Change is changing
After fifteen years leading transformation programmes across two very different markets, namely, the UK and the Middle East, I have learnt many things, but one thing in particular has become startlingly clear: the way organisations need to manage change has fundamentally shifted. What used to work no longer does, and what leaders expect from change management today is not what they expected even five years ago.
Across many sectors – manufacturing, construction, infrastructure, government – the patterns are the same.
Here are some of the shifts I’ve observed consistently.
Change is now continuous, not episodic
A decade ago, most organisations treated change as an event. It was a new ERP, a restructuring procedure or a process redesign. Plans were created, teams were trained, rollout was executed and then stabilised… Today, that rhythm no longer exists.
Organisations manage multiple concurrent change cycles: digitalisation, new regulations, cost efficiency, sustainability, AI integration… all happening simultaneously.
In the Middle East, the pace is accelerating even further due to national agendas, megaproject timelines and rapid scaling. After all, it is still an emerging market that is shaping its legacy.
Despite all this, one observation has been a constant in every organisation I’ve worked with: the silo mentality. This is not because people do not want to collaborate; it is because human nature defaults to “What is mine is mine, and what is yours is yours.”
Recently, in a manufacturing organisation preparing for a larger transformation, two departments independently decided to rewrite their standard operating procedures. Their intention was good as they wanted to strengthen the foundations before moving into the deeper transformation work. But neither team realised they were effectively undertaking the same initiative, and that each version would fundamentally affect the other’s operating model.
We had to step in, pause both efforts and demonstrate why sequencing and prioritisation mattered more than activity. It was not a case of stopping progress but of ensuring their work did not collide later.
And it was not driven by resistance or politics either. It was a simple reminder that silos still shape how people think, plan and act, even in organisations that believe they have moved beyond them.
Organisations cannot afford parallel change tracks that collide simply because teams do not look over the fence.
Change management must stop acting like a project discipline and start acting like a core organisational capability that connects the dots.
People are resisting overload, not change
In the Middle East especially, the non-stop evolving environment takes a visible toll.
New systems, new reporting cycles, new structures and new expectations are all stacked on top of each other with no let-up.
Let’s be crystal clear: resistance is rarely about not wanting change; it is about cognitive saturation. Overload has become the real barrier.
That is why having a proper change framework is the only way for organisations to protect their people’s capacity to absorb transformation.
I have read recent research from a strategy house that resonated strongly with my own experience on one point in particular:very few organisations critically challenge the initiatives they launch.
Leaders talk enthusiastically about proactivity, innovation, employee suggestions and “keeping people engaged”. But almost no one stops to ask:
Does this initiative clearly support our business goals?
Is the effort justified by the value?
Is this the right time?
What are we willing to stop to make room for it?
The question I repeatedly ask myself is, why the hesitation? I came to the conclusion that it is because leaders fear that questioning an idea may lead to demotivation.
But this creates its own paradox: not challenging initiatives leads to far more demotivation further down the road when teams become overwhelmed, scattered or confused by competing priorities.
Successful organisations do not run more initiatives. They run fewer, more meaningful ones, and explicitly protect people from noise. But for that, strong leadership at the top is essential.
Organisations need new tools, not the traditional pack
The old toolkit as we know it: communications, training, roadmaps, engagement plans, still has value, but it does not solve today’s challenge. In my view, organisations now need three additional capabilities:
a. Sense-and-respond change
They must adjust course every 90 days, not every 18 months, and they need short learning cycles, real-time data and, most importantly, teams empowered to act.
b. Behavioural change at scale
Tools and processes alone do nothing. Organisations need new behaviours, which are reinforced consistently. This defines whether a transformation sticks… or not.
c. Reinvention, not optimisation
Organisations may be focusing on improving existing processes, or they may need reinvention / transformation due to bold national visions with new operating models. Regardless, both cases require a deeper shift: questioning not only how the organisation works, but how it creates value.
This point brings me to my conclusion: change is no longer about implementing a project, it is about continuously reshaping identity, capability and culture.
So, if we agree that change is now continuous, and organisations are overloaded, who is actually orchestrating it?