Editar

Compartir a través de


Change management case study

An organization was implementing a replacement of an old legacy system. This system supported a call center where about 400 order takers entered orders that they received from customers over the phone.

During the planning for the project, no major changes were defined for the call center. The organization decided not to include the order takers in the implementation project directly. Instead, it worked with a group of business analysts who were anchored in the IT department. Earlier system changes had negatively affected order taker performance measures and, as a result, individual cash commissions. Because of those earlier experiences, everyone expected the order takers to offer lots of resistance to any kind of system or process change. Therefore, project management thought that it would be easier to wait until late in the project to include that group of users.

When the project was barely into the build phase, rumors about the new system started to spread from other departments to the order taker teams. The Sales department VP brought a couple of order takers into an improvised demo. The demo went poorly, partly because the demo data was unrelatable and partly because the department VP performed the demo after little or no preparation or practice. The unintended outcome was affirmation of the order takers' impression that the order taking process in the new system would be slower and involve more effort than in the legacy system.

The concerns and rumors almost turned into a revolt. Several key senior supervisors and team leads openly talked about going to a nearby competitor. This competitor was actively using these rumors to approach team members.

At this point, the project sponsor brought in a change manager. The change manager suggested two workstreams. The first stream consisted of the traditional assessments and planning across the organization. Then, given the late stage and the damage that had already been done, a second stream was immediately started to address the call center problem head-on.

The change manager immediately arranged sessions where the company president addressed the whole company, including the call center. They explained why it was critically important for the company to implement a new system and how this system would ensure a significant competitive advantage in the market. The president outlined a bright future for the company, with many other changes than just the system, including new product lines and modern workplace options. During these sessions, individuals in the call center also had a chance to voice their concerns that were related to the earlier changes.

A work group that represented all levels in the call center was set up, and a senior supervisor who was highly regarded and respected by their peers was reassigned as a liaison between the business analysts and the call center. Measures were defined for efficiency, and a plan was made for ensuring that commissions were calculated fairly during the transitional phase. The order takers were able to define some pain points in the legacy system, primarily related to alternative products. All these activities were communicated clearly and repeatedly.

There were still individuals who resisted, especially in the call center supervisor team. Although some general excitement was generated, it seemed as if this small group could turn individuals back against the changes.

The change manager asked a consultant from the implementing partner to arrange for a voluntary round of practice sessions and a contest for the order takers. They wanted to see who could take the most simulated orders in the new system. This time, a test setup that had real data was used. The president supported the contest, and donated not only a weekend at the corporate lodge for the winner and their family but also a symbolic cash prize for the winner and the two runners-up.

The outcome was stunning. More than 50 order takers signed up. After only a few hours of practice, the order takers who took part were largely able to match the legacy system in effectiveness, thanks especially to order copying functionality that didn't exist in the old system. During the practice sessions, the order takers noticed that they could search for products by using both internal and external stock keeping units (SKUs) and product names. They also noticed that the system could prompt them with suggestions for alternative products, whereas the old system required that they look up products in a binder.

In the face of these results, the small group of supervisors who had been resisting lost their argument. A few did eventually leave the company, but an increase in efficiency quickly balanced that loss. The connection between the call center and the IT department continued and eventually brought on more momentous changes, now driven by suggestions from the call center.

The traditional change management workstream also provided results. Sessions to define outcomes and measures found large differences in expectations, a high level of complexity and risk, and a low level of transformation maturity.

Directly after the assessments and discussions, department VPs and senior managers replaced the business representatives who were originally assigned to the project team, to ensure proper representation and decision-making efficiency.

The project sponsor realized the complexity and risk, and also the company's poor readiness. Therefore, they brought in a management consultant who specialized in the areas of warehouse management and supply chain management to help the project team.

Overall, the project was a remarkable success.