Change Management, Communicating from the Top, and the FBI

The impact of the 9/11 attacks was that the FBI's traditional role as a domestic law enforcement agency was redefined and expanded; with national security becoming its top priority. Sweeping changes had to be implemented, virtually overnight.

Assistant Director Stephen Tidwell outlined the shift of priorities within the FBI in an interview: “Our responsibilities used to be essentially domestic; now they were global. We used to be all about law enforcement; now we're about national security and law enforcement. We used to be case-driven; now we're threat-driven. Our inclination used to be 'Restrict, and share what we must'; and now it's 'Share, and restrict what we must.' Budget used to drive the strategy; now strategy drives the budget. Our priorities had changed as well.”

While going after terrorism was not an idea difficult to sell to dedicated agents outraged over the violation of everything they held sacred and sacrosanct, it was extremely difficult to give up years of network building and progress on continuing cases. Most agents had already invested a big part of their lives down very different tracks, infiltrating crime rings even at the risk of their lives, and now it seemed all was for naught.

The problems were handled case by case. In many cases agents were allowed to follow through their current high-priority cases, and in others things had to be handed over. The message Mueller succeeded in getting through to the agents was that “The priorities may have changed, but not the need for FBI core expertise.” Nobody felt unneeded, at risk of career, or disconnected from the vision of change.

Credit goes to Mueller for implementing the change and making agents dedicate themselves to their new roles and priorities. Mueller visited each branch office of the FBI, and many of them multiple times, talking with agents and staff, and giving time explaining his vision. At the same time, he managed to maintain his daily briefings with the President of the United States. He made webcasts, and continually communicated with people.

As the director of FBI, Mueller had to induct rapid change in an organization with critical duties, fifty-six branch offices, sixty global offices, ten thousand agents, and eighteen thousand support personnel.

If Mueller can do that, then even the hardest working CEO, most of who do not have such a vast organization, can make it a point to do so. That's what we can learn from the FBI in managing change within the organization. Communicate to the rank and files, and be open and accessible at times of change. It works.

Communication from the top is everything about change management. Why did Mueller bother himself so much? Because, without communication from a trusted voice within the organization employees do not feel properly informed. And if employees do not feel properly informed about changes, they will try to inform themselves by speculations and rumors. It would make the task of implementing change within the organization terribly difficult. Mueller knew that and acted fast and worked hard to communicate clear idea of the organizational change that was taking place.

How well did the FBI manage change? The country has not been hit again in over a decade, and of course, Osama bin Laden is dead, though the FBI doesn't claim credit for that, but it can claim credit for foiling at least 45 attempted jihadist plots in the last 10 years.

Reference:

Dan Carrison, From the Bureau to the Boardroom: 30 Management Lessons from the FBI (New York: AMACOM, 2009)