Skip to content
Technology & Innovation

Navigating a Leadership Transition Means Communicating Your Value

Mergers, promotions, retirements, acquisitions, firings: there are plenty of reasons why the names and faces above you on the organizational change might change. In each case, find where you fit in the new structure and make sure the new leadership notices.

Leadership transitions are part of life. Whether it’s your job, your place of worship, or some other organization to which you contribute, there are always going to be firings, hirings, retirements, acquisitions, mergers, and general shakeups up above. When it’s your workplace there’s often an underlying worry about how the new chiefs will perceive you. It’s easy to become worrisome or paranoid. As Anne Fisher writes at Fortune, the key is to identify what value you bring to the organization in its new state and communicate it to your new boss. She interviews Teresa Taylor, a former telecommunications executive, who explains that the average person is bound to have 10 or more new bosses during their career. It’s therefore important to get into the practice of marketing your worth.


Taylor says to network with new leadership. There’s no point in being too political; just be friendly and communicate how you’re part of what works rather than what doesn’t. That means, at least early on, not focusing too much on problems and instead talking solutions. You won’t do well to be a voice of doom to your new boss. Remember: first impressions are everything. The best advice is to remain flexible. Sometimes new leadership means a workplace evolution that you don’t fit into. Sometimes it opens up an opportunity to rise up. Either way, it won’t hurt to sharpen your résumé.

Take a look at the full piece linked below for more advice on how to survive a management shakeup. 

Read more at Fortune.

Photo credit: Ollyy / Shutterstock


Related

Up Next

Andy Warhol’s Masturbation Metaphor

In a 1977 interview with Glenn O’Brien for the marijuana lifestyle magazine High Times, O’Brien asked Andy Warhol if his teachers recognized his early “natural talent.” “Something like that,” Warhol responded with his characteristic unconventionality, “unnatural talent.” Warhol’s “unnatural talent” quip alluded not only to his mass-produced, machine-like paintings of soup cans and silk screen portraits, but also to his sexual orientation — the “unnatural” life of a homosexual. Just as Warhol turned that verbal double play, art scholar Michael Maizels tries to touch those two bases of Warhol’s art in “Doing It Yourself: Machines, Masturbation, and Andy Warhol” in the Fall 2014 issue of Art Journal. For Maizels, the way that Warhol made art reflected the way Warhol lived his life as a homosexual male in late 20th century America. When we look at Warhol’s art, Maizels suggests, we should see not just a critique of commercialized society and its art, but also a critique of that same society’s sexual tolerance.