Therefore Kotter advises leaders who want to implement changes to perform
a thorough analysis of their situation and problem. This analysis should take into
account the key factors and actors (partners, resistance and those possessing
information) and enable leaders to select and monitor the appropriate change
strategy. This strategy cannot be “one size fits all” in nature, but should take
different types of people, their interests and feelings into account. Attentive,
analytical thinking is required rather than mere operational stress and relying on
your “gut feeling”:
“Good people management is obviously the key to the implementation of this
analysis. But even excellent people management cannot compensate for a bad
choice of strategy and tactics. In a business world that is more and more
characterized by dynamics, the consequences of a too lax choice of methods have
to be taken very seriously” (Kotter 1999a, p. 51).
The next, common trap for change projects is fact-free communication, which
consists only of marketing slogans and raises more questions than it answers.
However, in such situations facts are the only thing that can counter confusion,
frustration, and rumors. Change communication should follow four simple maxims:
no secrets, no surprises, no hype and no empty promises (see Frankfurter
Allgemeine Zeitung, August 26, 2003).
3.2.7.4 Mourning and Reorientation
According to Manfred Kets de Vries, just as a person needs time to part with habits,
places or other people, organizations also have to “mourn.” Such processes are
common when companies discontinue old practices and begin new ones. An
enterprise goes through various stages, starting with shock and disbelief, through
letting go and finally accepting.
In the shock stage – after recognizing the impending changes – the employees
feel off-balance and seek security in routine activities. In the subsequent phase of
disbelief, vehement rejection and fear can arise. The employees cling to an
idealized version of the past and block the change through their passive behavior.
No wonder: the change threatens the relationships they have developed, the status
they have gained status, their freedom, and the skills they have developed.
At this point the leader should explain to the employees that continuing with the
status quo would have had even worse consequences, and what (realistic) benefits
the change will bring. To do so it is necessary to force the conflict, so that it is felt
collectively and along with it the need for change. There has to be a period of great
discomfort in order for people to leave their familiar “comfort zone” and leap into
the unknown.
When determining a change of course for their company, responsible leaders
should use the existent corporate culture as an “anchor” and point of identification,
rather than simply throwing it away. If the corporate vision succeeds in uniting the
company’s great past with its plans for the future, approval and support for change
will be the reward. At the same time, it is the responsibility of the leader to form an
168 3 Systemic Leadership or: Designing a World That Others Want to Be Part Of