I was talking about change
with a friend of mine today.
She mentioned an
organization that was planning to do some interesting new things.
What struck us both was
that we could each recall several instances where the initial person highlighting
an opportunity was unceremoniously dismissed, marginalized or otherwise rendered
powerless.
Ironically, in every
situation that came to mind, the organization ultimately moved in that new direction
after the person was gone.
It seems that companies
can take advice when it originates from people outside of their organization.
However, when an idea
originates from someone inside that person is far more likely to be attacked as
if they are a foreign body entering the organization’s blood stream.
Are “change martyrs” a
necessary part of the evolution process?
I agree. What I had to learn the hard way, is that you can’t push change through.
Not even (in fact, especially not) by pushing really, really hard.
More on Change Martyrs
I started reading Naked Conversations (by Robert Scoble and Shel Israel) on the plane the other day.The authors quoted Arthur Schopenhauer: “All truth passes through three stages: First, it is ridiculed; second, it is violently opposed; third it is acc…
Change Martyrs
In her Manage to Change blog, Ann Michael has an interesting post on Change Martyrs. By change martyr she refers to the situation were . . .the initial person highlighting an opportunity was unceremoniously dismissed, marginalized or otherwise rendered…
Alexander – I agree with you completely on both counts: it’s easy to ignore a change process that originates with someone from the outside AND that change agents can be their (our) own worst enemies!
It’s so hard to see how something must change and then take a breath, step back, and get the right people involved and on board. That also doesn’t mean forcing the change exactly the way you see it down anyone’s throat. Real change agents aren’t usually “my way or the highway” types of people.
They need to be open to an idea being refined and fleshed out to make it happen without letting the underlying “magic” of the idea be compromised to the point that it’s no longer meaningful. It’s a tough line to walk!
There is definitely something to that – I’ve been the change martyr myself on one occasion.
I think there’s a very simple reason for this:
External people will leave. You can accept their suggestions, show every intention of following through and once they’re gone the organization can safely and without challenge go on as it always changing nothing.
When the change idea comes from someone inside the organizations, this is of course impossible and the idea is therefore a lot more threatening.
That being said, I’m convinced that while many change agents encounter a lot of resistance, they create much of that resistance themselves. I have certainly been guilty of that.
You as a change agent can sabotage your own efforts by:
Pushing too hard
Not acknowledging people’s fears
Not listening
Being impatient
etc…
People from outside the organization may have an easier time accepting a slower pace of change because they’re not as involved.