Defining the purpose = telling the truth

​Hey Reader,​

At the end of Commcoterie's last newsletter, I said that in this issue, I would show you how defining the purpose of a change – its why – helps a change strategy design itself.

But the responses I got to our last newsletter, plus the conversations I've been having recently with leaders, make me want to take a step back, reiterate something, and unpack it a little first: when you state the purpose of a change, it has to be the real why, or the tactic of using the purpose to more easily design the change strategy won’t work.

Defining the purpose = telling the truth.

Many leaders muddle their message and sabotage their strategy from the start by attempting to state the Simon Sinek brand of “why” first

Simon says, "Your WHY is your purpose, cause, or belief. WHY does your company exist? WHY do you get out of bed every morning?”

I agree that an organization’s why is its purpose. But this noble cause and bold belief positioning of purpose is why leaders tend to answer the question, "What is the purpose of this change?" or "Why are we doing this?" with something that sounds more like a mission or vision statement.

But the mission or vision is not the actual purpose – of your company, of waking up in the morning, or of anything else.

It's not the real reason the organization is doing something. So:

• It doesn’t help with decision making
• It creates muddled and disconnected stakeholder messaging
• It strangles the momentum of the change project

Defining the real purpose = telling the truth. And that defines the strategy.

(Who you ultimately tell that truth to, how you tell it, what you say exactly, and when are all parts of your change communication strategy. But many leaders have been drinking the thought leader fruity punch for so long that they can't define the truth at all anymore.)

Framing like Sinek’s encourage leaders to skip the hard work of being honest before they start rambling off press releases to themselves and their teams from the get go.

Lots of leaders I've spoken to over the past 15+ years haven't been able to define a change's actual purpose clearly and truthfully to their leadership teams, me, or themselves. But it must be done to stop wasting resources, stop eroding trust, and start changing more effectively.

I also find it suspicious that Sinek specifically calls out that when he says that your why is your purpose, he's not referring to making money

“When Simon asks WHY,” Simon’s website says, “he’s not referring to making money—that’s a result."

Except...there are tons of people who get out of bed every morning with the primary purpose of making money, and plenty of companies exist specifically to make money.

If the purpose of an action (a change, showing up to work, etc.) is to make money – as in, you would not be doing that action if dollars weren't involved – you can either:

1. Be honest that the purpose is to make or save money, and make decisions based on that purpose that actually make sense and result in a clear strategy
2. Be dishonest about the purpose and craft some noble cause and bold belief statements, yet make decisions that center making or saving money as the purpose, which will cause confusion and chaos

If your organization's purpose is to acquire money to fulfill your mission, that's okay. If the purpose of a product launch is to open up new streams of revenue so that your organization can continue to exist and compete in the market and pay employees and pursue advances in your field, that's okay.

When I work with leaders, I try to reduce the social and emotional baggage around money. In my opinion, money is simply a resource that organizations or people use to fulfill their missions.

Making money can be the purpose, and the mission is the result.

Being honest about the purpose makes decision making and delegation so much easier. People understand why they're doing something or being asked to do something and then your change strategy – to guide them from awareness to understanding to acceptance to ownership – takes off.

Unfortunately, organizations and their changes don't typically operate with this level of honesty about purpose

So when leaders try to define why, they end up with a mission statement. Unfortunately, missions generally don't really mean anything in terms of strategy development.

Say your company's mission is to create technology that improves people's lives and empowers them. Sounds great.

However, your company's real purpose is to make a profit in order to generate returns for shareholders (meh). The CEO of this company is going to make a certain set of decisions. Strategies here won't make a ton of sense, because the decisions will center generating returns for shareholders while the message will be that the actions taken are intended to improve people's lives (...unless shareholders are the only ones considered people...).

Now say your company's mission is to create technology that improves people's lives and empowers them. Again, sounds great.

But this time, your company's purpose is to acquire money in order to generate health and wealth for people, including employees through robust salaries and benefits, as well as stakeholders from the beginning to end of your supply chain (love it). The CEO of this company is going to make a very different set of decisions every step of the way every day. Strategies here will make more sense, because there is a clear connection between making money by creating technology that improves people's lives and then using that money to generate health and wealth for people.

When it comes to designing a strategy, a company's mission and vision don't matter much at all – it's the purpose that dictates what happens...so tell it like it is

In this issue, I had originally planned to show you how defining the purpose of a change – its why – helps a change strategy design itself. But first I had to get very clear that when you state the purpose of a change, it has to be the real why or the tactic of using the purpose to more easily design the change strategy won’t work.

Now I'm thinking that I should still give a more detailed walkthrough of what happens when you design a change strategy based on a purpose or why that is not the real one (it should sound pretty familiar, because it's how change usually happens at organizations) before I show you how to do it the more effective way.

And if you've been following along since last year, you might be thinking, I thought you said you were going to talk about change readiness this year!? Where are the checklists? Where are the tactics!?

Well. The #1 thing you can do to be change-ready is to be a leader who is open to leaving the status quo of how organizations change behind and trying something new – approaching change with honesty, humbleness, compassion, curiosity, and clarity. Mindset first. The strategy follows.

So stay tuned!

And have a change challenge you want me to untangle in a future issue? Reply here and let me know.

Talk soon,

Caitlin Harper
​Founder, Commcoterie

P.S. – Know someone who needs to read this? Forward them this issue or share this page on your socials – there folks can check out past issues and subscribe so that they never miss a new one.

​​