What happens when the change is not possible due to lack of sponsors?

In many "transformations" in which we participate, get involved or are hired, we initially think that we have a sponsor, a person who will support us, promote us or help mitigate or eliminate impediments in the organization when necessary.

Agility emerged in teams as such (agile) and spread to the rest of the organization as agility. That is where many of the problems that already exist at the team level are visualized. The status quo wants to remain that, status quo, perpetual, even if things don't work, but they are known, standardized and systematic for "me".

Lean Change Management introduce a new "paradigm" to co-create the change & involve people in the change from start. More info in this video: 


If we have a sponsor that promotes, perfect, but in many cases it is simply the person in charge of hiring you, and as a consultant, letting you go in the face of the problem. You have x time to change this, make us agile, more efficient, etc. A goal in sight, but not a purpose in most cases.

As the 5 universal of change say in Modern Change management (https://modernchangemanagement.com) always need a cause & purpose to start, without this, the change is more resistant than you intention to help:


For 1 or 2 years, 3 ... initiatives / challenges are proposed to transform, improve, evolve an organization, experiments that we hope will have an impact and will make us drop the chips that enable said organization for the necessary change, since every organization needs a change today.

Biweekly, monthly, weekly, the CxO level establishes follow-up meetings (we're in a bad way), since they are to propose ideas that will systematically say "ok, apply it", "I'm not convinced" or "this cannot be applied here".

In many cases, resistance to change makes you stronger as a consultant, coach or facilitator, because it shows you signs of the type:

- It is not the correct change, something is failing that you are not seeing and you cannot pull it, desire, need, etc.

- It is not the right time, in many cases you cannot enable a change that is not seen as a necessity, but rather as a fashion, an imposition, or simply a "check" in a roadmap.

The big flaw in my opinion in change management that Lean Change tries to solve and carries out in a different way is to help your role change, your responsibilities change. Do not be a mere spectator, if you as a CxO do not get involved in the change, do not eliminate impediments, do not "stain your hands", the message that is sent is "change is not for me", any change implies a change in behavior at all levels, not just at the team level.

Through the involved map canvas or stakeholder map we can quickly see who is in the change and who is not and it can help us detect if the sponsor is involved or if we do not have the necessary support for the change, with which we will suffer greater attrition, by promote a change that you may not be ready to undertake from the start.



When carrying out this dynamic, if among those directly impacted we have resistance, we have a serious problem in starting the change, and even more so if it is a sponsor.

Each change needs time, and something very important is to be aware of the need, many times no matter how much you try to enable it, make the need visible, as we very well know, change begins with oneself, you can be drowning, "burning" and not see the need yet.

Changes must be natural, induced, not forced or imposed. You can be working on the change for 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, that until you are prepared for the change, the change will not come, you can enable, carry out experiments, achievements, quick-wins, that as long as there is no need for change seen by all, the change will not flow.