John Kotter on dealing with NoNos

I wrote a brief review of John Kotter’s book “A Sense of Urgency” in a posting yesterday. Here’s an example of something I think Kotter covers quite well: dealing with the corporate “NoNos” who resist change by deflecting and undermining.

I often find myself working as an agent of change inside Sun, whether it’s in encouraging others to adopt the MySQL subscription model or improving the focus on lead generation in marketing. (And I had a similar need to instigate change when I joined MySQL five-plus years ago.)

If you’ve ever worked as an agent of change, you’ll no doubt find yourself running into very reasonable-sounding people who simply don’t want to change. Maybe they’ve grown complacent, maybe they are threatened by the changes, or maybe they’ve become disillusioned because they are not steering the ship. They may dress up their concerns with a need for more research or saying that things aren’t really so bad, if it weren’t for some other department that needs to change.

Sometimes NoNos can spin up a lot of anxiety and anger to fuel a flurry of useless activity that creates what Kotter calls “a false sense of urgency.” (Think of how many time-wasting meetings, reports, or e-mails you’ve seen propagated by people who ultimately take no action other than inhibiting forward progress.)

Kotter distinguishes between NoNos and skeptics. Skeptics can serve a useful function to keep naive ideas in check. And ultimately, a skeptic can become an enthusiastic supporter of change once they make up their mind. NoNos, on the other hand, cannot be convinced of anything and will focus their efforts to undermine changes by discrediting those who try to make change happen.

Kotter describes a common strategy of trying to “co-opt” NoNos, the idea that it might be better to have them “inside the tent” rather than on the outside, presumably where they would do even more damage.

Unfortunately, co-opting NoNos almost never works well because the fundamental requirements for co-optation are missing. Regardless of what they say, NoNos are not skeptical but still willing to examine the data. They are not at all inclined to listen to others with an open mind. They won’t accept a majority opinion. They have usually learned all sorts of methods to delay action, to make study groups not function well, and to aggressively use other disruptive tactics, often unconsciously. As a result, time is lost… At some point, those who try to co-opt a NoNo almost always come to regret it.

Another tactic for dealing with NoNos is to isolate and ignore them.

An ignored NoNo can create much mischief. He will often relentlessly talk to others, especially the open minded (ironically), the anxious, and anyone who has a grudge against those trying to find new opportunities or avoid new hazards. The talk always contains observations or arguments that could be true… A smart NoNo can find weak spots in any argument but, unlike a skeptic, locates weak points not to make better decisions, but to stop action. A smart NoNo is expert at creating anxiety and undermining any new determination to exploit opportunities and avoid hazards….

Working constantly –as many NoNos do– they can create a small civil war inside an organization. As a result, any urgency that rises is channeled into wining the war, and not into serving the customer better, incorporating new technologies or becoming more externally focused.

Kotter identifies three effective ways to deal with NoNos: distract them with a special assignment where they can add value out of harm’s way, expose their behavior for what it is so that natural forces will reduce it, or move them out of the organization.

What are your thoughts? Have you run into NoNos? What worked? What didn’t? Let me know what you think.