Why Alignment Is Not Enough — The Role of a Guiding Coalition in Change

In many transformation efforts, a familiar pattern appears.

A leader — often responsible for driving the change — invests time aligning key stakeholders one by one. Conversations happen, views are exchanged, concerns are addressed and gradually, a sense of alignment seems to emerge.

On the surface, this feels like progress.

But when the transformation starts to move, something often becomes visible:

alignment is there — but collective ownership is not.

Why one-to-one alignment feels like the right approach

There are good reasons why leaders take this route.

One-to-one conversations:

• feel efficient

• allow for tailored discussions

• create space for openness

• avoid group tension

  
  

They are often necessary as they help to:

• understand perspectives

• build trust

• clarify positions

  
  

In that sense, they are a strong foundation.

But they are only that — a foundation.

What is missing

When alignment is built through one-to-one discussions, something important does not happen:

People do not experience the change together.

They may agree with the direction, and they may even support it in principle.

But they have not:

• challenged each other

• built shared meaning

• or taken a collective stance

  
  

Which means that when pressure comes — and it always does — each person tends to fall back to their own position.

Alignment creates agreement. A coalition creates commitment.

The idea of a guiding coalition

In his work on transformation, John Kotter describes the importance of a guiding coalition.

Not simply a group of stakeholders.

But a group that:

• shares ownership of the change

• is aligned on both direction and intent

• is able to act together

  
  

And importantly:

a group that is visible to the organisation as standing together.

Why this matters when resistance appears

Most transformations encounter resistance.

Not necessarily because people oppose the idea of the change — but because:

• priorities shift

• uncertainty increases

• local constraints appear

This is where the difference becomes visible.

If alignment was built on a one-to-one basis:

• support might become conditional

• messages start to be inconsistent

• leaders hesitate or diverge

  
  

If a coalition exists:

• leaders reinforce each other

• messages stay coherent

• decisions are supported collectively

Change does not fail at the moment of alignment. It often fails at the moment of resistance.

From alignment to shared ownership

The shift from alignment to coalition requires something different.

It requires people to:

• think together

• challenge each other

• build a shared understanding

• and take a position as a group

  
  

This rarely happens through individual conversations alone.

It needs a shared space.

Often, that space is created through:

• workshops

• working sessions

• structured dialogues

Not to present the change, but to build it together.

What happens in that shared space

When leaders come together in the same room, something changes.

They begin to:

• hear each other’s constraints

• confront differences openly

• align not only with the change — but with each other

  
  

This is where:

• assumptions are tested

• tensions are surfaced

• and real alignment is built

  
  

Not alignment to a message, but alignment to a shared position.

People don’t align as strongly to a plan as they do to something they have shaped together.

The role of the leader driving the change

For the person leading the transformation, this requires a shift from aligning individuals to orchestrating collective alignment

This can feel:

• less controlled

• more complex

• sometimes uncomfortable

  
  

But it is also where:

• ownership emerges

• and the change becomes stronger than one person

  
  

A practical reflection

If you are currently driving a transformation and relying mainly on one-to-one alignment, it may be worth asking:

• Have people aligned individually — or together?

• Have they had the space to challenge each other?

• Do they stand behind the change as a group?

  
  

Because these are not the same thing.

A different way to look at it

Perhaps alignment is not the end of the process.

It is the beginning.

What makes the difference is what happens next:

whether alignment becomes a shared commitment that can hold under pressure.

A transformation is not carried by a plan. It is carried by a group of people who stand behind it together.

A moment to reflect

When the change becomes difficult — and it will — people don’t turn to the plan. They turn to each other. And what they find there often determines whether the transformation moves forward or starts to fragment.

References

Kotter, J.P. (1996) Leading Change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Kotter, J.P. (2012) Leading Change. Rev. edn. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press.

Edmondson, A.C. (2012) Teaming: How Organizations Learn, Innovate, and Compete in the Knowledge Economy. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Hiatt, J. (2006) ADKAR: A Model for Change in Business, Government and Our Community. Loveland, CO: Prosci Research.