A parable of business change: Turning prey into predators

The difference between next-gen and last-gen IT is that last-gen IT was satisfied when it delivered technology that “satisfied requirements” and met the specifications. Next-gen IT is deeply embedded in making business change happen.

This means everyone in IT needs some level of competence in business change management methodologies. Business analysts, in particular, must have black belts in it — or they would if anyone was silly enough to award them.

[ Find out the 10 business skills every IT pro must master, beware the 9 warning signs of bad IT architecture, and steer clear of the 12 “best practices” IT should avoid at all costs. | For more of Bob Lewis’ continuing IT management wisdom, check out his Advice Line newsletter. ]

Here’s one place to start: As mentioned last week, organizations would resist change even if every single employee in the organization, from janitor up through the CEO and board of directors, actively embraced it. To understand why, take a lesson from one of my more intriguing consulting engagements: a project I undertook for the SWTD (Society of White-Tailed Deer).

“It was bad enough when it was just wolves and coyotes hunting us,” the SWTD president told me. “Then we had hunters, which was OK when they tracked us, because that was a battle of wits. But now they use deer stands — they wear deer musk and put food on the ground.

“We’re tired of it,” she said angrily. “It’s our turn to be predators. We want to hunt squirrels.”

“That’s what you want me to do?” I asked. “Turn you into predators?”

“You’re the only management consultant we could find who used to be an evolutionary biologist,” she answered. “It’s you or nobody.”

“But squirrels?”

“Seems like they’d be safe to hunt, and besides, they’re annoying critters, don’t you think?”

As a consultant, I’m not in business to argue or to say no, so …

The solution: It’s all in the teeth

Following extensive interviewing and a review of the literature, “Predators need biting teeth,” I explained. “I’m going to partner with a company that specializes in gene splicing to give you some.”

We did so, and the outcome was disappointing — the deer weren’t catching any squirrels, so they complained that their new orthodonture did them no good. This led to an uncomfortable meeting with my project sponsor.

“My members aren’t happy,” she told me, “and when they’re unhappy, I’m unhappy. They can’t catch squirrels, and with their new teeth it’s harder to chew grass, pine needles, and corn kernels.”

“This happens a lot with change,” I told her. “It isn’t only deer. People naturally resist change, too. Once we get past the change resistance, everything should be fine.”

I handed out copies of my book, “Who Moved My Squirrel,” to every member of the SWTD (turning it into an overnight best-seller in the process). Even with this, the SWTD’s squirrel-catching-per-capita metric refused to budge.

The eyes have it

More radical measures were needed. I consulted privately with an expert in predation at the University of Minnesota, who pointed out that almost universally, predators rely on binocular vision so that they can accurately fix on their prey, while prey rely on a wider field of view so that they can spot predators early. Armed with this insight, I approached my client and explained the plan.

“No more gene splicing,” she told me in no uncertain terms. Instead, we agreed to a longer but less painful process: selective breeding. I didn’t complain. A consulting engagement that lasts decades is, in my trade, a good thing.

We accomplished our goal. The result was creepy-looking but effective, and my clients were able to catch all the squirrels they could eat.

Sadly, that was more than the number of squirrels they could digest. As it turns out, the deer digestive tract is optimized for extracting nutrients from vegetable matter, not meat. I proposed a GI-tract reengineering project to deal with this challenge, but by then, my client had had enough.

Coevolved systems

OK, it’s a ridiculous example, but it illustrates an important point: Every organism and every organization are the results of a process of coevolution, in which all of the component parts converge to a state where they support and reinforce each other.

In the case of organisms, it’s purely evolutionary. In the case of organizations, someone generally designs the big pieces — the “core processes,” to use the industry’s preferred phrase — but that’s just the beginning. Middle managers, supervisors, and often frontline employees do the rest, figuring out solutions for handling all the gaps, exceptions, and situations business planners never thought of.

Every part of a deer is optimized for deer-ness. Every part of your IT organization is optimized for whatever style of IT provisioning fits the actual company you support right now.

And your company? As an old saying has it, every organization is perfectly designed to deliver the results it actually gets.

As everyone’s partner in collaboratively designing and planning business change, it isn’t enough to figure out a new business process and the software needed to support it.

Depending on the change, you might need to take into account all manner of structural factors as well, including how the company is organized, its facilities, its governance, its accounting systems, and how everyone in the company, from top to bottom, is compensated — not just how much, but for what.

Think change is complicated for white-tailed deer? If you want a serious migraine, think through all the different moving parts that will have to change if your organization is to be different tomorrow than it was yesterday.

[ This content first appeared in different form in Bare Bones Change Management: What you shouldn’t not do, Bob Lewis, 2010 ]

This story, “A parable of business change: Turning prey into predators,” was originally published at InfoWorld.com. Read more of Bob Lewis’ Advice Line blog on InfoWorld.com. For the latest business technology news, follow InfoWorld.com on Twitter.