The psychology of stakeholder involvement in achieving successful change
2 minute read
In the 1970s, Daniel Kahneman and two collaborators wrote a book titled, Judgement under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. The book profiles a number of fascinating studies in the domain of decision making and judgement. One fascinating study within the book takes a closer look at the effects of choice on the illusion of control we have as individuals.
I’d like to draw a parallel between some core assumptions and known truths in change management and the study by Kahneman.
Before I draw the connection, lets state two commonly known truths about change management. The first is the notion of perceived control being a key factor in how individuals respond to change. In other words, the more control people have on the outcomes of a change (or the notion thereof), the more comfortable they will be in aligning and perhaps even supporting the change.
The second truth is that when embarking on change with the long term in mind, it is imperative that stakeholders are brought along with the change. It is a best practice to involve stakeholders in a change early on, to gain their input and garner support. As the saying goes, if you want to move fast, go alone. If you want to go far, bring others (your stakeholders) along with you.
Given these two truths, lets get back to the Kahneman’s experiment.
The study involved two groups invited to take part in a lottery where the winning amount was undisclosed. Participants in Group 1 received a randomly assigned lottery number and participants in Group 2 were asked to take a moment and write down the numbers they thought would be the lottery winning numbers.
The scientists then asked participants in both groups if they would be willing to sell their tickets and at what price. What’s truly fascinating was that generally speaking, those who wrote down their own numbers wanted five times as much for the tickets as those who were randomly assigned numbers!
While this is not a large-scale study by any means, it underscores a simple psychological trait in our behaviours – we exercise greater ownership of something, when we have had a direct hand in helping create it.
Coming back to change management, I have witnessed multiple projects and initiatives that were often borne out of strategic planning sessions performed behind closed doors. Once the strategy was developed, the leadership would go about enforcing the change, a very uni-directional approach, only to be met with pushback and resistance from those impacted by the change.
Given what we know about Kahneman and his experiment, it would be highly beneficial in most cases, to ensure that those who will be impacted by the change are included in the dialogue, early in the process. As daunting as it sounds, there are many tech-enabled ways to do this in a practical way. Tools such as PollEv or OneOne allow you to poll employees regardless of location or even size of organization. GE used a similar approach to invite dialogue from employees during a transformation effort involving tens of thousands of employees.
While the feedback may not always be applicable to the reality of the strategies being implemented, providing individuals with opportunity to voice an opinion can be powerful in helping rally support from employees once the ensuing strategy is implemented.
References:
http://www.mckinsey.com/our-people/scott-keller
Tversky, Amos, and Daniel Kahneman. “Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases.” Utility, probability, and human decision making. Springer Netherlands, 1975. 141-162.