relationships

Change Capability Dimension #8: Connecting

What do I mean by Connecting?

My 8^th and final Change Capability dimension, Connecting, relates to the identification of individuals with something greater than themselves – the team, the organisation, the change..

Unlike the 7^th dimension, Caring, where the needs of the individual come first, employees identify with the wider needs of the organisation, and are prepared to act as one in support of change for the greater good. This strongly relates to loyalty, collaboration, customer-centricity and teamwork, and relationships matter.

How is this Change Capability manifested?

People that are involved in the implementation of change:

Are proactive in developing collaborative relationships with stakeholders
Model support for the vision and strategy as representing the common good
Foster connections between different groups or individuals to help break down silos

People that are impacted by the change:

Put their concerns to one side and support change for the greater good
Work across boundaries in support of change
Look out for their colleagues and provide social support during difficult times

How is the capability supported?

As with all of the capability dimensions, this is not an exhaustive list but Connecting is supported by:

Role Modelling: Lead by example in visibly breaking down silos/barriers and providing support to other teams or departments
Collaboration: Processes and tools support online and offline knowledge sharing and working across team or departmental boundaries
Communication: ‘Other’ orientation is often underplayed in favour of ‘WIIFM’ – emphasise that where decisions benefit colleagues, the organisation, customers and wider society

What happens if you overplay this strength?

Without balance, strengths can become weaknesses. Over-focusing on Connecting can occur in two ways:

Cosying: Relationships are all important, but not grounded in the overarching business or professional context and therefore too cosy to get results
Deferring: Individuals over-identify with the needs of others/the organisation and put their own needs last to an unsustainable or unhealthy degree

New Vocabulary or Better Relationships?

Andrew Campbell argues, in the HBR Blog, that a primary reason for dysfunctional organisations is the language that we use. We need to use more explicit language than “line”, “dotted line” and “team” to describe relationships, and we will function better.

He suggests that seven types of relationship exist:

Boss / subordinate
Customer / supplier
Policy / operator
Lobby / operator
Managed team
Business partner
No-walk-away collaboration

I’m all for more explicit and clear language. I also believe that language can be very powerful in creating performance and change. Putting aside the observation that some of these are in use, perhaps the real problem is that the language we use at work is a reflection of the organisation that we belong to, which is likely to be cold, sterile, formal and (still, in many cases) hierarchical.

Perhaps this, rather than a lack of clear terminology, is why many organisations fail to create the effective relationships to mobilise effectively to create change and performance?

New Vocabulary or Better Relationships?

Search Site

Categories

Recent Posts