Articles | The Meta-Model of Planned
Change
The Meta-Model of Planned Change
Michael F. Broom, Ph.D. and Edith W. Seashore,
M.A., rev 2/09
This a model of managing change in human systems based on the
classic perspective of organizational development developed by the NTL
Institute for Applied Behavioral Science. The classic perspective holds
that the tasks of an organization-from planning to production to
sales-are accomplished with the highest level of productivity when
those tasks are supported by high quality of relationships among those
responsible for them. With that in mind, the Meta-Model of Planned
Change is offered. It is a model that believes in the empowerability of
human systems and the people that live and work within them.
Accordingly, it calls for collaborative strategies and tactics aimed at
open communication and consensual decision-making.
A model is a descriptive system of information, theories, inferences,
and implications used to represent and support the understanding of
some phenomenon. Meta-, in the sense used here, is a context or
framework. A meta-model could then be understood as a framework or
context for a model-albeit, a model of a model. Therefore, a meta-model
of planned change is a framework from which any number of more specific
models of how to manage change in human systems can be understood and
developed.
Our model is a three dimensional matrix with the horizontal axis
describing the five iterative stages of any planned change project. The
diagonal axis offers four levels of human systems-personal,
interpersonal, group, and organization/community-to which the
horizontal dimension can be applied. Though straight-forward these two
dimensions can be difficult to use; that is, without the vertical axis.
The vertical axis describes eight disciplines which can facilitate the
success of any particular planned change effort. The last page of this
article offers a graphic of the three dimensions.
The Stages of The Planned Change Process
The stages of the planned change process are contracting, data
gathering, intervening, evaluating, and disengaging. They are not
discrete-they overlap and are iterative. Often, they must be
simultaneously orchestrated, as each can trigger the need for another.
Any stage can lead to any other stage. Data-gathering, intervention,
evaluation, and disengagement can all lead to re-contracting.
- Contracting
People in any of several different roles undertake planned change
efforts. This includes the person(s) with direct decision-making
authority over a system or part of a system, as well as someone working
or living within a system without direct decision-making authority.
Someone from outside a system, called in for that purpose, could
undertake planned change efforts. Regardless of the role they may be
in, we will call those who undertake change projects change
agents or change leaders. Again, in
spite of the role, change leaders must contract for change with the
other members of the system.
Contracting is the process of coming to agreement with those person(s)
who are key to the success of a change project. If the change agent is
the person in decision-making authority, the agent must contract for
change with those who live and work under that authority. If the change
agent works or lives within the system without decision-making
authority, that person must first contract with the person in authority
for the desired change. Together, they can contract with the other key
people in the system. Similarly, a person from outside the system must
first contract with the owner of the system, and together, they
contract with the other key persons.
When organization-wide change is desired, or when a local change will
have organizationñwide impact, the change contract is best made at the
highest level of management. Contracting at this level leverages the
greatest accountability-rewards and penalties-for the desired change.
Change occurs most efficiently from the point in the system that has
the greatest impact for the least effort.
Effective change contracts specify must specify the following:
- Change goals that are clear, internally consistent, and
have a systemic and human values orientation. The most effective change
goals are fully consonant with the well being of the system as a whole,
as well as its members.
- Clear, defined roles of the project leader (the client)
and process facilitator (consultant). It is important that the project
leader have primary responsibility for the system under change. It is
just as important that the project leader understand that he or she is
there to lead with the support of the process facilitator. The process
facilitator (consultant) must have the required skills to support the
project leader in effective use of the five stages and eight
disciplines of the Meta-Model.
- Collaborative, inclusive, consensus-building change
processes. These processes should be consistent with the human values
orientation of the change goals, and create the levels of committed
buy-in necessary for successful projects.
A critical element in the success of planned change contracts is the
depth of relationship that the project leader and process facilitator
can generate. Relationships of mutual high equity built upon straight
talk, curiosity, and consensus decision-making create profound learning
from the sometimes deeply personal and emotional deliberations that are
a part of the process.
- Data Gathering
Once the initial contract has been established, the prudent change
agent would insist on a data-gathering stage. This process serves
several purposes:
- It provides important information for the effective
planning of specific interventions.
- It galvanizes the organizational energy in preparation
for "something happening."
- It provides an opportunity for some initial empowerment
coaching of those from whom data will be gathered.
Data should be gathered regarding the following:
- What is working in the targeted system?
- What needs improvement within the system?
- What has been done to facilitate improvement?
- What barriers occurred to such attempts?
- Reactions to the change goals and reasons for it.
The information being sought is the general themes and patterns extant
about the state of the system and its readiness for a particular change
goal. This data will direct the formation of the strategic and tactical
plan for the change project. From it, the needs of the system, which
could be resistant to the change, can be planned for and engaged.
This is not the only time that data will be gathered during a change
project. This is a continuous process. This is discussed further under
the principle of Sound and Current Data.
- Intervening
Implicit in the idea of the empowerability of human systems is the
assumption that through improving relationships within the system, its
leaders and members can begin to identify and resolve their own issues,
and in the process create whatever change they wish. This could mean
improving the relationships and resolving conflicts between system
structures, groups, and individuals. At the intrapersonal level, some
change action is often needed to help resolve the internal conflicts
that bedevil many system executives and managers.
Interventions, as a stage in the total change process, are those
actions designed to improve relationships within the target system.
They are open communication, and develop more informed and inclusive
decision-making processes. In their various forms, interventions
include feedback to the system, team building, strategic planning,
training, conflict management, and coaching.
Group facilitation and conflict management are the important skills
necessary for designing and carrying out these interventions. These two
skill sets require deep use of listening and straight-talk capacities.
A systems orientation, where impact on the entire system is kept in
mind, is essential. Of course, the ability to be flexible and congruent
with any particular situation is fundamental. Conscious use of self is
notable as the first of the planned change disciplines, and is
described in the section on the Disciplines of Planned Change below.
- Evaluating
The evaluating stage informs the change agent and the system about the
results the interventions have had. It is as much an ongoing process as
it is a specific stage. In essence, evaluation is a feedback based
data-gathering process. This feedback will give the change leaders
critical information about how the system has responded to an
intervention, and how they might design the next intervention to be
more effective. This concept is notably different from the use of
feedback as an ineffective means of getting someone to change. It is
more useful as a means of determining the quality of relationship that
has, or has not been stimulated by a particular change action.
Essentially, feedback is an evaluation process that can also be used to
gather data about what can make a more effective next change action.
Evaluative processes can be as simple as asking how well something
worked, and what might work better next time. More formal group
processes can take a form where everyone takes a turn responding to an
evaluative question, such as, 'What did you learn about planned change
this weekend?' System-wide evaluations could be done, both at the end
of a change project, and at periodic intervals after that to see how
much staying power a certain systemic change might have. It is a good
idea to have evaluative feedback processes built into a system's
ongoing routine to monitor the specific and general well-being of that
system.
- Disengagement
The process of completing or ending a change project is discussed only
sparingly in the planned change literature. A typical disengagement
process for the participants in the change project might include a
closing evaluation session, statements of learnings gleaned from the
project, and celebration of whatever successes were achieved.
In addition, the change leaders-task leader(s) and process
facilitator(s)-should get together to formally agree that the project
is complete, or otherwise at an end. Additional and personal feedback
might be shared about what worked well or less well, and what might be
done differently in a future project. Celebration would certainly be in
order.
Appropriate closure and disengagement allow the system, and the people
in it, to learn from their involvement in the project, and to let go
and move effectively on to what is next.
The Disciplines of Planned Change in Human Systems
In order to create effectiveness within each of the prescribed
stages of change, the following eight disciplines are offered. They
directly support the notion of the empowerability of human systems,
along with the people that live and work within them. Accordingly, they
also support the use of collaborative strategies and tactics aimed at
open communication and consensual decision-making.
- Conscious Use of Self
The primary tool for anyone wishing to manage change in a human system
is the configuration of intellectual, emotional, and physical energies
that a particular person brings to the situation. That includes
personality, abilities (particularly the ability to learn), and
idiosyncrasies. Most change leaders have only begun to develop a full
command of themselves. Instead, they tend to respond automatically to
many situations. These automatic or habitual responses are the result
of over-learning. Over-learning is extrapolating an appropriate
learning from a past experience, and applying it too broadly to every
other set of similar situations. Over-learning gives a 'shotgun'
approach to life, where the impact of many intentions falls far from
the anticipated results.
Another hindrance to conscious use of self is the way people define
parts of ourselves as 'okay,' and other parts as 'not okay.' Too often,
people deny large portions of ourselves that have define as 'not okay.'
We want to see ourselves as male, not female, or female, not male. We
want to see ourselves as 'nice,' but never as 'mean.' In this manner,
people deprive ourselves of the inherent flexibility that comes with
the multiple aspects and attitudes that make up their fundamental
integrity. Often, people judge themselves too harshly.
In the processes of effective planned change, all the personal
flexibility we can mustered is needed. How we present ourselves in one
situation with one person is not likely to be very effective in
another, though the situation or person may be similar. Part of that
flexibility is the ability to notice when we might be mistaking our
assumptions for sound and current data. This is a pervasive pitfall,
both in the world and in managing change in human systems.
Effective use-of-self calls for learning how to be aware of and how to
direct our own thoughts, emotions, and behaviors. As we move toward
mastery, we will be more able to behave in such a manner that the
systems within which we wish to manage change will respond in ways
consistent with our goals and intentions.
- Systems Orientation
A pervasive approach to change defines a goal, and then sets out in as
straight a tactical line as possible to achieve that goal. Such an
approach tries to ignore or run-over any intervening or obstructing
variables, such as the fact that several people do not want the goal to
be reached, nor appreciate the tactics being used. A systems
orientation to planned change looks holistically at human systems. It
understands that any change within a system will reverberate throughout
the entire system, and impact, even seemingly unrelated parts of the
system. Using a systems orientation we…
- Understand that systems are comprised of constellations
of forces that must be aligned for efficient and successful change
projects.
- Widen our perspective from our immediate goal to one
that considers the entire system.
- Simultaneously orchestrate several coordinated change
actions.
- Develop feedback loops that are sufficient to stay in
touch with the impacts of our change strategies and their specific
actions.
Consider the following in helping you to think systemically:
- Universal Connectedness:
Everything is connected to everything else-processes, thoughts,
feelings, and actions. Everything that happens is connected to
something else.
- Mutual Responsibility: For things
to be the way they are everything must be the way it is; therefore,
responsibility is always mutual. Those who see themselves as "doing
nothing" are contributing to the way things are by "doing nothing,"
just as much as everyone else is doing.
- Sufficient Sound and Current Data:
These are needed to determine the system boundaries containing both the
problem and the solution. Look to a larger system definition when
problems seem intractable.
- Leverage Points: This is that
accessible point in the system that creates the greatest impact toward
the desired change with the least effort. The most important leverage
point is the person whose system it is. To contribute to their success,
build a high equity relationship with that person. If the system is
yours, build a support system you can count on to help you create
success.
- A Powerful Reframe: A systemic
perspective takes away the popular notion of single-point fault,
allowing for an easier transition to the infinite perspective. For
example, pain reframed from a systemic perspective is a signal for
healing rather a trigger for anger and fear.
- A Function of Consciousness:
Often, we are only consciousness of a very limited part of ourselves
and of all that is going on around us. Effective systemic-orientation
calls for being present to a larger portion of ourselves and to what is
going on around us. Only then, will we begin to perceive systemic
connectedness.
- Sound and Current Data
An efficient and successful change process requires good information
for effective planning and decision-making. Such a principle, though
obvious, is necessary as a reminder against mistaking our assumptions
for accurate information. Our need to be "right," seen as "smart," for
not wanting to "rock the boat," or upset the boss often overwhelms our
need for sound and current data. Accordingly, many change efforts
suffer from insufficient, inaccurate information, while others fall
prey to power struggles over whose data is right, and whose is wrong. A
related pitfall occurs when the need for conformity prohibits the
essential data from surfacing.
An environment of openness, straight talking, truthfulness, and honesty
can be built from effective conflict management and team-building
processes. In this way, a safe environment can be created where sound
and current data can openly exist.
- Feedback
Systemic feedback is information from our environment about how it is
responding to us. It is relevant data that is available to us at all
times, though often, we fail to notice it. Systemic feedback allows us
to evaluate how well the impact of our behavior is congruent with our
intentions. The more we can fine-tune our behavior to be synchronous
with our intentions, the greater our effectiveness as managers of
change.
People often attempt to use personal feedback as a direct means of
changing someone's behavior. However, it is not very good at that.
Personal feedback offered with that intention is often heard as
criticism, which, often as not, generates defensiveness and resistance,
rather than the desired change. So, when someone says to you, "May I
give you some feedback?"-duck!
Managing personal feedback effectively calls for understanding two
principles:
- Feedback always says something about the giver, not
necessarily anything about the receiver. Consequently, your initial
response should be curiosity concerning the giver's intentions, and
then decide your next course of action.
- What is done with feedback is solely in the hands of
the receiver. Consequently, be curious about why you are reacting the
way you are, and then choose a response that gets you what you want
more effectively.
Kurt Lewin offered the formula: behavior is a function of people in an
environment. Too often, our behavior is solely managed on data from our
internal belief systems. Effective planned change calls for paying
close attention to the feedback from our environment (including the
people in it), so that we can adjust our behavior to elicit the desired
response from those around us.
- Infinite Power
Traditional planned change approaches often call for identifying the
person or people who are not in accord with a change project, and
replacing them with those who are. This process typically leads to a
series of finite, win/lose power struggles that change little and waste
energy on non-productive activities. An alternative approach would be
to focus on infinite, win/win change goals and strategies, as win/lose
processes always generate lose/lose results in the long term unless our
physical survival is at stake.
An important aspect of playing infinitely is to focus on changing the
quality of relationships within the target system, rather than trying
to change members who do not seem in accord with a proposed change.
This is directly related to the processes of conflict management and
team-building mentioned in previous sections.
Focusing on changing the quality of relationships, rather than trying
to change people minimizes the need for power struggles. Open,
collaborative decision-making processes are enabled, during which most
individual needs can be met while centering on developing strategies
and tactics aimed at the change goals.
- Learn from Differences
Differences are the only sources of learning we have. When used for
learning, differences are the progenitor of synergy, wherein the whole
is greater than the sum of its parts. Too often, however, differences
are used finitely to determine who wins and loses. Accordingly, they
are the source of wasteful power struggles or creativity-deadening
conformity aimed at avoiding power struggles. Organizations overvalue
conformity-those with critical information, or new or differing ideas,
are warned not to "rock-the-boat," therefore, making sound and current
data a rare commodity. The Bay of Pigs and Challenger disasters are two
highly dramatic examples of this phenomenon. New, differing, and sorely
needed ideas are repeatedly stifled by our need to be safe within
finite organizational cultures.
The ability to learn from differences is a critical conscious use of
self for change leaders. It will support them in maintaining the
systemic, non-judgmental perspective. Such a perspective is necessary
to use the differences within their systems for the learning and
synergy needed to collaborate toward effective change processes. Given
our socialized propensity toward operating from the finite perspective,
this is easier said than done. The infinite perspective helps, as it
allows change managers the support of strong and long-lasting
partnerships and teams. Such support is doubly critical as the stress
of change can move us swiftly back to the traditional,
conformity-oriented way of operating. With support, a speedy return to
learning from differences can be provided as needed.
- Empowerment
The client, and his/her system, have the necessary power to manage
change within their system once their energies are released through
effective, infinitely-oriented processes. Of course, learning from
differences though good conflict management and team building skills
are concomitant with the infinite perspective. The potential success of
many change projects is often minimized by system authorities or change
agents who believe that they must make the change happen rather than
empowering the systems, the groups of the systems, and the individuals
to make the change.
Critical aspects of empowerment are the experiences of choice and
influence. Consider, as I experience my behavior as influential, I will
begin to experience choice about how I respond to my environment.
Consequently, I begin to experience myself as powerful. The more
powerful I feel, the more I will contribute my skill and energy to
those who support my experience of choice and influence.
Personal empowerment without effective leadership, conflict management
and team building, however, can lead to chaos. Groups are the
fundamental units of human systems. Successful systemic change, then,
calls for personal empowerment within the context of group empowerment,
and within the context of decision-making parameters that support the
success. Accordingly, our definition of empowerment is supporting self
and others to discover their ability to experience a choice about how
they respond to their environment on behalf of increasing the well
being of themselves and their environment.
- Support Systems
The ability to develop support systems is crucial to effective planned
change for two reasons. First, systemic planned change will occur when
the support for that change reaches critical mass among the members of
that system. The success of your planned change efforts depends on our
ability to develop empowering partnerships across a full range of
differences using the infinite perspective of power.
Second, applying the eight disciplines to the five stages of planned
change is a daunting task. Those who choose to take this on must
develop strong support systems. Change in human systems is never
created alone. It requires support systems. An initial support system
might be one or two confidants. This small informal group might evolve
into a larger group willing to take direct action and contribute to the
critical mass that is crucial to success. We cannot manage systemic
change alone. Develop support systems to help you strategize and
operationalize your change strategy and to assist you in using yourself
effectively.
The Meta-Model of Planned Change has one hundred and sixty boxes or
applications. Maybe, one could distinctively master each and every one.
In contrast, it might be more important to use the meta-model to
develop ones own model of planned change tailored to ones own
particular interests, goals, and skill. Just as important, have fun
with it as you develop your own model.
View 3-Dimensional image of
the meta-model