Throughout the preceding chapters, reference has been made to the need to engage and manage stakeholders of all types through the data strategy definition process to ensure you have traction. This is essential to avoid developing the data strategy in a vacuum, the likely outcome of such a situation being confusion, resistance and ignorance of what the data strategy is, why it has been produced or where it fits in the wider purpose of the organisation. I have seen organisations where this has been the case, and it is not a good place in which to be – on the back foot, justifying your actions and the value the data strategy brings, defending why no one knew about it and a presumption that their teams have not been involved in its production.

Let’s recap on some of the important ways that communication should have been managed throughout the data strategy definition phase before we get into readiness for the conclusion of drafting the data strategy, transitioning into formal sign-off.

In Chapter 2, the importance of understanding alignment to the corporate goals was addressed, highlighting the need to engage more widely with those who devised these and to explore how the data strategy should support the successful delivery of these goals. The concept of ownership of the data strategy was also explored, to understand the route to engage with those who are leaders in the organisation to get sponsorship and commitment to the data strategy at the right level. The CLEAR acronym highlighted the importance of stakeholder engagement as an integral part of leadership and to retain engagement with stakeholders to ensure relevancy.

Chapter 3 built on the scope and context of the data strategy to position it appropriately within the organisation and to frame how it contributes to, and is dependent on, other strategies and activities within the organisation. These need to be agreed with stakeholders so there is a clear mandate to operate that can open doors and also give credibility to your task.

Chapter 4 focused heavily on the role of stakeholders to ensure there is full understanding of the stakeholder map you need to manage as you move ahead – those who contribute to the data strategy and are impacted by it need to buy in to the concept and approach, as well as those who will approve it. The PRIDE acronym acts as a good guide to ensure stakeholder management has been considered every step of the way to have a successful outcome and to review and iterate progress frequently.

Chapter 5 highlighted the role a route map needs to play in ensuring all parties are aligned and in agreement on the approach to be taken. It covered the need to keep the data strategy route map grounded, and to ensure that there is communication at all times to give confidence to those who will take the data strategy into implementation that they have got the right level of engagement with stakeholders from the outset.

Finally, Chapter 6 reviewed the need to balance ambition with keeping stakeholders onside in terms of relevance and being assured on feasibility in the delivery stage. The importance of clarity as to what the scope of the data strategy is, to avoid confusion or conflict with other activities, was outlined, whilst recognising the data strategy is not prescriptive in the detail needed to execute.

All of these steps are critical to have a high probability of a successful outcome when the data strategy is presented for approval and resources are assigned to commence implementation. This may sound like the end of the process, so what more could there possibly be to consider in communicating the data strategy in order to succeed?

In the first half of this book, I have sought to create a platform for you to be ready to succeed as you head to strategy implementation. It is a significant achievement if you have made it through to being ready to implement the data strategy, and I do not wish to diminish your success; many do not reach this point so you have already achieved what many others do not get to experience. Enjoy it. There has been a lot of effort in getting to this point and it is a time for recognition and reflection on how far you have come. However, we start to turn the corner from here, turning the strategy into reality through the implementation stage, and this is where the scale of shifting an entire organisation can become overwhelming without sufficient preparation to ensure you are ready for the next phase.

Before embarking on strategy implementation, communication needs to be providing a sound platform on which to build your drive to execute the data strategy. At this stage, the data strategy should be signed off, of course, so there will be a communication requirement to publicise this fact, recognise the sponsor and the programme lead, and the compelling reason why a data strategy is right for the organisation. This needs to recap the high-level points in the data strategy, so those who have not read it or been involved know what it entails, what it means for them and what the implementation approach will involve. You should use this as your reference point in the future, as it should act as a useful launch pad for your future activity.

This may be the first time you have implemented a strategy of any sort, or you may be an experienced hand at this who has plenty of scars to show from previous difficulties you have encountered in convincing those you work with that this is something they want to embrace. Either way, I hope to provide some steers as to what you might encounter, and how to be ready for it.

A big part of what lies ahead is navigating your way through the culture of the organisation, charting a course to a successful implementation programme. You will discover the change readiness of the organisation, and may have already established that either a lack of readiness or resistance to change will be a challenge that lies ahead in your preparation for implementation. There is a need to anticipate resistance and to engage proactively to find a way through it – your job is not to change the culture, but to work with it, find a way to embrace it and to ensure you are not be blocked or prevented from making progress in the implementation of the data strategy.

7.1 ‘CULTURE EATS STRATEGY FOR BREAKFAST’

Every organisation is different, and every function and every team are different within an organisation. It is fascinating to observe, as I have done through periods in my career delivering interim programmes in a variety of organisations, just how strong the ‘local’ culture can be and yet how intangible it is, as probably nothing will be documented to reflect that culture. Organisations have values, commitments, mission statements, visions and a plethora of other seemingly corporate messages that appear designed to say ‘this is how it is round here’, but the larger the organisation, the more fragmented and distanced these will often be in the reality of day-to-day operational activity.

Do not be surprised to find subtle differences in culture based upon location – even from one office to another in the same city – or function. A finance function will be very different in outlook, focus and therefore culture to a sales function, whilst an operations team will often be a tight unit focused on getting the job done with a distinct camaraderie compared to a marketing or other corporate support function that may be a group of experts and creatives who contribute as individuals to the team goal. Even subsidiaries within an organisation may be quite different, even though they may share branding, values and overall direction, simply because of history, product focus or their own perceived importance within the organisation. Certainly, investment banking arms of most financial institutions have historically felt very different places to their retail networks.

Most organisations would point towards a corporate culture – one that is enshrined in documents, intranets and items displayed prominently on office walls – to suggest that this is the culture of their organisation. In many cases, this passes for an aspiration, where the organisation aspires to be, but is likely unsure how to get the employees to fully buy in to this model. No matter how much training, reinforcement of messages from the top of the organisation or encouragement through the management chain, if it isn’t what employees truly feel or recognise as their culture, then it is a false premise to base any expectation on a forced model of culture.

As a result, the corporate culture operates at a different level to the ‘way we do things round here’ culture, which is about established (but undocumented) norms and practices that have evolved and become established through habits, behaviours and precedence. The concept of having to ‘fit in’ with those around you leads to most people acquiescing to become part of the group, a tribal instinct to be accepted and not to stand out or challenge authority within the group.

The importance of understanding both the corporate culture and the local norms in the teams you deal with cannot be overstated. This will make or break your strategy implementation, regardless of the level of support you have within parts of the organisation or the mandate you have to make it happen.

So, what can be learnt from the case study above – one of the biggest failings in recent times in merging two large organisations? The corporate culture you are going to engage with will be prepared for the theory of what has been proposed, having been involved and party to the formulation of the data strategy as outlined through the preceding chapters. However, think about the stakeholder groups you are about to encounter and, in particular, their ‘local’ culture and the way in which they manage and exploit data. Use the network of contacts you have established throughout the data strategy definition process to gauge resistance to the future implementation and capture thoughts as to how to engage the audience – it will differ, depending on the function, leadership and nature of work undertaken, so do not rely on a ‘one size fits all’ communications strategy.

The quote used for this section of the book is attributed to Peter Drucker⁴ and was used by Mark Fields, President of the Ford Motor Company, who had it on a wall in a conference room and further added: ‘You can have the best plan in the world, and if the culture isn’t going to let it happen, it’s going to die on the vine.’ People are now more aware of the impact of culture than ever before, though the subsequent limitations in strategies of all kinds fulfilling their potential demonstrates limited understanding of how to address it.

So, does culture eat strategy for breakfast? It does if you are not prepared for it, and find yourself on the plate rather than cooking the breakfast. However, there are ways to navigate around culture in your data strategy implementation, and some of these will be adaptable to your own organisation and the circumstances you find yourself in. There is more on culture later in this chapter.

Do not underestimate the challenge that culture will pose, ensure you have undertaken the appropriate preparation and be aware of the pitfalls to navigate your way around them.

7.2 BARRIERS TO CHANGE

The natural reaction of people is to resist and challenge change, often due to the element of familiarity, knowing what the way of doing things is, even if those approaches are not universally liked. Put this into a team environment and it multiplies, with many unwilling to subject their colleagues to the sort of upheaval many associate with change. It is also a fact that most organisations handle change ineffectively, which leads to either failure or suboptimal outcomes and a legacy of poorly initiated change due to it not being fully implemented as intended.

Resistance to change is not a new concept. Lawrence identified failing to understand resistance as a cause of failure in change programmes as long ago as 1969.⁵ Yet, numerous reports over the last decade or so have consistently found around a 40–60 per cent failure rate in change programmes, with resistance to change consistently one of the top reasons given. In the 2016 Deloitte Global Human Capital Trends report,⁶ only 19 per cent of respondents believed they had the ‘right’ culture to be able to adapt to or embrace change, which demonstrates that resistance to change, from a cultural perspective, is something that you should be prepared for. I would strongly recommend that you anticipate, and prepare for, such resistance if you are to get traction when introducing change in your organisation.

The forms of resistance to change will vary depending on the history of your organisation and its experience of seeking to implement change. We all dislike change – how many people tend to take the same route or train/bus to work, for instance, rather than a variety of routes or options to mix it up? – but the reasons are deeply embedded.

Resistance to change can be identified in a number of ways, and I have highlighted one of these from Zaltman and Duncan, which is structured on four commonly cited types of resistance, and dates back to 1977:⁷

• organisation;
• culture;
• psychological;
• social.

7.2.1 Organisation

There are a series of organisational constraints to effective change being adopted that can prevent progress either individually or collectively. It is often the notion of power, or influence, which can give rise to a feeling of being threatened by the change that is proposed and will be exacerbated if the individual does not believe they have been fully engaged. Perceived lack of engagement can drive a negative response due to resentment or confusion as to why the individual has not been directly involved when others are. It can also apply the other way round, with those given influence seen to be exerting too much power over those without, leading to a level of resentment.

The structure of the organisation can also be a barrier, either reinforcing silos or, conversely, forcing people to work together across the organisation from disparate parts, without having established trust and understanding in the working relations to make this an effective solution.

If there is a feeling that the organisation is imposing change top-down, but those at the top are not seen to be actively embracing it, then resentment can arise which is due to those implementing the change not being seen to act accordingly. Leading by doing what you expect of others is an important principle.

The climate for change is an important factor to be considered. If the rationale for change has not been clearly articulated and bought into by the whole organisation, then inevitably there will be resistance. It is essential to articulate clearly the need for change. It may not gain agreement in all parts of the organisation, but setting out the rationale enables people to understand the reason the organisation has chosen to embark on change. This has to be accompanied by an openness to change, clearly demonstrating at all levels that the organisation is committed to the change rather than being seen to say one thing but do another. The potential for change is about reaching agreement on the scale and scope of change required to deliver the end result. There is a fine line between ambition and realism of what can be achieved that needs to be fully appreciated to take people with the programme.

Lastly, the opportunity for technological change is often more challenging than it might at first appear. The appetite of the whole organisation to understand, accept and adopt technology universally is not always there – regardless of whether the systems are a fit for purpose – and a patchy adoption will usually cause more issues than failing to adopt at all. The resistance in this area may be a lack of understanding as to how the technology is to be used, a desire to stick with what was known and understood, or a lack of appreciation as to why the organisation needs to innovate. All of these can be overcome, but it does take concerted planning and effort.

7.2.2 Culture

The cultural challenge has been partly covered already within this chapter. There are typically four categories of cultural barriers:

• values and beliefs;
• cultural ethnocentrism;
• impact of change on the individual;
• cultural norms.

Values and beliefs can be exceedingly broad, encompassing everything from religious to secular, motivation and aspiration, as well as pride, which can take on a variety of forms. These tend to be very personal, not necessarily stated, but drive behaviours and establish individual norms which influence tolerance, acceptance and a collective response. These need to be understood to a degree, and the cultural journey should be navigated in an explorative manner that seeks to deliver change in a way which is least challenging to the individual, whilst recognising that there has to be a level of uniformity of approach in the spirit of fairness.

Cultural ethnocentrism can take many forms and is a highly divisive position, and so one to try to avoid at all costs. It can be stated as simply as ‘our way is better than yours’ and may be based on any number of different characteristics, from race, gender or religion through to socio-economic status, regional difference or the seniority within an organisation. It is important to consider how information is presented and the representation of groups throughout the change, involving or consulting with as wide a range of stakeholders as possible to avoid such conflict arising.

Change may be taken personally, almost as an assault on an individual perceiving that what they do is not good enough, when it might simply be a case of the new approach being better rather than the current method being flawed in any way. This may lead to defensiveness on the part of an influential individual, who wants to save face rather than be undermined in front of their peers or team. Of course, there is also the potential that the change may expose the failings of previous approaches and highlight weaknesses that the individual who seeks to save face should have spotted much earlier. This may indicate that the team is not well led or the influencer, perhaps a manager, has been coasting along rather than performing at a level to be expected. A root-cause analysis, for example, would almost certainly flush out such limitations. Therefore, it is necessary to be engaging in the adoption of the new approach, avoiding anything which suggests criticism of what preceded it, and to potentially give the individual or individuals who may be resistant an opportunity to champion the change and hence advocate others to follow.

Finally, implementing a change which conflicts with cultural norms is the biggest challenge of all. The change may be compelling, for all the right reasons, for the organisation as a whole, but may have a significant impact on the way a particular part of the organisation operates and breaks established norms. Even if those impacted recognise the wider benefit, it can be hard for them to accept the shift it requires, and it may require a significant sweetener to get those impacted to agree to the change. The change is likely to have to be compelling, such that there is a clear rationale for it to be for the good of the organisation, leading to the group affected recognising it is impractical for it to block the wider good.

7.2.3 Psychological

Psychological barriers can be particularly challenging, as they reside within individuals and may be deeply engrained. The challenge in overcoming these is to aim for a neutral position as a starting point to move the individuals into a space from which they can see positives. Often, trying to unpick the psychological barriers an individual might have in one go is just as likely to reinforce their resistance, as it is too big a step for many to contemplate and is reinforced by confirmation bias.

Perception is a common psychological barrier, operating in a number of ways. The individual may choose to be selective in what information is taken from a change to be able to focus on the negatives and dismiss the positives from their mind. This exacerbates the problem, as there is nothing constructive to build from and it reinforces the reasoning of the individual to resist the change. Perception may also result in two individuals having very different perspectives of the underlying problem, and be irreconcilable in reaching agreement on where the focus for change needs to be. Similarly, the perception may simply be down to interpretation, with two differing views taken as to what is to be achieved and why, leading to a confused and frustrating barrier to overcome. Finally, perception may be driven by the perceived favouritism of one person over another, without any understanding or clarification being provided.

There may be a feeling of deep comfort in the status quo, known as homeostasis. This may lead to the sort of inertia that makes it difficult to shift whole groups of people who do not want to change. Finding common ground, in which a level of comfort is maintained whilst adapting to elements of change, may be the best course to strike a conciliatory balance, although this may hinder the pace of change and may not be practicable.

The resistance to change may arise where there is a perception the change is undermining conformity – the way a profession may typically operate regardless of organisation, for example. This may be true: it may be that you are moving people along faster than they see other organisations with the same type of professionals moving – after all, change has to start somewhere! This doesn’t necessarily mean that the change is wrong, but you need to recognise that it is breaking new ground and try to develop it with active engagement of those directly involved, otherwise you will find commitment levels drop and inertia retaining much of what you sought to replace.

The last psychological barrier is personality traits, and these can present an obstacle if they are in direct conflict with how the organisation is seeking to operate in the future. Rather like the earlier barriers which can cause an individual to fail to see the need to change, this one can be hard to shift other than to impose, especially if the change is driven by the traits being non-compliant or not acceptable in some way. It can be as hard as forcing individuals to accept whether the ‘new’ ways of working are for them, and it can be the prompt that leads to some individuals choosing to leave the organisation.

7.2.4 Social

Rather like personality traits, some of the social barriers to change can be deep rooted, albeit more as a collective than the psychological, which tend to be focused on the individual.

In some cases, group solidarity will be a collective force to resist change prompted by concerns over how members of that group will be affected. It is a difficult one to overcome unless you are willing to be open and engage the group and listen to their concerns. Focusing the effort on the specific concerns, rather than trying to answer a range of potential issues which are broader, enables progress to be made by channelling the resolution on those things that matter and demonstrating a listen, learn and act culture. Resistance may remain, but at a significantly reduced level, and you will have established a line of communication to the group, which is invaluable as a route to gauge response as you go.

The group you encounter may be very close and resistant to outsiders coming in to tell them how things are going to change, and for the better. This barrier is put up by a guild type of mentality in which no one outside the group understands what we do or how we do it, and hence has no place to preach change at us. The best way to approach this situation is to identify a way into the group to get representation and input into the design work you undertake ahead of implementation, and actively seek to engage on the basis of learning to be better informed. Finding a trusted insider to be willing to engage may prove challenging, but highly influential.

As highlighted earlier, conformity to norms is a characteristic of a tight-knit group. Understanding and being willing to comply with the established norms brings acceptance and kinship within the group, and it is hard to operate in many work environments whilst being an outsider. Challenging norms is a direct assault on the group, and it would be unwise to do so unless you are certain of your ground. As with most group situations, it is more effective to listen, learn and act based upon a greater understanding. An appreciation of the norms and the history that has led to their evolution will make it easier to comprehend how the change can best be implemented to accommodate or modify the norms rather than challenge them head on, with an awareness of how inflexible they might be.

There may be direct conflict between groups which has been simmering for some time or arisen recently due to a breakdown in cooperation or a feeling of a lack of understanding. Depending on how deep this goes, it may be impossible to reconcile the groups and you should identify how far you need to reach a common understanding to be able to proceed with your change. Operating in a form of neutrality, in which you can negotiate with both parties without undermining your own credibility, will put you in a position to find common ground that enables your change to proceed without being mired in the conflict yourself.

Finally, there is also a risk of group introspection in the way the group fail to see any need for change and are in denial that there is any flaw with their current approach. This may seem strange, even alarming, for an outsider trying to drive change and who believes that the evidence is compelling. However, without gaining trust and agreement to a need for change it is highly likely that this group will subvert any change by refusing to adopt new ways of working. It is imperative in such cases to bring someone who is sufficiently trusted by the group into an early discussion, as well as one from within the group who has credibility with their peers, and to work through the rationale as to why change is needed and the benefits of introducing the change. The combined impact of these two will provide the conviction and direction to the others, making it easier for you to achieve your goals.

7.2.5 Overcoming resistance to change

The US-based change management consultancy Prosci ran a webinar and captured eight categories of individual resistance to change from 350 responses.⁸ These give a sense of the range of emotional constraints and fears you will need to overcome in the data strategy implementation:

• Emotion – Fear, loss, sadness, anger, anxiety, frustration, depression, focus on self.
• Disengagement – Silence, ignoring communications, indifference, apathy, low morale.
• Work impact – Reduced productivity/efficiency, non-compliance, absenteeism, mistakes.
• Acting out – Conflict, arguments, sabotage; overbearing, aggressive or passive-aggressive behavior.
• Negativity – Rumors/gossip, miscommunication, complaining, focus on problems, celebrating failure.
• Avoidance – Ignoring the change, reverting to old behaviours, workarounds, abdicating responsibilities.
• Building barriers – Excuses, counterapproaches, recruiting dissenters, secrecy, breakdown in trust.
• Controlling – Asking lots of questions, influencing outcomes, defending current state, using status.

There are a number of approaches to managing resistance to change. One of the oldest, and most widely used to this day, is a simple three-step process (unfreezing, changing and refreezing, discussed below) devised by Kurt Lewin⁹ to navigate through the change process. It was created in 1947, which shows you how long organisational resistance to change has been with us and scholars have been researching to find answers, so do not think this is a new concept. This is why it is so important you are prepared to encounter resistance to change and know what to do when you identify it.

Lewin’s change model forms a useful prompt to guide you through the process from start to finish, and has a simplicity about it that is easy to remember and follow. A key part of the theory is the refreezing stage (originally called freezing by Lewin), often referred to as ‘making it stick’. The steps reinforce what the preceding chapters of this book and the next two chapters discuss, ensuring there is a consistent and clear approach every step of the way, but the concept of unfreeze and refreeze is a great way to think about the change you are seeking to achieve through the data strategy and its implementation.

The premise of the theory was, quite simply, to understand the rationale for change, to establish motivation for change to be generated before change can occur. This forms the initial stage, known as unfreezing, as it involves developing a compelling message as to why change is necessary. It is often the most challenging stage as it confronts convention, assessing beliefs, values, attitudes, behaviours and other aspects of the status quo that everyone is familiar with and might find comfortable, even it is recognised that it is not optimal. Unless change is seen to be needed, there will be continued resistance or, at best, passivity that leads to stagnation. There is a need to unfreeze in order to be able to progress.

Once uncertainty has been created through the unfreezing stage, the next stage is change. This is where uncertainty starts to bring a new clarity and a willingness to embrace an approach to set a new direction and participate proactively in change. This is what is sometimes referred to as the change curve, a means of bringing people with you on the journey to a new outcome. This stage is also where change becomes personal – what is in it for the individual to support this?

The change stage requires communication, time and clarity of direction to demonstrate the benefits, and may take considerable effort, energy and commitment to navigate.

Finally, the refreezing (or freezing) stage. This is the final step in mobilising the changes once the commitment of the whole organisation is in place, and is essential to bake in the changes, otherwise there is a risk of reversion to old practices or a fragmented series of interpretations that lead to confusion and disarray in implementation. The impact is a zero-tolerance approach to diverging from the new norm, and evidence through measurement of the positive outcome of the changes made.

Bear in mind that resistance to change may appear at any time, at any stage. Whilst you can endeavour to try to address it from the outset, it is inevitable that there will be periodic concerns and misunderstandings as you go through implementation. It is essential to have tracking of resistance as a key strand of the communications activity, and the earlier it is picked up the greater the chance of resolving it quickly. Put in place a communications and continuity plan to ensure that there are ways you can mobilise to address any resistance early and locally to prevent it spreading further.

7.3 SPONSORSHIP

The preceding chapters have addressed the importance of gaining active sponsorship of the data strategy, which needs to be in place not only for the data strategy definition stage but also into implementation, as executive sponsorship will be key to getting organisation-wide traction. I want to explore the role of the sponsor and, in particular, the communication support you are likely to require from the sponsor.

You may not have any say in the choice of sponsor when embarking on the data strategy and seeking to gain executive-level support. There are often options as to who could perform this role, given data transcends functions, and assuming there is not a CDO (or similar) at board level in your organisation. There is also an element of the right sponsor being determined by the maturity of the organisation from a data perspective, as well as being the individual with most to gain and/or being most enthused about what you are seeking to achieve.

The key responsibilities of a sponsor are, broadly:

• Set clear direction and ensure there is clarity on the fit with the corporate strategy and direction to move the organisation forward.
• Ensure the programme to define and then implement the data strategy is effectively resourced and funded.
• Oversee that the programme is delivered to time, budget and agreed scope, prioritising where necessary to adapt or change through appropriate governance.
• Provide challenge to the programme as appropriate to ensure it remains on track and the focus is maintained, whilst keeping momentum and maintaining enthusiasm within the programme.
• Communicate, both within the programme and to external stakeholders, on high-level progress and priorities to ensure all are aware of the programme status and expectations to maintain progress.
• Be an executive champion and advocate of the programme to ensure its purpose is fully understood, commitment is maintained and visibility is retained; be prepared to hold difficult discussions with peers if obstacles cannot be overcome at the programme delivery level; be able to tailor communication and delivery style to each stakeholder that needs to be engaged and support the programme.

The sponsor needs to be slightly detached from the day-to-day delivery of the programme. In most cases, those leading the programme tend to have a strong functional reporting line to the sponsor, though many in the field of programme management would strongly recommend against this. They would suggest more of a contractual arrangement, in which the individual who leads on the definition and delivery has discretion to make day-to-day decisions and autonomy in the way the programme is run, and agrees how communication between the two will operate. This could be progress reports, a run through the risk matrix (see Chapter 9 for more information on risk management), or an escalation process with agreement on what the nature of things to escalate might be and when would be appropriate. There may be a temporary and more flexible reporting line, but it is entirely based on the programme itself rather than having to be from the area of the organisation that the sponsor represents.

There should also be agreement from the outset as to the frequency of meetings between the sponsor and the data strategy lead. It is essential that a sponsor gives you (whether you are managing the data strategy through definition and implementation, or just one phase of the overall end-to-end process) the space to operate and avoid getting too involved in the detail, otherwise it makes it difficult to lead the team around the task without being undermined in terms of decision making. This is a recipe for failure, as it will almost certainly diminish the value that the sponsor should be adding through peer networking and by providing direction, and limit the effectiveness of the team delivering the data strategy or its implementation through delays, confusion and, ultimately, the impact on morale.

One aspect of sponsorship to be wary of, however, is that in many large organisations all major programmes (and strategy would be one of those) have to have an executive sponsor. This can lead to senior executives sponsoring far more programmes than they have time to devote to them to support them effectively. If this sounds like your organisation, you need to find a way to ensure you make the demands on your sponsor as light, but effective, as possible to optimise the value you gain from their sponsorship. This is something you need to address up front, at the start of the engagement with the sponsor, and a well-organised programme is more likely to gain favour and effective input than one which is floundering and lacking clarity to make the best use of the executive sponsor.

Being clear, from the outset, what you can bring to make the life of the sponsor more focused on those aspects which you are not equipped to do on your own will be appreciated by your sponsor. You should seek guidance from your sponsor as to the time likely to be available to support your programme, which facilitates a discussion on how best this can be utilised to benefit you and the programme of work, and how they would like to check in on progress – reports, meetings and the like.

Depending on the type of organisation, you may wish to look at an extended network of executives to support or enhance the role of the sponsor. There may be other influencers – potentially at various levels in the organisation – that could be worth exploring to maximise the likelihood of success. For instance, if you have non-executive directors in your organisation, finding someone with a keen interest in strategy and/or data might be a good avenue to bring a different perspective to the executive board. It may be that there is someone who exerts greater influence than others in bringing members of the executive board together, who is seen to have a good eye for strategic decisions or to be simply a particularly effective communicator. This is not to undermine the sponsor, or to fragment accountability, but to widen channels of communication and engagement to assist the sponsor to drive the strategy.

Do not assume the obvious candidate to sponsor the data strategy is the right one. Understand as much as you can of the organisational politics and interests of the executive board, and test out your assumptions through the data strategy exploration stage before identifying your sponsor. Bear in mind too that a board member may not see the data strategy through definition and the implementation programme – this could be four years, for instance – before moving on, so do not put all the proverbial data eggs in the one basket. Ensure there is wider commitment at board level, to ensure continuity should there need to be a change of sponsor.

7.4 ORGANISATIONAL MATURITY

The maturity of the organisation is a major factor in how you structure the communications effort that will be an essential lever in getting your message across to the organisation throughout the data strategy process – from definition to execution. It is important that you assess and review the perception of the organisation’s maturity, as this will be one of the bigger measures of success – how far you have you moved the dial in terms of organisational maturity.

The challenge you face will depend on the understanding and readiness of the organisation to embrace what you are seeking to achieve through the data strategy. If the organisational maturity is low, then there is a need to communicate progress in a way that is not only informative but also educational to provide the detail as to the difference it makes. By contrast, a more mature organisation may understand what is being described and just need the context of what it means by way of impact to help the organisation.

There are formal models to enable you to assess organisational maturity which look at benchmarks for process, quality, collaboration, knowledge, training and development, and change, amongst other things, depending on which model you choose to deploy. However, for the purposes of the data strategy, the requirement is less detailed and more based on the appetite and awareness of the organisation to embrace the data strategy. It can be, therefore, a more broad-brush assessment to determine how to pitch the activities you will undertake to ensure you get collaboration and appropriate engagement to achieve the outcome you are seeking.

You need to consider the purpose of the organisational maturity assessment. The data strategy will look at the data maturity assessment, which will give you an effective barometer of where the organisation sits and aspires to be. The focus of the organisational maturity assessment is based more on how to drive an engaged response through the communications you provide and where to pitch the materials so they land positively. Therefore, it is essential that you determine how communications can become a key enabler in maintaining engagement and visibility of the data strategy from its inception through to its implementation, and work for you to build interest and cooperation.

The organisation may have a formal corporate communications capability, in which case the data strategy implementation needs to be captured in their communications activity. The impact of communications needs to be considered in the widest of contexts too, as the data strategy itself may be seen to be a bit dry for those who are not necessarily able to link it to the impact it can and will have on the organisation. Therefore, you need to look for every opportunity to link in to the planned communications activity already being scoped, as well as that which lies ahead, to try to identify a way to weave in some core messaging about the impact the data strategy implementation will have on those activities in the future and how to get involved and/or learn more about the programme.

Integrating your messages into those which come from a wider range of programmes and senior leaders, and which have interest to a wider audience than you might be able to reach if creating a message focused solely on the data strategy implementation, will increase awareness and understanding. It will also link the core message, being delivered by someone elsewhere in the organisation, to your own, which will make it inherently endorsed by that individual.

The approach to communications may also indicate the maturity of the organisation and, indeed, how you can use communications to your advantage. In most organisations, communications is a team or function in its own right, or a dedicated communications team member is embedded in another function, such as HR, marketing or operations. The scale of the communications capability in the organisation will be indicative of the central coordination of a communications strategy that will have its own goals and programme attached to it. If your organisation has a minimal communications presence, your first task is to identify how information is communicated within your organisation. What is your own experience of receiving corporate messages, and who would be creating these if not a communications team?

The experience of others within the organisation in communicating strategy to the wider business will also give you some insight into how this has been approached and the perception of its effectiveness. Do not overlook learning from what others have done before; devising a data strategy is not a high-profile activity and so you need to use every tool in the box to be able to get your message across in a suitably engaging way that is likely to resonate with your colleagues.

If you are assisted at various points in the process of devising the data strategy by others from across the organisation, seek their input as to how they intend to engage on what they have been working on and what channels they are familiar with that are used within their own teams. As much as there may be formal ways of communicating, do not miss the opportunity to gain your own understanding of how things are cascaded through the local management chain within their function. It may be that there is an opportunity for you to address teams directly, presenting via team meetings or offsite to share your work with a wider audience.

Your sponsor should be able to guide you as to how best to promote the data strategy programme amongst their peers. Do set yourself the objective to make this as concise as possible, without leaving key information out, as this audience is likely to be inundated with material to read and digest, and so something well targeted that gets to the point quickly will go down well. Do not underestimate the challenge of writing something shorter but more focused. There is an art to being concise, complete and accurate, and it is unlikely your first iteration will succeed in this goal.

Do focus on the purpose of your communication. As I said at the start of this section, there may well be an educational purpose to your need to communicate, and so you need to set context and be clear on outcome and impact, as well as satisfying the key question of ‘so what does it mean for me?’ that will be in everyone’s mind as they read it. If there is a need to provide the before and after perspective to demonstrate what has changed, then do not be afraid to do so, but be conscious that you are challenging the ways of operating that some of your audience might have been wedded to for some time, and so you may be inflaming resistance if you do not set this out in a constructive and empathetic way.

Seek to create a feedback loop, whether through key contacts across different parts of the organisation or by actively engaging via team meetings or other such local groups. This will enable you to tailor your communications to land in the most effective way and also demonstrate that you are engaging with teams across the organisation rather than imposing something upon them. Building trust and understanding will pay back heavily as you progress through the data strategy programme, especially as you reach implementation and need to lean heavily on goodwill and clarity of understanding to succeed.

Remember to make these communication opportunities highly focused on the target audience, and digestible for those who possibly do not have the same technical background or understanding as you – avoid acronym overload and test your content out on someone outside your immediate team for a sense check. Keep it punchy and focused, getting your key points across in a way which is engaging. If you feel confident enough to do so (and possibly this is where you can lean for assistance on someone within the team you are briefing), pose questions which are relevant to the audience, highlight the benefits as you see them and try to get some level of engagement – feedback on whether this is heading in the right direction is invaluable to build credibility into your work and also ground it on tangible evidence collected from that stakeholder group, which will work well at the implementation stage. Do not forget the need for the emotional ‘sell’ alongside the hard analytical facts, if you are to overcome the psychological barriers to change. If you do not unfreeze then you will be unable to break the ice to deliver the change you need to achieve.

7.5 TRANSITIONING COMMUNICATIONS TO FOCUS ON THE DELIVERY OF THE DATA STRATEGY

The data strategy has been defined, submitted for approval and signed off to start the implementation. The communications process needs to be in full swing to keep the focus on the data strategy rather than lose sight of where the organisation has agreed it needs to head. The mobilisation of the communications activity has to pick up and keep the assorted loose threads of activity across the organisation suitably bound together to tell the story of how the implementation of the data strategy is progressing.

The first step needs to be the communication of the completion of definition and the seamless transition into execution – what does this look like, where are the priorities and what does it mean for me? The sponsor has a critical role to play here, as it is a big moment in the role that the individual plays in your organisation, stamping their credibility on this and ensuring that there is widespread acknowledgement this is a priority for the organisation. It is the achievement of a major milestone, and the start of a new phase, one which will demand more time and effort across the organisation than what has gone before. You need the big launch behind the implementation stage to ensure that the organisation does not take its eye off the ball and that you have a mandate to get resources from the whole organisation to support you through implementation.

Clearly the implementation plan will become a key artefact on which to build a formal communications plan to support it as it drives the focus, deliverables, milestones and benefits of what lies ahead. Identifying the key points around which the communications can be constructed enables a series of structured messages to be defined as anchor points, which provides opportunities to tailor localised messages relating to the impact and importance of changes within specific areas. These could be case studies, individual profiles in which those involved talk positively about the effect of the changes in their ways of working or experience of seeing the improvements realised, or more strategic pieces that outline the key activities ahead and the commitments to support those areas through the changes involved.

A regular stream of communications, to keep the organisation bound together in the enterprise of implementing the data strategy, is key to ensuring the momentum is maintained. Infrequent communication leads to a lack of visibility, resulting in it slipping from the focus of the wider organisation, and it becomes more of a challenge to gain support due to there being more of a feeling of upheaval than there would have been if the communications had been steady and constant.

Engage the communications team in what lies ahead and seek their guidance on what works, how you can co-develop the communications plan as an important stream within the data strategy implementation plan and get communications expertise aligned to this. They will have the experience of knowing what works within the organisation, the tone of messaging that is likely to hit the mark and the house style (if there is one) to be adopted in all communications issued through this programme. Understand the drumbeat of communications activity, align the frequency in your own activity to it and identify the opportunities to really focus in on the progress through implementation with some big success stories – remember, the success is the outcome, just don’t forget to position the data strategy and its implementation as the key enabler behind it.

The art of effective communications in relating positive change to the entire workforce is achieved through joining up the dots, linking activities from one part of the organisation through to another in a way that is measuring impact. The data strategy is meant to be making the organisation more effective in its management and exploitation of data, and therefore highlighting the benefits of unblocking a problem in one place and how it ripples through several other parts of the organisation starts to unlock the importance of data as a corporate asset that links everyone together. Join this up with the customer, the positive impact that it makes and the benefits that ensue, and the data strategy is beginning to become a rallying point for people to start to work together in a way that may be different to what has gone before.

Identify what else is in the corporate communications plan and be opportunistic. If you see an opportunity to get a line or sentence inserted into the core messaging then do so, as long as it is relevant. Keeping the data strategy implementation alive in the minds of the wider organisation is one of the key tasks within the implementation plan, otherwise it is quickly forgotten because of a lot of it operating in the background or not directly impacting some parts of the organisation at that time.

It is often overlooked that data is one of the few things that – on a day-to-day basis – binds the organisation together. For many organisations, data is seen to be more of a problem, or a constraint, than a true asset that generates value repeatedly and has application across the entire organisation. Creating communications around the commonality of data as an asset within the organisation positions it in a way that many may not have considered before. Therefore, following data through the corporate lifecycle of processes and decision points brings to life the importance of getting it right, and the consequences of getting it wrong.

Creating communications around examples such as that above is what makes a difference. It isn’t the factual that engages people in the organisation; often it is the more emotional side of the story, explaining the value of data in a way that makes it a team game and, momentarily, breaks down the silos or the remit of the individual and brings everyone back to their common purpose – delivering a quality service to the customer.

One of the tasks, therefore, of the communications effort is to generate sufficient insight into the impact of the data strategy implementation to create interesting and engaging stories to enthral the workforce as a whole and to sell the benefits – as Lewin’s change model illustrates. To do this requires a level of understanding of the organisation at large to know who the influencers and experts are within each part of the organisation – get these individuals on board and you are on track to get others to sit up and take notice. Explore the informal networks within the organisation, finding those who have a reputation for getting things done or who are seen to have influence through their expertise or longevity in the organisation. If you can win over some of these people you are well on track to get some compelling messages out that can really build traction behind your implementation programme.

Bear in mind that we all absorb and comprehend information in different ways, depending on format, messaging, big picture versus detail, or who we hear it from. Do not fall into the trap of assuming one size fits all. In my experience, sending everyone in the organisation an email, posting something on the intranet, even including a message for cascading via team meetings will all fail if you adopt a single communications strategy. Consider your audience, learn how they ingest information and talk to others who have seemingly succeeded in delivering strategic messages across the organisation as a whole. Don’t be afraid to try things, use Agile to deploy the PDCA approach and refine on the basis of what you learn. Set out the bigger picture to ensure there is clarity on the context and purpose, but deliver the detail when useful to do so.

Whilst it is easy to be led by an internal communications team into fitting in to their preferred approach, do not be afraid to challenge if you have evidence it is unlikely to work for you, because of the nature of the messaging or the topic. After all, your data strategy is all about embedding the use of evidence, so build an understanding of how communication can work for you. It is a critical investment in the data strategy programme, and if you do not generate engagement or interest then your implementation is destined to fail, so do not skimp on getting the communications strand of your programme right.

In addition, identify those who are likely to be advocates and willing to support your initiative. Don’t be afraid to issue a call to arms across key functions to get those individuals to come forward. Even if they are not influential to bring others along the journey with them, they will have insight into how these things tend to get done, the forums in which you need to engage, and the key messages needed to deliver support and engagement from those who are influential. In other words, do not be afraid to have too many contacts across the organisation. Identify what each person can bring to the communications effort and play to their strengths. Even if their only role is to help you navigate their part of the organisation, it serves a purpose. You need a lot of localised expertise to try to build momentum, and having people on the inside can only strengthen your knowledge and understanding.

7.6 TEN TO TAKE AWAY

The key themes to consider from this chapter are:

1. Culture and employee engagement are at the top of the list for programmatic failures worldwide, so do not underestimate this and prepare extensively for what you need to do to succeed.
2. Don’t assume the ‘corporate culture’ is the way the organisation operates. In most cases the local culture pervades and there is a gap between the two – which could be the difference between your programme being dismissed as another central initiative and being embraced as something to engage with.
3. Resistance to change will take many forms, on a number of levels. Understand these and identify how you intend to tackle them in your organisation. This is not specific to your programme: it affects all change, so do not try to find solutions beyond doing what you need to achieve your goals.
4. Remember to unfreeze before embarking on change, and to freeze once more when the change has been delivered. In the middle lies change itself, the hardest and longest phase, but it is made easier if you run an effective preparatory (unfreeze) stage.
5. Sponsorship plays a critical role in your likelihood of success. Understand what you need from each other, have clearly defined boundaries and play to strengths. Provide the structure, information and clarity needed and the sponsor can drive the programme forward for you by influencing peers and removing blockers.
6. Assess the maturity of the organisation and reflect on how best to utilise communication to ensure information is aligned to enhancing understanding and generating goodwill towards your programme. Seek feedback to check in on how well messages are landing and adapt as necessary.
7. Build a communications strand into your implementation plan to ensure you align the two to optimise opportunities to promote the data strategy implementation and to make it an integral part of your programme.
8. Identify communication opportunities at every turn. The more you can integrate thinking on data strategy into the core of how the organisation works and key messaging, the greater the influence you can drive.
9. Do not be afraid to repeat messages, use multiple channels and gather learning as to what works well for different audiences. It is a common misconception that people pick things up from a single communication, and subtle differences to the angle of the communication can be effective in tailoring the message to specific groups.
10. Utilise local knowledge and expertise to support and supplement your communications drive. Credibility at a local level can bridge the gap between centralised communications and information of local interest.

1 I Gotta Tell You: Speeches of Lee Iacocca. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press, 1994.

2 Deloitte Global Human Capital Trends Report. 2015. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/tr/Documents/human-capital/GlobalHumanCapitalTrends2015.pdf.

3 K. Hart, No Cultural Merger At Sprint Nextel. Washington Post, 24 November 2007. www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/23/AR2007112301588_2.html.

4 Though one of the most used quotes linking culture and strategy, there seems to be no evidence of Peter Drucker making this statement, and it was certainly used in a Giga Information Group headline in 2000, though the source remains uncertain.

5 P.R. Lawrence, How to Deal with Resistance to Change. Harvard Business Review, 1 January 1969.

6 Deloitte Global Human Capital Trends Report. 2016. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/global/Documents/HumanCapital/gx-dup-global-human-capital-trends-2016.pdf.

7 G. Zaltman and R. Duncan, Strategies for Planned Change. New York: Wiley, 1977.

8 Prosci Inc webinar. https://www.prosci.com/resources/articles/managing-resistance-to-change.

9 K. Lewin, Frontiers in Group Dynamics: Concept, Method and Reality in Social Science; Social Equilibria and Social Change – Understanding the Three Stages of Change. Human Relations, 1 (1–2), 5–41, 1947.

10 F. Herzberg, B. Mausner and B. Block Snyderman, B. The Motivation To Work, 2nd edn. New York: John Wiley, 1959.

11 J.P. Kotter, Leading Change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1996.

12 T. Smith, Successful Advertising: Its Secrets Explained. London: Thomas Smith Agency, 1885.