Leaders often project strength during turmoil, but this can create distance. Being vulnerable—admitting uncertainty—builds connection faster. When leaders show they trust employees with their own concerns, employees reciprocate that trust. It's an emotional, not logical, process.
During organizational change, insecurity triggers employees' primal threat response, leading to dysfunctional behaviors like resistance. Executives often misinterpret this as the employee being weak or lazy, when it is actually a high-performer's brain reacting to a perceived threat to their stability.
Executives, often "High D" personalities, thrive on change and assume their teams share their excitement. However, this personality type is only 10-15% of the population. Most employees' primary psychological needs are stability and social connection—the very things large-scale change disrupts.
Uncertainty during organizational change releases cortisol, which literally lowers an employee's IQ and hampers their ability to adapt. The antidote is empowerment. Involving staff in planning and giving them control over their environment reduces their threat response and preserves cognitive function.
When new owners raise standards, employees often feel their past work is being judged and criticized. Their resistance isn't to the goal of improvement (the 'what'), but to the implementation method (the 'how') which can feel demeaning. Leaders must frame changes as a shared opportunity to join a "winning team."
Asking "How are you?" gets a generic "I'm fine." Instead, ask employees to rate their job satisfaction on a scale of 1-10. Then, ask "What would make it a 10?" This specific follow-up question bypasses platitudes and forces them to articulate their single most important, actionable need.