The Rhythm of Change

The Rhythm of Change – Balancing Stability and Transformation

“We perceive our environment to be in a constant flux because we only notice the things that change.”

In reality, many aspects of our environment remain stable, and this stability provides the foundation for our experiences. According to Professors Quy Nguyen Huy and Henry Mintzberg in MIT Sloan Management Review, stability plays an essential role in shaping how we perceive and manage change.

The authors identify three distinct types of change in organizations: dramatic change, systematic change, and organic change. Each type is driven by different leaders, operates at different levels, and impacts the organization in unique ways. Crucially, these change types cannot operate effectively in isolation—they must work together in what the authors describe as “the rhythm of change.”

1. Corporate Revolution – Dramatic Change

• Led by: The leader of the organization

• Nature: Major, transformative events that can reshape an entire society or business sector

• Source: The cumulative result of numerous smaller, organic actions over time

These are the headline-making moments in corporate history—the bold moves and strategic shifts that redefine an organization’s trajectory.

2. Corporate Reform – Systematic Change

• Led by: Staff groups and consultants within the organization

• Nature: Large-scale changes arising from coordinated initiatives

• Balance Required: While planned and structured, reforms must avoid becoming overly rigid or bureaucratic

Systematic change ensures operational and strategic alignment but must remain flexible enough to adapt to unforeseen challenges.

3. Corporate Rejuvenation – Organic Change

• Led by: Individuals throughout the organization

• Nature: Deep cultural and strategic shifts, often emerging informally

• Forms: Can be inadvertent, imperative, steady, or driven

Organic change grows from within, creating lasting cultural evolution and embedding transformation into everyday practices.

The Interplay – Why All Three Are Needed

Huy and Mintzberg stress that these three types of change must operate collectively to maximize effectiveness. Dramatic shifts require a foundation of systematic planning, while both rely on the adaptability and cultural strength fostered by organic change.

When Stability Is as Important as Change

The prevailing business mantra—“keep on changing or risk being overtaken”—may overlook a critical truth: stability and continuity form the essential context for change. Without stability, organizations lose their reference point, making it harder to measure progress or maintain strategic focus.

The authors even argue there are times when change should be resisted. For example, when an organization already has a strong, well-functioning strategy, unnecessary change can create disruption and dilute focus.

📚 Source:

Quy Nguyen Huy & Henry Mintzberg, The Rhythm of Change, MIT Sloan Management Review, Summer 2003, Vol. 44, Issue 4, pp. 79–84

🔗 Visit INSEAD Knowledge

Related Reading

The Four Types of Dysfunctional Executives and How to Handle Them – Explore strategies for managing leadership challenges in complex organizations.

📌 The obsessive-compulsive leader:

NO COMPUTERS WERE HARMED IN PRODUCING THIS SITE, THEREFORE, EACH PAGE IS UNIQUE AND HAS ITS OWN PERSONALITY AND IDIOSYNCRASIES. THE PAGES WERE PULLED BY HAND AND HAVE DIFFERENT INKS, FINISHES AND FEELS. THE SURFACE OF EACH PAGE VARIES WITH THE NATURE AND REACTIONS OF THE VARIOUS VISITORS. THIS PROCESS AND WAY OF MAKING ART IS 100% INTENTIONAL. PLEASE KEEP THIS IN MIND WHEN BROWSING A PAGE.