Battilana, J. & Casciaro, T. (2013, July). The network secrets of great change agents.
Harvard Business Review, 91(7,8), 62-68.
To be an effective change agent in any organization, there are several avenues for contribution. Britian’s National Health Service (NHS) has employed the power of networks in investigating successful change and establishing long-term transformation. The NHS learned that change agents who are central in an organization’s informal networks (i.e. personal relationships), those who bridged disconnected groups, and those close to individuals perpetually ambivalent to change were the most successful with change efforts. Network centrality or being central and well-regarded within connected groups of people, significantly increases one’s chance of effectively implementing change, much more so than formal hierarchical authority. The type of network also matters, a cohesive network, where those you are connected to are connected to one another, offer the opportunity to harness trust and share information easily. These networks are best for non-revolutionary change, change that is not disruptive and foundational because individuals will pressure each other to participate. A bridging network, where those you are connected to are not connected to others, allows you to learn new, novel information and the ability to decide what to share and how to phrase the sharing. This network is best for divergent change, a major change effort since the network is not connected, internal coalitions against the effort will not be formed and the change-seeker can vary the message and timing of its delivery. Identifying influential people within the network to assist you in making change can be helping in changing hearts and minds. Endorsers are those who see change positively and give it their stamp of approval, resisters simply push back, and fence-sitters see both sides and therefore need to be convinced. Working to convince fence-sitters can be an effective strategy to aid change efforts, as their alliances are not firm in any argument.
This article highlighted the importance of understanding who has the necessary network needed for a specific type of change, either revolutionary or not revolutionary. When working through any type of change effort, defining what is significant and what is less so will help me in my current and future work to determine what networks to identify and target. Understanding what is effective in both cases will help me to be more efficient and precise.
LO2: demonstrate the ability to assess complex organizational environments and achieve communication goals.
LO3: address complex challenges by collaboratively leading teams across disciplines, distances, and sectors.
Comments