You cannot have an execution culture without robust dialog - one that brings reality to the surface through openness, candor, and informality. Intense debate brings up all sides of an issue, even if it makes people uncomfortable. ... from Execution: The Discipline of Getting Things Done, Larry Bossidy.
The notion that improvements take place in the absence of conflict, free and frank conversations, challanges to the notions being proposed by those suggesting the change is simply naive.
Intense debate is required, and anyone not up for the task, will either participate in the failure of the effort, be the cause of that failure, or be removed from the conversation.
For all business process improvement - and the project and programs that implement that business - the people aspects are secondary to the tangible evidence of improvement. People are critical, but the business is not tasked with the self actualization of the participants in the improvement process.
This is no way reduced the need to bring the people along, but left to their own, self organizing groups of people have little leverage in the board room unless they are the board, has little leverage in the C-Suite unless they are the C-Suite.
This is a common notion that actual change of an ongoing concern starts and ends with the bottom of the organizaiton. It's never worked that way. The best way to make a change stick is to be the one leading the change from a platform of sufficient power, resources, and leadership to overcome those above you resisting the change.
