4qtr2007 - Article Review - The Real Reason People Won't Change

Article Review: The Real Reason People Won’t Change
Robert Kegan And Lisa Laskow Lahey
Harvard Business Review (reprint R0110E)

So what is the real reason people won’t change? To bottom line it,

"It’s a psychological dynamic called a “competing commitment,” and until managers understand how it works and the ways to overcome it, they can’t do a
thing about change-resistant employees."

When people resist change, it’s not necessarily because they’re opposed to it. It’s not even necessarily because they’re lazy or inattentive to it, either. Rather, it’s because they have one or more hidden beliefs that directly conflict with them working toward meaningful change.

Example:

People often don’t collaborate even though they truly believe in teamwork. Why? Because they’re also dedicated to avoiding the confrontations that are typically intrinsic to any team-based activity. So, push come to shove, they never fully engage in the collaborative process for fear of that probable confrontation and what that means to them.

Oftentimes, though, it’s not readily apparent what the conflict is – or that a conflict even exists. So to unwind things, the authors have developed an interesting three-stage process to help figure out what’s in the way:

1. Through a series of key questions, managers can guide employees to uncover any competing commitments.
2. Employees can then examine these competing commitments to determine the Underlying Assumptions inherent in them.
3. Based on this new awareness, employees can then start changing their behaviors accordingly.

Uncovering Competing Commitments

The key questions recommended for guiding the uncovering process are as follows:

1. What would you like to see changed at work, so that you could be more effective or so that work would be more satisfying?
2. What commitments does your complaint imply?
3. What are you doing, or not doing, that is keeping your commitment from being more fully realized?
4. If you imagine doing the opposite of the undermining behavior, do you detect in yourself any discomfort, worry, or vague fear?
5. By engaging in this undermining behavior, what worrisome outcomes are you committed to preventing?

It’s important to realize that competing commitments do not necessarily reflect weakness or incompetence on anyone’s part. So, managers, don’t go there. Competing commitments are merely just a form of self-protection, and in that context, they make total sense. (e.g. If you want to avoid confrontation, avoid collaboration because collaboration results in confrontation.) Of course the follow-up question to ask is this: What are you protecting yourself from? What are you assuming will happen as a result of a confrontation?

Interestingly, once people start looking at things this way, it’s fairly easy for them to identify (and admit) what they are protecting themselves from. And once they identify that, most are ready to take some immediate action to overcome it.

But the authors suggest that a manager not press for behavioral change just yet. Rather, managers should encourage the employee to first notice his/her current behavior in light of now knowing about his/her competing commitments, Underlying Assumptions, and self-protecting mechanisms. That way, s/he can also look for what I like to call irrefutable evidence that their long-held assumptions might no longer be valid. (Who hasn’t found that a type of food they once thought they didn’t like was actually quite tasty?!) This can open whole new world of possibility for someone as one can use this as an opportunity to reflect on what caused these specific protection mechanisms to be created in the first place.

Understanding the circumstances that created the Underlying Assumptions can be very helpful in freeing oneself from them. And from there, meaningful change is not only doable, but often preferred to the status quo.