Implementation policy – regulating the interplay of forces
By implementation policy, I mean the targeted interweaving of the individual interests of those involved in the sense of the objective to form a well-functioning overall political construct. This dimension should therefore also be dealt with intensively and not, as is unfortunately often the case, left to chance. Pursue questions such as these:
- Who has what interests and for what reason?
- Where are there overlaps?
- Where do the individual interest groups diverge?
Here, too, the rule applies: thinking this through from the outset and addressing it proactively can ensure accelerated and, in this case, relaxed work during implementation.
The more intensive the change brought about by the project and the greater the number of people directly affected, the more relevant implementation policy becomes. And it is never too late to free a project from unnecessary resistance and get it moving again with a targeted implementation policy. However, this requires strict consistency, which does not necessarily mean harshness, but certainly includes one or two decisions that appear harsh to the outside world.
Without the courage to make clear decisions, a consistent implementation policy is not possible.
Kolbusa’s implementation policy program:
1. list the relevant persons
List the people you are dealing with in your project. The relevant people include all those who play a decisive role for you in the implementation project, such as stakeholders of all kinds, project sponsors, project drivers, project managers, managers from various areas or departments, holders of key competencies, etc. Take a sheet of paper and write down all the relevant people.
2. determine the power map settings
Take a look at each of these people with regard to the public sphere: What goals and values are associated with them? (see Fig. 2) and with regard to the personal, the emotional sphere: What interests and pleasures play a role for them and what causes them concern or fear and what may make them envious?
3. the power map – visualizing the mixture situation
In the form of a network of influences, link the circles of the individual persons according to the question: Who influences whom? Stronger influences can be represented by thicker arrows and you can also distinguish between positive and negative influences (see Fig. 3).
4. understanding the political landscape
An active-passive matrix can be used to evaluate and interpret the network of influences (Frederic Vester, 2002, *Die Kunst vernetzt zu denken*). The aim is to identify those factors or persons that are relevant in relation to the question “Who exerts the greatest influence in a positive or negative form in my implementation project?”. A person has an active effect when they influence other people directly or indirectly and the more strongly they do this, the higher up they are in the matrix. The more passive a person is, the further to the right they are positioned. A person is reactive if they are influenced or driven, while buffering people neither strongly influence others nor are strongly influenced themselves.
The easiest way to create the active-passive matrix is with the help of software. Otherwise, you can also transfer the people with their respective positive or negative influences into an influence matrix. The active and passive sums are formed in the matrix and transferred to a system grid. If your network of effects is relatively clear, the people who directly and indirectly cause resistance can also be determined without an active-passive matrix or system grid.
In the example matrix (see Fig. 3), Mr. Walter (No. 3) is a critical factor. Critical factors have both an active and a reactive character, i.e. Mr. Walter has a very strong effect on all persons relevant to the implementation project, but is also directly or indirectly strongly influenced himself. He can be used as an accelerator and generator of a positive mood in the implementation project. However, great care must also be taken to ensure that he is not negatively influenced and thus cause the project to topple.
Mr. Meier (no. 2) and Ms. Winter (no. 5), on the other hand, are very strongly influenced, but do not themselves have a great effect on the other participants. They are good indicators of the prevailing mood in the project.
5. the analysis of the results
You can now draw various conclusions for yourself and your implementation from the findings and initiate appropriate measures. The following questions will help you to do this:
a. What are the key success drivers for their implementation? How can you bring these together or establish them in the form of one or more committees in your implementation project?
b. Are there people who you will never be able to win over to your side based on the findings from the power map because they will never be able to reconcile their personal interests and goals with the implementation goal?
c. Can you avoid these people or do you have to try to manage your implementation project with the knowledge of the existing resistance and how can you break this resistance as early as possible or deliberately escalate it?
d. Are there people or groups of people who are currently still working against your implementation project, but whom you can win over to your side by actively influencing them? Who are the most influential people in these areas and on what emotional level do they influence you?
e. Are there any groups or alliances that actively support the overall goal? Can you draw other people into this group?
These quick steps will help you to make the political situation of your implementation project transparent. Because only when you know your friends and opponents and have an idea of their respective interests can you actively steer events. This is implementation politics.
Progress
