Change isn't something that happens just once in a while

I recently worked with a mid-sized professional services client on a change strategy for the implementation of a new customer relationship management system.  As part of the process, I was given a couple of years' worth of sales figures, which showed a real change in the revenue they were earning from different solutions they offered.

"I'm seeing a big increase in sales of Product X, but a decline in sales of Product Y," I remarked.  "I thought you told me you wanted to increase Product Y sales because it was higher margin and created a more steady revenue stream in the long-term.  What's happening?"

The Director of Sales sighed. "We changed the way we wanted to approach the market with Product Y, and now no one really knows what's going on."

Turned out that the senior leadership team couldn't agree on the revised positioning of Product Y (did they target one or two verticals, or try to go after a larger market segment?), which meant that marketing couldn't create any messaging around it - and that meant that not only were they not doing any external communications, they weren't doing any internal communications, either.  So the sales team, left in limbo but still wanting to make their numbers, were selling as much of Product X as they could while basically ignoring Product Y.

This is what I call 'everyday change': The kind of shifts in day-to-day business that seem like small things - until 6 months pass and you realize that little change, left unaddressed, has actually resulted in some big (and not positive) changes for the business.  No one bothers to create a 'Change Management Strategy' or call in a change management expert for this sort of thing, because it doesn't seem like a big deal.  But it is.

The solution?

As an outside consultant who already had access to the senior leadership and was accepted as a change expert, I was able to help my client:  At the next meeting I added 'product offerings' the agenda and we were able to map out a plan:

• We set aside time to finally get agreement on the revised positioning for Product Y
• We agreed on some basic features and benefits messaging
• Marketing was tasked with creating some internal communications, which were then approved by the leadership team
• Because leadership was now all on the same page, they could take that back to their teams
• We arranged training for everyone in the organization - not just the sales team
• Marketing prepared an external communications plan which was presented to the organization with some fanfare

None of this took very long - it was really just a matter of forcing the organization to make it a priority, and then taking the time to communicate it to the organization.

The result?

Sales of Product Y rebounded almost immediately - the salespeople preferred to sell it anyway, due to the higher margins.

The lesson?

Change management doesn't always mean allocating a huge budget for what is clearly an organizationally-transformative initiative.  Sometimes it just means managing day-to-day changes in business focus as efficiently as possible, to ensure that business goals are being met and everyone in the organization is moving in the same direction.

It's funny:  Every organization is different, but when organizational change fails, it's usually for the same reasons.  In this infographic, Rick Torben lists the top 20 change pitfalls to avoid. One of my favorites - and it's often overlooked - is 'Only focusing on rational elements'.  People often think they're being rational about a change - but it's their emotions which are providing the resistance to it.

The situation:

A large pharmaceutical organization needed to implement a new selling model across a sales force of approximately 2000 people - without negatively impacting sales volume, even in the short term.

Several disparate sales teams representing different geographical regions were being combined to form one unified sales force.  Because individual sales force identity was very strong - sometimes even stronger than company brand identity - in the field, and the management structure was going to change significantly, this represented a major shift in the way the company handled its sales.

Assessment:

The sales force was selling a commodity product in a highly competitive industry, which meant that even small changes to territories, processes or structure had historically led to significant drops in sales volume.  Additionally, because the sales force was large and spread across the country, changes could mean months of administrative disarray - which also led to steep declines in revenue.

Since this new selling model would include both territory and field structure changes, the risks were particularly high for this change initiative.

Strategy:

We recommended a 3-part approach:

• A change communication plan focused on the role of senior management and senior field management
• A change and transition plan including an indentity merger component, including a contest to come up with a name for the new, unified team
• A management training plan focused on how field managers could handle the change effectively

Results:

1. The change communication plan employed several different types of feedback loops, which encouraged all team members to participate effectively - which in turn created a positive business climate for the changes, in which junior sales force team members were set good examples by senior leadership
2. The contest to choose a new name for the unified team drove healthy competition across regions, which fostered maintenance of sales volumes while emphasizing the 'one team' message
3. The management training plan gave managers the tools to identify and understand where employees were in the change cycle and how to move employees through the process without negatively impacting sales volume

In the end, the majority of the sales force - from senior management to junior salespeople - thought the change was 'no big deal'.  In fact, even though the change represented quite a shift in the way the business managed sales, it was executed in a way that allowed people to move into the new selling environment without missing a beat.

Sales remained constant throughout the realignments, and even increased in some areas.  Sales management reported improved communication and increased morale across the entire sales force.  Sales in the first year following the change remained constant with no decline, and increased by 15% in the following year - which exceeded pre-change expectations.