What’s the one quality that leaders for change must have?

When I first began to think about becoming a coach a decade ago my concern wasn’t about learning coaching, getting clients or working two jobs.  It was the fear of the legal profession and my law clients turning away from me.  After all,  barristers are barristers, not coaches.  They think logically with their minds, rather than sense with their bodies and feelings.  They are trained to give their opinion on the best solutions, not help others explore their own destinations.  And they work in a world of knowing, and see no value in not knowing. Looking back, what I was feeling into were the dynamics of belonging and the risk of exclusion.

What’s the one quality which effective leaders for change must have? It’s the willingness to risk their belonging.

Below I discuss why, and what we learn from this.

Belonging and change: the basics

Belonging is the hidden glue that binds organisation, cultures, nations, families, all groups.  In its structure are relationships; in its substance are rules, values and conventions.  Policing belonging are feelings of goodness, innocence and reward (for the compliant), or guilt, shame and censure (for rule breakers).  Systemic belonging prioritises the group over the individual.  Exclusion of one is a price worth paying for the integrity of the group.  That’s why belonging is such a powerful force in securing individual compliance with group norms.

Anyone who wants to change the rules from the inside thus faces an obvious conundrum.  Their authority comes from their belonging within the group, but their capacity for systemic change demands a willingness to challenge the very rules which mark their own belonging. And so they must be willing to risk their belonging, and face the fear of exclusion from the group.

Through this lens we gain a number of insights into the dynamics of leading for change, both at a surface and an internal level. Here are four.

Support and Consensus seeking

Leaders with strong support may have an opportunity to achieve greater change.  Because their belonging is secure, change presents less risk.  On the other hand, if they are attached to their belonging, their support may constrain them, as their need to belong tempers their capacity to rock the boat.  Similarly, leaders who seek consensus would do well to reflect on their motives. 

While consensus-seeking can present as an act of care for others (“we need to bring people along”), it might more accurately reflect the leader’s internal fear of exclusion (“If I don’t get them to agree, they’ll turn against me”). 

Family birth order can have an impact here, First-borns may naturally flourish when striking out on their own, last-borns may naturally feel inclined towards seeking permission or agreement.  Our belonging in other realms also becomes relevant.  It is much easier to risk our belonging in one group when we know that we’re secure in our belonging to another.

Leveraging the Unconventional

So-called maverick leaders can deliver radical change quickly, because typically they’re comfortable defying the status quo and less concerned with what others think. Their qualities mean that their loyalty to belonging is relatively loose.  Leaders who come from non-conventional backgrounds compared to the organisational norm may find this a disadvantage or a strength. For some, their background may make their need for secure belonging more acute, hampering their effectiveness. For others, their outsider-ness may give them ease with navigating the edges of belonging, empowering their effectiveness.  The value of listening to rebel voices also reveals itself through the lens of belonging. Rebels offer valuable information because they are prepared to walk beyond belonging.  By bringing perspectives from the outside, they shine a light on what change may be needed on the inside.

Leadership for all

Leadership can be distributive: it can he displayed by anyone whether or not they have the formal role of leader.  Seen through the lens of belonging, we understand why.  Junior members of a team will have their own relationship with belonging and their own capacity for risk.  Sometimes, newness to an organisation will  impart some freedom from cultural norms which take grip over time.

The reason that psychological safety is such an influential factor in team performance and creativity is because it invites safety in apparent rule breaking - in other words, it provides the conditions in which otherwise risky behaviour can thrive.  

Mutual empowerment

By understanding the role of belonging we see the mutual dependency of junior and senior colleagues in creating effective leadership.   Junior members can display values or needs which empower the appointed leader by reassuring them that the change they’re pressing for will find a root within the group and serve on-going belonging.   Equally, leaders can inspire change  by demonstrating that pushing against the rules will not cause exclusion.  This can have a feedback effect of ongoing mutual empowerment.

Ultimately, looking at leadership and change through the lens of belonging reveals a simple truth.  Leaders must not only be in tune with the system’s dynamics of belonging. They must also understand their personal dynamics of belonging, too.