by Anne Adams, Chris Kingsley, Pam Smith

This article, the first of a series from Brandeis University's Center for Youth and Communities, examines the process of managing change. Drawing on their experience with organizations and communities over the years the authors explore change in an historical context, identify the barriers to achieving systemic change, and outline the elements needed to initiate, implement, and encourage change in the youth-serving field.

It has often been said that the only thing that is constant is change. In fact, the roots of thinking about change are documented early in history. The Roman poet Ovid (43 B.C.--A.D. 17) wrote,

...There is nothing in the whole world which is permanent. Everything flows onward; all things are brought into being with a changing nature; the ages themselves glide by in constant movement.

Even earlier, the Greek philosopher Heraclitus (544--483 B.C.) wrote that "change alone is unchanging," and "nothing endures but change."

Those in the youthwork profession would not argue with Ovid and Heraclitus. The rapidity and degree with which change occurs in modern society, however, complicates both the human and organizational experience. Shifting activities and emphases-with new and different people, with substitutes and alternatives, and with expanding technology-demand different skills for youth and adults alike, so they can cope with life and work. For instance, the shift from individual output to teamwork is a key change adjustment, as is the expectation for creativity and innovation. Increasing demands for empowerment and constructive regulation (self-sufficiency) in Community Youth Development work, welfare reform, the workplace, and so on, make change management a necessary developmental task of maturation. Organizationally and systemically, numerous issues and events require us to rethink how human service agencies and systems are designed. The changing face of our constituency, scarcity of fiscal resources, and new and complex job responsibilities demand new ways of doing business. New policies and legislation and the call for collaboration necessitate exploration of improved structures and processes in our work and our organizations. The very nature of progress is a demand for change.

The rapidity and degree with which change occurs in modern society complicates both the human and organizational experience. Shifting activities and emphases demand different skills for youth and adults alike, so they can cope with life and work.

Why Is Change So Difficult?
Logic tells us that, if change is such an historical constant, we should be much more used to it by now. We should know how to cope with it, accept it, plan for it, and manage it. The reality, however, is that we are not very comfortable with change. The concept of change is one we can all embrace: we intuitively understand that improving how we think about our work and how that work is structured is increasingly necessary for us to generate the array and quality of opportunities and supports we make available for young people.

Furthermore, we struggle with effectively organizing for tangible change. How does one handle ambiguity, resistance, fear of the unknown? Why are our attempts at change replete with false starts and plateaus? Why does change often occur so gradually, if at all? How do we really shape effective change?

The study of change is not new. How and why people change has been a focus of research and investigation over centuries; volumes have been written on understanding and managing change. We will not venture to synthesize the available literature here. Rather, our intent is to offer a practical perspective from the observations and experiences growing from our work with organizations and communities over the years. This, and subsequent CYD Journal articles, will examine the process of initiating, implementing, and encouraging an environment for change. Throughout, we hope to draw upon the body of knowledge and combined experiences from the youth-serving community in an effort to improve practitioners' facility to manage change.

Managing Change Is the Key to Change
We suggest that, rather than change itself, it is often ineffective management of change that creates stress among those called upon to implement it. Indeed, we propose that-like it or not-if people and organizations do not learn how to effectively manage change, they will find themselves managed by the changes that are as inevitable as the passing of time.

Youth-serving institutions spend considerable time, effort, and resources trying to change something. Their change efforts may be targeted within their own organizations or may be geared to cross-institutional partnerships. Anyone who has ever tried to alter an organization's or system's culture or tradition, or who perhaps has sought to change an apparently simple but well-entrenched operational procedure, can attest that achieving even minor institutional change is difficult. Those who bravely endeavor to achieve major systemic change-especially across multiple institutions driven by a complex array of ambitious goals-face an even more daunting task.

As people, organizations, and/or partnerships endeavor to institute change, they will choose unique routes. Progress and "wins" will occur in some areas, and commensurate celebrations will be in order. However, struggles, occasional defeats, and turf battles will also be the norm. Even the wins-giving us a respite from the ongoing struggles and an opportunity to catch our individual and collective breaths-can be dangerous. We become complacent, comfortable with the incremental changes that have occurred and convinced that perhaps just some change is enough.

In our experiences with communities, players involved in change efforts will typically say, "We want to move forward." This declaration is often followed by a set of questions (based on where the organization/community is in the change process) such as these:

• If we're embarking upon a new change effort, how do we start and what should we do immediately?
• If we're already midstream in a change effort, how can we improve on what we're doing?
• How do we organize our efforts?
• What should we do over time?
• Where do we go from here to achieve sustainability of the changes we seek?

To help practitioners manage the change process, we draw upon a six-element framework . . . We have applied this model to change efforts in many communities, and have found it to be an excellent framework for [organizing change] within and across institutions.

• Embarking upon a new change initiative
• Already into a change initiative and needing to step back before proceeding further
• Trying to change its own internal operations or initiatives
• Trying to spearhead a transorganizational partnership
• Trying to evaluate and then improve the operation of a partnership

To assist readers with their change efforts, we will investigate each of these six component steps in much more detail in future issues of the CYD Journal.

The Vision for Change
A vision is a detailed "big picture" of the end result that will be realized if all change efforts occur satisfactorily. A long-term vision, which describes what one is trying to change and what will ultimately be occurring among all key players after changes have occurred, is crucial to the success of any major change effort. The vision says,

Picture in detail what we'll all do and what will happen if everything works out right!

Creation of a cogent vision represents the starting point for all change efforts, and from it all subsequent steps can be drawn.

When a clear vision is developed by key stakeholders, and is adequately communicated to all levels of the organization, there is increased likelihood that people and institutions can find their places in the process and work in concert toward common goals. When the vision is developed without key stakeholders at the table, when it is unclear, or when it is inadequately communicated, confusion results. Some players may reject particular concepts because they are unhappy about some vague "it" (often because of incorrect perceptions), or they may expend significant energy tackling issues that are extraneous, of lower priority than what really needs to be addressed.

The Skills for Change
The issue of skills addresses the question,

Do the people and institutions focusing on this change effort possess the abilities needed to make the vision happen at a high level of quality?

When crucial skills are lacking, the players in the change initiative regularly find themselves experiencing stress and anxiety. They see what they're supposed to do, but wonder, "How do I do that?" While such individuals are sometimes forthcoming with their fears of inadequacy, many organizations do not invite this kind of exchange. Consequently, people often don't verbalize their fears-for to do so would be to admit weakness or incompetence. Instead, they object to the initiative by throwing up smokescreens about why the change effort is a bad idea.

The Incentive for Change
Incentive means ownership and buy-in among all players involved in the change process. Incentive comes alive during the vision-development process and addresses the two questions:

Why this vision?

What's in it for me, for those I serve, and for my organization?

Motivation theory and common sense state that people will devote strong effort to something that they value, and lesser effort to something they don't. People will work hard on something where rewards are tied directly to their efforts, and will avoid action if efforts carry with them the potential for punishment. Players and stakeholders must believe that called-for changes will be beneficial. If incentive is not adequately present among people at all levels, change will occur slowly at best; it may even be brought to a halt by individuals who play sabotage games because they have more incentive to hold on to the status quo than to move forward with change.

The Resources for Change
The issue of resources addresses the question,

Do we have what we need to do the job well?

Resources may include such things as program offerings, supplies, materials, equipment, space, funding, human capital, and certainly time. Allocation and coordination of these resources are also critical. For example, will funding allow the purchase of new equipment and supplies (e.g., computer hardware/software) to initiate more effective information management or training programs-and will staff have the time to become proficient in its use?

Change may occur even without adequate resources. However, it will take considerably longer and will regularly result in frustration among the players.

The Action Plan for Change
A realistic action plan provides people with the structure and direction they need. A well-conceived short- and long-term plan lets people know what their roles are, what they must do within those roles, by when, with whom, and how. An effective action plan uses "gap analysis" concepts to answer these questions:

Where do we want to go (vision, goals, objectives, outcomes)?

Where are we now (skills, resources, incentive)?

How will we get from where we are to where we want to go (structural components, prioritized tasks, processes, standards, guidelines, constraints, schedules, communication, roles, deliverables)?

How will we know how we are doing en route (accountability, quality criteria, feedback mechanisms)?

Evaluating to Produce Ongoing Change
Evaluation is an ongoing process through which one can identify progress and problems, spearhead improvements, encourage accountability, and keep up with other changes in the field. Questions that come to mind for individuals engaged in the evaluation process include:

How are we doing?

Where have we progressed-and where have we not progressed?

Are we achieving our goals at the expected levels of quality?

What's working well? What strategies/processes/activities must we revisit?

Without ongoing evaluation processes, a change initiative is doomed to remain static: it will reach a plateau and stay there. Even if it starts out strong, it will eventually reach a point that, while perhaps acceptable, does not enable optimal performance. Without ongoing evaluation, progress may be achieved, but the original vision or purposes may not be fulfilled and the change effort may not be able to keep up with the times. It is important therefore that each of the five other aspects of "managing change" have associated with them evaluation components that look specifically at midstream and ongoing performance, and outcomes in general.

Closing Thoughts
Managing change has been a recurring theme in our work over the past decade. Most requests for training and technical assistance continue to focus on aspects of change, whether or not the word "change" is used overtly. It is important to remember that substantial change does not occur overnight. Implementing the six key change components at a high level of quality will require significant, continuous efforts among multiple individuals and sometimes several institutions-probably over many years. We believe that the effort is worthwhile!

In keeping with the philosophy of academy and practice between partnerships such as the National Network for Youth and the Center for Youth and Communities, we hope to use this article as a venue to explore varied aspects of change agendas and human responses to those agendas. The aim of our efforts is to remove or significantly reduce the negative impacts of change upon the work we do with and on behalf of children, youth, families, and communities.

The authors invite readers to contact them with input, suggestions, questions, and/or field experiences with change efforts. Please email them at:

Anne Adams: anne.thomasadams@worldnet.att.net
Chris Kingsley: kingsleylc@aol.com
Pam Smith: psmith@brandeis.edu

Authors