Dear Joan:
“Having worked for state and local governments for more than 16 years, I was just wondering how you get past the unstated resistance of group leaders or members who may feel they have the most to gain by keeping things the same, and therefore undermine change. Is this a problem specific to government managers? What has been your experience? What suggestions do you have?”
Answer:
You have put your finger on why organizational change is so difficult. It’s hard enough convincing someone to change when the reasons are clearly in that person’s best interest (like losing weight, for example), but when the person thinks he or she will be hurt by the change, that person can really dig his or her heels in.
Resistance takes many forms, but in organizations it’s often unspoken and subtle because to be seen as “resistant” is risky. Often, a resistant person will say the right things but make no changes in behavior or subtly undermine anyone who does.
Much of my consulting work is in the area of organizational change and over the years I’ve begun to identify the key factors that make the difference in a transformation effort.
The leader is the most important factor. If the leader has a clear vision of where he or she wants to take the organization and he or she communicates that vision in every action, people will fall into line easier and faster.
I have found that leaders frequently underestimate the power and influence they carry. One president said to me, “I’m just a nice guy. I don’t throw my weight around or act like a big shot. I’m just one of the team.” Not quite. Whether he wants to acknowledge it or not, every person who comes in contact with him studies his moves. A leader’s actions speak so loudly, people can’t hear a word he says.
The senior team can’t delegate the change to someone else. Teamwork and empowerment must start at the top. Typically, senior managers each run a different part of the organization and only share information on a need-to-know basis with their peers. The top management group needs to work together to define the changes and their new roles.
The incentives and consequences must change. In government, like many other bureaucratic organizations, the game was played by keeping out of the line of fire, telling superiors what they want to hear, building an empire of many employees and not rocking the boat. The people who played the game won promotions. Today, the organizations that are serious about change must change the rules and the prizes.
Government jobs are narrowly defined, pay scales are locked in and promotions are often determined by rigid rules and tests. If you’re an ambitious, bright employee with many innovative ideas, where’s the incentive? As a result, government can’t change as fast as private industry. It needs to start “reinventing” these systems to create the freedom to compete against privatization.
The structure must change. They say that “form follows function,” so it’s often necessary to change the structure to match the changing functions in the transforming organization. If you leave all the supervisors in place, for example, with the same number of employees and the same policies and procedures, why in the world would they suddenly embrace (or understand) the change just because the CEO said to do it?
On the other hand, some companies make the mistake of only changing structure, in the hopes that it alone will force the changes to happen. For example, in some companies where middle layers have been removed and all other bureaucratic rules and administration have stayed the same, the net effect is a lot of burned out people. You simply can’t “do more with less” unless the system is re-wired for fewer people.
The process is everything. Most organizations approach organizational change the way they design a new product or switch suppliers. They figure it looks logical on paper, so it should all go according to schedule. They overlook the complications that occur because the changes are affecting people’s lives. That takes longer. That takes endless face-to-face communication. That takes more employee involvement.
You don’t build trust via email and you can’t change an organization via memos and speeches.
-Joan Lloyd is a Milwaukee-based executive coach and organizational and leadership development strategist. She has a proven track record spanning more than 20 years, and is known for her ability to help leaders and their teams achieve measurable, lasting improvements. Email your question to Joan at info@joanlloyd.com and visit www.JoanLloyd.com to search an archive of more than 1,600 of Joan’s articles. Contact Joan Lloyd & Associates at (414) 354-9500.
