Stabilizing vs. manifesting
The managerial mechanisms that were embedded in the leadership of organizations 150 years ago for planning, organizing, staffing, and measuring primarily served as stabilizing forces. Not enough effort, however, was generated for adaptation, change, and growth. And so, companies kept running the ball right up the middle, to use a football analogy, the meat and potatoes of stability. It worked for that generation. But we are not that generation any longer.
Times have drastically changed. Culture has evolved, consumers have different expectations, and organizations that don’t adapt slowly sink. We need a lot more management structures, systems, and policies that are less stability-makers and anchors, and more change-friendly. Up to recently, the average organizational culture was not highly adaptive, and you know what that means… a slow death.
My friend, Dr. John Kotter, performed a study a few decades ago of 26 competitor companies in nine industries. Thirteen or fourteen of them had highly adaptive cultures, while ten or eleven had very non-adaptive cultures. Another researcher conducted a follow-up study to the original one with a focus on the organizations that had adaptive cultures. All the adaptive companies, except for one, outperformed the non-adaptive ones. For over 30 years they grew, measured by revenue, and significantly outpaced their counterparts.
To circle back to a football analogy, what are some winning leadership plays to consistently put points on the board for organizational growth? Firstly, companies need a whole new manager and employee, not necessarily replacing people, but choosing those with a different mindset—a growth mindset. We need people who understand the emerging science of change, and who think about it in a positive way, not as a threat, but with an openness for opportunities. This is a shift in mentality for many executive leaders.
Management typically creates efficiencies and reliabilities. Leadership, on the other hand, produces change, innovation, and growth. The average business today doesn’t have enough people providing sufficient leadership who are willing to adapt. When more leadership is delegated to more people to develop and enact change, then organizations will enhance their ability to quickly pivot and adapt to changing times.
Secondly, organizations that are successful at generating change create a high sense of urgency among as many employees, board members, and volunteers as possible. The mantra becomes “Adapt to our surroundings or die.” When organizational life is on the line, there is a “fight to survive” mentality that takes over, one born not from fear but realizing the need to expand and develop. Is there urgency among your team to grow?
Thirdly, each stakeholder is encouraged to take a hard look and consider potential opportunities stemming from the changes surrounding them, ones that could drive the organization forward. Change becomes a heartbeat of the culture. Everyone takes responsibility for this task, asking, “What can I do? What do I see from my vantage point that could drive us forward?” Certain people will grow excited, feel the urgency, and see the possibilities. You enlist these individuals to be part of your “coalition of the willing” to spread a sense of urgency and brainstorming among their sphere of influence.
In short, a handful of people cannot provide enough leadership to drive change. You will need lots more leadership from an ever-expanding group who are aligned in mission. Your organization can no longer just stabilize; you must adapt. The future of the company depends on it.