The impact of poorly managed people change

So you have decided a restructure and leadership has determined that a change in operating model is necessary. Not only that, but all changes are needing to be delivered in a short time frame. In Australia there are clear guidelines as to workers rights, and if you are a human resources practitioner, you are well versed in these. But it takes time to mobilise and often people leaders aren't aware of the processes or protocols required, and then nervousness and fear sets in as leaders who need to implement these begin to realise the gravity of such changes on an individual level. It becomes poorly handled, through lack of communication, no sign of leadership conviction in the changes and outright confusion reigns as new roles are created without any accompanying clarity. Somehow the new structures are formed through sheer force, but what is the result and the ultimate people impacts?

Well here are some of them, and some of the most important reasons to have a change plan associated with your structure changes.

Productivity loss: This is the most obvious one. In the above scenario (which is modelled on many experiences) productivity loss has been significant. From the time any announcement takes place, productivity will dip. Hopefully not to the level of a team's inability to deliver, but certainly the acronym of MVP rings true (Minimal viable product). The bare minimum should only be expected if there isn't any change related plan in place to ensure engagement is maintained. And at times for individuals who are impacted, you simply have to cut your losses as they now have no reason to show any loyalty to an organisation that is letting them go. Any who do are showing their character, and those who choose an alternate path, well you may need to place them on gardening leave to minimise their impact on others.

Team impact: No-one lives or works on an interpersonal island in organisations, and even one person's exit can greatly impact a team. At the very least team dynamics change. as a result of that change a team can be unsettled or outrightly disrupted due to a change and at times if the leader who is affecting the change isn't respected enough then it will take a significant effort to get the team back on track. This can not only result in a team related productivity blip, but it can also spread disruption to other key stakeholder areas. If the team is customer facing this can result in an impact that is even more dire to the organisation and its brand. So any transitions or impacts for customer facing teams require even more in depth change plans and possibly PR strategies as well.

Significant investment in recovery: How well or how poorly people changes are managed will determine the timeframe and gap between the initial announcement and the newly formed team or individuals being settled in. Depending on the changes, it can either be three months or up to a year. The factors that are required to lessen the gap are clarity of vision, role clarity and interactions, recruitment to company values and onboarding pathways. If these do not exist and aren't in place, then it will be a long and expensive road to recovery. Think about the comparison of a long jumper who is standing still and taking a leap (no clarity, no longer term vision), as opposed to a jumper having a sprint and being able to hit the mark at speed and flying into the air (role clarity, vision and onboarding pathway).  One FAR outperforms the other.

Longer term turnover: One other area which is often underestimated is the longer term impacts on engagement scores for those who have witnessed poorly managed people changes, and an increase in turnover of staff who hung around initially but who have no more energy to invest in an organisation that doesn't respect or invest in them. The loss of talent can be masked in the short term but the costs are real and inefficiencies are many.

So how do you manage people changes well, even if time is against you?

Communicate, communicate and communicate again: The social network in an organisation will be activated to a major extent when any people changes are made. You want to make sure that rumours and gossip, (which will inevitably be rife) are not driving the communication. Be sure to communicate and communicate often, even if you are communicating that there are no updates. 

Be clear on who needs to provide the messages and make it happen: Depending on the seniority of the changes, make sure that the right spokesperson for the change is enabled and taking charge. But even for small changes ensure stakeholder groups are communicated with, especially around the why. It will make a difference even if there is judgement that there is a lot of change happening. 

Have an end to end change plan including transition activities: Most importantly you need a change plan. Whether it be created by a HR Business Partner, a Change lead or by a people leader. A plan outlining key engagements, at the appropriate time, across multiple areas (if required), is needed. Include transition workshops if functions and processes are impacted. In the long run it will be beneficial and allow a smoother transition. Always be clear on principles of respect and clear communication to make sure that all people are respected, whether they are staying with the organisation in the short term or longer term.