Filetype PDF | Posted on 23 Jan 2023 | 3 years ago
Authentication
digital resources
313x Filetype PDF File size 0.20 MB Source: spartan.ac.brocku.ca
Change management — or
change leadership?
Received (in revised form): 3rd February, 2003
Roger Gill
is Director of the Research Centre for Leadership Studies at The Leadership Trust and
Visiting Professor at the University of Strathclyde Graduate School of Business, where
he was formerly Professor of Organisational Behaviour and Human Resource
Management and Director of Executive Development Programmes. In addition to
academic appointments in the UK and the USA, he has worked as a management
consultant in the UK, the Middle East and Southeast Asia and as a human resources
manager in industry in the UK.
KEYWORDS: leadership, management, change
ABSTRACT This paper argues that, while change must be well managed, it also requires
effective leadership to be successfully introduced and sustained. An integrative model of
leadership for change is proposed, reflecting its cognitive, spiritual, emotional and behavioural
dimensions and requirements. The model comprises vision, values, strategy, empowerment,
and motivation and inspiration. The paper concludes with a brief account of the application
of the model in varied strategic change situations.
‘...thereisnomoredelicatemattertotake 2002). The reason for this, this paper
in hand, nor more dangerous to conduct, contends, is not necessarily poor
nor more doubtful in its success, than to set management of change but more likely a
up as a leader in the introduction of lack of effective leadership.
changes. For he who innovates will have for While change must be well managed —
his enemies all those who are well off under it must be planned, organised, directed
the existing order of things, and only andcontrolled—italsorequires
lukewarm supporters in those who might be effective leadership to introduce change
better off under the new.’ (Machiavelli, successfully: it is leadership that makes
Roger Gill 1469–1527) the difference. This paper proposes a
Director, Research Centre
for Leadership Studies, In the early sixteenth century, Niccolo` new model of leadership which is the
The Leadership Trust, Machiavelli clearly understood the result of a three-year study of the
Weston-under-Penyard, problem of change. In The Prince,he burgeoning literature on the subject and
Ross-on-Wye,
Herefordshire HR9 7YH, UK points out the difficulty and risk involved which has been successfully applied in
and in implementing change, in particular several organisations in a variety of
Visiting Professor,
University of Strathclyde resistance to change and, at best, lack of sectors planning and implementing
Graduate School of commitment to it.1 Some 500 years later, strategic change. The model proposes
Business, 199 Cathedral
Street, Glasgow G4 0QU, this is still a familiar problem. As that the leadership of successful change
UK Andrew Mayo says, ‘Our organisations requires vision, strategy, the development
Tel: 44 (0)1989 760705; are littered with the debris ... of of a culture of sustainable shared values
Fax: 44 (0)1989 760704; that support the vision and strategy for
e-mail: rwtgill@aol.com yesterday’s [change] initiatives’ (Mayo,
Henry Stewart Publications 1469-7017 (2003) Vol. 3, 4, 307–318 Journal of Change Management 307
Gill
change, and empowering, motivating and the result of the naı¨ve adoption of
inspiring those who are involved or management fads. Such fads frequently
affected. This behaviour reflects the deal with only one aspect of an
underlying dimensions and requirements organisation’s functioning without regard
of leadership: the cognitive, the spiritual, to their implications for other aspects.
the emotional and the behavioural. Lack of communication or inconsistent
messages and the resulting
misunderstanding of the aims and process
WHY‘MANAGEMENT’ IS NECESSARY of change lead to rumours that
BUT NOT SUFFICIENT demoralise people and to a lack of
Change programmes often fail because of commitment to change.
poor management: poor planning, A lack of commitment to change may
monitoring and control, lack of resources be due to a lack of compelling evidence
and know-how, and incompatible for the benefits of change. It shows itself
corporate policies and practices. Good in objections, unwillingness to consider
management of change is a sine qua non. options or look at process issues, and the
How change may be mismanaged is use of ‘hidden agendas’ or delaying
well known. Change efforts may fail tactics. Top management itself may
because of poor planning, monitoring display a lack of commitment to change.
and control, focusing more on the Their commitment is evident in several
objective than on the steps and process ways: their unequivocal acceptance of
involved, a lack of milestones along the ownership and responsibility for success
way, and failing to monitor progress and of the change initiative, eagerness to be
take corrective action. Change efforts involved, willingness to invest resources,
often lack the necessary resources, eg willingness to take tough decisions when
budget, systems, time and information, required, awareness of the impact of
and the necessary expertise — their own behaviour, a consistent
knowledge and skills. Corporate policies message, and the holding of regular
and practices sometimes remain the same reviews of progress.
and become inconsistent with the aims Change efforts that are purely
and strategies for change. For example, ‘managerial’ in nature, especially those
the performance criteria used in appraisal that are mismanaged, result in a lack of
and reward policies may not support and dedicated effort, conflict between
reinforce a desired performance-driven, functional areas and resistance to change.
teamwork-oriented culture, resulting in a Resistance to change is a common
disincentive or lack of incentive to phenomenon. Kubr (1996) provides a
change behaviour. A large European good account of why people resist
study found that the most successful change. A cognitive and behavioural
organisations make mutually supportive reason is lack of know-how. A lack of
changes in terms of changes in roles, conviction that change is needed —
governance structures and strategies questioning the meaning and value of the
(Whittington et al., 1999). change for individuals — inevitably leads
Change is all too often regarded as a toalackofmotivationtochange.Perhaps
‘quick fix’. This fails to address the the most powerful forces of resistance to
implications of the change for the change, however, are emotional:
organisation as a whole and therefore
causes unforeseen and unacceptable —dislike of imposed change
disruption. Change initiatives are often —dislike of surprises
308 Journal of Change Management Vol. 3, 4, 307–318 Henry Stewart Publications 1469-7017 (2003)
Change management — or change leadership?
—lack of self-confidence and confidence together or inspire change. In fact, [it]
in others: fear of the unknown and of probably had just the opposite effect.’
inadequacy and failure and the
adverse consequences, such as share In his classic statements on management
price decline and blame and leadership, Kotter (1990a, 1990b)
—reluctance of management to deal says that management produces orderly
with difficult issues (especially in the results which keep something working
case of managers approaching efficiently, whereas leadership creates
retirement) useful change; neither is necessarily better
—disturbed practices, habits and or a replacement for the other. Both are
relationships: ‘We’ve always done it needed if organisations and nations are to
this way’. Moving people from their prosper. He also says, however:
‘comfort zone’ means moving from
the familiar, secure and controllable to ‘Management’s mandate is to minimise risk
the unfamiliar, insecure and and to keep the current system operating.
uncertainly controllable Change, by definition, requires creating a
—self-interest and shifts in power and new system, which in turn always demands
influence such as loss or change of leadership.’ (Kotter, 1995a)
role in the organisation Sadler (1997) concurs:
—lack of respect and trust in the person
or people promoting change and ‘we have observed dramatic transformations
scepticism as a result of the failure of in British industry in recent times which
previous change initiatives. appear to be due more to inspirational
The human and political aspects of leadership than to good management as
change are often not well thought traditionally conceived. British Airways
under Colin Marshall, and ICI under John
through in change management Harvey-Jones are oft-quoted examples.’
initiatives. Mulligan and Barber (1998)
speak of the yin and yang of change: Change, therefore, is primarily about
respectively the social and emotional leadership.
considerations (leadership) and the
technical aspects (management). McLagan
(2002) points out that taking a purely THE LEADERSHIP OF CHANGE
rational and technical approach to The keys to successful change, according
change, ‘making sure it’s technically to an American Management Association
sound and offers economic advantage to survey (American Management
the organisation’, tends to lead to the Association, 1994), are first and foremost
false assumption that the organisation will leadership, followed closely by corporate
naturally absorb it. Kotter (1995a) says: values and communication (Table 1).
‘In failed transformations, you often find If change is a process of taking an
plenty of plans and directives and programs organisation (or a nation) on a journey
... [with] procedures, goals, methods, and from its current state to a desired future
deadlines. But nowhere was there a clear state and dealing with all the problems
and compelling statement [a vision] of where that arise along the journey, then change
all this was leading. Not surprisingly, most of is about leadership as well as
the employees with whom I talked were management. Leadership, in The
either confused or alienated. [The Leadership Trust’s view, is about showing
‘managerial’ approach] did not rally them the way: using personal power to win
Henry Stewart Publications 1469-7017 (2003) Vol. 3, 4, 307–318 Journal of Change Management 309
Gill
Alignment is displayed by a shared
Table 1 Keys to successful change: understanding, common orientation,
Survey of 259 senior executives in common values and shared priorities.
Fortune 500 companies in the USA Adaptability is displayed by
environmental sensitivity, tolerance for
%mentioning this contrary views, a willingness to
as important experiment, tolerate failure and learn
Leadership 92 from it, and the ability to respond
Corporate values 84 quickly to change — organisational
Communication 75 agility. Both alignment and adaptability
Teambuilding 69 are needed (World Economic Forum,
Education and training 64 2000):
‘Alignment without adaptability results in
bureaucratic, sclerotic organisations that
‘‘can’t get out of their own way’’ ...
the hearts and minds of people to work Adaptability without alignment results in
together towards a common goal (Gill, chaos and resources wasted on duplicate and
2001). The leadership of change, for the conflicting efforts.’
chief executive, Hooper and Potter
(2000) say, means ‘developing a vision of The former chairman of ICI, Sir John
the future, crafting strategies to bring that Harvey-Jones (1988), takes a radical view
vision into reality [and ensuring] that of alignment:
everybody in the organisation is
mobilising their energies towards the ‘In the future the organisation will have to
same goals ... the process we call adapt to the needs of the individual, rather
‘‘emotional alignment’’’. It can be argued than expecting the individual to adapt to the
that the most difficult challenges facing needs of the organisation.’
leaders today are making sure that people
in the organisation can adapt to change Nixon (2002) identifies ‘big issues’
and that leaders can envisage where the concerning global business leaders:
organisation is currently placed in the creating successful and sustainable
market and where it should be in the workplaces, the need to be good
future (Heifetz and Laurie, 1997). corporatecitizensandatthesametime
The case for alignment is made in a profitable, the gap between strategy
report by World Economic Forum (2000) makers and those not involved, products
in partnership with management that damage the quality of life, and a
consultants Booz Allen & Hamilton and yearning for meaning and balance in life,
the Center for Effective Organisations at ‘uniting body, mind, heart and spirit’.
the University of Southern California: Dubrin (2001) says that ‘The
‘Alignment ... galvanizes people around the transformational leader ... [helps] group
aspirations and objectives of the company. members understand the need for change
People know what is to be done, and both emotionally and intellectually.’ How
understand how they as individuals to meet the challenge of change can be
contribute to the whole. Adaptability enables understood more broadly using a new
the organisation to change rapidly and model of transformational leadership. This
effectively in response to external threats or model attempts to integrate the multiple
opportunities.’ dimensions and requirements of
310 Journal of Change Management Vol. 3, 4, 307–318 Henry Stewart Publications 1469-7017 (2003)
no reviews yet
Please Login to review.
