Creating change is a form of deviance.
I know that’s an awful big word, with an awful lot of connotations. But let’s go with the basic definition of deviance: “departing from usual standards, especially in social behavior.”
Most of the effective change-makers that I have known come across as “not normal” in some way or another. They’re abnormally fixated on a goal, or focused on atypical topics, or otherwise think outside the box. Sometimes they’re just plain quirky or really hopeful.
Elon Musk is a deviant. So was Ghandi. So is that woman in IT who is implementing a new company-wide cybersecurity system.
Deviant behavior can be positive. Think of the powerful message of a leader working hands-on beside someone on the factory floor.
Deviant behavior can be negative. Think of the disruption one manipulative coworker can cause on an otherwise caring and collaborative team.
Deviance may not be a choice. Think about how many people are automatically the “other,” because of ethnicity, upbringing, neurodiversity, physical ability, gender, background, mental health, age, education, and more.
Effecting change without making trouble
Here’s the challenge: If you’re in the position of introducing change, it’s pretty much guaranteed that people will experience you as “deviant,” and maybe not in a good way. However, you have lots of control over how this plays out, if you consciously engage in perception management and relationship-building behavior. This IS the work — think of it as reducing negative responses and resistance, so that it takes less effort to cultivate change. Some things to play with:
Respect the existing culture and values.
Get curious about and make a study of the existing culture. Ask the “old guard” questions like “What happened that led to the decision to work this way?” and “What does this process / value / guideline mean to you?” By honoring and better understanding the reasons for how things are now, you make it easier to connect new ideas to familiar concepts and values.
Make the changes small. And enjoy them.
“People don’t resist change. They resist being changed.” — Peter Senge
Imagine that I tell you that you must completely overhaul how you fix breakfast—you need to cook your eggs differently, add in more green vegetables, and use completely different cooking equipment. How do you feel?
Now, imagine that I invite you to my house and serve you a familiar breakfast, but I top it with a few spears of roasted asparagus. You watched me prepare the eggs and toast the same way you do, plus you saw how I roasted the asparagus using a rack and cookie sheet in the oven. It’s a little weird, but it seems doable. When we sit down at the table, I mention how much better I feel when I add in a few vegetables, and my sister expresses delight about how good the asparagus is. How do you feel about vegetables at breakfast now?
Consciously choreographing small changes reduces overwhelm and allows for gradual and sustainable adaptation. Celebrate these small wins in the most genuine way possible. By keeping it fun and light, you shift people’s brains into a receptive state. Generally speaking, humans enjoy watching other humans be happy. Happiness is attractive; people will step towards it with curiosity and a strong desire to be part of the fun.
Build relationships.
As an agent of change, your biggest leverage will come from who you know and how much you respect one another. This includes both allies who support the change you want and people who have legitimate concerns about it. Dedicate a significant amount of your “change time” to gathering diverse perspectives and building relationships based on mutual respect and admiration. The more genuine and heartfelt you make it, the more resilient the relationship will be to the inevitable challenges that come with change.
Communicate openly and often.
Regularly share the reasons behind the change, the benefits you expect, and what you know about how the change will impact people. Do this about 10 times more often than you think you need to — if you feel bored with it, you’re probably close to the right amount.
All sorts of things get in the way of effective communication: distraction, thinking about personal things, using terms in different ways, people’s emotional responses, etc. Your job is to create a consistent, simple, and ever-present flow of information, so that when people are ready to listen, the answer is easily accessible.
Empower others.
Encourage participation from various team members in the change process. Slow down enough to listen to people’s questions, ideas, and inspirations. When people feel they have a voice and can contribute to decision-making, they are more likely to take ownership of the change. This is true even if their ideas don’t ultimately get implemented — what’s important is that they feel heard and respected. Again and again, I have seen this sort of engaged empowerment transform resistors into change advocates.
Keep it clean
Humans are highly skilled BS detectors. This is why I talk a lot about “emotional hygiene” in both my personal life and the workplace. Pretty much any human interaction has the potential to get messy — that’s normal and predictable and forgivable. But if everyone shows up with clear intent and dose of bravery, the odds of finding a path forward go way up.
Especially when things get tough (which is bound to happen at some point during a change), it’s absolutely crucial to lean in and be honest. For some people, this can be nerve-wracking. It’s a learned skill that takes practice to acquire. As you practice, stay centered on one thing: The key is really listening and taking others seriously. Even a hint of manipulation will set off the BS detector and damage the dynamic.
I encourage people to communicate in a way that fits their essential being. I am naturally cynical and irreverent, so I communicate leaning on that.
I once worked as a development liaison on an important project that the c-suite actually bet the company on. I worked with a QA director that was in the habit of using the word "fail" when referring to a failed test. As a developer I detest that word. So whenever I talked to her, I never corrected her, but I would never use the word fail. I would go around it. The test was "suboptimal", "not correct", "less than successful", "not what we want", "messed up", "not at the mark", you name it I was starting to run out.
She was highly intelligent and she was not sub absorbed at all. Eventually, she asked me what was up. I explained to her that a developer worked in a black and white world. The IDE, the GUI everything was wired to disappoint and tell you how many errors and warnings you had. It was like being in elementary school and having a very exacting teacher. I told her that given those factors I usually chose my words about tests carefully.