Why Change Fails – and What Can Be Done About It
As long as the figures are such that no one feels under real pressure, change tends to be avoided. Yet growth is inherently limited when old systems are preserved.
An excerpt from the automotive industry, using a journalistic article about the Volkswagen Group:
(..) “This assessment has now been replaced by an almost apocalyptic analysis, accompanied by the sober warning that things will become very tight for the automotive group ‘if we continue at our current pace’. Transforming Volkswagen into a digital tech company, he said, is a gigantic task. By 2020, it would become clear how resilient, agile and responsive VW has truly become. ‘The storm is only just beginning,’ Diess warned.
Many VW employees apparently feel little or nothing of this storm yet — or not enough — which is hardly surprising. Unlike traditional corporations such as ThyssenKrupp, Commerzbank or Deutsche Bank, the Wolfsburg-based carmaker is performing exceptionally well. The business model built around the sale of combustion engines continues to function despite the diesel scandal. Year after year, VW earns double-digit billions.
In times of such economic success, insight into the necessity of radical transformation processes is not particularly pronounced. Accordingly, the forces of inertia are strong, clinging to what has proven itself in the past for as long as possible. Diess must succeed in turning these guardians of the status quo into courageous drivers of reform — people willing to change the company and, in doing so, themselves.” (..)
My experience has shown that, as a group, people tend to avoid change rather than embrace it. In relative terms, there are only a few who actively seek change and drive it forward. Angela Merkel represents the attitude of the majority in this country.
Those who initiate change are more likely to fall into the category of “doers” or “visionaries” — action-oriented individuals who look for ways to make things work.
Those who tend to avoid change, on the other hand, usually focus on finding — and arguing — why something will not work. Their focus is therefore the opposite.
Both approaches have their justification. The type who avoids process changes also avoids risks. Among them, one often finds the “perfectionist” personality type.
Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook) lives by the maxim: “Done is better than perfect”, which has a similar expression in German: “It’s not the big who eat the small, but the fast who eat the slow.” Strategy does not need to be discussed in excessive depth. Perfectionism, especially in today’s fast-paced world, prevents trendsetting. A strategy that adapts and reshapes structures during the ongoing process has proven to be far more effective. The real art lies in achieving the right balance within the workforce — between guardians of the status quo and reformers. The first step is to categorise one’s employees. Some companies attempt this through surveys; however, depending on the manager’s personality, suggestions for improvement are often not voiced out of fear.
In many companies, there is a so-called “suggestion box” hanging on the wall… without producing any real impact. Improvements are frequently neither proposed nor actively pursued by employees. The reason lies in conditioning: most people expect something in return. If no tangible benefit is in sight, motivation to actively contribute to the company’s progress tends to fade.
Some corporations have long since implemented systems that are rarely found in small and medium-sized enterprises with up to 50 employees:
Employees can submit suggestions for improvement that lead to cost savings, increased operational safety, or — quite simply — greater enjoyment at work (and thus a stronger sense of ownership). These suggestions are reviewed and evaluated using a points system. The points can then be exchanged for tangible rewards through an internal shop system.
In this way, reform-oriented thinking can be encouraged — and, at the same time, identification with the company can be strengthened.
There are two possible scenarios: either senior management is tired of change while employees are willing to move forward — in that case, the failure lies in leadership. Or the leadership would like to change, but the employees resist — then the failure lies within the workforce.
What can help here are so-called incentive seminars held off-site. As a coach, I have had very positive experiences with guided hikes involving multiple stations designed around teamwork. My role as a coach is to observe who, for example, emerges as an “informal leader” and who prefers to delegate responsibility for decisions to others. Over time, it becomes clear where strengths and weaknesses lie — aspects that were previously misjudged within the company (often by management). After the hike, with its variety of tasks, we hold seated reflection circles with a clearly defined focus. Through direct and indirect self-reflection, employees gain insights that may not previously have been consciously accessible to them. On such days, people also talk about very different topics during the walk; you begin to see other facets of a person. The shared evening gathering with food and drink further strengthens team cohesion.
For the entrepreneur: think big!
The key question is: where should the journey go? With the existing structure, is it possible to increase orders by 20–30% within a year — using the same workforce, both in headcount and individual performance — through process optimisation (for example, communication and software)? Or is it necessary to hire additional staff — and if so, how many and to what extent? Do you invest your energy in treating symptoms, or do you address the underlying causes? Treating symptoms is easier and cheaper — and it often delivers short-term results.
But: what are symptoms, and what are causes?
Investing in causes requires associative thinking, because some factors — such as enjoyment at work — cannot be measured directly in numbers, yet still move a company forward in a very real way.
Let me develop a tailored concept for you.
I am here for you.
Herzlichst
Gregor Schäfer
