Five Colors of Change and Inside the Box Leadership Theory

Introduction

Understanding the need to lead organizational change is important for all leaders because, without change, organizations become static and stagnant and will eventually fail from lack of innovation. As Vedenik and Leber (2015) point out, organizations must change if they desire to remain competitive. Therefore, leaders must be able to steer and facilitate change. To do so, they must present a vision of change that is logical and promotes buy-in, overcome resistance to change, and cement the change so that it holds.

There are many theories on how to manage change, but this paper examines two theoretical perspectives: the Five Colors of Change theory of De Caluwé and Vermaak (2004) and the Inside the Box theory of Boyd and Goldenberg (2013). The purpose of this paper is to provide a synthesis of these two frameworks to help one understand what it takes to lead an organizational change process. Key points include how to understand change using the meta-theoretical concept of colors, and how thinking within the structures of an existing paradigm—that is, inside the box—can help a leader unlock creative solutions that facilitate the change process.

Definitions and Context

It is important to proceed from a standpoint of clarity. For the purpose of this paper, leadership is defined as the ability to lead others to an envisioned end or through an envisioned process, and is defined by one's style—authoritative, delegative, or participative (Lewin, Lippitt, & White, 1939). Organizational change is defined as the transformation of the organization from one state to another, wherein a new culture, method, concept, or initiative is put into place (Walker, 2018).

Why Organizational Change Matters to Leadership

Organizational change is important to leadership because there are traits, talents, skills, styles, and perspectives that leaders must possess in order to lead change (Warrick, 2011). The purpose of change is always to improve effectiveness, efficiency, performance, production, or organizational culture. Change can provide fresh, innovative ideas that enhance production and prevent the organization from becoming stagnant. However, because employees can resist change—as it requires adaptation and transformation on their part—leaders must know how to engage workers and develop their willingness to accept and participate in positive change. The key to leading change is learning how to manage people and their reactions to it (Cameron & Green, 2015).

According to Lewin's change management model, the change process consists of three parts: the unfreezing phase, the change phase, and the refreezing phase. The unfreezing phase begins by explaining to workers the need for change, which helps to unfreeze them from their current attachment to the status quo. The change is then implemented, and once it is solidified and new processes are normalized, the refreezing phase is complete (Manchester et al., 2014). Throughout the change process, a leader must be sensitive to the thoughts, feelings, and actions of workers so that barriers to change are not erected. This is where humor and joy play an important part: the leader who is able to infuse a workplace with humor and joy will be able to transform the organization more easily than one who relies on punitive measures to enforce change (Carder, 2019; Van Wart & Moynihan, 2013).

Essential Elements of Organizational Change

The essential elements of organizational change consist of change management pre-work, the management of personal transitions, the change plan, and the implementation and monitoring of that plan (Sarran, Clark, & Mendonca, 2020). One cannot expect to unfreeze, change, and refreeze processes among workers without taking care to address each of these elements.

The first element—pre-work—consists of providing direction to those of whom change is required; creating a template for change; communicating the vision of change to stakeholders in a way that is logical and supported by reason; cultivating supporters and sponsors of change; conducting a stakeholder analysis and creating an engagement plan; assessing the degree to which the organization is ready for change; developing a behavioral change plan; and communicating with teams regarding that plan (Sarran et al., 2020).

One common element across change management models is that leaders must supply workers with the necessary motivation to accept change. Motivation can be dispensed using both intrinsic and extrinsic means (Gerhart & Fang, 2015). At the heart of motivation should be the elevation of the organization's core values. Best practices for leading change include communicating with stakeholders, obtaining feedback, incorporating that feedback into decision-making, and reinforcing the change with continuous reference to the vision. The use of humor can be complementary in the transformational process, as it brings people together in harmony, eases tensions, and fosters positive emotion (Kangasharju & Nikko, 2009).

Two Theoretical Perspectives: Five Colors and Inside the Box

De Caluwé and Vermaak (2004) explain in the Five Colors theory that organizational life is complex. Because it is complex, leaders should have a range of approaches from which to choose when facilitating change. That choice will be determined based on the leader's own assumptions, key competencies, and limitations. The Five Colors theory essentially helps leaders identify their own area of expertise and define their own professional development (De Caluwé & Vermaak, 2004). The Inside the Box theory offers leaders approaches to change through five distinct template concepts: subtraction, division, multiplication, task unification, and attribute dependency (Boyd & Goldenberg, 2013). By synthesizing the two theories, one can see how overlap is possible between the color concepts—which represent distinctive viewpoints on leadership—and the template concepts that offer change solutions for any organization.

The first of the Five Color concepts is yellow-print thinking, which "is based on sociopolitical concepts about organizations in which interests, conflicts, and power play important roles" (De Caluwé & Vermaak, 2004, p. 10). In this concept, people change their views only out of self-interest or if compelled to do so rationally. From this viewpoint, the leader assesses a "conglomeration of interests" in order to achieve a balanced approach to change leadership (De Caluwé & Vermaak, 2004). From this perspective, one can incorporate either the division or the task unification concepts from the Inside the Box theory of Boyd and Goldenberg (2013). By dividing tasks, for instance, a leader can regulate processes more efficiently; by unifying tasks, a leader can enhance organizational efficiency. Depending on how interests align and where balance can be achieved, the leader may find creative approaches in either concept that complement yellow-print thinking.

The second concept is blue-print thinking, which "is based on the rational design and implementation of change" (De Caluwé & Vermaak, 2004, p. 11). Essentially the opposite of yellow-print thinking, the blue-print leader ignores individual ideas and focuses on using expertise to plan and organize, never losing sight of the intended outcome. This concept correlates with the subtraction approach of Boyd and Goldenberg (2013): the leader takes away a feature to create better efficiency, and from the blue-print standpoint, the feature subtracted is the input of various individuals deemed important in yellow-print thinking. Blue-print leaders would be akin to the authoritative leadership style identified by Lewin et al. (1939).

The third concept is red-print thinking, which "has its roots in the classic Hawthorne experiments" (De Caluwé & Vermaak, 2004, p. 12). In this concept, the leader recognizes the invaluable role the human factor plays in change. Humans can be impacted by various incentives (Gerhart & Fang, 2015). The leader using red-print thinking will apply social and emotional intelligence to guide and direct workers, always conscious of the fact that people have feelings, concerns, and voices that need to be expressed. The leader who uses emotional intelligence (EI) in the workplace is more likely to win followers than one who does not (Weinberger, 2009). Bringing joy and humor into one's leadership style can further support the use of EI (Kibben, 2012). The corresponding Inside the Box approach is multiplication: it enables a leader to provide support where needed by seeing what works and then providing more of that to help workers make the desired change.

The fourth concept is green-print thinking, which "has its roots in action-learning theories" (De Caluwé & Vermaak, 2004, p. 13). The essence of this concept is that people learn from one another; thus a leader should foster communication and information sharing so that continuous learning and improvement can be obtained. This concept correlates with the attribute dependency approach found in Boyd and Goldenberg's (2013) Inside the Box theory: in the attribute dependency approach, development hinges upon various parts working together and transforming one another in the process. This approach helps to illuminate why joy is so important in the workplace and why leaders should use humor—humor and joy help different parts and players come together harmoniously so that they can share, communicate, and learn from one another, supporting transformation and organizational change.

The fifth concept is white-print thinking, which "arose as a reaction to the deterministic, mechanistic, and linear worldview derived from Newton and Descartes" and "is nourished by chaos thinking, network theory, and complexity theory, all of which are based on living and complex systems with limited predictability" (De Caluwé & Vermaak, 2004, p. 14). The main element of this concept is to understand why things happen and change, and to allow these processes to proceed organically by removing obstacles that might otherwise thwart them. It also corresponds to the attribute dependency approach in the Inside the Box theory. Parts do not move independently of other parts, and workers rely on one another. The leader who understands these relationships will, from the white-print thinking perspective, facilitate the organic development of those relationships and promote them to assist in a naturalistic change process.

Conclusion

Change does not begin outside but rather within. The leader who wants to lead change must be willing and able to change within himself for those times when a certain perspective or approach has not generated the buy-in needed for change to take place. The beauty and simplicity of the Five Colors of Change theory and the Inside the Box theory, when united, is that they provide the leader with a robust set of ideas useful when wielding the tools of whatever change model is applied. To accomplish organizational change, a leader may at times need to engage in internal change when it becomes clear that adjustments to his approach or perspective are necessary.

References

Boyd, D., & Goldenberg, J. (2013). Inside the box: A proven system of creativity for breakthrough results. Simon and Schuster.

Cameron, E., & Green, M. (2015). Making sense of change management: A complete guide to the models, tools and techniques of organizational change. Kogan Page.

Carder, B. (2019). Joy in the workplace is a business advantage. The Journal for Quality and Participation, 42(1), 25–27.

De Caluwé, L., & Vermaak, H. (2004). Change paradigms: An overview. Organization Development Journal, 22(4), 9.

Gerhart, B., & Fang, M. (2015). Pay, intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, performance, and creativity in the workplace: Revisiting long-held beliefs. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2, 489–521.

Kangasharju, H., & Nikko, T. (2009). Emotions in organizations: Joint laughter in workplace meetings. The Journal of Business Communication (1973), 46(1), 100–119.

Kibben, C. (2012). Humor and emotional intelligence: A correlational study of leadership (Doctoral dissertation).

Lewin, K., Lippitt, R., & White, R. K. (1939). Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally created social climates. Journal of Social Psychology, 10, 271–301.

Manchester, J., Gray-Miceli, D. L., Metcalf, J. A., Paolini, C. A., Napier, A. H., Coogle, C. L., & Owens, M. G. (2014). Facilitating Lewin's change model with collaborative evaluation in promoting evidence-based practices of health professionals. Evaluation and Program Planning, 47, 82–90.

Sarran, P., Clark, D., & Mendonca, K. (2020). Change management toolkit.

Van Wart, M., & Moynihan, D. P. (2013). Lessons from leadership theory and the contemporary challenges of leaders. Public Administration Review, 73, 553–565.

Vedenik, G., & Leber, M. (2015). Change management with the aid of a generic model for restructuring business processes. International Journal of Simulation Modelling (IJSIMM), 14(4), 584–595.

Walker, G. (2018). Change management: Organizational change. Training and Development, June, 30–31.

Warrick, D. D. (2011). The urgent need for skilled transformational leaders: Integrating transformational leadership and organization development. Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics, 8(5), 11–26.

Weinberger, L. A. (2009). Emotional intelligence, leadership style, and perceived leadership effectiveness. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 11(6), 747–772.