Control, suffering, impermanence: 3 Buddhist insights for change leaders
Buddhist philosophy has startling insights for anyone leading organisational change. To introduce change in an organisation is to introduce a new stressor to employees. This stressor could also be called suffering. Buddhist philosophy acknowledges that suffering exists. The magic is in how one minimises or takes advantage of this suffering to become a better person. This line of thinking certainly applies to employees. How can change leaders help employees reframe suffering?
Buddhism can teach us a lot about managing change. It is said that ‘The only thing constant in this world is change’, so it’s no wonder that many of us struggle with the concept of change. We are quick to point out all the things we cannot control or change — but what if we learned how to embrace change, and perhaps even welcomed it? By learning how to manage our reactions to change, we can reduce stress and be more open to embracing the inevitable changes which affect us.
Change is the only permanent thing at work.
In nearly nine years of working as an organisational change manager, I have found that people are open to change. I have come across cases of people feeling fatigued by change. Yet this is because previous changes may be poorly handled, or poorly timed. Poorly handled or timed change may lead to a sense of strain on many employees. Even well-managed change is in itself a stressor. Too many stressors (even good ones) can induce fatigue.
Change fatigue is one thing, resistance is another. Again in my experience, I haven’t found too many people who actively resist organisational changes that I have led. Those who are passionate are not resisting the change in my view. Many who bring a million questions to the table may seem to be passively resisting the change. Or if you may feel beaten up after trying to answer an intense cross-examination by someone like this. These kinds of people may even try to trip you up in what you have promised versus what you deliver. You might feel they are trying to undermine your change. But again in my experience ultimately these types of people see themselves as advocates for employee groups.
Even in the rare instance that someone completely opposes a particular change, it is worth engaging with them. What is it about their perceptions of the change ahead that don’t work for their team? their answers are a gift for you as you may be able to tailor your change based on the insights they provide.
The takeaway for change leaders? Change resistance and fatigue exist. Yet find value in understanding how employees are suffering. Learn how to deliver organisational change in a way that minimises strain on employees. This extra effort reduces friction, helping you smoothly introduce and install change.
Help employees let go of what they cannot control
Employees have limited control over change. They may not like a particular change initiative or organisational decision but they have little choice in the matter. I was involved in a difficult change for employees, where the organisation aimed to change payment timings. Financially, employees did not lose money in the long run. Yet the employee perception was otherwise. Hundreds of employees were impacted by this organisational decision. Changing this perception would be difficult.
As an organisational change manager, I have little control over my stakeholders. I can invite them to meetings. Suggest that we design change together. Ask them questions. In effect, many small things help nudge my stakeholders towards a successful change. Yet I have no control over their behaviours. They could move to reject the change. They could escalate — sometimes with incredible vitriol. They can seek to control communications for their team. This sometimes happens with disastrous results. They could seek to undermine my change planning and implementation.
I experienced this only recently when an operational leader and her team were to adjust to a new way of working at a particular time. This leader made it clear that they were going to adjust at a much later time. They even tried to blame it on something I said in a meeting. I let it go. My thinking was that you can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink.
This leader and her team ended up adjusting to the change at the correct time. Perhaps there were conversations that I was not aware of. Maybe she was gently “corrected” by someone with more power than me. But had I taken it personally and aimed to control this timing I would have wasted valuable energy. The older I get the more I aim to minimise the energy wasted on needless suffering.
It is legitimate for the organisation to make decisions affecting them. Change leaders can provide employees with a sense of control. Most change leaders I know are adept at keeping employee representatives informed about upcoming changes. Change co-design is the art of creating employee opportunities for input into those changes.
The takeaway for change leaders? Aim to create the ideal conditions for employees to adjust to new ways of working. Encourage your employees to access single points of truth for answers to questions. Provide opportunities for employee representatives to help shape organisational change. Provide a sense of control by signposting changes ahead. Except that employee and operational leader's responses or reactions to change may very. Adopt the mindset that we are there to facilitate change only. If employees want to resist change, they can take this up with organisational decision-makers. Don’t get caught up in petty battles.
Suffering exists … it’s how we consider and respond to suffering
Could it be that employees are generally not so attached to things? They may be using “System A” for now. This system may have been around for ten years. No employee is attached to this system. They don’t think about it when they go home. But are they afraid of the unknown and uncertain future when “System A” is no more? What will using “System B” mean for this employee?
Buddhist philosophy teaches us that suffering (dukkha) exists in the world. This is due to our ignorance (avijja), craving (tanha) and attachment (upadana).
This is a profound yet practical concept. These three causes of dukkha can be observed in most everyday situations. Buddhadasa Bhikkhu, a leading Thai monk, explains these in simple terms.
- We suffer throughout our lives because we are ignorant of things as they are.
- This ignorance comes from our constant desires and expectations.
- Our mind is like a monkey that cannot stay still. It jumps from one thought to another.
- Our monkey mind wants something for ourselves or some situation to happen as we want it.
- When this does not happen we become disappointed.
- When it does happen, we become greedy for more or change our desires to new ones.
I argue that organisational change is more prosaic than more glittering desires. Yes, employees may worry about a new way of working. It’s not as big and bold as desires for riches, good looks or fame. Yet the same ideas apply.
People are often afraid of what they do not know. They are afraid of uncertainty and the unknown. They are afraid of change because they don’t know what the future will look like. People may be focused on their own self-interest and their immediate needs rather than the long-term goals of the organisation. This fear can manifest itself in resistance which makes it more difficult for people to accept change, and move to a new way of operating.
Employee’s “monkey mind” might lead them to think unhelpful thoughts like:
- “Why can’t things just stay the way they are?”
- “It took me ages to get used to doing my job this way!”
- “Will I end up being unemployed because I’m not good at dealing with all this constant changing?”
This reveals an opportunity for my change communications and engagement. The opportunity? To help reframe this thinking towards more constructive thoughts. For my change initiatives to succeed, I need to work with my employee’s “monkey minds”. What rumours or concerns can I address? How clear and simple can I make my change narrative? I tell my project colleagues that I “aim to make my change as boring as possible.”
I look at any organisational change through a lens of people, processes and technology. How do I put myself in the shoes of an average employee? Then how do I imagine the employee moving from their current state to a future state? What changes to their role and their processes will they experience? What do they need to stop, start and keep doing? How can I build their capabilities to make it easier for them to adjust to new technology?
Many organisational philosophies have been created to guide us through this process — but none more so than Buddhism. Buddhism teaches us that we need to control our thoughts and desires, rather than letting them control us. As change leaders, we need to be cognizant of employee’s thoughts and feelings. Through self-awareness, we need to identify our desires and then control them, before they become greed or lust. Similarly, what desires do our employees have in the context of our organisational change?
The takeaway for change leaders? Employee “monkey mind” is a tangled mix of emotions and thought. Some of these thoughts might not be as constructive as you would like. One person’s monkey mind can be contagious, especially as employees are organised into teams. Being social creatures we are indeed influenced by people’s thoughts and feelings. This is change leaders we need to stare straight into the stark realities of negative thoughts and feelings arising from our change.
Sound change management practice means we skillfully use codesign and active listening. We also signpost changes and work very closely with employees to smooth the edges of our change. Buddhist philosophy help raises our self-awareness. We learn the power of detachment. Employee and operational leader resistance gives us an opportunity to put learnings into action. Being mindful of others' monkey minds helps us achieve a “right view” or “right understanding” of the employee journey during our change.
