The author does a nice job articulating the problems people face while going through corporate changes and has good general management advice in the second half.
• Corporate America has an optimistic view of change
○ View was strengthened in 1997 by Clayton Christensen’s The Innovator’s Dilemma. The simplified conclusion everyone drew was change is good
○ “Large-scale change is necessary, always; instigating change is the way to win; and if you are not disrupting every element of your operations, you are losing. These are the commandments of the cult of disruption. And their effect on humans at work has been dire.”
• Change has a lot of negative impacts on the people going through the change
○ Uncertainty
§ People hate uncertainty. Experiments show uncertainty about pain is worse than the pain
○ Lack of Control
§ People to whom change is done lose the motivation to drive improvement
§ “the lack of agency compares unfavorably with exposure to secondhand smoke in terms of physical health, mental health, morbidity, and mortality, and that diminished agency has a greater correlation with heart disease than does smoking.”
○ Feeling of not belonging
§ People do better when they feel as if they belong to a stable group.
§ “We frame the value of spending time at the office in terms of collaboration and innovation, when its most important function is actually the forging of human bonds, in important part by the delightful and enjoyably subversive mechanism of gossip.”
§ “We understand, in some abstract way, the importance of the feeling of belonging, yet we get the scale wrong. We talk about belonging to a company or to an organization—when the research demonstrates that that’s not how belonging works—and we fail to understand the importance of belonging to a small, local, tightly connected group.
○ Problem of Displacement
§ Small rituals ground people and a keep them comfortable. Change distrusts those and they are hard to rebuild
§ “Rituals take time to develop, so the longer you’ve lived somewhere, the more developed your rituals will be, and the more enmeshed in the daily place-ballet you will be. And this connection of time to place to ritual explains why relocation is so harmful.”
○ Loss of meaning
§ Workers who see meaning in their work are happier
§ “The loss of meaning that results from change is, first, a loss of coherence, and second, a resultant undermining of significance. This means that companies and their leaders cannot compensate for the erosion of coherence, in times of change, by pointing to ideas and projects that are intended to be inspirational—and it’s part of the reason why, when leaders are cheerfully flipping the blender buttons on and off, their assertions that they are “excited” (lifted up, we must imagine, by the significance of the whole thing) are so grating. When nothing makes sense, it’s annoying to be told how much it all mean”
§ “The science that we have examined points us to a humbler view of meaning. Not one of soaring oratory, or noble deeds, or apple trees and honeybees and peace throughout the land, but rather one in which we understand how the world around us works, and can find a way of living and playing within it that makes us feel connected to it, and located in it, and in some small way bend the arc of the future in a way that seems right to each of us.”
○ Loss of team
§ We spend a lot of time building relationships in teams. One hidden cost of change is the lost effort of getting to know your teammates.
• Solution 1: raise the bar for when large scale change is needed
• Solution 2: If change is needed
○ Slow the pace of change.
§ “Slowing the pace does a couple of things. First, it signals to everyone involved that there’s a plan, which is always a good thing and surprisingly often an overlooked thing. Beyond this, though, making time is super-helpful in its own right. Because so many of the ingredients of human work-health—building routines, learning where to go for help or advice, getting to know teammates and their skills—have a time dimension, allowing things to evolve more slowly lessens the risks inherent in sudden disruption.”
○ Make space for others
§ Listening makes space for others to talk
§ Sharing information makes space for other's decisions
§ Asking questions makes space for others to shape solutions
• General management advice that also helps change
○ Performance reviews
§ “Performance management, if you’re not familiar with the term, is the slightly Orwellian name given to the process involving goal-setting, annual or semiannual reviews and feedback, and performance ratings; in its traditional form, it represents a kind of all-you-can-eat smorgasbord of our worst and most erroneous ideas about human performance. Goals must be set for people, because they are extrinsically motivated and otherwise probably won’t do much work. Performance reviews and ratings are needed, because if people aren’t told where they stand and how to improve, they’ll never get any better—certainly not of their own volition. And it’s important to give people feedback, because if we don’t tell them where they fail to measure up, they’ll never figure it out for themselves, and because growth happens only when we tell people how to do the things they can’t do—in that way, it’s a gift.”
§ “Ratings, because of our human idiosyncrasies and unreliability when judging others, are that most dangerous animal—noise masquerading as data. 4 And feedback is a gift, neurologically speaking, in exactly the same way that terrifying someone is a gift: When we feel judged (whatever the “positive intent” of the person sharing the judgment), our brains fritz out, and our ability to learn is impaired. 5”
○ Identifying excellence is a key part of a manager’s job
§ "Because a clear idea of excellence is central to both stability and growth—a central part of the job of a team leader is to recognize excellence. Not to reward it financially, because people aren’t coin-operated; not to assess it; not to hand out scores; not to gauge progress on a scale of abstract qualities; not to encode it in annual goals; not to input any and all these into the all-seeing system—no, instead to flag, immediately, the moments of brilliance. “That’s a super email—can I tell you why I think so?” “I hadn’t thought of that point at all—do you have a moment to explain more?” “I loved what you said there, and here’s why.””
○ Share secrets
§ It's valuable to make people feel part of the inner circle and understanding the company.
§ Company value statements tend not to do that.
□ “It is almost as though there is a master list of company values hidden away somewhere, and each company gets to consult it every few years when it feels its old values are a bit tired, and choose seven or eight new ones at random. So there is the value about customer obsession, the value about innovation, the value about collaboration, the one about embracing differences, the one about servant leadership or transformative leadership or authentic leadership or whatever leadership adjective is in vogue that particular month; there is the one about respectful disagreement, and the one about taking care of the outside world; and for the edgier companies, there is some version of the one about not being an asshole.”
○ Good managers are predictable and distinctive
§ Predictable and easy to know leaders are more effective and teams like better
§ When teams are asked to list words about their leader, better leaders have a stronger overlap across their teams on which words people choose to describe them. But, good leaders can have very different attributes from other good leaders.
○ Speak real words
§ Better leaders use words that have actual meaning rather than corporate jargon