What’s the problem you solve as a transformational leader?

What’s the problem you solve?

You may know Clayton Christensen’s theory of “jobs-to-be-done” as a key to understanding why some innovations work and why some don’t. 

The story he tells is about trying to figure out why McDonald’s milkshakes were one of their most popular breakfast items.

A milkshake? For breakfast? Sure, if I’m seven years old. But these were being sold to middle-aged commuters.

It turns out the job the morning milkshake was doing was having a “breakfast” that fit in their cupholder, wasn’t instantly consumed, wasn’t messy, filled them up, and kept them interested. 

Afternoon milkshakes? A totally different job.

I’m wondering what’s the job-to-be-done of a transformational leader is in 2026? You might be wondering that too, seeing as it’s you I’m talking about. 🙂

Before I started the Change Signal pod, I’d have suggested a number of things:

Running the change project

Getting the senior support for the change project

Keeping my change team engaged, or more fundamentally, alive through the duration of the change project

Project Managing the sh*t out of the change project

You can see the common thread there: “change project.”

What I’ve really come to understand over the last year, is that the change project is dead. Sure, there are projects aplenty. But the truth is for many of us, change is now a state of being, not a project management spreadsheet.

Where I’ve got to? As a transformational leader, your goal is to create the capacity within the organization, and the agency within the people, to take responsibility for the change in their part of the organization.

There is no project. There are just your people.

Does this ring true? Or does it sound like poppcock?

---

10 unexpectedly encouraging insights about change

Which of these did you need to hear today?

Do you have a favourite quote, directly or tangentially related to change? I’d love to hear it. Will you hit reply and let me know? Meantime, here are some new ones I’ve come across in the last few months.

“The old is dead, and I don’t know what the new is. The only way to find the new is to start different things and see if there’s something that can come out of experimentation.”
~ David Lynch

“Do things fast. Things don’t actually take much time (as measured by a stopwatch); resistance/procrastination does. “‘Slow is fake.’” If no urgency exists, impose some.”

~ Nabeel Qureshi

“The desire to master a craft, to read slowly, to be embedded in a genuine community, to understand your place in some tradition larger than yourself: these desires are effortful to acquire and impossible to fully gratify.”

~ Joan Westenberg

“Almost everything will start working again if you unplug it for a few minutes… including you.” 

~ Anne Lammott

“Without data, you’re just another person with an opinion.”

~ W. Edwards Deming

“One of the most realistic parts of The Lord of the Rings is that almost no one wanted to get involved, until it was very nearly too late.”

~ Ricki Yasha Tarr

“What if acts of service that we can feel but can’t always measure expand our capacity for connection and trust?” 

~ MacKenzie Scott

“A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that worked. A complex system designed from scratch never works and cannot be patched up to make it work. You have to start over with a working simple system.”

~ Gall’s Law

“If it is a human thing to do to put something you want, because it’s useful, edible, or beautiful, into a bag, or a basket, or a bit of rolled bark or leaf, or a net woven of your own hair, or what have you, and then take it home with you, home being another, larger kind of pouch or bag, a container for people, and then later on you take it out and eat it or share it or store it up for winter in a solider container or put it in the medicine bundle or the shrine or the museum, the holy place, the area that contains what is sacred, and then next day you probably do much the same again — if to do that is human, if that’s what it takes, then I am a human being after all.”

~ Ursula K. Le Guin

“1. Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad with power.
2. The mills of God grind slowly, but they grind exceeding small.
3. The bee fertilizes the flower it robs.
4. When it is dark enough, you can see the stars.”

~ Charles Beard’s four lessons of history

---

Change done through me, not change done to me

Through me, not to me

Change done through me, not done to me. It’s nothing new to offer this up as an insight. You understand it viscerally for yourself, and I’m guessing as well, you’ve been doing your best within your organization to make it so.

On the global stage, there’s the same choice to be made. I’m watching with various levels of trepidation (ranging from “high” to “very high”) as that conversation plays out. Being Canadian, it’s a crappy time to have the US as a neighbour.

Canada’s PM Mark Carney just gave a significant speech at Davos, speaking truth to power. There’s wisdom here for all of us as transformational leaders, notably about the power of coalition and the realpolitik of influence. 

Here are a few extracts that I thought were particularly resonant.

So we’re engaging broadly, strategically, with open eyes. We actively take on the world as it is, not wait around for a world we wish to be.

…

We are calibrating our relationships so their depth reflects our values, and we’re prioritizing broad engagement to maximize our influence, given the fluidity of the world at the moment, the risks that this poses, and the stakes for what comes next.

…

To help solve global problems, we’re pursuing variable geometry. In other words, different coalitions for different issues based on common values and interests. 

…

This is not naïve multilateralism, nor is it relying on their institutions. It’s building coalitions that work issue by issue with partners who share enough common ground to act together. 

…

Our view is, the middle powers must act together because if we’re not at the table, we’re on the menu.

…

We know the old order is not coming back. We shouldn’t mourn it. Nostalgia is not a strategy, but we believe that from the fracture we can build something bigger, better, stronger, more just. This is the task of the middle powers, the countries that have the most to lose from a world of fortresses and the most to gain from genuine co-operation.

I suspect readers of all political stripes read Change Signal. I certainly hope so. This isn’t really about geopolitics. It’s about seeking wisdom in what it takes to help our organizations be their best, human places doing work that matters. I’ll take that wisdom wherever I can find it.

---

Bring in four different energies to change work

What are the Four Energies?

Years ago, I was part of an organization that would begin its gatherings by calling in the four directions, an indigenous practice in North America. It was a summoning of all we might need to do the work ahead of us. Each direction had its own colour, direction, sacred animal, and more.

The idea of drawing on different energies is powerful. It’s a way of recognizing both what’s within you, already present and perhaps sufficient; and also what might be lacking. 

Often when we’re building a change team or coalition, we focus on roles and skills. A different question might be: what energies do I need for this group to make a difference?

Warrior energy brings fierceness, grit, and a capacity to push hard, and hold the line. It’s up for the challenge ahead. It takes no prisoners. It burns bright.

Healer energy creates sanctuary. It’s a place for not just rest, but where you can safely fall apart so you can recover and get it together again. It glows calm.

Teacher energy prizes wisdom and learning. It’s finding what works and doesn’t, it has a geeky willingness to try things out, run small experiments, and see what’s possible. It dances between curiosity and articulation. 

Sovereign or Ruler energy holds the big picture and bold ambition. It sees the horizon, and remembers the game that’s being played. It’s strategic, and necessarily ruthless when it needs to be. It has a sharp edge.

In my experience, we typically hold one or two of these energies. I’d say I’m mostly a mix of Teacher and Sovereign. (How about you?)

And it’s useful to have all the energies on your team (define that as narrowly or as broadly as you wish). If you did a quick audit, where are you over- and under-indexed on energies? Do you have the mix you need, or is something missing?

I write more about this in How to Begin, my book on finding and starting a (thrilling, important, daunting) Worthy Goal, should you be interested.

---

What’s not urgent?

What’s not urgent?

My wife and I love to read. She has a PhD in Literature and a Master's in Library Science. I’ve got a Master's in literature, and I write books. So yeah, reading is one of our things.

A predictable outcome is that we have books everywhere in our apartment.

Everywhere.

Our laundry room is filled with just my books connected to Change Signal. 🫣

I get to mull over systems thinking while waiting for the dryer to finish.

When we do one of our regular book prunings, we’ve got a very particular approach.

We don’t just run our fingers along the shelves and remove a book or two.

We remove them all, pile them up, and then decide which ones we’re going to put back.

It’s out, unless it’s definitely in.

And trust me, we negotiate hard on which ones get to stay and which ones have to go.

Beyond books

It’s a strategy that can work for more than just bibliophilia.

I find when I run a project, typically all the strategies, sub-projects, and tasks all end up on the shelves marked “very urgent” or “urgent” or “oh yeah … also urgent.”

If that sounds strangely familiar, then you’ll know that not only do you have your focus pulled this way and that, but there’s always an ominous, low-level rumble of anxiety as the background soundtrack.

Like the Jaws theme, but more relentless.

In the past, I’ve just tried to prune the list back, or (for tasks especially) just kicked some of them further down the track. “See you in two weeks, Task I Don’t Want to Do!”

This month, I’ve done it differently.

I printed out my project and task lists … and deleted the electronic version. (Gulp!)

And now I’m (partway) to selectively putting back the ones that actually deserve to be on that metaphorical bookshelf labelled “genuinely important and urgent.”

You? My guess is that when you review your obligations, for a change project or just in general, there are all sorts that have snuck in as “urgent,” almost to the extent that “urgent” has ceased to be a label that means much. ​If everything’s urgent, nothing is.​

Don’t just half-heartedly prune. Take everything off the table.

Then decide, truly, what goes back.

There will be tough choices and consequences.

But that’s just strategy. That’s OK. You can do that.

More Of. Less Of

On a related note, close to 500 of you downloaded the simple New Year tool last week.

It pulls you out of the minutiae of goals and resolutions and the like, while keeping you more grounded than a “one word of the year” delivers.

What’s just one thing you want more of? And what’s just one thing you want less than?

Brainstorm a few possibilities. Make a bold choice. Then keep using that to orient and navigate in 2026.

If you missed it, you can ​grab it here​.

---

A simple, powerful way to navigate the new year

A simple tool to navigate 2026

Welcome back. I hope it’s been a lovely break. 

As you take a big breath and gird your loins for what’s ahead, I wanted to share a simple tool to help navigate what you’re doing. It’s a way to stay connected to the big picture, and to re-orient in times of confusion and stress. (So, if you’re totally free of confusion and stress, 🙂no need to read on.)

Step One

Pen and paper, ready to write. Or, if you’d like something a little more fancy, download the template I’ve prepared just for you.

You can download it here. No sign-up or email or anything required.

Step Two

Sit with these two juicy questions:

What do you want more of this year? And what do you want less of?

You can answer them at various levels. About the projects you’re working on. About the nature of the working relationships you have. About what’s present in your life. About how you’re showing up for the world. About how you’re showing up for yourself. (Consider this an incomplete list, but a good start.)

Step Three

In the moments of stress or confusion or discombobulation, when you’re at a crossroads and not sure what to do, answer this question:

Does this take me closer to or further away from my goal?

It’s simple and nuanced, all at the same time. I find it can often cut through the fog, and I hope it’s helpful for you.

Download the template here.

(And no doubt you’ve already figured out that, although I’m presenting this to you as an individual tool, it can work for a bigger picture, strategic, change conversation as well.)

Looking ahead

I’m excited about what’s in store for Change Signal this year. I’ve got more than a few brilliant new guests already “in the can” so I know you’re going to keep enjoying the podcast.

I’m also working on some in-depth playbooks that really dig into this idea of modern change mastery. Those are going to be cool to share with you!.

---

Three questions about Change Signal (last newsletter of 2025)

How can this all get better?

We’re slowing things down for the holidays, and this will be the last newsletter of the year. I hope you have an excellent break too.

Before you go, would you give me your thoughts on one, two, or all three of these questions?

I’ve created Change Signal to help transformational leaders like you find modern change mastery … so I want to know if it’s helpful or not.

What’s been most useful for you?

(The pod? The newsletter? A particular vibe? A particular guest? A particular sliver of wisdom? The haiku? Something else?)

What advice would you give me to make it a little bit better?

(Accepting all thoughts, big and small. Stop something. Build something. Tweak something. You can be as blunt as you like.)

Who should I talk to?

(A specific person? Someone, you’re not sure who, on a particular topic? An ally? A potential sponsor? A kindred spirit? Someone else?)

---

What does “belonging” feel like?

What does “belonging” feel like?

Maybe it’s because we’re in the midst of the holiday seasons, with US Thanksgiving in the rearview mirror, and Christmas and the like coming up fast … but I’ve been mulling over my Change Signal conversations with Hahrie Han (#46) and Helen Bevan (forthcoming in 2026). They’re both brilliant about the importance of belonging in the change experience.

Here’s Hahrie, talking about the success of a mega-church in the US that she studied:

“They recognize that the first need that people have is to feel like they're part of something bigger than themselves… that idea of belonging before belief… encapsulated 50 years of social science research in four words.”

I’m doing my best to imagine what radical belonging might look like and might feel like.

What would your answer be, for you? We have to figure this stuff out for ourselves, I think, before we can ask it of other people. Or if not “figure it out”, at least properly wrestle with the question. (My answers below.)

And here’s Helen reflecting on research about two change projects with identical tangible resources and quite different outcomes:

“The only factor they could find was the level of social connection between the people leading the change… social capital… is far more important than human capital… for large-scale change.”

Did you have “connections with other people” in your answer to “radical belonging”?

I didn’t, not directly. Indirectly, sure. I noted that I wanted to be seen, heard, and encouraged. I had a sense of both psychological safety and bravery. I wanted to dance in the paradox of having both lightness and gravity. 

But I didn’t list “really great social capital”. How about you?

This stuff is hard to figure out for ourselves. When we lay down the gauntlet of helping this be true for the people going through the change, radical belonging at scale, it feels harder still.

Harder, but also, what a delight when we get it right.

---

Can the Tarot help with change?

Can the Tarot help with change?

One of my favourite authors is Italo Calvino (this book and this book in particular), and one of his quirkier books is The Castle of Crossed Destinies. He uses the Tarot pack as a way of structuring and telling the story.

It’s using the Tarot the way I use it … which is as stimulus and play, a come-at-it-sideways prompt to help me think differently and see my situation anew.

I pulled three cards randomly from my pack. Let’s see what wisdom they bring.

The Hermit

How to read the card (I asked claude.ai)

Inner wisdom and solitude — Withdrawing from external noise to seek deeper truth and understanding. Time alone for reflection, meditation, or contemplation.

Spiritual illumination — The lantern the Hermit carries symbolizes enlightenment gained through introspection. You've discovered something valuable through your journey and can now light the way for others.

Patience and stillness — Slowing down, taking your time, being deliberate. Understanding that some things can't be rushed and wisdom requires space to emerge.

Here’s what I want to ask you:

What truth about this change have you been avoiding by staying busy? What would you discover if you gave yourself real space to step back and reflect before pushing forward?"

---

The Four of Cups (reversed ie upside down)

How to read the card:

Coming out of apathy or stagnation — You're emerging from a period of boredom, dissatisfaction, or emotional withdrawal. There's a renewed interest in life and opportunities around you.

Letting go of negativity — Moving past self-absorption, pessimism, or dwelling on past disappointments. You're becoming more open and receptive.

Re-engagement — Reconnecting with people, projects, or experiences after a period of isolation or indifference.

Here’s what I want to ask you:

Where in your change project are you moving (or could you move) from 'selling' to genuinely listening. What new possibilities might emerge when you stop trying to convince people and start being curious about their perspectives?

---

The King of Wands

How to read the card:

Action and decisiveness — Not just dreaming but making things happen. Takes initiative, moves quickly, and isn't paralyzed by uncertainty or overthinking.

Entrepreneurial energy — The archetype of the founder, innovator, or trailblazer. Comfortable with risk and excited by new ventures or challenges.

Maturity of fire element — Unlike the impulsive Page or Knight of Wands, the King has learned to channel creative energy strategically. Bold but not reckless, confident but experienced.

Here’s what I want to ask you:

If you were leading this change as the most authentic, courageous version of yourself rather than the version you think the organization expects, what would you do differently starting tomorrow?

And put them all together…

Here’s the story Claude tells me:

True change mastery doesn't start with strategy or stakeholder management — it starts with going inward first. The Hermit suggests you need to step back from the noise, pressure, and expectations to reconnect with what you actually know to be true about this transformation. This isn't procrastination; it's essential groundwork.

From that place of clarity, the Four of Cups Reversed marks your reemergence — but transformed. You're no longer leading from obligation, burnout, or trying to prove something. You're seeing opportunities and allies you'd missed, letting go of past disappointments or resistance that had you stuck, and genuinely re-engaging with curiosity rather than force.

This sets the stage for the King of Wands — but notice: this isn't the leader you were trying to be before the Hermit phase. This is leadership from authentic fire, grounded in inner wisdom rather than external expectations.

Honestly, that worked out pretty well for three random cards drawn from a pack and a tradition I don’t at all claim to understand.

The bigger invitation, I think, is to realize that stimulus and encouragement and provocation can be found in many places. In some ways, it’s about knowing you can bring a question to it (“what will this … meal/movie/conversation/walk/Tarot pack/etc … tell me about modern change mastery?) and staying curious to what’s revealed.

---

The three best things I’ve read about change recently

What’s been insightful for you recently?

I’m learning a lot talking to my fabulous guests on the pod, and I hope you are too.

I’m also keeping my eye out for “the good stuff” about change that’s being shared elsewhere.

Here are three articles that I thought were astute.

If you’ve come across something you’ve found helpful in the last little while (an article, a book, a pod, something else), will you hit reply and let me know? 

Speed

Faced with the pressure of “getting on with it” when tackling change, it’s likely we’re moving too fast with too little information. I thought this was a powerful article about what happens when you take a moment (or two) to study a system.
https://www.henrikkarlsson.xyz/p/problem-solving

Culture

“Culture eats strategy for breakfast,” said Charles Handy never. But still … I bet you and me both think hard and long about what it takes to change and influence culture. I thought this was a helpful HBR article about what it *really* takes. It’s about structure and it’s about power, you know, the tricky stuff.
https://hbr.org/2025/08/to-change-company-culture-focus-on-systems-not-communication

Manifesto

Does your change team have a manifesto? Mine doesn’t either. But I thought this one was both useful and inspiring. It might be helpful for you, too.
https://thedolectures.com/manifestos/manifesto-of-a-doer

---

Thank your teachers

Have you thanked your teachers?

I’m flying back from a week or so in Amsterdam, doing some work with my friend (and the most recent pod guest) Paulo Pisano, walking the canals, and visiting the renovated Van Gogh museum.

But for some of that time, I time-travelled.

It was 2006. I’d created my first-ever book, Get Unstuck & Get Going. I say “created” because this wasn’t your classic pages and paragraphs play.

It was like one of those kids’ books with different sections you can flip and combine, so you can create a character with (for example) a ballerina’s head, with a scuba diver’s torso, and a wizard’s legs.

Only mine wasn’t drawings, it was great coaching questions. (I’ve been in the game of collecting great questions for a while.) 

The idea is you’d bring a challenge to the book, open at one of the 100,000+ combinations, be inspired (new ideas and perspectives!), and get cracking.

I self-published because it was ridiculously complicated and I was a complete unknown. I had just gotten a small inheritance from my grandfather, and I decided to spend it all on the book.

But how do you market a book? I had no idea, other than you get someone famous to blurb it. (There’s more to it, btw.) How many famous people did I know? None.

So I went to my bookshelf, then organized in alphabetical order, and the first book in the top left corner was David Allen’s Getting Things Done, the OG of productivity texts.

I hadn’t read it per se, but I was sure it was pretty good. 

Seizing the moment, I looked up David Allen on this cool new thing called Google, found the company’s phone number, and rang it.

And on the first ring, it was picked up … by David Allen.

I had prepared nothing, thought through nothing, was utterly unready for this conversation.

But I burbled out something, David said, “Send me the book,” and he ended up writing a testimonial, and we formed a friendship. He and I even did an early version of a podcast together in, hmmm, 2010 maybe?

David moved to Europe, and we fell out of touch. But circumstance reconnected us just before my trip to Amsterdam.

So a few days ago, we shared a delightful lunch and a very good bottle of wine. And I was able to say thank you.

Not just for what he taught me (frameworks I still use today to focus my time and to ward off the overwhelm), but more for the encouragement, support and mentorship.

As I prepare for the launch of the 10th anniversary of The Coaching Habit next year, I’ve been reminded that beyond solving problems, people want to be deeply seen, heard, and encouraged.

And David did that for me two decades ago. It was one of my lucky breaks.

You’ll have your teachers and mentors as well.

If you can, take a moment to drop them a line to say thank you.

---

What professionals focus on

Where’s your focus?

I came across this quote recently, and it somewhat stopped me in my tracks:

“Amateurs talk strategy. Professionals talk logistics.”

I’d never heard it before, although apparently it’s fairly well known in military circles. It’s attributed to General Omar Bradley, a US Army many-starred general, and first chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In other words, someone who knows a thing or two about campaigns.

One of my favourite Change Signal conversations so far has been with Charles Conn, who, as an ex-McKinsey guy and one of the most strategic people I know, railed the inherited military metaphors and structures that inform “old school” strategy. He’s a fierce advocate for running “small experiments.”

And ironically, it seems like the military might agree; at least in that the “strategy” bit of change is not nearly as important as people might think (especially, I’d wager, strategic consulting firms … the clue is in the name.)

Of course, Bradley’s not the first to understand this (and *HT* to Fred Gibbs on Quora for these quotes).

Sun Tzu: “The line between disorder and order lies in logistics …”

Napoleon Bonaparte: “An army marches on its stomach.”

General Foch (attributed): “Behind every great leader there was an even greater logistician.”

Tom Peters: “Leaders win through logistics. Vision, sure. Strategy, yes. But when you go to war, you need to have both toilet paper and bullets at the right place at the right time. In other words, you must win through superior logistics.”

Their focus was on overcoming their enemies and winning the battles.

But as a transformational leader, what’s helpful in this for you and your focus on change in your organization?

---

Cooking Onions

Cooking Onions & Change

A favourite memory of mine is my Dad cooking down onions. He used them to make his version of potatoes au gratin, thin layers of potato, cheese, and those soft, sweet, browned onions.

It’s a slow process to cook onions well. Apply too much heat too fast, and everything burns.

But slice the onions thin, turn the heat way down low, cover, and stir occasionally, and magic happens.

There’s science behind it.

First, the rigid structures of the onion rings get broken down as the water evaporates, and the pectins and polysaccharides that are holding it all together begin to collapse. You’ll see the onion getting soft and translucent.

Then, and this is what makes you cry, the sulphur compounds are released. The sharp and bitter are removed.

Now, natural sugars are released. Or really, they’re now made findable. They were always there, but locked into the rigidity of the cell walls and overpowered by the sulphur compounds.

And finally the caramelization occurs, as the onion turns golden brown. The Maillard reaction, that chemical process that makes grilled meat so tasty, allows for new complexities and depths of flavour to emerge.

Perfect.

I do love a good metaphor.

And I suspect this won’t be the last newsletter that plays around with the idea of food as guidance for how we lead change. Just the other day, I read this great article about what it takes to make the perfect cacio e pepe … which is both simple, and amazingly tricky to get “just right.”

---

Five Unexpected Laws of Change

What are your core change principles? (Here are five I like.)

Hacker Laws is a collection of “Laws, Theories, Principles and Patterns that developers will find useful.”

It’s catnip to me.

A favourite quote of mine is “all models are wrong, but some are useful” (George Box); and here’s a rich collection of wrong models, many of which are useful.

Here are five that made me smile, wryly. They each punctuate a delusion I’ve held at various times during various change processes.

What would you add? Do you have any helpful rules of thumb, pithy saying, and/or time-tested principles that you use to bring your change dreams back in line with reality?

1. The 90-90 Rule

The first 90 percent of the code accounts for the first 90 percent of the development time. The remaining 10 percent of the code accounts for the other 90 percent of the development time.

It’s like the 80-20 rule, but realistic. When you’re 90% of the way through, it’s helpful (albeit painful) to realize that you might be about halfway.

2. Brooks’ Law

Adding human resources to a late software development project makes it later.

Human resources look so neat and tidy on a spreadsheet. Look, I’ve given you one extra person. You now have that much extra capacity. Move faster!

But: Ramp-up time. Added complexity. Communication muddling. And lots of tasks aren’t divisible. (Hence: "Nine women can't make a baby in one month.")

3. Cunningham’s Law

The best way to get the right answer on the Internet is not to ask a question, it's to post the wrong answer.

It hadn’t occurred to me that the best way to shape a change plan might be to show a prototype, and get people to tell you actually how to do it. But it certainly reinforces the point that Charles Conn made in our Change Signal episode that “small experiments” trump strategy.

4. Gall’s Law

A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that worked. A complex system designed from scratch never works and cannot be patched up to make it work. You have to start over with a working simple system.

Where are you heading to? And would you describe that as a complex outcome, or a simple working system that might evolve and merge into complexity?

5. Hofstadter's Law

It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's Law.

I love that even when you know Hofstadter’s Law, you still get done over by Hofstadter’s Law.

6. Chesterton’s Fence

And as a bonus (and nudge to listen to Change Signal), Carolyn Webb and I dig into Chesterton’s Fence in our pod episode.

---

Who are your swing voters?

And how will you tip them to your side?

It’s one of the hallmarks of modern voting today, and probably not in a good way, that the votes of a very few people can determine the government of the day and often the fate of a nation.

Now, I grew up in Australia (where there’s compulsory voting, which I approve of) and limits on how much election communication can take place. And I live in Canada, where there are also limits on how much you can spend to communicate.

I live on top of America, and watching the election cycles there is … um … illuminating.

The vast amounts of money. The relentless campaigns. The gerrymandering and disenfranchising. That weird electoral college system. 

I’m hoping that the strategy to reach people in your organization has mostly none of that. 

But what we can learn is that political parties have come to realize that they’ve got to target the key voters in the specific districts.

Yes, they’ve got to do enough to get their stalwarts to get out of bed and vote.

But really, they’re looking to reach the people who will tip things one way or another.

I’m reminded of the conversation with Rachel Botsman who said:

[Change leaders] don't ask the question, “What trust state is someone in?” So in the same way that people in marketing would think of customer segments and understand that you have to adapt communications and support and messaging based on that segmentation, it's no different for employees, where everyone is going to be in a different trust state in terms of their perception of the risk and therefore their willingness to change.

You might well segment your people by business units, or geography at the moment.

But what if you could find the people who were on the cusp of engaging with the change … which means, on the cusp of not engaging.

How do you find your swing voters?

---

Should you be sinister?

Should you be sinister?

This was a delightful short documentary on the many (113) printings of Hokusai’s extraordinary image, The Great Wave off Kanagawa" (神奈川沖浪裏).

The twist, for me, was at the end when scientist and curator Capucine Korenberg pointed out that because the Japanese read right to left, the picture is more ominous for them, a looming danger.

You can see what she means in the image above, where I’ve flipped the picture, so that our Western left-to-right reading now has the same experience.

It does feel different, right? It’s coming in from our blindside, so we see it just a fraction later, and that gets our “fight, flight, faint or fawn” lizard brain all het up.

It reminded me of pantomime etiquette, where our hero will enter from “stage right” (left, as the audience see it), while the villain enters from “stage left.” (Oh no, they don’t! Oh yes, they do!)

The neuroscience of engagement

In the TERA model from The Coaching Habit, one of the four drivers of engagement is E for Expectation. If people know what’s coming, they feel safer, which helps them stay present and engaged. If they don’t, they’re scanning for danger.

There are times and places you want to play with this. For instance, when I do a keynote I try and do all sorts of little things to disrupt their expectations (having them talking to someone within the first two minutes, present from a flipchart, get off the stage and in amongst the audience) while also meeting some of their bigger expectations (I’m sharing something helpful, I’m finishing on time.)

The point is, you want to actively choose how you use surprise or not. Don’t scare people off by accident by coming in from “stage left.” It’s tricky enough to keep people engaged. You don’t want to end up sinister by mistake.

---

The paradoxes inherent in change.

What are the paradoxes inherent here?

I’m not going to lie … being on Brené’s “let me send you a copy of my new book” list TOTALLY strokes my ego.

I got to know her a little before she became really well-known. I’ve had her on some of my pods, have been on hers, and she even asked me to write a blurb for an early book of hers.

(I’m just glad I didn’t do a Dick Rowe, and write the equivalent of “guitar groups are on the way out” as a reason for not signing The Beatles.)

Brené’s new book Strong Ground is the one most strongly aligned with organizational change, and I’m thrilled to see that one of the chapters is on paradox.

She references lots of people in the chapter, from Jim Collins talking about “the genius of the AND” to Richard Rohr’s idea of “the grace paradox” (we grow (spiritually) more by doing things wrong than by doing things right).

One of the quotes I immediately loved is from James March:

“Leadership is plumbing and poetry”

How about THAT as a challenge for the way you lead change? 🫣

The paradoxes I notice

Here are paradoxes I see showing up as I try to lead change. Or put another way, here’s where I find tension:

Doing change to people AND Doing change with people

Providing clear direction AND Running small experiments

Selling the benefits AND Pointing out the pain

Staying curious AND Wanting answers

Being optimistic AND Staying grounded in reality

Taking action AND Being patient and still

Fixing everything AND Letting some dumpster fires keep burning

Change as an event AND Change as a constant

Resolving paradox

“Enough with this BS tension! I want this awkwardness to end, please!”

(Or is that just me?)

Look, I know some of this is “sitting in the tension” of it. The most interesting paradoxes are probably not able to be resolved.

But “sitting in the tension of it” also feels quite passive.

So I have a few questions to more actively engage with the paradoxes that are showing up.

First, which pole of the paradox do I inherently think is more important? In other words, what’s my bias here? Knowing your personal preference, and knowing it’s a personal preference, not a universal truth, can be helpful.

Second, what choice would I actively make as to which one of the poles would best serve as a guide for this change process?

I’ve found a useful trick is to replace “AND” with “EVEN OVER.” It makes it clear what stand I’m taking in a difficult but useful choice.

So for instance, Not “Providing clear direction AND running small experiments” becomes (for me, most of the time) “Run small experiments EVEN OVER providing clear direction.”

Shades of Grey (and Gray)

It’s somehow appropriate that the colour of paradox has different spellings around the world.

If the answer seems clear and black and white, it’s possible you’ve misunderstood the question. 🙂

This is new thinking for me, so I’m curious to know how it lands with you. Do let me know, and let me know your favourite paradox too.

---

Navigational errors in change.

How good’s your map? (Rhetorical question)

Alfred Korzybski coined the phrase “the map is not the territory” (and also “the word is not the thing”). 

That sounds obvious enough when it’s pointed out – I can just see myself nodding vigorously and saying, “yes, exactly” when someone makes that point – but it’s amazing how quickly we forget.

• We do love our maps.

• Here are some maps that are currently leading you astray, more or less:

• How the senior team works

• The org chart

• What the values of the organization mean

• What behaviours the values of the organization will determine

• What people think the change is about

• How people understand that thing you communicated

• How much of the training will stick

• How power and influence work

• What competencies you have and don’t have in your change team

• How ready people are to change

• How people will respond to the change

• Your change strategy and plan

This is not a complete list. 🙂

Don’t get me wrong, maps are also really helpful

Creating them is powerful, because you can notice what you’re choosing to include or leave out, to emphasize or downplay.

Using them can generate shared goals and understanding, and increase the odds of you making good choices navigating what’s next.

But reality is messy and unmappable. If only we could “do a Google maps,” type in a destination, and get the exact route to the minute of the journey.

More likely, you need to run small experiments to figure out the way.

Antonio Machado:

Wanderer, your footsteps are the road, and nothing more; wanderer, there is no road, the road is made by walking.

If you’d like a literary excursion that makes the point, Borges’ extremely short story is slightly obscure and also mostly delightful.

And here’s a fun tool that makes the point literally. You can see just how warped our standard “Mercator projection” global map is.

---

Seeking success? Or avoiding failure?

A declaration of change often starts with someone senior painting the picture of success.

Often, they do it badly. “10% more widgets!” (In my pod interview with Dan Heath he is wonderfully acidic about how uninspiring c-suite numbers are as a vision.)

Sometimes they do it well, and there’s a resonant and compelling sense of what the future holds, and why we need to get there.

But as humans, we’re not really wired for bold success. We’re wired to minimize failure.

Blame our brains

Your brain has one overriding job, and that’s to keep you alive. The longer you live, the more chance there is of your DNA getting passed along.

So it’s learned that, on balance, staying safe and avoiding risk is the smart long-term bet.

That dark cave that tempted our ancestors some tens of thousands of years ago? The ones that avoided it were the ones who didn’t get eaten by the thing are also the ones who are our ancestors.

You’ll have your bias

In my experience, each of us has our own orientation of “towards reward” or “away from risk.” I’m a seek-rewards guy, my wife is an avoid-risk gal, for instance.

Do you know yours? The key players on your team? Your sponsors’? The CEO’s? The org culture’s?

Three conditions

One tool that might help to calm all nerves is to make explicit three different conditions of success.

From Lean comes the concept of Conditions of Satisfaction. These make explicit what “good enough” is. You know it, and they know it. They’re not just explicit, they’re typically measurable and limited in number. 

I’m going to add two more.

Conditions of Glory. 

What would be absolutely brilliant? What would be stunningly excellent? Do we know, specifically, what a truly glorious outcome would look like? And for whom? How do we unlock people’s ambition and excitement

Conditions of Catastrophe.

What would be disastrous? This might get into what Michael Abrashoff would call “above the waterline mistakes” and “below the waterline mistakes.” If the ship sinks, that’s probably a catastrophe. But does everyone know that?

There’s lots of general talk about success, but it’s helpful to remember that humans on the whole are more wired to avoid failure than they are to seek success.

Knowing how you, your team, your sponsor, and your organization are oriented will make clear what’s possible and worth striving for, and where you might choose to play it safe.

---

Beware sharks.

Where’s the danger?

I’m currently in Australia and entered some “risky” territory at the beach.

That’s a pretty excellent photo, right? It’s almost like they don’t want you to go swimming. 🫣

You probably haven’t erected Danger! Death Imminent! signs around the place for your change process.

That’s good.

But, almost certainly, people already have these messages posted in their own minds, and have their own internal doom scroll going on.

That’s less good.

Australian Tourism faces this challenge. More people die in Australia each year from their furniture tipping over onto them, than they do from shark bites.

But nobody asks Australians about the IKEA-related dangers of a trip Down Under.

Change makes people worry.

When in doubt, people will assume that change is a threat.

So let me ask you this:

What are the sharks, the stingers, the snakes, the treacherous undertow, and/or the collapsing beach that your change program has conjured for people?

You’ll find out when you go and ask them.

---