<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Four Features to Look For in a Change Management Methodology	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.enclaria.com/2014/08/06/four-features-to-look-for-in-a-change-management-methodology/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.enclaria.com/2014/08/06/four-features-to-look-for-in-a-change-management-methodology/</link>
	<description>Equipping individuals and teams to influence organizational change</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Mar 2017 00:35:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.5.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Martin Fenwick		</title>
		<link>https://www.enclaria.com/2014/08/06/four-features-to-look-for-in-a-change-management-methodology/comment-page-1/#comment-28343</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Martin Fenwick]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 2014 20:49:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.enclaria.com/?p=7059#comment-28343</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Great advice Heather. The last part on methodologies is so true. Why organisations expect one tool to do all things is beyond me, when all around us the complexity that people create is evidence that there is no one true way to manage any situation.  Be suspicious of any provider that says &#039;we use the xxx methodology exclusively&#039;.

On change overload I would suggest that it is largely a symptom of poorly handled change. Change is normal and life is change. Help your  people to embrace the fact that they change their lives every day willingly and the Organisational change is just like that.  Poor change confuses, doesn&#039;t engage, doesn&#039;t deal with fears, patronises, treats people like robots, assumes that because management understand everyone will, and does not provide information to aid understanding. That creates change overload.  People have the most complex computer in the planet inside their head and can process  tremendous amounts with it if the creators of &#039;overload&#039; are not present.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great advice Heather. The last part on methodologies is so true. Why organisations expect one tool to do all things is beyond me, when all around us the complexity that people create is evidence that there is no one true way to manage any situation.  Be suspicious of any provider that says &#8216;we use the xxx methodology exclusively&#8217;.</p>
<p>On change overload I would suggest that it is largely a symptom of poorly handled change. Change is normal and life is change. Help your  people to embrace the fact that they change their lives every day willingly and the Organisational change is just like that.  Poor change confuses, doesn&#8217;t engage, doesn&#8217;t deal with fears, patronises, treats people like robots, assumes that because management understand everyone will, and does not provide information to aid understanding. That creates change overload.  People have the most complex computer in the planet inside their head and can process  tremendous amounts with it if the creators of &#8216;overload&#8217; are not present.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Graham Sharp		</title>
		<link>https://www.enclaria.com/2014/08/06/four-features-to-look-for-in-a-change-management-methodology/comment-page-1/#comment-28065</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Graham Sharp]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2014 19:24:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.enclaria.com/?p=7059#comment-28065</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I agree with all, but offer the following add-on to Denis&#039; comment. Change overload is debilitating and often initially shows up as resistance. We have said this before; it is great to apply CM to a project, but you really gain when you are comfortable enough to stand back and look at the enterprise portfolio. Prioritization and capacity management are great tools to learn. It is critical to regularly audit the queue and constantly be aware of remaining capacity. Take the stress load from your resources and delivery capability soars!
Great article.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with all, but offer the following add-on to Denis&#8217; comment. Change overload is debilitating and often initially shows up as resistance. We have said this before; it is great to apply CM to a project, but you really gain when you are comfortable enough to stand back and look at the enterprise portfolio. Prioritization and capacity management are great tools to learn. It is critical to regularly audit the queue and constantly be aware of remaining capacity. Take the stress load from your resources and delivery capability soars!<br />
Great article.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Denis Kelly		</title>
		<link>https://www.enclaria.com/2014/08/06/four-features-to-look-for-in-a-change-management-methodology/comment-page-1/#comment-25200</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Denis Kelly]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Aug 2014 12:55:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.enclaria.com/?p=7059#comment-25200</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Heather and Dave

Really good points from both of you. I concur. One additional item I would add, maybe its there already, is the ability to paint the &quot;Big Picture&quot; of change right accross the business and allowing senior managers better prioritise change plans. One key benefit of this approach is avoiding change overload and its adverse impact on people and business as usual. A real risk I have seen become a  problem  is multiple change projects operating with insufficient co-ordination resulting in change overload in the business line. Many instances are reported as  resistance to change rather than what it really is  - change overload and people simply not able to cope.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Heather and Dave</p>
<p>Really good points from both of you. I concur. One additional item I would add, maybe its there already, is the ability to paint the &#8220;Big Picture&#8221; of change right accross the business and allowing senior managers better prioritise change plans. One key benefit of this approach is avoiding change overload and its adverse impact on people and business as usual. A real risk I have seen become a  problem  is multiple change projects operating with insufficient co-ordination resulting in change overload in the business line. Many instances are reported as  resistance to change rather than what it really is  &#8211; change overload and people simply not able to cope.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Heather Stagl		</title>
		<link>https://www.enclaria.com/2014/08/06/four-features-to-look-for-in-a-change-management-methodology/comment-page-1/#comment-25042</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Heather Stagl]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Aug 2014 20:26:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.enclaria.com/?p=7059#comment-25042</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Dave, thank you for your additions to the list. I see them as distinct and important to consider. 

The Irresistible Change Guide, my toolkit/methodology that I mentioned at the bottom of the post, addresses all of your points with the exception of (4) Balances focus across the entire life cycle of change including &quot;post implementation.&quot; The main reason for the exclusion is that it doesn&#039;t use a life cycle approach, although it is inclusive enough (my point #4) to apply one with it if you like to think of change in stages.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dave, thank you for your additions to the list. I see them as distinct and important to consider. </p>
<p>The Irresistible Change Guide, my toolkit/methodology that I mentioned at the bottom of the post, addresses all of your points with the exception of (4) Balances focus across the entire life cycle of change including &#8220;post implementation.&#8221; The main reason for the exclusion is that it doesn&#8217;t use a life cycle approach, although it is inclusive enough (my point #4) to apply one with it if you like to think of change in stages.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Dave Roitman		</title>
		<link>https://www.enclaria.com/2014/08/06/four-features-to-look-for-in-a-change-management-methodology/comment-page-1/#comment-25026</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dave Roitman]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Aug 2014 18:51:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.enclaria.com/?p=7059#comment-25026</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Heather â€“ I really like the 4 you proposed and agree they are critical. Here are several others I think are key: (1) Its language deals with people as human beings, not things; (2) It recognizes that human change is not linear, while at the same time can be linked to a linear project change method; (3) Balances focus across leaders, managers, and doers; (4) Balances focus across the entire life cycle of change including â€œpost implementation;â€ (5) Has clear linkage points  to Business and Technology, not exclusively focused on â€œPeople.â€ Iâ€™m curious â€“ do you see these additional points as already addressed in the 4 you proposed, or not? Havenâ€™t read your book â€“ I wouldnâ€™t be surprised if you addressed all 5 of these â€œadditionalâ€ pointsâ€¦.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Heather â€“ I really like the 4 you proposed and agree they are critical. Here are several others I think are key: (1) Its language deals with people as human beings, not things; (2) It recognizes that human change is not linear, while at the same time can be linked to a linear project change method; (3) Balances focus across leaders, managers, and doers; (4) Balances focus across the entire life cycle of change including â€œpost implementation;â€ (5) Has clear linkage points  to Business and Technology, not exclusively focused on â€œPeople.â€ Iâ€™m curious â€“ do you see these additional points as already addressed in the 4 you proposed, or not? Havenâ€™t read your book â€“ I wouldnâ€™t be surprised if you addressed all 5 of these â€œadditionalâ€ pointsâ€¦.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
