The Balance Needed to Lead Change

3:46 PM Tuesday September 16, 2008
by Christina Bielaszka-DuVernay

Tags:Change management, Leadership, Managing uncertainty

by Kerry A. Bunker and Michael Wakefield

One reason leading change is so difficult is the tension it sets up between managing business issues (creating a vision, aligning resources, restructuring the organization) and managing people issues (the legitimate concerns and feelings of those who must carry out the change and deal with its ramifications day-to-day).

Most managers are adept at the business side of leading change. They are trained to deal with structural and operational issues, and they are evaluated on and rewarded for their ability to innovate and to deliver business results.

But the pressures generated by major structural or operational change compel leaders to pay particular attention to what's happening on the human side of the organization. And it is here that many leaders fall short. The result? A destabilized organizational culture, an erosion of trust, insufficient buy-in, and fear and skepticism among employees at a time when a loyal, productive, and enthusiastic workforce is essential for success.

So how do leaders address the people side of change without jeopardizing the business side? How can they make tough decisions without losing sight of the emotions and concerns of employees at all levels of the organization? At the Center for Creative Leadership (CCL), we've found that the answer lies in building trust through authenticity.

When leaders focus on establishing trust, they are better able to deal with both the business and the human elements of change. They find they can be both tough decision makers and empathetic people managers--committed to the plan, yet understanding of the discomfort it might cause. They become agile and resilient, able to rise to the challenges of innovation and change.

Striking the right balance
To create and sustain an environment of trust during change, leaders must strike a balance between these six pairs of opposites:

Balance #1: Catalyze change/Cope with transition.
Catalyzing change involves the ability to manage an initiative, generate buy-in, and maintain momentum. Coping with transition means recognizing and addressing people's feelings and opinions about the change and its possible fallout. Leaders who are adept at both create a climate in which people can work together, even in difficult times. They embrace the vision of change and can communicate that vision with enthusiasm and energy.

At the same time, they give themselves and others permission to express doubt or anxiety. Trust and commitment reach a higher level, and the change initiative gains momentum as people work through the process.

Balance #2: Show a sense of urgency/Demonstrate realistic patience.
One of the most critical tasks for leaders of change is communicating a sense of urgency. A sense of urgency keeps positive energy flowing and increases productivity.

Patience, however, is just as important. Realistic patience involves knowing when and how to slow the pace so that people can adapt. A lack of patience with people can undermine their commitment and impede the change process. Balanced leaders don't panic, overreact, or make everything equally important. They make a conscious effort to provide support and guidance when it's needed. They recognize that people adapt to change in different ways. Some may require additional training or time to meet new expectations; others may need a forum to air their gripes. Realistic patience also means giving consistent, honest feedback. People need to know what they're doing well and what they can do differently.

Balance #3: Be tough/Be empathetic.
Being tough involves facing challenges head on, being decisive, and taking a firm stand in the face of resistance. Being empathetic means understanding and being sensitive to the feelings and experiences of others.

Empathetic leaders are able to put themselves in other people's shoes, consider individual limitations, and value people as much as results. They know that a lack of empathy can corrode morale and motivation.

These two competencies are among the most difficult for leaders to balance. Many leaders have been taught to shut down their emotional responses in order to make difficult decisions. They worry that letting their "soft side" show will communicate weakness or lack of commitment. But connecting emotionally actually creates the opposite effect in times of significant change or crisis. People want to know that their leaders can be tough and decisive, but they want them to be human, too.

Balance #4: Show optimism/Be realistic and open.
Leaders play a crucial role in maintaining optimism about major change. They need to see its positive effects and convey that vision to others. When people are stressed by change, they look to their leaders for energy and confidence. Optimistic leaders are genuinely committed to the change at hand, and their optimism is contagious.

But balanced leaders are not blindly optimistic. Their optimism is balanced with realism and openness. They can clearly read a situation for what it is. They don't sugarcoat the facts, and they can admit their mistakes. Balanced leaders ask the hard questions, deliver the news (both good and bad), and draw attention to challenges and struggles. A balance of optimism and realism generates trust.

Balance #5: Be self-reliant/Trust others.
Leaders who are self-reliant have confidence in their own skills and abilities. They are accustomed to working independently and often pride themselves on "going it alone." Trusting others means allowing them to do their part of a task or project without interference or overmanagement. In situations of complex change, it is critical for leaders to trust others to bring their own perspectives and expertise to the table.

Many leaders find this pair of competencies very hard to balance. The myth of the heroic leader who remains strong, courageous, and self-reliant in the face of extraordinary challenges is a deeply ingrained one. In reality, leaders are more likely to rise to new heights when they confront complexity with a strong team of allies. Whatever the challenge, a collaborative approach yields insight, innovation, and action that even the most talented individual cannot generate alone.

Balance #6: Capitalize on strengths/Go against the grain.
In times of crisis, leaders have a tendency to draw on the traits and abilities that led to their success in the past. But overreliance on past behaviors can cement leaders into strategies that no longer work, and the failure to recognize conditions that demand a new approach can be disastrous. On an individual level, failure to adapt is the main reason leaders derail. Leaders must have the ability to leave their comfort zone and challenge preferred patterns--in essence, to go against the grain.

To balance their innate strengths with new skills, leaders must first assess their strengths, weaknesses, preferences, and default behaviors. In CCL programs, they do this through a combination of 360-degree assessments, feedback, and coaching. Direct and honest feedback from bosses, colleagues, and direct reports can also provide leaders with a clear picture of their own performance and behavior.

Such awareness allows leaders to identify their strengths, shore up their weaknesses, and practice different behaviors. Self-awareness also allows leaders to leverage the diverse talents, experiences, and opinions of others, eliminating tunnel vision and groupthink.

The paradox of leadership

Leading change requires managing the constant tension between business-driven and people-focused priorities. Circumstances will sometimes demand that leaders play harder on the business side. But when they have built a strong foundation of trust, those who follow are more likely to do so in a spirit of cooperation and teamwork.

It's not possible to be perfectly in balance all the time. But wise leaders recognize that it's an ideal worth striving for.


* * * *

THE SIX TENSIONS OF LEADING CHANGE

I.
Catalyze change

Champion an initiative or a significant change, consistently promote it, and encourage others to get on board.
vs.
Cope with transition
Recognize and address the personal and emotional aspects of change.


II.
Show a sense of urgency

Demonstrate the need to take action; accelerate the pace of change.
vs.
Demonstrate realistic patience
Know when and how to slow the pace so that people can cope and adapt.

III.
Be tough

Make difficult decisions without hesitation or second-guessing.
vs.
Be empathetic
Take others' perspectives into account; understand the impact of your actions and decisions.

IV.
Show optimism

See the positive side of any challenge; convey that optimism to others.
vs.
Be realistic and open
Speak candidly about the situa¬tion, and don't shy away from dif¬ficulties; admit personal mistakes.


V.
Be self-reliant

Be confident in your ability to handle new challenges.
vs.
Trust others
Be open to others' input and sup¬port; allow them to do their part.


VI.
Capitalize on strengths

Know your personal and organizational strengths; confidently apply them to new situations and circumstances.
vs.
Go against the grain
Show willingness to learn and try new things--even when the process is difficult or painful.

Kerry A. Bunker is a senior enterprise associate and manager of the Awareness Program for Executive Excellence (APEX) at the Center for Creative Leadership (CCL), in Greensboro, N.C. Michael Wakefield is a senior enterprise associate at CCL, where he designs and trains in a variety of programs. This article is adapted from their book Leading with Authenticity in Times of Transition, published in 2005 by CCL Press.

People who read this also read:

 
* * *
Sign up for the Weekly Hotlist, a weekly email roundup featuring the top posts from HarvardBusiness.org and HBR.org.

Never miss a new post from your favorite blogger again with the HarvardBusiness.org Daily Alert email. The Alert delivers the latest blog posts from HarvardBusiness.org and HBR.org directly to your inbox every morning at 8:00 AM ET.


Trackbacks

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://blogs.harvardbusiness.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2821

No trackbacks have been made to this entry.

Comments

This is an up to date example of what you are reading about in Euro.

- Posted by Devon Manley 
September 17, 2008 10:44 AM

Very good article on Change Management.
It is very true that no matter what - Leadership to people is the most important aspect of change management. It is only thru people acceptance change can happen for good.
Managing contradictions during the change process is the key activity for the CEO. It is the open, fair & people concerning quality of the CEO which enables him /her to suceed.
True combination of Heart & Mind / Rational & Emotional is needed in the person who is a part of core team /change Mgt group.
The soft skills development plays most role in kneading change mgt thoughts. Once the initial phase of buying in of the change process is handled well with skill - then implementation happens at a rapid pace.

- Posted by Avinash Misar 
September 18, 2008 8:23 AM

Great article. I think two of the most overlooked items when we talk about leadership and or change management is communication and role accountability. Business Leadership often neglects to clearly present the "new" vision of the company which raises questions of change. A leader who can clearly communicate the benefit of particular change can often build unity among the ranks. People often what to know “what’s in it for me” or be part of something bigger. The other aspect of change is clearly defining role accountability. What does the change mean for my role, my department and or my team? Setting the stage for success is critical when address change but without the appropriate follow through and definition of duty shows lack of commitment by leadership and people will resume to "business as usual". It's very important for Leaders to implement change, create innovation and provide a suitable atmosphere for success but more importantly they need to manage execution of change.

- Posted by Derek Deveau 
September 19, 2008 9:50 AM

Thank you for writing a very provocative article. However, I disagree with many of the premises of the article. There are two core ideas here that need closer examination: the idea that there is a separation between business and people and that change is driven by the superhero leader, who can do and be all things for everyone. I think both premises are completely traditional and incorrect.

First, there never needs to be a separation between business and people. In our work with positive deviants, we found that they are always able to easily integrate the two and are especially effective at integrating these forces in times of acute stress and change. By leveraging what an organization’s positive deviants already know, it is possible to drive significant change without having to manage this duality.

Second, excessive reliance on a superhero, presumably charismatic leader is actually dangerous to change. Which form of change is better: top-down driven change or grassroots change? Anyone who has been part of a significant change knows that grassroots is vastly more effective. Granted that a leader must often initiate a change, but they should move quickly and effectively to empower the organization to change itself.

- Posted by William Seidman 
September 21, 2008 10:16 PM

FYI

- Posted by Laura Wood 
September 30, 2008 10:53 AM

While the importance of people for leaders in successfull change management is paramount, the role of process and technology should be also considered. How can process be redrawn to enable a leader/people in change management? And similarly leveraging technology.

Such a scenario where people are enabled for change by new process and suitable technology can be of great use to leaders in addressing, dealing and implementing change.

- Posted by David 
September 30, 2008 12:37 PM

I think that many of the previous posters may have missed a few very important points. Change leadership must be shared up and down the organization. The second is managing paradox. Leader/managers must strike balance between the need to "catalyze change/Cope with transition", urgency/patience, optimism/realism, self-reliance/trusting others, and finally "Capitalize on strengths/Go against the grain." These six form the crux of a well executed change leadership/management process.
I have forwarded the paper to all of my clients.

- Posted by Tom Arneson 
October 27, 2008 8:33 AM


Change and Transition is a very difficult task in any organization, the leaders should expect great resistance at first, what makes it a challenge is that leaders should prove to the entire organization the positive outcome of transitions and the scope of letting the group understand its purpose and motivation.

- Posted by Mariafe M. Plaza 
October 28, 2008 12:51 AM

I love the idea of inherent conflict (positive) in all leadership decisions and styles. The idea there isn't and can't be one way. It's refreshingly different to the proposition that there are a set of learned behaviours that can be applied. 20 years ago a friend gave me the Tao of leadership. By reading it again and again I got more used to the idea that it's ok to approach tough issues in apparently contradictory ways. Sometimes being tough and resilient and at other times letting go. Leaders I come across though find this extremely difficult. They want to reduce things to a solution, to take the behaviours they have just used and apply them to the next scenario. Instead take time to consider the role of being patient, being determined, to see what is happening. The nature of change means it is already happening, it's something beyond you that you are also part of. You need to see what's driving it, notice how you are interacting with it and from all these signals then decide on where you act. Do things in this way and you may help things evolve quicker. Act against what is happening and you'll be tough when you should have been soft and vice versa.

- Posted by Oliver Mack 
November 10, 2008 6:03 AM

Outstanding insights. The need for leaders to show courage in identifying a new course for success has never been greater. Still, the need to consider the human element is so often overlooked or ignored.

The best business plan falls flat if it is executed poorly and poor execution is often, among other things, the consequence of not fully communicating the vision, and synching everyone's objectives with the vision. The need to overcommunicate during times of great change and uncertainty can not be overstated. The greater the level of communication, the greater the feeling of inclusion in the success or failure of the plan. It also mitigates the possibility of minor players sabotaging the success because they understand and are part of the plan and can share the success.


- Posted by Olga Perez-Cormier 
November 22, 2008 3:25 PM

Very interesting piece. It is about passion amd resonance in leading or effecting change

- Posted by Bunmi Adebayo 
December 21, 2008 6:46 PM

I am highly inspired by the above write-up because of its phylosophical content which encompasses what leadership entails and what is required or expected of a leader that values or aspires change. The six ingredients given are well taken and understood.

- Posted by Segun-Martins 
December 22, 2008 1:18 PM

I have experienced similar situation in my career and the six pairs of conflicts are too good and optly written.
Would like to add that the buy-in process gets delayed when the people of very different background have conflicts.

- Posted by Mohandoss T 
December 25, 2008 4:08 AM

Join The Discussion

* Required Fields




Verification (needed to reduce spam):

Posting Guidelines

We hope the conversations that take place on HarvardBusiness.org will be energetic, constructive, free-wheeling, and provocative. To make sure we all stay on-topic, all posts will be reviewed by our editors and may be edited for clarity, length, and relevance.

We ask that you adhere to the following guidelines.

  1. No selling of products or services. Let's keep this an ad-free zone.
  2. No ad hominem attacks. These are conversations in which we debate ideas. Criticize ideas, not the people behind them.
  3. No multimedia. If you want us to know about outside sources, please point to them, Don't paste them in.
We look forward to including your voices on the site - and learning from you in the process.

The editors

Management Essentials

Straightforward, actionable advice for novice managers, seasoned leaders, and people at all levels in between.

Favorite Links

Learn how business innovators like Amazon's Jeff Bezos and Pixar's Ed Catmull achieve breakthrough results.
Harvard Business Review

ADVERTISEMENT

Browse Our Store

Productive Business Dialogue (Simulation)

This simulation will help you learn how to craft conversations that are fact based, minimize defensiveness, and draw out the best thinking from everyone involved.

Measuring Marketing Performance

In many organizations, marketing exists far from the executive suite and the boardroom. Learn how to improve the link between high level corporate strategy and the marketing function.

Management Tip of the Day Enrollment
SPONSORED BY:  

ADVERTISEMENT

Free Downloads