Leader to Leader52

Organizations face key challenges as they try to transform and evolve. Lead-ers who bring change to organizations also face a key challenge that, to me,towers above all the others: personal adaptation. Before leaders can ask their

teams to make changes, to shift mind-set and “heart-set,” to ignite new behaviors,they have to model it themselves. In short, leaders have to demonstrate, personallyand practically, what they are asking for from their teams.

This requires of leaders two additional aptitudes. First, they need enormous courageas they make themselves more transparent and more vulnerable to genuine scrutiny.The benefit of extending themselves in this fashion, however, is real credibility. Sec-ond, they have to be able to avoid the temptation to lapse into symptomatic remedies:shifting around the organizational chart, reassigning a few key people, introducing anew technology, launching a new marketing drive, and the like.All of these actions mayin fact be necessary when done at the right time and for the right reasons, but not asa palliative for the fundamental adaptive changes that are sometimes required of keyleaders as they lead change.

The challenge is even greater in global scenarios that bring together leaders from avariety of cultures. As communication becomes more challenging, the temptation isto avoid the high road of personal evolution and go instead for the low road of super-ficial interaction. If we succumb to this, however, we create an even deeper problem:communication becomes diplomacy and manipulation. In other words, we choosewhat we will say, not because it is what we actually feel or think, but simply to try tocreate or avoid a specific reaction in others.

To illustrate these points, I will examine the experiences of two leaders I’ve witnessedrise to the challenge of personal adaptation in a variety of global scenarios.

B Y O M A R K H A N

The Challenge of Adaptive

Leadership

E X E C U T I V E F O R U M

For bulk reprints of this article, please call 201-748-8771.

Fall 2005 53

Revitalizing 3M Gulf

Some years ago,3M Gulf (the organization in charge of3M’s Middle East operations) had a fairly cohesive

board,which was a mixed blessing, as many of the mem-bers came from the same region. (I am speaking here ofthe sort of management board made up of the opera-tional directors and usually the managing di-rector, not to be confused with boards ofdirectors as found in U.S. companies. Thisboard not only serves in an advisory capac-ity but acts as organizational coach and con-science.Oftentimes, the country manager ormanaging director is also the chair. At othertimes, influential locals or regional bosses aregiven the chair and the oversight that comeswith it.)

3M Gulf had surface harmony but inade-quate challenge between and among themembers of the management board. A col-lection of strong personalities seemed todominate the departments, and the perfor-mance and innovation edge had becomedulled as a measure of complacency set in.The company was in danger of taking onthe feel of a regional player,with local moresand reflexes prevailing over the ethos of 3Mglobally.

3M opted to send in a very dynamic leader,Bill Schnier, who came from a sales andmarketing background in the United Statesand had little Middle East experience. Hewas sent in to “internationalize” the culture and rekin-dle a more market-based orientation.

This was an adaptive aspiration—as demonstrated bywhat happened. Another leader could have appliedtechnical Band-Aids such as just changing the nation-

alities around so that on paper the board would appearmore diverse, or introducing more sales and marketinginitiatives without proper consideration of businessneeds or customer aggravations—or 3M’s own evolv-ing global brand. However, Bill seemed to sense thathe had to start elsewhere.

Building Unity

As a first step, a more diverse board was in-ducted with four or five different nation-alities represented. Bill’s style was initially ajolt to members of the organization. Theythought he brought a Wild West,“there’s anew sheriff in town” mentality with him. Itseemed to them that he wanted too muchof a clean sweep, potentially invalidatingtheir past.

When we began our work together, Billwas clear that he first wanted to build unityat the senior team level. He wanted a teamof various nationalities whose memberscould value their diversity but transcendtheir barriers. He also wanted them to alignon how the senior team could commit to-gether, as well as what they would collec-tively take aim at.

Bill was sensitive enough to understand thathe needed insight into how he was com-ing across.He realized, as few leaders botherto do, that message intended and message re-ceived frequently differ, giving rise to abun-

dant and often recurring misunderstandings.

After a highly passionate session together with his topteam, Bill had me interview and coach his senior lead-ers to get their unvarnished feedback on him, and onthe leadership culture. As we elicited their views, a

Omar Khan isfounder and senior

partner of Sensei In-ternational, a globalleader in leadership

and personal develop-ment operating in the

United Kingdom,the Americas, the

Far East, the MiddleEast, and South Asia.He is a sought-afterchange catalyst and

a pioneer in transfor-mational learning,

and author of severalbooks, including “Syn-ergy” and “Timeless

Leadership.”�

Leader to Leader54

number of perceptions emerged. It was intriguing tosee how Bill’s desire to retain a balance between workand personal life was often seen as “country club lead-ership” by those who didn’t understand that focus andproductivity are more important than just sloggingaway. Bill realized how sometimes his forceful style wasperceived by other cultures as lack of interest in diver-gent viewpoints and that he also needed to be alertedas to various cultural tripwires.

Facing Adaptation and Change

Some of this was hard for Bill toswallow. He urgently wanted to lead his team to success, andhe hadn’t realized that some ofthese impressions were being cre-ated.He and I were very careful,however, to make sure the la-ments he was registering wereconverted into action steps. Billwas dedicated to ensuring thatthe new culture of meritocracyand accountability he was thereto instill didn’t become a casualtyof necessary cultural sensitivity.

Bill went back and spent per-sonal time with each member of his team, so that theycould understand where he was coming from. He wasclear and unambiguous about his expectations, but healso asked them with disarming humility for their ad-vice as to how he could be more helpful to them andwhat he needed to do to help 3M Gulf succeed.

In meetings, he remembered to stop and ask for input,not assuming (as we sometimes do in Western cultures)that silence means consent, or that anyone who hassomething to say will say it. Frankly, this is a dubiousconclusion in any culture, but in cultures that empha-

size greater overt deference to authority, it can be par-ticularly hazardous. So Bill began to actively elicit re-sponse, to invite comments, to take people with himon marketing trips, to have them meet customersalongside him during golf tournaments that 3M spon-sored, to have weekly business brainstorming sessionswith clear actions identified, while all the time ham-mering home the business and performance prioritieswith unrelenting focus.

Each year, we held catalyst sessions with his senior team.In year 1, it was all about building relationships within the

team, and Bill was a passionateand forthcoming participant. Hemodeled the informality andopenness that had been alien tothat environment in the past. Inyear 2, the focus shifted to strat-egy and to connecting with thecustomer base. 3M’s worldwideemphasis that year was on being apreferred supplier and customiz-ing solutions for customers. Billled the charge while giving sig-nificant visibility and recognitionto his team. In year 3, we lookedat the people equation, the em-ployee value proposition, the in-

ternal culture.Bill had built up the HR function so that itrepresented 3M’s focus on both leadership development aswell as growth in technical expertise.

During his three-year tenure, Bill helped deliver excel-lent business results. He liberated a true performanceculture that has continued to flourish since his depar-ture, provided creative provocation to break some ofthe stalemates of the past, and guided an organizationthat became highly respected within 3M as an exemplarin many practices (a role quite different from what hehad inherited).

�

Message intendedand message received

frequently differ.�

Fall 2005 55

Had Bill not been willing to adapt personally, had he notchallenged each of his senior team members to do thesame, the transformation was very unlikely to have suc-ceeded. Had he not had the courage to be temporarilyunpopular, while continuing to both listen and remaincommitted to his core priorities, these breakthroughswould never have become real.

Charting a Path for Growth at Unilever Vietnam

My next example, Unilever Vietnam, belongs to aparent company that has

been facing various global chal-lenges during the last severalyears.A strong and capable com-pany overall, Unilever had seenits growth sputter somewhat, andit had been seeking not only torestructure for greater effective-ness and efficiency (the technicalaspect) but also to improve thequality of leadership and instillthe spirit of enterprise through-out its global operations (theadaptive part).

Unilever Vietnam came underthe chairmanship of a dynamic and highly execution-oriented leader, Michel Dallemagne. A Belgian, he andan extremely diverse management board (made up ofDutch, Australian, Indian, Korean, and Malaysian lead-ers) set out to deliver a high-growth company.

They produced meteoric growth, but with it camesome casualties. Various board members weren’t per-forming as the organization had hoped they would.While execution was highly prized, some of the humandimensions weren’t being addressed and there was quitea bit of burnout and disenchantment at the next level

of Vietnamese leaders. Because the high growth wascoming at a human cost, there was also a question ofsustainability. Moreover, competition from Procter &Gamble (Unilever’s chief global rival) was heating up.

When we embarked on our work together I was grate-ful to learn that,despite a reputation for being a very dif-ficult taskmaster and listening only selectively,Michel wasopen to ongoing adaptation as a leader. His head was inexecution, but his heart really was with his people. Hisbehavior sometimes did not relay that message effectively,driving some people underground.However,Michel had

a highly developed BS detectorand when people disengaged orwent underground, it incensedhim. He wanted people to en-gage, to prepare, to share theirenergy and passion, and evenhave the guts to take him on (noeasy task!).

Forging New Relationships

We began by building deep re-lationships between Michel andall the members of his seniorleadership team. (In fact, with-out first improving and empow-

ering the relationships at the senior leadership level,adaptive change is virtually impossible.) A board mem-ber had recently been sacked and this crisis gave us theopportunity to come together and decide what kind ofculture we were going to build.The team spoke of theiranger at each other, their pain, and their confusion. Onthe other hand, they spoke of their pride in their achieve-ments, their passion to win, and their commitment totheir own people and teams.

They first decided to work more as a team themselves(and less as an assortment of individuals) to share ideas

�

Without authenticity,

leaders engage in corporate

pantomime, parking their

passions and personalities

elsewhere.�

Leader to Leader56

and build alignment early. So one commitment that theyarrived at was to not present ideas after they had ma-tured and were well en route to being activated, as theyhad been doing, which caused resistance and defensive-ness. They realized that if ideas were shared when theywere embryonic, and everyone made inputs then, itwould be very different.Then the project or undertak-ing would have collective buy-in and endorsement.Everyone would have a stake in its success, and otherswould be naturally motivated to share improvement sug-gestions proactively and constructively.

They also chose to define whatleadership would mean for themin this context. To further this,they gave each other challeng-ing personal accountabilities to come through on within aclearly specified period. So, eachperson took turns in the “hotstand.” The other members ofthe board took turns givingthem what they called a “Wow.”Each Wow was specific to thatperson’s area of responsibilityand where they felt leadershipgrowth was required.Each Wowwas established taking a six-month achievement horizon. Here are some examples:

• It would Wow me if you focused better, if we didn’t have so many initiatives, and we knew our business priorities and really delivered them.

• It would Wow me if you were more detail-oriented and really knew the market. It would also Wow me if you made sure your team was fullyinformed and made decisions on that basis. I feelwe’re too reactive, and while you do a great job atcrisis management, we need better preparation.

• It would Wow me if you and I could com-municate more, consult each other more, make more time for each other, learn to trust each other, and make that relationship visible to ourteams, who also currently have an unconstructiverelationship.

Each person collected the Wows given to them, andthese were then circulated and reviewed at specified in-tervals and meetings as a mode of team coaching and ac-countability. Everyone, including Michel, relished theclarity, the stretch, and the commitment implied by these

“mutual Wows.”

Spreading the Culture

With the senior teamaligned, the board led

about 50 of their next-levelleaders into a similar leadershipjourney, as a way to extend re-lationships, trust, and passion forthe future. A “leadership jour-ney” is, as its name sounds, atrue journey, where leaders andteams go into a new culturalcontext. In the act of experi-encing new things, they cometogether as a team as well as

tackling pressing business issues.

As we traveled around Da Nang, living with villagers,doing community work, camping together, hiking, visit-ing a Unilever-sponsored orphanage, and playing teamgames on the beach, something wonderful happened. Inthe midst of these paradigm-extending activities, the team,sensing a new unity at the board level, found the courageto ask Michel to create “more space” for sharing. Theyasked for the other board members to be heard.And thesenext-level leaders asked the senior leaders to listen tothem, to hear them out.

�

Without strong

relationships at the

senior leadership level,

adaptive change is

virtually impossible.�

Fall 2005 57

They told the board what the team needed in order togrow, to thrive, and for individuals to feel both stimu-lated and important. Each of these requests from theteam was debated, with Michel deliberately backing offand letting his other board members engage the largerteam. Each point was again converted into a specificaction commitment.

Given Unilever Vietnam’s execution focus, the follow-up on the initiatives to which they had committed dur-ing the journey was excellent. Board members took oncoaches, the coaching culture became an area of com-mitment for the entire organi-zation, and the newly foundteam spirit became even moresharply focused on world-classconsumer connection and ex-ceptional business results.

More than three years later, theteam is healthier than ever.Newleaders have come in, but theculture still survives. Over thisperiod,Vietnam has been amongthe countries where Unileverhas consistently outperformedProcter & Gamble. UnileverVietnam has been the fastest-growing Unilever company in Asia.Michel has gone onto a bigger regional job, and his new regional team hasbeen highly complimentary of his tenacity (his naturaltalent) as well as his openness and commitment to de-veloping his team (his adaptive achievement).

The breakthrough came from huge personal evolutionand adaptation by the senior leader and his team, as wellas the larger team once an opening had been created.The example also highlights the courage needed byMichel to embark upon such a process. This in turnstimulated the courage of his team to take advantage of

the opportunity.This newfound openness and authen-ticity in turn inspired the larger team to ask for whatthey needed in order to feel engaged and valuable.

Without this authenticity, we often have what is calledpseudo-communication. In other words, the leader clearly de-marcates what is acceptable to talk about.The other seniorleaders therefore take the hint and speak in politically cor-rect ways. This invariably renders corporate communi-cation impersonal and abstract, and then the larger teamgoes through what is essentially a corporate pantomime,having parked their passion and often their personalities

elsewhere.

Retaining Engagementand Commitment

The fear of personal adapta-tion and emotional engage-

ment seems to r ise as we getmore remote from people andoperations. Retaining engage-ment and remaining committedto personal adaptation is whatdistinguishes truly great leaders.It’s certainly one of the reasonswhy so many still hang on toJack Welch’s words—because the

essential message he distils from his highly adaptive andcourageous years of leadership is about people, personalgrowth, and an unshakeable commitment to helping theorganization win by helping its people to win.

Reviewing both examples, some commonalities are clear.First,both leaders courageously faced their adaptive chal-lenges without any technical sugarcoating. Second, bothleaders were willing to be held personally accountable—with genuine curiosity rather than defensiveness, theytook on the adventure of personal adaptation.Third,eachshowed a clear awareness of the need to energize and

�

The fear of personal

adaptation and emotional

engagement seems to rise as

we get more remote from

people and operations.�

Leader to Leader58

engage team members and both invite and challengethem to live into the adaptation required. Fourth, theyshared an appetite for true, courageous, radical conversa-tions, the types that build trustand are potentially transforma-tional (rather than safe, surface,flimsy, political interactions). Fi-nally,both displayed a continuingdesire to evaluate the credibilityand quality of the adaptationagainst the stated vision and theorganizational results of greatestpriority to the organization.

Leadership is not a technical practice. It isn’t a primar-ily cerebral act. A vision is proved only through action

and focus. A strategy comes alive through both passion-ate consistency and meaningful flexibility.This in turncalls for behaviors that endorse both as required.

Leaders can’t ask of others whatthey won’t have the guts or driveto go for themselves. The op-portunity of adaptive leadershipis therefore for leaders to em-body the vision, to bring thestrategy vibrantly to life throughtheir own behavior, and to bewilling to be personally chal-lenged and enlarged as a way of

truly sponsoring the culture needed to help their or-ganizations win. �

�

A vision is proved

only through action.�