C4CM™ is the only nationally recognised qualifications centre in Change Management.
Our qualifications are work based qualifications within the Qualifications Credit Framework. In particular they deliver the change components of the National Occupational Standards for Management and Leadership.
Designed for professionals in the business of organisational change, C4CM™ accredits a series of short modules in Managing Change. These can be taken as classroom based courses or as online guided learning.
Two items came across my consciousness recently which are not difficult to link. The first is a set of lessons learned from projects in an organisation. An outstanding item of the lessons is the complaint that not enough people resources were available, or the people allocated already had a day job. The second item was an article about allocating resources across a business for strategic performance improvement. This article simply points that that the best resource allocation is based on getting the best return on investment.
I propose that assurance is the next big topic in programme and project management. I am reading more about it, customers are asking about it (though not yet for it!), and we have just finshed a new qualification for people doing project and programme assurance with our partner Aspire. The catalyst for this article is an excellent white paper from our partner Bestoutcome on the importance of Gateway reviews for assurance.
What about the mythical 70% failure rate for change in organisations? This has been searched for quite dilligently in the literature by Mark Hughes; who concluded that although well reported by very respected reporters, there was very little substantial measurement data to support the reports. Hence it becomes an urban myth. The dilemma is: what is the cause of the myth? Is it a myth about performance in doing change (the reality is that the success rate is much higher); or is the cause in the way success (and hence failure) is defined?
Which do you think should come first: the definition of the task to be carried out or the team to do the task? So what happens when an organisation needs to change: the top manager re-organises his senior team to prepare for the change. This seems to be putting the cart before the horse. Especially as the ‘new’ team have a new operational role to get to grips with before they can address the changes.
I propose that the key decisions needed to set up a change initiative are identified and then the appropriate leadership team are appointed to make those decisions.
A recent tutorial from Prosci identifies three critical areas of activity needed for change success. The model is both simple and elegant. However, it opens the question about where should change management professionals go for their support. The three areas are: project management; sponsorship; and change management. Not only does each activity have to work well, they have to work well together for change success. The schism between the three areas is becoming more evident as change failure continues, see how the model can help.