Visionary leaders produce change, but often it isn't change that lasts.  Why?

Because visionary leaders have lots of ideas - many of them good, some overly optimistic, and some unworkable.  Not all of the ideas are going to produce lasting organizational change.

Of the three parts of the Work of Leaders (Vision / Alignment / Execution) many visionary leaders are good at two (Vision / Execution).  [There is also a group of visionary leaders who are good at Vision and Alignment, but not Execution.  That's a topic for another newsletter.]  They think things up and they make them happen. What they often do not do is take the time to build alignment around those changes.

Here's what it feels like from the other side - from the side of those farther down the org chart.  Instead of "visionary leader" substitute the phrase "chaos creator" or "organizational disruptor."  It feels like change for the sake of change.

And it feels like: "If we just wait this out another change will soon be coming, so why bother with implementation, this will never last anyway."  The visionary leader (or chaos creator) looks around and doesn't see the promised or hoped-for results and so, having read another organizational development article, he institutes another approach believing that this may be the one that works.

But it too is doomed to fail.  Why?  Because the cycle is continuing.  Those down the org chart aren't evaluating whether this is a better approach, but simply how long they have to use the new terminology until it fades away and is replaced by yet another great idea.

What is the solution to this seemingly unending cycle of ineffectual change? Building alignment.

The problem is that our visionary leader isn't drawn to building alignment and really isn't that good at doing it.  So she must find an alignment builder within her organization and have that person oversee that part of the change process (Vision / Alignment / Execution).

One of my clients just assigned alignment to a partner-level team member.  This team member has the natural personality bent and leadership skills to excel at bringing people on board.

What are the practical implications of building alignment?

#1: Change will take more time to work its way through the organization.  You will need to use the 3Ds wisely (Direction / Discussion / Decision).  You still need to announce Direction at times, but you will need to allow time for discussion about how the Direction is to be implemented.  It isn't a discussion about whether but how.

#2: You will need to limit the number of new initiatives occurring at any one time. Too many changes can't be managed properly.  You can't build alignment when people are distracted and the change appears fragmented rather than unified.

#3: You will need to measure execution over time rather than the illusory appearance of execution where ideas are implemented and then discarded by team members who wander back to the old ways of doing things (usually without announcing that they are doing so - this form of passive resistance is a silent coup that kills an organization from within).

How can you measure alignment?  It is not as simple as seeing the vision or seeing the signs of execution.  It has more to do with the gray - buy-in, morale, and team focus. The best way I know to measure alignment is by having team members answer two questions: 1) Was I heard during the process of Vision / Alignment / Execution? and 2) Do I understand the rationale for and implications of the change for me as a member of the team and for the organization as a whole? (I'm cheating a bit with the second question since it is a compound question that will need to be broken down into at least two separate questions - "for me" and "for the organization.") 

Do you want to bring about change that lasts?  Would you like to escape the ineffectual change cycle?  Then make sure that Vision and Execution are partnered with Alignment. Find the team member best capable of building alignment, provide the proper environment for that to happen, and watch your organization implement changes that last - that produce genuine execution over time.