Viral Change is not Tsunami change

Have you been through significant structural change recently? Or implemented new IT systems perhaps? Have you undergone a number of clever strategic initiatives yet something is still stuck?  People aren’t quite doing what they need to?  The culture isn’t where you would like it to be?  Many of the best organisations we work with suffer from a blame culture where fear of failure and silo mentality is rife.  Others see a lack of ownership and an attitude of ‘it’s not my responsibility’.  And many are frustrated with the wasted time in meetings and not being productive and of course, the time it takes to make effective decisions and get things done.

If you are 80 per cent of where you should be – is that good enough? Of course not. That extra 20 per cent (like Pareto said) is difference between ‘also ran’ and blue oceans. Yet traditional management or change management programmes won’t get you there. But Viral Change TM will.

Viral Change is Not a Change Management Programme

Despite having ‘change’ in its title, Viral Change is not a ‘change management programme’. You may be familiar with most organisational change programmes: mechanistic, big, driven from the top, expensive, a big set of complex actions with lots of ‘push’ corporate style internal communications. Well guess what? It doesn’t work.  

‘It’s the old problem of rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic! Superficially, one can create the impression of making a lot of changes; but at the base level, nothing of significance may have really changed.’       Morgan, 1993

Remember what Gandhi said: “We need to become the change we want to see in the world.”  It is people who change other people: not processes, not systems, certainly not Village Hall corporate comms meetings! As a spokesperson at Pfizer told Dr Leandro Herrero, pioneer of Viral Change, “Change only happens when people see those around them changing” .

Creating Tipping Points

Viral Change is butterfly change (my words) – in that, like the butterfly effect, small changes at individual level end up having a far-reaching, ripple effect on the larger system. In Viral Change a small set of behaviours is spread, imitated, endorsed by a small network of people and this spreads new ways quickly through influential peer to peer .  The overall effect is sustainable changes created mainly by the internal ‘infection’ of success, and the achievement of tipping points.

Instead of focusing on processes and what is visible and manageable (the traditional linear, left brain approach), Viral Change recognises that the most important ways that change needs to occur cannot be controlled.  This is because an organisation is not a machine, it is a collection of individual human beings: a living system.  And living systems cannot be controlled like machines, not for long-term well being anyway, but rather have to be disturbed with impulses that will cause the system to react and make choices about what to do.

Living Systems Need Disruptions to Initiate Choice

Ever come across the concept of ‘self organising systems’?  Rather than change being driven from the top down, individuals and their individual actions create big change in the system.  This way the system is self organising.  Watch how these starlings roost – it looks like chaos but small behaviours lead to massive system change:

Small impulses in these massive flocks of birds, are interpreted and acted upon by the system and, out of what looks like chaos, a single impluse (ie ‘roost’) initiates massive change that tips the whole system into roost. Viral Change approach directs meaningful impulses into the system to influence large and sustainable changes.  We’ll talk more about those impulses in our next post.

Please comment and contribute to this discussion by posting your own thoughts and comments!

Other posts you might enjoy:

• How to implement Viral Change TM
• Interview with Dr Leandro Herrero about Viral Change TM
• Cultural Change is behavioural change

Communication comes in two flavours: Communication and communication. Communication with big ‘C’ refers to the formal, planned communication programmes; the ‘big splash’, so to speak. By communication (small ‘c’) I am referring to the informal means of communicating with people: word of mouth, role models, mentoring, on the job training, one to one meetings etc. In organisations, we need both types of communication for communication to be powerful and most effective.

An interesting article in the New Scientist magazine, considers the transmission of communication through informal networks. Whilst this article puts an interesting slant on these ‘transmissions’ considering anything from moods (happiness, depression) to habit patterns and illnesses, what is interesting is the subconscious and rapid way that our peers influence our behaviour.

Recent research shows that our moods are far more strongly influenced by those around us than we tend to think. Not only that, we are also beholden to the moods of friends of friends, and of friends of friends of friends – people three degrees of separation away from us who we have never met, but whose disposition can pass through our social network like a virus. The fact that, seemingly, friends and peer groups are more influential than relatives or partners and spouses is even more pertinent to the transmission of communication at work. And gender is important, so the research claims: women observe and are influenced far more by other women and vice versa for men.

So what does this mean for organisational communication? There are two sides to this: the first that we need to recognise how powerful this transmission of ‘influence’ is in the organisation’s informal communication system. If employees are influenced more by those around them – in terms of attitudes, thoughts and behaviour – we need to know how to use this for positive influence in communication and change programmes. We also need to understand that this social influence can both hinder and help change communication programmes. And of course, what applies inside the organisation through informal social networks, applies even more powerfully outside the organisation. Think of the informal influence, negative or positive, that your salesmen, engineers and customer service staff have on your customers every day.

This influence is spread through a process of unconscious imitation – like the reflex action of our nervous system, this imitation by passes any conscious process and is performed highly efficiently by our brain and nervous system without any conscious interference or even awareness. Remember how infectious a smile is? I often walk around with a smile on my face, and I notice other people – complete strangers – smiling at me for no reason at all! I think they are nutters until i realise that they are simply and unconsciously copying me. This process of unconscious imitation – copying of behaviour – that we humans are so beautifully ‘wired up’ to do – facilitates in the ‘modeler’ (the person doing the copying) the experience of the emotion of the model. By copying that person’s smile with my body (facial expression, posture) i experience a ‘pale reflection’ of my model’s emotions. So by copying behaviours, I start to experience the attitudes, emotions and even thoughts of the person I am copying.

And what of the implication for organisational communications? By tapping into the ‘collective intelligence’ of social networks in the organisation we can ‘engineer’ the adoption and spread of new behaviour and cultural change. Viral Change (TM) offers a process for this, but it does require careful planning and facilitation (and an understanding of human behaviour) behind the scenes. Coupled with a strong ‘Communication’ programme, this can be a very powerful way to effect change and communication in organisations.

And what about applying this yourself? Whilst we might not be in complete conscious control of the process of social modelling, our brains take the shortcuts before we even know it; we can choose who we have around us who are likely to influence us. In 2009, do you want to be more happy or more depressed? More successful or more lazy? Whichever you prefer, think carefully about who you have around you – they might be more influential than you think!

Talk to us at Changeworks to find out how we use traditional and new media as well as behavioural change techniques to turn around performance and communication in organisations: info@changeworkscom.co.uk.

We are taught about (and I lecture on) the cultural web and this model certainly has relevance when we talk of organisational culture but one thing is missing.  What is the evidence of culture? What is the real tangible measure of culture? It has to be behaviour. 

Behaviour is the outcome from the inputs of those elements of the cultural web, such as symbols, structures, rituals, values.  And when we talk about cultural change we are really meaning behavioural change anyway.

I went to the Chartered Institute of Marketing’s Annual Conference in Birmingham on 11th November and was inspired by some of the speakers there.  Evan Davis was fantastic as the Chair of the event. And several of the key speakers alluded to using employees as champions of cultural and strategic change. John Smythe, founder of Engage for Change, talked about sharing power and adopting a ‘co-creation’ approach to engagement where employees are involved in decision making and building the strategy (the ‘how are we going to get there’ element). I loved what John had to say because it takes the approach of employees as champions of change, perhaps seeing employees as directors of strategic and cultural change from the ground floor.

John listed five routes to engaging for change:

1. Engage the leaders (them as role models)
2. Interventions
3. Transforming communication
4. Build capability
5. Identify measures and drivers

Rather like in the hero’s journey (from Joseph Campbell’s amazing book ‘The Hero with a Thousand Faces’), they need a strong ’call to adventure’ to get them bought in to this process. I can see the hero’s journey applying to organisational change where the hero’s journey starts in the ordinary corporate world, and the employee receives a call (a challenge) to enter an unusual world of strange events.

Glenn Manoff from O2 told us the about the O2 story – a massive employee engagement exercise culminating in the opening of the O2 arena.  And this gave me some ideas for how to get this call to adventure across.  Using an almost trance-like process (akin to Anthony robbins!), a manager cleverly used ‘appreciate inquiry’ as a tool to help people visualise, imagine and connect to a future that is different and more successful than the present.  This is exactly like the ‘Imagine If’ sessions in Viral change.  It helps people step out of their current frame and put on a new, exciting frame that opens them up to possibility. From here we can use facilitated sessions to elicit ideas and connect to a new reality.

“If you can imagine it,You can achieve it. If you can dream it,You can become it.”
William A. Ward

“Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand.”  Einstein

Internal segmentation of employees is sometimes needed to help target different audiences by attitudes, values and potential behaviour around change. It can be useful in a collaborative change programme. We need to consider the outcome and use this as the basis for the segmentation, otherwise it is meaningless. But as part of this process, which doesn’t have to be onerous, we can ask employees where they can add value and what the likely blocks to success will be.  And this is just the start of the co-creation process.

Comment on this article or email me (sue@changeworkscom.co.uk) with your thoughts.  Changeworks Communications helps organisations achieve behavioural and cultural change.

I am in the middle of a Viral Change project for a large organisation and, as part of this process, I am talking to employees. I prefer to call these ‘thinking workshops’ rather than focus groups, because I think that the latter term has become cliched. And without encouragement, people perhaps may not think deeply enough about what we ask them.

On that point, I would highly recommend a book that I am reading: ‘Marketing Metaphoria’ by Gerald and Lindsay Zaltman uncovers the deeper metaphors that work behind our deeper thinking.  Zaltman has developed an innovative process for depth interviews and focus groups to elicit people’s unconscious layers of thinking.  You can watch a video of Zaltman talking about this process, with a live example at HBR’s site.  There is also a ‘mock’ written case study to illustrate Zaltman’s point about the risks of failing to think deeply about what consumers are saying.

Whether we are planning internal or external communication, marketing principles apply. However, most marketing practice is based on outdated or incomplete knowledge of how the mind works.  By studying disciplines such as cognitive and behavioural science we can augment and enhance our marketing tools significantly and far apace of our competitors.  But more importantly we can add significant value to our clients in our change communication with them.

I love Zaltman’s book because it is about understanding the deeper structure and meaning behind the words that customers use, and using this to produce deeper level and higher quality managerial thinking. As a coach, I am fully aware of the importance and significance of metaphor in the change process.  For me this book gives me lots of ideas as to take this approach overtly into focus groups and depth interviews as part of a research process for internal change.

Whilst the book relates the concepts to brands and brand development, but there is plenty of application in developing internal communication programmes and certainly in change management.

But remember, deep thinking is hard work: have you got the courage to face the deep?

If strategy is to be successfully executed, and bring effective turnaround in business performance, we need to communicate what it is that we want employees to do.  In other words how to behave.  This is obvious. But organisations often find this hard to implement in practical ways. Perhaps this is because communication is, by definition, open to interpretation.  Encoding and decoding, rather like the raft of confusing codex in any multimedia environment, is a fluid process and open to errors of configuration.

behavioural influencers

The Viral Change approach to organisational change is refreshing in its ‘bottom up’ approach: what will strategic excellence look like for us as an organisation and what will people be doing?  What are the 5 or 6 or so, critical behaviours that are going to achieve this for us? Sounds easy perhaps. But this needs careful attention and consideration (worthy of separate post).

Then as part of this ‘viral’ spread of change, we need to find those people who are already demonstrating this behaviour, for this is ‘excellence’ based on our future strategic needs.  Strategy is, after all, about where we want to be, and behaviour is about how we are going to get there.

So, given that we want to spread a certain set of behaviours, those that are deemed as excellent or noteworthy – those worth copying – modelling is one of the fundamental ways of ‘communicating’ that behaviour. Of course, I am talking from an NLP modelling perspective here and whilst this might present a rather lengthy process in its full programme, there are certainly useful learnings in change to be drawn from the formal modelling process.

The two elements to consider in modelling skills and behaviour are the observable, externally presented behaviour and also the internal mechanisms and strategies that individuals have developed (often subconsciously), or ‘what makes people tick’. 

The individual’s external behaviour is influenced by the higher logical levels of learning and change, such as capabilities and beliefs/values (see earlier posts on this topic), so it is to these that we must look for the deeper strategies for change.  The first step in the modelling process is usually implicit modelling; through that state of ‘not knowing’ an observer models the externally presented behaviour of the subject to gain insight (through the feeling mind) into state, thought processes, beliefs and attitudes. 

Then explicit modelling – the formal, interview type structure – is used to build on this model. Viral Change is focused on influencing external behaviour; external behaviour is observable and we can describe it accurately through language. However, if a successful behavioural change agent’s most important capabilities are internal (ie. thinking and feeling processes) – and often unknown to them – it is probably important to spend some attention in this area too.

Most people today accept that their ability to behave effectively is influenced by their feelings, way of thinking, beliefs, values and sense of identity. It therefore becomes crucial to identify thinking strategies and other ‘intangibles’ that are so important in ensuring these ‘change agents’ have the resources to maintain the momentum that the struggling organisation needs.  The problem is that often people are not conscious of what is going on for them – they are ‘unconsciously competent’ at the behaviour and have never picked apart what it is they do.

Here, a process of ‘macro modelling’ can be useful to help the individual understand what it is they do, and therefore facilitate transference of this behaviour overtly to others (through viral and other communication channels) but also to help the individual being modelled to demonstrate those strengths more of the time, especially when under duress or when facing difficulties.

For example if a required behaviour is ‘keeping customer promises’, macro modelling is undertaken in the following way:

1. Locate a time and space representing the context in which the person manifests ‘delivering on

macro modelling

promises’.   Find the beliefs and values which guide him in this context.

2. Locate another space for a context in which the person is not able to manifest ‘delivering on promises’.  Find the beliefs and values which are different in this context.

3. Establish a new location for a third position in which the person can view both the effective and the ineffective contexts.  From this perspective evaluate the similarities and differences between 1st and 2nd contexts with respect to beliefs, values and anticipated consequences.

4. Have the person return to each of these positions and from each one, move to action, or see the next steps he or she would take, as well as consequences related to those actions or steps.  This helps them to consider the ‘larger system’ in which they demonstrate this behaviour.

5. Add a 4th perspective, from which to consider all three.  From here, evaluate the presuppositions, assumptions, skills and capabilities operating in the evaluations that were made in the 3rd position space.  Are they appropriate? How did you select what constituted ‘delivering on promises’? What did you presuppose about values and beliefs in those contexts?  etc

This process helps to build up the model of how that person ‘does’ this behaviour both in terms of actual behaviour as well as mental processes.  And the simpler this model is, the more effective it will be in application.  The understanding gained (through this and other tools), can of course, be used to develop a profile by which to ’recruit’ similar behavioural change champions for the programme. 

Whilst a formal modelling process is not required for a Viral Change programme, an understanding of the tools and benefits of modelling is very helpful in ensuring the programme’s success.  Changeworks Communications undertakes regular modelling and viral change programmes for large and medium sized organisations.  Contact Sue (sue@changeworkscom.co.uk) for more information.