- This topic has 12 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 3 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
-
For you own individual reflection consider the next two questions:
Q1. For a change you are familiar with, how well (if at all) is the Change Curve and Transitions Model used to support an individual through a major change?
Q2. What specific examples can you think of where either (or both) model(s) were used, and what were the results?
-
Q1. Both models provide a clear framework for helping individuals deal with change since the models can be customised to an individual and their preferences/ character. In this way, the models can adapt to different needs and bring individuals to a place of productivity when they are ready.
Q2. Transformation of work processes in a national utility client. Both models are well represented by the ADKAR activities. -
1. Change Curve and Transitions Model support individuals properly as they help to go through transition via detailed planning. Once clear planning has been provided and clear communication established, personal concerns are overcome.
2. Reorganization – structural changes in companies. Providing new positions mapping in a clear way and explaining differences between old and new.
-
1. The Change Curve and Transitions model has helped support individuals in our organisation by clearly explaining the new changes. providing support whilst they adjust to the new change and providing praise where necessary.
2. Transition onto a new system within the organisation, that will effect all members of staff. We are still in the process of the transition but we have had positive feedback so far.
-
Q1: The Change Curve and Transitions Model helped Managers to understand the different stages the affected stakeholders had to go through. They were able to support during these different stages with open communication of what is going to change and give reasons, set new goals and provide trainings to enable them to work in the new way.
Q2: After an acquisition, we had to integrate a new branch into our company. Work processes had to be restructured and roles changed. We were able to support the people affected in different states according to their needs, so that all processes worked smoothly in the end.
-
1: The Change Curve was more useful in assessing an individual’s reaction to the change. The Transition Model was more useful for planning and executing the change management activities. Hence, we used the Transition Model up front and then used the Change Curve to assess how people were dealing with the change.
2: We used them on a major ERP project where the back office functions were being centralised to a low-cost country processing facility. We knew that this would mean major chnages for some and even some redundancies. Using the Transition Model set us up to lessen the fear of the change that was present at the start of the project. We got people to assess themselves on the Kubler-Ross curve and assisted them throught the Neutral Zone, based on the feedback. We found that painting a picture of the future was a key element of the New Beginnings and work well for us.
-
Q1: Both Change Curve and Transition Model can help to support an individual for passing through a major change in different circumstances.
Q2. One typical example would be replacement of a new ERP platform of old legacy system. Under Change Curve, users would encounter shock, denial, anger/blame, bargaining & self blame at the early stages as they are all comfortable of using existing legacy system for processing. After they get support, training and communication of the new system, they will start to reach acceptance and problem solving stages. Under Transition Model, at Ending stage user will receive the information of system change and therefore they will have emotional feelings and responses in netural zone stage. They will finally recognize the reality in the stage of New Beginnings under that model.
-
Q1: Both models should be taken into account whenever a change, be it big or small, is implemented in an oganization. I tend to relate to the answer from the participant Michael Gill: the Change Curve may be more useful in assessing an individual’s reaction to the change while the Transition Model may be more useful for planning and executing the change management activities.
Q2: Unfortunately, the company I work for went through a major “uplift” (aka transformation) that started a year ago and up to this day the remaining employees are still somewhere lost in the depresseion and confusion state. Everything from start to finish was not well communicated and little support was provided to the employees. If only these models were taken into consideration, I strongly believe the impact wouldn’t have been as big as it was.
-
Q1 – For a multinational SaaS vendor undertaking an org restructure; change curve can help leadership determine probable impact on key individuals affected by the change. Informing what they communicate, when and how. As well as the overall timeframe to assume around the change. The Transition Model builds on this. Ensuring each affected individual’s transition through the stages is acknowledged and supported.
Q2 – The above organisation didn’t apply any discernible change model. Change was announced. Leadership discussed amongst themselves and were reluctant to communicate. Affected employees oscillated between anger/ blame – bargaining – depression/ confusion. Some resigned as a result, others risked burned out and some performance dropped.
-
A1. Both the Change Curve and Transitions Model provided complementary and alternative perspective(s) to support an individual through a major change.
A2. Change announced but often the reasons for the change(s) was/were not stated (i.e. benefits) and opportunity for temp. solutions not considered.
-
1. I like the framing that the Change Curve is suitable for considering individual reactions and the Transitions Model works well for planning change management activities. I can equally see how the Transition Model can be applied to individuals.
2. Any change I have experience has not been well planned and was simply imposed – this is the way it will be going forward.
-
The organisation underwent a huge restructure in a key customer facing business area. Re: how well the change curve was applied – not well. There was very little lack of commmuication on they WHY behind the change and the value it would create. No communication of any applied methodology and measurement – had there been, the change may have been well considered and perhaps easier to buy into. As it was, Shock, Anger and Blame, Depression and Confusion remained a constant state for a very long time. Bridges model, also was not applied robustly, as in there was very little preperation and help, it was more announced change, already decided upon, and a juggernaut approach to implementation. After a year of implementing the new way of working, it became apparent it was failing, and was revamped again 2 years later by new management.
-
Change and the individual, activity 2.
As a fairly new business we haven’t been through a huge amount of business change. I think the models discussed are often used without realising – but I would say both are regularly used. I think the Kuber-Ross change curve is more suited to managing individual change and responding to an individual’s needs at a certain time. Bridges’ model is more of a blanket approach, so I think perhaps both could be used in tandem. Both require support and effective communication as their key messages.
-
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login here