# Change management theories

## Adler organizational model

Each organization is affected by Thinkers, Builders, Improvers, and Producers.

The four groups of people are aligned by a combination of experience and attitude about the work:

1. Thinkers develop [ideas](mind-creativity-how.md), where *most* of the significant ideas start with them (e.g., visionaries, creatives, researchers).
2. Builders create new things that convert Thinkers' ideas into reality (e.g., entrepreneurs, inventors, project managers of new projects).
3. Improvers manage defined tasks to make them work better (e.g., managers of existing systems).
4. Producers perform relatively mundane tasks for a project (e.g., helpdesk, sales, data entry).

People tend to develop their skills over time through a predictable pattern, with 1-2 dominant forms at any given time:

1. They start a role as a Producer, doing what they're told and not much else.
2. After some experience, they become a natural Improver for their work environment.
3. If they thoroughly [understand](understanding.md) what they're doing, they can become a Builder.
4. If they're intelligent enough, they'll resign themselves to becoming a Thinker.

At any given time, the questions you're asking determine the kind of person you need:

- What significant problems haven't been solved? (Thinker)
- Do we need to make any substantial changes or start new projects? (Builder)
- What needs upgrading or improving? (Improver)
- What portions of the project need high-quality and repetitive activities? (Producer)

Contrary to individuals, organizations' needs build through a reverse sequence:

1. Launch Phase - An organization starts by needing at least one strong Thinker to consider many [unknown factors](unknown.md) the organization will crash against.
2. Rapid Growth Phase - That Thinker will need a good Builder to [make those ideas happen](entrepreneur-1_why.md).
3. Maturation Phase - The Thinker and Builder will need an Improver to make everything work better.
4. Sustaining Phase - Everyone will need Producers to do exactly what they specify.

To that end, most organizations devolve into [bad systems](mgmt-badsystems.md) as the brilliant minds leave the organization:

1. Producers and Improvers do most of the work at first - TT BBB IIIIIII PPPPPPPPP
2. If the leadership doesn't keep fostering a culture of large-scale changes, Improvers' [risk assessment](safety-riskmgmt.md) halts future changes - IIIIIIIII T BB PPPPPPPPP
3. Before changes completely stop, the Thinkers and Builders have moved on to more meaningful work - IIIIIII PPPPPPPPP
4. Eventually, as the tyranny of standardization expands, Improvers follow the Thinkers and Builders, with new Producers replacing them to create some semblance of order - PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
5. The organization will dwindle and die from a lack of new ideas, or possibly [become necessary](mgmt-badsystems.md) by some form of [government legislation](people-rules.md).

## ADKAR change management model

It gives 5 domains necessary for successful change:

1. Awareness - everyone understands the change and why it's coming.
2. Desire - any concerns have proof to [convince](power-influence.md) members, including case studies, evidence, and [research](information.md).
3. Knowledge - the members understand how to make the changes.
4. Ability - the members can apply what they learned.
5. Reinforcement - members are rewarded for achieving at making the change.

While the model is effective at motivating managers to communicate change, it presumes everyone is acting out of the same motivation.

## Bridges transition model

It indicates the emotional state of members as their situation transitions:

1. Endings - they accept what might change.
2. Neutral Zone - they're still unsure about the new responsibilities.
3. New Beginnings - they've accepted the new method as how to do things.

Instead of "changes", it defines the concept as "transitions", and helps for understanding how people may [feel](mind-feelings.md) throughout the process.

The model is focused more on member satisfaction than on productivity.

## John Fisher change management model

The model considers the individuality of each stage of members' [feelings](mind-feelings.md):

1. Anxiety - insufficient information to [visualize](imagination.md) the future.
   - (Alternate) Complacency - complete apathy about the change, which can represent *anywhere* and at any time.
2. Happiness - shared [hope](trust.md) and relief that the change may have positive consequences.
   - (Alternate) Denial - refusing to believe a change is coming.
3. [Fear](mind-feelings-fear.md) - [uncertainty](unknown.md) over the impact of the change.
   - (Secondary) Anger - directed frustration, typically toward others at first.
   - The anger persists for several more stages beyond this one.
4. Threat - a sense of dread over the risks the change presents, especially to their [purposes](purpose.md) or [identity](identity.md).
5. Guilt - self-directed hatred about any failures regarding the change.
   - (Secondary) Anger - directed frustration at self.
   - (Alternate) Disillusionment - complete resignation, with [purposes](purpose.md) directed to something beyond the team.
   - (Alternate) Hostility - fierce aggression toward trying to make progress in [fixing](https://adequate.life/fix/) something, typically by ignoring or sabotaging the change.
6. Depression - total despair about the change, often with an [identity](identity.md) crisis involved.
7. Gradual Acceptance - a sense of [meaning](meaning.md) in the new change.
8. Moving Forward - complete integration of the new experience.

The model is *very* precise on how people behave (and very accurate), it may be too complex for most [middle managers](mgmt-middle.md) to comprehend.

It gives plenty of status on the members' emotional state, but doesn't explain how to resolve issues with members at each of those stages.

## Kaizen change management model

It's a 10-step process:

1. Releasing assumptions.
2. Taking initiative to [solve problems](mind-creativity-how.md).
3. Rejecting current [conventions](people-culture.md).
4. Avoiding perfectionism.
5. While discovering mistakes, looking for solutions.
6. Fostering an environment that provokes everyone to contribute.
7. Asking "why" instead of accepting obvious explanations.
8. Gathering information from multiple sources.
9. Finding low-cost, small improvements.
10. Ensuring continuous improvement.

The system is great at the entire team brainstorming and idea-generation.

The system isn't very effective at *making* the changes directly.

- It overlooks the emotional reactions everyone will have over the change.
- Often, including members in the brainstorming process can dramatically complicate the result, especially if the leadership didn't listen to their ideas.

## Kotter's change management theory

It uses 8 steps:

1. Increase urgency.
2. [Recruit a team](mgmt-3_teams.md) that will guide the change.
3. Build out the [vision](imagination.md) for that change.
4. Communicate how much everyone will have to contribute.
5. Help everyone to act.
6. Do everything possible to finish tasks and projects quickly.
7. Build momentum with the changes.
8. Make the change-based approach a [cultural standard](people-culture.md).

It emphasizes a focus on making important things urgent and fosters a culture of rapid change, but doesn't consider the long-term impact of those changes.

## Kubler-Ross change management framework

It draws on the 5 stages of [how we handle losses](mind-feelings-happiness-stress.md):

1. Denial - not able to admit the change.
2. Anger - generally upset in response to the change.
3. Bargaining - doing what they can to prevent the change.
4. Depression - hopelessness about the change happening.
5. Acceptance - resignation about the change occurring.

The model effectively captures the emotional state people may be having about a change.

- While we individually go through any loss sequentially, organizational changes are significant enough that we may make changes about *different* losses over the same change at different rates, meaning it'll appear random.

The system, however, often implies that people may be acting out of emotional reaction instead of a specific [principle](values.md) they live by.

## Lewin's change management model

It consists of 3 simple steps:

1. Unfreeze - observe and openly communicate existing processes and roles that should change or stay the same.
2. Change - start making changes and openly communicate as events happen.
3. Refreeze - create and communicate goals and deadlines for when a plan should be in place.

While it emphasizes communication, it doesn't focus as much on systems continuously running or how *fast* those changes need to happen.

## Nudge theory

The idea is that people more readily accept change when they choose to over strict rules and enforcement.

It employs a [marketing approach](marketing.md) with stages of selling.

1. Introduce something new alongside the old thing.
2. Provoke a [trend](trends.md) toward that change.
3. Finalize consensus by removing the old thing.

The approach is *not* effective when it's something people may dislike (e.g., pay cuts).

While this has been established for the purpose of casually [directing large groups](groups-large.md), it's also the basis for [many dysfunctional systems](mgmt-badsystems.md).

For most changes, there will always be at least a few outliers who will put up resistance.

- They will need to be terminated, reassigned, or forced to conform.

## Satir change management methodology

There are 5 phases to the methodology:

1. Late Status Quo - members understand what they're responsible to do.
2. Resistance - members don't like what they're responsible to do.
3. Chaos - members are less productive as they start applying the change and [understand](understanding.md) the new approach.
4. Integration - member morale improves once they see positive results.
5. New Status Quo - members are productive again.

While it accounts for dips in productivity while changing, it doesn't give much indication of the best way to navigate change.

## Level 5 leadership model

The model divides skills into 5 distinct levels of leadership:

- Level 1 - self-leadership (i.e., [professional](professionals.md) self-management)
- Level 2 - team player (i.e., can work on a team)
- Level 3 - team leadership (i.e., can tell people what to do)
- Level 4 - manager leadership (i.e., can direct managers)
- Level 5 - organizational leadership (i.e., can inspire entire organizations)

The model captures the idiosyncratic differences between scopes of leadership, but doesn't accommodate how different industries and organizations have different requirements for leadership.

## Greiner curve

The model captures the phases of an organization's growth based on the primary factor that drives its continued growth.

Stage 1 - Growth through [Creativity](mind-creativity.md)

- The organization's founders spend most of their time making new products and finding open markets.
- Not many staff, and communication is mostly informal.
- Individuals who work hard or extra hours are usually awarded a share of the profits or company stock.
- Growth ceases with a **leadership crisis** when the leaders must better [organize](organization.md) their resources.

Stage 2 - Growth through [Direction](purpose.md)

- Typically, someone new is brought in to compensate for inadequacies in current leadership.
- Communications are more formalized, such as [meetings or a knowledge base](mgmt-5_communication.md).
- There's more emphasis on budgeting, as well as separating activities into distinguished groups like [marketing](marketing.md), production, or sales.
- Individuals who work hard or extra hours receive incentive benefits more than profit-sharing or stock.
- Growth ends with an **autonomy crisis** once the products or processes have grown so numerous that one person can't oversee all of them.

Stage 3 - Growth through [delegation](mgmt-5_communication.md)

- The senior leader starts giving responsibilities to others, which often includes [middle managers](mgmt-middle.md).
- Top management monitors and managers large-scale issues (e.g., mergers & acquisitions).
- Individuals who work hard or extra hours receive increased authority over the organization and its processes.
- At this stage, most organizations fail because the primary manager usually won't consent to less direct control.
- Growth ends with a **control crisis** because different parts of the organization need a larger headquarters.

Stage 4 - Growth through coordination and monitoring

- The leadership starts establishing members in clearer roles.
- Previously isolated units become reorganized as usage-based process flows.
- Investing becomes centrally-managed and focuses on ROI (return on investment) more than simply profitability.
- Individuals who work hard or extra hours receive organization-wide profit-sharing arrangements.
- Growth ends with a **red tape crisis** when [bureaucracy](bureaucracy.md) halts further progress.

Stage 5 - Growth through collaboration

- The entire organization has enough collective motivation to adapt their culture and structure to [use more common-sense](https://gainedin.site/idiot/).
- The leadership eradicates vast systems that deliver rigid rewards to unchanging team structures and replace them with more autonomy to teams, including the ability to reorganize as desired.
- Individuals who work hard or extra hours are often promoted to team leadership or given special projects.
- Growth ends with an **internal growth crisis** where the organization has reached a hard limit on the number of people who can adopt the [culture](people-culture.md).

Stage 6 - Growth through extra-organizational answers

- The organization creates partnerships with complementary organizations.
- Growth continues through mergers, outsourcing, networks, and other solutions.

The model is very effective at capturing *what* can keep growth going, but doesn't work well for troubleshooting.

- Further, the model becomes *much* more complex with multi-team organizations, since it's harder to define what constitutes a "group" of people.