Change Management.

You have to hand to it Starbucks. It knows how to focus attention on fixing an issue. The act of shutting down operations for a half-day of training, whether it be for a turnaround or to address discrimination, says it is committed to a change and voting with its profitability. The execs clearly know that substantial short-term financial loss is better than long-term erosion of the brand.

But make no mistake, while its commitment to training is legend, its employee behavior change strategy rests on the symbolic act. The reason? Most diversity training doesn’t work. Here’s why:

We don’t think we’re the problem. Let me ask you directly. Are you racist? Of course not! Neither am I. We can’t see our own biases. They are unconscious. It’s a weird form of the Dunning-Kruger effect, where we assume our ability and our empathy are better than they are. The very lens we use to view the world is hard to see.

It feels punitive. Remember the one kid who acted up in school and got the whole class punished? Diversity training feels the same. It’s a bit like mandatory traffic school without an aspiring comic. So we enter the classroom closed to learning.

We don’t like training. Okay, there are nerds out there who do. But most people prefer to spend their time in other ways. We tend to favor information that solves a problem when a problem arises. And we know that diversity training, like sexual harassment training, can be a cynical exercise to prevent lawsuits rather than a solution to the essential issue.

It fosters the problem. Sometimes well-meaning programs can be divisive. Affinity groups can be alienating. Poor facilitation can create barriers rather than bridges. Focusing on the negative can be counter-productive. In fact, researchers have found that some training actually reinforces bias.

It reinforces bias?

Unfortunately, it can. In 2001, Lori Robb and Dennis Doverspike asked 90 undergraduate men to take J.B. Pryor’s “Likelihood to Harass” scale before taking an hour of a popular off-the-shelf video training. The men who originally tested as most likely to harass tested with a more negative attitude toward women after training.

What can make a difference?

Putting diversity training in an overall system. In 2016, Katrina Berzukova, Chester Spell and Karen Jehn analyzed over 260 diversity studies to determine the impact training might have. They found that if you want behavior change, not just an intellectual exercise, you need to embed training into the company’s ecosystem. Mentoring groups, social networks, and integration into a broader curriculum demonstrate the organization is committed to an inclusive environment. And that reinforces inclusiveness in your culture.

Mandatory medicine. Berzukova and her colleagues also found that required training is more effective than voluntary. This speaks to the fact that we don’t know we’re biased and might be blind to how we behave. It took court action to integrate schools, and legislative action to allow women to own property and vote. These decisions were controversial at the time but now we have generations of people who can’t imagine the world any other way. We’ve normalized to a higher standard.

If you want a wonderful eye-opener to your own unconscious bias, check out Fons Trompenaars’ work on something we all share: seven common dilemmas. These problems are universally uncomfortable, and our response to them is shaped by our culture.

Ongoing training. One standalone course creates the impression that diversity training is a compliance issue and that, once the class is complete, a legal requirement has been addressed. According the research, periodic training conducted over time reinforces the company’s commitment to its values, and signals that those in authority believe this is what is right.

Physical changes to the work environment. Historically, orchestras were dominantly male. This was because the director personally hired the musicians. This began to change in the 1950’s when orchestras began to involve members in the selection process. But what revolutionized the gender balance in today’s orchestras was blind auditions – having the musician play behind a screen so those evaluating them would have to judge the music alone.

According to Claudia Goldin & Cecilia Rouse, “…the transition to blind auditions from 1970 to the 1990s can explain 30 percent of the increase in the proportion female among new hires and possibly 25 percent of the increase in the percentage female in the orchestras.”

Measures. Data can indicate whether the overall system is what you intend. Take a clear-eyed look at your demographics, complaints, compensation, job applications. These can tell you who your environment attracts and what gets rewarded.

We belong to families, communities, interest groups, and companies. In a divisive world, our company can be a powerful unifier. Accomplishing this takes focused thought and design that reaches beyond the classroom. It’s easy to think that such steps won’t work. But they already have. After all, now we can use a Starbucks restroom without buying a venti triple no-foam latte.

I’m obsessing lately about a presentation Harvey Goldberg gave on leadership. He asked a simple question: “What do you expect from your people?” Then he asked, “Now, what do you tolerate from them?” He then drew the two squares above and said, “What you tolerate is what you will get, and that becomes your company culture.”

Our job is to align what we tolerate and what we expect…to get to zero gap.

Think about it.

Read down the columns. What kind of performance do you expect from an organization that exhibits the behavior on the left? How about the right?

And would people in your company be able to come up with the list on the left, on their own?

Why do we tolerate poor performance?

We are leaders responsible for running successful organizations. We are accustomed to giving direction and we are accountable for results. Yet that gap between what we tolerate and what we expect exists for all of us. There are some simple explanations.

We look away. Ever have that “how did we get here” moment? When I started my company, I didn’t look closely at employee expense reports. People would take their colleagues out to lunch. Those lunches became weekly events at wonderful restaurants. They soon involved wine and no clients. Then one month-end, I found myself staring at $30,000 of internal employee restaurant expenses. A grain of sand is nearly invisible, but in bulk it becomes a beach.

We rationalize. Do you tell yourself things like, “I don’t like admin; I’m not that person’s parent; I should empower people; I believe people will naturally do the right thing?” Our internal dialogue is based on how we want to see ourselves and the world. That dialogue is storytelling; we often tell ourselves stories that let people off the hook. Look at your story. Is it enabling people to behave badly? How does the story you tell yourself serve you?

It’s the path of least resistance. Accountability takes work and it takes vigilance. Letting things slide is easier – in the short term — than holding people accountable. Creating clear guidelines, setting expectations, establishing measures, then following up is intellectual and emotional work. And it takes time. Letting your standards slide is easier.

We don’t like confrontation. Everyone likes to be liked.  And telling someone that they are not living up to our expectations means we risk a negative response – defensiveness, excuses, embarrassment, or rejection. We encounter what Dale Carnegie observed: “When dealing with people, remember you are not dealing with creatures of logic, but creatures of emotion.” And many of us find that uncomfortable.

How do we get the culture we expect?

• Identify essential behaviors. What do you expect of your people? Make a list like the one in the table above. Detailing what you expect will help you be clear when you give direction.
• Prioritize and focus. You have a limited amount of time and capacity, so focus your energy on one behavior at a time. Map the behaviors on a grid – low to high impact, vs. low to high difficulty. What is high-impact and easy to do? Start with those behaviors to establish a foundation, and then build on it.
• Hold people accountable for one behavior per quarter. Research by Phillippa Lally and her team shows that it takes 66 days on average to ingrain a habit, but since business tends to run in quarterly cycles, a three-month cadence is just fine.
• When you are tempted to let a bad behavior slide, ask yourself, ”What if everyone in the company exhibited this behavior?” If you visualize the behavior as it scales across the organization, you will see the urgency. This can be a helpful shot of motivation.
• When you see the behavior that is not what you expect, ask the responsible person directly: “Why is this ok?” Help them see the gap that you see. If they don’t see it, they can’t close it.

Behavior drives culture. Culture drives results. You might expect performance, but in the end, you will get what you’re willing to tolerate.

You’re proud of the project you’re working on. You’ve invested late nights and a couple weekends. You missed your son’s semi-final soccer game and your friend’s birthday dinner because of it — it’s that important.

But imagine this: a colleague stops you in the cafeteria and asks you about the project.

Them: Hey, what’s this Project Axis about?

You: Well, it’s a systems implementation to replace Iroquois.

Them: There sure are a lot of people working on it.

You: Yeah, it’s important. It’ll solve a lot of things. But it’s pretty complex; I don’t want to bore you with all the details.

Is that really the best you can do?

No, you don’t want to bore anyone. But there’s an easy way to get everyone on the project — especially the leaders – telling a short, clear and powerful story.

Distill your project strategy into four main points that are easy to remember.

Select a group of leaders and ask them four questions.

1. What’s the challenge we’re faced with?
2. What’s the solution to the challenge?
3. What’s the approach we’ll take to execute the solution?
4. What’s the result we want?

For each question, brainstorm a one-word answer. Hint: start broad, then narrow down to the top two to three words, and then down to the final one.

Once the four words are selected, string them together in a 30-second elevator speech, buttressed by facts or examples. You’ll have a robust answer to the question, “What’s that project about?” When you deliver it, customize it for whomever you’re addressing. That is, use different examples for a Marketing employee vs. an IT employee. Note that each project member’s elevator speech will be slightly different, based on their communication style, area of expertise, and position.

Practice your 30-second elevator speech. Then, practice it again. (Even fluid presenters aren’t smooth the first time around.)

Let’s try our scenario again. A colleague approaches you and asks you about your project.

Them: Hey, what’s this Project Axis about?

You: Our procurement system, Iroquois is totally outdated (challenge). It doesn’t support mobile and has some system “holes” in it. A few of our biggest vendors tell us that doing business with us is getting harder. So we really need a more flexible (solution) system that closes our risk gaps and brings us into the 21^st century. To develop the best system, we’re asking for the participation (approach) of all our stakeholders, including three of our top vendors. That’s a first for us. We think that the new system will increase our efficiency (result) by two-fold. Did you know that, today, it takes us three weeks to get a simple one-month contract set up?

Them: Now I see why there are so many people working on the project.

This four-word “message frame” is the foundation of all project communication — road shows, newsletters, emails, intranet pages, posters, etc. Each time it’s used, it’s made more real with examples, quotes, and facts customized for the audience.

A consistent, well-crafted message helps the organization understand, embrace and support the change.

One painful aspect of leading is firing people you like. It’s hard for many reasons. The employee may love working with you and for your company. It might be someone you are friends with outside of work. And they might just be a good person who is doing their best. Firing anyone isn’t easy but firing someone you like is especially difficult. Rather than face this head on, many managers avoid it, until it’s too late.

William (“Duffer”) Duff, who runs a successful San Francisco-based architecture firm faced this issue. He describes what happened after he hired a referral from a close friend:

“I was over-compensating for the previous person, who wasn’t good at the tactical, operational work. I was looking for a can-do person who wasn’t afraid of anything. And my friend’s referral was exactly that. My blind spot was that I needed a solution. I think that’s one of the hardest things in business — to say no to something you desperately need. You have to deliver on a project and you don’t have all the resources and you need a key person. And here’s a person who almost-kind-of-fits, and it’s so tempting to hire that person. It’s the worst thing you can do.

That person was here 3 ½ years and it was evident that it was a problem after a year a half. It’s like you’re hearing something you don’t want to hear. So I didn’t act.

Then people voted with their feet. I had seven people leave, over time, and they told me ‘I’m leaving because I can’t work with this person.’ I did all this rationalizing, thinking, well that person was part of the problem, too. I’ve found that one of the hardest parts of being a leader is to know when to make those decisions and execute on them — to stop wasting time.”

Who hasn’t been in this situation? The key is to identify signals that force you to examine what you’d rather not. Here are some clear indicators.

Their results are mediocre. Data doesn’t lie. If you are not seeing growth, that person isn’t solving the problem you hired them to solve. It’s easy to attribute causes to external factors but, ultimately, you need outcomes. If your conversations are about all the reasons that person can’t deliver, step back. These are excuses, not ownership and problem-solving. You have the wrong person. To paraphrase Jim Collins, the enemy of great is good enough.

You find yourself doing their job. They’re delegating to you. You’re reducing their load. It’s easier to do the job yourself. It starts subtly, but ultimately, you’re doing what you hired them to do. To state the obvious, one of you is redundant.

Their actions don’t reflect your values. Values define how you want people to behave. If that person behaves in a way that isn’t consistent with your values, they damage your brand for both employees and customers.

For Duffer, values are the litmus test. He explains his indicator this way.

William Duff’s key indicators.

“The first time I saw the problem clearly was at an industry summit. The speaker, Cameron Herold, drew this box, and labeled it ‘Values and Performance’ and told us, write your people’s names on this grid.

“When we finished, he said, ‘So you have low values, low performance, what do you do?’ And I thought, duh, you fire them.

Then he said, ‘What if you have high performance, high values?’ And I’m like, well you handcuff them, don’t let them go anywhere.

Then he said, ‘What if you have low performance, high values?’ And I thought, I don’t know. He drew a chair and said, ‘You try to get him to another seat on the bus. Because maybe they are a good fit in the firm.’

Then he pointed to the bottom right and said, ‘What do you do down here — the high performance, low values person? Fire them ASAP. This is the cancer in your organization.’

I remember this viscerally because he had us write it all down. One of the names was a college buddy I had hired a year before, and it clearly wasn’t working. I crossed out my buddy’s name and moved it over. That’s how badly that I didn’t want to face reality. I was like, no, I misanalyzed that.

“Looking back, I shake my head. I had the answer right in front of me. Letting him go was a tough decision but ultimately the right one for both him and us.  His values were mostly aligned but he was in the wrong seat on the bus and we didn’t have a different seat available for him.  He’s now in a new job that’s much better suited to his skill set and, not surprisingly, is doing well.”

We like being liked. And we like to work with those we like. But some likable people can be harmful to your team and your organization. Identify your signals and check them often. You owe it to yourself, your company, and everyone you serve.

Everyone knows when change occurs in an organization – when people stop working the old way and start using the new way — there will be a performance dip.  In my early days as a consultant, I even taught clients about the typical “J” curve or the “Valley of Despair,” as it was called. We had that conversation as a project started, so the client would know what to expect: a temporary loss, then improvement, then a new stability.

But, is that true?  Do companies have to experience a downturn before realizing the benefits of the change? Stated another way, can they afford a drop in performance? Maybe they could in the business world of yesterday, when the pace of change was slower, and the change cycles were longer and less frequent. But today’s reality is one of constant change. To compete companies must be nimble; they don’t have time for a trip through The Valley of Despair.

If your company can’t afford the dip, and you agree that it’s not inevitable, how do you avoid it? You must help your teams strengthen as they climb. Imagine an experienced mountain climber. Each time he tackles a new mountain, he gets stronger and more skillful. In fact, he might become faster and better at climbing as he goes. In between trips, he stabilizes and carefully plans his next ascent. He is moving upward, and only upward – getting only better by building on previous experiences.

Your organization needs that “perform, plan, scale” mindset. Most change comes in stages or waves, and as you plan for the next change, help your team strengthen their performance. In other words, use each change to get better at change. Your tools are high expectations, clear communication, and thoughtful planning and execution.

Another tool at your disposal is momentum. Successful change has an expiration date – it’s essential to achieve momentum – early wins or positive impacts on the business — within 90 days.  Engineering successes demonstrates legitimacy to the wider organization. If you don’t get that – if you miss the 90-day window — the early energy and commitment can taper off. Keep the “Do it in 90!” rule central to your plans.

Looking back on my earlier years as a consultant, teaching clients to expect a performance dip, I realize I was taking the easy way out. The drop in performance does happen, but it’s also an excuse, used when the change doesn’t show benefits immediately. Don’t get me wrong, change is not easy, and you won’t always get it right the first time, but if you actively manage the change and expectations – yours and those of the organization – you can keep moving upward.

• Managing change is about getting to benefits as soon as possible.
• The organization can get stronger and better at change during the change and while planning the next ascent.
• Momentum has an expiration date. You have 90 days to make a positive impact and demonstrate that the change is legitimate. If we miss the window, we’ve lost the upward energy. Do it in 90!

You’ve done the work. The consultant you hired has given you a dense excel spreadsheet detailing audience, message, vehicle and timing. You’re executing against it. Your senior execs have delivered PowerPoint presentations, participated in talking head videos, and sent “sponsorship” emails. You have created a network of people to answer questions and send you feedback. You’ve distributed posters, tchotchkes, apps, and given your project a catchy name. But you’re not getting the traction you hoped for. Did you communicate effectively?

People seem unclear on what you’re trying to do, and unaware of the key points. Executives are frustrated because they feel like they’ve relayed the information, but no one understands it.  And employees won’t use the new process, system, method, tools, service model you are trying to deploy. So, what’s going on?

The answer: It’s just too much. Your employees are being assaulted by information and demands on their time. They simply can’t keep up.

According to the Radicati Group, 281 billion emails are sent worldwide daily. With 3.8 billion users, that’s 74 emails per person. Every day. Bain Consultants estimated in a 2014 Harvard Business Review article that 15% of company time is spent in meetings. Verizon commissioned a study that found people attend over 60 meetings per month, accounting for 37% of their time. And the Wall Street Journal reported that we are distracted every 3 minutes.

You are not in the communication business; you are in the attention business. If you want to be heard, you have to help people cut through the noise and focus on what’s important. That requires additional signals that indicate that your message is relevant, worthy of people’s limited time, and cause them to take notice.

Four ways to communicate effectively

Keep it simple. Distill your point to its essence. Once you do that, choose four words to capture your story. Four words are easier to remember than an elevator speech.

A childcare company was implementing new technology. They did it because their caregivers were overwhelmed. The solution? Make sure those people were connected to the right people and information. They employed a thoughtful approach to the implementation. Their intended result? Energized people. These words were easy to remember without relying on PowerPoint. Anyone from any department could provide examples for those words, and they did. Simplicity creates clarity.

Use visuals. Research shows that people can remember 2,000 pictures with 90% accuracy, likely because visuals engage more of the brain. It doesn’t matter whether the person is focused on memorizing the images or casually exposed to them. There’s an extra, unconscious leap for translating an image to a word, which is why words are harder to remember. Line drawings are particularly easy to recall, perhaps because they are visually more complex. Crude hand drawings are superior to stock images any day. Dan Roam has a great book, Draw to Win, that can help you overcome your self-consciousness and create your own powerful visuals.

Peter Molloy created a “visual vision” to convey company direction when he ran Farmhouse rice company. It was so effective, he used the same technique again when he ran La Terra Fina dips and quiches. Why? According to Peter, “There’s something about a picture that makes a concept real. Illustrating our vision made it come alive.”

Employ novelty or contrast. Subconsciously, we are constantly looking for a threat. That’s why anything unusual piques our interest. Anything you do to create disruption — whether it’s in stories, process, color, structure, or volume — causes people to notice. Use variety and look for surprising ways to present your point.

Years ago, an IT department in a Chicago hospital implemented a standard approach to requesting support and custom reports. Historically, people paged their favorite IT person to fulfill the request. (Yes, it was that long ago.) When the department went to the new process, they changed the staff’s pager numbers. This small disruption signaled that employees needed to use a formal request process for custom reports

Use environmental cues. Look at the workplace itself, like the office layout, what people are doing every day, and what they see and hear. Then make sure that what a person encounters every day reinforces that message and doesn’t contradict what you are saying.

My first professional job was as a customer service rep. The company told my new-hire group that we represented a new era – they purposely hired fresh college graduates to serve customers by solving claims problems. However, we were measured based on the number of calls we took, not on the number of issues resolved. It didn’t take long for these college grads to reprioritize. We learned to process as many calls as possible, with mixed results for the customer. Our environment told us volume was more important than service.

By contrast, Chevron decided years ago to create a safety culture. That meant asking introverted engineers to be a little confrontational if they saw something unsafe. Uncomfortable. All the communication in the world wouldn’t address that behavior. So, they made a point of starting every meeting with a “Safety Moment” where each person had to identify one unsafe thing they saw that day. Over time, they layered that with other activities, such as assessing each person’s workstation to ensure it was ergonomic or confronting one another for driving while talking on the cell phone. These environmental cues reinforced behavior in ways no email campaign could.

The best communication plans fail because they don’t apply the best thinking on human behavior. Don’t churn out information and hope it sticks. Pay attention to your people and how this affects them. Focus your attention on the behavior you want and your people will keep your outcomes prioritized and top of mind.

Originally posted on Forbes.com on May 27, 2018.

I have worked in several organizations over the past 15 years, so I have experienced the aftermath of monstrosities like 9/11 and the great recession both personally and professionally. But I find that these are the most stimulating times I’ve seen, as organizations grapple with constant, inconceivable threats from the internal and external environment. Amidst such volatility, it’s not easy to circumvent every problem – no matter what proactive measures you might have in place. To make matters worse, social media platforms foster incessant scrutiny and instant information sharing. So how can leaders manage change during a crisis?

We need to take care of the sniffles before they become a deadly flu.  A recent example that stood out for me was that of Starbucks. The arrest of two black men for trespassing when they refused to leave a Starbucks in Philadelphia caught our nation’s attention. What resonated with me is how Starbucks avoided a PR catastrophe. They used the following measures to manage change during the crisis:

Optimum Agility

Within four days of the incident, Starbucks made a public statement. Kevin Johnson (CEO) appeared on news channels to issue a public apology and flew to Philadelphia to meet with the two men, as well as government officials and community leaders. Despite the customers’ boycotts and protests, Starbucks took the time to talk to the right people and get all their facts in place, then they pressed all the right buttons.

Speed matters when you manage change during a crisis. It’s essential to be nimble, but don’t be too quick; get all the data points you need to understand the problem. Once you do that, you can create an action plan.

Impactful Communication

Starbucks acknowledged the issue and adopted the same stance across Twitter, news channels, in-person meetings, etc. to apologize and take corrective measures.

Be honest and genuine in your messaging. Everyone involved in the crisis communications needs to be aligned to provide consistent messages. Our audiences use many ways to access information, so use as many communication channels as you need for maximum reach.

Continuous Improvement

Starbucks decided to close all 8,000 company-owned stores for an afternoon to hold “unconscious bias” training. Even though the company stands to lose more than five million dollars in the afternoon shutdown, they are ready to make that investment. This is just the first in the series of planned remedies.

Learn from the problem and see what can be done — not only to solve it but ensure that it doesn’t recur. A stitch today saves nine tomorrow.

Accountable Leadership

Kevin Johnson led from the front and did all of the above. He owned the problem, made it his priority, personally communicated with the necessary parties and announced the plan of action.

To steer a ship through troubled waters, leaders should demonstrate ownership, emotional intelligence, courage, and creativity. No one can avoid all difficult situations but what you do with them differentiates the good from the great. If we keep our laser focus on the great, no adversity can sink us.

When you buy a company, you buy the power of people.

Just this month, over a dozen takeover deals worth more than $120B have been announced, including megadeals like Walmart and Flipkart, Sainsbury and Asda, and T-Mobile and Sprint. Total deal volume for 2018 is already at a record $1.7 trillion, beating the pace of pre-financial crisis highs. Cheap money at low-interest rates has fueled M&A activity for the last decade but, as interest rates rise, the takeover frenzy is peaking. Mergers are not bad, yet half of all mergers and acquisitions fail. The danger is even more acute this late in a business cycle when everyone is rushing to lock in a deal to accelerate growth.

Most failed mergers and acquisitions can be attributed to poorly planned integration. When a company is in a rush to close a deal, and it looks good on paper, they often ignore culture. And they continue to dismiss it during post-merger integration.

As soon the deal is done, many of the first steps are about people: retaining leaders, engaging employees in the change, assuring customers of continued excellence. Culture is difficult to shift in the best of times; combining cultures of two organizations is even harder. Due diligence, therefore, should focus on understanding the people and their cultures as much as strategic fit.

The understanding of both cultures provides a basis for aligning leadership on the purpose and plans for the combined business. Research shows that employees going through a merger look for trust, stability, confidence and empathy in their leaders. Managers who are uncertain of the path or unable to directly address employee concerns will undercut any efforts to integrate the business. Uncertainty among leaders and managers is the greatest enemy of an effective merger.

So what can you do to better plan a deal and integrate two businesses? First, conduct a culture assessment. A culture assessment is an objective, quantifiable method to accurately evaluate and document current cultures across both businesses – including behaviors, expectations, and how decisions are made and executed.

Our PRIDE culture assessment focuses on five strategic areas:

• How do PEOPLE interact?
• How are RESULTS recognized?
• How is INNOVATION approached?
• How are DECISIONS made?
• How are goals EXECUTED?

We use a combination of qualitative and quantitative research to gather data and create a detailed picture of the culture, which will then feed a post-merger integration plan that focuses attention on the most critical aspect of the integration – the people.

During a merger the challenges are acute and the stakes are high, but the opportunities are just as great. After all, a merger is a unique chance to spark innovation, taking advantage of the strengths of two cultures. Culture is the only truly sustainable competitive advantage for any company and the key driver of failure or success. Great companies understand that and act on it.

On March 2, 2018, United Airlines announced a new company initiative. It planned to stop giving employees quarterly performance bonuses of up to $375. Instead, qualifying employees would be entered into a quarterly lottery for cash, cars, vacations, and one grand prize of $100,000. To qualify, employees would need perfect attendance, and the company would have to hit its targets. According to a New York Times article by Christina Caron, those receiving bonuses would drop from roughly 80,000 to 1,361, with approximately  61 big winners.

Within days of the announcement, United Airlines President Scott Kirby announced they would be “pressing the pause button” on the lottery bonus plan, based on outraged employee response.

It’s possible the idea came from a place of good will. But, what we know for sure is that they stepped into a fresh mess of unintended consequences.

Much of this situation was both predictable and preventable.

Here’s what they should have considered.

• Humans are hard-wired for fairness. Let’s say you’ve been told you must split $100 with someone you don’t know and will never meet. The catch is, you both must agree on the split. If either of you rejects it, you both forfeit the money. Your mystery partner has offered you $10 and will keep the remaining $90. Will you take it or forgo it all? Researchers have replicated this “Ultimatum Game” since 1982 and found most people naturally offer fair deals, and reject unfair ones even if they benefit from them.
• Small losses hurt and focus our attention. How much do you care about seven cents? Not much, right? Yet, in 2017, the idea of paying seven cents for a grocery bag convinced 33% of Chicagoans to bring their own bags. Various counties in California have experienced similar results since instituting a ten-cent fee in 2012. A nominal cost focused people’s attention on an issue and changed group behavior.
• Predictability matters. United Airlines employees expected to receive $375 a quarter. To disrupt that is to violate an expectation, a social contract. And it’s a change – it’s new. Because we are wired for survival, we unconsciously look for anything unusual. Any disruption to “normal” is by nature threatening.

United tried to sell this as “exciting,” but everything its employees felt in their bones told them otherwise. Compensation design issues aside, here’s what to consider when implementing a massive change like United’s.

• Start with the bad news. We so prefer the predictable that we will stay in a bad situation until it is completely broken. This tendency keeps us in toxic jobs, expired relationships, and unreliable vehicles. So, resist the temptation to talk about benefits first. You must convince people that the current situation is harmful, dangerous, or impossible to sustain.
• Frame the issue properly. Clearly define the problem you are trying to solve and communicate it honestly. Was United’s problem that the overall benefits package was too expensive to sustain? Was it that small bonuses appear to have little impact? Most people can take terrible news if they have a chance to understand the situation, the implications, and how it impacts them directly.
• Establish the right comparisons. Comparisons are how we define value – why the outrageous $1,200 airfare you looked up two minutes ago (your anchor) is suddenly a screaming deal once you found the same flight for $2,000. In United’s case, management anchored against big prizes and big savings, while employees anchored against their current quarterly bonus. If management had identified what employees used as their anchor and aligned on that, they would have addressed the inherent fairness issue. Ask employees what’s on the grapevine about your initiative, then ask specifically what people are comparing it to. Make sure your point of reference is the same as your employees’.
• Launch at least three times. Borrow from Everett Rogers’ research on how innovation spreads. Your initial pilot should be between 2.5% – 13.5% of your intended population. Identify employees who are naturally enthusiastic about new ideas and involved in designing them. These positive, leading-edge people will provide insight on how to adjust the program while maintaining your intended objective. Then pilot again with 34% of your intended group but pick only those who are generally positive about change. They will continue to offer constructive feedback and positively feed the rumor mill. This makes the change safer for people who are more hesitant to sign on. Once these two pilots are complete, you have a more controlled environment for a full launch.
• Make the first step excellent. Research shows first impressions color our assessment of everything that follows. Manage that impression vigilantly – if your new IT system is complex, focus on rolling out only the simple sign-on. If your new compensation model is revolutionary, implement the spot bonus first. Design small, painless steps that allow people to gain familiarity with your direction. As people see themselves succeeding in the new system, they will come on board.

Every leader faces the threat of unintended consequences when they deploy something new. Fortunately, we have access to an unprecedented volume of research on human behavior. Look to that work to make decisions that affect your organization and your people. Give it the same emphasis as you would the technical aspects of your project. This will help you avoid false starts and mitigate those uncomfortable outcomes.

A project sponsor is the heart of any organizational change. Sponsors are critical – they clear the way and provide the fuel to keep everyone on course.

Sponsors are well-respected, credible senior leaders (executive or management team) who have overall accountability for the project. They ensure the project is aligned to the company’s strategy and goals. A project sponsor is personally vested in the success of the project and is active and visible throughout the life of the project

Here are a few tips for Effective Sponsorship on any project:

1. Own the Mission – Inspire the team toward a compelling vision. Make the project personal to focus the team’s attention on project goals.
2. Set the Direction and Course – Establish clear roles and responsibilities, expectations and timelines for your team. Make yourself available and be actively involved in key decisions.
3. Clear Obstacles – Make the project a priority. Eliminate other activities that might distract team members or divert energy and attention from the project. Have clear escalation paths for issue resolution and to manage risks impacting the project success.
4. Secure Resources – Commit the resources with the right skills and ensure funding is in place to support the project.
5. Lead the Team Toward its Highest Objective – Model the new desired behaviors. Respect and trust in the expertise of your team.

We have all been a part of projects that feel the lack of sponsorship. Being a project sponsor is not a one-time event. It requires sustained involvement throughout the project’s lifecycle.

Keep these simple actions in place and become the example for your company and team! It’s critically important to your organization’s success.