Robert H. Schaffer

<article-ideainbrief class="article-ideainbrief">
 <h4 class="ideainbrief-title">The Idea in Brief</h4>
 <div class="ideainbrief-contents">
 Four behaviors deeply rooted in the managerial psyche block organizational change:
 1. Failing to set proper expectations. Leaders announce shifts in goals or direction without spelling out specifics, saying who’s accountable, or setting clear deadlines.
 2. Excusing subordinates from the pursuit of overall goals. Managers allow employees to focus narrowly on their units, and so responsibility for companywide performance gets “delegated” upward.
 3. Colluding with staff experts and consultants. Executives permit experts to deliver solutions without assuming responsibility for outcomes.
 4. Waiting while associates prepare, prepare, prepare. Endless preparation gives the illusion of progress but ultimately gets in the way.
 Managers can best avoid these traps through small personal experiments that minimize risk and offer early payback.
 For example: Faced with an unacceptable rate of late shipments, an operations VP at an aluminum company organized and conducted a “model week,” during which 100% of orders would ship on time. It was a success, and the company applied the lessons learned more broadly.
 </div>
</article-ideainbrief>The 50 years I’ve worked with business leaders have been marked by a dizzying rate of economic, social, and environmental change. In response, senior managers and scholars have produced a flood of research, articles, books, and consulting programs offering countless methods for adapting to new circumstances. Strangely, just about all those efforts overlook four basic behavior traps that thwart organizational change, particularly its elusive human dimension.

l9p3TRs31shVhwrydPjTfraI57k13vRLx+tprF0t9WijbZ3loJKTQTPRJiT1JhLGhCunyd2cToTSpaXYAaH/n7ijAfmlinbC1zHDM/CJt/5y5uS4O85bSjnGmmjonsl6AfidkZmS4wMvjzoBfgkOjw==

Reprint: R1009G
Again and again, senior managers fall into four behavioral traps that thwart organizational change. The behaviors are difficult to recognize and reverse because they serve to protect egos and prevent anxiety&#8212;but executives can overcome them.
First, managers fail to set proper expectations. When they announce major directional changes or new goals, they don&#8217;t spell out credible plans or specify who&#8217;s accountable. Second, they excuse subordinates from the pursuit of overall goals, allowing people to remain preoccupied with their own units. Third, executives essentially collude with staff experts and consultants by going along with a deeply flawed contract: The experts agree to deliver and implement a &#8220;product&#8221; (a new system, for instance) but don&#8217;t include measurable gains as part of the deal. Fourth, managers wait while associates overprepare. After challenging their employees to make needed improvements, they accept the response &#8220;Yes, but first we have to&#8230;&#8221; Finish the sentence: Train our people. Set up focus groups. Bring in Six Sigma. And so on.
The best way to confront the traps is to conduct small personal experiments that rapidly produce tangible results, incur little risk of failure, and are confined enough to demonstrate a clear link between trial and outcome. For example, one iron plant addressed quality problems by targeting five areas for improvement, setting clear and measurable goals for each, and holding team leaders accountable for outcomes. All five experiments succeeded and were extended to the rest of the plant. Quality problems eased up within 100 days and virtually disappeared a few months later.

Four Mistakes Leaders Keep Making

Reprint: R1009G Again and again, senior managers fall into four behavioral traps that thwart organizational change. The behaviors are difficult to recognize and reverse because they serve to protect egos and prevent anxiety—but executives can overcome them. First, managers fail to set proper expectations. When they announce major directional changes or new goals, they don’t spell out credible plans or specify who’s accountable. Second, they excuse subordinates from the pursuit of overall goals, allowing people to remain preoccupied with their own units. Third, executives essentially collude with staff experts and consultants by going along with a deeply flawed contract: The experts agree to deliver and implement a “product” (a new system, for instance) but don’t include measurable gains as part of the deal. Fourth, managers wait while associates overprepare. After challenging their employees to make needed improvements, they accept the response “Yes, but first we have to…” Finish the sentence: Train our people. Set up focus groups. Bring in Six Sigma. And so on. The best way to confront the traps is to conduct small personal experiments that rapidly produce tangible results, incur little risk of failure, and are confined enough to demonstrate a clear link between trial and outcome. For example, one iron plant addressed quality problems by targeting five areas for improvement, setting clear and measurable goals for each, and holding team leaders accountable for outcomes. All five experiments succeeded and were extended to the rest of the plant. Quality problems eased up within 100 days and virtually disappeared a few months later.

Four Mistakes Leaders Keep Making

Summary.

Partner Center