As a leader or manager of a troubled organization, you will
in variably be told that you should take nothing personally. That the reactions of those you are
attempting to lead really aren’t about you. You will be told to keep smiling, stay
the course, and let the attacks fall off your supernaturally thickened skin
like so much rain water off a tin-roof.
That is such a wonderful concept it is likely etched in stone
at the Leadership monument that must exist somewhere on the grounds of FDR’s
home or in the basement of the business school at Harvard.
But the first point of failure of the books and the seminars
and the conferences and speakers is that they rarely if ever explain to you how
to get there. They do not bother to
share the map required to find that place inside where you can be safe from the taunts and the ridicule and the venom
unleashed when you call upon your workforce to do a little better or try
something just a bit different than what they are used to.
What many also
fail to tell you is that the attacks on you will be personal because the
reactions on the part of the workforce are personal! Entrenched and atrophied organizations are
made up of entrenched and atrophied people.
They are not necessarily bad people. In fact, many will be personally
convinced of the righteousness of their actions and their mindsets and will believe
that their actions and reactions are therefore fully justified.
However, that
does not imply that they will find it in themselves to react in a rational manner
when confronted with change. This is
because of several critical factors. On
the macro scale, many of our public organizations do not boast legions of
workers skilled at analytical thinking taking into account multiple
variables. On a micro scale—they are
just damn scared of anything you are going to try to do that takes them too far
from their comfort zone. As these
entrenched organizations often have strong collective identities, histories, and
traditions, it is no wonder that the reactivity to changes in that organization
occurs in the land of the personal. You
may, in their mind, be quite literally attacking their way of life. Although it may seem dramatic, these
reactions can rise to the level of a nation facing a disaster or terrorist
attack—or a community raging against the “outsiders” who have come to change their
way of life. You must understand, if you
are taking on the role of a change agent, that the response of some to
organizational change can be that basic—that fundamental—and with that level of
passion and fear.
Therefore—it should come as no surprise that they will lash
out in unanticipated ways to those who are the faces of that change. Never mind if the change is necessary, or
beneficial—it is a threat. And you are a
threat. And you will be treated as
such. The level of reaction will vary
based on the organization and people involved—however, we do a very poor job of
training our new leaders and managers on how to manage that element of the
relationship between them and their organization.
It is my
firm belief that this single element explains why so few public organizations
obtain incredibly high levels of success and why change is so hard to
enact. Most leaders or managers will
start their plan, try to put things into effect and, when faced by the
counter-assault, back down into their darkened office, shaken to their core by
the return fire, and never come out again.
Their plans start collecting dust on the shelves—and the organizational
remains mired forevermore in whatever state it was six months before, when the
dreamer had visions of so much more. And,
having tasted “victory”—the resisters to change become even more convinced that
if you just yell loud enough—just react with enough negativity—well nothing
will ever change. Only then, things will
have to get so bad before they become receptive to change that the organization
may well beyond saving. The difference
is trying to save the smoker from cancer before their first serious health
problem—or after their third bout of cancer—when the choices are clear, we owe
it to ourselves and to those we serve to enact necessary change before things
are so bad that to doubt the need for change is shockingly ignorant for even
the most defiant.
What “they” should
tell you—but what they don’t—is the need to keep going. That to make sure things don’t get to the
lowest point, you must find some inner strength of your own. You must be willing to adjust tactics, and to
maintain a constant level of enthusiasm for where you want to take the organization
and why. Remember, all of the reactivity
is almost never based on a realistic assessment of the quality of your
ideas. Looking at it on paper from a
distance, some of the most ardent dead enders would see the benefits from the
changes you are trying to implement. But
this is not about data or results—it’s about reactions. Human. Visceral. And almost never a rational
examination of the future of the organization.
If you can understand
the cause of that fear. The human nature
of dealing with change—especially in organizations that see little change
and/or have had bad experiences with it—then you can plan your response plan
when everything seems to blow up around you.
The critical elements of that approach are for you to have a
solid and simple plan of what it is you want to do. Be able to explain your key points in brief,
simple sentences, with a few bullet points.
For example: In 2015 we will make
sure every worker has been trained on the new computer system. Why? Because it takes too much time away from that
one departments job to do all of the data entry—when it would be much more efficient
for everyone to do it. They will yell—they
will scream—even if the department wants the change—even if everyone can see it
makes more sense. They will accuse you of trying to eliminate jobs—they will
say everything worked fine the way it was—what’s the point of changing? If you do not have a few key answers to
respond with, you will be dead in the water: Examples:
This will help us justify as many positions as we have in all
departments—it will lessen the heavy workload of some—it will get you better
response time for the reports you need, etc.
Always focus on the simple points of benefit—of the need and restate it
as often as you need to. Until you are
well passed tired of hearing. But never
get tired of saying it.
Whatever it is that you respond with—just make sure you do
not respond from the level of those that will attack you. You can shape your message—you can adjust
your tactics. But the moment you fall to
the level of being the screaming raging lunatic—the other side has won the
argument. Just as in a battle, you
position can often be your greatest strength but If you give up the position,
you will lose the battle.
Second, don’t stop doing what you need to be doing just because
people aren’t reacting the way you wanted them do. Can you imagine a Civil War General telling
his troops to lay down their weapons and go home because the other side didn’t do
something the right way? No, of course
not. And such is the way with leadership
and management in these types of organizations.
You have the goal in sight—you have the vision of where you want to lead
the organization. Get it done. It will not be easy—it will not follow the
lovely map you printed out from the internet—but the only way to guarantee you
will never succeed is if you stop trying.
If that initial counter assault renders you so upset you cannot move
forward—if you take their reaction so personally that you question your purpose
for being in your role in the first place—then you will not find any lasting
success.
Maybe that is what they mean when they say don’t take it personally.
Even though many in your organization WILL take it personally—organizational
change and transformation cannot become how you define yourself. You must have the inner strength to ride
through the insults, the taunts, the questioning of your motives and methods—to
see yourself through to the other side.
Having a strong sense of faith helps, having a good group of
professional mentors to reach out to for advice does as well. But above all, you must be able to suspend
your reactions on those crazy bad days when you realize just how crazy things
can get when you want to change the color of the paper towels in the
bathrooms.
When you have mastered this understanding—when you know what
is likely coming—then you can truly be ready to bring transformative leadership
to these types of organizations. Ironically,
it is these types of organizations that are most in need of what you have to
offer—if you can learn that it really isn’t personal. And if you can learn to
stay on message, avoid being reactive yourself, and stay committed to helping
your organization be a better place—for those who work there and those whom the
organization serves.
No comments:
Post a Comment