As change agents and change recipients take a Minimum Viable Change through the Validated Change Lifecycle different sections of the Change Canvas become validated through a number of different methods.
In this post I'll provide a summary of how our team has been typically validating the canvas depending on where it is within the lifecycle.
It is common for a change agent to create a draft canvas as soon as he feels that a change would be a benefit to one or more change recipient groups.
Upon entering the Agree on Urgency state the change agent may put a little more thought into the urgency and change recipient sections to prepare for initial conversations with stakeholders. Remaining portions of the Change Canvas will often only contained cursory notes or initial guesses as to what the contents would be.
As a Minimum viable change passes through the Agree on Urgency state the Urgency and Change Recipient sections of the canvas are validated through discussion with one or more change recipients. It is typical for the Targets, Vision and potentially other sections of the canvas to be given further consideration as a result of these discussions.
When the Minimum Viable Change passes through the Negotiate Change state the change recipients and change agent discuss how the Vision and Target State sections could address the various problems stated in the Urgency section.
Work then progresses on agreeing on a set of Action Items, Commitments and Benefits. After the majority of the canvas is completed, Success Criteria can be defined for the Change Canvas.
When the Minimum Viable Change passes into the Validate Adoption state, a backlog of Improvement Experiments are created. Each of these Improvement Experiments are responsible for validating that the actions listed in the Actions section will help change recipients move towards the Success Criteria defined boundary in the Change Canvas.
As improvement items are moved through the improvement lifecycle of Prepare, Adopt and Learn, various portions of the canvas are validated from a behavioral perspective. Can change recipients successfully use the new methods?
Once the Minimum Viable Change moves into the Verify Performance state Improvement Experiments are now executed, but this time improvement items are evaluated from the context of improved performance. Again as improvement items are moved through the Prepare, Adopt, and Learn lifecycle the Change Canvas is evaluated for correctness, this time from the perspective of performance. Can change recipients operate in a more effective manner because of the suggested change?
Read the Rest of Lean Change - Chapter 4: the Validated Change Lifecycle
- Validated Change Lifecycle Using Kotter, Leanstartup and Kanban
- State 1: Agree on the Urgency of Change
- State 2: Negotiate the Change
- State 3: Validate Adoption
- State 4: Verify Performance
- Realizing a Change Canvas through the Validated Change Lifecycle
- Instantiating the Lifecycle Effectively Using Information Radiators
Post a Comment