Listen to this article:
Abstract: This article discusses research-based strategies that organizational leaders can use to effectively implement unpopular decisions and gain acceptance of necessary changes from employees and stakeholders. It outlines the importance of clear communication to explain the rationale and context behind tough choices. Leaders must be transparent in their decision-making process and involve stakeholders to address concerns and build ownership of outcomes. Addressing the negative emotions that arise and exploring alternative options or ways to mitigate impacts can help address psychological and practical issues. Enlisting champions and coalitions of supporters to reinforce the reasoning for decisions can boost consensus. Continued communication on outcomes and progress reinforces that the difficult period was necessary. Ultimately, navigating tough times requires combining these communication strategies with empathetic and honest leadership that cultivates trust and shared commitment to organizational goals and vision despite short-term hardship.
Making difficult decisions that negatively impact employees or stakeholders is one of the greatest challenges a leader can face. However, tough choices are sometimes necessary to ensure the long-term viability of an organization. The key is gaining acceptance of the change through effective leadership and communication.
Today we will explore research-based strategies that can help organizational leaders navigate the political and emotional terrain when implementing an unpopular decision.
Communicate the "Why"
One of the most important factors in gaining acceptance is explaining _why_ the decision must be made (Fairhurst, 2007). People are more willing to endure hardship if they understand the necessity behind it. Leaders must clearly articulate the rationale, even if it risks displaying vulnerability (Kotter, 2012). Research shows communication that establishes context and shares relevant data fosters trust in the decision-making process (Appelbaum et al., 2017). Leaders of a regional hospital, for instance, closed an underperforming rural clinic. They held town halls explaining rising costs due to low patient volumes endangered services at other facilities. Data on utilization and expenses demonstrated the financial implications. This thoughtful justification yielded less backlash than a unilateral announcement would have.
Be Transparent and Involve Stakeholders
In addition to communicating the reasons, sharing information and garnering input builds ownership of the outcome (Fairhurst, 2007). Leaders at a manufacturing plant proposing layoffs met with union representatives to discuss projected declines and brainstorm alternatives. This engagement honors stakeholders' expertise and circumvents perceptions of unilateral edicts from the "ivory tower." It also surfaces new solutions or adjustments to alleviate impact. Transparency fosters psychological safety that encourages cooperation during changes (Edmondson, 2018). Leaders who publicly admit uncertainty or ask for guidance come across as authentic and willing to learn from others (Kotter, 2012). This builds the trust essential for gaining assent on tough decisions.
Manage Emotions and Address Concerns
Unfavorable choices naturally stir difficult emotions that must be addressed (Appelbaum et al., 2017). Leaders holding town halls following a benefits cutback at a school district allocated time for questions and comments. They listened with empathy as teachers expressed fears over affordability. Leaders validated anxieties but reiterated fiscal realities requiring action. Normalizing upset through acknowledgment relieves pressure while restating necessity maintains momentum (Kotter, 2012). Addressing top concerns through repeated Q&As assuages uncertainty. Leaders who show they understand humanity's emotional side earn influence to guide people through change (Goleman et al., 2004). Clear answers demonstrate a firm foundation for decisions resisting emotional “sabotage” arguments (Fairhurst, 2007).
Consider Alternatives and Mitigation
Thoughtfully exploring options, even if the final decision remains, signals good-faith effort to lessen impact (Appelbaum et al., 2017). An energy company downsizing explored staggering layoffs or early retirement incentives versus a single termination date. Leaders proposed a phased rather than abrupt factory closure. Mitigation conveys care for people that cultivates commitment despite outcomes (Kotter, 2012). It also demonstrates comprehending stakeholders’ perspectives (Fairhurst, 2007). Alternatives lacking feasibility should still be discussed transparently. Leaders increased morale after a division sale by outlining career counseling and references writing to aid the transition. Addressing “what’s next” reassures those affected they are not abandoned.
Leverage Coalitions and Champions
Building coalitions of supporters helps gain acceptance by addressing concerns through various lenses (Fairhurst, 2007). Leaders rolled out salary freezes more smoothly by first briefing department heads, who then reinforced reasoning to their teams. “Championing an issue is far more persuasive than simply decreeing a decision” (Kotter, 2012, p. 91). Enlisting natural influencers leverages preexisting trust relationships (Goleman et al., 2004). Leaders of an insurance company facing cuts held small “living room” discussions with employees alongside supportive peers to foster dialogue. Diverse viewpoints surface nuances to address while consensus signal boosts justification (Appelbaum et al., 2017).
Reinforce Progress and Outcomes
Once implemented, promptly sharing outcomes reassures the decision's rationale and need for a difficult period (Appelbaum et al., 2017). Leaders periodically updated staff facing furloughs on financial metrics confirming projections. This demonstrated necessity while still being transparent about challenges. Publicly celebrating early wins acknowledges hardship and sacrifice towards shared goals. Recognizing not only volume targets met but also team member accomplishments fosters pride in progress. Continued communication sustains commitment to navigate remaining uncertainty together (Kotter, 2012). Outcome tracking supports rationale even for temporary setbacks, allowing patience as intended results materialize.
Lead with Empathy, Honesty and Hope
Above all, people accept tough choices from leaders they trust (Fairhurst, 2007). Displaying empathy, honesty and hope breeds the allegiance to withstand objections and endure short-term hardship (Goleman et al., 2004). Leaders who acknowledge struggle's human toll while rekindling vision convince followers the trials are worthwhile. Exemplifying these virtues through active listening and caring transparency validates stakeholders as valued partners (Kotter, 2012). It invests them with purpose strong enough to accept necessary evils for a brighter future. With fortitude and compassion, leaders gain willingness to walk the hard road together towards prosperity.
Conclusion
Navigating difficult decisions requires combining research-informed strategies with empathetic leadership. Clear communication establishing rationale, transparency involving stakeholders, addressing emotions and concerns, exploring alternatives and championing positive outcomes cultivates trust to accept inevitable trade-offs. While tough choices stir resistance, leaders who demonstrate care, honesty and hope about a shared vision earn influence to guide acceptance. Practical industry examples illustrate applying these techniques facilitates transitions even through trying periods. Ultimately, gaining cooperation on unpopular actions comes down to treating people with dignity through openness, consideration and conviction in a brighter horizon worth any struggles along the way. Effective communication and relationships strengthen resolve to weather challenges as united partners in progress.
References
Appelbaum, S. H., Degbe, M. C., MacDonald, O., & Nguyen-Quang, T.-S. (2015). Organizational outcomes of leadership style and resistance to change (Part One). Industrial and Commercial Training, 47(2), 73–80. https://doi.org/10.1108/ICT-07-2013-0045
Edmondson, A. (2018). The fearless organization: Creating psychological safety in the workplace for learning, innovation, and growth. John Wiley & Sons.
Fairhurst, G. T. (2007). Discursive leadership: In conversation with leadership psychology. Sage.
Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. E., & McKee, A. (2004). Primal leadership: Learning to lead with emotional intelligence. Harvard Business School Press.
Kotter, J. P. (2012). Leading change. Harvard Business Review Press.
Additional Reading
Westover, J. H. (2024). Optimizing Organizations: Reinvention through People, Adapted Mindsets, and the Dynamics of Change. HCI Academic Press. doi.org/10.70175/hclpress.2024.3
Westover, J. H. (2024). Reinventing Leadership: People-Centered Strategies for Empowering Organizational Change. HCI Academic Press. doi.org/10.70175/hclpress.2024.4
Westover, J. H. (2024). Cultivating Engagement: Mastering Inclusive Leadership, Culture Change, and Data-Informed Decision Making. HCI Academic Press. doi.org/10.70175/hclpress.2024.5
Westover, J. H. (2024). Energizing Innovation: Inspiring Peak Performance through Talent, Culture, and Growth. HCI Academic Press. doi.org/10.70175/hclpress.2024.6
Westover, J. H. (2024). Championing Performance: Aligning Organizational and Employee Trust, Purpose, and Well-Being. HCI Academic Press. doi.org/10.70175/hclpress.2024.7
Citation: Westover, J. H. (2024). Workforce Evolution: Strategies for Adapting to Changing Human Capital Needs. HCI Academic Press. doi.org/10.70175/hclpress.2024.8
Westover, J. H. (2024). Navigating Change: Keys to Organizational Agility, Innovation, and Impact. HCI Academic Press. doi.org/10.70175/hclpress.2024.11
Jonathan H. Westover, PhD is Chief Academic & Learning Officer (HCI Academy); Chair/Professor, Organizational Leadership (UVU); OD Consultant (Human Capital Innovations). Read Jonathan Westover's executive profile here.
Suggested Citation: Westover, J. H. (2024). Getting Acceptance for Tough Decisions. Human Capital Leadership Review, 14(2). doi.org/10.70175/hclreview.2020.14.2.5
