Leading Change

by John P. Kotter

Because corporate culture exerts this kind of influence, the new practices created in a reengineering or a restructuring or an acquisition must somehow be anchored in it; if not, they can be very fragile and subject to regression.

Here we see a man trying respectfully to bury an old set of practices while making sure that their replacements are firmly connected to the group’s core values. The analytical side of our brains has trouble seeing the need for this. If we were only analytical, such a speech wouldn’t be necessary. But human beings are also emotional creatures, and we ignore that reality at our peril.

And that is why cultural change comes at the end of a transformation, not the beginning.

Culture is not something that you manipulate easily. Attempts to grab it and twist it into a new shape never work because you can’t grab it. Culture changes only after you have successfully altered people’s actions, after the new behavior produces some group benefit for a period of time, and after people see the connection between the new actions and the performance improvement. Thus, most cultural change happens in stage 8, not stage 1.

Anchoring change in a culture • Comes last, not first: Most alterations in norms and shared values come at the end of the transformation process. • Depends on results: New approaches usually sink into a culture only after it’s very clear that they work and are superior to old methods. • Requires a lot of talk: Without verbal instruction and support, people are often reluctant to admit the validity of new practices. • May involve turnover: Sometimes the only way to change a culture is to change key people. • Makes decisions on succession crucial: If promotion processes are not changed to be compatible with the new practices, the old culture will reassert itself.

Structure, systems, practices, and culture have often been more of a drag on change than a facilitator.

A higher rate of urgency does not imply ever present panic, anxiety, or fear. It means a state in which complacency is virtually absent, in which people are always looking for both problems and opportunities, and in which the norm is “do it now.”

Typical employees in typical firms today still receive little data on their performance, the performance of their group or department, and the performance of the firm.

To both create these systems and use their output productively, corporate cultures in the twenty-first century will have to value candid discussions far more than they do today. Norms associated with political politeness, with nonconformational diplomaticese, and with killing-the-messenger-of-bad-news will have to change. The volume knob on the dishonest dialog channel will have to be turned way down.

Development of leadership potential doesn’t happen in a two-week course or even a four-year college program, although both can help. Most complex skills emerge over decades, which is why we increasingly talk about “lifelong learning.” Because we spend so many of our waking hours at work, most of our development takes place—or doesn’t take place—on the job. This simple fact has enormous implications. If our time at work encourages and helps us to develop leadership skills, we will eventually realize whatever potential we have. Conversely, if time at work does little or nothing to develop those skills, we will probably never live up to our potential.

Linkages give power to some people who are then often reluctant to give it up. Linkages become habits. Deciding what is a relevant linkage and what is a historical artifact can occasionally be difficult, especially in the absence of a broader vision and strategy guiding the organization.

Truly adaptive firms with adaptive cultures are awesome competitive machines. They produce superb products and services faster and better. They run circles around bloated bureaucracies. Even when they have far fewer resources and patents or less market share, they compete and win again and again.

In a static world, we can learn virtually everything we need to know in life by the time we are fifteen, and few of us are called on to provide leadership. In an ever changing world, we can never learn it all, even if we keep growing into our nineties, and the development of leadership skills becomes relevant to an ever-increasing number of people.

I found that two elements stood out: competitive drive and lifelong learning. These factors seemed to give people an edge by creating an unusually strong competitive capacity

people with high standards and a strong willingness to learn became measurably stronger and more able leaders at age fifty than they had been at age forty.

Stability, regulation, and prosperity would reduce competition along with the need for growth, leadership skills, and transformation. But that’s not what the future holds.

Risk taking inevitably produces both bigger successes and bigger failures. Much more than most of us, lifelong learners humbly and honestly reflect on their experiences to educate themselves. They don’t sweep failure under the rug or examine it from a defensive position that undermines their ability to make rational conclusions.

Mental habits that support lifelong learning • Risk taking: Willingness to push oneself out of comfort zones • Humble self-reflection: Honest assessment of successes and failures, especially the latter • Solicitation of opinions: Aggressive collection of information and ideas from others • Careful listening: Propensity to listen to others • Openness to new ideas: Willingness to view life with an open mind

Lifelong learners actively solicit opinions and ideas from others. They don’t make the assumption that they know it all or that most other people have little to contribute. Just the opposite, they believe that with the right approach, they can learn from anyone under almost any circumstance.

Risk taking brings failure as well as success. Honest reflection, listening, solicitation of opinions, and openness bring bad news and negative feedback as well as interesting ideas. In the short term, life is generally more pleasant without failure and negative feedback.

As an observer of life in organizations, I think I can say with some authority that people who are making an effort to embrace the future are a happier lot than those who are clinging to the past.