What an afternoon at the dog groomer reminded me about leading change
“Zen is exactly like you—she gets impatient, she’s fidgety and always moving.”
The comment stopped me in my tracks.
The woman speaking was my new dog groomer. She had known me for about two hours.
A few weeks ago, I brought Zen, my standard poodle, to a new groomer in the village where I live. Unlike most groomers I have known, she invited me to stay while she worked.
I happily accepted. I was curious to learn a few professional grooming tricks and, admittedly, reassured to be able to watch over Zen.
After bathing her, we moved Zen to the grooming table. My job was simple: keep her occupied with tiny pieces of lactose-free cheese while the groomer trimmed her nails.
It worked beautifully.
Until the second paw.
Zen started fidgeting. I wasn’t surprised. She does exactly the same thing when I groom her at home.
I warned the groomer that Zen was becoming impatient and that finishing her nails might get difficult.
That’s when the groomer said, almost nonchalantly:
“Zen is exactly like you—she gets impatient, she’s fidgety and always moving.”
My first thought was:
How can she possibly know that? She’s known me for two hours!
I smiled politely, stayed quiet and started paying attention.
And then I noticed something—about me.
I was tired from standing for two hours. I was thirsty. My energy had dropped. Without even realizing it, I wanted the grooming session to end so I could sit down, have some water and rest.
My internal state was showing up externally—in my movement, my impatience and my energy.
I hadn’t even been aware of my own needs. Looking back, I wonder whether my habit of simply plowing through tasks had muted my ability to notice them.
Perhaps Zen was picking up on it too.
The groomer had noticed something I hadn’t.
Leaders are being read, too.
Driving home, I kept thinking about that interaction.
How often had my own teams read me this clearly throughout my career?
And what had I communicated without ever saying a word?
This question is particularly important during organizational change.
As leaders, we can become so focused on the change plan—the milestones, communications, deliverables and implementation—that we underestimate something much closer to us:
the mindset we bring into the change.
Our teams don’t experience change only through presentations, emails and action plans.
They experience it through us.
They notice our language.
Our energy.
Our consistency.
Our frustration.
Our confidence.
Our curiosity.
And the distance between what we say and what we do.
Leading change does not require pretending to love every decision.
It does, however, require becoming conscious of what we are transmitting and how we are transmitting it.
Before asking our teams to navigate a change, we need to understand our own response to it.
What do I need to understand, process or accept so that I can lead others with clarity and integrity?
Research supports this connection. Onyeneke and Abe (2021) found that change-leadership behaviors—including communicating a vision, involving employees, offering support and demonstrating concern for their interests—were associated with how employees cognitively appraised organizational change.
In other words, how leaders show up can influence how people make sense of change and, consequently, how they respond to it.
That afternoon, my dog groomer held up a mirror for me.
Zen simply made the reflection impossible to miss.
Three questions for leaders navigating change:
- What is my behavior communicating about this change, even when I am not talking about it?
- How am I listening to and helping people make sense of what the change means for them?
- What mindset am I bringing into the room, and how might it be shaping the emotional climate around me?
Sometimes, before trying to change what others are doing, it is worth noticing what they may be reading in us.
Reference: Onyeneke, G. B., & Abe, T. (2021). The effect of change leadership on employee attitudinal support for planned organizational change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 34(2), 403–415.