Imaginist35’s Weblog

Just another weblog

Peter Duschinsky, Imaginist – he can help you ensure a successful change project outcome

I have been a management consultant focusing on best practice for more years than I care to think about, and for the past 8 of these, I have operated as the Imaginist – someone who can analyse, think logically and laterally, diagnose underlying causes of problems and facilitate change.

There are 3 stages to this:
1. Imagine it
2. Structure it
3. Make it happen.

The first stage is about understanding what is going on and uncovering the risks and barriers to change. Too often, change projects are planned and implemented with little real insight into the organisation’s underlying culture and process capability weaknesses. These will slow down or even stop a project delivering the desired benefits.

– Does your organisation suffer from internal politics, silo working and distrust across departments?
– Do people like to ‘do their own thing’ and find work-arounds whenever they can?
– Are you overloaded with initiatives?

The more ambitious the project, the more people are affected, the more these weaknesses will block buy-in, undermine take-up and sabotage compliance to new ways of working.

It’s not sufficient that you recognise these barriers – you have to be able to convince the Board, project sponsors, budget-holders etc of the time and resources that need to be allocated to deal with them.

An Imaginist works by talking to stakeholders, developing an understanding of the underlying culture and process capability issues and putting this into a structured diagnostic framework which enables him to quantify their impact on the ROI of the project. Spreadsheets – that’s the language a senior manager understands!

So at the second stage, ‘Structure it’, the emphasis is on developing the route-map and action plan that the project team need to tackle the risks and barriers and to ensure the project goes smoothly and to plan.

Then, ‘Make it happen’ is a matter of supporting the in-house team with the skills and tools they need. Because the first two stages have identified exactly where the barriers to change lie,
it won’t cost a fortune to apply these precisely where they are needed to achieve a successful outcome.

The Imaginist can help you ensure a successful project outcome.

For more details, contact Peter Duschinsky on
or visit his website:

September 8, 2010 Posted by | business change management, project and programme management | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

How to de-risk your project – for free!

If you are planning to introduce big changes into the way your organisation works, then you will not be happy to learn that 70% of such projects fall short of realising their objectives – indeed 24% are written off completely!

If it is critical that your project delivers, wouldn’t it be good if you could  find out whether your project is going to succeed or fail? Well, you can.

We have developed a methodology to predict whether your project will succeed or fail. And we are offering a FREE Project Readiness Healthcheck so that you can see for yourself how it works.

The Imaginist Company is an independent Change Management Consultancy, established in 2002 
to help clients realise the benefits from modernisation and transformation projects. In 2006 we began development of a project readiness assessment methodology and we now work with a small group of expert, hands-on consultants to help clients achieve the full planned benefits from their projects. Between us, our group has helped over 100 satisfied clients in the UK and around the world.

Our Change Equation assessment methodology helps clients deliver successful projects by identifying organisational culture and process capability barriers that could block change and quantifying the potential impact of these barriers on the project’s ROI.

If you are interested in obtaining your FREE healthcheck, all you have to do is send us a copy of some project documentation – for example an ITT – which sets out the scope and objectives of the project. We will obviously treat this in complete commercial confidence. Within 24 hours you will receive an Executive Summary report on your project and a link to a full web-based report, available only to you.

The report will be based on the data contained in your documentation, combined with our knowledge of industry standards and norms. It is possible that you have already recognised and planned to address the risks we identify. However it is our experience that the issues that our approach focuses on are often not fully covered by standard risk analysis methods.

For more information or to take up our FREE offer, email: or visit our website:

We look forward to hearing from you!

July 23, 2010 Posted by | business change management, Project Readiness Healthcheck | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Change Equation – an excellent tool to help make change happen

At a software quality workshop a few years back, I asked a group of 25 software project managers:
“When a new system is implemented to improve efficiency, who is responsible for actually achieving the benefits?”
“I am” said one project manager.
“Really?” I said.
“Oh, I see – it’s the software supplier” came the response.
“Really?” I said, again.
After a pause for thought: “You mean it’s the client”
“Okay – but who?”
Tentatively: “The department manager?”
Silence, from me… “The system users?”

No doubt you are way ahead of me… But this is a serious point. Unless the people actually using the new system or improved process are involved in planning and implementing the changes to the way they work, the project will not realise the anticipated benefits. As the comedian George Carlin famously put it: “I put a dollar in one of those change machines. Nothing changed.”

It’s people, not systems and processes that are the drivers for change. We all know this, so why is it so hard for us to put this understanding into practice? Sometimes it is the culture of the organisation that works against gaining involvement and commitment at the local level. Often the ‘technology push’ mentality still prevails – it’s the IT department’s responsibility to manage IT projects. Maybe the management board or the politicians have set the deadlines and they are unrealistic, so they haven’t allocated enough budget, time and skilled resources to ensuring that people are fully bought in. But unless people are fully bought in, of course, nothing will get done.

One of the best ways to articulate this – and a useful tool when trying to get change to happen – is the Change Equation:

 V * F * D > C

Originally developed by David Gleicher in the ‘60s , this has been adopted and adapted by consultants under many names and in many guises over the years. My version has evolved in use and differs in emphasis slightly from the original. Here’s a quick run-through of the way this equation works.

C = Cost of Change
Change is difficult and scary. It’s expensive and distracting. It takes us out of our comfort zone and demands that we confront our fears (‘Do I have the skills?’ ‘Will I screw up?’ Will I have a job afterwards?’). This fear creates inertia, or worse – it can push people in the opposite direction, fleeing and hiding from the need to change. If the cost of change is so great, what do we need to do to create the momentum to overcome it? Well, the first element is Vision.

V = Vision
Any project needs a shared vision to ensure everyone is moving in the same, new, direction. This vision will have emerged from the analysis of the problem being tackled. In most transformation projects, that analysis will have included carrying out a top-down diagnosis, followed by consultation and brainstorming to arrive at something tangible and coherent – the basis on which people can move forward together.

Is having a Vision sufficient to overcome the fear and inertia of change? Maybe not… How often have you been carried away with enthusiasm by a good presenter, setting out their vision, then found the enthusiasm dissipates little by little as you get back to your day-to-day problems? So having a Vision on its own is not enough to drive change. One of the reasons for this – and a primary cause for change projects to deliver poor results – is that the vision (the project’s objectives) is often not sufficiently clearly understood by all the stakeholders – it is not really SHARED. The degree to which stakeholder perceptions differ, provides a good predictor of the problems that will occur when implementing the changes.

Even where the vision has been successfully communicated, it seems that it is not enough on its own to drive change. Why? Because it does not place sufficient focus on the practical steps that need to be taken to implement the change. Which leads me to the next element in the Change Equation:

F = First steps
To drive change, we need to have the first steps clearly set out. These might be in the form of a route-map or project plan that people can understand and use to develop their own plans for the action they need to take. Only at this level of practicality can we engage people and gain some degree of commitment. Is having a Vision and clear First steps enough to overcome the fear and inertia of change? The research carried out when the model was first developed suggested that even when the first steps were clearly set out and everyone knew what they had to do, change still didn’t happen.

What’s missing? It’s the energy and momentum for change. And where does this have to come from? The project champion? The project manager? No… it has to come from the people who need to make the changes – the system and process users. It’s only when people have convinced themselves that things are NOT okay and that there is a need to do something about it NOW, that new ways of thinking can be introduced. Then you can tap into the energy that’s needed to overcome the resistance and inertia. John Kotter, in his book Heart of Change , calls this ‘Raising the sense of urgency’. In the Change Equation its:

D = Dissatisfaction
Unless people can tell you why things have to change, they won’t. A good approach to focus people on this issue and get them to think about it, is the use of the ‘Incisive Questions’ technique.

Here’s an example of a recent conversation:
“Do your projects come in on time and achieve their objectives in full?”
“Most of them”
“What percentage don’t?”
“Oh, probably 10-20%”
“How much does this mean you are losing in cost benefits every year?”
“I don’t know – maybe £xxxk”

“Really?” (showing your surprise should make your victim a bit less complacent about this loss) “Are you happy about that?”
“Well no, I suppose not…”

Notice how each question asks for more detail, driving the respondent to think deeper about his own statement. When they have expressed dissatisfaction with the situation they are in, you can come in with the new idea:
“Would it be useful if we worked out you how you can cut this waste in half so you could use the resources to deliver more projects and increase profit?”
“Er, yes – how do we do that?”

Notice that the idea was phrased so that ‘we’ would work together and ‘you’ could make the improvement. The final ‘yes, how do we do that?’ is the signal that you have triggered the necessary dissatisfaction and have their permission to start tapping into the energy for change. So now the equation looks like this:

Vision + First steps + Dissatisfaction > Cost of Change

Except that I need to do one more thing. The ‘+’ sign suggests that you could take any element out and the equation will stand. You have seen that’s not the case – all three elements on the left hand side of the equation are essential to overcome the inertia and enable change to happen. So I need to change the operands to ‘x’:

Vision x First steps x Dissatisfaction > Cost of Change

And that’s the Change Equation!

[This is an excerpt from my book: ‘The Chaange Equ>tion’, published Nov09 and available from Amazon]

June 1, 2010 Posted by | business change management, knowledge management, project and programme management | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The cost of a failed project is not just what you spent on the project

Are you expecting your next business transformation project to deliver the full planned benefits, on time and within budget?

Really? So what are you going to do differently this time? Or were you just keeping your fingers crossed and hoping for a miracle? You can’t afford to invest in a transformation programme that does not deliver the results you need – look at the cost implications:

Typical change project

You need to achieve efficiency savings of £200k pa by bringing in a new web-based system.

The software licence and web costs will be £40k and it will cost £150k to implement (including allocation of in-house project management and training resources).  The plan is to roll out the system across the organisation over 18 months

So your 3-year business case looks like this:

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Total /3
Licence, web costs pa £40,000 £40,000 £40,000 £0
Implementation costs £100,000 £50,000 £0 £0
Total Costs £140,000 £90,000 £40,000 £90,000
Savings £50,000 £175,000 £200,000 £142,000
Net £-90,000 £85,000 £160,000 £52,000

Return on investment is +57%, and you hit your full efficiency savings target levels by mid-year 2.
But what happens if the project slips by 6 months?
The 3-year ROI drops to just +2% and it takes over 2 years to reach your efficiency target – but you are also 33% over budget and your implementation resources are tied up on this project, so something else isn’t being done in time either.

What if the project fails completely?
What happens if you cancel the project after 2 years, because it is clear that it will never bring in the full benefits? You have wasted £280,000 and over £400,000 in lost efficiency savings, but that’s not all – you probably have had to take action to limit the impact of the failed project, which may cost you several times what the project cost.

HP’s project managers knew all of the things that could go wrong with their ERP centralisation programme in 2004. But they just didn’t plan for so many of them to happen at once. The project eventually cost HP $160 million in order backlogs and lost revenue — more than five times the project’s estimated cost.

So if you could avoid the second scenario, it would be worth £100,000 and if you could avoid the last scenario, you’d be at least £680,000 in pocket.

What do these figures look like for your project?

If you are interested, we do have some answers…

April 12, 2010 Posted by | business change management, project and programme management | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Change management – tapping into the sub-conscious brain of an organisation

Those of you who are familiar with NLP will like this:

The ‘external’ aspects of an organisation are: its structure, policies, processes, governance, budgets, efficiency etc… These can be seen, defined, mapped, measured, changed and improved.

The ‘internal’ aspects of an organisation are: its culture, people’s attitudes and concerns, values, informal knowledge sharing etc… These are far harder to get at and therefore more difficult to change.

Change management supposedly concerns itself with the internal aspects, with the purpose of empowering people to make change happen.  But too often it actually focuses on the external aspects, seeking to control the changes by designing and implementing a ‘change programme’: consultation, training and targeting. The more complex a project, the more this approach doesn’t work. Compliance and take-up is poor and benefits don’t get realised. 

In trying to find a way to explain this to project managers who don’t see the difference between project change control and change management (or choose not to), I stumbled upon the following analogy: 

In NLP we say ‘the conscious brain doesn’t drive behaviour – it’s the sub-conscious brain’. And if we want to effect a change in behaviour, we need to reach the sub-conscious brain. So if you say you want to give up smoking, or lose weight, or overcome your fear of snakes,  or hights, or public speaking, an NLP practitioner knows it’s no good talking to you sensibly and rationally, telling you why you should change. You have probably told yourself a thousand times already and it didn’t work. What is needed is to get your conscious brain out of the way and have a dialogue with your sub-conscious brain.  Hypnosis is often a good way to achieve this.

Well, the same goes for organisations!  It’s not the conscious organisational ‘brain’ – the external aspects, that need to be addressed. It’s the sub-conscious brain, the way people feel about working in the organisation, their confidence in their role and relationships, the levels of trust and respect and concern they have for each other and, in the end, their commitment to making things work better.

So the kind of change management I mean, needs to operate at this emotional and sometimes apparently irrational level. And while I do not advocate hypnosis – although it would be interesting! – we do need to use similar, ‘internally’-focused, techniques …such as inspiring, involving, empowering… to get the conscious brain out of the way and appeal to people’s inner selves, their instincts and their creativity.

Its a thought, isnt it!

February 8, 2010 Posted by | business change management | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The world is getting worse for programme managers

I just saw a survey which confirmed something I suspected from my own research: the world is getting more difficult for people responsible for bringing in change projects and programmes successfully, leading to more failed projects and managers spending longer at work, trying to overcome the barriers to successful change.

The Arras People 2010 Project Management Benchmark Survey confirms that:
“a whopping 74% of Programme managers work more than 40 hours per week out of which 40% put in more than 48 hours. This figure is up by 10.3% from the data collected 12 months ago.  Over the twelve month period the Project and Change Manager spreads have shown a slight increase in hours worked. The support group however have seen two interesting moves which indicate additional pressure; firstly an increase in the numbers working < 35 hours by 2% suggesting additional part time roles whilst a 12% increase has been reported in those working more than 40 hours.”

It was already clear from the Standish research that the number of successful projects is falling:  32% in 2009, down from 35% in 2006.  Unless we think there was a drop in project and programme management skills – unlikely – the world we operate in has become that much more challenging.

One of the key reasons for this, the fast-changing economic circumstances, reinforces our view that change programmes have to be phased into short projects so that the risks associated with TIME are reduced.  Time is one of the 3 risk factors we look at in our Exponential Complexity model. (The other two are No of Stakeholders and No of Processes affected.)

As the world becomes a less friendly place for project and programme managers, tools like our model become even more important in your armoury. More on our website:

Happy New Year?

January 13, 2010 Posted by | business change management, project and programme management | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Change Equation

Wouldn’t it be great if someone had worked out an easy way to predict whether your change project was likely to succeed or fail?

Well, someone has! Peter Duschinsky’s new book, The Change Equation, now available from , sets out the principles of an assessment methodology which does just that!

The Change Equation is based on three key contentions:

  1. The success or failure of a change project is dependent on the complexity of the project being within the capability of the organisation
  2. The management of change cannot be achieved within the lifecycle of the project – it has to start earlier to prepare for the project and go on afterwards to embed the changes
  3. Management typically:
  • underestimates the complexity of the project, and
  • Is unwilling to invest in change management early enough

In practice, Peter tailors his approach to suit each situation, but there is a basic 6-step process that underpins every assessment, using models and tools based on our unique methodology:

The 6 steps

  1. Map the dominating Organisational Culture and Business Process Capability currently present in your organisation and combine these into an Organisational Capability indicator
  2. Test for shared objectives and assess the complexity of the programme, then analyse the gap between the Organisational Capability and the complexity of the programme
  3. Look at other factors that will impact on success, such as: trust and relationships within your organisation and with external stakeholders; benefits realisation planning; the robustness of the IT plan
  4. Review and analyse these findings and estimate the likely impact of the indicators on the business case
  5. Workshop these results with senior management to confirm or refine the findings and ensure their understanding and ownership of the issues
  6. The outputs from this process are a Culture Change Route Map and a prioritised Action Plan which addresses the identified barriers and risks.

Peter’s approach is based on 30 years of consulting experience, condensed into simple-to-understand models and tools which allow you to quickly identify and quantify the barriers to success.

Here is an example of a project that was planned to roll out within a year and recover its costs within eighteen months.

business case calc

If you are facing the prospect of a change project that is being forced through by senior managers without the necessary attention to culture and process barriers, read the book or have a look at the excerpts on Peter’s website.

And take advantage of our new offer – a FREE Project Readiness Healthcheck!

Good luck!

December 18, 2009 Posted by | business change management | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The multi-faceted customer

Customer service is supposed to be the single most important driver in public sector organisations.

The customer is, of course, all of you, as citizens, tax-payers and consumers of services. Notice that this means you are actually wearing 3 hats – 4 if you include how you interact with government in your business roles. So we are not dealing with a simple relationship here.

For example: let’s take waste management – if I ask you what you want as a consumer, it would be excellent service. As a tax-payer, you’ll say; but not at the cost of extra taxes. As a citizen, you will probably say: do something about recycling and sustainable energy.

Or how about care for the elderly? As a consumer, perhaps with elderly parents, you’ll want care provision to be much better than it is today. As a tax payer you’ll say: but I don’t want to have to pay for all those other people going into care homes. As a citizen, you’ll say: I am not happy about what happened to my next-door neighbour.

So who the ‘customer’ is and what they want is quite complex. And one of the problems is that first Thatcher, then Blair oversimplified it – most of the changes in government policy since the 80s have focused on the citizen as consumer and ignored our role as tax-payers and citizens. So choice of hospital is fine except it doesn’t translate into a good emergency service when we – or someone we know -needs it.

What that has done is:
– Raised our appetite as consumers for personalised service, where and when we want it
– Increased the cost of providing these services at a time when we would like to pay less
– Ignored our concerns for the interest of our community – people we identify with – as well as ourselves
– And therefore it has ignored the possibility that we would be prepared to ‘put up with’ lower standards of service in some things if we could count on other aspects being there when we needed them.

Overall the shift in focus to consumer has not improved our customer experience. So what would make us more satisfied? Recognising the complexity and subtleties of our multiple roles and attitudes and giving us and our communities what is important, at a cost we agree with.

It would be interesting to explore whether this ‘multi-faceted customer’ model could be used by the private sector to inform how companies can improve customer experience.

May 18, 2009 Posted by | business change management, project and programme management | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Be the best you are!

Its tough in business today. And probably getting tougher tomorrow. But when the recovery comes, are you going to ready to take advantage of it?

What’s your vision?

Whether it’s increasing your market share by 20% or transforming the way you do things to improve productivity and profitability, the secret of your success will be the way your people pull together to make it happen.

Anyone can help you articulate the vision and develop the Action Plan. But it is much harder to build the change-enabled, can-do culture that will make it happen.

That might sound like hype but its not. Most change programmes suffer from the lack of objective, quantified measurement of the ‘soft’ aspects – the focus on people. And its the people who have to change how they work, in order for the organisation to improve its performance.

But management culture does not have to be ‘soft’, nebulous or touchy-feely. Using the right models and tools, it is possible to quantify barriers to change and make them tangible, to measure the shifts in attitude and motivation needed for change to happen and to develop a well-defined programme to move culture change forwards along a clearly delineated route. That programme has to start with an assessment of the organisation’s culture today and its capability to handle change.

A Management Culture Evolution model provides the basis for the analysis and the route-map for the business transformation manager to take an organisation’s people up the ‘spiral of success’ towards becoming an aligned, empowered workforce, sharing knowledge, working with advanced IT tools and managed by visionary leaders capable of making far-reaching, well-founded decisions.

Does that sound like where you are now? No?

I’m not surprised! Most organisations have a bureaucratic and ‘tribal’ culture, where work is managed and rewarded according to laid-down policies and targets, rules and procedures which have become barriers to change rather than facilitators of efficiency. Silo working blocks the sharing of ideas and knowledge across groups and departments.

Staff in this culture tend to focus inwards, at local group or department level and see other groups and departments as the enemy. They spend a disporportionate amount of time focused on those relationships, building up walls around themselves to stop the others being able to come in and take what is theirs. These walls slow down the organisation’s responses to the outside world. They also block the alignment of the individual with the corporate goals, because they have insulated themselves from those goals.

The information you need to perform effectively in an organisation like this may not be available, or if it is available, it may not be of good quality, because others don’t see your need as a priority. What top management knows is governed by the way that information flows, and that is likely to be delayed, distorted and channelled via the hierarchical structure, so they won’t know what is actually happening out there.

Does that sound more familiar?

Changing a culture like this means reinforcing people’s confidence in their own importance to the organisation, while slowly unpicking ‘selfish’ behaviour. It means developing cross-organisation communication networks and getting people to understanding the end-to-end nature of what they do – in detail, not just the process maps the consultant left behind from the last reorganisation. It means giving people more responsibility for deciding how they work, within this more aligned culture.

Then, when decisions are made, they need to be made from bottom up as much as from top down. Superficial, ‘tick the box’ consultation won’t wear with a more empowered workforce.

Can you do that? Can you be the best you are?

April 17, 2009 Posted by | business change management | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Your route-map for fast and successful change

Most change programmes fail – that’s official.

Here is an approach which taps into some powerful models and tools to ensure that yours isn’t one of them. We call it the Change Equation.

The key is to generate an understanding amongst Board Directors of the complexity of the project, relative to the capability of the organisation to handle change. In other words: is this feasible, within the planned timescales and resources?

In order to achieve this, you need to establish:

  • The organisation’s culture
  • It’s capability to manage standardised processes
  • The degree of trust and respect between people – or the lack of it
  • The level of complexity of your project – is it too ambitious in the context of the first 3 factors?

Each of these must be measured and a ‘gap analysis’ carried out, to provide a top-level complexity/capability assessment. We call this the Project Readiness Healthcheck.

A full Healthcheck requires 5-10 days on-site, depending on the size of the organisation. The data generated is conveyed into a series of dashboard indicators:

These are then discussed with senior management at a half-day workshop, in order to get them to ‘own’ the issues and develop strategies to deal with them.

The strategies are written up as a Route-map for change, together with an Action Plan which would often include preparative work with managers and staff across the organisation to shift perceptions and enable culture and process transformation.

There’s more about the Change Equation and the assessment methodology at

And we have just announced a FREE 24-hr Project Readiness Healthcheck, based on project documentation, as a ‘taster’ for prospective clients.

You can contact me at

June 16, 2008 Posted by | business change management, Project Readiness Healthcheck | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment