Organizational Development: A Manual for Managers and ... - FPDL

However, usually this does not help - because the actual reasons for substandard performance are
not small salaries. The salary scale is often just another example of a pseudo-problem. As we see
now, understanding a problem may change during the course of a force field analysis. And this is
good, because things under consideration at this stage are much more specific, practical, and
doable. Often, the initial understanding of a problem is altered, and the definition of the root
controllable factors can be corrected.
Another technique that is worth using (actually, as a part of force field analysis) is called
stakeholders’ analysis. Human factors are crucial for most projects. Listing those who will support
the implementation of a given trajectory, because it is favourable for them for one or another
reason, and those who will create trouble because the path of action or its anticipated results are
not good for them, is useful for planning corresponding communications that will increase support
and reduce resistance. It is very important to note that real supporters may not be your friends, or
those who are smart, or kind, etc. – and those who will act against are not necessarily stupid or illmannered
people.
Stakeholders, as any other factors, may be more or less significant for any given trajectory, and
more or less flexible in the hands of a manager. Stakeholders’ analysis allows making a rational
choice - and not wasting too much time trying to convince those who are already supporters how
good the idea is, or repeating non-relevant arguments to opponents who are being asked to
compromise or sacrifice. However, the most important stakeholders are those who are influential,
but have no any special interest in the project; it is easy to influence them. Such stakeholders may
be present at a point of bifurcation. When he or she says ‘yes’ – this ‘yes’ weight a lot. If he or she
says ‘no’ - just because opponents were first to address him or her – the project may be ruined.
All relevant factors are changing in time, in relation to or without relation to the implementation
process. The balance and sum vector will be different at each new moment. When the actual
landscape for development looks like mountains – it is considerably easy to foresee and plan all
necessary actions going forward. But the landscape may look like a stormy sea – then longer-term
planning may not make sense – then only trial and error heuristics remain.
In many cases it is reasonable to manage implementation as a project. As defined by ISO9000 a
project is a ‘unique process, consisting of a set of coordinated and controlled activities with start
and finish dates, undertaken to achieve an objective conforming to specific requirements, including
the constraints of time, cost and resources’. An ‘action plan’ is often seen as something on paper,
a project is normally associated with certain organizational arrangements (a project team,
authority, resources, etc.), which is often well justified.
89