Please login or join to subscribe to this thread
Could you help rephrase your question for a better understanding
While some context is needed I will ask from the point of view of an ancient concept that becomes buzzword today: Agile and System Theory. Organizations are open and adaptable systems (not software systems) that must adapt when the environment changes. Adapt means transform the whole structure for moving to one state to the other. This movement implies a transition between states. To do that organization must mobilize all its resources.
Transition implies an expected change in state - for example, a team progressing through forming, storming, norming into performing. Transformation implies a more fundamental and impactful shift - for example, the culture of an organization changing from a focus on outputs to outcomes. Mobilization is needed to overcome inertia related to any change - creating a sense of true urgency, establishing a clear vision of the future, and inspiring those who need to embrace the new tomorrow.
I really like Kiron's summary of transition vs. transformation and how they refer to a change in state. It can range from nearly invisible to a complete and very publicized overhaul.
I would like to add to the word "mobilization". Where the other two refer to a change in state, "mobilize" refers to HOW changes are made. Mobile = moveable. Mobilization is moving the resources you need to address the state change you need.
In Outsourcing environments I encountered
- transition as the move of ownership to the service provider
- transformation as the improvements agreed to after transition
(Both projects or programs in their own right)
- mobilization as the activities towards staff during transition or transformation (part of organizational change management)
In a program management context transition is the change of ownership of deliverables and benefits from program to operations
Please login or join to reply