Month: August 2015

26 Aug 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in Organizational Change Articles Permalink

Training Doesn’t Equal Change

Sticky Post By On August 26, 2015
Dwight Eisenhower once said, “You don’t lead by hitting people over the head – that’s assault, not leadership.”

As hard as it is to believe, there are still many organizations and leaders that believe just telling someone how to change or what to do when a change occurs is sufficient for implementing a successful change. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Research and extensive practice indicates that change is much more about helping people through transition than creating or implementing new steps, processes, or procedures. William Bridges said it best:

“Much as we may wish to make a new beginning, some part of us resists doing so as though we are making the first step toward disaster.”
 
Successful change entails managing the “messy middle” of how people naturally deal with alterations to their environment.

CHANGE IS AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN CRITICAL

One of the most prominent memes in business today is that the only constant is change; Heraclitus first said it 2500 years ago, and it’s been repeated ad nauseum ever since. Yet, for the most part change initiatives are painful at best and unsuccessful at worst. Unfortunately, it is the latter that is the most common.

WHY DO LEADERS AND ORGANIZATIONS EXPECT COMMUNICATION AND TRAINING TO INTEGRATE CHANGE WITHIN THE INSTITUTION?

The short answer is that they are simple and straightforward. Each is controllable and has a defined beginning, middle, and end. Creating training and communication as the sole means of implementing change within an organization requires little, if any, input from those impacted by the change. It enables strict control on the message. It is also based in a belief that somehow change is a process with defined inputs and outputs. Leaders see change from a rear view mirror standpoint: they have already come to grips with why the changes are necessary and have done the heavy lifting internally to “get right” with the need for change. Not allowing or insuring that each and every impacted employee, as much as possible, has the opportunity to understand the change, internalize the need for change, and become an advocate for change is dooming the change to failure before it even begins. It is analogous to forcing someone to jump out of the window without convincing them there is a fire.

ENGAGE TO SUCCEED

Training and communication are vital to the success of any large-scale organizational change. There is no doubt that these are critical tools to ensure that people are well informed and prepared to be successful when a change occurs. However, it is unrealistic to think that just telling someone how to change and that the changes are coming is enough for them to believe that the changes are necessary. Engaging those impacted by the change in creating it will dramatically increase the likelihood of the success of its implementation and sustainability over time.
 
What part does training play in change?  How important is it to the success of change?  Please email us (info@cube214.com) or leave your comment(s)!

Anil Saxena is the President of Cube 2.14, an organizational development consulting firm that works with clients to increase both customer and employee engagement while decreasing turnover, improving customer retention, and increasing profitability within organizations.

Saxena is a certified High Impact coach and trainer and a Joint Application Design facilitator. He is also certified by both Rush Systems and IBM as a focus group facilitator. He is an inaugural member of Northwestern University’s Learning and Organizational Change program, and he earned his bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering from the Illinois Institute of Technology.

26 Aug 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in Facilitation Articles, Instructional Design Articles, Leadership Articles, Organizational Change Articles Permalink

Keep Training Short!

Sticky Post By On August 26, 2015

The attention span of modern adults is anywhere between five and seven minutes. What sense does it make to create multi-day training if within the first 90 to 120 minutes, you’ve lost your audience?

LIFELONG LEARNING HAPPENS IN AN INSTANT. 

Generally, lifelong learning does not happen inside the classroom or by watching a computer-based training course. Recent research tells us that the attention span of adults, and people in general, is dramatically reducing. A 2008 study commissioned by Lloyds TSB Insurance found that the average adult attention span is now just five minutes seven seconds – down from twelve minutes a decade ago. Training or discussing something for too long actually lowers the amount of recall
 
“The human brain can only hold 7 pieces of information for less than 30 seconds” John Medina, author of Brain Rules.
And yet, training course after training course targeting adults spans days and sometimes even multiple weeks. What is the true benefit of all of this training?

Regardless of the type of training or the topic that is being discussed, the human brain works much more effectively when it is given the opportunity to learn small bites of information and then go away to synthesize it, reflect on it, potentially practice using it, and then go back and learn the next piece of information. The adult brain searches for the relevance and practicality of information that is delivered (a topic to be discussed at a later date). Once a piece of information is delivered, the immediate reaction is to try and place that piece of information into context; that context is different for each individual. Keeping it short enables adults to put the information in context, think on it, and be prepared to learn more at the next opportunity.

SO WHAT DOES THIS ALL MEAN?

Training in the web era must be sustained, brief, and very pointed. Based on research on the attention span of adults currently, it is vital that training be redesigned and repurposed to be extremely focused. It is no longer appropriate to have training that extends over multiple days or multiple weeks, unless there are frequent breaks and opportunities to step away from the training. Organizations are no longer capable of allowing employees to be away from their workspace or their duties for long stretches of time. Research will show that it is also not necessary to be away for long periods of time. For the most part, employees are not natural learners, therefore training must be high-impact but very brief, to allow them to go back and utilize what they have learned.

WHAT NOW?

This is actually great news. What it means is that training that has been previously developed only needs to be modified. New training can now be developed with the idea of “keep it short” as one of the development frames. There are some key concepts to remember when altering current or developing new training that will leverage the power of keeping it short on the learner’s ability to recall and utilize the information delivered:

◦     Bursts of knowledge
◦     Broken up into 7 – 10 minute increments
◦     Limit topics to 50 minutes
◦     DO NOT have lengthy training
◦     Keep things fresh
◦     Limits the need for multitasking

This is by no means an indictment or call to throw out all of the training that’s ever been developed that is longer than five to seven minutes. That is similar to saying that all buildings that don’t have elevators should be destroyed. For the most part, people who develop training are not neurobiologists or experts on the brain, so it wouldn’t be logical for them to have this information.  It does mean that training should be modified to leverage this new knowledge. It is similar thinking to why the blog has become so popular. Our attention spans and ability to take in large amounts of information about single topics have been reduced, both because we are busier and because there’s just so much more out there. Blogs allow us to learn new information in a very short amount of time, and utilize or share it to increase our ability to recall it when it’s necessary. Training is the same way.  Keeping it short makes it more effective, keeps it more accessible over the long haul, and increases the likelihood that training will have a positive impact on the performance of the individual and organization over time.
 
How long should training be?  Can we afford multi-day training anymore?  Let us know what you think!

Anil Saxena is the President of Cube 2.14, an organizational development consulting firm that works with clients to increase both customer and employee engagement while decreasing turnover, improving customer retention, and increasing profitability within organizations.

Saxena is a certified High Impact coach and trainer and a Joint Application Design facilitator. He is also certified by both Rush Systems and IBM as a focus group facilitator. He is an inaugural member of Northwestern University’s Learning and Organizational Change program, and he earned his bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering from the Illinois Institute of Technology.

26 Aug 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in Change Management Articles, Facilitation Articles, Instructional Design Articles, Leadership Articles, Organizational Change Articles Permalink

Successful Change – Help The One To Help The Many

Sticky Post By On August 26, 2015

Want to increase the likelihood that your big change initiative is successful? Talk about its impact on one individual, NOT how it will make the organization/team/department better.

In his recent book, The Upside of Irrationality, Dan Airely discusses that people relate or accept change more effectively when it’s related to the impact on one person.  Wonder if that is true?  During the 2008 US Presidential campaign, John McCain brought up how his policies would impact “Joe the Plumber.”  The mention did not help Senator McCain (obviously), but it did provide a platform for each candidate to relate their policies in a way that everyone could understand the impact to

THEM.

This phenomenon holds true for so many things that impact large groups directly:

• Selling pharmaceuticals
• Marketing legal services
• Encouraging people to donate money to the “needy”

…and so many more.
 
WHAT TO DO WITH THIS INFORMATION?

STOP trying to tell people what a big difference the “big change” will have on the organization or the team.

START sharing how changing (or not changing) will impact “a person.” Relate it to someone like the employee; this makes the change and its impact real.  It will also improve the quality of the communication and cut out a lot of the buzzwords and jargon.
 
The Small Business Chronicle suggests mapping out the changes as well. Tell employees exactly what is going on and create understanding from the beginning. Once employees are on board with the change, they can make the internal transition smoother and help clients and vendors adjust as well.
 
How do you relate the change to the individual?  What has worked in your experience?

Anil Saxena is the President of Cube 2.14, an organizational development consulting firm that works with clients to increase both customer and employee engagement while decreasing turnover, improving customer retention, and increasing profitability within organizations.

Saxena is a certified High Impact coach and trainer and a Joint Application Design facilitator. He is also certified by both Rush Systems and IBM as a focus group facilitator. He is an inaugural member of Northwestern University’s Learning and Organizational Change program, and he earned his bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering from the Illinois Institute of Technology.

26 Aug 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in Leadership Articles, Organizational Change Articles Permalink

Successful Organizational Transformation: Enabling The Impacted

Sticky Post By On August 26, 2015

The success of organizational change initiatives ranges from 30 to 35 percent. That means that 65 to 70 percent of all change fails! Why would any organization take on a project like that if the odds are that it’ll fail?  Because they MUST.  Industries, customers, technology, and marketplaces are changing more rapidly than at any other time in history.
 
WHY OH WHY DOES THIS HAPPEN?

There are no sure-fire, guaranteed methods that will lead to a successful organizational change.  But there is one way that will almost certainly lead to its demise – leaving those impacted by the change out of creating the change itself.  This leads to natural resistance.

Resistance to change is about perceived lack of control: people feel like the change is “being done to them” and they don’t have a say in it.
 
WHAT CAN BE DONE?

Involve all of those impacted by the change.  A simple way to think about it is:

1. Make sure you find every constituency that might be impacted by the change – employees, customers, leaders, etc.

2. Involve all those constituencies in building the case for change.

3. Ensure that each constituency is a part of creating the solution.

4. Train key members of each constituency to implement and sustain the change.

Another key is to create wins and successes that people can see.  According to Kotter’s 8-Step Change Model, it is beneficial to create short-term wins to build on the change. Then, anchor the changes into the corporate culture with continuous efforts – like talking about progress at every chance and publicly recognizing key constituencies involved in the change.
 
There are many different methods to implement change/transformation successfully (Kotter, Proci, etc.).  All of them are great.  However, no organization can transform successfully without involving those impacted by the change.  Trying to force change will result in the culture rising up and crushing it.
 
How have you seen those impacted by change involved in the change process?

Anil Saxena is the President of Cube 2.14, an organizational development consulting firm that works with clients to increase both customer and employee engagement while decreasing turnover, improving customer retention, and increasing profitability within organizations.

Saxena is a certified High Impact coach and trainer and a Joint Application Design facilitator. He is also certified by both Rush Systems and IBM as a focus group facilitator. He is an inaugural member of Northwestern University’s Learning and Organizational Change program, and he earned his bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering from the Illinois Institute of Technology.

26 Aug 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in Organizational Change Articles Permalink

Stop Trying To Be Apple!

Sticky Post By On August 26, 2015

NOT EVERY COMPANY CAN BE APPLE.

Because of their great success, it’s easy to point to Apple as a paragon, but every company has the potential for greatness.

We need the non-Apples!

If every company was Apple, Apple wouldn’t be special. Not every company is going to revolutionize its industry – some are going to stay in the middle of the road, or innovate in less flashy ways, like cost reduction or energy efficiency. A healthy industry has a spectrum of companies that meet the needs of different market segments, though.  Apple, with its focus on design and slick marketing, caters to early adopters – and its pricing reflects that, too.  But there are plenty of people (who don’t want to spend that kind of money) in the market for a tablet or a smartphone or a laptop – and companies other than Apple manage to make a profit selling second- or third-wave versions of Apple products to those people. Samsung, no matter how the recent lawsuit turned out, may not be the most innovative tech manufacturer (they’re no Apple!), but they’re a major industry player, and millions of people use their devices every day.
 
It feels like books are saying, “Look, you can be whatever you want if you follow the Apple way.” No. No, you can’t. I’m five feet tall: there is no way I could play basketball like Shaq, and the harder I try, the more disappointed I get!
 
Likewise, not every company will have the same strengths – the same talents, visions, resources – and so not every company can follow the same path to greatness.  The genius of Apple that can be emulated isn’t just in its penchant for innovation and great design, but in its ability to identify and exploit its pool of talent and resources.
So if you must “be Apple,” do that – instead of wishing you had Steve Jobs’ vision, make the most of the tools you actually have.

What do you think? 

Anil Saxena is the President of Cube 2.14, an organizational development consulting firm that works with clients to increase both customer and employee engagement while decreasing turnover, improving customer retention, and increasing profitability within organizations.

Saxena is a certified High Impact coach and trainer and a Joint Application Design facilitator. He is also certified by both Rush Systems and IBM as a focus group facilitator. He is an inaugural member of Northwestern University’s Learning and Organizational Change program, and he earned his bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering from the Illinois Institute of Technology.

26 Aug 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in Leadership Articles Permalink

Leadership Is What?

Sticky Post By On August 26, 2015

Leadership is an interesting thing because when you are good at it the people around you are 

• Challenged but sane
• Understand how what they do impacts others
• Passionate about what they do

But, they don’t necessarily acknowledge your role and may even take you for granted. The funny thing is, you are okay with it. You are a leader when those around you count on your support but don’t recognize that they get it because being a leader means acknowledging its not about you.

What is your view of leadership?

Anil Saxena is the President of Cube 2.14, an organizational development consulting firm that works with clients to increase both customer and employee engagement while decreasing turnover, improving customer retention, and increasing profitability within organizations.

Saxena is a certified High Impact coach and trainer and a Joint Application Design facilitator. He is also certified by both Rush Systems and IBM as a focus group facilitator. He is an inaugural member of Northwestern University’s Learning and Organizational Change program, and he earned his bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering from the Illinois Institute of Technology.

26 Aug 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in Instructional Design Articles, Leadership Articles, Organizational Change Articles Permalink

Don’t Just Do Something, Stand There!

Sticky Post By On August 26, 2015

Is creativity really promoted in the workplace? Or are we are creating “sheeple?” Look at the office space. It’s sterile, quiet, etc. There is NO conversation!!!!  How can we promote productivity in such a barren work environment?
 
In a recent visit to a client site, one of the first things that I noticed was how quiet and solitary the organization felt. It was silent. Everyone was working on something while listening to their headphones.
 
There was:

• No one collaborating
• No one sharing information
• And each person an island on their own

As the client and I discussed her issues, she commented that “I can’t get my folks motivated to solve this problem creatively”

WORKING ON A SOLUTION

The first thing we did when we started working on the project was to bring the team together. Surprisingly, it was the employees I walked by getting to the client’s office that had the foundational issues.
 
They didn’t really know how to work together. They didn’t really know how to TALK to each other.  

Each was so focused on their own initiatives and projects that they had no idea how to collaborate because they had no idea how to communicate.

Once we got going on solutions, it didn’t take long to encourage them to collaborate. They loved it. It took time to show them how to do it effectively, but once they did the creativity flowed.  Amazingly, they not only resolved the issue we were brought in to help them with, but 3 others that they had been struggling with for over 18 months.

All told, increasing their collaborating and communicating delivered :
 
• $150,000 savings due to a process improvement
• Saving 2 days on resolving trouble tickets
• Created a process to standardize proposal responses
 
HOW’D THAT HAPPEN?
 
Honestly, it was very simple to turn the team’s creativity and ingenuity loose on some of the problems they had been struggling to solve. The primary tool that was utilized was encouraging them to collaborate much more.

We used three easy methods to jumpstart this process:
 
1)    We sat the team in one group, no walls but with access to private areas.

We gave the team their own space as a group to work. The team sat in a common room without walls but with easy access to private areas to make phone calls or to have some private time for themselves.
Primarily though, there were was done in one common area. In it were whiteboards, flip chart paper, and other easy to access collaboration tools.

“It first was hard to get used to the space that seemed less private. However, it became apparent quickly that it was much easier to work on team issues together while we were all in the same place and all had access to the same things. Being in a room together allowed us to work and have fun without bothering other teams.”
~ Key Member of client team
 
2)    Worked on everything as a team

Outside of a handful of tasks that could only be conducted by one or two people on the team, a free project or task was completed as a group. The task or issue was treated as a project. The team would meet together briefly and designate a leader (unless one person was already designated leader) and they would formulate a plan with milestones, deliverables, and due dates.

Then, they would work together on reaching the milestones and creating the deliverables to ensure that due date were met.

“Working on every project as a team was a little bit of a struggle at first. We were all very used to working as individuals on our separate projects. But when we realized that all of our work interacted it became easy to leverage each other’s ability to get projects done quickly and accurately. Surprisingly, work became a whole lot more fun.”
 
~Member of the Team (10 year employee with the company)
 
3)    Instituted challenge sessions
We instituted regular challenge sessions. In these sessions a member of the team would presents a solution that was recently created or an approach to resolve an issue. Members of the team would “challenge” what was presented.

However, when they came up with the challenge, they also had to be able to offer a solution or an idea to overcome the challenge. It didn’t always work out perfectly, but it improved the quality of solutions created by the team immensely.

“The challenge sessions were tough. Because we didn’t talk to each other or collaborate that much it was hard to come up with “critiques” of what our team members presented. We didn’t want to offend each other. But, we saw that problems were getting solved and we were working together more efficiently. The sessions actually made us a better team.”
 
~Team lead

SILVER BULLET

Let’s be clear, this solution works well for this particular team. It is by no means a silver bullet to solving productivity problems for teams. But, it does highlight an issue that we have seen, very frequently in organizations.
We don’t promote collaboration actively.

Workplaces are designed, in many cases, to suppress spontaneity, creativity and most importantly collaboration unless it’s scheduled. Collaboration happens when it happens. Implementing a few simple methods can create an environment work) in which teams can “prove” creativity by being collaborative.
 
Although counterintuitive, the solution may seem counterintuitive; actually increase the speed with which the team completed projects.
 
Maybe it’s time that we tear down the cubicle walls.
 
How does your organization promote collaboration? What are some winning tactics that you’ve seen to promote teams working together more effectively?
 
Please send us an e-mail or comment to let us know how.

Anil Saxena is the President of Cube 2.14, an organizational development consulting firm that works with clients to increase both customer and employee engagement while decreasing turnover, improving customer retention, and increasing profitability within organizations.

Saxena is a certified High Impact coach and trainer and a Joint Application Design facilitator. He is also certified by both Rush Systems and IBM as a focus group facilitator. He is an inaugural member of Northwestern University’s Learning and Organizational Change program, and he earned his bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering from the Illinois Institute of Technology.

26 Aug 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in Customer Service Articles Permalink

You’re Being Watched

Sticky Post By On August 26, 2015

The scary truth for businesses today? Customers are watching you..all the time!   
 
If you are a business owner, a business leader, or frontline employee at a factory, customers (or potential customers) are paying attention to your actions.
 
Because there is so much parity in design, service level, and quality of product one of the key differentiators is the customer’s relationship to the company or service provider. Customers more and more want to feel good about what they’re buying and from whom they’re buying it.
 
This should terrify organizations that don’t pay attention to how they treat their employees.
 
Every level of stakeholder –  shareholders, clients, investors –  is paying attention to every nuance of an organization.
 
Therefore, it matters more than ever how the  ”most important asset”, the people who work for you, are treated.
 
This is not an excuse for being lenient or lackadaisical with standards. It is about being consistent, fair, and ethical. Organizational stakeholders are interested in companies holding true to their statements or “beliefs” about employees.
 

In a recent incident at a large fast food establishment, an employee was berated by a manager in front of customers. Unfortunately for the manager, the incident happen right below a sign that read “Our employees are our most important asset”. This location and subsequently the entire chain was impacted by customer backlash. So much so, that the berating manager and the company’s president had to apologize.
 
For those organizations that exemplify the values they profess, this new scrutiny will be a welcome light on established good practices.
 
For those organizations that still believe employees are resources that are interchangeable and expendable, the thought of a watchful customer  should be very frightening.

How have you seen organizations leverage their employees to gain and retain customers?  Do you agree that customers are watching?  Let me know!

26 Aug 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in Change Management Articles, Organizational Change Articles Permalink

Throwing The Monkey

Sticky Post By On August 26, 2015

One particularly excellent method of passing the blame from one individual to another is called “throwing a monkey”.

There is a colloquialism in the United States about a problem or burden being “like having a monkey on your back” – A big problem to solve, an issue that can’t be dealt with easily or causes great stress.
 
People are busy.  No one is interested in inheriting or taking on other people’s problems. But surprisingly, many people view managers (parents, clergy, political leaders, etc. ) as receptacles for solving problems that they either don’t want or don’t know how to solve.  They take the problem or monkey off their backs and put it on the manager…and the manager lets them.  In fact, MOST MANAGERS ENCOURAGE IT!
 
Leaders think they are the most able or don’t trust their folks to solve problems correctly.  Thus creating a vicious spiral of making sure that employees are reliant on them, the leader, to solve problems.  Then the manager/leader has the audacity to think – I can’t trust my people to solve problems or they don’t have initiative!

SO WHAT TO DO?
One of the most powerful lessons that a manager can provide to a team is the ability to analyze and solve problems. Empowering the team to solve problems and innovate creates a high performing team. It also eliminates the nasty practice of throwing one’s own monkey (or problem) onto another person (manager).

TAMING THE MONKEY
One of the most powerful ways to end the practice of monkey throwing is replacing it with the “taming the monkey” methodology. This is a simple and effective way to increase accountability and creativity the same time. It works like this:
 
Any problem that is brought up must be coupled with a potential solution(s) or recommendation(s). This encourages the person that brings the issue forth to contemplate remedies to solve the problem.
 
When someone approaches the manager, leader or colleague with an issue it must be paired with a suggested remedy or next step to solve said problem.
 
Thrown Monkey (incorrect):
This process is SO broken!  What are you going to do about it?!?!?!
 
Tamed Monkey (correct):
This process is SO broken!  If we created a form to help the processor note the request, that would stop the confusion.  I mocked up what one might look like, what do you think?
 
Now the manager or colleague is not trying to solve a problem but COLLABORATE ON CREATING A SOLUTION.  Its empowering, freeing, and creates energy.
 
This way of thinking can be called “don’t tell me that the monkey is wild, tell me how to tame it“. Just telling someone that the monkey is wild is useless because they can SEE that.   Providing ideas or solutions to tame it will ensure that everyone can be safe.
 
Clearly, some problems must be addressed by the person to whom its brought. However, no leader is interested in simply being handed a problem to solve. Ideas or recommendations for the potential solutions may not only always be used, but are always welcome. Promoting this practice is a great pathway to encouraging leadership.
 
Remember – Keep your monkeys to yourself.  Tame them by encouraging your team to develop and implement solutions!
 
What do you do when someone tries to make their problem yours?  How do you tame your monkeys?

Anil Saxena is the President of Cube 2.14, an organizational development consulting firm that works with clients to increase both customer and employee engagement while decreasing turnover, improving customer retention, and increasing profitability within organizations.

Saxena is a certified High Impact coach and trainer and a Joint Application Design facilitator. He is also certified by both Rush Systems and IBM as a focus group facilitator. He is an inaugural member of Northwestern University’s Learning and Organizational Change program, and he earned his bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering from the Illinois Institute of Technology.

26 Aug 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in Instructional Design Articles, Leadership Articles, Organizational Change Articles Permalink

The Reason They Don’t Call Marriages Mergers

Sticky Post By On August 26, 2015

There is a reason that marriages are not considered mergers. They are not the joining of two disparate groups to make a stronger bigger group, but the joining of two groups to make one cohesive unit dedicated to being great together, supporting each other and leveraging each other to be more successful.  
 
Yes, marriages and mergers are different.
 
Clearly there is a difference in combing the operations of thousands of people versus two.  But the sentiment is the same.
 
MIND-SET OR APPROACH

The reason that most mergers fail is mind-set. The approach of many mergers is to come out it from the standpoint of garnering new market share or swallowing a potential competitor or sometimes to even purchase new growth/new technology.
However, the standpoint is generally from the perspective of “how can we make our company bigger and better faster?” It’s not, “How does this merger benefit our customers, employees, and in the end, both companies.

Of course mergers are an important tool to continue the growth, viability, and infusion of innovation of some larger organizations. Often, on paper, these mergers make sense. They are the combining of two organizations that can leverage the economies of scale to drive down cost or corner particular market share.

Unfortunately, what ends up happening is people get in the way. Mergers, like any change, are messy and complex. Therefore distilling what could make a potential merger successful, in most cases, will you increase the likelihood of a long-term success and long-term return on investment.
 
Viewing Mergers like a Marriage

There are a few simple questions to think through before deciding whether or not the merger could actually work.
 
1.    Will the resulting company be beneficial to both parties? 

That is, when all is said and done, will the merged entity have benefited the two previously separate companies, the customers of the two previously separate companies, and the employees of the previously separate companies?

There might not be some employees that become redundant when there is a merger, but it’s important to make sure that those employees that are seen as assets review the merger as beneficial to them. If they don’t, it could be more costly to merge them to leave the companies separate.
 
2.     Are the two companies’ cultures compatible?
 
Cultures that are diametrically opposed will likely clash and work against each other. It is likely that those cultures will never completely melt.
 
This constant internal battle between the two opposing cultures will undermine forward progress and often make it difficult, if not impossible, to implement new strategies or products quickly.
 
Therefore, it may be better to avoid a merger of two diametrically opposed cultures than to force the marriage between the square peg and the round hole.
 
3.     Once the merger is completed, can the two formerly separate companies work together towards mutual benefit?

Although this is hard to determine prior to the merger happening, it is vital that both parties are willing to commit to the benefit of the newly created entity.
 
It is a desire to do what is best for the new organization, thinking about decisions and direction based on what will make the new organization successful.
 
Senior leaders have to be fully committed to this and wiling to reward and reprimand individuals that exemplify either.
 
4.     Are both organizations willing to willing to give up something about themselves to make the new merged entity successful?

Each party or company must be willing to give up some tactic or artifact that is part of their cultural make up.  Both sides need to show their willingness to be fully behind the new organization.
 
If these can be addressed with some level of certainty, the merger has a higher chance of succeeding.  Undoubtedly, there will still be challenges; no merger is that simple.  But, if both organizations are willing to embrace the new organization,a merger can work.

However, if there is not a goal of common success, then the merger will go the way to AOL Time Warner.  Marriage sounds like a strange business term.  It feels like there is some commitment to it.  That is because there is.
 

If mergers were approached like a marriage, then maybe more of them would work.
 
Where do you think mergers go wrong?  What can be done to make them more successful?

Anil Saxena is the President of Cube 2.14, an organizational development consulting firm that works with clients to increase both customer and employee engagement while decreasing turnover, improving customer retention, and increasing profitability within organizations.

Saxena is a certified High Impact coach and trainer and a Joint Application Design facilitator. He is also certified by both Rush Systems and IBM as a focus group facilitator. He is an inaugural member of Northwestern University’s Learning and Organizational Change program, and he earned his bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering from the Illinois Institute of Technology.

FIND A SOLUTION

Cube 2.14 will increase your organizational effectiveness. We specialize in developing innovative, practical solutions to create productive workplaces that exceed goals.

CONTACT INFORMATION

  • Anil@Cube214.com
  • (847) 212-0701
  • www.cube214.com

CONTACT US

Your Name (required)

Your Email (required)

Your Website (required)

Subject (required)

Your Message (required)