The OCM capabilities support model for managing change in the United States industry

Someone once said that a perpetual change is the most stable process out there. In the industry, a change is introduced as a means of implementing an innovation. Companies constantly and routinely make changes to organizational structure (employees, their roles and responsibilities), systems (equipment), and processes/procedures/policies/operating models. To achieve its goals, a change must be managed. In the United States, managing change is a subject of a separate discipline called Organizational Change Management. This discipline studies and manages the ways to influence human behavior and steer it in the desired direction to ensure an innovation is adopted. In the United States industry, Organizational Change Management is fairly mature. Many companies either employ their own Organizational Change Management professionals or hire consultants in that area to support company initiatives. Lately, however, the United States industry is going through a transition and is experiencing its own challenges. One of these challenges is a conflict between a growing demand for OCM support and a conservative approach to funding Organizational Change Management activities. The current support models in that field seem to be struggling with providing a solution to this challenge. The proposed OCM Capabilities Support Model allows for efficiently addressing this challenge.

What is Organizational Change Management?

In order to learn about the proposed model for managing change we must first understand what Organizational Change Management is. Organizational Change Management (OCM) is most commonly defined as a coordinated practice or structured approach to ensure the effective transition of individuals, teams and organizations from the current state to a desired future state. It ensures a solution that is applied to support the new state is embraced, adopted, and used proficiently. In the US industry, Organizational Change Management is a separate discipline. In some countries, a responsibility for successful adoption of a change resides with Project Management. In the United States, Project Management only ensures the solution is designed, developed and delivered successfully. Unlike Project Management, Organizational Change Management focuses on ensuring adoption of a solution and overcoming employee resistance.

PROSCI, world’s leading organization that develops change management methodologies and tools defines Organizational Change Management as a “discipline that guides how we prepare, equip and support individuals to successfully adopt change in order to drive organizational success and outcomes” [1].

In other words, Organizational Change Management is a discipline that allows for steering employee behavior in the desired direction that ensures the company in general reaches its goals.

The notion of Organizational Change Management as a separate discipline independent from Organizational Psychology, Industrial Psychology, and Organizational Development has evolved gradually. Starting back in the sixties of the XX century, the American industry has started collecting data on how people adapt to new ideas and technologies. The first formal model describing employee reaction to change has been published after 20 years of research, in 1982. It took the industry another 10 years to establish that there is a strong direct relationship between a successful implementation of a change, employee productivity, and the use of formal methods of managing change. The industry took the hint. In the early 2000, the industry has formalized the role and responsibilities of an Organizational Change Manager. Shortly thereafter, colleges started offering a formal training in this area. Today, many companies have a formal Organizational Change Management practice or hire Organizational Change Management professionals to support company projects.

Purpose of Organizational Change Management

Why does the industry need OCM? The answer is simple: because change is a means of perpetuating innovation. In many cases, changes impact employee life and work. Employees are conservative. They do not like changes and respond in ways that are not conducive to innovations. They have every right to be threatened by a change: in most cases, an innovation may have an impact on employees, and that impact might not necessarily be positive. Employee response to a change is a passive or active resistance, lack of adoption, or both. At the time of change, employee productivity drops while turnover, stress, health issues, and conflict rates increase exponentially. This adversely impacts company’s bottom line. OCM is necessary because it manages employee resistance, helps support change, and promotes employee behavior that is most conducive to an innovation. Specifically, OCM helps to proactively address employee attitudes and behaviors, prepare employees for a change, and avoid the risk of negative processes occurring in a company.

As shown in Fig. 1, from a statistical standpoint, there is a direct and strong relationship between company performance and OCM practices.

Fig. 1. Impact of poorly managed change on company performance

As you can see, the success of a project that leads to an innovation depends on the quality of an OCM effort on that project. A poorly managed OCM effort invalidates and nullifies project value. In other words, the presence of a properly managed OCM may just mean the proverbial “make it or break it” when it comes to a project and a company’s success.

Key Processes of Organizational Change Management

It is important to understand the key processes that OCM employs to accomplish its goals. This provides a framework for the understanding of what an OCM professional manages. The OCM Capabilities Support Model introduced in this article represents an efficient way of managing OCM efforts as part of company projects. The key to that efficient way of managing change lies in the understanding of which team members are better aligned with the key OCM processes depending on a project type. In other words, it is important to understand that, depending on various factors, OCM can be performed by either OCM professionals or other project team members. Which practices comprise OCM?

The diagram on Fig. 2 shows the six key areas (practices) that comprise OCM.

Stakeholder Management

Change Impacts

Communication

Change Readiness

Sustainment

M

Identifyand manage stakeholders that are impacted by the change and how theycan influence the change

A

Identify and assess change impacts to people, process and technologs7

Pl an and execute a robust, consi stent communication th roughout the p rogram lifecscl e

Measure organizational readiness th roughout the p rogram lifecycle

Ensure ongoing adoption of change through periodic measurements

Fig. 2. Key processes of Organizational Change Management

Managing Stakeholders

Stakeholder management processes entail identifying and classifying all project stakeholders who may be impacted by the upcoming change. OCM offers an intervention that allows for indoctrinating an employee in the desired behavior. For an OCM Manager to understand which intervention to use for each particular employee group, employees need to be identified and broken into these groups. Employees can be broken into groups using various factors. Examples of these factors may include:

• •    Employee division or department

• •    Employee role on a project (e.g., change target, change leader, change agent etc.)

• •    Impacts of change (how much future employee behavior changes from its current state as a result of introducing a change) (e.g., major impact, some impact, minimal impact, no impact)

• •    Reaction to change (which behavior that employee group demonstrates with respect to change) (e.g., oppose change, support/follow change, become a change enthusiast)

There may be other factors that influence how an OCM Manager classifies employees. This classification allows an OCM Manager to break employees into groups and determine an OCM approach to each group. Depending on a group, that approach might range from a heavy communication coupled with close monitoring of employee readiness for change to merely keeping employees in the loop. The approach to OCM determines the type of OCM intervention (communication, engagement, and training) that will be the most efficient in indoctrinating employees into a change.

Identifying Changes and Impacts

Change analysis allows for determining and documenting the gap between the current state and the future state in the areas of organizational structure, processes, or systems/equipment. Each of the changes might have an impact on employee behavior. The role of an OCM professional is to identify and document all impacts and determine their criticality for the success of a project or/and a company in general. Naturally, an OCM approach will reflect the most critical impacts that should be addressed first.

The effort of identifying changes and change impacts is coordinated with project managers, subjectmatter experts (SME), and company Leadership.

Planning and Executing Communication

OCM employs the current research in human behavior to ensure efficiency of its methods. These methods include a broad use of social and professional (including corporate) media, creating and maintaining change networks to support employee activities during and after projects, and active engagement of change enthusiasts (also called Change Champions). Other OCM methods include using targeted messaging, dedicated SharePoint sites, presentations, campaigns, posters, broadcasts, employee training, and other engagements. These methods are very efficient in ensuring employees are aware of the upcoming changes and are adequately prepared for them.

Assessing Change Readiness

OCM professionals are judged by the results of their work. These results may include the amount of resistance to a change that employees demonstrate and the level of change adoption. There are a variety of methods OCM employs to determine the degree of employee readiness for a change. These methods range from surveying employee populations to collecting objective data from the existing sources maintained by other organizations. For example, the number of employee calls to Technical Support or HR will help evaluate how adequately employees are prepared for an innovation and the changes that support the innovation. The goal of OCM is to ensure that, as the result of the chosen OCM interventions, the majority of employees show adoption of an innovation, compliance with the desired behavior and rules, and commitment to change.

Ensuring Knowledge Acquisition via Education and Training

Employees need to demonstrate proficiency in following the new processes and using the new systems and equipment. OCM professionals either develop or coordinate development of various training or self-education solutions that allow employees to reach the desired proficiency level.

Ensuring Sustainment of an Innovation

OCM is responsible for ensuring that an innovation introduced in a company continues to function after the initial effort to introduce it is completed. The innovation sustainment phase of an initiative occurs after that initiative has completed. That phase may entail various OCM activities. These activities range from organizing a refresher class to various forms of additional communication. For example, a communication may include the answers to the most frequently asked questions that employee ask of the Technical Support or HR organizations. OCM does not seize when an initiative comes to an end. Rather, it continues to monitor employee behavior after an innovation is successfully implemented. OCM professionals then intervene as needed to ensure the desired employee behavior perpetuates.

As you can see, an OCM Manager is engaged in the planning and execution of various changemanagement activities. Naturally, the scope of this engagement and the amount of time spent on these activities vary depending on the nature of the project.

Risks of Ignoring or Underestimating OCM

Whenever an innovation introduces changes to employee life and work, the adoption of the innovation becomes a critical factor to the success of that innovation in a company. Each initiative must have an OCM component to it if the Leadership is at all concerned about the adoption of innovations. Yet, quite surprisingly, some Leaders choose to resist any OCM involvement. These Leaders underestimate the value of OCM and the risks that the lack of an OCM effort entails. What are the key risks of ignoring or underestimating OCM? The diagram on Fig. 3 shows the most common human reactions associated with a change. The purple line shows the typical human reactions that follow the changes shown on the transformation path (in blue).

First, a lack of understanding of a change leads to miscommunication and speculation. OCM builds employee awareness of a change. To ensure employee awareness, OCM delivers information about the upcoming innovation and its impacts to employee work and personal life. Furthermore, OCM trains employees to help them understand and adapt their behavior to meet the requirements of the upcoming innovation. Both awareness and understanding contribute to employee adoption of an innovation. A lack of awareness and understanding leads to uncertainty and fear. The lack of information communicated by a reliable and controlled source is compensated with information from other, much less reliable sources. Misinformation leads to speculation. Misinformation and speculation translate into a lack of the Leader- ship’s control over how and by whom that information is used. Organizational risks resulting from the lack of such control range from reputational losses to the company to a loss of expertise and the increase of capital expenditures toward developing new talent. A company might need to invest extra efforts in preventing its trade secrets walking out the door with the departing talent. In either case, a company is risking a negative impact to its overall capitalization and its position on the market.

Fig. 3. Transition Cycle

S ec ond, the la c k of a war ene ss a n d under s ta nd ing of a n innov a t ion decreases employee participa t ion. T hi s risk e ntail s a d e cr e a s e in employee productivity and a major gap in the f e e db a c k loop. Ev er y administ r ator is a war e of th e ne g a tive impact of low employee productivity on a c ompa ny ’ s standing i n the industry. Breaking the f e e db a c k loop due to employee apathy and indifferenc e lea ds to e mploy e e mi str us t i n c ompa ny Le a der shi p a n d in future innovations. By allowing employee pa rti c ip a t i on to la p s e compa nie s ar e look ing a t d i r e ct a nd ne g a tiv e impa c ts t o their b ot tom line.

T h ird, w ith a wid e ning g a p in the feedback loop, risks and issues are overlook e d. T hi s in e v ita b ly l e a d s to dela y e d a nd missed ini tiat ive deadlines and budget overruns. A poorly motiv a te d wor k f or c e i s l e ss lik e ly to b e loy a l to th e c ompa ny . W hy would a ny one risk his or her neck reporting an issue when t he y do not trus t th e i r e mploy e r to p r oper ly a dd r e s s th at is sue in the f i r s t pl a c e?

F orth, th e pi c tu r e is e v e n g r immer when it comes to stakeholder expectations. The y a r e eit he r no t met or poorly managed. It would not be long before all these factors lead to compa ny mis ma na g eme nt. I t is not me r ely suff icie n t for a c o mpany to innovate to survive. It is equally criti c al f or a c ompan y to com munic a te to all st a k e holde rs a b out a n i nnov a ti on’s impa c t to their l if e a nd work.

The r i sk s of ig noring or un de restimating OCM to the company are so great that, f or a c ompa ny , it come s to a c ho ic e o f “ ei th e r ma na ge change or seize to exist”. The practice of innov a t ing ma y be a n awe some thi ng , but let’s n ot for g e t that it has got a human component to it. Unless it is supported by employ e e s, a n in nov a tio n will ne v e r be succ e s sf u l.

The OCM Capabilities Support Model for Managing Change

Companies cannot ignore OCM as part of their development strategy if they want to continue to stay in business. How exactly a company is building its relationships with the OCM organization depends on an industry and the nature of the company’s business. Naturally, there is a variety of ways a company and its OCM organization may interact with each other. The most common of these ways are summarized in OCM models. As with any formal discipline, Organizational Change Management prac- tices have produced a number of management models. For a discussion on the key management models in this area you may refer to my recent article that discusses the role of an Organizational Change Manager, goals and common methods of managing change [2].

So, why is there a need for a new model right now? What is happening in the US industry today that calls for a new approach to OCM? There are two key factors that contribute to this need.

Currently, the United States industry is undergoing a transition. This transition has mostly been precipitated by the latest recession. Today, it is not merely sufficient for business clients and stockholders to demand a higher return on investment. Nowadays, a greater return has to be coupled with a higher risk visibility and a sane risk management policy. In a company, the first step toward achieving a better return on investment while reducing risks is to take the portfolio and demand management process under control. The portfolio and demand management process entails collecting, analyzing, and evaluating data on initiatives and innovations that a company chooses to fund and implement. This process allows for a visibility into changes therefore allowing Senior Leadership to decide which innovation is better aligned with the company’s sustainability and growth strategy and therefore should be funded. When greater control over the portfolio and demand management process is implemented, OCM organizations have to transition from the one-off operating mode to the mode of systematically supporting company innovations. In the absence of a systematic approach to portfolio and demand management, OCM support on most of the initiatives is typically random. When OCM support of an innovation is random, a demand for OCM support is created by Senior Leadership by giving OCM organizations orders on which innovations to support. A greater visibility into a portfolio of innovations increases the demand for OCM services. In this new operating mode, OCM organizations have to make their own decisions on which company innovations to support. This signifies a paradigm shift in the OCM business: from “order takers” to a mature OCM practice of “decision makers”. The same transition that had led to a higher demand for OCM services, however, had led to a greater distress in OCM organizations. Why has this occurred?

In the new reality of greater visibility into a return on investment, the new challenges for OCM include tighter budgets and a conservative approach to funding OCM activities and staffing OCM organizations. This conservative approach has resulted in some OCM organizations being chronically underfunded and understaffed.

Systematic portfolio and demand management practices in the industry brought most company initiatives and innovations into Senior Leadership’s spotlight. This practice has revealed that a company might have a great many initiatives that might require OCM. In a large company, the initiative count that might require OCM may literally be in the hundreds or even thousands. No matter how large an OCM organization is that organization will not have sufficient resources to support every single innovation.

So, what have we ended up with? On the one hand, a larger number of innovations might require OCM support. On the other hand, the underfunded and understaffed OCM organizations simply cannot sustain OCM activities and offer OCM support to every initiative. A company cannot underestimate OCM, but the reality is that it is physically impossible to provide OCM support for every single initiative in the company. Such is the reality in the US industry today. This is a dangerous paradox. Every initiative must consider OCM as vital for its success. Yet not every initiative can physically be supported by an OCM organization. Let’s not forget: many initiatives that OCM Managers support require a full-time engagement. In other words, the amount of time that an OCM Manager must spend planning and executing OCM activities on an initiative amounts to roughly 35-40 hours or more per week. There are simply not enough OCM resources to go around. This is the “perfect storm” outlook. The existing OCM support models fail to provide a solution to this challenge. That is why a call for a new OCM model is in order. The new model has to help OMC organizations to efficiently manage the talent while providing an adequate OCM support.

Is there a model out there that can be applied to every innovation and help a company to evaluate which level of OCM support is required from the OCM organization? Enter the OCM Capabilities Support Model. The OCM Capabilities Support Model allows for supporting a larger number of initiatives from an OCM standpoint utilizing the existing talent, without dropping the ball.

So, why does the OCM Capabilities Support Model succeed where other OCM models fail? What does this model offer that other OCM models do not? The OCM Capabilities Support Model offers:

• •    A differentiated approach to OCM Support

• •    A flexible approach to the planning and execution of OCM activities, including a distributed approach

• •    Transparent criteria that allow for determining the level of OCM Support on an initiative

The current models of OCM support assume that all projects receive support from a dedicated OCM professional. This specialist is charged with planning and executing all OCM and communication activities. On many initiatives, the same specialist is also planning and executing all personnel training activities as well. In many cases, the same professional also plans and executes all activities to measure change adoption and employee resistance, such as creating and processing employee surveys. But in reality an OCM professional can only be supporting a limited number of initiatives without compromising the quality and timeliness of OCM deliverables and deadlines. The OCM Capabilities Support Model assumes that each initiative’s OCM needs are unique, and not every initiative requires a full-time dedicated OCM professional support. The new approach is in proactively determining which of these OCM activities must in fact be executed by a dedicated OCM professional and which can be performed by other team members who have neither a formal educational background nor an OCM experience.

The OCM Capabilities Support Model establishes three levels of OCM support: High, Medium, and Low. The diagram on Fig. 4 explains the OCM support levels.

High

Dedicated engagement v/ithOCM staff. OCM producesOCM deliverablesand oversees execution of OCM activities.

Additional OCM staff likely needed

Medium

OCM engagement limited to training project staff on executing OCM activities and tracking completion of theOCM activities.

Low

OCM activities are managed within project team. Upon request, OCM staff will consult the team on OCM best practices as needed. OCM may get involved if necessary

Lead/Contributor

Mentor/Coordinator

Coach

OCM Team Member (dedicated OCM resource)

Project Manager (with guaranteed help from OCM Team)

Project Manager (helpfrom OCMTeam is available if needed)

Lead OCM effort

Execute all OCM project activities and deliverables

Report OCM status

Train PM on OCM approach

Encourage do-it-yourself approach to OCM

Track OCM activities and deliverables

ReviewOCM deliverables, make recommendations for improvement

Educate the PM on best practices, deliverablesand activities

OCM resource available to step in if necessary

Report OCM status

Fig. 4. OCM Support Levels

What is the difference between the support levels? The key differences are in:

• •    The OCM professional’s role

• •    The OCM professional’s responsibilities

• •    The responsibilities of other members of the initiative’s team

The High level of OCM support is identical to the traditional OCM support approach. At this level, an initiative is supported by a dedicated professional who is a member of the OCM team. The OCM professional’s role on a team is that of the OCM Lead. That professional is accountable for the planning and execution of all OCM activities. As the OMC Lead, that professional tracks and reports the status of all OCM activities to the Leadership. S/he may also manage other members of the OCM and Training teams, such as a communications expert, instructional designer, or instructor. On the other hand, the OCM professional is also an individual contributor on such projects. As such, s/he produces all OCM deliverables.

At the Medium level of OCM support, the role of the OCM professional is that of a mentor to other team members. In this scenario, the OCM professional seldom performs the planning and execution of the OCM activities. Instead, that professional trains and mentors others on how to plan and execute these activities. This support level assumes that, with adequate training, other team members, such as a Project Manager, are capable of carrying out the responsibilities for the OCM activities traditionally planned and executed by the OCM professional. Naturally, other team members’ expertise may be in the functional areas other than OCM. The OCM Capabilities Support Model does not assume that, by some kind of miracle, these team members will instantly acquire a broad expertise in OCM. This level of OCM support assumes that within the limited OCM boundaries of a specific initiative, the OCM delegates will perform at an adequate level that will allow for the innovation to be implemented successfully. Their OCM expertise will not extend beyond the specific project’s completion date. It is unlikely that these OCM delegates will perform at an adequate level as OCM professionals with another project or at another company. Once trained by an OCM professional, the delegates will plan and execute either all or most of the OCM activities that we have discussed in the Key Processes of Organizational Change Management section. We assume that project managers and other team members, including requirements analysts, training specialists etc. are, with the appropriate training and oversight, capable of performing stakeholder analyses, identifying and documenting changes and their impact on company employees and other stakeholders, writing communications, organizing training etc. Their performance, however, will require a lot of oversight by the OCM organization. The good news is, in this OCM support model, the OCM professional will also closely monitor their performance as OCM delegates, review the OCM deliverables they produce and make recommendations for their improvement. Finally, the OCM professional will report the status of the OCM activities to the Senior Management and should be ready to step in as a full-time dedicated OCM resource at a moment’s notice as needed.

The Low OCM support level is somewhat similar to the Medium support level in a sense that the OCM professionals, once again, delegate their OCM responsibilities to other team members. Unlike the Medium OCM support level, however, that level of OCM support encourages the “do-it-yourself” approach to a project’s OCM support. The OCM professional plays the role of a coach to other team members. Once the initial OCM training is complete, the OCM professional steps back to focus on other priorities. The team continues to plan and execute all OCM activities, produce OCM deliverables, and report OCM status without expecting any further support from their OCM coach. Of course, the OCM professional will be available to step in if necessary, but the assumption is, no further help will be required from the OCM team.

Neither the Medium nor the Low OCM support levels entail a full-time dedicated OCM resource being a part of a team. These support levels rely on a so called distributed approach to the planning and executing of all OCM activities. Many initiatives do require a full-time OCM engagement. Some initiatives, however, do not require a dedicated OCM professional. Not all initiatives are born equal, and the level of OCM support must to be adequate for the needs of a particular initiative. If a team can sustain them, OCM responsibilities can be shared and distributed among other team members. These responsibilities can be decentralized and executed by many instead of being planned and executed from a centralized location by a single dedicated OCM professional or the OCM team.

The OCM Capabilities Support Model is flexible enough to allow for the OCM support levels to transform along with the project’s changing OCM needs. An initiative, for example, may have several phases. Initially, that initiative may require a High level of OCM support and a dedicated OCM resource to manage all its OCM activities. As a project manager gets more familiar with OCM practices, receives OCM training by OCM professionals, and gets to observe their work, s/he may decide that the next phase may require a different level of OCM support. Another reason for switching to a different level of OCM support is when an initiative itself transforms due to a changing scope, complexity etc. An OCM professional may need to step up her/his involvement in an initiative to the High OCM support level to ensure the innovation receives an adequate OCM support. By the same token, that engagement may be scaled down.

As you can see, OCM support levels will influence and determine the role which an OCM professional plays on a project, their responsibilities, as well the responsibilities of other team members. But how would a team know which OCM support level is appropriate? OCM professionals rely on predetermined criteria that unequivocally determine the required level of OCM support.

The OCM Capabilities Support Model offers a set of transparent criteria to determine the level of OCM support and clearly delineate the role an OCM professional plays on an initiative. The chart on Fig. 5 OCM Support Matrix provides the criteria and the ranges that help to determine the appropriate OCM support level. The OCM Support Matrix uses the point system to calculate and determine the desired level of OCM support.

Fig. 5. OCM Support Matrix

The OCM Capabilities Support Model uses a set of seven criteria to determine the OCM support level. These criteria are:

• •    Project Scope

• •    Project Size

• •    Project Duration

• •    Number of employees and other stakeholders impacted

• •    Project Complexity

• •    Project’s Compliance requirements

• •    OCM Sustainability requirements

Each criterion is assigned a certain number of points, ranging from 1 point on the lower end of the scale to 3 points on the higher end. For example, an Enterprise-wide project with a global impact receives 3 points for scope. A project which only impacts a single organization within a certain county or city receives 1 point. In a similar fashion, a project with duration of 12 months or longer receives 3 points for the duration criterion. A project that is only planned for 3–9 months or under 3 months receives 1 point for duration. An OCM professional can easily determine the appropriate OCM support level by tallying up the total project’s OCM support score. A total score of 20 and up means that the project is very complex, global in nature, will service the entire employee population across the globe, will take upwards of a year to complete etc. A total score of 20 puts a project into the High OCM support level category. That project requires a dedicated OCM support specialist or a support by the OCM team. That person or a team of OCM professionals will plan and execute all OCM activities associated with that initiative and produce and manage all OCM deliverables. A total score of between 14–20 points indicates that a project requires a Medium OMC support level. The score ranging between 7 and 13 indicates a Low OCM support level.

These c rit e ria a r e t r a n spar en t. Any initiative manager or OCM professional ca n use t he m to de t e rmi ne the pro je c t ’ s OC M su ppor t needs. A couple of side notes, however, are in or de r .

F irs t, t he a b solu te maj ority of th e se criteria are simple concepts, approaching a binary “yes” or “no” i n their simplici ty le v e l. Fo r e x a m ple, it is simple to determine whether an initiat iv e ha s be e n s ta rted t o ma ke a pr o c e s s, o r g a niza t i ona l r ole, or technology compliant with a requirement set forth by a regulator (the “c omplia nce r e qu ire m e nt” factor). Initiative complexity is the only exceptio n to th a t r u le . How do y ou dete r mine whe th e r a n i nit iative is simple of complex? Initiative complexity is not a simple c on cep t (smile)! It is comprised of m ul tiple factors that contribute to complexity. These f a ctors ar e sum ma rize d by the chart on Fig. 6: P r o j e c t C omple xi ty Le v e l [3, 4]. It is important to understand how initiative comp le x ity is dete r mine d. Our i ntui tion tells us that an initiative that is managed by an e xpe rie nce d m a na g e r , h a s a homog e ne ous te a m, use s a formal and proven process will be less complex tha n a n in it iativ e th at d oe s no t h a v e a ll of these f e ature s. B u t whe n it comes to determining the level of OCM support and t he cost a ss oc i a t e d wi th i t, we c a n not rely on our intuition alone, can we? Let’s re fe r t o Fig. 6.

Complexity Dimension	Low Complexity	Moderately Complex	Highly Complex
Team Composition and Performance	•    Strong project leadership •    Team staffed internally, has worked together in the past, and has a track record ot reliable estimates •    Formal, proven PM. BA, SE methodology with QA and QC processes defined and operational	• Competent project leadership ■ Team staffed with internal and external resources; internal staff has worked together nthe past, has a track record of reliable estimates • Contract for external resources is straightforward; contractor performance known ■ Semi-formal methodology with QA/QC processes defined	■ Project manager inexperienced in leading complex projects ■ Complex team structure of varying competencies, (e.g., contractor teams, virtual teams, culturally diverse teams, outsourced teams) ■ Complex contracts; contractor performance unknown ■ Diverse methodologies
Urgency and Flexibility of Cost, Time, and Scope	- Minimized scope •    Small milestones •    Schedule, budget and scope are flexible.	■ Schedule, budget, scope can undergo minor variations, but deadlines are firm ■ Achievable scope and milestones	■ Over-ambitious schedule and scope ■ Deadline is aggressive, fixed and cannot be changed ■ Budget, scope & quality have no room for flexibility
Problem and Opportunity Clarity	■ Clear business objectives • Easily understood problem or opportun'ty	■ Defined business objectives ■ Problem or opportunity is undefined	■ Unclear business objectives ■ Problem or opportunity is ambiguous and undefined
Solution Clarity	• Solutionis readily achievable using existing, well-understood technologies and processes	■ Solutionis difflcultto achieve or the technology and processes is proven but new to the organization	■ Solution requires groundbreaking innovation ■ Solution is likely to be using immature, unproven or complex technologies and processes provided by outside vendors
Requirements Volatility	• Strong customer/user support • Basic requirements understood, straightforward, stable - Low complexity of functionality	■ Adequate customer/user support ■ Basic requirements understood, but are expected to change ■ Moderately complex functionality	■ Inadequate customer/user support ■ Requirements are poorly understood, volatile, and largely undefined ■ Highly complex functionality
Level of Organizational Change	■ Impacts a single business unit	• impacts a 2-3 business units	■ Large-scale organizational change that impacts the enterprise - Spans functional groups or agencies ■ Shifts or transforms the entire Enterprise/organization
Risk, External Constraints and Dependencies	•    Considered low risk •    Some external influences - No challenging ntegration issues - No new or unfamiliar regulatory requirements ■ No punitive exposure	■ Considered moderate risk ■ Some project objectives dependent on external factors • Challenging integration effort ■ Some new regulatory requirements ■ Acceptable exposure	■ Considered high risk ■ Overall project success depends largely on external factors ■ Significant integration required ■ Highly regulated or novel sector ■ Significant exposure

Fig. 6. Project Complexity Level

P roj ect c omple xi ty is a c on c e pt that is c ompr i se d o f s ev e r a l factors, such as:

• •    Te a m c o m position, inc ludi ng the background and experience of project manage r s a n d te am m em be r s

• •    The use of f or ma l, p r ov e n me thods or p r oce ss e s

• •    F lexi bi li ty of scope , c os t, and sc h e dul e

• •    C lar i ty of a pr o ble m a nd a s olut ion

• •    C lar i ty and vol a t i li ty of re q uir e me nts

• •    C omplexity of sy st e m f unc t ionali ty , pr oce ss, o r o r g a niza ti on

• •    R isk , e xt er nal c o nst r aint s, and de pende ncies

OCM professionals use a simple questionnaire to determine initiative complexity. This questionnaire is used to ask questions, such as “Is the project manager strong and experienced in leading complex projects?” and document the answers. The chart on Fig. 7 Project Complexity Level Cheat Sheet represents a simplified view of the criteria contributing to a complexity level. These criteria allow us to assign project complexity to the high, medium, or low group. That group, in its turn, is factored in when using the OCM Support matrix to determine the appropriate level of OCM support. Generally speaking, more complex initiatives may require a higher OCM support level.

High Complexity

Medium Complexity

Low Complexity

Impacts one businessunit

Strong PM

Internal team

Formal PM, RM/BA, development,

QA. ОС m eth od о I ogy

Minimal scope, с I ear m i lestones

Flexible schedule and budget

Clear problem and solution

Str a ightforward and stab Ie requirements

Low functionality/process complexity

No dependency on external factors

No regulatory requirements

No exposure

I m pa cts several busin ess u n its

Competent PM

I ntern aland extern a I resou rces on the tea m

Semi-formal methodology

Achievable scope and milestones

Dead lines are firm

Scheduleand budgetcan undergo minor variations

Defined busin ess objective

Problem and opportunity are undefined

Solution is either difficult to achieve with current technology or business processes OR new to organization

Moderately complex functionality or process Basic requirements understood, but expected to change

Dependency on external factors

Some regulatory requirements

Acceptable exposure

Impacts the Enterprise

PM is inexperienced in leading comp lex initiatives

Com p I ex tea m stru ctu re, com p I ex contracts, unknown team competencies

Diverse methodologies

Overly ambitious scope and schedu Ie Dead linesare aggressive and cannot be changed

Budget, sc ope a n d q u ality leave n о room for flexibility

Unclear businessobjective

Problem and opportunity are undefined and ambiguous

Solution requires ground-breaking innovationOR relies on unproven technology or immature process

Highly complex functionality or process Requirements poorly understood, volatile or poorly documented

High dependency on externa I factors Highly regulated or novel sector Significant exposure

Fig. 7. Project Complexity Level Cheat Sheet

Second, the criteria shown in the OCM Support Matrix may look like they are skewed toward a specific industry and company size. Specifically, they may look like they are geared toward new technology or process implementations in a large company (global company with a large number of employees). Most of the criteria, however, are universal enough to be applied to an innovation in any industry or any size company. Depending on an organization’s size, you may need to replace the data ranges used in the OCM Support Matrix with data ranges that are more applicable to your industry and tailored to a specific company size. Your company might not be global, nor might it have regional organizations. In this case, data ranges that show a breakdown to smaller organizational units (Division, Department, and Group) may be more appropriate. Depending on the size of your company and the industry, you might also need to replace the number of impacted users with the number of your employees and initiative stakeholders that is scaled down or up to your organization’s size. Other than that, all criteria should be applicable to any industry. The important thing is to have a set of criteria with the appropriate data ranges in place to help you determine the appropriate OCM support level.