Everyone talks about change. Just take a look around yourself. How many people are talking about it? Even my eighteen-year old reminds us every now and then that things aren't what we, his parents, think they are. Humbling experience.

So corporate corridors are abuzz with talk of change. We seem to be running out of choices. The question isn't whether or not to change but how soon. Easier said than done. More so in an environment like Dubai where we all think of today, and don't want to reflect about tomorrow.

Be that as it may, corporations that decide to bite the bullet and take up the challenges of change need to have a strategy for doing so. And so they embark upon it. Soon, something goes wrong. Why? For several reasons. Here are some of them.

1. Companies are unable to rally a critical mass of change managers in the belly of the corporation. Yes, the belly, not the executive suite. Because change has to take root in the sinews, in the innards of the corporation, not just in cloud nine. There simply aren't enough people around who buy into the change management process.

For instance, consider a company that decides to incorporate service excellence across its operations. The necessary speeches are made, lots of paper gets pushed around. But the people who have been around for a while know from past experience that this is a passing fancy. So they decide to sit tight until the fad dies. A few real believers, on the other hand, decide to risk their necks and give the whole thing a real go. Then comes the moment of truth. A transaction hits a snag at the delivery stage. This guy goes beyond his authority level to set things right. There is an urgency in this person's passion. He takes it upon himself to get involved in the delivery department's turf, since he knows that's how things will be speedily tackled. What happens? The manager of the delivery department growls, snarls, and whines. He doesn't like others interfering in his affairs. Management fails to support the well-meaning employee. His knuckles are rapped. Clear messages get sent out like clarion calls - don't mess around, stick to your narrow orbit and you will be safe.

2. The size and dimension of the critical mass depends upon the nature of your business. Jon Katzenbach of McKinsey suggests that roughly a third of middle managers ought to be change agents. Fast changing businesses [say, computer companies] would need more, while slow changing ones [oil companies] would need less. Companies simply don't work on the required critical mass according to their needs. They get shortchanged, eventually.

3. Companies are unable to recognize the real change agents. Mistaken belief has it that change agents must be some very special people. This is only partly true. In most cases, change agents are those innocuous looking guys in the company who make the real things happen. A community that is forgotten and ignored. Yet these are the people who get the job done. They are the unsung heroes of the corporate circus. These people have somehow figured out how things work. They didn't necessarily learn them in training programs or some fancy business school. They are the plodding doers.

4. Companies fail to get into the heads of these change agents and glean the knowledge residing in their heads. Instead, CEOs prefer to back their traditional managers who simply can't deliver. For instance, change breeds a degree of discomfort. You need to put people in charge who do not feel uncomfortable about change. By and large, the majority of change agents are older executives, and so you have a real problem. These guys aren't going to buy these ideas easily, because their comfort zones are going to be badly bruised. And there's good reason for this.

Most older managers have spent their formative years when the world was dominated by industrial giants. They also gained most of their experience in that environment. But here we are, at a crossroads where the world is changing tracks and moving to the information age. No one knows the recipe for success in an information world, where knowledge, communications, and computers are the drivers of growth.

It is only natural that the majority of people above forty dearly wish to cling to the industrial past. After all, don't we all wish to be in familiar surroundings? Thus the need for younger managers. Companies need a healthy sprinkling of younger minds that are more willing to change and try out new methods.

That isn't all. Whether you are twenty-three or forty-three, you need to have a balance between technical skills and people skills. Corporations cannot afford the luxury of having one set of people who can do one type of things while another set does another type. Today's managers need both.

Champions of change seek the front-line because they know that real information is born where the rubber meets the road. These people simply ignore the system and get down to the place of action. They spend lots of time with customers and suppliers and employees who do the real work. In short, they get first-hand information which is real knowledge.

Here's an example of this in action at GE [which they borrowed from Wal-Mart]. Managers get together every week to learn about competitors and customers during the last few days. This information is almost always qualitative, but is real and recent. At one such meeting they were able to figure out that a competitor's product was giving customers problems, and came up with a solution before the competitor. The results were cataclysmic for the competitor and glorious for GE.

Change agents are risk takers. Their juices flow from results more than recognition. Sure, they expect to be recognized, but more importantly, they are very confident of their abilities and thus less scared to take risks. They know that their skills will always be in demand so a failure or two doesn't really matter. They also have great faith in their mobility. If a company can't recognize their talents, they will simply take those talents elsewhere.

They are in great demand and will simply find several better opportunities if you don't give them those challenges followed by well-deserved kudos. They are in short supply and companies can't do enough to take advantage of these guys.

Successful companies always maintain a healthy mix of change agents and 'steady as she goes' managers. After all, it is necessary to keep the ship afloat and on course while changes below deck are being brought about. But change champions are a highly respected breed.

Why not take an inventory of your own people and figure out what the state of your change champions is? It may be a good moment to find about yourself as well. Are you willing to change? Won't you learn a lot about your corporation's ability to incorporate change? Wouldn't that be valuable knowledge before embarking on any change program?