May’s Culture Reflection summarized the limitations of “buy-in” and advocated for a more theoretically grounded method of effecting organizational change.
This month, we cover other aspects of “Buy In” and why leaders need to understand the differences.
This understanding is key to why some change initiatives succeed and others fail.
Before diving into how leaders can mitigate the loss of purpose and lead through change – it is critical to distinguish between organizational identity and commitment.
These two concepts are frequently used interchangeably but are fundamentally different.
Organizational Identity is about employees deeply connecting to the company’s core attributes, and aligning their sense of self with the company’s values, which result in loyalty and actions aligned with organizational goals.
When the needs of the project align with the employee’s personal values, the employees become more engaged and committed. Otherwise, they don’t ultimately support or commit to change.
Point – change needs to start with and focus on organizational identity, not commitment.
Takeaways
Organizational identity can be adaptive or subtractive
Adaptive Change – Incremental adjustments to organizational identity in response to market shifts.
Subtractive Change – Fundamental changes that cause the organization to lose its core attributes, often due to mergers or spin-offs, leading to increased workplace anxiety and conflict. Although the implementation approach is similar, this type of change requires more effort and focus.
Implementing Change
Leaders should act as bridges between the current and desired organizational identities, adopting and demonstrating the core attributes of both.
This includes: 1)reinforcing value of current identities through actions and communications and 2) creating a consistent rhetoric to bridge the gap between existing and future identities.
Walking the Talk
Leaders’ approaches will vary, but using consistent labels and meanings helps maintain the connection between old and new identities. Modern charismatic leadership involves inspiring followers to prioritize collective interests, strengthening their connection to the mission.
And effective vision communication inspires employees to pursue the future vision of the organization, aligning with the new organizational identity.
The Challenge
Quantitative Validation – there is a lack of quantitative data supporting these theoretical approaches. Additional analysis is needed to measure and predict the outcomes of implementing change through organizational identity.
Conclusion
While Daan van Knippenberg, contributing author of Making Sense of Who We Are: Leadership and Organizational Identity, doesn’t offer a definitive step-by-step guide for implementing change, the book provides a valuable framework to move beyond the fallacy of “buy-in.”
And this framework leverages theory to create a deliberate, supported, and repeatable process for leading change.
While I recognize the development of a practical step-by-step guide is necessary and until such a guide exists, many leaders will remain bought into the tried and trusted approach to leading change – “buy-in.”
The above synopsis is from an original research paper submitted to Vanderbilt University’s Leadership & Learning Doctoral Program.
Read the original paper – Bought Into “Buy In” – A Leadership Fallacy.
About the author
William Lindstrom found his career niche in helping organizations achieve their business and financial objectives through technology and analytics. Read More
