Part 8: The Friction That Occurs When a Successor Starts 'Something New'—It's Not Opposition, It's a Collision with the 'Past Success Model'

A few years after taking over.

It's about time to start something new as my own management.

・I want to develop a new customer base
・I want to review the pricing structure
・I want to change the sales method
・I want to expand the scope of responsibilities for young employees
・I want to start a new business
・I want to promote the digitalization of operations

There are many successors who start thinking this way.

However, when you actually try to move—
for some reason, friction occurs within the company.

“We have always done it this way”
“It's difficult in our industry”
“Our customers don't want that”
“It's too early for that now”
“It worked well during the predecessor's era”

These kinds of words come up.

Then, the successor feels like this:

“Is my thinking wrong after all?”
“Am I not trusted yet?”
“Am I being too impatient?”
“Can this company not change?”

However, in many cases, this is not simple opposition.

The 'something new' that the successor is trying to start
is colliding with the 'past success model' that remains within the company.

It is not that new things are disliked.

What is truly disliked is
“feeling as if the way things have been done until now is being denied.”

Even if it is an improvement for the successor,
it can look like a denial to long-term employees.

For example,

Changing the sales method.
From the successor's perspective, this is a move to create future sales.

But from the perspective of a veteran salesperson,
they might feel,
“They are saying our way is no good.”

Raising prices.
From the successor's perspective, this is a decision to protect gross profit.

But from the perspective of the staff on the ground,
it might be perceived as,
“Are you going to destroy the relationships with our long-time customers?”

Standardizing and digitalizing operations.
From the successor's perspective, this is creating a system to reduce reliance on specific individuals.

However, from the perspective of veteran employees, they might feel,
'Will my experience and intuition become unnecessary?'

In other words, the true nature of the friction is
not the new initiative itself.

It is that the initiative
shakes someone's past efforts, experience, and pride.

If a successor misreads this, they will struggle.

'Why don't they understand?'
'I'm trying to do this for the company.'
'Things will be bad if we stay like this.'
'They lack a sense of crisis.'

Feeling this way, they continue to provide more explanations.

But the more they explain, the more the other party becomes defensive.

This is because what the other party is hearing
is not just the rationality of the initiative.

Deep down,

'Were we wrong?'
'Will our methods until now become unnecessary?'
'Will I lose my place here?'
'Are you rejecting the era of the predecessor?'

—these anxieties are at play.

That is why, even though you are saying the right things, things do not move forward.

This happens very often in a successor's company.

What is particularly dangerous
is trying to force things through with 'correctness'.

Of course, the successor's awareness of the issues is often correct.

• Gross profit margins are falling
• People are not being developed
• Work is becoming too dependent on specific individuals
• There is a strong dependence on specific customers
• Young employees are quitting
• Investment capacity is decreasing

In such a situation, it is necessary to change.

But a company will not move just by being correct.

This is because a company
is driven not only by numbers, but also by emotions and history.

Especially in a company after a succession,
past methods always have meaning.

It is not just an old way of doing things.

There are people who have protected the company with that method.
There are people who have built relationships with customers.
There are people who have generated sales.
There was a time when it supported the livelihoods of employees.

That is why what a successor should do is
not to deny the past.

While acknowledging the role of the past,
it is to distinguish what needs to be changed in the current environment.

"It has always been this way"

When these words are spoken,
the successor might feel frustrated.

However, behind these words,
there are three major meanings.

The first is simple habit.
There is no deep reason; it is just how things have always been done.

The second is past success experience.
It used to work well that way in the past.

The third is anxiety.
The fear that changing things will lead to failure.

If you lump these three together as "old-fashioned thinking" without distinguishing them,
the friction will intensify.

What you really need to discern is

・Whether it is a custom that should be kept
・Whether it is a custom that should be changed
・Whether it is something that should be tried on a small scale first
・Whether it is something that should not be touched just yet

is what it comes down to.

In a successor's management,
there is no need to change everything at once.

Rather, if you try to change things significantly from the start,
the organization will trigger a defensive reaction.

Therefore, what is important when starting something new is
not "starting big and correctly."

It is "starting small."

For example,

instead of raising prices for all customers at once,
try it first with new customers or specific products.

Instead of introducing a new meeting structure across the entire company,
start by trying it out in just one department for two weeks.

Instead of systemizing everyone's work,
start by visualizing only the tasks that are causing the most trouble.

Instead of making a large investment in a new business,
start with interviews with existing customers and small-scale test sales.

Just by doing this, friction is significantly reduced.

This is because,
if you start small, it is easier for those who oppose it to accept.

Instead of 'changing the company',
change it to 'trying it out once'.

This difference is significant.

When a successor starts something new,
what is truly needed is not momentum.

What is needed is the right order.

First, organize why it needs to be changed.
Next, clarify what will be kept.
Then, decide where to start testing on a small scale.

If you get this order wrong,
the organization will not move, even with the right measures.

Conversely, if you get the order right,
what appeared to be major opposition
may turn out to be nothing more than anxiety or a lack of information.

Finally.

The friction that occurs when a successor starts 'something new'
is not necessarily a bad thing.

Rather, it is
a state where the history, pride, anxiety, and interests within the company are surfacing.

What is important is
not to eliminate the friction.

It is to identify the true nature of the friction.

・Are you truly being opposed?
・Do they feel that the past is being denied?
・Are they just afraid of failure?
・Is there a lack of information for making decisions?
・Is this something that will move forward if tested on a small scale?

Once you can organize these points,
the successor's new challenge will gradually become integrated into the company.

If you are currently,

・You want to start something new, but the company won't move
・Friction is occurring with veteran employees
・You are being stopped by 'That's how it's always been done'
・You want to change things, but don't know where to start
・You want to take the step toward a second founding, but the atmosphere in the company is heavy

If that state continues,
it is not due to a lack of ability on the successor's part,
but perhaps just because the 'order of change' has not yet been organized.

I handle over 400 consultations annually in the fields of succession, second founding, and new business development.

In a 60-minute brainstorming session,

・What should be changed
・What should be preserved
・What is the true nature of the friction
・Who should be involved first
・Where should you start testing on a small scale
・The next move you can take within the scope of gross profit, surplus funds, and investment capacity

are what we organize.

A successor's management
is not a job of destroying the past.

It is a job of building your own management
little by little on top of the past.

*Case studies have been partially modified. They are not related to actual companies or individuals.

📩 Click here for your first 60-minute consultation
'Executives won't move,' 'Meetings don't result in decisions,' 'I'm taking on too much myself'
Together, we will organize these states from their structural roots.

👉 Click here for inquiries
https://jissenstrategy.com/contact
✉ info@jissenstrategy.com

Atsushi Kumagai
Practical Management Advisor / SME Management Consultant

I provide hands-on support in the fields of succession, second founding, and new business development to create a state where management can make decisions.

Next article

Previous article