MSLD 635 Module 3 - 50 Reasons Not to Change/The Tribes We Lead

50 Reasons Not to Change… The Tribes We Lead

Godin (2009) says we live in a new model of leadership, where the way we make change is not by using money or power to lever a system, but by leading, by connecting a tribe of people who are desperate to be connected to each other, by leading a movement and making change.

People has a natural resistance to change (Brown, 2011; Heathfield, 2018), , giving constant excuses to avoid the “threatening” aspect that change brings. When I hear a colleague giving excuses, before even considering the details, or gathering a bit of data behind the change, instantly I think “what a closed mind” and on the same moment I start preaching about the big picture, all the aspect that could have been involved and all possible positive impacts. My most common reaction is to present a holistic perspective of the changing process.

Although I am aware of the power of change, and that it is essentially important in development, as a human I also resist. Considering Godin’s list, I tend to use "this will not stand, I can't abide this status quo” or "this one is not important, we need to organize around it." I believe a way I can overcome my resistance thinking is by stepping back and zooming out, trying to look in different angles and also trying to gather more data to understand all the driven forces behind the decision to change.

I personally don’t agree that change is driven by tribes, but I believe that leading by tribes can be an effective strategy on leading change, a way to kick start a change process, before reaching broader audience and followers.

A lesson I can take in this exercise, is a thought given by Godin which I haven’t though through:

“You don't need everyone to create and lead change. It means that the idea you create, the product you create, the movement you create isn't for everyone, it's not a mass thing. That's not what this is about. What it's about instead is finding the true believers."

The human aspect is crucial to the effectiveness of the changing process, in the role of agents or advocates. If as a leader we not necessarily dictate the change, but possibly only lead a change which is already in progress. I believe the same way we only need a small group of people embracing our change, a small group of people also only need a leader to believe in them to spark change. The roles os change agents and advocates is not necessarily related to the formal rank one has in a organization.

References

Brown, D.R. (2011). An experiential approach to organization development (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Godin, S. (2009). The tribes we lead. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/seth_godin_on_the_tribes_we_lead/transcript

Heathfield, S. M. (2018, December 10). What Is Resistance to Change? How to Spot Resistance to Change in Your Company. Retrieved from https://www.thebalancecareers.com/what-is-resistance-to-change-1918240

MSLD 635 Module 2 - How Companies can make Better Decision

How Companies Can Make Better Decisions

Hock et al (2001) state that only few of us are aware that we do not make good decisions, and one of the reasons is that, as long as the results are positive, we do not look closely to our decision processes. Blenko (2010) lists four elements for an effective decision making:

1.      Quality: goal achievement

2.      Speed: how fast decisions are made and how it plays a role on its effectiveness

3.      Yield: the planned decision is coherently put in practice

4.      Effort: are the action being fully embraced and acted upon.

Through an extensive research, Blenko (2010) confirmed her hypothesis that decision making effectiveness is correlated with employee engagement and brings positive financial results. Considering the conclusion that for a change to happen in its totality, it requires the involvement of the organization also as a whole, it is impossible to neglect the importance of the employees as change agents. On the last three elements of Blenko’s list, the direct and indirectly correlation between the decision and people involved in the change is undeniable.

Blenko (2010) also listed steps for effective decision making:

1.      Understanding how well decisions are being made

2.      Identifying critical strategic and operational decision

3.      Setting up decision for success by defining what is the decision, who is involved, how it will be implemented and when (calendar)

4.      Ensuring support from all elements of the organization

5.      Holistic embedding/ embracement inside the organization.

Again, if a closer look is taken at Blenko’s five steps, it is undeniable how the human factor plays an intrinsic role on the decision-making process and the power it “holds in hand” for its effectiveness. Considering the researchers’ data and presentation, I believe employee engagement should be considered not only as a change agent after the decision is made, but also in the organization/ change development. Critical decisions are not necessarily the big ones, but often includes strategic and operational decisions. Who best to describe and debate about operational factors if not the “operator”?

On implementing change, the frontline is the one that will deal and live with the change in a daily basis. How to ignore their opinion before the change is made, and on the ongoing process of the decision implementation? If employees do not understand the purpose behind the change, if does not see the long-term effects, I believe that hardly the decision or the change will happen fully.

      Impediments or barriers for good decision making, according to Blenko (2010), are not limited but include the following:

1.      Establishment of decisions that matter

2.      Unclear of who makes the decision and who is involved on the process of decision making

3.      Lack of leadership behind the decision-making process

4.      Lack of expertise

Adding to Blenko’s list, I also believe that an unsafe platform for open discussion, highly hierarchic organizations and departments agenda are possible and frequently witnessed barriers for effective decision making. I also pursue the idea that two more crucial elements should be included on Blenko’s list (previously stated) as: (1) Data collection/ Inventory and (2) Holistic Involvement. The own author indirectly describe these elements as important factors, but not necessarily lists as core elements for effective change.

      A way to apply this exercise and knowledge in my career is trying to find platforms to engage on the change process. In my organization often the workforce is only informed about the decisions made. We have internal and external Organization Development Practitioners at the moment but the involvement of employees is limited to change implementation, and often forced downwards. I know about trials before changes happen and I am also aware about change ambassadors that the company choose to represent the workforce on the change development. Looking for a platform where I can be part of this team would assist me on directly chang the decision-making enforcing reality. Lately I have been in workshops where changes are being informed. Although the workshops are designed for informative communication, it is clear that the company want to hear from employees after the change is being implemented. Taking this reality in consideration, I can open the communication channel with the departments directly involved in the operational change process (Product and Development) and report directly to my manager to look for support and guidance on opinion and communication patterns in the office, as I work remotely.

References

Blenko, M. (2010, October 13). How companies can make better decision, faster. Retrieve from https://youtu.be/pbxpg6D4Hk8

Hoch, S., Gunther, R., Kunreuther, H. (2001). Wharton on Making Decisions. New York, NY: Wiley.

MSLD 635 Module 1 - 21st Century Enlightenment

21st Century Enlightenment

“Enlightenment is not a historical period, but a process of social, psychological or spiritual development, unbound to time or place” (Stanford, 2017). Although it is a process mainly expressed on the eighteenth century, it carries values, meaningfulness, challenges and learnings which can be applied to 21^st century. The current century carries some peculiarities different from those of the “original enlightenment period”. We are leaving in a world of constant changes (Brown, 2011), not only in the market field, but in a human perspective. Cohesive is not our “only engine” anymore. We are moved by ideals, same as the pioneer thinkers of enlightenment, and our understanding of the effect between natural and social world in human nature increased substantially (Taylor, 2010)

            Taylor (2010) reinforces in the wake of enlightenment that to live differently we need to think differently. By that he means that we, as humans, need to see the world and ourselves from a new perspective, with more self-awareness socially embedded in a model of autonomy, focusing on our ability to empathize, and that we also need to resist to our tendencies to make right or true that which is merely familiar, and wrong or false that which is only strange. As humans, the way we perceive the world is based on our experiences. Often, the way we perceive the world around us is more a reflection of ourselves instead of the reality. A clear example in my company that reflects this idea is the way the high leadership apparently perceive the flight attendant traits, in a personal scope. For instance, in one of the forums created and ran by leaders just to front line (to cabin crew to be more specific), one of the highest leaders in the company, when questioned about a decision made that impacted directly on the quality of life of the workforce, made some statement that have shown inaccurate facts, simply based on some of the trues about very specific people he has heard of (detail is not given due to company policies on exposure of information).

            I believe communication, in several different ways, is the tool we humans have to change the superficial reality of relationships and to break through the limits of logic in science, markets and bureaucracy. Communication by acknowledging, honoring and debating different point of views. Communication by sharing of information (personally and virtually). Communication gathering of cultures we come across in this global world, to make it universal apart from global.

            The lack of empathy, understanding, values norms and cognitive factors in our relationships is undermining the full potential of human interactions. It is also undermining the potential of changes towards evolvement. Humans are becoming skeptical about working collaboratively. The 21^st century brings with it a virtual reality that sabotage the blossoming nature of collaborative work environment. It does not mean that relating with each other virtually jeopardizes completely collaboration, but I believe the barriers of virtual relations have a destructive effect in human growth, consequently in the potential of organization changes.

            I have been thinking through this subject for a while, as the nature of my job allows me to constantly reflect upon the need of changes, the potential of diversity and the power of empathy, and also due to the Master degree I am majoring  An interesting perspective brought by Taylor (2010) that haven’t crossed my mind is how the author presented enlightenment as a process of cultural psychotherapy. I haven’t thought about enlightenment through these lenses, therefore I haven’t seen this process as a correlation between all beings of a human (social, natural, cultural, intellectual). Another take away is the reason behind the stalling of empathy and the counter relation of globalization vs public deficits.

The questions are:

What are the necessary measures to deal with globalization in order to achieve a positive outcome?

Currently, globalization is fostering empathy or hostility between humans?

References

Brown, D. (2011). An Experiential Approach to Organization Development. New Jersey, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Stanford (2017, August 29). Enlightenment. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/enlightenment/

Taylor, M. (2010. August 19). RSA ANIMATE: 21st Century Enlightenment. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AC7ANGMy0yo&feature=youtu.be