Change Management

A railway track stretches across a lush mountainous landscape under a vibrant sky, capturing the serene beauty of nature at dusk.

Even with all of the tools, expertise, and political will, change is hard. Perhaps it is not human nature to change, or perhaps it is the diversity of incentives that drives each individual's behavior, that makes changing a collective so difficult. Nevertheless, there are some behaviors that have overtime, proven more effective than others. In this essay, I hope to shed light on those practices, in the hopes that others will find both value and efficiency in their own endeavors. Since procurement is at the heart of my experience, the examples herein will focus on that particular brand of bureaucracy, however, I would contend that these lessons apply far more broadly to bureaucracy change writ large.

1. Start Small

2. Maintain Alliances

3. Take none of the credit but all of the blame

Start Small

It is not that small endeavors are easier than large ones, many times it can be as difficult if not more so. Small projects often lack senior or even mid-level awareness, which is often necessary for implementing out-of-cycle activities or waiving standard operating procedures. Also, small projects often lack the potential reward for taking a seemingly large risk. Nevertheless, it is precisely this obscurity, which makes small projects ideal for creating the initial spark from which a big bang may occur. In these small efforts, you can experiment and establish precedents of success or learn from failure without the fanfare that a flagship program might draw. These are not irrelevant projects for which there is no value, they are simply ones that would likely have gone largely unnoticed had nothing out of the ordinary occurred. It is here where the reward equation tips in favor of the change agent.

A small figurine dressed in bright yellow casts a long shadow on a concrete surface, creating a striking visual effect in the sunlight.

A small failure can likely be recovered quickly and realigned. A small success, however, can serve as a case study for future implementation with slightly larger stakes. Change is a marathon, not a sprint! It is often the largest acquisitions that get the attention and demand change. Yet there are thousands of small procurements that consume more resources than they provide. Implementation of streamlined acquisitions commensurate with the risk makes sense. If it did nothing more than free resources to focus on the more complicated large acquisitions, thus reducing bottlenecks, that might be enough. However, it does far more. It demonstrates that the monsters in our closets are nothing more than the figment of our imagination; a set of rules created in response to a single lapse in judgment rather than empirical evidence. Small wins scrape the calcification away which increases mobility for larger movements.

Other Transaction Authority is an example of this. It allows for the process to be reimagined and has demonstrated the value of down-selections, challenges, and increased collaboration with industry throughout the process. It is already clear, where mistakes have been made, that the same calcification can grow, however, it has also proven that these practices can be adapted to other purchases as we are seeing more so under federal supply schedules acquisition and those purchased using simplified procedures.

Maintain Alliances

When implementing change, it is common to make those whose job it is to maintain order and structure, or in other words “bureaucracy” agitated. It is often their very role to minimize risk through the execution of procedures that, have over time, proven to provide at least a tolerable level of risk management. It is a case of the “devil you know, versus the one you don’t” only in this case you are the devil they do not know.

There are two approaches to this resistance. There is force and there is flow. In the force model, presuming some level of endorsement, the change is driven over (or perhaps through) the resistance by relying on top cover, empowerment, and sheer confidence. While this often works and is sometimes quite necessary, it is imperative to remember “every action has an equal and opposite reaction.” While it is highly likely that the desired change will occur, it will undoubtedly result in increased antibodies to future change and resentment from the very individuals who will be charged with maintaining or supporting the change in the future. The battle may be won, but at what cost? Alternatively, the flow model suggests, that resistance is rarely best met with equal or greater resistance. When attaining flow, energy is used, if perhaps redirected, such that momentum is created without expending more energy, that is to say, “1+1=3.”

A diverse group of professionals join hands in a symbol of teamwork and collaboration, smiling and united under the bright sky.

Understanding concerns and providing risk mitigations that offer greater reward than the perceived risk, while aligning outcomes with stated needs is often far more effective in obtaining buy-in from key stakeholders and decision-makers. This can only be accomplished through a thorough understanding of their perspectives, concerns, and needs as well as an established understanding of the framework within which you hope to create change. Force may result in the same outcome, but will create scar tissue; flow may take incrementally longer but will often result in muscle memory which will serve to support future activities; fast is not fast, smooth is fast.

Changing the way you procure and ultimately the way in which what you procure is delivered has impacts on external organizations. Security and Configuration organizations, for example, may have very different priorities, and forcing them to a model which does not align with theirs is rarely effective in the long term. Using healthy User Centered Design practices, understanding their needs, and establishing an approach that allows them to be effective and confident will increase the likelihood of success. Understanding they are the experts in their respective fields is essential, as they are often the most capable of helping navigate the terrain.

Take none of the credit, but all of the blame

Change has risks. It is likely you will fail, starting small and obtaining buy-in decrease the impact of failing, but failing is part of learning. It is absolutely essential that it is clearly stated upfront and honestly upheld post-execution, that you “take none of the credit but all of the blame.” There is no glory for the change agent, it is the satisfaction of change that drives them and the courage to face the potential flashback of failure which sets them apart. Ensuring stakeholders that the risk is yours and yours alone, that you will take the blame and stay around to clean up the debris while ensuring that success is theirs, is not only right but necessary.

A polished and imposing suit of medieval armor stands as a testament to the craftsmanship and artistry of historical warfare.

Change is a matter of creating instability for the purpose of growth, however, that instability is often not something that most stakeholders are asking for or overtly willing to accept. It is only through selfless commitment that one can gain the trust and support of those who are most affected and who are required for enduring success. The measures of success in any acquisition are difficult: reaching an award before an often arbitrary timeline, without a successful protest, and resulting in a capable contractor (something often not known until later) are essentially the only metrics. This makes it difficult to promise change that can be measured through an objective lens. The lack of objective metrics makes it far more difficult to obtain buy-in. Regardless, when wins occur they are clear and very real. Awarding a new contract in less time than the existing schedule would release the requirement or obtaining the first deliverables in less time than the previously anticipated award are clear wins. Allowing those that went along with the change ownership of these wins is important to build trust, therefore, ensuring future support; future support is what it is all about.

Change is Hard…

There is no single solution, change is as much intellectual as it is emotional intelligence. Change requires understanding there is a better approach, a deep understanding of the rules and policies under which the status quo exists, and responsible risk-taking. It is through these principles, which one can experiment, learn, and grow through the creation of momentum and the selfless reward of those who are willing to step outside of their comfort zone to support it.

Change Management