Regulatory Lifecycle Management System – Pre-Design ... · 01/12/2016 North Highland 001 Initial draft ... project management team and departmental leadership provide relevant,

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

AND CONSUMER SERVICES

REGULATORY LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT

SYSTEM – PRE-DESIGN, DEVELOPMENT,

AND IMPLEMENTATION PROJECT

D4D-E – COMMUNICATIONS AND CHANGE

READINESS PLAN

Date: 02/24/2016

Version: 007

Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services – RLMS Pre-DDI Project

D4D-E - Communications and Change Readiness Plan Page i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 1

1.1 Purpose ...................................................................................................................... 2

1.2 Description .................................................................................................................. 5

1.3 Scope ......................................................................................................................... 5

NORTH HIGHLAND APPROACH / ASSUMPTIONS ........................................ 7

2.1 Approach .................................................................................................................... 7

2.2 Assumptions ............................................................................................................... 8

RLMS COMMUNICATION PLAN ..................................................................... 9

3.1 Communication Plan Context ...................................................................................... 9

3.2 Communication Plan Objectives ............................................................................... 10

3.3 Identification of Stakeholders and Audiences ............................................................ 11

3.4 Defined Communication Events ................................................................................ 15

3.5 Evaluation of Existing Communication Methods ........................................................ 16

3.6 RLMS Communication Action Plan Template ............................................................ 18

3.7 RLMS Communication Plan Governance .................................................................. 21

3.8 Next Steps ................................................................................................................ 23

RLMS CHANGE READINESS ASSESSMENT PLAN .................................... 24

4.1 Proposed Change Readiness Assessment Approach ............................................... 24

4.2 Change Readiness Assessment Survey Questions .................................................. 26

4.3 Change Readiness Evaluation Methodology ............................................................. 28

ATTACHMENTS ............................................................................................ 31

5.1 Attachment I: Stakeholder Analysis Matrix ................................................................ 31

5.2 Attachment II: RLMS Communication Action Plan Template ..................................... 31

5.3 D4A-B-C Stakeholder Analysis, OCM Assessment, and OCM Approach / Plan ........ 31


D4D-E - Communications and Change Readiness Plan Page ii

Revision History

DATE AUTHOR VERSION CHANGE REFERENCE

01/12/2016 North Highland 001 Initial draft

01/19/2016 North Highland 002 Ongoing edits

02/05/2016 North Highland 003 Ongoing edits

02/06/2016 North Highland 004 Draft for Team QA

02/12/2016 North Highland 005 Draft for Internal QA

2/16/2016 FDACS 006 FDACS Review

02/24/2016 North Highland 007 Draft for Internal QA

Quality Review

NAME ROLE DATE

Jennifer Pang NH Internal QA 02/12/2016


D4D-E - Communications and Change Readiness Plan Page 1

INTRODUCTION

North Highland has been asked to assess the Regulatory Lifecycle Management System (RLMS) Project Organizational Change Management (OCM) needs and develop communication and stakeholder strategies to facilitate system implementation and change throughout the lifecycle of the project. This deliverable contains analysis to develop a RLMS Communication Plan and the Change Readiness Assessment Plan to address overall change management needs, strategies, and activities. The goal of the OCM workstream activities is to help the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services’ (FDACS, the department) stakeholders become comfortable with, and able to move to, the new RLMS environment and operating model, and effectively leverage the new system in delivering regulatory services.

The RLMS will change the way people work to deliver activities across the regulatory lifecycle and the way related technology is supported across the department. With the anticipated improvement in system capabilities (such as workflow, business rules, mobile access, and self-service), some data entry tasks will shift from FDACS staff to the customer, offering FDACS staff the opportunity to spend more time on higher-priority duties, and for staff in the field to move towards paperless workflow and real-time data management. Migrating to RLMS presents significant opportunities for efficiency gains, and requires significant changes to the way the department and its employees work today.

Effective OCM is associated with greater probability of project success (achieving the full benefit of RLMS), increased management and end-user buy-in, and faster adoption / execution of the desired change. A robust communication and change management plan is key for successful change adoption, and supports FDACS employees and other stakeholders as they become aware of the changes, adapt to, and benefit from new processes and tools.

OCM activities currently being provided by North Highland as part of this workstream include:

Articulating the benefits of the change clearly and consistently.

Identifying and assisting key leadership and management sponsors in supporting change.

Identifying stakeholder groups impacted by the change.

Planning and executing communications to support key stakeholder needs.

Identifying and proposing opportunities for stakeholder involvement and communication.

Planning for and executing an information sharing approach for stakeholders regarding the new system, processes, policies, procedures, and responsibilities.

Assessing and managing resistance to change.

The North Highland RLMS Pre-Design, Development, and Implementation (Pre-DDI) OCM workstream activities are also designed to ensure that activities to deliver effective and successful change management and communications are incorporated throughout the life of



the RLMS project via the repeatable OCM processes and communication tools developed in this document.

Additionally, the Workforce Transition and OCM workstream activities are coordinated. Findings and recommendations from the Workforce Transition deliverables shape OCM activities and are used to help guide the organization in responding to the changing environment of its workforce, consumers and other stakeholders.

1.1 PURPOSE

Communication plans are vital to project success. System and process project outcomes and related workforce productivity are facilitated by transparent and structured communication approaches that provide consistency in project perceptions and understanding, and help manage expectations during a change effort. In addition, communication is important for demonstrating ongoing executive support and commitment, building overall buy-in and commitment to the changes, and ensuring that stakeholders know how the transformation journey is progressing at key points during the project.

The purpose of the Communications and Change Readiness Plan is to ensure that the RLMS project management team and departmental leadership provide relevant, accurate and consistent information to stakeholders and other appropriate audiences throughout the lifecycle of the project. By effectively communicating to people and organizations impacted by the system implementation, the project team can accomplish its work with the support and cooperation of each stakeholder group.

This deliverable leverages information gathered in prior OCM planning and other workforce transformation activities. The key questions addressed by this workstream are captured in Exhibit 1: OCM Workstream Activities and Dependencies below, which shows how this deliverable is driven by the findings and approaches developed in the Stakeholder Analysis, OCM Assessment, and OCM Approach / Plan (Deliverable D4A-B-C)

http://floridafresh/OATS/PPMO/RLMS/Complete%20Document%20Library/160112-DACS02-D4ABC-Stakeholder-Analysis-OCM-AP-v100.docx




Exhibit 1: OCM Workstream Activities and Dependencies

A previous deliverable (Deliverable D4A-B-C – Stakeholder Analysis, OCM Assessment, and OCM Approach / Plan) identified (by stakeholder group) observations including the estimated impact of the change, current perceptions about change, and issues that may impede change. The document included a Stakeholder Analysis Matrix with high-level recommendations for change management approaches to support successful change for specified entities or groups. Additionally, it laid out a recommended approach for managing change throughout the RLMS Design, Development, and Implementation (DDI) phase, and it established a basis for ongoing OCM planning needs and activities.

The exhibit below shows how information from the previously completed Stakeholder Analysis will be used to guide an assessment of stakeholder readiness.

Who is impacted?

How?

What is their level of influenceor involvement?

What are current organizational sentiments?

What are the expected reactions to change?

What are the communicationneeds?

How do we execute change management?

Stakeholder Analysis

OCM Assessment

OCM Approach /

Plan

D4A-B-C

D4D-E

Communication Plan and Change Readiness Plan





Exhibit 2: RLMS Change Readiness and OCM Desired End State

The concept of the OCM Desired End State, which measures when desired levels of change adoption are achieved (the red line in the exhibit), is important because change readiness, related communication, and OCM goals hinge on two concepts:

Understanding the change journey a stakeholder or audience group must undertake; and

Knowing when desired change levels are achieved so that activities for a specific stakeholder or audience group may be reassessed and modified as needed.

Aware of the

Change

Understand the

Change

Accept the

Change

Committed to the

ChangeChampion

5. As-Needed

Information Partners

4. FDACS Staff (Non-

RLMS Users)

Not Supportive

Moderately

Supportive

Not Applicable as of January 2016

3. Tax Collectors (External RLMS Users)

Unaware

3. FDACS Staff RLMS End Users (including first level supervisors,

who are not section chiefs)

10. Information Sharing Partners

6. Customers, License and Permit Holders, Applicants,

Consumers, General Public

1. FDACS IT Governance

Fully Supportive

Neutral

Slightly

Supportive

2. Division Directors / Office Directors / Assistant Directors

2. Bureau Chiefs / Section Chiefs

3. IT Support Staff (Regulatory Application Support & Other

Roles)

5. External Stakeholders

Governmental Stakeholders (not in scope of Change Readiness Plan)

1. Executive Leadership

OCM Desired End State

Level of Stakeholder Impact

High

Medium

Low

N/A



Section 4.1 further outlines how this exhibit informs the Proposed Change Readiness Assessment Approach.

1.2 DESCRIPTION

This document (Deliverable D4D-E) develops key components that are critical for executing change management and communication activities in support of RLMS deployment:

The RLMS Communication Plan

The associated RLMS Communication Action Plan Template

The RLMS Change Readiness Assessment Plan

Section 3: RLMS Communication Plan. This section presents the principles, analysis and communication methods identified for developing the RLMS Communication Plan. The plan is composed of the identification of stakeholders and audiences (Section 3.3), the RLMS Communication Action Plan Template (Section 3.6) and the communication plan governance components which include ownership, principles, feedback mechanisms, and protocols for updates and reviews (Section 3.7).

Like the Stakeholder Analysis Matrix, by its dynamic nature, the Communication Action Plan Template is intended to be a living document throughout the deployment of RLMS releases, and can be expanded and revised as necessary by the RLMS OCM Lead (discussed in Section 3.7).

Section 4: RLMS Change Readiness Assessment Plan. To measure and support progress toward change adoption throughout the RLMS project, it is important to establish a baseline for change readiness for each stakeholder and define an evaluation approach for tracking the change journey against the baseline. This section proposes an approach to analyzing change readiness by stakeholder group and presents a survey tool, as a set of questions to be executed at proposed intervals.

1.3 SCOPE

The entities addressed in this deliverable include individuals, teams and functional areas within FDACS that perform regulatory lifecycle-related activities.

Areas of primary focus for RLMS Release 1 are:

Division of Licensing (DOL).

Related revenue collection and processing and mailroom roles / activities in the Division of Administration (DOA).

Office of Agricultural Law Enforcement (AgLaw), for the purposes of the regulatory investigative activities it performs on behalf of DOL.

http://floridafresh/OATS/PPMO/RLMS/Complete%20Document%20Library/160224-DACS02-D4DE-Attachment-II-RLMS-Communication-Action-Plan-Template-v100.xlsx




Areas of secondary focus for future RLMS releases are:

All other bureaus within divisions which perform regulatory lifecycle-related activities.

Areas of tertiary scope are:

Any bureau within a division or office which does not perform regulatory lifecycle-related activities.

Any bureau within a division or office which carries out regulatory lifecycle-related activities that will not be managed through RLMS, such as inspections carried out by the Division of Fruit and Vegetables (F&V) on behalf of the USDA (e.g., tomatoes and peanut grading).

The primary audiences for the communication plan are current stakeholders, especially those soon to be impacted by RLMS Release 1. However, it is intended that tools developed here are extendable and scalable to future RLMS releases.



NORTH HIGHLAND APPROACH / ASSUMPTIONS

2.1 APPROACH

This deliverable builds on prior OCM-related findings and tools, and centers on the concepts of:

Identifying communication needs for RLMS-impacted stakeholders (who, what, when, how).

Understanding and evaluating change readiness.

Measuring change readiness and progress.

Providing recommendations for RLMS OCM leadership for ongoing management of the tools developed in support of these activities.

To create this document North Highland has:

Identified audiences, and relative needs, for communication / events.

Created an RLMS Communication Action Plan Template tailored to the needs of the department.

Proposed a governance approach for the RLMS Communication Plan.

Leveraged previous OCM deliverables to frame change readiness approaches.

Designed Change Readiness Survey questions.

Developed a methodology to capture and measure movements in change readiness.

Inputs (primarily from the Stakeholder Analysis, OCM Assessment, and OCM Approach / Plan):

OCM Information Request

Discussions with department leadership about RLMS communication needs and availability of internal OCM leadership

Previously delivered Stakeholder Analysis and Organizational Impact

North Highland Findings / Observations and Recommendations

OCM Assessments and supporting documentation

RLMS OCM Functional Model

Best practices related to OCM

Outputs:

Identification of stakeholders and audiences





Definition of communication events with a related evaluation of existing and needed communication methods

RLMS Communication Action Plan Template

Governance protocols for the RLMS Communication Plan

RLMS Change Readiness Assessment Plan with supporting survey and recommendations for analysis

2.2 ASSUMPTIONS

Assumptions used in this analysis:

There is widespread support at the highest levels of responsibility in the department for the vision guiding this effort and the implementation of changes the analysis drives – to achieve quality, consistency and expediency goals in regulatory services.

For the purposes of this document, RLMS Release 1 is assumed to primarily impact DOL, Tax Collectors, and AgLaw Regulatory Investigators, along with DOA.

The Communication Action Plan Template is intended to be maintained as a separate document to be updated and revised throughout the life of the project.

The Change Readiness Assessment Plan is also intended to be maintained as a separate document to be updated and revised throughout the life of the project.

The communication vehicles / media / technologies presented in this deliverable are those preferred for the RLMS impacted resources, and reflect an understanding of the department’s communications practices and culture. Stakeholder numbering throughout this document reflects the numbering assigned in the Stakeholder Analysis Matrix in Deliverable D4A-B-C.

Governmental Stakeholders (such as the Legislature, the Governor’s Office, and the Florida Cabinet) are not a core audience for the Communication Plan because project communication needs for these stakeholders are addressed on an individual basis through currently established relationships and channels.

The RLMS OCM Lead role and the Change Champions’ network recommended in Deliverable D4A-B-C are, or will shortly be, established.

All assessments, findings and recommendations supporting this deliverable reflect information as valid at this point in time. The nature of any change is dynamic over the life of a project.



RLMS COMMUNICATION PLAN

3.1 COMMUNICATION PLAN CONTEXT

The RLMS Communication Plan outlines recommended communication activities to support the RLMS project throughout its lifecycle. Components of the communication plan include:

Identification of stakeholders and audiences that are a target for the plan.

Identification and evaluation of communication events best suited for FDACS.

The RLMS Communication Action Plan Template to guide execution of communication activities.

Definition and guidance on governance for the RLMS Communication Plan.

Communication which reflects stakeholder needs and feedback is vital to ensure project success. Effective communication requires careful planning and governance to ensure that identified stakeholder groups and audiences receive appropriate information to ensure they know what is happening and what might be expected of them at key points throughout the lifecycle of the project. Hence, communication plans support enterprise transformation by supporting stakeholders as they seek information and make their personal decisions to accept and embrace change. Communication plans also help manage people’s expectations, and overcome barriers to change.

Communication efforts are also important in managing business outcomes and risks that may result from RLMS process and technology changes. Business risks associated with inadequate communication can span a wide range of outcomes, including:

Potential dips in quality / speed of service for licensing processes during the transition to the new system and processes.

Vocal, unhappy stakeholders, who may not see the value in the proposed changes.

Lost time and project resources used managing fear and misunderstanding.

Potential implementation delays due to funding or technical challenges.

A core function of the RLMS Communication Plan, therefore, is to support the RLMS Future OCM Vision and Strategy and support the stakeholders’ change journey from Awareness to Ownership as depicted in the exhibit below.



Exhibit 3: RLMS OCM Vision and Strategy

3.2 COMMUNICATION PLAN OBJECTIVES

To launch and accomplish OCM Phase 1: Prepare for Change, key communication objectives are:

To promote and gain support for the project.

To encourage successful deployment of the RLMS technology and its capabilities.

To give accurate and timely information about the project.

To ensure consistent messages.

A communication plan needs to be deliberate in considering the specific needs of both internal and external stakeholders. The following are the key criteria that make a good communication plan:

Ownership (business lead of the change project) and execution (organizational change management) resources with defined relative responsibilities for management, design, execution duties, governance and maintenance

Flexibility (to deal with “popping up” and reactive communication needs)

Feedback mechanisms that inform the effectiveness of communication messages

The RLMS Organizational Change

Management Vision is to deliver to

stakeholders prompt, relevant, and

accurate information and

successfully guide them through the

implementation journey

Awareness

Understanding

Buy-in

Ownership

Reinforce ChangeOCM Phase 3

• Deploy a two-way, multi-audience communication strategy

• Build individual and team capacity to change

Manage ChangeOCM Phase 2

• Build leadership capacity and stakeholder commitment

• Align culture and change process

• Design a tailored change architecture

Prepare for ChangeOCM Phase 1

• Determine organizational readiness and business case for change

• Articulate a compelling vision for change

• Align organizational design and assessment systems



Link to business changes / timing (must reflect the questions / needs in management and audience scope of interest)

Availability and suitability of communication channels

Specifics on frequency of communication, who sends communications, and the appropriate levels of communication

3.3 IDENTIFICATION OF STAKEHOLDERS AND AUDIENCES

This Section identifies the audiences targeted for the RLMS Communication Plan and the purpose for communicating with each audience.

Deliverable D4A-B-C – the Stakeholder Analysis, OCM Assessment, and OCM Approach / Plan captured the list of RLMS impacted stakeholders which comprise the target audiences for the RLMS Communication Plan. The matrix, also available in Attachment I: Stakeholder Analysis Matrix, is a living document and it identifies the following 13 stakeholders / stakeholder groups:

1. Executive Leadership – The Commissioner, the Assistant Commissioner, the Deputy Commissioners, and other non-project-related department leadership.

2. Division / Office Directors / Assistant Division Directors – Division Directors and Assistant Directors from divisions in which regulatory lifecycle activities occur.

3. Bureau Chiefs / Section Chiefs – Bureau Chiefs and Section Chiefs from divisions in which regulatory lifecycle activities occur.

4. FDACS Staff / RLMS End Users (including first-level supervisors who are not section chiefs) – Staff from divisions in which regulatory lifecycle activities occur.

5. Tax Collectors (External RLMS Users) – Tax Collectors' office staff who currently use the CWIS system.

6. IT Support Staff (Regulatory Application Support and Other Roles) – Regulatory application and other IT support staff in the divisions and infrastructure, end user support and service desk staff who are currently in OATS.

7. FDACS Non-RLMS Users – Primarily FDACS employees who will not use RLMS, but may work with or know of others who do.

8. FDACS IT Governance – The Governance Body that oversees FDACS decision-making and project prioritization. This group oversees the RLMS project and makes decisions that greatly impact the design and implementation of the RLMS.

9. External Stakeholders – Groups, organizations, advisory bodies, and entities external to FDACS which have influence over the project, or can be vocal in support or opposition of the system implementation.

10. Information Sharing Partners – Entities with whom FDACS shares data on a daily or frequent basis. RLMS implementation may require coordination with Information Sharing Partners.



http://floridafresh/OATS/PPMO/RLMS/Complete%20Document%20Library/160112-DACS02-D4ABC-Attachment-I-OCM-Stakeholder-Analysis-Matrix-v100.xlsx




11. As-Needed Information Sharing Partners – These are entities that receive data requests from FDACS or provide data on an ad hoc basis.

12. Governmental Stakeholders – The Legislature, the Governor’s Office, the Florida Cabinet, and regulating bodies (Not a core audience for this RLMS Communication Plan, managed instead by FDACS senior leadership).

13. Customers, License Holders, Applicants, Consumers, General Public – Any individual who is requesting or receiving a service from FDACS, or is impacted by the RLMS.

In the development of a communication plan, it is important to consider that some stakeholders have a high level of impact on project success and need targeted forms of communication. To guide the development of the RLMS Communication Plan, the extract from the Stakeholder Analysis Matrix (Attachment I) below summarizes the interest and influence dimensions of each identified stakeholder group:

Exhibit 4: RLMS Stakeholder Influence and Interest Grid

These stakeholders have been included in this communication plan according to the level of impact they can have upon the project, and their communication needs have been correspondingly considered.

InterestLow High

Influence

Low

High

Red = blocker/skeptic Orange = neutral Green = advocate/support

Provide Status

ManageClosely

(maximum effort)

Monitor(effort as needed)

KeepInformed

Executive Leadership

Division Dir./External Stakeholders

Bureau/Section Chiefs

FDACS RLMS End Users

Tax Collectors

Customers/ Consumers

Info Sharing Partners

GovernmentalStakeholders

As-Needed Info Partners

FDACS Non-RLMS Users

Assistant Dir.

IT Support Staff




Note: FDACS IT Governance is not separately represented above as its members are individually represented in other stakeholder groups.

In addition to the identified RLMS stakeholders, a key set of individuals are expected to be appointed as department Change Champions for OCM Execution (see Deliverable D4A-B-C, Section 5.3). A Change Champion is a named individual who represents an area or group of people for purposes of providing OCM activities. The appointed individuals, on behalf of a stakeholder group, serve as a “delivery channel” for OCM and communication activities.

Change Champions represent an additional audience group for the RLMS Communication Plan as they will need to be educated on their role, the project, OCM activities execution plans, and most importantly, they will be the individuals actively interacting across their respective organizational unit with other targeted audiences.

With this understanding of the stakeholders for the RLMS project, North Highland executed the first steps of development for an RLMS Communication Action Plan Template by grouping stakeholders into audience groups. An audience is a person (or group) who has been selected from the Stakeholder Analysis Matrix to be included in the project communication plan and can be grouped together for communication purposes based on common needs. Audiences receive targeted communication and can be best served with communication methods (defined in Section 3.2 below) that are straightforward and quick to produce so that messages can be customized as needed to address emerging communications needs.

The Exhibit below shows the results of an exercise to identify audience groups for the development of the RLMS Communication Action Plan Template. As stated in the assumptions, stakeholder numbering throughout this document reflects the numbering assigned in the Stakeholder Analysis Matrix from the Stakeholder Analysis, OCM Assessment, and OCM Approach / Plan. It should be noted that “12. Governmental Stakeholders” have not been assigned an audience group because communication with this stakeholder group will be managed by FDACS leadership outside the RLMS project communication process.

AUDIENCE COMMUNICATION PURPOSE COMMUNICATION VEHICLE(S)

DEPARTMENTAL LEADERSHIP


Maintain ongoing project sponsorship Update on project status Governance on communications / the

plan In addition to Project Management Communication protocols as defined by the PMP

Status Report Comprehensive

Monthly Report Periodic presentations


DIVISIONAL LEADERSHIP


Update on project status Up-to-date cross-departmental project

information and coordination Maintain open lines of communication

and feedback with divisional operations on RLMS progress

Status Report (optional) Comprehensive

Monthly Report Periodic project updates

at divisional meeting / presentation






AUDIENCE COMMUNICATION PURPOSE COMMUNICATION VEHICLE(S)

RLMS END USERS

4. FDACS Staff RLMS End Users (including first level supervisors, who are not section chiefs)

Update on project status Managing expectations Modeling transparency in

communication Leveling the project information gaps

across the department Preventing rumors and misinformation

about the project

Newsletter (online) Town Halls Meetings with divisional

management / liaison Ad hoc information

sessions (linked to project roll outs)

SharePoint project information portal

Email update


6. IT Support Staff (Regulatory Application Support & Other Roles)

NON-RLMS USERS

7. FDACS Staff (Non-RLMS Users)

Convey the service innovation efforts of the department through RLMS project

Ensuring an adequate flow of information about a major change in the department

Newsletter (online) on FDACS portal

INFORMATION PARTNERS


Convey the service innovation efforts of the department through RLMS implementation



11. As-Needed Information Partners

CUSTOMERS

12. Customers, License Holders, Applicants, Consumers, General Public

Education on how RLMS changes the licensing process for customers

Identify opportunities to promote the benefits for RLMS (added features, ease of access via the self-service portal, etc.)


Educational materials Mailing to active

customers, as needed

CHANGE CHAMPIONS

Change Champions

Updates on the project Execution of OCM activities Articulation of progress towards change Liaison between their functional unit or

division and the project

Access to all RLMS-related materials

Attendance at relevant meetings

Access to RLMS OCM tools

Exhibit 5: RLMS Communication Plan Audiences

The communication vehicles are more formally discussed and applied in the following section which presents defined communication events that represent a set of options for communication and are reflected in the RLMS Communication Action Plan Template.



3.4 DEFINED COMMUNICATION EVENTS

A communication event is a mechanism for sharing and collecting information. For each audience (as identified in Section 3.3 above), the RLMS Communication Plan captures what information needs to be communicated, with what frequency, and with what method.

There are several key considerations when selecting communication event formats. These range from consideration of costs (meeting vs. electronic communication, for instance), the currently adopted and / or preferred communication channels for that organization, the availability of technology that facilities dissemination of information (such as intranet and video conferencing), and physical constraints driven by geographic distribution of resources and offices.

The exhibit below lists typically available communication event formats and briefly describes their suitability to audience types and organizational constructs.

TYPE EVENT BENEFITS DRAWBACKS

Individual contact

Conference call and videoconferencing

Highly effective in terms of audience engagement

Supporting technologies are widely available

Hard to accomplish with resources spread across times and geographies

Can result in fragmented information sharing

Word of mouth / Talking points for leadership

Telephone conversation

Personal conversation

Meeting Periodic formal meetings Ideal for: hands on brainstorming sharing lessons learned exchanging ideas (formally

and informally) surfacing organizational questions about change

learning about new ideas, products, and services

building team rapport and morale

Can be costly, cumbersome to coordinate and at times ineffective

Town Hall (interactive participation with leadership)

Bureau or division briefings

Road shows to present and explain the project or new technologies

“Lunch and learn” (informal training sessions)

Informal meetings

Electronic Email to affected parties only with targeted content

Email to individual parties increase response action, if necessary

Simple and easy for the audience to access the information and process at their preferred level of interest

FAQS on FDACS intranet / internet

Background materials postings

It is hard to immediately gauge the effectiveness of the information

Social media is often not accessible from work

Periodic project reports (electronic)

Email to all (broad messaging)

Newsletter providing updates on project activities

Intranet / website posting

Social media posting (externally focused)

Exhibit 6: Defined Communication Events



Additionally, communication events include already established project management protocols of project status updates and project governance meetings (not covered in this deliverable).

3.5 EVALUATION OF EXISTING COMMUNICATION METHODS

In the Stakeholder Analysis, OCM Assessment, and OCM Approach / Plan, North Highland executed an OCM Assessment regarding impacted resources across the department. The request included questions about different communication formats and captured how communication preferences manifest primarily within divisions. The results for the 33 impacted bureaus and offices in the exhibit below are extracted from Section 3 of the document.

ROUTINE ISSUES MAJOR CHANGES

Email to all 79% 67%

Email to affected parties only 97% 58%

Intranet posting 30% 9%

Telephone conversation 97% 45%

Personal conversation 79% 45%

Conference room meeting with Supervisors; then supervisors distribute the information

58% 79%

Bureau meeting 73% 94%

Division meeting 24% 82%

Exhibit 7: OCM Information Request – Communication Mechanisms

Individual contact encompasses personal and telephone conversations.

There is a consistent approach to communication formats for different bureaus within individual divisions.

Across the department, multiple communication mechanisms are generally used to communicate change.

More routine communication (about daily operational issues) is generally shared at the bureau level.

Major communication (typically strategic in nature) is shared at both bureau and division meetings for a majority of respondents.

Additionally, North Highland gathered information that indicated the extent to which impacted resources are physically distributed across the department.

Resources performing regulatory lifecycle roles are distributed across the state with a concentration of staff headquartered in Tallahassee, Bartow (F&V) and Gainesville (Division of Plant Industry).

Most divisions have fewer than 10 offices / regional spread of resources.




Divisions with resources concentrated in Tallahassee have the ability to bring everyone together for face-to-face communication and provide access to leadership.

For this deliverable, to further understand what communication methods are currently commonly used in the department, and what level of communication is the norm, we conducted additionally conversations with department resources and stakeholders and found:

There are two formal platforms, emails / newsletters, of communication currently established:

› The FDACS’s Commissioner “Today’s News” daily newsletter which is focused on sharing news about the policy / external context in which the department operates.

› The “Open Lines” quarterly newsletter which is focused on sharing social news such as awards given, new hires, retirements, etc. The feeds for the newsletter come from a contact person from each division, and the newsletter is produced by Marketing and Development.

Communication approaches in some divisions (such as DOL) tend to be sporadic in nature, and communication is typically delivered through the chain of command or via email.

The department intranet is a place where department-relevant information is posted, but it is unclear how much individuals are aware of the information available, or that they use this source.

Communication with customers is usually triggered by regulatory requirements (notice given on licensing status changes) and it is typically via letter.

Important external stakeholder communication for the department is attendance at industry and regulatory meetings (events). For instance, department representatives attend and often present at the Private Investigation, Recovery and Security Advisory Council (PIRSAC) meetings which take place the last month of each quarter. There might be similar events of FDACS relevance for communicating with external stakeholders, and the RLMS Communication Action Plan Template can identify and capture these communication opportunities.

Given current department communication practices, and in the context of RLMS implementation, it is also important to consider specific implications for communication needs resulting from these realities:

Affected stakeholders are distributed across the state (i.e., External Stakeholders, Customers, Tax Collectors, etc.) – both internally and externally to the department – and geographic dimensions can affect the information delivery effectiveness.

Not all stakeholders are easily accessible via (or have access to) electronic communication, and the RLMS project will require a longer span and more intense level of communication than current practices. Hence, there might be additional costs involved (events, mailings, meetings, etc.), particularly for customers, license holders, applicants, consumers, and the general public.



While this and related RLMS OCM deliverables focus on change and communication driven by RLMS implementation and identifies needed resources for execution, raising the department’s communication profile with the wide-range of stakeholders will inevitably raise expectations for the department to sustain new levels of communication on an ongoing basis for other potential forthcoming changes. In the next few years, leadership is advised to make decisions on where and whom in the department will be charged with communication leadership.

Overall, department resources could benefit from more structured or deliberate communication about changes and initiatives. As the Exhibit below shows (from Deliverable D5A), it is the vision of department leadership to model improved communication and to facilitate operating as “One Team”. The red boxes show how effective communication can and must support the RLMS Future Workforce Vision.

Exhibit 8: RLMS Future Workforce Vision and the Role of Communication

There is an opportunity, therefore, for the department to increase the level of communication within and across divisions by modeling and implementing a deliberate and sustained communication approach in deploying RLMS and beyond.

3.6 RLMS COMMUNICATION ACTION PLAN TEMPLATE

The RLMS Communication Action Plan Template is designed to be the driving tool for planning, scheduling, executing, and monitoring the effectiveness of communications for RLMS stakeholders and audiences. With this template, the RLMS OCM team can manage activities in support of communication needs and goals, and respond to findings from Change Readiness Assessments.

RLMS FUTURE WORKFORCE VISIONEmpower the regulatory workforce to support the changing needs of the department, customers and

other stakeholders by enabling a culture of service; leveraging efficiencies enabled by the system;

focusing on relevant and aligned competencies; and the use of consistent approaches and processes

across the department – working as One Team

Co-delivery and

consolidation of

services, where

appropriate

Consistent ways of

working with clarity on

roles, responsibilities

and handoffs

A competency-based

model to support career

paths across the

department

GUIDING PRINCIPLES

Continuous learning

and feedback from

ongoing organizational

transformation

initiatives

Increased employee

satisfaction through a

focus on value-added

activities and outcomes

Minimized change

impact on personnel

through communication,

phasing and feedback

Organizational

structures and

capabilities aligned to

changing business

needs

Coordinated regulatory

activities to minimize

impact on customer

entities



This section describes the structure, usage and content of the RLMS Communication Action Plan Template (the template) found in Attachment II. The template has four key tabs:

Instructions – describes the structure of the document and each tab.

Communication Action Plan – the core tool for managing and tracking all RLMS planned communications in support of communicating with RLMS stakeholders and Change Champions. This tab will help FDACS ensure it provides the right information / message to the right stakeholders at the right time.

Audiences Analysis – identifies RLMS audience and stakeholder groups, and supports the alignment of communications with topics that are of concern or relevance to them.

Vehicles – lists communication methods and events the RLMS OCM Team may use to communicate relevant information to stakeholders.

The Communication Action Plan Template tab is organized into three main areas:

1. Key Information 2. Ownership, Tracking and Approvals 3. Audience Group

The Key Information section of the tab below tracks information about the purpose and mechanism of communication: The Key Information section of the tab below tracks information about the purpose and mechanism of communication:

The Ownership, Tracking and Approvals section of the tab enables the ability to manage, track and govern the communication to ensure there is clarity of responsibility and accountability.

Next Delivery Date When the communication needs to be sent out

Title The specific name of the communication

Key Messaging / Purpose The reason for, and the objective of the communication

Vehicle The method for delivering the communication to the audience

Frequency How often does the communication occurs

Feedback Mechanism Description of the system in place for the audience to respond

Key Information

OCM Team Owner The OCM Team who owns the completion of communication

Content Owner The person(s) who provide content for communication

Content Approver The person(s) who needs to approve the communication

Distributed By The person responsible for sending the communication

Notes / Status Any additional information about the communication

Date Sent Date the communication was sent

File Location SharePoint location where a copy of the communication resides

Ownership, Tracking

and Approvals




The Audience Group section, which shows Audience Group and / or Stakeholder are scheduled to receive the communication:

Exhibit 9: RLMS Communication Action Plan Column Definitions

The next tab, Audience Analysis helps the OCM Team or Lead understand and monitor audience groups by maintaining a snapshot view of how well targeted communication is facilitating the change progress.

Exhibit 10: Audience Analysis Column Definitions

The baseline information currently pre-populated in this tab for the Current Level of Awareness / Buy-In and the Desired Level of Awareness / Buy-In is extracted from the Stakeholder Analysis Matrix and is meant to be updated over time (refer to Attachment II: RLMS Communication Action Plan Template).

The Vehicles tab captures ownership of communication vehicles (such as Open Lines by Marketing and Development and the department’s intranet by OATS). This tab logs what was communicated, who is responsible for the communication and tracks the effectiveness of specified communication mechanisms. This tab is also an inventory of communication vehicles that references Exhibit 6: Defined Communication Events.





4. FDACS Staff RLMS End Users


6. IT Support Staff

NON-RLMS USERS 7. FDACS Staff (Non-RLMS Users)



11. As-Needed Information Partners

CUSTOMERS13. Customers, License and Permit Holders, Applicants,


CHANGE CHAMPIONS Change Champions

Audience Group

LEADERSHIP

DIVISION DIRECTORS AND

CHIEFS

RLMS END USERS

INFORMATION PARTNERS

Audience Group Stakeholder group

Stakeholder Group / Name Name

Geographic Distribution Geographic location or distribution of the group

Current Level of Awareness / Buy-In Current level of awareness or support for RLMS

Desired Level of Awareness / Buy In Desired future level of awareness or support for RLMS

Preferred Distribution Vehicle (s) The group's distribution vehicle preferences for receiving communications

Notes Any other relevant information





Exhibit 11: Vehicles Column Definitions

A Feedback Mechanism is a structured way to solicit feedback from a stakeholder or stakeholder group such as face-to-face interaction, via email or functionality on intranet / internet sites. Feedback is important because it allows the OCM Team to understand progress toward change and to hone in ongoing communication efforts. For instance, feedback can be used to enhance and further develop messages for FAQs.

3.7 RLMS COMMUNICATION PLAN GOVERNANCE

Implementing the RLMS Communication Plan is a key component of OCM execution. The exhibit below depicts the RLMS OCM Functional Model developed in Stakeholder Analysis, OCM Assessment, and OCM Approach / Plan.

Vehicle Name The name of the recurring communication vehicle

Description Briefly description of the communication vehicle

Type Type of communication

Audience Name of the audience or stakeholder(s) who receive the communication

Distribution Method How the communication is disseminated

Frequency of Vehicle How often is the communication / vehicle is sent out

Initiative / Program Driver The reason for the communication (update, strategic, etc.)

Contact Person Individual to contact to get information

Contact Information How to reach the Contact Person for information

Review Process Describe the review process and the timing for submission

Feedback Mechanism How we are measuring the effectiveness of the communication

Notes Any other information that would be helpful





Exhibit 12: RLMS OCM Functional Model

The exhibit below outlines the key roles and responsibilities needed for the successful management and execution of the RLMS Communication Plan:

ROLE RESPONSIBILITY

Communication Manager (the Owner, with the support of the Business Advisory Group)

The RLMS Organizational Change Management Lead responsible for coordinating the creation, review, approval and distribution of project related communications

Content Authors, Delivery Channels and Contributors

OCM Team individuals and Project Sponsors responsible for multiple roles relating to communication. Frequently, resources will be named on an ad hoc basis as a reviewer of content, such as system integrators or other third parties

Content Approver FDACS IT Governance individual responsible for providing

final approval for communications prior to distribution

Exhibit 13: RLMS Communication Plan Execution – Roles and Responsibilities

The RLMS Communication Plan governance should be managed with consideration of these suggested supporting principles:

An agenda is produced for meetings.

Communication must receive appropriate approval before distribution. The RLMS OCM Lead will secure needed governance approval of communications, as applicable.

Manage Closely

Keep Informed

Provide Status

Monitor

FDACS Governance

Executive SponsorBusiness

Advisors

Group

OCM GOVERNANCE – Strategy, Approvals, Recommendations

OCM

Core Team

Assistant

Directors

RLMS Change

Champions

RLMS Project Team, PPMO,

OATS and divisional IT, SI, Other Vendors

OCM COORDINATION – Project Information

Communications, Collateral, Feedback – OCM EXECUTION

… evolving stakeholders’ needs …

RLMS

Organizational

Change

Management Lead



To reduce rework and duplication of effort, communication documents will be leveraged and distributed to achieve multiple purposes, where possible.

Communication should promote transparency and be sent on a timely basis to all relevant parties.

The most effective communication vehicle for each stakeholder or audience group should be used.

The communication plan should include channels for stakeholder feedback.

Communication plan governance is also about assigning accountability for managing a communication plan, making decisions on how to update and formally review the plan, and on how to use it to understand and track progress towards organizational change management success. North Highland recommends the following:

Updating the RLMS Communication Plan:

› Who: The RLMS OCM Lead (the owner) or a designated OCM Team member. › When: Specific triggers typically define when an update is needed. These include

RLMS releases / phases, input and feedback from stakeholders, issues that might arise during design, implementation and sustain. The owner of the plan is charged with recognizing and defining update triggers.

Reviewing:

› It is the responsibility of the Business Advisory Group to perform period reviews of the plan and to escalate needs for approval of material changes to the plan by FDACS IT Governance.

› Reviews can occur as an agenda line item at pre-scheduled periodic meetings, unless there is a specific event that reveals a need for interim guidance or approvals.

Tracking or noting the effect of the communication plan towards shaping shareholders change progress is the responsibility of the communication plan owner.

3.8 NEXT STEPS

Next steps for handoff of the RLMS Communication Plan include:

1. Identifying the RLMS Organizational Change Management Lead (OCM Lead) and

empower them with the ownership of the OCM tools and templates.

2. Finalizing the list of RLMS Change Champions.

3. Launching the OCM Core Team (establish, communicate role, support).

4. Getting input across impacted divisions and, where appropriate, stakeholders to further

develop the RLMS Communication Action Plan Template.

5. Gaining approval for the RLMS Communication Plan.

6. Initiating, tracking, managing and monitoring RLMS project communications.



RLMS CHANGE READINESS ASSESSMENT PLAN

The development of the RLMS Change Readiness Assessment Plan is driven by the need to monitor the change experiences of impacted stakeholders and audiences throughout the RLMS project. By using a series of periodic survey assessments, the department can be confident that stakeholders are progressing though the phases of change as described by the Prosci ADKAR Model™.

A Change Readiness Assessment tells us if impacted stakeholders:

Are Aware of the change that is coming.

Have found a personal reason or Desire to learn about the change and move toward making the change.

Have secured the Knowledge they need to execute the change.

Have demonstrated their Ability to use their recently acquired knowledge.

Are receiving the necessary Reinforcement to sustain the change once the initial change events occur.

The proposed approach for assessing current and ongoing organizational change readiness centers on conducting periodic surveys to collect data for evaluation, and interpreting this data using the proposed change readiness assessment methodology found in Section 4.3.

4.1 PROPOSED CHANGE READINESS ASSESSMENT APPROACH

The starting point for Change Readiness Assessment activities is the results from the Stakeholder Analysis Matrix (developed in Deliverable D4A-B-C and found in Attachment I) which captured, by stakeholder or stakeholder group, perceived current levels of change readiness. The use and relevance of the matrix for guidance on approaches for change readiness activities is shown in the exhibit below.

Exhibit 14: Example Change Readiness Journey for Stakeholders

Aware of the

Change

Understand the

Change

Accept the

Change

Committed to the

ChangeChampion


6. Customers, License and Permit Holders, Applicants,


3. FDACS Staff RLMS End Users (including first level

supervisors, who are not section chiefs)


Unaware

OCM Desired End State




In this example, the four stakeholder groups above were initially assessed as being “Unaware of the Change.” Achieving change readiness for these groups means they become aware of the change, understand the change, and accept the change. In other words, these groups should end their change journey with personal motivation to move to the new RLMS environment and use the system as designed.

A change readiness approach is therefore needed to capture, measure, and adjust for shifts in change readiness levels by stakeholder or audience. Based on change readiness measures, the RLMS Project OCM Resources can:

1. Establish a (more) current and informed baseline understanding of change readiness by stakeholder / audience.

2. Identify change readiness gaps by stakeholder or audience.

3. Adjust OCM Execution Plans, as needed or change the communication approach towards audience.

4. Capture achievement of desired change adoption support levels (OCM Desired End State).

The exhibit below explains the required process steps in the proposed change readiness assessment approach:

Exhibit 15: Change Readiness Assessment Approach

The approach depicted in the exhibit above is a repeatable process for OCM execution and is centered on periodically gathering data from (surveying) stakeholder or audience groups on a selective basis. Readiness assessment activities can be triggered by specific project milestones (such as releases, pilots or training events), by the pace of change adoption by

Assessment

Outputs

Share findings with the

OCM Core Team

Coordinate through

OCM Governance

Develop / update

training materials

Update the RLMS

Communication Plan

Capture feedback on

OCM efforts

Identify• Identify audiences to be assessed

Select

• Select appropriate assessment questions and topics

Gather

• Gather change readiness information through a survey

Analyze

• Analyze survey results and identify change readiness gaps

Execute

• Execute OCM activities based on analysis results



stakeholders, or by material changes in RLMS deployment strategy, timing and / or outcomes. The exhibit below shows how change readiness assessments flow during the RLMS project.

Exhibit 16: Tracking Stakeholder Awareness and Buy-In Throughout RLMS Project

Specific timing of each Readiness Assessment will be determined by the RLMS Project OCM Lead, and will depend upon the timing of other project activities.

4.2 CHANGE READINESS ASSESSMENT SURVEY QUESTIONS

This exhibit below presents proposed Change Readiness Assessment Survey questions and how to interpret the results to measure organizational change needs and attitudes resulting from the RLMS project throughout its releases.

Awareness Questions

1. I understand the purpose and objectives of the RLMS project. 2. I am aware of how RLMS will benefit FDACS, our customers and consumers. 3. I understand how RLMS will affect my division/office. 4. I understand how it will affect my role and day-to-day job. 5. I understand the risks of not doing RLMS. 6. The purpose of the RLMS project has been well-communicated.



Desire Questions

1. I want to support the changes that RLMS is bringing. 2. I want to know more about that RLMS project. 3. I am excited by the opportunities the RLMS project will create. 4. I know how the RLMS project will benefit me on a personal level. 5. I look forward to the new working environment that the RLMS system will enable. 6. My peers demonstrate support for the RLMS project. 7. My supervisors demonstrate support for the RLMS project. 8. FDACS leadership demonstrates support for RLMS.

Knowledge Questions

1. I know where to go to find out more information about RLMS. 2. I have a clear understanding of the skills I will need to perform my role with the new

system. 3. I am being given the necessary training to help me perform my role with the new

system. 4. My supervisor has the necessary skills to lead our team through the implementation

of RLMS. 5. The right people have been involved in the project to ensure RLMS will be

successful.

Ability Questions

1. I have the ability to implement the new skills to use the new system. 2. I have practiced performing with the new system. 3. I can get support when I have problems and questions. 4. I can see a clear connection between improving individual skills and broader

RLMS/FDACS benefits. 5. I understand the need to change our current methods of working. 6. My supervisor supports my skills development. 7. FDACS leadership helps me develop my skills.

Reinforcement Questions

1. I am committed to supporting the RLMS project. 2. The organization is committed to implementing RLMS and to the changes it brings. 3. There are incentives in place to reinforce the achievement of RLMS project

objectives. 4. I am committed to helping others see the value in the RLMS project. 5. Customers are seeing improved value and service from RLMS.

Note: Each question answer will be calculated as a numeric equivalent so that the data may be quantified for analysis. The word/numeric scale will be:



-2.0 = Strongly Disagree, -1.0 = Disagree, 0.0 = Neutral, 1.0 = Agree, 2.0 = Strongly Agree

Exhibit 17: Change Readiness Assessment Survey Questions

4.3 CHANGE READINESS EVALUATION METHODOLOGY

This section presents the proposed evaluation methodology for drawing insights from the change readiness assessments and for integrating these insights into OCM workstream activities. There are four steps to the process as outlined below:

Gather Data from surveys of FDACS staff and other stakeholders as well as project-related information shared by other RLMS workstreams.

Aggregate and Visualize Data to present and enable the evaluation of stakeholder-specific change readiness levels. The exhibit below shows an example of capturing results from surveys at an aggregate level.

Exhibit 18: Example: Measuring Overall Change Readiness

The proposed Change Readiness Assessment Survey questions should also include an unstructured field for comments and suggestions. These qualitative responses can be aggregated and presented in a manner similar to the table in the exhibit below:

Will I be able to

benefit from the

new system and

be successful?



KEY CHANGE READINESS ASSESSMENT SURVEY QUOTES

ENABLERS BARRIERS

WHAT I LIKE MOST ABOUT RLMS… WHAT CONCERNS ME ABOUT RLMS…

Gives us the tools to perform better in our area of expertise

Will we receive the necessary resources to make RLMS successful (5 similar mentions)

New opportunities and improved processes

There are a lot of parts to be implemented, so time, people and money will be needed to have it successfully completed

[other positive feedback text] [other opportunities for improvement]

Exhibit 19: Summarizing Qualitative Change Readiness Assessment Survey Results

Perform Analysis, once the data has been captured and visualized, in order to draw meaning from the results. It is important the specific results are interpreted in light of the context and knowledge of the department’s organizational structures, the current levels of the impact of the project on stakeholders, communication efforts executed to date, and culture. Conclusions and findings can be developed once results are compared to previously established baselines, including exploration of any emerging trends or themes that have been identified.

The following exhibit illustrates a way responses can be analyzed. For example, this diagram explores response scores and variance. The items in the green box have an average response score above “1,” which is positive. Additionally the variance scores are low, which means most respondents answered similarly. The red box below indicates a negative response with a score of less than “1,” and respondents provided a broad distribution of scores, suggesting divergent views.

Exhibit 20: Measuring Desire – Analysis Results



Using the scale in this analysis (which is consistent with the readiness survey response options) the values of “1” and above would be considered positive/strengths; answers between “1” and “0” would indicate opportunities for improved communications and OCM activities; and anything below “0” would be considered an area for concentrated OCM effort.

Disseminate Change Readiness Findings and Insights to key stakeholders and the RLMS Project Team, and using these outputs as a basis for adjusting OCM, training and communication activities to facilitate RLMS change readiness.



ATTACHMENTS

5.1 ATTACHMENT I: STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS MATRIX


5.2 ATTACHMENT II: RLMS COMMUNICATION ACTION PLAN TEMPLATE


5.3 D4A-B-C STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS, OCM ASSESSMENT, AND OCM APPROACH / PLAN








Documents

Regulatory Lifecycle Management System – Pre-Design ... · 01/12/2016 North Highland 001 Initial draft ... project management team and departmental leadership provide relevant,