Leading Change

Bluntly said, organizational change is people change. It is not without problem or disappointment; neither is it undertaken with the leader hoping to remain in the good favor of all. It is a messy business that can only be attempted if you are certain that where you’re going is where those in the organization have asked you to take them. Anything else is fraud or egomania. It is likewise certain that not everyone in the organization will want to go with you although you’re direction is ostensibly the same as theirs. This is so because direction is always qualified, that is, who determines how we get there? Those in power who value their position and/or perceived investment in the organization have already resolved the change issue. What remains for them is the power issue. Depending on the depth of crisis in the organization, when a new leader arrives everyone may already know “we need change around here.” What isn’t known until the journey begins is the form that change will take: Who initiates it and who orchestrates it?

At issue in leading organizational change narratively is the leader’s appreciation for the lived experiences of members and the practices they have privileged. It is not a slavish confinement to honor everyone’s story but those that result in the practices the organization is known for. It’s important to hold this distinction because people will be upset at you and will leave your leadership, sometimes after they’ve first tried to wreck it. Another important distinction worth holding is that the goal of narrative leadership isn’t to preserve the organization but to preserve the people. The organization will change and in some cases not resemble anything it has been. It seems a little oxymoronic to say the goal is to preserve people yet be prepared for them to leave, doesn’t it?