Background:

During July 2009 a project was launched at Pep Clothing to conclude an Enterprise Resources Planning system implementation that was struggling to become part of the organisation’s culture, over the previous 18 month period.

The AX System was intended to integrate various systems and/or components of the business into an integrated system that ensures enhanced work-flow and improves business performance visibility.  This workflow and performance visibility improvements would create a platform that would enable people to enhance their contributions towards PEP Clo’s Vision of Sustainable Growth and Competitiveness.

Due to problems that were experienced with the disciplines to consistently follow procedures pertaining to business information, inefficiencies were not visible enough and made the appropriate response to these inefficiencies difficult.

After concluding a Supply Chain Team Role Clarification workshop as well as two separate Problem Identification Workshops in different sections of the organisation,  pertaining to the problems that were experienced post the AX system implementation, a variety of problems were identified by employees.

The People and Organisation Development Manager in partnership with Schuitema and Associates designed a change management process that endeavoured to implement an effective “process-solution” to capacitate leaders in Pep Clothing to:

a.     Manage the final wrap-up stage of the AX system.

b.    To respond appropriately to the problems that were highlighted by their team members during the above mentioned workshops.

The Deliverables for the project were as follows:

                      i.    Leaders :

a.     Would be enabled to facilitate change in their areas during the AX Wrap-Up phase and going forward by:

                                          i.    Embedding skills such as problem solving, through the planning and implementation of project plans, supported by coaches who will give the Leaders feedback in real time.

                                         ii.    Training Process Leaders to on an ongoing basis respond to problems that prevent the bedding down of the AX system as they occur and to instil proactive responsiveness.

                                        iii.    Improving their resilience to be able to respond appropriately to the wrap-up of the AX system implementation.

b.    Their roles as Leaders during change were clarified.

c.     Provide the leaders with a framework to enable them:

                                          i.    To empower their teams,

                                         ii.    To cultivate accountability in their end-users.

d.    Commence the Pep Clothing Leadership Development process by integrating the business imperative to implement the ERP system effectively, while leaders would experiment with their newly acquired leadership competencies.

e.     To instil a relationship of trust between the leadership, end users and the information technology system.

                     ii.    End-User concerns would be dealt with appropriately by their respective leaders to ensure the following:

a.     Establish information integrity.

b.    Reduce stock adjustments.

c.     Increase employee compliance with AX process disciplines.

d.    Improve the users’ experience of the AX system.

e.     To support Leaders to make the End-Users feel acknowledged and valued by them.

f.     To instil End-User Accountability.

Key Activities that supported Leaders and End Users with the Change Management Process:

a)     Training:

Key leaders were given a leadership competence platform to provide a common frame of reference for all parties and to inspire them to willingly get involved in the facilitation of the change that was required to implement the system effectively.

b)    The following Leadership Training  took place:

                              i.    Managing Change within the Care and Growth leadership framework.

                             ii.    Course Material: Succeeding as Leaders during time of change. (The Care and Grow Model, Schuitema and Associates)

c)     The following End-user Training took place:

                      i.    Responding to Change (life)

d)    Change was actively managed by leaders in their respective teams/areas as follows:

                      i.    Each Process Leader ran a series of workshops involving their end-users. They facilitated the inputs of the end-users to identify that they experience as well as solutions to the same.

                     ii.    Each Process Leader drew up a Change Management Project Plan for their specific area.

                    iii.    The Project Plan was used at the team workshops to track the progress that was made by the specific team as well as to plan new actions that need to be taken.

                    iv.    The process leaders got in touch with how the end-users experience the system, as well as got to know their team members better.

                     v.    The regular contact sessions during the formal follow-up sessions as well as those that took place in between them facilitated deeper rapport and the building of relationships while the ERP system was being embedded.

                    vi.    The leaders and the process were supported by  two coaches (1 external – Schuitema and Associates, 1 internal – People and Organisational Development Manager). Feedback and guidance was given during and after each follow-up workshop.

                   vii.    The problems that were  experienced were  categorised into one of the following possible root causes, that enabled the leader to decide on appropriate action:

                              i.    Means:

(i)     The barriers in terms of tools, system etc needed to be removed.

                            ii.    Ability :

(i)     Training, coaching or mentoring that may be required.

                           iii.    Accountability:

(i)     In this category all the above was taken care of, and appropriate action needed to be taken against the person who is not performing to standard.

e)     Conversations were structured to assist movement from gripe to goal individually and collectively in workshops. This was part of the theme of holding people accountable for their actions by instilling an understanding of that they are in control of what is happening on the floor and supporting them to take action.

f)      Process leaders demonstrated their leadership (Care and Growth) in a practical and real way, and got to practice the skills that they learned during the training sessions.

g)     A Community of Practice session was held to:

i)     Formally close the project

ii)    Set a foundation for ongoing (in-house) business review of the project and the leadership issues.

iii)     This platform enables continuity of learning culture and beds down the leadership ethos.

 Project Evaluation

The total possible rating per graph category is 9 (9 respondents to the questionnaires)

Notes:

The score go from +10 to -10…

Any minus score is NEGATIVE – needs improvement/urgent attention

0-5 score means OKAY… but some people are unsure

+5 to +7.5 means good/solid

+7.5 to +10 Great

All scores would have been adjusted by +1 if it had not been for a respondent who only joined the process towards the end and most of her responses were “Don’t Know”

One other respondent also marked many “Don’t Knows”

  •       The scoring indicates that in most areas, process leaders are positive and believe significant improvements have manifested.

The following represent the ongoing concerns:

                      i.    Accurate Financial reporting

                     ii.    Cost control

The issues that represent potential problems (in other words, these have not yet been cemented)

                      i.    Proactive planning

                     ii.    Ease of Stock Take

                    iii.    Performance measurements

                    iv.    Downtime reduced

i.    The system has successfully been implemented.

a.     The notable indicator of the extent to which the system – user interface was working is to be found in the Error Log

                  i.    This at the commencement of this project was in excess of 20 000 line item.

                 ii.    Two weeks before conclusion of this project, it had reduced to 300, (4 of which came from the biggest user, Production).

b.    The ERP system was introduced on-time and within-budget, driven by leaders and teams who collaboratively derived solutions to problems – successfully forging an inclusive resolution.

 Overall Exceptions:

i.    It is evident from the analysis, that leaders still hold reservation about:

a.     SYSTEM: stock adjustments

                  i.    Which indicates that this is an important indicator of ongoing system success and should be incorporated into formal performance scorecards

b.    LEADERSHIP: leaders’ providing real time feedback

                  i.    This indicates, that though they are listening, end-users may still feel unsure while they are waiting for response or update from their leaders.

Learning and Insights

i.    All leaders appreciated the direct and immediate effect they have, as leaders, on their teams.

ii.    An acceptance of the leaders’ role and responsibility in the issues (barriers to performance) surfaced.

iii.    All issues that hampered the successful implementation of the AX system could be attributed to the variables of empowerment:

a.     I.e. All issues were categorised as being Means, Ability or Accountability issues.

b.    This confirmed that the role leader’s play in ‘unblocking’ the pathways to empowerment of the team is real.

iv.    Leaders realised that paying attention to their people and really listening (with interest and concern) to them – had an exponential effect of the team’s readiness to engage.

v.    The leader sets the limit to the team’s overall capability and willingness.

vi.    Being proactive is crucial – and sets the tone for the leader and team to embrace a more directive role in change:

a.     Moving from victims to masters.

b.    All leaders and teams started to take responsibility for their experiences with the system and became more involved in finding solutions.

c.     This involved a change in attention from what to Get to what to Give.

 Community of Practice formulated the following:

WAY FORWARD FOR Pep Clothing – “EMBRACING CHANGE”

On 29 October 2009 Pep Clothing Leadership concluded their first Leadership Community of Practice workshop. The following are the reflections that they shared with the rest of the COP.

a)         What was the Difference that made the Difference? Verbatim

      i.    I believed that to apply the change, I had to change within myself: what had to change in me: how I thought about change – towards work and personal.  I needed to see myself and my demons. My attitude to change had to change.

     ii.    We were all committed to ONE VISION.

    iii.    We did nothing technical – in order for this to work, no one went to intensive training… it was the approach we had to our clerks and how we nurtured them.  This was the crucial element.

    iv.    To move away from what leaders think others know to what they really know.  We think or wish people can or will do… without first establish it first hand.  Took presumption and assumption out of it. Speaks to intent of leader. 

     v.    To see production moving and succeeding – the exemplars of change (victim to master shift happened with production managers first) this demonstrated well and rolled down to team.  The managers were not just victims.

    vi.    Ownership and accountability – most of change happened in production, from within the individuals (especially the managers)

   vii.    Change happened in me first and the focus was on people from results… now realising that people are important and people realised this.

  viii.    Foundation was provided to all parties in same way (from getters to givers; gripe to goal) this enabled the change.  What happened here (in training session) and the support from process leaders.  The reflection of self – I moved from getter to giver; from hearing to listening.  We grew in this process.

    ix.    Move from unconscious to conscious mode.  Becoming aware of self and the effect on our people was great.

     x.    Focused on people first, and then aligned the people to the process.  Leaders created Purpose and belief: by focusing on people they gave them belief and gave them purpose and this unleashed energy.

    xi.    Alignment that took place throughout business.

   xii.    Mini-reflections enabled growth and understanding.  This enables learning.

  xiii.    Overall: all comments indicate that the shift in leaders’ intent was the difference that made the difference!

 xiv.    Xiii           Adopting the “Victims to Masters” approach (self and team).

  xv.    Ix Always Checking-in with team (regular contact, update, check-ins)

 xvi.    Understanding the Care model.

xvii.    Helping to shift people from seeing only Current reality towards seeing the Future they desired.

xviii.    The employees have a lot of patience, endurance to deal with problems.  Once assisted, recognized, they flourish with ideas and problem solving abilities

 xix.    All team members have evolved into highly capable individuals on AX - we have found some shining stars.

  xx.    My view is different I am more firm, higher expectations with compassion and understanding but less tolerance!

 xxi.    Understand GIVING and HELPING

xxii.    Clear and Specific communication & instructions

xxiii.    Handover of Authority -> Empowerment: Implement monthly reports; budget controls; 1-2-1’s; attend meetings etc. department heads responsible

xxiv.    Reporting function changed

xxv.    Delegation, I’m watching the game as the coach, not team player

xxvi.    We eliminated the ‘blame’ approach

b)  What should we continue to do?

Standardise the following practises:

i.    Workshops on departmental issues.

ii.    Find the solutions.

iii.    Documentation of internal processes.

iv.    Gripe to Goal process.

v.    Support and hold people accountable.

c) The Way Forward

i.    Build departmental rapport (personal interaction, get to know your people).

ii.    Empower people through training and cross training (look at development needs).

iii.    Have strategic feedback sessions with the different departments; ensuring that people do not feel intimidated. The more complex the terminology or methodology the more intimidated users feel, leaders must find a way of making it accessible.

iv.    Show genuine support and appreciation.

v.    Give everyone a chance to coordinate feedback sessions or KPI meetings.

vi.    Seize the moment: be proactive, not reactive.

vii.    Apply genuine praise.

viii.    Drive improvement through visual progress reporting.

ix.    Develop a KPI format to keep team focused.

x.    Align your dept KPI with rest of business.

xi.    Look at small improvement / continuously.

xii.    Check in – team morale.

d) Improvement Focus

i.    Look at MY INTENT to grow my people

ii.    Improve my knowledge of coaching

iii.    Be aware of self and your effect on team.

iv.    I am here to serve.

v.    Create a safe and healthy work environment.

vi.    People must work confidently because they want-to, not have-to.

vii.    Leadership development should include:

a.     Leadership enhancement (means, ability, accountability framework); measurable; training on succession planning

Conclusion

The effectiveness of this change management process over a four month period can be ascribed to:

• The participants being inspired by higher order aspiration rather than the mere conclusion of a computerised system.
• Iterative approach with frequent intervals of experimenting, reflection and shared learning and planning the next steps towards concluding the implementation.
• The leaders and end-users started to recognise the meaning in what they were doing over and above the mere acquisition of better discipline in maintaining information.
• The AX Bedding Down process became an opportunity for personal growth, for team members to connect around a purpose and for people to exercise their personal growth of intent. “We moved from getters to givers”

As people we are meaning making beings and as leaders we need to assist people to deliberately make this meaning to optimise their personal growth and at the same time the business imperative engaged with.

Many thanks to all the process leaders who dedicated their energy, time in such an inspired manner to this process. Special mention to, Mark Hobson, Ronel Ellis, Bobby van der Scholtz, Mercia Patience, Arthur Meyer, Johan Southey, Marthie Kemp van der Werf and all the End-Users and specialists involved. Special thanks to Amanda Cronje who both designed and managed the overall change management process.