Leading change presentation. hay
- 1. KOTTER & MORE Leading Change
- 2. Kotter Every leader can profit from Kotter's thinking on a practical eight stage process that should help achieve successful change. He argues that organizations can't get where they need to be through incremental change (20 th Century processes). In the twenty-first century change will be constant, increasingly frequent, and required for survival.
- 3. Kotter Employee will need to know more about both leadership and management than his or her counterpart. This learning will be continuous and necessary. Kotter suggests that the mental habits needed to support this lifelong learning are: (1) risk taking, (2) humble self-reflection, (3) solicitation of ideas and opinions of others, (4) careful listening, and (5) openness to new ideas.
- 4. Kotters steps His steps include: (1) establishing a sense of urgency, (2) creating a guiding coalition, (3) developing a vision and strategy, (4) communicating the change vision, (5) empowering employees for broad-based action, (6) generating short-term wins, (7) consolidating gains and producing more change, and (8) anchoring new approaches in the culture. These steps can be adapted to organizations of all sizes.
- 5. Diffusion of Innovation Select people (adopters) you work with Use power of networks Focus on adopter-appropriate innovation (trailabililty, compatibility, relative advantage, observability, complexity, adaptation) Everett Rogers Diffusion of Innovation, 5 th Edition
- 6. People are key
- 7. People - Perceptions Count The receiver's perceptions of the attributes of an innovation, not the attributes as classified by experts or changes agents, affect its rate of adoption.
- 8. Adopter Categorization Everett Rogers Diffusion of Innovation, 5 th Edition
- 9. Innovators Venturesome Friendships among innovators Substantial financial resources Understand and apply complex technical knowledge Ability to deal with high degree of uncertainty
- 10. Early Adopters Respected Integrated part of local social system Greatest degree of opinion leadership
- 11. Early Majority Deliberate Adopt new ideas just before the average member of a system Interact frequently with their peers Most numerous adopter category (one-third of the system) Follow with deliberate willingness in adopting innovations, but seldom lead.
- 12. Late Majority Skeptical Adoption may be both an economic necessity and the result of increasing network pressures from peers Innovations are approached with a skeptical and cautious air Pressure of peers is necessary to motivate adoption Scarce resources uncertainty must be removed
- 13. Laggards Traditional Last to adopt Point of reference is the past Decisions are made in terms of what has been done previously Suspicious of innovation and change agents Limited resources
- 14. Adopter Categorization Everett Rogers Diffusion of Innovation, 5 th Edition
- 17. Isolated Researchers Weak Ties Biology Cluster Math/Physics Chemistry CS/EE Engineering Biotechnolgoy Earth Sciences Biology Infectious Diseases Medical Brain Health Professionals Social Sciences Humanities
- 18. Isolated Well Funded Researchers Less Funded Connected Researchers Well Funded Isolated Cluster Mike Kirby Math/Physics Chemistry CS/EE Engineering Biotechnolgoy Earth Sciences Biology Infectious Diseases Medical Brain Health Professionals Social Sciences Humanities
- 19. Relative advantage The relative advantage of an innovation, as perceived by members, is positively related to its rate of adoption $$$ Status Incentives Mandates
- 20. Compatibility As perceived by members of a social system, is positively related to its rate of adoption Combatable with old ideas Innovation negativism previous negative experiences make for perception of incompatibility Naming
- 21. Complexity As perceived by members of a social system, is negatively related to its rate of adoption
- 22. Trialability As perceived by members of a social system, is positively related to its rate of adoption.
- 23. Observability As perceived by members of a social system, is positively related to its rate of adoption
Editor's Notes
- #18: Rubber banding effect, etc. Lots of individuals that are not connected at all Clusters get pulled to edges if connected to isolators Several distinct clusters connected through weak ties Central cluster (Biology? Explain) is being pulled to the center by multiple weak ties
- #19: Very large funding unconnected folks Small funding connections Begs question of strategies to: Big to Big? Little to Big? Little to Little?