Following a Vision to Go to the Other Side of the Hill – Part II

In Part I of “Following a Vision to Go to the Other Side of the Hill” we laid out four keys to guide a project from inception to conclusion. Using the metaphor of “going to the other side of the hill” and talking in the context of launching a web based communications platform, we said that a leader should:

1. Be able to see the big picture.
2. Explain to his followers the steps needed to get to the other side of the hill.
3. Help each person involved in the project see how what they do makes a difference in getting to the other side of the hill.
4. Create a vehicle that we can climb onto and go to "the other side of the hill."

Today, let’s talk about the second of these four steps.

Explaining the Steps Needed to Get to The Other Side of the Hill

In the movie, Braveheart, there’s a scene where William Wallace and his men are discussing the challenge of facing the British Cavalry. They know their history, and realize that in 200 years of military conflict, no army that lacked its own cavalry had been able to withstand the charge of an opposing army that was equipped with lance and armor. Then, as Wallace looks up at the trees that surround him, he begins to lay out the steps they will take to fashion long fixed pikes that will absorb the charge of the armored British horsemen. Having made their preparations, Wallace and his men show up with their pikes, and win the battle. Immediately after that, Wallace walks into a meeting of the Scottish nobles and announces his plan to invade England.

William Wallace wasn’t just a man with a vision. He knew what steps would be needed to carry out the plan, and in what order to take them. He wasn’t just “making it up as he went along.” He had it all thought out, based on the goals of “freedom” and “a country of our own” that he had previously articulated.

And, he was able to explain those steps to the people around him.

A trap into which visionary leaders can fall is to share their vision with key people that are close to them – people who will likely respond by saying “that’s a great idea,” but then go no further. To create large scale change, it is very important that one not only communicate the vision to as many people as possible – it’s important to anticipate objections and explain how they will be addressed. To do this, we must be able to anticipate and describe the steps needed to get from point A to point Z.

According to a researcher by the name of David Gleicher, we can visualize the resistance to change by creating a pseudo math formula, like this:


Change Occurs When: D x V + FS > R

In this formula for change, D (dissatisfaction) times V (vision) plus FS (first steps) must be greater than R (resistance) to change. Otherwise, the project will fail. Consider the objections we encountered in Part I of this article series. The more we want to do something new that requires people to modify the current “way we do things around here,” the greater the resistance to change we will encounter.

Let me share an example of what we are talking about. Let’s say you wish to survey the congregation about whether or not they are in favor of doing X. You know that for them to provide an intelligent response, they will need more information than can easily be provided in a typical paper survey. So, you decide to administer the survey via your church web page. People can click on a link you supply, and then go to complete the survey.

In completing the survey, they may come to a section that may require some additional explanation. So, you provide a link they can click for “more information.” When they click on it, a “You Tube” style video plays, showing the Senior Pastor providing a brief explanation of the issue being addressed in the survey question. At this point, you might hear an objection: “Some people won’t have internet access to take advantage of this. We’ll need to have print material to do this for those people, and we just don’t have\ the time/funds available.”

Now, this is a valid issue to raise. Yes, there will be some who won’t have Internet access. More likely, however, the real issue is there will be those who are not used to using the Internet in this way. Therefore, the assumption is they won’t use the Internet in this way, and so the conclusion follows: Don’t use the Internet in this way! Whether it is this specific example, or something similar, one can anticipate similar types of resistance.

Another potential source of resistance might be the fact that those being asked to help make the change a reality will also feel pressure to update/expand their existing skill sets. And, to do that, they may find it necessary to reach out to new, possibly younger volunteers who DO have those skill sets.

Ouch! Can’t you hear someone say: “Get to know new people instead of hang out with those I already know! Which ministry do you think I’m part of – the ‘Outreach Ministry’?” 

To reduce the resistance to change, having a well thought out time table of when different things need to happen is critical. Start with the “drop dead date” for implementation and work backwards to today. This will help you see what needs to be done, and in what order. This will come in handy when explaining to people the process needed to get to “the other side of the hill,” and help reduce potential resistance to the idea. Then, if we are going to involve new people in making change happen – or if we are going to get “old dogs” to become willing to learn “new tricks,” then, we’d best be ready to execute the third step in the visioning process:

3. Help each person involved in the project see how what they do makes a difference in getting to the other side of the hill.

We’ll examine this topic in the next article.