By Jonathan H. Westover, PhD
Listen to this article:
Abstract: This article explores how perspectives shape organizational leadership and the potential for change. Research shows perspectives are influenced by cognitive biases, social roles, and mental filters more than objective reality. While ingrained, perspectives can be reframed through approaches like growth mindset training, resilience studies demonstrating challenges are temporary, and leadership during crises like the 2008 auto industry downturn. Diverse perspectives improve complex problem-solving, though psychological safety is needed. Tools for shifting perspectives include design thinking, feedback systems, and self-reflection. Examples illustrate perspective shifts liberating resilience and innovation at a hospital, consulting firm, and non-profit. The article argues leaders should facilitate broadening perspectives through inclusion, dialogues, and personal introspection to maintain adaptability amid uncertainty. Changing perspectives unleashes insights, energy, and new solutions for growth.
As consultants and researchers, we are often brought in to help organizations address challenges and opportunities for growth. While the specific issues may vary, one theme tends to emerge again and again in my work - the importance of perspective. How we see situations, other people, and even ourselves has tremendous power to either limit or liberate positive change.
Today we will explore this concept through both research and application-oriented examples, ultimately arguing that shifting perspective is one of the most impactful ways for leaders and organizations to catalyze their potential.
The Lens We Live Through
A great deal of research has demonstrated the influence of perspective on our thought processes and behaviors. As psychologist Daniel Kahneman notes, we have two systems of thinking - System 1 operates automatically through mental shortcuts called heuristics, while System 2 allocates attention to effortful logical thinking (Kahneman, 2011). Significantly, System 1 dominates up to 95% of our daily decisions (ibid). This means the lens through which we initially perceive and interpret situations has profound sway.
Our natural tendencies lean towards negativity bias as well. Psychologist Roy Baumeister and others have found that "bad is stronger than good" - negative stimuli and experiences carry more psychological weight and impact than positive ones of equal intensity (Baumeister, Bratslavsky, Finkenauer, & Vohs, 2001). This bias shapes how readily we notice and recall problematic details over strengths and opportunities.
At the same time, sociologist Erving Goffman likened life to theater, with each of us playing social "roles" shaped significantly by organizational and cultural norms around us (Goffman, 1959). Our roles both reflect and refract the realities we experience. In essence, our perspectives are constructions - learned perceptions that can be unlearned and reconstructed when necessary.
Taking these concepts together, it's clear we don't see the world objectively, but through mental filters profoundly shaped by cognitive shortcuts, emotional biases, and sociocultural influences. This has practical importance for organizational leadership. If perspective influences what leaders and teams notice, believe, prioritize and ultimately do, doesn't it make sense to consider thoughtfully adjusting dysfunctional perspectives where needed?
Reframing for Resilience
A key starting point is recognizing that perspectives, though deeply ingrained, can and do change. Researchers Carol Dweck and Lisa Blackwell found even brief "growth mindset" interventions - emphasizing the malleability of attributes like intelligence - led students to maintain higher grades over time (Dweck & Blackwell, 2007).
Studies of resilience offer another angle. In the face of major crises or setbacks, some individuals bounce back with renewed determination while others become overwhelmed. Psychologist George Bonanno identified perspective as a core difference, with resilient people better able to reframe challenges in a way that preserves self-esteem and hope (Bonanno, 2004). They see reversals as temporary blips, not identity-defining failures.
Teams can likewise develop a shared resilience through reframing. In the auto industry crisis of 2008-2009, Ford CEO Alan Mulally rallied employees by recasting the threat not as a collapse, but an opportunity to streamline and future-proof the company (Mullaly & Lois, 2011). This perspective empowered swift, strategic action that ultimately led Ford to avoid bankruptcy when competitors faltered.
Whether on individual or collective levels, these examples speak to the power of proactively shifting perspective during difficult periods. Rather than feeling at mercy to outside forces, leaders who model reframing empower renewed focus and problem-solving. It's a lesson many organizations would do well to learn in our current turbulent climate.
Seeing Strategy Differently
Perspective also shapes strategic choices in important ways. For instance, firms that view competitors primarily as threats often miss opportunities to cooperate on industry challenges like infrastructure development or skills training.
At the same time, inwardly-focused companies may fail to recognize valuable perspectives from outside stakeholders. During periods of stagnation or decline, taking an "outside-in" view through an advisory board or customer council can yield important insights leaders had discounted due to bias or limited information (Porter, 1985).
Indeed, carefully cultivating diverse perspectives has benefits. Management researchers Scott Page and Lu Hong found that diverse groups consistently outperform homogenous ones on complex tasks, as each member brings unique heuristics, backgrounds and ways of thinking (Page, 2007). Diverse perspectives spark more questions, alternatives and innovative recombinations.
However, truly taking advantage means moving beyond just assembling diverse individuals. Research underscores that what matters most is whether a group establishes psychological safety for controversial ideas, open-minded inquiry and civil dissent (Edmondson, 1999; Kahnweiler, 2013). With the right environment and facilitation, different viewpoints can synergistically catalyze strategic breakthroughs.
In practice, perspective-driven strategy plays out through adaptive approaches like design thinking. At companies embracing this model, multi-disciplinary teams immerse themselves in customer and industry perspectives to redefine problems and identify unexpected solutions (Martin, 2009; Brown, 2008). Their ability to "think different" stems directly from broadening typically constrained organizational viewpoints.
A Process of Perspective Change
Of course, broadening perspective is rarely an overnight process. Psychologists Lawrence J. Sanna and Norbert Schwarz found that even small acts of reframing our experiences, like describing a challenging event in more positive terms, can incrementally shift cognitions and emotions over time (Sanna & Schwarz, 2003). It's through numerous small changes that larger perspective alterations tend to occur.
Research on organizational change offers guidance here. Authors like John Kotter emphasize engaging as many constituents as possible through an iterative, multi-step approach (Kotter, 1996). Early feedback helps surface unacknowledged perspectives, while ongoing dialogues normalize reframing discussions and keep new viewpoints top of mind. Over months, outlooks gradually evolve through this inclusive process.
Leaders also benefit from personal introspection on their own mental filters and blindspots. Tools like journaling one's automatic thoughts or interviewing others confidentially about one's strengths and areas for growth can promote valuable self-awareness (Linderbaum & Levy, 2010). With diligence, we identify and unlearn unhelpful perspectives that may subtly influence decisions and responses without recognition.
Application in Practice
Let me now share a few illustrative examples of organizations that have successfully shifted perspective to positively impact culture and performance:
Healthcare Organization
A mid-sized hospital was facing burnout, high turnover and quality lapses due to elevated workplace stress. Leadership launched confidential small group "experience exchanges," where frontline clinicians candidly shared overload concerns and ideas. This unearthed entrenched perspectives around limited resources as an unchangeable barrier.
Through facilitated discussions injecting design thinking techniques, groups reframed the constraints as challenges to collectively problem-solve. New workflows and resource reallocations followed, improving work-life balance while maintaining standards of care. Shifting the perspective unlocked previously undiscovered solutions and resilience.
Professional Services Firm
A consulting company found client acquisition plateauing as the market evolved. An advisory board of current and prospective customers provided an "outside-in" perspective on perceived gaps in services and approach. Executives realized their technology and industry expertise, while an asset, also constrained how they defined client challenges.
A subsequent workshop applied customer experience mapping to uncover unmet needs the firm had discounted. Reframing clients as partners launched an innovation process diversifying service offerings. New partnerships and a refreshed brand positioning expanded the pipeline within months. Perspective change drove competitive adaptation.
Non-profit Organization
A social advocacy group hit a fundraising lull after years of growth. Volunteer leaders attributed this to external conditions like the economy. An external consultant interviewed all levels and uncovered burnout from an "always doing more with less" mentality entrenched since the recession.
Facilitating appreciation of past successes while also envisioning a sustainable future, the consultant helped reshape perspectives around current constraints as temporary versus defining. Renewed energy coalesced around priority-setting, process improvements and establishing a rainy day fund. The group determined their capacity for impact relied more on internal mindsets than outside factors alone.
In each case, proactive perspective shifts liberated fresh thinking, adaptability and performance improvements. Leaders who model openness to reframing situations empower organizational learning and resilience.
Conclusion
Perspective matters profoundly for leadership and catalyzing change. Our ways of seeing and making sense of the world profoundly influence what stands out to us, what we believe is possible, and ultimately what actions we take. But perspectives, though deeply ingrained, are not fixed - they evolve through experience, self-reflection and social influences.
As consultants and researchers, part of our role is to excavate taken-for-granted perspectives that may be limiting growth, and collaboratively facilitate creative reframing. Leaders too must lead the way in cultivating an appetite for broadening perspectives within their organizations. Whether through inclusion, feedback systems, design thinking or personal introspection, proactively adjusting viewpoints maintains the adaptive edge needed to thrive amid uncertainty.
In the end, changing perspective is perhaps the most powerful change management tool available. It's not about positive spin for its own sake, but unleashing the insights, energy and fresh options that emerge when we open our minds to see challenges and opportunities in new, unconstrained ways. For organizations striving to catalyze their inherent potential, perspective change offers a path well worth continued exploration.
References
Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of general psychology, 5(4), 323–370. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.5.4.323
Bonanno, G. A. (2004). Loss, trauma, and human resilience: Have we underestimated the human capacity to thrive after extremely aversive events? American psychologist, 59(1), 20–28. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.20
Brown, T. (2008). Design thinking. Harvard business review, 86(6), 84-92.
Dweck, C. S., & Blackwell, L. S. (2007). Implicit theories and goals: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. In P. A. M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (p. 195–233). Sage Publications Ltd.
Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative science quarterly, 44(2), 350-383.
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Doubleday.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Kahnweiler, J. B. (2013). The introverted leader: Building on your quiet strength. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Harvard Business Review Press.
Linderbaum, B. A., & Levy, P. E. (2010). The development and validation of the Feedback Orientation Scale (FOS). Journal of Management, 36(6), 1372-1405.
Martin, R. (2009). The design of business: Why design thinking is the next competitive advantage. Harvard Business Press.
Mullaly, A., & Lois, T. (2011). Forcing change: How Ford tapped its inner strength to save itself--and lead the auto industry to prosperity again. Jossey-Bass.
Page, S. E. (2007). Making the difference: Applying a logic of diversity. Academy of Management Perspectives, 21(4), 6-20. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2007.27895335
Porter, M. E. (1985). Technology and competitive advantage. Journal of business strategy, 5(3), 60-78.
Sanna, L. J., & Schwarz, N. (2003). Debiasing the hindsight bias: The role of accessibility experiences and (mis) attributions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39(3), 287-295. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00528-6
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). Rethinking Perspective for Positive Change. Human Capital Leadership Review, 11(4). doi.org/10.70175/hclreview.2020.11.4.18
