Changing the operating model is not just a structural or technological exercise. It is a behavioral and identity shift for thousands of people: how they see their jobs, what success looks like, who they interact with, and what they can control.
If you treat change management as “comms and training at the end,” you will get workarounds, quiet resistance, and partial adoption. If you design change as part of the TOM, the new model becomes the default way of working rather than an imposed project.
This chapter covers:
- Turning the TOM design into a clear, compelling change story
- Mapping stakeholders and engaging them deliberately
- Designing communications, training, and interventions that actually change behavior
- Managing resistance and protecting early wins so momentum builds instead of fades
16.1 Translating TOM Design into a Compelling Change Story
The TOM design, as you’ve built it, is full of value streams, platforms, roles, and KPIs. Most employees will never read that. What they will hear (and repeat) is the story: why we’re doing this, what will change, and what it means for them.
Your job is to translate the TOM into a narrative that is:
- Strategically sound
- Emotionally resonant
- Practically specific
You need a version of that story for different audiences, but the spine is the same.
A simple structure that works:
- Why we must change (the “why now”)
- What we are changing (the TOM essentials)
- How we will do it (phasing and principles)
- What it means for you (impacts and support)
Why we must change
Start with facts and context, not slogans:
- External pressures: customer expectations, competitors, regulation, technology shifts.
- Internal realities: complexity, slow decisions, errors, cost base, risk events.
- Strategic ambition: where you are trying to be in 3–5 years.
Be concrete. People know when “the world is changing fast” is just filler. Share the real problems the TOM is designed to solve: duplicated processes, multiple systems, painful handovers, recurring incidents.
What we are changing
Describe the TOM in plain business language:
- “We will run the company around a small number of end-to-end customer journeys instead of only by functions and regions.”
- “We will move transactional work into shared services and free local teams to focus on customers and growth.”
- “We will standardize on a few global platforms instead of dozens of local tools.”
- “We will make performance visible end-to-end, not only inside each silo.”
Avoid dense jargon. The goal is for a front-line team lead to be able to explain the essence after hearing it once.
How we will do it
Reassure people that this will be sequenced and supported, not a chaotic big bang:
- Waves and pilots: where you will start and why.
- Principles: what will guide trade-offs (e.g., “global standards where they matter, local flexibility where they add value”).
- Guardrails: what will not change immediately (e.g., certain employment terms, core brand commitments, regulatory obligations).
People need to feel that this is intentional and paced, not random.
What it means for you
This is where most change stories fail. Every audience is silently asking: “What does this do to my team, my role, my workload, my risk?”
You will need tailored versions for:
- Senior leaders and middle management
- Front-line operational staff
- Functions (IT, Finance, HR, Risk, etc.)
- Key geographies or business units
For each, address:
- What will be different in how you work day-to-day
- What you will gain (clarity, tools, support, growth, reduced friction)
- What will be harder (new metrics, new ways of working, loss of some autonomy)
- What support you will receive (training, coaching, transition plans)
A short change story checklist for your TOM:
- Does it start from real strategic and operational facts, not vague “burning platform” clichés?
- Can you explain the TOM in five sentences that a front-line manager would understand?
- Does it clearly describe how change will happen and in what sequence?
- Are there specific, credible messages for the main stakeholder groups about “what it means for you”?
If the answer to any of these is no, keep refining before you start large-scale communication.
16.2 Stakeholder Mapping and Engagement Tactics
A TOM shift touches almost everyone, but not everyone in the same way or at the same time. Treating “the organization” as a single blob is a recipe for generic, ineffective change management.
You need a simple, explicit stakeholder map and engagement plan.
Mapping stakeholders
Start by listing stakeholder groups at a practical level, not just “employees”:
- Executive leadership team
- Business unit and country leaders
- Journey/value stream owners (current or future)
- Functional heads (Sales, Operations, IT, Finance, HR, Risk, Compliance, etc.)
- Front-line team leaders in key processes and customer-facing roles
- Unions or works councils where relevant
- Key external stakeholders: regulators, major partners, sometimes large customers
For each group, assess:
- Impact: how much their world will change under the TOM
- Influence: how much they can accelerate or block adoption
- Current attitude: supportive, neutral, skeptical, opposed, or split
This gives you a simple grid:
- High influence / high impact: critical sponsors and change agents (or blockers)
- High influence / low impact: allies you must keep aligned (e.g., corporate functions not directly in Wave 1)
- Low influence / high impact: people who need strong support and local engagement (often front line)
- Low influence / low impact: keep informed, but don’t over-invest early
You can do this in a few workshops with the core TOM team and HR/Change.
Choosing engagement tactics
Different stakeholders need different types of engagement, not just more emails.
Examples:
- Co-design and working sessions
- For: journey owners, BU heads, functional leaders, key experts.
- Purpose: shape the TOM, own decisions, not just receive them.
- Leadership alignment sessions
- For: executive and middle management.
- Purpose: align on story, expectations, non-negotiables, and how they will role-model.
- Change champion / network
- For: selected front-line leaders and respected informal influencers.
- Purpose: act as early adopters, feedback channels, and “local translators” of the TOM.
- Targeted engagement with unions / works councils
- Purpose: create early, transparent dialogue about impact on jobs, locations, and ways of working; avoid surprises.
- Regulator / partner briefings
- Purpose: explain the TOM where it significantly changes how you manage risk, operate services, or interact with them.
For each major stakeholder group, you should be able to summarize:
- What do we want them to think, feel, and do at each phase?
- What are the key messages for them?
- What specific engagements will we run, and when?
If engagement work is left as “we’ll do some town halls,” you will end up reacting to resistance rather than shaping it.
16.3 Communications, Training, and Change Interventions
Change management is not just communication, but communication is still vital. People cannot adopt a new operating model they do not understand, cannot see, or never hear about from leaders they trust.
You need an integrated, light but disciplined plan across communications, training, and targeted interventions.
Communications
Principles that work:
- Simple and consistent: avoid rebranding every initiative; keep a stable TOM name and core messages.
- Multi-channel: leadership calls, local team meetings, intranet, videos, FAQs, dashboards.
- Two-way: opportunities for questions and feedback, not just broadcasting.
Plan at three levels:
- Enterprise-level communications
- Led by CEO / ExCo.
- Focus: overall TOM story, progress, major milestones, value delivered.
- Frequency: typically quarterly “big moments” plus ad-hoc for major announcements.
- Wave- and journey-specific communications
- Led by wave leads and journey owners.
- Focus: what is changing now in this area, for whom, and what support is available.
- Frequency: aligned to key design, build, and go-live milestones.
- Local / team-level communications
- Led by team leaders and local management.
- Focus: what tomorrow looks like, what to do differently, how to get help.
- Frequency: regular team meetings, daily huddles during cutover periods.
A short communications checklist:
- Do we have a core narrative everyone is using?
- Are there named spokespersons for each major area?
- Do front-line managers receive talking points and FAQs, not just a link to a slide deck?
- Is there a simple way for employees to ask questions and see answers?
Training and enablement
Training must be role-based, just-in-time, and hands-on. The TOM changes:
- Which systems people use
- Which processes they follow
- Which decisions they can make
- Which metrics they manage
Design training by role segments, for example:
- Journey owners and product/platform owners
- Front-line team leaders in operations, sales, and service
- Specialists in risk, finance, HR, and IT
- Shared service and hub staff
- General employees affected by system or process changes
For each segment, define:
- What they must know (concepts, TOM basics)
- What they must be able to do (e.g., run a daily huddle, manage a workflow, interpret a dashboard)
- How you will teach and reinforce (classroom, e-learning, job aids, coaching, buddying)
Avoid “mega training” months where everyone is taken into classrooms for long theory sessions. Instead:
- Train close to go-live, with sandbox environments for new systems.
- Combine short conceptual modules with guided practice in the new tools and processes.
- Reuse material across regions and BUs, but localize examples where needed.
Change interventions
Beyond comms and training, a few high-impact interventions support operating model shifts:
- Leadership immersion sessions
- Leaders walk through key journeys in detail using the target TOM, see real frontline work, and jointly solve issues.
- Simulation workshops
- Teams simulate “a day in the life” under the new model (e.g., processing mock cases end-to-end with new roles and systems).
- Rituals and routines
- Introduce new management routines (e.g., daily huddles, weekly journey reviews) with structured support.
- Symbolic moves
- E.g., senior leaders relocating to hubs during go-live, decommissioning a legacy system in a visible way, publicly celebrating teams that retire “heroic workaround” practices.
These interventions tell people, through actions, that “this operating model is real, and the leaders mean it.”
16.4 Managing Resistance and Protecting Early Wins
Resistance to a TOM is normal. You are changing power structures, routines, and in some cases jobs and locations. The goal is not to eliminate resistance; it is to surface, understand, and manage it early while protecting the momentum from early wins.
Understanding resistance
Most resistance is a mix of:
- Rational concerns
- “This will harm service levels.”
- “This system is not ready.”
- “We will lose local knowledge.”
- Emotional responses
- Fear of loss (status, competence, security).
- Attachment to legacy ways of working.
- Fatigue from previous “transformations” that didn’t stick.
- Political dynamics
- Threats to informal power bases.
- Turf protection between functions or units.
- Concerns about losing budget, headcount, or influence.
You want to create channels where resistance:
- Is safe to voice early (through leaders, change agents, Q&A channels, union/works council forums).
- Is analyzed, not dismissed: what is truth, what is perception, what is politics?
Responding to resistance
Practical patterns:
- Listen first, diagnose clearly
- Distinguish between “this will break our regulatory obligations” and “I don’t like losing control”.
- Use data and pilots to test claims where possible.
- Adjust where justified
- If resistance reveals a real design flaw, adjust the TOM or the sequence.
- If a system truly is not ready, change the cutover plan rather than forcing a disaster.
- Hold the line where necessary
- If resistance is mainly about local preference vs. agreed global principles, restate the principles and explain the rationale.
- Back local leaders who support the TOM even when they face pushback.
- Support the “fence-sitters”
- Many are not opposed, just unsure. Target communications, training, and early positive experiences at this group. Their movement often determines perceived momentum.
A helpful lens: treat resistance as data about the organization’s readiness. Where it is strongest, you likely need more sponsorship, more clarity, better design—or, occasionally, stronger decisions.
Protecting and amplifying early wins
Early wins are crucial because they:
- Increase belief that the TOM works
- Provide real examples to point to in communications
- Build political capital for further change
But they must be real and relevant, not cosmetic.
Good early wins:
- Are visible to both leadership and front line (e.g., halved processing time, fewer handovers, reduction in rework).
- Are credibly linked to TOM elements (e.g., new journey ownership, shared service, new workflow tool, new routines).
- Do not depend on unsustainable heroics.
To protect and amplify them:
- Measure and publish results
- Before/after metrics on cycle time, error rates, NPS, cost per transaction.
- Simple dashboards or one-page summaries that leaders can show and explain.
- Tell the story through the people who delivered it
- Short videos or panels where front-line leaders and staff describe what’s different and better.
- Celebrate both the outcomes and the new ways of working (e.g., “we now solve 80% of issues in the daily huddle instead of escalating”).
- Lock in new practices
- Ensure that when an early wave succeeds, the old processes, systems, or governance are actually retired.
- Update policies, SOPs, and performance metrics to reflect the new way—otherwise the organization will drift back.
- Use early wins to negotiate harder changes
- When entering tougher waves (more sensitive geographies, more complex functions), use concrete examples: “Here is what this change did for region X; here is how we protected roles; here is what we learned and will do differently.”
A short “resistance and wins” checklist:
- Do we have explicit, safe channels for surfacing concerns?
- Are we differentiating between valid risks, emotional responses, and political maneuvering?
- Are we prepared to change the TOM where evidence shows we should, and to hold firm where we must?
- Have we identified and prepared 2–3 early wins that will be visible within 6–12 months?
- Do we have a plan to institutionalize those wins, not just celebrate them?
