|
Can only change at the top ensure change within the organisation?
Sure, you need change at the top. You wish to see that the top leadership takes things seriously and that they are on the path of change. It may be that they themselves have declared these intentions, conscious of the importance of their role modelling. If it goes that way, bingo! But sometimes it doesn't. There is a spectrum of leadership-at-the-top behaviours. On one end: total support, clear leadership and a pristine role model with high awareness of the importance of their behaviours. At the other end of the spectrum: total blockage, lack of support and unhelpful behaviours that jeopardise change efforts made in many other parts of the organisation. Success at that end of the spectrum happens despite leadership, not because of it. And there are, of course, situations in between! Conventional wisdom says that there is a good correlation between leadership and changes, but reality tells us that it is not often the case.
'Change at the top' is obviously desirable, but Viral Change TM does not wait until this is happening. The power of the distributed leadership - mainly across the Champions network - often leads to advances on the ground not mirrored at the top. Of course, this may be a problem. Champions often tell us about these 'disconnects' and their worries about taking risks with no consequent support. Our general advice is usually one of 'suspend judgement'. Unless there is notorious toxicity in the system (leadership does NOT want the changes, no matter how much of a distributed leadership is pushing for them), many so-so leadership teams - which were supposed to lead but didn't jump on the wagon at the last meeting - will see tipping points and changes occurring when they open the windows. And then they will suddenly become fully supportive and they may even try to take credit for it!
 Subscribe to the The Chalfont Project FAQs RSS feed >>
|
