Why People Not Plans Are the Key to Winning Change: The Psychology Behind Adoption

If you believe a briefing book and a rollout plan are going to do the heavy lifting on change, you're setting yourself up (or your Organisation) for an unpleasant surprise. Organisations love tidy plans. They love Gantt charts, KPIs, risk registers. Problem is: They don't dwell in people's heads. They live on spreadsheets.

The acceptance of change is a journey that happens psychologically well before operational changes are in place, and when we ignore that, it's expensive, on emotional terms as well as the accounting ledger. But let me be honest: a project of change. It's an experience. And experiences are messy.

Why the Psychology of Framing Matters

When leaders try to change the way a team works, with new tech, reshuffling roles or shifts in strategy, the most predictable friction is psychological. People don't instinctively resist change because they're perverse or lazy. They resist because change challenges the security of certainty, competence and identity.

Threats activate the brain's defence mechanisms. I do not mean this metaphorically; it is neuroscience. When the limbic system is activated, reason flies out the window.

Here's a good benchmark to keep me honest in workshops: According to Prosci, projects with Excellent Change Management are nearly 6 times more likely to meet objectives versus those with Poor change support! That's no fluff number; it's a hard reminder that investing in how people experience change pays real dividends. If you're debating whether to allocate dollars for a communication lead or training budget, that stat should be grounds for your vote.

Before we get going, a few unpopular opinions:

• Middle managers, yes, the ones you're grumbling about under your breath, are key. If they're not on board, your slick executive message is going to land on the floor like a paper plane
• Metrics are necessary but overrated. You can inflict compliance without winning hearts. One engaged team is worth ten of the compliant variety any day

That rubs some people the wrong way, both of those statements. Fine. They're worth the discomfort.

Resistance: Normal, Predictable, Fixable

Resistance is not a breakdown; it's a feedback system. It says what isn't fixed: fear of failing, vague incentives or a sense of lost status. Cognitive biases are also a big part of it. Status quo bias keeps people running existing processes because stepping into the unknown is perceived as risky; confirmation bias filters out information that runs counter to what we already understand. It's not that your people are irrational; they're just doing what the human brain evolved to do, try to keep you safe.

Consider the role of identity. If somebody's job identity is "the guy who knows the old system inside out," for that person to be asked to ditch a system is to make them exchange a badge of competence. Competence and identity are intricately intertwined. Pull one, and the other will come.

So to begin with: Acknowledge what people will lose, even if the gains are genuine. It's a little human act that saves against bigger fractures later.

Appraisal and Coping: How People Decide to Move

When you're confronted by change, you run two mental checks over whether or not to take action:

• Primary appraisal: Is there a threat here, a challenge, or is it irrelevant? The label matters. A threat narrows options; a challenge broadens effort and problem solving
• Secondary appraisal: Do I have the resources to cope with this? It involves skills, time, social support and clarity

And leaders who only concentrate on primary appraisal, selling the big idea, forget secondary appraisal. They pitch the vision but not give people the tools to get there. I've been in enough meetings where we cheer for agility and the senior leaders whisper, "We still haven't completed last year's training yet."

If you want folks to feel competent as part of their preparation, resource the transition: train time, peer coaching, quick wins. Self efficacy is your secret currency. Boost it, and people not only tolerate change, they own it.

Social Proof: Use It or Lose It

No one decides on work in a vacuum. Not all innovations are accepted practice but decisions depend on social norms and peer pressure. Harness influencers. Not the loudest, just the trusted: The old hand who's in early, the quiet analyst whose judgement everyone respects, the frosty boss who can be counted on to figure out how to make things work.

You hear people talk about the magic bullet, "top down endorsement." It doesn't hurt, leaders are perceived to be in alignment! But it's not enough. Internal, in team social proof is infinitely more convincing than an all hands from the CEO. If your pilot team goes for change and starts to see some value, adoption catches on. That's not magic. It's social learning.

Emotional Design Is More Powerful Than Rational Design Usually

We designers of change obsess over usability. Yet usability without emotion is like a great product in an empty mall. Fear, loss, curiosity, pride, these are engines of an operation. Good change programs are designed for feelings. Stories that resonate, rituals that mark transitions and recognitions of effort are thanks to.

A real example: when one of the client's distributed a new CRM, they only highlighted its features. Adoption flatlined. When we rebranded the rollout as a timesaver for weekend admin and brought in quick to see value training sessions, adoption took off. People wanted less paperwork more than they wanted a pretty interface.

And don't forget: emotional payoff frequently trumps rational or strategic gain.

Leadership and Communication: The Human Element

Leadership in change is not polished speeches and memos. It's vulnerability, clarity and repetition. When it comes to leadership you need to do three things consistently:

• Show why: Connect the change to something that people care about, Customer outcomes, career development, team longevity
• Show how: Offer practical steps and pathways. Make the first steps ridiculously easy
• Demonstrate what's in it for people: Not just for your Organisation; for people, personally

Transparency diminishes the angst that fuels conspiracy theories. Do not overdo cadence in the name of "keeping people informed"; but do not mistake silence for satisfaction.

Culture and Readiness: The Long Game

You can't hang throws readiness on a resistant culture overnight. Culture is cumulative behaviour. If you incentivise short term output against learning in your Organisation, you'll make that system gameable. If you were to want agility, you would need to reward learning, curiosity and safe failure. That's not soft talk, it alters how performance is evaluated and how promotions are determined.

We work with teams in Sydney and Melbourne where cultural change is occurring as leaders stop commending "firefighter heroics" and start praising "preventative thinking." It's slow, but it compounds. That's why investing in cultural signals, how you celebrate, how you recover from your mistakes, is just as important as training budgets.

Practical Strategies That Work

Here are the approaches I employ with teams that actually move the needle:

• Go small, prove big: Do a short pilot on a specific pain point. Publish results early and loudly
• Structure involvement: Don't simply "ask for feedback." Collaborate with certain people for co creating assets. Participation creates ownership
• Create competency pathways: Microlearning, on the job coaching and role based playbooks are better than single training sessions
• Use social proof: Capture the stories of early adopters and make them visible, videos, short emails, water cooler conversations
• Protect time: If you want people to learn new ways of doing things, give them learning hours. Otherwise uptake will slug it out with day to day
• Recognise and reframe loss: Be honest about what will be lost and the implications of that loss, then chart compensatory gains
• Measure the right things: Monitor capability, sentiment and actual behaviours, not just bum on seat time

A couple of slightly controversial, even secular sounding ones, but I don't believe in over rotating to "change fatigue" as an excuse. Yes, people can be exhausted. But the problem, more often than not, is poor sequencing and relief nowhere in sight as far as the plan goes. Slowing down, smartly; not stopping.

And for what it's worth I think tech adoption should be people led, not IT led. IT constructs the house; but, the Business decides how to live in it. That will get some technical teams ruffled, but it's true.

A Practical Note on Layers of Leadership

Too often, organisations make being immune to change the job of someone else. If the work is being done in middle management, then train and resource that layer. Give them language to coach, to model behaviours and to escalate authentically unavoidable blockers. Reward the managers who are catalysts for change, not those who merely hit short term metrics requirements.

Where I Witness Most Programs Falter

Budget cuts mid flight. Poorly sequenced priorities. Failure to measure behaviour change. Too much communication without skilling. Not taking team social dynamics into consideration.

Also, a big blind spot: failing to take the temperature of the emotion. Poll people about how they feel about the change. Then act on what they say. That sort of feedback loop is how you build trust.

A Small Note on Organisational Wellbeing

Change is not just a business issue but also a wellbeing one. Abrupt changes without the protection of a scaffold might stress and disengage students. That is ethically suspect and operationally perilous. Give them support, mentors, access to counselling, flexibility around timetabling if they need. It's good for the people, and it's good business.

We learnt that, when teams felt supported, they did not just comply; they improvised. They make the new process better than leadership even envisioned.

Conclusion or Thereabouts

Change behaviours are always going to be a knot of cognition, emotion and social dynamics. Good plans are important, but they're not as important as how people view the transition, feel and experience it. Run your change programs as rigorously as you run financial forecasts but never let the numbers drown out the story.

Yes, invest in tech, process and governance. But invest in people first, beliefs, competence and social proof. That's how projects stop being projects and instead become new ways of working.

We do that work every day, practical, messy and rewarding, and I'd bet on a well supported team over another perfectly scheduled plan any day.

Consider your next transformation: who are you backing, who are you demanding take charge, and what will your response be the instant there's an inkling of resistance? The responses are more revealing than your risk register.

Sources & Notes

• Prosci. (2022). Best Practices in Change Management. Prosci Inc. (According to Prosci benchmarking, projects with excellent change management are six times more likely to meet objectives than those with poor change management)
• Australian Public Service Commission. (2021). Leading Change: A Guide for Government. Australian Government.