The Real Reason People Won't Change

Categories: Society

Essay, Pages 6 (1320 words)

Views

857

Introduction

In the realm of personal and organizational development, the quest for change is a common endeavor. Whether it be enhancing skills, altering behaviors, or fostering a culture of continuous improvement, the aspiration to change for the better is a constant presence. However, change is often met with resistance, not because individuals lack the requisite skills or deep commitment, but rather due to the existence of hidden competing commitments and underlying big assumptions. This essay delves into the profound insights provided by Robert Kegan and Lisa Laskow Lahey in their article, "The Real Reason People Won't Change," published in Harvard Business Review in November 2001. It explores the concept of personal immunity to change and how uncovering competing commitments and big assumptions can pave the way for genuine transformation.

The Nature of Personal Immunity to Change

In the pursuit of change, individuals frequently encounter roadblocks that hinder their progress.

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get your custom essay on

“ The Real Reason People Won’t Change ”

Get custom paper

NEW! smart matching with writer

These impediments can be as frustrating for onlookers as they are for the individuals themselves.

Doctor Jennifer

Verified writer

Proficient in: Society

5 (893)

“ Thank you so much for accepting my assignment the night before it was due. I look forward to working with you moving forward ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

Kegan and Lahey introduce the concept of "personal immunity to change" to elucidate this phenomenon. Personal immunity to change refers to the hidden barriers that prevent individuals from embracing change, even when they possess the necessary skills and commitment. These barriers are deeply rooted beliefs that have become integral to one's identity, making change a formidable challenge.

Examples of Competing Commitments

To understand the concept of competing commitments better, let's explore a few illustrative examples:

Procrastination as a Defense Mechanism: Imagine an individual who consistently procrastinates on assignments or tasks at work.

Get to Know The Price Estimate For Your Paper

Topic

Deadline: 10 days left

Number of pages

Email Invalid email

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy. We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

"You must agree to out terms of services and privacy policy"

Write my paper
You won’t be charged yet!

On the surface, it may appear as if this person lacks the necessary motivation or discipline to complete their work promptly. However, upon closer examination, their procrastination may be driven by a hidden competing commitment. They may be delaying tasks because they fear that once completed, they will be assigned even more challenging or undesirable tasks in the future. In this case, their procrastination serves as a defense mechanism to avoid future burdens.
Avoidance of Teamwork: Some individuals may consistently avoid participating in team projects or meetings. This behavior may seem counterproductive, especially in organizations that emphasize collaboration. However, their reluctance to engage in teamwork may stem from a hidden competing commitment to evade conflict. They may have had negative experiences with conflict in the past, leading them to believe that participating in teamwork will inevitably lead to disagreements and discord. As a result, they distance themselves from such situations to protect their own peace of mind.
Sarcastic Humor as a Shield: Another manifestation of competing commitments can be observed in individuals who use sarcastic and disruptive humor as a means of distancing themselves from a work group they wish to avoid. This behavior may appear as mere cynicism or negativity, but it may actually be driven by a deeper commitment to remain separate from a particular group or set of colleagues. The humor serves as a shield, preventing genuine connection and collaboration.

The Psychological Analysis and Research

Kegan and Lahey's article delves into the psychology behind personal immunity to change and provides a structured approach to uncovering competing commitments and big assumptions. The research emphasizes the importance of understanding the hidden factors that resist change rather than attributing resistance to a lack of willpower or motivation.

The central premise of their approach is to guide individuals through a set of questions aimed at uncovering their competing commitments:

What change would you like to see in your work or personal life to enhance your effectiveness or satisfaction?
What beliefs or commitments are implied by this desired change?
What behaviors are you currently engaged in, or not engaged in, that are obstructing the realization of these beliefs or commitments?
If you were to imagine doing the opposite of your current behaviors, would that evoke discomfort, worry, or fear?
If you were to actually carry out these opposing behaviors, what outcomes are you trying to prevent or protect against?

These questions serve as a powerful tool for individuals to explore the hidden commitments and assumptions that underlie their resistance to change. By uncovering these competing commitments, individuals can gain clarity on the factors that have been holding them back.

Case Studies: John and Helen

To illustrate the practical application of this approach, Kegan and Lahey present two compelling case studies. These examples shed light on how individuals can be genuinely committed to change on the surface while harboring hidden competing commitments beneath.

John's Struggle with Integration

John, a talented manager at a software company, is characterized by his open and communicative nature. He values close relationships with his colleagues and genuinely desires to be well-integrated into the team. However, despite his best efforts, he struggles to bridge the gap. The hidden competing commitment that John uncovers is his fear that integrating fully with the team would threaten his loyalty to his racial group, betraying his family and friends. While John is committed to working harmoniously within the team, this powerful hidden commitment keeps him at a distance.

Helen's Battle for Production

Helen, a manager at a manufacturing company, is deeply committed to increasing production efficiency. She strives to make improvements in this area but repeatedly faces setbacks. Upon examination, she reveals an unrecognized commitment to maintaining a subordinate relationship with her boss, Andrew. Helen's big assumption is that if she were to operate as a peer rather than a subordinate, she would not be up to the task. This hidden commitment to subordination undermines her ability to drive the desired production improvements.

Unearthing Big Assumptions

Every individual who resists change harbors a hidden commitment that is accompanied by underlying big assumptions. These assumptions result from the competing commitments and play a pivotal role in perpetuating resistance. Unearthing these big assumptions is essential for the change process.

To identify big assumptions, individuals can invert the beginning of sentences related to their competing commitments and complete them. This inversion process allows individuals to articulate their assumptions, which are often accepted as unquestionable truths. For example, the assumption that complements John's competing commitment could be expressed as, "I assume that if I did hear about problems I can't fix, people would discover I'm not qualified to do my job."

Taking Action to Overcome Immunity to Change

Once competing commitments and big assumptions are uncovered, individuals can take proactive steps to overcome their immunity to change. Kegan and Lahey recommend a structured approach consisting of five key steps:

Notice and Record Current Behavior: Individuals should document their current behaviors and note how their assumptions influence their actions. This step provides insights into the ways in which big assumptions shape their lives.
Look for Contrary Evidence: Actively seeking experiences that challenge the validity of big assumptions is crucial. It encourages individuals to question their long-held beliefs and opens the door to alternative perspectives.
Explore the History of Assumptions: Reflecting on when and how assumptions took hold is essential. Understanding the origins of these beliefs can shed light on their deeply ingrained nature.
Test the Assumption: Individuals should consider making changes in their behavior and test whether their assumptions hold true. This can be done in safe environments or situations where they can retreat if discomfort arises.
Evaluate the Results: The final step involves assessing the outcomes of challenging assumptions. Even if assumptions contain elements of truth, individuals may discover more effective ways of operating once they confront their fears and resistance.

Conclusion

Personal immunity to change is a common human instinct aimed at self-protection. However, these self-protective mechanisms often stem from deeply rooted beliefs and big assumptions. By uncovering these hidden commitments and assumptions, individuals can break free from the shackles of resistance and embrace change as a catalyst for growth and improvement.

This transformative process not only benefits individuals but also fosters a culture of adaptability and progress within organizations. It is through understanding and confronting our hidden barriers that we can truly unlock our potential for change and personal development.