Every place I've worked and will work has it's own culture. Edgar Schein describes culture as "a result of what an organization has learned from dealing with problems and organizing itself internally." 

But what role does culture play when it comes to adopting change?

Culture both helps and hinders adopting new technology and change. It doesn't matter what type of culture exists at a company, parts of that culture help and parts hinder. If I want to implement a change successfully, I can't concentrate on changing that culture, but I can incorporate the culture into my strategy. I can lean on the parts that help the process and create an action plan for the parts that don't.

If you would like more details about culture and change, check out the article I got the quote from. You can find it here: Culture Fundamentals - 9 Important Insights from Edgar Schein.

Any time a change happens or new technology rolls out, it's important to keep a few aspects in mind.

The first, and I believe most important, is people. One day Skynet and the T1000s may win the war of the machines, but until that day, people are at the center of every change and process. Change and technology must serve people, or it has no purpose. 

The second is process. This isn't simply "How am I going to do this?" It's "How am I going to this in repeatable way that people can follow?" Great people need an equally great process.

The third aspect is technology. I must make certain the technology in use isn't holding back the process or the people working through that process. A bad system can tank a good process and frustrate great people.

And last, partners. With how expansive technology has become, not everything is handled in house anymore. There is likely at least one other department or vendor involved with any change initiative. We must work together or fail separately.

To help aid adoption, I like to use the diffusion of innovation. It's a bell curve. On one end we have early adopters (people pumped to use the new technology) and on the other end we have the laggards (people who don't want to adopt the technology). Most of us hang out in the middle as part of the early or late majorities. 

Knowing these divisions hold true to adoption,  I can use it to my advantage. I think of early adopters as the influencers. They are the ones I want to go brag to everyone else about how great the new system is. Once people start to see the benefits, we get the early majority on board. Then the late majority joins in because they don't want to be left behind, and the laggards hold out until the end.

Each group has it's strengths, and not all laggards should be ignored. Often, a chunk of this group is asking the tough questions, which if answered and researched, address possible faults in the product or technology I want adopted.

Last on the list of tools is design thinking. When change happens, people are going to ask questions and poke holes in my arguments, plans, and the product itself. And that's okay.

Design thinking is an approach that emphasizes the ability to accept these changes and keeps people at the center of the process. 

First, I need to empathize with the people who will use the new product and understand what they want from it. Then, define what problem the product solves. After that, think of the different ways we can solve that problem. 

The last two are the really fun parts. Build a prototype. It's not going to be perfect, I just need something for people to react to. And then, I get people to test it. 

Is the product going to change? Absolutely! That's the whole point. But since we understand the problem, and more importantly the people who will use the product, we can make it better and better through multiple iterations. 

It's a great feeling, and when the technology is presented to the larger audience, I can stand behind it confidently knowing the change took people and their ideas into account.