These two models have traditionally not been all that connected. Project Managers, in general, have an understanding of the people component but do they fully appreciate that it is the very key element of ensuring the successful delivery of their initiative? Project Management through its very nature implies that some form of change will take place and that it will do so in a structured and controlled manner. This raises the question: “If we are willing to carefully manage the tangible concepts of a change project, should that not include the people? Are people as a resource, tangible?” They sure are. In fact, to consider the people side of any change project requires much more focus and energy than dealing with the other resources involved. The debate has since shifted not to whether it is important to change manage, but to when should change management and project management be introduced.

Timing

Project management delivers its value through controlling costs, quality and deadlines during the phases of implementing transformation. Change management delivers value through the adoption of the project or change by the people it impacts. We should explore the timeliness of applying the change principles.

When do we involve a change manager? In essence, the question translates to: “when do we consider the people impacted by the project to be important?” It reaches wider than that if we understand that it is also people performing the activities throughout the lifecycle of the project, people who need to be familiar with the bigger picture and how their efforts add value to the end goal.

That roughly translates to there being two types of stakeholders when a project starts. Those performing the project, the doers, and those whose business as usual lives will be changed by the project, the receivers. These two groups should already be identified during the definition of a business case and should be defined in detail as soon as the business case gets approved. So, to answer the question of when… There is no better time than right in the beginning whilst the benefits and reasons for embarking on a project are being defined. It is a change manager who will elaborate on the two groups of stakeholders and build roadmaps of their journey ahead.

Why then?

The work to understand these stakeholders and to determine their influence over the achievement of the benefits starts there. It then continues as a process containing elements like:

• Analysis and planning;
• Assessment of impact;
• Communication and engagement;
• Knowledge and skills transfer;
• Support and readiness, and
• Change sustainability.

Clearly, to complete such steps will require time and dedicated attention.

Common mistake

The mistake is often made to bring change management on board right at the end of a project and just before a certain change is launched. This is done to ensure the people will now be brought on board to receive a change. The biggest hindrance with this approach is that it requires change management to be some sort of a magic psychology that convinces people in an instant how much the change is exactly what they want. It reminds me of the traditional villain in many a superhero tale. With such magic, one manipulative character could control the behaviour of all humans on earth from a central point where there is most probably a large stirring pot present.

Getting involved late

If it so happens that a change manager is then asked at a very late stage of a project to produce some sort of adoption success the approach in my opinion should be kept simple. Fundamentally the change manager should ensure that the people have ALL the related information available that will help them to make decisions and choices for going forward. The good thing of a late stage is that most of the facts are defined and available and it can be shared. There is no time for ambiguity or uncomfortable corridor talk as the change is about to go live.

Conclusion

Change management is strong enough and in fact important enough to be its own discipline. It attempts to look after the most unpredictable resource when going through any transformation. This being said we should probably apply logic and conclude that it requires as much time to affect the desired outcome as is available. It needs to consider people when benefits are defined right through to where the benefits are being realised because in the end it is all made possible or impossible by the behaviours and willingness of people.