I have heard mention a number of times lately that the term 'Business Change' is out of favour in Government IT circles. And quite right too. Here's why I agree... The (now defunkt) Office of Government Commerce used to be pretty hot on Business Change. After all, it was the thing so often perceived to be the problem: a lack of engagement between technology folk and 'the Business'; poor 'Benefits Realisation' and so on. But it's more complex than that: there was something more fundamental wrong and it's exemplified in the idea of Business Change itself. I believe that the term Business Change is used, broadly speaking, with an underpinning model of thinking (pl forgive geeky equation) that looks like this...
And this is unhealthy: it encourages the fatal notion that - if the bits on the left-hand side are defined clearly enough at the beginning of a project - all will be well and the desired bit on the right will materialise at the end. It has been conclusively shown that it mostly doesn't.
I have experienced a number of attempts in government organisations to turn the management of change - which is, at heart, a subtle human skill - into a mechanistic process. (I have even seen a Business Change mouse-mat with a 20-box diagram on it.) This doesn't work and I am concerned that the processey mindset in which it is rooted still breathes.
The term Business Change is bankrupt and perpetuating old thinking. I've stopped using it.