Imperative Features of a Master Plan for Change

We’ve talked for a long time about the need for developing master plans, and now there are name changes to those once hefty documents. Instead of a master plan, there is talk of putting together team strategy plans that are more time-defined with a short range focus. It would therefore be good to ask your team several questions as you work together to put together your goals and plans for this year and beyond.

As we look at Acts 15, we see where Paul and Barnabas had to adopt radically different change models, and the succeeding chapters expound on those action items at least for Paul. Actually there are many important things to consider when planning a change process, but those factors are best understood within the framework of their chronological context. French & Bell (1999) suggest that organizational change has three basic stages: diagnosis, action, and program management. Nadler, Shaw, & Walton (1995) insert transitional elements into these stages to form five chronological phases: diagnosis, clarifying and coalition building, action, consolidation and refinement, and sustaining. Regardless of how the stages are categorized, each phase must be carefully planned in advance, and some key components must be considered if that master plan is to succeed. Each phase creates its own series of questions for planning, and these questions provide an excellent checklist for managing those plans.
Q1: What kinds of questions has your team created to manage your change initiatives this year?

In the diagnosis phase, three areas must be addressed: leadership, identity, and architecture. The diagnostic question to ask about top management is if the level of commitment and competence of the senior leadership team matches what is required to change. Diagnosis of corporate identity is done by a realistic review of what is currently good and what would be better about the company. Paul implemented this diagnosis when he refused to take John Mark along on a second term (Acts 15:38). For IMB this is being addressed on the local level through setting MAP goals this year whereby an individual team member’s goals are nested in the overarching team goals. The locale and structure of the organization must also be assessed for its strengths, weaknesses and flexibility throughout the change process.
Q2: How do your individual goals “nest” in your team’s goals?

In the clarifying and coalition-building phase, it is vital to refine a clear vision for the desired future. A strategic team of change advocates must be built during this phase. It is also at this time that the changes and interventions must be carefully spelled out and sequenced. By implication, Paul's commendation from the Antioch church allowed him to choose a new team members, Silas, for this very purpose (Acts 15:40).
Q3: Has your team set aside time to clarify the vision for 2010 and 2011?

It is during the action phase that politics runs high. This phase begins with the launching of major changes and is completed when the new architecture is implemented and when the new organization emerges. The most important factors to consider when planning the action phase is maintaining optimism and properly handling resistance. Paul's major team changes began in Acts 15 in Antioch and culminated in the additions of Timothy in Lystra (Acts 16:1-3) and Dr. Luke (Acts 16:10).
Q4: How ready and willing are you to initiate new changes for your team?

Just as diagnosis was important as the beginning, it must again be implemented during the consolidation and refinement phase. The major objective at this time is to determine who really fits within the new organization and providing synergy to the new teams of key supporting people. This can be handled through coaching, listening, and modeling. Sometimes Paul picked key chronos moments for the inclusion or exclusion of certain team players (Acts 15:38; 2 Tim 4:11).
Q5: Are there any players on your team that are not being utilized to their potential?

Sustaining requires reflection and evaluation. It can also be a time of encouragement and refreshment to those who came through the change process. Each of these phases can and should be planned. However, Nadler et al (1995) warns against rigidity of planning when unforeseen shifts in the master plan might afford opportunities for a better way. Planners must be thorough, courageous, flexible and determined. In other words, be careful to plan some wiggle room in your plans!

Two books I highly recommend:
Nadler, D.A., Shaw, R.B., & Walton, A.E. (1995). Discontinuous change: Leading organizational transformation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
French, W.L., & Bell, C.H., Jr. (1999). Organizational development: Behavioral science interventions for organization improvement. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.