6.  Holistic Participatory-solution-focused methods

The Holistic Participatory-solution-focused methods incorporate in change process management activities multiple techniques that address IT processes including the human equation or need in the change. Every time a method is applied that involves the human needs, multiple aspects such as culture, backgrounds, personal employee participatory needs, and communication / learning abilities are considered. This process slows the speed of change. The longer change however takes the more variables could come up and create a greater complexity to the change process. Therefore, the sooner a change-over or switch-over from one process or method to another one the better.

Gappmaier (1997) primarily has discussed and recommended addressing the human needs in change. Of course, Michael Hammer (1990) had suggested that change needs to be radical for best productivity and greatest effectiveness. Hammer later recalled in 2002 his former beliefs and stated that the human needs should be considered. In Gappmaier’s (1997) proposal, the Holistic Participatory-solution-focused methods, he recommended three aspects that could greatly benefit the outcome of change management. These are first participation of all stakeholders in the change methodologies and the change process design, second the reflection of status and was/is/will-be status of the change process progress, and third being oriented or focused on solution rather than problem descriptive.

It is put into question whether time delays of change initiatives caused by lengthy human-needs and participation concerns is more effective over radical change. Again, radical change opposes the incremental change to which the holistic participatory-solution-focused change methodologies are counted. To keep a change initiative short and radical may have be advantageous in respect to effectiveness when getting new systems introduced in organizations. To the other hand, the system may be operational quickly, but at what cost? The system works, the humans that operate the new system however are broken morally and not capable or able to run with a new system. So which one is really better?