I just finished up an exercise in mapping the major changes and seismic shifts over the years of my work life: corporate, startup, academic and consulting. I thought it might be interesting to try to identify patterns or trends if any...looking for the constants in the turbulence of steady change. And there seemed to be some - the changes and shifts do not appear to simply be random inflection points.
The first thing I noticed is that every significant change – whether on an institutional or individual basis – centered around three dynamics:
1. A deliberate shift in focus;
2. The engenderment of different results; and
3. A new paradigm of participation or leadership.
The shift in focus is embodied in strategy. Triggered by dissatisfaction – internally to an organization or individual. Or sometimes externally due to circumstances. Either way, the shift in focus either preceded the actual change or was an integral part of it. And it was often embodied or shrouded in an explicit strategic shift or articulated strategy change. In other words, there was always an element of planning to it if it was internally driven. And even the external circumstances driving change were usually accompanied by – or resulted in – internal responses.
The second dynamic I noticed, the engenderment of different results, seemed to be all about execution of the strategy. The key in every case, though, was that the results were different from prior results. In some cases, better. In other cases, not so much. But, in every case, something significant had happened and the results were different. In fact, sometimes the results were measured on an entirely different set of metrics (but in the normal business setting the objective of the change is usually improved financial results).
The third – but not necessarily the sequentially last – dynamic is what I am calling the new paradigm of participation. It is the WHO of change – either intentional or accidental. Who is involved? Who becomes the noticeably different participant or leader? Who is most impacted? And, honestly, in every change I mapped, if an institution or organization was involved the change itself involved different participants and leaders. That may be the most important dynamic of change to always remain mindful of. Sometimes it happens before the actual change. Sometimes concurrent to the actual change. And even, but less often, following the actual change. But the evidence indicates that it always happens in association with the change.
For the most part, the trigger mechanism of the change was the acknowledgement of dissatisfaction, either internal to the organization or external. That dissatisfaction then led to an intervention by leadership into one of the three dynamics: a change in strategy, a change in measurable results or a change in the team. And once triggered by one of those three changed dynamics, changes in the other two were inevitable. For instance, if the change initially occurs in the team – either the participants on the team or in the leadership of the team (the first dynamic in this case), the newly formed team/leadership will inevitably want to change, or at least tweak, the strategy (the second dynamic) leading to a change in how results are measured (the third dynamic). In what I have seen, the three dynamics always go hand-in-hand.
So those three dynamics: a deliberate shift in focus, the engenderment of different results, and a new paradigm of participation (or leadership as the case may be) seem to be the pattern of change in my experience. But then, another, maybe more important, pattern emerged – significant changes seemed to happen every 2 or 3 years. So, did the frequency or rate of change – even if the changes were unrelated – seem to follow a pattern? I think so. Have you noticed that in your career or work?
And then I noticed from this mapping exercise (and maybe most significantly of all) when more time passed without one of those changes, either a professional or organizational staleness seemed to set in.
The changes were truly transformative when all three dynamics were significant, highly visible, and broadly supported. Maybe you cannot have one without the other two – I don’t know. But I do know where the changes were widely embraced and the changes were positive and long-lasting, all three dynamics were clearly in play.
Try the exercise yourself (all you need is a blank piece of paper) and arrive at your own conclusions – how has change progressed in your work life?
©2021 North Riverside Partners LLC
Comments