I just returned two weeks ago from a corporate training trip in mainland China covering 3 major cities in 3 days.

Hectic? Yes.

Tired? Yes.

I am just recovering from a fever and bad sore throat.

Anyway, the last time I was in Beijing, Shanghai and Shenzhen was about 4 years ago. Stepping back into these cities 4 years on, I felt like they are new cities that I’ve never been in before. Of course, my trip was short and hurried and I felt this way only through the glimpses of the city-scape from the taxis I was traveling in.

They say that change is good. Beijing had a major makeover because of the Olympics in 2008. Shanghai is completing its makeover for the World Expo in 2010 May. And Shenzhen, perhaps keeping up with changes in Hong Kong.

While the many “externals” are constantly changing, I found one thing unchanged throughout my trip.

What I observed is that the changes seem to be happening only on the surface. The “hardware” has been upgraded but the “software” remains the old version.

Imagine running DOS or Windows 3.0 on a Supercomputer.

But the expectation is there. If you show the world that you have modern hardware, facilities, buildings, and infrastructure, then the world is going to expect that there is a corresponding “software” that goes with it. In this context, this software is the mindset and attitude of the people.

My mission conducting the training was two-fold: (1) Introduce the new online performance management system and process that the company is implementing, and (2) teach the managers how to set effective goals with their staff members.

Both these two items were new to the managers who attended the training.

New => Change

Change => Disruptions

Handling disruptions = (Extra) Work

(Extra) Work (Without Extra Pay) => Unhappiness

Who wants change?

From my experience, most people would rather stay in their comfort zones going through the same familiar routine day in and day out. Disruptions messes people’s brains up, give them a heightened level of stimuli, and consumes more energy and emotions than usual.

So, when I started the training, the participants had no problems with goal setting. Goal setting is not new per se and many people think they know goal setting but they really don’t. What I taught was simply a new method to make their goal setting process more effective and useful.

Next, when I touched on the new performance management system and process, I started to hear noises and mumbling from the participants. Now, this system is completely new. It is a system and standard upon which the performance of every employee in the company will be evaluated each year. It is also an online system which is completely different from the paper-based performance evaluation system currently used.

As the course went on, the mumbling became louder and louder.  I stopped and asked what the matter was and got the following responses.

“Nobody asked for our feedback and opinion on this new system. Why were we not consulted?”

“The Americans [the company is an American public listed MNC] are trying to control the world again!”

“How can one standard to used across all departments to evaluate all staff?”

“This is going to introduce more work for us, not help us!”

“If I discuss career development opportunities with my staff, they will get the idea that they can switch to other roles in the company. If they are allowed to switch, that leaves me with problems!”

“Who’s going to read all these information that we generate? Are they simply going into a black hole as usual?”

By this time, lots of grumbling were aired. These were questions and issues I cannot address as it obviously wasn’t my job to do so. It was obvious to me that the change management process was not handled well by the company’s human resources department. So much for large companies with lots of resources…

Fundamentally, I have no doubt that the new system will push the organization into a more transparent and unified performance evaluation and career development system. This will introduce relative “fairness” into the company because the same standards are used on all employees. It also promotes talent management and job-fit, which will enable the right people at the right jobs. The company will certainly benefit from this change in the long term.

But the devil is always in the details and implementation process.

The problem is that this change was implemented too quickly (world-wide roll-out within 1 month) without the much needed support and buy-in process from the stakeholders. This means that not enough effort has been put into convincing the people who are supposed to make the system work. If they are not convinced, no matter how great the new system can be, it will not work.

It will be like running Windows 3.0 on a Supercomputer. Dead slow.

Indeed, nobody likes change. If the change is for a good purpose and cause, then it is worth investing the time and effort into making sure that most, if not all, parties concerned are supportive and agreeable; that their mindsets and attitudes are aligned to the direction of the change necessary.

Needless to say, my point really is that it is useless for elaborate external “improvements” when the inside (which is the heart of the matter) has never been changed at all. What good is form without substance?