Change Without the Chaos: Five Tensions Every SME Leader Must Hold
Transformation risk rises when leaders treat hard choices as either/or. Research on APAC boards suggests a better approach.
Every small business is changing. AI tools, new customers and tighter rules all force decisions with no clean answer. Leaders often respond by picking a side: move fast or stay safe, share everything or share nothing. Each choice can leave a gap that later becomes a risk.
A both/and mindset
A study of 66 APAC board directors found that strong leaders did not treat these tensions as trade-offs. They used three connected capabilities to turn ambiguity into opportunity (manuscript under review, 2026).
Open strategy means involving staff and stakeholders in strategy and being transparent about it (Whittington et al., 2011).
Dialectical thinking means holding two opposing demands at once and building a response that serves both (Smith & Lewis, 2011).
Inclusive leadership means drawing out different views while keeping the direction clear (Shore et al., 2011).
Five tensions to watch
The study names five dilemmas inherent in modern governance. Each has a practical SME version.
Process: How much do we plan, and how much do we test as we go?
Commitment: When do we lock in a decision, and when do we stay flexible?
Disclosure: What do we share with staff, and what do we hold back?
Empowerment: What do we hand to the team, and what do we keep?
Escalation: What do we solve locally, and what goes to the top?
Researchers note that open strategy brings these dilemmas with it and cannot make them disappear (Hautz et al., 2017). The task is to manage them with care.
How to start
Name the tension. Write down the two pulls in your next big decision.
Ask “how can we do both?” before asking “which one?”
Invite a wider view. Ask the people closest to the work. Inclusive leaders create the safety that makes honest answers possible (Nembhard & Edmondson, 2006).
Set the direction. Openness works best when everyone knows what has been decided.
What changes
Leaders who hold both sides make fewer rushed reversals. Their teams voice concerns earlier, which lowers the cost of change. Manage the risk, and the productivity follows.
References
Hautz, J., Seidl, D., & Whittington, R. (2017). Open strategy: Dimensions, dilemmas, dynamics. Long Range Planning, 50(3), 298–309.
Manuscript under review. (2026). Opportunity from chaos: How APAC directors navigate open strategy through dialectical thinking and inclusive leadership. California Management Review.
Nembhard, I. M., & Edmondson, A. C. (2006). Making it safe: The effects of leader inclusiveness and professional status on psychological safety and improvement efforts in health care teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(7), 941–966.
Shore, L. M., Randel, A. E., Chung, B. G., Dean, M. A., Holcombe Ehrhart, K., & Singh, G. (2011). Inclusion and diversity in work groups: A review and model for future research. Journal of Management, 37(4), 1262–1289.
Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 381–403.
Whittington, R., Cailluet, L., & Yakis-Douglas, B. (2011). Opening strategy: Evolution of a precarious profession. British Journal of Management, 22(3), 531–544.
