Isaca-Cobit 5 Implementation-Isaca (2012)

The Intersection of
Change Management and

Lean Six Sigma
The Intersection of
Change Management and
Lean Six Sigma
The Basics for Black Belts and
Change Agents
Randy K. Kesterson
CRC Press
Taylor & Francis Group
6000 Broken Sound Parkway NW, Suite 300
Boca Raton, FL 33487-2742
© 2018 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

CRC Press is an imprint of Taylor & Francis Group, an Informa business
No claim to original U.S. Government works
Printed on acid-free paper
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-1-1382-1702-7 (Paperback)

International Standard Book Number-13: 978-1-138-10297-2 (Hardback)
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-1-315-11689-1 (eBook)
This book contains information obtained from authentic and highly regarded sources. Reasonable
efforts have been made to publish reliable data and information, but the author and publisher
cannot assume responsibility for the validity of all materials or the consequences of their use. The
authors and publishers have attempted to trace the copyright holders of all material reproduced in
this publication and apologize to copyright holders if permission to publish in this form has not
been obtained. If any copyright material has not been acknowledged please write and let us know
so we may rectify in any future reprint.
Except as permitted under U.S. Copyright Law, no part of this book may be reprinted, reproduced,
transmitted, or utilized in any form by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or
hereafter invented, including photocopying, microfilming, and recording, or in any information
storage or retrieval system, without written permission from the publishers.
For permission to photocopy or use material electronically from this work, please access www.
copyright.com (http://www.copyright.com/) or contact the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. (CCC),
222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, 978-750-8400. CCC is a not-for-profit organization that
provides licenses and registration for a variety of users. For organizations that have been granted a
photocopy license by the CCC, a separate system of payment has been arranged.
Trademark Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and
are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.
Visit the Taylor & Francis Web site at

http://www.taylorandfrancis.com
and the CRC Press Web site at

http://www.crcpress.com
To my wife, Susan, and my three kids: Michael, Nicole, and Chase
Contents
List of Abbreviations..............................................................................xi
Foreword.............................................................................................. xiii
Preface.................................................................................................... xv
Working at the Intersection.................................................................xix
Introduction��xxi
Thank You.......................................................................................... xxiii
About the Author................................................................................. xxv
Section I
Chapter 1 Why Should You Care?....................................................... 3

Change Receptiveness of the Organization...............................6
A Catalyst for Success...................................................................8
Respectful and Respected Leadership........................................8
\kə-ˌla-bə-ˈrā-shən\ .......................................................................8
The Collaboration Trade-Off.......................................................8
Key Takeaways...............................................................................9
Reference.........................................................................................9
Chapter 2 Change Is Good!................................................................ 11

Key Takeaways.............................................................................13
Chapter 3 Change Is Hard!................................................................ 15

Key Takeaways............................................................................ 20
Reference...................................................................................... 20
Chapter 4 Resistance Is Real.............................................................. 21

The Change Curve......................................................................21
Key Takeaways............................................................................24
vii
viii • Contents
Chapter 5 Minimizing Resistance..................................................... 25

The Story of the Shoe that Changed My Perspective
on Change.....................................................................................25
Key Takeaways............................................................................ 30
Chapter 6 Why?: The Most Important Word in

This Book........................................................................... 31
Why?..............................................................................................31
The Targets of the Change..........................................................32
People Analytics Tools................................................................33
Key Takeaways.............................................................................35
Reference.......................................................................................35
Chapter 7 Resistance in Your Personal Life?.................................... 37

Key Takeaways.............................................................................37
Reference.......................................................................................38
Section II
Chapter 8 What Is Organizational Change

Management? .................................................................... 41
The ADKAR Model (by Prosci, Inc.)....................................... 42
Managed Change Model (by LaMarsh Global)...................... 42
Resistance to Leaving the Current State............................. 43
Resistance to Moving to the Future State........................... 43
Resistance to the Change Plan............................................. 44
The Five Stages.............................................................................45
Emotional Support.....................................................................47
A Chaordic Change, Discovered in an
Unlikely Place..........................................................................47
Friction Equation.......................................................................49
Organizational Change Management......................................50
Some Lessons Learned on How Can I Help?......................50
The Reinforcement Paradox?............................................51
Key Takeaways.............................................................................52
References.....................................................................................53
Contents • ix
Chapter 9 Project Risk Assessment................................................... 55

Some Changes are Bad Changes................................................57
How to Prevent Bad Projects......................................................58
Key Takeaways.............................................................................58
Chapter 10 Some Basic Organizational Change Management Tools....... 59

Stakeholder Analysis Tool..........................................................59
Stakeholder..............................................................................59
What Is the Tool Used For?...................................................59
How to Use the Tool?............................................................. 60
When to Use the Tool?...........................................................61
What to Do with the Results?...............................................61
Risk Analysis Tool.......................................................................62
How to Use the Tool?..............................................................62
When to Use the Tool?...........................................................63
What to Do with the Results?...............................................63
Communication Plan..................................................................63
How to Use the Tool?............................................................. 64
When to Use the Tool?.......................................................... 64
What to Do with the Results?.............................................. 64
Levers You Can Pull....................................................................65
Communication.......................................................................... 66
Incentives................................................................................ 66
Training and Development...................................................67
Key Takeaways............................................................................ 68
Reference...................................................................................... 68
Chapter 11 When to Ask for Help....................................................... 69

OCM Intuition.............................................................................70
Key Takeaways.............................................................................71
Chapter 12 The Intersection of Organizational Change

Management and Lean Six Sigma.................................... 73
A Note to the LSS Program/Deployment Manager................75
Key Takeaways.............................................................................76
x • Contents
Chapter 13 People Are Different.......................................................... 77

Introduction to the WorkPlace Big Five Profile......................78
Need for Stability (N)..................................................................79
Extraversion (E)...........................................................................79
Originality (O).............................................................................79
Accommodation (A).................................................................. 80
Consolidation (C)....................................................................... 80
Change Propensity......................................................................82
People and Facts and Data.........................................................82
People Analytics..........................................................................83
Key Takeaways............................................................................ 84
References.....................................................................................85
Chapter 14 The Final Word................................................................. 87

Key Takeaways............................................................................ 88
Section III
Chapter 15 Interviews with Experts.................................................... 91

The Interview Questions.............................................................92
Chapter 16 Mini-Biographies of the Interviewees........................... 159
Section IV
Appendix A: Competencies for the Successful Black Belt................ 165

Appendix B: Coaching and Mentoring for the Black Belt................ 167
Appendix C: The Shingo Principles................................................... 169
Appendix D: A Brief History of Continuous Improvement............. 171
Appendix E: Where to Go for More Information............................. 179
Appendix F: Acknowledgments.......................................................... 181
Bibliography......................................................................................... 183
Index�� 185
List of Abbreviations
ADKAR awareness, desire, knowledge, ability, reinforcement
ASEM American Society for Engineering Management
ASQ American Society for Quality
BMGI Breakthrough Management Group Inc.
CAP change acceleration process
CEO chief executive officer
CI continuous improvement
CM change management
COO chief operating officer
CPI continuous process improvement
DISC a personality profile model
DMADV define, measure, analyze, design, verify
DMAIC define, measure, analyze, improve, control
EMO/PERF emotional response/performance
FMEA failure modes and effects analysis
HR human resources
IT information technology
LSS Lean Six Sigma
MBTI Myers–Briggs Type Indicator
OCM organizational change management
OD organizational development
PDCA plan, do, check, act (or adjust)
PM project management
PMO project (or program) management office
QWERTY name of a common computer keyboard design
ROIC return on invested capital
ROI return on investment
SQL Structured Query Language
TPM total productive maintenance
VP vice president
TV television
WIIFM what’s in it for me?
xi
Foreword
Much has been written on change. The sentiments expressed in articles
and books that describe the importance and challenges of successful
change management are certainly accurate. The statistics often quoted are
not. After all, can it really be true that 70% of change efforts fail (a number
blindly repeated time and time again)? Probably not. But then again, what
exactly does it mean to succeed? Most change DOES eventually happen.
The real question is how painful the path turns out to be and how much
time, effort, and money is lost along the way. The more time it takes and
the more effort required, the less efficient the change effort. Of course,
some change efforts DO actually fail, resulting in no net change. In the
end, the measurement of change lies along a continuum, and effective
change management is about improving the odds of success while reduc-
ing the resources required to succeed.
Randy K. Kesterson offers us his career’s worth of wisdom. In fact,
through research and interviews with others, he offers us many careers’
worth. By bringing together the collective wisdom, research, and learning
of so many others, Randy creates a truly collaborative compendium with
special emphasis on the challenges of driving day-to-day process changes
such as those often driven by the continuous improvement leaders we call
Six Sigma Black Belts.
Strategic change often comes from high above. While people might
drag their feet, mandates from high above generally move forward. In
these cases, change management is intended to grease the skids, ensuring
change happens as fast as possible.
On the other hand, Six Sigma Black Belts, the principal actors in this
book, tend to be operating at peer-to-peer levels, meaning they don’t have
the authority to mandate change and they don’t have the access to the
resources necessary to ram change through. Black Belts also tend to be
working to improve the daily operating processes of the business, which
is much like trying to change the belt on an engine while the engine is
running. In other words, for Six Sigma Black Belts, change manage-
ment efforts are often far more challenging than for their superiors in the
organization. Yet collectively, their efforts are no less important. In fact,
xiii
xiv • Foreword
strategic change driven from on high above is often implemented through

the efforts of many Six Sigma Black Belts.
I’ve known Randy for a decade, and since the day I met him, his pas-
sion for understanding and managing change has always been apparent.
When we first met, he was at LaMarsh & Associates, a time in his life that
he refers to affectionately throughout this book. Ten years on, LaMarsh
Global remains one of the top change management firms in the world.
I’ve seen Randy’s passion applied in the workplace when he was a client
at General Dynamics. Without his solid background in change manage-
ment, I don’t believe his team or mine would have met with the success
they experienced together.
The readers of this book will no doubt be able to relate to many of the
experiences and stories Randy shares. And they will likely ask themselves,
“Why wasn’t I taught this sooner?” The answer is that, while change man-
agement is very often referred to as a “soft skill,” in practice it is quite hard.
Resistance to change is complex and dynamic. Just as a block of wood
sliding across a surface meets with resistance from multiple forces, so,
too, does effort to change a process. As the block of wood moves faster,
resistance increases. The friction presented to the block by air increases
exponentially as something moves through it, while the friction between
the block and the surface also increases according to the interfaces coef-
ficient of friction. Process change is no different. There is organizational
resistance brought on by corporate bureaucracy, there is process friction
by virtue of the fact that most processes do not operate independently of
all other processes, and then there is the resistance of people who may not
understand the need for change or who are just more comfortable with
the status quo. Breaking down the change and dealing with the human
element is the focus of this book.
David Silverstein, CEO

The Lean Methods Group
Preface
I’ve had this book in my head for a while. It’s been trying to get out, and I
finally decided in early 2016 to sit down and start to write it.
The book straddles a possibly untouched niche—the intersection of
change management (CM) and Lean Six Sigma. The book is written for
the Black Belt, or the organizational change management practitioner,
working inside an organization with low Lean maturity, where significant
resistance to change is the norm. You see, I believe there is a continuum
of organizations with “Fat” (i.e., non-Lean) organizations on the left and
“Leaner” organizations on the right.
You may know of organizations with more Lean maturity, where there
is no longer as much need for overt change management and Lean has
become a part of the culture rather than a set of tools practiced by people
in structured Black Belt roles.
A recent list of the top 10 Lean manufacturing companies in the world1
included the following:
1. Toyota
2. Ford
3. John Deere
4. Parker Hannifin
5. Textron
6. Illinois Tool Works
7. Intel
8. Caterpillar
9. Kimberly-Clark
10. Nike
I’d also nominate Danaher and Milliken for inclusion in the “far right” club.
For the less-Lean organization, building change management tools into
Lean Six Sigma projects helps to mitigate resistance to change, accelerat-
ing the benefits and saving the organization time, money, and employee
angst—in short, eliminating waste. Change management can also help
with the Lean Six Sigma initiative deployment or, more likely in today’s
world, redeployment.
xv
xvi • Preface
Why is it that more organizations are not farther right on the Lean con-
tinuum? I have a theory about this. Referring to the elements of Lean on
the right side of Figure P.1, where within a typical organization does strat-
egy formulation reside? Typically, at the top, you say, with the executive
team or involving a team of experts in the business development function?
And who does the lion’s share of work on process improvement? Maybe
Operations? And who fiddles the most with org structure? Executives with
the help of Human Resources/Organizational Development (HR/OD).
And who typically strives to improve workplace culture and address nag-
ging culture gaps? Maybe HR/OD again? How about metrics? Who typi-
cally owns most of them and tracks them? Maybe Operations and Finance?
The picture I’m painting is that the work to move toward a Lean(er)
organization requires the close coordination and alignment of multiple
teams of people working across functional areas, up and down the orga-
nization. It’s not easy. My observation is that organizations that have been
most successful (at least large organizations in some parts of the world)
have relied upon Hoshin Kanri to create the needed alignment from top
to bottom and across the organization.
Some people who have read early drafts of this book come from orga-
nizations on the far right side of the Fat–Lean continuum. A few of them
The Fat–Lean Continuum
FAT Organization LEAN Organization*

FAT Strategy Deployment (None) LEAN Strategy Deployment**
FAT Processes LEAN Processes
FAT Structure LEAN Structure
FAT Culture LEAN Culture
FAT Competencies LEAN Competencies
FAT Metrics LEAN Metrics
Low LEAN Maturity High LEAN Maturity
Lots of Waste Less Waste
* If you’re not familiar with an organization on the right side of the Fat–Lean Continuum,
you can get a feel for it by reviewing the Shingo Principles at http://www.shingo.org.
** I’m not suggesting that a FAT organization never formulates strategy; I’m saying that
most seem to lack an effective strategy deployment and execution process. A strategy
deployment approach that aligns very well with Lean and the Shingo Principles is called
Hoshin Kanri. You can scan for it on the Internet or, if you want to know more, see
The Basics of Hoshin Kanri, of Hoshin Kanri (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2015) a book
at the primer level.
FIGURE P.1
The Fat–Lean Continuum. (Created by the author.)
Preface • xvii
seem to look down their Lean noses at people who don’t reside near them
in the land of Lean-ness. They tell me that Six Sigma is not really a part of
Lean, i.e., you shouldn’t require people to work on projects in Black Belt
roles, and they say that change management should not be needed. With
the greatest of respect, I tell them a story in an attempt to help them to see
other (less Lean) perspectives.
An Olympic swimmer was watching a very young boy take his first swim-
ming lesson at the community swimming pool. The boy had finally learned to
put his face in the water and was now using a float board while his instructor
held him a float. The Olympian scoffed, “you should not need a float board
to swim!” From his position at the far right end of the swimming continuum
he had forgotten that he once, long ago, had needed this kind of help as well.
I’ve spent two-thirds of my career in executive roles in industry and
one-third of my time in strategic change management consulting, working
deep inside the intersection of Lean Six Sigma and change management.
I’ve helped Master Black Belts within several Fortune 500 companies weave
structured change management approaches and tools into the DMAIC
(define, measure, analyze, improve, control) and DMADV (define, mea-
sure, analyze, design, verify) steps. The results have been significant.
DO NOT READ THIS BOOK!

Do not read this book if you are fortunate enough to work within an orga-
nization that lies on the right side of the Fat–Lean Continuum. On the
other hand, if you are like most of us, living in organizations on the left
side, struggling to move toward the right side of the continuum, facing
resistance to change at every turn, please join me for an exploration of the
intersection of two fascinating methodologies.
Randy K. Kesterson
Davidson, North Carolina
REFERENCE
1. Top 10 Lean Manufacturing companies in the world, ManufacturingGlobal.com,
June 12, 2014.
Working at the Intersection
There are many people in this world who possess more expertise than I do
in the field of OCM, and there are also a considerable number of people
with far more expertise in Lean Six Sigma.
But, I suspect that I am a member of a fairly small group of people who
possess experience and some expertise in both—people with experience
working at the intersection of change management and Lean Six Sigma.
xix
Introduction
I’m guessing that you’re reading this introduction because you’re looking for
a simple explanation of Organizational Change Management (OCM). I under-
stand. I sometimes hear people involved in a stalled project tell others, “We
need to use change management on this project.” But, I wonder, “do they
really know what Change Management is?”
This book could be titled “Change Management 101.” It is intended to
be used as follows:
1. A refresher for existing Black Belts, Green Belts, and Master Black
Belts to improve their understanding of change management;
2. A primer in change management for new belts going through Lean
Six Sigma training;
3. A source of training material for those leading Lean Six Sigma train-
ing classes; and
4. A source for change management practitioners coaching existing
belts through their projects.
A DEFINITION
“Change management is about people. It is the way we help people navigate
change successfully. Tools, techniques, and processes exist to help people
make the transition to adopt change.”
—Lisa A. Riegel, PhD

President/CEO
Educational Partnerships Institute, LLC
CONFUSION ABOUT THE TERM

Management of the people side of change is sometimes confused with the
term, change management (CM)., used in the parlance of the Information
xxi
xxii • Introduction
Technology (IT) professional. In the IT world, the people side of change is

critically important, but “change management” is also used to describe an
IT service management discipline. The objective of change management
in the IT context is to ensure that standardized methods and procedures
are used for changes to control IT infrastructure—NOT to help people.
I first learned of the term OCM when I was Executive Vice President and
COO for an aerospace and defense company. In the many years since, I
have learned that change management applies to all forms of change—
from breakthrough, cataclysmic change, to incremental continuous
improvement projects. In this book, I’ll talk about how Organizational
change management (OCM) applies to Lean Six Sigma, from the unique
perspective of the Black Belt.
TERMINOLOGY
I’ll use the terms “organizational change management”, “change manage-
ment”, and “OCM” synonymously throughout this book.
I’ll also use the terms, “Lean Six Sigma” and the abbreviation “LSS”
interchangeably.
The first part of the book explains the BIG problem—resistance—and
why you should care about it. Part II explains what you can do about it.
Part III contains Q&A sessions I conducted with experts from the fields of
OCM and Lean Six Sigma; many of the interviewees are experts in both;
mini-biographies of all the participants are also included. Section IV
includes some nuggets of information that should help you as you move
on to more advanced change management topics.
Paraphrasing Leonardo da Vinci and Albert Einstein, I hope this book is

simple enough, but not too simple.
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.

—Leonardo DaVinci
Everything should be made as simple as possible but not simpler.

—Albert Einstein
Thank You
To Jeanenne LaMarsh and Jeff Hiatt for sharing a small portion of your
change management expertise with me, helping me to understand a few
important things about this fascinating subject.
To all of you who spent time with me, sharing your thoughts and answer-
ing my questions for incorporation into the “Interviews with Experts” sec-
tion of this book.
To A. Blanton Godfreg Ph.D. for sharing a bit of your knowledge of Lean
Six Sigma with me.
To Ellen Domb, Pierce Howard, Ph.D., Zack Johnson, Alireza Kar,
Siobhan Pandya, Lisa Riegel, Ph.d., and Michele Quinn for your valuable
contributions to their book.
To Susan and my siblings (Lori Lynn and Kris Anthony) for your sup-
port and (mostly) positive, constructive editing.
To Chase for your help with the artwork.
To those who assisted me with the editing of the final draft, you will find
your name listed in Appendix F, Acknowledgments.
Finally, to all of you who throughout my career have given me examples
of how to (and how not to) effectively manage change.
xxiii
About the Author
Randy K. Kesterson has held executive-level positions at Cobham,
Doosan Bobcat, General Dynamics, and Curtiss-Wright, with prior suc-
cessful experience at Harsco Corporation, John Deere, and at privately
held Young & Franklin/Tactair Fluid Controls.
He also worked as a management consultant to organizations such as
Bank of America, Caterpillar, Motorola, Bank of Montreal, Ford Motor
Company, Milliken & Company, RJ Reynolds, and the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA).
Randy recently served as the Chair of the Advisory Board for the Center
for Global Supply Chain and Process Management at the University of
South Carolina’s Moore School of Business. He earned his Six Sigma Black
Belt at North Carolina State University/IES.
He earned his Bachelor of Science degree in Engineering Operations
from Iowa State University and attended Syracuse University, where he
earned his MBA with a concentration in Operations Management.
Randy and his family have residences in North Carolina and in the
Washington, DC, area.
xxv
Section I
1
Why Should You Care?
You can have Change Management without Continuous Improvement;

however, you cannot have Continuous Improvement without Change
Management. It is a requirement at every stage of a Lean Six Sigma project,
and without the acknowledgment of its importance and the deployment
throughout the entire project, you will not be successful.
—Siobhan Pandya
Director of Continuous Improvement and Lean at
Mary Kay Inc. Formerly with Shell Oil Company in
the UK and US. Lean Six Sigma Black Belt
You will learn, or maybe you’ve already learned, that Lean Six Sigma is
about changing and improving processes to eliminate waste and/or to
reduce process variation. When you change a process, you almost always
require people to change what they do or how they do it. Now, there is the
rub: This stuff involves people! Oftentimes, people don’t like change, even
when the change is good for them.
Why should you care about organizational change management (OCM)?

Because you will probably fail without it.
Most of the unsuccessful Black Belts I’ve known have not failed
because of their inability to use the Lean Six Sigma tools. They’ve failed
because of their inability to deal with the “people stuff,” including the
inability to deal with the resistance they encountered on their projects.
As a certified Black Belt, or a Black Belt in training, why should you care
about OCM?
3
4 • The Intersection of Change Management and Lean Six Sigma
Years ago, I asked this very question. I simply didn’t understand. Now that
I have some gray hair on my head, I finally understand that being a good
Black Belt requires the following skills along with a set of core competencies.
I call these skills and competencies the critical success factors for a Black Belt.
As shown in Figure 1.1, the required skill sets form a triangle, with the
core competencies shown to be residing at the very heart of the critical
success factors.
Critical success factors = three (3) sets of skills + one (1) set of competencies
The Black Belt must have the ability to use:
1. Lean Six Sigma approaches and tools

2. Project management approaches and tools
3. Change management approaches and tools
4. … and the Black Belt must also possess the required competencies to
do the job.
In my experience, the best, most successful Black Belts are masters of the
three skill sets shown in Figure 1.1, and they also possess the required
Black Belt competencies. You can think of the four elements shown in the
diagram below as the critical success factors to be a good Black Belt.
I’ve intentionally shown the competencies to be in a gray zone, as shown
in the triangle in Figure 1.1, because there is disagreement about the
makeup of this list. As consultants often say, “It depends.” It depends on
the environment within which the Black Belt is working—both the project
environment and the overall “change receptiveness” of the organization.
More on change receptiveness later.
Project management
approaches and tools
Black
Belt
competencies
Lean Six Sigma Change management

approaches and tools approaches and tools
FIGURE 1.1
The critical success factors for a Black Belt. (Created by the author.)
Why Should You Care? • 5
A representation to help explain Figure 1.1 might be:
Probability of Black Belt success = PM * LSS * OCM * Core Comp,
where
PM = a project management skills score
LSS = a Lean Six Sigma skills score
OCM = a organizational change management skills score
Core Comp = A Black Belt competency assessment score
A zero score in any of the aforementioned assessment areas would obvi-
ously give the overall probability of success a score equal to zero. In other
words, if you don’t have some ability in all three skill areas and possess
the competencies (some of which are congenital, and some of which are
learned and developed), you might become a Black Belt, but probably not
a good Black Belt.
I believe some of these competencies to be inherent (i.e., if you weren’t
born with them, you’re not going to get them in a training class), while
some of the competencies may be shaped by one’s environment.
Here is a list of Black Belt competency areas:
• Communication skills
• Analytical, technical, project management skills
• Empowerment
• Passion and enthusiasm
• Leadership, training, and coaching
• Change agency
• Influence, “making things happen”
• Confidence
For those of you who just can’t move on without learning more about
these competencies, stop now and go to Appendix A for a peek. There you
will find more on my personal favorite list of Black Belt competencies. Be
advised that the list was not handed down from on high on a stone tablet,
so please be aware that others may disagree with the competencies I’ve
included on this list.
Bottom line: if you want to be a high-performing and successful Black
Belt, you need to be good at change management. You may not use extensive
change management on every project, but if you work enough projects, you
will find yourself in need of some knowledge of change management sooner
rather than later. At that point, you can choose to handle it yourself with
the skills you’ve accumulated, or you will hopefully be able to recognize the
need to call for help from a change management expert (before it’s too late).
Sidenote: My friend, Alireza (Ali) Kar of Sydney, Australia, politely

reminded me of my sloppy use of the word “probability” in the earlier
section. I‘ve left it “as is,” because I am trying to make a point without
being absolutely pure in the mathematical, statistical sense. I hope those
of you offended by this can find it in your analytical hearts to forgive me.
Here are Ali’s words:
May I ask, don’t disturb the science by creating wrong science.
My friend, what does, “Probability of Black Belt Success = PM * LSS *
OCM * Core Comp” mean? You failed to understand the meaning
of probability. Please read Fooled by Randomness by Nassim Taleb to
understand the difference between “probability” and “expected value”.
Thanks, Ali!
CHANGE RECEPTIVENESS OF THE ORGANIZATION

I told you earlier that Black Belt competencies depend on the environment
within which the Black Belt is working—both the project environment
and the overall “change receptiveness” of the organization. Here’s a for-
mulaic way to think about it.
You’ve heard of Y = f (X), where Y is a function of X?
For example, a person’s weight (Y) might be dependent on several fac-
tors, the X’s.
A person’s weight (Y) = calorie intake (X1) * daily exercise (X2) * genetic
propensity to be overweight (X3) * number of fast food meals per year
(X4), etc.
Several different X’s might impact a person’s weight, and some of the X’s
are more correlated with Y than the others.
I propose that the change receptiveness of an organization—let’s call
it Y—is also a function of several X’s, and the outcome of Y is dependent
on the X’s.
Based on my experience, I’d say if a business unit scores high on the first
two Shingo guiding principles—respect and humility it probably also has
a more change-receptive environment. Low scores on these two critical
“X’s,” probably not.1
Shigeo Shingo (新郷重夫, 1909–1990), was born in Saga City, Japan. He
was (and is) considered one of the world’s leading experts on what is now
known as operational excellence. In 1988, Utah State University conferred
an honorary doctorate on Mr. Shingo, a Japanese industrial engineer and
author credited for his contribution to many of the elements, theories,
and tools associated with the Toyota Production System. That same year,
Utah State University established what was then called the Shingo Prize
for Excellence in Manufacturing in his honor.
The Shingo Prize for Operational Excellence is now an annual award
given to organizations worldwide by the Shingo Institute, part of the Jon
M. Huntsman School of Business at Utah State University in Logan, Utah.
Criteria defined as a set of Shingo guiding principles are used to select the
award winners.
More information can be found at www.shingo.org.
So, the Change Receptiveness of an Organization (Y) = Level of Mutual
Respect exhibited within the organization (X1) * Level of Humility dem-
onstrated by the leaders in the organization (X2) would be a good start if
we were looking for the critical X’s that drive Y. You will note that I added
the word “mutual” to the sentence. I believe that respect must go both
ways—from the leaders down to the bottom of the organization and also
from the bottom to the top. It’s not a one-way street. In my experience, this
starts at the top. If leaders show that they respect their people, then they
will eventually earn the respect in return.
Respect and humility are cornerstones of a good, solid organizational
culture. I think it goes without saying, but I’d throw in the three C’s (com-
munication, cooperation, and collaboration) as other critical X’s to help
make an organization more receptive to change.
Some may be surprised that humility is included as a success factor,
since pride and maybe even arrogance are perceived as success factors in a
lot of organizations, including some with whom I’ve worked. I suggest that
people at all levels need to be humble enough to recognize that all of our
systems and processes can be improved, no matter where they came from.
A CATALYST FOR SUCCESS

There are enablers that help immensely with regard to Lean Six Sigma,
OCM, Hoshin Kanri, and other disciplines related to improvement and
change. These enablers help foster more of the three C’s (communication,
cooperation, and collaboration) and form a catalyst, a “spark,” that will
help ignite the continuous improvement process.
RESPECTFUL AND RESPECTED LEADERSHIP

Using the ten Shingo principles as the starting point, I think of the ideal
leader as being both respectful and respected.
The leadership team is respectful of the employees/associates and the
employees/associates truly respect their leaders. I believe that leading
with humility aids tremendously in gaining employee/associate respect.
Command and control leaders and impactful managers will kill a Lean/
continuous improvement deployment. Look for the leaders with the “What
do you think?” versus the “Thou shalt” approach. Executives need to move
the dictatorial leaders and managers out of the way.
\kə-ˌla-bə-ˈrā-shən\
It looks and sounds a bit like the name of a Russian ship, doesn’t it? Well,
it’s not. It’s the pronunciation of a very important word for successful
change management—collaboration.
THE COLLABORATION TRADE-OFF

A discussion with my friend David Silverstein always results in two things:
(1) he will says something that would shock even the utmost contrarian;
and (2) I learn something. Typically, several somethings.
One day, as I was writing this book, David and I were discussing change
management and the topic of collaboration came up. David mentioned a
book that he had recently read: Team of Teams: New Rules of Engagement
for a Complex World, by General Stanley McChrystal, Tantum Collins,
David Silverman, and Chris Fussell.
David explained that he had learned from the book that collaboration is
something that involves a huge trade-off. Collaboration improves effective-
ness, but at the sacrifice of some efficiency. In my experience, the collabora-
tion trade-off typically pays huge dividends. In a change project, the gains in
effectiveness that come from a collaborative approach are worth the loss of
some efficiency, i.e., the project might involve more meetings and discussions,
but the enhanced project outcomes will be the reward for your extra efforts.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
• Without OCM, you will probably not be successful in your Black Belt
career.
• OCM is one of the required skill sets needed by a Black Belt for success.
• In addition to OCM skills, a successful Black Belt also needs
• Project Management skills
• Lean Six Sigma skills
• Certain competencies (some inherent, some acquired)
• Always try to be respectful and act with humility! The Shingo prin-
ciples help set the tone for any Black Belt, brand new or deeply expe-
rienced. See www.shingo.org for more.
• And finally, communicate, cooperate, and collaborate across and up
and down through your organization!
• As Ellen Domb recently reminded me, this book is about WASTE (a
Lean term)! It is wasteful to have a team do a great job of improving
a process, then have the new process not be adopted by the organiza-
tion, due to lack of understanding of the human side of changing to
the new process.
REFERENCE
1. “Shingo Guiding Principles.” The Shingo Model – Shingo Institute. N.p., n.d. http://
www.shingoprize.org.
2
Change Is Good!
It is really hard to stay the same size in business. There are market forces
always at play. As a result, a business tends to grow or shrink over time.
Most shrink and die, or are consumed by larger, healthier organizations.
It is not easy to grow a business. It takes skill, good planning, good execu-
tion, and a bit of luck does not hurt. If you do not effectively manage a
business, it will tend to lose revenue and decline over time.
Processes are similar in this regard. If you leave a process alone, it will
tend to decline over time. You have probably heard that the natural state
of a process is decay. Decay in this context means to “decline from a state
of normality, excellence, or prosperity.” Think of a satellite in orbit. Over
time, with no outside influence, orbits deteriorate, and the satellite eventu-
ally plunges to a fiery death.
To avoid decay, we need to pay attention to the processes that matter.
Within the operations part of an organization, that often means seeking
to improve things like safety, quality, delivery, and speed. You should have
a bias toward action. I have found that it is best to push hard for change,
even when others around you do not see the need for it. It is best to make
some change, then course correct, whether it is an incremental change or
a breakthrough, seismic change. It is almost always better to be changing
and evolving versus standing still.
I have always found it helpful to think of myself and the organization
as being in a race. I have imagined that the leading competitors in our
business niche are slightly ahead of us and that our competitors are right
behind us, catching up fast. That mental image has always spurred me on,
helping me to avoid any chance of complacency.
11
So, let us begin this book with the premise that at least some change
is good, as has been explained by a wide variety of very knowledgeable
people from across the reaches of time:
He who rejects change is the architect of decay.

It is not necessary to change. Survival is not mandatory.
—W. Edwards Deming
I cannot say whether things will get better if we change; what I can say is
they must change if they are to get better.
—Georg C. Lichtenberg
One must change one’s tactics every ten years if one wishes to maintain
one’s superiority.
—Napoleon Bonaparte
Life belongs to the living, and he who lives must be prepared for changes.
—Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Change is inevitable. Change for the better is a full-time job.

—Adlai E. Stevenson
Change before you have to.

—Jack Welch
To improve is to change; to be perfect is to change often.

—Winston Churchill
What good is an idea if it remains an idea? Try. Experiment. Iterate. Fail.

Try again. Change the world.
—Simon Sinek
Change in all things is sweet.

—Aristotle
The path of least resistance is the path of the loser.

—H. G. Wells
Change Is Good! • 13
The world hates change, yet it is the only thing that has brought progress.
—Charles Kettering
Screw it. Let’s do it.

—Richard Branson
If “Plan A” doesn’t work, the alphabet has 25 more letters!

—Claire Cook
It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent,
but the one most responsive to change.
—Charles Darwin
When you’ve finished changing, you’re finished.

—Benjamin Franklin
KEY TAKEAWAYS
• If you leave a process alone, it will tend to decline over time.
• To be successful, organizations need to work diligently to improve
their key processes to prevent this decline.
• As Lisa Riegel, Ph.D. and President/CEO of the Educational
Partnerships Institute, recently pointed out to me, “… change is a
natural part of growing, and we should embrace advances. We would
still be drinking mercury if we didn’t apply change to our medical
discoveries.”
3
Change Is Hard!
Have you ever been on a diet and failed to lose weight? Have you lost
weight but failed to keep the weight off? Have you ever tried to stop smok-
ing, but your best efforts (pardon the pun) went up in smoke?
If you answered “yes” to any of these questions, you’re not alone. A
quick Internet search of how many diet and smoking cessation programs
fail most often brings up the statistic of 95% failure rate. Why is this? It’s
because change is hard! Changing long-established processes (within an
organization or within your personal life) is not easy. Changing long-held
habits, at home or in the workplace, is just plain hard.
Let me demonstrate.
Do you have a QWERTY keypad on your computer? No, QWERTY is
not a slang term used by one of your friends in Great Britain. QWERTY
describes the standard layout on English-language typewriters and key-
boards, having Q, W, E, R, T, and Y as the first keys from the left on the top
row of letters (see Figure 3.1).
When I showed a computer keyboard to my son a few years ago, he
asked me, “Why aren’t the letters in alphabetical order?” That was a good
question, so I googled it.
As a result of that Google search, I learned that Christopher Sholes, the
man who is believed to have invented the keyboard, created the QWERTY
design to slow typists down. You see, the faster someone typed, the more
often the typewriter jammed (see Figure 3.2).
According to urban legend, Mr. Sholes put common letters in hard-to-
reach spots.
I read recently that this popular theory has been debunked. According
to a story in the Smithsonian, the QWERTY keyboard was actually cre-
ated based on the advice of telegraph operators.1 The first keyboards
15
FIGURE 3.1
A QWERTY keyboard. (Stock image purchased from DepositPhotos.com.)
FIGURE 3.2
Photo of jammed typewriter keys. (Stock image purchased from DepositPhotos.com.)
were being used by telegraph operators to translate Morse code, and the
keyboards were built for that.
Regardless of how the QWERTY came to be, the time has come, some
say, to revise the keyboard for an increasingly mobile world.
Change Is Hard! • 17
But ask yourself, would you be willing to adopt a new keyboard? What
if you were told that the new keyboard was more ergonomic in design,
making you less prone to repetitive motion injuries, e.g., carpal tunnel
syndrome, and it might also allow you to type faster? Would you change?
Here is your chance to demonstrate your personal propensity to change!
Behold, the Dvorak Simplified Keyboard!
The Dvorak Simplified Keyboard is a keyboard layout patented in 1936 by
Dr. August Dvorak and his brother-in-law, Dr. William Dealey. Several mod-
ifications have since been designed by the team led by Dvorak. These varia-
tions have been collectively or individually called the Simplified Keyboard
or American Simplified Keyboard, but they all have come to be commonly
known as the Dvorak keyboard or the Dvorak layout (see Figure 3.3).
Dvorak proponents claim the layout requires less finger motion and
reduces errors compared to the standard layout, the QWERTY key-
board. It is claimed that the reduction in the finger distance traveled
permits faster rates of typing while also reducing repetitive strain inju-
ries, though that claim has been questioned, and that criticism, in turn,
has also been challenged.
Here’s another opportunity for you to assess your openness to change!
Have you ever heard of the BeeRaider Keyboard? It was created by Ray
McEnaney because he wasn’t satisfied with the QWERTY or Dvorak.
Figure 3.4 shows BeeRaider’s optimized radial keyboard. The optimized
layout of the alphabet characters on this keyboard is based on the fre-
quency of occurrence of the characters in the English language.
Another keyboard design (see Figure 3.5) is called the KALQ, and it has
been designed around a very specific, very modern behavior—typing with
the thumbs. Some thumb-typers claim that they can enter text signifi-
cantly faster using a KALQ design than when using a QWERTY design.
DVORAK keyboard
FIGURE 3.3
The Dvorak keyboard. (Stock image purchased from Alamy.com.)
FIGURE 3.4
The BeeRaider (optimized) keyboard. (Image of BeeRaider keyboard provided by Ray
McEnaney.)
FIGURE 3.5
The KALQ keyboard. (From Williams, Christopher. Typist-small.png. Digital image.
Business Insider. N.p., n.d., Web; Obtain permission for KALQ image or buy stock
image.)
What’s next? Maybe a spherical keyboard? (Figure 3.6)

So, while it might be a great idea, you can see how hard it is to make a
change.
According to Jimmy Stamp in his 2013 article about the QWERTY key-
board, “when a design depends on a previous innovation too entrenched
in the cultural zeitgeist to change, it’s known as a path dependency.”
As of this writing, I’m not seeing a lot of thumb-typer or spherical key-
boards on computers. Maybe there is something to this path dependency
theory?
Change Is Hard! • 19
FIGURE 3.6
The keyboard ball. (Stock image purchased from DepositPhotos.com.)
So, can we move forward with an agreement that at least some change
is good, and it’s also very hard to accomplish change at least some of the
time? If you’re still skeptical, I refer you to comments by a wide variety of
very knowledgeable people from across the reaches of time.
Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing

himself.
—Leo Tolstoy
Change has its enemies.
—Robert Kennedy
Change is hard because people overestimate the value of what they have
and underestimate the value of what they may gain by giving that up.
—James Belasco and Ralph Stayer, Flight of the Buffalo (1994)
If you want to make enemies, try to change something.
—Woodrow Wilson
There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct,
or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction
of a new order of things.
—Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince (1532)
People don’t resist change. They resist being changed.

—Peter Senge
Change is hard at first, messy in the middle, and gorgeous at the end.
—Robin Sharma
It is easier to resist at the beginning than at the end.
—Leonardo da Vinci
Change is such hard work.
—Billy Crystal
KEY TAKEAWAYS
• Changing long-held habits, at home or in the workplace, is just plain
hard.
• Some things become too entrenched in the culture to change. The
QWERTY keyboard is a good example of this.
• Changing the U.S. customary measurement system (based on
the British imperial system) to the metric system is another good
example of a change that is hard. Most countries around the world
use the metric system, which uses measuring units such as meters
and grams and adds prefixes like kilo-, centi-, and milli- to identify
orders of magnitude. The United States has attempted to adopt the
metric system, but still widely uses the older, imperial-based system,
where things are measured in feet, inches, and pounds.
REFERENCE
1. Stamp, J. Fact or Fiction? The Legend of the QWERTY Keyboard. Smithsonian.
com. N.p., 3 May 2013. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/fact-of-
fiction-the-legend-of-the-qwerty-keyboard-49863249/
4
Resistance Is Real
Before we get started with this chapter … please cross your arms in front
of you (Figure 4.1).
Now, uncross your arms and cross them the other way … with the other
arm on top this time.
How does that feel? A bit uncomfortable?
Now, uncross your arms and cross them one more time. Did you go back
to the original “normal, more comfortable” way? Why?
Change is hard. Even simple changes like that in the arm-crossing
example can be difficult. Most of us like the way we do things. That’s why
we do them a certain way.
We all have resistance to change. At least to some change.
The next time you visit your parents’ home, please take a look inside
the kitchen cabinets, pantry, and bathroom. Check out the brands of
toothpaste, shaving cream, laundry detergent, soap, etc. they’re using. Do
you see any overlap with the brands in use in your home? Why is this?
Resistance to change for many of us can be high. It’s so much easier just to
stay with what’s comfortable. Stay with familiar brands of products. Stay
with old habits.
Remember the story of the keyboard in the last chapter? The story tells us
that a lot of innovative thinking never gets people to change. Most of us are
still using the QWERTY keyboard. Why is this? The answer is, resistance!
THE CHANGE CURVE

The following chart is an adaptation from the work done by Kübler-Ross,
Daryl Conner, Don Kelley, and others over the years.
21
FIGURE 4.1
The crossed-arms experiment. (Created by author’s son.)
What I am calling the change curve has also been identified, in vari-
ous shapes and forms, as the “Kübler-Ross Model,” “Emotional Cycle of
Change,” “Grief Cycle,” “Five Stages of Grief,” “Emotional Response to
Change,” and “Five Stages of a Change.”
The curve shown in Figure 4.2 represents the response that has been
found to typically result from what is perceived as a negative change.
High
1
EMO/PERF
4
2
1 = Uninformed optimism
2 = Informed pessimism
3 = Valley of despair
4 = Hopeful realism
3 5 = Informed optimism
Low
Time
FIGURE 4.2
The change curve. (Created by the author.)
Resistance Is Real • 23
On the y-axis in Figure 4.2 is the abbreviation EMO/PERF. This stands

for “emotional response/performance.” A high-performing team would
score high of the y-axis, while a low-performing team, as you might
expect, would score lower. Likewise, emotional response at the top of the
y-axis is positive energy, while the bottom of the y-axis reflects negative
energy. Other words I’ve seen used to describe the y-axis include morale,
self-confidence, and perceived effectiveness.
Bottom line, think ☺ at the top of the y-axis and ☹ at the bottom.
The x-axis indicates the time that passes as the change project progresses.
The five numbered balls in Figure 4.2 indicate stages one moves through
when faced with a negative change—or at least one that is perceived
negatively by the target of the change. Keep in mind, this change may be
considered a positive change by leadership, management, and the project
team. The target is the person who is impacted directly by the change. The
change will require him or her to do something differently in the future,
that is in a future state. More on targets later.
As you can see, emotional energy and performance both decline, and
then eventually return to normal, (or, ideally, to an even better place than
before) once the person going through the change has departed from the
so-called “valley of despair.”
People resist change, or they resist being changed. Either way, resistance
is a big deal (see Figure 4.3).
FIGURE 4.3
Resistance. (Created by the author.)
KEY TAKEAWAYS
• How did you do in the arm-crossing example? Did you go back to
your original way? Probably so.
• Resistance is real.
• What keyboard do you use? Is it the QWERTY? Probably so.
• Have you, or someone you know, lived through the change curve
based on the Kübler-Ross model?
5
Minimizing Resistance
How does one deal with resistance to change? Is there a way to eliminate
resistance or to at least mitigate it? You’re probably aware of structured
problem-solving approaches. Lean Six Sigma includes many approaches
and tools intended to achieve and enable problem solving. You will prob-
ably be pleased to know that there are also structured approaches to elimi-
nate, or at least reduce, resistance to change.
I will tell you a story that literally changed my life. It significantly altered
my career path in a good way, and it changed my perspective forever on
how to successfully lead change projects, regardless of size and scale.
THE STORY OF THE SHOE THAT CHANGED

MY PERSPECTIVE ON CHANGE
Several years ago, I was flying home to the United States from Europe. It
was a Friday, at the end of a long week of business travel. In between the
bumps and lurches of the plane, I was working to put together a plan to
deploy and execute major change initiatives across our company. The first
attempt was pretty simplistic:
Formulate strategy—Develop a differentiating strategy that results in

1.
a set of strategic objectives for the business; and
Deploy the strategy—Carry out the strategy by cascading objectives
2.
down into the units and functions and by launching initiatives to
attack the biggest problems, improve the key processes, and improve
the overall business results.
25
We were using a few tools at that time:

Tools to formulate strategy—A number of strategy formulation tools,
including the Balanced Scorecard, long with some highly paid consul-
tants. I learned about Hoshin Kanri later;
Tools to deploy the strategy—The Balanced Scorecard, Lean Six Sigma,
and Project Management.
I remember sketching out our “Current State” on an airline napkin
(literally). I will call what we were doing back in those days, “Version 1.0”
of an evolving strategy formulation and deployment approach. We had a
“tool box” with some tools (see Figure 5.1). Period. End of story.
During this trip to Europe, I had met with the managing director of a
company we had recently acquired. Gerhard and I had talked extensively
(well, in retrospect, I talked a lot while he listened politely) about mak-
ing significant changes within his business unit. I remember having the
feeling as I was driving back to the airport in Zurich that the trip had
been an utter failure. Gerhard was going to keep things the way they
were before we had acquired his company. I remember reflecting on how
the resistance to change was incredible, especially at some of our newly
acquired business units.
But, we couldn’t give up! Gerhard’s business unit’s return on invested
capital was nowhere near our targeted level, and it was imperative that we
(I) fix this. Somewhere over the North Atlantic, after a couple of glasses of
Cabernet, I remember drawing another diagram on the back of another
napkin, and this diagram consisted of a few more boxes. I’ll call this
Version 1.1 (see Figure 5.2).
Formulate Deploy the

strategy strategy
Tools: Tools:
Strategy creation tools, Balanced scorecard,
including the Balanced project management, and
Scorecard Lean Six Sigma
FIGURE 5.1
Version 1.0. Strategy formulation and deployment approach. A toolbox containing a
few tools. (Created by the author.)
Minimizing Resistance • 27
Deploy the strategy
Gain
Formulate Cascade the Execute the acceptance
strategy strategy strategy and sustain
the results
Tools: Tools: Tools: Tools:

Balanced Scorecard Balanced Project Management None
plus Scorecard Lean Six Sigma
Expensive consultants
FIGURE 5.2
Version 1.1. Strategy formulation and deployment approach, with more details added on
the deployment side. (Created by the author.)
The process I had drawn consisted of four major steps, with “deploy the
strategy” now broken into three pieces:
Formulate strategy—Develop a differentiating strategy that results in

1.
a set of strategic objectives for the business;
Cascade the strategy—Flow the strategic initiatives (that came from
2.
the strategic objectives) down into the organization (via numerous
scorecards);
Execute the strategy—Attack the biggest problems, close the b
3. iggest
gaps, improve key processes, and improve the overall business
results; and
Gain acceptance and sustain the results—Truly engage with the
4.
employees [engage with “their hearts and minds,” as our human
resources (HR) people would say] to eliminate resistance to the
changes and improvements and to sustain the hard-fought gains
once they have been achieved.
I listed the tools we were using at that time in support of each of the four
steps:
Tool to formulate strategy—Some strategy creation tools, including the
Balanced Scorecard (along with some highly paid consultants)
Tool to cascade the strategy—The Balanced Scorecard
Tools to execute the strategy—Lean Six Sigma and Project Management
Tools to gain acceptance and sustain the results—Nothing. Nada. Zip. We
had no formal approach nor any tools to help us in this area.
After I returned to the United States, I sent our best Lean Six Sigma
Black Belt, a guy I will call “Ph.D. Stan,” to Switzerland to see what he
could do about helping to make the required process-related changes hap-
pen within Gerhard’s business unit.
Fast-forward a couple of months. I recall looking up from my desk
and seeing Ph.D. Stan standing in my office doorway. Stan had his head
down, and his body language indicated that he was thoroughly dejected.
“They don’t want to do it,” he said. He went on to explain that he had used
every analytical arrow in his analytical quiver, but he could not convince
Gerhard, the managing director, and his team to make the necessary
changes to improve their key business processes.
A few days later, I explained my problem to Martin, our VP of HR. After
listening intently (as good HR people tend to do), Martin suggested that
what we needed was organizational change management. He called it
“OCM”. I thanked him, but given its roots in the organizational develop-
ment (OD) world, I assumed this “OCM thing” was grounded in a lot of
hand-holding and singing of kumbaya. It probably even included the use of
the dreaded F-word, highly promoted by the HR and OD world… feelings.
However, I did some research and found that OCM was being employed
successfully in industry. In fact, General Electric had been using an
approach called the change acceleration process in conjunction with Six
Sigma for several years with noteworthy results.
I remember thinking that we needed a similar approach—a methodol-
ogy, model, toolset that was synergistic with strategy deployment and the
Lean Six Sigma tools, something we could use to eliminate the tremen-
dous resistance to change we faced in Europe and in other “foreign think-
ing” parts of the business, e.g., California.
Just kidding, California… sort of.
My conclusion at the time was that we were using the Balanced Scorecard
to develop “balanced” top-level objectives, and we were also using it to
some degree to deploy strategy by cascading the scorecards down into the
organization. We were also using the Lean Six Sigma tools (in some areas
anyway) pretty successfully. But the thing we lacked was a tool set—a meth-
odology, an approach—that could help us deal with resistance to change.
We needed something that would work well with the Balanced Scorecard
and Lean Six Sigma and that we could deploy across the enterprise.
After doing quite a bit of research about OCM, I concluded that an OCM
tool, approach, or methodology was needed to help eliminate resistance to
Minimizing Resistance • 29
the major changes we were trying to make, to help gain adoption, and to
help us sustain the results.
I scheduled a meeting with my boss (Gerry) to talk about the plans
for the proposed new strategy formulation and deployment approach.
I also invited a consultant who was working with us at the time, who
happened to be my Lean Six Sigma Black Belt instructor from years
earlier.
I explained the four-step model to my boss: strategy formulation using
some strategy creation tools, including the Balanced Scorecard; cascad-
ing of the strategy using the Balanced Scorecard; strategy execution
using the Lean Six Sigma tools and Project Management; and Resistance
Management, using an approach called “organizational change manage-
ment.” With that, Gerry held up his hand to indicate that I should stop
talking. He said, “I have a change management approach that has served
me very well for over 30 years in business.” I can still see my consultant
friend lean forward to listen more intently, as he has always been eager to
learn about new, successful approaches. My boss then swung his foot up
on the conference table, pointed to it, and said “11-E” (his shoe size). “If
they don’t want to do it, I kick them in the butt,” he said. Gerry called it his
“11-E approach to change management.” I will say that while my boss at
the time had indeed perfected the art of 11-E, he was saying this mostly in
jest (see Figure 5.3). The meeting ended soon thereafter without a positive
resolution (at least from my perspective).
I left that company soon after and was subject to the restrictions of a
noncompete agreement that prevented me from working for any company
in the industry with which they competed. I knew I couldn’t just sit at
FIGURE 5.3
The 11-E approach (11-E was the size of my boss’s shoe.) . (Used this photo in my The
Basics of Hoshin Kanri book.)
home and do nothing, so I decided to go into the world of management

consulting, specializing in an area I wanted to learn more about. You
guessed it—OCM.
Note to Reader
There are times when the 11-E approach is needed … A fire in the hallway
doesn’t call for consensus building. It’s the type of change that calls for imme-
diate action! “The building is on fire, get the hell out of here!”
And, there are also times and places for command and control management.
For example, can you imagine a military environment without a command
and control approach? But, when you’re trying to drive strategy down into an
organization, for example, when using a Catch ball process,* a command and
control approach just doesn’t work very well.
I knew from experience that the 11-E approach to change management

was not entirely effective, so I went in search of a new, more enlightened
approach. I intended only to remain in this field for a short time, but I enjoyed
it so much that I continued on that path for almost 4 years. The wealth of
information that I learned in those 4 years about managing resistance and
sustaining change proved extremely valuable later in my career.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
• There are structured approaches to eliminate, or at least reduce,
resistance to change. Companies such as General Electric have used
them for decades, with great success.
• Most organizations have approaches and tools to help them create,
deploy, and execute strategy. Strategy execution often involves sig-
nificant changes within, and sometimes throughout, the organiza-
tion. But many of these organizations do not have approaches and
tools to help them manage the resistance to these changes.
• The 11-E story is about one of these organizations.
* See my book, The Basics of Hoshin Kanri, of Hoshin Kanri (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2015), for
much more on the Catch ball process and other related subjects.
6
Why?: The Most Important
Word in This Book
After living through the 11-E story, I became fascinated with change man-
agement, and I studied it in earnest for the next 4 years. I read every book
and article I could find on the subject of change management. I spoke with
John Kotter, author of Leading Change, on the phone. I wrote a couple of
articles, of which one was published in the Wharton Leadership Digest.
I eventually became certified in two organizational change management
(OCM) methodologies and met two incredible thought leaders in the field.
I studied under Jeanenne LaMarsh and rode horses with Jeff Hiatt as part
of his training and certification program in Boulder, Colorado.
Along the way, I learned that successful change management almost
always requires the completion of an initial step. It’s only one step, but it’s
a BIG, very important step. If you remember nothing else from this book,
please remember this one, simple word.
WHY?
From all my personal experiences and all of my studying and training in
OCM, I’ve learned that people must understand why a change is needed as
a first step to accepting the change.
People must develop an Awareness of the need to change. Once aware of
the need, they must also have some personal Desire for the change.
To build awareness and to create desire, it often helps to explain the
business case for the change, and most people also want to understand the
WIIFM, i.e., the What’s in it for me?
31
All of these have to do with the Why.

Until you explain the Why, you should not attempt to explain the What
or the How or the Where or the Who or the When. Most people won’t even
listen to you. They’re still living back in the current state (to be explained
later in this book) asking, “But Why do we need to change? Why do I
need to change? What’s the business case for change? What’s in it for me?
Where’s the WIIFM?!?!?”
The problem with many project teams is that they’ve had these discus-
sions amongst themselves for a while (sometimes months), and they’ve
finally convinced themselves about the Why. They have Awareness of the
need for change, and they have the Desire to make the change. They under-
stand the business case, and they personally understand the WIIFM. But
what do many of those project teams do? They often start the discussions
with others who are outside the team by explaining the What (what we are
going to change) and the How (how we are going to do it), while the people
outside the project are still asking themselves, “Why do I want to do this?”
It typically takes many attempts, using various communication tech-
niques, to convince people of the Why. In my experience, you rarely con-
vince everyone, but once you’ve convinced enough of the people, you’re
finally ready to move on to explain the What and the How.
WHAT? What are we going to change?

HOW? How are we going to do it? What’s the plan?
THE TARGETS OF THE CHANGE

An important group of people outside the project team are the people who
will need to change to make the project successful. These people are the
so-called “targets” of the change.1 The targets of the change also ask, “Why
do I want to do this?”
A lesson I’ve learned is that if you haven’t convinced enough people
of the Why, and you move forward anyway, you move forward at your
project’s potential peril. I speak with experience. I’ve done this, and I’ve
failed. I also learned that it’s not all about numbers. You must convince the
people who are the influencers within an organization, and oftentimes,
these people are not in formal positions of power. The influencers are the
people to whom others listen and respect. I’m guessing you have observed
Why?: The Most Important Word in This Book • 33
some influencers in organizations where you have worked. Convince the

influencers and you’re on your way to satisfying the Why!
PEOPLE ANALYTICS TOOLS

A few years ago, I discovered a neat new tool that I believe could prove
invaluable to large organizations in answering the question, “Who are our
influencers?” Who are those people, regardless of their formal authority
in the organization or lack thereof, who have “the ear” of their coworkers?
And sometimes the ears of the coworkers are thousands of miles away.
If an influencer likes and supports a change, good things tend to hap-
pen for the project team. They tell others, and/or others ask them for
their opinion about a change. Organizations love to find these people. For
example, if Sally or Bob like this new <fill in the blank>, a lot of people
who are sitting on the proverbial fence will too.
The tool is based on an approach used initially to find “the bad guys”
in the outside world. If person X is known to be involved in criminal or
terrorist activity, then the good guys want to learn with whom person X is
connected. With whom is person X communicating? By phone, by e-mail,
by text, by other electronic means?
Some large organizations have taken this approach inside, and they
are learning that Sally acts as a major hub of communications, i.e., she is
widely connected in the organization’s communication web, via company-
owned communication devices and networks, to thousands of people.
What Sally thinks matters to a lot of her coworkers. If we can make Sally
aware of a major change, and gain her personal desire to become involved,
good things can happen for the project team (Figure 6.1).
FIGURE 6.1
An influencer within an organization. (From “4 Tips to Becoming an Influencer”, Blog article
by Marc Guberti, August 22, 2014; Obtain permission to use this image or create a replacement.
Sidenote: Mapping influencers is just one of the many ways that ana-
lytics are changing how managers attack change. Over the coming
years, People Analytics will provide managers with a new toolset that
will make process and behavior change easier to track, incentivize,
and make a core organizational capability.
Today, tracking behavior change is focused on measuring results,
which, as anyone who has worked in an organization before knows,
can be way more subjective than it should be. While an important
yardstick for measuring change, only measuring results misses a whole
lot of the ‘why.’ It’s sort of like treating an aching arm with painkillers
as opposed to resetting a bone. If you don’t know the driving behaviors
that are helping or hindering results, then you will miss what really is
or isn’t changing.
People analytics allow organizations to measure and optimize the
behaviors that drive successful outcomes. The category encompasses
a broad swath of behaviors, including measuring who communicates
with who, how they communicate, which medium, how communica-
tion connects into a broader network, how this impacts things like
retention, customer success, sales, and far beyond.
People Analytics are particularly powerful for change because they
allow managers to track who is actually changing daily behaviors and
who is not. You can see if someone is communicating with the groups
they are supposed to be communicating with. You can see if some-
one is logging into the system they are supposed to be logging into
and how that’s impacting team behavior. You can see how this impacts
onboarding times because every aspect of the employee process is
measured.
With tracking also comes incentivizing. You can game behavior
change, and make sure people who adopt early are rewarded, both
publicly through recognition and with tangible rewards. If seamlessly
embedded into work processes, this system could theoretically drive
near continuous change that is simply embedded into day-to-day work.
At the end of the day, using these techniques require experimenta-
tion, strong values, and good governance. You don’t want to look at all
data because that’s creepy. You don’t want the data to by accessed by
anyone in the wrong capacity. You also want to make sure the learn-
ing from the data is synthesized into action, where it is used either to
continue or to kill the change.
Why?: The Most Important Word in This Book • 35
People analytics present powerful ways to enhance the change

process, and we will see much more in the years to come.
— Zack Johnson
Co-founder & Former CEO,
Syndio Social
Syndio Social was acquired by Edge Analytics in 2016. See www.synd.io

for more information.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
• WHY is the most important word in this book. Seriously!
• People must understand why a change is needed as a first step to
accepting the change.
• Next, people must develop an Awareness of the need to change.
• Once aware of the need, these people must also have some personal
Desire for the change.
• Until you explain the Why, you should not attempt to explain the
What or the How or the Where or the Who or the When. Most
people won’t even listen to you.
REFERENCE
1. Potts, R., LaMarsh J., Change—The Basics. Master Change, Maximize Success,
Chronicle LLC, San Francisco, CA, 2004. 31. Print.
7
Resistance in Your Personal Life?
The following information may be a bit painful to consider, but it’s been
included to help bring the understanding of resistance home, so to speak.
Have you seen the TV commercials about children starving in other
parts of the world (Figure 7.1)? Have you seen the commercials about pets
in need of adoption to prevent euthanasia (Figure 7.2)? In both cases, these
commercials are making a personal appeal to change you, to change your
behavior.
Have you responded by donating money? If not, why not?
The commercials are intended to make you Aware of the problem, but
you may not have the Desire to become personally involved.
This is a personal example of living in the first two steps of the Prosci
ADKAR Model®1 for organizational change management—Awareness and
Desire.
More on this in Chapter 8.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
• Every one of us has resistance in our life: at work, at home, and
everywhere.
• If you observe very carefully (and honestly), you will see yourself
resisting some changes that you encounter and you will observe
others doing so as well. It’s a part of life.
37
FIGURE 7.1
Starving children. (Requested permission from scmun.org to use “starving children”
photo.)
FIGURE 7.2
Homeless dog. (Requested permission from TopofOhioPetShelter.org to use “homeless
dog” photo.)
REFERENCE
1. Prosci, ADKAR, and Awareness Desire Knowledge Ability Reinforcement are reg-
istered trademarks of Prosci, Inc., used with permission.
Section II
8
What Is Organizational Change
Management?
A structured process for supporting individuals and groups from the

current state to a new future state to deliver organizational results.
—Michele Quinn
Certified Prosci Change Management Practitioner, Prosci
Master Instructor and Train-the-Trainer professional, Former
LSS Deployment Leader, and Master Black Belt
I met Michele Quinn many years ago when she was teaching OCM to
a group of Black Belts in training. Her credentials are fairly unique in
that she is a certified Master Black Belt, and she’s also certified in change
management.
Michele’s definition of OCM aligns perfectly with Lean Six Sigma in
that they are both structured processes that, when used properly, deliver
organizational results.
The OCM approaches I learned, and became certified in, are not
touchy-feely nor kumbaya- like. They are fact based and structured, and
they rely heavily upon data. For many Black Belts in training, this prob-
ably sounds great. The problem is that much of the world’s p opulation
doesn’t think this way, so we need to take these differences into account
as we are working with teams of people to change what they do and/or
how they do it. More on this in Chapter 13, “People Are Different.”
41
FIGURE 8.1
Prosci ADKAR Model®. (Image Source: Prosci ADKAR Model ©2016 Prosci, Inc. All
rights reserved; Permission to use ADKAR Model info granted by Prosci.)
THE ADKAR MODEL (BY PROSCI, INC.)

The first OCM approach I will explain was designed to deal with indi-
vidual change. It’s a step-by-step method developed by Jeff Hiatt and Tim
Creasey at Prosci Research. It’s called ADKAR, an acronym that includes
the words Awareness and Desire as the first two steps in the five-step
process.
Similar to the DMAIC process used in Lean Six Sigma, with ADKAR
you move through five distinct steps as you work through a change.
Awareness of the need to change

Desire to participate in the change
Knowledge about how to change (skills and knowledge needed)
Ability to implement new skills & behaviors (ability to perform the
skills and act on the knowledge)
Reinforcement to keep the change in place (incentives)
The ADKAR model is shown in Figure 8.1.

Most Lean Six Sigma projects involve more than one person. You’re
often dealing with groups or teams of people.
MANAGED CHANGE MODEL (BY LAMARSH GLOBAL)

Another approach and methodology for change management is called
Managed Change, and it was developed by Jeanenne LaMarsh.
The LaMarsh approach to change management has three primary
functions: first, is to identify who, among those who will be impacted by
the change, is likely to resist it; second, to assess the sources, types, and
degrees of resistance the change may encounter; and third, to design effec-
tive strategies to reduce the resistance (Figure 8.2).1
What Is Organizational Change Management? • 43
Desired Future State
Structure Process
People Culture
Current State
(Today)
Key metrics
Structure Process
People Culture
Key metrics
FIGURE 8.2
LaMarsh’s Current State/Future State model. (Permission to use LaMarsh Model info
granted by LaMarsh Global.)
The Current State can be defined in terms of five elements: structure,

process, people, culture, and key metrics.2
Structure = geography, organization, systems

Process = the way we do work
People = skills and competencies
Culture = beliefs, behaviors, rules (written and unwritten)
Key metrics = key measures for this part of the business
Resistance to Leaving the Current State

When trying to make more complex change, resistance can come from
people not wanting to leave the Current State. These are people who are
satisfied with the status quo, who are asking, “why change?”
Resistance to Moving to the Future State

The Desired Future State can be defined using the same approach, in
terms of structure, process, people, culture, and key metrics. Some people
who are ready to leave the Current State will not be willing to move to the
Future State as defined by the project team. They don’t want to go there.
Resistance to the Change Plan

Some people will not like the plan that has been constructed to move from
Current to Future State. They don’t want to follow the plan defined by the
project team.
Most Lean Six Sigma projects focus largely on the process and that gen-
erally reduces the scope of the resistance faced by the project team.
I’m not going to attempt to make you an expert in ADKAR or the
LaMarsh Managed Change Methodology in this primer level book. For
that, you’ll have to dedicate some time to taking training classes and
then employ what you learned in the real world. Appendix E in this book
includes information on where to go for more information about OCM
approaches and tools.
There are several good change management approaches and
methodologies available to you. Prosci, for instance, has developed change
models in addition to ADKAR. I am qualified to write about only the
two for which I was trained and certified. Chapter 15, “Interviews with
Experts,” includes comments about other OCM tools.
Remember the change curve you saw in Chapter 4 (Figure 4.2)? That
same curve is the solid line in Figure 8.3. The solid line represents the
1 = Uninformed optimism
2 = Informed pessimism
3 = Valley of despair
High 4 = Hopeful realism
5 = Informed optimism
5
1 4 5
2
1
EMO/PERF
4
2
3
Low
Time
FIGURE 8.3
The change curve: with and without a well-managed change. (Created by the author.)
traditional change curve when there is no application of change manage-

ment to the change. Figure 8.3 also includes a curve constructed out of
a dotted line, which is meant to the show the result of a well-managed
change. It’s just a representation, but the assumption here is that the use
of appropriate, and appropriately timed, OCM approaches and tools will
lessen the “dip” in the curve and shorten the amount of time that the tar-
gets of the change spend in the “valley of despair,” as well as reduce the
amount of time it takes to complete the entire project.
So, appropriately applied OCM approaches and tools lead to
• Less time required for the change project

• Less negative energy expended
• Less disruption to the organization
• Less “dip” in emotional response
• Less “dip” in performance
• A greater chance of the project team making it to the Desired Future
State
• A greater chance of sustaining the gains once there
THE FIVE STAGES

The Kübler-Ross model, or the five stages of grief, postulates a series of emo-
tions experienced by terminally ill patients prior to death. The model was
first introduced by Swiss psychiatrist Elisabeth Kübler-Ross in her 1969
book On Death and Dying* and was inspired by her work with terminally
ill patients.
The five Kübler-Ross stages are as follows:
Stage 1: Denial
Stage 2: Anger
Stage 3: Bargaining
Stage 4: Depression
Stage 5: Acceptance
Don Kelley and Daryl Conner developed their emotional cycle of change
model in the mid-1970s, and they outlined it in the 1979 Annual Handbook
for Group Facilitators.
The Kelley/Conner cycle has five stages as described below:
Stage 1: Uninformed optimism

Stage 2: Informed pessimism
Stage 3: Hopeful realism
Stage 4: Informed optimism
Stage 5: Completion
*Note: Kübler-Ross stated later in life that the stages are not a linear and
predictable progression, and that she regretted writing them in a way that
was misunderstood. Rather, they are a collation of five common experi-
ences for the bereaved that can occur in any order, if at all.
What’s shown in Figure 8.4 is an amalgamation of several models that all
stem from the Kübler-Ross model, or the five stages of grief, and/or work by
Don Kelley and Daryl Conner, Jeanenne LaMarsh, and possibly others. The
takeaway is that most people go through stages when dealing with change
and change management, which when done well, help lessen the depth of
the “dip” in the curve and can also reduce the time spent in what some call
the “valley of despair.” Jeanenne LaMarsh called this the Delta State, a
place that lies between the Current State and the Desired Future State.3 The
results of a well-managed change are also less time spent, less project cost,
less disruption, higher performance sooner … less all-around angst.
The table in Figure 8.4 shows the five stages of change, along with terms
sometimes used to describe them. There have been many versions of,
Stage of the
I II III IV V
Change
Descriptions sometimes Uniformed Informed Valley of Hopeful Informed
used to
describe each stage Optimism Pessimism Despair Realism Optimism
Terms used by Jeaneane Desired

LaManh to describe the Current
The Delta State Future
progression State
through a change State
Status Quo Shock and Denial Depression Acceptance Engagement

Some Unaware Disbelief, Frustration Overwhelmed Openness Acceptance
words Naïve Avoidance, Irritation The Blahs Discovery and Exploration Commitment
used to Uninformed Confusion, Anger Lack of Energy Enthusiasum and Hope Sucess
describe Unaware Fear, Uncertainty Helplessness Moving on Fullfillment
things Bargaining Fight Encouraged Improved Performance
at each Struggling Regret Involved and Engaged High Performing
stage Pessimistic Despair Desire to Help/Change Enpowerment
Aware of the change... Giving Up Seeking Knowledge and Ability Self Esteem
...but no Desire Do Accept it Low
Informaton and Communication Involvement and

Clear Direction
Encouragement
How to help
Emotional support
FIGURE 8.4
The five stages of change. (Created by the author.)
what this author calls, the “change curve” presented over the years, so I’ve
attempted to capture some of the variations in a table form.
As you can see in the table, Jeanenne LaMarsh’s Delta State is shown to
span stages II, III, and IV. The table also includes some terms used in vari-
ous “change curves” readily available on the Internet.
The bottom of the table shows some high-level “how to help” guidance
as a person moves through the stages of change, starting with providing
information and communication, moving on to emotional support, and
finally to guidance and direction. Attempts to help must be aligned to
where people are in the change.
There is no specific “recipe” for all of this, as to how much of what
approach or tool to use and exactly when to apply it. What I’ve found is
that every change project is different, and different people go through the
same change in different ways and at very different speeds.
It’s a surprise to some that everyone doesn’t go through the stages at the
same speed. Some move swiftly from the Current State to the Future State,
with barely a glance at the Delta State. But others will progress at their own
pace—some slower, some very slow. Depending on the change, some will
never be able to leave the Current State. They might give up. They might quit.
Or, they just might stick around and agitate others, either directly or pas-
sive-aggressively, to undermine the change. In those situations, you need to
get management involved to help deal with the active or passive resistance.
EMOTIONAL SUPPORT
Some who helped me with the editing of early drafts of this book were
troubled by the term “emotional support” in a business setting. They’d
ask, “What are you recommending, that the Black Belt provide psychiatric
counseling?!?!” My response: “These are not couch sessions or ice cream
socials. They are merely opportunities for back and forth conversations to
improve understanding. If more is needed, seek out your OCM, HR, or
OD expert for help.”
A Chaordic Change, Discovered in an Unlikely Place

I recently became aware of a significant change project that didn’t involve
any application of Lean Six Sigma tools, yet the story fits this book per-
fectly. It’s a story about a church in Alexandria, Virginia, on the outskirts of
Washington, DC, which recently embarked on a change that would impact

thousands of people. After 60 years of worship in a stately sanctuary, the
old building was finally starting to show wear and tear. A decision was
made after years of contemplation and praying to renovate the facility. That
meant moving two Sunday worship services out of an ornate sanctuary
with lofty ceilings, stained glass windows, and wooden pews into a nice,
but frankly fairly ordinary, fellowship hall for the 18 months that would
be required for demolition and refurbishment. The fellowship hall, replete
with linoleum-tiled floor and suspended ceiling blocks, had the look of a
place that could have once been used as a gymnasium—not very holy look-
ing indeed. You can imagine the resistance some felt to no longer attending
church services in a place that had come to be so special and so familiar.
I was there in attendance the first week the church services were held in
the fellowship hall. It was a significant change, and yet it went very, very
well. It went so well because of all of the countless hours of detailed planning
done by the pastor and his team of devoted parishioners. It was a significant
change, but it was handled well because, whether the parishioners knew it
or not, they had done a fantastic job of change management. The people
were told of the problem. They were made aware of the need to renovate the
church. Communications were held every week, using different messengers
and various forms of media to explain the change and to build personal
desire to participate in the change. People came to understand the business
case. They came to understand the WIIFM (the What’s in it for me?).
Pastor Don capped off the communication campaign by speaking about
the subject of change during that first week in the temporary sanctuary,
and his message was about the word Chaordic: “a system or organization
that blends characteristics of chaos and order.” Sitting there that Sunday
morning on a plastic chair, on what could have once been a basketball
gymnasium floor, I had the sense that this could have REALLY been a
chaotic morning—and yet I was surrounded by order. Pastor Don and his
talented team had, through superb planning and seemingly flawless exe-
cution, achieved a blend of chaos and order. I can’t think of a better way
to describe the Delta State when living through a well-managed change.
Huge kudos to Pastor Don and his dedicated team!
I give credit to Chief Pastor Don Davidson for introducing me to the term,
Chaordic—a blend of chaos and order. The term was coined by Dee Hock,
the founder and former CEO of the VISA credit card association.
—From Wikipedia
WARNING!
For those who like engineering stuff and equations, please read on. For
those who don’t, you may want to go directly to the Safe Zone sign, shown
in the next section.
FRICTION EQUATION
Another way to explain the value of OCM involves the equation for deter-
mining the resistive force of friction.
FF = µN

where
FF = resistive force of friction
μ = coefficient of friction for the two surfaces
N = weight of the object
If a block of aluminum (shown in Figure 8.5) weighing 1 lb is pulled
along a dry, clean aluminum plate, it requires approximately 1.2 lbs of
force to make the block move. This assumes that (μ), the coefficient of fric-
tion between the two surfaces equals 1.2. If you lubricate the surfaces with
oil, the force required to make the block move drops to around 0.3 lbs,
given that (μ), the coefficient of friction has been reduced to 0.3. In this
example, it’s four times easier to make the block move after lubrication,
i.e., resistance drops significantly after you apply oil Figure 8.6.
FF
Aluminum
block
Aluminum
plate
N
FIGURE 8.5
An aluminum block on an aluminum plate. (Created by the author.)
FIGURE 8.6
An oil can. (Created by the author.)
ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE MANAGEMENT

OCM is like “oil used to reduce the friction between two surfaces.”
It can help you identify and mitigate resistance to (1) the overall Lean/
Continuous Improvement initiative and (2) the improvement projects that
will result from the deployment.
Some Lessons Learned on How Can I Help?

Recognize the loss of control that is perceived by some employees
Increase your communication; informed employees are more capable
of coping
Don’t over promise; you can provide clarity, but you cannot provide
certainty
Manage your own demeanor and behaviors; the organization is looking
for grounding
Think hard about the concept of “honesty”; be honest, not familial.
Years ago, I attended a conference at Eli Lilly where Brad Claretto, a Master
Black Belt, and expert an OCM, presented. My notes from the conference
included the aforementioned lessons learned.
The Reinforcement Paradox?

Some have asked me, “Don’t the terms Reinforcement and Control fly in
the face of change?” or “Doesn’t the (R) Reinforcement step in ADKAR
and the (C) Control step in DMAIC actually work to prevent future
change?” or “Doesn’t the drive to reinforce and control the new process
‘lock things in’ forever?”
I tell them that continuous improvement is like a never-ending stairway
to excellence. You take one step up, reinforce it to keep the process in con-
trol, then when ready, take the next step up and repeat the process.
In Figure 8.7, we start with an important process that has poor results.
Let’s say the key metric in the y-axis represents first pass yield. The x-axis
represents time. We’re starting with only 25% first pass yield, and as you
can see from the process control chart, the process is not in control. The
results of the process vary quite a bit and are not predictable. On the basis
of our project selection and prioritization process, we decide to improve
this process, so we launch a change project, using the Lean Six Sigma tools.
CHANGE #1
As a result of Change #1, the results improve to 60% first pass yield and
the process is now in control! That’s a big improvement and we “lock
in” the process to make sure we retain those results. In DMAIC ver-
nacular, that is “C”, the control phase. We want to keep the process
in control. In ADKAR terminology, we want to “R” (reinforce) the
new current state. We don’t want to drift back to old, bad practices
and allow first pass yield to erode. Note that OCM helps to eliminate
resistance so we can make the change, and it also helps with sustain-
ing the gains once we have them.
But, 60% first pass yield is still not very good. We decide (based on
priorities) to launch a second change project to see if we can improve
the process further.
CHANGE #2
As a result of our second project, first pass yield is increased to 90%. And,
the process remains in control. We might choose to launch another
change project later to attempt to improve the process again. It all
depends on how improving this process compares in priority to other
improvement work we could do with the resources we have available.
FIGURE 8.7
The never-ending stairway to excellence. (Created by the author.)
So, it starts with identifying a key process in need of improvement. We

use Lean Six Sigma tools to improve it, then lock it in. Later, we improve it
again and lock in the results. Later, we repeat the process again. And again,
and again, and again … That’s why it’s called continuous improvement.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
• To paraphrase Michele Quinn, OCM is a structured process used to
deliver organizational results.
• Prosci’s ADKAR approach and LaMarsh’s Managed Change meth-
odology are examples of proven, structured OCM processes.
• OCM approaches and tools, when used correctly, will lessen the
“dip” in the Change Curve and shorten the amount of time that peo-
ple spend in the “valley of despair.”
• OCM also helps to reduce the amount of time it takes to complete
the entire project.
• Five Stages of Change have been defined to explain the steps a person
typically takes as they move through the “change curve.” This con-
cept was originally described by the Kübler-Ross model, or the five
stages of grief.
• Appropriately applied OCM approaches and tools lead to
• Less time required for the change project
• Less negative energy expended
• Less disruption to the organization
– Less “dip” in emotional response
– Less “dip” in performance
• A greater chance of the project team making it to the Future State
• A greater chance of sustaining the gains once there
REFERENCES
Chronicle LLC, San Francisco, CA, 2004. 52–59. Print.
9
Project Risk Assessment
What follows is a change readiness checklist you can use as a preliminary

assessment of your project’s readiness to move forward from a change
management perspective (Figure 9.1).
One extremely important part of change management is actually a
very common project management tool, but it’s often neglected or under-
whelmed. Do a good job of creating a project charter and you will have
taken a great step forward. Neglect it, and you put your entire project at risk.
Figure 9.2 is a project charter template that I found among the materi-
als available on LeanMethods.com, a great source of free Lean Six Sigma
information.
Once you have what you and your project champion believe to be a solid
project charter in place, there is an important follow-up step that is often
neglected—the completion of the project charter risk assessment.
Key Roles—Sponsor versus Champion?

The terms Sponsor and Champion are sometimes used synonymously.
For purposes of this book, here is the distinction.
Sponsor
The senior executive who sponsors the overall Lean Six Sigma initiative.
Champion
Middle- or senior-level executive who sponsors a specific Lean
Six Sigma project, ensuring that resources are available and cross-
functional issues are resolved.
55
FIGURE 9.1
Change readiness checklist. (Created by the author.)
FIGURE 9.2
Project charter template. (From http://www.leanmethods.com; Permission to use granted
by Lean Methods (BMGI).)
Project Risk Assessment • 57
Change Management Elements: a few examples

Red/Yellow/ What are the
Green Problem or Issues?
Leadership
The accountable sponsor/champion visibly
champions the project.
Charter
Business Gap/Problem Statement
The pain to be remedied or opportunity to be seized
has been clearly defined.
Objective/Goal Statement
The specific results expected for this project are
clearly described (qualitatively and quantitatively).
Business Impact/Finanical Impact

This change contributes to the accomplishment of
an important buisness strategy, i.e., there is
alignment.
There is a clear external threat or impetus driving

this change.
The project “competes well” with other projects in

the portfolio of influence of relevant senior leaders.
The business impact is quantified and compelling.
FIGURE 9.3
Project charter risk assessment. (Created by the author.)
More on the Role of the Champion

If you ask people what a Champion does, they will quickly reply, “They
remove roadblocks.” Superficially, that is true. Champions should
remove roadblocks. Champions need to be in a position to defuse any
issues that may arise between a Black Belt and another person in the
organization, particularly if the issue is with someone with a higher for-
mal position in the company. The Champion should be the buffer that
keeps a Black Belt out of a head-to-head confrontation with Managers,
Vice Presidents, and Directors in the company, allowing Black Belts the
freedom to focus on the problem, not engage in some inane territorial
dispute. This is the most fundamental function of the Champion.
Source: http://www.isixsigma.com
SOME CHANGES ARE BAD CHANGES

Occasionally, you will run across a change that is, there’s no other way to
say it, a bad change. It might be a bad idea, or it might be a good idea, just
ahead of its time. I’ve used resistance information gathered using orga-
nizational change management tools to explain and typically convince
leadership that we should cancel or postpone that change project. Keep in
mind, this is the rare exception and not the rule.
HOW TO PREVENT BAD PROJECTS

If a proper project selection and project prioritization process is used, this
will greatly reduce the probability that a Black Belt will ever be assigned to
a bad project. It’s still possible, but much less likely.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
• You can use the change readiness checklist described in this chapter
to conduct a preliminary assessment of your project’s readiness to
move forward, from a change management perspective.
• The project charter is an extremely important part of change
management. It’s actually a very common project management tool,
but it’s often neglected or underwhelmed. Don’t make this mistake.
• You should take the time to assess the risks associated with the
project charter carefully. The project charter risk assessment tool can
help with this.
10
Some Basic Organizational
Change Management Tools
I’m going to show you a few basic change management tools you might
want to use on your projects. Let me start by suggesting that you should
first engage your human resources team, or your resident organizational
change management (OCM) expert, if you are lucky enough to have one.
Please don’t try to do them alone with these OCM tools, especially on your
first projects.
STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS TOOL

Stakeholder
People who will be affected by the project or can influence it but who are
not directly involved with doing the project work. Examples are managers
affected by the project, process owners, people who work with the process
under study, and internal departments that support the process, custom-
ers, suppliers… (e.g., the finance and accounting department).
Source: https://www.isixsigma.com/dictionary/stakeholder
What Is the Tool Used For?

The stakeholder analysis tool, shown in Figure 10.1, helps you identify the
people who can have the most positive, and the most negative, impact on
your project.
This tool helps assess the positioning of stakeholders relative to change
and commitment to the goals of the team, and it is used to identify and
59
Stakeholder Analysis
A × B × C = D
Impact Influence Attitude Score
Stakeholder
Level of Stakeholder
Impact of Influence on Current
Project on Project’s Attitude
Stakeholder Success Toward Project
Stakeholder (High = 3, (High= 3, (Positive = +2, Stakeholder Score Reasons for
Stakeholder Role in Med = 2, Med = 2, Neutral = +1, (Range= –18 Resistance of
Name Organization Low = 1) Low = 1) Negative = –2 to +18) Support
Jane Ryan Operator 3 × 2 × +1 = 6 Job will be easier

Fred Jones Operator 3 × 2 × +2 = 12 Job will be much easier
Jack Williams Supervisor 3 × 3 × –2 = –18 New skills needed
Susan Brown Supervisor 3 × 3 × +1 = 9 Skills not an issue
× × =
× × =
FIGURE 10.1
Stakeholder analysis tool. (Created by the author.)
enlist support from stakeholders. It provides a visual means of identifying

stakeholder support so that you can develop an action plan for your project.
The output of the tool is a representation of where the impacted people,
both inside and outside the system, stand relative to the change.
How to Use the Tool?

Start by identifying the people who will be impacted most by the proj-
ect. As you will recall, Jeanenne LaMarsh calls them the “Targets” of
the change. Next, add the names of the people who will have the most
influence over the project’s success. Some of these influencers will also be
“Targets” of the change, but others might be people in supporting, super-
visory, or leadership roles.
For each person listed in the stakeholder analysis table, you assign an
impact score ranging from 1 (low impact), to 2 (medium impact), to 3
(high impact). The impact score represents your estimate of the impact of
the project on that person.
For each person listed in the table, you now assign an influence score
ranging from 1 (low influence), to 2 (medium influence), to 3 (high influ-
ence). The Influence score represents the amount of influence you believe
that person can have on the success (or failure) of the project.
I’ve found that the scoring process sometimes leads to remembering
other people’s names that should be added to the table.
Some Basic Organizational Change Management Tools • 61
For each person listed in the table, you now assign an attitude score
ranging from −2 (negative attitude), +1 (neutral attitude), to +2 (positive
attitude). The attitude score represents your current impression of how sup-
portive a person is with regard to the project objectives. This is a hard one,
as it calls for some guesswork on your part, based on what you’ve seen and
heard. You might want to tap into some of the “F-word” stuff we discussed
earlier … feelings. These scores often change over the course of the project.
Another way to think of the attitude rating is to consider the person’s
willingness to embrace the change and to make a cultural commitment to
advocate for the change.
Next, you multiply impact times, influence times, and attitude scores to
arrive at an overall score for each person.
Stakeholder score = impact ∗ influence ∗ attitude
If the math was done correctly, you should have scores ranging from −18
to +18.
Negative scores indicate people who might be resisting the project’s objec-
tives. You may want to focus your resistance mitigation efforts on them.
Note: Some stakeholder analysis tools include a “desired rating/stake-
holder score” in addition to the “current rating/stakeholder score” and
include an action plan designed to help make movement toward the
desired target.
When to Use the Tool?

• Consider using this tool at the beginning of every project.
• You might also want to use it when you see possible misalignment
of elements of the project charter among the sponsor/champion, the
project team, and the Black Belt.
• Use it whenever the risk assessment seems (feels) incomplete.
What to Do with the Results?

• Identify areas of risk. They might be the larger negative stakeholder
scores.
• Use findings from this report as inputs into the charter, communica-
tion plan, and the risk analysis.
RISK ANALYSIS TOOL

The risk analysis tool is based on the failure mode and effects analysis
(FMEA) tool that is used in the Lean Six Sigma methodology (Figure 10.2).
You probably have been, or will be, exposed to the FMEA approach and
tool in your Black Belt training. The risk analysis tool is used to iden-
tify potential risks to the project, define how they could impact the proj-
ect (scope, cost, time), define the probability of occurrence, estimate the
impact relative to the project, and calculate a priority rating by multiply-
ing probability of occurrence by the estimated impact. A risk response
is identified for each risk and assigned to an owner who is charged with
ensuring that the risk response is properly executed.

Start by identifying the risks that might impact the project. Next define
the type of risk. Will it potentially impact scope, cost, and/or time? Next
assess the probability of this risk occurring. If there is no perceived risk,
Risk analysis
Probability
Impact of × Impact = Priority Risk
Type Occurrence Rating Rating Response
Description Accept
Risk # Owner
of the Risk Avoid Identify
1 = None 1 = None Reduce and
Scope 2 = Low 2 = Little Probability Describe
Cost 3 = Medium 3 = Moderate (Probability × Minimize Risk
Time 4 = High 4 = Heavy Impact) Impact Response
Some functional Cost Engage

Reduce
1 leaders will resist and 3 × 4 = 12 OCM John S.
probability
the change. time expert
2 × =
3 × =
4 × =
5 × =
6 × =
FIGURE 10.2
Risk analysis tool. (Created by the author.)
assign a 1 (although I wonder why you included it on the list in the first
place). If the risk is low, assign a “2”; if the risk is medium, assign a “3”; and
if the risk is perceived to be high, assign a “4.”
Next, assess the relative impact to the project should the risk occur. If
there would be no impact, assign a “1”; if the risk is low, assign a “2”; if the
risk is medium, assign a “3”; and if the risk is perceived to be high, assign
a “4.”
Now, multiply probability of occurrence by impact rating to arrive at the
priority rating for each risk.
Next, consider the risk response for each risk. Should we just accept it?
Avoid it? Work to reduce the probability of occurrence? Or minimize the
impact?
Next, identify and describe the risk response along with the owner of
said response.
When to Use the Tool?

• Consider using this tool at the beginning of every project.
• Use it whenever the risk assessment seems (feels) incomplete.
What to Do with the Results?

• Identify the areas of greatest risk. The highest risk priority ratings.
• Make sure the risk responses, i.e., mitigation plans, are satisfactorily
executed. If not, notify your project sponsor/champion immediately.
COMMUNICATION PLAN
I’ve found that OCM is mostly about communications, and most peo-
ple, and most companies tend to under communicate about important
planned changes. The communications plan helps to define a structured
delivery of the key messages to the right audiences, delivered by the
right people, using the right medium, at the right time and frequency
(Figure 10.3).
Communication plan
Audience Media Purpose Key Message Owner Frequency Status
Senior Face to Face To make them We have a CEO Repeat for top Meeting #1 - Feb 12
Leadership Meetings w Aware of the need problem two levels of Meeting #2–4 - Feb 13
Team CEO for change leadership
FIGURE 10.3
Communication plan. (Created by the author.)

The input for the communication plan comes from many sources. The
resistance identified using other tools often results in the need for coordi-
nated communication. At the start, most of the communication is about
the “Why”—why change? The messages are often delivered by leadership
to various audiences to build awareness of the change, and to start devel-
oping some personal desire for people to participate in the change.
Audience groups might include the senior leadership team, the “Targets
of the change, or the supervisors of the Targets, with each audience getting
a slightly different message to help it understand the Why, the business
case, and the WIIFM (What’s in it for me?).
When to use the tool?

The easy answer is, from the beginning of the project to the very end, and
everywhere in between. I have not seen a case where there has been too
much good communication. I have seen instances of too much bad, poorly
crafted communication, which did not help.
What to do with the results?

Just do it! Execute the plan, on time and with the designated “owner”—no
substitutes: e.g., no last minute stand-ins for the CEO. This is important!
Some lessons learned regarding communication:
• Communicate, communicate, communicate—most communicate

too little
• Communications should include two-way discussions
• Include supervisors
• Communicate in many ways—face-to-face, in “town hall” meetings,
via email, etc.
LEVERS YOU CAN PULL

With consideration given to the OCM tools shown in this book, and the
myriad of similar OCM tools available elsewhere, I've found three pri-
mary actions that tend to result from all of them. You might think of them
as the levers that can be pulled…
The word “tools” in OCM is a bit of a misnomer, because most of them
are not like a hammer or a screwdriver. Most are not designed to DO
something, whereas most are designed to help you prepare to do some-
thing (Figure 10.4).
There are three main “levers” you can pull to manage resistance and
increase the probability that your change will be successful and sustained.
You can use
1. Communication
2. Incentives (positive and negative, i.e., carrot and stick)
3. Training and development
In my experience, here’s how the distribution of “lever pulling” typically

goes (Figure 10.5). Please keep in mind that the use of the “levers” varies
widely from project to project. This is just my estimate after being involved
in many change projects over the years.
Change management is typically
FIGURE 10.4
Pulling an OCM lever. (Created by the author.)
Training and
Development
Incentives
Communication
FIGURE 10.5
Change management—When viewed from 50,000 ft. (Created by the author.)
Mostly about communication

Next, about incentives (“carrots and sticks”)
And then, about training and development
COMMUNICATION
Careful now. It’s not just about how much to use the various change man-
agement tools and levers, it’s also about when. The timing is critical. When
working on a change, I’ve seen many project teams lead with training,
which is almost always a bad idea. It’s not a good idea to train people until
after the participants have acquired awareness and desire. If the training
is done earlier, it’s likely to be a waste of time and money. And, just try
getting the Targets back in the class again a few months later for a repeat
performance, when they’re finally ready and willing to be trained. Their
bosses may push back on this.
The solution is to train people once: when they are ready, engaged, have
awareness and desire, and are receptive to being trained.
Incentives
Incentives might also be called reinforcements. These are so-called “car-
rots and sticks” that can be designed and implemented by the leadership
and management team. I’ve found these to be less used on Lean Six Sigma
Black Belt projects, but if there is a perceived need, you should involve
your project sponsor/champion and engage your friends from human
resources. Don’t try to take on incentives alone.
Lisa Riegel, Ph.D, recently reminded me that, “we don’t always need
money incentives. Sometimes positive reinforcement can really help…
and that can simply be communicating that a person did the right thing
and is a valuable member of a team.”
Training and Development

A simple test that I’ve seen applied to help identify the need for training
and development is to ask the question, “Could <insert a Target’s name>
perform this task if their life depended on it?” In other words, is it a matter
of will or skill?
If it is determined to be a matter of will (or lack thereof), we need to
determine the problem. What is the obstacle? Is there a lack of motivation?
A lack of awareness? No desire? Is it resistance?
If it is a matter of skill (a lack thereof), we need to determine the best
approach to address the competency problem. Look for skill gaps—assess,
then address. Possibly coaching, a job aid? Formal training? If none of
these approaches work, then maybe the person needs to be shifted to a
different job.
Sidenote: A word about training: There’s something called the

Kirkpatrick Model that has been around for years. It’s used to evaluate
the effectiveness of training.
How many of you have attended a training class and at the end you’re
asked to complete what is the equivalent of a smiley face evaluation
form? If you liked the environment, trainer, materials, etc. you’d circle
the ☺. If you didn’t like it, you’d circle the ☹. This is Level 1 learning,
which involves assessing a participant’s reaction to the training.
Level 2 learning measures the degree to which participants acquire
the intended knowledge skills, attitude, confidence, and commitment
based on their participation in the training. A pretest, posttest approach
applied to a training session is one way to assess Level 2 learning.
Level 3 learning involves the degree to which participants apply what
they learned during training when they are back on the job.
Level 4 learning involves the degree to which targeted outcomes are

achieved as a result of the training.
In summary, the Kirkpatrick Model includes four steps:
Level 1: Reaction
Level 2: Learning
Level 3: Behavior
Level 4: Results1
More about the Kirkpatrick Model can be found at www.

kirkpatrickpartners.com.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
The stakeholder analysis tool helps you identify the people who can have
the most positive, and the most negative, impact on your project.
• The risk analysis tool is used to identify potential risks to the project,
define how they could impact the project (Scope, Cost, Time), define
the probability of occurrence, estimate the impact to the project, and
calculate an overall priority rating.
• The communications plan helps to define a structured delivery of the
key messages to the right audiences, delivered by the right people,
using the right medium, at the right time and frequency.
• There are three main “levers” you can pull to manage resistance
and increase the probability that your change will be successful and
sustained.
• You can use:
• Communication
• Incentives (positive and negative, i.e., carrot and stick)
• Training and development
REFERENCE
1. Kirkpatrick Partners, The One and Only Kirkpatrick Company ®. The Kirkpatrick
Model. The Kirkpatrick Model. N.p., n.d., March 19, 2017. http://www.kirkpatrick-
partners.com.
11
When to Ask for Help
There comes a time in every Black Belt’s career that they find themselves
in “over their head” (from an organizational change management [OCM]
perspective) on a project. I’ve used the image of a beach and seashore to
help portray some situations with regard to the need to ask for help in
dealing with resistance.
The depth of the water in Figure 11.1 represents the amount of resistance
to change on a project. If you find yourself as Black Belt/project leader
getting into “deep water” with regard to resistance, seek out help from
an OCM expert. If no expertise exists at your site, call someone. I recom-
mend you start your search for OCM expertise in your human resources
department. People there probably know someone who can help.
In the situation shown on the left side of Figure 11.1, the Black Belt is
wading in to shallow water. Things are fine. The sun is shining. The waves
are lapping at his/her feet. There is minimal resistance to his/her proj-
ect. In this case, good intuition regarding change management may be
enough. More on intuition later.
In the situation shown in the middle of Figure 11.1, the Black Belt is
swimming in deeper water. He/she is facing some mild resistance on the
project, and the use of some simple OCM tools might suffice.
In the situation shown on the right side of Figure 11.1, the Black Belt is
in deep water, facing much resistance. Sharks appear in the water. It’s time
to seek help from an OCM expert.
Staying with the swimming analogy for a minute, I’d like to make an
observation regarding Lean Six Sigma training delivered as an initial step
in what some call a Lean Transformation.
I’ve attended Lean training sessions, and I look around the room know-
ing that 95% of the people in the room don’t get it. They’re no longer lis-
tening. Why is this? The training is often delivered in a “cookie cutter”
69
Water depth: Shallow water Deeper water Deep water
Resistance: Minimal resistance Some resistance Much resistance
Risk: Low risk Medium risk High risk
OCM approach: Good intuition might Simple OCM Tools Get help! More OCM
be sufficient might be sufficient expertise is probably
needed
FIGURE 11.1
When to ask for help. (Created by the author.)
approach to disseminate information across the organization. I think of

this as the equivalent of a senior livesaving training class, where some
fairly high-level lifesaving approaches are being taught to people who may
not yet even know how to swim. A few people in the room get it and leave
with the plan to go do something with the training, while the many who
don’t know how to swim listen and try to connect for a while, but then
ultimately check out. These people need to be taught how to float. My
point in all of this is that the training needs to be tailored to the audience,
which is not easy to do when you’re in the mass delivery mode.
OCM INTUITION
I’ve noticed that some people seem to have GREAT intuition about OCM.
They naturally communicate with people across the organization—up,
down, and across. They tend to exhibit the qualities of a great leader:
respect and humility. They seem to spend a lot of time involved with the
three C’s—communication, cooperation, and collaboration. I’d put these
people on the right side of the distribution in Figure 11.2.
When to Ask for Help • 71
Intuition about Change Management
Most people
No OCM Intuition Great OCM Intuition
FIGURE 11.2
OCM intuition distribution. (Created by the author.)
I’ve also noticed that other people fall on the left side of the distribution
in Figure 11.2. They often would not score high marks on things like com-
munication, cooperation, collaboration, respect, or humility. Don’t waste
much time on these people. With regard to OCM, they probably don’t get
it, don’t believe in it, and won’t support it.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
• If you find yourself as Black Belt / project leader getting into “deep
water” with regard to resistance, seek out help from an OCM expert.
• I recommend you start your search for OCM expertise in your human
resources department. The people there probably know someone who
can help.
• Some people seem to have GREAT intuition about OCM. They naturally
communicate with people across the organization—up, down, and
across. These people are typically great to work with on change projects.
• Other people do not have very good intuition about OCM. These
people may not receive high marks on things like communication,
cooperation, and collaboration. And, they may not support the
notion of earning respect from their people or demonstrating humil-
ity in the workplace. Don’t be surprised if they don’t see the need for
OCM and won’t support it.
• If you encounter these nonsupportive people, you should seek out
others in management with attributes that support your change work.
12
The Intersection of Organizational
Change Management
and Lean Six Sigma
Years ago, I was trained and certified as a Black Belt. My lead instructor
was a man by the name of Dr. A. Blanton Godfrey. Blan has spent a life-
time improving the world, through his roles in industry and in academia.
During my time learning from Blan, he talked extensively about the need
for change management, but the training and certification program at
that time did not include training in organizational change management
(OCM) tools. Blan later rectified this situation.
Dr. Godfrey’s impressive resume could easily fill a chapter in this book.
Let me summarize his career by telling you that Dr. Godfrey is listed along
with Deming, Juran, Shingo, Shewhart, Feigenbaum, Ishikawa, Taguchi,
Crosby, Goldratt, Ohno, and only 40 others on www.qualitygurus.com.
Today, some Lean Six Sigma (LSS) training programs include change
management modules, but few include extensive training in this area. It’s
more than just the tools. Would you allow a 16-year-old kid, equipped
with a new set of power tools, to remodel your house? Probably not, unless
that kid had extensive experience employing those tools successfully.
In your LSS training, you learned (or you will learn) that a five-step pro-
cess called DMAIC is used on some projects to address a problem.
D = define
M = measure
A = analyze
I = improve
C = control
73
Tool
Tool #4, #5, #6
#1
D M A I C
Tool
#2
Tool
#3
Tool #
1 Change readiness checklist (Figure 9.1)
2 Project charter template (Figure 9.2)
3 Project charter risk assessment (Figure 9.3)
4 Stakeholder analysis (Figure 10.1)
5 Risk analysis (Figure 10.2)
6 Communication plan (Figure 10.3)
FIGURE 12.1
Mapping of OCM tools to the DMAIC steps. (Created by the author.)
The mapping diagram shows where some simple OCM tools can be used
throughout the DMAIC process to help identify and mitigate resistance to
change (Figure 12.1).
Note that the application of OCM is not limited to DMAIC. It’s equally
valuable when used in conjunction with the DMADV steps and the Kaizen
process.
The intersection of LSS and OCM refers to the intertwining of these
two complimentary approaches and methodologies. As pointed out by
Ms. Pandya in Chapter 1, “… you cannot have Continuous Improvement
without Change Management.” Michele Quinn’s quote in Chapter 8 helped
us understand that OCM aligns perfectly with LSS in that they are both
structured processes that, when used properly, deliver organizational results.
When the intersection of OCM and LSS is done correctly, the Black Belt
uses OCM approaches and tools as part of the DMAIC process. (Figure 12.2)
FIGURE 12.2
A partial solution. A tool box with PM, LSS, and OCM tools. (Created by the author.)
Intersection of OCM and Lean Six Sigma • 75
The Belt no longer thinks of these as change management tools. They are
simply additional tools in the Black Belt LSS tool kit.
A NOTE TO THE LSS PROGRAM/DEPLOYMENT MANAGER

Along with blending or sprinkling OCM tools into the Black Belt tool-
box and the DMAIC steps, there’s also another intersection between these
two methodologies that occurs at the program or initiative level. In this
case, in addition to using OCM tools to manage resistance to individual
projects, you may also find the need to employ OCM tools to help reduce
resistance to the overall LSS deployment (or redeployment).
As of this writing, LSS has been around for decades. Many organiza-
tions are in their 10th attempt at “implementing Lean.” Outside the scope
of this book is the need to find the REAL root causes of the repeated fail-
ures to implement (and sustain) Lean. See my book on Hoshin Kanri for
some thoughts on this matter.
Figure 12.3 illustrates that the successful Black Belt:
• Has Black Belt competencies

• Has skills in project management (PM), LSS, OCM
• Holds a tool box filled with PM, LSS, and OCM tools
• Using a Shingo-like approach based on respect and humility
An approach based on respect

and humility (Shingo-like)
FIGURE 12.3
The successful Black Belt. It’s not just about the tools. (Created by the author.)
KEY TAKEAWAYS
• Most organizations today are in their 10th LSS deployment or Lean
Transformation, and some of the training programs include change
management modules.
• Few organizations go beyond the “module” training of OCM, so
most Black Belts leave certification armed with only a few change
management tools.
• OCM is much more than a few simple change management tools.
• And, becoming a successful Black Belt involves much more than
learning a set of PM, LSS, and OCM tools. It’s not just what you
know, it’s how you apply it… how you interact with people every day.
13
People Are Different
Under the laws enforced by EEOC, it is illegal to discriminate against an

applicant or employee based on race, color, religion, sex (including gender
identity, sexual orientation, and pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or
older), disability, or genetic information.1
When I say people are different, I’m not talking about any of the afore-
mentioned traits. I’m referring to differences in workplace personalities
and thinking styles. And some, including this author, believe these dif-
ferences are measureable and are actually important to help improve the
performance of the organization.
When I’ve conducted personality or thinking style assessments in the
past, I’ve found that many Black Belts tend to have scores that fall on the
left side of the DISC model (see Figure 13.1). In other words, they tend to
be more task than people oriented. It seems to me (no data here) that they
often tend to like and rely upon facts and data more than the people on the
right side of the DISC model. But, I’ve also known many highly successful
Black Belts with scores that placed them on the right side of the model.
The thing to remember is that the world’s population, and possibly
the teams with whom you’re working, have workplace personalities and
thinking styles that are equally distributed around the four quadrants of
the DISC model shown in Figure 13.1.
Important: Just because you like facts and data doesn’t mean that the peo-
ple on your project team, and (most importantly) the Targets of your change,
think and feel the same way! Communication is only effective if you present
people with information in a way that they will be likely to hear it. And, I
mean REALLY hear it. My wife Susan, for example, is not a huge facts and
data person. However, much to my chagrin, I’ve come to realize that when
she wants something—and ultimately gets it—she presents me with a busi-
ness case. She has learned to mitigate my resistance by speaking my language.
77
FIGURE 13.1
The DISC model. (The intellectual content is provided with permission by Dr. Robert
A. Rohm & Personality Insights, Inc., www.personalityinsights.com. All rights reserved.
Duplication is prohibited; Obtain permission to use DISC Model or create a replacement.)
Another way people can be different is in terms of their ability to deal

with change. Years ago, I was certified in the CENTACS WorkPlace Big
Five methodology, and I learned that people’s workplace personality can
be assessed across what are called five supertraits.
INTRODUCTION TO THE WORKPLACE

BIG FIVE PROFILE
In 2001, the Center for Applied Cognitive Studies (founded by Pierce and
Jane Howard in Charlotte, North Carolina, and now called the Paradigm
Personality Labs) introduced the WorkPlace Big Five Profile, a survey with
workplace-oriented language. The current version of the Profile measures
5 supertraits and 23 subtraits.
The five supertraits that describe work-related behavior are as follows:
Need for stability (N)

Extraversion (E)
Originality (O)
Accommodation (A)
Consolidation (C)
People Are Different • 79
What follows further defines each supertrait and identifies the subtraits
found within each supertrait.2
NEED FOR STABILITY (N)

Explains how people at work respond to and handle stressful situations, a
critical aspect of today’s successful and effective work environment.
1. Worry
2. Intensity
3. Interpretation
4. Rebound time
EXTRAVERSION (E)
Defines how people at work tolerate and deal with sensory bombard-
ment or the lack of it. Situations would include when people work alone
at home or settings and sensory experiences such as a three-day senior
management off-site strategy meeting.
1. Warmth
2. Sociability
3. Activity mode
4. Taking charge
5. Trust of others
6. Tact
ORIGINALITY (O)
Illustrates how open and accepting people at work are to new experiences,
ideas, and change.
1. Imagination
2. Complexity
3. Change
4. Scope
ACCOMMODATION (A)
Measures how easily or to what degree of difficulty people defer to others—
this supertrait relates directly to power and how to use it effectively.
1. Others’ needs
2. Agreement
3. Humility
4. Reserve
CONSOLIDATION (C)
Explains the degree to which people at work focus on their work, goal
accomplishment, and need for achievement and success.
1. Perfectionism
2. Organization
3. Drive
4. Concentration
5. Methodicalness
Let’s talk about just two of these supertraits—(N) need for stability and
(O) openness.
Important: If a person, maybe it’s one of your Targets for change, is
assessed as having a high need for stability, i.e., a high “N” score, they
might be more likely to resist the change you are proposing. Likewise, if
another person involved with the project has a high “O” score, an open-
ness to consider new things, they might be more likely to embrace the
change. On an important change project, it might be good to know things
like this before you start your plunge into the Delta State.
In addition to the DISC model and the CentACS WorkPlace Big Five
methodology, there are other tools available to identify important
differences in people’s workplace personalities and thinking styles. One
such tool is called the Change Style Indicator.
The Change Style Indicator, offered by Multi-Health Systems, Inc., is an

assessment instrument designed to measure an individual’s preferred style
in approaching change and in addressing situations involving change.3
Three primary styles exist on a continuum: conserver—pragmatist—
originator.
More info on this tool can be found in Appendix E.
Sidenote: Change management includes attending to three component

systems: technical, administrative, and people. At least, that is one way
of looking at it. The change manager can assume that all screws in
one batch are interchangeable (technical system). Similarly, they can
assume that all dollars are equivalent (administrative system). But they
cannot assume that all workers are interchangeable (people system).
People vary according to traits, mental abilities, experiences, physi-
cal characteristics, and values. They are not interchangeable like screws
and dollars. Perhaps for a temporary period, you can put a worker in
a position for which they lack the ideal qualities, as in putting a more
big-picture person in a proofreading role. They can adapt to these
unnatural tasks for a period of time, but eventually they will feel a
strong urge to revert to their set point of that trait, ability, value, etc.
As a change manager, you need to know whether you are assigning
someone to a role for which they are a natural fit, or whether there are
areas of misfit that you will need to allow for. If a worker continues
for too long that involves a significant misfit, you are risking injury,
quality deficits, job dissatisfaction, stress, and, eventually, burnout.
—Pierce J. Howard, Ph.D.
Co-Founder and Chief Innovation Officer
Paradigm Personality Labs
Remember the story about Ph.D. Stan back in Chapter 5? He was a real
person (given a fictitious name for this book), and he was one of the big-
gest lovers of facts and data I’ve ever met. I’ll bet you know people like
this. Maybe you’re one of them? I’ll bet you also know people who use
the F-word (feelings) in almost every meeting at work. It’s possible, but
chances are that the person who talks about feelings when making busi-
ness decisions is not also a facts and data lover.
People are different. You can probably use facts and data, charts and
graphs, to help some people gain awareness and personal desire to make
a change. With other people, you can be armed with the best data and the
most convincing histogram, and it won’t budge them an inch. You’ll need
to find another approach to convince some of the “feelers” to have a per-
sonal desire to make an important change.
CHANGE PROPENSITY
I’ll caution you ahead of time—I have no facts and data to support the
“bell curves” you’ll see in this chapter—only a lifetime of observations.
Dr. Pierce at Paradigm Personality Labs (www.CentACS.com, soon to be
www.ParadigmPersonality.com) could probably provide some statistical
data in support of my supposition, if queried. My observation has been
that a few people seem to LOVE almost every change they encounter,
while others absolutely HATE almost any change. Most of us can be
found somewhere in between. It’s situational. It depends on the change.
It depends on what else is going on in our life (personal and business) at
the time (Figure 13.2).
PEOPLE AND FACTS AND DATA

I’ve also observed that a few people LOVE facts and data. They live and
breathe it. While a few others don’t want to ever see a number or a graph.
For them, it’s all about feelings and intuition. Keep this in mind when
designing your communication plans, your incentives, and your training
and development plans (Figure 13.3).
The bottom line is that people are different, and in important ways that
can really matter at work.
Some people’s DISC scores tend to fall on the left side of the DISC pro-
file, and they are task oriented and might be more inclined to consider
(and maybe even love) facts and data. While some people’s DISC scores
fall on the right side of the DISC profile and they tend to think more about
people and feelings, and possibly less about facts and data, when making
decisions at work.
Change propensity
Most
people
HATE change LOVE change
FIGURE 13.2
A hypothetical distribution: Propensity to like change. (Created by the author.)
As explained during the WorkPlace Big Five discussion, some people

are inclined, whether by nature (their genetic makeup) or nurture (their
environment), to need more stability (less stressful situations), while
others tend to thrive in less stable, even chaotic situations. Some are more
open to change and new experiences, while others will almost always opt
for sticking with the status quo.
I’ve found that it’s often good to understand the workplace personalities
and thinking styles of those people with whom you’re working on a project,
especially when dealing with a change that could face significant resistance.
It’s better to know it and not need it, than to need it and not know it.
PEOPLE ANALYTICS
Shown in Figure 13.4 is what I’m calling People Analytics, a bridge
between the people side of change and the hard data used by the Lean
Six Sigma Black Belt. Tools such as CENTACS’ WorkPlace Big Five and
People and facts and data
Most
people
HATE facts and data LOVE facts and data
FIGURE 13.3
A hypothetical distribution: Propensity to like facts and data. (Created by the author.)
People analytics
Project Management
Approaches and Tools
Black
Belt
competencies
Lean Six Sigma Change Management

Approaches and Tools Approaches and Tools
People Analytics
Approaches and Tools
FIGURE 13.4
People Analytics: A bridge between the “People Stuff” and hard data. (Created by the author.)
Syndio Social make use of data, statistics, and other analytical tools to
derive information about people’s behavior and workplace personalities.
This helps remove some, but not all, of the subjectivity from the analysis.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
• There are differences in workplace personalities and thinking styles

that matter at work.
• These differences are measureable and are actually important to help
improve the performance of the organization.
• The teams with whom you’re working have workplace personalities
and thinking styles that are typically equally distributed around the
four quadrants of the DISC model. That means that three-fourth of
the people on your project team may not think the same way you do!
• People can also be different in terms of their ability to deal with
change. The WorkPlace Big Five methodology helps with this by
assessing a person’s workplace personality across what are called five
supertraits.
• Some people seem to LOVE almost every change they encounter,
while others absolutely HATE almost any change. Most of us can
be found somewhere in between. It’s situational. It depends on the

change. It depends on what else is going on in our life (personal and
business) at the time.
• Some people seem to LOVE facts and data. They live and breathe
them. While a few others don’t want to ever see a number or a graph.
For them, it’s all about feelings and intuition. You can probably use
facts and data, charts and graphs to help these people gain aware-
ness and personal desire to make a change. With others, you can be
armed with the best data and the most convincing histogram, and it
won’t budge them an inch.
REFERENCES
1. Prohibited Employment Policies/Practices. U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission. N.p., n.d., March 19, 2017. http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/practices.
2. Howard, P., and J. Howard. Why the Big Five? Centacs. N.p., n.d., March 19, 2017.
Centacs.com is rebranding to become ParadigmPersonality.com shortly after pub-
lishing of this book. http://www.centacs.com.
3. Change Style Indicator. MHS Assessments. N.p., n.d. http://www.tab.mhs.com.
14
The Final Word
Question: What do you call the person who finished last in their class in
medical school?
Answer: Doctor
OK, I threw that one in just for fun.
Question: Whom do you want operating on you, a newly trained M.D.

or a doctor with many successful operations under her/his belt?
Answer: I want the operation performed by an experienced doctor who
made any early career mistakes on someone else and learned from them.
The same is true with regard to Black Belts and change management.
The best Black Belts tend to be those who have worked several projects,
made some mistakes, learned from each of them, and then took corrective
action to avoid repeating them.
I’m glad you took the time to read this book explaining the need for
change management on Lean Six Sigma change projects. Are you now
completely ready to employ change management approaches and tools on
your Lean Six Sigma projects? Probably not.
Does the medical doctor in training go off and perform surgery after
reading the first Intro to Anatomy book? I hope not!
You, and the medical doctor in training, have more learning and practic-
ing to do.
Now, go forth and learn and learn more … maybe even become certified
in a change management methodology … and then do good work!
87
KEY TAKEAWAYS
• As Ellen Domb recently reminded me, this book is really all about
WASTE (a Lean term)! It is wasteful to have a team do a great job of
improving a process, then have the new process not be adopted by
the organization due to lack of understanding of the human side of
changing to the new process.
• I encourage you to learn a change management approach and then
use it to help minimize the resistance (and WASTE) that is otherwise
inherent in your continuous improvement activities.
Section III
15
Interviews with Experts
What follows is the result of numerous interviews with Change

Management experts—practitioners in industry, consultants, authors,
Master Black Belts (MBBs), and professors. Many of these experts
work(ed) on the ground at companies like Danaher, Motorola, Caterpillar,
Shell Oil, Bank of America, Wiremold, Wells Fargo, Coca-Cola, DuPont,
Lowes, Duke Energy, Dana, and many others. I’ve scoured through count-
less pages of notes from my interviews and have included some of the most
insightful responses about successes and failures with managing change.
I hope you will find their comments as informative as did I.
As you read the experts’ comments, you will see that they are not all
completely aligned with each other, and they certainly do not all agree
with me. After working at the intersection of change management and
Lean Six Sigma for many years, I have learned that there is not one “right”
way to do this stuff. I know some approaches and tools, but I’m always
learning new things.
Sidenote: Over 100 people volunteered to read and comment on this

book when it was still in its draft form. People seemed to either LOVE
this chapter or they HATED it. There was not much middle ground. The
haters told me that I should have edited this chapter and removed all of
the “outlier” comments, i.e., I should have made the Q&A section agree
with what I wrote in the front of the book. Others said that I should
have summarized the interviewees’ thoughts to save readers from tak-
ing the time to read all of them. In the end, I left the chapter format
alone. I like the fact that there is not complete agreement on this subject.
It confirms my belief that there is more than one way to do this stuff.
As Taylor Swift would say, “Haters gonna hate” ☺
91
THE INTERVIEW QUESTIONS

Q1. What is your personal experience with organizational change
management?
Q2. What is your personal experience with Lean Six Sigma?
Q3. How would you explain the importance of change management to
a Lean Six Sigma black belt (BB)?
Q4. What is change management, in your own words?
Q5. What three words would you use to describe change management?
Q6. Why use change management?
Q7. How have you seen change management used in conjunction with
Lean Six Sigma? Was it successful?
Q8. What do you think the typical Lean Six Sigma BB needs to know
about change management? How should it be taught to the belts?
Q9. What are the critical success factors, i.e., the secrets to success, in
using change management in conjunction with Lean Six Sigma?
Q10. Lessons learned in using change management (with or without
Lean Six Sigma)?
Q11. What can go wrong when using change management?
Q12. What are the dos and don’ts with regard to change management?
Q13. Do you have a favorite change management methodology? If yes,
please explain.
Q14. Key metrics? How do you measure the effectiveness of change
management?
Q15. Please describe the biggest mistake you’ve made (or seen being
made) with regard to employing change management.
Q16. Do all Lean Six Sigma projects need change management? If not,
how do you know when it’s needed?
Q17. How does a BB (the project leader) know when it’s time to ask for
help with a change management problem?
Q18. How can you measure the level of resistance to a project?
Q19. What is the project champion’s role (some call it the sponsor) with
regard to change management?
Q20. Are gaining adoption and eliminating resistance the same thing?
If not, please explain the difference?
Q21. With regard to reducing resistance, how would you address a
group of “thinkers,” i.e., highly analytical, data-oriented people?
Interviews with Experts • 93
How would you address a group of “feelers,” i.e., people who are not
interested in facts and data?
Q22. Do organizations with excellent employee engagement still need
change management?
Mini-Biographies of the Interviewees can be found in Chapter 16.
Q1. What is your personal experience with organizational change

management?
Tom Cluley: organizational change management is at the heart of my
company’s approach to strategy execution, leveraging Lean and Six
Sigma continuous improvement methodologies. I have training
and assessment tools developed on many methods, associated with
personality analysis, team effectiveness, effective communications,
change management, leadership, and dealing with difficult people.
Bob Dodge: I am certified in LaMarsh as a change manager, change
master, change management facilitator, methodology master, and
also hold certification in Prosci. I have 17 years of practical expe-
rience with my own company, implementing improvements for my
clients, and 3 years with LaMarsh clients, facilitating, assessing,
coaching, and consulting.
David Ringel: I have 20 years of experience in the private industry as a
process owner (i.e., shift manager, plant manager, operations man-
ager, director of operations). In these positions, I was more able
to direct change and manage it from that perspective. I also have
12 years of experience as a change agent/performance improver (i.e.,
director of Lean manufacturing in [the] private industry, 10 years as
a performance improvement consultant).
Joe Beggiani: I have used organization change management for numer-
ous projects, from rolling out new systems to training development
to standing up a new organization. I was trained and certified in the
LaMarsh Change Master Program in 2005.
Lynn Doupsas: I started my career in the organization and human
performance practice of Accenture. I completed change manage-
ment coursework and am also certified in MBTI, Firo-B, and NBI. I
worked on and off for the last decade as a change manager and coach
for Fortune 500 companies, both internally and as a consultant.
Scott Leek: I advised and consulted numerous leadership teams and
belts on change management for more than 25 years. I trained on
the subject as a consultant to GE Capital and later as an employee.

I also taught the subject to clients and advised leadership teams on
large-scale deployments.
Gary Bradt: I’m a licensed clinical psychologist in the state of North
Carolina since 1987 and have been in the business of leadership con-
sulting since 1987. I’ve had my own business since 1993. I do a lot of
individual coaching with C-suite level executives who lead and man-
age change. I’ve also written books and delivered keynotes about
leading through change.
Sarah Carleton: I attended a 1-week train the trainer (TTT) course in
change management. I was certified as a qualified instructor and
have taught many classes. I am also a certified MBB. I am a con-
sultant who provides Lean and Six Sigma training with a focus on
integral theory (based on Ken Wilber’s works).
Roxanne Britland: My first introduction to change management
was while I was running the International Society for Six Sigma
Professionals (ISSSP), and I was running what we called Leadership
Circles and MBB Circles, which were designed for one-hour to half-
day sessions on a particular topic. The leadership level included
champions, managers, and people who had belts reporting to them,
with whom the topic of change management was very relevant.
With the MBB Circle, there was a big need to introduce the soft
side of business into their more technical world and community, so
I engaged a relationship with Lamarsh & Associates. I brought them
into our event to run seminars on change management. That’s how I
was introduced to change management. Since then, I’ve worked with
the US government and am currently bringing managing change
principles and techniques into everything that we do to support
organizational development (OD).
Darryl Bonadio: I have been involved in organizational change activi-
ties for the past 10–12 years. I was formally trained and certified in
Accelerated Implementation Methodology (AIM), which is a change
methodology approach. I have been a Six Sigma MBB since 2010, which
also allotted me opportunities to influence organizational change.
Don Linsenmann: I led the Enterprise Process Management Office for
DuPont.
Bob Von Der Linn: I am experienced with GE’s Change Acceleration
Process (CAP) and am Prosci/ADKAR certified. I’m also widely
familiar with Kotter, Bridges, and others.
Marc Zaban Fogel: I started doing business development for a Lean Six
Sigma consulting company based in China in 2002, and also started
doing program management and sales for new projects in China at
that time. We followed the John Kotter road map. I moved back to
the United States doing the same in 2003. I’ve been helping compa-
nies use this road map for general projects as full-time work since
2008.
Beth Cudney: I was part of the initial wave of BBs that went through
training on Six Sigma for our organization. My site had five people
go through the Six Sigma BB training, and we led the change
initiative in our organization.
Currin Cooper: I have been a project and change manager for almost
20 years.
PMI: Project Management Professional (PMP) since January
2007. Six Sigma Green Belt (GB) with DFSS (Design for Six Sigma)
since 2006. I received change management certification with
Acuity Institute in 2017. I am also a certified change management
professional (CCMP) and a member of the Association of Change
Management Professionals (ACMP).
I have been working as an organizational change management
consultant since 2012 [at] Queens University of Charlotte, McColl
School of Business, MS in Organization Development program.
Mike Ensby: I previously taught OB/OD courses at the undergraduate
and graduate level and have consulted in this area for over 20 years,
in a wide range of industries/sectors.
Patra Madden: I am a Prosci-certified practitioner, advanced practitio-
ner, Enterprise Change Management Boot Camp, and Prosci TTT
(lead trainer for a corporation of ∼7000 people).
Scott McAllister: I’ve been involved in initiating organizational change
through the last 15 or 20 years, both inside of organizations and as
a consultant. I’ve been through Prosci’s certification program and
TTT program. I also do a lot of teaching in my current role. I com-
pleted the BMGI 5-day change leadership program as part of the
MBB development process.
Abdiel Salas: I hold an MBB certification (SBTI, Inc.), am a certified
Lean manager (Ohio State University and Productivity Inc.), and am
a member of [the] Operational Excellence Committee for Emerson
Latin America. I have been responsible for deployment of Lean Six
Sigma programs in two companies.
Rick Rothermel: I have been a practitioner, consultant, and coach for

more than 25 years. I hold multiple certifications in the LaMarsh
Global Managed Change Methodology, as well as Prosci.
Michele Quinn: I am a trainer, facilitator, and coach in the area of orga-
nizational change. I’m certified as a Prosci master instructor and
TTT.
Jessica Bronzert: I was Director Change Execution for Lowe’s
Companies prior to going out on my own as an executive coach
and change management consultant. While at Lowe’s, I helped
transform the organization and culture to meet changing con-
sumer demands. My primary change background is in the Conner
methodology.
Siobhan Pandya: During my previous role at Shell, I was project man-
ager for Shell’s E2E Customer Experience project, which required
the transition of key sales support activities (disputes, pricing, and
customer set and amend) to customer service centers in Manila and
Cape Town. This entire project was about organizational change
management, from the design of the future organization to execu-
tion through communication, training, team working, counseling,
etc. In addition, I have attended several internal Effective Change
Management courses at Shell.
Q2. What is your personal experience with Lean Six Sigma?

Tom Cluley: I was trained by Shingijutsu in Lean while a member of
the leadership team within Wiremold. I am a certified MBB in Six
Sigma from Deloitte. I have been working primarily in Lean for
about 26 years as an internal leader, a senior management consul-
tant, and as an owner of three consulting companies over the past
15 years.
Bob Dodge: I completed several classes with BMGI in Lean [and] taught
Intro to Lean to Vestas. I have facilitated Motorola and Northrop
Grumman Change Management for Six Sigma BBs.
David Ringel: I learned Lean and Six Sigma in the automotive sup-
ply chain, serving Ford, GM, Chrysler [and] Mazda as a supplier
of third-party packaging. I practiced Lean and Six Sigma (i.e., all
CPI disciplines) as a process owner and change agent in the pri-
vate industry. I also practiced CPI for 10 years as a performance
improvement consultant, and I also hold the Lean Master and LSS/
MBB certifications.
Joe Beggiani: I have used Lean Six Sigma to reduce process variation,
decrease cost, and maximize efficiency. I was Lean Six Sigma certi-
fied in 2006.
Lynn Doupsas: I have completed some Prosci-related coursework. I
have worked with Six Sigma consultants, but I am not certified as a
GB/BB.
Scott Leek: I’m a practitioner of the improvement arts and sciences for
more than 30 years, the last 17 devoted to Lean Six Sigma.
Sarah Carleton: I am a certified MBB. I have trained over a thousand
GBs, BBs, and MBBs, over a span of about 12 years.
Roxanne Britland: I started in the world of Lean Six Sigma in 1993
with the original deployment at Allied Signal. My discipline in the
area was about deployment strategy, and I built the product that
became what’s now called Initialization. That product took care of
infrastructure components of a Lean Six Sigma deployment, such as
human resource practices, the information management tools, the
finance tools, project tracking, and communications components.
Darryl Bonadio: I have a DMAIC BB, DFSS BB, and an MBB. All were
achieved through Juran, International. My DMAIC and DFSS BBs
were in 2005 and 2008, respectively, and my MBB was in 2010.
Don Linsenmann: I led the Six Sigma transformation at DuPont for
16 years. I’m a certified GB and champion.
Bob Von Der Linn: I am GE Six Sigma BB trained, taught Six Sigma GB
level for GE Capital, and have coached dozens of projects. I’ve had
Lean training at GE and other companies. It is important to note
that virtually all of my hands-on experience is in financial services—
not manufacturing. Way before we started calling it Lean, in finan-
cial services, we were doing Action Workouts (i.e., process mapping,
identifying value/nonvalue steps, and rapid implementation of pilot
improvements).
Marc Zaban Fogel: I am GB trained. I’ve run champion sessions and/
or Lean Six Sigma overviews in the past. My focus is mostly on the
project selection and definition phase of projects, bringing in MBBs
to do training and coaching in LSS.
Beth Cudney: I have written six books on Lean Six Sigma. I teach Lean
and Six Sigma at a university and I regularly provide Lean Six Sigma
training. I also hold the following certifications:
• IIE certified MBB, 2013
• ASEM certified Professional Engineering Manager, 2011
• ASQ certified Quality Technician, 2008

• ASQ certified Quality Process Analyst, 2008
• ASQ certified Quality Inspector, 2008
• ASQ Manager of Quality/Operational Excellence, 2007
• ASQ certified Quality Improvement Associate, 2007
• ASQ certified Six Sigma GB, 2007
• ASQ certified Six Sigma BB, 2005
• ASQ certified Quality Engineer, 2003
Currin Cooper: I attended Lean Six Sigma training while at Bank of
America. I was already GB certified, requiring being a PM on a proj-
ect that created documented revenues or savings of at least $250,000.
Mike Ensby: I have been an MBB-level trainer since 1998, and I com-
pleted GE’s TTT course and spent 2 years training GE GBs, sales
GBs, BBs, and MBBs. I also completed the Alcoa Business System
(ABS) facilitator training, based on the Toyota Production System
(TPS), which covers Lean/5S principles. Over the years, I have taught
university-level courses and professional seminars using Lean Six
Sigma content and have also been invited to speak on the topic at
national conferences.
Patra Madden: I am an LSS GB and BB (Lockheed Martin certified),
currently working on [an] MBB.
Scott McAllister: For almost 15 years I was in the Lean Six Sigma con-
sulting space working at BMGI and had the privilege to work with
more than 70 clients in 28 different countries.
Abdiel Salas: I hold both BB and MBB certifications (SBTI, Inc.), am
a certified Lean manager (Ohio State University and Productivity,
Inc.), and have developed a customized LSS for Invensys Corporation,
where I train over 400 GBs and over 150 BBs in Mexico, the United
States, and Europe.
Rick Rothermel: My experience with Lean Six Sigma is largely in assist-
ing organizations with the integration of the Managed Change
Methodology into their Lean Six Sigma approach.
Michele Quinn: I am a Lean Six Sigma MBB. I have led the deployment
of Lean Six Sigma across several large global companies and have
coached hundreds of belts, champions, and team members over the
last 16 years.
Siobhan Pandya: I am a certified Lean Six Sigma BB. I have spent over
8 years in continuous improvement teams, including my current role
as Director for CI/Lean at Mary Kay. In addition, I was a certified
Lean expert and CI business coach in Shell. I have deployed Lean Six
Sigma throughout my career to deliver various benefits for Shell. I
believe that the methodology used is not as important as ensuring
that the tools are fit for purpose, so one day, I may be more focused
on the Lean toolkit, and the next day, it may be the Six Sigma toolkit.
This can also mean looking at alternative toolkits where necessary,
e.g., TPM.
Q3. How would you explain the importance of change management

to a Lean Six Sigma BB?
Tom Cluley: The technical elements of continuous improvement are
the simple side of the equation. Sustainable change relies on creat-
ing the proper environment for success and establishing acceptance
on the part of both the leadership team and the workforce. To estab-
lish that acceptance, you need to understand diversity and what
motivates individuals and then learn to communicate in a manner
that addresses their values and needs, not yours.
Bob Dodge: The return on investment of a great solution won’t be real-
ized if people don’t use it. Change management increases acceptance,
embracement, and sustainment of great solutions. Your team will
produce ways to improve quality, but unless you address resistance,
the people will not implement your solution.
David Ringel: There is a direct correlation between:
• the level of effectiveness of how a change is managed, start to
finish
• the level of effort required to affect the change
• the level of benefit resulting from the change and
• the sustainability of the implemented change
Good change management can get more out of an imperfect solution
than a perfect solution can get out of poor change management.
Joe Beggiani: Change management certifies that employees, customers,
and stakeholders understand and support the change before it hap-
pens. Outcomes can be a reduction in the time needed to implement
a change and improved productivity.
Scott Leek: Simple. Do you want your project to succeed or fail? Ignore
change management at your peril. The road down continuous
improvement is littered with the skeletons of improvement efforts of
striking technical elegance [that] everyone in the organization duti-
fully ignored.
For the BB, change management is really about the WIIFM

(What’s in it for me?). And what’s in it for the BB is project success.
The BB should think this way and ask, “What’s in it for people to
make process improvement changes?” Change is not the natural
state of a large organization.
So the BB needs to understand and, in some cases, experience
firsthand that a perfect solution with little to no support or “accep-
tance” is doomed to languish and die of neglect.
Gary Bradt: I differentiate between change management and change
leadership. Change management has more to do with a structured
process, steps to go through…making sure that we’re getting the
focus groups together, making sure that we have a communica-
tion system in place, making sure that we have a feedback system in
place. I put all those types of things—processes and procedures and
activities—into the bucket of change management. Very important!
The other part is change leadership. Change management outlines
the steps you go through. Change leadership is how you get the hearts
and minds of the people that you’re trying to reach. So my answer to
your question is: understand the difference between change manage-
ment and change leadership. Recognize when you’re working on one
versus the other and that they are both very important.
Sarah Carleton: Change management is an integral aspect of Lean Six
Sigma as it appears especially in the WE space of the AQAL model
of integral theory. If anything is to be accomplished, change must be
managed. In almost every Lean Six Sigma project, significant change
occurs, and BBs must be prepared to recognize, identify, understand,
respect, and deal with aspects of change that affect their projects.
Roxanne Britland: I would look at it in two ways. First, there’s a change
management component about the introduction of Lean Six Sigma
into a business. It is a new, structured deployment method that yields
very strong results, project by project. And, just the idea of deploying
Lean Six Sigma is a change for the organization. Second, project by
project, improvement by improvement, you will also be introducing
change to people’s jobs, so depending on the person’s role as a BB,
MBB, trainer, or project lead, he/she needs to recognize that change
is being introduced—possibly in two unique ways.
Darryl Bonadio: Unless you are able to have the improvements stick
and become the new process, you are only performing part of your
role. With process improvement, you can get implementation,
but with change management, you get institutionalization.

Institutionalization is when the process changes are embraced and
owned by the people and become their new way of doing things.
With implementation, you have only forced them into a new way
that will not be sustained unless the changes are supported through
reinforcement to drive preferred behaviors.
Don Linsenmann: With all of the statistics, processes, methodologies,
and technology that you learned as a Lean Six Sigma BB, the lasting
impact of your work will be dependent on how well your organiza-
tion adapts to change. Change management skills will let you inter-
act with all levels at your company, to communicate and solidify the
changes you design into your control plan.
Bob Von Der Linn: There are numerous examples throughout history
of people resisting new ways of doing things, even when faced with
compelling logic and evidence that the change was beneficial. If you
don’t understand the human side of change, there is significant risk
of failure.
Marc Zaban Fogel: Lack of change management thinking is THE rea-
son good solutions at ANY scale fail.
Beth Cudney: A Lean Six Sigma BB must understand change manage-
ment for the initiative to be successful. While the statistical anal-
ysis required to conduct a project is important, results will not be
achieved or sustained without understanding and changing the cul-
ture of the organization. A BB must anticipate the roadblocks and
fears associated with implementing a new strategy, so as to alleviate
these fears.
Currin Cooper:
• Six Sigma is about consistency, error reduction and elimination,
efficiency, and the ability to measure what you are changing.
• Project management is about delivering a project and keeping
the project resources aligned to the schedule, budget, and scope.
• Change management is about business readiness—identifying
and addressing the impacts of implementing the new strategy,
initiative, or Lean process on the organization.
Note: Knowing about change is not the same thing as being prepared
for change. Readiness isn’t a newsletter or a survey. Change manage-
ment is not the same thing as communications.
Mike Ensby: All the use of the LSS methodology and tools is generally
useless in business process problem solving without an embedded
change management approach baked into the structure. A sufficient

stakeholder analysis at the outset of the problem definition should
include a connection to scope elements, with an initial risk assess-
ment that has a modicum of “barriers and resistance to change.”
Patra Madden: I firmly believe we MUST incorporate CM tools and
techniques into ANY LSS project from the very beginning. Many
changes result from LSS projects, without understanding the stake-
holders and their potential reactions. The resistance that surfaces
while a process is being developed allows the team to deal with it and
mitigate the damage. If you don’t have the CM involvement, along
with the voice of the stakeholder, the project is destined to fail before
it gets going.
Scott McAllister: In the Lean Six Sigma movement, we focused an enor-
mous volume of rigor on the quality of the solution, and I would
explain that the right answer is not enough. Individuals have to
change how they do their work for process improvement to succeed,
and change management addresses the change that needs to happen
at the individual level for any process improvement to sustain.
Abdiel Salas: As an LSS BB, you have to master change, and there is a
psychology for changing people’s behavior from state A to state B. It
is a complex process. Also, you need to know that any change needs
a stimulus. Stimulus is so important, because it determines the speed
of change. Be careful not to manipulate, but to obtain, the “buy-in”
change from people.
Rick Rothermel: Change management provides the focus on the people
and cultural dimension of the changes and implementations that the
Lean Six Sigma BB is responsible to deliver. Although Lean Six Sigma
methodology recognizes the impact on the people, it is insufficient.
The issues of individual and group resistance are typically ignored or
underestimated, and they typically result in the installation of pro-
cesses and/or process changes that are not fully understood, accepted,
or adopted by the people who need to make the changes work, so as to
deliver the business results the organization is expecting.
Michele Quinn: Lean Six Sigma is all about “Change for the Good,”
whether using the DMAIC process, DFSS process, or a Kaizen pro-
cess. While having a new solution for a problem is a great outcome,
without the adoption and usage of this new solution by the impacted
groups and individuals, full realization of the benefits and ROI will
not be achieved. This is where change management becomes critical.
Project Management can deliver the new solution, but change man-
agement is required to deliver the people side of change—adoption
and usage of the new solution.
Jessica Bronzert: Change management brings a deep understanding of
the human and organizational dynamics of change to an initiative.
LSS, to my knowledge, does not have this focus to the same depth. In
many cases, for LSS projects to be successful, the human side must
be considered.
Siobhan Pandya: You can have change management without continu-
ous improvement; however, you cannot have continuous improve-
ment without change management. It is a requirement at every stage
of a Lean Six Sigma project, and without the acknowledgment of its
importance and the deployment throughout the entire project you
will not be successful.
Q4. What is change management, in your own words?

Tom Cluley: Change management recognizes that in any population,
there are a small number of individuals who are early adapters and
an equally small number who are active resisters, with the bulk of
individuals on the fence. To create organizational acceptance of
change, you have to manage the transformation process, establishing
WIIFMs. I’ve used different approaches in the past, but have settled
on Kotter’s eight steps, identified in his book, Leading Change, and
building those steps into a Hoshin Process.
Bob Dodge: Change management is the process of identifying and
reducing the root causes of resistance to great solutions.
David Ringel: To favorably reconcile all key stakeholder imperatives
with respect to a circumstance that has been identified as “requiring
change.”
Joe Beggiani: Change management is a methodology and process that
drives how we prepare, communicate, and assist employees to suc-
cessfully adopt change.
Lynn Doupsas: I believe [that] ultimately, as a change manager, I deal
with the people side of any change (system, culture, organization
realignment, etc.). Change management is the use of techniques to
help move people and organizations through the change curve.
Gary Bradt: Change management is putting together the systems, pro-
cesses, and procedures we need to make sure an organization goes
through a change process in a systematic and thoughtful manner,
in a way that keeps everybody engaged and informed about what’s

going on.
Sarah Carleton: Change management is recognizing, identifying,
understanding, respecting, and dealing with both the visible, outer
aspects of change, and the invisible, inner aspects of transformation.
Roxanne Britland: It’s the ability for an organization to introduce an
improvement or a change that is accepted by all the players who have
influence or are impacted by that change. So, it’s mitigating the resis-
tance through acceptance.
Darryl Bonadio: It is the institutionalization of action modifications
within the organization that is evidenced through the observation of
desired behaviors necessary to sustain the changes so as to achieve
the goals of the organization.
Don Linsenmann: Enabling an organization to accept the different
actions, results, and culture resulting from transformational efforts
to improve the enterprise.
Bob Von Der Linn: The systematic identification and remediation of
people-related risks.
Marc Zaban Fogel: Understanding the impact of your change on stake-
holders and managing their needs and challenges as an integral part
of your solution.
Beth Cudney: Change management is a strategy of understanding indi-
viduals’ fears or resistance to change and addressing these fears to
ensure that changes are smoothly implemented for the good of the
organization.
Currin Cooper: You can’t change what you don’t understand. Change
management helps to close the gaps between the “as is” and the “to
be.” Important projects, like BB or Lean efforts, can be disruptive. By
their nature, they change the way work gets done. When you change
the way work gets done, this requires new standards around process
and procedures, terminology, roles and responsibilities, and very
often, a change of culture. I believe that change management is more
than “the people side of change.” It is the secret sauce for mitigating
risks when so much is at stake.
Basically, it boils down to:
• Do they know about the change?
• Do they know what to do?
• Do they know when to do it?
• Are they prepared?
Finally, will they do it? Who wants it? And who can get in the way?
Projects can be derailed when there’s a mutiny or when a key con-
stituency puts up a road block that leadership or the program office
didn’t see coming, but that was common knowledge in the rank and
file. Telling people about what’s changing is not the same thing as
preparing them for change.
Mike Ensby: People clamor for change, but they don’t want to be changed.
Change management is the component of structured problem solv-
ing that clearly identifies “change-based risks,” with the same level of
rigor as is given [to] the technical aspect of the project. Specifically,
a good change management approach is incorporated in the voice of
the customer (VOC)-to-critical to quality (CTQ)-to-Scope.
Patra Madden: Change management is thinking about the people first
and the project (or outcome) second.
Scott McAllister: It is a discipline and a management philosophy cen-
tered around helping individuals and organizations adopt new
ideas. I have a strong bias that you only use change management to
improve the outcome. It’s not a “let’s make everyone feel better” kind
of approach, so while I think the discipline gets a bad rap for being
touchy-feely, investing in change management should have a direct
and positive output in terms of the effectiveness of the change you’re
working.
Abdiel Salas: Change management is a process to get to the next level
of excellence.
Rick Rothermel: Change management is a focus on the people who are
impacted by and/or can influence successful implementation, accep-
tance, and adoption of changes happening within an organization.
Executives, managers, and supervisors who are responsible for lead-
ing change through their organization must leverage a disciplined
methodology provided by change management to understand and
shift the beliefs and behaviors of the individuals impacted by the
change and address the resistance created as a result of change for
the organization to successfully realize the intended results driving
their decisions.
Michele Quinn: Change management is a structured process for sup-
porting individuals and groups from the current state to a new,
future state to deliver organizational results.
Jessica Bronzert: Change management is the discipline devoted
to architecting understanding, alignment, and commitment to
changes. This is about more than communication and training. It’s

about being clear about what change looks like when it has deliv-
ered on its promise, engaging employee mindsets and behaviors
and continuing to stay engaged with the work until that original
promise has been fulfilled.
Siobhan Pandya: The “what” we have to do is usually well defined; how-
ever, the “how we get there” is either undefined or unclear. Therefore,
for me, change management provides the pathway to [being] able to
achieve what we need to do, while taking into consideration every
aspect of the journey, e.g., process, people, politics, etc.
Q5. What three words would you use to describe change management?
(Note that some respondents needed more than three words in their
response.)
Tom Cluley: Gaining peoples’ acceptance
Bob Dodge: Resistance mitigation process
David Ringel: Influence without authority
Joe Beggiani: Planning, implementing, communicating
Lynn Doupsas: Challenging, transformational, rewarding (when
achieved)
Scott Leek: Purpose, people, process
Gary Bradt: Important, structured, thoughtful
Sarah Carleton: Recognize, respect, reconcile
Roxanne Britland: Results = Quality Solution × Acceptance (four words)
Darryl Bonadio: Behaviors, institutionalization, sustainment
Don Linsenmann: Transformation, acceptance, results
Bob Von Der Linn: Essential, challenging, leadership
Marc Zaban Fogel: Contextual, relational, ongoing
Beth Cudney: Culture, strategy, communication
Currin Cooper: Plan, identify, mitigate
Mike Ensby: Prior proper preparation
Patra Madden: Invaluable, intuitive, inspirational
Scott McAllister: Individuals adopting new things (with “new things”
being one word)
Abdiel Salas: Challenge to improve, challenge to try, courage to defend
change
Rick Rothermel: People risk mitigation
Michele Quinn: Change Management = Adoption and Usage
Jessica Bronzert: Nascent, underutilized, misunderstood

Siobhan Pandya: Critical success factor, sales, sustainability
Q6. Why use change management?

Tom Cluley: The technical aspects of continuous improvement are easy.
Creating acceptance of change is hard and has to be managed.
Bob Dodge: Good change management provides a way for organiza-
tions to implement changes faster, reach better implementation
results, and sustain the changes with far less stress than without it.
David Ringel: To increase the return on the investment of resources
required to affect a change, as well as to increase the sustainability
of the change.
Joe Beggiani: Change management can help an organization achieve
the people side of that change. A new process, a new system, or even
a new organization design is no good if the people who are going to
be using it are not bought in. Without change management, change
resistance, lower productivity levels, and employee turnover can,
and most likely will, take place.
Lynn Doupsas: Most large changes fail if change management tech-
niques are not used.
Gary Bradt: Because if you don’t use change management, you’ll have
chaos.
Sarah Carleton: As an essential aspect of any project, change manage-
ment increases the probability of success of any project and helps
everyone involved with the project grow.
Roxanne Britland: As we evolve in our careers and become managers or
leaders in any capacity, I think there needs to be an awareness that
there is a method and technique and principles to be taught, learned,
and practiced.
Darryl Bonadio: Because without “winning the hearts and minds” of
the people, you will not be able to sustain the changes, and things
will deteriorate rapidly after oversight activities cease. All organi-
zational changes are really about getting people to accept and own
the new activities with a positive attitude that doing things this way
will result in benefits. Those benefits span individual and corporate
values and, as such, need to be communicated in multiple levels of
meaning to the employees. Change management helps you identify
how the changes will impact people, the behaviors needed to sustain
the changes, and how to assure the right reinforcements are imple-
mented to assure change.
Don Linsenmann: It is the complementary “technology” that supports
the technology of LSS.
Bob Von Der Linn: Simple; to mitigate risk and maximize the ROI of
an initiative.
Beth Cudney: To ensure a smooth transition.
Currin Cooper: Change management can effectively target and mobi-
lize groups and individuals and form organizational partnerships.
This allows key stakeholders or leadership to focus limited resources
on the right activities, goals, and outcomes.
Mike Ensby: The alternative is to achieve less of a result in addressing the
business process issue at hand. Effective change management helps
reduce the “sag” principle of traditional PDCA, LSS, and KBM meth-
odologies. The most variable variable in organizational problem solv-
ing is people. Change management helps keep the cats herded.
Patra Madden: To improve the life of your coworkers, your customers,
and yourself.
Scott McAllister: To improve results and outcomes and sustainability
of our solutions.
Abdiel Salas: We are part of a whole organization; therefore, our behav-
ior affects the whole organization’s results. Because people are impor-
tant, we need to understand change beyond our own world and get
a bigger picture. By using change management, we want to diminish
harm and pain but still speed up and assure the results.
Rick Rothermel: Use change management to proactively predict, iden-
tify, validate, and mitigate the resistance expressed by those indi-
viduals impacted by change, enabling the organization to achieve the
intended business results that generated the need for change.
Michele Quinn: Without adoption and usage of the “new way” by indi-
viduals and groups, organizations risk limited benefits achieved, a
growing culture of failed change, and frustration impacting custom-
ers and employees.
Jessica Bronzert: The vast majority of large-scale changes attempted in
organizations fail to take into consideration any meaningful under-
standing of the human and organizational dynamics of change and
therefore fail to deliver sufficient results. Change management, when
applied by seasoned practitioners, brings this critical lens to the table
to increase the chances of success.
Siobhan Pandya: On the basis of the three words mentioned earlier

(critical success factor, sales, sustainability), you will not be success-
ful without change management, as it will highlight areas for atten-
tion that project management alone will not uncover, e.g., the level
of support of staff, the impact that staff has on the outcome of the
project, etc. Also, it will help to define the sales pitch that you need
as a project lead to help everyone impacted by a project understand
the importance to the organization, but more so, why it is impor-
tant for individuals, what it means for them, and how they contrib-
ute to the bigger picture. Change management helps you focus on
each individual, thus ensuring that you have support and long-term
sustainability.
Q7. How have you seen change management used in conjunction

with Lean Six Sigma? Was it successful?
Tom Cluley: My companies have used change management in hun-
dreds of client engagements at both the program and project level.
Success varied, depending on leadership engagement.
Bob Dodge: Motorola and Caterpillar are great examples of the benefits
of the combination. Their application was at both levels.
David Ringel: Yes, Yes, Both.
Joe Beggiani: Yes, I have used change management on a project on
which I was the leader. I had a Six Sigma leader and a change team.
The project was successful, because we brought the change team in
at the very beginning. We had a very strong sponsor, which was an
enormous help in the communication portion of the change. But
also, I was able to focus on the day-to-day project build and imple-
mentation, while the change manager focused on the training and
communications delivery plans. Our Six Sigma team focused on the
processes to be used, and this integration of a focused team elimi-
nated a number of risks, brought some great ideas to the table, and
helped us use the end user as part of the testing team. This helped
with adoption, employee readiness, and feedback.
Scott Leek: Yes. Yes. Program and project level. Both have a role in my
opinion.
Sarah Carleton: At both the program and project levels, change man-
agement is used as an essential aspect of LSS. It is most successful
when change management has been taught to BBs, and it is expected
that they use it and report on it in their project reviews.
Roxanne Britland: Let me talk about it first at the project level. It was
my experience for over 15 years that many of the MBBs who were
developing curriculum about training belts would bring in a module
called change management. It might be a 2- to 3-h block, and it was a
one-way knowledge transfer delivery. I’m not saying some didn’t do
more, but mostly it was just checked off the list as a training module.
Change management is not something that’s merely trained; it needs
to be applied. It needs to be practiced to the benefit of the organiza-
tion introducing the change.
From a leadership perspective, those companies that I worked
with were endorsing Six Sigma from the top and investing a lot of
money in the idea that Six Sigma was going to be their improve-
ment methodology. My personal skills in helping them deploy Six
Sigma was really around making sure that the infrastructure was
well established so that you addressed the people needs, the finance
needs, the IT needs, and the communication needs. In those organi-
zations that did not deploy from the top down, change management
was absolutely required, but in many cases, was not addressed.
Darryl Bonadio: I have been personally involved, either directly or as
a coach, in over 100 different Six Sigma projects and have seen how
change management has impacted the success. Depending on the
size of the efforts, we have used change management at both the proj-
ect and program level. Key to change management is the support and
reinforcement of the changes by management. Successes have been
great, but failures are as spectacular. If management does not under-
stand and embrace the changes and know how these changes will
impact the people, they will assume everyone will simply accept the
new. Without positive and negative reinforcement of the changes,
employees will receive mixed signals and assume that the changes
were either not supported, or worse, that no one cared what they
thought.
Don Linsenmann: Yes. Yes. Used at the program level and then cas-
caded to the project level.
Bob Von Der Linn: In the late 1990s at GE, CAP was an integral part of
GB and BB training. You could not do a Six Sigma project without
incorporating CAP. Over time, it became obvious that change had to
be managed at a program level.
In 2016, change had to be managed at an enterprise level.
What Jack Welch understood in 1990 when he commissioned the
development of CAP has never been truer (he was a genius). In the
typical enterprise today, managing “changes” is a fool’s errand. You
must enable your organization to manage change. It is constant, and
there are interdependencies between initiatives that make it impos-
sible to address them independently.
Marc Zaban Fogel: Most programs I’ve been a part of (Six Sigma and
otherwise) fail to apply any change management beyond basic proj-
ect definition and alignment of the team, and so [they] struggle at
the implementation phase of the solution(s). Where it is applied well,
it’s seen as an indirect support to the project or program.
Beth Cudney: Change management was provided to us as additional
training during the BB course. Since we were given the task of lead-
ing the change throughout the organizations, we were fortunate to
be provided with additional training solely on change management.
It was successful in changing the culture of the organization. It was
at the program level.
Mike Ensby: If it is begun at the outset of the program/project, with
a clear connection to the “stakeholder-scope-risk” discussion,
the champion can be better informed on the “temperature of the
room” and better lead the communication offensive that should be
part of every phase of whatever methodology/model is being lever-
aged. The sooner the change strategy becomes a centerpiece of the
DMAIC/DFSS/5S process, the better the probability of a success-
ful implementation of the ultimate solution, and the longer the
gain(s) can be held. It’s the difference between getting commit-
ment over participation from the problem-solving team and the
various stakeholders. Accountability for the “change” cannot be
delegated.
Patra Madden: Everything I do utilizes change management. When
running a Lean Six Sigma event or project, I ensure the identification
of stakeholders is robust. During the initiative, I often ask the team,
“What do you think the ______ will think of this?” The impact on
the stakeholder of the changes identified in the Lean event is dis-
cussed before, during, and after the mapping of the new process. I
believe one of the keys to a successful process change is identifying
the impact on the stakeholders and determining resistance mitiga-
tion methods. It doesn’t matter if the team determines the impact
has a negative or positive effect. What matters is the perception the
stakeholders have and that the team acknowledges it.
Scott McAllister: The short answer is “yes.” And, I’ve seen it where the
answer is “no” as well. We spent almost 13 years using basically the
same approach, in terms of structure, methodology, and tool set, and
some clients were wildly successful, others were modestly successful,
and some didn’t achieve any success at all. It wasn’t because of technical
aspects… those stayed the same. It was all tied to the adoption of the
approach. It’s not just the tools. It’s often-times the mindset, so change
management, both at the project and the program level, is an absolute
necessity and to me is what separates the winners and the losers.
Abdiel Salas: Any LSS project or program should be executed before we
see the result; therefore, all LSS projects and programs need change
management to be successful.
Michele Quinn: Absolutely. Starting in the initial project definition and
chartering, effective change management should be integrated at
each step/stage of the process.
Siobhan Pandya: See my reference above that LSS cannot be success-
ful without understanding and deploying change management.
Change management helps you recognize how you manage your
different stakeholders, helps you understand their attitude toward
the change, how they can influence others, what is important to
them, which ones to focus on and to what level, and how to ensure
they help you succeed in your project. When done correctly, you
will be successful in your project—I have used it at the program and
project level.
Q8. What do you think the typical Lean Six Sigma BB needs to know
about change management? How should it be taught to the belts?
Tom Cluley: Typical Lean Six Sigma BBs should become experts in
change management, if they wish for sustainability regarding their
improvements. It is best taught in a train-and-mentor approach,
with training followed up by mentoring in which the tools are called
on situationally. I find it follows a learning curve of (1) unconscious
incompetence, (2) conscious incompetence, (3) conscious compe-
tence, and (4) unconscious competence. This transitioning only
comes with experience.
Bob Dodge: They need to know it will make them far more successful,
valuable, and fulfilled. It should be taught only if the practitioners
and their sponsors are committed to use it. Otherwise, time and
resources are wasted.
David Ringel: Relationships trump reason, emotions trump logic, cul-

ture trumps individuals, and data trumps conjecture. Personal styles
affect how messaging is both given and received, whether there is any
perceived value in the message—learn about personal style and how
to apply situational behavior/communication as a facilitator/change
agent. Learn to listen effectively and seek to understand the rest of
the story. Make no assumptions, develop no opinions, and alien-
ate no stakeholder. Learn to effectively facilitate consensus between
those who otherwise want it their way.
Joe Beggiani: Based on my background, and being a LaMarsh Change
Master, I would say they need to understand the change model … iden-
tify, prepare, plan, implement, and monitor. Others’ methodologies
will say prepare, manage, reinforce. What is entailed in these sections,
impact assessments, sponsor screening, communication plans, train-
ing, etc. They need to understand this runs in parallel with the project
management and/or DMAIC life cycle and are enablers to success.
Scott Leek:
1. Understand the basic concepts, including the need for change
management
2. How to use the basic tools to “grease the skids” for project success
3. Some basic classroom training
4. Learning mostly on the job with a mentor or coach
Sarah Carleton: BBs must be prepared to recognize, identify, under-
stand, respect, and deal with aspects of change that affect their proj-
ects. CM should be taught as an integral aspect of every phase of the
Lean Six Sigma methodology.
Roxanne Britland: I think they should be certified in a change manage-
ment methodology. There are programs available. I don’t believe CM
is a PowerPoint set of slides that has been handed down, company
by company, MBB by MBB. It is a religiously practiced method and
approach, project by project. There needs to be a change manage-
ment plan. It’s not something you get from PowerPoint slides. It is a
trained, and then an applied and practiced, method of introduction.
I also don’t believe that it’s a stand-alone activity. I’m not too sure I
really understand organizations that say, “I’m going to go buy change
management.” All of a sudden, they’re training a lot of people and
sending people to seminars. There really have to be applications and
related activities. There has to be a real change, a real solution that’s
being developed using an applied method for managing change.
Darryl Bonadio: We use what we call mindsets and behaviors. What

we teach is that there is a human side to all changes, and if you do
not address the needs and feelings of the employees, you will not get
your improvement to be sustained.
Don Linsenmann: Influence skills… Communication skills…
Stakeholder analysis… Process model. Taught at BB training.
Bob Von Der Linn: Every BB should have training in organizational
behavior and change management, and then should be given hands-
on experience facilitating change management tools.
Every BB should understand that to sustain a change (control), you
must realign the business systems and structures with the desired
end-state. If you do not update your measurement and reward sys-
tems, hiring and staffing systems, training and development sys-
tems, etc., those systems will push you back to the old way—that’s
what they are designed to do.
Marc Zaban Fogel: All belts should be taught the need to incorporate
stakeholder needs into their thinking and planning. It can be most
simply done as stakeholder analysis and communications planning
but needs to be emphasized as an analysis tool to target barriers
before they come up. It should be brought up at the beginning of a
project and discussed actively when the FMEA concept is taught as
a tool.
Beth Cudney: How to effectively communicate change in terms
of what is important to each individual. They must understand
individuals’ potential fears and what’s in it for each individual.
It should be taught consecutively with each tool in the Lean Six
Sigma program.
Currin Cooper: Implementing a new process without understanding
the impacts or unintended consequences is risky. Very few lines of
business or business units actually do work in a silo. Organizations
are systems and processes are cross-functional. Politics are real. You
can’t influence what you don’t understand, and you can’t understand
that of which you aren’t aware.
Mike Ensby: Much more than is typically covered. There is more
emphasis on the cadence of the application of the “tools of prob-
lem solving” which are inherently disruptive to existing processes,
than there is on measuring the impact of the change to the status
quo. Most belts are not people-change facilitators. They need a basic,
“freeze–unfreeze–refreeze” model to work from.
Patra Madden: I believe all BBs should be certified as CMPs prior to
completing their LSS training and BB certification. I also believe all
BBs should be trained in cause mapping (root cause analysis), con-
flict management, effective listening, etc.
Scott McAllister: I think it needs to be integrated into Lean Six Sigma
training, so it’s not different than, but is a key part of, the program.
And, I think they need to learn a model for organizational change
and for individual change and understand when they use which
parts of the approach.
Abdiel Salas: Be prepared to work with all levels of resistance, teach
the basics of [the] change management process. Increase the change
management topics.
Rick Rothermel: Lean Six Sigma BBs need to understand the value
of the acceptance and adoption of the change by those indi-
viduals who are impacted. They need to understand what fac-
tors generate resistance and the strategies and tactics they can
use to proactively mitigate the resistance. Learning change man-
agement methodology and tool application should be integrated
into the Lean Six Sigma BB curriculum. It should align to the
people requirements and be delivered as a part of the project
implementation.
Michele Quinn: I’d start with the ADKAR model as a foundational
model for individual change. Building from here, BBs and others
need a solid process and set of tools to support their ability to deliver
both the new optimized process and the people adoption and usage
of the new optimized process.
Jessica Bronzert: Process professionals generally can benefit from
understanding the human and organizational dynamics of change.
Siobhan Pandya: The main thing that they need to know is their stake-
holders’ attitude to change—from there they can determine how
best to approach them and win their support. They should learn
the basics about the various models—Rogers Curve, Bridges Model,
etc.—through theory, but also simulation, e.g., role play with folks
in different stages of change, and learn how to react and navigate
conversation.
Q9. What are the critical success factors, i.e., the secrets to success, in
using change management in conjunction with Lean Six Sigma?
Tom Cluley: The critical success factors are measured in terms of:
1. Organizational urgency
2. Will to change
3. Awareness of deficiencies
4. Skills required
5. Reliability
These are enforced through the proper:
1. Leadership
2. Empowerment
3. Communication
4. Learning
5. Discipline
Bob Dodge: First and foremost, the sponsors of the initiatives, pro-
grams, and projects must practice good change leadership. One
must understand that it is an ongoing practice and not just a “punch
list.”
David Ringel: Other than [my] previous response [to Question 8], the
ratio of the level of effort put against change management and the
technical solution should be around 4:1.
Joe Beggiani:
• Committed sponsors
• Change leadership team
• Buy-in from the senior and frontline management
• Continuous and targeted communications
• Sustaining the change after project completion
Lynn Doupsas:
• Leadership alignment
• Clear understanding of the end goal
• Employ tactics that lead to increased adoption
Scott Leek:
• The tired cliché of senior leadership: INVOLVEMENT
• A worthy project (worthy = solid business case + people care +
customer impact)
• Project leader with the competencies to lead a project and inspire
change
• Sincere commitment to addressing people’s legitimate concerns
• An organizational culture committed to not only getting it done,

but also, doing it better
Gary Bradt: (1) That you have the buy-in and sponsorship of senior
leadership that has the ability to get things done. (2) That you have
a communication system that is ongoing and not just a one-time
announcement, as well as a way to gather information about how
people are experiencing the change—two-way communication, not
just top down. We also need bottom-up communication. (3) We need
to capture the hearts and the minds of the people who are being
impacted by the change. (4) We need to recognize that the people who
are leading the project on the change are going to be living and breath-
ing that project, way more than anybody else who is being impacted
by it, and we need to keep in mind, if you’re leading the change man-
agement project, you have to give people time to catch up with you
and the time to think through all of the issues that they might not
like about it. You must take the time to address those issues. Many
times, people who are leading change management efforts have lived,
breathed, and eaten that concept for months, and when they’re ready
to roll it out, they’re shocked that people don’t immediately buy in.
Sarah Carleton: BBs should ask these questions at every phase:
• What is changing in this phase?
• What does this mean to me?
• What does this mean to stakeholders?
• What does this mean to the team and the organization’s culture?
• What individual skills have to grow to accommodate this
change?
• What organizational systems have to grow to accommodate this
change?
Roxanne Britland: Those that are training Lean Six Sigma practitioners
in change management need to be certified and practiced in it—and
not just a transfer of information on slides. It is a practiced meth-
odology. Leadership and deployment champions need to endorse
change management as a serious element of their Lean Six Sigma
deployment. It’s not a “sprinkle in”… it’s embedded. It’s got to be a
part of the way you do business. And Lean Six Sigma says that all
the time, right? We’re going to be just the new way of doing business
when you want to improve something. Change management needs
to be embedded with that same mindset.
Darryl Bonadio: Involve key players in the change. Understand the

impact of the process changes on the individuals. Make sure that in
addition to the control plan there are a set of reinforcing behaviors
that need to be supported.
Don Linsenmann: Top management support… Recognition of a cul-
ture change is needed… Results measurement… Open comm-
unication.
Bob Von Der Linn:
1. Engage with a change consultant early.
2. Engage with the managers in the affected population early and
often.
Marc Zaban Fogel:
1. Ongoing to analysis of stakeholders and communication adjust-
ment by the project manager
2. Ongoing discussion by the champion of resistance to change
3. Willingness of the project manager and champion to engage or
challenge key people who resist the change
Beth Cudney: Teach it as part of the training curriculum.
Mike Ensby: Change management is the “critical” aspect of LSS efforts.
Projects are about changing the current state. So, success is predi-
cated on a properly developed change approach.
Patra Madden: To not take every tool at 100% face value.
Scott McAllister: Embedding it early in the process. We’ve got a strong
bias within Prosci. We’re trying to get individuals to the Ability
milestone in their ADKAR training, and it saves time when we’re
training on solutions. Successful adoption of the solution requires
more than just communication and training.
Abdiel Salas: We need to know that all good ideas are only ideas if
they are not implemented and that once they are implemented they
become innovations. There is a difference between my idea and our
idea, go and try. Resistance to change is normal behavior, but if there
is no will to change, then you are destined to become obsolete.
Rick Rothermel: “It’s not about the tools!” Like any disciplined approach,
change management methodology and tools provide the framework for
data collection. The critical success factor is in the analysis of the data
and the recommendations implemented to increase the probability of
success. Remember, there are two important aspects to success in the
use of change management with Lean Six Sigma: Six Sigma supports
the identification and implementation of the best solution/process.
Change management supports the acceptance and adoption of the

solution/process by those who are impacted. You need both these fac-
tors working in unison to achieve the intended business results.
Michele Quinn: Understand the ADKAR model, be willing to focus
as much effort on supporting individuals through awareness, desire,
knowledge, ability, and reinforcement as the effort we put into value
stream mapping and variation/waste analysis.
Siobhan Pandya: You must know what is important to each individual
stakeholder—whether it is a frontline employee or the CEO; each
individual is motivated differently and engaged differently, and
therefore, understanding this will help you achieve the improvement
opportunity you are seeking. It will also help you determine the best
solutions as you will have support and buy in from the beginning.
This will also help with sustainability.
Q10. Lessons learned in using change management (with or without

Lean Six Sigma)?
Tom Cluley: Lessons learned are that change needs to be managed
and that without engagement on the part of leaders, results will be
marginalized.
Bob Dodge: Change sponsorship (leadership) is as critical as change
management. In my experience, many leaders try to delegate both,
and it won’t work.
David Ringel: Don’t leave home without it. Start with CM; don’t stop;
end with CM.
Joe Beggiani:
• Get change and program managers together early in [the]
planning phase
• Communicate expectations often and to everyone
• Reward for the change
• Change is hard; understand the change and the impacted groups
• Answer the employees’ questions
• Put the time in to sustain the change
Scott Leek:
1. If there is no or insufficient communication about possible or
certain changes, stories are created to fill the void, and almost
always paint a more dire picture than is reality.
2. Seek first to understand, but know that understanding some-
times comes from observing behavior, not listening to words.
3. Everyone’s behavior makes sense to them.

4. Stay focused on behavior, not on trying to change attitudes.
5. There are legitimate fears and concerns, and then there is sabo-
tage. Recognize the difference and act accordingly.
Sarah Carleton: Change management must be addressed as an integral
aspect of Lean Six Sigma.
Roxanne Britland: Change management trainers or consultants really
need to work closely with the business improvement people. It’s not
a separate track. Sometimes the change management folks are not in
the project all the way through, so they don’t really know what the
solution is.
Darryl Bonadio: Management support, through its behaviors and
attitudes, has a significant impact on success. When implement-
ing across functional areas, you need to understand the key drivers
within each functional area, so as to assure consistent support.
Bob Von Der Linn: As a change consultant, when the change is man-
aged well, my client appears to be a highly effective leader and gets all
the credit. When the change is not managed well, regardless of the
root causes, the leader appears highly ineffective, and I get blamed.
Marc Zaban Fogel:
• If the champion or key stakeholders do not actively want change,
you will fail.
• If you don’t get and integrate feedback from frontline people, the
change will fail.
• Taking a pilot/experimentation approach to implementing
change(s) is the best mindset to finding effective solutions.
Beth Cudney: Communicate and get people involved early to help gain
buy-in.
Currin Cooper: Be pragmatic. Don’t go crazy with the forms and
surveys.
Water cooler talk will happen. When information is lacking, peo-
ple will fill in the gaps with misinformation. Change management
helps get in front of that.
Mike Ensby: CM can never begin too early. Most LSS (or other) proj-
ects do not pay sufficient attention to the stakeholders—the analysis
is too superficial. Just when you think you know how a stakeholder
will respond, they will react in an entirely unpredictable manner.
“That’s not what I wanted/expected.” Change is more difficult than
most leaders understand. Just because a solution makes sense doesn’t

mean people will embrace the change.
Patra Madden: Just because a change appears good to one person,
NEVER assume the rest of the people will like it. Everyone is differ-
ent and deserves to be heard.
Scott McAllister: There’s no such thing as perfect change management,
so don’t let perfect get in the way of progress. The more you invest
on the people side, the better results and outcomes you get. We often
call it the soft side of change, but it’s actually the hardest part of mak-
ing change happen.
Abdiel Salas: Most changes are not welcome because they are not under-
stood. Once they are fully understood, they are mostly welcomed.
Rick Rothermel:
• Be clear on your direction—what are you trying to accomplish
and what will the Future look like when you arrive?
• Leadership support, engagement, and ownership of the change.
Sponsorship of the change is critical, and without it, the project
will not achieve intended results.
• Have a good, solid plan and follow it.
• Recognize that there will always be a level of resistance to the
change, no matter how great the change is. Be prepared for the
resistance and be willing to take the necessary steps to mitigate
the resistance.
• Align the change to the mission, vision, and goals of the organi-
zation. The change has to make sense to the organization and the
employees.
• Recognize there are multiple changes happening in the organi-
zation at the same time, and your change may not be the “most
important.” You need to assist employees in calibrating the prior-
ity of a specific change.
Michele Quinn: Focus on the behaviors—those that are required in the
current state, and those that will be required in the new future state.
Apply the ADKAR model, identify barrier points, and use a proven
structured CM process and methodology.
Jessica Bronzert: Transformational change is fundamentally messy,
and there are known patterns of risk that contribute to whether
the change will be successful or not. These include a lack of effec-
tive sponsorship of the change effort, an unclear picture of what the
future looks like after the change is successful (or a lack of alignment
among decision makers about the future), and a failure to continue
supporting the change past installation until the full business ben-
efits of the change are realized. Any change management approach
that doesn’t architect these outcomes from the beginning, and moni-
tor and mitigate them as the change unfolds, will be less effective.
Additionally, the change management function itself must be well
sponsored. If the leaders of the change itself are not bought in to
using a change management approach and don’t fully partner with
change management practitioners supporting them, it will be very
difficult, if not impossible, for change management to be an effective
approach. Even when change management is fully supported, it can’t
be outsourced to practitioners alone. Sponsors and other stakehold-
ers responsible for making the change successful must build their
own capability in the change space as well.
Siobhan Pandya: Important to have [a] clear end goal defined, as you
need to be able to communicate this to others. Often, the journey
has been embarked on without this clarity. Take the time required
to use change management—more work and more difficult at times,
but better in the long run.
Q11. What can go wrong when using change management?

Tom Cluley: Failure to engage leadership in the process can lead to frus-
tration, especially if the lower level workforce understands the prin-
ciples and sees it lacking in their leaders.
Bob Dodge: Leaders trying to delegate change leadership/sponsorship.
Disagreements over whether it is needed, being done effectively, who
should do it, and how.
David Ringel: The greatest risk for a belt is to have, and to allow to come
to light, an opinion or position on subject matter that is not theirs
(theirs being the CPI tools, methods, agenda). Belts must be trusted
as honest brokers of the change.
Joe Beggiani: There are a number of reasons—poor sponsorship, poor
communication planning, not planning the change at the beginning
of the project, cutting corners on the prepare phase of change. There
are many more, but it does not have to be this way. If you have com-
mitted sponsors and a strong change team, you can make sure that a
change plan will be strong, but only if the program/BB is open and
committed to the change.
Scott Leek:
1. If handled ham-handedly, the effort can be perceived as nothing
more than crass manipulation, instead of sincere attempts at dia-
logue to understand genuine concerns.
2. Loose credibility, if changes are not seen through to completion,
or if changes are made upon changes, without proper assessment
or evaluation.
3. Spending too much time planning for and overestimating the
resistance to change. This is a particular risk if the change man-
agement professionals are not sufficiently grounded in opera-
tional realities and/or are otherwise underemployed.
Gary Bradt: (1) Under-communication. You have to have a simple
message, and you need to communicate it repeatedly. (2) Not giv-
ing people a voice in the change process—taking it top down, [say-
ing] just do it. (3) Not giving it enough time. Giving up too soon.
(4) Declaring victory too soon.
Sarah Carleton: Change management can go wrong when insufficient
attention is paid to it, when it is not taken seriously, and when it is
used in an immature manner.
Roxanne Britland: Change for the sake of change. For example, a change
agent who comes in and wants to introduce these methods and prac-
tices of change, but is not doing it in conjunction with a solution.
Change management can’t be a sidebar; it’s got to be embedded.
And, it shouldn’t feel like you’re doing it. It should just naturally be
a part of the project.
Darryl Bonadio: A poor communications plan can cause more issues
than solve. Knowing what to say, to whom, and when, can make a
huge difference in how well the change is perceived and accepted.
Bob Von Der Linn: Almost universally, unenlightened leaders assume
that a communication plan and a training plan are all that is neces-
sary for change management.
The most significant problem, however, is the semi-enlightened
leader who believes that he/she can “outsource” change management
to HR or to a consultant (internal or external).
Beth Cudney: Not getting sufficient employee involvement and not
communicating effectively. These will lead to resistance, the change
will not occur, and the culture of the organization will be negatively
affected. When this happens, executive management is often no lon-
ger trusted.
Currin Cooper: Spending too much time on non-value-added activi-

ties. Not helping sponsors see the value in the approach you are tak-
ing. (Not all practitioners understand it themselves, so it is difficult
to help others to understand it!)
Mike Ensby: Trying to satisfy too many “wants” and “like to’ s,” and
losing focus on the “musts.” A lack of effective communication
(under-and/or over-communicating). Treating all stakeholders
equally. Not having a committed senior leader as the project cham-
pion. Everything and anything!
Patra Madden: Sometimes the team or sponsor wants to take short-
cuts to complete a project and will often try to cut out the CM piece.
Don’t let them!
Scott McAllister: It’s a great scapegoat when things don’t work out to
say we needed more change management, so understanding that it’s
a bit of a minefield to get started in. It takes some courage to take on
a leadership role in this kind of work. A lot of people misunderstand
communications and training as change management, so you often
times are misunderstood, I think. Everyone has a different definition
of what change management is, so creating a common definition and
language around it is important. Oftentimes, it’s a derailer when we
think everyone is talking about the same thing, and we’re actually
talking about wildly different things.
Rick Rothermel: I believe any focus on the people impacted by the
change is a good thing, even if it is minimal. When applying change
management discipline, it is possible to place too great an emphasis
on the tools and too little emphasis on the analysis that is required
to determine solid and reasonable action steps. This adds time and
complexity to the project, which may create more resistance than is
mitigated. Keep it simple and reasonable. The intent is to understand
the resistance and deal with it. Another pitfall is to misread the cli-
ent or leadership. Many leaders don’t want to address this, because
they perceive it as “soft.” Shift the conversation and the focus to risk.
Change management is addressing the risk(s) associated with the
people who are impacted by change.
Michele Quinn: Lack of effective leadership and sponsorship is the
number one risk.
Jessica Bronzert: The worst thing that can happen is that the change
itself fails to deliver its intended benefits. While the use of change
management should contribute to the success of the change itself,
ineffective or shallow change management efforts can, at best, be

neutral in their impact or, at worst, contribute to the failure of the
initiative to deliver. Strong change management goes well beyond
the traditional thinking of “communication and training.” There are
known patterns that contribute to the success or failure of change
initiatives. A change management approach that doesn’t take these
patterns into consideration is insufficient. Lack of sponsorship for
the use of seasoned change practitioners using a robust methodology
is insufficient. An approach that is only started “when implementa-
tion happens” is insufficient.
Siobhan Pandya: Taking too long with certain stakeholders, moving for-
ward without clear support, [being] too caught up in emotions, etc.
Q12. What are the dos and don’ts with regard to change management?
Tom Cluley:
Do—learn to recognize diversity in individuals and that what
motivates one individual to accept change may not motivate
others.
Do—insist that while the workforce can be won over in time, at
the onset, the leadership team must fully support the effort
Do—require leaders (formal and informal) to lead the change. It
can’t be delegated.
Do—use an assessment tool that measures the element of cul-
tural change, so that you know where the gaps are and can
focus on areas of need.
Don’t—assume that change will happen without being managed.
Don’t—accept resistance on the part of the management or lead-
ership team.
Don’t—expect organizational change to come quickly. My expe-
rience is that it takes the best organizations 3 to 5 years to
create organizational change. Transformation follows a very
similar pattern to Collin’s flywheel effect described in Good
to Great!
Bob Dodge: In my world, in small businesses, I cannot try to “do”
what worked for large enterprise clients. I have to think very care-
fully about where there is an opportunity to help these businesses
make changes, based on the frameworks to which I have been
exposed. The one piece that is reinforced over and over is to Start
with Why.
Joe Beggiani: My major don’t is assumptions… check all assump-

tions! Also, don’t cut corners. Follow the methodology. It was put
in place for a purpose. If you are the change leader or a sponsor of
a change, be committed. You are driving the team making major
decisions, and you need to be engaged. DO NOT force the change.
Work through the change and get the end users involved if possible.
Gary Bradt:
Dos:
• Involve the people impacted by the change.
• Give them time to buy into the change.
• Communicate it until you are blue in the face.
Don’ts:
• Have a major meeting to announce the change and expect every-
body to buy-in immediately.
• Make it just a top-down process.
• Get hung up on the people who are most resistant. I call this the
10-80-10 rule. About 10% of the people won’t buy in, no matter
what. About 10% want change, no matter what. It’s the middle 80%
that you need to focus on. If they are properly led, with proper
change leadership and proper change management, you’ll get
them to move along. The bottom 10% are the most vocal and nega-
tive. Change leaders will get hung up trying to address the vocal
minority and miss the majority of the middle just waiting to be led.
Sarah Carleton: Do recognize, identify, understand, respect, and deal
with aspects of change at every phase of the project. Do involve
team members and stakeholders in change management. Do review
change management aspects at every phase review.
Don’t gloss over any aspect of change management. Don’t treat it
as something separate from Lean Six Sigma.
Roxanne Britland: Do role model good quality results that are accepted
by the people who are going to be effected by that change/improve-
ment. Do recognize that change occurs every day. It’s not something
special. New people receiving training is a change. New skills are a
change. Improvement is change.
Don’t think you can communicate your way through effective
change.
Darryl Bonadio: Dos: Over-communicate. Understand what drives
behaviors within the target community. Sell the change, even if you
think it should sell itself. Get people involved so they own the change.
Don’ts: Assume everyone understands why. Think that the exist-

ing reinforcements will support the change. Confuse change with
good.
Marc Zaban Fogel:
Do:
• Make the entire project team aware of and responsible for change
management
• Continually collect and review stakeholders feedback
• Find the people who are willing to try and make them successful
first
• Expect resistance as a natural reaction
Don’t:
• Stop with the initial change management plan
• Ignore frontline people with low power
• Expect logic and facts to explain all things
Beth Cudney:
Dos:
• Communicate, communicate, and then communicate.
• Get feedback before starting a project or an initiative. People
want to be involved.
• Management must walk the walk and not just talk the talk.
Don’ts:
• Handle every employee the same way when it comes to change.
Each person may have a different fear. They all must be addressed
with an effective communication strategy.
• “Sell” the change. People need to feel it and understand the ben-
efits of the change.
Currin Cooper:
Do be an advocate for the employees/stakeholders who will have
to live with the “new way”.
Don’t fall into the trap that change management is sending out
communications. It is consulting, coaching, asking difficult ques-
tions, driving out gaps, and anticipating challenges.
Patra Madden:
Don’t assume you don’t need it. You always do! (Not always at the
same amount or the same thing. But always something.)
Scott McAllister:
Do—start early, and make sure you engage with sponsors early in
the process, and have a budget for it
Don’t—think you can send an email on Monday, with training on

Tuesday, to go live on Wednesday, and be successful. Let perfect get
in the way of progress.
Abdiel Salas:
Do—involve. Welcome all ideas. Accept criticism. Accept wrong.
Expend time to explain. Lead change. Look for the better of most
people. Appreciate by listening. Use inclusive words. Use personal
names, not titles. Make jokes, but be firmed to ideas. Make team
decisions. Care about the people more than processes. Be prepared
to give back something to people, always quickly. Always thank and
appreciate the help of others. Be kind and be responsible for failure.
Don’t—impose ideas. Never promise more. Do not ignore or mis-
spell names. Never kill ideas. Never ignore small ideas—see ideas as
opportunities to be at the next level of acceptance. Never show you
don’t care. Never manipulate or have hidden agendas. Don’t give the
impression you are the superstar hero.
Rick Rothermel:
Do—collect data upon which to make people impact decisions
and recommendations.
Do—engage leadership, and force them to accept their role and
associated responsibilities for leading change.
Do—recognize that there will always be a degree of resistance by
those impacted by the change, regardless of how great or positive the
change is.
Do—recognize that change management is a disciplined
approach, but unlike project management, it is not a linear applica-
tion. It is simultaneous and iterative in the implementation of tasks
and outcomes.
Do—make certain leaders understand they must provide positive
reinforcement when they see change happening AND deliver correc-
tive action when it doesn’t happen.
Don’t—make it about the tools. Tools are intended to support the
data collection. The real value is in the data analysis and recommen-
dations implemented.
Don’t—allow leaders/sponsors to abdicate their responsibilities.
They need to be seen as the leaders of the change.
Don’t—make it more complex than is necessary. The level of
change management support required is driven by the resistance to
the change, not a templated project plan.
Michele Quinn: Coach and guide sponsors/champions, engage middle

management early, and never underestimate how human beings
will cling to the current state, even when unsatisfied. Provide a clear
vision. Communicate well-articulated answers to the questions,
“Why this? Why now? What’s the risk of not changing? What is
expected of me? What’s in it for me?”
Siobhan Pandya:
Do have a clear plan, clear communication tailored for different
audiences, stakeholder management, empowerment.
Q13. Do you have a favorite change management methodology? If

yes, please explain.
Tom Cluley:
Employing Kotter’s eight steps into whatever process I am trying
to implement.
1. Create a burning platform for the change, in terms that are
locally relevant.
2. Create a coalition for change (typically executive council or
steering team).
3. Establish the vision for what change will look like and what
will likely happen if the change is not implemented.
4. Communicate that vision, again in terms that are locally
relevant.
5. Empower individuals to act.
6. Attain early wins (pick easy wins first so as to build confi-
dence and show results).
7. Build on momentum by increasing the pace of change (build
on the flywheel effect).
8. Anchor the change in disciplined standard work.
Bob Dodge: I use a blending of LaMarsh, Prosci, and my own expe-
rience, which is to know no one mythology will be acceptable in
such a diverse world. There is too much experience with so many
approaches. I know I must work with what is in place that works
and help my clients apply methods to improve those areas that need
improvement. I am typically working with much smaller firms these
days, and there is no capacity for the rigor of a brand name meth-
odology. I must work with the business owners to help them: Define
the change, determine who might resist and why, and mitigate that
resistance.
David Ringel: Kotter, as a baseline method/guiding principles

Joe Beggiani: LaMarsh—it is what I was trained in. But from my expe-
rience they all are very close on what needs to be done to achieve a
strong outcome.
Lynn Doupsas: Kotter and Procsi methodologies are most common. I
use a combination or tools, techniques. Also, good standard project/
program management techniques.
Gary Bradt: John Kotter’s eight steps is my favorite methodology for
making change happen. It’s been around for a long time, and it’s
been tried and tested. It does lean more on the leadership side, but
there are some change management parts of it, as well.
Roxanne Britland: I’ve only practiced in the LaMarsh model. That’s
why I use the phrase “managing change” a lot.
Darryl Bonadio: Yes, AIM.
Bob Von Der Linn: GE CAP: The GE approach has always been to put
simple, effective tools in the hands of all managers, and teach them
how to use the tools. This approach makes them better leaders, and it
enables change agility. It works.
Marc Zaban Fogel: John Kotter’s work. Switch, Heath Brothers.
Currin Cooper: I use a hybrid approach. I believe that change is a pro-
cess, not an event.
I have used Conner Methodology, PROSCI, Accenture, Kotter,
ACMP, and others. The basic steps are the same:
• Understand and articulate the intent of the project. There needs
to be a crisp summary and a common vision. People need to be
able to grasp what the end result will be, without having to read
the project charter. The people impacted need to understand
where they fit into the process.
• Identify and understand your stakeholders. What do they need?
What kind of information, training, skills, or preparation?
• What are the gaps from the “as is” and the “to be”? What is the
delta?
• What are the risks to the project that won’t be managed by the
project manager? Often in change management, the “out of
scope” items are the ones that bite the hardest.
• Communicate, communicate, communicate. Use as many chan-
nels as possible. Use as many existing, or “trusted,” sources as
possible. Use them in person, when possible. Make sure everyone
involved on the project team can verbalize the intent (see first
bullet, above) and knows where to direct the Chicken Littles

(“The sky is falling!”) and the “old schoolers,” doggedly fixated
on continuing to do their wonky, archaic process.
• Will it stick? Did the change do what it set out to do? What are
your measures of success and can you measure them? What does
success look like? Is work productive?
Mike Ensby: Not really. Interesting that a search of “X” Management
models reveals over 200 CM methodologies. The best thing is to
borrow liberally from several models and develop a robust heuristic
that can be situationally applied. Kotter is good, but so are the many
variations. Avoid becoming a “one-book wonder.”
Patra Madden: ADKAR (Prosci model). The assessments and tools that
they have developed are excellent for technical people to grasp. (I’m
an engineer and work in a very technical company.)
Scott McAllister: I grew up on the Kotter approach, and since getting
more exposure into the Prosci model, I really appreciate the Prosci
approach, because it connects individual and organizational change.
I learned from John Kotter that the first step is Sense of Urgency,
and he’s written in the Harvard Business Review that even if you
don’t have it, sometimes you need to fabricate it. Not all change will
benefit from approach. If you’re upgrading [the] Windows operating
system, fabricating a sense of urgency isn’t going to be the path to
success. I really appreciate that the Prosci approach works on lots
of different kinds of changes and is designed to be sized and scaled
appropriately.
Rick Rothermel: I am compelled to recommend the LaMarsh Global
Managed Change Methodology. Our clients tell us they like the
approach because it is simple, scalable, easy to understand and apply,
and results in data-driven decisions and outcomes.
Michele Quinn: ADKAR Model – Prosci 3 Phase Methodology
Jessica Bronzert: I’m trained and certified in the Conner methodology.
That said, there are many methodologies on the market, but they are
not substantially different from each other. The key factor is having
a seasoned change practitioner doing the work. The best practitio-
ner can leverage a basic methodology and have a positive impact;
however, an inexperienced practitioner won’t have the presence to
influence sponsors and other stakeholders, no matter how good his/
her tools are.
Siobhan Pandya: No favorite—fit for purpose is more important to me.
Q14. Key metrics? How do you measure the effectiveness of change

management?
Tom Cluley: I use a proprietary assessment tool that measures the ele-
ments I defined in the critical success factors. It relates to an “S”
curve that defines where an organization is on its transformation
curve.
Bob Dodge: This has always been a difficult one, and in my current
world, even more challenging to come up with quantifiable metrics.
All I can go with are more behavioral:
• Do people understand the why and the what for their changes?
• Are we sensitive to their difficulties with the how?
• Are we identifying why they might resist?
• Are we successful in reducing that resistance?
David Ringel: Percentage of projects that result in an implementa-
tion of a change, percentage of improvement of project metrics,
percentage of monitored risks realized (and percentage of those
that were successfully overcome), trending rate of change (project
frequency).
Joe Beggiani: There are all kinds of metrics. Below are just a few that are
very good at measuring change.
• Employee satisfaction survey
• Adoption metrics
• Employee readiness assessment results
• Proficiency assessment results
• Usage reports
Lynn Doupsas:
• A: Rate of adoption (systems)
• B: Employee engagement scores
• C: Customer satisfaction scores
Scott Leek:
• Made the change (yes/no)
• Project goals met (e.g., reduced cycle time by 30%)
• Climate survey of population (“How did it feel… ?”)
• Expert panel autopsy and lessons learned
Sarah Carleton: The ultimate (though lagging) metric is the success of
the project. Leading metrics include survey scores of team members,
stakeholders, process owners, and sponsors; time spent addressing
change management aspects; risk management scores.
Roxanne Britland: By mitigating resistance—no stalls. No pauses. By

actually getting to the results and making it all the way through
implementation.
Darryl Bonadio: Observation of the necessary behaviors.
Bob Von Der Linn: The best measure of change effectiveness is ROI for
the project. Some leading indicators would be percent and speed of
adoption, participation in training, communications milestones on
time. I have used employee surveys effectively to gauge effectiveness
of change strategies. It is very hard to quantify.
Beth Cudney: Absenteeism. If the culture of the organization is strong,
then employees will come to work, even if they are a bit under the
weather.
Currin Cooper:
For data: You can do a before/after survey. You can measure sup-
port calls on “how to” questions. You can measure how long a process
takes, how many errors, typical Six Sigma stuff. Training surveys can
measure understanding of the new way of working or where folks are
on the change curve. If training was inadequate, there will be errors.
You can measure turnover, and you can measure your ability to fill
vacant roles.
Bottom line: Who’s hair is on fire on day 1/cycle 1? Whose phones
are blowing up? If things are pretty quiet, it means you did a great
job with change management. People may not like the new process
or environment, but it means they’re trying to work it out.
I have learned that the key success criteria take months or years to
manifest. If you have to back out and go back to the old process, do a
lot of rework, or overhaul workflow, it was not a success. But, this is
slow, and usually the books are closed by that time.
Here is an example of where investing in change management
could have saved a lot of time, money, and heartburn:
A very large public school system rolled out a Pay-for-Performance
program. They spent millions collecting metrics and building data-
bases and dashboards. They trained the Central Office. They pro-
moted the new approach.
No one who was directly impacted wanted it. The teachers didn’t
want it, the principles sure didn’t want it, the parents didn’t want it,
and the students just wound up spending more time taking tests to
measure their teacher’s performance, so they didn’t want it.
Guess what? The superintendent left the district before the direc-
tive was fully implemented, many teachers quit, and ultimately the
pay-for-performance initiative was repealed.
Mike Ensby: Stakeholder expectations surveys, and future performance
gains. Better gains usually mean better CM structures during the
project.
Patra Madden: Very difficult. My biggest metric is talking to people.
Unorthodox, I know, but it gives you a good idea.
Scott McAllister: Adoption and usage of the solution. The nice thing
is that ADKAR provides a rich set of adoption metrics in and of
itself.
Abdiel Salas: Results versus time.
Rick Rothermel: Did the organization achieve the intended results
in the time frame, to the level of quality and the investment
allocated?
Did the organization achieve an “acceptable level of acceptance”—have
those impacted by the change accepted and adopted the behaviors
required for the organization to continue to achieve the performance
levels set by leadership?
Michele Quinn: Speed of adoption, ultimate utilization, pro-
ficiency.
Jessica Bronzert: There are three major areas of measurement for effec-
tive change management: (1) risks, (2) commitment, and (3) realiza-
tion. There are known patterns of risk that contribute to the success
or failure of transformational change. Monitoring and mitigating
against these risks helps make the change more successful. Leader
and employee commitment to change is critical to its success as well,
and this can be measured. Lastly, realization is the delivery of the
original business outcomes that got the change approved and initi-
ated in the first place. Most change management efforts stop at instal-
lation—when the system is turned on or the people are trained—and
doesn’t continue until the business benefits of that system or training
are realized.
Siobhan Pandya: Business and performance targets, employee
engagement scores, feedback from internal communities, number
of visual metrics, recognitions awarded, CI projects running and
completed, number of engagement sessions, number of success
stories.
Q15. Please describe the biggest mistake you’ve made (or seen being
made) with regard to employing change management.
Tom Cluley: The biggest mistake I’ve made is not getting leadership
engaged and driving the change. The second is not taking baseline
data up front, so as to measure the impact of the change.
Bob Dodge: I was sent to a client to assist in implementing change man-
agement, my way. They did not know our Methodology, but insisted
on implementing what they envisioned would help them. It became
a point of contention; so much so that I was asked to let someone else
help. That person could not implement the solution we had in mind
any better than I did. The lesson for me was to be clear on what the
desired solution is and go with what they want initially, and move
them incrementally to what works, as we both discover the flaws in
their vision of success.
David Ringel: Doing it in an overt, obvious, in-your-face manner. Better
to be subtle and organic/vested.
Joe Beggiani:
• Cutting corners on the process
• Running change management separate from the project/program
• Change effort not properly funded
• Sponsor delegating responsibility
• No reward system
Lynn Doupsas: Usually it is around not garnering the right executive
level support.
Scott Leek:
Have seen versions of the following on multiple occasions:
Patronizing and insincere attempts to persuade target population
that the answer being pushed was not only right, but the best; not
listening to legitimate concerns raised as part of the change manage-
ment process, ignored or dismissed; and, generally coming off as “…
we know best, we just have to communicate better so those of you
who don’t ‘get it’ will finally understand…”
I call this one-way change management… because it is only going
to end one way… bad.
Gary Bradt: Leadership not understanding the needs of the people
impacted by the change and just telling them they need to go change
without explaining why. Along with that, if there’s going to be some
pain involved in that change, why do we need to go through this
pain? And the biggest mistake I’ll see in the same vein is, “well here’s
how the company is going to benefit, here’s how our stakeholders are
going to benefit, here’s how our customers are going to benefit,” but
if you can’t explain to people how they’re going to benefit somehow,
someway, you’ll lose them.
Sarah Carleton: The biggest mistake I’ve made is neglecting significant
stakeholders who came back to haunt one of my LSS projects.
Roxanne Britland: Resistance is such an important element of change
management. Leaders are entitled to ask whatever questions they
want, and just because they’re asking a question doesn’t mean there
is resistance. It may mean they simply don’t know. Sometimes we’re
focused on the idea of resistance a little too much. It makes you feel
negative.
Darryl Bonadio: The biggest mistake I have ever seen is acting like the
change was good for everyone. Sometimes changes are not good
for people, but are still necessary. People are not stupid and will see
through this quickly, and resistance will be extreme.
Bob Von Der Linn: Aside from the obvious big ones (e.g., not using it at
all or engaging CM resources too late), the two biggest problems I see
are (1) Not having an organizational structure that can integrate and
leverage multiple change initiatives, and (2) Not having an effective
means of determining the level of CM support an initiative requires.
Not all changes are equal. Budget and size of impacted population
are unreliable predictors of need for CM.
Marc Zaban Fogel: Not being direct with a leader who wasn’t commit-
ted the full scope of the change he/she was asking people to make.
Beth Cudney: The biggest mistake that I have seen made is training
individuals on Lean Six Sigma without change management.
Mike Ensby: Sticking to the “model” when the mood says otherwise.
Better to have an adaptable heuristic. Having a technically compe-
tent, but organizationally clueless project lead who is bound and
determined to drive the clown car over the cliff.
Patra Madden: Stopping after the change is implemented.
Implementation is not the end of CM focus, but the beginning of the
more difficult CM focus. Not the time to stop!
Scott McAllister: Starting with a bunch of training and thinking that’s
going to solve all of the problems.
Abdiel Salas: Assume everybody sees or understands everything at the
same level as you do.
Rick Rothermel: Many practitioners interpret change management as

the application of tools and methodology, failing to recognize that
the purpose of tools and methodology is to provide a framework for
analysis, decision making, and resistance mitigation activities. I have
also observed emerging practitioners over-complicating the applica-
tion of the methodology. I have operated throughout my consulting
career from the philosophy that the amount of change management
methodology and discipline required is dictated by the specifics of
the change and the level of resistance that requires mitigation.
Michele Quinn: Leadership believing that the “Right Answer is enough.”
You can have the best solution, but without adoption and usage by
the people impacted by the change, the return on the investment will
be limited.
Jessica Bronzert: When the change management function itself is not
sponsored well enough to partner with the business making changes,
it will be difficult, if not impossible, for change practitioners to be
successful.
Siobhan Pandya: Lack of communication, including lack of clear
communication and message and also lack of follow-up after
communications—false sense of confidence that message is under-
stood and all are in support.
Q16. Do all Lean Six Sigma projects need change management? If

not, how do you know when it’s needed?
Tom Cluley: They all need some level of change management. Even a
small project on a production line requires the workers to accept the
change.
Bob Dodge: Absolutely. It is needed in every case, now. If we do what
I described above [in Question 15], and the answers are yes, there is
not much more to do.
• Do people understand the why and the what for their changes?
If people are genuinely willing to leave the current state, have bought
in to the desired state, can and will go through the delta, with no
issues over sponsorship, history, or their own wiring, we are good
to go. If we are going to invest in the resources to “do” Six Sigma or
Lean” why not make sure people will make the change?
David Ringel: Yes, all.

Joe Beggiani: Tricky questions… my answer is yes, whenever a process,
design, build, or whatever the change might be, the communication
to the effected group of employees still needs to be done. The change
could mean new training do to the change of skills, or the under-
standing of role changes, and even the reduction of needed person-
nel. Change management can elevate a number of risks that any size
organization needs to build adoption to stay on top of the game and
remain productive.
Scott Leek: Yes. When something has to change, and that change will
impact multiple people, change management should be used. The
question is really one of degree of formality and detail.
Sarah Carleton: Change management is an integral aspect of all
projects.
Roxanne Britland: As long as the solution is introducing a change in
the business, in terms of somebody’s role, a process step change, then
change management is needed at that level. As the solution becomes
more complex, and as it affects more people, change management is
more likely to be needed.
Darryl Bonadio: Do they all need the “same level”? No. But, all Six
Sigma projects are about change, so using change management tech-
niques and methods make sense.
Bob Von Der Linn: Ask yourself, “Will this project change how people
do their jobs, and if so, how much will it change?”
If it is a developmental change, i.e., moving to a clearly defined
future state (e.g., transitioning from an existing software application
to a different, new, cloud-based application), by definition, you will
have 100% adoption, but this population will still need communica-
tions, training, manager preparation, support, etc.
If it is a transformational change, i.e., moving to an undefined
future state (e.g., reorganizing around a new operating model, off-
shoring some work, and introducing new tools and processes, all
simultaneously), now in addition to the typical support, you need
a shared vision, transparency, employee input in process design,
updated measurements, rewards, training, etc.—all change manage-
ment practices.
Marc Zaban Fogel: Any project that changes the way other people work in
a way that is different and/or requires more effort or decision making,
should include some thinking on change management.
Beth Cudney: Yes, all projects need some level of change management.
BBs and the Lean Six Sigma team will be working with individuals
on making changes. No matter how small the change, if it is not han-
dled appropriately, it can negatively impact the success of the project
or the culture in the organization. Change management can be as
little as how to inform people about the project. An authoritarian
approach to certain individuals can immediately make them resist
changes associate with the project. Therefore, it must be addressed
in every project.
Currin Cooper: Sometimes training and additional information is all
that is needed. Good project managers intuitively keep an eye out for
change management pitfalls.
Mike Ensby: All do. It’s a matter of scope and scale. It’s not a true LSS
project if it doesn’t result in change.
Patra Madden: YES!!!
Scott McAllister: I’d say the vast majority need change management.
And, how do you know when change management is needed? You
have people in the organization that need to change how they do
their work. If yes, you need change management.
Rick Rothermel: Every project requires a level of change management,
because no matter how large or small the scale of the change, if
people are impacted, their resistance needs to be acknowledged and
mitigated.
Michele Quinn: Yes, but the level of time and resources applied needs
to be evaluated and determined, using proven risk assessment tools
and organizational readiness tools.
Jessica Bronzert: Engage change management practitioners at the
beginning of any ideation around projects. Seasoned practitioners
have approaches to determine if the disruption from an LSS project
requires change management, and if so, what level of support.
Siobhan Pandya: Yes.
Q17. How does a BB (the project leader) know when it’s time to ask
for help with a change management problem?
Tom Cluley: When they can’t overcome resistance to change within the
workgroup or leadership members of the client.
Bob Dodge: If the BB cannot measure the risk, or the Risk Management
Assessment indicates the risk is high, help is needed to make that
assessment or to mitigate the risk. If it is important enough to
determine what to change, it is important enough to understand why

the change may fail.
David Ringel: When they sense there is no progress or momentum has
stalled.
If a stakeholder is beginning to lobby others against the change.
If you start to hear “noise” from people who have not been directly
involved.
Stakeholders sustain or increase levels of argument, quietness or
challenge.
Joe Beggiani: If they bring in the change manager in the planning stage,
there should not be a problem. But, all too often, the project leader does
not pull in a change manager until communication leaks, employee
resistance, and bad water-cooler talk has already begun. This should
not stop the project lead from engaging the change team to get involved.
Scott Leek: Change management is a process of asking for help. If they
are doing change management, they are asking for help by definition.
Gary Bradt: When you can’t sleep at night.
Sarah Carleton: BBs should ask for help from their team at the very
start of their projects. If there are any significant roadblocks, they
should ask for help from their mentor.
Roxanne Britland: When there is resistance to the solution.
Darryl Bonadio: When they recognize that there are issues with either
sponsorship or resistance from the targets of the change. But, the
best answer is that unless they are formally trained in change man-
agement, they should always seek advice to make sure they are set-
ting themselves up for success.
Bob Von Der Linn: When a project charter is being drafted. ☺
Marc Zaban Fogel: When they know a key person or group is negative
or neutral on the change.
Beth Cudney: A BB should work with the project sponsor and cham-
pion before the project starts to understand potential resistance and
should keep them informed throughout the project, so that potential
issues can be identified before they happen.
Currin Cooper: A key stakeholder group is missed. Stakeholders are
confused and frustrated. Damage control is taking up a lot of time.
Rumors are out of control.
Mike Ensby: When the level of commitment required doesn’t material-
ize, and the team members start leveraging competing priorities to
avoid the tasks at hand.
Patra Madden: I insist that all my BB become CM practitioners

(Prosci), so we never need to ask for help. And, we know when
to recommend to a sponsor to have a practitioner assigned to the
follow-on with the team.
Scott McAllister: The CAP program talks about quality × accep-
tance = Effectiveness, and when you are only focusing on the qual-
ity and not the acceptance, you’re never going to be as effective as
you want to be. So, I’d say a BB or a project leader should ask for
help when they start seeing resistance from employees … when the
people side of the equation starts to be more challenging than the
technical side of the equation.
Abdiel Salas: When projects become longer than expected, i.e., 6 or
12 months. A BB should be an expert in change, and as experts, we
need to understand the company's background on change. There is a
certain amount of change a person or department can manage. As a
BB, you should find out.
Rick Rothermel: They shouldn’t wait to ask for help. They should incor-
porate change management methodology and discipline into the
project plan from the beginning. They should acknowledge that the
people impacted by the change will have issues, challenges, as well as
opportunities, and that a change management lens will improve the
probability of success.
Michele Quinn: Start with a Change Management strategy as an inte-
grated component of your project plan; be flexible, adjust as necessary.
Jessica Bronzert: When they first get wind of the project! Change man-
agement is most effective when considered up front—even before a
project is approved. Indeed, change management as a discipline has
a lot to offer in establishing the intent of a change and helping leaders
determine if they are truly committed to seeing it through.
Siobhan Pandya: When you are not progressing with the stakeholders
and the project—you may not have everyone where you want them
to be or the project complete, but they are moving in the right direc-
tion. If you are not moving at all, or if blockers are being intention-
ally created, then it is a good idea to request help.
Q18. How can you measure the level of resistance to a project?

Tom Cluley: Through team participation and seeing and listening.
Bob Dodge: Aside from asking questions, surveys, and observations, it
boils down to determining:
• Do people understand the why and the what of their changes?

David Ringel: Progress
Joe Beggiani: There are tools that you can use, such as a history assess-
ment of employees impacted by a previous change, culture assessment
of the impacted employees, identifying the root causes of resistance,
engaging the resistance to gain feedback and acceptability.
Lynn Doupsas: I would power map all the major players and rank them
green, yellow, or red in terms of their level of support.
Scott Leek:
• Assume it is not zero, and tap into the informal network of
chatter.
• Target thought leaders for direct or indirect questioning.
• Talk with the people who talk with the people.
• Ask.
Gary Bradt: I don’t know if you measure that as much as you feel it. You
need to be out walking around. You need to be walking the halls
and talking to people. You need to invite dissent. You need to say,
“Hey, how’s it going?” and “How do you feel about this change?” and
“What worries you the most about it?” It needs to be more of a feel
process. You can measure things like how many people are show-
ing up at meetings and how many are meeting their deliverables and
things like that, but I think resistance is more of a heart thing—not
a head thing. You’ve got to touch it and feel it. You’ve got to talk
to people. And, if there is resistance, rather than telling them that
they’re wrong, try to understand why they feel the way they do and
see if you can address what’s behind the resistance.
Sara Carleton: You can measure resistance with survey scores and with
delays in accomplishing project deliverables.
Roxanne Britland: When you scope a project, you identify all of the
stakeholders who can influence that solution or are impacted by the
solution. You then have to build a relationship with all of those peo-
ple. Resistance comes from people, not from anywhere else.
Darryl Bonadio: There are several factors to consider. First is the cul-
ture of the organization and its acceptance of change. Next is the
support from impacted parts of the organization. This is often done
through interviews or tribal knowledge. We highly recommend that

all improvement projects do a stakeholder analysis that sizes up
key individuals or groups and their current level of support for the
change. Then, a communications plan can be developed to address
or mitigate resistance.
Bob Von Der Linn: I gave up trying to quantify resistance a long time
ago. I assume that there will always be some level of resistance and
that we should plan for it. Having said that, if employee engage-
ment scores are low—indicating a poor relationship between lead-
ers and the employees—there will be resistance. In my experience,
the most significant predictor of resistance is the “capacity” of the
affected organization. If they are already overworked/understaffed
and/or change fatigued, because they’ve been in turmoil for a while,
you can count on significant resistance. If there has been a change of
leadership and/or reorganization, things tend to move slower due to
lack of trust and connection—that can appear as resistance. If you
have metrics and incentive systems in conflict with a change, you
will definitely have resistance.
Marc Zaban Fogel: The speed of getting basic information and feedback
from stakeholders.
Beth Cudney: It is difficult to measure. There are signs, such as team
members coming late to meetings, difficulty in getting people
involved, and lack of ideas being shared during brainstorming.
Currin Cooper: Ask. Do an assessment. Interview people. Conduct
focus groups. Have business representatives sit on the project team.
Go out into the field and talk to people. Try to understand what they
have today and what they like about it. Try not to break what’s good
about the current state.
There are plenty of assessments. I like the 4-square or the 9-square
ones the best. They are accurate enough to tell you what you need to
know, and take a lot less time and seem less bureaucratic.
Mike Ensby: The typical conflict warning signs: avoidance, arguments,
increased level of CYA.
Patra Madden: Speed of adoption and ultimate utilization. I had
a project that a lot of the stakeholders/users worked to develop.
Everything they wanted was implemented, but when the tool was
rolled out, the utilization was abysmal. And no one would explain
why they weren’t using it when asked. I decided to pull all 65 of the
users together in a room and ran a “resistance workshop.” (They

didn’t know I called it that.) I gave all of them a pile of Post-its and
asked four simple questions: What do you like about the process?
What questions do you have for the developers? What suggestions
do you have for the developers? What don’t you like about the pro-
cess? After 15 minutes, the corners were full of Post-its. Lots of
good suggestions, good questions, and about 60 Post-its all saying
the same thing under the “What I don’t like” page. They didn’t
want to be the one person to say it, but were able to get their voice
heard loud and clear when they were speaking anonymously. The
sponsor never would have guessed where the resistance would sur-
face and didn’t understand where the people were coming from.
But he didn’t need to understand it. He just needed to fix it. Which
he did.
Scott McAllister: You can use frameworks like ADKAR to help iden-
tify and mitigate resistance… and to measure it to some extent. You
can measure it by using stakeholder management tools, stakeholder
analysis where you plot them on a spectrum on level of support.
Abdiel Salas: Time versus difficulty.
Rick Rothermel: Data! Talk with those impacted. Observe their behav-
iors and body language. Surveys, focus groups, interviews, and
observations are all typical strategies for identifying resistance that
can be translated into measurable data. If you have done everything
possible to successfully install/implement the solution, it is likely
that the real issue is the resistance factor of those who are impacted
by the change, but still are resisting.
Michele Quinn: Observe behaviors. Listen to the questions being
asked. Resistance is an indication that individuals or groups have
an unmet need. I don’t know that I would spend my time measuring
resistance. Identify it, work to understand it, and then take action.
I’d suggest investing time and effort in a solid, proven change man-
agement process, since research shows that 50% of resistance by
employees and middle management can be avoided. First, resis-
tance prevention by implementing effective change management,
then proactive resistance management—anticipate it, put special
tactics in place to break it down, and finally, reactivate resistance
management as necessary, focusing in on observed behaviors,
potential reasons for the resistance, and selecting and sequencing
specific tactics to overcome.
Siobhan Pandya: Everything, from attendance at meetings, responses

to e-mails, and provision of information, to actual project deliver-
ables not being delivered.
Q19. What is the project champion’s role (some call it the sponsor)
with regard to change management?
Tom Cluley: To go beyond support to engagement. Actively participate
in report outs, asking questions that challenge the team. The Change
Manager should participate in what I refer to as GBUs (good, bad,
ugly meetings) with the facilitator, to discuss what is going well, areas
of concern that are being worked, and showstoppers that require
management intervention.
Bob Dodge: The sponsor must be consistent in displaying his or her
commitment and passion for the change, program, project, or
change, while being just as diligent in observing why people might
resist and helping them reduce the reasons for resistance.
David Ringel: Sponsors call for change, charter the project, and com-
municate with stakeholders that are considered key to the success of
an event. They ensure resources are made available, roadblocks to
progress are removed, and decisions to support the recommenda-
tions of the team are made.
Champions act as agents of the sponsor and key stakeholders with event
team members and other stakeholders across the enterprise. They
ensure communication and understanding are maintained through-
out the life cycle of the event and interact with the team on a regular
basis, advocating as required with the sponsor and key stakeholders
on the team’s behalf. This dual advocacy role of the champion can be
summarized as the change agent for the project.
Joe Beggiani: *Sponsors must understand the change, meaning they
need to define the desired state both numerically and in behav-
ioral terms. They need to identify and empower change agents.
They will also need to identify the amount of and type of loss
tolerable in the delta phase. They need to engage senior man-
agement to gain adoption.
The role of the project champion is to identify a project’s stra-
tegic objectives, ensure the vision for the project is successfully
* Taken from LaMarsh Change Master text.

communicated into requirements and design, remove roadblocks

for the project team, work with the project manager to prioritize the
allocating and organizing of internal resources.
Lynn Doupsas: Very important to help align and set the tone. Champion
needs to be visible and active as well.
Scott Leek:
1. Help the BB understand the concerns and interests of the vari-
ous stakeholders and develop strategies and tactics to obtain the
necessary buy-in.
2. Assist the project team [in] breaking down barriers and resistance.
3. Help overcome cross-functional turf battles.
4. Lend political capital to gain support.
Gary Bradt: Tear down barriers and obstacles that the team needs
removed, so as to be successful. The senior project sponsor’s job is
to be a servant to the people on the ground, making the change hap-
pen and saying, “What resources do you need?”, “What obstacles can
I help you overcome?”, “What doors do you need me to help open
for you?” So, in my mind, they’re in very much a servant-leadership
role. Obviously, somewhat of a cheerleading role as well, but making
sure the team is executing the project and has the resources that they
need to be successful.
Sarah Carleton: The sponsor should insist on using change manage-
ment as an integral aspect of the project, help identify key stake-
holders, and ask questions about change management during project
reviews.
Roxanne Britland: Awareness of the project, endorsement and approval
of the scope, engagement, commitment, and inspiration to the team
members, then they need to walk the walk. It can’t be lip synch. They
really have to commit to team members first and foremost—that
the right people are on the team who can contribute to building the
solution.
Darryl Bonadio: They both need to communicate and demonstrate
support. Their roles are to address barriers to change that arise dur-
ing the project. The sponsor (in our world) owns the project and the
results. The champion is higher up and can help by cross communi-
cating to other functions. (We call everyone a sponsor, but differenti-
ate the “project sponsor” from general sponsorship.)
Bob Von Der Linn: A great question—lots of debate here! A business
leader is accountable for the success of their business unit. A project
team is the leader’s tool to implement a change. Ultimately, they are

the leader of any change initiative. Change management is a core
leadership competency; it cannot be outsourced to someone else.
In 2016, if you cannot effectively lead your organization through
change, you are not a competent leader and should not be rated or
compensated as one. It is perfectly legitimate for a leader to enlist
the support of a change consultant to coach them through a change,
but to delegate change management to a hired gun in the PMO is
abdication, pure and simple. When I learned CAP, we were taught to
address this issue with sponsors at the project outset—If you cannot
commit to visible, engaged leadership of this project (to the project
team, and all the stakeholders), that is a red flag and the project is at
high risk of failure.
Marc Zaban Fogel: Champions should be aware of all critical stake-
holders and their issues. They should be ready when resistance is met
at their level.
Beth Cudney: The project sponsor and project champion should be able
to anticipate resistance, since they are closely working with the indi-
viduals who will be affected by the change. They should help the BB
develop a communication plan that adequately addresses these fears
and eliminates roadblocks before they occur.
Currin Cooper: This is well documented in a lot of places. Someone has
to want the project. Someone has to go to bat when there’s resistance.
Someone in authority has to put their foot down and say, “This is
going to happen. These are my expectations.”
Mike Ensby: They are accountable and need open and collaborative
communications. Trust and respect for the process.
Patra Madden: The sponsor and champion are required to communi-
cate the benefits of the change and ensure the management team is
aligned to the change and fully supporting.
Scott McAllister: The project sponsor needs to be active and visible
throughout the life of the change, they need to build a coalition of
support amongst leaders in the business, and they need to commu-
nicate effectively.
Abdiel Salas: There are problems that should be resolved at certain lev-
els of the organization. The BB should be aware, should recognize,
and should ask for help in a timely manner.
Rick Rothermel: The issue here is having a common definition of
project sponsor and project champion. There is one person in the
organization to whom all of the people impacted by the change

ultimately reports. This person is the only leader who can hold the
entire organization accountable for making change happen. His/her
role is to hold everyone in the leadership cascade accountable for
leading the change through his/her organization. Sponsors at every
level need to understand their roles and responsibilities: Be actively
engaged in and support the change, encourage those impacted to
voice their issues and concerns, look for and leverage opportunities
to reinforce and recognize individuals who are attempting the live in
the “future state,” discipline/inform those who choose to change the
consequences and then enforce them.
Michele Quinn: Provide the business why behind the change. Build a
coalition of support of other leaders. Communicate, communicate,
communicate (talk and listen).
Jessica Bronzert: One of the misconceptions about change management
is that it can be “farmed out” to project teams or change manage-
ment practitioners, letting leaders “off the hook.” Nothing could be
further from the truth. While change practitioners can educate and
support, only those who control communications and consequences
(positive and negative) for those who must change can truly make
a change successful. Indeed, the lack of effective sponsorship is the
number one killer of transformational change efforts.
Siobhan Pandya: Provide a fresh perspective. Provide challenge if nec-
essary. Assist in development of way forward. More coaching and
teaching than just doing. Help to overcome blockers. Ensure that
progress is on track. Update on any strategic changes that may
impact the goal.
Q20. Are gaining adoption and eliminating resistance the same

thing? If not, please explain the difference?
Tom Cluley: Not really. Adoption can be gained through authoritative
oversight. If resistance is eliminated, [people] will accept the results
without oversight.
Bob Dodge: The difference is in “forcing adoption” in spite of resistance.
We might achieve adoption, but leave a lot of bodies in the wake, create
far too much stress, add to a history of forced changes, and risk rever-
sion to the old ways if we don’t address the root causes of resistance.
“It’s my way or the high way” will get adoption, but at what cost?
David Ringel: Gaining adoption can be accomplished on any proj-

ect through consensus building (effectively mitigating the effect of
the resistance). Eliminating resistance would require the source(s)/
cause(s) of resistance to be eliminated. If the cause(s) remain, the
resistance will surface again and require gaining adoption.
Joe Beggiani: They are not [the same]. Ggaining adoption can have a
number of reasons: high tolerance to change, open-minded employ-
ees who thrive on challenges, employees who have access to the right
information due to good communications from management, as well
as employees who were involved with user testing or those employees
that pushed for change to better the organization.
Eliminating resistance is done by doing the homework on the
culture, history, and resistance of the targeted group, as well as
laying out a proper communication plan, and executing that plan.
Acquiring senior leadership buy-in early and keeping them in the
loop on the change throughout the change life cycle is key.
Scott Leek: They are not the same. Eliminating resistance is eliminat-
ing a negative. Gaining adoption is affirming a positive. Eliminating
resistance makes you no better off; it makes you no worse off. Gaining
adoption makes you better off, because that means the object of the
exercise is occurring, namely, change.
Gary Bradt: Gaining adoption is on a continuum. You’ll get people who
will say, “OK, I guess I’ll do this, I guess I’ll go along, we’ll see what
happens.” At the other end of the continuum, you have people who’ll
say, “This is the greatest thing ever. What can I do to make this work?
I can’t wait! I’ll work morning, noon, and night, because this is so
exciting.” So, gaining adoption has a continuum.
Overcoming resistance kind of gets you to the point where people
say, “OK, I’ll stop resisting you here,” but where they are on the con-
tinuum is really what matters. They’re two different things. You’ve
got to overcome resistance before you can get them to adopt. And
then, when you get them to adopt, it’s about where they will be on
that continuum.
Sarah Carleton: Gaining adoption is more inclusive than just elimi-
nating resistance. Gaining adoption may include eliminating resis-
tance, overcoming inertia, increasing motivation, providing tools
and resources, highlighting good examples, rewarding appropriate
behaviors, and recognizing improvement.
Darryl Bonadio: I think you are asking is there a difference between

installing the change and truly implementing the change. Yes, the
latter is changing behaviors. If you do not see the new behaviors, you
probably just installed the change, and it will not hold.
Bob Von Der Linn: They are not the same thing. Adoption is the desired
outcome. Eliminating resistance is a part of your change strategy to
achieve adoption.
Marc Zaban Fogel: They are two sides of the same coin.
Beth Cudney: Eliminating resistance is proactive. It is predicting
potential resistance and eliminating it before it can occur through
strategies such as communication. Gaining adoption is reactive. It is
after the change has occurred and getting individuals to accept the
change.
Currin Cooper: This is a good question. They are related. However, not
adopting the change is not the same thing as resisting the change.
Resisters want the change to fail. They want the change to go away so
they can keep doing what they are familiar [with] doing.
Both require enforcement and consequences to doing work the
new way. If the consequences aren’t important to them, if they are
too far into the future, or if they are uncertain what’s expected,
you probably won’t get adoption from the folks on the fence or the
resisters.
If there is no governance, or the governance isn’t enforced fairly,
resistance will grow.
Mike Ensby: No. People will adopt but not adapt to the changed state
(participation over commitment), if they are resistant to change.
Patra Madden: My story about the resistance came about, because I
noticed the lack of adoption. The reason for the lack of adoption sur-
faced by delving into the resistance. They are linked, and one leads
to the other.
Scott McAllister: I wouldn’t say they’re the same thing. They are both real-
ities, so in some situations, you’ve got to drive adoption, while in others
you might have a change that is experiencing lots of resistance, and so
you take different steps to address both desired outcomes. They’re defi-
nitely connected. Often-times people talk about change management
as managing resistance. That’s a part of it, but not all of it.
Abdiel Salas: They are different. People first accept the leader and then
the idea. Resistance has to do with knowledge, while adoption has to
do with process change.
Rick Rothermel: Resistance represents the issues and concerns from

those impacted by the change that get in the way of the individual
making an informed decision to adopt or not [to] adopt the change.
All resistance could be eliminated, and yet an individual may still
choose not to adopt. Adoption happens when the individual accepts
the new behaviors required and demonstrates them in his/her
actions, regardless of whether resistance is fully mitigated.
Michele Quinn: I think of it in terms of compliance versus commit-
ment. Mandated change can result in compliance, but for real, long-
term, sustainable change, commitment is required.
Jessica Bronzert: Yes and no. It’s tempting to simplify commitment
and resistance as two sides of the same coin, but there are different
models and ways of thinking about both concepts. Resistance and
commitment are complex ideas that have many layers and nuances
underneath. Different models will speak to the emotional experience
of change, the behavioral or observable experience, and the mental
experience.
Q21. With regard to reducing resistance, how would you address a

group of “thinkers,” i.e., highly analytical, data-oriented people?
How would you address a group of “feelers,” i.e., people who are
not interested in facts and data?
Tom Cluley: With thinkers, stick to the facts regarding the need to
change, the positive impact of that change, and the detrimental
results that will occur if the change is not implemented.
With feelers, discuss the positive social impact of the change and
how it will affect people in a positive manner, as opposed to how not
changing will negatively affect people.
I like to use Clare Grave’s values systems, where you address dif-
ferently the values systems of individuals that are Tribal, Egocentric,
Conformist, Competitive, Sociocentric, or Existential. When talking
to a group, I try to address all of the values systems. When talking to
an individual, I try to address what I perceive their value system to be.
Bob Dodge: The analysts need to understand the significance of the
change—the why and the urgency of the change. They need to be
brought up a level to understand the need to move quickly. The feel-
ers need to understand the need for structure and the lack of cer-
tainty without the detail work. Gut feel and feeling good alone do
not assure success.
David Ringel:
Thinkers: Talk about the current state, gap, and potential results
in tangible measurable terms, as well as the association between
those measurable terms and the performance of the organization (or
system) under review.
Feelers: Talk about the current state, gap, and potential benefits in
terms that align with the people factors (quality of life [QOL], quality
of work life [QOWL]) and the association of the people factors and
the performance of the organization (or system) under review.
Joe Beggiani: For analytical thinkers, I would use data to help drive key
points and help produce conversation. For those who are feelers, I
would still show some data, but have open dialogue and gain discus-
sion through Q&A and feedback sessions.
Lynn Doupsas: This is why I became MBTI certified: to help teams
understand differing approaches to dealing with change and com-
munication. This is why I would prefer, for instance, to talk about
something over the phone (as an extraverted feeler) than fill out a
questionnaire. Additionally, I would say I practice the Art of change
management not the Science (which is more of a BB/PMI trait)
because I have high gut intuition.
Change, adoption, resistance are human factors. In many ways it
is the highly attuned person (in this case, [the] BB) who can accept
what he/she may have a blind spot on and compensate by engaging
a strong change management professional to assist. The most suc-
cessful programs recognize and celebrate the need for a variety of
expertise and communication styles and approaches.
Scott Leek: Seek first to understand, and go to where people are. Don’t
try to make them come to you.
Gary Bradt: You need to understand that you have to talk to them [the
feelers] with their language, versus the people who are really into the
details and the facts.
When you’re talking to the data people, give them the data, give
them the information. When you’re talking to the feelers, don’t give
them the information that would convince you. Give them the infor-
mation that will convince them.
Sarah Carleton: Using the preferred mode of communication of the
audience helps the message to be more impactful. Thinkers may like
to see the data, while feelers may like to hear about how relationships
are affected.
Roxanne Britland: With data-driven decisions being a theme, regard-

less of whether you’re a data person or not, a compelling story is
driven by good data. So, if you are in front of non-data people, you
have to pull that compelling story out of the data and give it to them
in non-data ways. I use data appropriately analyzed to build infor-
mation that allows you to develop a compelling story.
Darryl Bonadio: The best way is to include people in the process.
Mindsets and behaviors address both by educating people about
the change and understanding the impact. No one likes to change,
so understanding what is considered important to people will help
identify communication methods that will be more successful. Will
it be education, addressing fear or uncertainty, or gaining ownership
of the change [that is] the best approach? Or all three?
Bob Von Der Linn: Every change strategy must address both the heart
and the head to ensure it can reach all styles. An old adage from the
art of persuasion is, “Never a statistic without a story, never a story
without a statistic.” I have used tools such as TRACOM® Social Styles
assessment, or DiSC®, to help leaders and teams understand why this
is important and to help develop robust change strategies.
Marc Zaban Fogel: Provide the case and ask for analysis and input from
the thinkers. For the feelers, tell them the benefits and ask for their
reactions or concerns and ways to address those concerns.
Beth Cudney: With a group of thinkers, I would show them the data to
justify why the project or change is needed. For a group of feelers, I
would make the business case based on what is happening within the
organization and how it will benefit the employees. For an effective
approach, both should be included.
Currin Cooper: They are not as different as you would think. If they
communicate with you using PowerPoint, use PowerPoint. Give the
analytical people more data, more spreadsheets, more charts, and
more detail. Give the feelers the summary information, the big pic-
ture, bullets, analogies, and stay away from the data tables!
BEST: USE BOTH! Appeal to folks on multiple levels. Invite the
loudest complainers to a session, and ascertain what the real prob-
lems are.
I did this once with a critical group of reporting power users (ana-
lytical, data-oriented), and I swear, the answers were all things like,
“It won’t work.” When asked why, they couldn’t articulate the issues,
only that, “It’s not what we’re used to,” or “It’s different.” (Wow.)
So, they vented (these were SQL developers). I documented

their issues and created a table with a proposed solution/mitiga-
tion. I came up with the list of things to facilitate the transition,
offered up tools, data mapping documents, training, workshops,
and other resources. They felt heard, and I was able to run things
by them, get them to pilot some solutions, and get their input.
Input = buy-in.
The Go Live went great, by the way.
Mike Ensby:
Thinkers: logic is not common sense; while the root cause analysis
may lead to a “natural” solution that may be unnatural to the folks
who will bear the brunt of the change. End users are not always suf-
ficiently engaged early enough.
Feelers: this is not about making people happy, it’s about sat-
isfying organizational needs. Status quo is more disruptive than
structured disruption. Data is a good starting point to under-
standing “pain.”
Patra Madden: I find Post-its work well for both types of people. The
thinkers usually spend a lot of time sitting before they put down any
words, and the feelers start writing the minute I say “go.”
Scott McAllister: You’ve got to know your audience. With thinkers, you
can use more of the analytics and data-driven decision making, and
in the change management world, I think this is where you can get
into the tracking metrics from an ADKAR perspective, where we
often describe things with adjectives instead of numbers.
For the feelers, we may talk about what we are hearing, seeing, and
feeling. These are sort of feedback elements, and we can then take
an appropriate course of action. Instead of presenting graphs and
numbers, it’s often statements or verbatim from participants in the
change journey that help with the feeler side of the equation.
Abdiel Salas: Balance is the word. All kinds of people are needed. Have
a level of enough data, and use appropriate words to feed them.
Become one of them, but challenge them to their level of commit-
ment. Even thinkers are emotionals, and emotionals are thinkers at
some degree.
Rick Rothermel: I would not make any distinction. The question asked
is, what factors, issues, concerns, and challenges are getting in the
way of your making the decision to embrace the change and adopt
the required behaviors?
Michele Quinn: I use the DiSC model to understand my stakehold-

ers, their motivators, fears, likes, dislikes, preferred communication
mode, conflict mode, etc. There are three ways to engage people—
logos, ethos, and pathos. The key is to understand your stakeholders’
style and utilize the appropriate mix of each as you communicate the
vision and address the questions, concerns, fears, etc.
For people not interested in facts, I’d focus on using examples,
stories, testimonials; engaging their emotions. For the thinkers, I’d
use logic, data, facts, research, etc. But a quick caution: no one is just
one style. All of us are a mix of styles, so a balance of logos, ethos,
and pathos is critical.
Jessica Bronzert: Resistance fundamentally comes down to questions
around ability and willingness. Ability is about not only the skills or
capabilities to be successful doing the new change, but also about my
power, status, or position as well. Willingness is about my desire (or
not) to expend the energy necessary to be successful with the change.
Thinkers and feelers may articulate their ability or willingness con-
cerns in different ways, which would guide a change practitioner or
leader as to how to best address those concerns.
Siobhan Pandya: It is about balance. For the thinkers, data should be
used to “get a seat at the table,” to show that the data demonstrates
there is need for this project, but also requesting more data from
them. This is where they will thrive and be able to see from their
own generated data that they need to move with others and reduce
resistance. At the same time, you also need to introduce the feel-
ing aspect to them, as it is not just about data and not just about
feelings—balance is key. They will be more receptive due to the ini-
tial conversation and data support. Vice versa for the feelers.
Q22. Do organizations with excellent employee engagement still

need change management?
Tom Cluley: Yes, because resistance to change doesn’t just occur in the
workforce, it also occurs in leadership. As noted in Kotter’s 8-Step
Process for Leading Change, communication and engagement are
just a part of the equation to creating change acceptance.
Bob Dodge: Sure. It may be easier since they might be more willing
to share their resistance than an organization of people afraid to
engage, to “show up,” or to collaborate to increase acceptance.
David Ringel: Yes.
Joe Beggiani: Yes, they are separate pieces in the company. Change
management is a methodology to transition employee(s) and orga-
nizations, using a process to redirect modes of operation that signifi-
cantly restructure a company or organization. Employee engagement
is used to strengthen the culture and values of the corporation.
Lynn Doupsas: Yes, there is always room for improvement. It really
helps if there is high employee engagement, and the key agents are
helping to craft and disseminate the right messages.
Scott Leek: Yes, but not the same as organizations without it. For exam-
ple, in organizations with excellent employee engagement, change
management might focus more on change adoption versus eliminat-
ing resistance.
Gary Bradt: Of course! If an organization has excellent employee engage-
ment, that’s wonderful. Hopefully, that means they will be more open to
whatever changes you need to introduce. The external world is chang-
ing so rapidly, if you’re not constantly changing, you’re falling behind,
and you’re going to die. So, whether you’ve got engaged employees or
whether you’ve got walking zombies, you need change management.
Sarah Carleton: Yes, they probably are using change management to
sustain employee engagement, because the world is changing at a
rapid pace.
Roxanne Britland: I really believe that change management needs to
be embedded innately into leadership and managers, and if it is, it’s
just the way you do business. You’re always able to explain why we’re
doing something. You’re always able to reward.
Darryl Bonadio: Yes, in fact sometimes more. Engaged employees take
more ownership of the current way, so you need to make sure you
address their needs and understanding for the change.
Bob Von Der Linn: Of course. Employee engagement is similar to trust
in that it is fragile and can be broken. Fortunately, organizations with
high engagement typically have an easier time managing change.
Beth Cudney: Yes, because you always need to have a communica-
tion plan and strategy to address change issues. By addressing them
before they occur, you can mitigate risks.
Currin Cooper: I was on an employee engagement project. I still am not
certain what that means. ☺
If they are engaged, it must be a great company to work for. They
like things the way they are and may not want things to be disrupted.
Change is disruption.
So, yes. They can be engaged, but do they know what’s happening?
Do they know how they’ll be impacted? Will they lose their jobs?
Will they be prepared? Will the change happen during their busy
season? Will the training tell them how to do their jobs or just how
to click through the system? What processes and controls will be in
place to sustain the change?
Mike Ensby: Yes, even more so, because the expectations are increased
for these types of organizations. The advantage is that the heuristic
can be more adaptable, and you can look for opportunities to develop
leaders at all levels of the organization.
Patra Madden: Absolutely.
Scott McAllister: Absolutely, I think they’re closely connected.
Organizations that have success with employee engagement tend to
do a better job with the people side of change. Organizations that
have poor employee engagement oftentimes under-serve the people
side. So, I think one is an enabler of the other.
Abdiel Salas: Yes, time is always a constraint, so change needs to be
managed.
Rick Rothermel: Yes—they probably have high employee engagement
scores, because the organization leverages the key tenants of change
management.
Michele Quinn: Absolutely.
Jessica Bronzert: Yes. Transformational change actually causes engage-
ment to drop. Effective change management helps move employees
through the disruption of change faster and with less disengagement
to get back to a high engagement environment as quickly as possible.
Siobhan Pandya: Yes—employee engagement can change at any time,
and therefore, change management should be a part of the organi-
zation on an ongoing basis. It can be incorporated into how we do
communications, [the] process we follow for changes, etc.
16
Mini-Biographies of the Interviewees
Joe Beggiani: Director of Human Resources Operations, Global

Talent & Learning Operations for Enterprise Services, Hewlett
Packard Enterprise. Change master, Black Belt, program manager.
Formerly with Bank of America and Motorola, Inc.
Darryl Bonadio: Director and Master Black Belt of the Office of Business
Effectiveness Academy. MBA and Six Sigma certified since 2005.
Profiled in the Juran Quality Handbook (6th edition). Over 35 years
of experience across multiple industries and a quality improvement
professional.
Dr. Gary Bradt: A keynote speaker on change and the author of Change:
The Tools You Need for the Life You Want at Work and Home. Austin,
TX: River Grove Books (December 2016).
Roxanne Britland: President of Professional Performance Group, LLC.
Founder and former owner of International Society of Six Sigma
Professionals (ISSSP). Currently, Organizational Development and
Transformation consultant with the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA).
Jessica Bronzert: MBA, ACC, Principal at The Sparks Group and adjunct
faculty at the Center for Creative Leadership. Formerly Director of
Change Execution at Lowe’s Companies, Inc.
Sarah Carleton: Master Black Belt, Principal of Sarah A. Carleton
Consulting, providing Lean and Six Sigma training and mentoring.
Author of The Green Belt Memory Jogger (GOAL/QPC, 2016).
Tom Cluley: Owner of Above the Fray Advisory Services, LLC. Formerly
with The Wiremold Company. Author of several books, including
Driving Strategy to Execution Using Lean Six Sigma (with Gerhard
Plenert: CRC Press, 2012).
159
Currin Cooper: Over 20 years project and change management expe-

rience for Fortune 500 clients such as Bank of America, Wells
Fargo, Coca-Cola Bottling Company. Consolidated, Lowe’s Home
Improvement, and Duke Energy. She is an adjunct instructor at the
University of South Carolina Department of Continuing Education
for PMI project management certification classes. She holds a
PMP certification, a Six Sigma Green Belt, is a Certified Change
Manager (CCM) through Acuity Institute, and a Certified Change
Management Professional (CCMP) through AMCP.
Beth Cudney: Ph.D. ASQ Fellow, ASEM Fellow, Associate Professor,
Director Design Engineering Center, Missouri University of Science
and Technology, Formerly with Danaher and Dana Corporation.
Author of several books, including Using Hoshin Kanri to Improve
the Value Stream (CRC Press, 2009).
Bob Dodge: Co-Founder of IDI Consulting, and Former Director of
Consulting Services for Lamarsh & Associates, Founder of Expert
Change Management, and Sr. Vice President of The Alternative
Board Denver West –Trusted Advisor to Business Owners as their
Coach and Facilitator of Peer Advisory Boards.
Lynn Alvarez Doupsas: Principal, LD Consulting. Specific areas of
expertise: program management, organizational change manage-
ment, coaching, facilitation, employee engagement. Past clients:
Verizon, Marriott, Disney / ABC Television, Mazda, Merrill Lynch.
Speaker, writer, and regular contributor for many social networking,
community, and special interest forums.
Mike Ensby: Manager with Ernst & Young, LLC, Performance
Improvement Advisory. Specializing in change management issues
facing project management office (PMO) structures and governance.
Marc Zaban Fogel: Principal Consultant at Dragon Thinking
Consulting.
Scott Leek: Advisor, coach, and Master Black Belt at Sigma Consulting
Resources, LLC. Author of several books and training courses,
including contributing author of Six Sigma Leadership Handbook
(John Wiley & Sons, 2003).
Don Linsenmann: CEO of Executive Transformation Mentoring, LLC.
Previously, VP Business Process Excellence and Corporate Six Sigma
Champion for DuPont. Coauthor of The Six Sigma Fieldbook with
Mikel Harry.
Mini-Biographies of the Interviewees • 161
Patra Madden: Advisory Engineer, Naval Nuclear Laboratories.

Focusing on corporate transformation by utilizing Lean Six Sigma
and change management tools and techniques. Author of absolutely
no books.
Scott McAllister: Vice President of Growth at Prosci. Executive consul-
tant; has worked with more than 80 clients in 28 countries to develop
and deploy strategy, Lean Six Sigma, innovation, and change man-
agement initiatives.
Siobhan Pandya: Director of Continuous Improvement and Lean at
Mary Kay, Inc. Formerly with Shell Oil Company in the UK and US.
Lean Six Sigma Black Belt.
Michele Quinn: Certified Prosci Change Management Practitioner,
Prosci Master Instructor and Train the Trainer professional, Former
LSS Deployment Leader, and Master Black Belt.
David Ringel: Vice President of Operations at MainStream GS,
LLC, where he leads the Performance Improvement and Change
Management consulting business. Prior to joining MainStream in
2006, he was a successful operations executive in Tier 2 suppliers to
the automotive industry.
Rick Rothermel: Owner of LaMarsh Global. Change management author
and thought leader. Founding Board Member of the Association of
Change Management Professionals.
Abdiel Salas: Master Black Belt and Lean Manager, Continuous
Improvement Master, writer, blogger on spiritual issues, husband, and
father of a successful family (best enterprise). Expertise: Worldwide
implementer and mentor.
Bob Von Der Linn: President and Principal Consultant, Change
Leadership Resources, LLC. Formerly with General Electric.
Section IV
Appendix A: Competencies
for the Successful Black Belt
Competency
Specific competency
area
Strong, clear and candid communicator, and effective presenter with all levels within the
organization, “quick on his/her feet,” good negotiator, excellent writing skills.
Communication Skills
Listens effectively and stimulates the development of new ideas with effective probing and
questioning.
Analytical, Technical, Project Demonstrates ability to dissect and comprehend complex and sometimes ill-defined situations.
Management Skills
Willing to dive into details when necessary “get hands dirty.”
Works effectively across traditional organizational boundaries of function, position, and other
differences.
Empowerment
Promotes cross-functional efforts. Trusts others. Encourages risk taking and empowerment
behavior. Leverages individual strengths.
Creates exciting and positive working environment with strong projection of confidence for
making improvements.
Passion and Enthusiasm
Projects genuine personal commitment to business, quality, and process improvement.
Passion for Lean Six Sigma.
Demonstrates effective coaching skills. Motivates and effectively influences to ensure
accomplishment of key objectives. Can lead without formal authority.
Leadership, Training, Coaching
Creates an open and receptive mindset for learning and effectively imparts new
information.
Understands and promotes the need for change, open to ideas and change.
Change Agent
Enjoys problem solving and initiates new and better ways of doing things.
Speaks assertively and with authority of experience and is recognized as someone who will
Influential, “Makes Things deliver results.
Happen” Considered promotable to higher levels of responsibility due to consistent, excellent
performance, high potential.
Doesn’t hesitate to “push back” when he/she disagrees with direction.
Confident Willingness to face difficult issues take a stand become personally involved in resolving
problems.
FIGURE A.1
Black Belt competency list. Some elements from The Lean Methods Group.
165
Appendix B: Coaching and
Mentoring for the Black Belt
Sometimes, the Black Belt’s boss is knowledgeable and experienced in

the skill sets identified in the critical success factors triangle shown in
Figure B.1. In that case, external coaching and mentoring relationships
may not be required. But, in the case where the Black Belt works for a
person who lacks training and experience in project management, Lean
Six Sigma, and change management, it is recommended that a person (or
persons) inside or outside the organization be found to serve as a coach
and mentor for the Black Belt.
Some organizations establish these relationships with regard to the Lean
Six Sigma skill set, but few provide a person to help with the issues that
ultimately arise having to do with resistance and the mitigation thereof.
The Coach and Mentor

Ideally, this is one person with both skill sets but
two different people will work if they are “joined at
the hip” (i.e., working together as if LSS and OCM were
one, intertwined methodology).
Master Master in OCM,

The Black Belt in change
Black Belt’s boss Lean Six Sigma management
The
Black Belt
FIGURE B.1
Coaching and mentoring for the Black Belt.
167
Appendix C: The Shingo
Principles
Reference The Ten (10) Shingo Guiding Principles—See http://www.singo.

org/model.
The following are the first two principles:
1. Respect Every Individual

2. Lead with Humility
RESPECT EVERY INDIVIDUAL

Respect must become something that is deeply felt for and by every per-
son in an organization. Respect for every individual naturally includes
respect for customers, suppliers, the community, and the society in gen-
eral. Individuals are energized when this type of respect is demonstrated.
Most associates will say that to be respected is the most important thing
they want from their employment. When people feel respected, they give
far more than their hands—they give their minds and hearts as well.
To better understand the principle of respect for every individual simply
ask the question, “why?” The answer is because we are all human beings
with worth and potential. Because this is true, every individual deserves
my respect.
EXAMPLES OF IDEAL “RESPECT-RELATED” BEHAVIORS

1. Create a development plan for employees that includes appropriate
goals.
2. Involve employees in improving the work done in their areas.
3. Continually provide coaching for problem solving.
169
170 • Appendix C: The Shingo Principles
LEAD WITH HUMILITY

One trait common among leading practitioners of enterprise excellence
is a sense of humility. Humility is an enabling principle that precedes
learning and improvement. A leader’s willingness to seek input, listen
carefully, and continuously learn creates an environment where associ-
ates feel respected and energized and give freely of their creative abilities.
Improvement is only possible when people are willing to acknowledge
their vulnerability and abandon bias and prejudice in their pursuit of a
better way.
EXAMPLES OF IDEAL, “HUMILITY-RELATED” BEHAVIORS

1. When an error occurs, focus on improving the process that created
the error.
2. Ensure that all parts, materials, information, and resources are cor-
rect and meet specifications before using them in a process.
Appendix D: A Brief History
of Continuous Improvement
Lean seems to be treated like a centuries-old religion by some. You may

be surprised to learn that the term “Lean,” as used in the continuous
improvement context, was never uttered before 1990. As of writing of this
book, Lean is less than 30 years old!
1795—Carl Friedrich Gauss introduces concept of the normal curve

1913—Henry Ford introduces the assembly belt in his factories
1920s—Walter Shewhart’s early work on process variation
1939—Edwards Deming publishes a series of Shewhart’s lectures
1950s—Toyota Production System is developed by Kiichiro Toyoda,
Taiichi Ohno, etc.
1950s—Shigeo Shingo introduces SMED and Poka-Yoke
1951—Juran’s Quality Handbook, by Joseph M. Juran and A. Blanton
Godfrey
1951—Kaizen is introduced in Japan
1960—Japan awards Dr. Deming the Order of the Sacred Treasure
1980s—Lean Manufacturing makes its way to the West
1986—Bill Smith at Motorola invents the Six Sigma quality improve-
ment process
1990s—General Electric develops Six Sigma as a management approach
1990—The Machine` That Changed the World, by James P. Womack,
Daniel T. Jones, and Daniel Roos
1990s—The first use of the word “Lean” in the continuous improvement
context
1996—Lean Thinking, by James P. Womack and Daniel T. Jones
1998—Lean Thinking, by Mike Rother and John Shook
THE HISTORY OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT

Because this book is mostly about change management, I’ve included two
perspectives on the history of this discipline from people who have been
171
172 • Appendix D: A Brief History of Continuous Improvement
deeply involved in the niche for decades. First, an excerpt from an e-book
written by Jeanenne LaMarsh, followed by an examination of the history
and future of change management taken from the Prosci website—the
organization founded by Jeff Hiatt.
A Brief History of Change Management

by Jeanenne LaMarsh
Do you make your living as a change management professional? Are
you passionate about the intellectual challenges inherent during times of
change and the positive difference you make in the lives of employees and
leaders of the organizations you serve?
Then celebrate the fact that you are at a place where the need to manage
changes well now intersects with real recognition by organizations that
leaders must also deliver the resources to meet that need.
It wasn’t always so.
Forty years ago, there was no change management. There were no struc-
tured, disciplined, nor transferable methodologies that could be internal-
ized and leveraged by organizations. And certainly, there were no change
management professionals.
Organizations have always handled changes, but until a few years ago, the
few who did it well did it instinctually and often erratically. Unfortunately,
most also did it from a frame of reference that did not take the fears, con-
cerns, and questions of the people impacted into consideration. Randy
Kesterson, VP of Global Ops, Op Excellence/TQM, Sourcing at Doosan,
tells a story in his book The Basics of Hoshin Kanri of a related experience
he had early in his career. While trying to convince a senior manager of the
need to take the fears, concerns, and questions of those impacted into con-
sideration before embarking on major changes, Randy tried to explain the
use of a structured new concept called change management. With no hesi-
tation, the senior leader held up his hand to signal Randy to stop talking.
He said, “I already have a change management approach that has served me
very well for over 30 years in business.” The manager then swung his foot up
on the conference table, pointed to it, and said “11-E,” his shoe size, “If my
people don’t want to do it, I kick them all in the butt.” That was his change
management approach: the 11-E change management methodology.
Looking back on it, Randy’s story is comical, but it shows the great prog-
ress we as change management advocates have made. History shows a
Appendix D: A Brief History of Continuous Improvement • 173
similar situation in the business process of managing inventory. Originally,

there pretty much was no process. There was only “Joe” who knew where
everything was in the warehouse or in the closet. “Go ask Joe. He’ll find it
for you…” was a simple inventory control system. This thinking became
increasingly unsatisfactory as a way of managing the whereabouts of
important business materials. And when World War II started, the explo-
sion of need for equipment and materials to be shipped to Europe and
Asia was too great to continue to rely on Joe with only his memory and
his instincts. This led to the development of a structured organizational
process for gaining control over the logistics of tracking, reordering, and
shipping, which today is known as Inventory Control. Eventually, tools,
processes, and systems were developed. Today, there is a profession and a
set of professionals that are critical to organizations of all sizes all over the
world directly related to the concept.
Another key effect of WWII was the development of what came to be
called Management Science. Companies large and small had existed for
centuries prior to the efforts of ten men, including Robert McNamara,
who pioneered the field. These revolutionaries put structure and process
to increases in operations, finance, and logistical information demanded
by the size and scope of the war effort, and they basically created the
Statistical Control profession.
And as the demands of the war resulted in the development of other
new business disciplines, organizational innovation continued through
the 1970s and 1980s with the need for companies to implement huge
technical systems such as Manufacturing Resource Planning (MRP) and,
subsequently Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP). Combined with the
decision by management to introduce multiple major changes simultane-
ously, these new fields sparked the recognition by leaders that the need
to help employees cope with all the changes happening around them was
becoming increasingly critical.
This thinking triggered an idea in 1985. At the time, LaMarsh &
Associates, which evolved into LaMarsh Global, had begun training on
efficient ways for organizations to implement these important changes.
We learned that the employees often took well to the new required behav-
iors and new technology solutions, but there were failures long term too
often. And participants in workshops on team building, decision mak-
ing, project planning and performance management helped demonstrate
understanding of concepts and abilities to apply the tools and techniques
used in the workshop setting, but failed to sustain the new learning.
Unfortunately many still failed to apply their newly acquired skills once
they actually returned to the workplace.
This thinking led LaMarsh & Associates into the study of change and
eventually change management. Our firm confirmed that training was
really only one step in the process of changing behavior, and thus the
organization. Our studies and analysis led to the development of a specific
process and model for proactively managing crucial business changes. We
named this deliberate approach to change management Managed Change.
THE HISTORY AND FUTURE OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT

Source: http://procsci.com/what-is-change-management
The Emergence of Our Discipline

Over the past quarter of a century, change management has emerged,
evolved, and grown from foundational understandings to conceptual
underpinnings and on to a recognized discipline. Prosci’s research and
experience suggest that in the coming years the focus will shift toward
advancement along three fronts:
1. Increased collaboration of change disciplines

2. Enhanced organizational maturity development
3. Individual professional development
Brief History of Change Management

Four distinct eras mark the evolution and growth of the change manage-
ment discipline:
Pre-1990s: Foundations. Academics begin to understand how

1.
humans and human systems experience change.
1990s: On the radar. Change management enters the business
2.
vernacular.
2000s: Formalization. Additional structure and rigor codify change
3.
management as a discipline.
Going forward. Individual professional development and enhanced
4.
growth of organizational maturity emerge.
Pre-1990s 1990s 2000s Future
Foundations On the radar Formalization Change managament

discipline
Van Gennep (1908) Conner (1992) Processes and tools Enhanced organizational
Lewin (1948) Jick (1993) maturity
Positions and job roles
Beckhard (1969) LaMarsh (1995)
Bridges (1979) Kotter (1996) Organizational functions Individual professional
Johnson (1998) development
FIGURE D.1
Change management timeline.
Pre-1990: F oundations
The first era of change management was the period before 1990. During
this period, the focus was on improving our collective understanding of
human beings, how we experience change, and how our human systems
interact and react. This era provided crucial insights, research, and frame-
works for understanding successful change. Some of the primary contrib-
utors during this time include:
Arnold van Gennep (1909)

Van Gennep was a cultural anthropologist studying rites of passage
around the globe. He introduced the idea of change as happening in three
states: separating from our current state, moving through a transition,
and reincorporating into a future state (examples include adolescence,
marriage, and parenthood).
Kurt Lewin (1948)

A social psychologist, Lewin introduced three states of change—unfreezing,
moving, and refreezing—as well as force field analysis.
Richard Beckhard (1969)

Beckhard was a pioneer in organization development and defined the
discipline as “an effort (1) planned, (2) organization-wide, and (3) man-
aged from the top, to (4) increase organization effectiveness and health
through (5) planned interventions in the organization’s ‘processes,’ using
behavioral-science knowledge.”
William Bridges (1979)

Speaker, author, and consultant, Bridges described the states of a transi-
tion as the ending, the neutral zone, and the new beginning.
This list is certainly not exhaustive. Many other scholars from psychol-
ogy, business, engineering, and the social sciences added research and
insights that helped shape our understanding of how people experience
change. It is important to understand the roots.
Contribution of the Foundations era: An underlying understanding of how
individuals and systems experience change.
1990–2000: O n the RADAR

The second era of change management was the decade of the 1990s.
During the “on the radar” era, change management began to enter the
business vernacular. The people side of change moved out of the aca-
demic and exploratory space and into concepts discussed at project
meetings, in C-suites and around boardroom tables. Language began
to form around the discipline of change management, and many of the
guiding principles that still guide the discipline were articulated during
this time. The first steps were taken to show that individual change does
not happen by chance, but can be supported and driven with thoughtful
and repeatable steps.
While there were many who contributed to putting change management
on the radar, some of the most notable include:
General Electric (Early 1990s)

As a recognized world leader, GE introduced the Change Acceleration
Process as part of its larger improvement program.
Daryl Conner (1992)

In his seminal work, Managing at the Speed of Change Conner provided
invaluable insights on numerous change concepts and topics.
Todd Jick (1993)

Jick’s Managing Change: Cases and Concepts included topical case stud-
ies and a chapter titled “Implementing Change” in which he shed light
on the common pitfalls and introduced his Ten Commandments of
Implementing Change.
Jeanenne LaMarsh (1995)

LaMarsh’s work Changing the Way We Change developed concepts around
the importance of the ability to change, the mitigation of resistance, and
the enabling frameworks for supporting change.
John Kotter (1996)

First in a Harvard Business Review article and later in his book, Leading
Change, Kotter described eight change failure modes and subsequent steps
to address them.
Spencer Johnson (1998)

Johnson’s Who Moved my Cheese? presents readers with a parable that
addresses how people can deal with the changes happening around them
and to them.
During the 1990s, change management landed “on the radar” with con-
cepts and language that began to take hold in mainstream management.
Geopolitical forces, economic development, budding new value systems
(think empowerment), and shifting employee–employer relationships set
the stage for an increased recognition of how important the human side
of change was.
Contribution of the On the Radar era: Socialization of the phraseology and
importance of the people side of change and conceptual underpinnings of an
emerging discipline.
2000–Present: Formalization
The third era in the development of change management was that of the
2000s, leading up to the present. This era of change management was
marked by the formalization of the discipline. Where the foundations era
gave us underlying understanding, and the “on the radar” era gave us con-
cepts and language, a shift occurred as we entered the new millennium.
Growing out of a need for greater repeatability and structure, the change
management discipline began adding formal structure and discipline on
a number of fronts. Although founded in 1994, it was early in the 2000s
that Prosci formalized and accelerated its research specifically in change
management.
In 2003, Prosci introduced the first integrated approach to change man-
agement that leveraged organizational and individual change management
processes and tools. The Prosci ADKAR Model, an individual change

model, provided an outcome orientation to change management work:
driving success one person at a time. The Prosci 3-Phase Process provided
the structure, process, and tools for creating customized change manage-
ment strategies and plans. In 2005, Prosci started to formalize research
and a platform for the innovators of the discipline, who started working
to embed change management as a core capability of their organizations.
There are three dimensions where this formalization can be seen more
than any others:
Processes and Tools

Building on the underlying understandings and concepts that had been
laid, practitioners began building and applying more rigorous structure
to the work of change management, including more robust and repeatable
processes and enhanced tools to support consistent application.
Positions and Job Roles

Organizations began creating specific jobs with a sole focus on applying
change management on projects and initiatives (with significant growth
since 2010).
Organizational Functions
Organizations began establishing and resourcing functions and structures
to support change management application across the enterprise (such as
a Change Management Office, Center of Excellence, or Community of
Practice).
In addition to formalizing of processes and tools, positions and job roles,
and organizational functions, steps were taken to formalize the profession
of change management during this era. Professional associations, stan-
dards, and certifications emerged during this time (such as the Change
Management Institute and the Association of Change Management
Professionals).
Contribution of the Formalization era: Structure and definition, along with
tools and processes, that provided repeatability and credibility to a growing
discipline.
Appendix E: Where to Go
for More Information
Organizational Change Management

Tool: ADKAR Model (and others)
Organization: Prosci
Website: www.prosci.com
Tool: Managed Change Model

Organization: lamarsh Global
Website: www.lamarsh.com
Organization: Conner Partners

Website: www.connerpartners.com
Tool: General Electric CAP (Change Acceleration Program) Model

Website: https://www.slideshare.net/HomerZhang/
ge-change-managementcap
Lean Six Sigma (Sources of Free Information)

Organization: Lean Methods Group (formerly Breakthrough
Management Group)
Website: www.leanmethods.com
Organization: iSixSigma
Website: https://www.isixsigma.com/
People Are Different

Tool: DISC Profile
Source: Multiple sources and websites identified
Tool: WorkPlace Big Five Profile

Organization: Center for Applied Cognitive Studies
179
180 • Appendix E: Where to Go for More Information
Website: http://www.CENTACS.com (soon to be http://www.

ParadigmPersonality.com)
Tool: Change Style Indicator

Publisher: Multi-Health Systems Inc.
Website: https://ecom.mhs.com
Appendix F:
Acknowledgments
What follows is a list of the people who helped me with the editing of
the final draft of this book. If I have accidentally excluded your name,
I apologize.
I am thankful to those who allowed me to interview you for this book:
Joe Beggiani, Darryl Bonadio, Dr. Gary Bradt, Roxanne Britland, Jessica
Bronzert, Sarah Carleton, Tom Cluley, Currin Cooper, Beth Cudney, PhD,
Bob Dodge, Lynn Alvarez Doupsas, Mike Ensby, Marc Fogel, Scott Leek,
Don Linsenmann, Patra Madden, Scott McAllister, Siobhan Pandya, Michele
Quinn, David Ringel, Rick Rothermel, Abdiel Salas, Bob Von Der Linn.
Also to David Silverstein for writing the Foreword; to Pierce J. Howard,
PhD and Zack Johnson for writing a special note for use in the book; to
Siobhan Pandya and Michele Quinn, and Alireza (Ali) Kar for allowing
me to use your quotes; to Ellen Domb, PhD for your candid input and help
with editing; to the fantastic team at Productivity Press to include Michael
Sinocchi, Alexandria Gryder, and Mathi Ganesan; and to the following for
providing endorsements.
Some of which and others may be found within this book and/or
available on my website at RandyKesterson.com are as follows:
Jon Atwood, Janet Basile, Christopher Biggs, James Bond, Andy
Bordick, Tom Bornemann, Kevin Briede, Jessica Bronzert, Paul Carney,
Joyce Carroll, Louis Carter, Jason T. Collett, Currin Cooper, Bob Dodge,
Ellen Domb, PhD, Erdem Dursun, Mark Evans, David Foxx, Marshall
Goldsmith, Brent Grazman, PhD, Dr. Steve Griffin, Paul Grizzell, Jamie
“Jay” Guttenberg, PhD (ABD), Stephen G. Hall, Robert Handfield,
PhD, Erik T. Hansen, Arun Hariharan, Jesse Harrington, Juan Victor
Hernandez, Owen Hewitt, Steven Hodlin, Pierce J. Howard, PhD, Anoop
Jain, Zack Johnson, Mark Jolley, Robert Jones, Simranjit Kainth, Gary
Kapanowski, Koray Karakas, Kay Kendall, Christine Kreuser, Jeanenne
LaMarsh, Don Linsenmann, Craig Long, Andrew S. McCune, Rear
Admiral Terry McKnight, USN (Retired), Kevin McManus, Denise
Meredith, Cornelius Moore, Richard Moormann, Terry Newell, Zane R
181
182 • Appendix F: Acknowledgments
Nobbs, Patrick O’Hearn, Siobhan Pandya, Dave Parkerson, Ralph W.”Pete”

Peters, Gerhard Plenert, PhD, James Michael Reames, Karen D. Riding,
PhD, Teresa Riffel, Jorge J. Roman, Neal Ropski, Lori F, Rothenberg,
PhD, Rick Rothermel, Paul Sample, Amy Sequeira, Jeremy A. Sparks,
Dean R. Spitzer, PhD, Mark Stewart, Barbara A. Trautlein, PhD, Frank
Uhelsky, John Vaughn, Albert Vermeulen, Sandra West, Matthew Wilson,
Catherine Wolpert, Chris Woodbine, Doug Wright, Herman Zwirn.
Bibliography
J. M. Hiatt and T. J. Creasey, Change Management: The People Side of Change, Prosci
Learning Center Publications, Loveland, CO 2003.
R. Potts and J. LaMarsh, Master Change, Master Success, Chronicle Books, San Francisco,
CA 2004.
183
Index
A needs, 138
success, 109
Accommodation (A), 80
taught at BB training, 113
ADKAR Model, 37, 42
Behavior change, tracking, 34
American simplified keyboard, 17
Belasco, James, 19
Aristotle, 12
Black Belt
Arm-crossing example, 21, 22
coaching and mentoring for, 167
Awareness and desire, 31–33, 37
competency list, 165
critical success factors for, 4–5
successful, 75
B
Bonadio, Darryl (interview with)
Balanced Scorecard, 26, 27, 28 addressing group of thinkers and
The Basics of Hoshin Kanri (book), 30, 172 feelers, 153
Beckhard, Richard, 175 biography of, 159
BeeRaider keyboard, 17, 18 change management
Beggiani, Joe (interview with) BBs asking for help, 140
addressing group of thinkers and biggest mistake, with regard to
feelers, 152 employing, 136
biography of, 159 describing, 106
change management dos and don’ts, 126–127
BBs asking for help, 140 effectiveness, measurement of, 133
biggest mistake, with regard to employee engagement and, 156
employing, 135 failure/risk, 123
describing, 106 methodology, 130
dos and don’ts, 126 own words about, 104
effectiveness, measurement of, 132 personal experience with, 94
employee engagement and, 156 project champion’s role, 146
failure/risk, 122 reasons for using, 107–108
methodology, 130 gaining adoption and eliminating
own words about, 103 resistance, 150
personal experience with, 93 Lean Six Sigma, personal experience
project champion’s role, 145–146 with, 97
reasons for using, 107 measuring resistance, 142–143
gaining adoption and eliminating OCM and LSS intersection
resistance, 149 critical success factors, 118
Lean Six Sigma, personal experience explaining the importance of,
with, 97 100–101
measuring resistance, 142 lessons learned, 120
OCM and LSS intersection needs, 138
critical success factors, 116 success, 110
explaining the importance of, 99 taught at BB training, 114
lessons learned, 119 Bonaparte, Napoleon, 12
185
186 • Index
Bradt, Gary (interview with) lessons learned, 120

addressing group of thinkers and needs, 138
feelers, 152 success, 110
biography of, 159 taught at BB training, 113
change management Bronzert, Jessica (interview with)
BBs asking for help, 140 addressing group of thinkers and
biggest mistake, with regard to feelers, 155
employing, 135–136 biography of, 159
describing, 106 change management
dos and don’ts, 126 BBs asking for help, 141
employee engagement and, 156 biggest mistake, with regard to
failure/risk, 123 employing, 137
methodology, 130 describing, 107
own words about, 103–104 effectiveness, measurement
personal experience with, 94 of, 134
project champion’s role, 146 employee engagement and, 157
reasons for using, 107 failure/risk, 124–125
gaining adoption and eliminating methodology, 131
resistance, 149 own words about, 106
measuring resistance, 142 personal experience with, 96
OCM and LSS intersection project champion’s role, 148
critical success factors, 117 reasons for using, 108
explaining the importance of, 100 gaining adoption and eliminating
Branson, Richard, 13 resistance, 151
Bridges, William, 176 OCM and LSS intersection
Britland, Roxanne (interview with) explaining the importance of, 103
addressing group of thinkers and lessons learned, 121–122
feelers, 153 needs, 139
biography of, 159 taught at BB training, 115
change management
BBs asking for help, 140
C
biggest mistake, with regard to
employing, 136 Carleton, Sarah (interview with)
describing, 106 addressing group of thinkers and
dos and don’ts, 126 feelers, 152
effectiveness, measurement of, 133 biography of, 159
employee engagement and, 156 change management
failure/risk, 123 BBs asking for help, 140
methodology, 130 biggest mistake, with regard to
own words about, 104 employing, 136
personal experience with, 94 describing, 106
project champion’s role, 146 dos and don’ts, 126
reasons for using, 107 effectiveness, measurement of, 132
Lean Six Sigma, personal experience employee engagement and, 156
with, 97 failure/risk, 123
measuring resistance, 142 own words about, 104
OCM and LSS intersection personal experience with, 94
critical success factors, 117 project champion’s role, 146
explaining the importance of, 100 reasons for using, 107
Index • 187
gaining adoption and eliminating Churchill, Winston, 12

resistance, 149 Cluley, Tom (interview with)
Lean Six Sigma, personal experience addressing group of thinkers and
with, 97 feelers, 151
measuring resistance, 142 biography of, 159
OCM and LSS intersection change management
critical success factors, 117 BBs asking for help, 139
explaining the importance of, 100 biggest mistake, with regard to
lessons learned, 120 employing, 135
needs, 138 describing, 106
success, 109 dos and don’ts, 125
taught at BB training, 113 effectiveness, measurement
“Catch ball” process, 30 of, 132
Center for Applied Cognitive Studies employee engagement and, 155
(CENTACS) failure/risk, 122
WorkPlace Big Five Profile, 78–82 methodology, 129
Champion, 55, 57 own words about, 103
Change, 11–13, 15, 19–20, 21, see also personal experience with, 93
Organizational change project champion’s role, 145
management (OCM) reasons for using, 107
bad changes, 57–58 gaining adoption and eliminating
chaordic, 47–48 resistance, 148
five stages of, 46 Lean Six Sigma, personal experience
people, to deal with, 77–84 with, 96
prevention of bad projects, 58 measuring resistance, 141
reasons for, 31–32 OCM and LSS intersection
states of, 175 critical success factors, 116
targets of, 32–33, 60 explaining the importance of, 99
Change acceleration process (CAP), lessons learned, 119
28, 176 needs, 137
Change curve, 21–23 success, 109
with and without well-managed taught at BB training, 112
change, 44–45 Collaboration, 8
Change management, see also Communication, 66–67
Organizational change Communication plan, 63–65
management (OCM) Completion, 46
1990–2000, 176–177 Conner, Daryl, 45–46, 176
2000–present, 177–178 Consolidation (C), 80
history of, 172–177 Continuous improvement, 8, 51, 52
pre-1990, 175–176 brief history of, 171–178
timeline, 175 Cook, Claire, 13
Change manager, 81 Cooper, Currin (interview with)
Change propensity, 82–83 addressing group of thinkers and
Change readiness checklist, 55, 56 feelers, 153–154
“Change receptiveness” of organization, biography of, 160
6–7 change management
Change Style Indicator, 80–81 BBs asking for help, 140
Changing the Way We Change (book), 177 describing, 106
Chaordic change, 47–48 dos and don’ts, 127
188 • Index
Cooper, Currin (interview with) (cont.) critical success factors, 118

effectiveness, measurement of, explaining the importance of, 101
133–134 lessons learned, 120
employee engagement and, 156–157 needs, 139
failure/risk, 124 success, 111
methodology, 130–131 taught at BB training, 114
own words about, 104–105 Current State model, LaMarsh’s, 43
personal experience with, 95
project champion’s role, 147
D
reasons for using, 108
gaining adoption and eliminating Darwin, Charles, 13
resistance, 150 da Vinci, Leonardo, 20
Lean Six Sigma, personal experience Dealey, William, 17
with, 98 Decay, 11
measuring resistance, 143 Delta State, 46–47
OCM and LSS intersection Deming, E., 12, 171
explaining the importance of, 101 Desire and awareness, 31–33, 37
lessons learned, 120 Desired Future State, 43–44
needs, 139 DISC model, 77–78
taught at BB training, 114 DMAIC process, 73–74
Creasey, Tim, 42 Dodge, Bob (interview with)
Critical success factors, 4 addressing group of thinkers and
Crossed arms experiment, 21, 22 feelers, 151
Crystal, Billy, 20 biography of, 160
C’s (communication, cooperation, change management
collaboration), 7, 8, 70 BBs asking for help, 139–140
Cudney, Beth (interview with) biggest mistake, with regard to
addressing group of thinkers and employing, 135
feelers, 153 describing, 106
biography of, 160 dos and don’ts, 125
change management effectiveness, measurement of, 132
BBs asking for help, 140 employee engagement and, 155
biggest mistake, with regard to failure/risk, 122
employing, 136 methodology, 129
describing, 106 own words about, 103
dos and don’ts, 127 personal experience with, 93
effectiveness, measurement of, 133 project champion’s role, 145
employee engagement and, 156 reasons for using, 107
failure/risk, 123 gaining adoption and eliminating
project champion’s role, 147 with, 96
reasons for using, 108 measuring resistance, 141
Lean Six Sigma, personal experience explaining the importance of, 99
with, 97–98 lessons learned, 119
measuring resistance, 143 needs, 137
OCM and LSS intersection success, 109
Index • 189
taught at BB training, 112 personal experience with, 95

Domb, Ellen, 9, 88 project champion’s role, 147
Don, Pastor, 48 reasons for using, 108
Doupsas, Lynn (interview with) gaining adoption and eliminating
addressing group of thinkers and resistance, 150
feelers, 152 Lean Six Sigma, personal experience
biography of, 160 with, 98
change management measuring resistance, 143
biggest mistake, with regard to OCM and LSS intersection
employing, 135 critical success factors, 118
describing, 106 explaining the importance of,
effectiveness, measurement of, 132 101–102
employee engagement and, 156 lessons learned, 120–121
methodology, 130 needs, 139
own words about, 103 success, 111
personal experience with, 93 taught at BB training, 114–115
project champion’s role, 146 Extraversion (E), 79
Lean Six Sigma, personal experience
F
with, 97
measuring resistance, 142 Facts and data, 82–83
OCM and LSS intersection The Five Stages of a Change, 22
critical success factors, 116 Five Stages of Grief, 22, 45–47
Dvorak, August, 17 Fogel, Marc Zaban (interview with)
Dvorak keyboard, 17 addressing group of thinkers and
feelers, 153
biography of, 160
E
change management
“11-E approach to change management,” BBs asking for help, 140
29 biggest mistake, with regard to
Emotional cycle of change model, 22, employing, 136
45–46 describing, 106
Emotional response/performance, 23 dos and don’ts, 127
Emotional Response to Change, 22 methodology, 130–131
Emotional support, 47–49 own words about, 104
Ensby, Mike (interview with) personal experience with, 95
addressing group of thinkers and project champion’s role, 147
feelers, 154 gaining adoption and eliminating
biography of, 160 resistance, 150
change management Lean Six Sigma, personal experience
BBs asking for help, 140 with, 97
biggest mistake, with regard to measuring resistance, 143
employing, 136 OCM and LSS intersection
describing, 106 critical success factors, 118
effectiveness, measurement of, 134 explaining the importance of, 101
employee engagement and, 157 lessons learned, 120
failure/risk, 124 needs, 138
methodology, 131 success, 111
own words about, 105 taught at BB training, 114
190 • Index
Ford, Henry, 171 Keyboard ball, 18, 19

Franklin, Benjamin, 13 Kirkpatrick Model, 67–68
Friction equation, 49–50 Kotter, John, 31, 177
Future State model, LaMarsh’s, 43–44 Kübler-Ross, Elisabeth, 45
Kübler-Ross model, 22, 45–47
G
L
Gauss, Carl Friedrich, 171
General Electric, 28, 171, 176 LaMarsh, Jeanenne, 31, 46, 60, 172, 177
Gennep, Arnold Van, 175 LaMarsh Managed Change methodology,
Godfrey, A. Blanton, 73 42–45
Grief Cycle, 22 Leadership, 8
Leading Change (book), 31, 177
Lean (term), 171
H
Lean Six Sigma (LSS), 3, 25, 26, 27, 28
Hiatt, Jeff, 31, 42, 172 interviews with experts about,
Hock, Dee, 48 93–158
Hopeful realism, 46 training programs, 73
Howard, Pierce J., 81 deployment, 75
Humility, 170 intersection of OCM and, 74–75
respect and, 7, 70, 75 tool box with, 75
websites, information on, 179
Lean Thinking (book), 171
I
Lean Transformation, 69
Imperial System, 20 Leek, Scott (interview with)
Incentives, 66–67 addressing group of thinkers and
Influencers, 32–33 feelers, 152
Informed optimism, 46 biography of, 160
Informed pessimism, 46 change management
Interviews with Change Management BBs asking for help, 140
experts, 91–158 biggest mistake, with regard to
Intuition, about change management, employing, 135
70–71 describing, 106
Inventory Control, 173 effectiveness, measurement
of, 132
employee engagement and, 156
J
failure/risk, 123
Jick, Todd, 176 personal experience with, 93–94
Johnson, Spencer, 177 project champion’s role, 146
Johnson, Zack, 35 gaining adoption and eliminating
Juran’s Quality Handbook, 171 resistance, 149
with, 97
K
measuring resistance, 142
Kaizen, 171 OCM and LSS intersection
KALQ keyboard, 17, 18 critical success factors, 116–117
Kelley, Don, 45–46 explaining the importance of,
Kennedy, Robert, 19 99–100
Kettering, Charles, 13 lessons learned, 119–120
Index • 191
needs, 138 M
success, 109
Machiavelli, Niccolo, 19
The Machine That Changed the World
Lewin, Kurt, 175
(book), 171
Lichtenberg, Georg C., 12
Madden, Patra (interview with)
Linn, Bob Von Der (interview with)
addressing group of thinkers and
feelers, 154
feelers, 153
biography of, 161
biography of, 161
change management
change management
employing, 136
employing, 136
describing, 106
describing, 106
dos and don’ts, 127
effectiveness, measurement
effectiveness, measurement of, 134
of, 133
failure/risk, 124
failure/risk, 123
methodology, 131
methodology, 130
own words about, 105
project champion’s role, 147
project champion’s role, 146–147
gaining adoption and eliminating
resistance, 150
resistance, 150
with, 98
with, 97
measuring resistance, 143–144
measuring resistance, 143
OCM and LSS intersection
critical success factors, 118
explaining the importance of, 102
lessons learned, 121
needs, 139
needs, 138
success, 111
success, 110–111
Managed Change model, 42–45
Linsenmann, Don (interview with)
Management Science, 173
biography of, 160
Managing Change: Cases and Concepts
change management
(book), 176
describing, 106
McAllister, Scott (interview with)
feelers, 154
biography of, 161
change management
with, 97
employing, 137
describing, 106
success, 110
dos and don’ts, 127–128
192 • Index
McAllister, Scott (interview with) (cont.) interviews with experts about, 93–158
effectiveness, measurement of, 134 intuition about, 70–71
employee engagement and, 157 Lean/Continuous Improvement
failure/risk, 124 initiative, 50–52
methodology, 131 “lever pulling,” 65–66
own words about, 105 Managed Change, 42–45
personal experience with, 95 Prosci ADKAR Model for, 37, 42
project champion’s role, 147 risk analysis tool, 62–63
reasons for using, 108 seek out help, in dealing with
gaining adoption and eliminating resistance, 69–70
resistance, 150 stakeholder analysis tool, 59–61
Lean Six Sigma, personal experience tool box with, 75
with, 98 tools mapping to DMAIC steps, 74–75
measuring resistance, 144 websites, information on, 179
OCM and LSS intersection Originality (O), 79
P
needs, 139 Pandya, Siobhan (interview with)
success, 111 addressing group of thinkers and
taught at BB training, 115 feelers, 155
McEnaney, Ray, 17 biography of, 161
McNamara, Robert, 173 change management
Metric System, 20 BBs asking for help, 141
Multi-Health Systems Inc., 81 biggest mistake, with regard to
employing, 137
describing, 107
N
dos and don’ts, 129
Need for stability (N), 79, 80 effectiveness, measurement of, 134
Negative change, 22 employee engagement and, 157
On Death and Dying (book), 45 failure/risk, 125
methodology, 131
own words about, 105–106
O
Openness, 80 project champion’s role, 148
Operational excellence, 7 reasons for using, 109
Order of the Sacred Treasure award, 171 Lean Six Sigma, personal experience
Organizational change management with, 98–99
(OCM), 3, 28, 29 measuring resistance, 145
basic tools, 59–68 OCM and LSS intersection
communication plan, 63–65 critical success factors, 119
component systems (technical/ explaining the importance of, 103
administrative/people), 81 lessons learned, 121
definition of, 41 needs, 139
emotional support, 47–49 success, 111
five stages, 45–47 taught at BB training, 115
friction equation, 49–50 Pandya, Siobhan, 3
intersection of Lean Six Sigma (LSS) People
and, 74–75 dealing with change, 77–84
Index • 193
and facts and data, 82–83 R

workplace personalities and thinking
Reinforcements, 66–67
styles, 78–82
Resistance, 21–23
People Analytics, 83–84
to change plan, 44–45
People analytics tools, 33–35
to leaving Current State, 43
People’s workplace personalities, 78–82
Project charter risk assessment, 57 minimizing, 25–30
Project charter template, 55, 56 to moving to Future State, 43–44
Project management, 26, 27 in personal life, 37
tool box with, 75 Respect
Project risk assessment, 55–58 for every individual, 169
Prosci ADKAR Model, 37, 42, 178 and humility, 7, 70, 75
Riegel, Lisa, 13, 67
Ringel, David (interview with)
Q addressing group of thinkers and
QualityGurus.com, 73 feelers, 152
Questions, interview, 92–93 biography of, 161
Quinn, Michele (interview with), 41 change management
addressing group of thinkers and BBs asking for help, 140
feelers, 155 biggest mistake, with regard to
biography of, 161 employing, 135
change management describing, 106
BBs asking for help, 141 effectiveness, measurement of, 132
biggest mistake, with regard to employee engagement and, 155
employing, 137 failure/risk, 122
describing, 106 methodology, 130
dos and don’ts, 129 own words about, 103
effectiveness, measurement of, 134 personal experience with, 93
employee engagement and, 157 project champion’s role, 145–146
failure/risk, 124 reasons for using, 107
methodology, 131 gaining adoption and eliminating
project champion’s role, 148 with, 96
reasons for using, 108 measuring resistance, 142
Lean Six Sigma, personal experience explaining the importance of, 99
with, 98 lessons learned, 119
measuring resistance, 144 needs, 138
OCM and LSS intersection success, 109
critical success factors, 119 taught at BB training, 113
explaining the importance of, Risk analysis tool, 62–63
102–103 Rothermel, Rick (interview with)
lessons learned, 121 addressing group of thinkers and
needs, 139 feelers, 154
success, 111 biography of, 161
taught at BB training, 115 change management
QWERTY keyboard, 15–17, 18 BBs asking for help, 141
194 • Index
Rothermel, Rick (interview with) (cont.) OCM and LSS intersection

biggest mistake, with regard to critical success factors, 118
employing, 137 explaining the importance of, 102
describing, 106 lessons learned, 121
dos and don’ts, 128 success, 111
effectiveness, measurement of, 134 taught at BB training, 115
employee engagement and, 157 Senge, Peter, 20
failure/risk, 124 Sharma, Robin, 20
methodology, 131 Shewhart, Walter, 171
own words about, 105 Shingo principles, 169–170
personal experience with, 96 Shingo Prize for Excellence (award), 7
project champion’s role, 147–148 Shingo, Shigeo, 7, 171
reasons for using, 108 Sholes, Christopher, 15
gaining adoption and eliminating Silverstein, David, 8
resistance, 151 Simplified keyboard, 17
Lean Six Sigma, personal experience Sinek, Simon, 12
with, 98 Smith, Bill, 171
measuring resistance, 144 Spherical keyboards, 18, 19
OCM and LSS intersection Sponsor, 55
critical success factors, 118–119 Stakeholder analysis tool, 59–61
explaining the importance of, 102 Stakeholders, 59
lessons learned, 121 Stamp, Jimmy, 18
needs, 139 Stayer, Ralph, 19
taught at BB training, 115 Stevenson, Adlai E., 12
Strategy formulation and deployment
approach
S
version 1.0, 25–26
Salas, Abdiel (interview with) version 1.1, 26–27
addressing group of thinkers and Success
feelers, 154 catalyst for, 8
biography of, 161 critical factors, 4
change management Swift, Taylor, 91
BBs asking for help, 141 Syndio Social, 35
employing, 136
T
describing, 106
dos and don’ts, 128 Targets, of the change, 32–33, 60
effectiveness, measurement of, 134 Team of Teams: New Rules of Engagement
employee engagement and, 157 for a Complex World (book), 8–9
own words about, 105 Tolstoy, Leo, 19
personal experience with, 95 Toyota Production System, 7, 171
project champion’s role, 147 Training, 66
reasons for using, 108 and development, 67
resistance, 150
U
with, 98 Uninformed optimism, 46
measuring resistance, 144 Utah State University, 7
Index • 195
V Welch, Jack, 12
Wells, H.G., 12
Valley of Despair, 23, 46
Who Moved My Cheese? (book), 177
von Goethe, Johann Wolfgang, 12
WIIFM, 31–32, 48
Wilson, Woodrow, 19
W WorkPlace Big Five Profile,
78–82
WASTE, 9, 88

Isaca-Cobit 5 Implementation-Isaca (2012)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Isaca-Cobit 5 Implementation-Isaca (2012)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Isaca-Cobit 5 Implementation-Isaca (2012)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Intersection of

Change Management and

© 2018 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

No claim to original U.S. Government works

Printed on acid-free paper

International Standard Book Number-13: 978-1-1382-1702-7 (Paperback)

Visit the Taylor & Francis Web site at

and the CRC Press Web site at

Chapter 1 Why Should You Care?....................................................... 3

Chapter 2 Change Is Good!................................................................ 11

Chapter 3 Change Is Hard!................................................................ 15

Chapter 4 Resistance Is Real.............................................................. 21

Chapter 5 Minimizing Resistance..................................................... 25

Chapter 6 Why?: The Most Important Word in

Chapter 7 Resistance in Your Personal Life?.................................... 37

Chapter 8 What Is Organizational Change

Chapter 9 Project Risk Assessment................................................... 55

Chapter 10 Some Basic Organizational Change Management Tools....... 59

Chapter 11 When to Ask for Help....................................................... 69

Chapter 12 The Intersection of Organizational Change

Chapter 13 People Are Different.......................................................... 77

Chapter 14 The Final Word................................................................. 87

Chapter 15 Interviews with Experts.................................................... 91

Chapter 16 Mini-Biographies of the Interviewees........................... 159

Appendix A: Competencies for the Successful Black Belt................ 165

strategic change driven from on high above is often implemented through

David Silverstein, CEO

The Fat–Lean Continuum

FAT Organization LEAN Organization*

DO NOT READ THIS BOOK!

—Lisa A. Riegel, PhD

CONFUSION ABOUT THE TERM

Technology (IT) professional. In the IT world, the people side of change is

Paraphrasing Leonardo da Vinci and Albert Einstein, I hope this book is

Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.

Everything should be made as simple as possible but not simpler.

You can have Change Management without Continuous Improvement;

Why should you care about organizational change management (OCM)?

The Black Belt must have the ability to use:

1. Lean Six Sigma approaches and tools

Lean Six Sigma Change management

A representation to help explain Figure 1.1 might be:

Probability of Black Belt success = PM * LSS * OCM * Core Comp,

Sidenote: My friend, Alireza (Ali) Kar of Sydney, Australia, politely

CHANGE RECEPTIVENESS OF THE ORGANIZATION

A CATALYST FOR SUCCESS

RESPECTFUL AND RESPECTED LEADERSHIP

THE COLLABORATION TRADE-OFF

He who rejects change is the architect of decay.

Change is inevitable. Change for the better is a full-time job.

Change before you have to.

To improve is to change; to be perfect is to change often.

What good is an idea if it remains an idea? Try. Experiment. Iterate. Fail.

Change in all things is sweet.

The path of least resistance is the path of the loser.

Screw it. Let’s do it.

If “Plan A” doesn’t work, the alphabet has 25 more letters!

When you’ve finished changing, you’re finished.

What’s next? Maybe a spherical keyboard? (Figure 3.6)