Review by Mike Broemmel of
Music
as a Metaphor for Change
by Saku Mantere, John
A.A. Sillince & Virpi Hämäläinen
Journal of
Organizational Change Management
Mike
Broemmel
Communication
Strategies for Effecting Change
March
30, 2014
Introduction to the Premise:
Music as a Metaphor for Change
Music as a Metaphor for Change
addresses what the authors consider is a time-honored presumption in classic
organizational theory. Specifically, a presumption in organizational theory is
that people prefer stability. Because individuals generally prefer stability,
the status quo within an organizational setting, change translates into a
painful experience.
In Music as a Metaphor for Change,
the researchers maintain that by uncovering and utilizing metaphors associated
with music, the underlying presumption that stability trumps change and change
is always painful can effectively be challenged. Ultimately, the authors
identify five musical metaphors which they contend are suitable for use in
guiding a change process within an organization and addressing the reaction of
people within the organization to that evolution: form, volume, harmony, rhythm
and texture.
The Elephant and Music
as a Metaphor for Change
The article contends that when it
comes to the emotional aspect of moving a change process forward in a
constructive manner, when it comes to making the change process palatable to
the members of the organization, an understanding of the true nature of the
attendant emotions must be realized and understood. The authors take exception
(to some degree) to the classic construct that change evokes pain in
individuals who prefer stability within an organization. Rather, the authors
argue that what really happens is that change generates tension.
Understanding that change generates
tension as opposed to pain is a positive reality. In other words, pain is
counterproductive. People – by nature, by instinct – avoid pain. Thus, under
this classical theory of behavior related to organizational change, people
naturally will instinctively run from change.
In fact, with the emotional element
of the organizational change process correctly recognized as tension (which
admittedly can be unpleasant, but is not pain in and of itself), a change
process can become more palatable to the individuals involved in that
evolution. Pain is counterproductive. Tension is productive.
Pain impedes the process of change.
When change is perceived as painful, those who are responsible for facilitating
the change itself end up spending an inordinate amount of time addressing what
they perceive as the pain of the participants.
On the other hand, tension causes,
and even forces, progress. Pain needs to be tended to while tension needs to be
saddled and utilized. But, this can only occur when the stakeholders involved
in an organizational change process generally understand the distinction
between the two and realize that those subjected or involved in a change
process actually are not feeling pain but tension. Ultimate, tension drives the
change process.
In a further attempt to explain the
pain versus tension conundrum, the authors discuss cognitive dissonance, but do
so in terms of musical dissonance. They surmise that the manner in which a
person’s beliefs conflict resembles the emotions that are aroused when an
individual hears a dissonant chord in a musical performance. Certainly, on the
surface, the physical reaction to a dissonant chord very well could resemble
pain. Indeed, if an observer were to witness a person who hears a dissonant chord
wince without the knowledge that music was being played, the observer could
readily conclude that the listener experienced some sort of sharp pain.
In fact, a cliché associated with a
musical misstep oftentimes is “that was painful to hear.” But, if a person is
pressed, a listener does not experience pain in such a situation. Similarly, in
the case of organizational change, participants oftentimes remark that “this
change is painful.” Nonetheless, as with a bad chord in a musical presentation,
if pressed they truly are not experiencing true pain. Rather, in both cases,
the dissonance associated with a misplayed note in a song or an element of a
change process that disrupts stability really results in tension.
The authors believe that by
accurately understanding the underlying emotions associated with organizational
change, a better opportunity exists to involve participants more constructively
in the process itself.
The Rider and Music as
a Metaphor for Change
Overall, the authors focus most
specifically on dealing with emotional aspects of change – the proverbial
Elephant. However, there is information and analysis designed to address the
Rider in the change process as well.
The
authors further contend that what they call temporal structuring permits
control over a change experience, to render the experience both more productive
and less stressful (not painful) to the participants. In short, change (as is
the case with any seemingly unpleasant experience) is capable of management.
A prime example used by the
researchers in the article centered on a long distance runner. A long distance
runner oftentimes breaks up his or her jaunt into individual milestones, based
either on time or distance. In this way, a long distance runner sees both the
process made and the distance behind him, but has an ability to better control
and manage what lies ahead. The experience becomes quantified on some level.
In the same way a musical piece is
broken down in its component parts, so can an overall change process as a means
of selling it to participants as being something quantifiable and capable of
milestone achievements along the way.
The Tools Associated
with Music as a Metaphor for Change
As noted at the outset of this
review, the authors identify five tools associated with their proposition that
music provides a suitable metaphor use within the organizational change
process. These are: form, volume, harmony, rhythm and texture.
Form
Using the music
as a metaphor for change, form is the arc of that change. A change process
includes the same elements of a musical piece: the raising part, initial sparse
structure, surprise, repetition and progression to an ultimate ending. Again,
tension drives the change process.
Volume
Volume in music
readily can be adjusted. In the same way, tension in the change process can be
managed in a tangible manner as well. For example, the tension associated with
change is rendered more productive when appropriate resources (an appropriate
volume) is associated with that process.
Harmony
Harmony is
achieved in the change process through a balancing process that involves both
consensus and dissent. Consensus is built where possible and dissent is
provided an outlet.
Rhythm
In an
organizational change process, rhythm includes appropriately structured
milestones, timetables and deadlines. In other words, rhythm is the proper use
of the classical elements of project or change management.
Texture
The final tool associated with music
as a metaphor for change is texture. Texture represents the bringing together
of personalities, institutional positions regarding change and process itself.
Conclusion
I found the article compelling, at
least in regard to the manner in which it provides an analysis of what I
perhaps would best describe as the “Elephant” component of the change process.
I do think they authors are onto something meaningful when they attempt to move
way from the concept of change as a painful process to change as a process that
generates tension (which can be marshalled and utilized to move change forward).
www.mikebroemmel.com
