Page 266 - The Handbook for Quality Management a Complete Guide to Operational Excellence
P. 266

252   C o n t i n u o u s   I m p r o v e m e n t                e f f e c t i v e   C h a n g e   M a n a g e m e n t    253


                                These steps for achieving buy-in may be used several times for different
                                issues within a given project, and can even be used informally within a
                                team meeting.
                                   There are five levels that may be used to rate the buy-in (or lack of
                                buy-in)  from  stakeholder  or  stakeholder  groups  (Forum  Corporation,
                                1996):
                                    •  Hostility
                                    •  Dissent
                                    •  Acceptance
                                    •  Support
                                    •  Buy-in

                                   The lowest level, hostility, is easy to recognize. Dissent may go unno-
                                ticed until stakeholders are questioned about the change initiative, such
                                as through discussion or survey. Acceptance is the lowest level of buy-in
                                that should be considered for proceeding with the change initiative, but is
                                insufficient. Support must be achieved from a majority of the critical stake-
                                holder  groups.  True  Buy-in  is  the  desired  level,  when  stakeholders  are
                                enthusiastic in their commitment for change.
                                   There are a number of issues that serve to reduce stakeholder buy-in
                                (Forum Corporation, 1996).

                                    •  Unclear goals. Goals need to be clearly communicated throughout
                                      the stakeholder groups.
                                    •  No personal benefit. Goals should be stated in terms that provide a
                                      clear link to personal benefits for stakeholders, such as decreased
                                      hassles or improved working conditions.
                                    •  Predetermined solutions. When teams are given the solution without
                                      chance for analysis of alternatives, they will likely be skeptical of
                                      the result.
                                    •  Lack of communication. Analyses and results should be communi-
                                      cated through out the stakeholder groups.
                                    •  Too many priorities. Teams need to be focused on achievable results.
                                    •  Short-term  focus.  Goals  should  provide  clear  benefits  over  short
                                      and longer terms.
                                    •  No accountability. Clearly defined project sponsors, stakeholders,
                                      and team members provide accountability.
                                    •  Disagreement  on  who  the  customer  is.  Clearly  defined  stakeholder
                                      groups are needed for project success.
                                    •  Low probability of implementation. Formal project sponsorship and
                                      approvals provide a clear implementation channel.








          12_Pyzdek_Ch12_p241-264.indd   253                                                            11/9/12   5:13 PM
   261   262   263   264   265   266   267   268   269   270   271