Change Through Persuasion By David A. Garvin and Michael A. Roberto   Leaders can make change happen only if they have a coherent strategy for persuasion. The impressive turnaround at a world renowned teaching hospital shows how to plan a change campaign and carry it out.   Faced with the need for massive change, most managers respond predictably, the revamp the organization’s strategy, the round up the usual set of suspects people, pay, and processes shifting around staff, realigning incentives, and touting out inefficiencies. Why is change so hard? First of all, most people are reluctant to alter their habits, what worked in the past is good enough; in the absence of a dire threat, employees will keep doing what they’ve always done. A legacy of disappointment and distrust creates an environment in which employees automatically condemn the next turnaround champion to failure, assuming that he or she is ¨just like all the others¨ Our research into organizational transformation has involved settings as diverse as multinational corporations, government agencies, nonprofits, and high-performing teams like mountaineering expeditions and firefighting crews. We’ve found that for change to stick, leaders must design and run an effective persuasion campaign one that begins weeks before the actual turnaround. Like a political campaign, a persuasion campaign is largely one of differentiation from the past, to the typical change-averse employee, all restructuring plans look alike, the trick for turnaround leaders is to show employees precisely how their plans differ from their predecessor´. They must convince people that organization is truly on its deathbed or, at the very least, that radical changes are required if it is to survive an thrive, turnaround leaders must also again trust by demonstrating through word and deed that they are the right leaders for the job and must convince employees that theirs is the correct plan form moving forward. Paul Levy an executive dean for administration at Harvard Medical School was an unlikely candidate to run BIDMC Medical Center, he identified a common yet insidiously destructive organizational dynamic that causes dedicated teams to operate in counterproductive ways. The Boston Harbor Cleanup was a difficult, highly visible change effort that required deft political an managerial skills, he had to stood firm in the face of tough negotiations and often heated public resistance and had instilled accountability in city and sate agencies. The problems began after the merger of Beth Israel and Deaconess a misguided focus on clinical practice rather than backroom integration, a failure to cut costs, and repeated inability to execute plans and adapt to changing conditions in the health care marketplace all contributes to BIDMC´S dismal performance.