Forums

An approach that saved me aggravation last time I rolled out a new administrative requirement with my directs…

One of the most frustrating things for me is need for corrective guidance on follow-up.  I know I need to check on stuff, make sure it’s happening.  But when I check, and it ain’t happening, and I know they know what I’ve asked them to make happen – and I know they know I know – argh.  Just do the document for every project, please.  Timesheets.  Every week.  Do it.  Dang it.

So I stole tactics from the _How To Pre-Wire A Meeting_ cast, hoping to prevent aggravation on the back-end by investing up front. 

I introduced the topic in O3’s, noting objections.  I took my two most senior team members to lunch, talking through the issue and their concerns – changing my approach, actually, based on their take.  Then back to the topic again in O3’s, addressing previously noted objections and possible approach.  A final bit of tweaking based on responses.  Then pitched an approach in weekly staff meeting, asking for comments, listening to the discussion.  Then, finally, a short all-hands to roll it out.  (This is what we’re doing.  Any questions?  Thank you.)  There were no questions at the all-hands; we were done in three minutes.  No, really.  It was a bit worrisome, actually.

But follow-up was a breeze.  Everybody did it, every time, without further guidance.  In fact, without my having to even mention it again.  They just did it.  It was wonderful.

A lot to invest up front, but it paid off big time.  For me, anyway.  Of course, past performance is no guarantee of future returns – as if anybody needed that reminder these days.

Best,

Paul Schweer
 

douglase's picture

sounds to me like a good example of how a change should be implemented.  By involving everybody in the design phase of the change in some way you helped them take ownership of the change.

 

It's always good to hear positive reinforcement of good organisational change methods.

 

Regards

Douglas.