Change management: When theory does not meet practical reality

What happens when grand theoretical ideas do not pan out in practical reality? A dream does not just turn itself into reality. The planning and execution of implementation is more important and impactful than merely the idea itself.

Take the example of what the US is experiencing right now with the wave of changes that undermine many of its most critical programmes.

Observers witness on the news about the abrupt haphazard termination of thousands of government employees, including even specialised nuclear personnel who safeguard the atomic weapons belonging to that nation that were fired before it was even understood what they actually did.

American government administrators seem to have shown bewilderment by eliminating those well-qualified professionals, resulting in a critical manpower shortage, then scrambling to rehire some individuals.

Such a series of arbitrary firings, shutdowns, and budget reductions is typical of a disorganised strategy that makes many citizens nervous and fearful. It will become the stable of the next generation of MBA strategy class case studies in what not to do.

Policy experts point to additional harm done by mass cancellations of grants and employee terminations at the United States Agency for International Development (USAid), an American government agency charged with life-saving foreign aid around the globe.

Ill-informed administrators seem not to appreciate the wide-ranging value that foreign aid programmes contribute to international stability and economic growth.

Observers also detail draconian reductions targeted at their Department of Education, as well as confusion regarding that department and its very existence.

Even leaks by the transition administrators revealing sensitive classified data. The list of sad examples goes on and on. Such a climate of administrative upheaval discourages qualified professionals and renders government planning more arduous across a range of sectors.

America’s best and brightest may never desire for government job positions again for the next two generations as memories linger of the brutal, uncaring, irrational blanket firings that hurt families across their country and around the world, even impacting households here in Kenya.

Researcher Laurence O’toole authored a seminal study that is useful in shedding light on what is currently happening across the ocean in Washington DC.

He examined the enduring disconnect between theoretical principles versus on-the-ground realities. He noted that practitioners are commonly confronted with multiple, competing objectives, limited resources, and changing political pressure.

Theoretical policy makers may not appreciate the practical limitations of implementation. The study offers recommendations for building on areas of theoretical agreement and learning from high-performing cases.

The study showcased the opinion that reflective translation of evidence-based research into policy action requires context sensitivity, cautious coordination, and ongoing re-examination of strategic assumptions.

US leaders could have undertaken a step-by-step approach based on established models and solid evidence. Instead of disregarding decades of research and studies planners could have created pilot projects, tried out results, and tuned up procedures before enlarging organisational modifications that swept across an entire national federal government.

Read: Change management: The atrocious execution that's unfolding in US

Specialists could have conducted planning sessions with stakeholders, matching strategic visions and capacity resources. A phased planning procedure, fueled by context-specific evidence, would have lessened the danger of abrupt cuts or undesirable reductions, saved institutional memory, and eased longer-term change.

Also, author Per Nilsen states that there exists a taxonomy classification that differentiates among process models, determinant frameworks, classic theories, implementation theories, and evaluation frameworks.

He advocates for stringent conceptual models that can shed light on how and why policy programmes fail or succeed in implementation.

His research revealed that every theoretical model has its own strengths and emphasises different things about implementation, which encourages administrators to try different approaches.

The research shows that the lack of theoretical preparation is usually the root of piecemeal approaches and second-best results in public policy. In America, the use of no tried and tested process model may become known in the history books as a “muskfrenzy”.

Sadly, instability in key global players has a tendency to send shockwaves around the globe. Current upheavals in America can undermine cooperative ventures that are based on sound partnerships, many of which involve hundreds of projects here in Kenya.

Abandoned programmes or withdrawn commitments endanger assistance to healthcare programmes, exchange students, infrastructure development, youth engagement, educational support, among many other sectors.

While not fully dependent, many Kenyan beneficiaries still depend to some degree on such activities for part of their growth and progress, and a dynamic shift in American policy planning may derail major strides since cessation occurred without notice, planning, or any process.

A more orderly and theory-based approach to governance tested in practice would be able to restore coherence, avoid damage, and maintain good international relations.

Have a management or leadership issue, question, or challenge? Reach out to Dr. Scott through @ScottProfessor on X or on email [email protected]