Author: rwheeler

Posted on

Get Real to Succeed – vulnerability, love, and clarity

Growth chartI am accustom to encountering friendly (sometimes intense) competitive posturing when entering a new situation. A little verbal sparing sets the tone for who is stronger in position and perspective. Once the first probe of potential strengths and weakness passes the conversation gets down to business.  It is like a hazing designed to determine the level of competence and connection.
So, imagine my surprise when entering a tense conversation when the CEO started with, “Your perspective (referring to an email) hurt me.  I don’t think it captured my intent or characterized my actions well.”

I sat back in my chair, grasped for a new sense of orientation to the meeting and responded with, “Fair enough, help me understand.  I thought you made clear in our last conversation that you were quite agitated with the course we decided to take. Was I wrong?”

Feelings change the “rules of engagement” in interactions. They can introduce vulnerability instead of competitiveness in communication in a way that accelerates clarity.  I don’t often see this kind of vulnerability in organizations.  Communication is more often a muddle of dishonesty and irritation punctuated with rare moments of personal honesty that infrequently slips out from the edges.  This “usual pattern” is horribly inefficient.

This CEO was in the middle of a deliberate culture change.  He had inherited a corporate culture permeated with a cover your backside attitude, pettiness, excuse making, blame shifting poorly performing company.  He wanted to move it toward a responsible, accountable, vision casting quest for excellence. There are still burps of regression along the way but wow, a little honesty about feelings seems to have gone a long way in getting at clear communication. Three factors help start then negotiate a culture shift.

Vulnerability

Brené Brown has made an impact on the way leaders think about vulnerability by defining vulnerability accepting the uncertainty and risk associated with emotional exposure. What is the benefit to this approach? The opportunity for love to grow.  “Shame, blame, disrespect, betrayal, and the withholding of affection damage the roots from which love grows. Love can only survive these injuries if they are acknowledged, healed and rare.”
― Brené Brown, The Gifts of Imperfection: Let Go of Who You Think You’re Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You Are  What does love have to do with business or leadership?  It has everything to do with engaging work with who one really is rather than what people think they should be.

I remember my first VP in business after my transition from pastoral ministry to the corporate world.  One day he asked me what I thought about being in the “real world.”  I turned and laughed at him.

“Real? You think this is real? All I see are people afraid to be themselves, filled with competitive envy who are confident of only one thing – the moment they let down their guard someone will view them as less successful.  You want real?  Come to my pastoral office where people pour out their fears, describe their losses, unveil their shame and guilt and ask for help in becoming the person they want to be…that is real.  This is mostly a farce where some people enjoy what they do yet worry that they may be truly known and others hate what they do and will never allow themselves to be truly known.”  The VP looked stunned for a moment then wandered off muttering something about my being really different.

Vulnerability makes the shift from hiding to walking into the open with all the skills, insights, interests and passion that sit at the core of people’s true engagement.  Without the willingness to embrace the chance of failure no real success will ever occur.  I have a quote hanging on my office wall from Theodore Roosevelt, 26th president of the United States that summarizes this idea.

“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly.”

Love

James Autry, retired president of the magazine group at Meredith Corporation, reflected on one of the most transformative encounters he experienced as a leader. He was listening to Bob Barnett, then CEO of the Meredith Corporation in 1968.  According to Autry, Barnett reflected on the importance of self renewal as a leader pointing out that the most important thing in this process is love.

Love in business?  Why not? Love is not being a jolly, well-liked sap who cannot make difficult decisions or who has lost the respect of others and become an impotent in leader. Rather it is a commitment to act out beyond ego to recognize when denial or hubris has misdirected critical thinking. Love is the humility to learn from others regardless of their status and a commitment to grow personally. Love sets a tone in which others can risk excelling – an act that requires they also risk failing.

So did love work for Autry?  Under his tenure the magazine group went from $160 million in revenue to $500 million.  In Autry’s words “I tried to integrate love in the corporate setting. And it just kept working; I just kept getting results.”

My CEO friend is on the verge of becoming deliberate about love. He clearly has compassion for his employees and cares about their well-being.  However, he has not yet defined love in a way that allows him to also exercise difficult leader decisions. As a result he sometimes lacks clarity in the muddle of his own duplicity in action. He affirms when he needs to correct and sometimes corrects when he needs to affirm.  He has retained less than capable people with the hope they will improve and not designed a development plan to move them toward improvement or replacement.

Clarity

In my conversation with this newly minted CEO I asked him to tell me what his vision was for the company.  He outlined a profit target.

“Ok,” I said, “hitting a profit is great and necessary to continue in business but what inspires you to work to that end? What will you use to rally the people in your charge to truly invest themselves in the work of the company?”

“Hitting the profit goal,” he responded with even greater intensity. He appears to see profit as the means to an end. It is of course in one sense, he will not keep his position or meet his other goals without making a profit.  However, he has fallen into the great distortion of the American corporation.  The real work of any business is not making profits; making profits is the result of the real work.

In his book, Drive, Daniel Pink noted that purpose was one of the core aspects of motivation.  When people own and work toward a greater purpose their internal drive reduces any need to force a motivation onto them. Most managers learn that extrinsic motivators are not consistently reliable and often work to undermine rather than amplify motivation.

The greatest businesses I have had opportunity to engage all have and live in a sense of purpose and they can describe their purpose clearly and succinctly. Sure they are aware of their metrics and check their profit.  However, their profitability (and all of them are profitable) does not arise out of their monitoring of profit but out of their passion for their work.

When I pressed this new CEO for a purpose his communication became a muddled disarray of incomplete thoughts.  It seems to me that once the CEO becomes clear about love he will also become much more clear about purpose. Clarity in purpose is essential for any company that seeks to thrive and walk toward greatness.  Those companies that only walk toward profit are not great, they are wreaks of burned out employees and bitter executives living to avoid the next round of cuts.

Conclusion

I see vulnerability, love and clarity as revolutionary in force and outcome. In my own leadership I have seen the power these unleash the gifts and abilities of others and myself. These characteristics always probe my weaknesses and push on my strengths. These characteristics consistently help turn negative poor performing units and companies into thriving and financially successful operations in my experience. However, they clearly need a commitment to personal change and growth. How does vulnerability, love and clarity factor into your leadership?  If they don’t, why? How can you introduce them? Do you need help – who will you talk with? I am always game for a conversation – I am still learning.  Let’s talk.

Posted on

breaking down barriers

Terry has joined an important dialogue. I recommend her article and your comments. Women in leadership will find encouragement. Men in leadership will (or should) find insight.

Posted on

Thank you for serving

iStock_000009064865MediumWe were entertaining one of our new employees from our Tennessee factory and to give him a true Southern California experience we took him to In-N-Out.  I paid for the order and turned to see a  man in a classic 1960s green fatigue coat with the unmistakable yellow service ribbon with three stripes.  He looked worn almost haunted.
“Are you a Vietnam vet?” I asked.

“I am” he answered with a look that wondered where I was going with the inquiry.  The mix of pride and suspicion with which he answered the question struck me. But then, I grew up during that war.  I had friends in that war that I sat with upon their return and heard about their struggles, the same mix of pride and suspicion.  I know these two emotions aren’t just rooted in the political chaos that surrounded the Vietnam war, but in the very nature of war and combat itself. I saw combat change friends.

“Thank you, for your service,” I said holding his gaze.

Suspicion seemed to melt into gratitude – almost relief. There was no commentary on what I think about war and its morality.  There was no judgment about his role.  There was my simple recognition that while I have no real idea of what any veteran has endured in combat (the draft ended right after I registered). I do have an appreciation for any man or woman who will stand in the gap to defend the defenseless and insist upon justice.  There is a place to debate the morality of war – it is not in the face of those who have endured its worse.

“You are welcome,” he said as he sat a little straighter.

To all veterans I say, thank you, for your service. Thank you, for standing up for the ideals of liberty, justice for all and the idea that all men (and women) are created equal. Thank you, for enduring the wounds both physical and emotional.  Thank you, for serving with discipline in the midst of unbridled cruelty. Thank you, for delivering and protecting the country that has provided me with the opportunities I enjoy – opportunities your service encourages me to use to serve others as you have done so courageously.

Posted on

Powerlessness, Greatness and Choice – what every leader needs to remember

leaderHave you ever felt frustrated or powerless at work? A friend of mine recently admitted, “I am at odds at work.  How much commitment do I really want to give to a company that seems compelled to undermine its own success?  Any commitment I do make seems like an exercise in futility.”
The question was not trite. The question stemmed from frustration. My friend is a remarkably gifted leader recruited to the company for which he now works to change to a struggling department. However, he feels stymied in the continued development of his department. The impulses of his Vice President derail planned action thus limiting the traction needed to produce consistent positive results.  Unsurprisingly this is a common experience for many managers and directors.

Last week I heard Jim Collins speak – he always encourages and challenges me.  I was reminded of something he wrote,

Most businesses also have a desperate need for greater discipline.  Mediocre companies rarely display the relentless culture of discipline – disciplined people who engage in disciplined thought and who take disciplined action – that we find in truly great companies.  A culture of discipline is not a principle of business; it is a principle of greatness….we need a new language…reject the naive imposition of the language of business…embrace the language of discipline.[1]

The concept of being great hits me every time I read it. The question I ask myself is, “do I have the discipline and perspective needed to contribute to a truly great enterprise?”  Further more do I contribute to a culture of discipline? The challenge here is to buck any trend toward mediocrity by building a culture of discipline around my responsibilities.

Collins’ research concluded that building a great company occurs in four stages. Think about these stages as I have outlined them in Table 1 and consider; (1) how you contribute to these stages; (2) how do you encourage others to step into this mind-set; (3) whether you are hirable today as one who contributes to these stages and (4) if you are not hirable today in a great company what do you need to change?

One of the most important insights Collins presents in his monograph on the social sector is the insight that Level 5 leaders often exist within diffuse power structures and can be effective in creating pockets of greatness.  Collins identified two kinds of power i.e., executive and legislative.

In executive leadership enough concentrated power exists to simply make right decisions. Executive power makes right decisions no matter how painful they may be. However, many Level 5 leaders do not have this kind of concentrated power. Many leaders in the middle are not the CEO but work somewhere in the mishmash of organizational structure and political reality.

Legislative leadership on the other hand possesses enough structural power to create the conditions for right decisions via persuasion, political currency, and shared interests.  Many leaders have legislative power within their departments or divisions and can take the responsibility to move toward greatness not-with-standing the pressures that push the rest of the organization toward mediocrity.

Table 1: Inputs of Greatness[2]

Inputs of Greatness Defined Actions I can take
Stage 1: Disciplined people
Level 5 Leadership Exhibits personal humility i.e., they are ambitious for a cause and  the organization and professional will i.e., fierce resolve to do whatever it takes to make good on that ambition
First who, then what First, get the right people into the right places and the wrong people out and then think about what you need to do i.e., the “what”
Stage 2: Disciplined thought
Confront brutal facts Identify and remove those barriers to being great live the Stockdale paradox i.e., confidence you will ultimately succeed while also identifying all the barriers to that success.
The hedgehog concept Attain piercing clarity about how to produce the best long-term results, then exercise relentless discipline to exit those things that fail the test – (1) what are you deeply passionate about? (2) What drives your economic engine? (3) What can you be best in the world at?
Stage 3: Disciplined action
Culture of Discipline Accepting one’s responsibility (larger than a job) to consistently work to greatness.
The Flywheel Relentless action toward the goal that builds momentum on small successes
Stage 4: Building Greatness to last
Clock Building not time telling Great organizations prosper through multiple generations of leaders – build mechanisms that stimulate greatness
Preserve the core/stimulate progress Great organizations run on a fundamental duality: (1) a timeless set of core values and reason for being and (2) a creative compulsion for change and progress.

What kind of leadership power do you have?  Are you willing to take responsibility to exercise your power in building a great department or division? If you are unwilling to take responsibility what does this say about you as a person and a leader?

One of the things I find consistently true in leadership is that the very act of leading forces me to engage in an assessment about whom I am as a person and whether I can live with myself as that person. My friend’s question shook me up.  It made me think. Taking responsibility to exercise greatness in my corner of influence is not an option – it is the only rational course by which I can make a lasting contribution to the good.  How about you?

[1] Jim Collins. Good to Great and the Social Sectors (Boulder, CO: Jim Collins, 2005), 1-2.

[2] Collins 2005:34-35.

Posted on

Sitting in the Cocoon of Transformation – Feedback that Changes Destiny

cocoonThe statement stung.  “Ray,” Don said, “this will be the hardest thing you have ever done.”  By itself the statement could sound noble. But it was ignoble.  Don had just told me that developing other leaders would be the hardest thing I had ever accomplished because I was accustom to the privilege and power of being the top dog.
Don zeroed in, “Ray, you will always find it easier to do it yourself because you are pretty competent.  But until you allow yourself the discomfort of feeling less than competent you won’t learn the skills, time applications and work values needed to become a more effective developer of others.”
I protested, “I developed leaders all the time, I empowered them, directed them toward success, helped them do what they thought they could not.”
“You have done that pretty effectively in small organizations over which you exerted absolute control. What about organizations in which you are simply a cog among other cogs? How will you influence the development of others when you don’t control the environment?  That is what you need to learn.” Don said.
Upon reflection I had to admit that I had little experience working in larger complex systems over which I exerted little or no control.  I did need to learn how to apply the skills I had developed in small organizations to social and operation networks of complex organizations. Complex organizations are characterized in sub-surface allegiances and alliances carved out by power brokers. In smaller organizations I simply powered over these allegiances and alliances.
Following my encounter with Don, I found my self embroiled in painfully challenging conversations that refused to simply act on my great advice.  In fact they rejected my advice altogether.  Slowly, I began to see that I need to learn new approaches to developing others. I learned the power of asking questions to help others get at their own assumptions and unseen biases.  I learned the power of dialogue that helped me engage the effort to align my experience and knowledge to the needs experienced by the individual I was hoping to influence.  I learned that there were multiple skills and approaches to leadership development that were dictated by the circumstance, the leader and the history of the organization in which I was working.
Don challenged the embedded models of leadership that I had never critically assessed.  By “embedded models” I mean those leadership behaviors, speech patterns and assumptions I had “caught” from watching others and used to gain success.  I assumed, wrongly, that the skills and insights that made me successful in one venue would make me successful in all venues.  Not only is this assumption misguided but it reinforced behavior that did not stand the test of either theological reflection or the crucible of experience.  In my worse nightmare I discovered that how I acted as a leader sometimes contradicted both the message I intended to announce and the work I was trying to complete.
This growing self awareness describes the essence of adaptive change – in order to engage in this kind of change one must be willing to face the difficult facts of their actual situation.  I resisted what Don had to say because he showed me things about myself that I did not want to see.  But my resistance was rooted in another motive besides denial – I was afraid.  I was afraid that I would loose my sense of competence.  What is more I was afraid I would never regain it.  Resistance to change is usually never rooted in the change itself, it is rooted in the sense of loss that accompanies the change.  If the loss looms large enough it eclipses the gains.
After my conversation with Don I went through a series of events in which I lost my job, my role, and my sense of accomplishment.  I went through a time of embarrassment and shame – borrowing a descriptor I learned from my friends from Asia, I lost face.  What I did not see at the time was that like a caterpillar’s descent into a cocoon I faced a deconstruction of my self-image so that a different expression of who I am could emerge.
It has been years since Don first challenged me by his statement.  Developing leaders is still the hardest thing I do.  But now when Don and I get together we often laugh about how comical my stunned response was to his pointed observation.  I am thankful that he respected me enough to challenge me with his observation. I am grateful that he never withdrew from me in my turmoil.  The question that emerged for me through the experience is simple, will I really listen to the feedback that can change my work for the better? Will I maintain a learning posture so that the work of transformation continues to shape me into a more effective leader? Will I act in ways that consistently align to my announced intention and work I want to complete?
If you find yourself in a time of descent into the cocoon of transformation it is important to remember one important lesson. Whether or not you emerge on the other side of the experience stronger or weaker, ready or defeated is all up to you. Will you embrace the change, see the potential and let go of bitterness and resentment that seek to limit and define you?  Will you forgive?  Yes, forgiveness is a critical leadership development choice. Without it the muddle of the cocoon will never develop into the clarity and focus of powerful leadership.

Posted on

Sitting in the Cocoon of Transformation – Feedback that Changes Destiny

cocoonThe statement stung.  “Ray,” Don said, “this will be the hardest thing you have ever done.”  By itself the statement could sound noble. But it was ignoble.  Don had just told me that developing other leaders would be the hardest thing I had ever accomplished because I was accustom to the privilege and power of being the top dog.
Don zeroed in, “Ray, you will always find it easier to do it yourself because you are pretty competent.  But until you allow yourself the discomfort of feeling less than competent you won’t learn the skills, time applications and work values needed to become a more effective developer of others.”

I protested, “I developed leaders all the time, I empowered them, directed them toward success, helped them do what they thought they could not.”

“You have done that pretty effectively in small organizations over which you exerted absolute control. What about organizations in which you are simply a cog among other cogs? How will you influence the development of others when you don’t control the environment?  That is what you need to learn.” Don said.

Upon reflection I had to admit that I had little experience working in larger complex systems over which I exerted little or no control.  I did need to learn how to apply the skills I had developed in small organizations to social and operation networks of complex organizations. Complex organizations are characterized in sub-surface allegiances and alliances carved out by power brokers. In smaller organizations I simply powered over these allegiances and alliances.

Following my encounter with Don, I found my self embroiled in painfully challenging conversations that refused to simply act on my great advice.  In fact they rejected my advice altogether.  Slowly, I began to see that I need to learn new approaches to developing others. I learned the power of asking questions to help others get at their own assumptions and unseen biases.  I learned the power of dialogue that helped me engage the effort to align my experience and knowledge to the needs experienced by the individual I was hoping to influence.  I learned that there were multiple skills and approaches to leadership development that were dictated by the circumstance, the leader and the history of the organization in which I was working.

Don challenged the embedded models of leadership that I had never critically assessed.  By “embedded models” I mean those leadership behaviors, speech patterns and assumptions I had “caught” from watching others and used to gain success.  I assumed, wrongly, that the skills and insights that made me successful in one venue would make me successful in all venues.  Not only is this assumption misguided but it reinforced behavior that did not stand the test of either theological reflection or the crucible of experience.  In my worse nightmare I discovered that how I acted as a leader sometimes contradicted both the message I intended to announce and the work I was trying to complete.

This growing self awareness describes the essence of adaptive change – in order to engage in this kind of change one must be willing to face the difficult facts of their actual situation.  I resisted what Don had to say because he showed me things about myself that I did not want to see.  But my resistance was rooted in another motive besides denial – I was afraid.  I was afraid that I would loose my sense of competence.  What is more I was afraid I would never regain it.  Resistance to change is usually never rooted in the change itself, it is rooted in the sense of loss that accompanies the change.  If the loss looms large enough it eclipses the gains.

After my conversation with Don I went through a series of events in which I lost my job, my role, and my sense of accomplishment.  I went through a time of embarrassment and shame – borrowing a descriptor I learned from my friends from Asia, I lost face.  What I did not see at the time was that like a caterpillar’s descent into a cocoon I faced a deconstruction of my self-image so that a different expression of who I am could emerge.

It has been years since Don first challenged me by his statement.  Developing leaders is still the hardest thing I do.  But now when Don and I get together we often laugh about how comical my stunned response was to his pointed observation.  I am thankful that he respected me enough to challenge me with his observation. I am grateful that he never withdrew from me in my turmoil.  The question that emerged for me through the experience is simple, will I really listen to the feedback that can change my work for the better? Will I maintain a learning posture so that the work of transformation continues to shape me into a more effective leader? Will I act in ways that consistently align to my announced intention and work I want to complete?

If you find yourself in a time of descent into the cocoon of transformation it is important to remember one important lesson. Whether or not you emerge on the other side of the experience stronger or weaker, ready or defeated is all up to you. Will you embrace the change, see the potential and let go of bitterness and resentment that seek to limit and define you?  Will you forgive?  Yes, forgiveness is a critical leadership development choice. Without it the muddle of the cocoon will never develop into the clarity and focus of powerful leadership.

Posted on

Make a Significant Difference in the World – network with those making a difference

village churchMaking a difference in the world for me is investing in leaders – helping them find their own voice and engaging the power of their own unique personality, abilities and vision. I often get to do this through business. I have opportunity to do it through education. But the most exciting vehicle I get to be a part of is the church.  Why?  I think Rick Warren said it best:

‎”Even if we had the cure for AIDS right now, you couldn’t get it to everybody in the world without the church because I can take you to 10 million villages in the world where the only thing in it is a church. They don’t have a school. They don’t have a post office. They don’t have a government. They don’t have a fire department. They don’t have a business, but they’ve got a church. The church is the only truly global organization. Nothing else comes close. Everybody else just plays at globalization.”

(Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback Church, founder of the PEACE Plan and author of the New York Times best-selling book, “The Purpose Driven Life,” at a recent forum on religious freedom at Georgetown University.)

How to you respond to Warren’s statement?  Let me know.

Posted on

Two Insights about Change Every Leader Needs to Understand

change signThere are two common dynamics I see in almost every change project.  The positive dynamic is nurture – the ability to see change as a system wide interaction of behaviors, belief, decisions, relationships and new actions.  The negative dynamic is the ex nihilio fallacy – the thought that stating the need for change equates with actually executing a change.  Recognizing the difference between these two dynamics means the difference between success and often painful failure.
Change requires constant nurture

Change is like planting and growing seeds in a harsh environment.  It takes constant nurture and patient repetition. By nurture I mean a leader must continuously re-check the validity of the original change goals and ask to know if routine action and behavior is actually moving toward the desired end or working against it.

When thinking about this kind of nurture messaging is important. It is easy to fall prey to the two most common traps of non-communication when the pressure is on to execute on change. The first trap is  mindless repetition of the change slogan as though a slogan repeated often enough becomes believable.  The second trap is head-down avoidance of all interaction in the mistaken wish that if controversy is avoided it will melt away like snow in the spring. When leading change it is important to remind everyone on the team about what the change intends to accomplish. Keep the goals (the ends) in plain sight.  This is especially important in light of the fact that every change requires a change in thinking and organizational culture to be successful.

By avoiding communication managers end up rooting for change without addressing the very real inconsistencies and operational gaps inherent in any change. Lack of two-way communication that interrogate the present in light of the future runs the risk of destroying the adoption of change. Interrogating reality is essential to success.

However, managers sometimes mistake this interrogation with the rise of negativity. In a quest to quell so-called negativity these managers fail to engage the operational questions, observations and concerns of their employees – employees who must work out the change in behavior and thinking. Limiting conversations, even difficult ones, will not effect change.  Limiting conversations simply affirms that managers are only engaged in the corporate dance of morons who talk change, behave as usual and change their tune every time someone higher up the organization reads a new book, announces a new program or initiates a new direction as the next flavor of the month.

Ex nihilio creative speech only works if you are God

The ex nihilio fallacy is a view that because a leader has power he/she is capable of decreeing change into reality. Ex nihilio apparently works for God when creating the world but it does not work for managers or other leaders attempting to carry out change. Even the best plans for change end up dogged by questions, bugs, inconsistencies and gaps between expected outcomes and actual results.  I watch leaders implicitly appeal to ex nihilio decrees instead of doing the hard work of understanding the system in which they have attempted change. It takes hard work to outline new processes, train and coach people to execute on new processes, and encourage new behaviors and feedback lines.

Ex nihilio management behaviors show up in statements like:

  • There is no excuse they should know this already.
  • This is simple, just do it.
  • If you can’t do your job I will get someone who can.
  • We talked about this already why aren’t you doing it?

Ex nihilio management behaviors assume that spoken wishes about the future actually create processes, behaviors, and outcomes all miraculously aligned around what the manager intended to communicate.  The danger of course is that the meaning conceptualized by the manager rarely ever is heard or interpreted in exactly the same way by the listener.  When ex nihilio managers face the routine task of clarifying their intent they (1) avoid repeating what they intend – thus indicating that they themselves are unclear about what they really want to have completed and/or (2) resort to tirades about poor execution forcing everyone to hide until a clear reprimand indicates a violation of intent or silence affirms that one has stumbled into the right action.

I find several other behaviors that parallel ex nihilio change management.  Watch for these:

  • Hyperbolized expectations.  Change is limited in part by the premature or unreasonable promises made about its outcome by managers fearful of conflict.
  • Impatience. Impatience causes managers to prematurely abandoned change because of fear, boredom or frustration with poor implementation.
  • Indolence. Change processes fall flat when managers fail to assess outcomes resulting in formalizing change. Acting in indolence is like changing course then assuming the course change was an end in itself and not a means to an end – it is a form of resource mismanagement.
  • Ignoring unexpected consequences. Change reveals previously hidden or compensated weaknesses in skill/ability.  Ex nihilio change management not only fails to expect this reality it also fails to constructively address it when it does arise.
  • Experiential distortion. Change easily morphs to recognizable or familiar forms as a means of managing ambiguity. Change is fundamentally a learning cycle not a process differential.  Ignoring learning as change results in change in name only. The ambiguity inherent in change obfuscates communication leading to heightened anxiety and siloing. Ambiguity creates new power alliances that present unexpected resistance to breakthroughs of innovation. Some of these new alliances stay dormant in the short run and erupt unexpectedly when apparently slight offenses set of an avalanche of emotional reaction.

Conclusion

There is not a successful company or organization around today that isn’t in the middle of deep change. Rapidly shifting consumer behaviors, changing regulatory environments, stake holder demands, competitive pressures, morphing technology all challenge the routines managers and employees use to define themselves.

If leaders cannot define predictability in the face of rapid and discontinuous change two things are certain. First, the leader will show more ex nihilio change mismanagement behavior. Second, employees will define themselves around routines of resistance thus artificially limiting their ability to adapt while simultaneously undermining valid change.

In the face of the chaos of change leaders need to return to the necessity of nurturing change.  The simple rule of thumb is this – if you are not completely sick of talking about the change project you initiated and if you have not yet experienced the frustration of describing it a dozen different ways you are not yet clear in where you want to go and what the execution of your intent should look like.

Help your employees define themselves by their competencies and value as creative people versus the routines that define what they do at work today.  The reality is that the way we work, in fact the kind of work we do today may have little resemblance to the work we end up doing tomorrow. On the other hand who your employees are today and the competencies they have learned are transferable.  People remain vital and relevant to the degree they understand their value to the organization stems from a commitment to a learning. Learners use experience to differentiate the opportunity in problems and outcomes from the means of getting there.

New behaviors and beliefs show sustainable change. Wise leaders watch their employee’s behaviors and beliefs. The accomplishment of short-term goals indicates milestones but they do not indicate a change of thinking. Remind yourself that if you ever grow tired of nurturing change you have ceased being a leader. The alternative is not only a drop in productivity but  a loss of competitive survival as well.

Posted on

Need a Big Idea? Ask Questions.

ideaBig ideas and significant breakthroughs come by asking questions.
According to Rich Warren courage determines the quality of your life and work.  It takes courage to question what you are doing and it is by asking questions new insights reveal themselves.  What kinds of questions does it take courage to ask?  He suggested eight.

Use these insights to systematically ask yourself and your team the kinds of questions that will transform the way you work.

  1. Termination. What do you need to stop?  You will never have the margins and the energy to innovate if you don’t first stop doing what is no longer effective.
  2. Collaboration. How do we do it faster, cheaper, or larger with a team?  How can we coordinate the resources in front of us to get things done?
  3. Combination. What can we mix to make something new – what can we combine to create a synthesis?
  4. Elimination. What part can we take out to make it simpler?  What barrier can we remove to give greater access?
  5. Reincarnation. What has died that we can bring back in a new form?
  6. Rejuvenation.  How can we change the purpose or motivation for what we are doing to recharge our energy and engagement?
  7. Illumination. How can we look at this in a new light?  What can we see by simply altering our perspective?
  8. Fascination. How can we make it more interesting or more attractive?

These are more challenging than they sound. Spend some time asking these questions about what you do – you just may discover a deeper insight into the purpose you really want to pursue.  Don’t stop however until you have asked all the questions.  Testing your insight with the full scope of these questions will help you avoid the pitfall of short-sighted enthusiasm and engage long-term transformation.