企业变革为什么这么难

    我想，作为工商业者，我们中间没有哪个人需要别人来说服他相信提高灵活性和适应能力的重要性。我们日常工作的特征就是变化迅速、充满未知和起伏不定。

    不过，大多数人都会承认，做出改变很难。有人说：“我们善于实施较小的改变，但不善于进行重大的战略性调整”；或者说：“我们启动了调整计划，但似乎总也不能顺利完成”；甚至有人说：“我们的调整措施过多，但还是没有切中要害。”

    这些话都有实例为证。2008年，IBM对15个国家和地区的1,500多名企业高层人士进行了调查，结果发现几乎60%的管理者都在这方面遭受过挫折，有的人未能实现某个主要目标，有的甚至以全面失败告终。在这之后，牛津大学（University of Oxford）也在研究报告中指出，IT项目耗费的时间和成本通常都会超过预期，只有16%的项目能按计划完成。

    并购是企业做出改变的动力之一，但它一直很难给股东带来价值。20世纪80年代以来的大多数研究都表明，破坏、而不是创造价值的并购所占的比例高达70%。2012年6月，卡斯商学院（Cass Business School）在《首席财务官》（CFO）杂志上发表报告称，该学院研究了1997-2010年英国公司实施的3,000多次收购，结果表明，成功收购所创造的价值多于失败收购所破坏的价值；但报告同时也承认，收购失败的比例约为60%。

    如果企业适应能力的核心在于对成功的改变进行管理，那么失败率为什么还显得这么高呢？打造真正灵活的企业，也就是不仅欢迎改变、而且把改变视为活力源泉并主动改变的企业时，都会遇到哪些障碍呢？

    失败的原因通常都能归结为下列四种中的一个：没有愿景、中层管理人员毫无活力、对改变缺乏理解以及没有好的方法来衡量改变，实现改变。

    要鼓励创新，企业就必须能够开展合作，同时突破企业内部和企业之间的界限，以便把完全不同的经验和观点整合起来，同时恰当地允许人们想出办法进而完成改变。换句话说，我们必须建立不同的企业文化和运作方式。

    这些是适应能力中的软因素，但也是最关键的因素，它们为改变创造条件。同时，它们更难理解，也更难实施，这就是人们为什么会如此经常地低估这些因素。

    在改变如何真正发挥作用这个问题上，专门追踪和衡量公司变化的澳大利亚公司ChangeTrack Research拥有我所见过的最大数据库。十年来，这家公司追踪了各式各样的企业调整计划，涉及大量企业。借助ChangeTrack Research公司，我们可以非常清楚地看到真正影响企业变化的主要因素有哪些。

    它的研究成果印证了这样一点，那就是管理层不投入、缺乏热情或者不参与是公司进行调整的最大障碍。

    那么，如果要通过持续的投入和持久的热情来建立信任，我们应该如何创造出相应的环境和机制呢？

    I don't think any of us in the business world need to be persuaded of the importance of becoming more agile and adaptive. Fast-pace change, uncertainty, and volatility are the lexicon of our work lives.

    What most will acknowledge, though, is that change is hard. "We're good at the smaller change, but we're not good at the big strategic change," or "we start change programs, but we never seem to finish them properly," or even "we've got too many change initiatives but are still missing the point."

    The evidence backs these perceptions. A 2008 study by IBM of more than 1,500 executives across 15 countries found that almost 60% failed on at least one major objective or failed entirely. More recent research by the University of Oxford reported that IT projects typically take longer than planned and cost more, with only 16% of projects hitting their targets.

    As a driver of business change, M&A has also struggled to deliver value for shareholders. Most research since the 1980s suggests that as much as 70% of deals have destroyed rather than created value. A Cass Business School study, reported in CFO Magazine in June 2012, examined more than 3,000 UK acquisitions by UK companies between 1997 and 2010, and found that successful deals create more value than unsuccessful deals destroy, but still acknowledged that the failure rate was around 60%.

    If managing successful change is at the heart of being adaptive, why are the failure rates apparently so high? And what are some of the barriers to creating truly flexible organizations -- organizations where change is not only welcomed but seen as energizing and engaging?

    The typical culprits tend to fall in one of four categories: A lack of vision, middle management permafrost, a lack of understanding about change, and a lack of good methods to measure and implement change.

    To encourage innovation, companies have to be able to collaborate, work across boundaries within and between organizations, to bring together disparate experiences and perspectives, and to properly empower people to come up with ideas and make change happen. In other words, we have to build different corporate cultures and ways of working.

    These elements are the "softer" side of adaptability. But they are also the most critical enablers of change, and they are harder to understand and to put into effect, which is why they are so often underestimated.

    Change Track Research in Australia has the biggest base of data I have seen on how change really works. They have tracked hundreds of change programs of all types over a wide range of companies for 10 years. This has provided great insights into what really are the major influencers of change.

    Change Track's findings reinforce the point that things like a lack of management commitment, passion, and involvement are the greatest barriers to change.

    So, how do we create the kind of environments and organizations that build trust through consistent commitment and passion?