Change management as a process

I just had a conversation today with Dulce-Maria Vasquez of Kamaleo, a consulting firm in Mexico focusing on change management, and who did a great job at Schneider Electric last year.

On one of her presentation change management is presented as a process. You know: Analysis > Development > Roll-Out > Post-Roll-Out > Stabilization... or something like this.

I believe there is a flaw in such a presentation, not because it's wrong, but because it is misleading. Some managers might actually end up thinking that change can be systematic and automated. That's dictatorship. Indeed, there are some phases and milestones to any major collective change, but in the same way as a growing plant: first a leaf, then a branch, then flowers, then fruits...What managers should do to make change happen is only a process at a high level: to have a good crop, you need to plough, then to sow, then to water, maybe spread some fertilizer, and to harvest when the day comes. But if you stay at that level, you are unlikely to succeed as a farmer. Plants are complex systems which evolve over time depending on external factors. One plant might be growing and healthy while another one is dying. You might be facing draught or floods. This means that you must be prepared to take unforeseen action all the time. What makes a great farmer is the ability to spot possible illnesses very early and take action accordingly. But that's not a process. It's a practice.

So is change management, and knowledge management, and management in general.