The article “The benefits and limitations of leadership speeches in change initiatives” by Johan Roos (2013) contains a case study that describes the author’s use of speeches as president of Copenhagen Business School (CBS) in order to facilitate change in the institution.
The Facts Surrounding the Case
The aim of Roos (2013) as president consisted in transforming CBS from a “fragmented social science and humanities university with a business orientation” into a more focused and pragmatic international business school (p. 549). The need for change was spurred by the 2008 recession, which forced the Danish government to demand more financial prudence from CBS. The previous CBS president was known for his laissez-faire methods that had encouraged the fragmentation of CBS. It is also noteworthy that Roos (2013) had little experience in leadership and change at the time.
Key Issues
The key issues that confronted CBS included fragmentation, a lack of common direction, and a relative lack of financial prudence. The pressure for change was both economic (the 2008 recession) and political (the Danish government), making it urgent. The situation was complicated by the diversity of the units and staff, all of whom needed to be motivated to change. Similarly, the school was used to a laissez-faire leadership style and the aforementioned fragmentation, part of the school’s philosophy and value system for thirty years. This aspect did not facilitate the change process, either. However, from the case, it is apparent that avoiding change was no longer a suitable course of action.
An issue that Roos (2013) highlights from the point of view of rhetoric can be described as lacking the art of rhetoric among the majority of modern leaders. He suggests evaluating his course of actions with respect to speech planning, to determine if such an approach can be regarded as a viable solution to a company’s issues.
Course of Action Evaluation
Roos (2013) started the change campaign by gaining information about the institution. In particular, he chose to become acquainted with the situation at CBS with the help of personal interviews and e-mails to people inside and outside CBS, which provided him with background knowledge on the issues that the school was experiencing, a most reasonable course of action.
The process was facilitated by the reluctance of the author’s predecessor to leave the position; this provided Roos (2013) with extra time as a “shadow president,” and the author’s course of action is an example of using time wisely. Roos (2013) also points out that CBS employees found it surprising that their opinions on change were of interest to their future leader, which led the author to work toward increased openness and transparency in the school and especially among those in leadership positions.
Also, the interviews and e-mails became the first step toward the development and implementation of the employee engagement strategy, which was further developed through the speeches that the author discusses in detail. Apart from that, the speeches were used to outline the five key courses of action that the author planned for necessary change.
They included a consolidation of CBS that had to be respectful of its diversity, the change of the then-existing growth strategy to include the consolidation processes, the development of clear policies and processes to empower staff for more effective work, the improvement of transparency across CBS (with special attention paid to leaders), and the “sharpening” of the school’s “blurred profile as a center for research vs a top teaching business school” (Roos, 2013, p. 550).
The first, second, and fifth principles were directly aimed at resolving the issues of CBS, which makes them necessary for the change Roos was proposing. It is noteworthy that the first principle pays particular attention to the realities of CBS, that is, its diversity, which is probably the result of the author’s extensive workplace research.
The third principle presupposes the empowerment of the employees for change, which includes the development of suitable tools, including policies, processes, aims, and so on. The existence of such empowering techniques does not only facilitate change; it improves job satisfaction, motivation, and commitment (Jo & Park, 2016). In other words, choosing to develop empowering tools is a very promising course of action.
The author provides more details on transparency improvement via speeches, which is the fourth course of action. The importance of transparency, especially that related to management, is highlighted in one example by Mishra, Boynton, and Mishra (2014). The authors carry out a study with modern executives and demonstrate that the latter tend to improve transparency via communication, which results in improved engagement and trust, and raises the reputation of the managerial community. In this respect, Roos (2013) carried out open meetings that provided opportunities for sharing news and communication with the audience. This practice also allowed addressing resistance.
Finally, the speeches demonstrate that Roos (2013) worked toward the development of a new vision and philosophy that was both partially based on and partially opposed to the previous one. In particular, the author proceeded to use the predecessor’s metaphor of flowers (that had been allowed to bloom freely), but promoted the development of one “garden.” Apart from that, Roos (2013) carried out what could be called an advertising campaign for his strategy of change, which included the speeches, posters, postcards with the five guiding principles of the change, and university magazine articles. This course of action was also directly aimed at employee engagement.
Employee engagement is now regarded as the key to successful change. Sonenshein and Dholakia (2012) point out the fact that the implementation of a strategy directly depends on employees. They also highlight the significance of communication as the primary tool of engagement and employment of the employees in change. A similar focus is described by Mishra et al. (2014), who point out an increasing interest in internal communication that is being exhibited by modern employers. In other words, the course of action that was undertaken by Roos (2013) to engage the CBS employees is apparently justified by contemporary research.
Best Course of Action: Recommendation
The courses of action chosen by Roos (2013) complement each other in providing a framework for change that is aimed at resolving the issues of CBS, and that takes into account the specifics of its situation and provides the employees with the tools for change. The author demonstrates the importance of working with the community’s view of the change, and suggests speech as one of the key means for this process.
However, Roos (2013) also explicitly states that dialogue is required for actual engagement. The focus of Roos (2013) on interaction with the employees is justified by research, practice, and his case study. As a result, a recommended course of action in a similar case that is characterized by a long-existent, deep-rooted but inept way of organization, one that requires change, consists of working with the employees, engaging them through all available and suitable methods, and thereby empowering them to participate in the change.
References
Jo, S. & Park, S. (2016). Critical review on power in organization: empowerment in human resource development. European Journal Of Training And Development, 40(6), 390-406.
Mishra, K., Boynton, L., & Mishra, A. (2014). Driving employee engagement: The expanded role of internal communications. International Journal of Business Communication, 51(2), 183-202.
Roos, J. (2013). The benefits and limitations of leadership speeches in change initiatives. Journal Of Management Development, 32(5), 548-559.
Sonenshein, S. & Dholakia, U. (2012). Explaining employee engagement with strategic change implementation: A meaning-making approach. Organization Science, 23(1), 1-23.