Research Article - Journal of Research in International Business and Management ( 2023) Volume 10, Issue 4
Received: 15-Feb-2023, Manuscript No. JRIBM-23-89380; Editor assigned: 17-Feb-2023, Pre QC No. JRIBM-23-89380 (PQ); Reviewed: 03-Mar-2023, QC No. JRIBM-23-89380; Revised: 21-Apr-2023, Manuscript No. JRIBM-23-89380 (R); Published: 28-Apr-2023, DOI: 10.14303/2251-0028.2023.026
This study argues that while change must be well-managed, it also requires strong leadership in order to be implemented and sustained successfully. A model that reflects the cognitive, spiritual, emotional, and behavioral elements and prerequisites of change leadership is offered. Vision, values, strategy, empowerment, and motivation and inspiration are included in the approach. The study finishes with a concise discussion of the model's use in various strategic change circumstances.
Leadership, Management, Change, Empowerment, Motivation
According to Machiavelli (1469–1527), cited in Ramsay, establishing oneself as a leader in the implementation of change is the most delicate, perilous, and uncertain endeavor imaginable. For the innovator will have as his foes all those who prosper under the status quo, and only tepid allies among those who may benefit from the new arrangement (AME, 1994).
Early in the sixteenth century, Niccol Machiavelli was acutely aware of the problem of change. In the prince, he discusses the difficulties and risk of enacting change, highlighting opposition to change and, at best, a lack of commitment to it. 500 years later, this issue is still prevalent. Our organizations are littered with the detritus... of yesterday's (change) projects. This research argues that the cause is not always inadequate change management, but rather a lack of effective leadership. Change must be well-managed, i.e., it must be planned, organized, directed, and controlled, but it also requires strong leadership to be successfully implemented: leadership makes the difference (Baum, et al., 1998). This paper provides a new model of leadership that is the outcome of a three-year examination of the increasing literature on the subject and that has been effectively utilized by a number of organizations planning and implementing strategic transformation in a variety of industries. The model posits that successful change leadership requires vision, strategy, the establishment of a culture of shared values that support the vision and strategy for change, as well as the empowerment, motivation, and inspiration of those involved or affected. This conduct represents the cognitive, spiritual, emotional, and behavioral qualities and prerequisites of leadership (Bennis, et al., 2010).
Why ‘management’ is necessary but not sufficient
Change programs frequently fail as a result of bad management: inadequate planning, monitoring, and control, a lack of resources and expertise, and incompatible business policies and practices. Good change management is an absolute necessity (Bolden, et al., 2004).
How change can be mismanaged is common knowledge. Change attempts may fail due to poor planning, monitoring, and control, a focus on the target rather than the steps and process involved, the absence of intermediate milestones, and the failure to monitor progress and take remedial action. Change initiatives frequently lack the required budget, processes, time, and information, as well as the required knowledge and skills. Sometimes, corporate policies and practices remain unchanged and become incompatible with transformation objectives and plans. For instance, the performance criteria used in assessment and reward programs may not support and reinforce a desirable performance driven, teamwork oriented culture, resulting in a lack of incentive or disincentive to modify behavior. A big European study indicated that the most successful organizations make adjustments in roles, governance structures, and strategies that are mutually supportive (Conger, et al., 1999).
Change is frequently viewed as a "quick fix." This disregards the effects of the change on the organization as a whole, causing unanticipated and undesirable disturbance. Change efforts are frequently the result of naive embrace of management fads. Frequently, these fads focus solely on one aspect of an organization's operation, disregarding their effects on other aspects. Lack of communication or contradictory signals and the subsequent misunderstanding of the goals and process of change result in demoralizing rumors and a lack of change commitment (Covey, et al., 1992).
A lack of commitment to change may be attributable to the absence of compelling evidence demonstrating the benefits of change. It manifests itself through objections, refusal to accept alternatives or examine process flaws, and the deployment of "hidden agendas" or delaying tactics. There may be a lack of change commitment within the executive suite. Their commitment is demonstrated in a number of ways, including their unambiguous acceptance of ownership and responsibility for the success of the change initiative, their eagerness to be involved, their willingness to invest resources, their willingness to make difficult decisions, when necessary, their awareness of the impact of their own behavior, a consistent message, and the holding of regular reviews of progress (Deetz, et al., 1999).
Purely "managerial" change initiatives, especially when mismanaged, result in a lack of focused effort, disagreement between functional areas, and reluctance to change. Change resistance is a common occurrence. Presents an excellent explanation for why individuals resist change. The absence of knowledge is a cognitive and behavioral cause (Dess, et al., 2000). A lack of conviction that change is necessary, as evidenced by individuals who question the significance and worth of the change, eventually results in a lack of drive to change. However, perhaps the most potent forces of change resistance are emotional:
•Dislike of imposed change
•Hatred of surprises
•Lack of self-confidence and confidence inothers: dread of the unknown and ofincompetence and failure, as well as thenegative repercussions, such as a shareprice decrease and blame.
•Management's reluctance to addressserious topics (especially in the case ofmanagers approaching retirement)
•Dysfunctional customs, routines, andrelationships: "We've always done it thisway." Moving people out of their "comfortzone" involves a transition from the familiar,secure, and controllable to the unfamiliar,insecure, and uncertainly controllable
•Self-interest and shifts in power andinfluence, such as loss or change of role inthe organization
•Lack of respect and trust in the person orpeople promoting change and skepticismdue to the failure of previous changeinitiatives (Drucker, et al., 2013).
Change management attempts frequently fail to adequately include the human and political components of change. Sadler, et al., describe the social and emotional concerns (leadership) and the technical parts of change as the yin and yang of change (management). McLagan, et al., notes that a purely rational and technical approach to change, "making sure it's technically sound and gives economic advantage to the organization," tends to lead to the mistaken belief that the organization would absorb it spontaneously. Kotler, et al., indicates that Kotter, et al., in failed changes, there are frequently numerous plans, instructions, and programs... with procedures, objectives, and dates. But nowhere was a clear and compelling vision of where all this was headed articulated. Not surprisingly, the majority of employees He spoke with were either confused or estranged. (The 'managerial' approach) did not unite them or drive transformation. In reality, it likely had the opposite impact (Dubrin, et al., 2022).
In his classic pronouncements on management and leadership, Kotter, et al., asserts that management generates orderly outcomes that keep things functioning efficiently, whereas leadership produces beneficial change; neither is inherently superior or a substitute for the other. Both are required for the success of organizations and nations. He also says, however the responsibility of management is to minimize risk and keep the current system operational. Change, by definition, necessitates the introduction of a new system, which in turn requires constant leadership (Hendry, et al., 1993).
Sadler-Smith and Riding concurs: "Recently, we have witnessed tremendous transformations in British industry that appear to be the result of inspirational leadership rather than traditional excellent management." Frequently cited instances are British Airways under Colin Marshall and ICI under John Harvey-Jones. Change, therefore, is primarily about leadership (Goodwin, et al., 1998).
The leadership of change
According to a survey by the American management association, the keys to successful transformation are leadership, closely followed by corporate values and communication (Table 1) (Hastings, et al., 1993).
If change is the process of guiding an organization (or a nation) from its current condition to its desired future state and resolving all the problems that develop along the way, then change is a combination of leadership and management. According to the leadership trust, leadership entails demonstrating the way: Utilizing one's own influence to win the hearts and minds of others in order to work together towards a common objective. According to Hooper and Potter, change leadership for the chief executive entails "developing a vision of the future, crafting strategies to make that vision a reality, and ensuring that everyone in the organization is working towards the same goals... a process we call "emotional alignment"." It might be claimed that the most challenging difficulties leaders face today are ensuring that their organization's members can adapt to change and that they can envision the organization's current market position and its future position (Heifetz, et al., 1997).
|Value of Importance (%)
|Education and training
Table 1. Keys to successful change: Survey of 259 senior executives in Fortune 500 companies in the USA.
A report from the World Economic Forum in collaboration with management consultants Booz Allen and Hamilton and the center for effective organizations at the university of Southern California makes the argument for alignment:
‘Alignment... galvanizes individuals around the company's aims and objectives. People are aware of their responsibilities and comprehend how they contribute to the total. Adaptability helps the organization to respond fast and effectively to external threats or opportunities (Hooper, et al., 2011).
Alignment is characterized by shared comprehension, common orientation, shared values, and shared priorities. Adaptability is characterized by environmental sensitivity, tolerance for opposing viewpoints, a willingness to experiment, accept failure and learn from it, and the organizational agility to adjust swiftly to change. We require both alignment and agility:
'Alignment without adaptation leads to bureaucratic, rigid organizations that 'can't get out of their own way'... Adaptability without alignment leads to chaos and wasted resources on redundant and conflicting attempts (Jackson, et al., 2015).
According to the former chairman of ICI, alignment is viewed as following:
‘In the future the organization will have to adapt to the needs of the individual, rather than expecting the individual to adapt to the needs of the organization’.
Philpot, Devitt, Parr, and Nixon, identifies "big issues" for global business leaders: creating successful and sustainable workplaces, the need to be good corporate citizens and profitable, the gap between strategy makers and those not involved, products that degrade the quality of life, and a desire for meaning and balance in life, "uniting body, mind, heart, and spirit." According to Dubrin, et al., a transformational leader helps group members grasp the need for change on both an emotional and an intellectual level. Using a new model of transformational leadership, the issue of change can be comprehended in a broader context. This paradigm aims to integrate the numerous cognitive, spiritual, emotional, and behavioral elements of leadership (Kets de Vries, et al., 2000).
The dimensions and requirements of leadership
The development of leadership theory has followed distinct paths that have never entirely or effectively merged. However, each path offers a unique dimension and set of requirements for effective leadership. The study of cognitive or rational processes (cognitive intelligence), the need for meaning and significance in people's work and lives (spiritual intelligence), emotions or feelings (emotional intelligence), and volitional action or behavior (behavioral skills) in leadership (Korac‐Kakabadse, et al., 2002).
The intellectual/cognitive dimension and requirements of leadership ‘thinking
Strategic failure, particularly in times of fast change, is frequently attributable to the inability to see a novel reality: the corporate mind is enslaved to old ideas that obscure the sense of change. Effective leadership involves the intellectual or cognitiv talents to detect and comprehend information, reason with it, imagine possibilities, apply intuition, make decisions, and solve issues. These competencies provide a compelling vision, mission (purpose), shared values, and tactics for accomplishing the vision and mission (Kotter, et al., 1995).
The spiritual dimension and requirements of leadership ‘meaning’
Webster's dictionary and the Oxford English dictionary define "spirit" as a person's animating principle. The spiritual aspect of leadership relates to the desire for significance and sense of value that motivates people in their pursuits and actions. Meaning and this sense of value are contingent on the common vision and values to which one subscribes. William W. George, chairman and CEO of Medtronic, Inc. one of the world's largest medical technology companies headquartered in Minneapolis and the Academy of Management's "Executive of the Year" for 2001, contends that employees in the workplace today need meaning and purpose in their job. When they do, they will embrace the company's objective and dedicate themselves to achieving it. Xerox PARC guru John Seely Brown is quoted by Dess and Picken as saying, "The task of leadership today is not merely to produce money: it is to make meaning." Effective leadership "wins the souls of people."
The emotional dimension and requirements of leadership ‘feeling’
Effective leadership also involves highly developed emotional intelligence, which is the capacity to comprehend oneself and others, exhibit self-control and self-confidence, and respond appropriately to others. Emotionally savvy leaders rely on their own personal strength as opposed to positional power or authority. In addition to cognitive and spiritual intelligence, emotional intelligence is essential for recognizing and supporting the shared values that support the pursuit of vision, goal, and tactics, as well as for empowering and inspiring others. Emotionally savvy leaders "win the hearts of the people".
The behavioral dimension and requirements of leadership ‘doing’
The necessary behavioral skills of leadership include both using and responding to emotion, such as through 'body language,' as well as communicating in other ways through writing, speaking, and listening using personal power - and through physical behavior, such as MBWA ('Management by Walking Around'). Communication is the organization's "life blood" and the "oxygen" of change inside it (Kotter, et al., 2008).
A new model of leadership for change
All of these elements of leadership are reflected in effective change leadership. Vision, values, strategy, empowerment, and motivation and inspiration must be outlined in an integrative model of leadership for successful change. Without solid vision and strategic thought, effective emotional and behavioral leadership can be misdirected and even hazardous. The opposite is ineffective.
‘Without vision, a people perish’, one is told in the Bible, and so does in an organization. Defining and expressing an alluring vision of the future is the cornerstone of good leadership. The Oxford english dictionary provides one of the greatest definitions of a vision: "something seen clearly in the imagination, involving insight, foresight, and wisdom." This is the basis for conducting the transformation initiative.
According to Kotler, et al., the first step in a successful change process is to give change a sense of urgency and priority. According to Kotter, it is vital to generate discontent with the status quo and an awareness of the need for change. A former CEO of a prominent European corporation is cited as saying that the first step to a successful transition is "making the status quo appear more frightening than venturing into the unknown." This is the foundation for establishing a change vision. The Royal military college of science at Cranfield university's Sylvie Jackson vividly displays how little vision plays a role in organizational communication.
‘Total amount of communication going on to an employee in three months 2,300,000 words or numbers. Typical communication of a change vision over a period of three months 13,400 words or numbers. 13,400/2,300,000 0.0058. The change vision captures only 0.58% of the communication “market share”.
Leadership has been acknowledged by the British government as crucial to overcoming the challenges of transformation in public services. Change begins with a vision: "The government must provide a clear picture... of the kind of society it (wants) from its reforms and cease being perceived as a "value free zone," according to health minister Alan Milburn. Tony Blair, the prime minister, responds, "(new labor) must rediscover its political vision... creating an opportunity rich Britain for all.”
Vision must be significant, moral, and motivating. Visions that are effective are imaginable, desirable, practical, focused, adaptable, and communicable. They are memorable and quotation worthy. Senge, et al., identifies vision as a driving force, but Covey, et al., defines vision as 'true north,' which serves as a 'compass.' Vision fosters commitment, inspiration, and motivation by intellectually and emotionally engaging and aligning people with the organization, and it is related with the expansion and success of the organization.
Change requires a shared vision to be successful. Korac‐Kakabadse, Kouzmin, and Kakabadse reveals from a survey of over 12,000 organizations conducted by the Cranfield school of management that more than one third of directors have a different vision for the future of their organization than their colleagues. Without a common goal, there cannot be alignment. Senge, et al. explains it as follows:
In a corporation, a shared vision changes people’s relationship with the company. It is no longer “their company”; it becomes “our company”. A shared vision is the first step in encouraging mistrustful individuals to begin collaborating. It establishes a shared identity.
Senge, et al., argues that for organizational change, only a vision based strategy is effective over time. According to him, a shared vision is essential for the following reasons:
•Clarifies the direction of change andguarantees that everything (new productdevelopment, acquisitions, recruitmentcampaigns) is carried out in accordancewith it.
•Motivates people to move in the rightdirection, despite the fact that the beginningstages of change may be difficult for some.
•Effectively alignsindividuals and coordinates their efforts
Values and culture
As a Nepalese Buddhist mantra once stated: ‘Open your arms to change, but don’t let go of your values’. Values are the concepts that people hold dear and live by (and sometimes die). Covey, et al., distinguishes between personal values, which are intrinsic, and corporate values, which he considers to be extrinsic behavior guidelines for the entire organization.
Change's difficulty has prompted an emphasis on values based leadership. According to McCall, et al., there is a common perception among corporate executives that strong, shared values are necessary to connect individuals in a fragmented environment. The fear, though, is the threat of "groupthink." However, if there is one organizational quality that binds individuals together, it is trust. According to McCall, et al., trust “emanates from leadership based on shared purpose, shared vision, and, most importantly, shared values”.
Bennis and Goldsmith, et al., point out that ‘Leaders walk their talk; in true leaders, there is no gap between the theories they espouse and their practice’. Effective leaders serve as exemplars of organizational values; they set an example. According to Collins and Porras, corporate values are ‘not to be compromised for financial gain or short-term expediency’.
Leadership effectiveness requires finding and promoting common values. A strong organizational culture (consisting of beliefs, attitudes, and patterns of habitual behavior) that supports a common goal and inspires Drucker, et al., devotion to it is characterized by shared values. Not sharing the same values might be dysfunctional. Shared values foster a sense of belonging and may favorably influence competitive advantage. Indeed, a change orientation is one of the qualities shared by the most admired organizations in the United States, and corporations have grown more customer and stakeholder oriented, time competitive, and value added and quality focused.
Networks of power and influence and 'horizontal' links will replace bureaucratic organization’s formal structures. Bureaucratic cultures characterized by hierarchy, limits, internal orientation, control, and the drive to avoid errors will be replaced by new organizational cultures. It is well-established that bureaucracy hinders the development of a learning culture.
One of the challenges of change during mergers and acquisitions is that it is both exhilarating and threatening for people who through it. The solution that worked for one business was to encourage participation. In the 1990’s, when Scottish Power purchased Man web and Southern Water, it formed "transition teams" comprised of managers from the acquired companies to establish shared principles and human resource policies and procedures.
The goal of culture change initiatives is to "transform the hearts, minds, and souls" of employees. This takes much time and requires some good fortune: Amin Rajan states, "The 'big bang' strategy has the potential to cause... collateral damage," while it may be necessary on occasion. Bill Cockburn, managing director of British Telecoms' UK operations, argues that incrementalism does not work in his industry: "radical reinvention" is necessary. But for culture change to be more effective, leaders must plan and implement consecutive but progressive changes.
Marks and spencer is an example of a culture change initiative aiming at altering feelings of participation, consultation, and ideals. At the end of 1998, Marks and Spencer saw a precipitous decline in shareholder value. Beginning in 2000, a new chairman, Luc Vandervelde, began a massive drive to revolutionize the corporate culture as part of the recovery strategy. This involved implementing Business Involvement Groups (BIGs) and training in consultation processes for managers and staff, with a focus on strategic business challenges as opposed to "tea and toilets."
According to Marks and Spencer's Helen Eaton, the result by May 2002 was 'a greater mutuality of interest during meetings, with management and staff beginning to work together on major business issues' as well as more transparency, honesty, trust, and professionalism' and a clearer sense of direction.
Using the example of sellotape, Wendy Sullivan and her colleagues demonstrate how matching the values of the people within an organization and those of the organization itself can facilitate quick change. Over the course of two and a half years, the company's profitability increased from three percent to ten percent, and individual job satisfaction and fulfillment, as well as morale and teamwork, improved dramatically.
Without change tactics, vision is a pipe dream. Strategies are methods for pursuing the goal and mission; they are shaped by the vision, mission, and values. Strategic plans are "road maps" of an ever changing landscape that requires a compass (vision). Effective leadership requires formulating, gaining support for, and implementing reasonable business strategy based on the organization's potential future situations. Key to the effectiveness of strategies is their ownership and commitment: Good strategy formulation draws on the organizational knowledge of its members.
William W. George of Medtronic asserts, "Employees can adjust to significant strategy shifts so long as the company's goal and values stay consistent." This is essential for retaining confidence in the executive suite. Every five years, Medtronic's business strategies are "reinvented" from the ground up. For instance, between 1989 and 1994, the company transitioned from a pacemaker company to a broader cardiovascular business, introducing revolutionary new therapies during the subsequent five years and predicting additional innovations within the next five to ten years in accordance with its 'Vision 2010'.
In the meantime, mission and values have stayed unchanged and will continue to do so. Innovation and change require structural flexibility, but also the steadiness to deliver on-time products and services. Peters, et al., refers to this as "permanent adaptability." In the management literature, it is well-established that structure must serve strategy, not the other way around. The advent of short term, high-performance teams, which replaced permanent functional or departmental teams and cross functional teams, is one example of how structures have changed. They assemble for a certain objective and dissolve after achieving it. Consequences include regularly shifting roles and transitory, diverse leadership positions.
An effective change strategy requires the formation of a steering coalition, or a group of individuals with the authority to lead the change, and the coordination of their efforts. Kotter also emphasizes the necessity of employing all feasible means of communication and explanation of the new vision and strategy, as well as ensuring that the governing coalition exemplifies the behavior required of all employees.
Empowerment, like so many other facets of leadership, is not a novel concept. Lao Tzu composed the following in the fifth century B.C.: ‘As for the best leaders, people do not notice their existence. The next best, the people honour and praise. The next, the people fear. And the next, the people hate. But when the best leader’s work is done, the people say, “we did it ourselves”.’
Literally, empowerment is giving people power. It is about equipping people with the skills necessary for the transition process. In practice, empowerment involves providing individuals with the knowledge, skills, opportunities, freedom, self-confidence, and resources necessary to manage themselves and accept responsibility. Important parts of empowerment include engaging people's intellects and imaginations, including their inventiveness in the transformation process, willingness to take risks, and trust. Part of empowering people to take action is reducing barriers to change, removing or altering systems or institutions that undercut the vision, and encouraging risk taking, fresh ideas, and inventive actions.
Bennis and Goldsmith, argues that a "shrinking" world with growing technological and political complexity offers fewer and fewer opportunities for successful top-down leadership. The key to genuine transformation, according to him, is empowered teams. The requirement for rapid response and innovation has spawned an “intrapreneurship" culture in many businesses. Innovation is now the responsibility of all employees, not just the product development division. Encouragement of intrapreneurship is an illustration of empowerment.
In the 1980’s, under the leadership of chairman and CEO Jack Welch, general electric successfully restructured in order to construct a network of interconnected businesses with the goal of achieving top market share positions in their respective industries. The transition approach includes 'work out,' a mechanism for employees to participate in teams, and 'town hall meetings' with all employees to increase communication and comprehension regarding the change process and the required new responsibilities and work habits. Previously, managers were evaluated primarily based on their ability to manage in a "command and control" mentality. Now, though, they had to achieve ownership, stewardship, and entrepreneurial objectives. Therefore, performance expectations and rewards were realigned. Consequently, GE enhanced its position on a number of worldwide marketplaces and substantially raised its market value.
Additionally, empowerment involves integrating individuals in the reform process. People are significantly more likely to support something they helped to build (and they resist what is forced on them). When workers have greater influence when they can help define their own goals... and when they engage in decision making their job happiness increases, according to research after study.
Tom Cannon describes the responses of organizations to the problem of change. They have established flatter organizations with more empowered staff who are expected to adhere to shared principles and are urged to be more entrepreneurial and innovative. They have implemented flexible learning programs to improve change initiating and implementation skills.
Motivation and inspiration
Effective leaders motivate and inspire followers to want to perform the necessary tasks. In any process of change, the proponents of the change the leaders must be believable. According to Kouzes and Posner quoted in Saban and Wolfe, leaders' credibility stems from perceptions of their honesty, competency, and capacity to inspire. Motivation and inspiration result from the connection of organizational goals with the needs, desires, values, interests, and aspirations of individuals, as well as the use of positive and appealing language.
Motivation is also generated through short term successes. Gaining short term victories requires planning and implementing visible changes throughout the change management process. It also involves publicly acknowledging and honoring those who made the victories possible.
By framing the message and structuring one's discourse, positive and enticing language is characterized. Conger defines message framing as "linking your message with the needs, interests, and sentiments of those whose commitment you need"; Goodwin defines message framing as "making people feel they have a stake in common problems." These are examples of framing language:
•Linking the message to the benefits for allparties involved.
•Reflecting their values and beliefs.
•Speaking in their language.
•Matching body language with words.
•Shifting from “I” statements to “we”statements.
•Making positive comparisons between theirsituation and that of others.
•Expressing confidence in people's ability tosucceed.
Giving examples, citing quotations, reciting slogans, varying one's speaking rhythm, using familiar images, metaphors, and analogies to make the message vivid (Martin Luther King's reference to "the jangling discords of our nation" comes to mind), waxing lyrical, and employing repetition are all elements of rhetorical language construction.
Applying the leadership model
This integrative model of leadership has been successfully applied to leadership development programs in a number of organizations concerned with change, including a manufacturing company, a private mental healthcare company, a public sector defense agency, the top management teams of two universities, a youth charity, and an insurance and emergency assistance company.
Former U.S. president Harry S. Truman is quoted as stating, "Men create history, not vice versa." In the absence of leadership, society comes to a standstill. When daring, competent leaders seize the opportunity to make things better, progress is made. Change necessitates competent administration, but above all, effective leadership.
It is important to differentiate between change management (the tools, processes and techniques used to help people progress through change), and change leadership (the style, attributes, values and behaviours of the person creating the momentum). The two processes are vital to implementing a change strategy, but confusing the two terms can lead to problems.
•The individual or individuals who ‘own thechange;
•The styleand disposition of the individual(s);
•The credibility and influence of the personowning the change;
•Emotional and social intelligence;
•Mindset not position anyone can lead achange, it does not require hierarchy;
•Focus, and clarity of thought.
•An agreed process or method by which tomanage change;
•Is about involvement, and overcomingresistance;
•It often has a ‘hierarchical play’ in effect;
•Removing resistance and getting to the newstate ASAP;
•People and process; and
•Implementation rather than installation.
Clearly, change leadership describes influencing and focusing on the change, whereas change management describes the processes for how the change can be achieved. If change leadership does not exist employees may not support or understand the vision of the strategy and without change management the processes for achieving, it may not be in place.
Citation: EL-Annan S, et al. (2023). How about Some Change Leadership Instead of Change Management?. JRIBM.