People rarely have a binary attitude toward change. They are ambivalent, holding both pro and anti-change thoughts. An effective leader listens for an individual's own pro-change language and reflects it back, which makes them 11 times more likely to elaborate on their own reasons to change.

To get buy-in for NYT's transformation, A.G. Sulzberger was advised that logic gets you 90% of the way; the final 10% requires addressing emotional blockers. He systematically met with all 1,300 newsroom employees to hear and answer their specific fears, not just present data.

Change adoption follows a bell curve. Instead of assuming everyone is an eager early adopter or wasting energy on staunch resistors, focus on the large majority in the middle. Persuade them with a steady stream of small, proven, and safe wins that build comfort and trust.

Mandating new processes, like reducing meetings, is ineffective if the collective beliefs driving old behaviors (e.g., lack of trust) are not addressed. To make change stick, leaders must first surface, discuss, and realign the team's shared assumptions to support the new structure.

Companies believe providing information or motivation drives change. However, the brain assesses safety and cost first. Resistance to change is often a nervous system's threat response, not a failure of understanding or buy-in, making traditional change management ineffective.

Leaders often misjudge their teams' enthusiasm for AI. The reality is that skepticism and resistance are more common than excitement. This requires framing AI adoption as a human-centric change management challenge, focusing on winning over doubters rather than simply deploying new technology.

During any major strategic shift, employee buy-in will predictably split: 25% will be champions, 50% will be cautious observers, and 25% will actively resist. Leaders should focus on empowering the believers to build momentum rather than trying to achieve 100% consensus from the start.

The change management industry overemphasizes technical skills like creating models and plans, which only reach those already aligned. The real gap is in conversational skills—the ability to sit with an employee's ambivalence and help them find their own intrinsic reasons to move forward.

The term "resistance" is a lazy diagnosis that communicates low expectations. This framing makes employees disengage, fulfilling the initial negative assumption. This creates a destructive cycle where leaders blame employees instead of examining their own flawed communication strategies.