Idea in Brief
The Problem
We look to leaders to make consistent decisions, keep a steady course, and align an organization’s culture. But leaders typically face multiple demands that conflict with one another, and it’s a mistake to assume there are cut-and-dried choices.
Why It Happens
Strategic paradoxes are essentially dilemmas that cannot be resolved. Tensions continually arise between today’s needs and tomorrow’s (innovation paradoxes), between global integration and local interests (globalization paradoxes), and between social missions and financial pressures (obligation paradoxes).
The Solution
Managers need to shift from an “either/or” mindset to a “both/and” one by seeing the virtues of inconsistency, recognizing that resources are not always finite, and embracing change rather than chasing stability. In practical terms, this means nurturing the unique aspects of competing constituencies and strategies while finding ways to unite them.
Jack Welch once claimed that great leaders are “relentless and boring.” Management thinkers largely agree: Good leaders, so the narrative goes, are consistent in their decision making, stick to their commitments, and remain on-message. The trouble is, much as we may value consistency in our leaders, we don’t live in a world that rewards it—at least not in the long term.
