Stories, slogans and symbols are powerful catalysts for influencing people. They can support or destroy corporate change efforts. Paolo Moscuzza explores how selecting the right words can assist the implementation of change

“You must clear your mind of the fancy with which we all begin, as children, that the institutions under which we live are natural, like the weather. They are not. Because they exist everywhere in our little world, we take it for granted that they have always existed and must always exist. That is a dangerous mistake. They are in fact transient makeshifts. Changes that nobody ever believed possible take place in a few generations. Children nowadays believe that to spend nine years at school, to have old-age and widows’ pensions, votes for women and short-skirted ladies in Parliament is part of the order of nature and always was and ever will be; but their great-grandmothers would have said that anyone who told them that such things were coming was mad – and that anyone who wanted them to come was wicked.”

In his book, The Intelligent Woman’s Guide to Socialism and Capitalism (London, 1928), George Bernard Shaw refers to the above changes taking place over a few generations. However, the speed of change is so much greater now that it can take place just over a few years. In the 1980s I remember comments like: “It’s ridiculous to even suggest that a computer can do a person’s job, let alone believe them capable of it.” In the early ’90s commuters would commonly glance angrily at someone using a mobile phone on a train as if to say, “That is so rude… and besides you don’t really need it.”

I recall a senior manager explaining to me in the late ’90s how outrageous it was for his organisation to expect him to use a keyboard. He tried to convince me that it really was a much more efficient use of his time for his secretary to print out his e-mails, and for her to type out his replies and then e-mail them. It supposedly gave him more time to speak to the troops!

There are numerous parallels with the words ‘madness’ and ‘evil’ and the emotive language that is used in society to describe both the suggestion of and introduction of changes, both at socio-political levels and at organisational levels. Attempts to introduce the changes lead to expressions such as, “they have no idea what they are doing” and the classic, “it will never work”. Those that resist change are often described as ‘dinosaurs’ or ‘old school’ and in many cases contribute to and infect others with toxic shock.

The wider the gap between the ‘now’ and the ‘necessary’, the greater the bridging perceptions must be in order to ensure that fear and conservatism, which often lead to stagnation and sabotage, do not prevail. At the macro level the catalysts for change have often originated from political (in the form of law) and religious (in the form of moral) levers. However, enforcement is often neglected when the prevailing culture overrides legal or religious requirements. I recall being driven through a red light in Naples, Italy by a local. When I questioned the safety and legality of going through a red light, she explained to me that some of the traffic lights should not be there and the locals know which ones should and which ones should not, and only respect the ones that should. The police re-enforced that culture through not enforcing the law. The traffic lights did not change anything for the locals, although logically it should have been a very strong lever for change.

In the same way major PR and marketing usually accompanies legislative changes; and changes to workplace design or reward systems require a series of less tangible levers to be pulled. These often appeal to both the logical side of the brain and the emotional parts of the brain. The logical levers are pulled by facts, figures and hard data. The emotional levers come from more symbolic and story like information. The adherence to rules or evasion of rules creates the culture and subcultures within organisations. The emotional messages reinforce which rules are going to be followed and create the norms. These levers are the slogans, language, stories and symbols, which promote or inhibit change by their presence or absence.

Slogans

Words fly around organisations just as fashions come and go. Words and expressions that we think are original have often been used before. However, the application of the words is unique in each environment. I have recently been working on several transformational changes. One involved restructuring numerous countries into regions. The other involved introducing HR processes into an organisation that lacked them. They were both referred to as ‘transformational changes’.

When change is announced, people search for consistent messages. If a major strategic change is announced and people have been through a strategic change before they will use that as a reference point and look for signals. The signals are given off by expressions, time spent off site, requests for information, etc. If individuals have never been though a strategic change they will listen to their colleague before deriving meaning. Hence there is a danger that the information their colleagues provide will concern, dishearten or even depress the vulnerable group.

Whenever I review organisational internal feedback data, I consistently find that organisations believe that communications could be improved. It’s not that there’s a shortage of communication during change, but the anarchic way in which the communication filters through the grapevine could be improved. In other words, the communication exists, but it is simply not the right information being channelled around the organisation. The lack of consistency between the CEO’s e-mail about a transformational change, what has actually happened and what Pierre said to John in the cafeteria that fuels the titbits – which is all it takes to create a toxic shock that can poison change efforts.

The speed of communication during change is viewed by some organisations as an opportunity to quickly define what is and isn’t included and reinforce those messages. The unofficial channels, such as, the viral marketing is a phenomenal opportunity to get communicating (unofficially). However, for many organisations it is simply the official channels, the occasional e-mail from the CEO and briefings from managers who don’t really understand the changes. In those instances the slogans become toxic, especially when they are couched in unrealistic positive terms. However, carefully chosen language, symbols and stories really can have a positive impact on how people feel and that will directly influence how they behave.

Language – Value Statements (Useful but completely misused)

These are one of the most common metaphors used in organisational change; usually a set of 4 to 6 words, which appear everywhere and often associated with HR. The most common one I have noticed in organisations is ‘open and honest’. I recently tested the hypothesis that these words do not mean the same thing in different organisations. It was a quick experiment and the findings were very clear. The words ‘open and honest’ did not mean the same thing in the same organisation let alone between different organisations. However, one consistent point of agreement was that constructive challenges were a product of:

• History (how have challenges gone down before?)
• Context (is it a good idea at the moment?)
• Build up (was the request for comment genuine?)

Values can be an effective supplement to behavioural change programmes. However, they can also be seen, as a senior manager recently put it, “ambiguous, false and open to selective interpretation.” Fortunately, few organisations try to specify precise behaviours for every situation, taking the view that clones are not desired. However, some parameters of interpretation defined through the use of theatre or other interactive methods may be the key to providing a clear articulation of what the coloured laminated words on the wall mean. That way the laminated words become meaningful reference points for change.

Therefore, if you are going to put those words up on the wall, ensure that the harder levers are linked to them. For example, values are integrated with competencies, which form the basis for selection, development and performance management. That way the values are forming the basis of something real and tangible, rather than colourful visuals on the wall.

Stories (not used enough)

If you have trouble sleeping do not switch the television on at 3am. I made that mistake recently and spent 40 minutes listening to a life coach explain to me that I could be anything I wanted in 30 days provided I purchased a set of cassettes. I also learnt that I could have 6-pack abs and bulging biceps in 21 days as long as I purchased various contraptions. The really interesting aspect of this marketing was that about 80% of those 40 minutes were based on the story of people like Johnny, Sarah, Jane and William – who were supposedly, like me. Most of the advertising was about stories and not facts. I may be stating the obvious here, however, when promoting a new change in an organisation, my experience is that most organisations spend a great deal more time communicating facts rather than conveying messages through symbols and stories. I often get a surprised look when I suggest to a client that is introducing assessment centres or a new competency framework that we work with the internal communications team too.

After all, stories are powerful catalysts for influencing people and, if used wisely, will fill the space between the pie charts and figures. The business case for a systematic and objective assessment process may be very strong. It may be even stronger when it is brought to life with real and emotive personal examples of what it means for individuals. When working on organisational change in relation to creating feedback cultures (a common challenge as organisations have become less hierarchical), ER Consultants often use professional actors who help to bring emotive issues, such as, anxiety and fear to life. And such methods have had a positive impact on even the most toxic of dinosaurs within organisations.

Symbols (often noted by their absence)

When I arrived for my first meeting at the Madrid office of a global service sector organisation, I knew there was a lot of work to do if this office was going to consider itself part of an integrated European business. All the business cards were solely in Spanish. By contrast, every other country I had visited for this organisation had business cards in the native language and English on the back. The defiant symbolism of the absence of English was echoed throughout the organisation, outraged that Brussels was going to pull them closer into Europe.

Symbols are phenomenal levers for not changing, noted primarily by their absence rather than their presence. Those small pieces of detail which people detect, somewhere between the conscious and subconscious, imprint images in their minds, which they can often only describe as a feeling they seldom choose to reject. Therefore, when undertaking a significant change programme, identify those symbols that will be interpreted by both their presence and absence and ensure that the symbols are re-enforcing the changes.

Making an impact

Let us return to the social and legal changes that were taking place over a few generations, and consider the organisational changes that are taking place over the next few months and years. You may believe that organisational changes do not have such a great impact on people’s lives. However, 40 hours per week X 48 weeks X 20 years = 38,400 hours of cementing what is right and normal. Challenging the assumption that something was not right and will not be desirable in the future means bringing into question the thought processes that were both present and rewarded through those 38,400 hours and that is only the logical argument. Those 20 years involved aspiring to role models, building one’s power and status through official and unofficial channels, defining madness and evil and the creation of a massive sense of identity. Therefore, let us not underestimate logically and emotionally what change really means to people and think that a business case is all that is required to enforce boundaries that define new ways of working.

‘Mad’ and ‘evil’ (yet, not impossible) predictions for the future

• 2015 Brain scanning starts to replace personality profiling for selection Early work has already been carried out to determine which areas of the brain relate to aspects of personality. The next step will be using it for selection decisions.
• 2020 CEOs have to wear a microchip A microchip (the size of a pinhead) contains details of every conversation they will ever have and used to protect against litigation. The technology for this is just around the corner.
• 2025 Genetic testing widespread in organisations We are all familiar with the use of genetic testing for diseases. However, there is currently considerable research into the genetic basis for personality and particular skills.
• 2030 The use of microchips is extended to different groups in society Big brother is listening so beware!

For more information contact Paolo Moscuzza, T: +44 (0) 1223 315 944
E:  paolo.moscuzza@erconsultants.co.uk