Leading by Example: Stories of Leaders Who Transformed Cultures
Leaders can be transformative in their approach to businesses, organizations and government. I highlight two transformative leaders in this post.
An organization’s culture is often defined as “how we do things around here.” That is the simple definition, but of course, this definition has many nuances, dynamics, and processes inherent within it. How an organization achieves a specific culture or value structure depends upon many factors, none more important than the people who are part of the culture.
The question for many, especially leaders who are recently appointed or ascendent to a leadership position within an organization, is the following: “Is the current culture the culture we want?” Is the current culture bringing success, profits, and fulfillment to the employees, customers, and investors?
The culture of an organization is a significant asset. This asset can be used to accelerate the organization to success. It can be the structure upon which recruiting and retaining talent is maintained. Culture is the asset that entices investors and attracts customers to purchase your product or service. A non-profit’s mission can benefit by promoting a culture that matches people and contributors to the organization.
Organizational culture must have a common language as well. I have recently studied and have become an adherent to the idea of cultural archetypes. Using archetypes or stories we tell about ourselves and our organization provides a common language that people understand and can use. Suppose you are a leader seeking to maintain and promote your current culture or are seeking to change it. In that case, the archetype language is an effective way to understand yourself and your culture and provide a common foundation for communication.
Let’s look at some leaders who have changed the culture of their organizations. Some of that change may not be explicitly noticeable to the outsider, but it is pretty apparent in some cases. Here are some examples of cultural change:
Satya Nadella — Microsoft
When Nadella took over the reins of Microsoft in 2014, he was only the third CEO of the company. Still, he was saddled with a company attempting to overcome many obstacles, including stiff competition from Apple and others. Steve Ballmer, who had succeeded Bill Gates and was Nadella’s predecessor, failed on many fronts as Microsoft became a huge company. The Reddit boards are filled with comments by current and former Microsoft employees about how he mismanaged the company. Before Nadella, the Microsoft culture was internally competitive, siloed, and bureaucratic.
A strong Ruler archetype was prevalent in the company’s history with a high level of structure, orderly processes, and a company adept at managing highly complex situations yet shadowing rigidity, entitlement, and hierarchical structures.
The result was that performance lagged, products were undesirable, and stock prices stagnated. If you had invested $10,000 in Microsoft stock when Steve Balmer took over, it would not have changed much 14 years later when he was replaced by Nadella.
The transformational leadership under Nadella included a shift in the organizational focus from a “know-it-all” to a “learn-it-all” organization. He has fostered collaboration, innovation, and a growth mindset. The outcomes have been substantial. He has reignited innovation, leading to the development of successful products like Azure and Office 365. In addition, stock prices tripled within a few years.
Under Nadella, Microsoft revised its mission statement to “empower every person and every organization on the planet to achieve more.” In 2015, Nadella wrote in the new mission statement, “We will be open to learning our own biases and changing our behaviors so we can tap into the collective power of everyone at Microsoft. We don’t just value differences, we seek them out, we invite them in. And as a result, our ideas are better, our products are better, and our customers are better served.”
As I write this, Nadella recently announced a new product called Copilot, which is based on ChatGPT and works within your Microsoft products, including Word, Excel, and Outlook.
Nadella said this about Copilot, “This is as significant as the PC was to the ’80s, the Web in the ’90s, mobile in the 2000s, cloud in the 2010s. Like you boot up an operating system to access applications or use a browser to navigate websites, you will involve a Copilot to do all these activities and more.”
The cultural shift Nadella has orchestrated at Microsoft emphasizes empathy, collaboration, and a ‘growth mindset.’ This cultural shift exhibits three archetypes moving from Ruler to Explorer, Creator, and the Hero.
The Explorer organization exhibits a diversity of opinions, a penchant for seeing what is on the horizon, and achieving fulfillment through the exercise of curiosity.
The Creator organization rewards innovation, creativity, and production. It has a feel for form and function, helping make things and systems attractive and practical. If this Creator archetype is overdone, newness and cleverness can sometimes be too far ahead of consumer needs or desires.
The Hero archetype is dedicated to a solid drive for organizational success, being goal-focused and results-oriented. Too much Hero behavior and an uber-competitive and siloed environment can be created.
Nelson Mandela — South Africa
Let’s look at a leader who spurred a cultural change in a more public and transparent way. Everyone who follows world events and history knows the story of Nelson Mandela. Mandela was born into African tribal royalty and yet was considered a middle-class black South African. Part of the Xhosa tribe, he was the only child of his polygamous father to get an education.
In the early part of his life, he increasingly became a political activist and, at one time, advocated for armed rebellion against the apartheid government of South Africa. As a leader of the African National Congress (ANC), and at the time of his prison sentencing “for life,” many factions and ideas were circulating among members of the ANC and other satellite groups. Mandela was effective at coalescing them into a single movement.
At the time, the South African Nationalist Party, a minority white party, strictly enforced apartheid laws and regulations. The culture in the country was divided, with racial tension and inequality rampant. This created a lot of civil unrest, an unstable political environment, and increased sanctions by the international community.
Mandela had a transformational experience while in prison. When he was finally released in February of 1990, having served 26 years in prison, he advocated reconciliation and unity, prioritizing nation-building over retribution.
The outcomes of his transformational leadership were dismantling apartheid and a peaceful transition to a majority rule and an equitable society. And while South Africa continues to face economic, cultural, and societal challenges, Mandela’s legacy of peace and reconciliation continues to this day.
Before Mandela was released from prison and became the first president of South Africa under a new constitution that did away with the apartheid system, the organizational archetype of the ANC was likely a strong Magician, Innocent and most certainly Revolutionary, with the South African government deep into the Ruler archetype. With Mandela’s transformational leadership, the culture shift went from those listed above to Everyperson, Magician, and Sage.
The Everyperson organization supports practical problem-solving and coming together for a common outcome. There is an assumption of safety in working together. Overdoing the Everyperson archetype can devolve into a “us” versus “them” mentality.
The Magician organization seeks leadership and expertise to help deliver new ideas and use them in change. They create win-win solutions. Overdoing the magician archetype can result in organizations that pay too much attention and adoration to transformational leaders, treating them as gurus or prophets.
The Sage archetype rewards learning, wisdom, and fostering knowledge, mentoring new generations of leadership. However, exhibiting a shadow side, a Sage organization can spend too much time debating, overanalyzing, and downplaying intuition.
