As author Gary Hamel noted, “The bottleneck is at the head of the bottle.” That is where the potential of an organization is slowed. Where customer and employee promises are miscommunicated. Where meetings become hum drum “nobody raised their hands again.” Better yet, where managers and leaders adhere to positions by agreeing to whatever cadence the senior team marches to in honor of self-preservation.
My mother often said I am judged by my friends. A leader then is judged by the people he or she hangs out with. They are I assure you people who attended similar universities, clubs, backgrounds, and race. Their thoughts are genuinely the same. Innovation doesn’t have wow signed on it. Because those with divergent opinions aren’t hired by HR because of the muted directions of the people at the top. When teams are created they too represent this sameness. Forward thinkers are advertised as sought after but in quiet circles, they permeate chairs with tried and true assumptions without dissension and especially diverse opinions. That’s why you are losing market share. The competition is you. In other words, companies tend to self-immolate.
This reminds me that a leader has a strong impact on an organization — especially its culture. But, if that leader is a bubble or a clique, the behaviors that the leader has cannot be emulated across the whole organization. I’ve seen these leadership cliques impede major business transformations because a lot of employees cannot relate to them or understand them.
I’m always surprised that when a new CxO comes in, they will bring in their own people to fill the VP and Director ranks — people they know and understand. Then after 1 year things blow up because just too much “new” was brought in too quickly.
Chris, Thanks for taking time to reply. Sadly, I am compelled to agree. There is a great read by Art kleiner on the radicals that turn things on their head. Boston Consulting Group stated about 70% of change programs fail. You stated precisely who is to blame. Certainly not the frustrated line worker. Thank you again my friend. Jim
True. I feel 70% is very reserved for today. Wasn’t that 70% initially quoted before 2010? Can’t recall. I remember Kotter suggesting 70% as well.
Either way, I crunched some numbers early this year from Gartner and found that the failure rate is about 94% for large scale initiatives that involve transformation. Gartner didn’t state that, but I was able to crunch it out based on the information they did provide.
Anyway, 70% even if it is dated is way too high for a failure rate. These posts are making reconsider opening up the book on that “change calculus” I developed a few years back. It’s a syntactical approach that models how change can be planned and executed on. I think it’s worth another look.
Very interesting point of view. I know it is always a balance of hiring innovator and people that are a cultural fit. To be honest I have had the best luck with people with great imaginations, are openly engaged in creativity and dynamic change.
Hello Larry, Thank you for the comment. Totally agree – imagination is great! innovators rule! … but all of this as long as person ready to work and take responsibility for their work