Category Archives: Uncategorized

CHANGE IS PAIN

Neuroscience and Organizational Change

Advanced computer analysis of neural connections and the application of theoretical work linking the brain and the mind give the organizational leader lots to think about. Beyond carrot and stick behaviorism, fMRI’s, PET scans and EEG’s reveal new rules about change and why it hurts when someone moves your cheese.

As reported in The Neuroscience of Leadership, organizational change is unexpectedly difficult because it provokes sensations of physiological discomfort. In the brain, change is pain. First, anything “new” draws on working memory and the elegant but colicky and easily fatigued prefrontal cortex. Work that has become hardwired in the jolly mindless hum of the basal ganglia is suddenly pushed to the difficult top of consciousness. It’s a feeling that’s uncomfortable, and naturally avoided.

Second, the orbital frontal cortex has evolved to alert us of anything “new” with an error signal. This cortex is closely connected to the brain’s fear circuitry, which resides in the amygdala. Move my cheese and I’m going to have a fear response. Taken together, the brains sends out powerful messages that something is wrong, and the capacity for higher thought is decreased. “Change itself amplifies stress and discomfort, and managers tend to underestimate the challenges inherent in implementation.” Change, even good J-curve change, is initially pain.

 

Getting to the End State


Is it better to undertake change with a future state goal in mind? Don’t nod so vigorously just yet…..
Over lunch with colleagues recently, we all realized we had an underlying assumption about change: you must have a vision or goal from the top levels that acts as a compass for the change. It’s the future state that you cling to when things start getting wobbly. This push methodology is somewhat linear, logical, and expected.
When we tried to figure out just where and when we learned this approach, we could only meagerly poke at our Masters degree, which is from a well respected institution, yet it’s certain this was not the only source. Interesting – you could literally see our boundaries expanding. Eyes turned upward, contorted mouths, silence.
We turned to Human Systems Dynamics (HSD) because that’s actually where we started our conversation. HSD would say that it is better to not have a vision of where you’re heading as you undertake a change. In fact, this may undermine an optimal outcome by limiting your destination to only those places on your map. This pull approach, actually it’s organic growth, allows for the system to grow toward an undefinable end. Yes, a sensible model…but a realistic model?
Given that our client partners already have concerns about undertaking change, and rightly so, how then can we show them that not having a clear end state may sometimes be the best vision for their particular situation? As always, it’s about communicating with your client partner about expectations for your work together. A compelling vision of the future state is certainly needed when undertaking complex systemic change, but it’s best to think of it as a moving target. A realistic approach may be that organic change simply delays clarification of the end state until further into the change process, while the linear approach starts with a clarified vision (and ideally refines it as new information is taken in).
When you look at the many change models, vision, or a clear picture of the future state, is a weighty component. Many are geared toward the linear line of thinking but as anyone in this field knows (and is adept at!), there are many ways to reach the same destination. Deciding which approach is best for your particular change initiative, one that will have the highest degree of success, is the inherent skill of the Organizational Change Management (OCM) consultant.