How Progressive Leaders Approach Blockers & Inhibitors

Two weeks ago, I wrote an email about the importance of a leader’s ability to change people’s mindsets. It’s an essential skill set all effective leaders need to develop.

A subscriber, Nancy, replied to that email:

“Good piece….in today’s environment -however- there will be some intransigence and some negativity regardless of slower intentional efforts at gaining buy-in…..your thoughts if any on how to contain the impact of that mindset?”

First of all, in case you need to look up intransigence (I did):

“Intransigence (n): refusal to change one’s views or to agree about something.”

Nancy, thank you for the response, you bring up a good point! We can be intentional about trying to change people’s mindsets by communicating our strategy and being patient and what if people STILL aren’t on board?

Let’s normalize this for a second…

CEOs stand for progress (change)—at least the good ones do.

Invariably, people are individuals and every individual is going to think differently.

So of course you’re going to have blockers within your organization! Of course people are going to have differing opinions than you! It’s practically a guaranteed thing.

Ok, so now, what do we do about them?

In my formula to change people’s mindsets, I listed out 7 steps:

Step 1: Let go of the expectation that change happens quickly.
Step 2: Be consistent about sharing the vision and strategy.
Step 3: Communicate how strategy execution often requires change.
Step 4: Have intentional conversations with people opposing the change.
Step 5: Take that new understanding and refine your message.
Step 6: Be patient. A lot more patient.
Step 7: Repeat.

Today, let’s expand on Step 4—and add another route to consider.

In fact, I just began a new advisory gig where I’m working with a CEO to do just this thing—addressing blockers who want the status quo and don’t want to align to strategy.

Here’s the exact approach I’m using with this leader to address the situation.

Start by working future-back.

As I’ve said to this CEO I'm working with, “At the end of the day, your job as a leader of an organization is to execute strategy.”

Sure, there’s an AND here. It should be done in a way that is culturally sound and people-centric—I’m not suggesting to overlook that.

However, your ultimate allegiance is to the strategy. Your mandate, as a CEO or leader, is to execute strategy on behalf of the organization to help it reach its goals.

So, despite all your efforts, if you have inhibitors that are STILL blocking your ability to execute strategy, as Steven Chipman once said, “If you can’t change the people, you change the people.”

Let’s pause on that for a moment because it’s important.

Your allegiance is not ultimately to the people, it’s to the strategy.

(Side note - When I was hired/promoted to be a CEO, the mandate wasn’t: “Execute strategy and push the organization to new heights….as long as you don’t change anything or cause people to be uncomfortable.”

Executing strategy and pushing the organization to new heights IS the gig.)

If someone is a blocker to your strategy, that’s a real problem.

As Nancy alluded to in her question, the impact that person has throughout the organization MUST be contained. Why?

Because people are listening. If you have one leader speaking in opposition to strategy, you better believe people are hearing that person and it’s influencing the greater organization. That’s not good!

Now, removing someone from the organization is a last resort.

I want to emphasize that it may be necessary, though.

To be an effective leader who accomplishes strategy and achieves meaningful results, you have to be willing to embrace that as an action you might need to take.

If it’s a last resort, that means we are going to do everything in our power to avoid that result WHILE still being able to execute strategy.

What, exactly, are we going to do in the meantime?

Let’s continue…

Figure out WHAT and WHY.

Ok, if “changing the people” i.e. removing them from the organization is a last resort, what do we do with the blockers before we get to that point?

We have to figure out the WHAT and WHY.

What is most important to them?

Why are they unwilling to change?

Without definitive answers to those two questions, good luck changing someone’s mind or gaining alignment.

So engage them. Initiate difficult conversations in which your singular goal is to be curious and learn.

What’s important to them?

Is it about money? Prestige? Titles? Reputation?

And why are they unwilling to change?

Do they not want to put forth the effort to change?
Do they not like what the change is?
Are they against taking a risk?
Do they not trust the CEO (maybe that’s you)?

Figure out exactly what it is.

And then you have to decide: Can you fix it or not?

If you can fix it by making a compromise or being able to demonstrate how executing strategy will address what’s important to them, do it.

Make the necessary changes or communicate effectively with your stakeholders to try to change people’s minds to get them to come on board.

And if you can’t fix it? If there’s no middle ground or the person is unwilling to change? Fix it by re-assigning them to a position where their voice is less influential.

Ultimately, you as CEO will need to make the hard decision of removal if the person continues standing in the way of progress.

It seems to me that leaders want to avoid this reality at all costs. Look, I get it! It’s hard.

When I was elected to be Baker Tilly’s next CEO, a colleague shared the following: “We pay you 10% of your salary for 90% of your work and 90% of your salary for 10%.”

I took the 10% to refer to these types of situations— the hard, really hard decisions, like removing a performer who insists on blocking the organization’s progress.

Some will say that acquisitions, for instance, are really hard….true. And moving people, whether to join a movement or leave the organization is just as hard, if not harder.

It’s not personal, though. “The company has decided to go this way, you’ve been tasked with helping us get there, and if you’re unwilling to do that, we need to part ways.”

It’s a business decision—and a last resort.

As I recently said to the CEO of the organization I started working with, “Our job is to understand people. We need to learn everything we can and then we can make informed decisions."

So, if you are still experiencing blockers and are worried about their impact on the organization, start by figuring out the WHAT and WHY—then decide what to do from there.

Permission to do what you need to do.

It’s interesting, sometimes what people are really looking for is permission.

They feel like they know what to do and are afraid to do it—it makes sense!

So consider this permission. I’ve been in these situations and have had to make these kinds of decisions. I know it’s not easy.

AND if you want your organization to become all it can be and want to achieve differentiated results, it’s necessary, at times, to make difficult decisions.

If you’ve gathered all the information and feel like a difficult decision to part ways with someone has to be made, you’re likely right.

Throughout my career, I’ve found having an outsider's perspective to be incredibly valuable. Someone who can be a level removed from the situation to help figure out what's really going on.

If I can be there to support you in understanding what’s getting in the way of executing strategy (as I am for this CEO I recently started working with), I welcome the opportunity.

​​Use this link to book a call​ or simply reply to this email and we set up a time to chat.

With intention,
Alan D Whitman