maximum performance a practical guide to leading and managing people phần 6 pot

Whatleaders and managers have to strive for is an optimum level of conflict, where there is ‘enough conflict to prevent stagnation, stimulate ity, allow tensions to be released, and init

behaviour which, as history has shown, have all too often been used fortruly monstrous reasons (adapted from French and Raven, 1959;Carlopio, 2001: 260–80).

Which forms of power are the most effective ones to use? One of thebest-known large-scale studies of the way 750 managers use powerrevealed that they typically used seven influencing strategies whendealing with their bosses, subordinates and co-workers In order ofpopularity, these were (adapted from Kipnis, 1984):

• using reason, data or logic (‘expert’),

• friendliness and assertiveness (‘referent’),

• forming coalitions with others (‘referent’),

• bargaining and/or negotiation (‘expert’, ‘rewards’ and ‘referent’),

• ordering compliance (‘legitimate’, ‘coercive’ and ‘rewards’),

• gaining the support of a higher authority (‘legitimate’),

• sanctions or punishments (‘legitimate’ and ‘coercive’)

In a similar vein, Hughes and colleagues (1999) cite the example of thefictional but iconic leader, Jean-Luc Picard Captain Picard normallyused referent and expert power to influence his subordinates.However, during crises or emergencies, he did occasionally use legiti-mate and coercive power On very rare occasions, he used rewardpower to get his own way with a recalcitrant member of his crew.There is considerable evidence to support the view that logic andreason are the most effective power strategies Leader/managers whouse information, facts and data to support their decisions are rated farmore highly by their subordinates, when compared to those who useeither coercive or legitimate power to force through their ideas Thosewho consistently use these two strategies have less motivated, morestressed and poorer performing employees Those who habitually useforce, coercion or Machiavellian strategies to drive through their deci-sions also end up making more bad decisions than good ones (Schmidtand Kipnis, 1987; Kipnis and Schmidt, 1983)

Coercive and legitimate power strategies also act as extrinsic tors We saw in Chapter 4 that these are the least effective ways ofmotivating people because, over time, they diminish the capacity of

motiva-individuals to change, improve and develop themselves High intrinsic

motivation is one of the primary drivers of both individual and nizational excellence Further support for this position can be found innumerous research experiments on small work groups For example, inone study by Kipnis, work groups were divided into two sub-groups.The first were given the freedom to make influential decisions abouttheir work tasks, and the other group were prohibited from doing this

orga-The managers of the powerless groups reported that their employeeswere not motivated to work hard, were unsuitable for promotion, andevaluated their overall work performance less favourably than theleaders of the empowered work groups (Kipnis and Schmidt, 1983).Hence, while coercive or Machievellian power may have to be used inemergency or life-threatening situations, in most organizationalcontexts its use must be the last resort for a leader/manager because it

is the most ineffective way of influencing others Effectiveleader/managers use referent and expert power as much as possible,but will occasionally draw on the other three if the situation demandsit

You do not lead by hitting people over the head – that’s assault, not ship.

leader-(General Dwight D Eisenhower, Supreme Allied Commander during World War II)

In summary, leaders and managers have a simple choice to make Eitherthey can hoard and use power for their own ends, or they can give itaway to their followers in pursuit of collective goals and objectives Thischoice will be governed to some extent by their beliefs about theiremployees, and whether they have a Theory X or a Theory Y view ofhuman nature (described in Chapter 4) If they have a positive and altru-istic view of human nature, they will trust their employees with morepower and more responsibility to take charge of their jobs and worktasks Granting power to others is one way of turning passive ‘workers’into self-managing employees, and enabling them to exercise power,choice and discretion in the things they do If leaders and managers have

a more negative and cynical Theory X view of their employees, they canlook forward to spending much of their valuable work time issuingorders, sorting out mistakes, putting out fires and managing passive,underperforming and demotivated employees Ultimately, we all have

to make personal choices about how we exercise the power we havebeen granted, but it is worth asking yourself these questions: in yourheart, which approach do you believe is likely to produce the most bene-ficial results, for you, the people you lead and the organization you workfor? Do you believe that your employees will perform better if they are(a) involved in decision making and truly empowered, or (b) simplyexhibiting robotic compliance to your authority?

Dealing with toxic employees and politicized organizations

One ought to be both feared and loved, but as it is difficult for the two to go together, it is much safer to be feared than loved for love is held by a

chain of obligation which, men being selfish, is broken whenever it serves their purpose: but fear is maintained by a dread of punishment that never fails.

(Niccolò Machiavelli, The Prince)

In the preceding section and Chapter 1 it was suggested that mostmanagers and professionals have great respect for leaders who do notengage in ‘Machiavellian’ politics and who exude professional trust,integrity, empathy and reliability As a general rule this is true, but, atsome point in our working lives, we will come across truly toxic indi-viduals whose only mission in life is to impose their overbearing egos

on everyone around them, bully their staff and treat their subordinatesbadly At other times, we may also find ourselves working in highlypoliticized organizations How can we deal with these situations? First,recall what we discovered about toxic personalities and bullies inChapter 1:

[Bullies] exhibit most of the following traits: impatience, arrogance, tionism, defensiveness, rigidity, bluntness and a keen ability to hold grudges People who are tyrants and bullies in adulthood became little tyrants and bullies during their formative years [and] many childhood bullies do then evolve into cunning and manipulative managers They are likely to be intelligent, but use this entirely for their own ends and their own self-aggrandizement They have no empathy with other people and any decisions they make are driven by one consideration, ‘What’s in this for me?’ They will utilize an autocratic management style on their subordinates but behave compliantly towards their superiors They will often lack a sense

perfec-of humour and take themselves and their own opinions very seriously.

Some toxic personalities may become fully-fledged psychopaths To be labelled psychopathic, an individual needs to display 10 out of 16 psychopathological tendencies These are selfishness, callousness, remorse- less use of others, lying, cunning, failure to accept responsibility for actions, extreme egotism, extreme sense of self-worth, emotional instability, anti- social tendencies, need for constant stimulation, behavioural and emotional problems in childhood, juvenile delinquency, irresponsibility, unrealistic long-term goals and a sexually deviant or promiscuous lifestyle.

There are several practical insights that can be drawn from this extract.First, we are better people than the bully or domineering boss Second,

we do not have to accept their abuse of power and we must not esce to it If we do, this will only encourage repetitions of this kind ofbehaviour Third, we can be assertive and stand up to it, because mostbullies are revealed to be cowards when they are challenged We cantell the person in question how we feel about their behaviour, why it isunacceptable and why we expect their behaviour to change Thisshould be done calmly and without aggression, because they thrive onthe emotional anxiety and discomfort of others If this approach doesnot produce the desired change, and there are no other options (such

acqui-as resigning and moving to another organization), it may be time toemploy some Machiavellian techniques Several books appeared in the

1990s and early 2000s with the stated intention of ‘putting Machiavelli

back into business’ These include Grifin‘s Machiavelli on Management: Playing and Winning the Corporate Power Game, McAlpine’s The New Machiavelli: The Art of Politics in Business, The 48 Laws of Power by Robert

Greene, and some tongue-in-cheek advice from a real-life coup leader,

André de Guillaume, in How to Rule the World: A Handbook for the Aspiring Dictator These authors suggest a number of more devious and

underhand strategies that employees can use to achieve their tions within political organizational cultures It has to be said that some

ambi-of their suggestions are rather nebulous or vague, and a few may even

be illegal in some countries However, an abridged selection of the best

of these and a few of mine are presented below

Power is a social game

The word ‘game’ is often used synonymously with power and tics, and for a very good reason Like chess, this is a game which must

poli-be played with a clear idea of your personal strategies (and tive strategies) and a good understanding of what your opponent’sstrategies are likely to be (and where their strong and weak pointsare) Your energy must be focused at all times on the best strategies

alterna-to use, as well as the personality of your opponents To use powerwell, we have to be both master players and master psychologists,recognizing the needs and motivations of others, while at the sametime not becoming emotionally involved with them An understand-ing of these hidden needs and motives is the greatest power-tool that

we can ever possess, because we will then be able to appeal to, andmake use of, the self-interests of others while pursuing our own goalsand objectives

Guard your reputation

Your personal reputation (how others see you) is the keystone of yourpower Once this slips, you are vulnerable Make your reputationunassailable Maintain a professional (but friendly) space betweenyourself and work colleagues As a former mentor of mine onceobserved, ‘I look at it this way You don’t have to make love withthese people, you don’t have to socialize with them after work or betheir lifelong buddies I deliberately maintain a space between myselfand everyone else who works here What you have to try to do isdevelop good working relationships and maintain a professional,impartial approach with everyone, even if they do sometimes behavelike ******s.’

Praise your leaders

Or, at least, do not criticize them by name in public Sooner or later,someone will report back to them what you have said Act as theperfect courtier; yield to superiors and flatter them when the opportu-nity arises Don’t ever upstage them in public Learn about theirprivate interests and personal goals Support their ideas in public, butoffer critical advice, tactfully, in private Your power and influence willalso increase if you are willing ‘to go the extra mile’ for them, and helpthem out with problems and difficulties they may encounter at work

Make people dependent on you

To maintain your independence, you must be needed by other people.

The more you are relied on, the more freedom, influence and poweryou will have Cultivate relationships at every opportunity – with yourpeers, your bosses and with your clients Act as a mentor for juniorstaff Be a team player and share in your colleagues’ accomplishments.Support their ideas and suggestions and be responsive to their prob-lems, without endangering your own interests Be seen as someonewhom people can chat with confidentially about work issues Behonest with the people who do rely on you, but keep your cards close

to your chest Don’t reveal more than you need to Find allies and

mingle – isolation is dangerous Work on people’s hearts and minds If

you have to ask other people for help, appeal to their self-interest Try

to find or uncover something that will benefit them if they help you.Professional politicians know this as the ‘reciprocity strategy’

Avoid people who are negative, self-obsessed, unhappy or unlucky

Associate with people who make you feel good and valued, or whosepositive reputation will reflect well on you Avoid people who arealways negative, self-obsessed or just interested in their own agendas.But try to deal professionally and calmly with second-rate, difficult ortoxic employees at all times

Be calm and objective

Power is amoral Your focus must always be on your opponent’sactions and strategies, and what these mean Anger and emotion arecounterproductive because, as we saw in Chapter 3, they cloud reasonand clarity of thought Try to remain calm and objective at all times

Make use of the stress diffusion techniques described in Chapter 2.

Remember that other people cannot make you angry, only you can allow yourself to become angry Learn from previous occasions when

you have allowed emotions to damage your case and don’t repeatthem Train yourself to take nothing personally and never show defen-siveness or vulnerability If you do, you might expose an Achilles heelthat your opponent can strike at But, if you can make your opponentlose control of his temper, you will gain an enormous advantage overhim

Don’t say more than you have to (and don’t be a smartarse)

The more you talk, or seek to hog the limelight, the less effective youwill be Only talk when you have to and when you really have some-thing valuable, insightful or pertinent to contribute to discussions ordecision-making processes at work Use logic, data and facts to supportyour position, not bluster, polemic or personal opinions Wheneveryou can, let your actions persuade others, because they will often speaklouder than any words you use or any arguments that you win.Nobody likes to feel less intelligent than another person The trick is tomake other people feel smarter than you Once convinced of this, theywill not suspect that you may have ulterior motives or be a threat tothem Never say or do anything that could be held against you Controlhow you use valuable information If you can act on information before

an opponent knows about it, you can often gain an advantage

Conceal your intentions and don’t take sides in haste

If you are going to create a stir, keep people in the dark Do not revealyour intentions in advance Don’t be predictable all the time and, occa-sionally, surprise and confound your colleagues The only cause youshould concentrate on is your own If you have to choose sides, takeyour time to evaluate carefully which will be the winning one In thiscontext, recall the age-old adage cited earlier, ‘Fools rush in to takesides’

Don’t fight battles you can’t win and ensure that you crush your enemies

Surrender the occasional battle if you have to, but stay focused onwinning the war Concentrate your energies and resources on impor-tant victories, not the pyrrhic ones Life is short, opportunities are few

and you only have so much energy to expend in locking horns withpeople at work If you want to neutralize an opponent, you must know

as much as possible about them Everyone has weaknesses or skeletons

in the cupboard: find out what these are, but only use them when thetime is right Timing is everything and support is vital Make sure thatyou have enough supporters to support the removal or deposition ofyour enemy before this is proposed Make sure that you crush themcompletely, or they may come back to get you at some point in thefuture As the master of political skulduggery Machievelli onceobserved, ‘when he seizes power, the new ruler must determine all theinjuries he will need to inflict He must inflict them once and for all.’

Summary

Having described some Machiavellian power strategies it’s important

to emphasize that most people would feel very uncomfortable beinginvolved in these kinds of power plays and political mind-games, ifthey were routine features of their daily working lives (professionalpoliticians excepted) While there may be times when your survival, orthe survival of a project you are involved in, forces you to make use ofthe ‘dark side’ of power and politics, they are ultimately self-destruc-tive Such behaviour and strategies will, sooner or later, involve cheat-ing and lying, as well as deceitful and malicious behaviour towardsothers In time, these will eventually lead to personal or corporate self-destruction (an issue we will return to in Chapter 12, in the context ofthe collapse of companies like Enron and Worldcom) Furthermore,engagement with the dark side of power and politics uses up a tremen-dous amount of time, energy and resources, be this at the individual,group or organizational level These are precious commodities in mostorganizations these days, and highly politicized working cultures arecharacterized by time wasting, infighting, backbiting and cheap pointscoring, rather than active engagement with the productive andcreative aspects of organizational leadership and management

Managing conflict

Many managers seem to think it is impossible to tackle anything or anyone head-on, even in business By contrast, we at Intel believe that it is the essence of corporate health to bring a problem out into the open as soon as possible, even if this entails a confrontation Dealing with conflicts lies at the heart of managing any business As a result, facing issues about which there

is disagreement can be avoided only at the manager’s peril Workplace ticking grows quietly in the dark; like mushrooms, neither can stand the light of day.

poli-(Andy Grove, High Output Management, 1984)

We’ve seen that power and politics are natural and inevitable facts oforganizational life, as individuals and groups seek to acquire influenceand gain resources in order to achieve their objectives The same prin-ciple applies to conflict, which is often the natural outcome of personal,factional or departmental power battles in organizations It too can beregarded as a normal feature of life in all organizations In somecircumstances, it may even be essential for groups to function effec-tively and to remain energetic and creative because, without somedegree of conflict, nothing would ever change in organizations What

leaders and managers have to strive for is an optimum level of conflict,

where there is ‘enough conflict to prevent stagnation, stimulate ity, allow tensions to be released, and initiate the seeds for change, yetnot so much as to be disruptive or to deter the coordination of activi-

creativ-ties’ (Robbins et al., 2001: 510).2In the same way that conflict tition’) between firms promotes innovation and change, it can also be auseful management strategy within organizations, so long as it ismanaged in the right way In the context of innovation in companies,this has been described as managing the process of ‘creative abrasion’(Leonard and Strauss, 1999) As Nonaka has also suggested,

(‘compe-Employee dialogues can – indeed should – involve considerable conflict and disagreement It is precisely such conflict that pushes employees to question existing premises and make sense of their experiences in a new way ‘When people’s rhythms are out of sync, quarrels occur and it’s hard

to bring them together,’ acknowledges a deputy manager for advanced technology development at Canon ‘Yet if the group’s rhythms are completely in unison from the beginning, it’s also difficult to achieve good results’.

(Nonaka, 1991: 104)

The former CEO of Nissan, Carlos Gohn, who was instrumental inturning the company’s fortunes around during the 1990s, shared thisapproach to conflict He was widely regarded as a good listener andsomeone who was able to get traditionally compliant staff at all levels

to look critically at every aspect of the company’s performance tional, organizational, strategic and interdepartmental) even if thiscreated conflict between junior and senior staff who had been longaccustomed to the hierarchical and top-down power relationships ofJapanese corporations The consequence of this approach was thecreation of hundreds of new ideas and innovations to improve thecompany’s performance, and a fundamental shift in the company’smind-set during the late 1990s and early 2000s

(opera-Hence, while some conflict may be useful in organizations, there are

many potential sources of destructive conflict in organizations Theseinclude interpersonal differences, group conflicts, poor communica-tion, task and process conflicts, gender and cultural clashes, status

distinctions (for example, between line-workers and management),interdepartmental rivalries, power differentials between groups ofemployees, discrimination, inequitable reward systems and so forth.

So what strategies can be employed in order to maintain a manageable

or optimum level of conflict or competition, while ensuring that sive or toxic levels of these do not disrupt the workflow of a group ordepartment?

exces-There are a number of conflict management and resolution styles thatcan be used at work More importantly, you already possess a number

of other skills that are useful for dealing with conflict The most potent

of these are the communication skills covered in Chapter 3, althoughthe leadership skills described in Chapter 1 also play an important role

in conflict management, as do the team management skills identified inChapter 5 The communication skills that can be employed when deal-ing with conflict include active listening, not interrupting other peoplewhile they are talking, summarizing others’ contributions, looking forwin–win rather than win/lose solutions, focusing on issues rather thanpersonalities, being aware of hostile non-verbal behaviour, coping withand diffusing emotional outbursts and anger and, most importantly,not behaving in a domineering or hectoring manner

There are a few other techniques that can also be used in situations thatare characterized by a disagreement or conflict Invariably, these areaccompanied by a lot of emotional baggage, including resentment,fear, passion and anger This means that we should all remember tothink before acting, particularly if we are going to be involved in aconflict between individuals or groups Do you fully understand whatthe underlying issues and facts are? How did the conflict arise? Whatresolutions to the conflict might there be? We then have to get people’sadult minds refocused on the task at hand and to diffuse tensions asquickly as possible This can be achieved through the effective use ofquestions, a technique I’ve come to think of as the ‘Captain Angry andCaptain Zen’ approach to dealing with situations that have the poten-tial to degenerate into open conflict Here are some examples of thistechnique in action:

Captain Angry Captain Zen

What would it take to make itwork?

Can you suggest an alternativesolution that could work?You can’t do it that way What would happen if we did?

How could we do it that way if

we had to?

We’ve tried that already What was the outcome?

( it didn’t work) ( why did it go wrong?)This is the only way to do it It may be – but are there any

other options that we shouldconsider, before making thisdecision?

It should be done this way Why?

Is that the best option?

Are there any other options?

I don’t understand this proposal Can you be more specific?

Which parts aren’t you clearabout?

I can’t/won’t do that What would make you willing

to do it?

What would you do instead?Your idea is stupid What, specifically, don’t you like

about this idea?

What alternatives to this ideacould you suggest?

This is a disaster What caused it?

What will make it better?This is my position and I’m Well, I’m sorry you feel that

this to a vote*

*Only if you know you have enough votes to carry your decision

through

If you are going to be involved in negotiations that have the potential

to become heated, you’ll need to assess the situation calmly and tively, collect as much accurate information as you can about the prob-lem or issue, identify what you want and what your objectives are.Decide early on where you can compromise (concessions that do notdestroy your position) and look for compromise (win–win) solutions

objec-This means that you must look at the problem or issue from your own

perspective, the perspective of your opponent (who may well be ing for your vulnerable points) and, if possible, from the viewpoint of

look-a neutrlook-al third plook-arty You then need to decide, before negotilook-ating,where you might be able to accommodate someone else’s point ofview, where you can collaborate with them, or where you can givesomething up This is certainly harder work than simply imposingdecisions on others through coercive or legitimate means, but theoutcomes are always more successful It is vitally important to remem-ber that, eventually, ‘the truth will out’ and the only way to come to theright decisions on any issue in organizations is through questioningand reasoned argument These should be backed up by facts (not opin-ions) and presented in a manner that recognizes that others may havestrong views of their own, even if they might be wrong

If you ridicule an idea – the person feels ridiculed.

If you attack an idea – the person feels attacked.

If you dismiss an idea – the person feels dismissed.

If you ignore an idea – the person feels ignored.

(Gould and Gould, From No to Yes, 1991)

Does this mean that we have to ‘waste time’ dealing with ideas that weconsider to be useless? One of the main reasons why conflict occurs isthat all humans are raised, educated and trained to put critical or eval-uative thinking before creative thinking In Chapter 3, we saw howpeople often categorize ideas and concepts instantly, and then slap

‘accept’ or ‘reject’ labels on these Hence other people’s proposalsbecome ‘right’ or ‘wrong’, ‘perfect’ or ‘useless’, ‘good’ or ‘bad’.However, reality is always more complex than this Very few ideas areever perfect, including our own, and very few are completely useless.Most ideas have some merits, even if they are not immediately appar-ent Therefore, the creative solution is to build on what is good about aparticular idea, and then try to overcome its shortcomings In the longrun, this approach can actually save us a great deal of time and effortbecause we will have enabled others to learn for themselves what isgood, and not so good, about their ideas or proposals

In almost all conflicts, people become angry because they believe thatthey are about to lose something that is important to them This is theninterpreted as an attack on their ‘territory’, not in a geographical sense,but in a psychological one If people believe that their status, freedom,knowledge, expertise, power, control or reputations are under threat,they will become fiercely defensive This real or imagined threat can alsoset in process the ‘fight/flight’ reaction to stress, with its attendant nega-tive consequences Trying to avoid a difficult situation or serious conflictwill not make it go away Escalating the level of conflict, by digging ourheels in, will only make things worse Hence a joint solution can only be

achieved if the threat can be identified and recognized If it isn’t, theconflict will continue and a win/lose ‘solution’ will be the only possi-ble outcome The main problem with win/lose outcomes is that theywill almost inevitably leave some people feeling disillusioned or angry,although sometimes this is unavoidable And there will be occasionswhen conflict gets out of hand and cannot be resolved If you findyourself in this kind of situation (and feel that you are gettingabsolutely nowhere), and if others are behaving in an aggressive andhostile manner towards you, it may be necessary to warn them thatyou will leave, and only return when they have had time to cool down.

It is important to say this calmly and politely

Conclusion

In summary, successful political strategists are capable of takingcalculated gambles that lead to successful results They learn quicklyhow to use, or change, organizational rules to their best advantage.They acquire, use and share information to further their interests andthose of their followers They exploit opportunities that come theirway, but also have the capacity to create these As a result, they arebetter able to compete and win, and achieve their objectives And,while they may be highly driven individuals, they do not step overthe line into unethical leadership or business practices They givepower away to their followers and this, in turn, enhances their powerbases The use of power and politics is a complex art, not an exactscience, and there is no single best power and political strategy, orconflict management style, to adopt Which one(s) you choose to use

is dependent on and shaped by your personality andleadership/management style, the kind of organization you work for,its political culture, and the nature of the problems or conflicts thatyou routinely deal with Having said this, it is important that leadersand managers work on developing all their power bases (referent,expert, reward, legitimate and coercive), because each one will beneeded at some point in their careers The same principle applies toconflict management This reinforces an important point made aboutleadership in the Preface and Chapter 1: the more ‘tools’ we have atour disposal, the more effective we will be in dealing with any prob-lems that arise in our organizations The more strategies we haveprepared in advance, the greater our chances of success; the fewer thestrategies, the more limited our options and chances of success willbe

Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

(Lord Acton, British peer)

Most powerful is he who has himself in his own power.

He who has great power should use it lightly.

(Seneca, Roman senator and historian)

2 This idea has parallels with the satisfaction/dissatisfaction process, described in Chapter 3.

8 Leading organizational and

cultural change

Objectives

To define change, vision and mission

To describe why the ability to manage organizational and culturalchange is a key leadership/management competency

To examine the principal elements of successful change managementstrategies

To revisit the main qualities and characteristics of transformationalleaders

To look at the reasons why employees resist change and how learningtheory can help in the planning and management of change

To present two real-life examples of organizational and culturalchange, one successful and one unsuccessful, and the practical lessonsthat can be drawn from these

Introduction: ‘May you live in interesting times’

We tend to meet any new situation by re-organising, and a wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress while producing inef- ficiency and demoralisation.

(Gaius Petronius, Roman general, 66)

There is nothing more difficult to carry out, nor more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to handle, than to initiate a new order of things Because the innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under the old conditions, and lukewarm defenders in those who may do well under the new.

(Niccolò Machiavelli, politician, 1513)

As the two quotations above indicate, our predecessors have always

had difficulties coping with change, even though this has been the

defin-ing feature of human history and the evolution of modern civilizations

298

over the last 10 000 years, and even more so over the last 200 years Thebig difference today, when compared with the agrarian, industrial,scientific and political revolutions of the past, is the sheer pace ofchange in contemporary societies and organizations Whenever groups

of employees in industrialized or industrializing countries are asked todescribe what most characterizes life in their organizations today, theiranswers invariably include ‘change’ This ubiquitous word is derived

from the Old French word, changier, and is defined here as the process

of making any alterations, transformations or modifications to the way

an organization or its employees operate Almost all managers andprofessionals can recall personal experiences and anecdotes aboutchange, re-engineering, restructuring, downsizing or mergers in theorganizations they have worked for This is not surprising, given thatthe last decade of the 20th century was variously described as ‘the age

of chaos’, ‘the tech-decade’, ‘the decade of blur’, ‘the age of surprises’and ‘the age of uncertainty’ These surprises and uncertainties includeglobalization, the breathtaking pace of technological innovation, theongoing redefinition of the roles and activities of organizations,employers, trades unions and employees, the end of ‘jobs for life’ andjob insecurity amongst managerial and professional employees,economic and political instabilities in most regions of the world, grow-ing ethical and ecological challenges in business, the financial melt-down of many East Asian economies in the late 1990s, and theemergence of China as an economic superpower in the 2000s Morerecently, we have also witnessed the tragic events of 11 September

2001, subsequent terrorist atrocities and the impact of the second GulfWar and its aftermath in the Middle East

In this fast-changing and uncertain world, only a handful of companiesnow appear to have what it takes to thrive over long periods of time.For example, the Dow Jones Index was created in 1896 with 30 listedcompanies Just one of the original 30 is still in existence: GeneralElectric, the corporate behemoth founded by Thomas Edison in 1892.The Helsinki Exchange was created in 1921 and only one of the 12companies that formed the first group of listed companies is still inexistence: Nokia Furthermore, the life cycles of many medium-sizedand large companies are getting shorter year by year A survey by

Fortune compared the US companies that had been on their 1970 ‘Top

500’ list and discovered that one-third had disappeared by 1985 Tenyears later they compared the companies on their 1980 ‘Top 500’ listand found that two-thirds of these companies had disappeared by

1995 More recently, we have also witnessed a growing number ofspectacular corporate collapses These included dozens of companiesfrom the dotcom collapse of April 2001, and Worldcom, Enron, Tycho,Arthur Andersen, K-Mart and Global Crossing in the USA; UMP,

Ansett, HIH, One.Tel, New Tel and The Mayne Group in Australia,Boo.com and several other companies in the UK, and Parmalat in Italyduring 2000–4.

As we will see in Chapter 11, the speed of change in organizations isgoing to accelerate at an even faster pace over the next 20 years, driven

by an explosion of dazzling new technologies, the rapid globalization oftrade and commerce and the emergence of newly industrialized nations.These developments mean that very few business organizations canavoid change, and any company in the private sector that thinks it issecure probably has a short lifespan ahead of it Whether the organiza-tion is small, medium or large, perpetual change and organizationaldevelopment is now the name of the game As Martin Bollinger, manag-ing director of Booz, Allen and Hamilton, observed in 1998, ‘It is difficult

to think of a company being able to maintain a posture where they arenot trying to change and trying to reinvent themselves I just can’t imag-ine a situation where a CEO could stand there and say, “Nope, we’repretty happy with things the way they are” ’ (cited by Cornell, 1998b).Change is now so pervasive that just making incremental, ad hoc reac-tive changes is no longer sufficient for many businesses

The key to success now, and in the future, will be the ability to makecontinual, proactive changes, and to create change for others to follow(rather than playing the energy-sapping game of perpetual catch-upwith other organizations) Change must also be ingrained in the mind-sets of employees and their working practices, and be an integral part

of organizational cultures and operational thinking Hence the ability

to lead organizational and cultural change is one of the most importantskills that leaders and managers must possess However, many don’treceive any formal education or guidance in the complexities ofmanaging change Almost all of the MBAs and other professionals I’vebeen involved with over the last decade have consistently indicatedthat they have had to ‘muddle through’, ‘learn by experience’, ‘hire

some consultants’ or, in many cases, simply react to change rather than

initiating and controlling it Therefore it comes as little surprise todiscover that around 75 per cent of all attempts at corporate changeeither fail or do not achieve their original objectives (Kotter, 1995) Astudy by Ernst & Young in 1996, of 584 US, Canadian, Japanese andGerman companies, revealed that less than 20 per cent felt that theywere able to sustain long-lasting change management strategies A six-year longitudinal study, by the Centre for Corporate Change at theUniversity of New South Wales in Australia, revealed that 67 per cent

of change management initiatives had suffered ‘at least one majorsetback’ that prevented the changes being implemented in the way thathad been originally planned (Simons, 2000)

Another study, by AT Kearney in 2000, reported that one in five of 294medium and large European companies rated their change manage-ment programmes as being successful Sixty-three per cent had madesome temporary improvements, but failed to sustain these, and 17 percent had made no improvements at all An even more dramatic findingconcerned the use of external consultants by these companies Just one

in five of the companies that had successfully managed change hadused external consultants, and then only for limited or specificpurposes such as the introduction of new IT systems In contrast, fourout of five companies that had failed to implement successful changeused external consultants The AT Kearney study observed that ‘Thelargest gap between companies that were good and bad at changearose because some learnt from change and institutionalised thatknowledge, building it into their cultures and performance assess-ments Because such companies learn, their changes are more likely to

be sustainable’ (The Economist, 2000) The importance of organizational

learning, within the context of perpetual change, will be discussedfurther in Chapter 9

The obvious question raised by these findings is ‘Why do so manychange management initiatives fail?’ The reasons for this are simultane-ously simple and complex First, when people talk about ‘the manage-ment of change’, what they are usually thinking about is changing ‘theorganization’ in some way What they often fail to grasp is that what is

really going to be changed, in any change management process, is the people who live and work inside the organization An organization, as such,

does not exist Sure, it has buildings, technology systems, products andservices, customers and clients, corporate logos and a market presence ofsome description; but, at the most basic level, an organization is no more

or less than a group of people working together Take the people awayand the organization ceases to exist This seems such an obvious point tomake, and yet when we look at the primary reasons for the failure ofchange management programmes over the last 30 years it is alwaysbecause the organizations’ employees were not involved in, or notengaged with, or did not believe in, the changes that were being pushed

through by the leadership of their organizations, every single time, out exception By far the most complex, unpredictable and yet important

with-drivers of organizational change are the employees However, as we willsee shortly, most adult human beings (and, by extension, most organi-zations) are psychologically conservative and that is why they will oftenresist change, unless we can provide them with good reasons and incen-tives to embrace new ways of thinking and working

Secondly, managing change (particularly from a standing start and/or

in large, bureaucratic organizations) is time-consuming, complex and

difficult It requires the effective use of many of the leadership andpeople management skills described in Chapters 1–7, as well as somenew ones that will be outlined in this chapter It also requires the abil-ity to implement a series of strategic initiatives and processes, oftensimultaneously and systemically Far too many books on changemanagement, particularly those written by consultants, portray themanagement of change, in a ‘paint-by-numbers’ fashion, as a relativelystraightforward exercise It isn’t, and anyone who says that it is easy ismisleading you John Pettigrew neatly captured the complexities ofthis process when he observed, ‘The management of change can becompared to juggling lots of balls in the air while the platform onwhich the juggler stands is moving all the time Drop one of the balls

or forget to pick one up in the first place and the effect will be trous’ (Pettigrew, 1985: 70) In a nutshell, this is why leading organiza-tional and cultural change is extremely difficult, and why we will bespending some time examining why all change management

disas-programmes must first focus on how individuals habitually interpret and react to the prospect of change in their organizational contexts.

Leading organizational and cultural change: the theory

People talk a lot about ‘the management of change’ these days The reality

is that much of this ‘change’ is so badly ‘managed’ that it often produces demoralisation, fear and resistance amongst employees.

(Tom Peters, 1992)

A staggering quantity of research has been generated on leading andmanaging change While preparing this book, I came across more than

200 books and about 1000 articles or websites that had ‘change’,

‘cultural change’, ‘renewal’, ‘restructuring’, ‘re-engineering’, or nizational development’ in their titles There are at least 40models/frameworks of change management in this literature,although many of these echo each other and/or overlap to a largeextent Despite this voluminous output, and more than 30 years’research on change in organizations, very few people would agree thatthere is a widely accepted and foolproof formula for leading andmanaging organizational and cultural change However, there are veryclear indications of the components that do need to be in place whenmanaging change processes, and these are described below Thefollowing sections represent a synthesis of these 40 models/frame-works, as well as numerous theories about leading and managingchange, spanning organizational theory, management studies, the soci-ology of organizations and occupational psychology

‘orga-In addition to these insights, several hundred of my MBA students havelooked at change management programmes (CMPs) in more than 70organizations between 1997 and 2004 These include household-namecompanies, such as General Electric, 3m, Hewlett-Packard, IBM,Continental Airlines, Harley-Davidson, BHP-Billiton, BP and RoyalDutch Shell, and more than 30 Australian private and public sector orga-nizations, who have experienced both incremental and radical changes inrecent times By reviewing the change management programmes in thesecompanies, and after many hours of class discussion and debate, an 11-point template for successful change management has been developed.This has also been road-tested in conjunction with two companies whocollaborated in the Australian Institute of Management/HarvardBusiness School’s Action Learning Programmes during 2003–4, andduring several Executive MBA change management projects during2002–3 This template contains the key elements and components that

were always in place during successful change management programmes

and, conversely, often not in place when change failed:

• the presence of energetic and committed transformational leaders;

• a vision, or a clear sense of direction/purpose, or a set of clear andwell-articulated goals and objectives for the company to traveltowards (it doesn’t matter which);

• an appreciation among organizational leaders of why there isalways resistance to change, at the individual, group and organiza-tional level, and an understanding of strategies that could be used toovercome this;

• integrating strategic macro change with the organization’s tional culture and the daily working practices of its employees;

opera-• creating a sense of urgency, in order to develop the initial impetus

or thrust for change, removing those senior and middle managerswho stand in the way of necessary change, and ‘getting the rightpeople on the bus’;

• developing straightforward, realistic and workable strategies todrive change initiatives throughout all levels of the organization;

• extensive two-way communication with all employees during times

of change;

• involving employees, whenever and wherever possible, by givingthem as much ownership as possible over change managementinitiatives and processes;

• celebrating successes and short-term wins, and rewarding ees when they have made changes to their working practices;

employ-• involving external customers and clients in change managementinitiatives and processes;

• developing an ongoing cultural commitment to continuous change,improvement and learning

Each of these components is described in more detail below, and thenillustrated in practice with two real-life examples of change:Continental Airlines and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.

The presence of energetic and committed transformational leaders

One of the fellows at the mine said that the guy who took over BHP would need steel balls They wanted to make sure I had some.

(Paul Anderson, former CEO of BHP-Billiton, commenting on the gift he received from his employees at the Escondida copper mine in Chile, January 2000)

In Chapter 1, we saw that transformational leaders seek somethingmuch more than mere unthinking obedience and compliance fromtheir followers Transformational leaders are capable of changing theirfollowers’ basic beliefs, values and attitudes in order to get superiorlevels of achievement out of them Sometimes described as ‘Super-Bosses’, they are perceived to lead by virtue of their ability to inspiredevotion and extraordinary effort from their followers These individ-uals are driven, often from an early age, by a very strong need forachievement and success They are very self-confident and believe thatthey can truly make a difference to the world People usually do whatthese leaders ask them because they understand something abouthuman behaviour and how to motivate or, if required, manipulatepeople to do their bidding They are often regarded as good communi-cators and storytellers Transformational leaders are also able to adapttheir leadership styles, depending on the circumstances, particularlywhen they are brought in in the role of trouble-shooters to sort out anorganization in crisis A direct corollary of this is that they have to befast, proactive learners and good listeners They also have to adopt ahands-on approach to leadership in these situations Another charac-teristic is their ability to ride the white waters of change This transfor-mational mind-set is absolutely essential these days When we unpackthis mind-set, we discover that it is actually a combination of a number

of skills, such as the ability to think long-term, the ability to createvisions, effective communication skills, the ability to link strategieswith opportunities and, increasingly, systemic and lateral thinking.Transformational business leaders embrace change with enthusiasm.They believe that change is good and inevitable They have the ability

to create an impetus for change They also recognize that change must

be perpetual and not reactive

Research on the management of change in organizations, and ourreviews of numerous change management programmes, indicate that,without the presence of such leaders, successful change is near impos-sible to achieve This does not mean that they have to be larger than

life, highly paid ‘charismatic’ leaders brought in from the outside AsCollins has observed:

Larger than life celebrity leaders, who ride in from the outside are tively correlated with taking a company from good to great Ten of eleven good-to-great CEOs came from inside the company, whereas the compari- son companies tried outside CEOs six times more often [ ] We also found no systematic pattern linking forms of executive compensation in the process

nega-of going from good to great The idea that the structure nega-of executive compensation is a key driver in corporate performance is simply not supported by the data.

(Collins 2001: 10–11)

Collins and his research colleagues were surprised to find that theleaders of their ‘Good-to-Great’ companies were not archetypal,high-profile or larger-than-life charismatic personalities (or grosslyoverpaid for underperformance) They had little in common with thekind of leaders who were so often exalted by the business and finan-cial press of the 1980s and 1990s, and who are still part of the mythol-ogy of successful change management In contrast, their leaderswere all modest, self-effacing, quiet and even reserved In fact, ‘Theywere more like Lincoln and Socrates than Patton or Caesar’ (ibid.:12–13) Something else they all had in common was an unerring ability to diagnose the problems facing their businesses and whattheir companies’ strengths and weaknesses were They also spent alot of time ‘clean-sweeping’ their senior managers and recruiting

new people who shared their visions of the future, before they set

about deciding in which direction they were going take their nies

compa-Hence any organization (public or private sector) that hopes to changemust have some leaders with transformational qualities In a smallenterprise, this may be just the founder of the company In a medium-sized company, it may be seven or eight people formed into a changemanagement team In a very large company, it could be 50–100 senioremployees The presence of people who are comfortable with leadingthe change and committed to its outcomes is important because, whilemost employers believe ‘employee resistance’ is the biggest obstacle tochange, most employees believe that the biggest problem is ‘poor lead-ership’ In one large survey, the biggest perceived faults of leaders whowere unable to manage change were, in ranking order, ‘lacking direc-tion, failing to communicate a vision of the future, not matching thevision with organizational processes, failing to lead by example, failing

to motivate staff, failing to make unpopular decisions about change,demonstrating inconsistent attitudes to change, and failing to come upwith ideas for change’ (Waldersee and Griffiths, cited by Gettler, 1998:16)

A clear sense of direction, or purpose, or a set of clear and well-articulated goals and objectives for the company to travel towards (it doesn’t matter which)

Somebody who can develop a vision of what he or she wants their business unit, their activity to do and be Somebody who is able to articulate to the entire unit what the business is, and gain through a sharing of discussion – listening and talking – an acceptance of the vision And, someone who can then relentlessly drive implementation of that vision to a successful conclu- sion.

(Jack Welch, former CEO of General Electric describing his ideal leader)

One of the things about leadership is that you cannot be a moderate, balanced, thoughtful, careful articulator of policy You have to be on the lunatic fringe.

(Welch again, talking about the risks that leaders have to take, cited by Lowe, 1998:

72, 86)

When a team of change leaders has been established, a path to thefuture has to be identified for the organization Without this, nothingwill ever change and a leader cannot move an organization forward ormobilize its employees, without a clear understanding of the journeythey want to embark on This is usually described as the organization’s

vision and/or mission The word ‘vision’ is derived from the Latin, videre, ‘to see’ This was defined in Chapter 1 as ‘an apparition of a

prophetic, revelational or supernatural nature presented to the mind in

a state of heightened spiritual or emotional awareness, a distinct orvivid mental image or concept, insight or foresight, an ability to plan

or formulate policy in a far sighted way’ (OED website, 2003); moresuccinctly as ‘a realistic, credible and attractive future for an organiza-tion’ (Bennis and Nanus, 1985: 8) and ’an ideal and unique image of thefuture’ (Kouzes and Posner, 1997: 95) It is defined in this chapter as thearticulation of a road, way, path or journey to the future The word

‘mission’ is derived from the Latin missionum, meaning action, and is

defined here as the formal, written articulation of an organization’svision and/or purpose and/or its main strategic goals and objectives

It is important to emphasize that, whether we call this desired futurestate the ‘vision’, the ‘mission’, the ‘direction’, the ‘purpose’, ‘a cause’

or the ‘goals and objectives’ really doesn’t matter one iota Manysuccessful transformational leaders use these terms interchangeablyand some, like Michael Chaney of the highly successful Australiancompany Wesfarmers often don’t use the word ‘vision’ at all This maycome as a surprise to those organizational leaders who have spentlarge sums of money employing consultants and PR companies to crafttheir vision and mission statements But the reality is that organiza-tions that manage change successfully attach little importance to vision

and mission statements These merely represent the starting point of a

long process of perpetual change and evolution Equally, it doesn’tmatter where the sense of direction/vision/mission comes from Youmay create this yourself, because you have exceptional creative, lateral-thinking and scenario-mapping skills (as described in Chapter 9), oryou may develop this in conjunction with a senior change team and/or

your employees However, the following must emerge from this

organiza-• the identification of the way, road or path to travel down in pursuit

of this picture or image of the future,

• a clearly mapped out series of destinations on this journey into thefuture

In Chapter 1 we cited some examples of individuals and companieswho have created breakthrough visions in the past Here are a fewmore

Frank Whittle

He wrote his original ideas for a jet engine in a school dissertation inthe early 1920s Scientists, engineers and the military in the UK rejectedhis ideas for more than a decade With the help of two visionary RAFpilots, and a small investment, their company, Power Jets Limited, wasestablished and a working prototype built in 1937 However, it wasonly with the outbreak of World War II that his ideas were taken upwith enthusiasm by the military and personally backed by WinstonChurchill On 1 May 1941, the first jet plane flew, revolutionizing mili-tary and civil aviation forever

Frank MacNamara

The first recorded use of credit was in Abyssinnia and Egypt nearly

3000 years ago and, by the early 19th century, goods could be bought

‘on credit’ in industrializing countries In 1914, Western Union becamethe first bank to offer a deferred-payment credit service to customers.However, the modern credit card is a much more recent innovation.MacNamara was dining in a Manhattan restaurant with some clients(including Alfred Bloomingdale) in 1949 The bill arrived and he andhis guests realized that they did not have enough money to pay it.Afterwards, he thought about this for a while and, with Bloomingdale,came up with the idea of a network of restaurant charge accounts and

a third-party credit company for people dining out in Manhattan Notsurprisingly, this new ‘credit card’ was called ‘The Diners’ Club Card’

By the end of the first year, 200 cards had been issued which wereaccepted in 27 of New York’s finest restaurants By 1958, there weremore than a million cardholders in the USA American Express andMaster Card arrived on the scene in 1966, with Visa following in 1977.There are now more than 140 million individual cardholders in theUSA who collectively owe about $US500 billion and, in 2003, paidabout one trillion dollars in interest.

Richard Branson

The pioneer of Virgin Records, Virgin Airlines, Virgin Mobile, VirginBride, Virgin Credit and many other companies, Branson has set hiseyes on outer space He established a new company, VirginIntergalactic, in March 1999 Its mission: to get the first paying space-tourists into orbit by 2007 XCOR Aerospace is currently developing areusable eight-seat space plane for this This will provide fee-payingpassengers with the opportunity to experience weightlessness and seethe curvature of the earth The company is now taking bookings and,

if you’re interested, a ticket will set you back $US100 000 per person

Alan Wurtzel

Wurtzel took over the US company Ward’s (now known as CircuitCity) in 1973, when it was almost bankrupt At the time, the companywas a hodgepodge of appliance and hi-fi stores, with no clear vision orstrategic focus Wurtzel later confessed that he did not have theanswers to the company’s problems or a grandiose vision to rescue it

So he did what any good leader would do in this situation: he asked alot of questions Wurtzel quickly gained a reputation as a CEO whoasked more questions of his board, and other employees, than they did

of him One fellow-board member recalls, ‘Allan was a real spark Hehad an ability to ask questions that were just marvelous We had somewonderful debates in the boardroom It was never just a dog and pony

show, where you would just listen [to him] and then go to lunch.’ Heused the same approach with all of his senior managers, pushing andprodding and probing with questions He did this to gain understand-ing of the firm and, only then, start to develop a vision and strategies

to create a better future for the company Over the next ten yearsWurtzel and his senior management team not only turned thecompany round; they also laid the foundations for a stunning record ofresults, with the company’s share price beating the market average by

a factor of 22, between 1982 and 2000 (abridged from Collins, 2001:74–5)

The Kyungwon Enterprise Company

The company has spent approximately US$3.4 billion over five yearsdeveloping an add-on device which transforms water into an electri-cally charged liquid that cleans with the same power as conventionalpowders Called the ‘Midas System’, this harnesses the tendency ofsupercharged water to launder, deodorize and kill viruses This willcreate cheaper, easier and ‘greener’ washing, by using half the powerand two-thirds of the water of conventional machines The patent forthis was registered on 18 September 2001 and the product is expected

to be on the market in 2005 This will not be good news for the wide multibillion-dollar detergent industry, but will be appreciated byconsumers throughout the world (Kuyungwon website, 25 October2002)

world-While a vision is clearly important to kick-start a CMP, employees can

be justifiably cynical about both vision and mission statements Forexample, Tom Peters used to advise audiences of organizational lead-ers to put mission statements in the trashcan the moment they receivedthem Scott Adams once described a mission statement as ‘a long andawkward sentence that demonstrates management’s inability to thinkclearly’, and most US managers ‘believe that mission statements arenot worth the paper they are written on’ (Gettler, 1998: 15) They allhave a point, because the glossiest and most finely wordedvision/mission statement in the world will change absolutely nothing,because change has to be learnt and internalized and, most impor-

tantly, it has to be led Fine words on paper will change nothing.

Employees have to understand and see where they are heading, whythey are going there and how they can get there As we will see later,the first reaction of most individuals, when confronted with change,will be, ‘What’s in it for me?’ followed by an introspective bout of find-ing all the flaws in the proposed changes, and what the negative effectsare likely to be Hence, in a nutshell, what employees need are some

good reasons why they should embark on this journey, a clearlydefined road, way or path to follow, what the end goals are and someincentives for changing what they currently do.

‘Would you tell me please which way I ought to go from here?’ asked Alice.

‘That depends a good deal on where you want to go to,’ said the cat.

‘I don’t much care where ,’ said Alice.

‘Then it doesn’t much matter where you go,’ said the cat.

‘ so long as I get somewhere,’ Alice added as an explanation.

‘Oh, you’re sure to do that,’ said the cat, ‘if only you walk long enough.’

(Lewis Carroll, Alice in Wonderland, 1871)

‘If you chase ten rabbits, you probably won’t catch one.’

(Old Japanese saying)

Our reviews of successful and unsuccessful change managementprogrammes in dozens of organizations over an eight-year periodrevealed that those visions that grabbed the attention of employees,and motivated them to action, had a number of common characteris-tics

1 They were attractive, inclusive, memorable and compelling, andwere grounded in marketplace requirements Ineffective visionswere lengthy, unfocused, bland, difficult to remember and did notact as a guide to action in employees’ daily working lives

2 They were trimultaneously broad-brush (the overall strategic tives, goals or stretch targets), narrow-focus (what does this changemean to me and the job I do?) and also addressed the disparateneeds and concerns of the groups who would be affected by thechange

objec-3 They acted as guiding stars or beacons, providing these tions and their employees with a distinctive purpose, as well asshort- and long-term goals They captured and symbolized long-term dreams about what the organization hoped to become Theystretched and motivated employees, by providing them with objec-tives to strive towards and, in some cases, a cause to believe in

organiza-4 They appealed to employees at all levels and to the organization’sstakeholders, customers and clients They reached both heads andhearts They raised ambitions and were catalysts for action Theywere concerned with the feelings, hopes and aspirations of those towhom they were directed

The leaders of these organizations embodied their visions in their to-day working practices and communicated them frequently and inperson They knew that, if they had just stuck their visions/missions

day-on notice boards, or in emails, newsletters and videos, they would havedied very quickly

Visions were regarded as being quite different from mission ments because, while statements of intent and specific plans and poli-cies are important, they can also place restrictions on flexible,evolutionary change The visions of companies that have successfullymanaged change were not regarded as a ‘plan’ as such, but as a device

state-to motivate people state-to change They undersstate-tood that their visions could not

be allowed to become dead documents, as mission statements so often

do They regarded their visions as living, evolutionary statements ofintent, while their mission statements became out-of-date the momentthey were committed to paper To cite one example of this, 3m updatesits ‘values and visions’ on its website at regular intervals as the strate-gic focus of the company shifts and changes

Their visions were built into and reinforced by the day-to-day strategicand cultural changes that employees saw going on around them (asdescribed in the Continental Airlines case study later in this chapter)

If employees cannot see this connection fairly early on in the changemanagement process, distrust and cynicism will soon set in Avision/mission that is not matched on a day-to-day basis by whatemployees experience will soon wither on the vine and lose its moti-vational impact

Here’s one example of a vision statement that fails to meet any of thesebasic requirements:

In the 21st century, Blob University will be recognized as an internationally excellent, research-intensive university and a leading intellectual and creative resource to the community it serves It will provide a broad and balanced coverage of disciplines in the arts, sciences and the professions at internationally recognized standards It will be characterized by a strong research and postgraduate emphasis across the full range of its disciplines and it will be noted for concentrations of particular research excellence in selected areas of strength, opportunity and importance Blob University’s research and postgraduate strength will be linked to and sustained by a high quality undergraduate program in which teaching and learning takes place in an atmosphere of research and scholarship The university will foster an international focus for all its activities and standards as an integral part of its overriding commitment to excellence and high quality It will be valued above all for its enduring commitment to improving society through learning and discovery.

This quotation has been read several times to groups of MBAs, whowere asked for their reactions Apart from observations about thedodgy punctuation, strangled syntax and the repetitions it contains,other comments have included the following:

• ‘Completely vacuous Why isn’t the university doing these thingsnow? It’s been in existence for a hundred years.’

• ‘Why isn’t it already recognized ‘internationally’ for its teaching andresearch? This is the same empty rhetoric we used to hear when Iwas an undergraduate here ten years ago.’

• ‘Why is there no mention of the university’s employees? Don’t theymatter?’

• ‘Nice rhetoric A pity it’s not matched by the reality of this sity’s relatively poor standing in international terms.’

univer-• ‘Does nothing for me Totally off-putting, because it’s nothing morethan a series of stale, repetitive clichés that we’ve all heard before.’

• ‘The part about serving the community is a joke I doubt if this sity has any impact on 95 per cent of the people who live in this city.’

univer-• ‘Leaves me cold Sounds like it was put together on a post-it after afew lunchtime drinks.’

• ‘My understanding of a vision statement is that it is about the future.This is about the things this university should already be doing.’

By way of contrast, what about this vision statement from a known and successful Australian resource and mining company?

well-Our vision is to maximise shareholder value through the use of the talents

of all our company employees We will maintain a diversified portfolio of commodities and exercise prudential financial management We will search for new business opportunities and find, acquire, develop and operate new mineral resource projects throughout the world Our immediate tasks are to capitalise on the best of the past, address current issues and – most impor- tantly – challenge ourselves for the future and maintain our shared commit- ment to continuous improvement [The company] is committed to achieving compatibility between economic development and the mainte- nance of the environment It is also committed to developing relationships

of mutual understanding and respect with the indigenous peoples of the areas in which we operate or propose to operate To achieve these goals, we will develop and retain top quality people We will be at the cutting edge of management practice and make best use of new technologies We will develop agreed values, behaviours and expectations that unite and repre- sent the commitment of all our staff Our objective is to create an even better company, maximising shareholder value through the use of the talents of our valued employees across the whole corporation.

This is better because it satisfies most of the requirements of an attractiveand compelling vision statement It uses inclusive language (‘we’), refers

to the major stakeholders in the company, makes some reference to itssocial responsibilities and, unlike Blob University’s mish-mash, is

concerned with the future But it is still too long and probably needs to be

shortened by 20–30 per cent Many of the best organizational visions that

we have come across were often surprisingly simple and, as a result,became captured in ‘rallying cries’ that were understood and embraced

by employees Examples of these include the following: ‘Ask the ger in seat C-9’ (Continental Airlines); ‘We don’t sell flowers – we sellbeauty’ (Podesta Baldochi); ‘The only limitation is your imagination’

passen-(Industrial Light and Magic); ‘To make people happy’ and ‘Dream,believe, dare and do’ (Disney); ‘Cars for the world to love’ and ‘To beatPorsche’ (Toyota); ‘No limits’ (Nokia); ‘Putting Perth’s homes on themap’ (aussiehome.com); ‘Bringing computer power to the people’(Apple); ‘First to market – first to profit’ (Hewlett-Packard); ‘Fromanywhere to anywhere in 24 hours’ (TNT); ‘The appliance of science’(Zanussi); ‘Quality is job number one’ (Ford); ‘Strength, speed, simplic-ity, synergy, superb quality and satisfied customers’ (General Electric),

‘The world on time’ (Federal Express), ‘Buy into Moore’s Law’ (Intel);and, most notably, ‘A computer on every desk and in every home’(Microsoft in 1978)

Even so, as we will see later, vision/mission statements can be littlemore than useless pieces of paper, and rallying cries little more thanuseless slogans, unless they become operationalized in concrete changemanagement strategies and employees’ daily working practices

Exercise 8.1

In Chapter 1, you were asked to develop a compelling vision that would challenge the way people in your department or organization operate now and in the future Are you now in a better position to develop and articulate a new direction for your followers? This doesn’t have to be revolutionary, just a statement of a better future state for your people to move towards It should also be short enough to take no longer than one minute to explain to a colleague at work What is the end goal of this vision?

What are the principal components of this vision?

Can these be encapsulated in motivational ‘rallying cries’?

If you are still having some difficulties with this exercise, there will be another nity to try this in Chapter 9 ◆

opportu-Understanding why resistance to change is inevitable

Reform a university? You may as well try to reform a cheese There is a certain flavour about a university as there is about a cheese, springing from its antiquity.

(The English Peer Lord Cecil, during a debate on the reform of British universities

in the House of Lords, 1923)

Why is changing a university like moving a graveyard? Because it is cult, complex and time-consuming, and you won’t get any help from the occupants.

diffi-(Internet joke, 2001)

Resistance is futile.

(The Borg, in Star Trek)

With a team of change leaders in place, and a clear and articulate vision

to act as a guiding star, the third issue to get to grips with is why peopleresist change It was suggested earlier that ‘leading organizational andcultural change’ should be reframed as ‘changing people’s behavioursand attitudes’ Changing behaviours is possible; changing attitudes can

be very difficult and time-consuming We know from a century ofpsychological research that behavioural change always precedes attitu-

dinal change, in all circumstances This is one reason why simply telling

people to change is usually a completely fruitless exercise Hence oneway of reframing our understanding of organizational change is tothink about the way individual change happens The most dramaticchanges in our personal development occur when we are young andprimed to learn and unlearn rapidly This is the reason why young chil-dren ask lots of ‘why’, ‘what’, ‘when’, ‘where’ and ‘how’ questions and,

as we’ll see in Chapter 9, this child-like curiosity is also one of theprimary sources of creative thinking As we mature, we tend to becomeslower at learning and more resistant to upheavals and dislocations inour lives, unless we have embraced a mind-set that accepts perpetualchange and unlearning as the natural and normal way to live and grow.Broadly speaking, the same is true of organizations When they havejust been born, or are growing rapidly, they have an inbuilt, organic

capacity for change In fact, they relish change and thrive on it As they

mature and get older, they can become more set in their ways andincreasingly resistant to change, unless they too have embraced perpet-ual change and unlearning as ‘the way we do things around here’ Withthese thoughts in mind, please complete Exercise 8.2

Exercise 8.2

Leading organizational change

Before reading through the next section of this chapter, please complete this survey There are

a series of statements relating to learning and change management Indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with each one where:

6 = Strongly agree, 5 = Agree, 4 = Slightly agree, 3 = Slightly disagree, 2 = Disagree, 1 = Strongly

disagree.

1 I understand why perpetual organizational change

is inevitable