It is important to keep an eye on balances and changes in group dynamics, both within the company and within individual teams. If you want to bring about change, even potentially positive group dynamics can swing in the wrong direction. Then firm resolutions turn into empty words:
"I am a change professional. My first name is 'Change,' my last name is 'Management.' Every morning, I get up with a different foot first." Empty phrases, memorized, as meaningless as soggy toast full of empty calories. You hear these words from applicants who say what seems to be in demand when Change Competence to Change Competence . Everyone knows how important the ability and willingness to change are, but primarily we long for consistency, security, and orientation—which can be promoted in particular by group dynamics. That's why our commitment to the new often sounds so artificial.
Of course, there are people who thrive on change. But many hoard their records even though their record player has long since broken down: strong at collecting, weak at letting go. Some drive their cars until they fall apart, even though it would have been more economical to trade them in at the right time. Often underestimated: every change has an enormous emotional component. It disrupts habits and jeopardizes our sense of security. The fact that so many change projects fail miserably is rarely due to strategy, but rather to emotional stress and the accompanying group dynamics. During these phases, fears such as "Will I be made redundant?" or "Will I have to work much harder now?" far outweigh the intellectual communication of possible synergies.
People are fragile. This also applies to the apparent "tough guys."
The recurring suicides of managers tragically highlight how often people who appear strong on the outside are broken by the realities of life. Everyone balances on their own roof ridge. If our world is shaken too much, we lose our balance. That is why it is much more important to shape group dynamics emotionally than to fill our heads with numbers, data, and facts.
As Niccolò Machiavelli so aptly put it:
"Those who want to create something new have enemies in all those who benefit from the old."
Anyone striving for transparency in change will face many obstacles. Why else would car electronics deteriorate despite synergies when two automotive giants merge? "When the shepherds quarrel, you can tell by the cheese,"says William Basie, expressing what we all know.
Ignoring emotions in times of change provokes pack formation.
The dissatisfied use their new power to stir up the fearful and thus spark negative group dynamics. Outwardly, the change is praised, but behind the scenes, sand is being thrown into the gears. That's why you need to know not only your employees, but also their relationships with each other: Which groups have which interests? Only then can you defuse the change guerrillas before all the gears grind to a halt.
Are you more of a results-oriented or relationship-oriented person? Neither is "better"; both are important, each in its own time. Keep your eye on the golden mean between these two extremes—a fine art! The first type turns people into machines. They are expected to function, and if they mess up, they are mercilessly accused. The other type covers up the failures of their supposed friends when in doubt. Smart leader when results are needed and when relationships are needed. This strength resolves the apparent conflict between capital and people.
And what if someone constantly interferes?
Before your reptilian brain wants to declare the future ex-employee, try to capture him: keep him close and hold him accountable! His crossfire may be a cry for more intensive leadership. If nothing helps? As leader , you leader be able to do both—connect and disconnect. Someone has to go, and you decide who, otherwise the group dynamics will become uncontrollable. It's better not to let it get that far in the first place. In change projects, focus your attention on the emotional component. That's professional!
Thinking ahead ...
Defeats are another area where emotions play a decisive role. An example from the past: Bayern Munich is eliminated in the semifinals of the Champions League and suffers a painful defeat—a strain on group dynamics. We, too, face the challenge of dealing with setbacks on a daily basis. The key question is whether we decide to just observe from the sidelines or take action ourselves as players—and risk possible defeat in the process.
That's why you're not really happy.
Why success and fulfillment have nothing to do with each other.
