As every parent knows, teenagers can be… uhm… challenging. Teenagers are hormone-filled, angst-ridden, semi-autonomous adults who often have a respect-resentment issue towards authority. The hormone part aside, this pretty much describes your average working in an organization or industry undergoing significant disruption or change. For a teenager, their anxiety and fear stem from an uncertainty of who they are in this world. For an employee in disruptive times, there is often a similar crisis of identity: suddenly, they are asked to be different (more innovative, proactive or customer-centric), and behave in ways that are new and uncomfortable, even while faced with the possibility that they will lose their job.
For leaders, this is a problematic mix when trying to successfully embed change in their organization. As the “parents” in this analogy, good leaders wish the best for their teenagers employees – they want them to thrive and learn to navigate an uncertain world. The more enabled people are, the more innovative they tend to be, the more results-oriented they are, and the more likely they are to collaborate. All of these are qualities that organizations faced with change desperately want and need.
The problem is, parents are often the last people that teenagers listen to. This is not just a parental gripe; it has been borne out in study after study. And it is perfectly natural. Not just for teenagers but for all of us. We learn best and identify most easily with those that are most like us: our peers. Our peers are ‘people like us’, and we look to them for acceptance, belonging and guidance. So for an organization interested in implementing change (which requires people to actually behave differently: be more innovative, collaborate and be more customer-centric), the single most effective way of making this happen is by employing the natural dynamic of peer-to-peer learning.
Praising yourself for ‘good’ behaviour makes it more likely you will do something ‘bad’ afterwards.” Then what should you do?
Organizations want to be responsive to their customers’ movements, to ‘swing’, but mostly they’re simply doing the stasis shuffle – dancing on the spot.
Employees suffer from change fatigue. How do we balance the current imperative to change with our innate reluctance to change?