day 1 1410 - 1455 - maple - rt sundari

1

Change Management -A success story in a Government Organization

Ashutosh Pandey, R.T.Sundari

27 Septemper 2013

2Change Management- A success story in a Government Organization

Agenda

1. Introduction

2. Challenges faced in Government Organization

3. Change Management Model

4. Implementation of Change Management

5. Analysis of result after Implementation

6. Conclusion

3

INTRODUCTION

• The concept of "change management" is a familiar one in most

businesses today.

• Any change initiative is to steer the organization away from

where it’s currently headed to an enhanced and improved

future.

• Organizational change is something that occurs throughout an

organization’s life cycle.

• Change in the organization is required due to demand in the

globalization, ever changing technology.

Change Management - A success story in a Government OrganizationChange Management-

4

Challenges faced in the Government Organization

• Various mega software projects, the planning itself was more

complex.

• No defined requirements.

• Specification changes during project implementation were

frequent and inevitable.

• Scope creep and schedule missed very frequent due the client

non involvement.

Change Management- A success story in a Government Organization

5

Strategy to adopt Change Management (CM)

• To overcome the challenges faced it is felt to have change the• Working Mechanism

– can be changed by introducing new procedures, methods to attain better performance with available resources

• Organizational Structure – can be changed to be more responsive with external

factors i.e. customers, market competitions etc• Human behavior and Organization Culture

– can be redefined by training to managers and employees for new knowledge, skills and Right-Sizing


6

Change Management Models

• While there are many change management models, most

organization will choose at least one of the following three

models to implement the strategy:

1. Lewin’s Change Management Model2. McKinsey 7-S Model3. Kotter’s 8 Step Change Model

• While each one of the models has its own advantages and

disadvantages, one has to carefully analyze the model that best

suit to the organization and its culture.


7

Advantage of the Kotter’s Model

• The process is an easy step-by-step

• The focus is on preparing and accepting change, not the actual

change.

• Transition is easier.

“Hence Kotter’s Model was selected to implement the CM”


8

Kotters’ 8 step model

• 1. Increase the urgency for change.

• 2. Build a team dedicated to change.

• 3. Create the vision for change.

• 4. Communicate the need for change.

• 5. Empower staff with the ability to

change.

• 6. Create short term goals.

• 7. Stay persistent.

• 8. Make the change permanent.


9

CM in Organization structure

• The organization structure was built around domain areas.

• Project teams were formed within these domain, who were

responsible for design, development, testing and implementation.

• It is proposed to change the Organizational Structure from

Project base to Matrix Base


10

Analysis of Cost and Risks-Organizational vs Project level

Cost Risks

Project level •Project delays•Missed milestones•Budget overruns•Rework on design•Loss of work by project team

•Resistance – active and passive•Project put on hold•Resources not made available•Obstacles appear unexpectedly•Project fails to deliver results•Project is fully abandoned

Organizational level

•Productivity plunges •Loss of valued employees•Reduced quality of work

•Impact on customers•Impact on suppliers•Morale declines•Legacy of failed change•Stress, confusion, fatigue•Change saturation

If the change is not implemented

•Lost investment made in the project•Lost opportunity to have invested in other projects

•Expenses not reduced•Efficiencies not gained•Revenue not increased•Waste not reduced•Regulations not met


11

Challenges in Project Base Organization Structure

• Project documents like designing, review reports were prepared

after the activity of that phase is over.

• Similar modules/ functionalities developed by a number of

projects but components developed under one project were not

being re-used in other projects

• There was lot of rework in the projects and more efforts.

• Individuals and teams are continually ‘reinventing the wheel’.

• Simply do not know that what they are trying to do have already

been done by other teams.


12

Project base organizational structure


13

Implementation Change Management

• Keeping opportunities and challenges in mind, Centre evolved

some internal changes in its functional structures

• First step towards this was to identify the group which will

implement the change.

• Software Engineering Process Group (SEPG) was formed with

the representation from different technical groups

• Putting people at the top of the agenda with planning for

enhanced staff performance has become a key element of the

Strategy.

• change the organization structure by creating four groups’ viz.

Design, Development, Testing and Implementation


14

Implementation of Change Management

• This has helped in pooling the skill and talent in a group with a

clearly defined roles and responsibilities.

• The documentation has become a must from other group before

they start their work.

• The common repository system was created by the Quality

Assurance Group for easy handing of the documents from the

various groups and Core-Library for Re-Usable components.

• Baseline documents were uploaded in project repository for the

stakeholders to use.

• The vertical functional group and horizontal project team of

matrix helped to speed up the implementation.


15

Matrix based Organizational Structure


16

Problems after the Change Management

• Initially, the changes made in the structure did not go well in

between the groups.

• There have been barriers created between the groups leading

to water tight compartments.

• No accountability was felt by Design, Development and Testing

groups.

• The Implementation team always faced the pressure from the

clients.


17

Mitigation of the problems

• SEPG group has identified the Project Management Office

(PMO) to co-ordinate with different groups.

• PMO tracks the timeline and progress of the project and gave a

good support to implementation group.

• Weekly meetings were conducted by the PMO with the Team

Leads of different groups.

• Targets were fixed during the meeting and issues between the

groups were sorted out amicably.


18

Data collection and analysis

• Data of efforts, schedule, cost, no of bugs after deployment

were collected from different projects.

• With data analysis of the variance in efforts, schedule, cost etc

were calculated.

• After one year of change management the improvement were

felt.


19

Analysis of CSI after Change Management

• Customer Satisfaction Index

(CSI) was taken after one

and half years.

• During the project based

structure overall CSI was

between 1 and 2 whereas

the matrix based structure of

CSI was reached 3 on the

scale of 5


20

Benefit of Change Management

• Cost of implementation of projects lowered.

• Against size was compared the re-usable components; rework;

defects detected before delivery of the product and after

delivery.

• Reworking has reduced due to number of re-usable components

used in the projects.

• The defects rate after delivery was also declined


21

Project Base Vs Matrix Base Structure

Project Base Structure Matrix Base Structure

Projects

Size (No. of

Processes)

Re-Usable

Components

Rework (Man days)

Size (No.of

Processes)

Re-Usable

Components

Rework (Man days)

PGIMER 728 45 340 1625 124 201

GNCTD 446 14 225 1258 76 175

RIMS 875 7 324 986 49 115

SMS 678 17 275 625 29 121


22

Project Base vs Matrix Base Structure

Project Base Structure Matrix Base Structure

Projects

Defects

before Deliver

y

Defects after Deliver

yRedundancy %

Implementation Cost (INR)

Defects before

Delivery

Defects detected Delivery

Redundancy %

Implementation Cost (INR)

PGIMER 2673 215 42 5356.46 3678 202 12 3883.08

GNCTD 1463 175 54 5595.85 2458 124 6 3713.04

RIMS 1225 227 62 4172.00 2126 62 8 3768.51

SMS 1900 122 38 4737.09 1965 57 7 4389.60


23

Comparison of implementation cost between Project base vs Matrix base organizational structure

• Comparison of the Project

data between the two type

Organizational Structures

shows that there is an

average of 40% cost

reduction due to the Change

Management


24

Conclusion

• The organization was able achieve the milestones leading

towards processes and performance improvement.

• Resulted in the client and employee satisfaction.

• Change has Minimized Project Risks.

• Accelerated Project Benefits and Optimizing current & future

processes and structures.


25

Thank You

Ashutosh Pandey, R.T.Sundari

27 Septemper 2013

day 1 1410 - 1455 - maple - rt sundari

Business

change management models

organizational change

sizing change management

concept of change management

change initiative

actual change

change permanent

lewins change management