Initiate. Confront. Lead. Innovate!

Judith M. Bardwick, Ph.D.

Whether in terms of an institution or an individual, if there’s a lot of anxiety about risks, then the core motive is to gain security by avoiding failure. That becomes more important than achieving major break-through. Over time, the culture and practices and procedures all develop in ways that unconsciously are  designed to avoid failure. That includes:  

o   An appraisal system without teeth.

o   No negative feedback.

o   A promotion system independent of individual merit.

o   Informally guaranteed tenured for everyone.

o   A culture in which competition is prohibited.

o   A compensation system that doesn’t reflect what people do.

o   Fixed rules to determine what’s right or wrong.

o   Committees without authority to decide whats good or bad.

o   A style of consensus with no disagreement.

o   Rewarding system players because initiators are scary.

o   Leaders who are conservative.

o   Layers and layers of a person whose primary job is to check and recheck to make sure that no mistakes can be made 

In organizations that are very hierarchical, many people become passive. When the ladder is very tall, and status is very important, people wait to be told what to do and then wait to be told how well they did it. It’s like a long line of penguins, all dressed for success, waddling with confidence. But, while the PA system in the background is saying, “Initiate. Confront. Lead. Innovate!,” all eyes are skyward – waiting, cautious, passive.

I am impressed and distressed at how passive hierarchical organizations make people. There’s often a lot of activity, but its busyness; it’s not going anywhere; it’s game-playing. It’s playacting at work. While mouths talk about progress and innovation, nobody gives a damn because nothing happens as a result of what you do or dont do. There is an optimum point on the anxiety curve. Too little and people are not motivated to perform; too much and they’re unable to perform. In the latter case, some of our organizations now embody enough anxiety that people are in the panic end of that curve. Mergers, restructuring, downsizing, the acquisition of whole new businesses and the sale of others wipes out any sense of security. Instead of a generally orderly growth of business, weve moved into an era of violent change as corporations respond to international competition, a global financial system, and Wall Streetdriven dynamics.

Naturally, many people feel very anxious. They don’t know whats going to happen to them and they don’t have much control over it either. Uncertainty leads to anxiety. Unremitting anxiety is psychologically extremely costly, so it frequently results in efforts to create psychological security by avoiding risk and resisting change. We see that when people resist innovations, fight to keep their turf, fight to keep things the way they’ve always been.

Thus, institutions cannot prosper when their people either are too secure or when they are too frightened. People need the manageable amount of anxiety that comes from having responsibilities and being accountable for achieving results. When they achieve, something good should happen. When they don’t, something negative should happen.

People and organizations develop a sense of vibrancy when they are in the midrange of anxiety. Organizational survival requires that that’s where they be. In young, fastgrowing organizations, the situation itself creates that mid-range. In mature organizations, it has to be managed; it has to be created.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *