“In creation, you are created.”
Nietzsche's Zarathustra: Notes of the Seminars Given in 1934-39 (C Jung)
This quote made us think about the notion of development integrations in organisations – and how so many are designed in a way that run counter to the development outcomes we’re looking for.
Often organisations try to develop “strategic, high accountability, interpersonally skilled leaders that know how to navigate ambiguity”…and do so by creating interventions that are linear, task based, tightly framed structures that have no sense of community or peer-to-peer interaction.
The way you do something is the way you do everything. If there’s a fundamental disconnect between how you structure and deliver the intervention – and what behaviours and outcomes you are hoping to get out of them – it won’t land well, and won’t stick.
It’s like screaming at a child that they need to be calm and kind. Or teaching someone how to create an impressionist painting with a strict set of rules (or paint by numbers). The message and method say one thing; and the desired result is something else entirely.
In over a decade of supporting leaders and teams to make sustainable change, we’ve got some principles that can help avoid this contradiction.
Use ‘theory’ sparingly
Yes, theory and models can be powerful. But they’re just frames or lenses for people to understand what’s already there – not a solution in and of themselves. We’re not trying to wrestle a square peg into a round hole; we’re offering a mould to shape and re-form what already exists.
There’s a temptation to ‘start fresh’ with a revolutionary new model, framework, or imagined solution (coupled with the seductive idea that we can dump all the legacy ‘baggage’ getting in the way of progress).
But this isn’t how development works. We need to align what’s already there with the change we want to see. This could be as simple as finding a common lexicon for the current methodology and the proposed framework; or involving leaders and teams in the ideation process.
Don’t try and reinvent the wheel. Instead, tune into the status quo, then find the ‘levers’ that will catalyse the changes you want to see, without unnecessary disruption.
Root change in practice
We’ve all sat through an interminable powerpoint – only to forget or disregard the material immediately afterwards because it’s not grounded in the here-and-now.
Instead, our development integrations involve ‘action learning’ where we workshop using the new framework in live situations or issues. This provides an opportunity to bring the ideas to life in real time.
We facilitate dedicated, structured time to grapple with tricky situations (something of which there is too little in many senior teams); in doing so, we allow leaders to practise using the skills and approaches. It’s no longer abstract – it’s real and already in circulation.
Initiate change at multiple levels
Imagine trying to move a massive block of stone. If you push only at the top, however much force you apply, you’re likely to simply push the block over. But apply force at several points ranging from the top to the bottom of the block, and you can push it forward without toppling it.
Yes, change generally starts at the top of the business. But initiatives that are only applied at the upper levels will take a much greater time to percolate through the rest of the organisation. We need to provide support, training, and action learning at multiple levels to make change happen.
And supporting change shouldn’t only happen at a single point in time either – it needs to be longitudinal, spanning weeks, months, and even years. Going back to the block of stone analogy: one strong push will have limited impact (or could push the stone over). Instead, we need to push at an even rate, consistently.
A new way of doing things can be set in motion initially by an external body. But change should be championed and delivered internally to have real impact. All our interventions focus on transferring capability to the organisation’s leaders – giving them the tools and insight they need to shape the process over time.
So what’s the takeaway? We need to avoid the idea that we can create a structure for development, overlay it onto the status quo, and expect the results to fall in line. Instead, we need to consider that an outcome emerges from the way in which we embody or perform an activity. If we focus on creation (and being the creator) we create nothing. If we immerse ourselves creatively in the task, model the approach that we want to see, and shape attitudes and behaviours collaboratively – then we may find something creative emerges.