The five stages of radical change are Planning, Enabling, Launching, Catalyzing and Maintaining. While each stage needs a leader with varying leadership styles, I will focus on the most important leadership styles for each.
Planning stage requires an inspirational leader above all else (Reardon et al, 1998). The planning stage requires a leader that can get people excited about changes that might otherwise be uncomfortable or scary. A leader has to be able to convince people that change is good and will have extraordinary results, and that the status quo is worth changing.
Enabling stage requires a leader that is mostly logical. Enabling involves examining and analyzing next steps in a way that is easy to explain to team members/employees (Reardon et al, 1998). A leader in the Enabling stage of radical organizational change will need to be accessible and able to assist employees in the next steps in a practical way.
Launching stage requires a leader who can be authoritative because this is the stage of implementation (Reardon et al, 1998). Radical change is necessary but it is extremely risky, so a leader has to be authoritative about what needs to be done at this change. Steps in radical change need to be calculated and executed well; therefore, a good leader is needed to ensure this.
Catalyzing stage requires an inspirational leader once again. At this stage, employees have been working according to plan after first being inspired to a leader's vision. Circumstances might even become difficult at this point, as it is the beginning of the changes and employees are working their hardest. Further inspiration would be needed at this point, to keep everyone motivated.
Maintaining phase involves keeping momentum to execute a plan and readjusting to the new status quo. A leader needs to be mostly inspirational, but also logical (Reardon et al, 1998). Until the status quo becomes similar across an industry, employees can still be apprehensive about radical changes. A leader needs to be continuously inspirational to offset the uncertainty amongst team members, but they must also be logical in order to maintain focus on the changes at hand.
My Experience
An example from my industry, entertainment/media comes from Time Inc. (Time Magazine Corporation). I used to work as an employee there, and shortly after I'd started the company was bought by a larger one and massive layoffs and organizational changes ensued. Unfortunately, the leader (CEO) saw the remainder of the company through to the launch stage, but not past there. I believe the reason is that we had an inspirational leader who may not have mastered the logical or supportive leadership strategies. The CEO did well to get everyone excited about new plans through corporate emails, but seemed dangerously out of touch with how the changes were affecting the employees on a real-world level. When the time came to launch, which would require a logical leader who can keep everyone focused, the company ultimately failed. The New York offices space was then shuttered. I believe that if we had a leader who could get on the employees' and managers' levels and help us implement the plan practically, the rest of the company could have succeeded. From this experience, I learned that leadership has many different strategies associated with it, if it is successful. A leader can be extremely intelligent, and also very inspirational, and while that is normally plenty of reason for a leader to be successful, it will not carry that person through any circumstance of business. Leaders who embark on difficult changes have to know how to lead logically and practically as well, because radical changes requires this--and business now requires consistent radical change (Hogue, 2015).
References
Hogue, F. (2015, Nov 9). 5 Habits of Truly Disruptive Leaders. Fast Company. Retrieved from: https://www.fastcompany.
Reardon, K.K., Reardon K.J., & Rowe, A.J. (1998). Leadership styles for the five stages of radical change. Acquisition Review Quarterly, 2. Retrieved from: http://www.au.af.mil/au/
Comments