My 10 Principles for Executing Strategic Change

As part of our final reflection in class for 440: Executing Strategic Change, we were asked to write 10 principles that we felt were important. Below are my 10 principles I always want to remember when leading change in organizations. Maybe there is something that resonates with you as well?

• You must change minds...and hearts

Kotter’s 8 steps of successful change really resonated with me because Kotter and Cohen (2002) highlight the need to change people’s behaviors, not just their minds. Most of the other models offer ways to change minds with processes and data. Kotter’s 8-steps recognize that is not necessarily enough to change behavior, which is the key to successful change. Particularly, changing behavior is about awakening peoples’ feelings and emotions. I highlight this principle first because it frames everything else involved in executing strategic change. Changing feelings, emotions, and hearts leads to successfully changing organizations.

• The time to change is before you “know” it

Cawsey, Deszca, and Ingols (2019) discuss a sigmoid curve that outlines when an organization should begin its change journey, which is before it becomes obvious that the organization needs to change. See the curve below (Cawsey, Deszca, & Ingols, 2019, p. 41).

The underlying principle here is that no matter what industry you are in and how quickly or slowly it evolves, eventually the environment, organization, and people will change. Therefore, the organization needs to anticipate and change with them. One might face resistance to this idea for numerous reasons (Cawsey, Deszca, & Ingols, 2019), however helping people understand the need to change before it is obvious is key to long term organizational success, which is why I hold it as one of my 10 principles.

• Urgency, Urgency, Urgency

Urgency and its importance to executing change is a theme throughout this course (Kotter, 1995; Kotter & Cohen, 2002; Cawsey, Deszca, & Ingols, 2019; Ford & Ford, 2010). In order for any change effort to get off the ground, a sense of urgency must be established. What is an important takeaway for me is that urgency doesn’t only have to be established from a “stick” perspective. A “carrot” opportunity may relay urgency as well. The point is, urgency must be felt either way.

• Establish change roles

Conner (1992) lays out defined roles that different people in an organization can play during change; sponsor, agent, target, and advocate. Being able to understand what role people could and should play is an important aspect of executing change and has helped me think through past scenarios where understanding change roles could have aided the situation. Additionally, the importance that Conner (1992) places on the relationships between the roles and the effect that can have on change efforts resonates with me. As organizations have become more fluid in their hierarchical structures, the relationships people have in organizations has evolved. Therefore, understanding relationships between those who could have an important impact on change efforts is paramount, and working to help people play those roles is equally as important.

• Resistance 1: Sensemaking

One of my most profound takeaways from this class is the importance of understanding resistance. This idea has been so impactful for me, I have divided it into three separate principles. The first aspect, resistance as sensemaking, is an important framing for why both agents and recipients react to change with resistance (Ford, Ford, & Amelio, 2008). Resistance might truly be resistance to an idea, but oftentimes, especially early in the change process, resistance may simply be an individual's attempt to make sense of how the change will affect their life. Remembering this will make change efforts more successful, and will help agents (and me) have empathy for those who are resisting it.

• Resistance 2: Resistance as a resource

My second principle regarding resistance is also from Ford, Ford, and Amelio (2008) when they discuss how to turn resistance into a resource supporting change efforts. They highlight that resistance can be valuable in three ways: 1) It keeps the conversations about change active, not letting it slip away to be forgotten. 2) They recognize that resistance can be a useful feedback model, as important insights can be gained from paying close attention to resistance. Finally, 3) they state that authentic resistance can actually deepen resistors’ commitment to change efforts as conflict is proven to strengthen both the quality of and commitment to decisions (Ford, Ford, & Amelio, 2008). Viewing resistance as a potential resource for executing change can turn what is broadly thought of as roadblocks into resources, and that is something I always want to keep in mind.

• Resistance 3: Recognizing resistance

Opposed to the traditional view that resistance is obvious, Mauer (2010) supplies a list of the many faces of resistance: confusion, immediate criticism, denial, malicious compliance, sabotage, easy agreement, silence, and in-your-face criticism. I hold recognizing resistance as a principle because in the chaotic, real-time experience of change, getting below the surface of how people are behaving is important. Recognizing outward behavior as resistance can help you address it in an appropriate, productive way.

• Cook the conflict

The principle of cooking the conflict (Heifitz & Linsky, 2002) is one I love both for the metaphor and the utility of the concept. Generally, people try to avoid conflict. Yet as stated above in principle 6, conflict is a recognized and necessary part of change, and ensuring that conflict exists in a productive way is crucial to change efforts (Ford, Ford, & Amelio, 2008). Cooking the conflict means creating a safe space where conflict can be freely expressed, and then actively controlling the “temperature” to ensure people are paying attention to and confronting change while keeping it from spiraling out of control (Heifitz & Linsky, 2002). As someone who does not always lean into conflict, this is an important principle for me to keep in mind as it can be a powerful change management tactic.

• There is no such thing as overcommunication during change

As pointed out by Barrett (2002), strategic communication is crucial for successful change efforts. Change leaders can have everything in place; strategy, technology, funding, and even a commitment of sponsorship from leaders. However, without a detailed communication plan that frequently reiterates, checks-in, and delivers important messaging, change will fail. Meaningful communication and strategy for delivering it helps educate employees, motivates them to support the change, encourages additional effort, limits misunderstandings, and aligns employees behind overall strategy and improvement goals (Barrett, 2002). Accomplishing all of that through communication highlights the need to over communicate and ensure the message is received, understood, and accepted (Kotter, 1995). This is a good reminder that during the constantly in flux state that change initiatives create, constant communication is important.

• ?To lead change successfully, complimentary leadership styles must exist

In discussing charismatic and instrumental leadership, Nadler and Tushman (1990) highlight how one style of leadership is not sufficient to drive successful change efforts.

Change requires generating energy, driving commitment, and aligning individuals with new objectives, values, and aspirations (charismatic); yet it also requires managing systems, guiding behaviors, and monitoring/measuring progress (instrumental) (Nadler & Tushman, 1990). In my experience I have felt much more comfortable as a charismatic leader, and this principle helps me remember that I either need to find a partner who can take on incremental leadership, or develop my skills and ability to manage both.

References

Barrett, D. J. (2002). Change communication: using strategic employee communication to facilitate major change. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 7(4), 219–231. https://doi.org/10.1108/13563280210449804

Cawsey,T., Deszca, G. and Ingols, C. (2019), Organizational Change: An Action-Oriented Toolkit. 4th edition. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications

Conner, D. (1992). The roles of change. In Managing at the speed of change (pp. 105-124). New York: Vilard

Ford, J. D., & Ford, L. W. (2010). Stop Blaming Resistance to Change and Start?

Using It. Organizational Dynamics, 39(1), 24–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2009.10.002

Ford, J. D., Ford, L.W., & Amelio, A. (2008). Resistance to change: The rest of the story. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 362-377. Vilard.

Heifitz, R., Linsky, M. (2002). A Survival Guide for Leaders. (2016, January 21). Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2002/06/a-survival-guide-for-leaders

Kotter, J. P., (1995). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. (1995, May-June). Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/1995/05/leading-change-why-transformation-efforts-fail-2?

Kotter, J. P., & Cohen, D. S. (2002). The heart of change: Real-life stories of how people change their organizations. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business School Press.

Maurer, R. (2010). Beyond the Wall of Resistance. Amsterdam University Press.

Nadler, D., & Tushman, M. (1990). Beyond the charismatic leader: Leadership and organizational change. California Management Review, 32(2), 77-97.