Linking strategic and systemic intervention to genuine self-discovery and self-development by leaders is a far better path to embracing the vision of the organization and to realizing its business goals. In our work together with organizations undertaking leadership and cultural transformations, we’ve found that the best way to achieve an organization’s aspirations is to combine efforts that look outward with those that look inward. Training that only emphasizes new behavior rarely translates into profoundly different performance outside the classroom. The second common mistake, made even by companies that recognize the need for new learning, is to focus too much on developing skills. 3 3.Īlexander Grashow, Ronald Heifetz, and Marty Linsky, The Practice of Adaptive Leadership: Tools and Tactics for Changing Your Organization and World, Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Publishing, 2009. That means these companies direct their attention to what Alexander Grashow, Ronald Heifetz, and Marty Linsky call the “technical” aspects of a new solution, while failing to appreciate what they call “the adaptive work” people must do to implement it. The first is to focus solely on business outcomes. Look both inward and outwardĬompanies that only look outward in the process of organizational change-marginalizing individual learning and adaptation-tend to make two common mistakes. Equally, the same McKinsey research indicates that if companies can identify and address pervasive mind-sets at the outset, they are four times more likely to succeed in organizational-change efforts than are companies that overlook this stage. In other words, despite the stated change goals, people on the ground tend to behave as they did before. 2 2.įor more on McKinsey’s organizational-health index and findings on organizational change, see Scott Keller and Colin Price, “ Organizational health: The ultimate competitive advantage,” McKinsey Quarterly, June 2011. McKinsey research and client experience suggest that half of all efforts to transform organizational performance fail either because senior managers don’t act as role models for change or because people in the organization defend the status quo. A new strategy will fall short of its potential if it fails to address the underlying mind-sets and capabilities of the people who will execute it. To achieve collective change over time, actions like these are necessary but seldom sufficient. Be it a new growth strategy or business-unit structure, the integration of a recent acquisition or the rollout of a new operational-improvement effort, such organizations focus on altering systems and structures and on creating new policies and processes. Many companies move quickly from setting their performance objectives to implementing a suite of change initiatives. We hope this article helps leaders who are ready to try and will intrigue those curious to learn more. 1 1.įor a case study of leadership development supporting organizational change, seeĪaron De Smet, Johanne Lavoie, and Elizabeth Schwartz Hioe, “ Developing better change leaders,” McKinsey Quarterly, April 2012.īuilding self-understanding and then translating it into an organizational context is easier said than done, and getting started is often the hardest part. Simply put, change efforts often falter because individuals overlook the need to make fundamental changes in themselves. After years of collaborating in efforts to advance the practice of leadership and cultural transformation, we’ve become convinced that organizational change is inseparable from individual change. Tolstoy’s dictum is a useful starting point for any executive engaged in organizational change. Leo Tolstoy, the Russian novelist, famously wrote, “Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself.”
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |