 |
|
|
|||||
My friend Jessica Kriegel often warns her clients about the action trap, the urge to do somethinganythingwhen things arent going well. Yet while taking action might make us feel better, its no guarantee well get results. Many leaders fall into this trap, confusing taking action with making an impact, which can blind us to the underlying problem. The truth is that you cant change fundamental behaviors without changing fundamental beliefs. It is, after all, beliefs, in the form of norms, that get encoded into a culture through rituals that drive behaviors. So unless you make a serious effort to understand the underlying problem youre trying to solve, any action you take is unlikely to be effective. Thats why you need to start by asking good questions. While coming up with answers makes us feel decisive, those answers will close doors that should often be left open and explored. Good questions, on the other hand, can lead to genuine breakthroughs. With that in mind, here are three essential questions you need to ask before embarking on a transformational initiative. 1. Is this a Strategic Change or Behavioral Change? Every change effort represents a problem, or set of problems, to be solved. A strategic change starts at the top and needs effective communication and coordination for everybody to play their role, like the famous case at Intel, when Gordon Moore and Andy Grove made the fateful decision to move out of memory chips and bet the company on microprocessors. In a strategic shift, resistance is not particularly relevant. That doesnt mean it doesnt exist. As Grove recounted in his memoir, Only the Paranoid Survive, there were plenty at Intel who questioned the decision. But as chairman and CEO, Moore and Grove had full authority to allocate budgets and convert factories, and the change was going to happen whether people liked it or not. Thats why traditional change management methodologies, like Kotter’s 8 Steps or Proscis ADKAR (awareness, desire, knowledge, ability, and reinforcement), tend to be effective for strategic changes. Yet research shows that change itself has changed. In 1975, 83% of the average U.S. corporations assets were tangible assets, such as plants, machinery, and buildings, while by 2015, 84% were intangible, such as licenses, patents, and research. That means the changes we grapple with today have less to do with strategic assets like factories and equipment and a lot more to do with the things people think and do every day. Clearly, that changes how we need to approach transformation. Because often the most important changes involve collective action, which can be maddeningly complex. People adopt things when they see others around them doing so. Success begets more success, just as failure begets more failure. Big communication campaigns can ignite early resistance and backfire, while isolated individual efforts rarely scale. For collective action problems, we need to focus on, as network science pioneer Duncan Watts put it to me, easily influenced people influencing other easily influenced people. You build momentum and reach critical mass not through persuasion but through connectionby empowering early adopters and helping them influence others. 2. What are the Shared Values? Humans naturally form tribes. In a study of adults who were randomly assigned to leopards and tigers, fMRI scans revealed signs of hostility toward out-group members. Similar results were found in a study involving 5-year-old children and even in infants. Evolutionary psychologists attribute this tendency to kin selection, which explains how groups favor those who share their attributes in the hope that those attributes will be propagated. Our ideas, beliefs, and values tend to reflect the tribes we belong to, and sharing our thoughts and feelings plays a key role in signaling our identity and belonging to these groups. For instance, expressing an expert opinion can demonstrate alignment with a professional community, while sharing a moral stance can signal inclusion in a particular cultural group. Every organization has its own tribes, with their own values, customs, and lore. Divisions and functions develop their own norms, rituals, and behaviors, shaped by their institutional needs and priorities. As the workplace expert David Burkus told me, there isnt really any such thing as an organizational culture because each organization contains multitudes of cultures. So before you start trying to evangelize a transformational initiative across those myriad cultures, with all of their internal biases and emotional trip wires, think about the values they share and build an inclusive vision. That may sound simple and straightforward, but its harder than it seems, which helps explain why so many transformational efforts fail. The problem is that when were passionate about something, we want to focus on how its different, because thats what makes us passionate in the first place. We want to talk about how innovative and disruptive it is. Yet while that may honor the idea itself, it doesnt do much for the people we want to adopt it. If we want them to share our priorities and aspirations, they have to believe that they share our values. 3. What are the Sources of Power? We like to think of transformation as a heros journey. Theres an alternative future state that we want to reach, and wed like to think that if were good enough, we do all the right things, and our cause is righteous, well eventually get to that place. Yet the truth is that change is always a strategic conflict between that future state and the status quo, which always has soures of power keeping it in place. These sources of power have an institutional basis and form pillars supporting the current state. It is only through influencing these pillars that we can bring about genuine change. Without institutional support, the status quo cannot be maintained. Thats why to build an effective transformation strategy, we need to identify the institutions that support the status quo, those that support the future state, and those that are still on the fence and as yet uncommitted. These institutions can be divisions or functions within an organization, customer groups, government agencies, regulators, unions, professional and industry associations, media, educational institutionsthe possibilities are almost endless. Whats important is that they have power and/or resources that can either hold things up or move them forward. Thats what makes them viable targets for action. If you can influence the sources of power upon which the status quo depends, genuine transformation becomes possible. But make no mistake: As long as the forces upholding the status quo stay in place, nothing will ever change. The Power of a Question All too often, transformational initiatives are presented as a fait accompli. A strategy is set, a plan is made, and everything is announced with a lot of hoopla at a big launch event. Questions are treated as a nuisance, something to be batted away rather than engaged with. Change leaders, in an effort that seldom succeeds, try to act as if they have all the answers. Yet while answers tend to close a discussion, questions help us open new doors and lead to genuine insights. Asking What kind of change is this? is essential to building a strategy to overcome challenges. Investigating shared values is key to getting widespread buy-in. Analyzing sources of power is how you identify institutional targets for action. The truth is that every great breakthrough starts with a question. As a child, Einstein asked, What would it be like to ride on a bolt of lightning? which led to his theory of special relativity. He then asked a second question, What would it be like to ride an elevator in space? and that led to his theory of general relativity. Change leaders often feel they need to have all the answers, but what they usually need is to ask moreand betterquestions. Thats the essence of the changemaker mindset: Its not about building consensus around a plan and executing it, but about building a coalition to explore possibilities that lead to a better future.
Category:
E-Commerce
Youre at your usual weekly team meeting. The team leader asks for ideas, and you immediately come up with the best one. Its not just clever. Its perfect. You rush to say it, glowing with anticipation. Silence. Nobody reacts. You walk out deflated, wondering how a group of smart people could ignore the obvious answer. The assumption is simple. If the idea is sound, it should carry weight. We tend to believe that the one with the best ideas has the greatest impact. We take for granted that influence flows from competence and that those who are right, early and often, naturally shape decisions. But decades of research in social psychology and decision science tell a different story. In group settings, being right doesnt automatically translate into influence. In fact, one of the reasons ideas fail to land is that being right too early can undermine your influence. Heres why even brilliant ideas face immediate resistance. 1. The Ego Threat You may think youre helping, but solving the puzzle first can make others feel small. People don’t just want the answer. They want the sweat equity of finding it together. Theyre not rejecting your idea because its bad. Theyre pushing it away because it feels forced on them, not discovered together. They feel threatened rather than persuaded. 2. Logic vs. Shortcuts Wouldnt it be wonderful if our ideas were judged purely on logic and data (diagnostics)? But most of us are busy, tired, distracted, or just want to move on with our next task. So, groups often rely on shortcuts such as who sounds confident, who talks the most, whos more assertive (proxies). Such shortcuts may drive quick decisions, but they rarely lead to results. If you drop a maverick idea before the group is ready, youre basically asking an overwhelmed group to do the hard work of thinking outside the box. Chances are theyll rely on proxies rather than substance such as diagnostics. Influence isnt about having the loudest voice. Its about having the best-timed one. 3. The Consensus Comfort Zone Groups love sticking to what feels familiar. Its safer and lets everyone feel like theyre working together. If you toss out a big, unusual insight right away, you dont look like a visionary. You look like youre playing a different game than the rest. The team will reject the disruption because unconsciously they protect the direction and rhythm of the group. How to Make Ideas Land To stop being the “ignored expert” and start being the influential leader, you need to stop selling facts and start managing social currency and timing. Heres what works: 1. Practice strategic silence Dont jump in with the solution. Practicing strategic silence means that you first consider issue relevance, issue readiness, and target responsiveness, before speaking up. Let the group feel the problem. Listen to others perspectives. When you finally speak, tie your answer to what they care about in that moment. Now your idea will feel more like a relief. 2. Show the “why,” not the “what” If you just drop the answer, youre asking people to trust your brain rather than the facts. Instead narrate your logic. By sharing your logic and the why, youre giving them the map you used plus time to process. Now theyre on the same page as you. 3. Lower the ego shield Present your idea as a 90% complete thought and leave the last 10% for the group to solve. For example, you can ask questions like What obstacles do you see?, or What would make this easier to implement? Youre not lowering your confidence. You invite collaboration. In return, you arent just right anymore; youre the person who helped the team find the right answer together. Accuracy is essential, but social recognition is the currency of influence. Start thinking less about winning with facts and being the first to offer a solution. Think more about how people want to arrive at a conclusion with you.
Category:
E-Commerce
Much like its peers in the tech industry, Oracle is pouring money into AI infrastructure. The tech giant inked a lucrative $300 billion deal with OpenAI last year to build out AI data centers, in a bid to compete with companies like Amazon and Microsoft. But the deal requires Oracle to spend a significant amount of money upfronta move that is now pushing the company to cull its workforce. According to recent reports, Oracle is planning major layoffs that would reportedly affect thousands of jobs. The company had already earmarked about $1.6 billion for restructuring costs this yearlargely due to employee severance costsindicating there would be job cuts. As of February, that sum has now increased by $500 million, bringing overall restructuring costs to $2.1 billion. Bloomberg has reported that the layoffs would impact many parts of the business and could take effect this month; some of the job losses will also target roles that AI is rendering less essential. The forthcoming job cuts were framed as broader than Oracles usual rolling approach to layoffs; the company typically avoids large-scale layoffs that merit a public announcement. Oracle would also effectively freeze hiring in its cloud division, according to Bloomberg. Oracle joins a growing list of companies that are trimming headcount due to AIbut as with many other employers, theres limited evidence that the company is replacing workers with AI en masse. Instead, these layoffs largely seem to be driven by Oracles extensive investments in AI, which could take years to pay off. Oracle is currently raising $50 billion in debt and equity to finance its AI aspirations, and analysts have said the company will likely continue losing money on this venture until 2030. Last month, Jack Dorsey announced major layoffs at his fintech company Block, which drew widespread consternation. Dorsey framed those job losses, which affected 40% of the companys workforce, as the direct result of efficiency gains from AI. But many companies have also used AI as a convenient explanation for more pedestrian cost-cutting measures, even as economists have argued that AI is not yet displacing workers on a large scale. Some companies have cited AI rather than blaming issues like immigration policy and tariffs, which might not be as politically expedient or appealing to shareholders. Others, like Oracle, are slashing jobs over AIbut not necessarily because theyre outright using AI to replace workers. Microsoft, too, has made sweeping investments in AI, spending tens of billions of dollars on data centers while laying off over 15,000 in 2025. The layoffs at companies like Microsoft and Amazon have also targeted middle managers, the sorts of jobs that cant exactly be replaced by AI at the moment. The AI boom has also helped cement an era of forever layoffs, in which even big tech jobs no longer hold the promise of stability. Since the pandemic, tech employers have become especially reliant on layoffsa trend that has been accelerated with the rise of AI. Whether or not workers are getting explicitly displaced or ousted due to automation, few jobs are now safe if companies value AI over human capital.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||