How Do You Balance Your Power Once You’ve Ascended In Leadership?
Disrupting the balance in an environment undermines the steps one can take to evolve and improve the environment. Through disruption which is too powerful and “unhinged,” you risk not just resetting policies, but relationships.
Politics aside, leadership needs to be about assurance and reassurance. Part of those assurances is that, in addition to meeting the goal desired by and for the organization, a minimal level of stability needs to exist in the present moment as work is being carried out to reach said goal in the future.
Regardless of a leader’s individual stance on an issue, it is on them to reassure their followers of, at the very least, a minimum level of continued maintenance and stability of the group going forward as decisions are made and carried out.
With no stability where you stand today, there is no way you’ll hit your target in the future.
This has nothing to do with politics and ideology but, instead, with the balance required for the mission and organization to operate and function as it has to-date, to maintain its basic composure.
“Disrupting the balance in an environment undermines the steps one can take to evolve and improve the environment.”
Balance doesn’t mean continuation of the same ideas, but a continuation of an environment which allows for the work environment to be maintained without major distraction. It’s not necessary for the policies need to be maintained, only the basic balance. Basic balance is the undercurrent which allows policies to be successful.
Balance allows everyone to come to the table, from both inside and outside your group without making anyone scramble to get a footing to make it there. It’s about not brutally undercutting any stakeholders. Stakeholders include those who you believe you are indebted to and those to whom you aren’t but whom would be impacted by your decisions.
Instability today will only reverberate and incrementally grow, rippling into the future state of the organization or group, leaving faith in the future of the group in a dubious position, resulting in low odds for any betting man or woman.
This isn’t to say that things need to remain as they have always existed. An organization or a country can remain in basic balance while utilizing different paths and based on varying ideas to achieve its ideological goals.
“An organization or a country can remain in basic balance while utilizing different paths and based on varying ideas to achieve it’s ideological goals.”
A team, division, organization, or country cannot cease existing at Point A and decide to exist at Point B in an instant or overnight. All the ideas of Point A, where an organization has existed, cannot completely end while beginning to operate under Point B’s protocol, logic, and operations without some kind of due diligence, understanding, and careful transition. In this transition there needs to be at least consideration given to whether a gradual weaning off from Point A is necessary to avoid any possible abrupt adjustment, which would undo any existing balance in the shift to any other strategy or plan.
What’s amazing to contemplate is that most people want a similar end result for their group with everyone supposedly benefiting, but differ on the fashion in which they achieve that end result. Consider when the houses of United States Congress shift power. They change laws and regulations to completely undo what might have existed under the predecessor party without oftentimes considering what goes into the actual change. But what they see on paper simplifies how their decisions play out in the schools, within the borders, and on the streets. Oftentimes, they want to change things completely, any semblance of success be damned.
Disruption is good when things get too stale or if they are not moving fast enough, but how much disruption is the right balance in the cocktail of change?
Just because those who are being lead have called for change, and to a lesser extent, maybe even disruption, it does not necessarily mean that there is a need to turn everything on its head from the get-go and all at once.
One may have been promoted to the top spot with their own understanding – or belief — they have a mandate to carry out due to their success, but how that “mandate” or goal is achieved is just as influential and impactful to decide in a strategic manner as the energy which was used to achieve the mantle of that top leadership.
“With no stability where you stand today, there is no way you’ll hit your target in the future.”
Everything needs to be calculated and disciplined. Not every interaction, process, or initiative can move at that same speed as the ascension of a leader or the energy which propelled him or her to such a position.
As a leader, you need to separate the focus on what needs to be improved in an environment from dismantling the progress which has achieved.
Is your goal to really restart and rebuild relationships and perceptions from the ground up?
Is your goal to undo the progress to-date?
Again, this has nothing to do with politics and everything to do with the methods in which goals are reached and balance possibly compromised.