Languages of Change How to t 273960

7/23/2019 Languages of Change How to t 273960

1/12

This research note is restricted to the personal use of [email protected]


G00273960

Languages of Change: How to Tap Into the

Positive Side of Change ResistancePublished: 6 March 2015

Analyst(s): Bard Papegaaij

Change initiatives often fail for no clear reason. As a leader, you cannot

afford for this to happen. This research explores why change is difficult, and

how CIOs can use language not only as a diagnostic tool, but also as a

means of turning resistance to change into a readiness to work together.

Key Challenges Resistance to change is often based on emotional tension between conflicting commitments

and beliefs not on rational arguments.

Instead of dealing directly with their own resistance to change, people tend to use negative,

deflecting language to place the responsibility for their inaction outside the scope of their own

control.

Confronting the resistance directly will only make it stronger.

Avoiding or ignoring the resistance allows it to spread.

RecommendationsAs CIOs you must:

Understand the sources of resistance against change in your environment.

Monitor your environment for the types of language that indicate resistance caused by internal

conflicts. Practice using positive, explorative counterparts to the negative, conflict-focused languages

you encounter.

Be the leader who helps people find their internal commitments and passion to overcome their

own resistance.

Table of Contents


2/12



Introduction............................................................................................................................................2

Analysis..................................................................................................................................................2

Understand the Sources of Resistance.............................................................................................2

Monitor Your Environment for the Languages of Internal Conflict...................................................... 4

Practice Using Positive, Explorative Languages................................................................................ 7

Help People Overcome Their Own Resistance..................................................................................9

Gartner Recommended Reading..........................................................................................................10

List of Figures

Figure 1. Resistance Protects Identity Against Change...........................................................................3

Figure 2. Language Reveals Emotional Resistance................................................................................. 5

Figure 3. Using Language to Reduce Resistance....................................................................................9

IntroductionIT brings many changes to an organization: when it is introduced, as it evolves, and even when it

gets replaced or decommissioned. To reap the benefits of IT, the organization needs to adjust its

operational parameters: its processes, its information flow, its control mechanisms. All these

changes directly and indirectly impact the way the organization's people work. It is common

knowledge that trying to change the way people work can be difficult. In fact, people's "resistance

to change" is often given as a major cause of the more than 50% failure rate of organizational

change initiatives. CIOs who want to be leaders in and of their organizations have to address the

change resistance working against the success of the IT they are responsible for.

Analysis

Understand the Sources of Resistance

Resistance to change is such a common phenomenon, it is quite natural to conclude that people

simply do not like to change, and that that is the reason they resist it. Looking a bit closer, however,

shows that things are not that simple. When presented with the arguments in favor of a changeprogram, most people will see the necessity for change. They will say they, too, want to improve

their work, their productivity and the performance of their team, department and business. When

their organization is facing difficulties, many (if not most) people understand that and are willing to

make changes necessary to overcome those difficulties. Yet, even when the vast majority of people

involved in a change initiative say they support it and are committed to it, very often the changes

don't happen, or happen slowly and haphazardly.

Page 2 of 12 Gartner, Inc. | G00273960


3/12



The cause of this apparent contradiction is a discrepancy between what people say and believe

they agree with on a rational and intellectual level, and what they feel and believe at a deeper,

emotional level. Even when people agree on a rational level with all the reasons for the change

initiative and honestly think they are actively supporting it they also hold beliefs, assumptions

and emotional commitments that strongly favor the status quo. These subconscious motivators act

as a counterforce that prevents them from actually contributing to the change, or that even compels

them to sabotage it. As depicted below, the conflict between the internal, mostly emotional,

motivators and the external, mostly rational, motivators is (mostly subconsciously) perceived as a

threat to people's identity the things they believe make them who they are, both as individuals

and as a group (see Figure 1). When the threat to the identity is strong enough, a "shield" is created

in reaction that pushes back at the threat, effectively neutralizing any energy consciously devoted to

the change initiative.1

Figure 1. Resistance Protects Identity Against Change

Source: Gartner (March 2015)

This process of neutralizing change happens both in individuals and in organizations. It is part of a

natural, and normally quite healthy, tendency of complex systems to try and stabilize themselves

against a variable environment. This stabilizing force helps individuals to maintain a sense of

Gartner, Inc. | G00273960 Page 3 of 12


4/12



continuity, for instance, instead of constantly being swayed by the many, often contradictory

demands that are being made of them. And it helps organizations to bond together and operate as

a recognizable, coordinated entity, rather than as an accidental configuration of people each doing

their own thing. Its function is to hold us together, both as individuals and as groups. In that sense,

the tendency to resist change can be compared to an immune system that protects us from change

that threatens to undermine the way we function.2

This otherwise healthy immune system becomes dysfunctional when it springs into action against

changes that are actually beneficial and/or necessary to us. On a personal level, almost everyone

has encountered situations where we knew a change would be good for us (such as more exercise,

healthier diet or less alcohol). Most people have at one time or other tried to make such a change,

only to find their resolve quickly weakening, and ending up more or less where they were before

they started. And on an organizational level most of us have been in situations where much energy

was being put into ambitious and even celebrated change initiatives, to end in very little real change

and a prevailing sense of frustration and futility.

Monitor Your Environment for the Languages of Internal Conflict

The processes underlying resistance to change are largely subconscious, since most people do not

make it a habit to consciously study their internal motivations, emotions, and assumptions. When

they feel discomfort, anxiety, or fear, instead of examining and addressing the source of the

contradictions, most people externalize the tension between their conscious and subconscious

drivers, and "explain" that tension by finding flaws, faults, and obstacles in their environment.3Quite

a few people habitually ignore such emotions to the point they don't even feel them anymore, but

that doesn't stop those emotions from influencing those people's behavior. These emotions keep

working on the subconscious, even if they are ignored or unnoticed on the conscious level. The

personal benefit of this externalization is that it firmly places the cause of the discomfort, anxiety orfear outsidetheir reach and scope of influence (see Figure 2).



5/12



Figure 2. Language Reveals Emotional Resistance


This tendency to find blame outside is stronger the more uncertain people are about the change

initiative, and the less they understand its background, motivations and intended outcomes. Such

uncertainty causes stress and anxiety, which will trigger all people's internal assumptions and

beliefs to fill in the gaps for them, almost always in a negative, externalizing manner. The more

anxiety they feel, the more they will be inclined to look for external factors they can blame, so they

don't have to do anything about themselves.

Though they may not be aware of it themselves, the language people use when struggling with

conflicting drivers actually provides a clear window into the internal conflicts, if one knows how toanalyze it. Typical expressions of conflicts between external and internal drivers are:

Repeated complaints

Assignment of blame

Statements of intention not followed by action

Arguments based on unchallenged assumptions



6/12



Negative judgments about other people's character

Criticism of other people's behaviors

Typical examples of these languages are:

"Something is wrong."

"It's all their fault."

"I have too much to do."

"This is never going to work."

"It's all been done before."

"They are deliberately sabotaging us."

"They should know better."

What all these languages have in common is that they externalizethe source of the discomfort and

place it outside the scope of the individual's control. And with the source of the problem firmly

outside their span of control, it automatically relieves them of the obligation to dosomething about

it. This "learned helplessness" helps to reinforce the status quo and secure the constructed identity

from any necessity to change, which feels safe, because it allows the internalized beliefs and

assumptions to remain intact.

In most organizations, these languages are used so frequently that we often take them for granted,

accept them as normal, and don't even pay attention to the fact that consistent use of these modes

of communication builds an effective and self-perpetuating barrier around even our best-designed

and well-intentioned change initiatives, effectively creating an invisible "force field" that neutralizesour efforts to change, feeding the status quo.

4

But even when people dobecome aware of these languages and the paralyzing effect they have,

the most common response to them is quite ineffective. When confronted with complaints, blame

and judgments, most people will respond by trying to address the surface-level issue: They will

reasonwith the complainer about the validity of the complaint;arguewith the blamer about the

actual blame; try to convincepeople their judgments are unfair. These responses are ineffective for

two reasons:

By addressing the externalization, they implicitlyacceptthe premise that there is an external

problem: Even when trying to negate it, the fact it is talked about it makes it more real in the

minds of the speakers.

The responses appeal to therationalside of the individuals using these languages, while the

real problem stems from their emotionalside. The negative, externalizing language is, after all, a

protection against an emotionally felt threat, not a rationally acknowledged actual problem.

When people try to reason with the individual under attack, and come with rational arguments

especially when those arguments are convincing and make sense, because that makes them much

more dangerous the feeling of being threatened is heightened, and in response, the protection



7/12



mechanisms get triggered even more. So, by trying to talk people out of their defensive, negative

and paralyzing way of looking at the world, people very often end up reinforcing other people's

emotional position, rather than changing it.

Practice Using Positive, Explorative LanguagesSystematically helping people change the language they use to speak about things that concern,

frighten or frustrate them can turn those emotional obstacles into a much more positive energy.

Although those negative languages may be difficult to deal with because of the emotional energy

behind them, it is precisely that energy that makes it worth engaging with. People use these

negative languages because they care: They feel strongly enough about the issue to speak up. By

tapping into that care and harnessing it in positive, constructive conversations, that same energy

can be used as a force for change, engagement and constructive commitment.

Neuroimaging has shown that there are tangible benefits to using positive, rather than negative,

language when talking about situations. Negative language tends to limit our perception, focusing

our attention on the problem, causing the problem to fill our entire awareness. This severely limitsour ability to see alternatives to the problem, to see it context, and making the problem appear

larger than it necessarily is. Positive language, on the other hand, expands our perception, and lets

the problem recede into the background, allowing us to see not only the problem, but also its

context. This helps us see alternatives, and reduces our apprehension about the problem itself. This

principle has one important caveat: people that think only positive thoughts run the risk of

becoming overly optimistic, underestimating the reality or severity of the problems facing them.

Recent research suggested the ratio of 1 negative to 4 positive thoughts to give the optimum mix of

optimism and realism.

Changing the language is a five-step process:

Examine what people say and explore what this reveals about the concerns, beliefs and

assumptions that lie underneath.

Listen closely for the "negative" keywords: "but," "if only," "however," "them," "they," "always,"

"never" words and phrases that reveal an externalization of responsibility.

Change the focus of the conversation to the underlying concerns, beliefs and assumptions

people really care about, and focus on the positive aspects they are defending against the

threat of change.

Explore together how the external changes can be aligned with people's internal values and

drivers. This may require a number of iterations to make sure the revised change description iscoherent, consistent and addresses the most important internal drivers as in, the ones most

likely to cause obstruction.

Encourage people to make a habit of helping each other turn negative, defensive language into

positive, constructive language wherever possible.

Figure 3 contains examples of positive "counter languages" to the negative languages of resistance:



8/12



From complaints to concerns: What does the complainer really care about? What underlying

concerns drive the negative language of the complaint?

From blame to responsibilities: What does the blamer believe about responsibilities and scope

of control of the person(s) blamed?

From intentions to priorities: This is about having long lists of intentions and "to do"s without

actually acting on most of them. What real priorities can the speaker set: what if there was

only one thing they could do right now would they be able to actually get done?

From assumptions to hypotheses: What evidence is there to support the assumptions? What

counterevidence is there? What would we need to test these assumptions?

From judgments to appreciation: Instead of just looking at what is wrong, explore what is right

about the situation. What is good, working well, something to be proud of or beneficial?

From criticism to collaboration: This shift requires a change of a number of assumptions

underlying even the best-intended forms of criticism: The criticizer's judgment is correct.

The criticizer knows more than the criticized.

The criticizer knows the solutions or answers.

The criticized should follow the criticizer advice.

By suspending those assumptions, the criticizer and criticized can engage in a much more

productive and engaging conversation that explores:

What really happened and how it was perceived by both parties

Why it happened what was the reasoning and chain of events leading to the event

What alternatives are available

The responsibilities each party can take in avoiding a repetition of the event



9/12



Figure 3. Using Language to Reduce Resistance


Such conversations foster collaboration, shared responsibility and shared commitment, rather than

the more usual surface-level acceptance of the criticism, which actually masks underlying

resentment, resistance, and defiance.

Help People Overcome Their Own Resistance

As a leader, the negative languages defending people's identity against change are a challenge to

deal with. Nobody likes listening to complaints, blame or criticism, much less be the subject thereof.

Avoiding these languages, however, does nothing about the underlying emotions giving rise tothem. Quite natural reactions such as resisting or arguing against the surface-level statements will

only make the underlying negative emotions stronger. Ignoring these languages allows them to

spread: negative languages are contagious and can become part of the collective mode of thinking.

The longer they are allowed to continue, the harder they become to turn around.

As a leader, make sure to listen to the negative languages you hear around you and engage with

them to explore the concerns, fears, and assumptions that lie underneath. Addressing those



10/12



concerns instead of attacking the surface-level grievances can help you leverage people's internal

commitments and beliefs to make them change agents, rather than change obstacles. Exploring

concerns together also helps leverage shared concerns, beliefs, and commitments to build a sense

of community and "togetherness" that can go a long way toward allaying the fear and uncertainty

that triggered the initial immunity response to the change.

Recommendations:

CIOs:

Understanding and overcoming your own resistance to change is a necessary first step for any

change leader: Embody the changes you aim for to be able to inspire and lead your people. If you

don't feel comfortable with this "soft" approach to resistance but want to learn how to do it, here

are a few suggestions:

Start with monitoring your own resistance for instance, by listening to the kind of language

you are using. Use the framework presented here to explore what lies underneath the resistance you find in

yourself. Find someone you trust to explore this together: It is often easier to discover things

about yourself when you need to explain yourself to someone else.

Don't be afraid to ask for help from internal sources (such as HR) or to bring in external

expertise if you feel uncertain about starting this journey by yourself.5

Gartner Recommended ReadingSome documents may not be available as part of your current Gartner subscription.

"Leading From the Heart: Why Emotional Intelligence Is Crucial for CIOs"

"Maverick* Research: Living and Leading in the Brain-Aware Enterprise"

"Maverick* Research: Socially Centered Leadership"

"Special Report: CIO Power Politics"

"The Politics of Powerful Partnerships"

"Sustainable Enterprise Change"

"Leadership Development Module 5, Chapter 8: Tools and Techniques for Organizational Change

Management"

"Leadership Development Module 5, Chapter 2: The Art and Science of Organizational Change

Management"

"Leading Enterprise Change"



11/12



Evidence

1R. Kegan and L. Laskow Lahey, "How the Way We Talk Can Change the Way We Work: Seven

Languages for Transformation," Jossey-Bass, 15 November 2000.

2

R. Kegan and L. Laskow Lahey, "Immunity to Change: How to Overcome It and Unlock thePotential in Yourself and Your Organization," Harvard Business Review Press, 13 January 2009.

3 "It is not change that causes anxiety; it is the feeling that we are without defenses in the presence

of what we see as danger that causes anxiety." R. Kegan and L. Laskow Lahey, "Immunity to

Change: How to Overcome It and Unlock the Potential in Yourself and Your Organization," Harvard

Business Review Press," 13 January 2009.

4This brings us to a third force in nature: the processes of dynamic equilibrium, which, like an

immune system, powerfully and mysteriously tend to keep things pretty much as they are. R. Kegan

and L. Laskow Lahey, "How the Way We Talk Can Change the Way We Work: Seven Languages for

Transformation," Jossey-Bass, 15 November 2000.5 The process described here is partially derived from the works of Robert Kegan and Lisa Laskow

Lahey; several organizations, including their own Minds at Work, offer assistance-based on their

work. There is also a Gartner workshop accompanying this research to demonstrate the process

described here.

http://www.mindsatwork.com/


12/12


GARTNER HEADQUARTERS

Corporate Headquarters

56 Top Gallant RoadStamford, CT 06902-7700

USA+1 203 964 0096

Regional Headquarters

AUSTRALIABRAZILJAPANUNITED KINGDOM

For a complete list of worldwide locations,visit http://www.gartner.com/technology/about.jsp

2015 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. or its affiliates. This

publication may not be reproduced or distributed in any form without Gartners prior written permission. If you are authorized to accessthis publication, your use of it is subject to the Usage Guidelines for Gartner Servicesposted on gartner.com. The information contained

in this publication has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable. Gartner disclaims all warranties as to the accuracy,

completeness or adequacy of such information and shall have no liability for errors, omissions or inadequacies in such information. Thispublication consists of the opinions of Gartners research organization and should not be construed as statements of fact. The opinions

expressed herein are subject to change without notice. Although Gartner research may include a discussion of related legal issues,

Gartner does not provide legal advice or services and its research should not be construed or used as such. Gartner is a public company,and its shareholders may include firms and funds that have financial interests in entities covered in Gartner research. Gartners Board of

Directors may include senior managers of these firms or funds. Gartner research is produced independently by its research organization

without input or influence from these firms, funds or their managers. For further information on the independence and integrity of Gartnerresearch, see Guiding Principles on Independence and Objectivity.

http://www.gartner.com/technology/about/ombudsman/omb_guide2.jsphttp://www.gartner.com/technology/about/ombudsman/omb_guide2.jsphttp://www.gartner.com/technology/about/policies/usage_guidelines.jsphttp://www.gartner.com/technology/about.jsp

Languages of Change How to t 273960

Documents

Transcript of Languages of Change How to t 273960