Deep Change - Summary

Leaders Book Summaries

www.studyleadership.com

About the Book’s Author

Robert E. Quinn holds the Margaret Elliott Tracy Collegiate Professorship or organizational behavior and human resource management at the Graduate School of Business at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. He has written several books and numerous articles, and consults with business and government leaders regarding managing organizational life and change.

About Leaders Book Summaries

Our passion is to see pastors and Christian leaders become the men and women that God intends, so that the people of God can do the same—become who God has called them to be.

We believe that we can impact the whole church, and ultimately the world, by helping pastors and Christian leaders become more effective. As leaders become the men and women that God intends them to be, the people who they influence will also grow. Good leadership matters! Everything we do is built around this idea.

Leaders Book Summaries make it possible for Leaders to spend a fraction of the time and cost, yet still reap the benefit of the best leadership books available.

Published by Study Leadership, Inc. 872 New Britton Rd, Carol Stream, IL 60188

No part of this document may be reproduced without prior written consent.

© 2017 Study Leadership, Inc. All rights reserved

www.studyleadership.com

Table of Contents

Nutshell Summary

Full Summary

Preface

PART I: Deep Change or Slow Death

Walking Naked Into the Land of Uncertainty

Confronting the Deep Change or Slow Death Dilemma

PART II: Personal Change

The Fear of Change

Finding Vitality

Breaking the Logic of Task Pursuit

A New Perspective

Confronting the Integrity Gap

Build the Bridge as You Walk on It.

PART III: Changing the Organization

Denying the Need for Change

When Success is the Engine of Failure

The Tyranny of Competence

The Internally Driven Leader

PART IV: Vision, Risk, and the Creation of Excellence

Overcoming Resistance

Why Risk Is Necessary

The Transformational Cycle

Excellence is a Form of Deviance

Confronting the Undiscussable

A Vision From Within

The Power of One

The Power of Many

Nutshell Summary- To go to the full summary click here.

At some point, every individual, and every organization, comes to a place where a choice is required: to experience slow death, or make a deep change.

Slow death is when things have stopped working. The things that have brought success before aren’t adequate anymore. In an organization, the numbers are beginning to go down, morale is dropping, there isn’t a clear vision or a sense of unity. It may take months, it may take years, but the end is clear. If something doesn’t happen, if something doesn’t change, the decline will inevitably continue. The world has changed, and to survive, organizations also need to change.

The alternative is deep change. When we talk about change, often we mean incremental change. Slow change, little by little, step by step, with a sense of control. Slow change is tweaking the system to hopefully improve it.

Deep Change is different. It is a major change, often with a radical departure from the past and even the areas we have felt competent in. It involves a letting go of control and “walking naked into the land of uncertainty.” It means learning to look at everything differently, and often doing things very differently. It means significant change from the status quo.

Often when we see the need for change, our first reaction is to point at how other people need to change. If we are in leadership, we may put significant effort into getting people to change—we try to persuade, even coerce—but that usually doesn’t work. People don’t generally like being told they need to change and resist it. Leaders have a choice then: we can blame the people, or take a look inside and say “The change didn’t happen because I didn’t model it.”

It’s easier to not pursue a deep change. There are always more things going on, more tasks that we have to attend to, than we have time for. And, pursuing deep change requires time. Time to look at what we are doing, and why. Time to see how our lives might not be aligned with what is really important. Time to decide what to do about it. As we invest the required time, we become aware of our own lack of integrity; of the gap between our deepest values and the choices we are making. Addressing this gap changes us, and positions us to change the organizations we are part of.

When we make the decision to change, we face a series of tough challenges. Change doesn’t happen in a linear way; we often have to make it up as we go along. Having a vision for something isn’t necessarily having a plan. Deep change involves an extensive learning process that results from trying different things, evaluating them, and trying other things. It requires a certain type of confidence—not confidence in your skills necessarily, but confidence in your ability to learn and grow when in new or unknown circumstances.

Another challenge is that organizations have a natural resistance to change. Systems and procedures are in place to help things be efficient, but these same things make innovation and change difficult. There may be a culture of conformity or a bureaucracy that stifles initiative. Bringing change, then, involves risk and courage. Risk because there is no guarantee of success when you try something new, and courage because there will be forces arrayed against the changes that have to be battled through. It requires having a vision of what could be, and a willingness to put the health and well-being of the organization first, even at great personal cost.

Developing vision is a key element of the change process, but most executives are uncomfortable with it. It is one thing to develop a “vision statement” that you hang on the wall; many companies have statements but no real vision. It takes work and time to develop vision, including time spent with people in the organization to identify the core values and desires that are already in people. When a vision touches those things, people embrace it, because it connects with their lives, and is no longer just theory.

Leaders who have a vision, are willing to courageously take the risks involved, and are willing to “walk their talk” (personally model the changes they are pursuing) become transformational leaders. They transform the organizations they are part of, and often the people who comprise the organization. They exercise a kind of moral power that people pay attention to and follow. These leaders are rare, but tremendously impactful. Anyone can be a transformational leader, but because of the high cost (including huge personal investment, risk of change, and the possibility of failure) few actually are. But, our organizations often cry out for someone to step into this place.

The truth is, we each have as much power as we really want. Many of us long to be “empowered,” but no one can really empower us. Others may create an environment where it is easier to empower ourselves, but no one can do it for us. We must take responsibility for our own empowerment, and make the deep changes necessary to have it. In the final analysis, we each have as much power as we really want.

Full Summary

Preface

Deep Change assumes that one person can change the larger system or organization in which he or she exists. But, this book is not about specific tools or techniques; it is about the process of transformation or deep change.

All of us, at some point, get overwhelmed and disconnected and feel that life lacks meaning. We realize that we need to do something to alter our present situation, but lack the motivation and inspiration to do so. We also recognize that we want to influence and change the behavior of others. If you must face up to the need to change, and don’t quite know how to get through the process, this book is for you.

For people with responsibility in the world, the most important questions do not have simple solutions. How, then, should we make these important decisions? Our capacity to face uncertainty and function in times of stress and anxiety is linked with our self-confidence, and our level of confidence is linked with our sense that our integrity is growing over time. Integrity, more even than our competencies, gives us moral power. In the end, integrity is the ultimate source of power. This book is about the process of becoming an internally driven leader who is able to draw on this ultimate source of power.

PART I: Deep Change or Slow Death

Walking Naked Into the Land of Uncertainty

When we talk about change, we typically mean incremental change. Slow, step-by-step, limited in scope, reversible, and safe—we are in control. Deep change is different: it is change that is major in scope, discontinuous with the past and generally irreversible.

Most of us build our identity around our knowledge and competence in certain areas. We are secure because “we know what we are doing.” Making a deep change involves abandoning this security and “walking naked into the land of uncertainty.” Letting go of control is usually a terrifying choice, often involving a “dark night of the soul.” Therefore, it is natural to deny any need for a deep change.

Organization and change are not complementary concepts. To organize is to systematize, to make behavior predictable. Organizing initially makes things more efficient or effective. Eventually, however, these routine patterns move the organization toward decay and stagnation. Over time the world changes, and if our organization doesn’t also change we end up out of alignment with the world around us.

When alignment is lost the organization faces a choice: either adapt or take the road to slow death. Usually, the organization can be renewed or energized only if some leader is willing to take big risks by stepping outside the normal boundaries. When this happens, the organization is pulled, or pushed, into unknown territory. This can be a terrifying experience, with the possibility of very real failure. During these times the organization members must continually learn; they must “make it up as they go.”

In today’s competitive environment organizations must frequently make deep change. Individuals must also make deep change. Just as organizations become structured and stagnant, so do individuals. And, no organization can make deep change if the individuals within don’t change.

There is an important link between deep change at the personal level and deep change at the organizational level. Deep, personal change comes by developing a new paradigm, a new self, one that is more effectively aligned with current realities. This only happens as we venture into the unknown and confront whatever we find there. As we do this we learn the paradoxical lesson that we can change the world only by changing ourselves. The most important insight about the need to bring about deep change in others has to do with where deep change actually starts: in ourselves.

Each of us has the potential to change the world. Because the price of change is so high, we seldom take on the challenge. But, there is also a price for not making deep change. The price is slow death, enmeshed in a sense of fear, anger, and helplessness.

Confronting the Deep Change or Slow Death Dilemma

Slow death begins when someone, confronting the dilemma of having to either make deep organizational change or accept the status quo, rejects the option for deep change. This decision results in the gradual disintegration of an organization, business, or company.

Executives often behave as if the problems they are having are a secret. But this is seldom the case; people know when a critical issue is being ignored. And when it is, they slowly lose hope of real change and begin to feel trapped by their circumstances.

During troubled times, people thirst for effective leadership. They crave a vision that has credibility. Unfortunately, many leaders would rather stay busy with numbers and spreadsheets than do the hard work of developing and casting vision. But vision precedes change, and is essential for deep change to happen.

For leaders, there are three common strategies for confronting slow death. One is to play the victim. A victim is someone who experiences loss because of the actions of others. This, also, can progress to believing that salvation comes only from the actions of others. As a result, a victim has little choice but to wait passively for something good to happen.

A second strategy is an “active exit.” The leader continues working and doing his or her job, but actively searches for a way to move on. The active exit strategy is proactive, but efforts do not confront any of the root causes leading towards slow death. The third option, and that espoused by this book, is deep change.

PART II: Personal Change

The Fear of Change

I worked with a top management team of a large company that went to a well-known seminar on quality. As they discussed how to implement what they learned, I shared with them a story about another company. Three years earlier they had sent all their senior executives to the same seminar. They also thought their new plan would yield dramatic improvements, but after three years they found that their immense effort had little if any impact.

The executives waited anxiously for an explanation of the failure. Instead of explaining, I asked them to tell me why it failed. After a long silence, one member said, “The leaders of the company didn’t change their behavior.” I nodded and pointed out that while they were talking about changing other’s behavior, not once had anyone said they were going to change their own behavior. As they came to grips with the truth, they suddenly began to see something that few people ever clearly see: the incongruity of asking for change in others while failing to exhibit the same level of commitment in themselves.

Life is full of situations in which we want others to change their behavior. We first try to talk about it and ask them to change. When that doesn’t work, we try some kind of coercion to force the change. That may work in the short-term, but seldom produces long lasting change.

When we fail to get others to change, we often blame them. Seldom does someone say, “The change didn’t happen because I didn’t model the change for everyone.” That takes a lot of courage, which may be why it is so rare. Yet, the key to successful leadership is continuous personal change. By having the courage to change, we can model the behaviors we are asking of others.

The challenge is that to grow we must confront our own immaturity, selfishness, desire for security, and lack of courage. Moreover, we need to undergo this confrontation before we ask others to change. This kind of commitment is embodied in true leadership.

Finding Vitality

To avoid the journey toward slow death, one of the most useful things we can do is monitor our level of vitality. If our vitality, our energy and drive, begins to drop off, it is an indicator that there may be a deeper problem.

Foolishly, many of us live in a state of denial. Denial occurs when we ignore painful information about ourselves, information that suggests we need to make a deep change. By doing so, we embrace a clear path toward slow death. When we practice denial, we work on the wrong solutions, or on no solutions at all. We try to address the surface issues but never confront those deeper at the root. Over time, the problem gets worse and our vitality level drops as we sink into discouragement and hopelessness.

Breaking the Logic of Task Pursuit

In pursuing a task, we naturally follow the approach that has worked for us in the past. The problem is that as we experience success, we change, and so does the world we live in. The old approach may not work in the new reality. We may become deeply frustrated about our approach not working. At such times, we often become trapped in the logic of task pursuit.

Here is an example. Imagine someone trying to cut up a large woodpile. As he works, he realizes the saw is getting duller and duller, but the pressure to keep working stops him from taking a break to sharpen the saw. In the end, he is unable to finish the task. It isn’t that he’s ignorant; he knows the saw needs to be sharpened, but he can’t bring himself to stop working long enough to do it. He is a victim of the logic of task pursuit.

Any organization has a group of systems that enable it to operate: a strategic system, a financial system, a technical system, etc. Over time, these systems wear down—just like the saw. Alignment between the systems gets lost, and people find themselves working harder than ever, but seeing less from their efforts. As tension mounts, people look for someone to blame. The real problem, however, goes deeper.

When an organization discovers that its systems need realignment, a common response from its leaders is, “What you don’t understand is that we don’t have the time to make the deep change you are recommending.” That’s true—there is not time. In coming to this conclusion the executive is choosing task over maintenance, and is also choosing a future crisis.

How do you break the logic of task pursuit? The answer requires the very thing that task orientation does not give up easily- time. Time to reflect on what you are doing, and especially on why you are doing it. Time to examine your own motives, values, and goals, and look honestly at where you are, and are not, living them out. If a man’s motives, conscience, and capabilities are aligned, he will perform to the best of his ability regardless of the problem. And even if he experiences failure, he will have done the right things. In an important way, this man changes the world by changing himself.

A New Perspective

Embracing deep change often includes a perspective shift. A change in perspective can greatly alter how we see and relate to the world. Unfortunately, enlarging our perspective is very difficult. Our history, and especially our success, builds into our minds a way of looking at the world. For example, we may “know” something is right; we have our successes to prove it. What we fail to see is that our success, by the old formula, is like a map that has guided us to the edge of known territory. However, when we cross into new territory, this map doesn’t work anymore. Deep change is about redesigning our maps to align with new realities. It is reinvention through perspective.

As we face unknown territory, we have to review some basic questions: what is the meaning of my life? What are my core values? What does this look like in my new reality?

Doing this brings a fresh perspective; it makes sense of the things we are involved in, and gives us more energy for living them.

Confronting the Integrity Gap

Often, when we evaluate a situation from a fresh perspective it helps to clarify the actions we need to take. The resulting actions may present a series of risks. However, to initiate a deep change we must confront a path littered by many risks and unforeseen challenges. Our capacity to perform in uncertain situations is tied to integrity.

New situations, and pressure, often reveal a gap between the person we think we are (our preferred self-image) and who we actually are. Increasing our effectiveness comes from building integrity through the constant observation of these choices and recognizing where we are compromising our integrity.

A lack of integrity occurs when we begin to compromise our values. The process often begins innocently enough. In pursuing some justifiable end, we make a trade-off of some kind. We know it’s wrong, but rationalize our choice, using the end to justify the means. As time passes, something inside starts to wither. We lose energy and experience no joy; we are experiencing slow death.

We need to take the time, a necessary self-examination, to face and overcome the challenges presented by our own defense mechanisms. In so doing, we discover our own hypocrisy and cowardice. It is vital that we confront the lies we have been telling ourselves; we must admit our own weakness, greed, insensitivity and lack of vision and courage. If we do this, we start to see the need for a course correction and can re-align ourselves with what matters. It is often a scary process; but as we go through it, we develop unconditional confidence.

Conditional confidence asserts that you can do well in situations you are familiar with. Unconditional confidence enables you to face new situations, knowing you have the ability to discard inaccurate assumptions and old ways of thinking. It is the ability to have confidence even when you are lost. In a world of constant, change and uncertainty, unconditional confidence is very desirable.

Build the Bridge as You Walk on It.

When we make the decision to initiate a change, we face a series of tough challenges. The path of change seldom has a clearly defined structure for determining if our actions are correct. Even though later recounted so, organizational and personal growth seldom follow a linear plan.

Having a vision does not necessarily mean having a plan. We must trust ourselves to learn along the way, to build the bridge as we walk on it, to make it up as we go. Deep change is an extensive learning process. When we pursue our vision, we must believe that we have enough courage and confidence to reach our goal.

Trusting in our vision enough to start our journey into the chasm of uncertainty, believing that the resources will appear, can be difficult. The fact that we have enough trust and belief in ourselves to pursue our vision is what signals to others that the vision is worth investing in. Our message is filled with good intentions, but it is our actions, not our words, that send the message.

Acting on a vision that exceeds our resources is a test of our vision, faith, and integrity. Often, we make plans that are limited by our present resources. But, vision leads us towards plans that exceed our present resources. It is easier and safer to stay within the zone of certainty; the challenges arise when we contemplate deep change. Tackling deep change and pursuing a vision for the future requires that we get lost with confidence. This confidence will begin to guide our actions as we build the bridge that turns our vision into reality.

PART III: Changing the Organization

Denying the Need for Change

Organizational cultures are not designed; they tend to evolve naturally. At any given time, the culture will facilitate certain desired outcomes and block others. Deep change is impossible if those cultural characteristics are not identified and addressed.

For example, deep change requires more than the identification of the problem and a call for action. It requires looking beyond the scope of the problem and finding the actual source of the trouble. The real problem is frequently located where we would least expect to find it, inside ourselves. Deep change requires looking at the ideologies behind the organizational culture. It requires looking at the assumptions, at the implicit, unspoken rules and values of the organization that govern how things are actually done.

When Success is the Engine of Failure

I once interviewed a man who worked for a large company. He was a gifted engineer—technically competent, innovative, and action-oriented—and he was promoted several times. After his last promotion he went through several difficult years. It seemed like the game had changed, but nothing ever happened. It seemed like people would sit around and talk forever, and the technically right answer didn’t matter. Everything was political.

He faced a classic problem. Upon entering upper management, he found that his technical models and strategies were no longer working. Finally, a critical incident occurred. One of his subordinates was getting regularly complimented by the engineer’s boss for always being at work early. Upon investigation, he found that the man came in early to have some time to himself, when he could read, journal, have coffee, etc. and then start work at the normal time. At first he was furious; then he laughed as he understood the power of perception. He began to change how he did things, and began to understand the different types of issues that were at play at higher levels of management.

The man underwent a classic personal transformation, from the paradigm of technical competence to the paradigm of political transaction. The two paradigms are very different. The first is much more individualistic, and the important thing is personal competence. The latter is more corporate, and the important thing is about building coalitions to gain power.

Learning how to act appropriately in the political environment is important. It is critical to survival in an organization. It can be difficult for the individual contributor to embrace a different way of doing things. It often requires a deep change.

The Tyranny of Competence

The tyranny of competence happens when someone puts too much emphasis, or value, on personal competency. While competency is important, it can be defined too narrowly. Someone might argue, “The only thing that should matter here is how well someone does the job.” While logical, that can lead to problems.

From this perspective, competence often comes to mean task completion—getting the job done, the sale made, etc. Someone who is extremely competent ends up gaining a lot of power, and can begin to be viewed as indispensable, even while they are poisoning the work environment.

In one company, a man of enormous competence gained a lot of power, but many of his actions poisoned the climate in the workplace. People hated working with him and went to great lengths to avoid him.

The bad feelings and inefficiencies cost the organization large, but undocumented, sums of money. Finally things grew so bad that people united and demanded change. A senior person intervened and tried to coach the man, but he couldn’t receive it. He was finally let go.

He argued that he was doing his “job” better than anyone else in the place, and the organization was simply out to get him for personal and political reasons.

Note the accuracy of his arguments! He was doing his “job” well, and the organization was out to get him for personal and political reasons. The problem was in his definition of the word job. His job did not include relating to other people. Not disciplining himself enough to maintain good relationships is, in fact, destructive behavior. The man eventually left his job, convinced that he had been politically rejected (which was correct) for unjust reasons (which was incorrect). The day he left all his coworkers celebrated! They also discovered that this irreplaceable person was indeed replaceable. The top executives marveled at the increase in overall performance, and vowed not to make the same mistake again.

Technically competent people who don’t know how to be a part of a team are often not as helpful or valuable as they first appear. Organizations that give in to the tyranny of competence are often choosing slow death rather than embracing a new paradigm that also values teamwork and relationships.

The Internally Driven Leader

Beyond the paradigms of technical competence and political transaction is another level of leadership, that of transformation.

Transformational leaders are different from leaders in either of the other paradigms. For example, this paradigm doesn’t assume personal survival, but vision realization at any cost. The vision is far more important to these leaders than personal survival.

A transformational leader will develop a plan of action, mobilize the workforce, and unleash power by vocalizing the core values of the system. Their source of credibility is their behavioral integrity. A leader must walk the walk and talk the talk. Every action must be in alignment with the vision. When evaluating a vision, people watch the behavior of their leaders and quickly recognize if a leader lacks personal discipline and commitment. People know when a leader’s words are empty, and they respond by simply ignoring the vision until the vision dies.

In order to embrace the transformational paradigm, the leader must become free of the organization’s most powerful expectations, see it from a self-authorized perspective, and still care enough to be willing to be punished for doing whatever it takes to save the organization. Such a process involves deep personal change. Sometimes the person has to leave the organization for awhile and operate alone; sometimes the process involves a career failure or serious illness. Through one, or more, of these situations he or she is empowered and learns to think outside of the current company system. As a result, that leader returns with a different perspective. He or she is no longer dependent on the system and willing to pursue what is right instead of what is acceptable.

Visionaries, for example, are internally driven leaders. Their main objective is the realization of their vision, and sacrifice of self for the good of the organization is an acceptable outcome. They have become independent of the organization, and are attached to it by choice, not fear. Their actions are self-determined and self-authorized; they aren’t looking for “permission” from some higher authority—the vision itself is the authority. Leaders who are willing to pursue a vision regardless of the personal cost are rare, but they inspire others to take significant risks for the sake of the organization. They transform the people around them, and ultimately the organization itself.

PART IV: Vision, Risk, and the Creation of Excellence

Overcoming Resistance

Most organizations have a built-in resistance to change. Some have a culture of conformity that discourages people from stepping out of the pack. Others have layers of bureaucracy that stifle initiative by burying it under a massive hierarchy. Internal conflict and competition can stifle initiative, as well as something as simple as people’s basic time constraints.

While not easy to press through the barriers, some leaders are able to. Often, these leaders have a transformational mindset. They are people who are loyal to the organization and are eager to make a significant contribution. They are people who are inclined to “do the right thing” because they are deeply loyal and are less concerned with the political risks of making deep change. They are willing to confront the pressures of conformity and pay the price of deep change.

Why Risk Is Necessary

Organizations need people to conform. Rules and procedures are established to ensure stability and predictability in the organization. These rules bind the organization together and make cooperation and coordination possible. However, today’s rules and procedures are often solutions to yesterday’s problems, and can get in the way of responding to the new challenges that an organization faces. To remain vital, an organization needs to adapt to the new realities it faces. But this only happens if a few people are willing to take a few serious risks.

A group of executives in a large state government were interested in leadership training, especially in teaching transformational leadership. They decided to seek out people who had made dramatic transformations within their agencies, and wanted to put together a video highlighting their successes. Teams went out to interview the leaders, but came back with bad news. The video couldn’t be made. In every single case, the transformational leader had, at least once, broken a state law. To transform the ineffective organization into an effective one, regulations were ignored, required forms were not turned in, and directives violated. This doesn’t mean you have to break the law in order to be a transformational leader; it does always require, however, that someone must take some significant risks.

When transformational leaders emerge, they usually have a vision, and they follow unconventional methods that are based on moral principles rather than organizational pressures.

Making a difference is important for both the individual and the organization. Though we often prefer to believe that nothing can be done about the awful problems we face, there comes a time when we have to take on the system because the system needs to change.

When we do decide to initiate action, there are no written guarantees, no insurance policies that will save us if we fail. The possibility of failure is a constant companion for every real leader. Leaders cope with this presence because they understand that whenever they sacrifice their principles for pressure, both they and the system take another step toward slow death. They are willing to accept the necessary risk because it is the right thing to do.

The Transformational Cycle

Occasionally a group will perform at a very high level, beyond the sum of its individual talents. It happens in the symphony, in the ballet, in sports, and in business. It’s easy to recognize but hard to explain. It cannot be achieved without immense effort, training, and cooperation, but these alone rarely create it. Some groups reach it consistently; few can sustain it.

Shifting to a higher level of performance means that a transformation must occur. At least one person must recognize that more is possible. Someone must then lead the group toward the collective goal.

Most of us seek quantum leaps in our performance levels by following a strategy of incremental investment. We try to improve little by little. This strategy simply does not work. The land of excellence is safely guarded from unworthy intruders. At the gates stand two fearsome sentries: risk and learning. The keys to entrance are faith and courage.

To attain excellence an individual or group must care enough about an activity to insist that it exceeds expectations, and this involves a fair amount of risk. Excellence also demands experimentation, reflection, and evaluation, and these in turn lead to growth and learning.

Excellence then is a process. It isn’t a state we arrive at and stay at forever. Every system is continuously evolving, and excellence is something that happens as part of that evolution. This evolution can be described as a transformational cycle, with four distinct phases: initiation, uncertainty, transformation, and routinization.

During initiation, an individual or group develops a vision and begins to take some risks. As they progress from there they enter the uncertainty phase, where they are experimenting and evaluating. This phase can be uncomfortable and frustrating, but if participants can press through this they can gain the new insights that bring transformation. As this transformation matures, it is built into the routines of the organization, causing deep change throughout the organization.

Excellence is a Form of Deviance

Excellence is not common; it is unusual. By definition, excellence is a form of deviance. It is outside the norm.

When an organization begins to excel, it will encounter pressure to return to normal, conventional behavior. If you perform beyond the norm you disrupt all the normal systems. Over time those systems will adjust and try to make you “normal.” The pressure to conform can be significant. You become excellent because you are doing things normal people do not want to do. You become excellent by choosing a right path that is risky and painful, a path with a cost that is not appealing to others.

Given that pursuing excellence is painful, why would anyone want to do it? Two reasons: first, it is simply the right thing to do. Second, it brings enormous personal satisfaction. People accept the pain that accompanies transformational leadership because the pain they experience is exceeded by the pain of lost potential. For these leaders, lost potential is the worst pain of all.

Confronting the Undiscussable

One of the greatest obstacles to achieving high performance is the presence of “undiscussable issues.” An undiscussable issue is one that is important to the group but is too threatening to discuss within the group.

Sometimes they exist because of history. When the issue first surfaced it got personal and it was easier to avoid it after that. Sometimes it will cause someone hurt or make them angry. Other times it threatens “the way we do things.”

There are real costs to allowing these kinds of issues. Communication is hindered, trust falls, and innovation becomes unlikely. Only the easiest decisions get made, and progress is very limited. Confronting undiscussable issues is difficult. It creates fear, stress, and tension; it can seem threatening to the individuals and the group as a whole.

In order to face them, someone needs to take the lead to put them on the table. An outside facilitator may even be needed. Note: effective groups are simultaneously tough and supportive. They are determined to confront issues yet care deeply about the individual members of the group.

When a group or team gets serious about pursuing excellence, it requires them to confront the undiscussable. As they do this together, each person in the group will probably have to undergo some kind of deep change. Organizational change cannot occur without personal change. Confronting the undiscussables of the group is scary, painful, and tremendously fruitful when done together in the pursuit of excellence, with each person looking at themselves and not just pointing fingers.

A Vision From Within

While vision statements are now common in most large organizations, vision is not. People long for someone who has a clear vision and communicates a clear message, providing meaning and direction. But when people express their yearning for a useful vision, it can irritate company leaders, who typically feel inadequate about their ability to provide that vision.

Many senior executives are uncomfortable with the notion of creating and communicating a vision. They have difficulty coming up with anything that is persuasive, exciting, or passionate. There is no life in what they conceptualize. Worst of all, when they do formulate a vision it isn’t consistent with their behavior or the top management teams’.

Developing a vision is a difficult process because it requires something more than a superficial analysis. It is much easier to focus on solving today’s problems than it is to mold the future. Yet, transformational leaders can do both. They link the operational present with the developmental future.

Often, leaders simply don’t know how to develop a vision. They look at their official documents and wonder why they aren’t effective. An illustration from the movie Gandhi can help us understand:

Before Gandhi got involved in politics in India, he went on a journey through the country. He spent a great amount of time listening to the peasants and observing their surroundings. Shortly thereafter, a political convention was held, where many of the top politicians called for home rule and expulsion of the British. Finally, the unpretentious Gandhi spoke. He began his speech by talking about the “real” India. The citizens of India did not really care who was ruling the country. What they did care about was bread and salt. Unless the politicians understood the issues of bread and salt the voters would simply be replacing British tyrants with Indian tyrants.

People listened to Gandhi because he had captured the essence of India and was vocalizing it in a way they could feel and understand. Such vocalization is often at the heart of deep change. Real visions have to capture the issues of bread and salt. An influential vision reflects the insight of a person or group that has deeply contemplated the core issues. A visionary leader delves into the core of the organization or group and touches the issues of bread and salt. Few senior executives ever do so, which means they are unable to articulate a persuasive vision that connects with people’s hearts.

When you touch the core of the system, the system readily accepts the vision. The process is a circular one: an executive may cast the vision, but it is rooted in the life of the organization, which becomes clear after much listening and dialog. People respond to it because they see themselves in it.

The Power of One

Overcoming our fears and facing the challenges of change can be a painful process. To champion our vision, we must be willing to deviate from conventional methods, press through roadblocks, and continue courageously toward our goal. We must accept the fact that we have the power and ability to change.

One person can make a difference. One person can make deep change in an organization. It means taking some risks. But when we take the risks, we become self-empowered, confident, and make genuine progress toward our goal. We become energized, and begin to discover that one person really can change the system.

The Power of Many

Empowerment is a common buzzword these days. Everyone is for it, but it often doesn’t happen. Whereas nearly everyone wants to be more empowered by their boss, fewer people are comfortable with the idea of empowering their subordinates. We want to be empowered, but still be in control.

In a study on empowerment, Gretchen Spreitzer (University Of Michigan) found that empowered people are more innovative than less empowered people, have more upward influence, and are rated as more effective managers by both subordinates and superiors. They are also more likely to take initiative to make important changes.

Empowering people is worth the effort; the question, then, becomes how to do it effectively.

Spreitzer’s research identified four things that lead to an empowering environment:

1. Clear vision and challenge. Highly empowered people feel that they understand the vision and have access to the information they need. They know where the organization is going.

2. Openness and teamwork. In their work units they report a sense of working together, creatively and effectively, to solve problems.

3. Discipline and control. Highly empowered people indicate that in their units such things as goals, responsibilities, and lines of authority are clearly defined.

4. Support and a sense of security. Highly empowered people indicate they receive support from peers and those above and below them.

These four elements lead to an empowering environment, but not to empowerment. In an empowering environment people are more likely to take risks, experience success, and then feel empowered. We do not, however, empower people. Empowerment cannot be delegated. We can only develop an environment where people will have to take the initiative to empower themselves. In this kind of environment, people ultimately have as much power as they really want.

Table of Contents

Nutshell Summary

Full Summary

Preface

PART I: Deep Change or Slow Death

Walking Naked Into the Land of Uncertainty

Confronting the Deep Change or Slow Death Dilemma

PART II: Personal Change

The Fear of Change

Finding Vitality

Breaking the Logic of Task Pursuit

A New Perspective

Confronting the Integrity Gap

Build the Bridge as You Walk on It.

PART III: Changing the Organization

Denying the Need for Change

When Success is the Engine of Failure

The Tyranny of Competence

The Internally Driven Leader

PART IV: Vision, Risk, and the Creation of Excellence

Overcoming Resistance

Why Risk Is Necessary

The Transformational Cycle

Excellence is a Form of Deviance

Confronting the Undiscussable

A Vision From Within

The Power of One

The Power of Many