Like a lot of quality professionals, I tend to think of myself as a change agent. However, leading change can be a frustrating venture, fraught with active and passive resistance, slow progress, and disappointing results. And yet I couldn't help but notice how many politicians campaign on a platform of change, most recently our newly elected President. Why is "change" such a welcome message from candidates and such an apparently threatening message when delivered in our own organizations?
Without any cynicism or sarcasm intended, I identified some key differences in these scenarios. Candidates touting "change" are highly visible, appear anxious to hear the concerns of their constituencies, and craft messages that seem responsive to the needs of voters. In our own organizations, "change" is often announced following a cloak of secrecy, undermined by poor communication and a lack of transparency, and rarely appears to be in response to the needs of the workforce.
So as "change agents," what can we learn from these two scenarios? I did some soul searching and decided that in the midst of a difficult change I need to be more visible, more approachable, more committed to listening to what people are saying, and more open to the concerns they express. Organizations might find more acceptance of change if they had to win the "votes" of their workforce through capturing the spirit of their hearts and minds.
