Why is change often so fraught? Blame our brains.
What has our brain's primitive threat system got to do with our performance in the workplace? Quite a lot as it turns out.
Due to the increase in the use of functional MRI scans in recent years, neuroscience has greatly increased our understanding of not only how our brains work but also how poorly adapted they are for modern life.
Very approximately we can think of our brains as being in three layers. At the base is the brainstem, which sustains our basic functions and keeps us alive, then there is an emotional (limbic) centre and on top the rational, thinking brain or neocortex. This top layer is the most recently evolved and it has a much slower response time than the more primitive, deeper ones.
If we think of these layers as systems, each influencing our motivation we can say that we are motivated to avoid threats, approach rewards and attach for connection. All three motivations were vital for our prehistoric ancestors but it was even more vital to avoid threats (sabre-toothed tigers) than approach rewards (food) as if they missed the opportunity for food there might be another one later but if they missed that sabre-toothed tiger, there would be no more opportunity for them, just a well fed large cat.
For this reason our brains have a built-in negativity bias which means we are more reactive to threats than rewards, as the more primitive layers react quickly and automatically, before our more rational thinking has a chance to get on board. Essentially our brains have not caught up with the fact that the threats we face in the modern workplace are more likely to relate to deadlines, performance and difficult interactions with colleagues than deadly predators and yet it is the same fight/flight mechanism that is triggered whenever we sense a threat. And given the brain's negativity bias, we often sense threat when there is none.
One helpful way of thinking about possible triggers for the threat system is the SCARF model* according to which we all have needs for:
Status
Certainty
Autonomy
Relatedness, and
Fairness
According to the model, if any of these needs is at stake it will trigger our threat system and that horrible sense of being under attack will ensue, due to our body being flooded by stress hormones to prepare us to fight, take flight or freeze on the spot, before hopefully our more rational brain joins in to encourage a more proportionate reaction and assessment of the situation. Building mindfulness and emotional intelligence are effective methods for developing a greater ability to regulate our reactivity and recover more quickly if we sense we are being hijacked by our trigger-happy threat system.
It can be incredibly helpful to bear these needs in mind when implementing change in the workplace. Thoughtful and transparent consultation and communication, particularly when any changes might be perceived as in any way unfair or a threat to the status of any individual or group could make a significant difference. And for those designing the change programme, remember you're not immune yourself.
Finally, it is also worth noting how resonant much of this is with some of Sir Michael Marmot's work** which has found a correlation between poor health (particularly the risk of coronary heart disease and depression) and lower status, low control at work, reduced opportunities for social engagement and an unfair exchange of reward for effort. All are thought to lead to the chronic activation of our stress response, i.e. the threat system and so it is not difficult to fathom that finding ways of addressing these issues should lead to healthier, happier, more engaging and productive workplaces.
*Rock, D (2008) SCARF: A Brain Based Model for Collaborating with and Influencing Others. NeuroLeadership Journal Issue 1: 1-9.
** For an immensely readable summary, see Status Syndrome: How Your Place on the Social Gradient Directly Affects Your Health (2nd edn. Marmot, M 2015: Bloomsbury)
