THE CHALLENGE FOR LEADERS

The one common element in all these forces for change is the need for public and nonprofit leaders to adapt and transform the way people and processes perform. But change is not easy. While potential rewards may be great, change carries risks for the organization, leaders and managers, and other stakeholders. This is true in the private sector as well as the public and nonprofit sectors, but there is reason to believe that change in the public and nonprofit sectors is more “risky” than change in the private sector.

A private-sector CEO has to satisfy his or her board of directors, and ultimately the stockholders, but can often proceed in relative secrecy, without a great deal of collaboration. In contrast, public and nonprofit sector leaders have significantly more stakeholders. They include those internal to the organization, such as unions, senior political appointees, and nonprofit boards of directors, and those external to the organization, such as political leadership (both elected and appointed), donors, suppliers, and citizens/consumers. Generally speaking, organizational change in the public and nonprofit sectors must be transparent, requires extensive consultation, and is usually conducted in a highly visible arena. Additionally, the nature of political (and nonprofit board) leadership creates a short-term horizon for many of the stakeholders, making long-term change initiatives more problematic.

While change in the ways of conducting business is usually called organizational change, the reality is that change is not organizational unless it is first individual change, and then team change. At these levels, a number of stakeholders with interest in the change efforts emerge. Each of these stakeholders has distinct and often very different perceptions, expectations, and “stakes” in whatever change is being proposed. In addition, the perceptions, expectations, and stakes of the leader influence the course of change. While local stakeholders are more prominent in the leader’s daily environment, the increasing complexity and scope of the managerial role in government and the nonprofit sector—with its increased emphasis on public-private partnerships and intergovernmental arrangements—means that all stakeholders must be on the leader’s radar to some degree.

Collectively, these relationships and their influences on the change process constitute the “change landscape.” Becoming aware of and thinking critically about this landscape are critical first steps toward deliberately negotiating it with proficiency and skill.

Leadership expert William Bridges once noted that change is inevitable, but transformation is optional (1991). However, when we examine the nature of problems that government and the nonprofit sector must address—terrorism, global warming, bird flu and other potential pandemics—the failure of public and nonprofit organizations to learn and evolve is unacceptable. So while transformation may be optional in some theoretical sense, if public and nonprofit leaders and managers are to uphold their responsibility to act in the public interest, they are compelled to learn how to transform their organizations to succeed in the face of new challenges. Change and transformation are difficult, however, requiring sound methodology and change-centric leaders who can balance the need for transformation and the need to be good stewards of their organization and their employees.