Topic how men and woman differ such as communication styles, influence tactics and leadership styles I also plan to a discuss the effect of gender roles and gender. The last is to discuss the sex diff
Running head: LEADING CHANGE 0
Leading Change: An Analysis of the necessary leadership strengths to implement Kotter’s Eight-Step Heart of Change
Introduction
When someone is asked to think of a great leader and the strengths that individual posses, there are many different descriptions that may come to mind. The research conducted by Gallup Scientists which was reported in Strengths Based Leadership by Tom Rath and Barry Conchie, suggests four main areas to describe leadership strengths: executing, influencing, relationship building, and strategic thinking which have thirty-four total combined sub-descriptors (24). As change is becoming a common practice among all businesses around the world, we must find and utilize these strengths in all leadership teams. So we know we need leaders and that we need change, the question is, what types of strengths do we need in a leadership team and how must they go about implementing change?
Thesis: The four main strengths of leadership, according to the SBL StrengthsFinder research, are all necessary to implement Kotter’s eight-step change process in an organization.
Historical Background
Change
The world we live in today is evolving faster than ever among people, places, products, markets, etc. You name it, it’s changing. In order to keep pace with competition and new technology in the evolving world, organizational change is inevitable if an organization wishes to survive. Organizational change is defined as the modification of leadership structures and business processes (Basu). Both external and internal factors together contribute to the need for various types of changes. Common changes in an organization range from a change of employee job roles, changing locations, and even entire reconstructions in an organization (Mavromatis and Oloffson 1).
Based on previous research, we can break down the various rational and importance of change into three general categories. The first is the population ecology theory, which suggests that change stems from the development of new organizations and those that replace existing structures. The second theory, rational adaptation theory, focuses on strategic changes along with individual organization changes developing from changes in the environment, threats, and opportunities. The final general theory, random transformation theory, proposes that organizations change in response to internal processes (Hannan and Freeman 150). Because change has become so prevalent around the world, having effective leadership teams in place is crucial to having a successful change process if an organization wishes to survive.
Strength Based Leadership
Strength Based Leadership was created and based on a 30-year research project conducted by Gallup scientist about 10 years ago. The research consisted of “20,000 in-depth interviews with leaders, 50 years of Gallup Polls about the worlds most admired leaders, and interviews with more than 10,000 followers around the world.” (Gallup). After the research was conducted, Authors Tom Rath and Barry Conchie put together the book, Strengths Based Leadership to share the results. Broadly speaking, there are three main findings from the research. First is that effective leaders always invest in their strengths. The second suggests that surrounding yourself with the right people leads to effective leaders. And the third, understanding followers’ needs is critical to being an effective leader (Gallup).
The research lead to the development of the StrengthsFinder assessment, of which the goal is to find the areas an individual thrives and has the ability to strengthen. Since creating the StrengthsFinder assessment, more than 7 million people have used the tool to find out more about their strengths (Gallup).The assessment consists of nearly 200 self-descriptors of which participants must respond to by deciding which item best describe themselves. For example, the descriptor may say, “I like to help people” on one side and “When things get tough and I need things done perfectly, I tend to rely on the strengths of the people on my team and don’t try to do it all myself”. Then, the participant would select which item best describes them. In addition, they must select the degree they believe it represents them on a scale from “Strongly describes me” to “neutral” (Asplund, Lopez, Hodges, and Harter 3). After completion of the assessment, participants receive a ranking of their strongest “Themes”. The researchers define a theme as, “a category of talents, which are defined as recurring and consistent patterns of thought, feeling, or behavior” (Asplund, Lopez, Hodges, and Harter 4). Total they have identified 34 themes of which each fall under four broader domains of leadership: executing, influencing, relationship building, and strategic thinking.
The research does not stop there. There is still one big question to be answered: Why do people follow? To answer this, Gallup conducted a study to find out what people need in a leader in order for them to want to follow that individual. They sampled more than 10,000 followers and asked them to list three words that described a leader in their lives. As a result of this study, they found there are four basic needs of followers: Trust, Compassion, Stability, and Hope (Rath and Conchie).
The executing domain describes leaders who know how to get things done/make things happen. Nine themes fall under the executing domain including achiever, arranger, belief, consistency, deliberative, discipline, focus, responsibility, and restorative (Rath and Conchie). As described by the Strength Based Leadership resources, the achiever is someone who has stamina and likes to work hard. An individual who scores high on the achiever strength enjoys being busy and productive. The arranger is typically very organized. They will search for a way to arrange resources to maximize time and efficiency. A score high in the belief theme indicates an individual that has strong core values and a purpose in life. A believer is deeply connected to their values and beliefs. Consistency represents individuals who understand the importance of treating everyone the same. These individuals are generally rule followers and predictable. If an individual is very careful in their decision-making, they may be defined as deliberative. Deliberative individuals are careful decision makers. They look for and prepare for obstacles they anticipate will occur. The discipline theme describes people who are very structured and often tend to create order. These individuals like and prefer routine daily schedules. Many of these individuals will follow a strict schedule. The focus area describes those who take direction and follow through. These individuals are great at prioritizing and then completing the tasks as necessary. Responsibility typically applies to anyone who takes ownership for his or her actions and values honesty and loyalty. The last theme under the executing domain is restorative. The restorative theme is one in which people are problem solvers. Specifically, they succeed at uncovering a problem and fixing it (Rath and Conchie). An individual does not need to possess all of these traits in order to fall under the executing domain. However, the more you exhibit, the more likely you are to be an executer.
The next domain stemming from the StrengthsFinder results is Influencing. Rath and Conchie describe the influencing domain by stating, “People with strength in this domain are always selling the team’s ideas inside and outside the organization” (Rath and Conchie 25). Someone who ranks high in the influencing domain is a good person to look toward to take charge and assure that the group’s vision is heard. Eight themes fall under the influencing domain: Activator, Command, Communication, Competition, Maximizer, Self-Assurance, Significance, and Woo (Rath and Conchie).
The activator is someone who has the ability to get things done and make things happen. They are able to do this by turning thoughts into action. Often times, activators are described as impatient. An individual who is said to have command is likely to have control of the situation. These individuals are usually the ones to make decisions for a group or team. As for the communication theme, these individuals in simplistic terms are good at communicating. It is easy for these individuals to express their thoughts in words. Competition, another theme under influencing, is the idea that individuals compare themselves to others in hopes of being the best. The maximizer is one who looks for the strengths of the group and utilizes them to help the team grow. They find something the group is good at and strive to make them the best at it. Self-assurance is the theme that discusses confidence in ones own life decisions. Significance is the concept in which an individual desires to be important to others. These individuals want others to recognize them. Finally, the Woo theme in this domain represents those who enjoy meeting new people, making a connection with them by breaking the ice, and ‘winning them over’. Someone who is good a “wooing” can be characterized as a “charmer” (Rath and Conchie).
The third domain proposed from the Gallup poll findings is Relationship Building. Relationship building is defined as, those individuals who “have the ability to create groups and organizations that are much greater than the sum of their parts” (Rath and Conchie 25). Adaptability, Developer, Connectedness, Empathy, Harmony, Includer, Individualization, Positivity, and Relator are the nine themes that make up the Relationship Building domain. To begin, adaptability is a theme that is similar to flexibility. Those who are adaptable tend to “go with the flow” and handle things as they come at them. The developer is able to see the potential of those around them. These individuals genuinely are happy for other people’s success and growth. Most of us know someone who believes that “everything happens for a reason” and that there is no such thing as a coincidence. Based on the strength based leadership approach, these individuals fit into the connectedness theme. Empathy is a characteristic that many people strive to develop in order to grow a relationship. Empathy is having the ability to put yourself in someone else’s shoes and imagine feeling the way they do. Conflict is something that can be both helpful and harmful to relationships. From the research conducted by the Gallup poll, they have defined the harmony theme as if conflict is not good for relationships. The harmony theme describes those who avoid conflict and look for areas in which they can agree on with others. The includer is another theme that describes individuals that are strong in building relationships. An includer does not like to see people left out and will go out of their way to include them. Although relationship builders want to include everyone, they also accept the differences among the group. This concept is defined as individualization. This is when someone enjoys the unique differences among people and wants to use them to their advantage. Most people enjoy being around optimistic rather than pessimistic people. Someone who is optimistic is likely to have great positivity. Positivity is the idea of contagious enthusiasm and ability to excite others around them. In turn, this positivity encourages others to work. A relator, the final theme under the relationship building domain, is one who likes working with friends and desires close relationships (Rath and Conchie).
The importance of building relationships is not surprising. In fact, it has been suggested that “humans are wired for social connection” (Umberson, Crosnoe, & Reczek 15). We, as a human species, both desire and actually need healthy relationships with others.
The forth and final domain established from the Gallup Poll is Strategic Thinking. Strategic thinkers are those who, “keep us all focused on what could be… they are constantly absorbing and analyzing information and helping the team make better decisions” (Rath and Conchie 26). The last eight themes all fall into the strategic thinking domain. They are Analytical, Context, Futuristic, Ideation, Input, Intellection, Learner, and Strategic. Analytical people are those who are able to identify all factors that affect a situation. Cause and affect is the way of thinking for analytical minds. The context theme portrays individuals that are fascinated by the history and background and using it to understand the current situation. Another theme of strategic thinking, futuristic, are those who have the ability to look into the future and create a vision. These people are also able to use their own vision of what is ahead to motivate others to look into the future. Not all strategic thinking is analytical with simple cause and affect. Another theme of strategic thinkers is ideation. Ideation individuals are able to come up with creative ideas with their imagination. They are able to think outside the box and develop ideas when others cannot. Critical thinking is assumed to be very important to successful leaders. Along with critical thinking comes the desire to know more and want to know all the information possible or in other words, input. Intellection is another feature of those who engage in critical thinking. Intellectual individuals are often the ‘thinkers’ of the group and like to have highly intellectual conversations with others. Many times when we use the term learner, we associate it with the word follower. However, these terms are not exactly the same. A follower is someone who takes after a leader. While on the other hand, a learner is someone who constantly seeks out ways to improve and learn new skills or methods. The most unsurprising theme of them all, strategic, also falls under the strategic thinking domain. Strategic describes individuals who find new solutions or alternative methods to move forward with a task when an obstacle arises. In addition, those who score high in the strategic theme notice patterns and issues and use them to find new ways to proceed with a task (Rath and Conchie).
Strategic thinking is another crucial element for a successful organization. According to the Harvard Business Review, “a strategic approach to leadership was, on average, 10 times more important to the perception of effectiveness” (Kabacoff). With that being said, it is not by any means an easy skill to master. Therefore, having this skill in your organization is something to look for, hold on to, and utilize to your advantage in order to grow a successful organization.
Kotter’s Eight Step Change Process
John Kotter originally wrote a book in 1996, Leading Change, that discusses why people often failed in their effort to implement change (Cohen). In the original book, Kotter presented an eight-step model for successful change in an organization. Although the book was a success, many people wanted more research and more advice. Because of a suggestion by Deloitte Consulting, Kotter collaborated with Dan Cohen to uncover stories from large-scale organizational changes by interviewing about 100 organizations. The results of their finding were published in their book, The Heart of Change, in 2002 (Cohen). Below is the visual representation of the Eight-step process for leading successful change: The Heart of Change model.
Source: Cohen, 2009, The Heart of Change Field Guide
Kotter and Cohen have broken the eight steps into three phases: creating a climate for change, engaging and enabling the whole organization, and implementing and sustaining the change. Within those phases are eight steps of change: Increase urgency, build guiding teams, get the vision right, communicate for buy-in, enable action, create short-term wins, don’t let up, and make it stick.
The first phase of the process, creating a climate for change, focuses on creating the necessary energy to foster change (Cohen). The first step, which falls into this phase, is creating a sense of urgency. In this step, the leaders must energize their followers with a “lets-go” attitude. There are several ways to create urgency among followers. One, show them why there is a need for change by displaying something they can see and feel. Two, provide outside evidence that change is necessary. Three, be cautious and look for alternatives to complacency and fear (Kotter and Cohen). The second step is to build a guiding team. A CEO simply cannot successfully implement change on their own. Rather, a team of the ‘right people’ and teamwork are required to create a successful guiding team. The right people are those who have the necessary skills, leadership, and credibility. A guiding team is composed of the appropriate knowledge, credibility, internal understanding of the organization, and formal authority coupled with managerial skills such as planning, organizing, and control. In addition, a guiding team will have visionary, community, and motivational leadership skills (Kotter and Cohen). An example provided by Kotter and Cohen of a successful guiding team was made up of representatives from each area of the organization including finance, human resources, corporate affairs, IT, regional leaders, and asset managers. The third step is to get the vision right. This step in the heart of change process is where a “clear, inspiring, and achievable picture of the future” is created (Cohen).
Engaging and enabling the whole organization is the second phase of the heart of change model. This second phase, centers around involving stakeholders through a demonstration of leadership (Cohen) and includes steps four, five, and six of the model. Step four is to communicate the vision for buy in. In this step, the vision and change strategies are communicated to as many people as possible in order to gain buy in and followers to act in ways that move toward the vision. The most successful messages of change are simple and heart-felt rather than complex. The fifth step is to empower or enable action. In order to obtain the required action, the barriers must be removed from the process. Barriers often times can include a boss who is stuck in their ways, poor evaluation and reward systems, and lack of information (Kotter and Cohen). By removing each of these obstacles, we are able to empower and enable action. The sixth step, creating short-term wins, is critical to gaining the involvement of stakeholders. Creating short-term wins, helps maintain, “faith in the change effort, emotionally rewards hard workers, keeps the critics at bay, and builds momentum” (Kotter and Cohen). Short-term wins, such as providing feedback to leaders to validate their vision, giving hard workers a ‘pat on the back’, and taking power away from critics, will help keep the change efforts strong (Kotter and Cohen).
The third and final phase, implementing and sustaining the change, suggests, “Insuring that the change is lasting by leaders being tenacious” (Cohen). The final two steps, seven and eight, are in this phase. The seventh step is to not give up and maintain momentum. The key in this step is not to celebrate a successful win too early. Many organizations simply reduce urgency when they see the first sign of a completed change process. A simple rational for this is that change is exhausting and an organization is likely to move on to the next task as soon as possible. In order to insure the continued success of a change, the urgency, energy level, vision, leaders, and its followers all must remain strong (Kotter and Cohen). The eighth and final step in the heart of change is to make the change stick. Although it is the last step, it can arguably be the most important because of the difficulty that comes along with it. In order to make the change stick, an organization must change their deeply rooted culture and shared values. In order to do so, “leaders must recognize, reward, and model the new behavior in order to embed it in the fabric of the organization and make the change ‘the way we do business here’” (Cohen). In addition to rewarding the new culture among followers, people in power should be those who have embraced the new culture.
By following the Heart of Change model, an organization can implement a change effectively. However, in today’s fast pace and evolving world, change is inevitable and sooner or later organizations will have to go through change again whether it be because of external or internal forces. Therefore, we know that in today’s world, change is happening and it happens more often than many would like. We also know that there are certain leadership domains and themes that describe successful leaders. In addition, we have the tool necessary to effectively implement change, Kotter and Cohen’s Heart of Change model. To have the most effective implementation of the Heart of Change model, each domain of the Strength Based Leadership must play a role in the process.
Analysis
Each step in Kotter’s Heart of Change Model requires at least one domain of leadership identified in the Strengths Based Leadership. The first step, urgency, focuses on creating a “lets go” attitude. The Influencing domain of Strengths Based Leadership is demonstrated in this step. Specifically, the activator theme, which describes those who are able to get things done by turning thoughts into action (Rath and Conchie). An example of this can be demonstrated from a company that motivated their employees to change. The company videotaped their customers complaining about the craftsman’s work and the manager played the video in front of the craftsman (Kotter and Cohen). Because the craftsman were able to physically see and hear the customers complaints first hand instead of by word of mouth from the manager, the sense of urgency and desire to change was elevated. The manager engaged in the activator theme by using a physical tool to turn words into action.
The second step, building guiding teams, relates heavily to the relationship building domain in the Strengths Based Leadership. Both of these concepts focus on the importance of developing strong relationships between leaders, followers, and peers. Developer, includer, and individualization are three themes required to complete the second step of the Heart of Change model. One CEO was able to put together a successful team to focus on organic growth. His tactic was to choose a member from each major section of the organization such as “finance, HR, corporate affairs, IT, regional leaders, and asset managers” by doing this, he was able to ensure that each area of the company was represented (Kotter and Cohen). In this example, the CEO utilized all three themes. He was a developer because he was able to identify the potential of bringing these individuals together. The CEO was also an includer by making sure to include a representative from each area of the organization. In addition, he utilized individualization because he realized that each member was unique with different perspectives and by bringing them all in, demonstrated how he valued each one of their opinions.
During the third step of the change process, getting the vision right, both executing and strategic thinking domains are necessary for proper implementation. Kotter and Cohen used an example of a real estate agent and a buyer to demonstrate getting the vision right. The real estate agent suggested the buyer make a list of everything they wanted to fix and to get it done in the first six months. However, the buyer wanted to take five years and slowly get everything done. The real estate agent said they recommended completing everything in the first six months or it wont get done because buyers simply get used to how things are and don’t end up fixing it. In the end, five years later, the buyer admitted that anything that wasn’t completed in the first six months never got finished (Kotter and Cohen). The executing themes played a crucial role in order to getting the vision right by inspiring an ‘achievable picture of the future’. The achiever role is someone who has stamina and works hard to get things done. In the agent-buyer example, stamina and hard work are required in order to complete the changes. The arranger and discipline themes are required because one must organize their time and priorities to make the fixes in six months. Also, the focus theme is crucial in this example because the buyer needs to prioritize, complete the tasks, and follow through with the plan. The domain of strategic thinking is also necessary to create a vision. Specifically, an individual needs to be futuristic if they wish to look into the future and create a vision of the finished project. In the example provided by Kotter and Cohen, the buyer needed to be able to imagine what the finished project will look like.
Communicating for buy-in is the forth step in the Heart of Change model and also requires an element from Strengths Based Leadership. With the influencing domain, leaders should utilize the communication theme to gain buy-in. Kotter and Cohen suggest that in order for effective communication the “the message communicated to employees must be simple and heartfelt, not complex and technocratic”. Those who are strong in the Strength Based Leadership Communication theme are therefore good people to communicate the change efforts because they are able to express their complex thoughts in simplified words that are easy for followers to understand.
Enabling action, the fifth step in the Heart of Change model, requires elements of both the relationship building and strategic thinking domain. Within the relationship building domain, positivity should be utilized to help enable action. There was a company whose managers only received direction when something was wrong and needed fixing. Because of all the negative feedback, the employees agreed to have meetings in which they discuss areas of improvement. However, these meetings turned into a time for employees to complain about different aspects of the job. Because of all the negativity, employee moral is down and nothing is improving. The company decided to record a couple of employees going about their jobs. The employers were able to watch the tape back, identify areas that could be improved, and implement ways to make work better (Kotter and Cohen). From this example, we can see that without positivity it is difficult to identify realistic solutions and foster improvement as a team. With contagious positivity, employees are motivated to improve. This example also demonstrates the benefits of strategic thinking. The company utilized the strategic theme by coming up with alternative methods to approach team meetings and searching for new solutions.
The sixth step, creating short-term wins, involves the arranger and achiever themes from the executing domain as well as the woo theme from the influencing domain. In the example from Kotter and Cohen, a transportation department was looking to make several changes in order to create better service for their clients. They knew the senator, who also happened to own a tucking company, could be of potential help. So, they approached him and asked for recommendations as to what can be improved. They were not thrilled with his answer but knew that if they resolved his issue, he would be satisfied and, in turn, be of assistance to them on bigger projects later on. Therefore, winning over the senator was a short- term win. The trucking company utilized the arranger and achieve themes by staying organized and looking for ways to be efficient. They realized that helping the senator now, will make things more efficient long term and maximize their resources to get things done. The company utilized the Woo theme from the influencing domain by winning over the senator in hopes of him returning the favor later.
The seventh step, don’t let up, centers around the strategic domain of Strengths Based Leadership. The most common example of giving up starts when an organization prematurely declares a successfully completed change. As a result, urgency declines. In order to avoid this, the company should activate the learner and futuristic themes. A learner is someone who constantly searches for area of improvement and ways to do better. They are always finding new skills and methods to implement. This theme is crucial because during the seventh step it is important to continuously look for areas that need improvement. Since today’s world is continuously changing, companies need to always look for ways to learn more. The futuristic approach also ties in here. It is important to always keep focused on the vision and to not let up when parts of the vision start to take shape.
The eighth and final step in the Heart of Change model is to make it stick. This step requires command, maximizer, and woo themes from the influencing domain. A company that is able to make the change stick, puts people in power that have absorbed and embraced the new culture. The people in power during and after a change process need to command the situation with their control. If those in power do not take control of the situation, the followers are going to resist the change and revert to their old ways. Also, the leaders need to utilize the maximizer theme. Kotter and Cohen suggest that those in power should value the new culture. Therefore, the maximizer theme is exhibited because those in power are selected as the individuals who have strong shared cultural values that mirror the organizations values. They then use this to help the followers grow and accept the new culture. And finally, if leaders are able to win over their followers by getting them to embrace the new culture, they are one step closer to making the change stick.
Conclusion
After reviewing each of the four domains of Strengths Based Leadership, the 34 supporting themes, and Kotters Eight-Step Heart of Change Model it is evident that all four domains of leadership are necessary to implement the change process in an organization. Change is becoming inevitable in todays world. It is almost as if we must stay in a continuous change effort in order to survive among the competition. It is not necessary or even feasible for an individual to possess and thrive in all four domains of leadership, however developing a team of individuals who, as a whole, represent each domain can help lead an organization through change. Rath and Conchie said it best, “Although individuals need not be well-rounded, teams should be” (23). Teams that identify their members’ strengths and follow the Heart of Change Model are on their way to successful change.
References
Asplund, J., Lopez, S., Hodges, T., & Harter, J., (2007). The Clifton StrengthsFinder 2.0 Technical Report: Development and Validation. The Gallup Organization. Princeton, NJ. Retrieved from http://strengths.gallup.com/private/Resources/CSFTechnicalReport031005.pdf
Basu, C. (n.d.). What is the Meaning of Organizational Change? Retrieved February 01, 2017 from http://smallbusiness.chron.com/meaning-organizational-change-35121.html
Cohen, D. (2009). The heart of change field guide: tools and tactics for leading change in your organization. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Gallup Organization (n.d.). Strengths Dashboard. Retrieved February 02, 2017, from httpa://strengths.gallup.com/110251/Gallups-Leadership-Research.aspx
Hannan, M., & Freeman, J. (1984). Structural Inertia and Organizational Change. American Sociological Review, 49(2), 149-164. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2095567
Kabacoff, R. (2014, February 07). Develop Strategic Thinkers Throughout Your Organization. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved February 12, 2017 from http://hbr.org/2014/02/develop-strategic-thinkers-throughout-your-organization
Kotter, J., & Cohen, D. (2002). Real-Life Stories of How People Change Their Organizations: The Heart of Change. Executive Book Summaries. Retrieved from https://www.cu.edu/sites/default/files/ExecSummaries-Heart_of_Change.pdf
Mavromatis, M. & Olofsson, J. (2013). Leading organizational change. Chalmers University of Technology. Retrieved from http://publications.lib.chalmers.se/records/fulltext/183830/183830.pdf.
Rath, T., & Conchie, B. (2008). Strengths based leadership: great leaders, teams, and why people follow. New York: Gallup Press.
Umberson, D., Crosnoe, R., & Reczek, C. (2010). Social Relationships and Health Behavior Across the Life Course. Annual Review of Sociology, 36, 139-157. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/25735072
