A Rapidly Evolving World
Society, culture, and technology are changing at an unprecedented rate. Globalization ensures that what happens in one corner of the globe echoes in every corner. Adapting to rapid change is no longer considered a competitive advantage – it’s necessary for individual thriving and organizational survival.
As the need for real-time evolution increases, two related concepts have emerged: change management and Adaptive Capacity. While these terms are often used interchangeably, they represent distinct approaches to navigating change. Distinguishing their use cases helps us leverage each with greater impact in our quest to build organizations that are innovative, agile, and resilient.
Origins of Change Management
The origins of change management stem from the need for process optimization during the two Industrial Revolutions that occurred during the 19th and early 20th century. Due to the growth of automation, manufacturers looked for ways to cut costs by improving workflows. Two scientists, Frederick Taylor and Henri Fayol, pioneered the concept of scientific management – a field dedicated to ergonomics, standardizing processes and tools, employee selection and training, and performance-based pay systems. The work of Taylor and Fayol provided revolutionary insight into the factors that produce optimal employee performance. These insights culminated in the development of the field of change management – a discipline devoted to leveraging technical solutions and behavioral science to drive and implement effective change initiatives.
Problems Suited for Change Management
Change management methodologies support progress on large-scale complex, technical initiatives that include layers of decision-makers, streamlined execution, and widespread adoption. For example:
- Building a large data center – which requires municipal or county approval, employee and team engagement, structured project management, adoption of timetables, meeting budgets, etc.
- Reducing a university’s carbon footprint – which requires community buy-in, budget management, validation of building performance, etc.
Frameworks and Methodologies
At the core of change management is a robust foundation in behavioral science, emphasizing essential elements required for individuals, teams, and organizations to successfully modify behavior. Key frameworks and tools include:
- Communication Plans
- Metrics
- Incentives
- Accountability Structures
- Feedback Loops
- Project Management Schedules and Tools
Origins of Adaptive Capacity
In contrast to change management, Adaptive Capacity refers to the ability to learn new behaviors, build the resilience necessary to navigate ambiguity, and to thrive amidst change. With origins in evolutionary and systems biology (notably work by C.S. Hollings), organizational behavior (Otto Scharmer), and the field of leadership studies (Ron Heifetz and Marty Linsky), Adaptive Capacity embodies a multidisciplinary framework for navigating complexity and disruption.
The term “Adaptive Capacity” emerged from the work of two Harvard professors, Ron Heifetz and Marty Linsky, in the 1980’s. As the pioneers of Adaptive Leadership, they sought to understand why leadership initiatives on complex problems often failed. It turns out that a central reason why change initiatives fail is due to the misdiagnosis of problems. They suggest that distinguishing between technical problems – even complex, technical problems – for which procedure or process depends upon optimizing execution with expertise or authority, are quite distinct from “adaptive” problems – problems to which the answers aren’t clear, require human behavior change, and necessitate some or all stakeholders to accept uncomfortable forms of loss. Complex change initiatives often fail because these intractable, adaptive problems are treated like linear technical problems. As Heifetz suggests, adaptive problems have a host of defining characteristics which, in order to solve them, must include human dynamics, adult learning, experimentation, iteration, discovery, and management of the losses endured by the very stakeholders engaged in solution-making.
Problems Suited for Building Adaptive Capacity
Adaptive Capacity methodologies support progress on complex adaptive problems where human dynamics, losses endured by stakeholders, multi-layered and multi-scalar problems, and recurring challenges have led to repeat failure or loss of traction. For example:
- Organizational Culture Change – in which new behaviors must be generated by the same stakeholders who are part of the old, less effective culture.
- Caring for Aging Parents – for which a linear care plan is insufficient to address the implications of disability or for whom the psychological impact of loss of independence can lead to depression and a shedding of old identities.
Frameworks and Methodologies
Beyond building systemic awareness and tactical clarity on strategies for navigating change, Adaptive Capacity methodologies tend to be “longer-tail” (take more time), address the human dynamics that stymie change in the first place, and require new ways of thinking, doing, and being. Methodologies include:
- Executive / Individual coaching for behavior change
- Team development
- Training to extend skillsets and support adoption of new perspectives
- Organizational and individual diagnostic assessments to reveal new insights, blind spots, and gaps in behavior
- Adaptive consulting and peer-case consulting in which participants focus on systemic issues, barriers to change, stakeholders, factions, and experimental intervention to assess impact and progress
Final Thoughts
What’s the difference between change management and Adaptive Capacity?
Change management largely focuses on the technical aspects of implementing change – such as communication plans, incentive systems, and accountability structures. In contrast, Adaptive Capacity refers to the internal foundation of resilience and stability that allows individuals, teams, and organizations to withstand systemic pressures and persevere through change. Where change management is more process focused, Adaptive Capacity tends to be more developmentally focused, although performance benchmarks can be used with both.
Which is more effective—change management or Adaptive Capacity?
It depends. While change management ensures that the technical processes and accountability metrics are in place to successfully implement change, building Adaptive Capacity is equally essential. Change management alone cannot address the human elements of change – the emotional and behavioral shifts required for successful adaptation. Adaptive Capacity empowers individuals to endure the discomfort and uncertainty inherent with change, making it a key complement to the structured processes of change management.
Are both necessary?
Not always. While change management and Adaptive Capacity are often best applied together, there are situations where one may be sufficient. Consider an update to the behind-the-scenes existing IT security infrastructure. Although this is a change, it’s largely technical. No widespread, significant behavior change is required for adoption, so building Adaptive Capacity is unnecessary for the majority of stakeholders. Conversely, consider an organization deploying a new ERP or CRM solution. Here, change management alone is insufficient. The disruption caused by the new system requires not just learning a new system, but also requires individuals to buy into the new system, integrate it into their daily behavior, and shed old routines and behaviors tied to legacy systems. Adaptive Capacity fosters resilience, enabling employees to adjust, stay engaged, and maintain productivity in the face of transformation. In this light, deploying change management programs while concurrently strengthening Adaptive Capacity will enhance outcomes and create new solutions for adaptive problems.
The Consequences of Low Adaptive Capacity
Without Adaptive Capacity, individuals struggle to maintain equilibrium during disruption, leading to burnout and disengagement. Those with low Adaptive Capacity are often the first to give up prior to reaching their goals. When organizations lack Adaptive Capacity, they often fail to innovate and learn new behaviors in the face of economic headwinds.
At CLA, we integrate change management with Adaptive Capacity.
At CLA, we combine technical and adaptive strategies to provide comprehensive solutions that drive behavior change at the individual, team, and organizational levels. We understand the intricacies of behavior change and what it takes to create meaningful, lasting transformation. By blending our expertise with a deep understanding of the human response to volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and disruption, we empower our clients to navigate change effectively, achieve sustainable outcomes, build the muscles to thrive – not just survive – and create meaningful, lasting impact.