‘Make things better,’ new managers' challenge in a double-edged sword

The new broom sweeps clean”. Yes indeed; but, must one sweep whenever they have a new broom?
The proverb “the new broom sweeps clean” is said when someone new takes a leadership role in an organization and makes many changes. However, the pressure to show results, make a mark, puts many new managers under pressure to make changes— but sometimes detrimentally at the expense of useful things that went before. Yes, making things better often involves making changes; but making changes does not necessarily involve replacing old ways with new ones. That is why new managers and leaders must understand that:
Change is a gradual and gentle improvement on the past
The influential book ‘48 Laws of Power’ by Robert Greene talks about the process of introducing change nicely: “too much change will engender a revolt”. The author adds that “to introduce change, make it seem like a gradual and gentle improvement on the past”. This has very practical application for newly appointed managers. In order to avoid falling in the trap of sweeping clean practices and useful shared understandings, it is essential for new managers to first respect the way people have been living up until that point.
Second, new managers must remember that although a new broom sweeps clean, it should only sweep when there is dirt to clean.
At other times, the role of the broom is simply to dust off dirt from an old practice rather that sweeping it away.
Additionally, a new manager who seeks to sweep away all the remnants of previous leadership may end up doing more harm than good, by breeding unnecessary conflict and distrust.
Organisational memory is a new manager’s strategising tool
Organisational memory represents the knowledge that has been accumulated from past experiences, which resides in the organization and can be used towards making decisions. New managers must tap into the organisational memory, especially at their direct level of supervision and let that knowledge inform their strategy moving forward. This involves using sometime to learn from the team(s) directly under, to understand existing practices, and know which and whether the practices need sweeping away or just some dusting off.
Leveraging on existing practices to inform the way ahead builds trust with the team. In contrast, trying to change everything immediately sends a message to the team saying that: ‘everything you did up until this point was meaningless and lacked value’, which will negatively impact the manager’s ability to gain and retain the trust of the team.
As such, without using organisational and team memory, the new manager may end up addressing issues that do not need to be addressed, and fail to address genuine problems that require attention, hampering the overall functioning of the team.
If it is not broken, don’t try to fix it
One day while discussing some material for an online computer lab session for Master’s students, my PhD supervisor told me: “if it is not broken don’t try to fix it”. This has a lot of application for new managers. Fix only what is broken. Let what works continue working, even if you personally disagree with some aspects of it.
An important thing to remember is that leaders must avoid imposing personal preferences on those being lead.
They must learn to separate what they ‘don’t like’ from what ‘doesn’t work’. Managers who lead, rather than micromanage, focus more on results than processes.
As was nicely captured by a HR manager on the professional networking site LinkedIn recently: “I don’t care if my team stand on their heads and rub their bellies while they work, as long as they get the job done”. Indeed, autonomy is what managers must offer their team – setting out what results need to be achieved, and then letting them explore their creativity in achieving it.
In summary, change is necessary, but not all the time. Also, there are more meanings of change than replacing old ways. As such, new managers must assess their decisions and approaches to bringing change in ways that will prevent distrust, conflict, or downright managerial failure.