In a prior post, I talked about the practical matter of finding the critical mass, the right 20% of the people who need to be involved in a change. But I also referred to the situation where someone in a position of power is resisting the change. Coaching these people is hard work and the solution is often not obvious.
When you make popcorn to enjoy while watching a movie on a cold, weekend afternoon, there are always a few kernels that don’t get cooked. In some cultures, these are often called “old maids” and for some people – but not me – their crunchiness makes them the best part of the snack. No matter your preference, these kernels have had all the right things done to them… they have been put in oil/butter, had high heat applied, and have been shaken or stirred…and they still did not pop.
Successful organization changes often have to deal with unpopped kernels. The unpopped kernel problem occurs when a new strategy or transformation is initiated and leaders do all the right things to support the emergence of new behaviors, but get no results from a few managers. The organization describes the new behaviors that are important to the execution of the strategy and provides training on them. It incentivizes the new behavior and provides feedback on progress.
But, there are always some managers who do not get the message or refuse to make the shift. They are the unpopped kernels.
I first heard about the unpopped kernel problem at Allstate Corporation, the US insurance company, and I’ve seen it play out in change processes in the UK and the EU. It usually looks like this. A transformation effort in the organization is succeeding where many have failed. Leadership has done a great job of establishing a clear vision, aligning work and structure, and developing appropriate incentives in support of an overall culture change effort. The change is accelerated by paying attention to the system as a whole, not just one part of it. The change is moving forward but – in a culture that has grown a little stale over the years – it is clear that not everyone within the management ranks has gotten the message. These managers have been given chances, given feedback on their lack of alignment with the values, purpose, and strategy, and given coaching and support. And everybody is watching.
What has to be done – holding managers accountable, removing them from positions of power, or as the French like to say, “mets les dans le placard” (put them in the closet) – is easy to see, but as we all know from experience is hard to do on several levels. With courage and support, the leaders of the transformation can make the tough decision, make the change, and re-catalyze the change effort. When you see it happen, when you experience it, or when you have to do it, it is both difficult and liberating.
How leaders address this issue can play an important role in the change initiative’s success, can influence the workforce’s perception of leadership in the organization, and can determine whether the organization is agile enough to be effective in a rapidly changing world.
Managerial behavior has an important symbolic component. Like it or not, the workforce often “looks up” to people above them in the hierarchy. They can spend a lot of time watching what senior managers do and say and engage in some recreational gossiping to figure out what is important. But what if the managers they are watching are not aligned to the new strategy? It’s a “walk the talk” issue. If managers say something is important but don’t act as if it is important, people notice. If something doesn’t smell quite right, people are less likely to trust the system.
To be clear, I am not advocating for the removal of change resistors. The reasons for resistance often represent important information about a change that can be acknowledged and used to make a change process better. But in some situations where the appropriate amount of effort has been made to help people make change, and the behavioral change is not forthcoming, leaders have an important symbolic and operational obligation to address those individuals.
What we’ve found in many of these situations is that the workforce feels betrayed by leadership who got everybody all riled up about the importance of the last change and implicitly suggested that change would be over. Notice the word – betrayed. It was the word used by a manager we talked to was describing why the workforce was tired of change. That’s a powerful emotion and if it happens over and over, it’s not hard to imagine the emergence of cynicism in the culture.
