Our group had the opportunity to come together to work on a toolkit to guide an aspect of a preparing for a digital learning initiative.
In thinking of a persona who would benefit from this toolkit, we thought of someone working in an organizational development role as a trainer, consultant, or leader, who is considering a change.
We welcome your thoughts on our resource, especially if you think you could use this in your work.
Matt, Radhika, Tracy
Failure isn’t fatal, but failure to change might be.
John Wooden, American basketball coach
This unit and the readings associated was a very insightful experience that gave me a chance to revisit some memories of projects past. Through these readings I found myself making notes and highlighting concepts which provide insights to me now, about why certain projects I have seen fell short of meeting the intended outcomes.
One former project/initiative from my past which came to mind was an attempt to implement a digital asset management platform, or DAM, for short. In brief, a DAM is a searchable online library where one can upload and store digital communication assets such as images, videos, logos, templates, designs, documents, and more. It is intended to function as a central repository for all of an organization’s official assets.
Many years ago, I worked in a department within a very large organization whose leadership attempted to implement a DAM. The intended outcome was to have a centralized, searchable, and manageable platform where official organization assets were stored. It was intended to reduce the reliance on ad-hoc filing and storage methods and save time searching for desired assets, or duplicating the creation of assets that already existed. The primary stakeholders were staff members who were in roles that involved creating and sharing external and internal facing communications products. The communication to stakeholders contained ample details about benefits of a centralized tool; where the implementation could have been more robust was in understanding the user experience of how stakeholders would need to change their behaviour to realize the full benefits of the DAM. As Conway et al., (2017, p.3) observes: “Great design doesn’t always generate impact…innovations attempting to scale and create systemic change often hit barriers to change, sending them catapulting back to square one. We call this the system immune response.”
I found this particular reading very informative given my work, which happens within a highly connected system of inter-related practices and norms that are often overshadowed by resistance to change, even when there is ample data and evidence to show that an innovation can yield benefits. In this DAM example, although there was no formal change management process assigned to support its implementation, there was an attempt to involve stakeholders by recruiting an “ambassador” from each smaller team within the larger department. The intention was that the ambassadors would become early adopters of the DAM, gain familiarity with the process and functionality and bring that experience back to their respective teams. This tactic never took hold, and the proposed DAM was not implemented as intended.
My reflection on what was missing from this implementation relates to aspects of integration and cultural theory. Managing integration and managing stakeholders – two key knowledge areas of the Project Management Body of Knowledge – sheds a lot of light on why change involves more than just communicating to one’s stakeholders the benefits or gains from adopting a change. Understanding and foreseeing resistance from stakeholders, at the same time keeping loyal to the project objectives requires a broad skill set. I am not convinced that this DAM implementation did not occur because of a lack of PMBOK per se. However I do see the value in knowledgeable practice in project management and the benefits of understanding what could go wrong to derail an intended outcome.
I also observe power dynamics playing a role in this implementation attempt. As Covey et al., (2017, p. 17) notes: “Power dynamics revealed by a cultural theory analysis can help to suggest the type of intervention that will have the greatest chance of success in any given system.” This is a useful and salient reminder for those leading change that great design, (even if it has proven to be successful in other sectors and applications) and data are often not enough to sway stakeholder action and participation.
References:
Watt, A. (2014). Project management. BCcampus Open Education Pressbooks.
Conway, R., Masters, J., & Thorold, J. (2017). From design thinking to systems change. How to invest in innovation for social impact. RSA Action and Research Centre.