How do you get people on board with your change programme? Most of us would include information about just how big a problem we’re trying to address. However, new research shows people paradoxically underestimate the seriousness of a problem when it appears very widespread. How do we overcome this ‘big problem paradox’?
At the start of a change programme, one of the main tasks of the leader is to motivate people to engage in the process. It’s essential to convey the importance of addressing the problem, and most of us use one or more approaches to do this.
Size is often key – we talk about how big the problem is, how pervasive it is, how many things it impacts. And we expect this will always strengthen our ‘case for change’ and increase people’s motivation to join in addressing the problem.
BUT – and it’s a big ‘but’ – research consistently shows that people are paradoxically less motivated to address a problem when they see it as pervasive.
A meta-analysis of studies into this issue confirms the painful truth for change leaders. In a wide range of different contexts, when people were presented with a problem that was obviously a problem, they believed it was worthwhile to try to address. However, when they were informed the problem was ‘big’ (widespread, prevalent) they believed it was less worthwhile to address.
As the authors state, this presents leaders with the challenge that ‘the bigger the problem the littler’ in the minds of the people we most need to motivate for change.
So what do we do?
So should change leaders stop talking about how ‘big’ a problem is, for fear that people will give up entirely on trying to address it?
The research does point to one helpful fact – the ‘big problem paradox’ is mitigated by ‘perceived personal threat’. In other words, when an issue has personal relevance, affecting something close to people’s hearts, they are less affected by the ‘big problem paradox’.
Tips for making your ‘case for change’
- use data where you have it, but don’t expect people to make entirely logical decisions based on data alone
- beware giving the impression that a problem is too pervasive – describe it as ‘important’ but perhaps not ‘big’ or ‘widespread’
- above all, frame your case for change in personal terms not just logical. Show why this issue affects what people care about, their own internal values and drives.