With increasing change in technology, there is also the need to change internal applications or processes within an organization. One of the applications we use at GSK is a CRM tool to get a 360 view of the customer, ultimately providing a better customer experience. We’ve implemented a version of this CRM tool a few years back and now we are about to launch a new version in our organization. Releases have already been launched in other global units and the US is about to launch a new release. Our management has preempted this launch with a series of communication briefs and meetings around some of the new functions that the new application will provide. Kotter’s Change Management Model addresses three areas that I can see as user’s perspective that our company is addressing. First, the creating a climate for change. The project leads recruited users from each of the units that the application will be launched in. I see this as not only getting valuable feedback to what business requirements would be vital, but as they work through the project will essentially become champions of the change. The second area that Kotter focuses on is engaging and enabling the whole organization. The project leads have effectively communicated out the reason behind the change, and how as the users, it will make our day-to day jobs easier. This will foster a buy-in from the organization and its users as a positive change. Communicating the project goals will also elicit more feedback and open communication between management and its users. Open communication will also help identify who’s an early adopter, or champion, and who is resistant. One of the meetings that we had around this new application was the leader of the meeting asking for those that were hesitant about the change or had doubts of the application to speak up as they were looking to see what they needed to address for a smoother transition. I know we spoke about that in class and thought that was interesting to see happen. Being at the same company for quite some time, I’ve seen the evolution of how GSK handles change management and this was a different approach that before. In the previous release of the application we currently use, we were pretty much told, use it and we will be measuring you to make sure you are. There wasn’t much communication of how this would help the company or us as users, it was just one more thing to add to our plate and it was another metric to reach. These points are also referenced to Auster/Ruebottom How to Navigate Change as assessing influencers receptiveness and engaging both positive and negative skeptics. Evaluating how people will react to the change and just overall open communication between stakeholders and users will facilitate a better experience. This could also provide even more insight into how to implement and sustain the change. Most people are fearful of change because they feel they won’t have the resources to adapt or learn a new capability. With management being aware of those reactions, they can better prepare trainings and resources for when the application is implemented. We are using a sandbox for users to become familiar with the application and practice before the launch. This will also help identify possible defects that could be fixed before launch to make a better user experience. There’s nothing worse than having an application that is riddled with issues to make a user frustrated and quickly jump off the bandwagon.