Quite often responses to change are framed as resistance and set in concrete. Those experiencing change “stay put”, hoping things will pass them by and no one will notice. Those responsible for the change frame those who are “not on board” as resistant and quite often a problem to be dealt with.
Fortunately, there is a better way to understand individual responses to change and overall capacity to engage with change. This requires a pause by change leaders to make sense of how individuals are responding. It involves curious questioning of those impacted by change.
What does curious questioning look like? First, change leaders need to take the time to understand where their people are in relation to the proposed change, or the context the change is designed to address. Too often change is announced by leadership and the assumption is that it automatically makes sense.
This requires getting to the detail of how employees are responding to the context the proposed change is trying to address. How do individuals feel about the current situation? Do they see it as a late stage status quo slowly trending downwards? Are they satisfied with the current situation? Have they been able to put words to how they feel about it?
Leaders have a responsibility to be curious about the context of the change in order to support employees to understand the risks and opportunities associated with changing or remaining with the status quo. Laying a foundation around the why of change gives employees the agency to properly explore their response and weigh the opportunities and risks of different paths.
From here, leaders can facilitate a process where individuals consider what doing nothing — or changing — might look like over different time horizons. These could be weeks, months, or years. Something like six weeks, six months and six years can be helpful in gaining perspective and prioritising action.
This approach also has the benefit of moderating some of the more extreme behaviours that can emerge during complex change. When people imagine what the situation might look like years from now, responses often become more measured and realistic.
A further way to break down this reflection is to ask employees affected by change to consider the risks and opportunities associated with doing nothing or engaging with change. Evaluating potential costs and benefits over time can illuminate the energy required — and needed — to change. This can be a powerful motivator for people to understand their own capacity to adapt to changing circumstances.
Employees can then examine the two perspectives and identify the patterns that emerge. Are there more risks associated with doing nothing? Do these risks appear immediately or gradually over time? Are the opportunities associated with either course of action too distant to be motivating? Encouragement should be given for people to discuss these reflections with trusted colleagues, friends or family. The assumptions sitting behind them often benefit from being challenged to obtain a clearer perspective.
Finally, these reflections and patterns can help individuals assess where they sit on the change spectrum. This is not an exercise in shaming people who do not feel ready or willing to change. Rather, it is a balanced self-assessment that leadership can use to understand organisational capacity for change and to build appropriate feedback mechanisms. In fact, low levels of willingness to change can guide leadership on the scale and type of change required, and the tactics involved.
Too often change is announced and individuals are expected to respond accordingly. Understanding how employees frame their context — and how they perceive the consequences of changing or doing nothing — is a valuable leadership tool. It sits firmly within the work of making sense of organisational change. If you have any questions about this approach, or would like to explore how it might be adopted in your organisation, please contact me here.
Leave a Reply