By Debbie Nicol, Founder, 'business en motion' & 'embers of the world'

Change may be imposed or planned.  Planned change often happens in organizations, and can be effectively or ineffectively managed.  When effectively managed, it follows a structured process, achieves intended outcomes, incorporates dedicated roles and resources, has defined activities, supplements the technical aspects of change, and ensures long-term sustainability of a change that will withstand the test of time.

Can the same be applied to imposed change?  One such example, redundancy, can take us all by surprise.

Why is it that an organization will treat imposed change differently?  Do we think that fast reactive action will be a case of ‘out of sight, out of mind’? Can imposed change not still benefit from long-term sustainability implications?  The current credit crunch is providing a plethora of examples of redundancy management. What better time for CEOs and decision makers, to:

• Increase opportunities for people to support and partake in the change (both those made redundant and those surviving the wave of redundancy).

• To surround themselves with committed ambassadors (both those made redundant and those surviving the wave of redundancy).

• To create success stories, and branded packaged experiences, which in turn become long-term selling and PR elements for both the individuals and corporate culture.

• (For organizations) To cement the need for change to become a senior-level competency rather than a one-off activity.

For those leaving the organization, those left behind,  and for all decision-makers of organizations, what opportunities can be found in the following questions?

How are current actions serving the future?

What is the alignment between what you say and what you do?

What opportunities exist for positive to be extracted from negative?

What will be identified from current actions?