As a loyal fan of a certain Southeastern Conference (SEC) college team — that shall remain nameless, but is possibly in search of a coach — I fully acknowledge that I was spoiled. When I joined the faithful many years ago, I was all-in on what that coach said to the public and the team. Most importantly, it translated to victories on the field. Much to friends’ chagrin, this increased my arrogance as a fan.
As the years progressed, there were awards, championships, more wins, etc., that further fueled a passionate fan base who thought it would never end. And you know what? It finally did. What seemed like an eternity was about a decade.
Unfortunately, that same old ball coach isn’t on the field, and I am reflecting back on the good old days like my parents talked about walking up hill in the snow — both ways — to school. Oh, how the mighty have fallen. With each new coach, there appear to be not only the expectation of winning but also a return to an earlier time. “Why can’t we run an offense like he did?” “Why can’t we recruit that blue-chip star like we did?” “Why can’t we … ?” And there is the rub.
Will the new coach do it exactly like the old coach? Probably not, and we need to be OK with that. Certainly, if the team starts losing over time, then you can question the decision-making, but what got my team from a bygone era to the promised land might not work in a new era.
The same lessons apply in business. The one inalienable truth of business is that everyone gets older, and more than likely, your team will see or be part of a regime change. Sometimes the change is welcome, particularly if the business has been challenged. If it isn’t making money, the team might benefit from a new person at the helm. However, in many privately held construction organizations, the tenure of the leadership/ownership team is usually positioned for a long reign. When that leader or group retires or exits the business, there may be growing pains experienced on both side of the house.
Lessons for the New Leader
First, the new team has to do a whole lot of listening. It seems contrary that the leadership team should have to take a defensive posture, but it is less about subordination and more about empathy. For the most part, people tend to despise change. They’ve been doing it a certain way for a long time and fear a massive amount of upheaval. It will take some time to get used to the new ideas, new strategies, new tactics or simply the new voice.
Another thing to consider is the rate of change that the new leader(s) will implement. This is not to say that new leaders should be maintaining a status quo, but they should be thinking strategically about how and when change can be introduced and where the small victories will be. It is important to remember that there is a base camp or existing culture that more than likely will be maintained within the new regime. It might be best to think of this as an evolution rather than a revolution.
One of the stickier issues revolves around the existing team. Harkening back to the coaching conversation, rarely does a team preserve people from the previous coaching staff. I remember saying to myself, “If only they kept the defensive coordinator …” However, that new coach will want team members they selected and will not necessarily retain the baggage of the previous group. There are certainly exceptions, but the head coach wants to surround themselves with the best talent that they had a say in, versus some arranged marriage.
This does not mean the new CEO or president has to clean house in a construction firm. In fact, this transition will probably be an assimilation and not a hostile takeover. But it is important to realize there may be people loyal to the prior leader who may not make the cut.
There is often a reluctance to separate ties with the “old coaches,” viewing some individuals as a protected class. Meanwhile, the rest of the organization is watching the strife, and it has the potential to act as cancer that only festers the longer it remains. Why isn’t <INSERT LEADER HERE> doing anything about <INSERT SUBORDINATE HERE>? There is a balance from both sides that has to be found. A purge will go over like a lead balloon, but a new leader who acts like a custodian simply keeping the leadership seat warm is not going to be an effective leader.
Lessons for the Team
The first lesson of management succession is that things will be different. Even if this is simply a generational transition with a well-established culture, the new leader is not the previous leader. Even if there is a DNA connection, it will be different. Be cognizant of saying phrases like:
- “Well, <INSERT OLD LEADER HERE> never did that.”
- “That’s not the way we do it at Brand X Construction.”
- “I never had to do that for <INSERT OLD LEADER HERE>.”
Killer phrases undermine the leader and the team’s collective ambition. You may be right that the “old leader” would never do that, but there also may be a compelling reason why he or she should have done it sooner. What if a market is shrinking or a key account is going away, or the organization is losing money? Change may be necessary, even if the old regime wouldn’t have taken that risk. It is fine to ask questions and judge the answers, but the team should rally around the new leader rather than ponder a bygone era.
One of the greatest challenges may lie in associates who were also contenders for that same role. For instance, the new president may have been selected from a small group of internal candidates. Be realistic! The people who weren’t selected will have hard feelings. This doesn’t mean they will revolt or stage a coup, but they are humans with emotions. Throw in the fact that a peer is now driving the bus, and you can easily see how egos and personalities can create an awkward dynamic. This does not mean a team member should stifle their feelings or not feel hurt. However, there may come a time where you ask yourself, “Can I thrive in this environment and be a strong team player, or was this blow to much for me to handle?” Bitter feelings make it hard to drive strategy, and the new leader will need lieutenants who are all in. Both sides should realize that decisions have consequences, and that may mean you will lose a team member at some point.
Transitions should be celebrated. Once the honeymoon is over, the new leader should be graded by how they performed, not held to some unrealistic legacy standard during a different time. The business is about Brand X Construction 2.0, and they will lead this change with a team that is bought in.
In the meantime, if you have any coaching resumes, please send to the University of …
