Heifetz: Technical vs. Adaptive
Fullan (2003, 2005) cites Heifetz and Linsky (2002) to distinguish between technical and
adaptive change. Technical change involves people putting in place solutions to problems for
which they know the answers. While this can be difficult, it is not as difficult as adaptive
change, which involves addressing problems for which they don’t yet know the solutions.
Adaptive change involves changing more than routine behaviours or preferences; it involves
changes in people’s hearts and minds. Because the change is so profound, adaptive change can
result in transformation of the system.
Every day people have problems for which they do, in fact, have the necessary know-how and
procedures. We call these technical problems. But there is a whole host of problems that are not
amenable to authoritative expertise or standard operating procedures. They cannot be solved by
someone who provides the answers from on high. We call these adaptive challenges because
they require new experiments, new discoveries and adjustments from numerous places in the
organization or community. Without learning new ways – changing attitudes, values and
behaviors – people cannot make the adaptive leap necessary to thrive in new environments.
The sustainability of change depends on having the people with the problem internalise the
change.
Heifetz and Linsky, 2002, cited in Fullan, 2003, page 29, emphasis added
According to Fullan (2005), “Addressing the problem of sustainability is the ultimate adaptive
challenge” (page 14). Because it conflicts with their deepest beliefs, adaptive change is a deeply
unsettling process that can threaten people’s sense of identity and lead to resistance.
Adaptive change stimulates resistance because it challenges people’s habits, beliefs, and values.
It asks them to take a loss, experience uncertainty, and even express disloyalty to people and
cultures. Because adaptive change asks people to question and perhaps refine aspects of their
identity, it also challenges their sense of competence. Loss, disloyalty, and feeling incompetent.
That’s a lot to ask. No wonder people resist.
Perspectives on Change: Ronald A. Heifetz
Summary
Heifetz identifies two types of challenges in change: adaptive and technical. The technical is defined as those
that can be solved by the knowledge of experts, whereas adaptive requires new learning. When the problem
definition, solution, and implementation is clear, Heifetz calls this technical change. For the adaptive, change
must come from the collective intelligence of the employees at all levels. So, together they learn their way
toward solutions.
Level I:
Level II: Technical &
Level III: Adaptive
Technical
Adaptive
✭ Problem
definition is
clear
✭ Problem definition
is clear
✭ Problem definition,
solution, and
implementation require new
learning
✭ Leader or
✭ Solution requires
expert
new learning
provides solution
✭ Responsibility for the
solution resides
within the followers
✭ Easiest to
resolve
✭ Most difficult to resolve
✭ Both leader and
followers are
responsible for the
solution
✭ Second order change
Challenges Educational Leaders Face: Technical or Adaptive?
---“The mark of leadership in the competitive world is leading others in adaptive work.”
Six Principles for Leading Adaptive Change
1. Get on the balcony
a. Leaders need to have distance to see the “big picture”
2. Identify the adaptive change
a. Leader needs the ability to identify adaptive change when it is called for
b. Must address it in order to turn it around
c. Confront the brutal facts (Jim Collins, 2001)
3. Regulate distress
a. Do not overwhelm but provide enough tension to maintain urgency
b. Challenge unproductive norms
c. Ask questions rather than give answers
4. Maintain disciplined attention
a. Must be able to identify distractions and refocus the work
b. Attention on tough issues
c. People ten to slide back into old behaviors unless focus is maintained
d. Reframing isues get at the heart
5. Give work back to people
a. Getting others to assume responsibility
b. Instill confidence in others through encouragement and support
c. Be part of the change
6. Protect voices of leadership from below
a. Protect rather than squelch those who risk speaking up
b. Need to hear all voices including dissenters
Political Thinking
(Level 5 Leadership, Jim Collins, 2001)
Lastly, Heifetz stresses that educational leaders need to be able to think politically. Leading adaptive challenges
require that we develop a strategy for learning. Our strategy needs to be who needs to learn what and how. The
following are highlights of politcal strategies as described by Heifetz.
✭ Personal relationships are key to successful leadership
✭ Adaptive leadership is based on political thinking
✭ Develop alliances
✭ Keep the opposition close
✭ Acknowledge the loss and difficulty
✭ Accept casualties in order to make progress
✭ Take responsibility for your piece of the mess
Adaptive and technical problems
The difference between an adaptive problem and a technical one is key. There are problems that
are just technical. I'm delighted when a car mechanic fixes my car, an orthopedic surgeon gives
me back a healed bone, or an internist gives me penicillin and cures my pneumonia. That's a
key question: is this a problem that an expert can fix, or is this a problem that is going to require
people in the community to change their values, their behavior, or their attitudes? For this
problem to be solved, are people going to need to learn new ways of doing business?
The Vietnam War was an adaptive problem which Robert McNamara and the other authorities
of the time insisted on treating as a technical problem. Right now we are treating the problem of
crime as a technical problem, by debating how much we should pay for more police, rather than
addressing the underlying forces that produce criminal behavior.
The drug abuse problem is an awful example of an adaptive problem treated as if it were
technical. When President Bush came into office it was the hottest problem in the land. Because
he was the president, all eyes turned to him, as the most senior authority, to solve the drug
problem. He brought his experts together and they devised a $9 billion plan. They appointed a
powerful chief executive, Bill Bennett, and called him the "Drug Czar." And in September of
1989 Bush gave his debut speech in which he told people basically not to worry. We have got a
plan. We are going to win this war. It is going to take time but we are taking action.
People were delighted to hear that. They did not want to be told that the problem of drug abuse
comes from us, from our being stretched too thin as parents, and not knowing how to parent
teenagers. It comes from our lack of community spirit, from the fact that the weave of our
neighborhoods has been shredded, so that we don't help each other raise our kids. Our teachers
want to teach reading, writing, and arithmetic; the technical skills. Our churches no longer
provide sustaining sources of meaning during times of distress and pain. The adjustments
required to solve the drug problem are not adjustments in Bolivia or Panama, but are
adjustments in each and every one of our own families and communities. And the nation does
not want to hear that.