A permitting-software change rewrites inspector job duties, but the city manager never appears as sponsor. Which change-leadership gap should HR name?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
When job duties get rewritten and the city manager is nowhere in sight, that is not a logo problem. Change leadership needs a visible executive sponsor. HR can run the playbook, but HR cannot be the only adult in the room.
Full Explanation
Naming sponsorship failure—visible executive ownership missing, with HR unable to be the sole owner—is the correct change-leadership gap when permitting software rewrites inspector job duties and the city manager never appears. Insufficient logo color, too many super-users, or vendor over-communication are not the core gap when authoritative rationale for rewritten duties is absent. HR can run the playbook, but HR cannot be the only face of a change that redefines how inspectors serve builders and residents. Exam caveat: SPHR change leadership requires visible executive sponsorship especially when technology rewrites core jobs. Operational check: escalate to place the city manager as visible sponsor, script sponsor communications to inspectors, align operations leadership, and pause high-risk duty changes until sponsorship is real for the civic permitting reform. Inspectors will not sustain new software-driven duties without a visible city manager explaining why the change serves permitting customers. Escalating sponsorship is a change-leadership correction; logo and vendor-noise fixes are distractions from missing executive ownership. Assign an owner, a measure, and a review date so the choice remains visible in civic oversight.