Conventional change management wisdom says that the greatest contributor to success is “active and visible executive sponsorship” (this is corporate speak meaning high level executives are supposed to inspire and influence their people). I don’t buy it. I believe that the number one success factor for leading change is YOU.
I have been part of and seen plenty of examples where individuals truly believe in an idea and they don’t need a ‘sponsor’ to realize it. Sure, you need the support of a high-level manager or executive to approve the idea, but your ‘sponsoring executive’ is not the make or break point on whether your idea gets realized successfully. The greatest contributor to success is you. Isn’t it time that we as brazen change leaders acknowledge that our role is the most important – not whether your executive sends another email or mentions your idea in a meeting. Your ‘executive sponsor’ doesn’t have the passion and stories around your idea to authentically engage with people, connect with people. You do!
Conventional change management ‘experts’ — I’m calling your bluff.
When it comes to leading change, who do you think has the passion and stories to inspire people to talk about it, to spread the word? Let’s keep learning, adapting, and iterating together.
Cheers!
Melissa
{ 1 trackback }
{ 26 comments… read them below or add one }
Hooray for leading change from wherever you are! It's definitely a myth that change has to start from the top.
Hi Heather – thanks for visiting RIVERFORK! I just listened to your blog talk radio, "The Change Agents Dilemma: How to Influence Change Without Authority." AWESOME! http://www.blogtalkradio.com/influencechange
I would love for us to work together some day – I love your style!
Cheers!
Melissa
Hi Melissa,
Call me old fashioned, but if my boss, and his boss, etc. are not in favor of what I think, I may try a few times to sell my idea, but ,especially in this time, do I risk my job, or a promotion, or a bonus? I think not. I admit I am looking for senior leaders to be good sponsors. It is only slightly different than being good leaders. You are right, anyone can theoretically lead, but the person with the authority trumps every time, when it comes to sponsorship.
Thanks for teeing this up!
Bob
Bob,
I completely agree that a high level manager needs to be in support of your idea. I 'm not proposing that people go off and do whatever they damn well feel like in organizations. That's not why they were hired. I'm saying that once an idea is approved, the biggest success factor is YOU, not some executive sponsor. Yes, the sponsor needs to play a role, but their actions are not going to make a break the success. I believe that the number one success factor for leading change is YOU. Make sense?
Thanks for your comments!
Melissa
Melissa, thanks for the great statement. I agree with you – conventional change management is a fad. Organizations are too complex to approach them with any kind of ready made model. Change is a journey. As long as change facilitators don't get that point there is no hope for successful and susatainable change.
Holger,
Wow! I was excited to read you comments! Why don't some of the BIG change management research and training firms get this? Welcome to RIVERFORK – glad to have you here.
Cheers~
Melissa
Yes, change management is a fad, there are lots of fads out there, all of which have some germs of usefulness to offer.
Not sure I agree that change is a journey (is it a ready made model to see change as a journey?). Suggests the destination is clear and there is a route map. In organisational change I don't think that's the case – too much ambiguity.
As a change facilitator i have also come to the conclusions that planned change "projects" are a facade and don't contribute to the goals of organisation or people. I firmly believe that changes start with listening to people and trying to understand them rather than forcing them to a planned change road trip. When change is really wanted or needed accoring to people, change (and learning processes) will follow by perceiving that change is an awesome jouney for everone involved! So i totally agree with Holmer!
Regards, Guido
Guido,
Excellent comments! Thanks for contributing.
~Melissa
@RIVERFORK
I don't quite get your perspective here, it seems contradictory somehow. I agree that it is good to listen to people and attempt to understand them.
Then you say that change managers shouldn't force people to a planned change road trip. And then you agree with the previous comment that change is a journey and go on to say that change is an awesome journey for everyone involved. What is the difference between the awesome journey you elevate and the planned change road trip you denigrate?
I don't agree that the experience of change is awesome for everyone involved. For many it is quite traumatic and very difficult indeed, despite exhortations to have a positive attitude towards the change.
Stephen,
You're right, the experience of change is not awesome for everyone involved and as change leaders, which I'm sure you can appreciate in your practice, we be as transparent as possible and we adjust and modify change plans because we're dealing with people (which I believe is what Guido means). Nothing about leading change is black and white. We use our best judgment, we lead with integrity and transparency, and we learn as we go.
Thanks for the comments!
Melissa
Melissa, I am pointing to what looks like a contradiction in Guido's comments. He is saying first that change is not a planned road trip, and then that it is some other kind of journey. You are clarifying the listening / adjusting / modifying aspects of change, and sure, we improve as we go, no problem there.
I am pointing out that there seems to be a discrepancy between on the one hand, refuting that change is a planned journey, and then on the other hand saying that it is a journey and then that it can be perceived as an awesome journey for everyone.
As the owner of the site, I imagine you want to keep all your commenters happy, as they are crucial to a blog, and you are also a person with a positive outlook – it's clear from your writing. The requirement to keep everyone welcome on your site causes a tension between agreeing with one point of view while not antagonising people with another point of view. I also have this dilemma on my own blog (http://www.changingorganisations.com).
I also find myself balancing these tensions all the time in my change projects in client organisations, and I'm sure other consultants and change practitioners do as well. There are many times when keeping things ambiguous is beneficial in allowing everyone to go on together.
In this case I haven't kept things ambiguous, I am being deliberately provocative, but I do think there is a discrepancy in the metaphors used by Guido in his post, even though I agree with the part about listening and responding.
Melissa, thanks for the great statement. I agree with you – conventional change management is a fad. Organizations are too complex to approach them with any kind of ready made model. Change is a journey. As long as change facilitators don't get that point there is no hope for successful and susatainable change.
As a consultant with change management tricks in my tool box, I am OK with your point.
But don't forget that the management role is to create conditions for creativity and initiative, and to streamline the innovation flow. It is not the smaller part of the game.
A good balance between top management presence creating new conditions(organization, atmosphere, challenge, funding,etc), and people assertive posture, is the key to success.
People hate change, but do love to adapt.
Best regards
François
Francois,
All excellent points! I like your point about "good balance." Realizing successful change requires both – management presence and change agents with enough fortitude to organize and inspire a tribe of people to spread the word.
Thanks for visiting RIVERFORK – glad you found me!
Cheers~
Melissa
What is the difference between the change that people hate and the adaptation that they love?
I think the trick is every change initiative is different. Some need lots of visible executive support, some just need them to tick the approve box, some need lots of planning, some are more serendipitous, some need to be directive, some more inclusive. And I don’t think it’s a case of either/or: either visible executive support or your skills as an agent of change. Both are required to varying degrees, depending on the program. Melissa, in reading the synopsis of your book, I like your emphasis on the importance of “assembling and connecting, listening and designing, and interacting with a group of people on a mission”. In my own book, I constantly reiterate that change is fundamentally about people, not systems, building, org charts, etc. I look forward to reading your book when it comes out.
Leslie Allan
Author: Managing Change in the Workplace
http://www.businessperform.com/managing-change
Twitter: http://www.businessperform.com/twitter
Facebook: http://www.businessperform.com/facebook
Thanks Leslie! Welcome to RIVERFORK and I appreciate the comments. I'm glad you found me. I followed you on Twitter and look forward to collaborating some day!
Cheers~
Melissa
I agree with you Leslie. I also went to your website and really like what you are doing. I would like to talk to you offline about some of the work you are doing. Please contact me directly at spyle@communication-lines.com.
thanks
HI Leslie and all. You hit the nail! Every change journey is different! This is why all the change models might work in some situations or not in others. Last year, I ha a client who told me: "Don't mention Kotter in this organization. We've tried him already…".
Today, we started to open up our new concept – I call it a meta model – of The Change Journey. Would love to see you all there and see you comments!
http://www.changejourney.org
Executive support is sooooooooooooo useful to the projects we work on. And, it comes with consequences. A common one is all of us (clients and consultants alike) are more inclined to look and lean in the exec direction, disempowering ourselves in the process. This has major implications for future work in the organization and building on the power of the people there. I've done it often; I'll do it again, but there consequences cut both ways.
Hi Geoff, welcome to RIVERFORK! Glad to have you here. Your points are appreciated and insightful. You have an impressive profile. http://extraordinarygroups.com/geoffrey-bellman/ Also, congratulations on your latest book!
Cheers!
Melissa
Melissa, I really appreciate the thread that you started. Change management is the responsibility of anyone who accepts responsibility for making things happen. Let me put a twist on the subject with a definition of leadership from Joseph
Rost in his book, Leadership for the Twenty-First Century, "Leadership is and influence relationship among leaders and followers who intend real change for their mutual purpose." This definition supports the position that anyone who wants to initiate change only needs to exercise leadership to make it happen.
Hi Dan,
Thanks for commenting. Love it. Leadership is an action not a title. That's perhaps what rubs me wrong about conventional change management. The focus is on securing 'executive sponsorship' and teaching them to lead. I want to focus on teaching people to lead change at any level, independent of title. Looks like you have an interesting company. Stay in touch and have a great weekend!
Melissa
I agree that change can be lead from anywhere; however it can also be blocked from anywhere. Some blockages are easier to handle but in a power struggle how do you overcome or work round an influential character who is also an executive?
Hi Jo,
Thanks for finding RIVERFORK and for the comments. Your question is worthy of a live conversation. Some questions to consider follow:
1) Do you know, explicitly, who your decision makers are to approve or reject your idea / your change?
2) Is this executive one those decision makers?
3) Do you understand why this executive rejects your idea?
I think the thing to remember is that you're not trying to convince everyone. If you get the right people to support your idea, others will eventually follow or not (and that's okay).
I wish you well!
Melissa