Unit 2 – Activity 1: Managing Change for Learning in Digital Environments
As someone who enjoys identifying and resolving various “gaps”, I have been fortunate in being able to expand many of my past roles to introduce training aspects where none existed. While reviewing the theories and models for change, I have found it difficult to place myself in context as I am not in a role where I have any direct impact on my organization. In particular, as a large organization without a training department, I have found this to be a difficult proposition.
For instance, as a Systems Integrator (SI) working on small- and large-scale building automation systems, part of my role was to keep the users in mind while developing interfaces and systems that allowed them to use their homes and buildings simply and easily. Whether turning on a light or controlling a heat pump, there was always a process to describe and articulate to the user. For that I wrote user manuals and trained the owners/users on how to operate the equipment. From the outset, though, there were always gaps such as Air-Conditioners (HVAC) controls that we and others had difficulty integrating into the buildings … so I found and sourced controllers for those products. That opened up a distribution aspect to the company, which snowballed into the company currently being a large wholesaler of parts to other Systems Integrators throughout South Africa.
This created a problem: There were only so many of us in the country and, in order for the systems we were using, an European open standard for building automation known as KNX, we would have to expand and train others to become certified installers or KNX Partners. Having been through a similar conundrum in other countries prior to this, KNX were the ones who spotted it first. In the end, I was selected to become the first KNX Tutor in Southern Africa, opening the first certified training centre in the region which was both fun and daunting. In between there were also many marketing pushes and private meetings with potential SI’s to raise awareness of KNX and the benefits that an open standard could bring to installers and owners. The combination opened the door for training to become an official part of my job description and, without realizing it at the time, seems to have followed the Lewin’s 3-Stage Change Model (Lewin’s Change Management Model, n.d.):
- Unfreezing:
- Identifying that further growth of the KNX standard required the existence of a local training centre.
- Identifying and importing products that met needs in the market (i.e. HVAC).
- Working to make local SI’s aware of the benefits of KNX products, both to themselves and their clients.
- Marketing to, and building systems for, clients in order to improve market penetration and awareness of KNX in general.
- Change:
- Get certified and open a training centre.
- Be open with SI’s about the pros and cons of the system.
- Train SI’s.
- Move away from installing towards distribution, supporting SI’s both in continued training and product supply/support.
- Refreeze:
- Instituting a local KNX Group for SI’s to find support in one another.
- Working with local governing authorities to ingrain KNX as a standard for Building Automation in South Africa.
- Continue to support SI’s as needed.
In terms of current context, however, not being in a position to enact change has made it difficult to enact change through implementing a training department. Similarly, understanding the context in order to follow such a simplistic change model as Lewin’s is difficult. At the same time, the leadership and organization have articulated that integrity and authenticity, as well as open communication, are company values (These values were a large part of why I began to work here). There is also current expansion into new regions, the integration of multiple companies into the current SaaS platform that we developed, as well as of some of their products and services to flesh out our platform. All of this exemplifies a need for training within the organization.
As values and culture have been identified as a strong component to be upheld, both by myself and the organization, it may be beneficial to implement a change model in which these attributes are integral. While aligned with Lewin’s model, the CHANGE model noted by Beich (2007) may be more directly applicable to this organization as the words it uses to describe its stages, particularly “harmonize,” “align,” and, “nurture,” align more closely with the softer wording of the internal culture. Similarly, Beich notes that, “understanding organizational culture is important,” in particular as to avoid disconnects between individuals and the evolving culture so as to ensure implementation of any changes (p. 8).
Knowing that the organization has articulated the need for learning but looking for the way forward, I believe we would currently be in either Step 1 or Step 2 of the CHANGE model. In particular, there are some who understand the “Why” of needing a training department, but it is possible that not all are able to see the need quite yet. Articulating this need to leadership and stakeholders, for instance current mergers, new hire on-boarding, and platform changes, may be the preliminary step in moving this forward. From there it would be necessary to identify and document the internal structures currently in place in order to understand what habits currently exist. That would allow us to identify and move through the Harmonize and Align Leadership phase so that we could begin to look at the “How” of implementation strategies.
References
Biech, E. (2007). Models of change. In Thriving Through Change: A Leader’s practical guide to Change Mastery (p. 8). https://viewer.books24x7.com/assetviewer.aspx?bookid=22651&chunkid=584631078#
Lewin’s change management model: Understanding the three stages of change. (n.d.). Retrieved February 14, 2021, from http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newPPM_94.htm