Change Management

If you live in the Mid-Atlantic region and don't know what PJM Interconnection is, pay attention. PJM was founded 99 years ago to manage the distribution of electricity over Pennsylania (P), New Jersey (J), and Maryland (M). Since then, the nonprofit company has expanded to include Delaware, Virginia, West Virginia, Ohio, Washington DC, half of Kentucky, and significant parts of Michigan, Indiana, North Carolina, and Illinois (including Chicago). It is the largest single power grid in the United States. Headquartered in Valley Forge, PA, PJM provides electricity to 67 million Americans. PJM coordinates the movement of electricity between all the different power companies within its service area, such as PECO in Philly, Delmarva Power in Delaware, and all the other power companies listed in the graph. PJM operates as a traffic cop for electricity generators, making sure that power plants (gas, coal, nuclear, etc.) operating in its service area are distributing electricity as needed across the entire grid so that no area goes without necessary power. Think of what air traffic controllers do at airports, guiding the planes in and out, making sure there is order and no mistakes, 24 hours a day. PJM does that with electricity. The problem is the rapid proliferation of AI data centers, particularly in Northern Virginia and Maryland (around DC) which is the most concentrated collection of data centers in the USA. These data centers just plug into the PJM grid and started sucking up power to the point that PJM is running nearly all the time at max capacity. If you live here and haven't felt the impact of electricity price increases, you will soon. Many power companies have price caps in place, but that won't last. In capacity auctions, where power resources commit to be available in years ahead, prices have gone parabolic; from $2.2B to $14B (a 536% increase), largely due to forecasted load growth from data centers. It's a challenge to generate a political solution with governors of both parties in the service area. Plus, the Trump Administration is now getting involved. The Energy Secretary and Interior Secretary hosted 13 state governors involved at the White House 1/16 where there was an agreement on 2 key principles: 1- Emergency Power Auction - the idea is to compel data centers to participate in financing new power plants by buying 15 years of power in advance. Data centers would bid for these contracts, hence the auction. 2- Price Caps - to shield the 67 million Americans from exponentially higher electric bills, it is proposed to cap electricity bills for 1-2 years. It is unclear who will absorb the risk and cost to make this happen. In many states price caps are already protecting Americans. If a solution can't be reached soon, it is increasingly likely that rolling blackouts will happen across the service area during high-load periods (extreme heat or extreme cold). Be prepared. #riskmanagement #interestrates #fedpolicy

I was shadowing a coaching client in her leadership meeting when I watched this brilliant woman apologize six times in 30 minutes. 1. “Sorry, this might be off-topic, but..." 2. “I'm could be wrong, but what if we..." 3. “Sorry again, I know we're running short on time..." 4. “I don't want to step on anyone's toes, but..." 5. “This is just my opinion, but..." 6. “Sorry if I'm being too pushy..." Her ideas? They were game-changing. Every single one. Here's what I've learned after decades of coaching women leaders: Women are masterful at reading the room and keeping everyone comfortable. It's a superpower. But when we consistently prioritize others' comfort over our own voice, we rob ourselves, and our teams, of our full contribution. The alternative isn't to become aggressive or dismissive. It's to practice “gracious assertion": • Replace "Sorry to interrupt" with "I'd like to add to that" • Replace "This might be stupid, but..." with "Here's another perspective" • Replace "I hope this makes sense" with "Let me know what questions you have" • Replace "I don't want to step on toes" with "I have a different approach" • Replace "This is just my opinion" with "Based on my experience" • Replace "Sorry if I'm being pushy" with "I feel strongly about this because" But how do you know if you're hitting the right note? Ask yourself these three questions: • Am I stating my needs clearly while respecting others' perspectives? (Assertive) • Am I dismissing others' input or bulldozing through objections? (Aggressive) • Am I hinting at what I want instead of directly asking for it? (Passive-aggressive) You can be considerate AND confident. You can make space for others AND take up space yourself. Your comfort matters too. Your voice matters too. Your ideas matter too. And most importantly, YOU matter. @she.shines.inc #Womenleaders #Confidence #selfadvocacy

70% of change initiatives fail. (And it's rarely because the idea was bad.) Here's what actually kills transformation: You picked the wrong change model for the job. It's like performing surgery with a hammer. Sure, you're using a tool. But it's the wrong one. I've watched brilliant CEOs tank their companies this way: Using individual coaching (ADKAR) for company-wide transformation. Result: 200 people change. 2,000 don't. Running a massive 8-step program for a simple process fix. Result: 6 months wasted. Team exhausted. Nothing changes. Forcing top-down mandates when they needed subtle nudges. Result: Rebellion. Resentment. Resignation letters. Here's what nobody tells you about change: The size of your change determines your approach. Real examples from the field: 💡 Startup pivoting product: → Used Lewin's 3-stage (unfreeze old way, change, refreeze) → 3 months. Clean transition. Team aligned. 💡 Enterprise going digital: → Used Kotter's 8-step process → Created urgency first. Built coalition. Enabled action. → 18 months later: $50M in new revenue. 💡 Sales team adopting new CRM: → Used Nudge Theory → Made old system harder to access → Put new system as browser homepage → 95% adoption in 2 weeks. Zero complaints. The expensive truth: Wrong model = wasted months + burned budgets + broken trust Right model = faster adoption + sustained results + energized teams Warning signs you're using the wrong model: • High activity, low progress • People comply but don't commit • Changes revert within weeks • Energy drops as you push harder • "This too shall pass" becomes the motto Match your medicine to your ailment: Small behavior change? Nudge it. Individual performance? ADKAR it. Cultural shift? Influence it. Full transformation? Kotter it. Enterprise overhaul? BCG it. Stop treating every change like a nail. Start choosing the right tool for the job. Your next change initiative depends on it. Your team's trust demands it. Your company's future requires it. Save this. Share it with your leadership team. Because the next time someone says "people resist change," you'll know the truth: People don't resist change. They resist the wrong approach to change. P.S. Want a PDF of my Change Management cheat sheet? Get it free: https://lnkd.in/dv7biXUs ♻️ Repost to help a leader in your network. Follow Eric Partaker for more operational insights. — 📢 Want to lead like a world-class CEO? Join my FREE TRAINING: "The 8 Qualities That Separate World-Class CEOs From Everyone Else" Thu Jul 3rd, 12 noon Eastern / 5pm UK time https://lnkd.in/dy-6w_rx 📌 The CEO Accelerator starts July 23rd. 20+ Founders & CEOs have already enrolled. Learn more and apply: https://lnkd.in/dwndXMAk

I just watched a brilliant young mind quit after his first performance review.  The system didn't fail, it worked exactly as designed. And that's the problem. A close friend's son called me yesterday asking for advice. This kid has always been exceptional - top of his class, and one of the most hardworking young minds I know. He joined a company last year, excited to prove himself. His first performance review just happened. They put him on a PIP for "team collaboration issues." Here's what actually happened that past year: + On-time, flawless project delivery. + Zero complaints from stakeholders. + Often stayed late to get things right. But he wasn’t loud. He didn’t hang around in Slack threads and coffee chats or networked just for the sake of being visible. He focused on the work. And that somehow became a problem. When he called me, his voice was shaking. "I keep questioning myself. Maybe I really am terrible at my job." Just imagine an A-player, now doubting his entire future because our review systems punish introverts, misfit metrics, and non-traditional brilliance. I told him what I'm telling you: You're not the problem, kid. The system is. Four decades in this industry, and this still breaks my heart every time.  We're crushing exceptional talent with processes designed for a different era. We measure yesterday's activities instead of tomorrow's potential. The best leaders understand that real performance happens in real-time, not annual reviews. They coach continuously, celebrate wins immediately, and address challenges before they destroy confidence. ✅ Netflix eliminated performance reviews entirely.  ✅ Adobe replaced them with ongoing conversations.  ✅ Google shifted to quarterly goals with continuous feedback. These aren't experiments, they're competitive advantages. While traditional companies waste months on review documents nobody reads, smart organisations invest that time in actual development conversations that drive results. We need to replace annual reviews with monthly check-ins that matter. And most importantly, replace the assumption that people need to be "reviewed" like products with the understanding they need to be supported, challenged, and trusted to grow. That young man will find a company that values his work ethic over his small talk skills. His former employer will keep wondering why they can't retain talent while using the same broken processes. The difference will transform one organisation and devastate the other. So, stop managing performance like it's a quarterly report. Start enabling it like it's a human being's career and dreams. #performancereviews #thoughtleadership

Climate Risks Are Financial Risks An alarming USD 1.14 trillion in corporate value, linked to the world's largest stock markets is exposed to severe socio-economic impacts from #climatechange by 2050. Data from the Climate Hazard and Vulnerability Index (CHVI) highlights a critical blind spot for many businesses: 📌 48 countries will be highly vulnerable to socio-economic climate impacts by mid-century, double today’s figure. 📌 Major emerging markets are expected to face significant climate-related disruptions. 📌 India alone accounts for over USD 1 trillion of the at-risk corporate assets, dramatically impacting global markets and supply chains. 🚨Companies must place dedicated climate leadership at the highest level to proactively identify risks, anticipate market disruptions, and strategically invest in long-term resilience. 🚨 Businesses should move beyond physical hazards to systematically report and manage socio-economic climate vulnerabilities. Transparent, detailed disclosures help stakeholders understand risks and encourage informed investments. 🚨 Corporates must prioritize investment in resilient infrastructure, diversified supply chains, and sustainable practices, particularly in vulnerable regions. This strategic foresight protects operational continuity and market valuation. The globalized nature of corporate operations means that climate vulnerability anywhere becomes a financial risk everywhere. 🌱 Is your company equipped with climate leadership at board level? Read more here 👇 https://lnkd.in/eFnsnjyY #ClimateRisk #ClimateLeadership #SustainableGovernance #ESG #BoardGovernance #InvestmentStrategy #Resilience #ClimateAction

For years, the biggest players in CPG and FMCG—Unilever, Nestlé, Kraft Heinz—built their empires on food. But now? They’re making a massive pivot..if you had told me 5 years ago that these brands would be pulling back from food, I would’ve raised an eyebrow. -Unilever is cutting loose its $8 billion ice cream division, choosing to focus on higher-margin beauty and wellness. -Nestlé is doubling down on health-science-based nutrition as food brands struggle with pricing power. - #CPG giants are seeing stronger growth in self-care, supplements, and skincare than in traditional food categories. The global personal care market is expected to hit $758 billion by 2030, while processed food growth slows. Why This Shift? 1. Margins in food are shrinking. Consumers are trading down, private labels are winning, and inflation-wary shoppers aren’t absorbing cost hikes like they used to. 2. Health & wellness are driving premiumization. Customers will pay more for skincare, supplements, and functional beverages—but not for basic pantry staples. 3. Brand loyalty in food is eroding. Over 50% of consumers are comfortable switching food brands based on price, but loyalty remains strong in beauty, healthcare, and wellness. Winning Brands Are Already Moving: -L'Oréal’s skincare division posted 9.1% revenue growth last year, while traditional CPG food brands saw single-digit declines. -The Coca-Cola Company is investing in functional drinks and non-carbonated wellness categories to stay relevant. -PepsiCo’s biggest success? Gatorade’s expansion into hydration and performance-based drinks, not soda. CPG Leaders: ✅ Stop thinking of food as the core driver of growth. Instead, align with evolving consumer behavior. ✅ Invest in personalization, self-care, and functional health. That’s where demand (and pricing power) is strongest. ✅ Rethink your brand mix. Is your portfolio weighted toward categories that will still be relevant in 5-10 years? So, here’s my question to FMCG execs: Are you future-proofing your brand strategy—or just managing decline? Let’s talk. #FMCG #CPG #ConsumerTrends #GrowthStrategy #Beauty #Wellness #RevenueShift #BrandEvolution "

Just out in Harvard Business Review, summary of the Hybrid Experiment results and lessons on how to make hybrid succeed. Experiment: randomize 1600 graduate employees in marketing, finance, accounting and engineering at Trip.com into 5-days a week in office, or 3-days a week in office and 2-days a week WFH. Analyzed 2 years of data. Two key results A) Hybrid and fully-in-office showed no differences in productivity, performance review grade, promotion, learning or innovation. B) Hybrid had a higher satisfaction rate, and 35% lower attrition. Quit-rate reductions were largest for female employees. Four managerial lessons 1) Hybrid needs a strong performance management system so managers don’t need to hover over employees at their desks to check their progress. Trip.com had an extensive performance review process every six months. 2) Coordinate in-office days at the team or company level. Schedule clarity prevents the frustration of coming to an empty office only to participate in Zoom calls. Trip.com coordinated WFH on Wednesday and Friday. 3) Having leadership buy-in is critical (as with most management practices). Trip.com’s CEO and C-suite all support the hybrid policy. 4) A/B test new policies (as well as products) if possible. Often new policies turn out to be unexpectedly profitable. Trip.com made millions of dollars more profits from hybrid by cutting expensive turnover.

Louder for the people at the back 🎤 Many organisations today seem to have shifted from being institutions that develop great talent to those that primarily seek ready-made talent. This trend overlooks the immense value of individuals who, despite lacking experience, possess a great attitude, commitment, and a team-oriented mindset. These qualities often outweigh the drawbacks of hiring experienced individuals with a fixed and toxic mindset. The best organisations attract talent with their best years ahead of them, focusing on potential rather than past achievements. Let’s be clear this is more about mindset and willingness to learn and unlearn as apposed to age. To realise the incredible potential return, organisations must commit to creating an environment where continuous development is possible. This requires a multi-faceted approach: 1. Robust Training Programmes: Employers should invest in comprehensive training programmes that equip employees with the necessary skills for their roles. This includes on-the-job training, mentorship programmes, online courses, and workshops. 2. Redefining Hiring Criteria: Organisations should revise their hiring criteria to focus more on candidates’ potential and willingness to learn rather than solely on prior experience or formal qualifications. Behavioural interviews, aptitude tests, and probationary periods can help assess a candidate's ability to learn and adapt. 3. Partnerships with Educational Institutions: Companies can collaborate with educational institutions to design curricula that align with industry needs. Apprenticeship programmes, internships, and cooperative education can bridge the gap between academic learning and practical job skills. 4. Lifelong Learning Culture: Encouraging a culture of lifelong learning within organisations is crucial. Employers should provide ongoing education opportunities and support for professional development. This includes continuous skills assessment and access to resources for upskilling and reskilling. 5. Inclusive Recruitment Practices: Employers should implement inclusive recruitment practices that remove biases and barriers. Blind recruitment, diversity quotas, and targeted outreach programmes can help ensure that diverse candidates are given a fair chance. By implementing these measures, organisations can develop a workforce that is adaptable, innovative, and resilient, ensuring sustainable success and growth.

Most changes fail, especially if they are complex. But why? The Lippitt-Knoster model explains exactly why you don’t get what you want. Making changes is notoriously difficult, especially if they are substantial and complex. In response, there are many change management approaches and step-by-step instructions for managing change. But, to manage change, it is essential to first understand it. Once we know the key ingredients of a successful change, we know what it takes to make it. Even more importantly, once we know these ingredients, we also know WHY a change fails, so that we can do something about it. According to the Lippitt-Knoster Model for Managing Complex Change, a complete change effort requires the following six ingredients: 👉 Vision: sets the direction and explains why the change is needed 👉 Consensus: creates alignment and commitment for the change 👉 Skills: outlines the skills and expertise needed to realize the change 👉 Incentives: creates the motivation and drive to make the change 👉 Resources: enables the change with the needed time, money and tools 👉Action Plan: clarifies the roadmap and steps for realizing the change All six are needed. Consensus was added later by Knoster and it’s not so clear if both originators agree. Yet, I find it essential for any change to be successful, so you need all six. If you miss one you don’t get the change you want. ❌ Miss Vision and you get Confusion ❌ Miss Consensus and you get Sabotage ❌ Miss Skills and you get Anxiety ❌ Miss Incentives and you get Resistance ❌ Miss Resources and you get Frustration ❌ Miss Action Plan and you get False Starts So, here is what it takes to make a successful (complex) change: Step 1: Vision. Create and share a clear vision of the change and why it is needed. What will the new situation look like? Step 2: Consensus. Engage people across the organization to gather input and align their viewpoints in line with the vision. Step 3: Skills. Identify which skills are needed, provide the necessary training, upskill or attract people with the right skills. Step 4: Incentives. Understand what motivates people and create the right mechanisms for intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Step 5: Resources. Reserve enough time and money for making the change and obtain the necessary tools, technologies and other resources. Step 6: Action Plan. Develop a high-level roadmap and detailed action plan that outlines the priorities, order and steps for making the change. === Want to create true and lasting change? Then the Certified Strategy and Implementation Consultant (CSIC) program may be something for you. For more information and registration for the September 2024 cohort of this exciting program, and booking a call with our enrollment advisor, visit our website strategy.inc. 

Ever heard of the Lippitt-Knoster Model for Managing Complex Change? It's a classic in the change management world, laying out the essential pieces needed to navigate big transformations. Taking a cue from that, I've adapted it to fit the world of digital transformation. There are seven key elements you can't afford to miss: Vision, Strategy, Objectives, Capabilities, Architecture, Roadmap, and Projects & Programs. Skip any one of these, and you're asking for trouble. Here’s why each one matters: • 𝐕𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧: This is the 'what' of your transformation. A clear vision gives everyone a target to aim for, aligning all efforts and keeping the team focused. • 𝐒𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐠𝐲: Think of this as the 'why' and 'how.' A solid strategy explains the logic behind your vision, showing how you plan to get there and why it's the best route. It’s designed to guide everyone in the company on how to make decisions that support the vision, aligning all efforts and keeping the team focused. • 𝐎𝐛𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐬: These are your milestones. Clear, specific objectives make it easy to measure success and ensure everyone knows what's important. Without them, you can easily veer off course and waste resources. • 𝐂𝐚𝐩𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐞𝐬: These are what your company will now be able to do that it wasn't able to before in order to achieve the objectives. These can be organizational capabilities (like improved decision-making), technical capabilities (such as real-time operational visibility), or other types like enhanced customer engagement or streamlined processes. • 𝐀𝐫𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞: A robust architecture ensures all your tech works together smoothly, preventing inefficiencies and costly headaches. This includes various types of architecture such as data architecture, IT infrastructure architecture, enterprise architecture, and functional architecture. Effective architecture is central to reducing technical debt and aligning software with broader business transformation goals. • 𝐑𝐨𝐚𝐝𝐦𝐚𝐩: Your roadmap is the game plan. It lays out the sequence of actions, helping you avoid uncertainty and missteps. It's your guide to getting things done right. • 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐬 & 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐦𝐬: These are where the rubber meets the road. Actionable projects and programs turn your strategy into reality, making sure your plans lead to real, tangible outcomes. From my experience, I think '𝐂𝐚𝐩𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐞𝐬' and '𝐑𝐨𝐚𝐝𝐦𝐚𝐩' are the two most overlooked. What do you think? ******************************************* • Follow #JeffWinterInsights to stay current on Industry 4.0 and other cool tech trends • Ring the 🔔 for notifications!