Change Support
Helping People Navigate Transformation
by Manfred Höfler, Kurt Mayer
Why Leading People Through Change Often Fails
Time and again, we see leaders trying to kickstart change by appealing to logic and presenting arguments. Examples of this include statements such as "It's clear why you need to change," "We must let go of outdated thinking and tackle new challenges," or more collaborative approaches like "Let's work together to create a brighter future, but that means we all need to change.“
Typically, these appeals have little impact. Organizational transformation requires changes in individual behavior, not just the application of smart concepts. While humans are born to evolve and enjoy trying new activities, such as a new sport or the latest iPhone, we resist change when it is forced on us by organizations and restricts our personal freedom.
Leadership often uses the typical appeal, "Let's please consider the facts" to block emerging resistance. However, changing behavior is a deeply emotional subject. If people don’t feel as though their emotions are being validated during change processes, they usually look for alternative coping mechanisms. These typically involve denying, ignoring, or simply sitting out the change process.
Three common mistakes leaders make in supporting personal transformation
Neglecting to reflect on their own emotional state
In times of change leaders are typically under pressure. If they are not sufficiently reflective and aware of their own emotional state, they tend to reduce their communication with their employees, while at the same time increasing the pressure on the team through appeals and demands.
Ignoring employees' emotions
Transformation process management often neglects the emotional aspect of change and focuses on processes, structures, systems, and new technical solutions such as IT applications and digitalization. With the abundance of transformation concepts, role descriptions and organizational charts, it is easy to overlook the importance of validating people's emotions during the change process.
Using appeals to create movement in change
When leaders react to resistance by intensifying their appeals, it can lead to employees feeling devalued and becoming disengaged.
What exactly are emotions?
Emotions can be defined as "energy in motion" or the energy that is constantly in motion in the body.
The human brain is programmed to permanently scan the environment for potential threats or rewards. Acting as a gatekeeper, the amygdala in the limbic system constantly assesses the emotional significance of situations and determines whether they offer rewards or pose threats.
Our sensory perceptions (e.g. when a board member is presenting the plan for the change process) are evaluated by the limbic system, which reflects an emotion back to us and gives us an impetus to act. These emotions may include interest, fear, sadness, anger, or joy, and the corresponding impulses guide our responses.
Emotions are the key to success when it comes to supporting behavior change and personal transformation processes.
Leaders must be able to
- perceive and recognize emotions in the context of change and
- use appropriate leadership interventions that enable them to deal with these emotions productively.
Change triggers five fundamental emotions
Fear
Fear has a positive function in that it can protect us from danger, but in the context of change it can lead to shock and paralysis, preventing people from taking action.
Anger
Anger allows us to mobilize energy to set boundaries and defend our identity. In the context of change, however, it often leads to resistance, aggression, and conflict.
Grief
Grief can loosen bonds and release energy for new experiences. In change processes, however, it can also lead to prolonged depression and frustration.
Interest/Curiosity
Interest and curiosity create feelings of openness, attentiveness, and a desire to discover new things that enable us to engage in change.
Joy
Joy strengthens bonds and cohesion and enables us to embed the new in change by celebrating initial successes.
Why people respond to change so differently
Emotions and hormones form a foundation that enables people to understand and positively support reactions in change processes. However, individuals exhibit different behaviors under the stress of change.
For example, while one employee may enthusiastically embrace a particular change expectation, another colleague may show incomprehensible resistance to the same impulse. The reactions of those "affected" are indeed difficult to predict. Nevertheless, it is worthwhile to examine some of the influencing factors more closely.
The personal biographies of employees can provide insight into certain reactions. We can ask: "What experiences have they had with similar situations or changes in their lives? Were those experiences positive or frustrating? Did they strengthen or weaken them?"
Although the resulting beliefs and convictions may not be immediately apparent, questioning them during change can lead to unpredictable reactions and conflicts.
In addition, personal interests determine how individuals respond to expected changes in behavior. People may ask themselves: "Will this change help me achieve my personal goals? Or will it entail additional effort, potential loss of status, relationship stress, or other personal drawbacks?
An individual's current emotional state also plays a role in how he or she reacts to announced changes:
Is everything going well for me – or did I just get back from a nice weekend? Or are family problems, relationship stress, or a crushing workload limiting my willingness to change? The key question to ask is How much capacity and energy do I have to learn new behaviors?
Sometimes organizational experience or negative stories about past changes have a significant impact on people's responses. For example, if change initiatives were previously announced with great fanfare but quickly abandoned at the first sign of resistance, the natural reaction to a new initiative is likely to be one of "wait and see.
Assessing the credibility of the sender of a change message is critical to the response to the proposed change. It is primarily a matter of whether the sender can be trusted to put the welfare of the organization and its people first, or whether his or her self-interest and career advancement are the primary motives for initiating the change.
Because of these factors, it is obvious that the reactions of individuals to change impulses cannot be accurately predicted.
Three models for effective change leadership
In the following, we would like to present three models that managers can use as a concrete toolbox to accompany people in their environment through change.
1. The SCARF model takes into account the basic neurobiological needs of people.
2. The Bridges Transition Model identifies three phases of experiencing change: the end of the status quo, the neutral zone, and the new beginning.
3. Resistance Analysis focuses on different resistance motives, which in turn require different leadership behaviors.
1. SCARF – leveraging neuroscience
The Scarf model picks up on the latest findings neuroscience and illustrates the two fundamental principles that guide human behavior: Minimizing threats and seeking rewards are among these patterns.
These behavioral patterns also have significant relevance in social contexts, with five specific SCARF dimensions triggering either the threat or reward center in the brain.
This diagram illustrates the five dimensions – and the questions that employees ask themselves, especially during a process of change.
2. The Bridges Transition Model: Three phases of experiencing change
William Bridges draws inspiration from the Change Curve and outlines key action steps for leaders who want to help their people through the transition. The focus is on the gradual psychological readjustment that occurs within us as we begin to adapt to change. Bridges' model identifies 3 phases of transition: 1. Letting go, 2. The neutral zone, and 3. The new beginning. In order to adopt new behaviors, it's critical to consistently let go of old patterns, intentionally navigate the uncertainty and creative potential of the "neutral zone," and then establish new practices. This three-step process is justified because people don't generally resist change; they resist personal transformation.
During personal transitions, we often feel like we're losing our world and identity, experience a sense of disorientation in the "in-between" zone, and fear failure in the new beginning. That's why it's important to take time for this personal transition and to avoid shortcuts. Many people rush to change jobs over the weekend, jump into new relationships overnight, or believe they must fully embody a new role the next day. Without a deliberate transition, we carry old - often obstructive - patterns into our new endeavors. This robs us of the opportunity to reflect on the past, let go of outdated patterns, and grow in a new context. To truly embrace something new with enthusiasm, we must always go through a process of "unlearning.
3. Resistance Analyses: Dealing with resistance constructively
Is change possible without resistance? Since any process of change disrupts existing patterns of behavior, resistance is inevitable. In fact, it contains valuable energy that is necessary for change. The challenge is to transform this resistance into creative energy. As a leader, it's critical to first examine your own attitude toward resistance and to recognize it as a positive signal that the change is being taken seriously. However, resistance may not always be obvious: you may need to take a closer look to identify it.
Examples of resistance symptoms include: decisions that are put off, long discussions about responsibilities and authority with no action taken, evasive answers to clear questions, unenthusiastic meetings that everyone is relieved when they are over, and lengthy discussions about trivial issues.
Before taking any action as a leader to address resistance, the first step is to explore and understand the reasons for the resistance of employees or groups. The following thought model describes three reasons for resistance:
In conclusion, organizational change requires changes in individual behavior, which are deeply emotional and cannot be addressed solely through appeals to stay factual. Factors such as personal experiences, beliefs, interests, emotional state, past organizational experiences, and sender credibility influence individuals' reactions to change. Neuroscience research highlights the importance of minimizing threats and seeking rewards in guiding human behavior. Dealing with resistance constructively involves understanding its reasons and transforming resistance energy into creative energy.