So far agile project management methods, e. g. Scrum, have been mostly employed in IT software development (Microsoft, Google etc.). Currently there are considerations on how to employ these methods in "classical" change processes. In this note we would like to offer you some ideas, which advantages could result when these methods are employed in change management from our point of view. We will concentrate on Scrum, since it is the best-known agile method.
Fig. 1: Change Processes - Scrum
1) In change processes objectives often cannot be clearly defined and are not clearly measurable. Even if objectives are described quite well, change projects are characterized by high complexity and connectivity. A linear achievement of targets as is sometimes desired by many managers, is not possible in that way. This can also be seen in the failure of many change plans. Agile methods such as Scrum expect exactly this concrete experience and imply the basic attitude that project plans cannot be sequentially broken down, if they want to be successful, but that they must be continuously adapted in iterative loops. That is why targets are repeatedly adapted to the current status quo in cycles, so called "sprints." One "sprint" usually lasts about two to four weeks. Within this time period / sprint the targets are not changed, however. This prevents exceedingly high expectations and attendant disappointments and frustrations, because adaptations in planning the new sprint can be made. At the same time, the team members discuss in a so called "daily scrum" what could be achieved in the last 24 hours and what not.
2) In classic processes employees are to be encouraged to participate in the change process in line with the motto "from affected to involved." The reality often looks different: Participation most often works in that way that participants take part in a survey and (are allowed) to visit a workshop which then reflects the results (if at all). Then life goes on as usual, except that a few colleagues have the possibility of participating in working groups, that recently have been described as "streams." Whoever is not a part of this is changed, but not involved. Thus, scrum relies on agile methods of self-organisation, which results in the fact that the members organise themselves on their own without instructions by the management on how to do their work in order to achieve the desired targets. Unforeseen obstacles (often labelled as resistance) are encountered on a daily basis and tried to be resolved by means of the "scrum master." This implies a direct participation of the employees with immediate feedback. The processes gain momentum and the possibility of actively being involved in creating change can be increased immensely.
3) Communication is considered one of the most important success factors in change mangement (refer e.g. to the study of Cap Gemini). The employees have to know what is going on and why it is going on. Open and transparent communication supports employees and executives in jointly promoting changes. In that regard communicational and informational processes must be shaped as such that they do not give the impression that it is only being talked and not authentically being acted. Talking and acting must be as close to each other as possible. For this purpose a culture is helpful that also allows critical feedback on the basis of trust. In the daily meetings in form of "daily scrums" as well as in the so called "retrospective," team members are enabled - with support of the "scrum master" - to argue constructively and to learn from mistakes. This can enhance the learning and performance culture of the company and simultaneously create a directconnection between talking and acting. The retrospective in change processes can be extended in that participants are being brought together across hierarchies in order to exchange their experiences.
Naturally, agile methods are no panacea, on the contrary: Their use should be well considered and the existing company culture should also be taken into account. If the prevailing culture is moreoriented to power and status, the successful use of agile methods such as Scrum is doubtful. If there is a rather open, curious and innovative company climate, however, we think that there are numerous chances for a senseful use of agile methods for handling pending changes.