Yo-yo change disrupts your organization’s natural ability with change. It creates a history of failed changes that limits your organization’s ability to respond and adapt to future changes. Preventing yo-yo change matters.
Informal surveys and research all suggest a project-based approach to change is the most common. But, it isn’t the most effective or efficient way to enable organizational change.
A good story lets you experience something as if you are actually there. Leaders throughout history have long known the power of stories to inspire, motivate and move people to achieve things they never believed they were capable of achieving.
Few people would argue about the importance of trust in an organization’s success. Building and maintaining employee trust can be one of the most challenging aspects of organizational leadership.
There are significant differences between the change-innovative and the cynical organization. This article explores these differences, and offers three things you can to to build a change-innovative organization.
Organizations today must constantly change, but doing so does not mean bombarding employees with change projects. The secret to creating an organization that is able to change continuously is less change, not more.
SMART goals – Specific, Measureable, Attainable, Relevant, and Timely – are all the rage, but are they smart?
If corporate, customer, team and individual goals are all aligned, then multiple energies flow in the same direction – that of organisational success – with magnified force, while lessening dependence on leadership. With so much to commend it, how can such a beneficial situation be brought about?
With tumultuous change crashing down on us every day, “nimbleness” in business offers a powerful strategic advantage. Having the readiness and ability to change quickly allows your firm’s strategic value to outdistance that of your competition. This article uses the story of a failing, but ultimately successful, $180 million offshore outsourcing project to demonstrate how […]
Can an organisation nowadays – faced with the inevitability of short-lived episodes of leadership – avoid the potential damage left behind, following the departure of the creator and champion of a partially executed new strategy?