By Jonathan H. Westover, PhD
Listen to this article:
Abstract: This article discusses common reasons why organizational transformations often fail and provides a framework for more effectively leading change, exploring how resistance to change is natural but must be addressed empathetically rather than dismissively, and how establishing a strong sense of urgency for change is critical yet overlooked as leaders underestimate how important it is to convey that the status quo is unsustainable and major changes are urgently needed, in addition to developing a compelling future vision that frequently lacks vivid imagery and purpose. The article also stresses how transformation efforts commonly neglect organizational politics and key stakeholder interests, and emphasizes the importance of frequent, targeted communication on an ongoing basis to increase buy-in over time, as well as aligning structures and systems to support new goals by removing obstacles like outdated processes and metrics, and truly empowering others at all levels for broad-based action is said to be necessary for sustained progress through unpredictability, using Lego's remarkable turnaround after almost going bankrupt as an example of success through focus on communication, vision, stakeholder buy-in, enablers and empowerment.
I have worked with dozens of organizations to implement large-scale changes and transformations and have seen first-hand why so many of these efforts ultimately fall short of their goals or fail altogether. While the desire and motivation for change often comes from the right place, successfully leading people through major shifts in strategy, structure, process or culture is an immense challenge that many underestimate.
Today we will explore why transformations fail and offer a framework for more effectively leading change.
Resistance to Change is Natural and Understandable
One of the greatest hurdles to overcome in any organizational transformation is inherent human resistance to change (Kotter, 2014; Lewin, 1951). We intrinsically seek stability and continuity, as change inherently creates uncertainty and disruption to the status quo. However, resistance should not simply be viewed as a problem to overcome - it is a natural and rational response given our human wiring for safety and predictability. As such, effective change leaders must undertake real efforts to understand the perspectives of those resisting and address legitimate concerns in a caring, empathetic manner rather than with force or dismissal (Armenakis & Harris, 2009). Taking time to have open, two-way dialogue and giving space for emotions to be discussed can help reduce resistance by building trust and transparency.
Failing to Establish a Strong Sense of Urgency
A critical early step in any transformation outlined by best-selling author John Kotter (Kotter, 2014) is establishing a sense of urgency for change. Yet in my experience, this is one of the most commonly overlooked aspects of the change process. Leaders underestimate how important it is to help others truly feel and believe in their bones that the status quo is genuinely unsustainable and that major changes are urgently needed for future success. Without a compelling call to action, people are much less motivated to devote long hours to a drawn-out change process. Leaders must use real data to paint a picture of why the present way of working no longer serves organizational goals and why a bold new direction is imperative rather than optional if the company hopes to survive and thrive into the future.
Neglecting to Create a Powerful Vision
Another crucial early step in the change process outlined by Kotter is to develop a compelling vision for the future that motivates and guides action (Kotter, 2014). Yet in my experience, visions too often lack vivid imagery, emotion or an inspiring higher purpose. They may spell out simplistic numeric goals or featureless buzzwords without conveying a true picture of what the transformed organization will feel like or why the journey matters. An effective vision acts like a magnetic North for the change process; it paints a picture so compelling that people want to help bring it to life. Leaders must invest significant time crafting a vision in emotional and imaginative terms that will energize each person's sense of purpose, meaning and identity within the transformed organization.
Underestimating Political Undercurrents
Having worked with thousands of leaders over the years, what surprises me most is how often major change efforts fail to acknowledge organizational politics and dodge important political considerations (Brown and Eisenhardt, 1997). Yet culture is built through the competing interests, assumptions and influence of individuals across divisions. Any significant shift in strategy, resources or decision rights will inevitably unsettle existing power structures and alliances. As such, effective change leaders carefully map the interests of key internal stakeholders, understand existing political dynamics and proactively work to gain support from different constituencies early in the process rather than hoping obstacles will magically disappear later (Pfeffer, 1992). Addressing political realities up front through open discussion and mutual understanding helps reduce uncertainty and positions leaders to better address internal opposition as transformations unfold.
Failing to Communicate Compellingly and Repeatedly
Frequent, targeted communication has been shown empirically to increase buy-in and commitment during significant organizational changes (Armenakis et al., 1993; Kotter, 2012). Yet in practice, leaders too often treat communication as an afterthought rather than a strategic lever. They may deliver a presentation to kick things off rather than viewing communication as an ongoing process requiring multiple tailored mediums. As frontline workers are inundated with daily demands, ongoing transformation updates must cut through clutter in a way that is positive, inspiring yet also solution-focused. Leaders must adopt a systematic communication approach utilizing various vivid channels like newsletters, videos, employee forums and intranet sites that bring the vision to life, motivate action and address lingering uncertainties on an ongoing, consistent basis. Only then can change start to feel like "the way we do things around here."
Failing to Remove Obstacles to Change
For a new vision to take root and embed in daily operations, structures and systems must align to support - not hinder - the transformation underway (Kotter,_ 2014_). Yet in my experience, leaders often introduce inspiring new strategies that contradict longstanding cultural tacit rules or are obstructed by outdated performance systems, budgets or hierarchies. For example, empowering autonomous cross-functional teams may be impossible if budgets are still set top-down in rigid silos. As such, a simultaneous focus on removing structural barriers through clear actions like process redesign, job redefinitions, budget reform and revised metrics is crucial for effective enablement (Miller, 2002). Failure to align formal systems behind new goals practically ensures lapses back to the status quo. Proactive change management demands ongoing barrier removal to pave the way for sustainable progress.
Not Empowering Others for Broad-Based Action
As transformations inherently involve navigating unforeseen hurdles, empowering others at all levels to drive everyday decision-making, problem-solving and continuous improvement is necessary for sustained progress (Conger and Kanungo, 1987). Yet in practice, some leaders bog down grassroots efforts with red tape or hoard influence out of fear of ceding control. As a result, change stalls or plateaus as work remains stuck at the top. Truly empowering others involves fostering collaborative leadership, promoting learning agility and self-managing teams, distributing decision rights, and creating a interdependent culture defined by helping peers rather than micromanagement or territoriality (Gratton, 2011). Only by empowering broad ownership throughout levels can organizations adapt nimbly to embrace both planned and emergent changes on the often lengthy journey to transformation.
Industry Example: Lego's Remarkable Turnaround
A powerful industry example of successful organizational transformation is Lego's comeback story after coming close to bankruptcy in 2003. Faced with plummeting profits in traditional brick toys, new CEO Jørgen Vig Knudstorp established a sense of urgency by publicly stating Lego was in "deep, deep trouble" and was willing to change everything or go bankrupt trying (Nalebuff and Brandenburger, 1996). He created an incredibly compelling vision that Lego would become "the most inspiring play company in the world" with a portfolio well beyond bricks alone (Fast Company, 2011).
Knudstorp proactively addressed potential internal critics by conducting non-accusatory "change readiness assessments" and openly addressing fears. He implemented ongoing "Friday feedback forums" to build transparency (Lencioni, 2002). Structurally, Knudstorp removed silos by flattening organizational layers, used cross-functional teams for all new product development and gave frontline employees budget authority for experimentation. Empowered grassroots efforts eventually led to blockbuster reinventions like Lego Mindstorms, Lego Worlds video games and wildly popular Lego movies breathing new life into the brand. By focusing on communication, vision, stakeholder buy-in, structural enablers and empowerment, Knudstorp succeeded in transforming Lego culture and strategy where others had failed. The lessons from Lego's experience provide a powerful case study for leading large-scale organizational change.
Conclusion
While the idea of organizational transformation may seem simple, successful execution in reality is an immense, complex undertaking where failure is common. By understanding why past efforts have foundered and applying frameworks like those outlined here, leaders can increase chances of success through proactively establishing urgency, crafting compelling visions, communicating relentlessly, aligning systems, addressing politics, removing barriers and broadly empowering others in change. Though challenging, those who effectively lead people through major strategic shifts leave organizations far stronger and more able to prosper in a continuously evolving business landscape. I hope the perspectives and examples shared provide a useful starting point for driving strategic change in a thoughtful, inspired manner rooted in both research and real-world experience.
References
Armenakis, A. A., & Harris, S. G. (2009). Reflections: Our journey in organizational change research and practice. Journal of Change Management, 9(2), 127–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/14697010902879079
Armenakis, A. A., Harris, S. G., & Mossholder, K. W. (1993). Creating readiness for organizational change. Human Relations, 46(6), 681–703. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872679304600601
Brown, S. L., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (1997). The art of continuous change: Linking complexity theory and time-paced evolution in relentlessly shifting organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393807
Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1987). Toward a behavioral theory of charismatic leadership in organizational settings. Academy of Management Review, 12(4), 637–647. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1987.4306715
Fast Company. (2011, May 31). How Lego reinvented its brand—And became cool again. https://www.fastcompany.com/1661327/how-lego-reinvented-its-brand-and-became-cool-again
Gratton, L. (2011). The shift: The future of work is already here. HarperCollins.
Kotter, J. P. (2012). Leading change. Harvard Business Review, 90(1/2), 59–67.
Kotter, J. P. (2014). Accelerate: Building strategic agility for a faster-moving world. Harvard Business Review Press.
Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science. Harper.
Lencioni, P. (2002). The five dysfunctions of a team: A leadership fable. Jossey-Bass.
Miller, D. (2002). Successful change leaders: What makes them? Ivey Business Journal, 67(2), 24-30.
Nalebuff, B., & Brandenburger, A. (1996). Co-opetition. Currency Doubleday.
Pfeffer, J. (1992). Managing with power: Politics and influence in organizations. Harvard Business School Press.
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). Leading Change: Understanding Why Transformation Efforts Often Fail. Human Capital Leadership Review, 11(4). doi.org/10.70175/hclreview.2020.11.4.2
Comments