9.5: Initiating Change
I am no longer one to fear about change. I’ve found through reflection upon changes in my life, even those that resulted in collectively worse circumstances, that an opportunity for learning and growth must always be realized and valued. Change does not always excite me. There is always uncertainty and often more time and energy (work) expended, at least in the short term. However, one of my strongest characteristics is adaptability, and it serves me and others as the voice of reason and patience during major change. “What if it doesn’t work?” I often respond, “What if it does?”
The key to initiating effective change is leadership, and that is what inspired the video interview Initiating Change: An Interview with the Principal. Drawing upon my personal experiences with change and reflecting upon Change or Die (Alan Deutschman, Fast Company, May 1, 2005), I developed a series of questions for the principal at my mentoring high school. She has successfully implemented major changes in a large and diverse setting--major changes that are really only small steps on the road to the masterful and holistic changes she will begin to see take shape over the next few years. Since the interview questions themselves are reflective in nature, please watch the video now in that context.
Considering change from three perspectives: leader, facilitator, and subject.
As the leader of change, one is often the mastermind who provides the grand vision, direction and motivation. This vision inspires a certain immediacy that is indicated in Lupold’s remarks about her staff’s reaction to contemplative time she spends away from the school. She believes that when she asks, “What do you think about…?” that her staff interprets the question as, “How quickly can we…?” With strong leadership comes the luxury of power and authority. Inspiration, curiosity and intrigue quickly initiate the formation and responsible consideration of new ideas.
As I have watched various leaders pass in front of me at P.F. Chang’s, it is interesting to observe their objectives, priorities, and the style in which they chose to implement them. Louise’s style was the most effective. She knew coming in, that there were non-negotiable changes that she wanted to make in our restaurant. She was forthright in outlining those changes and consistent in holding staff accountable. Many employees were unhappy, some even quit, but it did not take long for Louise’s leadership to positively impact the performance and morale of the staff.
Chris on the other hand was detached and reactionary. By the time he took over, the restaurant was performing very well under Louise’s watch. As an extension of Louise’s values, there were not many areas left for him to shake-up. Chris seemed to take upon himself a few personal objectives which left the remaining managers without direction. His style became disconnected, and his priorities appeared whimsical and inconsistent to the staff, since he provided no clear vision or purpose. As a leader and instrument of change, he cultivated much frustration and confusion about where we were headed.
Through professional and fraternity experiences, I have initiated changes of varying degrees. I prefer, like Lupold and Louise, to execute an inclusive and communicative style of leadership. I build a team of individuals who I believe are competent and capable of getting the job done. I fall short, however, with the strong hand. I am hesitant to demonstrate the fullest confidence in my idea and tend to compromise non-negotiables too soon, leaving me asking myself later, “what if?” I also believe in rapid change—quick and painless. This often means either pulling a few stragglers up by their bootstraps or leaving them behind.
In contrast to the leaders who are often shielded by the ivory tower or at the very least distanced by location or personnel, facilitators of change are in the trenches and face the most challenges as mediators and enforcers. They are chosen, as Lupold states, because leaders know they will help get the job done. Being a chosen few, facilitators are often privy to more sensitive information about the nature of the change. They believe in the change and in the results that hope to come from it, but are also confronted by the resistance that subjects rarely display in the presence of the leaders. Facilitators are sympathetic, and listen to reaction as changes are implemented. They truly see change from multiple perspectives, pipe dreams to impossibilities. They help interpret the reasons for the process and reinforce the hopeful results, while at the same time offering alternatives back to the leaders. They are quick to enforce the new ideals, but not harsh in tone or judgment. They understand that change is difficult for many to execute, and it requires time to adjust. That is why they masterfully maintain focus by recognizing small successes within their sphere of influence that align with the overall objectives. In their supervisory role, facilitators keep their subjects on task.
I thrive in this particular role. Under Louise’s leadership at P.F. Chang’s, her directive was always clear and consistent with the rest of her management team—her facilitators. We maintained open communication about tactics and objectives to implement her standards in our respective departments. There was a clear purpose, sound reasons, and consistent accountability. Several editions of my Wonton Scoop were dedicated to her priorities and expectations. I saw value in the changes she wanted to make, and in some cases had been trying to get former leaders to implement them. Managers had the direction and autonomy needed to effectively mold a new staff out of the one I had managed for almost two years. We spent time communicating and listening to suggestions, but had the strong arm of our leader at our back if we were challenged.
Why then, after 3 months of her administration, was I the only manager left? The others saw themselves as subjects, not facilitators. They lacked buy-in to the vision and continuously speculated about what the changes held in store for them. They were unable to perform or create autonomously and remain true to the new vision. Since our entire management team was already intact when Louise arrived, this is a good example of why facilitators of change are more effective when chosen by the leaders, not adopted and adapted.
A subject of change often means that change is being imposed upon you without choice or consideration. Whether an imposition upon your character, your time, or your routine, this is where change meets the most resistance. Because change happens to you, we generally react poorly to the interruptions it causes. We do exactly what the other managers did at P.F. Chang’s when Louise arrived. We resist and criticize because we think we know best and are unwilling to recognize the possibility of a better way. We speculate only about the worst-case-scenario and allow our imaginations to run wild with undesirable possibilities. Pessimism and negativity manifest themselves in our attitudes and our performance as we undermine the efforts of leaders and facilitators.
I know I have reacted exactly this way to changes in my roles or responsibilities at work, to new teachers or directors of programs I was involved in while attending school, and especially to the imposing changes in the fundamental operations, design, concept and target market that were handed down to me as a bw-3 franchisee. It is difficult to commit faithfully to a system that is yet unproven when what you are doing appears to be working just fine. It is even harder when the change replaces (by adapting or eliminating) systems you have created and implemented out of necessity because they were once lacking. Both at P.F. Chang’s and at bw-3™, I produced very effective operational systems that were later adapted or replaced in the mainstream. Admittedly, this was easier to swallow at P.F. Chang’s, since that is not a career-path for me. Contributions I make there are for the greater good, and I have little use for the recognition or battles. On the other hand, bw-3 was my life’s work at the time, and I was very sensitive to even the suggestion of tampering with my operations, unless it was proven to be as efficient.
Lupold would describe being the subject of change as sweeping change. By this definition, sweeping change is a matter of perspective. I believe, however, that sweeping change better describes the pace and level of expectation of initiating change. Deutschman proposes that sweeping changes of this manner are often more effective because they yield fast results. These results can help to squash resistance and increase buy-in at an early stage. These are the sort of small successes that facilitators can build upon that I discussed earlier.
Another point that should not go unmentioned is that change has been found to be primarily a personal and emotional journey. When we consider making any change, from policy and law to a new car or new toothpaste, we are ultimately considering certain behavioral changes that we or others will have to make. Motivating people to change, Deutschman reports, is highly emotional but not linked as strongly to fear as you might think. Lasting change is most effectively implemented when it is linked to the emotion of joy. It is important to make the process fun, celebrate successes, and make personal connections to the benefits.
Change simply boils down to good-bye. We are asked to abandon things to which we are accustomed and embrace something new and unfamiliar. It is under this sometimes sad light that growth and learning becomes the joyous motivation for personal change. A long time ago I read a poem about severed relationships, divorce in particular. But I found this poem highly applicable to all change, perhaps because I did not have the context of a severed relationship in which to interpret it at the time. Others cannot relate to my deeper interpretation, but if you can, you will find that it sums up my attitude about change.
As teachers, we must value the continuous nature of change for two reasons. First, as Lupold indicated, technology will not allow us to stand still or go backward. How teachers grow, compete, and challenge ourselves and our students to perform depends greatly upon how we respond to the demands of a “flattening” world (The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century, by Thomas L. Friedman). How will we be outstanding as teachers, for our schools and our students, and develop our students to compete in a continually more leveled playing field?
Second, I believe teachers generally recognize that our education system is an imperfect one. We continue to model successful schools and curricula, but we do not have all the answers yet. That is exactly why teachers should embrace change and minimize resistance. Unless we whole-heartedly participate in the experimental search for the best way to educate and serve our students and communities, we will continue to be stuck as agents of the same mediocrity.
So, how would I respond as a teacher in Lupold’s school? I truly respect her as a leader, and she has a proven record as a powerful and positive instrument of change. I believe in what she is trying to accomplish for Lawrence North High School. I would hope to be chosen as a facilitator, helping to interpret change and build support within my sphere of influence. If not, I would hope to take my position outside the circle of privileged information and ask questions about the process, consciously trying not to fall into the trap of feeling like a discontented subject. I think that subjects can be powerful motivators as agents to facilitators and positively influence peers by keeping the realm of opportunities and the impact of foreseen benefits in a positive light for those in resistance mode.
After A While
(alternate title - Comes the Dawn)
After a while you learn
the subtle difference between
holding a hand and chaining a soul,
and you learn that
love doesn't mean leaning
and company doesn't mean security,
and you begin to learn
that kisses aren't contracts
and presents aren't promises,
and you begin to accept your defeats
with your head up
and your eyes ahead,
with the grace of a woman,
not the grief of a child,
and you learn to build all of your roads
on today because tomorrow's ground
is too uncertain for plans,
and futures have a way of
falling down in mid-flight.
After a while you learn that
even sunshine burns
if you get too much.
So you plant your own garden
and decorate your own soul,
instead of waiting for someone
to bring you flowers.
And you learn that
you really can endure...
That you really do have worth.
And you learn and you learn...
With every goodbye you learn.
by Veronica A. Shoffstall
