Change Management Best Practices For Leaders

70% of change initiatives fail. (And it's rarely because the idea was bad.) Here's what actually kills transformation: You picked the wrong change model for the job. It's like performing surgery with a hammer. Sure, you're using a tool. But it's the wrong one. I've watched brilliant CEOs tank their companies this way: Using individual coaching (ADKAR) for company-wide transformation. Result: 200 people change. 2,000 don't. Running a massive 8-step program for a simple process fix. Result: 6 months wasted. Team exhausted. Nothing changes. Forcing top-down mandates when they needed subtle nudges. Result: Rebellion. Resentment. Resignation letters. Here's what nobody tells you about change: The size of your change determines your approach. Real examples from the field: 💡 Startup pivoting product: → Used Lewin's 3-stage (unfreeze old way, change, refreeze) → 3 months. Clean transition. Team aligned. 💡 Enterprise going digital: → Used Kotter's 8-step process → Created urgency first. Built coalition. Enabled action. → 18 months later: $50M in new revenue. 💡 Sales team adopting new CRM: → Used Nudge Theory → Made old system harder to access → Put new system as browser homepage → 95% adoption in 2 weeks. Zero complaints. The expensive truth: Wrong model = wasted months + burned budgets + broken trust Right model = faster adoption + sustained results + energized teams Warning signs you're using the wrong model: • High activity, low progress • People comply but don't commit • Changes revert within weeks • Energy drops as you push harder • "This too shall pass" becomes the motto Match your medicine to your ailment: Small behavior change? Nudge it. Individual performance? ADKAR it. Cultural shift? Influence it. Full transformation? Kotter it. Enterprise overhaul? BCG it. Stop treating every change like a nail. Start choosing the right tool for the job. Your next change initiative depends on it. Your team's trust demands it. Your company's future requires it. Save this. Share it with your leadership team. Because the next time someone says "people resist change," you'll know the truth: People don't resist change. They resist the wrong approach to change. P.S. Want a PDF of my Change Management cheat sheet? Get it free: https://lnkd.in/dv7biXUs ♻️ Repost to help a leader in your network. Follow Eric Partaker for more operational insights. — 📢 Want to lead like a world-class CEO? Join my FREE TRAINING: "The 8 Qualities That Separate World-Class CEOs From Everyone Else" Thu Jul 3rd, 12 noon Eastern / 5pm UK time https://lnkd.in/dy-6w_rx 📌 The CEO Accelerator starts July 23rd. 20+ Founders & CEOs have already enrolled. Learn more and apply: https://lnkd.in/dwndXMAk

Most changes fail, especially if they are complex. But why? The Lippitt-Knoster model explains exactly why you don’t get what you want. Making changes is notoriously difficult, especially if they are substantial and complex. In response, there are many change management approaches and step-by-step instructions for managing change. But, to manage change, it is essential to first understand it. Once we know the key ingredients of a successful change, we know what it takes to make it. Even more importantly, once we know these ingredients, we also know WHY a change fails, so that we can do something about it. According to the Lippitt-Knoster Model for Managing Complex Change, a complete change effort requires the following six ingredients: 👉 Vision: sets the direction and explains why the change is needed 👉 Consensus: creates alignment and commitment for the change 👉 Skills: outlines the skills and expertise needed to realize the change 👉 Incentives: creates the motivation and drive to make the change 👉 Resources: enables the change with the needed time, money and tools 👉Action Plan: clarifies the roadmap and steps for realizing the change All six are needed. Consensus was added later by Knoster and it’s not so clear if both originators agree. Yet, I find it essential for any change to be successful, so you need all six. If you miss one you don’t get the change you want. ❌ Miss Vision and you get Confusion ❌ Miss Consensus and you get Sabotage ❌ Miss Skills and you get Anxiety ❌ Miss Incentives and you get Resistance ❌ Miss Resources and you get Frustration ❌ Miss Action Plan and you get False Starts So, here is what it takes to make a successful (complex) change: Step 1: Vision. Create and share a clear vision of the change and why it is needed. What will the new situation look like? Step 2: Consensus. Engage people across the organization to gather input and align their viewpoints in line with the vision. Step 3: Skills. Identify which skills are needed, provide the necessary training, upskill or attract people with the right skills. Step 4: Incentives. Understand what motivates people and create the right mechanisms for intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Step 5: Resources. Reserve enough time and money for making the change and obtain the necessary tools, technologies and other resources. Step 6: Action Plan. Develop a high-level roadmap and detailed action plan that outlines the priorities, order and steps for making the change. === Want to create true and lasting change? Then the Certified Strategy and Implementation Consultant (CSIC) program may be something for you. For more information and registration for the September 2024 cohort of this exciting program, and booking a call with our enrollment advisor, visit our website strategy.inc. 

Ever heard of the Lippitt-Knoster Model for Managing Complex Change? It's a classic in the change management world, laying out the essential pieces needed to navigate big transformations. Taking a cue from that, I've adapted it to fit the world of digital transformation. There are seven key elements you can't afford to miss: Vision, Strategy, Objectives, Capabilities, Architecture, Roadmap, and Projects & Programs. Skip any one of these, and you're asking for trouble. Here’s why each one matters: • 𝐕𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧: This is the 'what' of your transformation. A clear vision gives everyone a target to aim for, aligning all efforts and keeping the team focused. • 𝐒𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐠𝐲: Think of this as the 'why' and 'how.' A solid strategy explains the logic behind your vision, showing how you plan to get there and why it's the best route. It’s designed to guide everyone in the company on how to make decisions that support the vision, aligning all efforts and keeping the team focused. • 𝐎𝐛𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐬: These are your milestones. Clear, specific objectives make it easy to measure success and ensure everyone knows what's important. Without them, you can easily veer off course and waste resources. • 𝐂𝐚𝐩𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐞𝐬: These are what your company will now be able to do that it wasn't able to before in order to achieve the objectives. These can be organizational capabilities (like improved decision-making), technical capabilities (such as real-time operational visibility), or other types like enhanced customer engagement or streamlined processes. • 𝐀𝐫𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞: A robust architecture ensures all your tech works together smoothly, preventing inefficiencies and costly headaches. This includes various types of architecture such as data architecture, IT infrastructure architecture, enterprise architecture, and functional architecture. Effective architecture is central to reducing technical debt and aligning software with broader business transformation goals. • 𝐑𝐨𝐚𝐝𝐦𝐚𝐩: Your roadmap is the game plan. It lays out the sequence of actions, helping you avoid uncertainty and missteps. It's your guide to getting things done right. • 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐬 & 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐦𝐬: These are where the rubber meets the road. Actionable projects and programs turn your strategy into reality, making sure your plans lead to real, tangible outcomes. From my experience, I think '𝐂𝐚𝐩𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐞𝐬' and '𝐑𝐨𝐚𝐝𝐦𝐚𝐩' are the two most overlooked. What do you think? ******************************************* • Follow #JeffWinterInsights to stay current on Industry 4.0 and other cool tech trends • Ring the 🔔 for notifications!

I typically do not use the term “change management” (unless I’m working with a partner who wants or needs to use it).  “Managing” change implies order, planning & stability; the ability to forecast, direct & deliver outcomes. Yet very few change or transformation plans deliver what they set out to deliver, in the predicted timescales. We no longer operate in a stable world where we undertake a change project and move back to equilibrium. Our environment moves faster, acts in more interconnected ways & is full of ambiguity. Change is relentless & continuous. We need to focus on building adaptive capacity & creating a collective process, not on "managing" change as a discrete, manageable task.  Michael Hudson talks about shifting from “change management” to “change fitness”. He sets out three core leadership practices for enabling change: 1. Continuous sensemaking: This involves incorporating five minutes of sensemaking into existing team routines, understanding what is different or changing. Over time, this practice builds "complexity capacity" & the ability to hold onto multiple, often contradictory realities without becoming overwhelmed. 2. Strategic energy management: Treating people’s energy as a finite resource that needs to be deliberately managed, like any other resource.  3. Learning from navigation, not just success: Shifting from an outcome-focus to process-focus builds the ability to prevail in situations where the path forward is unclear. https://lnkd.in/eqQQM5FF Via Forbes. Graphic from Corporate Rebels.

The biggest misconception I see about change management is that it’s only about people. Yes, people matter. But focusing only on mindset, buy-in, and communication misses the point. Because in most organisations, it’s not people holding change back. It’s the environment they’re working in. - The systems haven’t changed. - The tools still slow things down. - The incentives reward the old behaviours. - And the ‘unwritten rules’ still tell people to play it safe. That’s why the real job of a change manager isn’t just to support people through change. It’s also to design for it. That means: - Looking at the system, not just the individual - Removing friction that makes new behaviours harder - Using evidence to guide decisions - Shifting from “how do we get people to change?” to “what’s stopping them?” The best change managers understand this. They don’t just manage the rollout, they shape the conditions. They show up as system thinkers, problem solvers, and enablers of progress. Because lasting change doesn’t happen by chance. It happens by design. 📌 If you’re tired of being undervalued and overlooked as a change manager and, you've done the qualifications and need something to take you to the next level, get in touch. I run programmes for both individuals and teams. It's time to stop doubting yourself. Book your space now: https://lnkd.in/eQj9MBTV ------ ♻️ Repost to share with your network 💡 Signup for my newsletter and get insights like this straight to your inbox: https://lnkd.in/eESS94TS

Leading change isn't just about having a compelling vision or a well-crafted strategy. Through my years as a transformation leader, I've discovered that the most challenging aspect lies in understanding and addressing the human elements that often go unnoticed. The fundamental mistake many leaders make is assuming people resist change itself. People don't resist change - they resist loss. Research shows that the pain of losing something is twice as powerful as the pleasure of gaining something new. This insight completely transforms how we should approach change management. When implementing change, we must recognize five core types of loss that drive resistance. * First, there's the loss of safety and security - our basic need for predictability and stability. * Second, we face the potential loss of freedom and autonomy - our ability to control our circumstances.  * Third, there's the fear of losing status and recognition - particularly relevant in organizational hierarchies.  * Fourth, we confront the possible loss of belonging and connection - our vital social bonds. * Finally, there's the concern about fairness and justice - our fundamental need for equitable treatment. What makes these losses particularly challenging is their connection to identity.  When change threatens these aspects of our work life, it doesn't just challenge our routines and who we think we are. This is why seemingly simple changes can trigger such profound resistance. As leaders, our role must evolve. We need to be both champions of change and anchors of stability.  Research shows that people are four times more likely to accept change when they clearly understand what will remain constant. This insight should fundamentally shift our approach to change communication. The path forward requires a more nuanced approach. We must acknowledge losses openly, create space for processing transition and highlight what remains stable. Most importantly, we need to help our teams maintain their sense of identity while embracing new possibilities. In my experience, the most successful transformations occur when leaders understand these hidden dynamics. We must also honour the present and past. This means creating an environment where both loss and possibility can coexist. The key is to approach resistance with curiosity rather than frustration. When we encounter pushback, it's often signaling important concerns that need addressing. By listening to this wisdom and addressing the underlying losses, we can build stronger foundations for change. These insights become even more crucial as we navigate an increasingly dynamic business environment. The future belongs to leaders who can balance the drive for transformation with the human need for stability and meaning. True transformation isn't just about changing what we do - it's about evolving who we are while honouring who we've been. #leadership #leadwithrajeev

Inheriting the Impossible Project: What New Executive Sponsors Must Do First There is a particular call no executive seeks, yet most serious leaders eventually receive it. You are asked to sponsor a mission-critical, highly visible initiative. Tens of millions have been spent. Results are negligible. Confidence is low. Failure is not an option. You did not design the program or select the vendors. Still, the outcome now carries your name. In these moments, urgency is real. Discipline is essential. Before committing another dollar or entering a board discussion, a new executive sponsor must quickly analyze and mitigate several risks. 1. Establish objective truth. You need a clear, evidence-based view of what has actually been delivered, what is technically viable, and where the true risks sit. Independent validation provides the foundation for credible decisions and protects both the organization and the sponsor. 2. Clarify decision rights and accountability. Large, multi-vendor initiatives fail when ownership is diffused. Progress requires explicit clarity on who makes decisions, who integrates work across parties, and who is accountable for enterprise outcomes. 3. Reframe the financial conversation. The $20M already spent is history. Leadership credibility now hinges on a rigorous assessment of what the remaining $35M can realistically produce, under what assumptions, and on what timeline. 4. Reset scope around business outcomes. Execution accelerates when success is defined in measurable enterprise terms. Narrow the focus to what materially advances the business and align resources accordingly. 5. Prepare the board early. Requests for additional funding succeed when paired with a materially different plan, stronger governance, and a more explicit risk posture. Boards fund clarity, confidence, and control. Taking over a failing engagement requires steadiness, truth, and decisive leadership. That is how confidence is rebuilt and progress becomes real.

Over the past few weeks, I’ve had several conversations with talent and learning leaders to better understand their priorities and perspective on the future. A recurring theme has been the work of those leading enterprise-wide transformation. These aren’t small, isolated projects, but bold efforts to fundamentally reshape how their organizations operate. Whether it’s rethinking company culture, driving skills-based initiatives, expanding career mobility, adopting AI, managing large-scale transformation, or implementing new leadership frameworks. These leaders are operating at the intersection of business strategy, people development, and organizational change. A question I often hear is: “What separates the most successful efforts from the rest?” After these conversations and dozens of guests on The Edge of Work, a few powerful patterns have emerged. Here are four that consistently show up: 🔶 Systems Thinking: They don’t approach these initiatives as standalone projects. Instead, they embed them into the full talent system, connecting culture, skills, mobility, leadership, and strategy into one cohesive ecosystem. Silos are broken. Work aligns to enterprise goals. 🔶 Coalition Building: While they’re accountable for outcomes, they don’t go it alone. These leaders act less like the “sage on the stage” and more like the “guide on the side,” bringing others along, building ownership across functions, and fostering collective success. 🔶 Change as a Practice: Change isn’t a task list; it’s a muscle. These leaders treat change management as an ongoing practice, embedding it into daily work, meeting people where they are (not just what the spreadsheet says) and continually reinforcing new behaviors to sustain momentum. 🔶 Business First Orientation: They lead as business strategists first. While deeply skilled in talent, they speak first in the native language of their business stakeholders, (then their own) connect initiatives to enterprise outcomes, and position people strategies as drivers of organizational performance. These are just a few of the themes I’ve observed. If you're leading enterprise-wide talent, skills, career, or AI initiatives, what resonates? What would you add? I’d love to hear your perspective. #talent #futureofwork #leadership

Last week, I promised to answer your top questions about leadership in the age of AI. So, here goes! I’ll start with a foundational topic: What mindset shifts do leaders need to make during times of huge change? For me, it comes down to this — we need to go from being “map readers” to “explorers.” Map-readers rely on past routes and like knowing the destination. Explorers enjoy shifting terrain and thrive in not knowing the destination. They run experiments, stay close to the work and their teams, and earn trust by being present and being human.  They succeed because they are curious enough to learn. “Exploration is really the essence of the human spirit.” – Frank Borman (Apollo 8 astronaut) Minimize change → Ride the change Why it matters Change is not a phase. “Back to normal” isn't coming. Success is building resilience and helping teams thrive in turbulence. The mindset sets the tone: it has to be “let’s do this” versus “oh no, change”. What should leaders do Communicate with clarity relentlessly - what’s known, what’s unknown, and how you are making decisions. Make calls with incomplete information: run tests, adjust fast.    2. Certainty mindset → Scientist mindset Why it matters When so much is changing, doing what worked before won’t work. A scientist mindset means you have curiosity over certainty. You look for reasons you might be wrong, not just reasons you must be right and you surround yourself with people who challenge you. What should leaders do Set hypotheses and run experiments (more about this next week). Iterate, and learn as much from being wrong as from being right. Be a “learn-it-all,” not a “know-it-all.” 3. Manage from above → Get close to work Why it matters When you are exploring new paths, you need to stay close to the ground. You need to be a master of your craft Managing with decks and dashboards is not enough. What should leaders do Write prompts, embed within your team, get close to your team's processes. Triangulate with feedback from customers, partners and team members and don't rely on filtered reports. 4. Drive with control → Enable with context Why it matters The simple definition of context: it is what enables great work. Humans and AI both need it to deliver. It is the shared frame that makes the next action obvious and lets teams move with confidence and speed. What should leaders do Start with the “why” and “why now” behind strategies, pivots and decisions. Communicate it on repeat. Don’t dilute the message as it cascades down. Own it. 5. Me → We Why it matters No single leader can solve challenges alone, and being a lone explorer will lead to burnout. Choosing “we over me” puts team wins ahead of ego. And that’s how we win. What should leaders do Stay humble and recognize you may not have all the answers. Listen deeply across the business. Coach and help others grow. Let’s keep the conversation going in the comments, and I’ll share my second post in this series next week.

This past month, I celebrated my 10th anniversary at Scrum.org—a milestone that has naturally prompted some reflection. I joined this journey, asked by my mentor Ken Schwaber, because I fundamentally believe people have far more potential than they are allowed to use. Watching my family work in environments where they were told what to do, not asked for their input, was a powerful motivator. The heart of Scrum is empowerment—giving teams the problems to solve, not prescriptive solutions. Yet, 10 years in, true empowerment is still the exception, not the rule. I've realized that for too long, the Agile community has made a powerful mistake: blaming Middle Management. I believe good middle management is actually the answer, the key to supporting, enabling, and growing the idea of empowered teams. They are the ones who create the environment for work to happen every day. If we want to drive lasting change, we have to work with them, not around them. My Lessons for Engaging Middle Managers: * Don't Lead with Loss: Stop using buzzwords like 'removing hierarchy' or 'flattening.' Focus instead on how managers can step into new, essential leadership roles within the Agile framework. * Understand Incentives: Change efforts fail when they ignore how they affect the visible and invisible incentives of the people involved. We must understand and adjust these power structures. * Position Agile Roles as Leadership: Roles like Scrum Master and Product Owner require authority and experience. The right middle managers are ideal candidates for these accountabilities, giving them a vital position in the new structure. Looking ahead, the arrival of AI is fascinating. It may be the catalyst we need, potentially opening the door to teams that truly have all the combined skills—augmented by AI—to deliver a working increment. I'm excited for the next 10 years. We have to continue fighting to dispel the myth that middle managers are the problem. They are the fuel for the next decade of successful, empowered organizations. What are your experiences? How have you seen management become a powerful force for good in your Agile transition? https://lnkd.in/eUa7T7yt