seek to clarify its main strategy, as this will give i the company, especially its employees a sense of direction in spite of their ever evolving strategies. Further, it should seek to identify an effective organization structure away from the current highly matrixed structure which has slowed the implementation of change within the company. It should always have a sense of urgency by explaining and communicating the need, benefits, and opportunities to be realized for change whenever they are instituting any change within the company. In this case the company will be in a position to excite its employees to see the need for change and enhance their acceptance reducing the level of change resistance. It should create and enhance further a culture of teamwork, through which functional teams can be created, which can be used to lead and support planned changes. In this way, teams formed should take into consideration the SWOT analysis of all its individual members so that the team is cohesive and effective. Among the teams formed the management would be in a position to identify most respected of them as the guiding team. Thus, whenever there are changes to be implemented the guiding team should be tasked with creating vision and communicating strategies to be adopted while leading the changes. The management should seek to set-up effective two-way communication channels in the company between the management and employees, which has been constricted by its current highly matrixed structure. This will enhance effective communication of the vision created for change and the strategies to the employees, and also their concerns regarding the planned change to the management. CEB management should always break its future planned changes into small achievable changes with measurable targets in order to keep track of the success of the intended change progress. This will also be an avenue to reward employees who have attained these targets serving as a means of motivating them and the others to endeavor to embrace change willingly by meeting their targets. CEB should always be working with guiding teams in identifying norms that support changes, changing employee reward system in line with the change, providing necessary training to employees, eliminating the old organizational process and procedures that do not support changes and reinforcing those processes and policies that enhance change Conclusion Therefore, in order to accelerate the change process at CEB, its management should adopt Kotter 8-step model to ensure success in its planned changes in the company. Further, the company should seek to move away from its matrixed organization structure to enhance better two way communication between management and employees, which is critical in change management. Moreover, since change often disrupt the norm, especially in the organization chart responsibilities, it is important for any company anticipating or implementing change to restructure their organization chart. This strategy will clear up the confusion and conflict of responsibilities and also help employees to embrace the change as they will understand their roles and career progression map. In addition, CEB should always seek to break their intended change into smaller facets and set measurable targets and associate these with rewards to motivate employees to embrace change willingly. Thus, upon CEB adopting a close version of Kotter 8-step change model and changing the highly matrixed organizational structure, this will be effective in enhancing accelerated and successful change implementation in the company. References Aiken, C. & Keller, S. (2009). "The Irrational Side of Change Management". The McKinsey Quarterly. Retrieved from http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/organization/the_irrational_side_of_change_management Florent-Treacy, E., Kets de Vries, M., & del Amo, B.(2010) Accelerating Change Management at CEB: The Roots of Change Run Deep. INSEAD, CASE - Reference no. 410-111-1 Gold, J., Thorpe, R. & Mumford, A. (2010). Gower Handbook of Leadership and Management Development. Farnham, Surrey: Gower Publishing Company. Minkes, A.L., Small, M.W. & Chatterjee, S.R. (1999). "Leadership and business ethics: Does it matter? Implications for management", Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 327-335. Richtnér, A. & Åhlström, P. (2010). "Top management control and knowledge creation in new product development", International Journal of Operations & Production Management, vol. 30, no. 10, pp. 1006-1031. Read More