It is often said that existing technology is sufficient to foster sustainable business and society. But all the technology in the world won’t help us reduce resource and energy consumption if we don’t directly confront the innate human aversion to change. A major external force (a.k.a. the proverbial burning platform) is often required for people to change. Yet, sustainability requires companies— organized groups of humans — to proactively change. How do we do it?
Luckily, there is a discipline focused on inspiring change that is now being applied in the area of sustainability. Organizational change management is the process of shepherding an organization or larger collection of people through a planned change process — providing a roadmap to plan, initiate and stabilize change. This process integrates corporate strategy and employee engagement. When businesses lack a well-planned change management process the chance of successful change is 1 in 3, but doubles to 2 in 3 when a company engages in an effective change management process, according to a 2012 study by the Project Management Institute and a 2008 study by McKinsey.
Here are five rules of thumb to bolster sustainability transformation. None of these ideas is new, companies just don’t do them well. Examples are provided from DuPont to illustrate the ideas. (Full disclosure: My father, Charles (Chad) Holliday, Jr., was chairman and CEO of DuPont from 1998 to 2008.)
As background, DuPont was described in 1989 — by both Greenpeace and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency — as one of the worst polluters in the U.S. DuPont reacted to that burning platform and embarked on a path toward sustainability. Each year since then DuPont has strived to raise its bar and proactively change. Since 1990, DuPont shifted its product line from being 100 percent chemically-based, to 70 percent chemically-based and 30 percent bio-based materials; and reduced it greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) 72 percent, mainly through waste reduction and water/energy efficiency.
1. Talk to your people: Once your strategy and objectives have been determined, every line of business needs to understand how they will be impacted. All the people within your company need to be aligned to the strategy through objectives specific to them, performance indicators, ongoing communication, tailored training, updated job roles/responsibilities and incentives. Employees trust communications the most that come from the manager they directly report to.
In 1989, DuPont announced its first set of voluntary goals and is now on its third set of goals. After the goals are set, the company’s Sustainable Growth Center has prioritized which businesses need to deliver improvements so that the corporation achieves its commitments. Progress is measured largely by the energy savings achieved from individual improvement projects at each plant. Over 100 plants have annual energy targets. Site Energy Champions have monthly conference calls and biannual corporate energy conferences to share best practices and identify opportunities to rapidly replicate successful projects.
2. Keep talking to your people: The biggest oversight when embarking on a change process is assuming that people will change simply because it is part of the new strategy and it is required. Continuous engagement and direction are needed to engage people impacted by the change.
Each year DuPont’s Sustainability office leads Sustainable Growth reviews with the president of each of the businesses. The objective of the reviews is to engage in strategic conversations about the key sustainability trends and how those trends will affect future business challenges and opportunities. The reviews are conducted prior to the strategy reviews to help inform strategic plans.
Next Page: Don't stop talking (and listening)
![Ending the alphabet soup in the [insert word here] field](http://www.greenbiz.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/wide_small/130516-voien1-w.jpg "Ending the alphabet soup in the [insert word here] field")
This article raises some good
This article raises some good points about inspiring culture change, however it does leave out one of the most powerful ways to accelerate social change, which is through recognition and appreciation.
Recognition provides positive feedback for behaviours that you want to see more of. Recognition also helps communicate the values of an organization while reinforcing the organization's commitment to these ideals and behaviours.
Tony, I agree with your
Tony, I agree with your point. There were only so many points I could make in 2 pages. I decided to focus more on why it is important to make the case for change and how planned change is integral to a company becoming more sustainable. The persistence of communications was a story to use to share the ideas. Both in theory (academia) and practice (within organizations) there is a disconnect between strategy and (organizational) change management. Effective communication is one of the key tools for managing the change.
I did a study covering 20 years of DuPont's sustainability transformation story. As you mentioned awards, rewards and incentives were a critical success factor(CSF)— both monetary and recognition. On a similar note (of CSFs) I found if possible it is always great to make the success/ROI of the project part of all the key stakeholders' performance goals for the year (measure it so we can manage it). The 2010 case study is posted on my site http://www.scotholliday.com/publications.html
Fantastic write up! This
Fantastic write up! This type of thinking is going to be king over the next few years. Organizations are rapidly coming to the realization that they need to change, but understanding how to change effectively is still a challenge. You hit the nail on the head with the underlying theme: communication is key. People are far more likely to embrace change if they are confident that they can influence it and will be positively affected by it; the more they understand the though process behind the new strategy and the ways in which the organization will be executing that strategy, the more confidence they will have in the strategy. I'm bookmarking this one and I'll surely come back to it a time or two.
Caitlin, Thanks for the
Caitlin, Thanks for the applause. When a project, initiative or strategy is important it is worth having dedicated folks working to manage the change. It does double the odds of successful change. I aim to write more pieces soon. I work with several organizations. Once I have another case study example to highlight some ideas, I will voice some more ideas.
In case you are looking for the foundational ideas you can tailor to your own work here are two of the best thinkers I work to emulate (in terms of methodology and having advised the most organizations): Daryl Conner http://www.connerpartners.com/daryl-conner and John Kotter http://www.kotterinternational.com/our-principles/changesteps/changesteps
Fantastic write up! This
Fantastic write up! This type of thinking is going to be king over the next few years. Organizations are rapidly coming to the realization that they need to change, but understanding how to change effectively is still a challenge. You hit the nail on the head with the underlying theme: communication is key. People are far more likely to embrace change if they are confident that they can influence it and will be positively affected by it; the more they understand the though process behind the new strategy and the ways in which the organization will be executing that strategy, the more confidence they will have in the strategy. I'm bookmarking this one and I'll surely come back to it a time or two.
"70 percent chemically-based
"70 percent chemically-based and 30 percent bio-based materials"? I know Dupont dropped their motto "Better Things for Better Living Through Chemistry" because of public chemophobia - but bio-based "materials" are made of chemicals. Every THING - whether plant, vegetable, mineral, man-made or naturally occurring - is made of chemicals. Dupont still excels at chemistry. As does nature. What you should have said is "petrochemical-based" vs bio-based.
G Adams, I understand your
G Adams, I understand your point. Thanks for keeping me on my toes. I like the idea that DuPont has gone from being a chemical company to a chemical and life sciences company, and worked to reduce the negative impacts of the whole life cycle of its products on the environment. E.g., producing soy protein based ink rather than petroleum based ink for use in printers (used by Epson and others.
Good article with the
Good article with the exception of the second sentence. There is nothing innate about an aversion to change. We are creatures of habit but that doesn't mean that we accept any culture as it is handed down to us. Humans mold cultural habits and make them their own as individuals and collectively. Humans are creatures of habit in the sense they need habits to make sense of the world, not that they hold onto their "old" habits just because they can't shake them. Habits can, and do, change as long as people continue the dialogue and lead by example.
Carlos, I think I see your
Carlos, I think I see your point that we are always changing in some ways. I will think about what aspect or level of change people may have more aversion to. When I think of aversion to change I recall failed multimillion dollar IT projects, laggard companies in an industry not innovating fast enough, and in general the difficulty many people have in understanding how their day to day work focus should change to align to the new 5-year plan at their organization/company. The issue may not be aversion to change but instead poor direction/guidance on which areas to change and how to incrementally move toward achieving the goals (determining the direction to move an organization and then at the right speed guiding people in that direction). If the case is that failed change is due to poor guidance, then the root issue may be leaders having difficulty determining the right strategy and how to guide their organization in implementing it. I guess as in medicine, with change management on a day to day basis, sometime you treat the symptoms, other times you treat the dis-ease. Regardless of the aversion factors, results show managing (organizational) change on average doubles the chance of successful change.