Change Doesn't Fail in the Design. It Fails in the Leadership.

When organizations talk about change, there's often an unspoken belief driving the effort:

If we get the design right, the change will work.

The right structure, the best system, the cleanest workflow. The solution that finally fixes what hasn't worked before.

And because of this, enormous effort goes into perfecting the thing. Then when it's introduced, the story leaders tell tends to focus on enterprise-level benefits. Cost savings, efficiency, scalability, speed.

Those outcomes matter; but they're rarely what determines whether a change actually takes hold.

What I've seen (again and again) is that change initiatives stuggle not because the solution is flawed, but because too much faith is placed in the solution itself. The expectation is that the new system, structure, or process will resolved the underlying issues on its own.

It won't.

A new tool doesn't clarify roles that were never clear.

A reorg doesn't repair broken trust.

A new process doesn't compensate for disengaged leadership (or teams).

Instead, these changes tend to do something else: they expose what was already there. Gaps in alignment. Tension between teams. Confusion about decision-making. Leadership behaviors that haven't evolved alongside the organization.

That's often when the disappointment sets in. The over-promise, under-deliver moment where leaders quietly wonder why the "best" solution didn't produce the results they expected.

And then there's the way change is communicated.

Many initiatives follow a predictable rhythm: a surge of excitement and communication at the start, very little in the middle, and a frantic push at the end. I refer to this as the 'bookend communication strategy'. High energy at launch, silence during execution, and urgency when timelines slip.

It's the organizational equivalent of a New Year's resolution.

January 1st arrives with energy and motivation. People are ready for action. But there's no real plan for when motivation fades.

Organizations make the same mistake. They rely on initial momentum to carry the change forward. No structure, no reinforcement, no support, no leadership presence to sustain it. So when progress stalls - and it always does - there's a last ditch effort to save the goal. More training. More emails. Louder messaging. And the people on the receiving end are left thinking: Are we still doing this? Here we go again? I'll keep working in the way that works for me.

This cycle doesn't build confidence in change and usually gets labeled as "change fatigue". But it's something else entirely: leadership disengagement during the moments that matter most.

Sustainable change isn't driven by the brillance of a plan or the elegance of a solution. It's driven by leadership engagement. Consistently, visibly, and authentically.

Not the head-nodding "I'm aligned" kind of engagement.

Real engagement looks like leaders who understand the change deeply enough to explain what it means for their teams. Leaders who talk about the change regularly, not just at kickoff. Leaders who pay attention to what's being said - and what isn't - at the water-cooler level. Leaders who ask questions, listen carefully, and stay close as the work unfolds.

Whether they realize it or not, leaders are sending signals every day. How they show up, what they prioritize, and how they speak about the change all become indicators of how seriously it should be taken.

This is the uncomfortable truth many organizations avoid. Leaders own the success or failure of transformation more than any plan, tool, or system ever will.

The good news is that the shift required isn't complicated.

Lean in.

Stay present. Get curious. Ask questions. Talk with your people, not just at them. Share what you know, and be honest about what you don't. Owning uncertainty builds far more trust than pretending to have all the answers ever will.

Leading change means have the difficult conversations, resisting assumptions, and recognizing that every person brings their own experiences, perceptions, emotional baggage, and tolerance for chagne to the table.

The work isn't to force alignment or compliance.

It's to meet people where they are and help them rise - together.

Because change doesn't fail in the design.

It fails when leadership steps back instead of leaning in.